[geocentrism] Re: Saul of Tarsus.. Nick & Dan
- From: j a <ja_777_aj@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 14:32:45 -0700 (PDT)
I've never read a more foolish responce. It simply drips with that "holier than
thou" attitude I've already acused you of and is your particular downfall as I
see it. You are too correct and knowlegable to take simple instruction, even
from the bible.
The point is quite simple - is scripture to be read very plainly or do you need
special revelation to understand scripture? If you had bothered to read the
verses quoted and actually thought about them for yourself, you would see that
they are the cornerstones of what Allen is saying to you. His basis for how to
read the bible comes from the bible itself in the quoted scriptures mentioned.
Under what authority do you question the plain meaning of those verses? If you
reject what scripture says, how do you keep biblical authority for anything you
believe? Weather someone else has written on the subject is meaningless. What
do you say? Is the bible from God or not? if it plainly says something, should
you "go by that" or is there more to know? If something written is dificult to
understand or seems to contradict something else, where are you going to look
to gain understanding? The bible seems a likely answer. Or are you going to
depend on some special revelation outside of scripture?
By the way, I guess I've decided to quit worrying about staying on the
geocentric topic since that never seems to be discussed anymore. Perhaps we
should rename this "I know the true way - no, I do - your wrong - no you are" @
freelists.
JA
"Niemann, Nicholas K." <NNiemann@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Allen,
Thank you for the followup, but you've missed the point. I had asked the
following:
"You mention that Scripture defines itself, correlates its meaning, can be
easily understood without reading into the text and requires nothing more than
acceptance of plain text...etc. My question is, where in Scripture does
Scripture give you these absolutes on how it is to be read. Or have you
developed something else outside of Scripture to be able to make such
statements (and if so, on what authority)."
Of course "ALL Scripture is...profitable", etc. But where does it say all the
stuff you said on how it is to be read. It doesn't. The point is you are
drawing up your own guidelines (and in the process violating the very 1 Corr
provision you irrelevantly cited as your support). You are the one without
"authority" to do so.
Please read carefully before you go about preaching your "opinions" as Truth.
If you actually want an answer to the Catholic Church's authority, then go read
it in such Catholic texts as Denzinger, which I cited earlier, rather than
asking me to reproduce via emails the equivalent of several hundred pages of
well established text. Instead, (to again use your cite) you guys like to go
around "puffed up" with what you've "written".
Regards,
Nick.
---------------------------------
From: Allen Daves [mailto:allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 11:23 PM
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Saul of Tarsus.. Nick & Dan
This will have little meaning to others. However, as you accept Paul I would
point out the following to you and argue your objection based on the following
scripture. The short answer to any objection about absolutes in scripture
is.........well scripture!
2 timothy 2:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable
for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in
righteousness...........
1Chorinthians 1:6. Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively
transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that you may learn in us not
to think beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up on behalf of
one against the other. 7. For who makes you differ from another? And what do
you have that you did not receive? Now if you did indeed receive it, why do you
glory as if you had not received it?
If you do not apply these principles and methodolgy even to your own question
about absolutes and my point,you will see that..........
1.If there is no absolute then you have no case for ANYTHING! We could not
argue for or aginst any doctrine, POPE, INFALIBILITY or even salvation or
anything else. There would be no point to any debate or desscussion on or with
scripture about anything. Thus, your or any objecjection to my position would
be meaningless and moot, because we would just be trading one interpritaion for
the other.
2.If there is context or reference in scripture to other scripture how could it
be irrelivant or contrary to this example and positon. You would then find
yourself arguing scripture not me and if it cannot be understood then how can
you object and or hold any position for or agginst, to include the authority of
a Pope or anyone else...
3.everyone has a God given Choice on in WHOM to put their faith in....Jesus
stated the words I speak unto you they are life..........I base my authority on
this postion on scripture. What will you base yours on. If not on scripture
then the whole disscussion and any objection you could make is meaningless! You
put your trust in man who tells you somthing... I put mine in the scriptures
that will tell me somthing too...only if I listen and belive in ALL of them,
not selectivly ignore Plain staments Plain corelations plain terminology...the
Jews did not like jesus not becuse he taught contrary to the law...He just
taught contrary to their interpritaions of the L&P.. and He stated as much.
Which is the same reason that what I am speaking is not belived either.
4. In this particular case one must accept assumtions and assertions external
of scripture to demonstrate any other postion.. and WHERE in scripture could
you or anyone even if you had that authority get that authority?
