|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1179 days) Posts: 583 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: In whose name would that be lawful? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
goldenlightArchangel Member (Idle past 1179 days) Posts: 583 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
quote: 1st. - when one chooses to buy bread, the fact of paying the price does not mean that the price that is paid would be a supposed punishment, but the adulterated translation of Genesis made by the Scribes, which was left to the doctrines of faiths and abominations of the earth, has been crediting the theory of punishment which belongs to the dragon--the father of the beliefs/lies. 2nd. - According to the eternal Justice a child does not have to pay for a choice his-her parents made. 3rd. - The first instruction from the beginning of Genesis is still valid and remains forever. 1/2. immediate - lef - Do the biblical dictionaries agree that the word 'elohim' was a common generic designation for deity in the middle east? Beth - Did ELiYouN (Most High--He that Declares) self designate as 'elohim--god' which was a common generic designation for deity in the middle east? Gmel - Was the word 'EL', in the original Hebrew names, first written to be the short form of ELIYOUN (Most High--He that Declares)? Dálet - Was the word 'EL', in the original Hebrew names, first written to be the short form of a common generic designation for deity (elohim) in the middle east? ------- In the days of Mosheh 'to worship a deity (elohim)' meant to worship the calves Datasegment's definition for deity,A god or goddess; a heathen god. [1913 Webster] To worship calves, the deities of Egypt.--[1913 Webster] The first lie starts when one reads the first paragraph for the hearers: in the beginning elohim... that is what the children or first time hearers do hear,because the audible part, the part of a word that is heard, cannot be capitalized. And the child or first time hearer hears 'in the beginning god/elohim...'--from the versions that proceeded from the mastercopy that is according to the Scribes, religion and theologies-- instead of the kadhosh way to regard the eternal one of Israel. See the words 'kadhosh'(separate) and 'eternal one'in the above sentence. They are not capitalized and the reader understands their written form because these words are not a common designation. The premises of the Word are:the name that remains forever and the kadhosh designations, and the principles of the truth that common is common, common is neither holy nor kashosh (separate). Would one like Genesis as originally written,the first step is to listen to the Word and then ascertain and know that it is pointless to lean away from the premises of the beginning. The premises of the beginning are: A kadhosh designation,that is the kadhosh way to regard the eternal one of Israel, and the most kadhosh: the eternal name that remains eternally,which translates I AM THAT I AM, and says, 'I AM the same, I AM the first, I AM also the last', and is the same Word that became flesh: YHWH'SHUAH -- I AM IS THE SALVATION ------- did the Scribes not lock the door of the scrolls?or did they not adulterate the previous work of the Sages? It is the Word become flesh who first attested: 'woe to you Scribes and Priestsfrom religiosity, because you lock the doors [the scrolls] of the kingdom of heaven against men, for you yourselves do not enter in, nor will you let those enter who are trying to'. Therefore, the evidences of the locking of the door/scrollsof the Law/Torah are against the lying pen of the scribes. Did ELiYouN (Most High--He that Declares) self designate as 'elohim--god' which was a common generic designation for deity in the middle east? No.Because a common designation for deity is a common designation for deity, and is neither holy nor kadhosh (separate), since a deity(god--elohim) can be made of anything, dirty, wood, dust... a deity is spiritually less than nothing. Therefore the term 'god--elohim' has nothing to do with Kodesh,the same exact way that the word 'swine' is a common designation, and has nothing to do with the kadhosh designation 'sheep'. Example: the term 'catfish' is not an appropriate term to refer to a chosen one,because the words that can be used to refer to a chosen one are kadhosh designations like sheep and good fish The word 'elohim,which was a generic and common designation of deity in the middle east, is not the same as 'ELiYouN' (He that Declares), and therefore, the only possibilities that are leftwhile utilizing the words '...other than me' and '...other besides me', in the sentence of the first commandment as originally written are, I AM YHWH your EliYouN (He that Declares)You shall have no other EliYouN (Instructor--he that declares) than me, which means: 'you shall have no god/elohim at all before me', and proves once more that the Most High did not say the words 'elohim other than me' or 'other god besides me' from the Scribes' adulterated mastercopy, but these evidences have been falling on deaf ears.
quote: Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : 1st line Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : 2nd line
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5221 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
CrazyDiamond,
According to the eternal Justice a child do not have to pay for a choice his-her parents made. But they did, the fall of man. Mark There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
goldenlightArchangel Member (Idle past 1179 days) Posts: 583 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
Although the Scribes have been writing the opposite, adulterating the copies of the manuscripts of Genesis,
in the measure that they continued to eat the properties--nutrients from the dust of the earth, the man and his mate followed gradually a trajectory of return to the dust. They did not pay for more than the price of the choice that they made, not a punishment. If the validity of the first instruction is eternal,then there is still time to choose what Jehaveh --I AM-- had already chosen for you in the words From the fruits of the solid trees you can freely eat, except the one that is fruit and food at one time.. he--she might argue that everything changed with the fall, including the first eternal instruction... The spiritually imposed doctrines of faiths of the earth don't see the instructions given from the beginning as anything significant since: 1st. In the mind of those doctrines (or beasts; since a doctrine is not a human being), Adam was expelled from the Garden thus anything that was brought up beforehand would be void and would not pertain to this day and age. 2nd. The dietary laws brought up in the books of the Law do pertain to foods and include meats and thus in the mind of the doctrines of faiths, would still make the instructions given from the beginning void and would not pertain to this day and age. 3rd. The obscure doctrines also like to bring up the passage where it is said that it isn't what goes into the body that makes one unclean but what comes out of the body and by doing this it backs up their claims that it doesn't matter what one eats. There are also a few more things that those doctrines like to bring up and one of them is that they will always place the blame for their ills, the death, and both good and evil squarely on the dragon --the old-style serpent-- that was in the garden. Everything would be all 'its' fault... The same eternal Justice does not force a redeemed one to pay for other person's choices. The nutrient properties of the fruits from the compatible trees are not made of the dust of the ground, which means that they do not proceed directly from the ground, but Adam and Eve had chosen to eat bread and food and that was their choice, the price they paid for not eating only the fruits from the appropriate trees was the return to the dust of the ground. Sometimes he--she might argue that no one is under an obligation to eat the way the first instruction described; but he--she also might comprehend that the original word is 'by aemunah--fidelity --which means 'not because of any obligation'; 'not because of the imposition of human ministration'; 'not because of operation of law(or rules over rules)'; 'not before any image of doctrines of faiths--beliefs that were made by the inhabitants of the earth and their supposed spiritual authorities from down'; do it by free will--spontaneously, for love of friendship, not by obligation, but by fidelitate. The word fidelity is from the Scriptures as originally written, but the word faith/belief have been proved to be from the versions of scripture, because there are evidences that the word fidelity --from the original Roman word fidelitate-- was substituted with the word 'fide' (faith/belief) in the mastercopy of versions of scripture that proceeded from the Mother church. It is not possible for one to recognize the very beginning --in which the fear of death first started--,unless he--she first recognizes that Yahweh is not the author of death and did not make him-her to die. There is a moment of choice and a time of free will that is granted to everyoneby the eternal Justice, but the spirit of man has been often choosing his own ways, to not give ears to the first instructions of life. There is no fear of death chained to him--her that he--she did not or does not have power to choose it to be so,but the big majority have been choosing the death and the fear of death up to this day. See the distinction between punishment and Price to be paid, The man, which I AM/Yahweh/Jehaveh formed from the dust of the earth,and his mate, having chosen not to eat only the fruits which they were instructed by the eternal words that they can freely eat, had to pay the price because of the choice they made: his work became with toil for the food that perishes. Her childbearing became with pain, also the *glory of her spirit --the natural splendor of her spirit and strength of her desire-- became reserved exclusively for her spouse, **instead of that glory remain reserved to the Eternal and Celestial in the first place. * In order for her to prophesy with the power and authority of the Word of YHWH,she must have the Free Will of wearing the Sign of YAHWEH's Power over her head --the principal part of the head: the forehead which is the place that is attested, by the eternal words, to be the reserved place for the Name that remains eternally. ** When she recites the eternal instruction or prophesy with the authority of the Name that remains eternally: It is by wearing the foreheadcovering--The Sign of Power over her head: The Sign of YHWH's Authority which reclothes her forehead --the principal part of her head--, that she becomes, in that moment, reserved exclusively to the authority and power of YAHWEH of the Hosts, instead of having anything to do with the temporary sign of power of the spirit of man, whether her father or spouse's sign of temporary power.
quote: Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : 3rd paragraph
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
goldenlightArchangel Member (Idle past 1179 days) Posts: 583 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
IamJoseph writes: There are aspects of this episode I do not understand and see as mysterious or enigmatic There are no contradictions in the Scriptures as originally written,for the contradiction lies in the titles, introductions, complementary explanations and footnotes that were added by the Scribes. The contradiction started from the re-editions of complementary explanations which had been adapted and inserted in Scripture from time to time by the ones that have locked the door of the scrolls, Because knowledge of the truth cannot be retained throughthe doctrines of demons and of the father of the beliefs. See one of the evidences that is called 'the acts of Mosheh', 1st. - the books of Mosheh were written by Mosheh, 2nd. - the actions Mosheh did were written by himself: and his actions he himself attested in the first person of the singular, saying, I did it, like in the Song of Mosheh. After the re-editions made by the Scribes, one evidence more of the door of the scrolls being locked by the religious ones is clear, because it is not possible that Mosheh would have supposedly written about his actions using the third person of the singular. The second lie that was embedded by the Scribes in the copies of Genesis,has been the belief that the angels would have been made to be the legitimate sons of the Most High. Were the angels made to be the sons of the Most High? No. Because the usage of the term 'first-fruit of ELiYouN'(from the book of Job as originally written) has been written to hold the significance and meaning of 'spark--extension' and 'first-fruit of the devouring fire of Yahweh of the Hosts, because the bodies of the creatures (the cherub angels) were made to be a lamp for the shining intense light, In the time that it is attested that the bodies of the cherub angelswere made to be a lamp for the glittering of the shining Light of YHWH--I AM the Light--, the evidence is clear that the angels were not made to be the Light itselfand that they were made to serve on behalf of the legitimate sons. For only the spiritual descendence of Abraham can be the legitimate sons,because one must born again and an angel was not made to born again. The spiritual descendence of Abraham is born once in the flesh(for being generated once according to the precipitation of the flesh), and then born again in Spirit when he--she comes to be generated again,now according to the will of the Spirit. There are two accounts in Genesis, Evidences: The generation of the sons and daughters of men 1st - were formed in the sixth day2nd - were made to be creatures 3rd - were made to be male and female 4th - were made to live 120 years 5th - were given to eat not only the appropriate fruits from the solid trees The generation of Adam, which is of the sons and daughters of the Most High 1st - was formed after the seventh day2nd - was made to be a son--legitimate generation of EliYouN 3rd - the soul of the female was made from the substance of Adam 4th - Adam was made to abide the living (vivifying) YHWH's breath. And it was not the regular ordinary breath of life of the creatures and animals. 5th - were given to eat only the compatible fruits from the solid trees the usage of the term 'first-fruit of ELiYouN'(from the book of Job as originally written) does not mean that a cherub angel was made to be generation of ELiYouN, or a son of the Most High like Adam was. When men began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of the Most High [the generation of Adam] saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose. Then YHWH said, 'My Spirit will not contend to abide with the man forever, for he is mortal; his days will be a hundred and twenty years'. My Spirit --The Spirit that was in the generation of Adam,--will not contend to abide with the man forever--. ------- The book of Hebrews says clearly that the cherub angels were made to be angels, but the scribes of the false prophet(theology),and the doctrines of faiths of the earth do have the habit of choosing their version of Genesis that was copied according to the fables they made to please their father of the beliefs, which mixes a legion of truths and lies and says: ..'we' believes that the sons of god/elohim were fallen angels.. ..'we' sees clearly that angels are called the sons of god/elohim... 'we' is letting it be, 'we' is taking it as true, 'we' is giving spiritual credit to it... ..and all that 'we' needs is to believe..'
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5221 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
CrazyDiamond,
They did not pay for more than the price of the choice that they made, not a punishment. Look, you said:
According to the eternal Justice a child do not have to pay for a choice his-her parents made The bible clearly does punish humanity for the crimes of the father with the fall. It doesn't get more "for the crimes of the father" than that! You haven't said a single thing that challenges this. Mark There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3694 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: No, they did not. While there was a punishment for disobedience, the aspect of death was pre-ordained, before adam and eve emerged. This is proven by the command they should not eat from the fruit of knowledge - which they did eat and beget knowledge; but they did not/could not eat the fruit of life [immortality]. Here, the immortaility factor was pre-ordained, but the knowledge factor was not. When the law emerged, we are clearly told, only the sinner pays; only the knowledgeable can sin; all are born sinless. Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3694 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: This is not correct and is not based on any evidence. In fact, the evidence says: The most undistorted writings in humanity's geo-history, is genesis. This is proven by the scrolls, which is upto 2300 years old and unchanged from today's hebrew bible. And this document is the most undistorted by period of time - which document is unchanged for 2300 years? So you cannot make your claim based on nothingness, and against the greatest proof humanity has at its disposal. In fact, genesis and the OT represents the world's first HISTORICAL [with soecific dates, names, places and events], advanced [aphabetical] book [multiple pages with a continueing narrative]. Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3694 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: Do you agree that is an absolute proof of its athenticity of being contemporary? The same applies with the name 'EL' [Lord, Sir, Boss, High One, etc]; and circumsizion - this ritual predated Abraham and was the standard mode used for contracts and vows. You will find, likewise, the OT does not say camels and tomatoes existed in ancient egypt - because this is not known as a fact: camels emerged in arabia much later. Its called vindicated authentic contemporary writings. Also, the term 'dust' is not understood in this thread. This is an appropriate term to denote the base sub-atomic particles of the earthly elements, which all life contains. This says the OT was written for all generations of mankind. What better word can you nominate, which would be understoof by 3500 year mankind- and those of today?! Grammar was introduced in the OT. Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5221 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
IamJoseph,
No, they did not. While there was a punishment for disobedience, You contradicted yourself in the first sentence. It's not called the "fall of man" for nothing. Mark Edited by mark24, : No reason given. There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3694 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
No sir. The fall does not relate to the causation factor of death, but the disobediance of a command only; the crime of murder was also yet not mandated - the reason Cain was not terminated. This is also not the cause of man being born in sin, which is a later gospel doctrine, motivated by its own views. Man is born sinless; sins are not transferable; sin is only possible with full and wanton knowledge. Death and knowledge were pre-ordained; immortality [tree of life] was not: the eden story is not based on a physical realm - it becomes physical only after the casting down from paradise.
'ONLY THE SOUL THAT SINNETH IT SHALL PAY - THE SON SHALL NOT PAY FOR THE FATHER NOR THE MOTHER FOR THE DAUGHTER' [OT] This is also accepted in all judiciary institutions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mark24 Member (Idle past 5221 days) Posts: 3857 From: UK Joined: |
The fall does not relate to the causation factor of death Never said it did. Mark
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
goldenlightArchangel Member (Idle past 1179 days) Posts: 583 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
Immediate transcription:
And this is his instruction, That we should remain in the name of his first-fruit, Yhwh'shuah --I AM is the Salvation, and *love all persons, as he **gave us instruction. **love your enemies; let the sun of FORGIVENESS shine upon everyone*do not kill nor die in the name of a flag or of a country *do not anihilate nor judge a human being in the name of the justice courts of the earth. He that receives him is not lost: but he that does not receive him is already lost, because he has not received the name of him --Yhwh-- that abides in the name of the only begotten first-fruit of Eliyoun (Most High). ------- Scripture says to not trust in men spiritually,which means do not pay reverence, examine well, the spiritual things that had been made, translated or transcribed by the spirit of man, the spiritual things made by the spirit of man includes every translation of Scripture because the word is spiritual. For Yhwh has given him--her the gift of understanding (discernment) through which he--she can freely ascertain on the knowledge of the truth.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3694 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
I may be wrong, but I saw the doctrine of born in sin referring to the fall of adam and eve.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3694 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: Politics and racism - a doctrine which can be, and was, used to persecute. This was seen when Isabela of spain massercered many, with the premise of 'better to destroy their bodies and save their souls', and with Pope Pious who forbid the return of the jews to their land - a declaration of genocide. The law rules, not a name, and christians will be judged only how they act with Israel. You cannot choose your own premises and boast about only what suits you. The OT declares the most formidable 'AND' here: 'I SHALL JUDGE ISRAEL - *AND* - THE NATIONS'. And this has naught to do with the NT - it preceded and anticipated you.
quote: Let this doctrine be judged how others were treated - first learn to 'love the starnger' [OT] - then try for love your enemies'
quote: There is nothing wrong in love of country - a natural human trait. Better, do not rob another's land and deem it yours. Christians who do not act as honest historical witness of another peoples' land - should not fantasize they will get 70 virgins and a free bonus salvation.
quote: Kbnock, knock! Let the Most High speak for himself. Otherwise go and worship Mohammed before deciding the destiny for muslims, hindus, budhists, jews and atheists. The NT wants to act as judge, jury and executioner - but the Judge has not appeared. A judge must be arm's length and non-biased, cannot speak anything but the truth, with no omissions of any side's crimes and falsehoods. A true judge does not judge on the basis of which VIP club one joins. The law rules.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
goldenlightArchangel Member (Idle past 1179 days) Posts: 583 From: Roraima Peak Joined: |
IamJoseph,
the term 'is already condemned' is from a Catholic version, in a scripture that says 'he that does not receive him is already lost', which gives the understanding of 'can't be more lost than that', the term 'already' should read 'still': A paraphrase that translates 'he that does not receive [Yhwh] is still lost' seems to be the original text.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024