Resurrection? Why?

[ryanoneil]

Nowhere is Jesus named in the Tanakh as the seed of David that will rule over Abraham, Issac, and Jacob… IT IS THE “SEED LINE” and not the individual.

Who is the “SEED LINE” then? Is it every Jew and convert to Judaism regardless of what house or tribe they are from?

And no… I am quite familiar with the full chapter of Isaiah 56. You will note before this verse that you are listing, it is speaking of the Eunuchs (not the Gentiles… sorry).

The Eunuchs, according to Isaiah, are those who were “cut off” from either the Land or the People in some way or form. They can join back the same way the Gentiles do… but that is not by believing in a sacrificed man who is a Messiah or Saviour. That is never part of the covenant.

The foreigner and eunuch are identified together.

And the foreigners who join themselves to the LORD, ministering to him, Loving the name of the LORD, and becoming his servants-- All who keep the sabbath free from profanation and hold to my covenant, Them I will bring to my holy mountain and make joyful in my house of prayer; Their holocausts and sacrifices will be acceptable on my altar, For my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples. (Isa 56:6-7)

If the one who is sacrificed is the LORD. Then it is part of the covenant.

Interesting to note… Israel, the house of, that also went by the name of Ephraim was “cut off” for the “sins” of Judah… this was so that the promise to David could be kept. You will find this at the end of Psalm 78.

But God does not forget those who were “cut off…” (Hosea is really a good book for understanding all of this… in fact, the gentiles are mentioned )… but Hosea 14 is clear that when God calls one of His own out, it will be after they have let go of the idols (the false security that is grasped by the Gentiles)… and the ones who have let go of the idolatry (christianity) and heard that specific Word spoken, “you are my son/daughter” are the Eunuchs who will be happy to join back to the Jewish (the house of Judah… the husbandmen of the covenant) via the right way… conversion to Judaism… and THESE are the ones who will have names better than the sons and the daughters… my guess is due to they are one and the same as the suffering servant… Isaiah 53… the similarities in the wording describing Ephraim, the house of Israel, is uncanny. And this is already happening… that the People are joining back to the covenant via the calling they are getting from their God… and truly through the knowledge they bring back, the ties that bind God and Israel, the People (as a whole) are and will only be stronger. THIS, what I have just stated, is supported wholly by Isaiah… from beginning to end… and in fact, is supported through the whole of the Tanakh.
If Jesus is the LORD, then Christianity “is” New Covenant Judaism and modern Jews are Ephraim.

As for the afterlife… I don’t believe in one. After life is death. Ecclesiastes 9:10 … We are given life from the time we are born until the time we die. This is what is before us. I have no recollection of anything before I was born and this is in line with Ecclesiastes 9:10 and I expect what I know to be Truth to not change by the time I draw my last breath. Malachi 3:6

You are free to believe what you wish. If I’m not mistaken, the majority of Jews believe in the afterlife.

 

[Vico]

simplynoone, you wrote, with regard to the resurrection:

“…everything around you is testifying that it was not truth at all.”

I have not found that to be true in my life. From childhood, I was raised in a Catholic family which attended mass and was devoted, and had personal spiritual experiences, although not much scriptural understanding. I found that the more devoted I was, and the more I followed the commandments, I would not have an easier life or more material benefits, but rather have the strength to endure difficulties, greater self control, felt closer to God, and was more peaceful. I have truly been blessed with many perceptions, but I am not claiming to be any different than anybody else. There have been periods when I faultered, but did not loose my faith. Faith is the proof of things unseen, asserts that physical proofs and intellectual reasoning do not provide ultimate proofs. Our greatest proof of the truth expressed through the life of Jesus Christ, in is the salvation we experience as followers: being saved from our worldly attachments through our being attached to God. Truly the worldly man finds it hard to enter into an active relationship with God, because they are thinking about obtaining wealth, sensuous experiences, and material powers. These are all things that Satan can grant, but are not satisfying. The gifts to the faithful are eternal.

Another type of proof I can think of is that a tree produces fruit of its kind, so if a Christian properly applying the instructions of Jesus Christ, produces a saint, then Christ is a good tree and the saint is the fruit. There is record of numerous saints have been produced throughout the centuries.

But you could also test any predictions that Jesus made in the New Testament against history reported in the New Testament and in non scriptural history.

If you do not accept the testamony of the New Testament of the resurrection and ascension, and deny the connection to the prophesies made in the Old Testament, that Jesus referred to, then there will be no scriptural proof.

Q3 I believe in the resurrection because I believe the testamonies in the New Testament. That faith in the New Testament came initially from my childhood trust, and later upon my personal experience in my practice of Christianity. Why did Jesus Christ appear, Simeon said: The purpose is for the fall and rising of many in Israel (Luke 2:34,35).

So for Q1 proof that Jesus Christ is ascended: the new testament accounts. The reference of the New Testament to the Old Testament was mentioned, and you have a different interpretation. In general, the New Testament accounts were fulfilled in many ways for the purpose related to each of the prophecy, here are some:

1 Matthew 3:11 John the Baptist announces Jesus Christ, and John 7:38,39 fulfilled in Acts 2:1-4 Pentecost.
2 Matthew 16:21 Jesus tells of what will happen in his life, and it happens Matthew 26:57–28:10.
3 Matthew 21:43 Jesus tells the Jews that the kingdom will be taken from them and given to a nation giving forth fruits thereof, fulfilled in Acts 13:46,48 kingdom given to the Gentiles.
4 Matthew 26:1,2 Jesus predicts his crucifixion and when was fulfilled.
5 Matthew 26:13 Jesus says Mary will be remembered throughout the world, and it happens Matthew 26:6-13, Mark 14:3-9, and John 12:1-8.
6 Matthew 26:21-25 Jesus reveals Judas’s disloyalty, and it happens Luke 22:47,48.
7 Matthew 26:32 Jesus states he will go to Galilee after resurrection and it happens Matthew 28:16-18.
8 Luke 2:34,35 Simeon tells Mary of Jesus’s suffering, verified through his crucifixion.
9 Luke 19:43,44 The destruction of Jerusalem was predicted, and then it happened in 70AD.
10 John 2:19-21 Jesus predicts his resurrection after three days, fulfilled John 2:22.
11 John 6:62 Jesus predicts his ascension, fulfilled Luke 24:51.
12 John 6:64, 70-71 another account of Jesus identifies Judas as betrayer, fulfilled Luke 22:47,48.

 

[simplynoone]

I hope not to go too far into a tangent. If I may answer this question.

No worries about going too far into a tangent. I can understand them and would rather you get it all out than for you to hold back at the sake of what I think. I am after what is in your mind and not what you think we all want to hear.

It is an inanimate object and so does not function on it’s own. Because of this, I do not see why the Bus itself is at fault. Should we then complain that guns are the true culprit of death by gunshot wounds?

Still you are faced with trying to figure out who pulled the trigger. The Father, the Mother, or the Son … in regards to the trinity theory anyway. If we are allowed to be equal with the Son, then whatever charge you give to him you are also giving to us (whether innocent of the trigger pulling or guilty … that is us too … but it is him too… weird, huh?). Of course, this is me resigning to your level of mysticism for the sake of discussion ).

As for trying to find fault. A bus driver needs a Class B or above to drive the vehicle. I do not have such a license, but I should hope bus drivers, especially in the city I live, know how to avoid accidents and not get distracted. Humans do make mistakes however. And if such an accident occurs, unless there passengers outright interfere with the driver, either with force or other extreme cases, the driver would be the one responsible. A similar situation would be if you were driving your kids to the dentist and they really do not want to go. (Since I do not have children of my own I can only hope that well taught kids will not create such a disturbance.) As a responsible parent and driver (you are both at the same time while behind the wheel with your children), you would park the vehicle to calm the quarrel or disturbance before continuing on the road. Otherwise, any accidents caused by your vehicle would be your responsibility.

So, whoever is driving this bus we call Life is the responsible one, which is only the same reasoning you had above. So, who is driving here? Who is pulling the trigger? the Father … ouch!!!

How are is He doing? Good or bad

Mysticism is indeed an endless pit of confusion. Like going around over and over and over and over and over and over in circle. Hmmmm…

Also, what is the Greek mythology you speak of. I am Catholic and so I do not believe in mythology.

Study it first and then come back and tell me this. Which came first? the chicken or the egg? Wha-la … mythology

 

[simplynoone]

Who is the “SEED LINE” then? Is it every Jew and convert to Judaism regardless of what house or tribe they are from?

When Haman was being devious against the Jews, Esther went before the King to plead for the sake of the lives of the Jews. She did not call out individual names, only ever she was pleading for the lives of the Jews to be noticed as the living and allowed to continue living. Isaiah will give you the clear Word on who is a Jew.

The foreigner and eunuch are identified together.

And the foreigners who join themselves to the LORD, ministering to him, Loving the name of the LORD, and becoming his servants-- All who keep the sabbath free from profanation and hold to my covenant, Them I will bring to my holy mountain and make joyful in my house of prayer; Their holocausts and sacrifices will be acceptable on my altar, For my house shall be called a house of prayer for all peoples. (Isa 56:6-7)

Sorry, I may have put 5 and 6… I meant to put 4 and 5. 6 separates the Eunuchs from the Gentiles. Certainly the Gentiles are as precious to God, but it is the Eunuchs to which he gives an everlasting name to, better than the sons and daughters. This is understandable when you take into account the whole of the Tanakh. The sons and daughters are the signature … they are the ones keeping us here. Continue to kill and/or convert them, and you are erasing the signature.

If Jesus is the LORD, then Christianity “is” New Covenant Judaism and modern Jews are Ephraim.

Jesus spoke from the authority of the Tanakh by his own confession. Read Genesis 49 … It is to Judah the brothers will be called to. ahem JUDAism … sorry. there’s not a christ/messiah in the blessings other than the ones named for their purpose. And Judaism is the calling card for Israel.

You are free to believe what you wish. If I’m not mistaken, the majority of Jews believe in the afterlife.

After life is death … I don’t believe IN it… only I believe it is inevitable for us since the truth of it is, we are finite… Life only belongs to God and the breath of Life is given to us individually until we die… then it returns to God and we go back to dust. That is written in the Tanakh. Ecclesiastes in fact echoes this over and over.

 

[simplynoone]

“…everything around you is testifying that it was not truth at all.”

I have not found that to be true in my life. From childhood, I was raised in a Catholic family which attended mass and was devoted, and had personal spiritual experiences, although not much scriptural understanding. I found that the more devoted I …the strength to endure difficulties, greater self control, felt closer to God, and was more peaceful.

So the commandments taught you how to deal with difficulties, gain control, and feel closer to knowing God and you felt MORE peaceful… whereas words alone did nothing for you.

Thus far, I am correct. Huh…

There have been periods when I faultered, but did not loose my faith. Faith is the proof of things unseen, asserts that physical proofs and intellectual reasoning do not provide ultimate proofs.

Still you hang on to your faith … you have faultered though in that faith… maybe because, as you admit, there is no reasoning in it??

Hmmm…

Our greatest proof of the truth expressed through the life of Jesus Christ, in is the salvation we experience as followers: being saved from our worldly attachments through our being attached to God.

Let’s see … you still hang onto a man that died over 2,000 years ago and you say you do not hold on to the attachments? You don’t hang onto the lessons you should have learned from the experiences of Life, only ever the faith … and that is what you will die with … the faith. Never having contributed anything of real value to the ones who come after you …

after all, Isaiah 45:
18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else.

… there will be those after YOU.

Truly the worldly man finds it hard to enter into an active relationship with God, because they are thinking about obtaining wealth, sensuous experiences, and material powers.

You mean … living?

These are all things that Satan can grant, but are not satisfying.

No… these are all things that man can obtain his own self and that the jealous who don’t have it nor wisdom will attribute it to satan and claim they have something better.

if a Christian properly applying the instructions of Jesus Christ, produces a saint, then Christ is a good tree and the saint is the fruit.
You absolutely can not properly apply the teachings of Jesus and expect to resurrect physically from the dead.

But you could also test any predictions that Jesus made in the New Testament against history reported in the New Testament and in non scriptural history.

Okay… prove to me in non scriptural accounts that Jesus resurrected from the dead.

If you do not accept the testamony of the New Testament of the resurrection and ascension, and deny the connection to the prophesies made in the Old Testament, that Jesus referred to, then there will be no scriptural proof.

What is proof to you? The physical. Is it proof to you that someone is fine when they answer they are and even appear to be after you ask them “how they are.” In that case, it is a wonder why so many are taking medications to try to control the despair they have become permanently stuck in by giving into the illusion of what “perfect” is.

Q3 I believe in the resurrection because I believe the testamonies in the New Testament. That faith in the New Testament came initially from my childhood trust, and later upon my personal experience in my practice of Christianity.

There is proof in Life of my interpretation and not a shred of evidence for your interpretation… only ever you repeat “faith” by way of what man says and that is not proof.

 

[Vico]

simplynoone, you wrote: “Thus far, I am correct. Huh…”
Are you asking a question here?

Then: “No… these are all things that man can obtain his own self and that the jealous who don’t have it nor wisdom will attribute it to satan and claim they have something better.”

It is true that man can obtain worldly things his own self, but is not directly addressing what I said which was: “Truly the worldly man finds it hard to enter into an active relationship with God, because they are thinking about obtaining wealth, sensuous experiences, and material powers. These are all things that Satan can grant, but are not satisfying”.

You asking if I had “anything to show for my belief”, so I answered showing that there was positive change in me and more peace, yet still with material difficulties.

You asked: “… you have faultered though in that faith… maybe because, as you admit, there is no reasoning in it?”

Not because there is no reasoning in it, rather because of lack of understanding. Faith defined as belief almost always implies belief without proof, but another definition of faith is belief, trust, and loyalty to God. For me reason actually helped me to maintain my belief, trust, and loyalty to God.

You replied: “… you still hang onto a man that died over 2,000 years ago and you say you do not hold on to the attachments?”

No, I differentiate between worldly and God, the living God: “being saved from our worldly attachments through our being attached to God.”

You asked: “You mean … living?”
No, I mean living without devotion to God.

You wote: “You absolutely can not properly apply the teachings of Jesus and expect to resurrect physically from the dead.”

You are saying that expectations are somehow dependent on proper application, because that is not logical, you must mean something else. No? Maybe the sentence should not include the words “expect to”?

You asked: “Okay… prove to me in non scriptural accounts that Jesus resurrected from the dead.”

I am suprised you ask that, because you offered, earlier on, scriptural proofs from the Old Testament as an explaination that resurrection is not physical, and I wrote: “If you do not accept the testamony of the New Testament of the resurrection and ascension, and deny the connection to the prophesies made in the Old Testament, that Jesus referred to, then there will be no scriptural proof.”

Reference to you first post: Luke 16:31 (KJV): “And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.”

However, maybe there is some non scriptural proof of it after all: it is plausable that many have become Christians because they witnessed the resurrection, and did believe in the Moses and the prophets.

You said: “What is proof to you? The physical.”

Are you saying there is no proof except the physical? Well history is physical, but if you will not accept the history then there is no proof for you.

 

[reen12]

quote: Vico

Truly the worldly man finds it hard to enter into an active relationship with God,
because they are thinking about obtaining wealth, sensuous experiences, and material powers.

You mean … living?

Oh well said! simplynoone. I’ve had that thought for years,
and I’ve never found a way to articulate same with such brevity
and clarity. Thank you for that.

Christianity holds that man is born in ontological sin [original sin]
‘inherited’ from Adam. Man is one down at birth…as it were.
All this followed by an amazingly convoluted theology as
to how one is saved.

As to original sin, not so in Judaic thought.

jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/Original_Sin.html

Judaic thought is far more profound, I think, in terms of
explaining how God has made us wondrously. Man is
born in innocence, not in ontological sin.

[A Judaic view of human nature is discussed in the following link:]

jewfaq.org/human.htm#Yetzer

The yetzers are a far more compelling explanation of the
human nature created by God.

Best,

reen12

 

[ryanoneil]

Hi simplynoone!

When Haman was being devious against the Jews, Esther went before the King to plead for the sake of the lives of the Jews. She did not call out individual names, only ever she was pleading for the lives of the Jews to be noticed as the living and allowed to continue living. Isaiah will give you the clear Word on who is a Jew.

Would you please include book and verse for Isaiah?

Sorry, I may have put 5 and 6… I meant to put 4 and 5. 6 separates the Eunuchs from the Gentiles. Certainly the Gentiles are as precious to God, but it is the Eunuchs to which he gives an everlasting name to, better than the sons and daughters. This is understandable when you take into account the whole of the Tanakh. The sons and daughters are the signature … they are the ones keeping us here. Continue to kill and/or convert them, and you are erasing the signature.

Can we agree this is happening in God’s house? If so, there are those who have been included the whole time, the eunuchs (who had been excluded from the house) and foreigner who will be included in the house. Correct?

Is everyone in the LORD’s house considered sons and daughters? And are the eunuchs given a better name than even the group who has always been included?

Jesus spoke from the authority of the Tanakh by his own confession. Read Genesis 49 … It is to Judah the brothers will be called to. ahem JUDAism … sorry. there’s not a christ/messiah in the blessings other than the ones named for their purpose. And Judaism is the calling card for Israel.

Do you agree that Judah is an individual in Gen 49? From him comes the line of Judah (Judaism). The line of Judah becomes the royal line from which David and Solomon stem (who were christ/messiah). Are you saying these are the only christ/messiah in the blessings?

I have some follow up questions about the Davidic dynasty being eternal and the life span of the ruling monarch. iiia

 

[Vico]

reen12, yes, there are some elegant theological writings in Judiasm, such as those of Moses Maimonides. Christianity does seem somewhat complicated. I think is has to do the with reconstructive nature of the Theology, as is was not described by Jesus in detail as he said, they were so hard to teach, rather it is something to be lived.

In both Christianity and Judiasm, we have that battle of yetzer hara with yetzer hatov, as our life scenario may not be dependent of our theological beliefs (unless we are persecuted). Judiasm and Catholicism has something in common: we try to be as pure as we can and devoted to God.

The term resurrection or salvation could be defined as rising above the worldly influences when we live by the yetzer hatov. In Christianty, those that are justified (saved) will resurrect, and this is a resurrection of the body in Catholicism. (Note that this resurrection is also in Daniel 12:2 and 12:13 and taught by Moses Maimonides.) Are we living in a world and a state as Adam and Eve today? No, so there is something which has occurred that has made everyone born face the same difficulties, and one can get from that the general idea of original sin.

 

[simplynoone]

simplynoone, you wrote: “Thus far, I am correct. Huh…”
Are you asking a question here?

**I was not asking. I was stating. My intention is not to be arrogant, only pointing out that you, in your confession, agreed with me. **

---

From childhood, I was raised in a Catholic family which attended mass and was devoted, and had personal spiritual experiences, although not much scriptural understanding. I found that the more devoted I was and the more I followed the commandments, I would not have an easier life or more material benefits, but rather the strength to endure difficulties, greater self control, felt closer to God, and was more peaceful.

---

The above is what you said. You had spiritual experiences, but those experiences did not give you understanding. What I highlighted in purple, I found to be rather gorgeous, for it shows that what is often labeled as “spiritual experiences” are only euphoric feelings that we attribute to God … feelings alone teach us nothing … and thus, the feelings are not the “special gift” given to us (He established all of His creation to feel … animals do it too… even chimpanzees are thought to have a sense of wonder; which is a feeling). Feelings only prove the most basic of truths : we exist.

---

**The Laws given via Moses teach us the understanding of Life by imparting gorgeous wisdom to what we feel. The Law of God then becomes written on the heart because it is engrained into the mind and then … it becomes the natural way in which we judge the experiences/ feelings we are having so that we may KNOW Life. That is indeed true wealth. **

“Truly the worldly man finds it hard to enter into an active relationship with God, because they are thinking about obtaining wealth, sensuous experiences, and material powers. These are all things that Satan can grant, but are not satisfying”.

---

Seeking to gain wealth … I assume you mean material wealth, no? Do you work for more than you actually need to sustain your life and the lives of the ones you may be responsible? That is seeking wealth … thus, are you a “worldly man”?

---

**Sensuous experiences … do you face everything that life gives you without any thought as to if it will be good or bad … just fully in trust that there is a purpose? Or do you seek only that which makes you feel good? Even denying the reality that you are in to rather believe that you will go to another place thus negating you of responsibilities here on earth is seeking what is sensuous. Going to Church is seeking a sensuous experience. I almost think you don’t know what “sensuous” means. **

---

**Material powers (I am not sure I fully understand what you mean here … you can clarify if I am indeed misunderstanding) … Do you buy things only ever based on need rather than desire? **

---

** **You asking if I had “anything to show for my belief”, so I answered showing that there was positive change in me and more peace, yet still with material difficulties.

**Really we should define material difficulties. Anything that is not essential to maintain existence … that being what was natural on the earth … is material. So, if you have food and water for the day, you are not lacking in order to exist. **

**I hear a lot of people say, I have peace even though my clothes aren’t as nice; or I only have 10 pairs of shoes rather than 40; or my TV is not a 2009 model and I only have one; or I have work just to afford all the things that I don’t need but I never have more left over to buy 5 extra of those things. **

---

**Rarely do I hear any one say, I DON’T have peace because THIS IS NOT RIGHT THAT THERE ARE TOO MANY who don’t even have ACCESS to what they need. No one ever complains that others have taken control over the very essentials of nature that allow for existence and are making us pay to have access to them… and that so much waste in the name of “material” is occurring even by those sitting here condemning others just because the others may have MORE of it. **

---

** Something is terribly wrong with the minds of people in this day and age when it is spewed out that they are peaceful and base it on their possessions whilst others, even in America, are having difficulties getting access to the essentials of life. I find it highly ironic that there are so many places of worship… fancy buildings where the nicely pressed families go to show their devotion to God, the CREATOR OF this world … yet there are homeless just outside that literally are blended into the background as though they are a lamp post whose light is one of a more profound truth of the lack of devotion that is being shown to the Creator. **

---

**Devotion: is that when we convince ourselves that we are good people and it is those who are without, it is because they are bad? **

Not because there is no reasoning in it, rather because of lack of understanding. Faith defined as belief almost always implies belief without proof, but another definition of faith is belief, trust, and loyalty to God. For me reason actually helped me to maintain my belief, trust, and loyalty to God.

**And what do you know of God? What defines your relationship to Him? What is He doing that lets you know you are at “one” with God? **
**I have heard too many of other faiths say the same thing and yet you would not consider Allah worthy of your worship, would you? **

 

[simplynoone]

You replied: “… you still hang onto a man that died over 2,000 years ago and you say you do not hold on to the attachments?”

No, I differentiate between worldly and God, the living God: “being saved from our worldly attachments through our being attached to God.”

**Wordly attachments meaning what? You think material, don’t you. The attachments that keep you denial are the attachments in your own mind. Experiences are PART of what it is to exist in this creation … you CAN NOT live here and not experience … To try to detach yourself from the experiences is what keeps you in chains and is the reason you even find it comfortable to say “I have peace even though I have material difficulties.” **

You asked: “You mean … living?”
No, I mean living without devotion to God.

**What is devotion, do you think, from a creator’s viewpoint? Do you think it is to be considered devotion when one denies the creation? **

You wote: “You absolutely can not properly apply the teachings of Jesus and expect to resurrect physically from the dead.”
You are saying that expectations are somehow dependent on proper application, because that is not logical, you must mean something else. No? Maybe the sentence should not include the words “expect to”?

Sorry, I don’t know how to better clarify given I was straightforward with my intent.

“If you do not accept the testamony of the New Testament of the resurrection and ascension, and deny the connection to the prophesies made in the Old Testament, that Jesus referred to, then there will be no scriptural proof.”

**Hosea 6:2 … I don’t deny what Jesus referred to. I just deny the claim made by those who take his teachings out of context of what the Tanakh ACTUALLY is saying. **

Reference to you first post: Luke 16:31 (KJV): “And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.”

However, maybe there is some non scriptural proof of it after all: it is plausable that many have become Christians because they witnessed the resurrection, and did believe in the Moses and the prophets.

**ACTUALLY READ what Moses said BEFORE you come to me claiming that you are believing whilst holding on to beliefs that worship a man who lived 2,000 years ago as God. Read Deuteronomy 4:14, 15 ← THAT’S what Moses SAID. **

And tell me, which prophet are you referring to that spoke of a man being raised from the dead physically who would leave and then come back again later to raise up the rest of the dead? I am SURE you all have NOT actually read the Tanakh (at least without the notions of what you were taught prior to your reading it … power of suggestion does not make words appear that are not there no matter how hard you try to convince yourself).

You said: “What is proof to you? The physical.”

Are you saying there is no proof except the physical? Well history is physical, but if you will not accept the history then there is no proof for you.

**I am saying that if you can’t even acknowledge what is before your eyes, then your proof is in truly in vain. **

---

**I don’t accept ANY accounts that do not testify to what I can witness even today. If it is not speaking to Life physically, then I could understand it to be conceptual metaphors and/or allegorical language. That is proof via relating through something common to us all. **

---

There is the famous painting of Washington crossing the Delaware. I know that given the temperatures and the times they were in that this painting is not speaking to surface knowledge. The artist painted in a message and a truth, though in such a subtle way that I wonder if you could even find it. It is there in front of your eyes, clear as day, but because you accept the illusion and never question it honestly in your mind, you miss out on the REAL proofs… even though every moment, you are faced with them.

 

[simplynoone]

quote: Vico

Oh well said! simplynoone. I’ve had that thought for years,
and I’ve never found a way to articulate same with such brevity
and clarity. Thank you for that.

Christianity holds that man is born in ontological sin [original sin]
‘inherited’ from Adam. Man is one down at birth…as it were.
All this followed by an amazingly convoluted theology as
to how one is saved.

As to original sin, not so in Judaic thought.

jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/Original_Sin.html

Judaic thought is far more profound, I think, in terms of
explaining how God has made us wondrously. Man is
born in innocence, not in ontological sin.

[A Judaic view of human nature is discussed in the following link:]

jewfaq.org/human.htm#Yetzer

The yetzers are a far more compelling explanation of the
human nature created by God.

Best,

reen12

Thankyou for both, the kind words, and for sharing your wise thoughts and the links with us. I have not looked at the links yet, but will definitely check them out.

I think it is obvious in Genesis 3 that the lesson was that when we cover our sins in our mind, we are only hiding our own self from the Voice of God. We may hear it, but we aren’t actually being taught from His mouth because we cover the sins ourself rather than letting God justify us.

David learned this same lesson after getting another man’s wife pregnant. He tried to encourage the man to get next to his wife, even getting the man drunk, but the man being loyal to David would not leave him. So David tried to cover the shame of his actions by the man’s blood. Then he would look like the hero taking in his servant’s wife. Hmmm… so much profound truth in the Tanakh that is overlooked because so many can’t just face THAT WE ARE HUMANS BEING and everything we do is looked at as sin instead of experiences. We live and we learn… everyone acknowledges it, but so few actually know it.

Of course, just like in both cases, the only way to learn from our experiences actually requires “facing” God as we are to accept the judgments that are of Him. When we accept the judgments, we understand why something is wrong so as to genuinely repent and return to the path of the Lord (Ezekiel 18:28).

In the case of Adam and the Woman, they took the judgments. They weren’t put to death physically, so obviously physical death is never part of the judgment… that is actually to our benefit.

David, too, faced judgment and though his house was cursed, his seed was blessed. The stories are hand in hand in what they are teaching. It is gorgeous the language of the Tanakh.

 

[simplynoone]

Hi simplynoone!
Would you please include book and verse for Isaiah?

I have posted this several times throughout the thread. I am quite sure that you will understand that I think it is to your benefit to search for it your ownself for as you can see, when I post the textual reference specifically, it doesn’t stick in the minds of those wanting to know. Read Isaiah 41-49 for those are the chapters that spoke the understanding to me, and then …

Then you can read Genesis 48-49 as well … the blessings given. This sheds such gorgeous light on it if one can acknowledge the metaphorical language within the Torah.

Can we agree this is happening in God’s house? If so, there are those who have been included the whole time, the eunuchs (who had been excluded from the house) and foreigner who will be included in the house. Correct?

How can someone always have been included if they were excluded and have to join their self to the covenant to be included again, though they were always included? I am a bit confused by what you are trying to get across. If you would not mind, elaborate for me please. You certainly have my curiosity peaked.

Is everyone in the LORD’s house considered sons and daughters? And are the eunuchs given a better name than even the group who has always been included?

The sons and daughters are those who are born already into the covenant. The Eunuchs are the ones who are specifically called back … and in this case, there is no questioning … it is not something you will wonder about, but rather you will KNOW. It is not by the mouth of man, or even the words in the Bible, but only and literally by the “mouth” of God.

