This day have I begotten you

keypurr

Well-known member
Nope! Your mind is broken. I will not even try.

Besides, you won't even attempt to answer what should be an easy question, why would I think that you're remotely capable of an intellectually honest debate?

Do you lack the understanding to correct my thoughts Clete. Why don't you just show me why I am not a Christiam?

To do that you will need more than you display. Go back an sit in the corner and listen, you might learn that you have only been taught half the truth. You only see the tip of the iceberg.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using TheologyOnline mobile app
 

keypurr

Well-known member
You misunderstand. It isn't simply your post I'm ignoring (I don't even know what post you're talking about), it's you that I am ignoring. It's blind luck (if luck is the right word for it) that I even saw this post of yours!
Ask and daqq will plainly tell you what he is talking about.

Daqq is one of the most knowledgeable posters on TOL.

We can learn from each other if we share thoughts. It was not luck that brought you to see his post Clete.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using TheologyOnline mobile app
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Ask and daqq will plainly tell you what he is talking about.

Daqq is one of the most knowledgeable posters on TOL.

We can learn from each other if we share thoughts. It was not luck that brought you to see his post Clete.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using TheologyOnline mobile app

He's a mouth breathing idiot that should be ignored or ridiculed. A road you're merging onto yourself.
 

keypurr

Well-known member
I Corinthians 6:2 Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? 3 Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life?

Words mean things, Keypurr. And ideas have consequences.

You are not a Christian, by definition. I know that you will ignore me. You wouldn't be here if you weren't entrenched in this false doctrine and so I have no delusions about convincing you of anything. And while you're repentance is desired, I'm not saying these things for your benefit.

Clete

Are you saying you think your a saint?

Define Saint

Go back to reading the Bible as you have missed a lot.


Sent from my iPad using TOL
 

keypurr

Well-known member
He's a mouth breathing idiot that should be ignored or ridiculed. A road you're merging onto yourself.

So your not equipped to bring me into YOUR truth. In your weakness you call me names, it shows your level of intelllgence.

Best to you Clete, I wish you well and understanding someday.


Sent from my iPad using TOL
 

keypurr

Well-known member
He's a mouth breathing idiot that should be ignored or ridiculed. A road you're merging onto yourself.

Nope, you are off base. He speaks of things you are not interested enough in to see what he is saying. He speaks of spiritual beings that you know nothing of. God is a spirit and so is the Son he SENT. Notice I said the Son he SENT not the one born to Mary.

Study if your smart or discredit the folks who know more about who Jesus Christ really is.


Sent from my iPad using TOL
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Keypurr,

One of many mistakes you make is thinking that I care what you think about me or anything else. My dog's left dew claw garners more of my respect than you do.



I'll say it one last time for good measure...

If it was not God Who died on the cross, we are all still in our sins. One can be ignorant of the fact the Jesus is God and be saved but one cannot actively deny it and rightly call themselves saved nor even Christian.

Resting in Him,
Clete

:wave2:
 

daqq

Well-known member
quote_icon.png
Originally Posted by daqq
Why then did neither of you two Messiah deniers confirm the Testimony of Messiah which I pointedly asked you both to either confirm or deny? It is clear that you love your phony dogmas and creeds over and above the Testimony of Messiah. By ignoring what was posted you have both denied Messiah and whosoever denies him before men, well, supposedly the two of you already know the answer to that, right? I guess it is the lake of fire for the both of you. :)

You misunderstand. It isn't simply your post I'm ignoring (I don't even know what post you're talking about), it's you that I am ignoring. It's blind luck (if luck is the right word for it) that I even saw this post of yours!


Now that you have seen, and responded, you have no excuse for your open denial of the clear emphatic statements of the Messiah which were quoted, posted, and directed to you here, Reply#602, and then again here, Reply#626.


Ask and daqq will plainly tell you what he is talking about.

Daqq is one of the most knowledgeable posters on TOL.

We can learn from each other if we share thoughts. It was not luck that brought you to see his post Clete.

Sent from my SM-T330NU using TheologyOnline mobile app
He's a mouth breathing idiot that should be ignored or ridiculed. A road you're merging onto yourself.

All you have offered so far is a slew of railing accusations without any substance; nothing more than personal insults and attacks for the sole purpose of the same old typical internet tactic used in forum board character assassination. I am weary of fending off such attacks from you and yours; and as well, we all should already know from the scripture that your judgments are meaningless, (Matt 7:1-5, Rom 2:1, 1Cor 4:3, James 2:13). So I will simply now turn the other cheek as my Master-Teacher admonishes me to do in his holy Testimony, (Matt 5:39-48), for in so doing your master now owes my Master thirty shekels of silver, (Exo 21:32), and I know from my own experiences that your master is not going to be happy about that, (lol), but that is the supernal Torah understanding according to Paul: for we are likened to oxen, and no doubt some are like raging bulls of Bashan, (all of them fatlings of Bashan), and Paul teaches this even though most ignore his words and teachings from the Torah, (1Cor 9:9-10b, 1Tim 5:18, Deut 25:4, Exo 21:32). Likewise we know by the scripture writings of Paul that the Torah is supernal, spiritual, and holy, (Rom 7:12, 14), so I leave you to your own flesh and hellfire tongue for the destruction thereof, (1Cor 5:4-8, 1Tim 1:18-20). :)
 

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
Seqways in the Light.........

Seqways in the Light.........

That would be boring and it would defeat the purpose. I am not here to debate this. It's straight up stupidity. These morons might as well believe that the sky is green with bright orange polka dots and that all but the first and fifth legs of a millipede are attached with gorilla glue.

If you introduce or propose a proposition or inquiry, it might be proper to carry out explaining it instead of dangling it like a carrot on a stick :) - its also fair to read as much of a thread that you can, at least a good portion of it, the OP and more to see what the dialogue has included and what its direction is concerning the subject - before posting to stay in the groove of the discussion flow. It appeared you just honed in on a few posts that 'triggered' your impassioned retorts :) - I don't know if you surveyed the whole thread or not.

I've proposed my answer to your inquiry by noting a common Trinitarian one that explains that with Jesus it was only his humanity that died, his mortal being, while his immortal being is NOT subject to death. - one can jerry-rig or juxta-pose it anyway they wish. Still, that which is incorruptible in nature cannot suffer corruption of any kind. That which is deathless, cannot taste death. - hence the mystery of the Incarnation....where God is experiencing space, time and mortality in some way THRU Jesus.

I can speak this way and always have as being an 'eclectic', since I'm not tied down to any one given dogma or conceptual view of 'God', but approach theology in a spiritual-philosophic way, one grounded in universal metaphysics,.....kin to the occult and perennial wisdom schools. All truth and knowledge is interpreted 'subjectively' anyways, no matter what objective is being considered. There is always an 'esoteric' element and meaning within the vesture and mythology of exoteric religion. Love and wisdom is the way, while souls must follow their own inner guidance and spiritual discernment in their soul's journey Godward.

There is one universal infinite Spirit-essence, primordial consciousness, life-energy from which all is derived, from which all existence springs, within which all things are known, perceived and related. The One Absolute Reality that is 'God' is always already That which IS, the fundamental substrate or ground of being, wherein all space and time arises as a relational-play within infinity. - all else is relative and will suffer some degree of distortion thru translation and interpretation.

Do you remember Turbo? We need Turbo back. He was brilliant.

Yes,...there are quite a few old timers that don't post anymore for one reason or another.

I bet not even Knight has the original start dates anymore.

Wow, his join-date says 2002. We must be in the old boys club lol. hmmmmm
 

daqq

Well-known member
I gather that understanding the original languages, at least in order to 'intuit' the truest meaning of words is essential of course. But you know...there are so many reputable "greek scholars" on the NT manuscripts...have any come to see things the way you do? I know the belief that the canon is only contained in a mere 66 books compiled by man, but I don't hold to that belief - surprise! :angel: - in your study of apocryphal, inter-testamenal works and other non-canonical goodies,...haven't you found complimentary insights into the logos of God? I think there is revelation of God outside of formal canons,....you cannot put the INFINITE in a box, and that is that :) But I understand that the bulk of the traditional canon is your 'contextual word-study' for theology, and so on.

I go on being a happy heretic :jolly: - while I can entertain any number of propositions, dogmas or religious belief-concepts, I have no dogmatic investment in any of them, besides universal truths of reality, being and existence itself....which are Self-evident, as the One I AM :)



Ok, I recall certain 'nomina sacras' in the NT in other places, which are of particular interest, but I'm not well versed in reading Greek letters, and you did not 'translate' the above word-forms, so I cannot tell if what you propose is valid or logical, granted the context of your proposition. Some cannot read the greek text in greek, so it would be helpful if you could provide a complete English inter-linear translation then specify what is significant about it, and why your 'translation' would appear more tenable.


Okay, this is pretty awesome, I love studying the various 'names' of 'God',...but as a student of universal spirituality, I'm also aware that there is an aspect of 'God' that has no 'name', is beyond naming :) - granted,....God could of course know a particular name that he has not revealed to any mortal, and gives us secret names too as we pass certain initiations, ...pretty cool eh?

Well, I will say this much, from my canon I understand that Kepha is Yoseph of Arimathaia who is Nikodemo who is also the twelve, (for they do hide in him when the Yhudim are searching for them, as like in the "upper room", and at that time only Yoseph comes forth as they speak to Nikodemo), and there are three Shimoni, (he is a compound unity, like three hollow rocks, three carved out cisterns, three days and three nights, three commissions, and so on), and Yaakob ha Tzaddik, ("the Just"), is he who wears the gold chain about his neck, that is, Kleopa, who is also Yoseph in another canonical work of holy writing, (Apokalypse Yaakob). One may find the chain about his neck in Genesis 41 as follows:

Genesis 41:15-16 KJV
15 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, I have dreamed a dream, and there is none that can interpret it: and I have heard say of thee, that thou canst understand a dream to interpret it.
16 And Joseph answered Pharaoh, saying, It is not in me: God shall give Pharaoh an answer of peace.


Yoseph remembers his Elohim, which his father Yaakob no doubt taught him about as a young lad; and Yoseph wisely gives all credit to his Elohim for his understanding of the dream of Pharaoh, which understanding he is about to receive, as he hears Pharaoh recount the dream.

Genesis 41:25-37 KJV
25 And Joseph said unto Pharaoh, The dream of Pharaoh is one: God hath shewed Pharaoh what he is about to do.
26 The seven good kine are seven years; and the seven good ears are seven years: the dream is one.
27 And the seven thin and ill favoured kine that came up after them are seven years; and the seven empty ears blasted with the east wind shall be seven years of famine.
28 This is the thing which I have spoken unto Pharaoh: What God is about to do he sheweth unto Pharaoh.
29 Behold, there come seven years of great plenty throughout all the land of Egypt:
30 And there shall arise after them seven years of famine; and all the plenty shall be forgotten in the land of Egypt; and the famine shall consume the land;
31 And the plenty shall not be known in the land by reason of that famine following; for it shall be very grievous.
32 And for that the dream was doubled unto Pharaoh twice; it is because the thing is established by God, and God will shortly bring it to pass.
33 Now therefore let Pharaoh look out a man discreet and wise, and set him over the land of Egypt.
34 Let Pharaoh do this, and let him appoint officers over the land, and take up the fifth part of the land of Egypt in the seven plenteous years.
35 And let them gather all the food of those good years that come, and lay up corn under the hand of Pharaoh, and let them keep food in the cities.
36 And that food shall be for store to the land against the seven years of famine, which shall be in the land of Egypt; that the land perish not through the famine.
37 And the thing was good in the eyes of Pharaoh, and in the eyes of all his servants.


