Court case against Christianity

[Saltmeister]

Originally Posted by wizanda

Christianity world wide at present doesn’t follow Christ, it follows the Pharisees, let me explain.

As many intelligent scholars have noticed, Paul contradicts most of Christ’s teachings.

So changing the meaning of what he taught, it is almost impossible to follow both if they contradict each other; this is why there is so many different Christian denominations.

Many Muslims do already know this and this is one of the things Mohammed was told the Bible had been changed for.

I don't think it's a matter of "following Paul" or "following Jesus" -- that would be missing the point.

Who is Paul? Who is Apollos? . . . I did the work of an expert builder and laid the foundation and another man is building on it . . . 1 Corinthians 3:5-11

We are the living stones of God's temple and Christ is the foundation.

That's the basic idea for now. I intend to post some replies to your points.

[Saltmeister]

Classification of Topic Areas

I think it is important for us to classify our discussion under topic headings.

It is sometimes frustrating when people present their views about what they don't agree with in the Christian Gospel, but you never know when they have actually read your comments.

Ok, sorry for being so harsh, I might be wrong about this, but it seems that comments made by Christians (and by me) to explain Christian concepts fall on death ears. It could also be the same for those trying to present their views on what they disagree with on Christianity.

Therefore I recommend that we classify what we are talking about so that we know the other party has actually addressed our arguments.

On the other hand, because we are forbidden to convert at CR, we won't go any further than making our views understood. The aim is not to persuade or convince, but enlighten the other party. That involves letting them know exactly why we think the way we do. As soon as that's done, we can move on to another topic area.

The Law, Human Nature, Right and Wrong

1. Christ said he came to fulfill the law and not to end it. Paul said he came to end the Law, and if we are in Christ we are free of the Law.
2. Christ said that we are judged by the commandments; Paul said we are free of them, if we are in Christ.
5.Christ said that the inheritance is from God and they killed him to try and steal it, as in the parable of the vine dresser; Paul said that we have an inheritance because of Christ’s death.

Adam ate the fruit from the Forbidden Tree. By doing so, knowledge of evil was introduced into the human nature. Adam opened a path to evil and wickedness by exposing human beings to knowledge of evil and thereby making it possible for them to sin.

Christ came to perform the cleansing ritual that we call the "atoning sacrifice" of the Lamb of God. By doing so, Christ opened a path to holiness whereby whoever dies before the Second Coming or lives until the Second Coming while believing in Him is spiritually cleansed of the evil in human nature, losing the ability to sin.

Christ was the Second Adam, and did by instinct what was right without following rules and regulations.

When evil is removed from the human nature, we no longer need to follow rules and regulations because we will then be able to do what is right by instinct without need for ideology, dogma or doctrine.

This was how Christ fulfilled the Law: by eliminating the need for dogma, doctrine, ideology, rules and regulations. Christ did only what was right because he didn't inherit the dark side of human nature from Adam.

If we follow only the bright side of human nature then we will never sin and will not need to follow rules and regulations and this was how Christ fulfilled the Law. Love is one example of the bright side of human nature, and if we follow our love, we have obeyed the whole Law.

That doesn't mean we will never sin. We can never sin as long as we are following the bright side of our human nature. Sin is a result of us "turning to the dark side."

If you love someone, you will never do him wrong. To love, then, is to obey the whole Law. Romans 13:10

God and His Word

4.Christ said that God is the judge, Paul said Christ is.

Jesus was the Word of God. The human being itself was not God, but the character and personality revealed through that human being came from God and was God. The character and personality belonged to God not to the human being. The human being was like a medium of transmission. God used him to convey Himself to human beings.

It is much like the way the physical pages of the Quran is used to convey God's wisdom. Is it right to say that the Word of God can be made physical? We are talking about the incarnation of God's wisdom in a Holy Book.