Do you agree that Judah is an individual in Gen 49? From him comes the line of Judah (Judaism). The line of Judah becomes the royal line from which David and Solomon stem (who were christ/messiah). Are you saying these are the only christ/messiah in the blessings?

I read the whole of the Tanakh as it applies to now. I do not say that there is not historical facts, perhaps… but that is not the level in which I am taught by. Judah is the calling card and the Law of God is the standard. David was born in Bethlehem and he and solomon were the last kings of Israel as a whole. This also is speaking metaphorically. Look at the lesson of David… blood does not cover shame and rather is a curse to the house … but the gorgeous Law brings understanding and through it, the blessings are poured forth in abundance. Solomon, the Son, was representative of wisdom. But when wisdom is turned into deception, the lesson is that it will bring division in the land.

Yes, I guess you could say the spirit of the lessons learned is what guides us all to salvation on so many levels. And that work as a whole can only be attributed to God… the One Who is Eternal… the Creator, Who knows better than us all what the whole of the picture is… all we can do is live Life and face the struggles that are the judgment so as to understand what He wants us to understand.

I have some follow up questions about the Davidic dynasty being eternal and the life span of the ruling monarch.

Listen, I just read this all differently. The best way I can explain is in the way of a mathematician … (I am not one and in fact, could not get past Geometry in highschool … I failed each math class more than once, so that I recently came to understand a concept generally only well seasoned mathematician’s understand was a shock to me. But, it is the only way to explain how I read the Tanakh … I am sure you will understand with your bright mind).

In the infinite, the value between 0 and 100 is the same value that is between 0 and 5. This works both positively and negatively. This is how I read the Tanakh. The value of the Word between then and now is the same. This is the language of the infinite … and though no value can be set on the infinite, the value of the Word remains the same between today and yesterday and even today and 2,000 years ago as well as the value will remain the same today as it will in another 2,000 years. It is the everlasting Word of God Who is the Eternal God.

This is the vision of the Word given to Abraham. It is teaching us in terms that we can understand … but the value of it is always the same.

Understand? I do look forward to what you will be bringing up … just know that I am not living in the past … only in the now.

 

[Vico]

simplynoone, I am sending private answers to you, because they are very long and off topic at this point. You know, we should keep the Q & A short and on topic for the thread.

 

[StillWondering]

Still you are faced with trying to figure out who pulled the trigger. The Father, the Mother, or the Son … in regards to the trinity theory anyway. If we are allowed to be equal with the Son, then whatever charge you give to him you are also giving to us (whether innocent of the trigger pulling or guilty … that is us too … but it is him too… weird, huh?). Of course, this is me resigning to your level of mysticism for the sake of discussion ).

I think you are still having bias in your spectacles. I already said that the bus driver is responsible for not interrupting a dangerous situation. How did you go form there to God the Father? Also, Why do you say we make ourselves “equal with the Son”. That is quite a blasphemie. Christ is God, no many can be equal.

Over and over you showed to have misunderstands of what Catholics believe. And your analogy is poorly related to our concept of the Trinity. There is weak logical assertions, incorrect premises, and bias information in your posts. God never charged us to do anything evil. It is your scenario with the accident. Christ never did anything evil – I do not know where you got such an idea.

Catholicism is mystical, not mysticism in the same way you are describing. I do not know what you were taught as a child. But if what you know about Catholicism is what you were taught, you were taught wrong. It could also be because you taught yourself wrong due to being incompletely taught by others.

This website is a great place to read up about Catholic beliefs. Check out the articles from apologist or papacy documents. Once you see those, I think you’ll have less complaints about Catholicism whether you believe in the faith or not.

 

[ryanoneil]

I have posted this several times throughout the thread. I am quite sure that you will understand that I think it is to your benefit to search for it your ownself for as you can see, when I post the textual reference specifically, it doesn’t stick in the minds of those wanting to know. Read Isaiah 41-49 for those are the chapters that spoke the understanding to me, and then …

Then you can read Genesis 48-49 as well … the blessings given. This sheds such gorgeous light on it if one can acknowledge the metaphorical language within the Torah.

It seems Isaiah is refering to ideal Israel. This isn’t the only way he describes the Jews though.

How can someone always have been included if they were excluded and have to join their self to the covenant to be included again, though they were always included? I am a bit confused by what you are trying to get across. If you would not mind, elaborate for me please. You certainly have my curiosity peaked.

I wasn’t being very clear. If you go back to Deut 23:2 for example, there are those who included in the community of the LORD. They are the someone who have always been included. Then there were the eunuchs who are not included.

The sons and daughters are those who are born already into the covenant. The Eunuchs are the ones who are specifically called back … and in this case, there is no questioning … it is not something you will wonder about, but rather you will KNOW. It is not by the mouth of man, or even the words in the Bible, but only and literally by the “mouth” of God.

Does this mean they are considered full members of God’s covenant people, even though they were not in the past?

The next question is: are the foreigners who are gathered considered full members of God’s covenant people? When the LORD calls them his people and servants in v 3 and 6 (names are otherwise exclusive to Israel).

Then turn to chapter 57 and he is talking to people born into the covenant but who are wicked. He does not heal them or give them peace and they remain worthless. So, what I’m driving at is this: At what point does the bloodline you are born into no longer matter?

Was does it mean when Isaiah say someone outside the covenant has a monument and name better than one who is already in the covenant?

I read the whole of the Tanakh as it applies to now. I do not say that there is not historical facts, perhaps… but that is not the level in which I am taught by. Judah is the calling card and the Law of God is the standard. David was born in Bethlehem and he and solomon were the last kings of Israel as a whole. This also is speaking metaphorically. Look at the lesson of David… blood does not cover shame and rather is a curse to the house … but the gorgeous Law brings understanding and through it, the blessings are poured forth in abundance. Solomon, the Son, was representative of wisdom. But when wisdom is turned into deception, the lesson is that it will bring division in the land.

