Elia
Well-known member
Bs"d
You are blind if you don't see that the Jews are being gathered in again in Israel.
"For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God for ever and ever."
Micah 4:5
ISRAEL IS THE FOCAL POINT OF THE BELIEVERS
- Thread starter intojoy
- Start date
Bs"d
You are blind if you don't see that the Jews are being gathered in again in Israel.
"For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God for ever and ever."
Micah 4:5
Elia
Well-known member
Bs"d
The Jewish religion was established in the days of Moses by God through Moses.
"Serve Y-H-W-H! And if it seems evil to you to serve Y-H-W-H, choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell.
But as for me and my house, we will serve Y-H-W-H!”
Joshua 24:14-15
Elia
Well-known member
Bs"d
I'm not a woman.
The Revised Standard Version is one of the best translations, and the same holds true for the New World Translation.
The most corrupted translation is the KJV.
I usually quote from the NKJV, because many people wrongly think that is a very good translation.
In the Hebrew it says that the first messiah must come 7 weeks after the outgoing of the word to rebuild Jerusalem.
The 62 weeks refer to the time period of Jerusalem being rebuild.
"For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of Y-H-W-H our God for ever and ever."
Micah 4:5
Abraham BELIEVED God and it was reckoned unto him as righteousness.
Abraham was obedient to faith not the law of commandments. It is true in the church today that salvation is dependent only upon faith
...but whether we are blest and happy and productive depends upon whether we are obedient to faith.
The MOST Christians, 80-90 per cent if they are not obedient to commandments are strictly obedient to their confessions and theological creeds as though these things were the word of God and commandments.
They are not obedient to faith...see Abraham had to BELIEVE it was God who spoke to him.
Elia
Well-known member
Bs"d
God has no father, no son, and no brother. There is only one God; Y-H-W-H, who is one.
“This is what Y-H-W-H says- Israel's King and Redeemer, Y-H-W-H Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no god.”
Isaiah 44:6
Elia
Well-known member
Bs"d
You seem to have some dirt in your eyes, so I'll repeat this again for you:
"and in your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed; 5 because Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws.”
Gen 26
Just "believing" is not going to do anything for anybody:
"If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you do well; 9 but if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors. 10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. 11 For He who said, “Do not commit adultery,” also said, “Do not murder.” Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty. 13 For judgment is without mercy to the one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment.
14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? 17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.
18 But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. 19 You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble! 20 But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? 22 Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? 23 And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” And he was called the friend of God. 24 You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.
25 Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?
26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also."
James 2
"Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter:
Fear God and keep His commandments,
For this is man’s all.
For God will bring every work into judgment,
Including every secret thing,
Whether good or evil."
Eccl. 12:13
Last edited:
beameup
New member
This is really comical. The "Revised Version" was based upon the corrupt Alexandrian Text and the Texts released from the catacombs of the Vatican in the 20th Century (see: Wescott & Hort).
The "New World Translation" is a totally corrupt Bible created by the Jehovah's Witnesses (Watchtower Society) in the 1960s, and none of the "translators" knew either Greek or Hebrew.
The "New World Translation" replaced the King James Translation that the Jehovah's Witnesses had used for over a century.
Both bogus translations.
hahahahahaha
Jerusalem was rebuilt within the 49 years (sheba` shabuwa`) following the decree by Artaxerxes. It wasn't until Nehemiah that Jews were given the permission to establish the fortifications (gates, walls, moat) to secure the city from invaders. All previous decrees gave permission to rebuild the Temple.
Elia
Well-known member
Bs"d
The Wescott and Hort text is already much more reliable then the Textus Receptus on which the KJV is based.
How do you know? Do you know Hebrew and Greek that you can say which translation is good and which not?
Or are you just regurgitating what others said?
Do you know the translaters? No? Then how do you know that they didn't know Greek or Hebrew??
Your raving is not comical, but saddening. That people can spout so much nonsense, thinking they are right, while they have not the slightest idea what they are talking about.
"O Y-H-W-H, my strength and my fortress, my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come to You from the ends of the earth and say, 'Surely our fathers have inherited lies, worthlessness and unprofitable things.' Will a man make gods for himself, which are not gods?"
Jeremiah 16:19
Elia
Well-known member
Bs"d
??????????????
What are you raving about a decree?? There is no decree to be found in the prophecy of Daniel 9.
"O Y-H-W-H, my strength and my fortress, my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come to You from the ends of the earth and say, 'Surely our fathers have inherited lies, worthlessness and unprofitable things.' Will a man make gods for himself, which are not gods?"
Jeremiah 16:19
Epoisses
New member
This is the tribulation temple. The Prince person who offers sacrifice for himself is the antichrist or the man of sin.
beameup
New member
Nope.
Ezekiel's Temple far exceeds the size of Solomon's Temple by a long-shot. There could be something as small as the Tabernacle erected for the Tribulation.
beameup
New member
Bs"d
The Wescott and Hort text is already much more reliable then the Textus Receptus on which the KJV is based.
