1500 Year Old Bible Claims Jesus Christ Was Not Crucified

[gerryh]

I'll assume you are referencing the 600+ laws that the 12 Tribes were given in addition to the 10 Commandments. There were the laws that Jesus was to follow to show that sin was not part of being alive as a person. The cross was the final part of when those laws had meaning in that punishment followed the sin. Sacrifice for sin was forever changed and any blood sacrifice would be seen as an abomination by God.

Isa:66:3:
He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man;
he that sacrificeth a lamb,
as if he cut off a dog's neck;
he that offereth an oblation,
as if he offered swine's blood;
he that burneth incense,
as if he blessed an idol.
Yea,
they have chosen their own ways,
and their soul delighteth in their abominations.

De:4:30 has a prophecy concerning a scattering and that took place in 70AD and rather than it being an exile like it was into Babylon this was a scattering that had a purpose, the Gospel was to be taken to the Gentiles by going out into the Nations with it rather than the Nations coming to Jerusalem to hear about God. The vision 3 1/2 years after the cross in Acts:10 gave Peter the permission to eat food that was previously unclean to the 12 Tribes. Gentile food is still not considered to be clean according to some Jews even today.

By changing the Law from the one that covered mankind until the last giant died God made it possible that the 2 bruises from Ge:3:15 could be fulfilled in a way that didn't prevent the new earth from being just the way it was originally intended to be. That final destination will even see the 10 Commandments 'retired' as the law given in Re:21 will come into force and that is the law that will govern all people in the new earth, for eternity. The dietary laws will change again as killing anything Adam was given dominion over would be considered to me murder so eating meat will never happen, animals and birds will be around because they make good companions and we feed them by creating new pastures. (Isaiah:65)

Ac:10:15:
And the voice spake unto him again the second time,
What God hath cleansed,
that call not thou common.

The punishment for breaking the 600+ laws was taken away by whom, Rabbis or Gentile Governments?

:roll:

 

[MHz]

The punishment for breaking the 600+ laws was taken away by whom, Rabbis or Gentile Governments?

 

[Motar]

To my total lack of surprise, I see you don't understand what ad hominem means either. The data you've asked for should be part of the basic information in the head of any reasonably intelligent and educated layperson. If you don't know it, I'm not going to do your research for you. I don't agree about much with gerryh, but he correctly pointed out that there's no excuse for not knowing such things, and if you don't know them, you're ignorant. That's all ignorant means, not knowing. That's not ad hominem, that's just a fact. So what? The number of people who believe something to be true has nothing to do with whether it's actually true, that's just another version of the argument from authority fallacy. Apart from that, without knowing what question they were asked that produced that statistic, with no information about the historical distribution of the responses, no information about the subject matter distribution--physics, chemistry, economics, peace, whatever--and considering that "religious preference" doesn't necessarily mean they believe it, that information is meaningless. You're grasping at straws.

To my accounting, Dex this is your third page of side-stepping in his discussion and there is still not a single shred of evidence offered in support of your original opinion.

 

[gerryh]

The punishment for breaking the 600+ laws was taken away by whom, Rabbis or Gentile Governments?

If they are "Gods" laws, then neither of the above has the authority to "take away" these laws.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

According to Acts, they were taken away by the Apostles.

 

[gerryh]

According to Acts, they were taken away by the Apostles.

link please

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

link please

Legitimate request. Acts 15:20 (probably wanna read the whole chapter for context).

 

[MHz]

If they are "Gods" laws, then neither of the above has the authority to "take away" these laws.

John the Baptist and Jesus were High Priests so they had the authority and that in just 3 1/2 years they had a strong following it was a move the people wanted to see happen. If the Beloved Disciple has authority to witre in John the Baptist's place because they were a Disciple the the Apostles had the same Priest authority that installed the laws in the first place. John was from that House and Jesus was a Priest that included Abraham and Adam so that is a higher authority than an Israeli Priest would have. The Jews have no authority to 'resist' those changes and the 10 Commandments were not changed at all so obedience to God is still in effects. Bashing any writer in the NT would be an abomination to God, just as it would have been for the 12 Tribes to argue with Moses and Aaron about what should exist and which ones should not.

 

[gerryh]

Legitimate request. Acts 15:20 (probably wanna read the whole chapter for context).

Well, it appears pretty clear to me. Peter and the elders made the change as they were/are man made laws to begin with. Peter did not refer to them as "God's laws" but referred to them as being the Laws of Moses. This is something I have said in the past to show that the Bible is not all God's word.

The first time this was explained to me was by a Jewish rabbinical scholar. He explained that Leviticus and Mosaic law was not God's laws but were man's laws that were laid down for life at that time. Taking Leviticus as being "God's law" would be the same as men 2000 years from now looking at the american constitution and declaring that to be "God's law".

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Well, it appears pretty clear to me. Peter and the elders made the change as they were/are man made laws to begin with. Peter did not refer to them as "God's laws" but referred to them as being the Laws of Moses. This is something I have said in the past to show that the Bible is not all God's word.

The first time this was explained to me was by a Jewish rabbinical scholar. He explained that Leviticus and Mosaic law was not God's laws but were man's laws that were laid down for life at that time. Taking Leviticus as being "God's law" would be the same as men 2000 years from now looking at the american constitution and declaring that to be "God's law".

You're well beyond my competence (and interest) in the subject. If it works for you, I approve. For what (very, VERY) little my approval is worth.

 

[MHz]

Well, it appears pretty clear to me. Peter and the elders made the change as they were/are man made laws to begin with. Peter did not refer to them as "God's laws" but referred to them as being the Laws of Moses. This is something I have said in the past to show that the Bible is not all God's word.

It doesn't take much to make the Bible correct and make you the one that is in error. The Laws that Moses introduced were not the ones that God used to condemn the world as being sinful, the law used was the ones Angels are under and that is the one that will govern men in the period the Bible calls 'the new earth'. That same law died out when the last giant was killed (24 fingers and toes)

The first time this was explained to me was by a Jewish rabbinical scholar. He explained that Leviticus and Mosaic law was not God's laws but were man's laws that were laid down for life at that time. Taking Leviticus as being "God's law" would be the same as men 2000 years from now looking at the american constitution and declaring that to be "God's law".

God lays things down for life and if the 600+ laws were for 'life' they would have existed in the Garden and they didn't come along for almost 2,000 years from the exit from the garden. The Rabbi has it wrong, the 12 Tribes are under the Re:21 law once they are resurrected from the grave down to everybody mentioned in Eze:37.

God was the author of all Law in the Bible, OT as well as NT. The New Earth is an eternity where sin is never committed so having Laws that govern punishment for sin would be something that is useless.

What is in the American Constitution that is different from the Law that is passed onto the Governments of the world and their citezens in Romans:13 where one is given a sword to rule over evil people and then the same chapters details what acts are taken as being evil. Sounds like a Law and a people are defined that are to govern the people who will be most affected by the bruise to the head prophecy from Ge:3:15.

 

[gerryh]

It doesn't take much to make the Bible correct and make you the one that is in error. The Laws that Moses introduced were not the ones that God used to condemn the world as being sinful, the law used was the ones Angels are under and that is the one that will govern men in the period the Bible calls 'the new earth'. That same law died out when the last giant was killed (24 fingers and toes)


God lays things down for life and if the 600+ laws were for 'life' they would have existed in the Garden and they didn't come along for almost 2,000 years from the exit from the garden. The Rabbi has it wrong, the 12 Tribes are under the Re:21 law once they are resurrected from the grave down to everybody mentioned in Eze:37.

God was the author of all Law in the Bible, OT as well as NT. The New Earth is an eternity where sin is never committed so having Laws that govern punishment for sin would be something that is useless.

What is in the American Constitution that is different from the Law that is passed onto the Governments of the world and their citezens in Romans:13 where one is given a sword to rule over evil people and then the same chapters details what acts are taken as being evil. Sounds like a Law and a people are defined that are to govern the people who will be most affected by the bruise to the head prophecy from Ge:3:15.

Ok, let me make this clear......again...... IMO revelations is the raving of a lunatic. Drug induced hallucinations. It means nothing to me. As are your ravings concerning the second coming, bruising, and giants.

 

[MHz]

You're well beyond my competence (and interest) in the subject. If it works for you, I approve. For what (very, VERY) little my approval is worth.

Don't give in too quickly, the change in Law was given to those men by God rather than them thinking it up like the Temple leaders were doing that caused God to send Neb and put them into exile for their various 'misunderstandings' of what the Laws said. What Peter and Paul passed on is the same thing as if Jesus had stayed and went into the Nations himself. He didn't appear to the 12 Tribes for more than 3 1/2 years, the Gentiles also get 3 1/2 years but just like the cross was all things to the bruise to the heel the last 3 1/2 years before the return will be all things to the bruise to Satan's head. That is also a period that the bible says will have the Gentile equivalent to Moses and Aaron so the book will take a back seat to what they explain and our understanding will be brought up to date so everyone is on the same page.
You should approve if it fits the Bible in context, his version doesn't but many words are used to intimidate you or anybody else who doesn't agree with the crap he is trying to pass off as being factual. He many never have checked on what the Rabbi was saying and explaining the whole book when you reject a good portion of it isn't going to get it right. A Scribes need to know how to write, only God had the full version of what the words mean when all are considered and at the moment (most) Rabbis don't. Priest's are a close 2nd.

Ok, let me make this clear......again...... IMO revelations is the raving of a lunatic. Drug induced hallucinations. It means nothing to me. As are your ravings concerning the second coming, bruising, and giants.

Meaning you don't have a clue as it is the index for the ending of a lot of prophecy.
Revelation was written by Mary of Bethany, Disciple of John the Baptist, the last Prophet called by God and she will be the first person resurrected from the 12 Tribes.

Ge:3:15:
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman,
and between thy seed and her seed;
it shall bruise thy head,
and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Joh:19:30:
When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar,
he said,
It is finished:
and he bowed his head,
and gave up the ghost.

Re:16:17:
And the seventh angel poured out his vial into the air;
and there came a great voice out of the temple of heaven,
from the throne,
saying,
It is done.

The last time there is something said about that is when God says it at the start of the New Earth and all the people are there to hear the words.

Re:21:6:
And he said unto me,
It is done.
I am Alpha and Omega,
the beginning and the end.
I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Don't give in too quickly, the change in Law was given to those men by God rather than them thinking it up like the Temple leaders were doing that caused God to send Neb and put them into exile for their various 'misunderstandings' of what the Laws said. What Peter and Paul passed on is the same thing as if Jesus had stayed and went into the Nations himself. He didn't appear to the 12 Tribes for more than 3 1/2 years, the Gentiles also get 3 1/2 years but just like the cross was all things to the bruise to the heel the last 3 1/2 years before the return will be all things to the bruise to Satan's head. That is also a period that the bible says will have the Gentile equivalent to Moses and Aaron so the book will take a back seat to what they explain and our understanding will be brought up to date so everyone is on the same page.
You should approve if it fits the Bible in context, his version doesn't but many words are used to intimidate you or anybody else who doesn't agree with the crap he is trying to pass off as being factual. He many never have checked on what the Rabbi was saying and explaining the whole book when you reject a good portion of it isn't going to get it right. A Scribes need to know how to write, only God had the full version of what the words mean when all are considered and at the moment (most) Rabbis don't. Priest's are a close 2nd.

Hark!
Tolv two elf kater ten (it can’t be) sax.
Hork!
Pedwar pemp foify tray (it must be) twelve.
And low stole o’er the stillness the heartbeats of sleep.

 

[MHz]

Legitimate request. Acts 15:20 (probably wanna read the whole chapter for context).

Pretty much anything in the Bible after the Gentiles appear in Acts:10 is written to the Gentiles, the people that will be the subject of wrath from Satan for 3 1/2 years and then for a few hours from God. The be in line for punishment by God you have to be under law and the NT is the Law for Gentiles leading up to the return and glorification of mankind.
The punishment of the giants ended when they became extinct and that was not at the flood or Noah's sons would have had no wives, in the exodus wars no one was left so a new set of laws could be put into place. The 10 commandments rule from Moses until Satan is in the Pit along with all the sinners on a global scale.
Being a novice means your comebacks are limited, however being able to spot a bull*****er means you don't have to accept gerry's summations and he know nothing about the Bible or he wouldn't have to be seeking advice at all.

Hark!
Tolv two elf kater ten (it can’t be) sax.
Hork!
Pedwar pemp foify tray (it must be) twelve.
And low stole o’er the stillness the heartbeats of sleep.

More pork?

 

[cj44]

I was just looking for a thread already started (God knows we sure as hell don't need anymore) to comment on Bible Thumpers. Yesterday while taking my walk and minding my own business a guy named Darrel rides up on a bicycle and says "hello my name is Darrel and I'm from the Baptist Church and do you know where you are going after you die?" I said "no I don't and neither does anyone else". I managed to cut it pretty short after being asked if I ever told a lie or stolen anything. This guy didn't know me from a bale of hay. If there are any other Bible Thumpers paying attention perhaps someone might enlighten me as to why Darrel would want to know and why he wouldn't pick on someone a little more naive looking. I did manage to inform him that all lies and all theft aren't created equal. Are these guys perhaps in need of a shrink?