What does “Judah is the calling card” mean if David and Solomon are the last kings of Israel?

I appreciate the different senses of scripture and metaphors drawn from it, but you have said covenants don’t end. And David described it as eternal.

Is not my house firm before God? He has made an eternal covenant with me, set forth in detail and secured. Will he not bring to fruition all my salvation and my every desire? (2 Sam 23:5)

It clearly says the Davidic monarchy and dynasty will be eternal, and the prophets associate the reunification of the tribes of Israel and Judah with the restoration of the Davidic monarchy. (Hosea 3; Micah 5; Amos 9; Isaiah 9;11;42;55; Jeremiah 23;30;33; Ezekiel 34;37; Daniel 7)

Yes, I guess you could say the spirit of the lessons learned is what guides us all to salvation on so many levels. And that work as a whole can only be attributed to God… the One Who is Eternal… the Creator, Who knows better than us all what the whole of the picture is… all we can do is live Life and face the struggles that are the judgment so as to understand what He wants us to understand.

I agree!

This is the vision of the Word given to Abraham. It is teaching us in terms that we can understand … but the value of it is always the same.

Understand? I do look forward to what you will be bringing up … just know that I am not living in the past … only in the now.

I wasn’t very good at advanced math either and I appreciate the way you value God’s Word. I think we have a similair understanding of it in many ways, but very different in others. I don’t live in the past either, but it is important to understand it in order for God’s word to be fulfilling today.

Peace

 

[simplynoone]

simplynoone, I am sending private answers to you, because they are very long and off topic at this point. You know, we should keep the Q & A short and on topic for the thread.

Yes, I have seen your reply. It was rather interesting and a shame that you have let your aversion to going off topic get in the way of sharing it with everyone.

 

[simplynoone]

I think you are still having bias in your spectacles. I already said that the bus driver is responsible for not interrupting a dangerous situation. How did you go form there to God the Father?

And the bus driver in my scenario was the father … I think I clarified that but if I didn’t, then I apologize.

Also, Why do you say we make ourselves “equal with the Son”. That is quite a blasphemie. Christ is God, no many can be equal.

I came across something interesting the other day. I am curious what you will have to say about this. Acts 4:26 says, "The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and his Christ. If Jesus is the Lord, and he is the Christ, then why do you think the separation so as to say the Lord … AND HIS Christ? Interesting, don’t you think?

Over and over you showed to have misunderstands of what Catholics believe. And your analogy is poorly related to our concept of the Trinity. There is weak logical assertions, incorrect premises, and bias information in your posts. God never charged us to do anything evil. It is your scenario with the accident. Christ never did anything evil – I do not know where you got such an idea.

And I could say the same thing: that your information is based on weak logical assertions, incorrect premises, and biased ideas that are fed to you by the mouths of men.

If the foundation we are both basing our logical assertions is rooted in the Tanakh, then I would be the correct one. There is not more than ONE God and He is not a man, never was a man, nor ever will be a man. That’s part of the Law passed down by Moses in Deut 4:14,15.

Catholicism is mystical, not mysticism in the same way you are describing. I do not know what you were taught as a child. But if what you know about Catholicism is what you were taught, you were taught wrong. It could also be because you taught yourself wrong due to being incompletely taught by others.

I actually knew little of Catholicism from growing up. Everything I am learning, I am learning from those on this forum board. I am sharing my views and allowing you all the chance to point out where I am wrong.

Thus far, there is very little in favour of what you are saying … at least if its foundation is rooted in the Tanakh. If you say it is rooted in mythologies, then I can understand why you all think the way you do.

Jesus, though, said his teachings were rooted in the Tanakh. Matt 5:17-19. Yours? So far: the mouths of men.

This website is a great place to read up about Catholic beliefs. Check out the articles from apologist or papacy documents. Once you see those, I think you’ll have less complaints about Catholicism whether you believe in the faith or not.

I actually have far less complaints with the Catholics (though, only what they are teaching since it distorts the view of the Tanakh) than I do with those of other denominations (even though their distortions may be less in severity).

I prefer to learn from the ones being taught Catholicism … that is a more effective approach to learning about any religion and ultimately, life in general.

 

[simplynoone]

It seems Isaiah is refering to ideal Israel. This isn’t the only way he describes the Jews though.

Israel, the People, is not the same as Israel, the Land … which is the name under which the Jewish are called, well, a Nation … this in my very humble opinion. This is due to understanding that all the covenants are consistent with the first covenant made in Genesis 9; of which the Token is the bow. In Ezekiel 1:28, it is said the glory of God is in the bow seen in the clouds after it rains.

I believe that Israel, the People, which specifically are said to be the portion belonging to God, are the People in all tongues who are called by That One gorgeous “tongue” … whether they join to the Jewish or not. It is not the tongues of men or the tongue of A man … it is something that is far more Precious.

I would probably be considered one who should be ignorant of Jewish customs, culture, etc … except I am not. This came by way of being taught through oppression in my own life (though religion and then through man in general) and then experiencing the rain that cleanses. Then, those aspects of the Jewish religion, Judaism, became significant on a more spiritual level. I know them so profoundly through experience that often, it is automatically assumed by many I speak with that I AM Jewish. This is what makes the Jewish important … though, they might not be perfect individually (according to your “individual eyes”), they maintain physically the commands that become understandable to the oppressed throughout the nations.

Anyway, the children (the Jewish) are not to be held responsible for the sins of the fathers. Most think this was something added on later by Jeremiah and Ezekiel, and in fact, Moses did teach that the sins of the father (their nationality in other words) are not to be attributed to the children. Everyone is justified when they enter this world … every one!!! To me, given that the Jewish are the physical manifestation of what is spiritual to me, I have personally come to see them as justified (all of them) and even more than beautiful. Given that I have come to know oppression first and foremost by Christianity, thus serving as the catalyst for my desire to seek truth in justice, I see that it is justified as well … else, I might never have had something in which to question; for the truly gifted in mind will always seek to understand that which they do not understand. Only belief based in faith does not seek.

