If the Bible was first discovered in the Qumran caves near the Dead Sea...

[BilliardsBall]

Those are identified as being "works under the Law". [Jewish Law-- halacha).

So, the works in James 2 aren't also halachic?

And, the works you are fond of (as am I, just not for salvation!) in the Sermon on the Mount aren't Jewish/Torah/Halachic laws, but they also aren't WORKS?

There are no works in salvation, be they Halachic or no, unless John 3:16 is telling a partial truth? John 1:12 isn't true, etc.?

Please explain!

 

[BilliardsBall]

John 3:36 clarifies John 3:16 & John 3:19. Are you as Paul, foremost of sinners (Romans 7:20)? Or midrange (1 John 3:6)? As for your interpretation of John 3:6, remember that your leader and teacher, Paul, died and was supposedly buried. And while his demon spirit, apparently will not die (Revelation 20:10), he might wish that it did. As for the "Word" that does not return void (Isaiah 55:6), you have apparently nailed it to a cross.

New American Standard Bible John 3:36
"He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."

New American Standard Bible John 3:16
"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

New American Standard Bible 1 John 3:6
No one who abides in Him sins; no one who sins has seen Him or knows Him.

Isaiah 55:11 so is my word that goes out from my mouth: It will not return to me empty, but will accomplish what I desire and achieve the purpose for which I sent it.

You believe in sinless perfectionism? Why do you go to church if you never sin?

 

[BilliardsBall]

Although I like infants, they are rarely described as humble. As with giving tithes correctly, or selling all you own and giving to the poor, and following me, the floodgates of blessing follow both (Malahi 3:8). So one becomes "perfect"/"Compete" and clothed and fed as well (Matthew 6:33). You should try it. As it stands, the Word of God, that "which cannot be broken" (John 10:35), Jeremiah 31:30, states that "everyone will die for their own iniquity". And while "Christians" think they will be "gathered up" "first", per their rapture/twinkling theory, in fact, the tares will be gathered up "first" (Matthew 13:30).

Malachi 3:8 “Will a mere mortal rob God? Yet you rob me. “But you ask, ‘How are we robbing you?’ “In tithes and offerings.
9 You are under a curse—your whole nation—because you are robbing me.
10 Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. Test me in this,” says the LORD Almighty, “and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing that there will not be room enough to store it.

New American Standard Bible Matthew 6:33
"But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.

I tithe, what does that mean for me, do you think? Not sure why you quoted Malachi in this context.

 

[2ndpillar]

Israel wasn't restored in 1967.. Israel never controlled Sinai , the Bekka Valley or the Golan Heights.

Joel 3:1 reads that "I will restore the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem". That does not include "the house of Israel", which remains "scattered among the nations" (Ezekiel 36:17-19 & 24). And will remain scattered (Joel 3:2) until the "surrounding nations" "gather" "to the valley of YHWH's valley of judgment (Joel 3:11-12). At that time "Edom" will "become a desolate wilderness", and "Egypt" a waste, and "Judah will be inhabited forever". At that time Ephraim, the "house of Israel" will be gathered from the nations (Ezekiel 36:24), and combined with the house of Judah under the leadership of king David (Ezekiel 37:24-25) on the land I gave to Jacob. The northern tribes, the house of Israel remains scattered, and Edom has not been crushed.

Babylon fell in 539 BC. Medo-Persia fell in the fifth century B.C. The Greek Empire began its decline and eventual fall after the death of Alexander the Great in 323B.C. And Rome fell in A.D. 476. …. completely shattering of the statue symbolizing four different empires in Daniel 2:44. Its not the literal, earthly fall of any of these empires. Instead, the shattering of the statue represents the conquest of the territory once occupied by these empires, not their fall.

All the kingdoms of Daniel 2 have been crushed individually, but they have not been "crushed all at the same time" (Daniel 2:35), which is the final act. The feet of iron and clay was not crushed individually, until the 20th century. (Daniel 2:34) And the death of Alexander, did not mean the end of the Greek empire, for he was the "large horn" of Daniel 8:8, of the shaggy goat, "Greece" (Daniel 8:21) which was broken up into four conspicuous horns, the 4 generals of Alexander, and a "small horn" grew to the south, which represented Antiochus. "But he will be broken without human agency" (Daniel 8:25). It was the Romans, under the command of general Pompey, "with its teeth of iron" (Daniel 7:19), which crushed Greece and waged war with the "saints" (Daniel 7:21). The "saints" will not take "control of the kingdom" (Daniel 7:22) until Daniel 2:44-45, after all the kingdoms are crushed all "at the same time" (Daniel 2:35). In the meantime, "Jerusalem" has been restored as of 1967 under the the control of Judah, to set up the crushing of the nations (Joel 3:2 & 12).

 

[2ndpillar]

You believe in sinless perfectionism? Why do you go to church if you never sin?