So Pharaoh realizes that the Living Elohim and Wisdom speak through this man Yoseph:

Genesis 41:38-41 KJV
38 And Pharaoh said unto his servants, Can we find such a one as this is, a man in whom the Spirit of God is?
39 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, Forasmuch as God hath shewed thee all this, there is none so discreet and wise as thou art:
40 Thou shalt be over my house,
and according unto thy word shall all my people be ruled: only in the throne will I be greater than thou.
41 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, See, I have set thee over all the land of Egypt.


And now here is where the Prodigal Son Parable comes into view:

Genesis 41:42 KJV
42 And Pharaoh took off his ring from his hand, and put it upon Joseph's hand, and arrayed him in vestures of fine linen,
and put a gold chain about his neck;

In the Septuagint the word for chain is κλοιον, (which believe it or not is related to the name Kleopa, if you dig deep enough, but the name also has other significant supernal implications).

Genesis 41:43-46 KJV
43 And he made him to ride in the second chariot which he had; and they cried before him, Bow the knee: and he made him ruler over all the land of Egypt.
44 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, I am Pharaoh, and without thee shall no man lift up his hand or foot in all the land of Egypt.
45 And Pharaoh called Joseph's name Zaphnathpaaneah; and he gave him to wife Asenath the daughter of Potipherah priest of On.
[Septuagint - Ηλιου] And Joseph went out over all the land of Egypt.
46 And Joseph was thirty years old when he stood before Pharaoh king of Egypt. And Joseph went out from the presence of Pharaoh, and went throughout all the land of Egypt.


Zaphnath-Paneah = "the God speaks and He lives" = "the Living God speaks" (through Yoseph). :)
 

daqq

Well-known member
So that which I have received is that Meshiah died for our sins according to the writings; and that he was buried, and rose again the third day, according to the writings. And that he appeared to Kepha, that is, Yoseph of Arimathaia, who is also Nikodemo, moreover the twelve, (Gospel of Nikodemus). After that Meshiah appeared to above five hundred at one time, (Gospel of Peter). And after that Meshiah appeared to Yaakob, who is also Kleopa, moreover all the apostles, (Gospel of Leukos "the White" who is Titus the Man of Macedon, (from the vision of Paul at Troas), and likely also Raphael "the Physician" (from Tobit)). Thus we see three pillars: the pillar Yaakob ha-Tzaddik, "the Just", (he that wears the gold chain having a writers inkhorn by his side, and he is also Yoseph, (Apokalypse Yaakob)), and the pillar of Kepha and the twelve; and the pillar of Yohanan the Immerser, the greatest of the Prophets out of those having been born of women, (author of the greatest of all the scrolls of prophecy, (and the Testimony of Ι̅H is the Spirit of the Prophecy)), and Yohanan is he that immerses you in repentance and the water of the Word, to prepare the Way for Meshiah and his and our Father. Those who reject the immersion of Yohanan reject the counsel of Elohim for themselves, (Luke 7:30, for the words of Meshiah will not pass away). The waters of Shiloah flow softly; but you see how the natural man prefers violence, war, carnage, and killing, in his reading of spiritual and holy texts.
 

daqq

Well-known member
So that which I have received is that Meshiah died for our sins according to the writings; and that he was buried, and rose again the third day, according to the writings. And that he appeared to Kepha, that is, Yoseph of Arimathaia, who is also Nikodemo, moreover the twelve, (Gospel of Nikodemus). After that Meshiah appeared to above five hundred at one time, (Gospel of Peter). And after that Meshiah appeared to Yaakob, who is also Kleopa, moreover all the apostles, (Gospel of Leukos "the White" who is Titus the Man of Macedon, (from the vision of Paul at Troas), and likely also Raphael "the Physician" (from Tobit)). Thus we see three pillars: the pillar Yaakob ha-Tzaddik, "the Just", (he that wears the gold chain having a writers inkhorn by his side, and he is also Yoseph, (Apokalypse Yaakob)), and the pillar of Kepha and the twelve; and the pillar of Yohanan the Immerser, the greatest of the Prophets out of those having been born of women, (author of the greatest of all the scrolls of prophecy, (and the Testimony of Ι̅H is the Spirit of the Prophecy)), and Yohanan is he that immerses you in repentance and the water of the Word, to prepare the Way for Meshiah and his and our Father. Those who reject the immersion of Yohanan reject the counsel of Elohim for themselves, (Luke 7:30, for the words of Meshiah will not pass away). The waters of Shiloah flow softly; but you see how the natural man prefers violence, war, carnage, and killing, in his reading of spiritual and holy texts.

And lest we neglect the Gospel of Thomas:

The Ι̅H says, He that is mikroteros (the less(er)) among you all; the same shall be megas-great, (Luke 9:48). The talmidim say to the Ι̅H, We know that you shall go from us: who is it that shall be made great over us? The Ι̅H says to them, The place from where you did come, to there shall you go: to Yaakob ha-Tzaddik, ("the Just"), for because of him this heavens and earth came into being, (Thomas #12). Watching I was, and behold, a certain one clothed in the fine linen robe of the Kohen to the foot, having the inkhorn of a writer by his side.

And Paulos "the Little" confirms this also when he writes: For I make known to you, brethren, as touching the good news gospel which was preached by me, that it is not according to man. For neither did I receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came to me by way of The Apokalypse of Meshiah Ι̅H. For you have heard of my manner of life in time past in the religion of the Yhudim, how that beyond measure I persecuted the congregation of Elohim and laid it waste. And I advanced in the religion of the Yhudim beyond many of mine own age among my countrymen, being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers: but when it was the good pleasure of Elohim, who separated me from the womb of my mother, (Yerushalem of above), and called me through His grace to reveal His Son in me so that I might preach Him among the nations: straightway I conferred not with flesh and blood, neither went I up to Yerushalem to them that were apostles before me; but I went away into Arabia, (six months), and again I returned unto Damascus-Qumran. Then amidst three years I went up to Yerushalem to learn the histories from Kepha, and there were fifteen days I abode with him. But I saw none other of the apostles if not Yaakob the brother of the Master. Moreover, concerning these things which I write to you, behold, before Elohim, I lie not! (Galatians 1:11-20).

Paul says he saw none other of the apostles if not Yaakob the brother of the Master, that is, Yaakob ha-Tzaddik, ("the Just"), and then immediately he says, "Behold, before Elohim, I lie not!" And why does he says this here? It is because of what is written in Acts 9:26-30.

Acts 9:26-30
26 And when Shaul was come to Yerushalem, he assayed to join himself to the talmidim: but they were all fearful of him, and believed not that he was a talmid.
27 But Bar-Naba took him, and brought him to the apostles, and declared unto them how he had seen the Master in the way, and that he had spoken to him, and how he had preached boldly at Damascus in the name of
Ι̅H.
28 And how he was with them entering in and going out concerning Yerushalem
[Gal 1:18].
29 And how he had spoken boldly in the name of the Master
Ι̅H, and had disputed against the Greeks; but they, [the Damascenes] went about to slay him [Acts 9:19-25].
30 And when the brethren understood, they brought him down to Caesarea, and sent him forth to Tarsus.


So clearly Shaul met with all the apostles, the talmidim, and the brethren, but he saw none if not Yaakob the Tzaddik, the brother of the Master, as he says in Galatians 1:19-20. And for this reason he says, "Behold, before Elohim, I lie not!" so that we may know the symbolism which hidden in the Gospel accounts: for the heavens and the earth came into being for Yaakob the Tzaddik, the one with the writers inkhorn by his side, and he wrote them all into existence; and they would all eventually return to him, (Thomas #12). And your heavens and your earth will likewise pass away, (Rev 20:11, 21:1-5, 2Cor 5:17), but the words of Meshiah will not pass away. :chuckle:
 

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
In-sights into the Anointed.......

In-sights into the Anointed.......

And lest we neglect the Gospel of Thomas:

Quote Originally Posted by daqq View Post

The Ι̅H says, He that is mikroteros (the less(er)) among you all; the same shall be megas-great, (Luke 9:48). The talmidim say to the Ι̅H, We know that you shall go from us: who is it that shall be made great over us? The Ι̅H says to them, The place from where you did come, to there shall you go: to Yaakob ha-Tzaddik, ("the Just"), for because of him this heavens and earth came into being, (Thomas #12). Watching I was, and behold, a certain one clothed in the fine linen robe of the Kohen to the foot, having the inkhorn of a writer by his side.


On the GoT (Gospel of Thomas) reference -

Here is Layton's translation of GoT saying #12 -

LAYTON

(12) The disciples said to Jesus, "We are aware that you will depart from us. Who will be our leader?" Jesus said to him, "No matter where you come it is to James the Just that you shall go, for whose sake heaven and earth have come to exist."

I know Peter, James and John were considered pillars of the Jerusalem Assemly, but not sure if you're assuming 'James' and 'Jacob' are both interchangeable names? We would also note that James the Lord's brother was head of the Jerusalem 'church', and even though Paul claimed to have spent some time with James, it appears Paul later developed his own gospel to the Gentiles, and a greater division and tension became between the original apostles of Jesus and Paul, and eventually Paul's version of Christianity won in popularity as the original Jewish Nazarane followers of Jesus (the Way) dispersed with the disintegration of Jerusalem. - mixed opionions there, but just noting ;)

For those interested in our Gospel of Thomas thread go here :) - we're doing a commentary on the GoT, and are up to saying 50 now. - I chime in and expound starting on page 10 :surf:

And we would be reminded again, that the divine announcement of Sonship commences with the bestowal of the divine Spirit, the 'unction' granted is significant AT THE BAPTISM, the mantling of the divine-logos upon the man Jesus. However you term, reference or symbolize it,...is the Spirit-Power of 'God' Almighty, the Most High, the creative & prophetic WORD, upon and working THRU the Lord Jesus that is essential here. All power is from 'God' ALONE. Pure Incorruptible Divine SPIRIT. - soul-bodies are but vessels, containers for the spirit, light, energy and consciousness of 'God'. Understading this metaphysically is all that is essential, - for His is the kingdom, the glory, the power and dominion FOREVER. God works thru the power of his creative and prophetic LOGOS. 'God' is bringing to pass his word and will thru his Anointed, his agency in both heaven and earth.
 

daqq

Well-known member
On the GoT (Gospel of Thomas) reference -

Here is Layton's translation of GoT saying #12 -

LAYTON

(12) The disciples said to Jesus, "We are aware that you will depart from us. Who will be our leader?" Jesus said to him, "No matter where you come it is to James the Just that you shall go, for whose sake heaven and earth have come to exist."

I know Peter, James and John were considered pillars of the Jerusalem Assemly, but not sure if you're assuming 'James' and 'Jacob' are both interchangeable names? We would also note that James the Lord's brother was head of the Jerusalem 'church', and even though Paul claimed to have spent some time with James, it appears Paul later developed his own gospel to the Gentiles, and a greater division and tension became between the original apostles of Jesus and Paul, and eventually Paul's version of Christianity won in popularity as the original Jewish Nazarane followers of Jesus (the Way) dispersed with the disintegration of Jerusalem. - mixed opionions there, but just noting ;)

For those interested in our Gospel of Thomas thread go here :) - we're doing a commentary on the GoT, and are up to saying 50 now. - I chime in and expound starting on page 10 :surf:

And we would be reminded again, that the divine announcement of Sonship commences with the bestowal of the divine Spirit, the 'unction' granted is significant AT THE BAPTISM, the mantling of the divine-logos upon the man Jesus. However you term, reference or symbolize it,...is the Spirit-Power of 'God' Almighty, the Most High, the creative & prophetic WORD, upon and working THRU the Lord Jesus that is essential here. All power is from 'God' ALONE. Pure Incorruptible Divine SPIRIT. - soul-bodies are but vessels, containers for the spirit, light, energy and consciousness of 'God'. Understading this metaphysically is all that is essential, - for His is the kingdom, the glory, the power and dominion FOREVER. God works thru the power of his creative and prophetic LOGOS. 'God' is bringing to pass his word and will thru his Anointed, his agency in both heaven and earth.

Yeah, you will find that everywhere you read "James" in your English translations the name is actually either Ιακωβ, (Yakob) or Ιακωβος, (Yakobos, or one of the other case-form endings, Yakobon, and so on). Ιακωβ without a case ending is what now still appears in the genealogies, such as Matthew, and as far as I know most all English translations still render that form as Jacob, (because it is in a genealogy and they cannot get away with changing it to "James"). It is the same name but it certainly was not "James" in the first century. Also Paul says that Kepha was accounted to be a pillar, not Peter. Therefore it is much more likely that it was Peter whom Paul stood against when he found fault, not Kepha, so it is a mistake to assume that Peter is Kepha because Paul would never stand openly against one whom he has just informed us was considered a pillar of the congregation. Peter learned something we all must learn the hard way, that is, to look into the mirror at the mountain staring back at you; and say to the mountain, "Get thee behind me Satan", and have faith like a mustard seed, and it shall be done for you, (and no doubt you will begin to bear fruit in that day, "a little one", lol). Also the one who bore the stake or cross of Messiah, Shimon Kurenaio, he is the father of Rufus and Alexander; and the mother of Rufus is the mother of Shaul who becomes Paulos, "a little one", (hehe). I suspect there will be many MADites at the pearly gates expecting to find Paul, but instead meeting up with Peter; and not a few Messianics at the pearly gates also, expecting to find Kepha, or Petros, and yet it will be Paul who greets them, (I speak foolishly). Then there will be those who simply ate everything that the Master put before them on his holy table; and I suppose that Petros-Paulos will greet them, (though I may sound as if a fool my boast is in Messiah by way of his Testimony). :)
 

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
Paul issues...................

Paul issues...................

Yeah, you will find that everywhere you read "James" in your English translations the name is actually either Ιακωβ, (Yakob) or Ιακωβος, (Yakobos, or one of the other case-form endings, Yakobon, and so on). Ιακωβ without a case ending is what now still appears in the genealogies, such as Matthew, and as far as I know most all English translations still render that form as Jacob, (because it is in a genealogy and they cannot get away with changing it to "James"). It is the same name but it certainly was not "James" in the first century. Also Paul says that Kepha was accounted to be a pillar, not Peter. Therefore it is much more likely that it was Peter whom Paul stood against when he found fault, not Kepha, so it is a mistake to assume that Peter is Kepha because Paul would never stand openly against one whom he has just informed us was considered a pillar of the congregation. Peter learned something we all must learn the hard way, that is, to look into the mirror at the mountain staring back at you; and say to the mountain, "Get thee behind me Satan", and have faith like a mustard seed, and it shall be done for you, (and no doubt you will begin to bear fruit in that day, "a little one", lol). Also the one who bore the stake or cross of Messiah, Shimon Kurenaio, he is the father of Rufus and Alexander; and the mother of Rufus is the mother of Shaul who becomes Paulos, "a little one", (hehe). I suspect there will be many MADites at the pearly gates expecting to find Paul, but instead meeting up with Peter; and not a few Messianics at the pearly gates also, expecting to find Kepha, or Petros, and yet it will be Paul who greets them, (I speak foolishly). Then there will be those who simply ate everything that the Master put before them on his holy table; and I suppose that Petros-Paulos will greet them, (though I may sound as if a fool my boast is in Messiah by way of his Testimony). :)


Ah,....possibly so :)

Peter was the original apostle to the gentiles actually, before Paul 'assumed' that position for him, and there were tensions between Peter and Paul (see Galations, etc.). But surprises in heaven will probably be many, since everyone has their own ideas or beliefs, and these will be modified or challenged by new findings along the way, especially what the afterlife or spirit-world is like.

We've had threads on Paul, and I've usually taken a more critical, skeptical look at Paul and sharing resources oriented that way, as if Paul sought acceptance among the Jerusalem community in so many ways, then kinda took the ball and ran with his own gospel, based on his own revelations assumabely from Jesus. But this all depends on what his mission was, target-audience and what he was trying to communicate about Jesus, or his mystical Christ teachings, since it was more 'gnostic' in orientation on some levels, and fairly 'eclectic' in other ways, since he seemed to merge different religious concepts, allegorical themes and so on, centered in a 'new creation' or 'new man'....being "in Christ", there being a divine mystery involved here, and religious experience, even the 'resurrection' being 'spiritual',...our aspirations being to "put on immortality". (initiations and mystery school symbologies)

The Jerusalem Assembly were more focused on maintaining the bulk of their traditional orthodox Jewish customs with some innovations, so typically many of the Jews rejected Paul and his later developing 'gospel', or resolve, synthesize or synergize his teachings with the original apostles as do some Messianic groups today. However the Ebionites despised him, and we have modern 'Ebionites' so to speak that believe Paul is anti-Christ, a ravenous wolf of the tribe of Benjamin, one even spoken against in the book of Revelation, etc. But much of this depends on how we interpret Jesus teachings himself, and what he taught to his original 12 apostles, if it was indeed still rooted in fundamentals of Judaism with some innovations brought in by Jesus, and if/when Paul deviated from that and innovated his own 'religion' so to speak based mostly on his own personal revelation. Paul in this sense is a 'hot potatoe' which I can go anyways on, depending on what specifics or context we're considering, since I accept many of his allegorical, or purely gnostic/spiritual teachings, because they apply 'universally'. Paul a few times also admits where he is sharing his own opinion, and disclaims it being 'of the Lord', and there is almost half of the writings that are attributed to him as being 'pseudographical' :) - I'll look for some older Paul threads, or leave it open to begin a new thread on Paul, when time or interest permits. I think sharing on him from our more eclectic, peculiar or liberal progressive views could be stimulating ;)

A few good primer resources on the Paul issues, which are more pro-Jesus/con-Paul are -

Jesus Words Only


The Paul Problem (Bet Emet Ministries)

Then,

Paul and the origins of Chrisitanity
(atheist critique)
 

daqq

Well-known member
Ah,....possibly so :)

Peter was the original apostle to the gentiles actually, before Paul 'assumed' that position for him, and there were tensions between Peter and Paul (see Galations, etc.). But surprises in heaven will probably be many, since everyone has their own ideas or beliefs, and these will be modified or challenged by new findings along the way, especially what the afterlife or spirit-world is like.

We've had threads on Paul, and I've usually taken a more critical, skeptical look at Paul and sharing resources oriented that way, as if Paul sought acceptance among the Jerusalem community in so many ways, then kinda took the ball and ran with his own gospel, based on his own revelations assumabely from Jesus. But this all depends on what his mission was, target-audience and what he was trying to communicate about Jesus, or his mystical Christ teachings, since it was more 'gnostic' in orientation on some levels, and fairly 'eclectic' in other ways, since he seemed to merge different religious concepts, allegorical themes and so on, centered in a 'new creation' or 'new man'....being "in Christ", there being a divine mystery involved here, and religious experience, even the 'resurrection' being 'spiritual',...our aspirations being to "put on immortality". (initiations and mystery school symbologies)

The Jerusalem Assembly were more focused on maintaining the bulk of their traditional orthodox Jewish customs with some innovations, so typically many of the Jews rejected Paul and his later developing 'gospel', or resolve, synthesize or synergize his teachings with the original apostles as do some Messianic groups today. However the Ebionites despised him, and we have modern 'Ebionites' so to speak that believe Paul is anti-Christ, a ravenous wolf of the tribe of Benjamin, one even spoken against in the book of Revelation, etc. But much of this depends on how we interpret Jesus teachings himself, and what he taught to his original 12 apostles, if it was indeed still rooted in fundamentals of Judaism with some innovations brought in by Jesus, and if/when Paul deviated from that and innovated his own 'religion' so to speak based mostly on his own personal revelation. Paul in this sense is a 'hot potatoe' which I can go anyways on, depending on what specifics or context we're considering, since I accept many of his allegorical, or purely gnostic/spiritual teachings, because they apply 'universally'. Paul a few times also admits where he is sharing his own opinion, and disclaims it being 'of the Lord', and there is almost half of the writings that are attributed to him as being 'pseudographical' :) - I'll look for some older Paul threads, or leave it open to begin a new thread on Paul, when time or interest permits. I think sharing on him from our more eclectic, peculiar or liberal progressive views could be stimulating ;)

A few good primer resources on the Paul issues, which are more pro-Jesus/con-Paul are -

Jesus Words Only


The Paul Problem (Bet Emet Ministries)

Then,

Paul and the origins of Chrisitanity
(atheist critique)

The thing about Paul is that he can be read and understood either way, that is, either pro-Torah or anti-Torah, depending on how astute the eye might be. It all depends on what is in your heart and what you are truly looking for, (some seek only to know the truth while many seek to find justification for what they already believe and have already been taught "about" Paul and what he supposedly says). The struggle between Peter and Paul is internal, supernal, and spiritual, and this cannot be stressed enough; for when Peter came to Antioch it speaks of the vision he had received just before Cornelios and "all his household" were saved. Peter himself underwent an internal struggle because he was immediately accused of his own "Yhudim" for "eating with gentiles". That is really where the whole issue commences, (and why most do not even realize it; for most do not take dreams and visions or even parables as to be teaching doctrine). Cornelios was at Caesarea while Peter was at Yapho by the Sea, at the house of "Simon the Tanner", and that is not Yaffa on the Mediterranean Sea but rather the same Yapho of Yonah the prophet, (he went down to Yapho, Jonah 1:3, from Gath Hepher where he lived, 2Kings 14:25, which is much closer to the Sea of Galilee; and Yapho means "Beautiful", and in the case of Yonah it refers to the Sea of Galiliee or Yam Kinneret, the Beautiful Sea which is shaped like a harp, (kinnor), that is, Yam Yapho, "the Beautiful Sea", 2Chr 2:16, Ezra 3:7, (as the sages also say)). That means that Tarshish, and yes, Tarsus, is in Syria to the east of the Sea of Galilee, and not the Tarsus which was in Asia Minor, (though both are used in the like symbolism). This changes everything in the symbolism running through the writings of Paul, and not the least of which concerns where the true city of Antioch might truly have been, (it is either Caesarea which was formally Philippi, but Herod Agrippa changed its name, which was before that Panea; or Antioch may truly be Antioch Hippos, which was in Hebrew-Aramaic called Sussita, ("horses", again a reference to Philippo)). Peter therefore makes the same trip that Yonah made when he fled the presence of Elohim and went down to Yapho by the Sea of Galilee; but Peter obeys the Word which was given him in the vision, and he goes to the house of Cornelio which is likely where was the true Antioch of Paul and BarNaba, and which Luke speaks of in the Acts. Paulo "the little" is thus a spiritual son of Shimon Petro who recieved three commissions from the Master after the Master was resurrected, and those three commissions are recorded in John 21:15-19. That passage likewise foretells by what kind of "death" Peter would glorify Elohim, (which is not the kind of "death" that the natural man understands; for the Father of Love, who is Love, obviously does not desire physical death and literal physical martyrdom of His people so as to be glorified).

