Why did the Lord come to the earth?

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
25,225
6,171
North Carolina
✟278,308.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
1 Corinthians 3:10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. 11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 1 Corinthians 1:23 But we preach Christ crucified,
1 Corinthians 15:1-8
That good news
Galatians 2:7 the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me,
as [the gospel] of the circumcision [was] unto Peter;
That is: the gospel to the uncircumcision (Gentiles) was commited to me
as to Peter the circumcision (Jews).

It was commited to Paul to preach the gospel to the Gentiles,
and commited to Peter to preach the gospel to the Jews.
Same gospel to both--salvation by faith in the person and atoning sacrifice (Christ crucified) of Jesus Christ for the remisson of one's sin and right standing with God's justice; i.e., "not guilty," justified.

John 12:44-47 Jesus cried and said, He that believeth on Me, believeth not on Me, but on Him that sent Me. John 44:48-50 And I know that His Commandment is Life Everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto Me, so I speak.
(bold added)
It's not counterfeit faith, it's faith in another god.
It's "faith" that has no Holy Spirit (ten virgins), and "faith" that has no fruit (the talents),
which is not true faith, but counterfeit faith and, therefore, does not save.
Deuteronomy 13:1-3 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, 2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; 3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

Daniel 11:38-39 And he shall honour the god of forces on his place: and a god whom his fathers knew not he shall honour with gold, and silver, and precious stones, and desirable things. 39 And he shall do thus in the strong places of refuge with a strange god, and shall increase his glory: and he shall subject many to them, and shall distribute the land in gifts.LXX
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
25,225
6,171
North Carolina
✟278,308.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Some say Galilee got its name from invaders, not the indigenes.
You replied to the last two questions... skipping the proof altogether.
Wikipedia will never be an authoritative source for me.
Is it offensive to you when someone says you're wrong when you're not?
Wikipedia is proof of nothing to me.
 
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
25,225
6,171
North Carolina
✟278,308.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Within the context I've given you, which Abram, where? If you want to pretend you didn't even see the link or read the paragraph given you... then
you can also pretend that the Bible tells you where those places and people are.
So?
But we both know that the Bible doesn't tell you about which longitude and latitude the Bible was written... or even to whom the Bible first came, explicitly.
You think the Bible originated as a book?
Because the Code of Hammurabi and the Epic of Gilgamesh are older than the Bible's bits and pieces. And those two things are from Amorites... semitic speakers.
And?
A Hebrew Deluge Story in Cuneiform, and Other Epic Fragments in the Pierpont Morgan Library : Albert Tobias Clay

Man has placed those names in the area they were told to look. And archaeology went looking for the bones of whom they expected to find. The example of what happened to the name of the Hittites should've been a cautionary tale. They thought they found the Hittites and actually gave the invaders their name. They found their mistake when they dug up different layers from different people... and named the aboriginals Hatti.
Nor did they bother to correct the history books spun from that myth. So that, now, when we read about the Hittites... is it the indigenes we're reading about... or is it the invaders who've been handed the histories of the lands they stole? This has happened everywhere, by the way. Which must have coined the phrase: History is a set of lies agreed upon.
And this matters to divine revelation, why?
So let me ask you again, which Abram, where? Because the name Abram isn't a stand-alone item, not even back in the day.
You don't know the Bible well enough to discuss it.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
11,844
1,311
sg
✟217,741.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That is: the gospel to the uncircumcision (Gentiles) was commited to me
as to Peter the circumcision (Jews).

It was commited to Paul to preach the gospel to the Gentiles,
and commited to Peter to preach the gospel to the Jews.
Same gospel to both--salvation by faith in the person and atoning sacrifice (Christ crucified) of Jesus Christ for the remisson of one's sin and right standing with God's justice; i.e., "not guilty," justified.

It seems many covenant theologians prefer the NIV instead of KJV when it comes to scripture.

Is that the case for you, that is why you change the word "of" into "to"?
 
Upvote 0

Cornelius77

7Lion
Aug 5, 2021
17
4
singapore
Visit site
✟9,136.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
1. I think that the verses quoted are to draw us to their context. What do you think happened to Joseph and Mary and Jesus in Egypt? When did Jacob find God in the house of On, chapter 12? Context is everything, and so is audience in the New Testament. John 3:10-12 points out that a teacher of Juda didn't believe even what they saw, because they weren't born from above... and didn't even know what it meant. And they'd had David as a witness, along with the prophets they'd murdered.

Psalms 22:1 O God, my God, attend to me: why hast thou forsaken me? ... 12 Many bullocks have compassed Me: fat bulls have beset Me round. 13 They have opened their mouth against Me, as a ravening and roaring lion. 14 I am poured out like water, and all My bones are loosened: My heart in the midst of My belly is become like melting wax. 15 My strength is dried up, like a potsherd; and My tongue is glued to My throat; and Thou hast brought Me down to the dust of death. 16 For many dogs have compassed Me: the assembly of the wicked doers has beset Me round: they pierced My hands and My feet. 17 They counted all My bones; and they observed and looked upon Me. 18 They parted My garments among themselves, and cast lots upon My raiment. 19 But Thou, O Lord, remove not My help afar off: be ready for Mine aid. 20 Deliver My soul from the sword; My only-begotten one from the power of the dog. 21 Save Me from the lion's mouth; and regard My lowliness from the horns of the unicorns.

Jesus tell what His dying felt like... this must literally be what happens to your body when you're crucified. And He wanted His audience to know, so He sent them to look at the context. He also tells them that Judah is like a lion, a bull and a dog... Pilate judged Him righteous, remember, so he is not the dog.

The same can't be said of the out of context verses Paul uses. For instance, Psalms 14:1-3 is about atheists, and this is true of all of his OT verses that I've ever checked.

2. Jeremiah 31:31-33 says Israel broke the Covenant. Break means this:
parar = a primitive root; to break up (usually figuratively, i.e. to violate, frustrate:--X any ways, break (asunder), cast off, cause to cease, X clean, defeat, disannul, disappoint, dissolve, divide, make of none effect, fail, frustrate, bring (come) to nought, X utterly, make void.
Therefore, God disregarded them, says the LXX.

God didn't make a last will and testament and name Israel the beneficiary, He made a contract with them. In contracts, which Paul is talking about (with the whole human understanding thing), if one party breaks the contract, the whole contract is void. They didn't hold up their side of the covenant, they dissolved it. This is when God sent them into captivity via Assyria and Babylon. Why does Jesus use the language He uses in Matthew 23 and John 8 against them? Even John recognizes the Pharisees as fleeing from Babylon as vipers to be baptized by him.

3. Sarah was under the Law, Hagar was just a slave. And where was Sinai in Arabia? Ancient Greeks called Arabia East-Ethiopia. Acording to Jesus Heavenly Jerusalem is coming down after the Millennium. Luke wasn't there, so his book is hearsay. The Gospels of John and Matthew are first-hand witnesses, approved by Jesus (John 15:26-27 And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with Me from the beginning). The Gospel of the Kingdom is still being preached all over the world by those who keep His Commandments. The Kingdom is announced with the death and resurrection of the two witnesses. Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven... finally happens when the dragon is cast to Earth... then shall the end come. This Kingdom comes to Earth when Jesus comes to cast the dragon and his people from the Earth, as well. Without the King in house, the Kingdom is not visible, by their fruits ye shall know them...(not Paul's fruits)...these fruits are of the Kingdom that the two Gospels witness.

4. The context... 3:21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
Do you know where, in the law and the prophets, these "without the law" verses might be?

In context, "My words remain in you"... fruit always begins with thinking. The invisible church becomes clean from the inside out, it's not a whitewashed tomb. Remember that Jesus says some of those laws were allowed by Moses, because of their hard hearts.

They asked for Moses, instead of God. They asked for Kings, instead of God. They asked for a temple sacrifice, instead of the sure mercies of David. The OT law was a test they failed over and over again... finally failing to keep even their own hardhearted laws. God said He was testing them, straight up. Did that make them cautious or caring? No. They apparently forgot. So the Old Testament became a cautionary tale. The message: Learn the character/authority/name of God.

Last of all, He sent His Son, saying they will reverence My Son. Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee.

Good discussion :)

1. By context, Hosea 11:1-2 says, "When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called My son. But the more I called Israel, the farther they departed from Me. They sacrificed to the Baals and burned incense to carved images." - This context doesn't seem to refer to Jesus when Matthew quotes this verse.

Psalms 22 was spoken by David in his dire situation, it was David's story. Mark 4:12 quoted Isaiah 6:9-10 but by context, v11-13 suggests that this message is no longer applicable after the kingdom was destroyed.

2. So you were saying, they do not have any covenant with God from the time of Jeremiah since they broke it?

3. Even if we reject Luke, do you mean we will see a real dragon described in the Book of Revelation? Or all these are symbolic? Numbers 12:6 "Hear now My words: If there is a prophet among you, I, the LORD, will reveal Myself to him in a vision; I will speak to him in a dream." - Even after Jesus was raised, Peter still saw parable in his vision before going for Cornelius. So, John saw a real scene of the future or a parable in Revelation? Also, we are God's temple and His Spirit dwells in us, how can we say the King is not with us?