The Tanakh speaks good and bad of almost every single People that is brought into it (Gentiles included … there is both good and bad). It depends on which People you are part of that will determine how one views it for mostly, human beings seek the good that is of them and the evil that is of others … ME INCLUDED unless I am careful (and I try my hardest to be such) … it is hard to break out of that pattern. It is all a matter of perspective and this is how the Tanakh is set up.

If you are a man in the middle of a dried up forrest, the fire will be viewed as bad but the rain will be seen as good. If you are living next to a river “bulging at the seams” already, on a cold dreary day, fire will be good and rain will be bad. If you are neither in an area prone to easily flooding or in an area of combustible nature that has been given to drought, you most likely will not panic if you see storm clouds and/or smoke.

The goal of Israel was to see the perspectives (the glory of God … the rainbow after the rain) … for that is where understanding is found and where knowledge not only grows, but can indeed become effective.

And, thus … the explanation of Isaiah. But Isaiah is clear, that those who understand him will not seek to a man or anything else as God or their Saviour … they will all understand what is said in Deut 4:14,15 … there is ONLY one God, and His name is LORD, and He is the ONLY Saviour … never a man, who is only ever the hireling.

 

[simplynoone]

**(Continued) **I wasn’t being very clear. If you go back to Deut 23:2 for example, there are those who included in the community of the LORD. They are the someone who have always been included. Then there were the eunuchs who are not included.

Jesus explains the Eunuchs in Matthew 19:12 … this is not speaking of physical or even political (the scam) Eunuchs … this is speaking of those who have the promise already in their flesh and can’t find any reasoning for settling … they question what they are being taught and they question their own questions.

Does this mean they are considered full members of God’s covenant people, even though they were not in the past?

The FIRST covenant is found, again, Genesis 9. All other covenants must be consistent with this one and in fact, the ones listed in the Tanakh are. Everyone belongs to God … it is our own judgments that cut us and them off from Him. There is a People who were designated to remind of this … that is the Jewish and then, the People, Israel. The covenant of physical manifestation of what is spiritual belongs to the Jewish … and those called will have not a doubt in their mind that they belong … but they will be led down the path to joining physically to that covenant as well. Those who aren’t called still belong to God … whether they acknowledge it or not … whether they try to devise their own ways to getting around this fact or whether they are deceived into believing the devices of other men. Even still, truth remains … the first covenant is in effect and that includes ALL flesh.

The next question is: are the foreigners who are gathered considered full members of God’s covenant people? When the LORD calls them his people and servants in v 3 and 6 (names are otherwise exclusive to Israel).

Isaiah 56 is the covenant of Peace and the protype of this covenant is found in Genesis 14:18-20. Then, in this case, whether you are called as one of the Eunuchs to physically join to the Jewish or as a Gentile to spiritually join by way of understanding, both ways will be in peace and obstacles will not at all be road blocks, but rather gorgeous steps to knowledge.

Then turn to chapter 57 and he is talking to people born into the covenant but who are wicked. He does not heal them or give them peace and they remain worthless. So, what I’m driving at is this: At what point does the bloodline you are born into no longer matter?

The righteous and the merciful are not always necessarily only those born into the physical covenant. It can be one born outside of and being discouraged from the Truth by the magician’s secret … the power of suggestion … the sorcery is “faith.” This, the negative, is the covenant of lies … the covenant with hell/death. It is bought and sold via faith.

Was does it mean when Isaiah say someone outside the covenant has a monument and name better than one who is already in the covenant?

Isaiah 53:11 is my speculation … for the knowledge they will bring that will justify many.

What does “Judah is the calling card” mean if David and Solomon are the last kings of Israel?

I can only think that anyone who understands Isaiah 29 will understand why Judaism is their calling card according to Genesis 49:8-10.

I appreciate the different senses of scripture and metaphors drawn from it, but you have said covenants don’t end. And David described it as eternal.

I am not sure where I said “covenants” (generically speaking) will NOT EVER end because ONE of the many things I am beyond grateful for is the covenant that is disanulled by God as declared in Isaiah 28.

Eternal is only mentioned twice in the whole of the Tanakh. Once it is attributed to God and the other it is attributed to excellency … which this excellency is of God, Who is eternal Life. Eternity is mentioned, but what is specifically said is this, " For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones." … and this is the excellency of the Eternal One. Those with a humble spirit and contrite heart KNOW they will never be eternal and they will contribute all they are, not to man, but only to the Eternal God.

Is not my house firm before God? He has made an eternal covenant with me, set forth in detail and secured. Will he not bring to fruition all my salvation and my every desire? (2 Sam 23:5)

The Bible that I am using says “everlasting”… that is consistent with what I know. A convenant has to have a beginning and thus, cannot be eternal. The eternal has neither beginning nor end. To assign it such is to cut it off from being eternal.

It clearly says the Davidic monarchy and dynasty will be eternal, and the prophets associate the reunification of the tribes of Israel and Judah with the restoration of the Davidic monarchy. (Hosea 3; Micah 5; Amos 9; Isaiah 9;11;42;55; Jeremiah 23;30;33; Ezekiel 34;37; Daniel 7)

Mine only ever calls it everlasting except for three times … and all of which are referring to the Eternal God and all of which have nothing to do with man.

I don’t live in the past either, but it is important to understand it in order for God’s word to be fulfilling today.

Right… this is what makes His Word everlasting. It must apply today for it to be so. So, as long as we seek to the images of “then” … we will never understand the Word of “Now.” Isaiah 31:3-4 is speaking directly to this. So long as we see the “passover” as a thing of the past, it will never be a thing of the now. As Jesus tried to enlighten his listeners to … it is a thing of now that happens when a person understands by listening not to the hireling (the man), but to God who is Life Eternal.