John 21:15-19 ASV
15 So when they had broken their fast, Jesus saith to Simon Peter,
[σιμωνι πετρω] Simon, son of John, [T/R - ιωνα-Iona-Yonah] lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. [arnia-lambkins]
16 He saith to him again a second time, Simon, son of John,
[T/R -Yonah] lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Tend my sheep. [probatia-little-sheep]
17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of John,
[T/R -Yonah] lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep. [probata-adult-sheep]
18 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands,
[between two chains, Acts 12:6] and another shall gird thee, [Herod in the machaira-sword of spiritual warfare, Acts 12:2] and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. [Acts 12:1-7]
19 Now this he spake, signifying by what manner of death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.
[Acts 12:8 - the Angel of the Most High says the same, "Follow Me!"]

The three commissions of Shimoni Petro, (σιμωνι πετρω), are as follows:

1) "βοσκε τα αρνια μου" - "Feed My arnia-lambkins", John 21:15
2) "ποιμαινε τα προβατια μου" - "Shepherd My probatia-little-sheep", John 21:16
3) "βοσκε τα προβατα μου" - "Feed My probata-adult-sheep", John 21:17

So then, I ask:
Where does it say he must shepherd and feed all under the same pen-name?
Testimony is Spirit . . .

2 Peter 3:14-16 ASV
14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for these things, give diligence that ye may be found in peace, without spot and blameless in his sight.
15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also, according to the wisdom given to him, wrote unto you;
16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; wherein are some things hard to be understood, which the ignorant and unstedfast wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.


Modern scholarship says this is not likely Peter; I say it sure sounds like Paul:
Therefore, I say, it may indeed be Petros-Paulos "the Little" . . . :chuckle:
 

freelight

Eclectic Theosophist
Tooting your horn......

Tooting your horn......

The thing about Paul is that he can be read and understood either way, that is, either pro-Torah or anti-Torah, depending on how astute the eye might be. It all depends on what is in your heart and what you are truly looking for, (some seek only to know the truth while many seek to find justification for what they already believe and have already been taught "about" Paul and what he supposedly says). The struggle between Peter and Paul is internal, supernal, and spiritual, and this cannot be stressed enough; for when Peter came to Antioch it speaks of the vision he had received just before Cornelios and "all his household" were saved. Peter himself underwent an internal struggle because he was immediately accused of his own "Yhudim" for "eating with gentiles". That is really where the whole issue commences, (and why most do not even realize it; for most do not take dreams and visions or even parables as to be teaching doctrine). Cornelios was at Caesarea while Peter was at Yapho by the Sea, at the house of "Simon the Tanner", and that is not Yaffa on the Mediterranean Sea but rather the same Yapho of Yonah the prophet, (he went down to Yapho, Jonah 1:3, from Gath Hepher where he lived, 2Kings 14:25, which is much closer to the Sea of Galilee; and Yapho means "Beautiful", and in the case of Yonah it refers to the Sea of Galiliee or Yam Kinneret, the Beautiful Sea which is shaped like a harp, (kinnor), that is, Yam Yapho, "the Beautiful Sea", 2Chr 2:16, Ezra 3:7, (as the sages also say)). That means that Tarshish, and yes, Tarsus, is in Syria to the east of the Sea of Galilee, and not the Tarsus which was in Asia Minor, (though both are used in the like symbolism). This changes everything in the symbolism running through the writings of Paul, and not the least of which concerns where the true city of Antioch might truly have been, (it is either Caesarea which was formally Philippi, but Herod Agrippa changed its name, which was before that Panea; or Antioch may truly be Antioch Hippos, which was in Hebrew-Aramaic called Sussita, ("horses", again a reference to Philippo)). Peter therefore makes the same trip that Yonah made when he fled the presence of Elohim and went down to Yapho by the Sea of Galilee; but Peter obeys the Word which was given him in the vision, and he goes to the house of Cornelio which is likely where was the true Antioch of Paul and BarNaba, and which Luke speaks of in the Acts. Paulo "the little" is thus a spiritual son of Shimon Petro who recieved three commissions from the Master after the Master was resurrected, and those three commissions are recorded in John 21:15-19. That passage likewise foretells by what kind of "death" Peter would glorify Elohim, (which is not the kind of "death" that the natural man understands; for the Father of Love, who is Love, obviously does not desire physical death and literal physical martyrdom of His people so as to be glorified).

John 21:15-19 ASV
15 So when they had broken their fast, Jesus saith to Simon Peter,
[σιμωνι πετρω] Simon, son of John, [T/R - ιωνα-Iona-Yonah] lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. [arnia-lambkins]
16 He saith to him again a second time, Simon, son of John,
[T/R -Yonah] lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Tend my sheep. [probatia-little-sheep]
17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of John,
[T/R -Yonah] lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep. [probata-adult-sheep]
18 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdedst thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands,
[between two chains, Acts 12:6] and another shall gird thee, [Herod in the machaira-sword of spiritual warfare, Acts 12:2] and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. [Acts 12:1-7]
19 Now this he spake, signifying by what manner of death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.
[Acts 12:8 - the Angel of the Most High says the same, "Follow Me!"]

The three commissions of Shimoni Petro, (σιμωνι πετρω), are as follows:

1) "βοσκε τα αρνια μου" - "Feed My arnia-lambkins", John 21:15
2) "ποιμαινε τα προβατια μου" - "Shepherd My probatia-little-sheep", John 21:16
3) "βοσκε τα προβατα μου" - "Feed My probata-adult-sheep", John 21:17

So then, I ask:
Where does it say he must shepherd and feed all under the same pen-name?
Testimony is Spirit . . .

2 Peter 3:14-16 ASV
14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for these things, give diligence that ye may be found in peace, without spot and blameless in his sight.
15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also, according to the wisdom given to him, wrote unto you;
16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; wherein are some things hard to be understood, which the ignorant and unstedfast wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.


Modern scholarship says this is not likely Peter; I say it sure sounds like Paul:
Therefore, I say, it may indeed be Petros-Paulos "the Little" . . . :chuckle:


Just like you to "daqq" up the commentary :crackup: ;) :p

I agree with some of the tension-points between Peter and Paul going on at various levels, and that Paul's writings can be interpreted as 'pro-torah' or 'anti-torah', throw in all his other peculiar doctrines and you have a potpourri of goodies to nibble on.

