Behold, It Was Leah!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ben_Masada
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
simplynoone said:
🤷 *And they say I AM the stubborn one with the vivid imagination. This is fine… just know that it is not supported in the Tanakh. It is NT mythology with nothing whatsoever to do with the Jewish. *
Click to expand...
Of course in the TaNaKH there would be no explicit reference to the Holy Trinity, but I remember there is a verse, I can<t remember from which Biblical Book, but I read such a verse. I learned it in a Bible written in French, so how the English versions of the Bible would express it might come slightly differently: “Ils seront enseignés par Dieu Lui-même” ( “They will be taught — or: receive instruction – or a teaching —by God Himself”) And I don’t think it’s a NT verse. It might be among the quoted OT verses in the NT, though. And it would at least be found in the Septuagint Bible…
 
simplynoone said:
  • The Christians are the ones who say that God expects us to keep the commandments and because we can not do it for whatever reasons, God broke the Laws His own Self to send forth a man who did not actually fulfill the Law (according to the Church), but we can ignore this because “we” killed him and then God further broke the Laws to bring him back from the dead… of course, I must pause here and ask, where is he? What was the point for God to break so many Laws including the Law of Nature to bring him back from the dead if He is not even here to do anything to help anyone?
Certainly his teachings will do no good since he, Jesus, said to observe AND teach the Law of God and the prophets (matthew 5:17-19) that according to you we cannot even do and which, according to the Church, he did not even fulfill his own self. By the way, you obviously take the commands to be literal physical commands since our physically not obeying them is the reason we needed a Saviour to save us from eternal suffering… so, Jesus, if he was the fulfillment of the Law for mankind DID have to fulfill them physically since that was “the fall” according to the teachings of the Church. *
Click to expand...
“According to the Church”, you say? Really??? Tell me, where did you receive this information? For my Church taught me that He DID fulfill the Law!!
And where did you get that the notion of "physically fulfilling the Commandments? Is not the main one to love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and all your might? So it has to be fulfilled willingly. not just from the way your deed would look to most people!..
BTW, can you tell us in truth that you love God the Master of the Universe with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your might?
 
Ben_Masada said:
Thanks for your vote of confidence. This post of yours was
like a glass of fresh water where I find around only vinegar.
Click to expand...
I’m sure you were surprised to find the Catholic Answers forum filled with people who share your views? If you wanted “water” you look in weird places.
 
Lapell said:
Of course in the TaNaKH there would be no explicit reference to the Holy Trinity, but I remember there is a verse, I can<t remember from which Biblical Book, but I read such a verse. I learned it in a Bible written in French, so how the English versions of the Bible would express it might come slightly differently: “Ils seront enseignés par Dieu Lui-même” ( “They will be taught — or: receive instruction – or a teaching —by God Himself”) And I don’t think it’s a NT verse. It might be among the quoted OT verses in the NT, though. And it would at least be found in the Septuagint Bible…
Click to expand...
*It reminds me of Proverbs 2:1-7 which I can testify is a promise that God keeps… I was taught by the “mouth” of God, but I also found that the teachings were confirmed by one who is Jewish and in fact, I allowed myself to be instructed by this particular Jew because I do also 100% believe that God DID and with good reason, establish His testimonies and His Laws with and in the Jewish (Psa 78:5). The view of the Trinity is one of mythologies… it is not founded in the Tanakh. There is only one God… this God is not a man… and His Son is Israel and not one that He birthed via a virgin… I am sorry, but this is the Truth according to the Tanakh… *
**
According to mythologies, it is truth… but I personally do not consider mythology to be the testimonies or the Law of God. :o
 
Lapell said:
“According to the Church”, you say? Really??? Tell me, where did you receive this information? For my Church taught me that He DID fulfill the Law!!
Click to expand...
oh! well then, I apologize! I thought that the Church held to the position that Jesus was not married. I guess we are in agreement then that Jesus, being Jewish, was married and fulfilled the command to be fruitful and multiply. Again, I am sorry… I misunderstood your (and that of your particular church’s) position. 👍
And where did you get that the notion of "physically fulfilling the Commandments? Is not the main one to love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and all your might? So it has to be fulfilled willingly. not just from the way your deed would look to most people!..
Click to expand...
Do you mind to elaborate what you mean by this, above, please. I am not sure that I understand what you are saying. Thank you. 🙂
BTW, can you tell us in truth that you love God the Master of the Universe with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your might?
Click to expand...
*Hahaha…sorry, but I had a laugh at the phrase “Master of the Universe.” I used to watch He-Man when I was younger and considering most Christians’ view that Jesus was God… well, it just seemed rather silly to me that you would use that title. *
**
*I do Love God, and the Love grows as my knowledge grows. The knowledge is founded in the Law of God (yes, even that Law known as the Mosaic Law that most Christians so willingly discard)… The more I understand His Laws, the more I love Him. But it is not a type of love that I was taught in any of the churches… it is based on actual knowledge of God and the way He works with His creation (that being w/in His Laws). *
**
*The god of the virgin birth, physical resurrection of the dead, and fickle tendencies… that god I do not know and what I thought I love of him… well, it was all based on pure selfishness… meaning, what could I get out of him. *
**
*My attitude to God… the Creator… is no longer “what can I get out of Him” but rather what can I give to this, His Creation since He has given me life w/in it… which is the greatest gift to have been given. Knowledge of God seems the best thing at this point to give back to others since it is not something that abounds in the minds of most. I do not expect anything from Him… meaning, I know that I will die one day and that my life will be over… I do not seek to gain a god like status (eternal Life) and I do not cover myself with illusions that I am anything more than what I am… I am just me, mistakes and all. Best to learn while I can and share what it is I have learned and I am grateful for every moment of it… greed for more than I was given was never really “my thing” anyway. 😉 *
 
simplynoone said:
*It reminds me of Proverbs 2:1-7 which I can testify is a promise that God keeps… I was taught by the “mouth” of God, but I also found that the teachings were confirmed by one who is Jewish and in fact, I allowed myself to be instructed by this particular Jew because I do also 100% believe that God DID and with good reason, establish His testimonies and His Laws with and in the Jewish (Psa 78:5). The view of the Trinity is one of mythologies… it is not founded in the Tanakh. There is only one God… this God is not a man… and His Son is Israel and not one that He birthed via a virgin… I am sorry, but this is the Truth according to the Tanakh… *
**
According to mythologies, the NT’s story (virgin birth, physical resurrection, etc etc) is truth… but I personally do not consider mythology to be the testimonies or the Law of God. That is just me though, I guess. :o
Click to expand...
 
Ben_Masada said:
Oh my dear Lapell, how naive of you! Did you expect the Church to teach you about Replacement Theology? No, this was not brought up by a Jew, because when Paul brought it up, he was no longer a Jew. He had already apostatized from Judaism.
Click to expand...
Well, who came up with this expression: Replacement Theory? That’s what I exactly meant. Maybe I should have been more specific. Sorry!
 
Ben_Masada said:
Lapell, are you all right? You continue with your naivety. Israelites and Jews are the same. Regarding the writings of the NT, Christians started in the year 60 CE with Paul in Antioch. The gospels started coming out after the year 70 CE all the way up to the end of the First Century. Therefore, they were all Christians already. If I am not competent to discuss matters from the NT, how come you can’t refute them?
Click to expand...
Whenever we did, you did as though we said nothing, or you simply dismissed them.😃
In saying that Christians were Christians only once they were called so, yourself made a show of nice-looking naiveté indeed!!!
 
jbelokur said:
I’m sure you were surprised to find the Catholic Answers forum filled with people who share your views? If you wanted “water” you look in weird places.
Click to expand...
When Jesus cried of thirst on the cross, they did not give him water. That was a weird place. What do you mean by being this also a weird place? Am I supposed to get only vinegar? That’s a pity!
 
Lapell said:
Well, who came up with this expression: Replacement Theory? That’s what I exactly meant. Maybe I should have been more specific. Sorry!
Click to expand...
**How do I know Lapell? Some intelligent Jew, perhaps, who happened to stumble on Galatians 4:21-31. **
 
Lapell said:
Whenever we did, you did as though we said nothing, or you simply dismissed them.😃
In saying that Christians were Christians only once they were called so, yourself made a show of nice-looking naiveté indeed!!!
Click to expand...
Well my friend, the only option you have to discard Acts 11:26 is to burn the book, because Luke could not be more clear than to say that, then and there, it was the FIRST time the disciples started being called Christians. You are hitting on nails with your bare hands.
 
Ben_Masada said:
Well my friend, the only option you have to discard Acts 11:26 is to burn the book, because Luke could not be more clear than to say that, then and there, it was the FIRST time the disciples started being called Christians. You are hitting on nails with your bare hands.
Click to expand...
It’s like your saying Israelites are Jews even though there are not called so in the Torah and most of the Prophets (if not all)… and the word Judaism doesn’t even appear nowhere in the Old Testament, BTW! Where they Jews before their beying called so, or were they not?
 
Ben_Masada said:
Well my friend, the only option you have to discard Acts 11:26 is to burn the book, because Luke could not be more clear than to say that, then and there, it was the FIRST time the disciples started being called Christians. You are hitting on nails with your bare hands.
Click to expand...
Ever read the expression “The Way” in Acts about those who followed Jesus and remained faithful to him after his death, even proclaiming that Jesus resurrected from among the dead? Call them " those of the Way" or “Nazarenes” or “Christians” (or “Messianics”), like it or not, they are the same people. Just like the sons of Judah and of Benjamin who were called "Jews much later…
 
simplynoone said:
*It reminds me of Proverbs 2:1-7 which I can testify is a promise that God keeps… I was taught by the “mouth” of God, but I also found that the teachings were confirmed by one who is Jewish and in fact, I allowed myself to be instructed by this particular Jew because I do also 100% believe that God DID and with good reason, establish His testimonies and His Laws with and in the Jewish (Psa 78:5). The view of the Trinity is one of mythologies… it is not founded in the Tanakh. There is only one God… this God is not a man… and His Son is Israel and not one that He birthed via a virgin… I am sorry, but this is the Truth according to the Tanakh… *
**
According to mythologies, it is truth… but I personally do not consider mythology to be the testimonies or the Law of God. :o
Click to expand...
Say, are you and Ben Masada only one person, by any chance? Or you must be disciples of the same rav!!
 
simplynoone said:
oh! well then, I apologize! I thought that the Church held to the position that Jesus was not married. I guess we are in agreement then that Jesus, being Jewish, was married and fulfilled the command to be fruitful and multiply. Again, I am sorry… I misunderstood your (and that of your particular church’s) position. 👍
Click to expand...
I thought that to you Jew misvoth were not orders per se, but things you perform for the love of God. To you it’s apparently slightly different, hmm?
 
simplynoone said:
Do you mind to elaborate what you mean by this, above, please. I am not sure that I understand what you are saying. Thank you. 🙂
Click to expand...
What exactly is there that you don’t understand, simplynoone? You talked of “physically obeying God”, didn’t you, whatever you meant by that…
(I first thought that you and Ben Masada were the same person, but I don’t think Ben would have asked this question… I apologize.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top