Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (9005 total)
55 online now:
AnswersInGenitals, AZPaul3, dwise1, FLRW, JonF, PaulK, Stile (7 members, 48 visitors)
Newest Member: kanthesh
Post Volume: Total: 881,117 Year: 12,865/23,288 Month: 590/1,527 Week: 29/240 Day: 10/19 Hour: 3/2

Announcements: Topic abandonment warning (read and/or suffer the consequences)


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   THE TABERNACLE of His body
celestialGyoud
Member (Idle past 291 days)
Posts: 564
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 1 of 26 (259198)
11-12-2005 9:42 PM


Hello,

The Tablets of the Testimony were kept in the Ark of the covenant, and the books of the Law upon it, in a most Holy place, and the fulfillness of all the Law required a total Holiness;

Was the Tabernacle of His body established to fulfill, by His death, a law other than the Law that required Holiness?

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : updates


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by AdminPhat, posted 11-14-2005 9:11 AM celestialGyoud has responded

  
AdminPhat
Administrator
Posts: 1971
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-03-2004


Message 2 of 26 (259577)
11-14-2005 9:11 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by celestialGyoud
11-12-2005 9:42 PM


Spiritual Knowledge needs an editing job
Zsafira, is this a question that you wish to have answered in Faith and Belief? I really don't want you to start writing another online blog or book on this subject. Where are you going with it?

To whom are you addressing it? (For the record, I see a Yes and a No.) Please explain your belief and the audience to whom you hope to reach.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by celestialGyoud, posted 11-12-2005 9:42 PM celestialGyoud has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by celestialGyoud, posted 11-14-2005 12:47 PM AdminPhat has not yet responded

  
celestialGyoud
Member (Idle past 291 days)
Posts: 564
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 3 of 26 (259636)
11-14-2005 12:47 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by AdminPhat
11-14-2005 9:11 AM


Re: Spiritual Knowledge
Hi Phat,

With this thread one would be naturally heading to a discussion about the differences between the "Versions" of the Bible and the scriptures as originally written; but leaving room for a "Yes" and "No" Debate,

and for that, I would like to have it in "The Bible: Accuracy and Inerrancy".

I do not plan to make a blog, best seller or film script from it, at least not for the next one or two centuries.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by AdminPhat, posted 11-14-2005 9:11 AM AdminPhat has not yet responded

  
AdminPhat
Administrator
Posts: 1971
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-03-2004


Message 4 of 26 (259913)
11-15-2005 10:34 AM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
celestialGyoud
Member (Idle past 291 days)
Posts: 564
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 5 of 26 (260293)
11-16-2005 4:51 PM


Definition of blasphemy against the Tabernacle

First Cluster

imposition - The lamb was indicted by Roman laws.
eclipsed - Pilate’s words remained the same: “I find no basis for a charge against him.”

imposition - Pilate presided at a trial.
eclipsed - A second trial would invalidate the authority of the High Priest and of the Sanhedrin before the eyes of the Hebrew people, and would violate the Law that attests “One only Law shall be to him who is born at home, and to the stranger who lives as a foreigner among you”. The fact of asking the lamb five questions doesn’t mean that Pilate held the intention of presiding at a trial. A second trial by the invader’s laws was not what the High Priest asked Pilate to do.

imposition - The lamb was held prisoner inside the Praetorium.
eclipsed - The lamb was not Pilate’s prisoner; the Praetorium was the headquarters of a military unit, not a trial Court.

imposition - Pilate gave in because he was concerned about revolt and conveyed the death sentence.
eclipsed - His wife sent to him, saying: Have thou nothing to do with that just man; for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him.

imposition - The High Priest asked Pilate to have the lamb nailed to a cross.
eclipsed - The High Priests’ words remained the same: “We have a Law and he shall die according to our Law; because he made himself Jehavéh [I AM] the Anointed of Ishrael.” The word ‘cross’ does not exist in the books of the Law and of the Prophets, and of the Psalms. The roman cross was the symbol of the roman occupancy and had the shape of a roman sword. To the Hebrew people and the High Priests the roman cross represented Ishrael’s subjection and humiliation before the invader, the Roman empire.

imposition - Pilate had the lamb crucified.
eclipsed - He released the man who had been thrown into prison for insurrection and murder, the one they asked for, and surrendered Jeh-óshua to their will: that he was suspended [his hands tied together above his head to a green Hebrew tree] according to the Law.

imposition - The Hebrew trial by the Sanhedrin was completely illegal.
eclipsed - These are the words which I spoke to you, while I was yet with you, that all things would be fulfilled in me, which are written in the books of the Law and in the books of the Prophets.

1. Why, in the ordinations that were left to the Roman church, would the words 'cross, nails, crucify' have to be inserted in the Versions of the scriptures in the place of the words 'tree, chords, suspend'?

If there is a beast like a leopard, not being a real creature but an illustration of an imposed doctrine, that would have to open its mouth in *blasphemies against the Eternal, to blaspheme the Tabernacle [of His body], then it would be reasonable that a substitution of words had to be a part of those ordinations.

For the doctrine upon which the babylonical ‘Mother’ church is sitting, wouldn’t be a scarlet [obscure] beast [doctrine] and there wouldn’t be **blasphemy against the Tabernacle [body] of the lamb if, in truth, the same body belonging to the Holy Spirit had been nailed to a cross of the Roman empire, instead of having both hands tied together with chords to a Hebrew tree attested in the books of the Law and of the Prophets, and of the Psalms.

* blaspheme [definition], spiritually; 1. whenever Holiness and Eternity belonging to Whom is the Completeness of the Holy Spirit are attributed to something or someone which is not intrinsically Holy nor Eternal.

** blasphemy against the Tabernacle [body] of the Holy Spirit; [definition], spiritually; 2. whenever it is said that the Holiness to which the Tabernacle of His body had been separated [or sanctified] to die, could be applied to a law other than the Law in which abided the Holiness that was required to the fulfillness of all the Law.

Obscured in the eclipsed and celestial: “..are you the son.. ?” - was the lamb condemned by pronouncing the words “I son of El” [bar-Yah in Hebrew]; or by pronouncing the KADDHESH of the tetragram..

For the Law does not condemn anyone by saying "I son of El". Even the statement which belongs from the doctrine of those High priests has always been that “all the human beings are sons of El”.

Pilate and the High Priests.

- What accusation do you bring against this man?
- If this man weren’t our prisoner, we wouldn’t have brought him up to you.
- Then why don't you take him yourselves, and judge him according to your law?
- We have been impeded from executing a sentence to death with our own hands.

The reason why the High Priest’s went before Pilate. The High Priests already had sentenced Him to death, and the only barrier that impeded them from tying His hands together above his head to a post was the presence of the roman army. Judea had been invaded by the Roman empire and Pilate was the representative of the invaders; to which he was given the title ‘Pontius’ which means ‘commander’ of the Praetorium.

Only the Romans had the right;

- to appoint and crown the kings.
- to demand unpaid help from the Hebrew population.
- to ask anyone to serve them.
- to impose the death penalty.
- to cause to cease any death penalty.

- My Kingdom is not of this age. If my Kingdom were of this age, then the Hebrews would fight, that I wouldn’t be delivered to the roman soldiers. But now my Kingdom is not from this age.

Obscured in the eclipsed and celestial: “..would fight, that I wouldn’t be delivered to the Hebrews..”

[The lamb was being delivered to the roman soldiers].

The Hebrew people would want him to release Barabbas, for they knew that the lamb was not Pilate’s prisoner, neither was the lamb accused by him, not even the commander of the Praetorium [Roman military unit] could invalidate a Sanhedrin’s authority.

Did the apostles call the lamb by the NAME OF YAHWEH/JEHAVEH [YAH-ÓSHUA/JEH-ÓSHUA which means I AM the Salver/Mediation],

or did they call the lamb by a man’s name [Iesus/IESVS KRISTVS]?

He/she that hath the understanding,
let him/her count the number of the beast.
For it is the number of a man’s name;
and the number of the beast is 6, 6, 6

[VI, VI, SEI].

Hebrew numeric value for the word SVS [i.e. horse in Hebrew]

Sameq 6,0 - Vav 6 - Sameq 6,0

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : words


Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by jaywill, posted 12-06-2005 5:09 PM celestialGyoud has not yet responded
 Message 7 by jaywill, posted 12-06-2005 5:42 PM celestialGyoud has responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 567 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 6 of 26 (266138)
12-06-2005 5:09 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by celestialGyoud
11-16-2005 4:51 PM


Re: Definition of blasphemy against the Tabernacle

Jesus Christ strongly taught that He was the dwelling place of God upon the earth. In Him God the Father lived. The earliest example of this teaching of Jesus I see in John chapter 2.

"And He said to him, Truly, truly, I say to you, You shall see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man" (John 1:51).

This statement was a reference to Genesis 28:11-22. Jacob had a dream in which a ladder was set up on the earth and leading to heaven, keeping heaven opened to earth and joining earth to heaven. The place in which he had this dream he called Bethel, meaning the house of God.

Jesus, alluding that the Son of Man was the fulfillment of Jacob's dream taught by this that He was the human house of God. Within Him the eternal God resided upon the earth. And in Him the activity of the angels ascending and descending was God's operation to establish the dwelling place of God upon the earth within a Man.

Secondly, in John's gospel Jesus told His opposers that if they destroyed the temple of His body He would raise it up in three days. The language was mixed in with a discussion about the temple which the Jews took over 40 years to build:

"The Jews then answered and said to Him, What sign do you show us, seeing that you do these things? Jesus answered and said to them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then the Jews said, This temple was built in forty-six years, and You will raise it up in three days?

But He spoke of the temple of His body. When therefore He was raised from the dead, His disciples remembered that He had said this, and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had spoken." (John 2:18-22).

Christ refered to Himself as Bethel, the house of God. And Christ refered to Himself as the temple of God which being destroyed He would resurrect in three days.

Now we might wonder which "Scripture" John is refering to when he says that after the resurrection of Christ the disciples believed the Scripture. It would have to be a Scripture refering to God dwelling in a Man as His temple.

A possible candidate is revealed in the speech of the first Christian martyr, Stephen in Acts 7:47-50. Stephen end his long defense by a reference to the prophet Isaiah in Isaiah 66:1,2.

"Yet the Most High does not dwell in that which is made by hands, even as the prophet says,

Heaven is My throne, and the earth is a footstool for My feet. What kind of house will you build for Me, says the Lord, or what is the place of My rest? Has not My hand made all these things?" (Acts 7:48-50).

Here are the crucial words to Isaiah's writing plus the portion which Stephen did not quote in Acts:

"Heaven is My throne, And the earth is the footstool for My feet. Where then is the house that you will build for Me, And where is the place of My rest?

For all these things My hand has made, And so all these things have come into being, declares Jehovah.

But to this kind of man I will look, to him who is poor and of a contrite spirit, and who trembles at My word" (Isa. 66:1,2).

The meaning is clear. For a resting place and a house God will not look to dwell in anything that man can build for Him. He will look to man himself. In other words God looks to humanity to be His house, His dwelling place, and His place of rest.

Particularly then, Jesus Christ was the Man within Whom the God of the universe indwelt, lived within, was blended with, compounded with, and mingled with as one entity. He was God incarnate. And this He demonstrated by raising up the destroyed temple of His body in three days.

But the New Testament does not stop here. It goes on to show that in the concept of Jesus, those who believed into His name would also be included in His Father's house to build a mutual dwelling place where God and His saved redeemed ones unite together in one divine / human habitation of God in man.

This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-06-2005 05:13 PM

This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-06-2005 05:15 PM

This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-06-2005 05:18 PM

This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-06-2005 05:20 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by celestialGyoud, posted 11-16-2005 4:51 PM celestialGyoud has not yet responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 567 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 7 of 26 (266141)
12-06-2005 5:42 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by celestialGyoud
11-16-2005 4:51 PM


Re: Definition of blasphemy against the Tabernacle
----------------------------------

Delusion: The lamb was indicted by Roman laws.
Reality: Pilate’s words remained the same: “I find no basis for a charge against him.”

----------------------------------

The point of the gospel writers is that Christ was condemned unjustly. Pilate may have found no fault in Him but the opinion poles swayed him to act against his better conscience. Politicians often are preasured by the populace to act against thier conscience.

---------------------------------

Delusion: Pilate presided at a trial.
Reality: A second trial would invalidate the authority of the High Priests and of the Synedrium before the eyes of the Hebrew people, and would violate the Law that attests "One only Law shall be to him who is born at home, and to the stranger who lives as a foreigner among you”. The fact of asking the lamb five questions doesn’t mean that Pilate held the intention of presiding at a trial. A second trial by the invader’s laws was not what the High Priest asked Pilate to do.

----------------------------------

The hatred for the Messiah was manifest in the exposing clamor that they had no king but the Roman Ceasar. All the divine laws of God were out the window in the eyes of Christ's opposers. If Ceasar has the right to kill Him then they nullify everything and confess Ceasar as thier sole authority.

Their passionate opposition to the Son of God over ruled even their cultural regards for the moment.

---------------------------------------

Delusion: Pilate gave in because he was concerned about his career and about revolt - and conveyed the death sentence..
Reality: his wife sent to him, saying: Have thou nothing to do with that just man; for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him. Pilate listened to his wife and heeded her words because they pertained to the very man that the High Priests had brought before him. She was deeply troubled by her dream and even said that it had made her suffer a great deal.

----------------------------------

The simple answer is that regardless of what his wife's warning was, he didn't act based upon it.

Other forces prevailed upon him, like the fear that he would be called on by Ceasar for not being able to manage the situation.

---------------------------------

Delusion: Pilate had the lamb crucified.
Reality: he released the man who had been thrown into prison for insurrection and murder, the one they asked for, and surrendered Gehav-óshua to * their will. - * that he was suspended [his hands tied together above his head to a green Hebrew tree] according to the Law, and not according to the law of the invaders.

--------------------------------

The New Testament does refer to a tree in some places.

But if you were to ask Pilate if he considered this as sacrificing a lamb of course he would not have had any conept about that.

That Christ was the Lamb of God is something established in the eyes of God. And it is passed on to us as the gospel. Few made the connection between Christ's death and the atoneing sacrifice of the Passover lamb.

It seems quite strong in the concept of Jesus Himself and in the concept of His forerunner, John the Baptist who was a prophet of God.

That He was a sacrificial Lamb is evident in His establishment of the "new covenant" in His blood for the forgiveness of sins. His body was to be broken for the forgiveness of sins.

Plus the divinely arranged fact that He was ruthlessly examined for defects by His detractors and found to have had none. He was the spotless Lamb, which would harmonize with the Levitical requirement.

------------------------------------

Delusion: The High Priests asked Pilate to have the lamb nailed to a cross.
Reality: The High Priests’ words remained the same: “We have a Law and he shall die according to our Law; because he made himself Gehaveh [I AM] the Anointed of Ishrael.” The word cross does not exist in the books of the Law and of the Prophets, and of the Psalms.

-----------------------------------

Again, this was something established in the eyes of God. And God has the authority to say that this is what the death of Christ was.

Of course the HIgh Priest did not ask Pilate to sacrifice a lamb in the execution of the trouble maker Jesus.

Incidently, in God's providence, the people asked to release to them Barabbas and crucify Jesus. So they released the "son of father" and crucified Jesus, the Son of the Father.

How ironic. And how much this is a proof of the sovereignty of God over the whole situation.

This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-06-2005 05:44 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by celestialGyoud, posted 11-16-2005 4:51 PM celestialGyoud has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by ramoss, posted 12-06-2005 6:46 PM jaywill has not yet responded
 Message 9 by celestialGyoud, posted 12-07-2005 12:41 AM jaywill has responded

  
ramoss
Member
Posts: 3177
Joined: 08-11-2004
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 8 of 26 (266167)
12-06-2005 6:46 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by jaywill
12-06-2005 5:42 PM


Re: Definition of blasphemy against the Tabernacle
W
There are a certain number of assumptions you are making. One is that the gospel writers are being accurate. From secular historical sources, the nature of Pilate is not as described in the gospels.

As for the trial as described in the Gospels. That trial violates Roman law, it violates Jewish law, it violates the santity of the Sabbath, it voliates what is known about trials before the sandhrein. Because of the inconsistancies with known laws and traditions, it is a work of fiction from start to finish.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by jaywill, posted 12-06-2005 5:42 PM jaywill has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by arachnophilia, posted 12-07-2005 1:10 AM ramoss has not yet responded

  
celestialGyoud
Member (Idle past 291 days)
Posts: 564
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 9 of 26 (266293)
12-07-2005 12:41 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by jaywill
12-06-2005 5:42 PM


Re: Definition of blasphemy against the Tabernacle
jaywill writes:

"If Ceasar has the right to kill Him then they nullify everything and confess Ceasar as thier sole authority."

-

There is none who is that naive to think (or assume) that the pharisees were being sincere, and that they actually confessed Ceasar as their sole authority.

The re'Legions believe what their imposed doctrines[bestiae] guess to be truth, for they follow its doctrinal image[of the bestiae] but who ever is of I AM does remain in the Truth, not in the guessings[beliefs].

The religions have "faith", but the word "faith" has been inserted in the place of the original word "Fidelity", in the Versions of the reality; the "Versions" of the scriptures as originally written.

Fidelity requires permanence time, a whole life to remain loyal,

but faith is just a moment.

If the word "faith" in the ancient latin language(not the Medieval) could hold the meaning of "Fidelity", then the word "believe", which was also inserted in the versions of the scriptures, would hold the meaning of the original verb "to remain".

That is why the faith/beliefss in the guessings of the bestiae[imposed doctrine].

And they have, in the form of doctrine, the sign [that is made with the right hand at the height of the forehead], and the name [KRISTVS IESVS - VI, VI, SEI], and the number of the bestiae [numeral cross-reference/ reverentia numerale versetto-capitolare].

uno, due, tre, quattro, cinque, sei, sette.

-

This message has been edited by CrazyDiamond7, 03-23-2006 06:38 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by jaywill, posted 12-06-2005 5:42 PM jaywill has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by jaywill, posted 12-07-2005 2:10 PM celestialGyoud has responded

  
arachnophilia
Member
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 10 of 26 (266309)
12-07-2005 1:10 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by ramoss
12-06-2005 6:46 PM


Re: Definition of blasphemy against the Tabernacle
As for the trial as described in the Gospels. That trial violates Roman law, it violates Jewish law, it violates the santity of the Sabbath, it voliates what is known about trials before the sandhrein. Because of the inconsistancies with known laws and traditions, it is a work of fiction from start to finish.

hey ramoss, i'd be interested in seeing a source or two on that. what's known about trials, what roman and jewish laws, etc? not really debating, i've just never heard that argument.


אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by ramoss, posted 12-06-2005 6:46 PM ramoss has not yet responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 567 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 11 of 26 (266434)
12-07-2005 2:10 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by celestialGyoud
12-07-2005 12:41 AM


Re: Definition of blasphemy against the Tabernacle
Zsafira,

==========================
There is none who is that naive to think (or assume) that the High Priests were being sincere, and that they actually confessed Ceasar as their sole authority.
=========================

John records that this is what they said in John 19:15 - "... Pilate said to them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king except Caesat."

The blindness of religion and the darkness of politics joined together to carry out the unjust sentence against the Son of God.

Now, given the record of similar rebellions in the Old Testament, to believe that such was possible is not naive.

In Numbers 16 Korah, Dathan, Abiram, On and the sons of Reuben with 250 leaders of the congregation rebelled against Moses. They accused him of actually taking them out of the land flowing with milk and honey. They were refering to Egypt where they were previously enslaved.

"Is it not enough that you have brought us up out of a land flowing with milk and honey to have us die in the wilderness, but you also exercise leadership over us?" (Numbers 16:13)

Other portions of the Old Testament show degradation of the priests into rebellion against God. So it is not naive to believe John's account that the leaders of Israel opted to go along with the worldly empire rather than submit to the will of God.

Man, in general, is simply not for God. This is man's most basic problem since his fall. Man simply is not for God and not for God's will.

Man needs to completely identify with One Who was the only Person ever absolutely for the will of the Father. That is the Son of God, Jesus. He alone was totally given to submission to the Divine Will. By faith we can be attached to Him and His obedience becomes our justification.

====================
Shall one feed "believings" before the knowledge of the Truth?
or shall one Remain in the Truth.
===================

One should nourish and feed belief when such belief is ignited by the Word of God.

Not only Truth is conveyed but the True One as a Living Person is conveyed and imparted into the human spirit.

"That Christ may make His home in your hearts through faith" (Eph.3:17)

Faith is the means that God has ordained by which His living Person is imparted into our innermost being. Then man is joined to God "organically." The Son of God, bringing all that God is, dispenses the Divine Life into us through faith. And this dispensing, this organic union of the human life with the Divine Life makes us sons of God.

"He came to His own, yet those who were His own did not receive Him. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the authority to become children of God, to those who believe into His name ..." (John 1:11,12a)

========================
The re'Legions believe what you guess to be truth, but who ever is of I AM does remain in the Truth, not in the guessings[believings].
=======================

This is not guessing at all. This is receiving a living Person into one's being. The faith has an accompanying amount of confirmation that one is on the right track.

"The Spirit Himself witnesses with our spirit that we are children of God" (Rom. 8:16)

The union of God the Holy Spirit with the human spirit carries with it a deep internal witness that you have truly touched God and His life has been united with your life.

"In this we know that we abide in Him and He in us, that He has given to us of His Spirit ... Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him and he in God" (1 John 4:13,15)

The assurance is in the receiving of a living Person, Jesus Christ. The confirmation is the inner witness that we truly have been joined to the Father as sons in His life.

It is not "blind faith." It is faith with an accompanying degree of confirmation that the change that has taken place within us is not of us but of God.

========================
The religions have "faith", but the word "faith" has been inserted in the place of the original word "Fidelity", in the Versions of the reality; the "Versions" of the scriptures as originally written.

If the word "faith" in the ancient latin language(not the medieval) could hold the meaning of "Fidelity", then the word "believe", which was also inserted in the versions of the scriptures, would hold the meaning of the original verb "to remain".
=====================================

I am not completely sure of what you mean. However, Christ is a resurrected and living Person. And He teaches us to abide in Him. And that reminds me of your definition of believe as to "remain."

"Abide in Me and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself unless it abides in the vine, so neither can you unless you abide in Me.

I am the vine; you are the branches. He who abides in Me and I in him bears much fruit; for apart from Me you can do nothing." (John 15:4,5)

Jesus, therefore, teaches that belief in Him is not merely to accept some correct facts. It is to remain in His Person. It is to enter into and remain in the realm and sphere of His living Person and living presence.

Again, He teaches that He will come to abide in those who love Him and keep His word:

"Jesus answered ans said to him, If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word, and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make an abode with him" (John 14:23)

Christ, Who embodies the Father, as God incarnate, will come to His lover and make a living abode within him. Then Christ becomes that one's realm and sphere. Then He tells us to remain and abide in that sphere and He in us. That is a mutual abiding of God in a person and that person in God.

==============================
That is why the faith/believings are guessings and are based on assuming.
==============================

My experience is that these kinds of philsophical musing will not in the end provide peace within.

My need turned out to be, not correct facts, but a living Person. God in Christ Jesus the Lord, is a Living Person. Our deepest need is this Living Person. And only the presence of this Living Person abiding in our spirit and in our heart can truly give peace.

=====================
And they have, in the form of doctrine, the sign [that is made with the right hand at the height of the forehead], and the name [KRISTV IESVS - VI, VI, SEI], and the number of the bestiae [numeral cross-reference/ reverentia numerale versetto-capitolare].
=======================

I don't follow this.

But listen please - "The last Adam became a life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45).

This is the Apostle Paul's writing. It means that Jesus Christ was transfigured into a form in which He can be dispensed and imparted into man as divine life. He is in a pneumatic form. And in that form as the life giving Spirit, He can impart the divine life of God into our created life.

This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-07-2005 02:12 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by celestialGyoud, posted 12-07-2005 12:41 AM celestialGyoud has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by celestialGyoud, posted 12-07-2005 3:18 PM jaywill has responded
 Message 15 by celestialGyoud, posted 01-05-2006 2:24 AM jaywill has not yet responded

  
celestialGyoud
Member (Idle past 291 days)
Posts: 564
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 12 of 26 (266471)
12-07-2005 3:18 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by jaywill
12-07-2005 2:10 PM


Re: Definition of blasphemy against the Tabernacle
jaywill writes:

=====================
And they have, in the form of doctrine, the sign [that is made with the right hand at the height of the forehead], and the name [KRISTV IESVS - VI, VI, SEI], and the number of the bestiae [numeral cross-reference/ reverentia numerale versetto-capitolare].
=======================

I don't follow this.

You don't follow, but you have quoted the numeral cross-reference, which were inserted in the "Versions", as if they were part of the scriptures as originally written.

The reason why the numbers of verses and chapters that are found in the scriptures should not be quoted and memorized.

The scriptures were originally written in the Hebrew sequence, right to left, without breaks of verses and chapters.

1. When were the numbers of verses and chapters added to the scriptures as if they were already part of the scriptures as originally written?"

The New Testament was first divided into verses in *1551 in a greek version. In 1560, an English translation was entirely divided into the verses that still are found today.

-

2. To whom do the numbers of verses and chapters that are found in the scriptures spiritually belong to?

If they were inserted in the scriptures under the ordinance of the angels of the Eternal to the fulfillment of the words in the book Revelations regarding the spiritual ministry of a Roman city or church-woman who was built sitting upon seven hills; and says about herself “I am the Mother”; and all the nations have drunk from her cup of a Sunday’s mass; then, it would be reasonable to say that the numbers of verses and chapters belong to the spiritual ministry of Vivi Sei, the beast that has two horns like a new lamb.

* [1,5,5,1/*,* and 1,5,6,0/*,*] [2,4] [3,1,1,1/6]

-

3. Why the numbers of verses and chapters that are found in the scriptures should not be quoted and memorized?

The eternal words attest that a complete holiness would not be achieved unless there is an omission of the use of the type of number which belongs to the spiritual ministry of the beast. The eternal words didn’t authorize the use of the numbers of verses and chapters, not even the lamb has used quotation methods other than the eternal words only.

-

½. Why would the number of the beast have to be counted in a book of 66 books?

The eternal Word Who says “He that hath the understanding, let him count the number of the beast; for it is the number of the name of a man; and the number of the beast is 6 6 6”, also attests that the number of the beast would have to be part of a spiritual ministry standing where it ought not, [in a holy place]. The only spiritual place that was left where the name of a man is widely recognized as being a version of the name that replaces the original hebrew name I AM of the lamb, is the book that is a Version of the scriptures; a Version of the reality, and not the reality itself (as originally written). Three criterias attest that the “Version”; “book of 66 books”, is the place where the totality of the type of number of the beast would have to be counted:

I - Had to be counted in a holy or spiritual place.

II - The name of a man [Kristu I.e.sus/Id est suspended Nazarene Rex Iudaeorum] is found there in the place of the name of Gehavéh through which the lamb has been called by the apostles. [Gehav-óshua which means I AM the Salver/Mediation].

III - In that name of a man a trine a six is found twice, once in the hebrew numeric value and once more in the Roman algarisms/words value; KRISTVS IESVS – VI, VI, SEI – uno, due, tre, quattro, cinque, sei, sette. [reading system/ hebrew sequence].

I.e.sus - In a book of 66 books which is called "Version of the reality", the name given by the spiritual ministry called "the beast" is a name that has the value 60, 6, 60 = 6, 6, 6 whenever it is counted according to the Hebrew Numeric Values.

Samekh = 60
Vav = 6
Samekh = 60

/ the hebrew word sus/svs which means horse.

-

Had the apostles call the lamb by the Name of JEHAVÉH [Jehav-óshua / Yahshua which means I AM the Salver/Mediation], or did they call the lamb by a man's name [I.e.svs/Iesus]?

Version of the reality/ “He that hath understanding, let him count the number of the beast. For it is the number of a man: and the number of him is six hundred sixty-six.”

Obscured in the eclipsed and celestial: “He that hath the understanding, let him count the number of the beast. For it is the number of a man's name; and the number of the beast is 6 6 6.”

-

-

This message has been edited by CrazyDiamond7, 03-23-2006 06:46 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by jaywill, posted 12-07-2005 2:10 PM jaywill has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by jaywill, posted 12-08-2005 5:20 PM celestialGyoud has responded

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 567 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 13 of 26 (266931)
12-08-2005 5:20 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by celestialGyoud
12-07-2005 3:18 PM


Re: Definition of blasphemy against the Tabernacle
Zsafria,

The reason why the numbers of verses and chapters that are found in the scriptures should not be quoted and memorized.

I think that depends upon the level of your love for God's oracles.

Certainly David in Psalm 119 goes on and on about his devotion to God's statutes. And memorization was a part of his devotion.

Would you say that in Leviticus God discouraged the Israelites from memorizing His precepts and statutes? I would not say so at all.

I don't dispute that originally there were no chapters and verses.

What you follow with is interesting and a little perplexing unless I read it a few more times.

However, we are told to "let the word of Christ dwell in you richly"

Numbering the chapters, praying with the verses, singing the verses, speaking the verses, memorizing the verses, and numbering the verses, I think are all OK. If the result is that the word of Christ dwells in us richly, I don't think the heavenly Father is offended.

As for 666, it stands for Ceasar Nero.

This message has been edited by jaywill, 12-08-2005 05:20 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by celestialGyoud, posted 12-07-2005 3:18 PM celestialGyoud has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by celestialGyoud, posted 01-03-2006 1:13 AM jaywill has not yet responded

  
celestialGyoud
Member (Idle past 291 days)
Posts: 564
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 14 of 26 (275220)
01-03-2006 1:13 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by jaywill
12-08-2005 5:20 PM


Re: Definition of blasphemy against the Tabernacle
jaywill writes:

As for 666, it stands for Ceasar Nero.

Hello, jaywill, what you have pointed out does coincide with the interpretation of the materialists, who ever makes no distinction between flesh and the Spirit.

Would that prophecy remain eternally for all the generations, or would that have been written in the last book of the Scriptures just to advise a few 'dropped cats' who lived in the days of Nero?

.

Regarding that distinction which was mentioned above,

And the Word became flesh - ..and they have chosen the flesh

Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit - [definition] - spiritually; Whenever no distinction is made between the flesh and the Spirit.

.

In the beginning Was the Word that became flesh,

but they have chosen to worship the flesh through which the Savior was brought to the world. They preferred to worship that flesh, and they deemed a creature to be divine, and they worshipped the creature, a woman, and called her "the mother of the Holy Spirit".

And they blasphemed against the Word that was in the beginning,
by giving to a woman, who is not the Word that was in the beginning, the attribution "mother of the Higher".

.

And the Word that became flesh entered into the world, and the Holy Spirit abided in the flesh, but they called Him "spirit of a man" and not "the Holy Spirit in the flesh of a man".

And once more they have chosen to worship the flesh rather than the Holy Spirit Who abided in the flesh, and they created a doctrine by putting a division between Him and the Holy Spirit.

And they called the division "trine", and by doing so, they blasphemed against the Holy Spirit by saying that He (the Word that became flesh) was not the Holy Spirit Himself.

.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by jaywill, posted 12-08-2005 5:20 PM jaywill has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by imageinvisible, posted 12-19-2007 11:36 AM celestialGyoud has responded

  
celestialGyoud
Member (Idle past 291 days)
Posts: 564
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 15 of 26 (275949)
01-05-2006 2:24 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by jaywill
12-07-2005 2:10 PM


Re: Definition of blasphemy against the Tabernacle
jaywill writes:

This is receiving a living Person into one's being

Regarding the Progenitor, Begotten-son and His Holy Spirit,

Brought from the books of the prophets, ISAIAH: "I AM the same; I AM the first, I AM also the last"

1. I AM the First (the Progenitor). - here it is clear that the name of the First is I AM.

2. I AM also the Last (the Firstborn) – here it is clear that the name of the Last is also I AM.

This is confirmed by the Lamb, saying "I and the Progenitor are One."

And as I AM is Jahveh/JEHAVEH, it is proven that the Begotten-son holds the same name of I AM

-

According to the Law, a lamb may not be sent in his own name; also the Begotten-son didn't come in His own name, not even having His own name,

but the name of the One Who had sent Him; I AM, that is why the apostles have called Him by the name of His Holy Spirit: Jeh-óshua/YAHSHUA (I AM the Salvation), and it is clear that "I AM the SALVATION" is the complete name of His Holy Spirit, because the Holy Spirit is Salvation and Mediation between the First of Seven(the Progenitor) and the Last of Seven(the Begotten-son). The Holy Spirit is the only access (Mediation) through the narrow door and straight path.

And as the same Word became flesh, generated by His Holy Spirit, there was no "spirit of man" abiding in Him, for He was not generated by man. [A son of a fish is still a fish]

-

And as there was no "spirit of man" but only "His Holy Spirit Himself abiding in Him",

let none omit that "the flesh of Begotten-son generated by His Holy Spirit" is: "Holy Spirit become flesh".

It makes no sense to keep the concept of a trine as it has been presented by the theology[false prophet],

because the doctrine[beast] does try to support, through its doctrinal image i.e. called Triune, the delusion of the existence of a division between Him and His Holy Spirit,

and by doing so, the doctrine (beast) blasphemes and leaves to the habitants of the land the delusion that He would have had a "spirit of man"

And it was quoted before that the Most High is Spirit [A Spirit that is Holy and Seven], then spiritually regarding the ETERNAL; there is no "person" without first having a "Spirit", His Holy Spirit abiding;

therefore, there is no “person", but the Totality of His Holy Spirit abiding in the Lamb, for the Eternal is Spirit.

And there is no accusation, because the blasphemies against the Holy Spirit DO NOT COME from human being, but from spiritual ordinations: the imposed doctrine[bestiae] and the theology[false prophet].

-

-

This message has been edited by CrazyDiamond7, 03-23-2006 07:05 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by jaywill, posted 12-07-2005 2:10 PM jaywill has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020