Heaven forbid, why would one kneel to the daughters of Babylon? As for sinning, if one dies to self, and is "born of God", and "his seed abides in him;... he cannot sin, because he is born of God" (1 John 3:9). Now "the one who practices sin, is of the devil" (1 John 3:8). If you want to be "perfect", sell all you own, give to the poor and follow me. (Matthew 19:21). If you want to follow the "broad" "way" to "destruction" (Matthew 7:13), just follow the false prophets of Matthew 7:15. If you simply want to "enter into life" "keep the commandments" (Matthew 19:17).

 

[sooda]

Joel 3:1 reads that "I will restore the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem". That does not include "the house of Israel", which remains "scattered among the nations" (Ezekiel 36:17-19 & 24). And will remain scattered (Joel 3:2) until the "surrounding nations" "gather" "to the valley of YHWH's valley of judgment (Joel 3:11-12). At that time "Edom" will "become a desolate wilderness", and "Egypt" a waste, and "Judah will be inhabited forever". At that time Ephraim, the "house of Israel" will be gathered from the nations (Ezekiel 36:24), and combined with the house of Judah under the leadership of king David (Ezekiel 37:24-25) on the land I gave to Jacob. The northern tribes, the house of Israel remains scattered, and Edom has not been crushed.



All the kingdoms of Daniel 2 have been crushed individually, but they have not been "crushed all at the same time" (Daniel 2:35), which is the final act. The feet of iron and clay was not crushed individually, until the 20th century. (Daniel 2:34) And the death of Alexander, did not mean the end of the Greek empire, for he was the "large horn" of Daniel 8:8, of the shaggy goat, "Greece" (Daniel 8:21) which was broken up into four conspicuous horns, the 4 generals of Alexander, and a "small horn" grew to the south, which represented Antiochus. "But he will be broken without human agency" (Daniel 8:25). It was the Romans, under the command of general Pompey, "with its teeth of iron" (Daniel 7:19), which crushed Greece and waged war with the "saints" (Daniel 7:21). The "saints" will not take "control of the kingdom" (Daniel 7:22) until Daniel 2:44-45, after all the kingdoms are crushed all "at the same time" (Daniel 2:35). In the meantime, "Jerusalem" has been restored as of 1967 under the the control of Judah, to set up the crushing of the nations (Joel 3:2 & 12).

Edom became Indumea and prospered if you look at the ruins. Must have been pretty grand.

 

[metis]

So, the works in James 2 aren't also halachic?

Depends on how you are using the term "halachic". IOW, who's "halachic": normative Judaism or the apostles'?

And, the works you are fond of (as am I, just not for salvation!) in the Sermon on the Mount aren't Jewish/Torah/Halachic laws, but they also aren't WORKS?...

There are no works in salvation, be they Halachic or no, unless John 3:16 is telling a partial truth? John 1:12 isn't true, etc.?

Then you simply can't accept the Parable of the Sheep & Goats, nor the Parable of the Seed & Sower, nor Paul's statement to the flock to try and bring back those that have left the fold. You're justifying "rocking-chair religion", which is certainly not what Jesus taught.

Jesus said "I came to serve, not to be served", and he insisted that his true followers had to do much the same. You, otoh, want to strip that away from Jesus' message, which is heresy. And both James and Paul very much reflected that we had to do more than just believe through just sitting around twiddling our thumbs. They put out a call for action, not laziness.

Anyhow, what you are saying here is nothing short of heresy-- iow, just sit back, have some nice thoughts about Jesus, and then just do nothing else. That is simply not what Jesus nor the apostles taught, nor is the "once saved, always saved" scriptural. Instead, Jesus said "and you shall know them by their fruits", which is much more than just having some nice thoughts as "fruits" clearly implies action.

Finally, what you are conflating is the concept of "works under the Law", which indeed won't save, versus works matched with belief that's demanded by God and Jesus, which very much can save according to the Gospel.

 

[2ndpillar]

I tithe, what does that mean for me, do you think? Not sure why you quoted Malachi in this context.

You tithe to the daughters of Babylon. You are lucky that the fires of heaven don't come down to consume you. As for Malachi 3:10, it is with respect to tithes, which are associated with feeding widows and orphans, the poor, and the blessings connected. (Deuteronomy 14:28)

Malachi 3:10 Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. Test me in this,” says the LORD Almighty, “and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing that there will not be room enough to store it.

Deuteronomy 14:28 At the end of every three years, bring all the tithes of that year's produce and store it in your towns, 29so that the Levites (who have no allotment or inheritance of their own) and the foreigners, the fatherless and the widows who live in your towns may come and eat and be satisfied, and so that the LORD your God may bless you in all the work of your hands.

 

[2ndpillar]

Edom became Indumea and prospered if you look at the ruins. Must have been pretty grand.

Edom, as Idumea, occupied land of Judah as well as their own. Not a wise move.

 

[sooda]

Edom, as Idumea, occupied land of Judah as well as their own. Not a wise move.

Indumea was Nabotean.. a powerhouse in trade from Yemen to Mesopotamia and Egypt.. Look at Petra and Madain Saleh.

 

[2ndpillar]

Also, I didn't "twist" John 3:16, I quoted it, the Word that does not return void, "Trust me [Jesus] and NEVER perish."

If you had "trust me", you would have heeded what he said. You have apparently put your trust in the Pharisee of Pharisees, Paul.

 

[sooda]

If you had "trust me", you would have heeded what he said. You have apparently put your trust in the Pharisee of Pharisees, Paul.

If not for Paul, Christianity might have died out before the end of the first century.. Do Jehovah's Witnesses hate Paul?

 

[2ndpillar]

If not for Paul, Christianity might have died out before the end of the first century.. Do Jehovah's Witnesses hate Paul?

I am not a Jehovah Witness, and "Christianity" is the church of Peter and Paul, the Gentile church, built around the tare seed, the gospel of lawlessness, versus the "good seed", the "word" of the "kingdom". Jehovah Witnesses are followers of Paul.

 

[sooda]

I am not a Jehovah Witness, and "Christianity" is the church of Peter and Paul, the Gentile church, built around the tare seed, the gospel of lawlessness, versus the "good seed", the "word" of the "kingdom". Jehovah Witnesses are followers of Paul.

So you don't belong to the weed church.. Does your church have a name or is it secret?


Ah yes. Church of Christ.

 

[BilliardsBall]

If you had "trust me", you would have heeded what he said. You have apparently put your trust in the Pharisee of Pharisees, Paul.

I think I understand. You don't attend any church fellowship, no one is discipling you. You don't share resources or a tithe/offerings with others working full or part-time to reach the world with the gospel. Trusting Jesus means distrusting Paul, even though Jesus specifically commissioned Paul to reach the nations.

 

[BilliardsBall]

Depends on how you are using the term "halachic". IOW, who's "halachic": normative Judaism or the apostles'?

Then you simply can't accept the Parable of the Sheep & Goats, nor the Parable of the Seed & Sower, nor Paul's statement to the flock to try and bring back those that have left the fold. You're justifying "rocking-chair religion", which is certainly not what Jesus taught.

Jesus said "I came to serve, not to be served", and he insisted that his true followers had to do much the same. You, otoh, want to strip that away from Jesus' message, which is heresy. And both James and Paul very much reflected that we had to do more than just believe through just sitting around twiddling our thumbs. They put out a call for action, not laziness.

Anyhow, what you are saying here is nothing short of heresy-- iow, just sit back, have some nice thoughts about Jesus, and then just do nothing else. That is simply not what Jesus nor the apostles taught, nor is the "once saved, always saved" scriptural. Instead, Jesus said "and you shall know them by their fruits", which is much more than just having some nice thoughts as "fruits" clearly implies action.

Finally, what you are conflating is the concept of "works under the Law", which indeed won't save, versus works matched with belief that's demanded by God and Jesus, which very much can save according to the Gospel.

I accept all parables as I accept the rest of the scripture--for reproof, gain, knowledge, love, growth, teaching, etc. but not all parables are about salvation, some are about resources, some Christian living, some neighborly behavior, etc. and my experience with Bible interpretation causes me to be slower, more precise, when dealing with parables/allegories, as is rational, reasonable.

I am not saying only "do nothing", I'm rather saying that the free gift of Jesus was not free to JESUS, since He paid an infinite price for it. If you are hungry and I buy you lunch, it's free lunch to you, paid lunch to me. It seems your doctrine is causing a different heresy--Jesus needs your help to save you, combined with the omniscient God isn't sure whether you sincerely wanted to trust Him in the first place, unless you prove to the omniscient God that you have works. It seems I'm wholly focused on what Jesus did to save me and you are wholly focused on what I can do to save me. Who has chosen the "better part", as Jesus told Martha?

I'm not conflating works of the Law with works of the NT, for the simple reason you cited, that NT works I do can save. They cannot--if they could--Jesus wouldn't have been crucified, or as Jesus put in in Gethsemane, "If there's another way (Christian works, Law works, philanthropy, repentance) let this cup pass, Father!"

 

[2ndpillar]

I think I understand. You don't attend any church fellowship, no one is discipling you. You don't share resources or a tithe/offerings with others working full or part-time to reach the world with the gospel. Trusting Jesus means distrusting Paul, even though Jesus specifically commissioned Paul to reach the nations.

The gospel being shared, is the gospel of the Pharisee of Pharisees, Paul's false gospel of grace/cross, the mark of the beast (Constantine), preached from his instituted Gentile church/flock built on the foundation of Peter and Paul (Zechariah 11:7), which nails the testimony of Yeshua to a cross. As for Paul's "commission", according to Yeshua, if someone says "he is in the wilderness", do not believe them (Matthew 24:26). Apparently you lack "trust" in what Yeshua says. As for tithes, they are meant for the poor and priest of Levi, who have no inheritance, not meant for preaching some false gospel of the cross. As for you leaders and teachers, which is against the testimony of Yeshua per Matthew 23:7-8), they would be listed under the category of those who eat the flesh of the sheep and do not feed nor heal the sheep (Ezekiel 34:1-4), and as goats, will be judged (Ezekiel 34:17).

As for the tabernacle of God, it is found in the hearts of men/children, not in your stone and brick buildings.

 

[2ndpillar]

Indumea was Nabotean.. a powerhouse in trade from Yemen to Mesopotamia and Egypt.. Look at Petra and Madain Saleh.

The Nabateans were located in the area settled by Ishmael. They were Arabs, and ghost of the deserts who knew the desert, established trade routes, and destroyed armies of both Greece and Rome by either taking them into the desert to have the desert destroy them or using stealth and high end communications (smoke signals), to their advantage. They had good relations with the Maccabees. On the other hand, their territory apparently pushed Edom/Esau, out of their land into the original land of Judah and Simeon. Mohammed supposedly was of the family of Ishmael. Both Ishmael and Edom/Idumea are listed among those plotting to "wipe" .. "the nation of Israel" "out as a nation" (Psalms 83). It will end badly for both (Psalms 83:13).

 

[sooda]

The Nabateans were located in the area settled by Ishmael. They were Arabs, and ghost of the deserts who knew the desert, established trade routes, and destroyed armies of both Greece and Rome by either taking them into the desert to have the desert destroy them or using stealth and high end communications (smoke signals), to their advantage. They had good relations with the Maccabees. On the other hand, their territory apparently pushed Edom/Esau, out of their land into the original land of Judah and Simeon. Mohammed supposedly was of the family of Ishmael. Both Ishmael and Edom/Idumea are listed among those plotting to "wipe" .. "the nation of Israel" "out as a nation" (Psalms 83). It will end badly for both (Psalms 83:13).

Muhammed was not just related to Ishmael.. You forget that Abraham had six more Arab sons by Keturah. The Indumeans were absorbed by the Natabeans.

NABATEANS , ancient people in the Middle East. Originally a pastoral, nomadic people, the Nabateans became merchants in the trade of oils, aromatics and spices, frankincense and myrrh from southern Arabia. By the second century b.c.e., they controlled the Red Sea coastal cities and were considered unwelcome competition by Ptolemaic shipping interests (Diodorus 3, 43:5). Soon thereafter the expansionist Nabateans established settlements on the lucrative trade route, dominating the passage from the Hejaz through Petra to Damascus, and from Petra through the Negev to the Mediterranean port city of Gaza.

Nabatean remains are found at over 1,000 sites in this area. At their height they controlled and colonized parts of modern-day Syria, Jordan, the Israeli Negev, Sinai, parts of eastern Egypt, and a northwestern section of Saudi Arabia.

Nabatea's apogee is from the first century b.c.e. to the second century c.e. Nabatean material culture reaches its zenith in the second half of the first century b.c.e., before the Romans established control in 106 c.e.

The Nabateans (Gk. Nabataioi) are identified as people from the Arab kingdom of Nabatea. They refer to themselves as Nabatu on their Aramaic inscriptions.

Their origins are controversial, but according to Graf the Nabateans arose within the Aramaic-speaking world of the so-called "Fertile Crescent" (Hieronymous of Cardia, apud Diodorus Siculus 19:95), and they may have been a sub-tribe from Qedar or the Persian Gulf. Philip C. Hammond places their origins in the Arabian Hejaz. However, the fact is that we do not know where they come from; thus, their origins are unknown.

Whatever their origins, we do know that by 312 b.c.e. the Nabateans were already living in Petra, where they defended themselves successfully from an attack by Antigonus the "One-Eyed," a veteran commander from Alexander the Great's eastern campaigns.

Their sister city to Petra is Madain Saleh in Arabia which most people don't know about.. Their trade route came up from Yemen.

Nabateans | Encyclopedia.com

 

[2ndpillar]

Muhammed was not just related to Ishmael.. You forget that Abraham had six more Arab sons by Keturah. The Indumeans were absorbed by the Natabeans.

The Nabateans are most likely of Arabic origin, as in sons of Ishmael, and the Idumeans, were of Edom/Esau. Edom will be part of the end (Joel 3:19), the Nabateans, who were engulfed by the Roman empire, are only now referenced as the combination of iron and clay (Daniel 2:34). They are no longer a singular kingdom.