[geocentrism] Re: A tool of Satan

  • From: Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 12:06:20 -0800

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)

----- 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'. 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. 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?) 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 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 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. 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. ..... 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. ...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. ....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. 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, ...

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. 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?

Was not Krishna "born of a virgin" in 900 B.C.? And so on.

Other related posts: