[geocentrism] Re: A tool of Satan
- From: Allen Daves <allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 13:58:22 -0700 (PDT)
OK .........ME TOO AGAIN IN BLUE...
----- Original Message ----
From: Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 1:06:20 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: A tool of Satan
Allen, I have answered in green, but any further colouring would I think make
this dialogue too confusing.
-----Original Message-----
From: allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:26:30 -0700 (PDT)
blue
----- Original Message ----
From: Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2008 11:52:03 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: A tool of Satan
-----Original Message-----
From: allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 08:59:58 -0700 (PDT)
I have told you this before, but I will tell you in all sincerity again, "go
and learn what this means: 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice'." (1st canonical
gospel, 9:13a, NIV.)
1. This still begs the question how do you know that God really desires mercy?
Three reasons: It says so in Hosea. 'Jesus' claims that it is true. My
experience/spirit acknowledges it to be true.
Is mercy good only in your head or Godʼs as well and how can you be sure of
that? Mabye the real God is a vengfull God and what you call good is evil......?
This is a possibility, true, but I have considered it deeply about 6-12 months
ago and I have rejected it. (We are back to the good tree producing bad fruit
that started this discussion.)
2. More importaintly, a closer examination of that verse both in Hosea as well
as Mat 19:13.. shows us that Christ audience did not understand that verse
either (of course they didn't, since otherwise he would not have needed to tell
them to go away and figure it out - someone who is well is in no need of a
doctor - is that not the immediately preceding verse?), so what makes you so
sure you do?.... Did they sacrifice?...Yes! Did Christ condemn
sacrifices....NO!... Are you claiming that Christ condoned sacrifice, or that
he simply is not recorded as condemning sacrifice? Mark 1:44..Moses comanded
sacrifice for the cleasing........ Inserted by the Jewish scribes to tie this
teacher in with the concept of the Jews being the 'chosen ones'. We only have
this source....and that is my point..i only use and know what it
says........how and what do you base your assertion on? again back to my
hitler annalogy people can "feel" like he was a good guy..and claim
that all that bad stuff was just inserted by "the zionist"...? Of course it is
posible that only you are right but you have no way of validating any of your
belifes and thus far less reason to belive your error then i do even if in fact
mine was the error....In fact your beilfe offers no reason at all why anyone
else should go along with it.....What they like many do not understand, which
is what Christ was showing them is just because there is a acceptable sacrifice
for mistreating people does not mean it is acceptable to mistreat your brother
for your own sake ( the one he had healed )and make up for it with a "required
sacrifice". The sacrifice does not make up for the evil acts particular if the
act is intentional. They were asking a question why do you eat with publicans
and sinners? This was after Christ had just healed a man ...did they care about
the man or the publicans&sinners...NO! they only cared about themselfs. All the
sacrifice in the
world will not make up for their apathy and contempt for the truth and work of
God, which was Christ comming to heal the sick and bring the words of life to
the lost ....what were they doing?.......Mat 23:13 you dont go in and you
suffer not them that would........... Christ is pointing out that if they had
the truth of God /mercy they would not condemn work of God a mercifully act as
they did throughout His ministry and secondly seek to help/save not just
condemn their brothers who they condemn falsely. No. What Christ was pointing
out was that our Father not only desires mercy to be shown by us, but also does
not desire sacrifice of living creatures. "only mercy" is not found in that
verse........That is what you say about the verse, not what the verse says..
You are assuming a concept into the verse....the verse is about the application
mercy not the condemation of sacrifice The verse has two distinct parts,
tellings us firstly that God desires
mercy and secondly that God does not desire sacrifice. only if you assume that
is true first in the same way that i could apply that line of reasoing to my
bosses intruction for me to go home if i dont feel good....Therfore whenever i
dont feel good i should just go home even next week when everything happens all
at once.......I dont think you have difficutly applying reasonalbe meaning to
real people in context but you just refuse to do that with the teachings of
Christ, as such you are invoking circular flaicies to justify your selective
use of words and context that you use to develope your doctirne from then
justify your choices of the words & context by appealing to your
doctrine.....??.......... I can understand why the second part is a stumbling
block to defending the OT, because the OT is riddled with sacrificial ritual
and to say that this was not desired by our Father throws into question the
entire OT. However, that is my position. ....that
was jesus point when he said.....Matthew 21: 31 the publicans and harlots go
into the kingdom before you do....They did not have mercy on anyone, they were
only interested in being self-righteous (I don't think that whores are usually
noted for being self-righteous - besides which, how do you KNOW that they did
not display mercy?) if they had would Jesus be talking to them?..Christ came
to heal the sick, they thought it was Christ who was sick and had a
demon......what would be the point of point out a error that does not exist?.
they must have been in error he told them to go learn it!?.... he was not
speaking to the whores there, he was speaking to the pharisees and leaders of
the day....? "publicans and harlots" - a "harlot" is a whore
...............???Mat 21:23................. is spoken directly to and condemn
any and everyone that did not conform to them including Christ and anyone the
Christ helped. ....You see they were out to silence and
eventually would kill the Christ. No, Allen. This brings us back to the
sacrifice of a human being. Murder, okay, from their point of view, but you are
claiming that our Father required this as to be a sacrifice from before the
universe's creation. YES...but it was God in the flesh (Christr) God is a
spirit and must be worshipped in spirit and in truth Yes, But he came in the
flesh to teach you that fact, otherwise you would not know how you are to
worship him ..that is why they did not udnerstand coz they rejected the
teaching of Christ..................again gets back the the whole point of God
desirese mercy ( spiritual) not sacrifice ( fleshly carnal) but if you were not
in the flesh you would know GOD because spiritaly we are dead untill Christ who
is God in the flesh reconsiled man back to God in the spirit through the
sufferings in his flesh.........who demanded that of himself (son) God is not
bound by human morality, God sets the morality for
man not the other way around. you have it backwards............that is in part
Why God almighty had to do it himself cos it would not be acceptable for or
from a man .....? God made that determination before the foundation of the
world.... Christ offered himself he laid his life down no one took it from
him..? JOHN 10:18 .."NO MAN take it from me"...how could they He is God..? I
deny the trinity idea. ok i dissagree In which case, they would have had
absolutely no way of not wanting Christ's blood. The very purpose of their
existence would have been to bay for his blood. Every since Adam the men of God
have been looking for the Christ. They did not understand the purpose of Christ
or the sacrifice just like many do not today, as such God Who Sacrified himself
used their own ignorance and wickedness to accomplish God's Righteous
plan...ACTS 2:22-23 "By myself I can do nothing." The trinity idea enables you
to juggle about with what God is to suit your
position, rather than adjusting your position, even if it means throwing out
the black book (or most of it), to suit what God is. ...I did not mention
trinity...that is another discusion all together, but in any case....as you
said God is a spirit, and maybe even "omnipresent" at that so, why can't God
be in two places at one time...? it There are still plenty of folk who need to
as Christ said " Go lean what this means"....The verses are not condeming
sacrifice without assuming that into the verse ( circular logic), Jesus is
puting sacrifice in perspective. The verse is clear: Our Father does not desire
sacrifice. This is simple English. Right he desires mercy not
sacrifice........but he did not say that sacrifice was therofre not or ever
nessisary.... sacrife is the penilty for the transgression............ do you
desire to punish your childeren? No .....is it nessisary? Yes ..why you are
making the rules up you can just say everything is ok and
forget about the punishment right? But, Allen, what or who are you saying
should be punished. If one of my children did something wrong, then they would
be punished. I would not want or expect them to go out and punish an animal
instead. Furthermore, I would not expect someone else to take the blame for
what one of them did. This makes no sense. what difference does it make. If
you use a belt or a switch on your child did you not kill or take
responsibility for the cow or branch or if you prevent them from eating a
twinky did you not affect ecconomy for the workers who make them why should
they be punished too?....ridiculouls...NO! it is only a matter of SCALE not
substance......What is an animal to God? what is a man to God? If God makes the
animals and humans then just like the trees you plant in your garden or the
grass around your house why should the grass or roses get cut and die for your
good pleasure......COZ it is your grass and
floweres.....!? ...why not?..........man is made in the image of God....God
did not desire the disobediance of man, but it is nessisary otherwise there
could be no other "will" external of God ie...."contraly to the will of God"
if everything was according to the will of God.....Romans 9:18-19... you cannot
have a choice without 1. Options 2. the capcity to exercise those
options.....Could man exercise his option to disobey...yes....could he opt to
reconcile himself back to God....NO What?! Of course we can. HOW? and How do
you know that is true?....Only God could do that but God determined how and why
it was to be done and by Whom.....HIMSELF cos Man could not do it
himself......that is Why Christ Came...... You are supporting your contention
by simply reiterating it. NO that is what is taugh by the apostles of Christ
whom you reject but you reject them coz you built a doctrine on the things you
rejected...but the things you rejected or justified
in your eyes by your doctrine....circular falicy......But they would not hear
his words then and I dont see that you are listining to them now..........
What if you are one of the ones who needs to figure out what it means, Allen? I
apply context and use the only source of information we have about the issue
and man to ascertain the issue and the man...where as you pick and choose
meaning external of what context and information we have about the issue (from
the only source we have) with nothing more then how "you feel".......Well
now,..... what if i did that with the rest of human history...say Adolf
Hitler...I could show he was a good man if i pick and choose only what i feel
is true about him from the only sources we have about him.. Hitler did not
drink alchool or smoke................"surely this man was the son of God" !?
Adolf Hitler was also a vegetarian, which is extremely important in my opinion.
He developed the affordable family car, the world's first system of motorways,
family care, improved worker's conditions, ... why are the plants lives less
then the animals and humans...who made that determination...?..just rember
before you answer that maybe "i feel" differently.....
By using only the written Bible, as decided upon at the Council of Nicea, you
are neglecting to use what the Creator gave to each and every one of us. the
councile of Nicea did not determine the scriptures....The gospel of Christ has
been preached everywhere all over the world by AD 70 ? The scriptures even
point that out........ If anyone would bother to studdy the gnostic gosples and
all the other text it would not be hard to see how and why only certain ones
fit together and all the others dont fit even with each other........And why
does Christ so often say, "he who has eyes to see, ..." and "he who has ears to
hear, ..."? How do you know that the Quran has to be discarded? Or the Hindu
writings? Or the Buddhist writings? Coz you either accept or reject Christ
..but Christ said I AM THE WAY and NO MAN COME TO THE FATHER EXCEPT BY ME.....
there is no other way to validate anyother thing that i or anyone might imagine
that he said except by the
source records.......
Was not Krishna "born of a virgin" in 900 B.C.? was he?........i always like to
consider the source...what is it about the source(s) that makes me even want to
put my faith in that?
Neville.
Other related posts:
