Help me understand this

[HannibalFlavius]

I was taking a walk in a village and came across two houses.

One house looked ok but the other house looked like a crack house that was in serious need of fixing. I looked around and heard something coming from the ugly house and so I went to investigate. Inside the house were two snakes, one was Yellow golden and the other was black. There was a little child there with golden yellow hair crying. The little yellow snake suddenly puffed up and began to swallow the child with yellow hair. I ran outside and began to scream saying,'' who's child is this.''

Then I saw a woman with yellow golden hair and said,'' Hey lady, if that your baby, a snake is swallowing your baby.


When I looked back, I saw as the snake completely swallowed the child, and then the yellow snake became very little again.



I wondered to myself, why were there two snakes, and why was one black?

 

[HannibalFlavius]

.

Also, as I understand it, Ceremonial Law (sacrifices) is fulfilled and Civil Law was intended for Israel only.
Where am I wrong in all this?

Civil law is intended for everyone, and so is ceremonial law.


We don't do away with sacrifices, WE COMPLETE and live a sacrificial life and this is ongoing and fluid.


The law is a tutor that teaches how to be the sacrifice, how to live in sacrifice, and it says to the person,'' Go forth and die, give yourself freely and die.''


Triumph in Christ
…15For we are a fragrance of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing; 16to the one an aroma from death to death, to the other an aroma from life to life.

At the moment I have all I need--and more! I am generously supplied with the gifts you sent me with Epaphroditus. They are a sweet-smelling sacrifice that is acceptable and pleasing to God.


The Christ who sacrificed Himself for the believer is now continuing the sacrifice in the believer's life

Then Jesus called the crowd, along with his disciples, and said to them, “If anyone wants to become my follower, he must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me.''




Numbers 15:3
and you present to the LORD food offerings from the herd or the flock, as an aroma pleasing to the LORD--whether burnt offerings or sacrifices, for special vows or freewill offerings or festival offerings--

 

[yedida]

goodbye yellow brick road.....

 

[daq]

:o

The things said in this thread make me sad for the fate of mankind.

My previous point that Paul does not contradict the statements of Yeshua when it comes to food sacrificed to idols is born out by what the authors themselves have already provided in the accounts available. All of the "new congregations" where Paul had been used to plant seeds of Yeshua faithfulness had clearly already received the short Acts 15 epistle when Paul writes to them again later in the larger epistles which comprise much of the modern version of the New Testament:

Acts 16:1-5 KJV
1. Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek:
2. Which was well reported of by the brethren that were at Lystra and Iconium.
3. Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek.
4. And as they went through the cities, they delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem.
5. And so were the churches established in the faith, and increased in number daily.

So then every congregation to which Paul writes an epistle in the New Testament had already received the Acts 15 "decree" to ABSTAIN FROM BLOOD, (Acts 15:20-29). This is before and over above anything else that Paul states concerning food sacrificed to idols. In other words they are essentially vegetarians to begin with: they do not eat flesh of any kind except for fish; just as that is the only "flesh" we are ever told that Yeshua himself ate and did likewise give others to eat when he fed the four thousand and the five thousand. The encounter of Paul with Messiah was in the Way to Dammesheq-Qumran where Yerushalaim had "authority to bind", (which may or may not have been true in Damascus-Syria at that time). Paul was an Essene just as was Ananias Theophilus, the renegade Zadokite who fled to Dammesheq-Qumran from his own father Annas-Ananus-Ananias the former high priest who still ruled from behind the scenes. Ananias Theophilus was converted and was hiding out there with the many Zadokite brethren of his own who were leaders of the Qumran community, (Qumran-Dammesheq was primarily a Zadokite community). They were all essentially vegetarians, with the exception of Torah-prescribed fish, even though they upheld Torah of Moshe. "Nazarenos", the sect of which Paul was later accused of being the new "ringleader", most likely implies similarly a Nazar-(set apart)-Essene. In other words there is no way Paul is speaking of the flesh of animals having blood, which retains the soul, when he speaks of "broma-meat sacrificed to idols" and this is because of the precedent-setting Acts 15 prohibition against any form of blood whatsoever, (ever heard of a grain offering and how it is often referred to as a "meat offering"? lol). Therefore I concur with your sadness for the state and the fate mankind even if your statement was fully or partially directed at my own comments, (don't worry, I'm used to it).

