|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on May 17, 2015 21:20:07 GMT -5
"Your church" is offensive because it's an inherently exclusive term. Interesting that people who leave because of exclusivity will use exclusive terms like that, let alone words like heresy, cult etc. People like that become what they criticize and never seem to realize it.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on May 17, 2015 21:32:02 GMT -5
Ross I think you are getting mad because you know you can't defend posting things like you did about heresy and "deserve the nomenclature of cult". You know it's broad-brushing subjective nasty judgment, even if your family isn't reading the post. You know it's hard to reconcile that kind of nasty judgment with "one professing Godliness". You know that you can hardly write a post without some sort of subjective and judgmental dig about 2x2s. You know you are a better person than that. These things are true, and you know it. Don't get mad at others because of things you wrote!
|
|
|
Post by fixit on May 17, 2015 22:03:32 GMT -5
I haven't followed this closely so I'm not able to comment on your argument with Review, except to say what I said above. You did write that the cult title for the book is justified. I wrote that others would feel the title is justified - I wrote that I do not call it a cult. Forget Review and our exchange. Do you feel that it is appropriate behaviour for anyone to concoct a post and state that someone else has written it when they haven't? You write a lot about the teachings of Jesus so interested where you stand? Do you feel that it is appropriate behaviour for anyone to concoct a post and state that someone else has written it when they haven't?No. However with the flurry of posts and the difficulty of checking past posts it's easy to get things wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on May 17, 2015 22:32:07 GMT -5
Ross I think you are getting mad because you know you can't defend posting things like you did about heresy and "deserve the nomenclature of cult". You know it's broad-brushing subjective nasty judgment, even if your family isn't reading the post. You know it's hard to reconcile that kind of nasty judgment with "one professing Godliness". You know that you can hardly write a post without some sort of subjective and judgmental dig about 2x2s. You know you are a better person than that. These things are true, and you know it. Don't get mad at others because of things you wrote! Jesse, why don't you quote all of what Ross said instead of what suits your argument ! "If they teach this about Jesus they deserve the nomenclature of a sect or cult. I prefer the former." You seem to have missed the words " I PREFER THE FORMER"
|
|
|
Post by withlove on May 17, 2015 22:34:29 GMT -5
"Your church" is offensive because it's an inherently exclusive term. Interesting that people who leave because of exclusivity will use exclusive terms like that, let alone words like heresy, cult etc. People like that become what they criticize and never seem to realize it. I'm confused about how "your church" is an inherently exclusive term...if it isn't person A's church and it is person B's church, it seems appropriate...I would say "your church" in speaking with neighbors or most anyone, and they would say the same to me. What is a better term? It is especially tricky because there is no one official name that everyone agrees on. I'm really not trying to be antagonistic or defensive here. Actually want to know what would be the least offensive term to use, although I understand not everyone will agree, but would like to hear your thought, Jesse.
|
|
|
Post by kittens on May 17, 2015 22:48:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on May 17, 2015 22:51:56 GMT -5
I can second what you have said kittens
|
|
|
Post by withlove on May 17, 2015 23:09:38 GMT -5
Whatever Ross said about his family is his business. Interjecting your own agenda into the matter is weird and inappropriate. Why hound him about it? It's cruel. If his family has objections they will discuss it with him. He has begged for the subject to be dropped, and it is HIS family. Can't we respect that?
If you take objection to the word cult you can argue that with lots of us, but why don't we leave his family out of it.
Good for him for pursuing it outside of the forum.
