The Jews, along with pagans and Gnostics, believed in the pre-existence of the souls, so verses such as Jer 1:5 reflect that belief. Paul's own teachings reflect that belief, which is why Paul was so near and dear to the Gnostics.
So are you saying that what the Heavenly Father said to Jeremiah was a LIE for the sole purpose to mislead people? Paul was elected, chosen and his free will at the time was to rid this earth as many 'Christians' as possibly could. So IF God chose him why would God pick somebody who was so totally wrong about what Jeremiah had already penned.
Now I do not know who you are speaking of when you use the word Jews, but when Jeremiah was walking this earth the House of Israel, those ten tribes, had already been sent into captivity to the Assyrian king to the north and on their way to being dispersed throughout this world. Their punishment was to forget through the generations who they ever were and it still holds to this day. Not since that civil war has the children of Jacob/Israel been a nation which is yet to take place. The House of Judah was in the process of being sent down to Babylon and they were told to go and the king and his religious class did everything in their human power to resist. This bunch even threw Jeremiah in a cistern and treated Jeremiah like a curse rejecting the WORD from God. We can read what happened to the king and his sons while it was Jeremiah that was eventually given charge over the daughters of the king.
Any church that ignores and clips out the words of Jeremiah are ignoring the voice of the Heavenly Father and even His saving Hands through His only begotten Son.
Moses pens not one word regarding the creation of the devil but yet the devil was there in the Garden and beguiled Eve with knowledge of good and evil..
What was in the garden was a serpent, the most cunning of all creatures. There is nothing to suggest it was the 'devil' or Satan. That's something people made up at a later date. The Jews did not know the 'devil.' Satan was a faithful angel of the Hebrew God, known only by his title (ha-satan), the accuser.
What kind of snake was the 'serpent'? Another place says that the title/role of the serpent is another name for the devil. What kind of mythology are you making this mythical snake that could beguile ... means 'holy seduce' Eve by whispering sweet nothings into her ear? The devil was created perfect and he was so filled with himself that he decided he would be god. Ezekiel and Isaiah describe that rebellion. Is there another god beside the Hebrew God?
There is a whole lot of deception made up about what that 'original' sin was, eating apples and ending up in a fig grove sewing together *FIG* leaves to cover up nakedness.... Just hmmmmmm to much for some churches to deal with cover their eyes and plug their ears.... Yet Christ cursed that *FIG* tree and right in the middled of telling the signs of His return tellllllllls us even to this day "Learn ye the parable of the *FIG* tree. So I will agree with you about the church making up a whole lot of pleasing to the ear junk to cover over what really took place.... But hey Christ did say these things need be and it is up to the Heavenly Father to tear off the blinders to whomever He elects.
The devil, as the personification of all evil, is a product of the post-Babylonian Jewish belief influenced by Persian dualism. It wasn't part of Judaic belief before 400 BC, and then only among some sects.
HUH NO the devil was well described by Moses through out the Torah, and even in the Book of Job, and then oh never mind toooo deep for some minds.
I would not call II Peter a fraud, as that to me would be like saying the Heavenly Father, Christ as well as allllll those holy prophets Peter refers to are frauds as well. 2 Peter was written in the 2nd century, dear friend. It wasn't written by Peter.
You do have the freeeeee willl to discount, ignore, and clip out anything. Not my job to change your mind.
Based upon my study a generation has not passed since Christ left this earth
Your study is ignoring that He is also quoted as saying that those who were actually living when He spoke will be alive when He returns. The "never-ending" generation theory was a necessary rationalization when it became obvious that all those who lived when Jesus spoke were dead. Thus, 2 Peter was a badly needed 'scriptural' evidence of this theory.
Yes and Christ was NOT speaking of the flesh body, as was the purpose of the transfiguration (among other things) and even Paul goes into as well as others about the two different bodies. Christ said fear not them which kill the body, (flesh) but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear Him Which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell. What kind of 'fire' do you suppose it will take to destroy a 'soul'? Once again Peter was there and in the asking Christ what would be the sign of his return.... Christ listed events some of which have NOT happened yet that would 'mark' His return. So all Peter did was elaborate upon events - segments of time- as to what had been what was and what would be. We are still in the world (age) Peter calls NOW and will be until the flesh is no longer the vessel that houses the soul.