Sure, 'God' can use any vessel but some persons are more 'controversial' as to their actuall calling and apostleship, if it was really God-appointed or more self-appointed, because taking the Bible as a whole (OT & NT) requires synthesizing/synergizing all the various books, different authors & dispensations, so its a rather diverse assortment of books, open to various translations.

From what I've seen on 2 Peter,...it seems to be more a 2nd century production, and not authored by Paul who was long dead,...but I guess one scholarly guess is as good as another on some of the books in the Bible ;)

It would be interesting if Paul's letters were not included in the canon, but we would also note that Marcion despised most of the OT, and used mostly some of the gospels and Pauline letters for his first NT canon (considered the first 'canon' made in a formal sense), then the greater catholic church followed suit in forming the present day canon with variations. Marcion was against the stern, wrathful, war-lord like god 'YHWH' of the OT, and saw that the God and Father of Jesus was the true God, a different being altogether. How Paul factors into things puts an interesting spin on the whole historical development of the NT canon. In fact a thread on Marcion may be a good segway into Early Christianity and similar Gnostic movements within the first 4 centuries. (I'm one of the few liberal 'gnostics' on the board, as we've had some and engaged previous threads on the subject. My affiliation as a 'gnostic' is very liberal, as one interested in 'gnosis' as a key to inward enlightenment and the dawning of esoteric truths in one and all traditions).

Nowadays we have the 'holy bible' as being both the OT & NT lumped together, but this is entirely a Christian innovation, and its 'canon' is what is traditionally assumed as well. Since I'm not a believer in 'inerrancy of scripture', I wont toot that horn too much, and 'sola scriptura' is also with its limitations and imperfections, since know no matter how inspired and useful religious writings are, no book can contain or circumscribe the INFINITE. All you get is what is "channeled" thru various prophets and mediums, serving as scribes...and that what you have with a 'bible', and that goes for a 'bible' in all or any religious cult or tradition. At best religious writings can serve to point, approximate, symbolize, analog and describe God, eternal verities or divine mysteries, but these things are inwardly realized as a matter of personal religious experience, that goes beyond words, space or time. When cult-ure, tradition, names, words, forms dissolve in infinity, all souls attuned to 'God' experience the same sublime eternal reality, as pure Spirit.

But lest I go on :).........
 

daqq

Well-known member
Just like you to "daqq" up the commentary :crackup: ;) :p

I agree with some of the tension-points between Peter and Paul going on at various levels, and that Paul's writings can be interpreted as 'pro-torah' or 'anti-torah', throw in all his other peculiar doctrines and you have a potpourri of goodies to nibble on.

Sure, 'God' can use any vessel but some persons are more 'controversial' as to their actuall calling and apostleship, if it was really God-appointed or more self-appointed, because taking the Bible as a whole (OT & NT) requires synthesizing/synergizing all the various books, different authors & dispensations, so its a rather diverse assortment of books, open to various translations.

From what I've seen on 2 Peter,...it seems to be more a 2nd century production, and not authored by Paul who was long dead,...but I guess one scholarly guess is as good as another on some of the books in the Bible ;)

It would be interesting if Paul's letters were not included in the canon, but we would also note that Marcion despised most of the OT, and used mostly some of the gospels and Pauline letters for his first NT canon (considered the first 'canon' made in a formal sense), then the greater catholic church followed suit in forming the present day canon with variations. Marcion was against the stern, wrathful, war-lord like god 'YHWH' of the OT, and saw that the God and Father of Jesus was the true God, a different being altogether. How Paul factors into things puts an interesting spin on the whole historical development of the NT canon. In fact a thread on Marcion may be a good segway into Early Christianity and similar Gnostic movements within the first 4 centuries. (I'm one of the few liberal 'gnostics' on the board, as we've had some and engaged previous threads on the subject. My affiliation as a 'gnostic' is very liberal, as one interested in 'gnosis' as a key to inward enlightenment and the dawning of esoteric truths in one and all traditions).

Nowadays we have the 'holy bible' as being both the OT & NT lumped together, but this is entirely a Christian innovation, and its 'canon' is what is traditionally assumed as well. Since I'm not a believer in 'inerrancy of scripture', I wont toot that horn too much, and 'sola scriptura' is also with its limitations and imperfections, since know no matter how inspired and useful religious writings are, no book can contain or circumscribe the INFINITE. All you get is what is "channeled" thru various prophets and mediums, serving as scribes...and that what you have with a 'bible', and that goes for a 'bible' in all or any religious cult or tradition. At best religious writings can serve to point, approximate, symbolize, analog and describe God, eternal verities or divine mysteries, but these things are inwardly realized as a matter of personal religious experience, that goes beyond words, space or time. When cult-ure, tradition, names, words, forms dissolve in infinity, all souls attuned to 'God' experience the same sublime eternal reality, as pure Spirit.

But lest I go on :).........

Yeah, they also claim Apokalypse Yaakob is second century, and the Gospel of Peter, and the Acts of Pilate or Gospel of Nikodemus, (maybe even third century they surmise), and the same minds ridiculously postulate that the Apokalypse-Revelation was penned sometime circa 95AD based essentially on unreliable sketchy words from third party sources and a supposed martyr named Antipas who was concocted to support their mother church historicism; showing that when it comes to dating writings the bias is even worse than what appears in their English renderings of those things which they actually do consider to be their canon. Everything is designed to support the dogma and anyone who goes against it becomes anathema and out of work no matter how honest and trustworthy a "scholar" he or she might be: in fact it seems that the more honest the "scholar" the more likely the same will find himself or herself blackballed or labeled anathema by the herd. It is no different from what we see in places like this but not so out in the open I suppose. :)
 
Top