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 17, 2015 23:11:23 GMT -5
I know what I saw Review and I know what you edited. I just said in my post I'm sorry I didn't 'quote' that particular post as opposed to the one I did 'quote'. You know full well that you edited that post that I'm speaking of. Don't try your manipulation on me. Thanks Didn't Ross say he had saved a copy of that post? Then all he would need to do is send it in a PM to Review so that Review can make an appropriate apology.
|
|
|
Post by whyisitso on May 17, 2015 23:13:32 GMT -5
I know what I saw Review and I know what you edited. I just said in my post I'm sorry I didn't 'quote' that particular post as opposed to the one I did 'quote'. You know full well that you edited that post that I'm speaking of. Don't try your manipulation on me. Thanks Didn't Ross say he had saved a copy of that post? Then all he would need to do is send it in a PM to Review so that Review can make an appropriate apology. Possibly Emy. I'm not sure if that's the exact post he was talking about as Review does a lot of reviewing and editing of his posts. He likes to drop a grenade and follow it up pages later with 'what? Me? I didn't say that!! Prove it!'
|
|
|
Post by withlove on May 17, 2015 23:14:43 GMT -5
I know what I saw Review and I know what you edited. I just said in my post I'm sorry I didn't 'quote' that particular post as opposed to the one I did 'quote'. You know full well that you edited that post that I'm speaking of. Don't try your manipulation on me. Thanks Didn't Ross say he had saved a copy of that post? Then all he would need to do is send it in a PM to Review so that Review can make an appropriate apology. If Review purposely edited it and won't admit it then expecting an apology doesn't make sense. Maybe if a lawyer gets involved things will quiet down.
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 17, 2015 23:48:30 GMT -5
Didn't Ross say he had saved a copy of that post? Then all he would need to do is send it in a PM to Review so that Review can make an appropriate apology. Possibly Emy. I'm not sure if that's the exact post he was talking about as Review does a lot of reviewing and editing of his posts. He likes to drop a grenade and follow it up pages later with 'what? Me? I didn't say that!! Prove it!' I checked several pages of Review's posts. Most of his edits are within 2 - 5 minutes which hardly allows for any "Who? me?" scenarios. Some were within 20 - 30 minutes - maybe when he checked over his posts before leaving the board? I'm not making any excuse for the post he apparently deleted completely, but will wait for Ross to produce proof of it.
|
|
|
Post by whyisitso on May 17, 2015 23:52:17 GMT -5
Possibly Emy. I'm not sure if that's the exact post he was talking about as Review does a lot of reviewing and editing of his posts. He likes to drop a grenade and follow it up pages later with 'what? Me? I didn't say that!! Prove it!' I checked several pages of Review's posts. Most of his edits are within 2 - 5 minutes which hardly allows for any "Who? me?" scenarios. Some were within 20 - 30 minutes - maybe when he checked over his posts before leaving the board? I'm not making any excuse for the post he apparently deleted completely, but will wait for Ross to produce proof of it. Keep reading then. They're there, or not there Go back to around 17/18 April.... It's probably about 15 pages down on his posts. I hope the friends are happy paying him to troll TMB
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 18, 2015 0:11:22 GMT -5
no-one responded to my thread on Daniel's prophecy could they trust on the basis of word of mouth for thousands of years?
Read the story how Josephus came to write his famous book "The war of the Jews."
Probably, no-one responded to your thread on Daniel's prophecy for the same reason a lot of people don't respond, - because it was about the times that the book of Daniel was written and not some distant future as you maintain.
Of course word of mouth that is just what they did you know, -until the captivity in Babylon.
Perhaps you could tell us your "school of thought" about how Josephus came to write his famous book "The war of the Jews."
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 18, 2015 0:26:08 GMT -5
Dmmichgood quote - " NO "School of thought" Bert, just actual bible verses with references ( which you don't give for YOUR "school of thought"!)"Bert - "Paul admonished some who DID believe Jesus was returning in their life times. He said "there must first be a falling away..." That alone would sound strange because the church was growing exponentially." 2 Thess 2:3 Don't be so easily shaken or alarmed by those who say that the day of the Lord has already begun. Don't believe them, even if they claim to have had a spiritual vision, a revelation, or a letter supposedly from us. Don't be fooled by what they say. For that day will not come until there is a great rebellion against God and the man of lawlessness is revealed--the one who brings destruction. He will exalt himself and defy everything that people call god and every object of worship. He will even sit in the temple of God, claiming that he himself is God."IMO that "great rebellion" began with the so-called Enlightenment and the French Revolution. We are nearly at the stage of creating life and shutting down the aging process. Like Genesis, we have "become Gods also." Genesis 11:1-9. And not only have we a society which increasingly hates God, it hates what it "thinks is God.", ie all the false religions which are falling into disrepute, not because they are false (for secularists can't tell the difference) but because these religions speak of God.Bert - 'And Jesus Himself said much the same things, ie the Jews going into exile, Jerusalem "trampled under the feet of the Gentiles until the time of the Gentiles is fulfilled." The Gospel preached in all the world and so forth." Luke 21:24 " They will fall by the sword and will be taken as prisoners to all the nations. Jerusalem will be trampled on by the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled." Some say this wasn't said by Jesus at all, but written later in the 1st Century. Not so. Many Christian lives were saved by heeding this warning. And the fulness of it was not apparent until the last of THREE wars spanning nearly 70 years, when in AD 136 Jerusalem was off limits to Jews and Israel was totally depopulated of Jews.
One last word from Wikipedia on this, re AD 136Modern historians view the Bar-Kokhba Revolt as being of decisive historic importance. The massive destruction and loss of life occasioned by the revolt has led some scholars such as Bernard Lewis to date the beginning of the Jewish diaspora from this date. They note that, unlike the aftermath of the First Jewish–Roman War chronicled by Josephus, the majority of the Jewish population of Judea was either killed, exiled, or sold into slavery after the Bar-Kokhba Revolt, and Jewish religious and political authority was suppressed far more brutally.[7] After the revolt, the Jewish religious center shifted to the Babylonian Jewish community and its scholars. Judea would not be a center of Jewish religious, cultural, or political life again until the modern era, although Jews continued to live there and important religious developments still occurred there. a - Jesus DID prophecy, like others before him, the destruction of Israel after His coming b - most of this destruction took place in the 2nd Century. Long after some claim the Gospel writers ALL faked Jesus' prophecies.
We don't have a society which increasingly "hates God", Bert.
It is that we just don't give your GOD much credence any more.
We are increasingly getting wary of your GOD who spouts morality according to Bert, -yet kills even women & children,and for that matter kills his whole supposed creation with a flood except for a handful.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2015 0:53:20 GMT -5
Okay, just as long as we have settled all the other issues I covered.
Re "your God.... kills women and children..." Guess the poor men deserved killing. Sigh. You should mention "God kills or enslaves Jews in particular" and that would make God racist as well. ie Slavery in Egypt Jews delivered into various Canaanite hands Captivity in Babylon Jews slaughtered in their millions by Romans Jews slaughtered by Crusaders Jews slaughtered throughout the world by anti-Semites Jews gassed by Germans
God foresaw it all, told the Jews it would happen, and never apologized.
Coming soon - Gentile massacres (one third of the whole world, I think) when "all the cities of the world will fall." Ancient bible readers would have thought that was daft, but our generation understands only too well how that is possible.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 18, 2015 1:12:38 GMT -5
Okay, just as long as we have settled all the other issues I covered. Re "your God.... kills women and children..." Guess the poor men deserved killing. Sigh. You should mention "God kills or enslaves Jews in particular" and that would make God racistas well.ie Slavery in Egypt Jews delivered into various Canaanite hands Captivity in Babylon Jews slaughtered in their millions by Romans Jews slaughtered by Crusaders Jews slaughtered throughout the world by anti-Semites Jews gassed by Germans God foresaw it all, told the Jews it would happen, and never apologized. Coming soon - Gentile massacres (one third of the whole world, I think) when "all the cities of the world will fall." Ancient bible readers would have thought that was daft, but our generation understands only too well how that is possible. Oh, we didn't settle "all the other issues!"
I am just too tired to pay much attention tonight of all the other parts of "Bert's Gospel!"
That is including the late fantasy:
"Coming soon - Gentile massacres (one third of the wholeworld, I think) when "all the cities of the world will fall."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2015 1:34:34 GMT -5
Well, what Jesus, and those prophets before Him, said about the post Messianic Jews has come true. Jesus hinted that the Gentiles should one day expect the same. I didn't make this up. Nor am I happy at the thought. Perhaps in this order - Israel and its allies against Magog when all the Jews are back in Israel, last days. Sounds like nuclear warfare with constant reference to explosive fire, and allies "sending fire" upon Magog, obviously across the north pole. Battle of Armageddon. One third of the world's citizens dying. All the cities of the world falling. Final battle of Revelation. Not sure about this one. There's a few billion lives involved in the first two battles. ps Don't shoot the messenger.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 18, 2015 1:39:03 GMT -5
I think the post Ross took exception to, was the same post I referred to comments I made to Review saying he was a nasty piece of work went something like this: (please note Review has since edited his post and it doesn't include these words anymore) Blah blah blah your dear dad in the church you call a cult blah blah blah I think it was incredibly insensitive for Review to say that about Ross's dad given that he'd passed away not even six months before as can be read in the 'funeral & death notice' section of this board. The use of those words by Review was only used to cut Ross down. It was completely disrespectful of Review and clearly hit a nerve with Ross, as it would for most people who'd just lost a parent. Regardless of what Review thinks of Ross personally this comment was absolutely uncalled for. I'm only sorry that that wasnt the comment I quoted as opposed to the one I did (Edited: page 4 on Percy Watkins thread) I felt shocked when I read it as I was aware Review was a worker and could not believe that would be how he would want to represent himself & the 'truth' on a public forum. Anyway, that's basically what started the back & forth with Ross & Review as far as I can gather. There was probably niggily stuff going on before then tho. (Also note, I don't know Ross, I met him once in Sydney back in the day, but I did read his notice about his dad's passing and obviously took from his words the great respect he had/has for his dad... That all got shat on by Reviews insensitivity...) Yes, whyisitso, you are right. It was that post of review's. I remember it . "your dear dad in the church you call a cult."
He must have deleted it, -the usual dishonesty! Too bad someone didn't record it in their own post, -he couldn't delete someone elses post.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 18, 2015 1:53:11 GMT -5
Well, what Jesus, and those prophets before Him, said about the post Messianic Jews has come true. Jesus hinted that the Gentiles should one day expect the same. I didn't make this up. Nor am I happy at the thought. Perhaps in this order - Israel and its allies against Magog when all the Jews are back in Israel, last days. Sounds like nuclear warfare with constant reference to explosive fire, and allies "sending fire" upon Magog, obviously across the north pole. Battle of Armageddon. One third of the world's citizens dying. All the cities of the world falling. Final battle of Revelation. Not sure about this one.There's a few billion lives involved in the first two battles. ps Don't shoot the messenger. Jesus "hinted?"
"Perhaps?"
"Not sure about this one?"
All based on these? Bert, Bert!
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 18, 2015 2:15:36 GMT -5
The real review005 has certainly revealed himself/herself by his/her posts, by tone & content.
yes we all reveal ourselves by our posts.. even you are not exempt from that. The last post was about false allegations and threats posted on this thread. I'll be appreciative if you bring up your false allegations and threats made in your posts and paste them and also do the same for me if you wish. Review005. I am going to make an allegation right now.
You have been an apt student in the language of "workerese." You probably also had an apt teacher.
Which ever or both, -you are a "Master" of the language. In fact, I would say you have your PhD.
You are so adept at taking a quote that someone like Ross makes, - regroup the words & paraphrase it into a sentence that makes it sound completely different than the person actually stated.
That takes talent! (of the worst kind)
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on May 18, 2015 2:36:02 GMT -5
Thanks for your response. You are quite correct. It is important to ensure that you have your facts right before posting. You haven't exactly set an example with the incorrect allegation you make in your post against me. Don't worry I'm quite used to posters like yourself 'having a crack at a worker'. Review, I have gone back over this thread & still cannot find where I made an " incorrect allegation you make in your post against me." Can you please tell me the page that I done this ? Thank you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2015 2:36:24 GMT -5
Some of those mentioned were not spoken of by Jesus. At least, I don't think he was referring to any of them. What he "hinted" at was His comment "until the Gentile's time is fulfilled." And that's no laughing matter - everything spiritual in the OT and NT has been backed up by observable, physical, historical realities for all the skeptics to see: ie conquest of Canaan, Babylonian Captivity, Roman destruction, two thousand year exile and oppression, Return to Israel (1948) etc.. ps there's a two-way thread going on here!!!!
|
|
|
Post by maryhig on May 18, 2015 2:40:01 GMT -5
Thank you xna, That was very interesting. But I see Jesus all through that.
Maryhig, did you read that article?Here are some excerpts from the article "While the original Hebrew text clearly refers to the Jewish people as the “Suffering Servant,” over the centuries Isaiah 53 has become a cornerstone of the Christian claim that Jesus is the Messiah. Unfortunately, this claim is based on widespread mistranslations and distortion of context.
In order to properly understand these verses, one must read the original Hebrew text.
For an accurate Jewish translation of the Bible, read the “ArtScroll English Tanach." The Context of Isaiah 53
One obvious question that needs to be addressed: "'How can the “Suffering Servant,” which the verses refer to grammatically in the singular, be equated with the entire Jewish nation?
The Jewish people are consistently referred to with the singular pronoun. So how did the Suffering Servant come to be associated with Jesus?
After his death, the promoters of Christianity retroactively looked into the Bible and “applied” – through mistranslation and distortion of context – these biblical verses as referring to Jesus.
Missionary apologist Walter Riggans candidly admitted:
“There is no self-evident blueprint in the Hebrew Bible which can be said to unambiguously point to Jesus. Only after one has come to believe that Jesus was the Messiah, and more specifically the kind of Messiah that he is, does it all begin to make sense...” (Yehoshua Ben David, Olive Press 1995, p.155)
Hi, DMG firstly, the entire Jewish nation aren't necessarily the Jews. I spoke to a Jewish person once who told me that only the Jewish nation will receive revelation from God, I asked him "what about the Jewish unbelievers and the Jewish people who don't live right, you can't say they're going to receive revelation from God?" And they couldn't answer me. The true Jews include all those circumcised of the heart! Romans 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh. But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. And you will be able to tell anyone who is circumcised in the heart, because they will be following Jesus and they will be "suffering servants" denying the sins of the world just as Jesus did. Jesus came as a suffering servant to show Gods people how to live to please God. To suffer, and deny Satan in the heart and the sins of the flesh! And follow him. Jesus did come as a suffering servant, so will all the Jews of the circumsised heart that follow him! Which includes Christians!
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 18, 2015 3:17:13 GMT -5
Some of those mentioned were not spoken of by Jesus. At least, I don't think he was referring to any of them. What he "hinted" at was His comment "until the Gentile's time is fulfilled." And that's no laughing matter - everything spiritual in the OT and NT backed up by observable, physical, historical realities, ie conquest of Canaan, Babylonian Captivity, Roman destruction, two thousand year exile and oppression, Return to Israel (1948) etc.. ps there's a two-way thread going on here!!!! NO BERT, "everything" in the OT and NT ARE NOT backed up by "observable, physical, historical realities!"
And They are only made "spiritual" by someone like you that believe they are!
NOT even all the so called "factual" events-let alone "spiritual," -in the old or new testament are "backed up" by "observable, physical, historical" facts!
NO, it isn't a "laughing matter," -but those words you used are often used when someone doesn't have facts and throw in such words. It tells me that what they are postulating isn't built on anything substantial.
Those kinds of words give away the whole supposition that they are making! It is the very way that so many denominations have developed because of each person's interpretation of "scripture" is different!
Does this satisfy your idea of a two-way thread ?
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 18, 2015 3:27:22 GMT -5
Maryhig, did you read that article?Here are some excerpts from the article "While the original Hebrew text clearly refers to the Jewish people as the “Suffering Servant,” over the centuries Isaiah 53 has become a cornerstone of the Christian claim that Jesus is the Messiah. Unfortunately, this claim is based on widespread mistranslations and distortion of context.