Paul says at the last trump, there are seven, that alllll flesh will be changed, good bad and the ugly. AS even from the time of Moses there was the knowledge that flesh could not see God thus the people were in fear of dying.
Strange that Christ said that Peter would be the rock upon which the Church would be build and yet even the few words that Peter penned get such a slight of hand
By all accounts, Peter never wrote anything that has been attributed to his name.
You do realize this statement comes across as a proclamation from the Heavenly Father. And at the pace you are going, there is not going to be much of the Bible... that anybody can pay attention to. Which most have been given the free will to make claims to protect their own system and call if of God. Nothing new there.
Even that rich man could see Lazarus in Abraham's bosom across that proverbial gulf and none of them were in flesh bodies.
There was no proverbial golf. They were both in Sheol, except that Lazarus was comforted and the rich man wasn't. The fact that Luke speaks of both being in Sheol tells me that early Christians (or at least those being instructed by Paul) did not believe any souls were in heaven, or that they had any concept of Christian heaven.
Who comforted Lazarus? Quite an omission you have there. There was a separation wherein the 'rich man' could not cross to get the comfort Lazarus was offered and none of them were in a flesh body but yet it could be seen.
The soul has a body, Christ Himself demonstrated that in His visible to that group could go through a wall...
You seem to suggest that Christ resurrected spiritually and not bodily. The Bible, which you believe in, says that God made man out of dirt and then breathed his breath into him and he became human. Humanity, by biblical definition, is a union of body and soul. What you profess is Gnostic. Getting "instructions" from the Word, as you say, tends to do that to many. That's why Christ established a Church, lest everyone drift away according to his own understanding.
Was not the purpose of the Mount of Transfiguration to demonstrate that body in 'spirit' loooooks just like the flesh body yet none were literally in flesh bodies. God buried Moses himself so the devil would not have access to his flesh body, and now where did Elijah get buried??? The flesh body of Christ was transfigured and NO remains were left so some would not use said flesh remains to make the claim that Christ did not raise up that Temple. It would go against the laws of nature, say gravity, for Christ in the flesh body to have risen.
Flesh will die, and nobody is going to come back looking for their dead bones. The soul-spirit body does not earn their reward life eternal or complete and total removal, until that future event. Nobody will go to the proverbial fire of 'hell' without full understanding from the beginning to the end.
No. I have no clue what the Heavenly Father said to Jeremiah, or even if God said anything to Jeremiah. Mohammad claims that Allah dictated the whole book of the Koran to him, word-by-word. Does that mean it really happened? Sure, if you already believe it did! The point is: there is nothing intrinsically true about the Bible unless you already believe it!
So IF God chose him why would God pick somebody who was so totally wrong about what Jeremiah had already penned
If I had to provide some credibility to my sermons I would certainly hope to convince people that God chose me. St. Paul's function was to save the Church from certain annihilation in Israel.
The Church did not go to the Gentiles because Christ taught it should (in fact he taught to the contrary), but out of desperation (Acts 13:46). And, while I am sure others tried, St. Paul was the man who was able to convince pagan Greeks to accept a Jewish sect in hopes of having eternal life. So, if God did choose St. Paul, it was not in order to prove Jeremiah spoke with God, but for Paul to show pagans that Jesus died for our sins.
Any church that ignores and clips out the words of Jeremiah are ignoring the voice of the Heavenly Father and even His saving Hands through His only begotten Son.
The Church would exist with or without Jeremiah, Samuel and Jonah to name just a few. The Church is built on what Jesus said and did, what's in the Gospels. The rest of the Bible either conforms to the Gospels or doesn't. Without the Gospels there is no Christianity. I think we can't say the same about Jeremiah.
And the Gospels are at least narratives of eyewitness accounts, not some prophet having visions, visual and auditory hallucinations or taking dictations from God. Big difference.
