Is Our Time To Go, Set ???

[dacontinent]

So why does Moses, Elijah, Joshua, and all the prophets and the apostles get the GOLDEN chance and opportunity to supposedly come face to face with "God", but you or I can't? Talk about "respecter of persons"? This takes the cake.
...

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think the closest that any of those folks got to seeing the face of God was when Moses got to see God's butt. In that case, Moses' face had to be shrouded for a couple of weeks because it shone so brightly. Outside of that, people today can have the same types of encounters that the patriarchs had.

...You have to have "faith" that he exists, but they didn't? They supposedly had "God" right there in their midst. They didn't need faith, yet supposedly in the "kingdom of God", they'll have higher positions? How justified is that? They didn't need any faith at all, especially seeing what God did to the Red Sea and other supposed miracles. Why would anyone need faith after seeing that?
On the other hand, you or I will be severely judged with death if we don't have faith in something we can't see. How logical is this? It's not, no matter how you try and slice it...

Moses saw God face to butt; God wrote on tables of stone and gave the stones to Moses. Still, Moses disobeyed Him. How logical was that? He missed entering the Promised Land.

Joshua spied out the Promised Land, saw the parting and crossing of the Red Sea, manna through the wilderness, God's sovereign protection for 40 years (while all of his adult contemporaries except Caleb), and the parting and crossing of the Jordan. He even saw the "captain of the Lord's host" before attacking Jericho, where the walls fell down flat. But, the leading warrior of his time failed to complete the most important mission that he was assigned to do: Drive out the inhabitants from the land. How logical was that?

I could go on with character after character, but I think you get the picture. Faith can be measured as our obedience to God when He is "not in your face". THAT is why we must have it.

...Were they better than you or me? Why can't the OT/NT God simply show himself and be through with it? All that we have are words in a book that's full of errors and unfulfilled prophecies; no reliable historical evidence; no reliable archaeological evidence of most of the Bible, yet we're to believe?

Why can't you or I have the privilege of seeing what they saw? Perhaps you can overlook the many, many red flags this presents, but I can't.

For reasons cited above, we know that they were no better than you and me. We have their testimonies yet we repeat their errors - without the acute threats and persecutions that they endured. So, we are clearly no better than they. Would it logically "be through with" if God simply showed Himself? The Scriptures have told us that will not be so after Christ returns. There are people who will see Him and the results and still will not believe...but some will.

Many of the people that we read about in the NT were tortured for what they believed and preached. Do I think we want that? No...but it does still happen in other parts of the world. Why them and not me? Is that logical?? Hardly. Am I willing to be subject to that? Yes, I am.

 

[ROYAL BLUE]

So why does Moses, Elijah, Joshua, and all the prophets and the apostles get the GOLDEN chance and opportunity to supposedly come face to face with "God", but you or I can't? Talk about "respecter of persons"? This takes the cake.

You have to have "faith" that he exists, but they didn't? They supposedly had "God" right there in their midst. They didn't need faith, yet supposedly in the "kingdom of God", they'll have higher positions? How justified is that? They didn't need any faith at all, especially seeing what God did to the Red Sea and other supposed miracles. Why would anyone need faith after seeing that?
On the other hand, you or I will be severely judged with death if we don't have faith in something we can't see. How logical is this? It's not, no matter how you try and slice it.

Were they better than you or me? Why can't the OT/NT God simply show himself and be through with it? All that we have are words in a book that's full of errors and unfulfilled prophecies; no reliable historical evidence; no reliable archaeological evidence of most of the Bible, yet we're to believe?

Why can't you or I have the privilege of seeing what they saw? Perhaps you can overlook the many, many red flags this presents, but I can't.

I pray the verses below will help you to better understand..............

Romans 9:20 But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?â€￾

Romans 9:21 Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?

Romans 9:22 What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction,

Romans 9:23 and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory,

Romans 9:24 even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

 

[ROYAL BLUE]

Why can't the OT/NT God simply show himself and be through with it? All that we have are words in a book that's full of errors and unfulfilled prophecies; no reliable historical evidence; no reliable archaeological evidence of most of the Bible, yet we're to believe?

Why can't you or I have the privilege of seeing what they saw?

Romans 9:20......Paul is saying, who are you to talk back to God, O man, when He has directed you in a matter. If you are making something from material, say cloth, or wood, does the cloth or wood ever ask you why you are cutting it up to make the item. So in respect, this verse is saying that the piece of material is rejecting being put into the dress. Does it sound crazy? Well that is what it is like for you to question what God has planned for your life.

Romans 9:21.......Consider a potter with a big lump of clay in his hand. The potter has the power to make a very valuable vase [vessel unto honour], or just an inexpensive ashtray worth a few cents. Who then has the power of decision over what is to be made, and for the purpose that it is intended? Are you starting to get the picture? It is the creator.

What God does to and with souls in this earth age was determined in that first earth age, and it is for the potter, or the Father to determine what should be done with the lump of clay that you call your body. Think of it, one third of all of God's children worshipped Satan, who was only a created soul just like they were. This is like one lump of clay worshipping another lump of clay. It just doesn't make any sense because what is done by the clay, would be done in ignorance and defiance.

All souls had rights before in that first earth age our heavenly Father, yet one third of them wondered and were deceived into believing Satan's lies. Are you starting to understand why the Father was so angry with many of them, such as Esau.

"God's purpose regarded only a remnant", and only a certain number of souls were preselected. Only the Father can harden one man's soul, and yet not another, and God does what He does for His Divine purpose. This is called "Divine election" and it is not to be challenged by any man. The condition of the soul of Pharaoh is unknown to us, for when Christ died on the cross He went to all those lost souls and preached to them, and all those that believed and accepted came out of that holding place and went with Christ to be with the Father. http://www.theseason.org/romans/romans9.htm

 

[JayRob]

RB and dacontinent, you continue to quote these verses that have no historical support outside of the Bible as if they're true. No evidence to support it at all. Why are you quoting them?

Dacontinent, the reason why the NT claims that the OT God can't be seen and that he doesn't do miracles like he supposedly did back then is because the religion has been copied, and those miracles never happened to begin with. Many of those ideas came from other religions. I think you guys know this, but you don't want to face it. The evidence is clearly there.

--Prove to me that the name "Jesus" didn't come from the pagan god called "Zeus".
--Prove to me that the term "Israel" isn't pagan.
--Show me the evidence that Moses ever existed, then you can quote him.
--Show me the evidence that any of the major miracles mentioned in the OT actually happened. There's hardly a record on earth to support most of these miracles occurring.
--Show me the evidence that OT Israel existed, then you can quote verses about them.
--Show me evidence about David existing, then you can quote verses about him.
--Show evidence that Elijah existed, then you can quote to me verses that I can actually relate to.

--And RB, how can someone whose dead go to hell and preach to anyone? We covered that before, yet you continue to quote it as if it was true. If Jesus went to hell to preach while he was supposed to be dead, you just ruled him out as the messiah. The messiah was supposed to be dead three days and three nights. You have him preaching.

Why is it that folks continue to ignore the subject of errors and failed prophecies, but continue to accept as fact a book that's so unreliable? Why is that? It boggles my mind.

Please address the above questions if you don't mind guys.

 

[JayRob]

"God's purpose regarded only a remnant", and only a certain number of souls were preselected. Only the Father can harden one man's soul, and yet not another, and God does what He does for His Divine purpose. This is called "Divine election" and it is not to be challenged by any man. The condition of the soul of Pharaoh is unknown to us, for when Christ died on the cross He went to all those lost souls and preached to them, and all those that believed and accepted came out of that holding place and went with Christ to be with the Father. http://www.theseason.org/romans/romans9.htm

RB, just keep giving the OT god a "free pass". No matter what dirt he does, you're going to always claim that it's clean.

Your website above quoted the following: About 745 B.C. to 722 B.C. the northern nation, "the House of Israel", made up of ten tribes were over run by the Assyrians, and the Assyrians pack them off to an area just north of Lake Van in Iraq. Shortly after this resettling, the House of Israel fragmented, and migrated through the Caucasus mountains, and moved to become settlements in Europe and the Americas. These people of the House of Israel lost their identity as being Israelites, and became known by the event of their migrations through the Caucasus mountains, and were called "Caucasians".

Where do you get this stuff?
That info has been disproven time and again. How could Joseph have White children, when he married an Egyptian?

In the second half of the 19th century, a school of biblical criticism developed in Germany, of which Julian Wellhausen was a leading figure. It challenged the historicity of the Old Testament stories and claimed that biblical historiography was formulated, and in large measure actually invented, during the Babylonian exile.

These Bible scholars claimed that the history of the Hebrews, as a series of events beginning with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and proceeding through the exile to Egypt, the enslavement there and the exodus, and ending with the conquest of the land of Canaan and the settlement of the tribes of Israel, was no more than a later reconstruction of events that had never actually happened, and was written with a theological purpose.

The Bible, according to most modern, respected biblical scholars, is one of the most tampered-with scriptures on Earth, with dubious authorship and beginnings.

 

[JayRob]

In addition to that info....

Additional fuel was added to the fire with the publication in 1897 of The Myths of Israel: The Ancient Book of Genesis with Analysis and Explanation of Its Composition, by Amos Kidder Fiske (Macmillan Co., New York). Fiske de- tailed how different and incompatible versions of various events were cobbled together rather clumsily by whoever compiled the Old Testament, as for example the Elohist and Yahwist versions of the Deluge, resulting in contradictions that would be intolerable in any book purporting to set forth an accurate chronology.13

H.L. Mencken’s Treatise on the Gods was first published in 1930. (A second edition, in 1946, changed little of interest here.) Mencken pointed out that “[W]e have [the Flood myth] from the Jews, who got it from the Baby lonians, who got it from the Sumerians.” ....Mencken wrote that: “The Old Testament, as history, is on a much lower level” than Parson Weems’s Life of Washington or Uncle Tom’s Cabin.

 

[Dr H..]

JRob


I have read all your likes and dislike about whats's written in the bibe. The question I have for you is:

Do you have a better plan to offer, if so please present it to the entire creation. As like God told Job "if not" then shut up and go along with my plan for salvation.

Question: Are you saved, if so please explain, how and why you are.

 

[ROYAL BLUE]

JRob


I have read all your likes and dislike about whats's written in the bibe. The question I have for you is:

Do you have a better plan to offer, if so please present it to the entire creation. As like God told Job "if not" then shut up and go along with my plan for salvation.

Question: Are you saved, if so please explain, how and why you are.

......of course he doesn't have a better plan because he's a dying man without any supernatural power. He catches colds, bleeds, have to work to make a living, and knows not what will happen tomorrow; nor has he lived in the past to tell us why we're here on this earth...........he's miserable and has hopes of bringing everyone else into his poor spiritual condition. All we can do is ask God to open his eyes whereby he can see.

 

[JayRob]

JRob


I have read all your likes and dislike about whats's written in the bibe. The question I have for you is:

Do you have a better plan to offer, if so please present it to the entire creation. As like God told Job "if not" then shut up and go along with my plan for salvation.

Question: Are you saved, if so please explain, how and why you are.

Saved from what?:noidea:

As far as there being this "plan", what plan are you referring to?

One more thing, please don't forget to respond to each item in post 104. Thanks.

 

[JayRob]

......of course he doesn't have a better plan because he's a dying man without any supernatural power. He catches colds, bleeds, have to work to make a living, and knows not what will happen tomorrow; nor has he lived in the past to tell us why we're here on this earth...........he's miserable and has hopes of bringing everyone else into his poor spiritual condition. All we can do is ask God to open his eyes whereby he can see.

Dude, I don't have a plan, but the Creator has a plan. That plan is much more powerful and much more real than what your religion teaches.

We all have supernatural powers, but religion has robbed us of this knowledge and wisdom. Religion has told us that we are mortal and that this life is the ONLY life that there is, then comes judgement. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Every human being has lived in the past, and will continue to live on into the future, whether he believes it or not. Religion binds us to this one life and that's it. Religion has robbed humans of the knowledge once taught, the knowledge that we are all spiritual beings, clothed in a physical body.

When that physical body dies off, we go on to the next phase of our existence as judged by the Creator. That phase is not a hell fire either. That's another made-up myth.

As far as you accusing me of being miserable, nothing could be further from the truth. I'm continuing to grow on the spiritual level, I'm in good health, my spiritual and physical needs are being provided, so what more does one need? I try to treat others as I'd want to be treated and vice versa. These are the things that bring me joy.

I'm not bound by worshipping a man-made religion based on a book full of errors and unfaithful predictions. I'm not bound by man-made laws and statutes that tell me to do this and that, but I'm a free moral agent, mapping out my own destiny on this earth without a man looking over me and telling me what's right and wrong. I have direct access to the Creator. What more does one need?

If you call that being miserable, then that's on you. You may want to look in the mirror before judging another.

While you're at it, please don't forget to respond to each item in post 104. Thanks.

 

[dacontinent]

RB and dacontinent, you continue to quote these verses that have no historical support outside of the Bible as if they're true. No evidence to support it at all. Why are you quoting them?

Dacontinent, the reason why the NT claims that the OT God can't be seen and that he doesn't do miracles like he supposedly did back then is because the religion has been copied, and those miracles never happened to begin with. Many of those ideas came from other religions. I think you guys know this, but you don't want to face it. The evidence is clearly there.
...
Please address the above questions if you don't mind guys.

First, a story.
I was a sophomore at JSU in the fall of '80. One of my courses was Literature Of Science. The latter two-thirds of the course was on Darwinism. The content was what all of these famous scientists had to say about Origin Of Species. There was constant banter between the prof (evolution) and myself (creation) while almost all of the other 30 hostages were silent. One day while discussing something, she asserted that the church (Catholic) archeological researchers had discovered the place where Israel crossed the Red Sea and scientifically shown that it was only 4-inches deep when they crossed, diminishing the miracle. I later reminded her that the Egyptian army drowned in that same 4-inches of water. The point of this little story is that proof and evidence are only valuable if they are accepted.

It is clear that you refuse to accept the bible is historical, despite the findings of countless archeologists. With that in mind I first struggled with the thought of casting the pearls toward you. However, I have learned something from the story above and through the 28 years since: Give the antagonist pointers; if he is a seeker, he will find what he is looking for and love you for it. If not a seeker, then you have redeemed some time for better causes.

...--Prove to me that the name "Jesus" didn't come from the pagan god called "Zeus"...

If you understand the derivation of the Greek and Hebrew languages, then you already know that the etymologies for Jesus and Zeus are completely different. You do not appear to be seeking here.

--Prove to me that the term "Israel" isn't pagan...

Ibid.

...--Show me the evidence that Moses ever existed, then you can quote him...

The ancient EGYPTIAN writing of Sinhue should be enough to legitimize Moses. If not, consult the work of Dr. Ekrem Akrugal in his work, Ancient Civilizations and Ruins of Turkey. If you invalidate both of them, then I will stop quoting what he wrote.

...--Show me the evidence that any of the major miracles mentioned in the OT actually happened. There's hardly a record on earth to support most of these miracles occurring...

There are plenty of archaelogical digs along the plain of the Dead Sea where Sodom and Gomorrah were that show the brimstone that rained down on them. Mount Hermon continues to be totally watered with dew only.

...--Show me the evidence that OT Israel existed, then you can quote verses about them...

Op. cit. Invalidating Moses would invalidate OT Israel. When you do, I will stop quoting verses about them.

...--Show me evidence about David existing, then you can quote verses about him...

If you want to know about David from a non-biblical context, consult the work and research of Dr. William Schneidewind of UCLA, author of The Geopolitical History of Philistine Gath. When you invalidate it, I will stop quoting verses about David.

...--Show evidence that Elijah existed, then you can quote to me verses that I can actually relate to...

Assyrian historical documents confirm Elijah's anointing of Hazael as king. Read up on Tushratta (Ben-Hadad), who was a contemporary of Amenhotep III of Egypt. Tushratta's son, Kurtiwaza (sometimes recorded Mattiwaza) is Hazael, When you invalidate that, I will stop quoting verses that you should already relate to.

...--And RB, how can someone whose dead go to hell and preach to anyone? We covered that before, yet you continue to quote it as if it was true. If Jesus went to hell to preach while he was supposed to be dead, you just ruled him out as the messiah. The messiah was supposed to be dead three days and three nights. You have him preaching...

I will take this one...Only His body was dead. Peter, RB & I have Him (His living spirit) preaching to "spirits in prison" (1 Peter 3:19). Just preaching spirit to spirit.

...Why is it that folks continue to ignore the subject of errors and failed prophecies, but continue to accept as fact a book that's so unreliable? Why is that? It boggles my mind...

Still waiting for your thread on the subject.

 

[ROYAL BLUE]

As far as you accusing me of being miserable, nothing could be further from the truth. I'm continuing to grow on the spiritual level, I'm in good health, my spiritual and physical needs are being provided, so what more does one need? I try to treat others as I'd want to be treated and vice versa. These are the things that bring me joy.

I'm not bound by worshipping a man-made religion based on a book full of errors and unfaithful predictions. I'm not bound by man-made laws and statutes that tell me to do this and that, but I'm a free moral agent, mapping out my own destiny on this earth without a man looking over me and telling me what's right and wrong. I have direct access to the Creator. What more does one need?

If you call that being miserable, then that's on you. You may want to look in the mirror before judging another.
While you're at it, please don't forget to respond to each item in post 104. Thanks.

I don't judge, however I do state facts...........

I answered your question in post #94 before you even asked the question. This may not be the answer you seek, but it's the answer you'll get in honesty and love; I can't make you receive something you don't want.