In order to properly understand these verses, one must read the original Hebrew text.
For an accurate Jewish translation of the Bible, read the “ArtScroll English Tanach." The Context of Isaiah 53
One obvious question that needs to be addressed: "'How can the “Suffering Servant,” which the verses refer to grammatically in the singular, be equated with the entire Jewish nation?
The Jewish people are consistently referred to with the singular pronoun. So how did the Suffering Servant come to be associated with Jesus?
After his death, the promoters of Christianity retroactively looked into the Bible and “applied” – through mistranslation and distortion of context – these biblical verses as referring to Jesus.
Missionary apologist Walter Riggans candidly admitted:
“There is no self-evident blueprint in the Hebrew Bible which can be said to unambiguously point to Jesus. Only after one has come to believe that Jesus was the Messiah, and more specifically the kind of Messiah that he is, does it all begin to make sense...” (Yehoshua Ben David, Olive Press 1995, p.155)
Hi, DMG firstly, the entire Jewish nation aren't necessarily the Jews. I spoke to a Jewish person once who told me that only the Jewish nation will receive revelation from God, I asked him "what about the Jewish unbelievers and the Jewish people who don't live right, you can't say they're going to receive revelation from God?" And they couldn't answer me. The true Jews include all those circumcised of the heart! Romans 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh. But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. And you will be able to tell anyone who is circumcised in the heart, because they will be following Jesus and they will be "suffering servants" denying the sins of the world just as Jesus did. Jesus came as a suffering servant to show Gods people how to live to please God. To suffer, and deny Satan in the heart and the sins of the flesh! And follow him. Jesus did come as a suffering servant, so will all the Jews of the circumsised heart that follow him! Which includes Christians! That isn't the point, Maryhig. It isn't about who is, or isn't, a Jew.
It is that piece of OT scripture has nothing to do with any prophecy concerning Jesus. It was a prophecy about the Jewish people, not Jesus. "After his death, the promoters of Christianity retroactively looked into the Bible and “applied” – through mistranslation and distortion of context – these biblical verses as referring to Jesus."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2015 3:28:07 GMT -5
Okay. The Jews were given the prophecies of the Messiah. Alongside those of the Messiah were linked prophecies of the Jewish nation. That is - He would come to redeem his people, born of a woman, suffer rejection, be crucified, rise again etc.. And then there's the historical, observable (to other generations) linked prophecies - for the Jews: the end of the Law, end of their nation; exile; suffering at the hands of the Gentiles, destruction of the temple etc.. So if a Jew, reading the Torah, cannot accept that Jesus is the Messiah, he might at least note what Daniel, for instance, wrote - the Messiah will come while the Temple is still standing. That "should" inform them, if they are honest, that waiting for another Messiah in the future doesn't make sense. BTW Dmmichgood - it's only been this year, in writing on the TMB, that I have begun to realize this. Kind of neat - contending with people can be a learning experience!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2015 3:34:21 GMT -5
Quote - "That isn't the point, Maryhig. It isn't about who is, or isn't, a Jew.
It is that piece of OT scripture has nothing to do with any prophecy concerning Jesus. It was a prophecy about the Jewish people, not Jesus.
"After his death, the promoters of Christianity retroactively looked into the Bible and “applied” – through mistranslation and distortion of context – these biblical verses as referring to Jesus."
The normative Jewish position on Isaiah 53 (and latter part of 52) is that this "man" is actually the nation of Israel. This argument is more out of desperation because Isaiah 53 is simply the most explicit reference to Jesus in the OT. And these chapters are linked to other ones explaining the Messiah's "pierced hands" and riding upon the ass, and the East Gate being sealed because it was the gate of the great King etc.. It's worth reading again, this Isaiah 52 and 53. 52 starts with Zion, ie the nation of Israel, and then it presents their Messiah, starting from verse 13.
|
|