I have already been chastised for going off topic. They may do it again so lets go back to John.
The whole of john seems insecure. It says may, and might, words I use when I am not sure of a statement. It shows uncertainty in the events to come. Should we have faith in phrases where the writer is not confident.
"That whosoever believeth in him should not perish". "Should" leaves the room for doubt in the statement. A word like will would indicate certainty. I recognize that this is nit picking but from my point of view that states that we all go to Heaven, and that this view places doubt on the whole of John because my God is a God of inclusion not exclusion witch to me is a sign of a true God.
Nevermind that. Not important. What is important is what happens to those who do not believe, and why John would even worry about heaven at all if we all wre going there. If we are all going, what does he need to preach about belief for?
In fact, what do you need to preach for? We are all going to heaven, we are all perfect, we are all right. Go have some fun with your life. You do not believe in the Bible, so why worry about what it says? I am not being offensive, but if you think it is all wrong, that we are all going to heaven, you should be having just as much fun reading any other human book about God.
If life is to be good, mankind needs purpose. Our purpose is dependent on our environment. We as humans have no way to see the total impact on our environment that our actions cause. Even as I write these word, I have no real knowledge as to what impact I have, if any, on those who read. One thing we know we must all do is learn of the tree of good and evil. We cannot defer this duty. We are perfectly suited to learn these lessons. We are all destine for Heaven. This does not mean we have a free ride. If we do not seek wisdom on our own we can rest assured that God will find a way to teach us in His own way.
OFF TOPIC - Please Do Not Respond to this message or continue in this vein. AdminPD
Yes. I needed it to explain 'water and moonstone' which was just a joke about 'fire and brimstone'.
If not, I agree with you, but the writers of the Bible might not have.
I see that GIA would rather trash the whole Bible than give up his position. This is his choice, but he must at the same time relinquish his desire to prove his case using only Genesis. Very humorous; those who believe the Bible to be true, are most often given to calling Genesis myth. Those who disregard the rest of it, would take Genesis literally.
wrote: 'Lets discuss the meaning and misinterpretations'
the truth of the Hebrew manuscripts of new testament can be seen as having nothing to do with the versions that had been made under the spiritual ministry of the Roman doctrine fides quae creditur,
'How can these things be?' asked Nicodemus.
You are a Judge in Yizrael and don't know these things? -- YHWHâ€™Ã“SHUAH replied.
I assure you, by the principles of the Law of the Testimony one speaks what one knows and testifies to what one has seen and heard, but you, being a Judge, does not work up a belief on oneâ€™s testimony.
If I tell you about things that happen on earth and you, being a Judge, does not work up a belief on it, then does the *Torah not require much less belief if I tell you about things of heaven?
--If the Law of the Testimony--the ToRaH and of the Justice courts of this world do have the directive of not applying belief to the things that happen on earth, then much less do the listeners of the ToRaH have to work up a belief on the things that are of highest value.
Also these parables had been obscured in the translations as having been re-edited and translated under the spiritual ordinances of the Roman doctrine fides quae creditur, so that the ones who love religion and belief-system might have a suppposed light of belief for one to work up or give spiritual credit.
Parable of the Road â€“â€“ The light is with you in a brief time. Walk on the road in the time you have the light so that darkness doesn't overtake you. The one who walks in the obscurity credits a light, believing there is a road, but doesn't know where he's going. In the time that you have the light, see the road in the light so that you may become first-fruits of light.
Brief time: Immediate time; A type of time that is abbreviated. A time of access in a brief or immediate sequence; mediated.
...believing there is a road â€“â€“ Synonym: Not seeing the road.
In the Light youâ€™ll find the road. Yhwhâ€”I AM is the Light. In the eternal covenant says: To the Law of the Testimony and if they do not speak according to that instruction there will be no white light for them.
B in Basic English â€“â€“ ...one walking in the dark has no knowledge of where he is going.
obscurae quae creditur â€“â€“ ...walks in darkness [in lack of belief] knows not where he goes.
Parable of the Trail â€“â€“ Is there not a half day of daylight? A man may go about a half day without falling because he sees the trail in the light. But if a man goes about in the obscure, believing there is a trail, he may have a fall because the daylight does not depend on his will of believing.
Half day: Immediate time; A type of time that is a dividing of time. A time of access that is mediated.
...believing there is a trail â€“â€“ Synonym: Not seeing the trail.
The daylight does not emerge according to spirit of manâ€™s will of crediting or believing one thing or another.
B in Basic English â€“â€“ ...he may have a fall because the light is not in him.
obscurae quae creditur â€“â€“ ...because there is no light [of belief] in him.
The answer lies in whether or not God favors the creation of chimeras.
This would determine if a higher species like God should, or could, use humans to reproduce.
Biblical history shows God created us and then let sons of God access our women to produce chimers that God then drowns as useless humans. Genocide against chimeras that He allowed is a good indicator that God does not believe in chimeras.
Is it logical then to think that He in all His glory would turn around and use anotherâ€™s woman to reproduce a chimera. Please say no.
Jesus was a good, perhaps great prophet and Rabbi. That is all.
To call Jesus a chimera or Man/God hybrid is to insult both God and Jesus.