How do you know? Do you know Hebrew and Greek that you can say which translation is good and which not?
Or are you just regurgitating what others said?
Do you know the translaters? No? Then how do you know that they didn't know Greek or Hebrew??
Your raving is not comical, but saddening. That people can spout so much nonsense, thinking they are right, while they have not the slightest idea what they are talking about.
Unlike you, I'm intimately familiar with the subject, especially the facts around the two translations mentioned.
As a teen, the JWs had Bible Studies in my home, and they used the old King James Version. They had to abandon the KJV, and create their own cult version, because of their twisted doctrine.
Pretending to be ignorant of the books of Ezra and Nehemiah is not going to get you "off the hook" as far as Daniel 9 goes.
Now, what about your Messiah that came in 408 B.C.? You know, 49 years after the edict of Artaxerxes.
Tell us about him. We are waiting...........
Galatians 3 - verses being 3, 16, and 26-29 - deals with the change in the doctrine of the physical bloodline from Abraham to Israel, that is, what is it which determines who is Israel?
The certain implication of these verses is that under the New Covenant belief in Christ and belief in his doctrines is what determines who is Israel.
"But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
26. For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
27. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
28. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
29. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." Galatians 3: 25-29
There is no physical, literal bloodline here which determines who is Israel, who are the children of God, who are the elect of God.
One of the tactics of the dialectic as an argument or quarrel against the truth of scripture is to try to distract attention away from that truth in some way, sometimes by a focus on some other scripture which is not relevant to the Truth of another scripture which is the issue. The issue with the verses above, including verse 3 and verse 16 of Galatians 3 is whether in the New Covenant there is still the physical bloodline from Abraham which determines who are the children of God, who are the chosen people.
The dialectic sets up an opposition. The scripture at issue can be seen as the thesis while the opposition or anti-thesis tries to overthrow that thesis and in the Hegelian dialectic there is an outcome which is called the synthesis, often a compromise.
The dialectic is seen in scripture. Satan used it on Eve in Genesis 3: 1-6. There is a form of it used by the Pharisees in a dialogue with Christ in John 8. "Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;
32. And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
33. They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?" John 8: 31-33
"Then answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil?
49. Jesus answered, I have not a devil; but I honour my Father, and ye do dishonour me."
Jesus was teaching in John 8: 31-33, but the Pharisees did not understand and/or did not accept his teachings and the Pharisees started saying he was a Samaritan who was demon possessed. Thats a tactic of the dialectic, to try to change the focus of the debate away from what Christ was teaching - for example, that the truth can make you free of bondage to the many rules of the Pharisees to something else.
There is also a very brief mention of the early Greek philosophy of the dialectic in I Timothy 6: 20, which in seen in the Greek, but not made explicit in the English translations.
"O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:"
ω τιμοθεε την παρακαταθηκην φυλαξον εκτρεπομενος τας βεβηλους κενοφωνιας και αντιθεσεις της ψευδωνυμου γνωσεως
αντιθεσεις, or antitheseis, anti-thesis, is Strong's number 477, "opposition,i.e., conflict of theories."
Other Greek words mean oppose or opposition, such as Strong's 475, antidiaithemai, to set oneself opposite.
There is also Strong's number 498, antitassomai, to range oneself against, to oppose.
And there is Strong's 480, antikeimai, to lie opposite, be adversive, adversary, be contrary, oppose.
Antitheseis, used in I Timothy 6: 20, is a term used by the Greek philosophers before Christ who were into the dialectic as a way of making an argument.
Another translation of γνωσεως, gnoseos, is knowledge, which fits in with the Greek word αντιθεσεις, or anti-thesis.
But you might ask, how did a word from the Hegelian dialectic get in Paul's writing in the First Century? Hegel lived from 1770 to 1831. The answer is that in Greek philosophy before the time of Christ, there was a school of philosophy on the dialectic. Paul was educated and could very well have known about that Greek philosophical school and its terminology.
Paul uses αντιθεσεις, or anti-thesis, in I Timothy 6: 20, which is part of the terminology of the early Greek philosophical school on the dialectic. But Paul does not use διαλεκτική, or dialectic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic
"Dialectic (also dialectics and the dialectical method), from Ancient Greek διαλεκτική, is a method of argument.....The word dialectic originated in ancient Greece, and was made popular by Plato in the Socratic dialogues."
"In classical philosophy, dialectic (Greek: διαλεκτική) is a form of reasoning based upon dialogue of arguments and counter-arguments, advocating propositions (theses) and counter-propositions (antitheses)."
"Aristotle said that it was the pre-Socratic philosopher Zeno of Elea who invented dialectic, of which the dialogues of Plato are the examples of the Socratic dialectical method."
The certain implication of these verses is that under the New Covenant belief in Christ and belief in his doctrines is what determines who is Israel.
"But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
26. For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
27. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
28. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
29. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." Galatians 3: 25-29
There is no physical, literal bloodline here which determines who is Israel, who are the children of God, who are the elect of God.
One of the tactics of the dialectic as an argument or quarrel against the truth of scripture is to try to distract attention away from that truth in some way, sometimes by a focus on some other scripture which is not relevant to the Truth of another scripture which is the issue. The issue with the verses above, including verse 3 and verse 16 of Galatians 3 is whether in the New Covenant there is still the physical bloodline from Abraham which determines who are the children of God, who are the chosen people.
The dialectic sets up an opposition. The scripture at issue can be seen as the thesis while the opposition or anti-thesis tries to overthrow that thesis and in the Hegelian dialectic there is an outcome which is called the synthesis, often a compromise.
The dialectic is seen in scripture. Satan used it on Eve in Genesis 3: 1-6. There is a form of it used by the Pharisees in a dialogue with Christ in John 8. "Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;
32. And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
33. They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?" John 8: 31-33
"Then answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil?
49. Jesus answered, I have not a devil; but I honour my Father, and ye do dishonour me."
Jesus was teaching in John 8: 31-33, but the Pharisees did not understand and/or did not accept his teachings and the Pharisees started saying he was a Samaritan who was demon possessed. Thats a tactic of the dialectic, to try to change the focus of the debate away from what Christ was teaching - for example, that the truth can make you free of bondage to the many rules of the Pharisees to something else.
There is also a very brief mention of the early Greek philosophy of the dialectic in I Timothy 6: 20, which in seen in the Greek, but not made explicit in the English translations.
"O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:"
ω τιμοθεε την παρακαταθηκην φυλαξον εκτρεπομενος τας βεβηλους κενοφωνιας και αντιθεσεις της ψευδωνυμου γνωσεως
αντιθεσεις, or antitheseis, anti-thesis, is Strong's number 477, "opposition,i.e., conflict of theories."
Other Greek words mean oppose or opposition, such as Strong's 475, antidiaithemai, to set oneself opposite.
There is also Strong's number 498, antitassomai, to range oneself against, to oppose.
And there is Strong's 480, antikeimai, to lie opposite, be adversive, adversary, be contrary, oppose.
Antitheseis, used in I Timothy 6: 20, is a term used by the Greek philosophers before Christ who were into the dialectic as a way of making an argument.
Another translation of γνωσεως, gnoseos, is knowledge, which fits in with the Greek word αντιθεσεις, or anti-thesis.
But you might ask, how did a word from the Hegelian dialectic get in Paul's writing in the First Century? Hegel lived from 1770 to 1831. The answer is that in Greek philosophy before the time of Christ, there was a school of philosophy on the dialectic. Paul was educated and could very well have known about that Greek philosophical school and its terminology.
Paul uses αντιθεσεις, or anti-thesis, in I Timothy 6: 20, which is part of the terminology of the early Greek philosophical school on the dialectic. But Paul does not use διαλεκτική, or dialectic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic
"Dialectic (also dialectics and the dialectical method), from Ancient Greek διαλεκτική, is a method of argument.....The word dialectic originated in ancient Greece, and was made popular by Plato in the Socratic dialogues."
"In classical philosophy, dialectic (Greek: διαλεκτική) is a form of reasoning based upon dialogue of arguments and counter-arguments, advocating propositions (theses) and counter-propositions (antitheses)."
"Aristotle said that it was the pre-Socratic philosopher Zeno of Elea who invented dialectic, of which the dialogues of Plato are the examples of the Socratic dialectical method."
Nang
TOL Subscriber
Reformers believe God keeps all His promises; both temporal and spiritual. You have no basis to claim otherwise.
We also understand that many of the temporal fulfillments point to and lead to spiritual conclusions.
The "church" consists of all souls saved by the grace of God . . O.T. Believers as well as N.T. Believers, so many saints that enjoyed earthly promises also knew the spiritual fulfillments that came therefrom. . Abraham being the best example.
Epoisses
New member
Any return to the sacrificial offerings after the one time sacrifice for all sin for all time is a rejection of Christ and the highest form of sin. The mark of the beast will revolve around a restored temple worship in Jerusalem in the last days and it won't be just confined to Jerusalem. Jerusalem will become the capital of the world so the things practiced there will be followed by all the nations. Any nation who doesn't follow will be crushed by the armies of the beast. The armies of the beast being legions of fallen angels who could destroy an aircraft carrier with one of their pinkie fingers and not break a sweat. Anyone who thinks I am just being sensational read 2Kings 6:15-17
beameup
New member
OK. What's that got to do with the Millennial Temple?
BTW: the "temple" described in Revelation is only the
"holy place" and the "holy of holies", which is the
size of the original Tabernacle (ie: very small).
The "outer court" is given to the gentiles (still very small area).
Elia
Well-known member
PneumaPsucheSoma
TOL Subscriber
Pseudo-Zionist Dispensationalists engaged in terse battle with Pseudo-Zionist Judaizer... Priceless.
Ben Masada
New member
Okay Intojoy, how about starting with a quote of the text for a better understanding of the term "partake?"`I will read the quote and, somehow, we can get into a discussion of the subject of Replacement Theology.