Moses pens not one word regarding the creation of the devil but yet the devil was there in the Garden and beguiled Eve with knowledge of good and evil..
You keep repeating this and I am telling you that there is no mention of any "devil" in the OT. The way you keep stressing "beguiled" I have a feleing you are one of those people who believes that Cain was the "product" of the serpent and Eve, an offspring of a sexual union between the serpent and Eve. Do you believe that?
What kind of snake was the 'serpent'?
Did I say it was a "snake?"
Another place says that the title/role of the serpent is another name for the devil.
In the Old Testament? Numbers 21:6 says "The LORD sent fiery serpents among the people and they bit the people, so that many people of Israel died." Fiery serpents? Do you know of any "fiery snakes?" And if your theory is correct then God was sending demons to kill people.
The only place I can find where serpent and devil are used synonymously is in Revelation (12:9, 20:2). But Revelation hardly matches anything in the Gospels. I have no clue what that book is doing in the New Testament except to scare people into believeing.
What kind of mythology are you making this mythical snake that could beguile ... means 'holy seduce' Eve by whispering sweet nothings into her ear?
I guess the same mythology of the Old Testament that would have us believe in talking donkeys (Num 22:30), which is also believed by the author of 2 Peter (2:16) who says "But he was rebuked for his wrongdoing by a donkey—a beast without speech—who spoke with a man's voice and restrained the prophet's madness." So, if we have a talking ass, why not a beguiling serpent? And what about talking trees, as in Judges 9:8-11 picking their "leader?"
After all, does not the Bible say that men can live in a belly of a fish for three days and live to tell about it, or that bats are birds? What kind of mythology is it to say that the earth sits on four pillars and earthquakes happen when God shakes the pillars? I think it's best we leave the fairytale stuff out of this (for now) and concentrate on the good stuff.
There is a whole lot of deception made up about what that 'original' sin was
Why in quotation marks?
ending up in a fig grove sewing together *FIG* leaves to cover up nakedness.... Just hmmmmmm to much for some churches to deal with cover their eyes and plug their ears...
It's in Genesis 3:7 "Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings."
So I will agree with you about the church making up a whole lot of pleasing to the ear junk to cover over what really took place....
But you don't, I suppose?
But hey Christ did say these things need be and it is up to the Heavenly Father to tear off the blinders to whomever He elects.
Actually, the NT says the Father gave the Son all the power on earth to judge so I would imagine it would be Christ tearing off the blinders, except you seem to emphasize the "Heavenly Father" as some "higher" authority.
Christ came to free us form the bondage of death by dying in exchange for us. He gave each and every one of us a second chance. God in His mercy gave everyone a ticket to heaven. That some won't use it is not God's choosing.
the devil was well described by Moses through out the Torah, and even in the Book of Job, and then oh never mind toooo deep for some minds.
Try me.
Based upon my study a generation has not passed since Christ left this earth
Mark 9:1 says "Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power."
This couldn't be clearer: some of those who were listening to Jesus wold not even die before He returned. But, given the reality on the ground, the "undying generation" theory was an absolute must and that's why 2 Peter is in the canon!
Christ said fear not them which kill the body, (flesh) but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear Him Which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell
Well, we will have to decide if the soul is eternal or not. The OT says it isn't ("the soul that sinneth shall die"), but then you have souls that sinned in Sheol, obviously not dead! And the purpose for the lake of fire was to roast the devil and his angels (who have no bodies), and resurrected reprobates who didn't use their ticket for all eternity, so where does this destruction of bodes and souls fit in?
And at the pace you are going, there is not going to be much of the Bible... that anybody can pay attention to. Which most have been given the free will to make claims to protect their own system and call if of God. Nothing new there.
As I said earlier, everyone makes the Bible what they wish it to be. It goes both ways. That's why it's so popular. Every sect and cult can find itself in it.
Was not the purpose of the Mount of Transfiguration to demonstrate that body in 'spirit' loooooks just like the flesh body yet none were literally in flesh bodies.
It was a transfiguration of the existing body on Mt Tabor. Not a separate body. God created man body and soul. That is our natural state.