2 Corinthians 5:7 For we walk by faith, not by sight.

 

[JayRob]

dacontinent;1502652]First, a story.
I was a sophomore at JSU in the fall of '80. One of my courses was Literature Of Science. The latter two-thirds of the course was on Darwinism. The content was what all of these famous scientists had to say about Origin Of Species. There was constant banter between the prof (evolution) and myself (creation) while almost all of the other 30 hostages were silent. One day while discussing something, she asserted that the church (Catholic) archeological researchers had discovered the place where Israel crossed the Red Sea and scientifically shown that it was only 4-inches deep when they crossed, diminishing the miracle. I later reminded her that the Egyptian army drowned in that same 4-inches of water. The point of this little story is that proof and evidence are only valuable if they are accepted.

First of all, I appreciate you honestly in addressing the questions, unlike the other person who chose to run away from an honest discussion.

I don't believe in a theory of evolution, but I don't believe in the Genesis creation account either.

It is clear that you refuse to accept the bible is historical, despite the findings of countless archeologists. With that in mind I first struggled with the thought of casting the pearls toward you. However, I have learned something from the story above and through the 28 years since: Give the antagonist pointers; if he is a seeker, he will find what he is looking for and love you for it. If not a seeker, then you have redeemed some time for better causes.

I didn't say that EVERY statement in the Bible was false. I've always stated that most of the info was copied from previous sources and older pagan writings. Take for instance Christianity. It's clear that it came from Judaism.

If you understand the derivation of the Greek and Hebrew languages, then you already know that the etymologies for Jesus and Zeus are completely different. You do not appear to be seeking here.

That's not true, and I'll explain why.

Get out your Strong’s Concordance and look up the name ‘Jesus’. Above the listing of where his name appears in scripture an explanation and definition of the name is found. The pronunciation is stated as ‘Je’Zeus’. Look at it closely. Then go to the first reference where that name is listed and look up the Strong’s number. It reads like this:

Strong’s Greek Dictionary #2424
Iesous
Phonetic: ee-ay-sooce'

Text: of Hebrew origin [3091]; Jesus (i.e. Jehoshua), the name of our Lord and two (three) other Israelites: -- Jesus.

‘Iesous’ is a GREEK word and is NOT, and I say NOT of Hebrew origin. ‘Jehoshua’ is the correct translation from the Hebrew. So why was the SON OF GOD called ‘Jesus’ if his true name was ‘Jehoshua’(Yah’Shua)?

Now follow through with this and look up the Hebrew word [3091].
Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary #3091
Yhowshuwa`
Phonetic: yeh-ho-shoo'-ah
Text: or Yhowshuwa {yeh-ho-shoo'-ah}; from 3068 and 3467; Jehovah-saved; Jehoshua (i.e. Joshua) pronounced (Yah’Shua)

Let’s look at the Greek word "IESOUS’ and take special notice of the "s" or "z" which sounds the same in both the Greek and the English names when translated.

The names with "soos", "sooce", "ses", and "sez" endings are Greek while the Hebrew always ends with an "ah" sound in spite of its varying forms. This shows the absolute difference between the names ‘Iesous’=‘Jesus’(Greek) from the name ‘Yahoshua’(Hebrew). It is proof positive that ‘Iesous’ is not an ‘ACCURATE TRANSLATION’ of ‘Yahoshua’ or any of its Hebrew-Aramaic roots!

In order to establish the origin of the name ‘Iesous’, it will be necessary to understand how the name ‘Ie-sous’ arose:

The Greeks recognized no other deities except those of the Greek Mythos. Their false, pagan deity called ‘Zeus’ was their CHIEF GOD (Father god of Greek mythos) and ruler of the sky. In Greek, ‘Zeus’ is pronounced as "SOUS" or "SOOCE" with a long "oo" / "u" sound. The Greek believed that ‘Zeus’ controlled the SUN.

"sous" = "Zeus"
"Ie - sous" = "Je - Zeus"
"Je - Zeus" = "Je - sus"

Many Christians unknowingly are praying in the name of a Greek sun god named Zeus.
More evidence that Christianity is derived from paganism.

I'll continue later on with responses to the other comments.

--------------------------

 

[JayRob]

I don't judge, however I do state facts...........

I answered your question in post #94 before you even asked the question. This may not be the answer you seek, but it's the answer you'll get in honesty and love; I can't make you receive something you don't want.

2 Corinthians 5:7 For we walk by faith, not by sight.

If that's the best you can do, then you have my sympathy. If you present to me proven and accurate truth, I'll have no problem accepting it, but you're hard pressed to present evidence for basic errors found in scripture. You just gloss over it and ignore it hoping it will go away. That's not honesty.