4. Do you mean this?
  • Romans 10:5-7 [For concerning the righteousness that is by the law, Moses writes: “The man who does these things will live by them.” But the righteousness that is by faith says: “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ (that is, to bring Christ down) or, ‘Who will descend into the Abyss?' (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead).”]
However, Peter testified that even we, cannot bear the OT law. Acts 15:10 "Now then, why do you test God by placing on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our fathers have been able to bear?" and Paul testified OT law is just a guardian and of slavery in Galatians 3 & 4. Then, there is no point to have OT law and God should just begin the world using New Covenant since He is omniscient and He knew.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Ligurian

Cro-Magnon
Apr 21, 2021
3,589
536
America
✟22,234.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Private
1 Corinthians 3:10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. 11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. 1 Corinthians 1:23 But we preach Christ crucified, 1 Corinthians 15:1-8
That good news

Galatians 2:7 the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me,
as [the gospel] of the circumcision [was] unto Peter;

It was commited to Paul to preach the gospel to the Gentiles,
and commited to Peter to preach the gospel to the Jews.
Same gospel to both--salvation by faith in the person and atoning sacrifice (Christ crucified) of Jesus Christ for the remisson of one's sin and right standing with God's justice; i.e., "not guilty," justified.
Read it again... the verse doesn't say Jews, it says circumcision. The ten tribes aren't Judah. John 7 says the Jews were trying to kill Jesus... the lost sheep of the ten tribes didn't do that.

Peter preached the Father's Gospel of the Kingdom:

1 Peter 1:1 Peter [the] apostle [of] Jesus Christ, [to the] chosen pilgrim Diaspora, [in] Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, ... 23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. 24 For all flesh [is] as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: 25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by this Gospel is preached unto you. (Isaiah 40:3-8, John 1:23)

John 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God.

Matthew 13:10 And The Disciples came, and said unto Him, Why speakest Thou unto them* in parables? ... 16 But blessed [are] your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear. ... 23 But he that received seed into the good ground is he that heareth the word, and understandeth [it]; which also beareth fruit, and bringeth forth, some an hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.

John 12:50 And I know that His Commandment is Life Everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto Me, so I speak.

1 Peter 4:17-18 For the time [is come] that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if [it] first [begin] at us, what shall the end [be] of them that obey not the Gospel of God? 18 And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?

It's not counterfeit faith, it's faith in another god.

It's "faith" that has no Holy Spirit (ten virgins), and "faith" that has no fruit (the talents),
which is not true faith, but counterfeit faith and, therefore, does not save.

Esaias 6:9 Ye shall hear indeed, but ye shall not understand; and ye shall see indeed, but ye shall not perceive. 10 For the heart of this people has become gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.* 11 And I said, How long, O Lord? And He said, Until cities be deserted by reason of their not being inhabited, and the houses by reason of there being no men, and the land shall be left desolate.

Matthew 23:34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and of them ye shall kill and crucify; and of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city: 35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. 37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under wings, and ye would not! 38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. 39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see Me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed He that cometh in the name of the Lord.

Revelation 14:19 And the angel thrust in his sickle into the earth, and gathered the vine of the earth, and cast [it] into the great winepress of the wrath of God.
Revelation 16:16 And He gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.
Revelation 17:14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for He is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with Him called, and chosen, and faithful.

Deuteronomy 13:3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God tests you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

Matthew 13:24-25 Another parable put He forth unto them, saying, The Kingdom of Heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in His field: But while men slept, His enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.

Daniel 11:38-39 And he shall honour the god of forces in his place: and a god whom his fathers knew not he shall honour with gold, and silver, and precious stones, and desirable things.
 
Upvote 0

Ligurian

Cro-Magnon
Apr 21, 2021
3,589
536
America
✟22,234.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Private
"The word "Gentile" does not come from either the Hebrew language or from the Greek language. The word "gentile" has come into the English language from the Latin language.

The Latin word "gens, gentis" means: a family, a clan, a stock of people, a race, a tribe, a people, a nation. This is the root from which our English word "Gentile" has been formed. Now it should be immediately apparent that "gens" has a considerable scope of meaning and of application. And the plural "gentes" refers to multiple races, tribes and nations. The plural Latin word "gentes" is most assuredly not restricted to any particular ethnic or racial group of people. It applies to people of all ethnic and all racial backgrounds.

However, that is not how the English word "Gentile" is used in the Church of God today, or in our English language translations, is it? When people in the Church use the word "Gentile", then they wish to make a racial distinction."
THE USE OF THE WORD "GENTILE" IN THE BIBLE - franknelte.net

Wikipedia will never be an authoritative source for me.

Wikipedia is proof of nothing to me.

Didn't read the whole post, huh... how 'bout now?
Still don't believe the word Gentile is Latin?
If you don't admit when you're wrong, you never repent.
 
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
25,225
6,171
North Carolina
✟278,308.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Didn't read the whole post, huh... how 'bout now?
Still don't believe the word Gentile is Latin?
If you don't admit when you're wrong, you never repent.
What does Latin have to do with it?
Gentile is an English translation from the Greek ethnos, meaning "nation."
Much of English is from Latin.
Your point is meaningless.

The Biblical usage of "Gentile" is of non-Jews, including the Greeks who conquered Rome.

"Much ado about nothing."
 
Upvote 0

Ligurian

Cro-Magnon
Apr 21, 2021
3,589
536
America
✟22,234.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Private
Within the context I've given you, which Abram, where? If you want to pretend you didn't even see the link or read the paragraph given you... then you can also pretend that the Bible tells you where those places and people are. But we both know that the Bible doesn't tell you about which longitude and latitude the Bible was written... or even to whom the Bible first came, explicitly. Because the Code of Hammurabi and the Epic of Gilgamesh are older than the Bible's bits and pieces. And those two things are from Amorites... semitic speakers.

A Hebrew Deluge Story in Cuneiform, and Other Epic Fragments in the Pierpont Morgan Library : Albert Tobias Clay

Man has placed those names in the area they were told to look. And archaeology went looking for the bones of whom they expected to find. The example of what happened to the name of the Hittites should've been a cautionary tale. They thought they found the Hittites and actually gave the invaders their name. They found their mistake when they dug up different layers from different people... and named the aboriginals Hatti. Nor did they bother to correct the history books spun from that myth. So that, now, when we read about the Hittites... is it the indigenes we're reading about... or is it the invaders who've been handed the histories of the lands they stole? This has happened everywhere, by the way. Which must have coined the phrase: History is a set of lies agreed upon.

So let me ask you again, which Abram, where? Because the name Abram isn't a stand-alone item, not even back in the day.

So?
You think the Bible originated as a book?
And?
And this matters to divine revelation, why?
You don't know the Bible well enough to discuss it.

Seriously? all you know is Paul... and you butcher him by trying to make one gospel out of two gospels which are completely opposite in separate their theologies.

Not only could Peter NOT teach Paul's gospel of "Christ crucified", he also did not. If Peter HAD taught Paul's gospel, then Peter would never have been prophesied a martyr by Jesus in John 21... because Peter would NOT have been feeding Jesus' other sheep that which Jesus had fed the rest of His fold, John 10, Matthew 28:20.


But the gentiles were taught that Paul was their "wise masterbuilder".

architekton=from arche and tekton; a chief constructor, i.e. "architect":--masterbuilder.
arche=from archomai; (properly abstract) a commencement, or (concretely) chief (in various applications of order, time, place, or rank):--beginning, corner, (at the, the) first (estate), magistrate, power, principality, principle, rule.
archomai=middle voice of archo (through the implication, of precedence); to commence (in order of time):--(rehearse from the) begin(-ning).
archo=a primary verb; to be first (in political rank or power):--reign (rule) over.
tekton=from the base of timora; an artificer (as producer of fabrics), i.e. (specially), a craftsman in wood:--carpenter.
timoria=vindication, i.e. (by implication) a penalty:--punishment.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
25,225
6,171
North Carolina
✟278,308.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Seriously? all you know is Paul... and you butcher him by trying to make one gospel out of two gospels which are completely opposite in separate their theologies.

Not only could Peter NOT teach Paul's gospel of "Christ crucified", he also did not. If Peter HAD taught Paul's gospel, then Peter would never have been prophesied a martyr by Jesus in John 21... because Peter would NOT have been feeding Jesus' other sheep that which Jesus had fed the rest of His fold, John 10, Matthew 28:30.


But the gentiles were taught that Paul was their "wise masterbuilder".

architekton=from arche and tekton; a chief constructor, i.e. "architect":--masterbuilder.
arche=from archomai; (properly abstract) a commencement, or (concretely) chief (in various applications of order, time, place, or rank):--beginning, corner, (at the, the) first (estate), magistrate, power, principality, principle, rule.
archomai=middle voice of archo (through the implication, of precedence); to commence (in order of time):--(rehearse from the) begin(-ning).
archo=a primary verb; to be first (in political rank or power):--reign (rule) over.
tekton=from the base of timora; an artificer (as producer of fabrics), i.e. (specially), a craftsman in wood:--carpenter.
timoria=vindication, i.e. (by implication) a penalty:--punishment.
Non-responsive to my questions.
Bastardization of the NT.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ligurian

Cro-Magnon
Apr 21, 2021
3,589
536
America
✟22,234.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Private
Much of English is from Latin.

Correct... because the invaders learn the language of the indigenes.

and Latin is Ligurian...

"the Latin language was that of the Ligurian Plebeians and not that of the Sabine Patricians."--Ridgeway, Who Were The Romans?

"Avienus makes only one direct reference to the Celts when he mentions that
beyond the tin-producing Oestrymnides was a land now occupied by the Celts,
who took it from the Ligurians."--Cunliffe, The Ancient Celts

The Indigenes of Albion
(long barrow, long heads)

"[Sergi's] own authentic series of Ligurian skulls proves them, on the contrary, to have been long-headed, with narrow noses, orthognathic"
--Ligurians, Iberians, and Siculi; Science, Current Notes on Anthropology, 1892.

Their Priests

"Bertrand and Reinach both maintain the pre-Celtic origin of Druidism."
--Wright, Druidism the Ancient Faith of Britain
"so we must pass on to the non-Celtic natives, who had another religion, namely, druidism, which may be surmised to have had its origin among them."
--Rhys, Celtic Britain
"The monuments we call Druidical, must be appropriated, exclusively, to the Aborigines of the midland, and western divisions."
--Davies, Celtic Researches
"the Celtic invaders of Britain did not create Druidism, and, neolithic or not, it was at all events pre-Celtic."
--Holmes, Caesar's Conquest
"They were distinguished from the Celtae, not merely by their manners and customs, but by their small stature and dark hair and eyes, and are stated by Pliny and Strabo to have inhabited Spain. They have also left marks of their presence in Central Gaul in the name of the Loire (Ligur), and possibly in Britain in the obscure name of the Lloegrians."
--Dawkins, Cave Hunting
"That Entremont was an oppidum of Ligurians and not Gauls is further proved by the absence of any signs of wooden beams, alternating with layers of stone, described and approved of by Caesar."
--Hall, Romans on the Riviera
"SA´LYES (Σάλυες) SA´LYI, SALLU´VII, or SA´LLYES (Steph. Byz. s. v.), a Ligurian people in Gallia. There are other varieties in the writing of the word. The early Greeks gave the name of Ligyes to these Salyes; and their territory, which was in the possession of the Massaliots, when Strabo wrote, was originally called Ligystice.
--Dict. of Greek and Roman Geogr., Smith
"no bird nested in the nemeton, nor did any animal lurk nearby; the leaves constantly shivered though no breeze stirred."--Lucan, Pharsalia
"It is almost certain that second-sight and other ecstatic moods must be referred to the pre-Celtic races."
--MacBain, Celtic Mythology and Religion
"a stormy channel separates the coast which the Damnonii occupy from the island Silura, whose inhabitants preserve the ancient manners, reject money, barter merchandise, value what they require by exchange rather than by price, worship the gods, and both men and women profess a knowledge of the future."
--Skene, Celtic Scotland
"In Siluria, Bardism still observed its original principles, and Bran, as a member, would be bound by its rules to lay the doctrine of Christianity which he had embraced before a Gorsedd, or public convention, as far as was practicable. This, it is admitted, was not a very feasible task, for although the region was not finally reduced before the year 77, yet it was in the meanwhile the scene of active warfare, and the open proceedings of the Bards would be particularly opposed by the Romans, being regarded by them as the especial source of patriotism, freedom, and independence. This was remarkably instanced in the conduct of Suetonius Paulinus, who so cruelly massacred an assembly of Druids, and cut down their sacred groves in the isle of Anglesey about the year 59."
--Williams, Ecclesiastical Antiquities of the Cymry
 
Upvote 0

Ligurian

Cro-Magnon
Apr 21, 2021
3,589
536
America
✟22,234.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Private
Non-responsive to my questions.

Do you keep Jesus' Commandments?
(Did you plead the 5th to that question, and I never noticed it, 3 or 4 times?) :eek:

So?
You think the Bible originated as a book?
And?
And this matters to divine revelation, why?
You don't know the Bible well enough to discuss it.

"then you can also pretend that the Bible tells you where those places and people are."
"History is a set of lies agreed upon."

So?
And this matters to divine revelation, why?


Two questions, asked and answered by me.
Oddly enough, highlighted by you... and you never noticed.

You think the Bible originated as a book?

They Wrote On Clay, long before the Akkadians started borrowing stuff.
https://oi-idb-static.uchicago.edu/multimedia/1121/they_wrote_on-clay.pdf

"Because the Code of Hammurabi and the Epic of Gilgamesh are older than the Bible's bits and pieces."

And?

And... Ugarit was part of the home of the Amurru/Amorites.
And... The Nuzi texts are Hurrian/Horite... they spoke Hurro-Urartian.
And... The Hivites, Achivi in Latin, are the Achaeans... Greeks.
And Gergithes are Girgashites. "From the Teukrian region of Gergis, and from the Gergithes near Kymê, sprang the original Sibylline prophecies"
--Grote, History of Greece, v1

Not only could Peter NOT teach Paul's gospel of "Christ crucified", he also did not. If Peter HAD taught Paul's gospel, then Peter would never have been prophesied a martyr by Jesus in John 21, because Peter would NOT have been feeding Jesus' other sheep that which Jesus had fed the rest of His fold, John 10, Matthew 28:20.

But gentiles were taught that Paul is "a wise masterbuilder". ... architekton=from arche and tekton; a chief constructor, i.e. "architect":--masterbuilder. ... arche=from archomai; (properly abstract) a commencement, or (concretely) chief (in various applications of order, time, place, or rank):--beginning, corner, (at the, the) first (estate), magistrate, power, principality, principle, rule. ... archomai=middle voice of archo (through the implication, of precedence); to commence (in order of time):--(rehearse from the) begin(-ning). ... archo=a primary verb; to be first (in political rank or power):--reign (rule) over. ... tekton=from the base of timora; an artificer (as producer of fabrics), i.e. (specially), a craftsman in wood:--carpenter. ... timoria=vindication, i.e. (by implication) a penalty:--punishment.

Bastardization of the NT.

Romans 15:8-9 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises [made] unto the fathers: 9 And that the Gentiles might glorify God for [his] mercy; as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name.

Psalm 18:47 It is God that avenges me, and has subdued the nations under me; 48 My deliverer from angry enemies: thou shalt set me on high above them that rise up against me: thou shalt deliver me from the unrighteous man. 49 Therefore will I confess to thee, O Lord, among the Gentiles, and sing to thy name. 50 God magnifies the deliverances of his king; and deals mercifully with David his anointed, and his seed, for ever.

This is endtimes prophecy, and hasn't happened yet. Dunno why Paul used this quote... unless he didn't have scrolls, and remembered only the bits he quoted?

But where do we read that Jesus is a minister to the circumcision?
Answer: In the Gospels of the Galilean Apostles, Matthew and John.

Aaaannd we're back to square one, where two different gospels hold sway.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
25,225
6,171
North Carolina
✟278,308.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
It seems many covenant theologians prefer the NIV instead of KJV when it comes to scripture.

Is that the case for you, that is why you change the word "of" into "to"?
The difference between the gospel of the uncircumcision and the gospel of the circumcision is not the gospel preached, but the apostles who are preaching the one and the same gospel of Jesus Christ,

just as the difference in the apostleship of the uncircumcision and the apostleship of the circumsion is not the office of apostleship, but the apostles who are exercising the one and the same office of apostleship of Jesus Christ.

The "gospel of Peter" is the one and the same gospel as the"gospel of Paul."

The "gospel of Peter" is:
"Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them, by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. Now why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our faithers have been able to bear?
No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are. (Acts 15:7-11)

The gospel
of Paul is:
'All you rely on observing the law are under a curse. . .Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us. . .He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might ome to the GentiLes through Chirst Jesus so that by
faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit. . .for it is by grace you have been saved, through faith. . .not by works so that no one an boast." (Galatians 3:10-14; Ephesians 2:8-9).

Both Peter and Paul preached one and the same gospel of grace--Peter to the Jews, and Paul to the Gentiles.
That is the meaning of Galatians 2:7-8, per the entire NT.
 
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
25,225
6,171
North Carolina
✟278,308.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Do you keep Jesus' Commandments?
(Did you plead the 5th to that question, and I never noticed it, 3 or 4 times?) :eek:
"then you can also pretend that the Bible tells you where those places and people are."
"History is a set of lies agreed upon."
So?
And this matters to divine revelation, why?
Non-responsive to my question.
Two questions, asked and answered by me.
Oddly enough, highlighted by you... and you never noticed.

You think the Bible originated as a book?

They Wrote On Clay, long before the Akkadians started borrowing stuff.
https://oi-idb-static.uchicago.edu/multimedia/1121/they_wrote_on-clay.pdf

"Because the Code of Hammurabi and the Epic of Gilgamesh are older than the Bible's bits and pieces."

And?

And... Ugarit was part of the home of the Amurru/Amorites.
And... The Nuzi texts are Hurrian/Horite... they spoke Hurro-Urartian.
And... The Hivites, Achivi in Latin, are the Achaeans... Greeks.
And Gergithes are Girgashites. "From the Teukrian region of Gergis, and from the Gergithes near Kymê, sprang the original Sibylline prophecies"
--Grote, History of Greece, v1
Romans 15:8-9 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises [made] unto the fathers: 9 And that the Gentiles might glorify God for [his] mercy; as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name.

Psalm 18:47 It is God that avenges me, and has subdued the nations under me; 48 My deliverer from angry enemies: thou shalt set me on high above them that rise up against me: thou shalt deliver me from the unrighteous man. 49 Therefore will I confess to thee, O Lord, among the Gentiles, and sing to thy name. 50 God magnifies the deliverances of his king; and deals mercifully with David his anointed, and his seed, for ever.
This is endtimes prophecy, and hasn't happened yet. ... Dunno why Paul used this quote remembered only the bits he quoted?
Because it is not end-time prophecy?
But where do we read that Jesus is a minister to the circumcision?
Answer: In the Gospels of the Galilean Apostles, Matthew and John.

Aaaannd we're back to square one, where two different gospels hold sway.
Back to bastardization of the NT.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Ligurian

Cro-Magnon
Apr 21, 2021
3,589
536
America
✟22,234.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Private
"then you can also pretend that the Bible tells you where those places and people are."
"History is a set of lies agreed upon."

So?
And this matters to divine revelation, why?


Two questions, asked and answered by me.
Oddly enough, highlighted by you... and you never noticed.

Non-responsive to my question.

Just because you don't understand the answer, that doesn't mean it never happened.

Romans 15:8-9 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises [made] unto the fathers: 9 And that the Gentiles might glorify God for [his] mercy; as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name.

Psalm 18:47 It is God that avenges me, and has subdued the nations under me; 48 My deliverer from angry enemies: thou shalt set me on high above them that rise up against me: thou shalt deliver me from the unrighteous man. 49 Therefore will I confess to thee, O Lord, among the Gentiles, and sing to thy name. 50 God magnifies the deliverances of his king; and deals mercifully with David his anointed, and his seed, for ever.

This is endtimes prophecy, and hasn't happened yet. Dunno why Paul used this quote... unless he didn't have scrolls, and remembered only the bits he quoted?

But where do we read that Jesus is a minister to the circumcision?
Answer: In the Gospels of the Galilean Apostles, Matthew and John.
Because it is not end-time prophecy?

Seriously? Then when did this happen:
Psalm 18:48 Thou shalt set me on high above them that rise up against me: thou shalt deliver me from the unrighteous man.

Remember this is the OT, where the means of righteousness was the Law.
Which is also true in the Gospel of the Kingdom.

Aaaannd we're back to square one, where two different gospels hold sway.

Back to bastardization of the NT.

If the two gospels really are the same,
then you could answer Yes to both questions:


Do you keep Jesus' Commandments?
Did Paul keep Jesus' Commandments?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
11,844
1,311
sg
✟217,741.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The difference between the gospel of the uncircumcision and the gospel of the circumcision is not the gospel preached, but the apostles who are preaching the one and the same gospel of Jesus Christ,

just as the difference in the apostleship of the uncircumcision and the apostleship of the circumsion is not the office of apostleship, but the apostles who are exercising the one and the same office of apostleship of Jesus Christ.

The "gospel of Peter" is the one and the same gospel as the"gospel of Paul."

The "gospel of Peter" is:
"Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them, by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. Now why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our faithers have been able to bear?
No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are. (Acts 15:7-11)

The gospel
of Paul is:
'All you rely on observing the law are under a curse. . .Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us. . .He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might ome to the GentiLes through Chirst Jesus so that by
faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit. . .for it is by grace you have been saved, through faith. . .not by works so that no one an boast." (Galatians 3:10-14; Ephesians 2:8-9).

Both Peter and Paul preached one and the same gospel of grace--Peter to the Jews, and Paul to the Gentiles.
That is the meaning of Galatians 2:7-8, per the entire NT.

If it was the same gospel for both of them, Paul wouldn't have rebuked Peter at the 2nd half of Galatians 2.
 
Upvote 0

Ligurian

Cro-Magnon
Apr 21, 2021
3,589
536
America
✟22,234.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Private
The difference between the gospel of the uncircumcision and the gospel of the circumcision is not the gospel preached, but the apostles who are preaching [...]
The "gospel of Peter" is:
"Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them, by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. He made no distinction between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. Now why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of the disciples a yoke that neither we nor our faithers have been able to bear?
No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are. (Acts 15:7-11)

The gospel of Paul is:
'All you rely on observing the law are under a curse. . .Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us. . .He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might ome to the GentiLes through Chirst Jesus so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit. . .for it is by grace you have been saved, through faith. . .not by works so that no one an boast." (Galatians 3:10-14; Ephesians 2:8-9).
[...]
* Multiple men, same name.NT
Cephas
1Cor.3:22 Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours;
1Cor.9:5 Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and [as] the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?
1Cor.15:5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:
Gal.2:9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we [should go] unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

Luke doesn't know anyone named Cephas, but calls Paul's Cephas of Galatians 2:9, the name Peter, in Acts 15:7... while Act's James calls Luke's Peter the name Simeon, in Acts 15:14.

Simeon
13:1 at Antioch ... Simeon that was called Niger...
15:14 Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles...
2 Peter 1:1 Simeon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ:
Simon
1 Peter 1:1 Peter [the] apostle [of] Jesus Christ, [to the] chosen pilgrim Diaspora, [in] Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
8:9 But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one:
9:43 And it came to pass, that he tarried many days in Joppa with one Simon a tanner.
13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?
27:32 And as they came out, they found a man of Cyrene, Simon by name: him they compelled to bear his cross.
13:26 Jesus answered, He it is, to whom I shall give a sop, when I have dipped [it]. And when he had dipped the sop, he gave [it] to Judas Iscariot, [the son] of Simon.
James
two are the Apostles from Galilee...
15:7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.
19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.
13:55 Is not this the carpenter's Son? is not His mother called Mary? and His brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?
15:13 And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men [and] brethren, hearken unto me: 14 Simeon hath declared how God at the first...
John
two are the Apostle and the Baptizer...
4:6 And Annas the high priest, and Caiaphas, and John, and Alexander, and as many as were of the kindred of the high priest, were gathered together at Jerusalem.
12:25 And Barnabas and Saul returned from Jerusalem, when they had fulfilled [their] ministry, and took with them John, whose surname was Mark.

So... who are these men named James, Cephas, and John:
Galatians 2:9 And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we [should go] unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.
... if Cephas was in Antioch when Paul went to Jerusalem to complain about the circumcision that came to Antioch from James, to talk with Peter in Acts 15:7... if Peter was already in Jerusalem?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Ligurian

Cro-Magnon
Apr 21, 2021
3,589
536
America
✟22,234.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Private
The difference between the gospel of the uncircumcision and the gospel of the circumcision is not the gospel preached, but the apostles who are preaching

Who are these apostles? is the right question to ask. Revelation 2:2

If the two gospels really are the same,
then you could answer Yes to both questions:

Do you keep Jesus' Commandments?
Did Paul keep Jesus' Commandments?

Nobody ever answers the second question... but those who see 2 gospels.

If it was the same gospel for both of them, Paul wouldn't have rebuked Peter at the 2nd half of Galatians 2.

Which Peter?

If even the names Peter, Simon, and Cephas applied to only one man, the question need never be asked. The odds get even longer when you add the different men named James. And they say the name John was even more popular, in those days.

So, when you see these verses:

1Cor.15:5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:
1Cor.15:7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.

... what do you do with them? Turn a blind eye?
 
Upvote 0

Guojing

Well-Known Member
Apr 11, 2019
11,844
1,311
sg
✟217,741.00
Country
Singapore
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Who are these apostles? is the right question to ask. Revelation 2:2



Nobody ever answers the second question... but those who see 2 gospels.



Which Peter?

If even the names Peter, Simon, and Cephas applied to only one man, the question need never be asked. The odds get even longer when you add the different men named James. And they say the name John was even more popular, in those days.

So, when you see these verses:

1Cor.15:5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:
1Cor.15:7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.

... what do you do with them? Turn a blind eye?

There is only one Peter in Galatians 2
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
25,225
6,171
North Carolina
✟278,308.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Just because you don't understand the answer, that doesn't mean it never happened.
Seriously? Then when did this happen:
Psalm 18:48 Thou shalt set me on high above them that rise up against me: thou shalt deliver me from the unrighteous man.
That would be 1 Samuel 18-41; 2 Samuel 22:1-51.
Remember this is the OT, where the means of righteousness was the law.
More bastardization of the NT.

The problem with that is the law was not given for righteousness, it was given to reveal sin (Romans 3:20; Galatians 2:16). No one will be declared righteous by observing the law, righteousness is only from God through faith apart from law (Romans 3:21, Romans 3:28).
Which is also true in the Gospel of the Kingdom.
In the one and only gospel, the gospel of Christ. . .the gospel of grace. . .the "gospel of Paul," the "gospel of Peter". . .the gospel of the Kingdom. . .the gospel of salvation. . .etc., keeping the commandments does not make righteous in either the OT or the NT, only God through faith apart from works of the law makes righteous. (Romans 4:3, 5, 3:21, 28), for all those who rely on observing the law are under a curse (Galatians 3:10).
If the two gospels really are the same,
then you could answer Yes to both questions:

Do you keep Jesus' Commandments?
Did Paul keep Jesus' Commandments?
Neither in the OT nor the NT does the Decalogue make righteous, though it is required in both.
Only God makes righteous through faith apart from law keeping.

You do not understand the NT well enough to discuss it.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0