Editorial Disclaimer:
Please be advised that none of the references or comments herein concerning the Acts 15 council or epistle are implied or intended to be construed as "Telling someone to go back to kindergarten" in any way, shape, or form.


.

 

[mercy1061]

Yes, the best science relies on observation (that's the word that you're looking, instead of "testimony"). Yet, you would have us discard the observation of the physical world in favor of myths. That's just bad science - and bad advice.

If you can not accept the five human senses, as scientific evidence, then I do not understand how you develop your logical conclusions. I guess your only recourse ; purposely misinterpret, misunderstand or misrepresent my words?

 

[yonah_mishael]

If you can not accept the five human senses, as scientific evidence, then I do not understand how you develop your logical conclusions. I guess your only recourse ; purposely misinterpret, misunderstand or misrepresent my words?

The sense are, of course, used in the collection of data through observation. However, the senses can fail. Are you not aware of the fact that people can be deceived through their senses? Not everything that one hears is real. Not everything that one sees can be trusted. Not everything that one remembers is true.

 

[mercy1061]

The sense are, of course, used in the collection of data through observation. However, the senses can fail. Are you not aware of the fact that people can be deceived through their senses? Not everything that one hears is real. Not everything that one sees can be trusted. Not everything that one remembers is true.

Yeshua healed the senses when he came. Do you have perfect vision? Do you wear glasses?

 

[yonah_mishael]

Yeshua healed the senses when he came. Do you have perfect vision? Do you wear glasses?

Did he heal everyone’s senses – or just those of a select few?

 

[HannibalFlavius]

You never have to discard real science for the bible. Some preconceptions can cause distorted results from scientific methods though, no matter what methods are used. For example: if you expect the world to be billions of years old, you will see that in the evidence, even when it isn't there. If you don't expect to see Yahweh's hand in history, you won't.

Wait?

You think that the evidence of the fact of the universe being Billions of years old is not factual evidence?


The evidence is literally everywhere we look, but maybe I misunderstood you.


One cannot walk outside at night and look at the stars without looking millions of years in the past, not only do we look and see, we are on the same timeline, a million years back.


In my opinion, the bible backs up the big bang, and explains evolution.

It explains where we got our moon from and it is in sync with science.

 

[yonah_mishael]

Wait?

You think that the evidence of the fact of the universe being Billions of years old is not factual evidence?


The evidence is literally everywhere we look, but maybe I misunderstood you.


One cannot walk outside at night and look at the stars without looking millions of years in the past, not only do we look and see, we are on the same timeline, a million years back.


In my opinion, the bible backs up the big bang, and explains evolution.

It explains where we got our moon from and it is in sync with science.

It’s actually very common for fundamentalists (and yes, Pat is a fundamentalist in most of his opinions) to deny science flatly – except in a redefinition of the term “science” as that which conforms to the standard religious opinion. They deny any evidence that demonstrates the age of the universe as more than 10,000 years old (and most even less than that). In their opinion, the Bible must be interpreted literally – a literal man named Adam who had a literal wife named Eve, a literal tower in Babylon that reached to the sky and resulted in the literal separation of mankind in language groups, a literal flood that covered the entire globe and literally wiped out all of life, etc. It is all literal in their opinion – and anyone who would say that the seven days of Genesis 1 are “ages” or metaphorical is, to them, simply watering down the words of God and denying the truth.

Are you really surprised to find these opinions here?

 

[Avodat]

Wait?

You think that the evidence of the fact of the universe being Billions of years old is not factual evidence?


The evidence is literally everywhere we look, but maybe I misunderstood you.


One cannot walk outside at night and look at the stars without looking millions of years in the past, not only do we look and see, we are on the same timeline, a million years back.


In my opinion, the bible backs up the big bang, and explains evolution.

It explains where we got our moon from and it is in sync with science.

Evolution only relates, properly, to animate beings, not inanimate objects. If you accept the so-called big bang, from what did it originate and from where did the conditions to bring about the big bang begin?

 

[yonah_mishael]

Evolution only relates, properly, to animate beings, not inanimate objects. If you accept the so-called big bang, from what did it originate and from where did the conditions to bring about the big bang begin?

Perhaps you're talking about evolution via natural selection? Everything in the universe (from rocks and rivers to languages and fashion) goes through change, adaptation to external forces, evolution. Everything goes through it. Nothing that exists does so without experiencing change.

 

[HannibalFlavius]

Evolution only relates, properly, to animate beings, not inanimate objects. If you accept the so-called big bang, from what did it originate and from where did the conditions to bring about the big bang begin?

More and more scientists are coming to the conclusion that the big bang actually proves God, not disproves him, even a couple of noteworthy scientists have changed from being atheists to believing in something just because something had to begin the big bang. They also come to the conclusion that there is a multiverse, and I tend to agree with that theory, it is the only theory that makes sense to me.


I believe God created this universe in an instance, and this was the big bang.

I believe that the story of Adam laying down in a sleep of death is about how the moon was formed, and I believe that the comings and goings of the Temple show evolution itself, it is the goat temple.


If in the beginning, we began as a tent of meeting made of animal skins, and then the evolution show people are the temple, then the temple itself has evolved from animal skins to human skins.


And in the beginning, all the sins of the world were put on the head of an animal, and then it evolved into all the sins of the world being put on the head of a man, it also shows an evolution from animal to man.

 

[yonah_mishael]

Wow... All that metaphor to describe something that could have been conveyed in literal terms. What is the "goat temple" anyway?

Sigh... I just can't get where all of these thoughts come from. It's no wonder that the Kabbalah was cooked up. It was this kind of thinking that created it - and it is based on looney concepts and metaphors stretched to the point of incredulity.

I've been thinking recently about the "eternal recurrence," as discussed by Nietzsche and also by Marcus Aurelius. I'm not sure what I make of it, but it seems more reasonable than simply turning the world into a big mixed metaphor.

 

[aniello]

E=mcc.

Can't do without it.

Let's see y'all Evolve from Newton's energy equation to Einstein's. Now don't leave out any steps, explain your assumptions.

Ach, make sure to meditate on the implications of the Rest Mass Equation.

Oooooooooom, doo wah, diddle doo wah, the cow jumped over the moon, the fork ran away with the spoon.

2, 4, 6, 8 now it's time to integrate!!!!

Long ago, so very far away. And then there was 1, echad.

!Coplas!

 

[aniello]

Ah, "Eternal Recurrence" , Yonah. Gives question to whether Bereshit means In The Beginning or In A Beginning or In Beginnings.

Salvador Dali - The Persistence Of Memory - YouTube

Who can say.

 

[Avodat]

More and more scientists are coming to the conclusion that the big bang actually proves God, not disproves him, even a couple of noteworthy scientists have changed from being atheists to believing in something just because something had to begin the big bang. They also come to the conclusion that there is a multiverse, and I tend to agree with that theory, it is the only theory that makes sense to me.


I believe God created this universe in an instance, and this was the big bang.

I believe that the story of Adam laying down in a sleep of death is about how the moon was formed, and I believe that the comings and goings of the Temple show evolution itself, it is the goat temple.


If in the beginning, we began as a tent of meeting made of animal skins, and then the evolution show people are the temple, then the temple itself has evolved from animal skins to human skins.


And in the beginning, all the sins of the world were put on the head of an animal, and then it evolved into all the sins of the world being put on the head of a man, it also shows an evolution from animal to man.

The Goat Temple was from Pan myth, wasn't it, along with the dancing goats etc etc? Caesarea Philippi and the Temple of Pan springs to mind.

 

[HannibalFlavius]

The Goat Temple was from Pan myth, wasn't it, along with the dancing goats etc etc? Caesarea Philippi and the Temple of Pan springs to mind.

I don't know the deal on Pan, I doubt you would hear many people call the Temple a goat Temple.

I coined that term in thinking of Yom Kippor and the veil having 10 Palestinian she goat skins.

That sin and the forgiveness of sin is based upon a goat.

 

[kcmonseysr]

Are you really surprised to find these opinions here?

Actually - Yes. And I find it kind of refreshing !

 

[Frenchfrye]

Wait?

You think that the evidence of the fact of the universe being Billions of years old is not factual evidence?


The evidence is literally everywhere we look, but maybe I misunderstood you.


One cannot walk outside at night and look at the stars without looking millions of years in the past, not only do we look and see, we are on the same timeline, a million years back.


In my opinion, the bible backs up the big bang, and explains evolution.

It explains where we got our moon from and it is in sync with science.

can you give scripture to back that up, it has sparked some curiosity