Before the world existed, the Word already existed; he was with God, and he was the same as God. John 1:1

Rising with Christ

7.Christ said that God is the lord of the living; Paul said that we should remain with Christ in death.

We shall be raised with Christ from death.

God and His Word (2)

10.

Christ said he was sent and was a servant and a son, Paul said Christ is equal to God and even said he was God.

11.Christ said to worship God, Paul said to worship Christ.

Jesus said, "Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father."

1 John 2:23, "Whoever has the Son has the Father also."

Whoever has the Word of God also has God.

Living Stones of God's Temple

12.

Christ said to be one in God, Paul said to be one body in Christ.

Perhaps you should look at these passages.

I pray that they may all be one. Father! May they be in us, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they be one, so that the world will believe that you sent me. John 17:21

In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. Ephesians 2:21

You also, live living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood offering spiritual sacrifices to God through Jesus Christ. 1 Peter 2:5

I also recall somewhere that Jesus said, "if you do not remain in me, I will not remain in you."

We are living stones that form God's temple and we are His home. On the other hand, God is also our temple because He is our home.

We are His home because we have chosen to be His people.

He is our home because He is our Source. Our righteousness comes from Him.

If we follow rules and regulations, dogmas, doctrines and ideologies, then ideology is our home and our temple because the ideology is our source of righteousness. However, if we decide not to follow ideology, but to make God our source of righteousness, then God is our temple.

Understand?

My Personal Experience of Paul's Epistles

I first started looking at Paul's epistles a year ago, my second year at university. A lot of what Paul said at first seemed either confusing or contradictory of what Jesus said, but I have spent enough time reflecting and meditating on my life and spiritual journey to realise it isn't. A lot of the interpretation of the epistles comes from understanding yourself, human nature and your place in the cosmic structure of the universe.

Once you settle these three things: yourself, human nature and your place in the cosmos, things start to make sense.

That's at least my experience. Your's may be different.

Responding to the Points

Please respond to each topic individually and discuss my points for each one. I must know if you have understood what I have said, so please confirm it by discussing it.

Otherwise we will go round and round in circles where the problem is that we haven't checked if we understand each other. Then we might never learn anything because we are too busy trying to keep ahead of the other guy.

Let's do this step by step.

That's all for now, I'm looking forward to your comments!!!!

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by Saltmeister

If we follow rules and regulations, dogmas, doctrines and ideologies, then ideology is our home and our temple because the ideology is our source of righteousness. However, if we decide not to follow ideology, but to make God our source of righteousness, then God is our temple.

Understand?



That's all for now, I'm looking forward to your comments!!!!

i understand all that you have said Saltmeister and we see eye to eye on every point. just letting you know

[wizanda]

Originally Posted by Saltmeister

Classification of Topic Areas

Originally Posted by Saltmeister

I think it is important for us to classify our discussion under topic headings.

It is sometimes frustrating when people present their views about what they don't agree with in the Christian Gospel, but you never know when they have actually read your comments.

Sorry I will answer briefly to let you know I have read them in future.

A Classification is: it is hard to say Paul is Anti-Christ and leave out John as then people use Johns wording as if Yeshua said it him self. Which I now believe he didn't as there are to many things that Contradict his teachings and the way he puts him self across in the other gospels. The reason some bits fell on death ears is that, when the use of John was used as if Christ said it, I don't feel he did as it isn't even the way Christ phrases things. Yet we will go over it and I will explain. Yet for now anything used by John and Paul can't be taken as witness of Yeshua, as they are on trial and so the evidence must come from the key witnesses i.e. the disciples and the Old Testament to confirm things. I hope that make sense, it is just if John and Paul are Anti-Christ, in their wording they have already tried to cover their backs. Yet there is many flaws which is why I have noticed this and other top theologians.

Originally Posted by Saltmeister

Adam ate the fruit from the Forbidden Tree. By doing so, knowledge of evil was introduced into the human nature. Adam opened a path to evil and wickedness by exposing human beings to knowledge of evil and thereby making it possible for them to sin.

According to Ezekiel, sin isn’t passed down, yet the way you have phrased this is true in some senses. As yes; man is fallen, yet Christ said aim to be perfect and be as he is.

Eze 18:19-20 Yet you say, Why? Does not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son has done justice and right, has kept all my statutes, and has done them, he shall surely live. (20) The soul that sins, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, nor shall the father bear the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be on him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be on him.

Originally Posted by Saltmeister

Christ came to perform the cleansing ritual that we call the "atoning sacrifice" of the Lamb of God. By doing so, Christ opened a path to holiness whereby whoever dies before the Second Coming or lives until the Second Coming while believing in Him is spiritually cleansed of the evil in human nature, losing the ability to sin.

If this were the case the world would be perfect, yet it isn’t sin remains and people who say they are Christian’s normal are like:

Mat 23:26-27 Blind Pharisee! First cleanse the inside of the cup and of the dish, so that the outside of them may be clean also. (27) Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which indeed appear beautiful outside, but inside they are full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.

In other words they proclaim to be a changed person in Christ, when in fact they have not over come the previous troubles and simple just clean the outside with out forgiving others fully, yet giving it to Christ. So not in keeping with Christ’s teachings yet the Pharisees of making an offering for sin.

Originally Posted by Saltmeister

Christ was the Second Adam, and did by instinct what was right without following rules and regulations.

Mat 11:19 The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man who is a glutton and a winebibber, a friend of tax-collectors and sinners. But wisdom was justified by her children.

Hab 2:4-5 Behold, the soul of him is lifted up, and is not upright; but the just shall live by his faith. (5) And also wine indeed betrays a proud man, and he is not content. He widens his soul like Sheol, and he is like death, and is not satisfied, but gathers all nations to himself, and heaps to himself all the peoples.

Not to say that Christ said it wrong, as I do love him and have known he didn’t, since birth.

Yet a Nazarite should not drink!

Originally Posted by Saltmeister

This was how Christ fulfilled the Law: by eliminating the need for dogma, doctrine, ideology, rules and regulations. Christ did only what was right because he didn't inherit the dark side of human nature from Adam.

Mat 5:18-20 For truly I say to you, Till the heaven and the earth pass away, not one jot or one tittle shall in any way pass from the Law until all is fulfilled. (19) Therefore whoever shall relax one of these commandments, the least, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven. But whoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven. (20) For I say to you that unless your righteousness shall exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall in no case enter into the kingdom of Heaven.

I like some of your ideology in the next part as it doesn’t come from the Pharisees so much, yet is your own way of thinking.

The parts stated by John when you see me you see the father, are Anti-Judaic and so Anti-Christ; as away to put the Jewish off following him. There are tons of occasions in the other gospels of Christ referring to the father being in heaven.

Originally Posted by Saltmeister

I also recall somewhere that Jesus said, "if you do not remain in me, I will not remain in you."

Yes this is again by John and is referring to the vine, yet according to Ezekiel the vine is to be burnt.

Eze 15:2-4 Son of man, how is the vine tree more than any other tree, or than a branch which is among the trees of the forest? (3) Shall wood be taken from it to do work? Or will men take from it for a peg to hang any vessel on it? (4) Behold, it is cast into the fire for fuel. The fire devours both its ends, and its middle is charred. Is it fit for any work?

So do you really think Yeshua would have said this knowing the scriptures so well; as to make a mistake like that? On the other hand to most Jews who know the scriptures, none would follow Yeshua after hearing he said that. So it looks like it was made up by John as to stop the Jewish following him.

Originally Posted by Saltmeister

We are living stones that form God's temple and we are His home. On the other hand, God is also our temple because He is our home.

We are His home because we have chosen to be His people.

I do sort of agree with what you are saying and the way you phrase it, yet God has repeatedly spoken through the prophets to build him a temple; a real one. There is even exact measurements given and where to build it.

Isa 66:1 So says Jehovah, Heaven is My throne, and earth My footstool. Where, then, is the house that you build for me? And where is the place of My rest?

I would discuss the end points about who I am, yet God said not to; as this is about Paul and John and it is probably better to keep it on the subject of them.

I like a lot of your own ideology you have included. Could you make your posts smaller and more itemised as this took ages to answer!



Nice to meet you



Peace N love B with U



God bless you

[Saltmeister]

The Inheritance of Sin

Originally Posted by wizanda

Originally Posted by Saltmeister
</FONT></FONT>
Adam ate the fruit from the Forbidden Tree. By doing so, knowledge of evil was introduced into the human nature. Adam opened a path to evil and wickedness by exposing human beings to knowledge of evil and thereby making it possible for them to sin.

According to Ezekiel, sin isn’t passed down, yet the way you have phrased this is true in some senses. As yes; man is fallen, yet Christ said aim to be perfect and be as he is.

Eze 18:19-20 Yet you say, Why? Does not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son has done justice and right, has kept all my statutes, and has done them, he shall surely live. (20) The soul that sins, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, nor shall the father bear the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be on him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be on him.

It's important to interpret this in the context of the situation it presents. From what I see in this verse, it refers to the following contexts.

(1) The son inherits the guilt or record of wrongdoing of the father.
(2) The son inherits the personality or character of the father and is therefore capable of the same sin.

I believe this verse is basically saying that the child cannot be guilty because of the parent's sin, and nor does he necessarily inherit the character or personality of the parent. Some will say that "sin" or a "sinful nature" is therefore "not inherited from the parent."

However, when you start talking about "sinful nature" you are also talking about "human nature." This introduces a third context with which the passage may be interpreted:

(1) Child inherits guilt of the parent
(2) Child inherits character and personality of the parent
(3) Child inherits human nature of the parent

Sin is a general concept that sums up the notion of "iniquity," and may be seen in different contexts. When Paul talks about the inheritance of sin, he doesn't talk about sin in the context of inheriting guilt or inheriting character or personality, but sin in the context of inheriting human nature.

Character and human nature are not the same thing. Character is specific and unique to a particular individual. Human nature is generic.

Human nature gives us the ability to love, to laugh, cry, to be happy or sad, selfish, greedy, humble or arrogant, etc. Character and personality refer to our tendency to love, laugh, cry, etc. Character and personality are basically how we use our human nature. Think of human nature as the soil on which character and personality grows and develops.

The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, nor shall the father bear the iniquity of the son.

This refers to the inheritance of guilt.

The righteousness of the righteous shall be on him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be on him.

This refers to the inheritance of character.

There is no reference to human nature. This poses a problem to those who argue that the Bible says that sin wasn't inherited. How do you know "what kind of sin" the prophets were talking about?

The mistake many people make is that they treat the Bible as a "book of science" rather than a book that describes our spiritual journey, our relationship with God and the sentiments we may encounter in life. Guilt, character and human nature are three elements of our sentimental existence that relate to sin, yet many Bible scholars treat them as if they were one.

Sin is multi-dimensional and is a general term referring to evil and wrong-doing.

While Ezekiel and Paul are both using the word "sin", ironically they aren't talking about the same thing. This confuses some people because the same word is used to explain completely different concepts. Here Ezekiel talks about the inheritance of guilt and character while Paul talks about inheritance of human nature.

Important Point:

Many people either confuse sin with guilt, or confuse human nature with character. Because character is not inherited by a child, they think they can say the same about human nature. Wrong!!!! Human nature and character are not the same thing!!!!

Jesus' human nature was the same as that of the original Adam in he was not capable of evil. He was never greedy, selfish, arrogance, hateful or lustful. Jesus' human nature was void of evil. Adam's original human nature was like that until he ate the fruit from the Forbidden Tree.

Human nature determines the kinds of character that can develop. If love or greed are missing from human nature, we have a person who is incapable of having love or greed in his character.

If there is any evidence in the Old Testament that human nature is inherited, it's in Genesis. It all goes back to the story of the serpent in the Garden of Eden.

The snake replied, "That's not true; you will not die. God said that because he knows that when you eat it, you will be like God and know what is good and evil." Genesis 3:4-5

If human nature is not inherited, then some of us would be living in Eden today without having to die and be born again!!!! Those who have evil in their human nature are forbidden to live in Eden.

[wizanda]

Shalom,



Paul doesn't just discuss the idea of sin is passed down, yet says all are sinners and misquotes the Psalm 14:1.

By saying there is non righteous not one, where the start of the Psalm does say “the fool says this”. I have a full article on my site on this subject.

If you take a step back from all Paul has written and look at the ideology of his thinking. He tells people he has the mind of Christ, sadly this is definitely not so. He still thinks like a strict Pharisee, putting extra rules and regulations, using other peoples words as is own. Which Jeremiah 23 defines as being a fake prophet! Yet the point is Christ told people to be perfect as our father in heaven. Paul tells everyone they are sinners and so they need to attended church???

Very similar to the Pharisees; who Christ him self was so against as they didn’t acknowledge the things of God, yet tithes and offerings for sin.

Do you follow, with out me needing to elaborate?

Also if you read the whole of the Ezekiel chapter I posted, it does explain it is the actions of the child.

I do admit since the fall, we are fallen, yet if you fall, you get back up. This is what Christ was saying; Paul said you will always be down and there is not much you can do other then have faith in Christ. Yet Christ said to have faith in God. Plus also the Old Testament clearly states not to have faith in man, yet God alone. The point I am trying to put across though, is if you aim for the best you have more chance of succeeding; then someone who believe they can’t do it to start with. This is the difference between what Christ taught and Paul.



Peace N love B with U



P.S I do enjoy reading your answers as you try to be logical, unlike a lot of the conversations I have with others online.



God Bless You

[Bandit]

are there any other books & authors that need to go into the dumpster. just checking with you because I dont want to rip any of the wrong pages out of my bible.

what about James. should that one go too? it seems he had his own thoughts on the matter so we better take & poll & see what everyone thinks.
so, we should get rid of Paul & John for sure. (which i guess include revelations) & substitue the book of Wizanda. is that what you are trying to say?

[Faithfulservant]

poor Paul.. He died a violent death for Christ and he is still being crucified.. I just bet he's at the top of the list of martyrs for Christs sake.

[wizanda]

Well if you must know.........Peter= stone and is not a name.

The only time rock and stone are mentioned in the same sentence is twice, once said by Christ to Simon, you are a stone and on this rock and in Isaiah as the rock of stumbling and the stone of offence.

Simon Peter on authority respects the law of man, more then the law of God.

The end of Revelations is a blatant forgery, as he had only just been told by the same angel a chapter before, not to bow and worship angels. Then the end contradicts Christ teachings.



Peace N love B with U

[Bandit]

my cousins name is Rocky & i know someone named Stone.

so what religion(s) should we look to if we get rid of Christianity?
& what material would be better if we dump the NT books?

[Saltmeister]

Originally Posted by wizanda

Shalom,

Paul doesn't just discuss the idea of sin is passed down, yet says all are sinners and misquotes the Psalm 14:1.

By saying there is non righteous not one, where the start of the Psalm does say “the fool says this”. I have a full article on my site on this subject.

If you take a step back from all Paul has written and look at the ideology of his thinking. He tells people he has the mind of Christ, sadly this is definitely not so. He still thinks like a strict Pharisee, putting extra rules and regulations, using other peoples words as is own.

Speaking of taking a step back!!!!

I think one should be careful in classifying Paul's statements as a new set of rules and regulations. One of the things we should do when reading and interpreting Scripture is to try and understand what they are indeed saying.

Paul may set guidelines and recommendations, but that does not mean that he is saying, "you must do this . . . you must do that." Paul was not dictating to people about the rules they had to follow in life, but mentoring and guiding them. He was directing them on how to live and what areas of their lives they should focus on and what attitudes to adopt.

Paul was a mentor not a dictator.

I can guess why you're thinking like this. When I first started exploring Paul's letters, I read them as if Paul was dictating things to people. Later on, I realised that Paul was simply acting as a mentor and guide.

That doesn't mean that we shouldn't do what he says, however. Paul was simply explaining what we needed to do in our spiritual journey to God's kingdom.

Originally Posted by wizanda

Which Jeremiah 23 defines as being a fake prophet! Yet the point is Christ told people to be perfect as our father in heaven. Paul tells everyone they are sinners and so they need to attended church???

Attending church -- tread carefully here.

What you mean by "church" is a public building. What Paul, Peter, James and John mean by "Church" are the inhabitants of God's kingdom, members of the Body of Christ, the branches of the Tree of Life and God's chosen people.

In light in these concepts, Paul would never have told people that they had to attend a "public building." The reason is simple -- how does a physical building connect you to God? It can't. What connects you to God is your devotion to God and your obedience to His Spirit.

Do you have to "attend church (the public building)?" No.

You must, however, be part of the True Church and be a true believer. Full stop.

[wizanda]

Originally Posted by Bandit

so what religion(s) should we look to if we get rid of Christianity?

Originally Posted by Bandit

& what material would be better if we dump the NT books?

This thread is not to get rid of Christ, Yet the Anti-Christ I.E. Paul and John.

I find Matthew, Mark, Luke, James and Jude correct and inline with Christ teachings and the Old Testament (Tanach).

With Paul and John though, since they conflict so much with Christ, this is one reason why we have so many denominations.

Christ’s teachings as in the gospels written by the disciples are inline with Lao Tzu, Buddha and many other great teachers.

We have religious conflicts worldwide; take a look at where these stem from and you will see that it isn’t what Christ said, yet what the Pharisee made up.

This is also all foretold in the Old Testament, the Bible makes far more sense when it is looked at from this perspective, prophecies are fulfilled and there aren’t so many contradictions. It’s like the second commandment is the largest of these; make no image of God.

Christ never said he was; Paul and John did, in most religions worldwide God has no image, even Hinduism with its many reflections of God; God still has no image.



Saltmeister with Paul and dictating to people, it depends on which way you want to look at it. I believe your 1st way of looking at it was correct and this is what most people do to begin with, as that is the way it comes across. What you have to think about is that all over the world there are tons of non Christians, who will find a bible in a hotel room for instance and read just a bit of it, not taking the time to study as we have done. These and also many Christians, who simple brows occasionally they will take Paul as instructions. Then when they read what Christ said, they will interpret it from Paul’s perspective. So missing the whole meaning of Christ, even within many churches it is like this. Also many tracts I have seen refer to Paul, more then Christ. People quote Paul and say Christ said this??



As for Paul’s rules and regulations, why can’t women be preachers? As Paul said so, (foretold in Daniel) why must Christians have short hair? Again Paul! This list is quite substantial and causes so many conflicts, especial within the Christian communities them self’s. Have a look around the net and you will find women asking why can’t we be preachers? Well Paul said so??

You are right, Paul doesn’t say “you must”; he says “Do not”. Unlike Christ who says I ask you.

Also Paul’s wording I find like a snake it twists and winds like a side winder to cover its tracks; so it is extremely hard to follow. Also eventually it hypnotizes you into believing it as truth, even though many of us do see the contradictions to begin with.



Peace N love B with U

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by wizanda

This thread is not to get rid of Christ, Yet the Anti-Christ I.E. Paul and John.

I find Matthew, Mark, Luke, James and Jude correct and inline with Christ teachings and the Old Testament (Tanach).

With Paul and John though, since they conflict so much with Christ, this is one reason why we have so many denominations.

Christ’s teachings as in the gospels written by the disciples are inline with Lao Tzu, Buddha and many other great teachers.

We have religious conflicts worldwide; take a look at where these stem from and you will see that it isn’t what Christ said, yet what the Pharisee made up.

This is also all foretold in the Old Testament, the Bible makes far more sense when it is looked at from this perspective, prophecies are fulfilled and there aren’t so many contradictions. It’s like the second commandment is the largest of these; make no image of God.

Christ never said he was; Paul and John did, in most religions worldwide God has no image, even Hinduism with its many reflections of God; God still has no image.




Peace N love B with U

so is this to put Jesus on the same level as other prophets & teachers such as Buddah? if so then we will surely disagree.
on the other hand, as a Christian I do not see where anything in the bible states that Jesus IS God, however i do see where the bible declares Jesus AS God AND the image of the invisible God.

What i have noticed is those who make Jesus just another ordinary man, make him out to be less than what the scripture says he is. While i believe Jesus was just an ordinary man like the rest of us & not an incarnation as in the myths of Zeus & different gods who turn into men.
He IS also the fulness of the Godhead bodily & the EXPRESS image of the invisible God.
Your attempts to rid of the other books appears to be based on your own beliefs of who Jesus is & i dont think you are tying things together correctly. that is why you discard most of the NT. I also think it is because you are searching for something more than what you have found in other religions & that you are seeing that some things taught in Christianity do not line up.
just my observation & i could be wrong.
i fail to see your argument against the NT books as valid or being that of the pharisee.
However, I am not discarding the bible, neither can i put the Jesus on the same level as the rest of us or Buddah or just another prophet.

Jesus is the Son of the living God, the messiah, the Lamb of God & Jesus said himself he would be standing on the right hand of God. & everything the NT declares him as. i think if you really look at all the prepositions & verbs, you will see what i am saying is not that far off.
so i guess we will just have to agree to disagree, because you have already discarded all the books & it appears you have no room for any reconciliation.

if you believe the 3 gospels then you must believe Jesus did in fact die, was buried & he did rise from the dead & this is the main message that went out from the other books...OR do you continue & discredit the accounts of Calvary in the gospels???

"Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven." "Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? Behold, now ye have heard His blasphemy." (Matthew 26:63-65 KJV)
"Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God" (Luke 22:69 KJV)

the other NT books confirm this is the same light.

[wizanda]

Originally Posted by Bandit

so is this to put Jesus on the same level as other prophets

Mat 13:57 And they were offended in Him. But Yeshua said to them, a prophet is not without honor, except in his own country and in his own house.



Luk 24:19 And He said to them, what things? And they said to Him, The things concerning Yeshua of Nazareth, who was a man, a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people,



Rev 19:10 And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said to me, See, do not do it! I am your fellow servant, and of your brothers who have the testimony of Yeshua. Worship God, for the testimony of Yeshua is the spirit of prophecy.

Originally Posted by Bandit

He IS also the fulness of the Godhead bodily & the EXPRESS image of the invisible God.

Deu 5:8 you shall not make a graven image for you, any likeness of anything that is in the heavens above, or in the earth beneath, or in the waters beneath the earth.

The reason I do this is not through lack of knowledge, yet I know Yeshua personally. Yes he did die and was raised, he also does sit at the top right hand corner of God; which I have seen my self.

The reason I am against the books in question, is they are Anti-Christ’s teachings and cause much conflict between religions worldwide.

This that I am now discussing on here is all foretold by other prophets in the Bible. The Bible as whole makes far more sense, when these points are realised as many prophecies are then fulfilled. Especially concerning the snare spoken of in Isaiah.

Peace N love B with U

[I, Brian]

wizanda, I'm afraid I'm not seeing you justify your arguments - it would be great to see something that offers more structure for the discussion in general.