JLM,
Sounds like Darrel needs to brush up on his technique. I always like to first make eye contact and then wait at least 30 seconds for vulcanization to occur. It's the Nordstrom approach.


Any chance you might have this encounter with Darrel on video? JLM, you are a very fine classic!

 

[Motar]

Don't give in too quickly, the change in Law was given to those men by God rather than them thinking it up like the Temple leaders were doing that caused God to send Neb and put them into exile for their various 'misunderstandings' of what the Laws said. What Peter and Paul passed on is the same thing as if Jesus had stayed and went into the Nations himself. He didn't appear to the 12 Tribes for more than 3 1/2 years, the Gentiles also get 3 1/2 years but just like the cross was all things to the bruise to the heel the last 3 1/2 years before the return will be all things to the bruise to Satan's head. That is also a period that the bible says will have the Gentile equivalent to Moses and Aaron so the book will take a back seat to what they explain and our understanding will be brought up to date so everyone is on the same page.
You should approve if it fits the Bible in context, his version doesn't but many words are used to intimidate you or anybody else who doesn't agree with the crap he is trying to pass off as being factual. He many never have checked on what the Rabbi was saying and explaining the whole book when you reject a good portion of it isn't going to get it right. A Scribes need to know how to write, only God had the full version of what the words mean when all are considered and at the moment (most) Rabbis don't. Priest's are a close 2nd.


Meaning you don't have a clue as it is the index for the ending of a lot of prophecy.
Revelation was written by Mary of Bethany, Disciple of John the Baptist, the last Prophet called by God and she will be the first person resurrected from the 12 Tribes.

Ge:3:15:
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman,
and between thy seed and her seed;
it shall bruise thy head,
and thou shalt bruise his heel.

Joh:19:30:
When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar,
he said,
It is finished:
and he bowed his head,
and gave up the ghost.

Re:16:17:
And the seventh angel poured out his vial into the air;
and there came a great voice out of the temple of heaven,
from the throne,
saying,
It is done.

The last time there is something said about that is when God says it at the start of the New Earth and all the people are there to hear the words.

Re:21:6:
And he said unto me,
It is done.
I am Alpha and Omega,
the beginning and the end.
I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.

Bless you for your faith-filled patience and persistence, MHz.

 

[Sal]

I was just looking for a thread already started (God knows we sure as hell don't need anymore) to comment on Bible Thumpers. Yesterday while taking my walk and minding my own business a guy named Darrel rides up on a bicycle and says "hello my name is Darrel and I'm from the Baptist Church and do you know where you are going after you die?" I said "no I don't and neither does anyone else". I managed to cut it pretty short after being asked if I ever told a lie or stolen anything. This guy didn't know me from a bale of hay. If there are any other Bible Thumpers paying attention perhaps someone might enlighten me as to why Darrel would want to know and why he wouldn't pick on someone a little more naive looking. I did manage to inform him that all lies and all theft aren't created equal. Are these guys perhaps in need of a shrink?

nope, he thinks he's saved and he wants to share cause he loves you

when people ask me if I'm saved I say yes
when people ask me if I know where I'm going after I die I say yes

hasn't been 'officially' confirmed, yet.

so really this isn't true at this point and is not really up for discussion no?

 

[Cliffy]

nope, he thinks he's saved and he wants to share cause he loves you

when people ask me if I'm saved I say yes
when people ask me if I know where I'm going after I die I say yes

When I do that, they always come back with, "Oh, so you know Jesus then." I answer, " why yes. He is a very good friend of mine and he tells me that he is really pissed off at self righteous pricks like you."

 

[Sal]

Hark!
Tolv two elf kater ten (it can’t be) sax.
Hork!
Pedwar pemp foify tray (it must be) twelve.
And low stole o’er the stillness the heartbeats of sleep.

now that was funny as I was reading along actually being forced to think and then Hark lmao

When I do that, they always come back with, "Oh, so you know Jesus then." I answer, " why yes. He is a very good friend of mine and he tells me that he is really pissed off at self righteous pricks like you."

lol

just saying yes kinda shocks them to begin with...the self righteous part ought to knock them over