5. Finaly what then would be the basis for your objection to Neville or Carl's
position..they are just interpreting it the way they see it..."Sounds groovy to
me".....who am I or you to say anything against their postions. If the Church
at Rome has THE authority where did they get it scripture.....History??? My
Church history book, the Bible dosn't mention that and if there is no
absolutes from scripture.......how could you begin to argue otherwise.
I will accept these questions as retorical so that we do not engage in a
endless debate as you put it. However, I am making this point, it applies to
everyone else on the other side of all those other issues as much if not more
so. Even without the Pual Quotes!.......so everyone can feel free to ignore
this or take a shot!
"Niemann, Nicholas K." <NNiemann@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Allen,
Please continue the debate with Dan. My only suggestion was to read the
reference I mentioned. I don't want to get into an endless slinging of Bible
verses, especially when it's been so well covered elsewhere. I've read the
non-Catholic position posited by non-Catholics. Have you read the Catholic
position posited by Catholics. If not, I suggest you balance your reading
before reaching a conclusion, if you truly are interested in the Truth.
I will comment though on your assumption about Scripture. You mention that
Scripture defines itself, correlates its meaning, can be easily understood
without reading into the text and requires nothing more than acceptance of
plain text...etc.
My question is, where in Scripture does Scripture give you these absolutes on
how it is to be read. Or have you developed something else outside of
Scripture to be able to make such statements (and if so, on what authority).
Also, the fact that you need to go to such great lengths to prove your rock
point seems to be self-contradictory as to the validity of your methodology.
Regards,
Nick.
---------------------------------
From: Allen Daves [mailto:allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, July 20, 2005 5:39 PM
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Saul of Tarsus.. Nick & Dan
Nick, I accept your response to mine and Dan?s invitation for this discussion.
However, I would like to use this opportunity to address the REAL issue "How
and how not to address/use scripture"??.I am not trying to draw you out here
but Dan already accepts the Premises that Peter was not the rock then this
example will be the most strait forward for me to make to him.
Dan, Please hear me out.....Your premise that Peter was not the rock is
correct! ..However, the method of argument in your posting for reaching that
conclusion is based on similar methodology that is used to maintain that Peter
was the rock?..Namely it is a philosophical argument or
methodology(Interpretative of the scriptures that you use to make the
argument)?.This is the same methodology used in all the previous
debates??Scripture defines itself! It will correlates its meaning with itself!
It can be easily understood without reading into the text or its meaning, it
requires nothing more than acceptance of plain text external of anyone?s
interpretation or Ideas or Reasoning! ..Let me demonstrate this with the "Peter
and the Rock" issue. First note the context of OT & NT STATMENTS...in all cases
it is SALVATION,ROCK, STONE, AND THE WORK OF GOD.
Deuteronomy32: 3. For I proclaim the name of the Lord: ascribe greatness to our
God. 4. He is the Rock, His work is perfect; for all His ways are justice, a
God of truth and without injustice; righteous and upright is He???? 15. "But
Jeshurun grew fat and kicked; you grew fat, you grew thick, you are covered
with fat; then he forsook God who made him, and scornfully esteemed the Rock of
his salvation???. 18. Of the Rock who begot you, you are unmindful, and have
forgotten the God who fathered you???
2Samuel 22: 47. "The Lord lives! Blessed be my Rock! Let God be exalted, the
Rock of my salvation!
2 Samuel 23:3. The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spoke to me: `He who
rules over men must be just,
Psalms 62:7. In God is my salvation and my glory; The rock of my strength, And
my refuge, is in God.
Psalms 89:26. He shall cry to Me, `You are my Father, My God, and the rock of
my salvation.'
Psalms 94:22. But the Lord has been my defense, And my God the rock of my
refuge.
Psalms 95: 1. Oh come, let us sing to the Lord! Let us shout joyfully to the
Rock of our salvation.
Acts 12:12. "Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name
under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.''
Isaiah 17:10. Because you have forgotten the God of your salvation, and have
not been mindful of the Rock of your stronghold, therefore you will plant
pleasant plants and set out foreign seedlings;
Isaiah 8:14. He will be as a sanctuary, but a stone of stumbling and a rock of
offense to both the houses of Israel, as a trap and a snare to the inhabitants
of Jerusalem. 15. And many among them shall stumble; they shall fall and be
broken, be snared and taken.''
Palms 118:21. I will praise You, For You have answered me, And have become my
salvation. 22. The stone which the builders rejected Has become the chief
cornerstone. 23.This was the Lord's doing; It is marvelous in our eyes.
Mathew 21:42. Jesus said to them, "Did you never read in the Scriptures: `The
stone which the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone. This was
the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes'? 43. "Therefore I say to
you, the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bearing
the fruits of it.
Matthew 7:21. ???.24. "Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does
them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock: ?. 28.
And so it was, when Jesus had ended these sayings, that the people were
astonished at His teaching,
1Peter 2:4. Coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men, but
chosen by God and precious, 5. you also, as living stones, are being built up a
spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable
to God through Jesus Christ. 6. Therefore it is also contained in the
Scripture, "Behold, I lay in Zion a chief cornerstone, elect, precious, and he
who believes on Him will by no means be put to shame.'' 7. Therefore, to you
who believe, He is precious; but to those who are disobedient, "The stone which
the builders rejected has become the chief cornerstone,'' 8. and "A stone of
stumbling and a rock of offense.'' They stumble, being disobedient to the w
ord, to which they also were appointed. 9. But you are a chosen generation, a
royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim
the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light;
Acts 4:8. Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, "Rulers of the
people and elders of Israel: 9. "If we this day are judged for a good deed done
to the helpless man, by what means he has been made well, 10. "let it be known
to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ
of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man
stands here before you whole. 11. "THIS IS THE STONE which was rejected by you
builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.' 12. "Nor is there salvation
in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which
we must be saved.''
1 Corinthians 10:4. and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of
that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ.
The correlation?s between all these verse is SALVATION and ROCK & STONE.
??? People who think Jesus is calling Peter the rock miss the whole context of
all of scripture??..The name Peter means piece of stone but the whole context
of scripture is the Rock that God is supplying Jesus remarks are THOU
(Peter)and THIS Stone or Rock(JESUS).. this is why Jesus makes these remarks
with Peter.
Mathew 16:18. "And I also say to you that YOU are Peter, and on THIS rock I
will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. 19.
"And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind
on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be
loosed in heaven.''
This argument is not philosophical or interpritive. I show from the OT and NT
Who is THE rock and Stone are. The context of all of these discussions is
Salvation which comes from the Rock or stone ...spoken of by the L&P as
God/Jesus. Peter is given the keys to the Kingdom that is built on THE ROCK
that is GOD and JESUS (in whom is the ONLY salvation). Again scripture provides
context and correlation?s with itself that need no interpretation just
acceptance of those correlation?s, plain text and context. In fact in order to
assert that Peter is the rock one must ignore all the correlation?s, context
and plain blunt scripture? This is why we are told not to think beyond what is
written!
Dan <danchap9@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Was Peter the Rock???
THE TRUE CHURCH.
Mathew chapter 16 verses 13 to 18:
?When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples,
saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? And they said, Some say that
thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the
prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter
answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus
answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and
blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I
say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my
church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.?
Notice first of all Jesus asks his disciples whom do men say that I the Son of
man am? Because of various prophecies in the Old Testament they came to the
conclusion that Jesus was the fulfilment of one of these. In verse 15 he makes
it personal to his disciples and you can make it personal to yourselves right
now. But whom say ye that I am? He has already told them who he is by saying I
Am which is the name that God gave to Moses in reply to who shall I say sent me
when Moses returned from Mount Sinai.
Exodus 3:13 to15:
?And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and
shall say unto them, The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you; and they
shall say to me, What is his name? What shall I say unto them And God said unto
Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of
Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt
thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of
Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is
my name forever, and this is my memorial unto all generations.?
So this was God in the flesh standing before them. Simon Peter in verse 16
Simon in Hebrew means he who harkens or listens. And Peter means rock as in a
solid stone. But later on in the verse Jesus addresses Simon Peter as Simon
Barjona. Very interesting as we know names all have hidden meanings in Hebrew.
Here Simon means he who harkens or listens and Barjona means son of Jona. Jona
means dove. The dove is symbolic of the Holy Spirit. So Jesus is saying here
blessed are you who listen to the Holy Spirit, for flesh and blood has not
revealed it to you but my father in heaven. Now flesh and blood or man has not
revealed it to you means indoctrination of men you s ee man can teach this day
and night in the flesh and get nowhere but when God himself through the Holy
Spirit speaks directly into the innermost being of a person that?s Revelation.
John 16verse 13:
? Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all
truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that
shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.?
That?s what we all need because without that the bible is absolutely
meaningless to the carnal mind. Verse 18 is the key to the true foundation that
the Holy Spirit would like to lay in your inner most being right now if you
have the ears to hear. The rock is the revelation that not man but my father in
heaven has shown you. Peter means a stone or solid rock. But this is not
speaking of a solid foundation. Anything built in this physical realm is only
temporal. This is speaking of a spiritual foundation. The Lord Jesus Christ.
I Corinthians chapter 3 verses 10 to 13:
?According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise master
builder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let
every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. For other foundation can no man
lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.?
You cannot build a foundation on faith or prosperity or revival or healing etc.
Who heals who prospers who revives who gives faith?
Hebrews chapter 12 verse 2:
?Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that
was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at
the right hand of the throne of God.?
And on that revelation I will build my church. The word church means to ?call
out or to call forth.? It is not a building made with hands. It?s a people
called out and set apart by God. Now the doctrines of men will take this solid
rock and put a solid building made with the hands of man on it. The building is
not the church but the building is where the church meets. Jesus didn't talk
about it as a place to go to, but a way of living in relationship to him and to
other followers of his. Asking us where we go to church is like asking us where
we go to be us. How do we answer that? We are us and where we go there we are.
'Church' is that kind of word. It doesn't identify a location or an institution
or a denomination. It describes a people and how they relate to each other.
Luke chapter 17 verse 20 and 21:
?And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should
come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with
observation: Neither shall they say, Lo here! Or, lo there! For, behold, the
kingdom of God is within you.?
If we lose sight of that, our understanding of the true church a called out
people will be distorted. So with this simple understanding lets take a closer
look at verse 18. Blessed are you who listens to the spirit of God for flesh
and blood has not revealed this to you but my father in heaven and on that
revelation I will call out my people. And the gates of hell will not come
against it (them).
1 Corinthians chapter 3 verse 10 to 11:
?According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a Wise master
builder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let
every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. For other foundation can no man
lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.?
Jesus Christ is the spiritual foundation. Before we build a house in the
natural we have to make sure that the foundation is deep and strong enough to
support it. So it is in the spiritual.
Galatians chapter 3 verse 28:
?There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is
neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.?
Now this is a very interesting verse. If you are a Jew reading this you have to
leave your Jewish religion and move into Christ. If you are a gentile reading
this you have to leave your Gentile religion and move into Christ. Think about
how many Gentile religions there are and how many false Christ?s there are. Not
easy if you are deceived by one of them. If you think that was a bit harsh
what about ?neither male nor female.? Surely that counts us all out? Consider
this, the bible talks about us being Sons of God and new creatures.& amp; lt;
/P>
2 Corinthians chapter 5 verse 17:
?Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed
away; behold, all things are become new.?
So the new creature in Christ is not a Jew or a gentile. They are neither male
nor female but we are all one in Christ.
The bible also says that we are God?s body on the earth.
There is a counterfeit church out there and in the book of Revelation she is
called a prostitute or Harlot.
Revelation chapter 17 verses 3 to 6:
?So he carried me away in the spirit into the wilderness: and I saw a woman sit
upon a scarlet coloured beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads
and ten horns. And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and
decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her
hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: And upon her
forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS
AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of
the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus: and when I saw her, I
wondered with great admiration.?
The Beast is the coming One World Government and the Woman is the counterfeit
church. Think about it a prostitute sleeps around committing adultery and takes
all your money then leaves you for dead. A true bride keeps herself pure and
clean for her husband.
2 Corinthians chapter 6 verses 17 to 17:
?Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and
touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto
you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.?
Dan.
"Niemann, Nicholas K." <NNiemann@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Allen,
I've seen what good (or lack thereof) the Bible verse slinging does on this
forum. If you want a Biblical basis for Peter as the rock, read Denzinger.
I'm not going to write a book for you when it's already been done. Denzinger
is a compilation that has already been done. Read it, rather than just
responding that "there is none".
Regards,
Nick.
---------------------------------
From: Allen Daves [mailto:allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2005 4:22 PM
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Saul of Tarsus.. Nick
I have the history and Scripture.....My point was is that there is none........
The whole basses for such is on the premise on peter being the rock that the
church was built on.
---------------------------------
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page This message and any
attachments are confidential, may contain privileged information, and are
intended solely for the recipient named above. If you are not the intended
recipient, or a person responsible for delivery to the named recipient, you are
notified that any review, distribution, dissemination or copying is prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, you should notify the sender by
return email and delete the message from your computer system.
This message and any attachments are confidential, may contain privileged
information, and are intended solely for the recipient named above. If you are
not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivery to the named
recipient, you are notified that any review, distribution, dissemination or
copying is prohibited. If you have received this message in error, you should
notify the sender by return email and delete the message from your computer
system.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Other related posts:
