If Jesus was God, explain this verse...

[Prophet]

Your wishing, right?

Blessings, AJ

I'd actually welcome his return. I admit that I am able to stave off the inevitable boredom of taking on low level debate competition with spite. Making him look awful is egoically pleasing to me.

 

[look3467]

"...I admit that I am able to stave off the inevitable boredom of taking on low level debate"...>>>Prophet

You have just reviled a flaw in your character, unless..... (saving face) your just kidding, of which is easily forgiven.

Blessings, AJ

 

[Prophet]

I know. I'm pretty upfront about those flaw things. Notice my wording. "I admit..." Do you find that you often get superior satisfaction by pointing out the flaws of others?

 

[look3467]

I know. I'm pretty upfront about those flaw things. Notice my wording. "I admit..." Do you find that you often get superior satisfaction by pointing out the flaws of others?

No, that is why I suggested "just kidding".

By the way,I never, ever, absolutely ever, make any judgments of anybody's character.....................................................not, just kidding.

Now, we're even.


Blessings, AJ

 

[Prophet]

But there was no kidding on my part. I am often upfront about my egoic desire to humiliate opponents who have slighted me in some fashion.

And you saying that you never, ever make judgments on anyone's character the post after pointing mine out as possibly flawed... I don't want to call you purposefully dishonest as I don't believe you're that, but it certainly demonstrates a lack of self-awareness.

 

[Shermana]

The word you are looking for here is not congruent, but consistent, agreed?

I believe you used the word congruent, and congruent has an application that can be used with consistent.

And I do not contest that the passage in question in the OP is, indeed, consistent with what you believe about sin. However, you need to realize that I have been consistent as well in my criteria for discarding of what I deem to be false scripture, that being, that we should disregard anything of a magical or poorly reasoned nature.

I guess you've been consistent in saying that anything you consider "poorly reasoned" is only that which you happen to disagree with. My reasons for what is and isn't interpolated is a bit more scholarly.

In rooting out false prophets, beliefs, or Scripture, we are commanded to use all of our rational capacity.

Indeed. Now perhaps you will understand that your "rational capacity" may not be as rational as you think.

You treated me like absolute garbage from the first moment you ever read any of my posts.

I treated you like anyone I think is asserting garbage as matter of fact, and you took the gloves off immediately and refused to answer basic questions.

You actually treat just about everyone here like that.

I'm far from the only one who treats people like such as such. You would definitely not like the people with Shield of Research when they call you out.

Unless they agree with you.

People who agree with me I believe have been actively using their "Rational capacity" and aren't dead set on an agenda to undermine what I value as truth.

You just can't help but be a bully.

Maybe it's the testosterone.

I would explain how selfish your general attitude is further if I felt like anyone reading this other than you couldn't see it plainly as day.

You could say Jesus was pretty Selfish too then. He's not very nice to people he disagrees with either.

But, here we run into our differences in understanding of sin again.

Yes, mine is the scriptural view.

I think we agree that sin is congruent with evil.

The word "Evil" is a bit subjective.

When someone, anyone, Jew or not, does something evil, a psychological discomfort is felt in the form of guilt.

Definitely, unless they're desensitized.

I think we also agree on this. Now, I have to ask a question: What EXACTLY causes this guilt? I believe that this guilt is caused by an internal knowledge that the act they've performed is selfish and alters them from who they are meant to be.

It's caused by something they are built in with, a series of chemicals which are programmed to react when at fault.

You seem to be saying that this guilt is caused by subconsciously referencing Mosaic Law and finding themselves wanting, even in cases where the one feeling guilt has never heard of Mosaic Law.

I believe breaking the Mosaic Law is part of what achieves this. I know for example I've felt guilty about consuming pork when I wasn't a practicing Jew and held the religion in contempt. Same with breaking Sabbath.

What about the period of time before the Mosaic Law was written? Was there no sin then? Where was Moses when Cain murdered Abel?

The Law of Moses is the full extent of what constitutes sin.

Well, sir, you've successfully identified the magic bullet you will need to bring out to actually attempt debate. Put forth the selfless act that is motivated by fear if you have the scenario, and I will predictably prove this act to be hypocrisy.

Sure, a mother taking care of her child or going out of her way to protect it could be classified as all kinds of selfish desires. Ego and status for example.

I'm not saying one motivates piety more than the other. I'm saying that love is the motive for true piety and the fear is the motive for false piety aka hypocrisy.

And what is "love"?

No, that's probably your own issue,

Nice quaint attempt at another personal swipe, but I'm quite fine socializing with the ladies, the prettiest ones too. I'd be surprised to hear you do however.

but if that's the worst fear you know

,

Your desparation to smear me is evident. I merely used that as one example and you, expectedly turn it around in such a way.

of COURSE you'd never be a rapist.

I'm not even sure of what exactly you're trying to say here.

People who have lived the hardest lives and have murdered and raped and desensitized themselves to all else know that the only thing that is truly terrifying is being alone.

Is that an attempt to excuse them? Hmm...suspcious.

Whatever hardships your life may have cast your way, you've never been alone, and you take credit for the luck of your birth.

Again, I believe being born an Israelite is a Karmic reward (of which most of us lose and don't realize is such a blessing), and it's actually a fairly lonely life social-wise living in accords to what I believe are Nazarene principles, most people want to go out and party and engage in activities I don't believe in.

The only reason you aren't a literal murderer is that the hell you were born in wasn't as deep as the hell of the people you judge.

So if I was born as a poor gentile, I'd be murdering people?

As for way murder warps the mind of the one performing it, you do exactly the same. You are a murderer in your heart when you judge them angrily.

It's actually fleshed out as judge them without cause.

It seems you are proposing that people shouldn't angrily condemn those who murder and rape. Correct?

 

[psychoslice]

I feel that if we reduce God down to one mere man, then this is true blasapheming, Jesus the man only represented God, he never said he himself was God, in fact he said he cannot do anything without The Father, the Father is our Source, or Consciousness. When we ourselves are Self Realized, we then also can say that we represent the Father, collectively we are gods, like droplets of water from the ocean, but when we are Awaken we then truly realize we are the ocean.

 

[Ken Brown]

Ken

Very well stated! I am in agreement with you on all of it except the part where mankind can not reach a state of perfection without the second (perfect man sacrifice) man being our substitute.

That only means that being shown the path and the way does not gain ones salvation by works of righteousness, but rather by the shed blood of the perfect one.

That being the case, IMO, the path and the way does lead one to Christ in acknowledging His sacrifice as our own, granting us salvation solely based on His faithful obedience. Living in the flesh and knowing ones salvation is secure is a blessing of privilege. Solely the responsibility of the Holy Spirit.

But if, one has no knowledge, or even if one has knowledge of, which in many cases is, but does not accept that knowledge as ones own, than salvation is differed until death of the flesh, upon which ones soul will bow at the feet of Jesus and be instantly saved.

Blessings, AJ

Hi AJ, you have a nice way in presenting yourself, and I feel you are sincere, but with that being said, you should really discard the belief that Elohim desires sacrifice. Even though He commanded it, it is not His desire. He doesn't need Innocent Blood Shed in the place of sinners, but what He desires is that a sinner turn from their sin and do what is right. Now, for this transformation to occur, a precious, sinless, offering was killed by each and every one of us, as we, with the help of wicked me, did slay Yeshua. Yeshua told the authorities of His day to go and learn what this means: "I desired mercy and not sacrifice." Please tell me what you think that means? KB

 

[look3467]

Hi AJ, you have a nice way in presenting yourself, and I feel you are sincere, but with that being said, you should really discard the belief that Elohim desires sacrifice. Even though He commanded it, it is not His desire. He doesn't need Innocent Blood Shed in the place of sinners, but what He desires is that a sinner turn from their sin and do what is right. Now, for this transformation to occur, a precious, sinless, offering was killed by each and every one of us, as we, with the help of wicked me, did slay Yeshua. Yeshua told the authorities of His day to go and learn what this means: "I desired mercy and not sacrifice." Please tell me what you think that means? KB

Well stated: (" Even though He commanded it, it is not His desire".)

Not that the Father desired sacrifice, but that sacrifice was necessitated for the redemption of His creation.

I believe His desire was for us to be obedient, but as creatures of choice, as designed originally,obedience was not in the design for independent gods.

As you stated, by necessity, the redemption of His creation "Now, for this transformation to occur, a precious, sinless, offering was killed"...
Had to be complied with as predicted.

Jesus "Must die" as the Father turned His face from Jesus as stating, you must go through with it.

Sacrifice was the methods instituted by the Law of Moses and in which the nation of Israel were traditionally accustomed.

Where Jesus desired Mercy, which is by grace, they could not understand it.

The law showed no mercy. Either one adhered to it or one did not.

Grace on the other hand, by mercy extended granted forgiveness.

One can say that each one of us nailed Him to the cross because technically, had Jesus not paid for our redemption, we'd be liable a at a loss of an eternal existence.

"as like one of us" was the original design flaw that had to be corrected, but not first becoming as gods, to know good and evil.

Could any of us make such a correction.....being flawed, save God Himself?

Blessings, AJ

 

[Prophet]

I believe you used the word congruent, and congruent has an application that can be used with consistent.

You are correct here in both statements. Forgive my oversight of the uses of "congruent". Previously, I've only known the word to be the equivalent of an equals sign when used in a rational statement, and that is the meaning I use.

I guess you've been consistent in saying that anything you consider "poorly reasoned" is only that which you happen to disagree with. My reasons for what is and isn't interpolated is a bit more scholarly.

No. I said demonstrably more than this. Quoting myself:

I'm arguing that you really don't even know what Scripture is and you have thus, no real position teaching it. I'm arguing that Scripture is Truth, itself, and when correctly understood it will stand up to and be proven by unlimited inquiry as Truth can be proven from unlimited perspectives. You think a passage is Scripture because it is in a old book you worship, and then you go the further error of thinking old book you worship must necessarily be Truth, in spite of continual defeat by rational inquiry, and it is thus, your duty to deny rationality.

Quite consistent with how I dispatched you more than a year ago:

Some people will read a story written in ancient times and immediately figure out that the story was at least a partial fabrication when they read magical elements in it, such as a whale that is ordered around by God. Apparently, you are not at this level of thought yet.

People who adhere to "truth via agreement" feel more secure in their irrational positions when they are part of a group. While you care that people agree with you, and you feel others agreeing with you gives your opinion more value, I do not care whether people agree with me or not, and my opinions are the same with or without moral support from other people.

Indeed. Now perhaps you will understand that your "rational capacity" may not be as rational as you think.

Gosh, you sure got me this time!

I treated you like anyone I think is asserting garbage as matter of fact, and you took the gloves off immediately and refused to answer basic questions.

You're seriously implying that I am the question dodger between us? Even when you are pretending to answer me, you are dodging. Forcefully restating your own opinions when challenged for reasoning is not a form of debate that is conducive to the discovery of truth and the edification of any involved. The type of "debate" you attempt to engage in more closely resembles a political debate than a rational one as you regularly ignore any valid points made against you in favor of attempting to distract your opponent, the audience, and yourself from any of your exposed weaknesses such as unevidenced beliefs in a magical God who creates infallible holy books and stifles debate. In the type of "debate" you engage in, the winner is the one who fools all involved.

Again, the accusations you throw my way, you are much more guilty of than me. To this type of Christian, Jesus says:

You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. -Matthew 7:5

I'm far from the only one who treats people like such as such. You would definitely not like the people with Shield of Research when they call you out.

Oh, so because someone is more bigoted than you that excuses your bigotry? Is this your moral high ground?

People who agree with me I believe have been actively using their "Rational capacity" and aren't dead set on an agenda to undermine what I value as truth.

To be perfectly honest, I've not really witnessed this phenomenon, but I'll give you the benefit of a doubt that you have supporters.

Maybe it's the testosterone.

That's probably not helping.

You could say Jesus was pretty Selfish too then. He's not very nice to people he disagrees with either.

I see a different Jesus when I read. I see someone who was very forgiving of faults, and a friend to the lowly sinner. I see someone who is so reasonable and confident that he had no reason to be angry when he came up against opposing viewpoints, dispatching angry mobs intending to punish a being found guilty with a few wise words. "Let the one who is without sin cast the first stone."

Yes, mine is the scriptural view.

As opposed to a rational view. We know.

The word "Evil" is a bit subjective.

If you say so, but I am happy to debate against you on this if you go beyond just making a baseless claim.

Definitely, unless they're desensitized.

It's caused by something they are built in with, a series of chemicals which are programmed to react when at fault.

And is this the scriptural view on guilt?

I believe breaking the Mosaic Law is part of what achieves this. I know for example I've felt guilty about consuming pork when I wasn't a practicing Jew and held the religion in contempt. Same with breaking Sabbath.

The Law of Moses is the full extent of what constitutes sin.

You' are dodging. I ask again. Where was Moses when Cain killed Abel? Where was Mosaic Law when the first murder occurred? If Mosaic Law is the basis for sin, you find Cain logically innocent as his existence preceded the Law. But, since we all know that murder is always murder, it is rationally evident that there is a standard of goodness that supercedes Mosaic Law.

The mental gymnastics you perform to deny this must be exhausting.

Sure, a mother taking care of her child or going out of her way to protect it could be classified as all kinds of selfish desires. Ego and status for example.

So, you're talking about someone doing acts of good to be seen doing them?

1Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.

2 “So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. 3 But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4 so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

And what is "love"?

Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more.

Nice quaint attempt at another personal swipe, but I'm quite fine socializing with the ladies, the prettiest ones too. I'd be surprised to hear you do however.

And you're so impressively secure that you needed to inform me you can get with hot chicks.

Your desparation to smear me is evident. I merely used that as one example and you, expectedly turn it around in such a way.

Smearing you is fair. Yeah, I admit I'm enjoying the trash job I'm doing on your entire deluded worldview for very selfish reasons here. But desperation? Get real. I'm saying this straight up, not even trying to get a rise out of you: You are easy pickings, dude. Whatever you are good at, this isn't it. Stick with picking up girls, maybe?

Is that an attempt to excuse them? Hmm...suspcious.

No more than it is an excuse for you.

Again, I believe being born an Israelite is a Karmic reward (of which most of us lose and don't realize is such a blessing), and it's actually a fairly lonely life social-wise living in accords to what I believe are Nazarene principles, most people want to go out and party and engage in activities I don't believe in.

And when I challenge this as non-rational, you'll avoid my challenge again and claim it is scriptural? I'll save my time. I'm already quoting myself enough.

So if I was born as a poor gentile, I'd be murdering people?

I don't think the gentile part matters, but poverty makes viciousness more common. It probably matters a great deal what family you are born into.

It's actually fleshed out as judge them without cause.

It seems you are proposing that people shouldn't angrily condemn those who murder and rape. Correct?

Correct. I've fallen for your clever trap. Now show me how wrong I am.

 

[Shermana]

No. I said demonstrably more than this. Quoting myself:

I fail to see how anything you said goes against what I said.

Quite consistent with how I dispatched you more than a year ago:

The only thing you dispatched was your credibility. You should try dispatching your bloated ego as well, it would be good for you. But I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Gosh, you sure got me this time!

I get you every time. Like many others here, debating with you is like playing chess with a pigeon. You have no concept of debating along the rules, you demand to play by your own rules without regard for objectivity, dismiss and write off other views without much basis, claim that I have dodged when you simply don't understand my answer, and you make it a point to make it personal.

You're seriously implying that I am the question dodger between us?

Yes.

Even when you are pretending to answer me, you are dodging.

No.

Forcefully restating your own opinions when challenged for reasoning

Which is what you do.

is not a form of debate that is conducive to the discovery of truth and the edification of any involved.

Sometimes you have to restate yourself when your own points aren't actually addressed.

The type of "debate" you attempt to engage in more closely resembles a political debate than a rational one as you regularly ignore any valid points made against you in favor of attempting to distract your opponent,

You have no valid points. You are simply projecting what you do on to me each time. It's rather annoying.

the audience, and yourself from any of your exposed weaknesses such as unevidenced beliefs in a magical God who creates infallible holy books and stifles debate.

Again, basically your argument is "I get to decide what is and isn't scripture and then determine what you are supposed to believe as well". But you know what, that's what I do too! One little difference: My views are actually backed by scholarship and manuscript evidence with many others who have held similar reasoning. Yours don't.

In the type of "debate" you engage in, the winner is the one who fools all involved.

The winner in any debate with you is the person who is able to tolerate you.

Again, the accusations you throw my way, you are much more guilty of than me. To this type of Christian, Jesus says:

The only thing I am guilty of in my accusations of you is truth.

You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. -Matthew 7:5

Some advice you should consider following.

Oh, so because someone is more bigoted than you that excuses your bigotry? Is this your moral high ground?

Even Jesus was bigoted with people who deserved it. You deserve it. Every bit of it. Forum rules prevent me from saying more.

To be perfectly honest, I've not really witnessed this phenomenon, but I'll give you the benefit of a doubt that you have supporters.

To be perfectly honest, you're completely irrational, and I don't think it would be breaking rules to suggest you may honestly need professional help. Just saying.

That's probably not helping.

It definitely helps. It helps me deal with irrational people. Or perhaps you're jealous I have it?

I see a different Jesus when I read. I see someone who was very forgiving of faults, and a friend to the lowly sinner.

And I'm assuming you think the "Brood of vipers" stuff and the incident with the Money changers was interpolated? Also, the sinners Jesus hung out with and forgave were not murderers and rapists necessarily.

I see someone who is so reasonable and confident that he had no reason to be angry when he came up against opposing viewpoints, dispatching angry mobs intending to punish a being found guilty with a few wise words. "Let the one who is without sin cast the first stone."

John 8:1-8:11 is likely an interpolation, according to most scholars and based on manuscript traditions. I see Jesus as very vengeful and angry and wishing the undoing of those who promoted lies and heresy but held in check by his mission, who was prepared to unleash utter hell in Revelation upon them.

As opposed to a rational view. We know.

So you acknowledge my view is the actual scriptural one, good, that's a step towards you displaying some form of rationality. Baby steps. Maybe eventually you'll be taken seriously by rational people in the near future.

If you say so, but I am happy to debate against you on this if you go beyond just making a baseless claim.

The only thing you are capable of doing is making baseless claims and accusing my substantiated claims of being baseless.

And is this the scriptural view on guilt?

Is there any scriptural view on guilt? Perhaps David's Psalms might be one.

You' are dodging. I ask again.

No, you simply don't like my answer. My answer was very plain. The Mosaic Law is the greater extension of what is sin.

Where was Moses when Cain killed Abel?

Chilling in Limbo or perhaps living an existence on Earth.

Where was Mosaic Law when the first murder occurred?

Not yet instituted. Let me repeat for you, hopefully you are at least capable of understanding, the Mosaic Law represented the full extent of what God wanted to be done. Before then, there was his "Statutes ,judgments, and ordinances" which he became Friends with Abraham because he adopted and accepted. And there's the issue of Melchezdiek.

If Mosaic Law is the basis for sin, you find Cain logically innocent as his existence preceded the Law.

Wrong. If you had basic reading comprehension you'd understand what I meant the first time.

But, since we all know that murder is always murder, it is rationally evident that there is a standard of goodness that supercedes Mosaic Law.

That's right, that's what I was saying the first time. Except it doesn't "Supercede". Mosaic Law is simply the full extension of what is and isn't allowed. Some things that are "wrong" are not considered "Evil" necessarily. Worshiping a false god may not seem "evil" but it's a death penalty crime because it's a crime of the soul. Offering the Wrong Fire in sacrifice may not be "Evil" but it's also a death penalty crime for one reason or another. There is more to sin than "Evil"

Another death penalty crime is declaring to be a prophet when you are not. Just sayin'.

The mental gymnastics you perform to deny this must be exhausting.

The mental gymnastics you employ must be staggering. But I doubt you even have the flexibility to engage in legitimate use of it.

So, you're talking about someone doing acts of good to be seen doing them?

It's one possibility.

Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more.

So, what is love?

And you're so impressively secure that you needed to inform me you can get with hot chicks.

You implied I wasn't able to. And then you don't like it when I say I can. I smell jealousy. But I've smelled that this whole time. As well as other things.

Smearing you is fair.

Noted, so my gloves are off if you haven't noticed.

Yeah, I admit I'm enjoying the trash job I'm doing on your entire deluded worldview for very selfish reasons here

.

The only trash job you're doing is on yourself. Your ego prevents you from seeing it.

But desperation? Get real.

That is real.

I'm saying this straight up, not even trying to get a rise out of you: You are easy pickings, dude. Lowest tier here.

You are easy pickings, YOU are lowest tier here. I wish no good for you. At all. Rather I wish much humbling upon you. Your pathetic attempts to attack my worldview are only valid in your own mind. If there is a single person in this world who agrees with your methodology and worldview, I'd like to meet them, so I can smack them upside the head or see what mental institution they ran away from. You simply don't like the fact that I pointed out an error in your scriptural interpretation, and you went on the attack against me headstrong. You didn't like the fact that I asked you to explain your prophethood in our first exchange, and went on the attack. You go on the attack at the first threat to your fragile yet gargantuan ego, because you know you can't back up anything you say in a cohesive way.

No more than it is an excuse for you.

Is that supposed to mean something? Are you denying that you're asking for rapists to be excused?

And when I challenge this as non-rational, you'll avoid my challenge again and claim it is scriptural? I'll save my time. I'm already quoting myself enough.

You seem to not understand how subjective reasoning works, you can call something irrational all you want, we're talking about debates here.

I don't think the gentile part matters, but poverty makes viciousness more common. It probably matters a great deal what family you are born into.

Indeed. But being poor is no excuse to murder and rape. And what family you are born into I also believe is part of your karma. You may find that irrational, but I find it irrational to believe people are randomly assigned what they are given. Likewise, I find it irrational to excuse rapists and murderers for simply living hard lives.

Correct. I've fallen for your clever trap. Now show me how wrong I am.

I don't need to show you how wrong you are, I just need to point out that you are asking people to be forgiving of rapists.

 

[Shermana]

How do you feel about people who steal things and then fence them? Is that something you feel is justified and that they should not be condemned for if they are poor like how you feel that rapists should be excused?

 

[Prophet]

You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘You shall not murder,[a] and anyone who murders will be subject to judgment.’ 22 But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister[c] will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’[d] is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’[e] 28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

In other words, the sin is in the motive. You see murdering others as evil and cursing others as excusable, yet you have the same motive as the murderer, so you're in the same sin.

29 If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30 And if your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.

In other words, if you are such a fool as to believe that sin is in the action and eternal damnation will be staved off by not performing these actions, cutting off any body parts that might tempt you to perform these actions should represent the pinnacle of wisdom.

I say that before anyone judges anyone they must judge themselves FIRST by the example of perfection that God sets before all eternally.

You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[a] and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

Now, I am not pretending to care much for you, but I see that as my failing. You seem to PREACH a message that praises hating your enemies. How in the world can what you preach seem to be at all compatible with Jesus' teaching?

I have demonstrated time and time again that you preach the anti-thesis of Jesus Christ's message.

 

[Ken Brown]

Well stated: (" Even though He commanded it, it is not His desire".)

Not that the Father desired sacrifice, but that sacrifice was necessitated for the redemption of His creation.

I believe His desire was for us to be obedient, but as creatures of choice, as designed originally,obedience was not in the design for independent gods.

As you stated, by necessity, the redemption of His creation "Now, for this transformation to occur, a precious, sinless, offering was killed"...
Had to be complied with as predicted.

Jesus "Must die" as the Father turned His face from Jesus as stating, you must go through with it.

Sacrifice was the methods instituted by the Law of Moses and in which the nation of Israel were traditionally accustomed.

Where Jesus desired Mercy, which is by grace, they could not understand it.

The law showed no mercy. Either one adhered to it or one did not.

Grace on the other hand, by mercy extended granted forgiveness.

One can say that each one of us nailed Him to the cross because technically, had Jesus not paid for our redemption, we'd be liable a at a loss of an eternal existence.

"as like one of us" was the original design flaw that had to be corrected, but not first becoming as gods, to know good and evil.

Could any of us make such a correction.....being flawed, save God Himself?

Blessings, AJ

Hi AJ, I'm not sure you are really understanding my point. Are you a parent? Would you require that your only good child stand in the place of your disobedient children just so your disobedient children could be forgiven by you? No you wouldn't! It is just like what father would give his son a serpent when he asked him for a fish. Common sense and logic should prevail.

Elohim is a patient and wonderful teacher. His plan was for mankind to experience sin, while dwelling in the flesh, so that this short breath would be used to train and teach us how to LIVE with Him throughout all of eternity. Adam and Eve had no choice. They were just like two little innocent children who had no knowledge of good and evil, and when told not to do something, they reacted just like a small child would in hearing from their parent not to eat the candy that is sitting on the table. What Elohim is doing with mankind is a sort of "spiritual" inoculation, or vaccine for the disease of sinning against His Spirit. And just like with a physical vaccine, a less deadly form of the disease is injected into the body so that the body can build up it's defenses against it. The sin of the flesh is the inoculation or vaccine that Elohim is using to protect His Body against Spiritual Sin, and the True or Proper reaction that we should have when coming into the Knowledge of the Truth concerning what that physical sin causes (Yeshua's suffering and death), is that we learn to stop sinning, and extend mercy to Yeshua by not making Him stand up on the Cross where He ought not stand. He desires this mercy from you and me and ALL sinners, as He does not like to be unmercifully sacrificed.

Yeshua knew it had to be so. That He be treated with such violence and hate. It was the ONLY way to cause us to be blessed in TURNING us from our iniquity. And He knows that mercy will triumph in the end as most sinners will be delivered OUT from their sin, and be healed from the wound that Elohim inflicted. KB

 

[captainbryce]

You could argue the same thing about getting hungry, needing to sleep, needing to go to the bathroom, etc. But if God becomes human, than God as a human, like any human, would be human in every respect.

And by that very logic, he would no longer be "God". Because by definition God is NOT human, and cannot be subjected to human limitations. Trinity still results in paradoxical, circular logic.

 

[Shermana]

In other words, the sin is in the motive. You see murdering others as evil and cursing others as excusable, yet you have the same motive as the murderer, so you're in the same sin.


In other words, if you are such a fool as to believe that sin is in the action and eternal damnation will be staved off by not performing these actions, cutting off any body parts that might tempt you to perform these actions should represent the pinnacle of wisdom.

I say that before anyone judges anyone they must judge themselves FIRST by the example of perfection that God sets before all eternally.


Now, I am not pretending to care much for you, but I see that as my failing. You seem to PREACH a message that praises hating your enemies. How in the world can what you preach seem to be at all compatible with Jesus' teaching?

I have demonstrated time and time again that you preach the anti-thesis of Jesus Christ's message.

What a nice spiel, but totally avoids my actual points. So don't be trying to turn it around on me this time when I say you're dodging the questions. You failed to address what I said about Jesus calling his enemies horrible things like BROOD OF VIPERS.

The only thing you have demonstrated is that you have a miserable understanding of the totality of Christ's message and that you seem to want to excuse people for horrible sins like rape and murder if they are poor and not hold them in condemnation. Do you think theft and reselling the stolen goods is justified if you are poor or not?

Basically it seems you are teaching an obviously anti-version of Jesus's teachings, you are teaching a "Do as thou wilt" mentality.

Also, I don't believe in "Eternal" damnation, I believe it's "Age-long", temporary, less than a century in between lives (or a bit more if the Pistis Sophia), where you are burned for each of your unresolved sins no matter how pious you were otherwise.

I also believe that the bit about not cursing your enemies is in fact an interpolation, as it does not appear in multiple manuscripts. Jesus cursed the Fig Tree as an example of something....but what is that something.

Now cursing someone with humbling is far from having the same motive as the murderer. If I really wanted you dispatched, I'd wish for that. But instead, I said I wished for you to be humbled. A big difference. Besides, the commandment is to not be angry "Without cause". Many people miss that part. And it also only applies to "your brother". You are certainly not my brother. You are a brother of those who have doctrines of demons.

 

[Prophet]

What a nice spiel, but totally avoids my actual points. So don't be trying to turn it around on me this time when I say you're dodging the questions. You failed to address what I said about Jesus calling his enemies horrible things like BROOD OF VIPERS.

Forgive my oversight of what you believe is a good argument. In our first ever interaction, you chose to cut and paste a dictionary definition of the word "context" to imply to me and all involved that I was such a simpleton that I had no concept of context. I bring up context, not to imply that you are a simpleton, but rather that you are taking Jesus out of context rather purposefully to lend a semblance to the strength of your argument.

So, Jesus called his enemies a "brood of vipers". If Jesus' message is as you believe, he should be pointing out the enemies' evil, in terms of murder or rape or theft. Yet, each time I find him calling his enemies a brood of vipers, he is addressing proud hypocrites.

You brood of vipers, how can you who are evil say anything good? For the mouth speaks what the heart is full of. 35A good man brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and an evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in him.

In other words: You tricksters! How can you whose motives are selfish say anything selfless? When your motives are selfish, nothing can come from you but evil. A good, selfless man gives his actions with pure motives of goodness for all, but you tricksters, even when you are giving on the surface you are taking your selfish reward in full in your hearts.

29 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous. 30 And you say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ 31 So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. 32 Go ahead, then, and complete what your ancestors started!

33 “You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell? 34 Therefore I am sending you prophets and sages and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town. 35 And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.

Here Jesus completes his argument that these prideful blind teachers of the law are no different than murderers and even expresses concern over the fate of these blind teacher's souls (LOVE YOUR ENEMY).

The only thing you have demonstrated is that you have a miserable understanding of the totality of Christ's message and that you seem to want to excuse people for horrible sins like rape and murder if they are poor and not hold them in condemnation. Do you think theft and reselling the stolen goods is justified if you are poor or not?

Do you think that this is gonna be the trap that finally gets me? ZZZZZzzzzzZZZZ

No, I've not said anything logically like this. I haven't said I excuse rape or murder. However, I don't see anything profitable angrily condemning anything but the root cause of these injustices: PRIDE.

Basically it seems you are teaching an obviously anti-version of Jesus's teachings, you are teaching a "Do as thou wilt" mentality.

As long as your motives are selfless, yes, do exactly as you will, I completely agree. By contrast, you teach, "Love your neighbor and hate your enemy."

Also, I don't believe in "Eternal" damnation, I believe it's "Age-long", temporary, less than a century in between lives (or a bit more if the Pistis Sophia), where you are burned for each of your unresolved sins no matter how pious you were otherwise.

I will try to commit this nuance of your beliefs to memory.

I also believe that the bit about not cursing your enemies is in fact an interpolation, as it does not appear in multiple manuscripts. Jesus cursed the Fig Tree as an example of something....but what is that something.

Now cursing someone with humbling is far from having the same motive as the murderer. If I really wanted you dispatched, I'd wish for that. But instead, I said I wished for you to be humbled. A big difference. Besides, the commandment is to not be angry "Without cause". Many people miss that part. And it also only applies to "your brother". You are certainly not my brother. You are a brother of those who have doctrines of demons.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[a] and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

I believe you flagrantly disregard this entire teaching, particularly the underlined portion.

 

[Shermana]

Forgive my oversight of what you believe is a good argument. In our first ever interaction, you chose to cut and paste a dictionary definition of the word "context" to imply to me and all involved that I was such a simpleton that I had no concept of context. I bring up context, not to imply that you are a simpleton, but rather that you are taking Jesus out of context rather purposefully to lend a semblance to the strength of your argument.

I probably did it to mock your own concept of context in that you had no basis for saying I was taking what he said out of context and you had some radical twist on it. For someone who has radically wrong views on the subject and insists that he's right, you should understand that rather easily.

See, basically you simply have nothing but to call my own argument out of context, when its not, and declare your own argument as right, or to call my argument weak or whatnot. Anyone can see right through that. It's because you have no argument.

I find it interesting that any attempt to paint Jesus as Jewish speaking in terms his own Jews would understand, as a defender of the Mosaic Law against those who would twist it is deemed "out of context". Everyone wants to paint Jesus into some new type of context for their own agenda. Can't possibly just be what fits in the actual cultural idea.

So, Jesus called his enemies a "brood of vipers". If Jesus' message is as you believe, he should be pointing out the enemies' evil, in terms of murder or rape or theft. Yet, each time I find him calling his enemies a brood of vipers, he is addressing proud hypocrites.

He actually does accuse them of a lot of specific things like neglecting the poor, as well as putting on a show of their obedience to the commandments.

esus said to the crowds and to his disciples:

2 The Pharisees and the teachers of the Law are experts in the Law of Moses. 3 So obey everything they teach you, but don’t do as they do. After all, they say one thing and do something else.

4 They pile heavy burdens on people’s shoulders and won’t lift a finger to help. 5 Everything they do is just to show off in front of others. They even make a big show of wearing Scripture verses on their foreheads and arms, and they wear big tassels[a] for everyone to see. 6 They love the best seats at banquets and the front seats in the meeting places. 7 And when they are in the market, they like to have people greet them as their teachers.

(Contemporary English version)

Likewise, Jesus was also saying that the Pharisees made a rule to get around helping their parents by declaring that their posessions were a gift to God and thus they could not use it to help them.

In other words: You tricksters! How can you whose motives are selfish say anything selfless? When your motives are selfish, nothing can come from you but evil. A good, selfless man gives his actions with pure motives of goodness for all, but you tricksters, even when you are giving on the surface you are taking your selfish reward in full in your hearts.

It seems you are completely caught up on the idea of condemning sinners altogether, as if anyone who does so must be somehow related to the Pharisees. THAT is not anything close to the context. Jesus would probably not be telling his disciples to simply give rapists and murderers a break as you are saying.

Here Jesus completes his argument that these prideful blind teachers of the law are no different than murderers and even expresses concern over the fate of these blind teacher's souls (LOVE YOUR ENEMY).

There's a specific reason he's saying they are no better than murderers.

Do you think that this is gonna be the trap that finally gets me? ZZZZZzzzzzZZZZ

No, I've not said anything logically like this. I haven't said I excuse rape or murder. However, I don't see anything profitable angrily condemning anything but the root cause of these injustices: PRIDE.

I've already got you, several times. You've already said that we should not be condemning rapists and murderers. Pride is indeed a root cause of injustice, but that's just the root. The action itself is much more condemnable. Now twice you have ignored my question about theft and fencing, is Pride the only root of that sin as well? If so, should we immediately forgive thieves of the theft and simply condemn them for being prideful?

As long as your motives are selfless, yes, do exactly as you will, I completely agree. By contrast, you teach, "Love your neighbor and hate your enemy."

Hate is such a strong word.

I would say "Ridicule and be ready to oppose and defend against".

I will try to commit this nuance of your beliefs to memory.

Good. It's a good nuance.

I believe you flagrantly disregard this entire teaching, particularly the underlined portion

I believe he's referring to fellow Israelites and those who are under the Law only. For example, the Canaanite woman is referred to as a "dog", unworthy to receive a blessing until she acknowledges Jesus as the King of the Jews.

What we see here is simply a long, many posts-long attempt to deride the view that sin is defined in the scripture as breaking the law, and that one should not condemn those who commit an act of violence upon others.

 

[Prophet]

I believe he's referring to fellow Israelites and those who are under the Law only.

You believe that hey? Based upon what? I would guess prejudice. Certainly not something solid like evidence, reason, or context.

Since you are so good at the subject of context, let's see what context says. From the verses preceding the Scripture in question:

38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’[h] 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

Note the underlined portion. What do learned people on the subject say about that verse? I doubt you care because it isn't in line with your beliefs, but it is a reference to the practice of impressment in which Roman soldiers were allowed by law to force any non-citizen throughout the empire to carry their bags for a mile. Jesus clearly means to teach us to be good to everyone, not just good people and not just fellow Jews.

 

[Shermana]

ou believe that hey? Based upon what? I would guess prejudice. Certainly not something solid like evidence, reason, or context.

I think the context is quite clear. Why would you think otherwise? I think reason leads anyone to believe that he's referring to his Israelite audience, and if you took the evidence of the Canaanite woman like I said into account, maybe you'd come to the same logical conclusion.

ince you are so good at the subject of context, let's see what context says. From the verses preceding the Scripture in question:

Are you seriously unable to understand that referring to obliging a Roman Centurion forcing you to accompany them for a mile to do menial work is NOT referring to "being good to them" in the sense of "love"? Do you think the idea of not resisting someone is the same thing as what you're referring to?

So there we have it everyone, Prophet here says that the verse about obliging a Roman Centurion is about "love".

I'm definitely going to start addressing you as "Mr Context".