YOU ARE MY SHOFAR OF WAR AND DELIGHT ! A VISION AND WORD

I saw the Father in the Garden with Jesus and the Father had a shofar in his left hand .

My sons and daughters of Zion ( hebrews 12:23 )it is time to unite as one with me The Father for we are advancing inward to penetrate the last strongholds .

See them in the center for we have them surrounded , yet many within this circle that have resisted me and my will " Jesus " shall soon be inialted OR come into this very army I have formed as My Bride and soon there shall be a great feast and banquet for you My Bride as I betroth you to My Son in all the majesty of My kingdom .

" Behold " I place the nations ( people of the earth's mindset )before you even now and many shall come to know me through My Son \o/ !

" Behold " ! For I AM in this battle with you and our advance and victory shall be swift and complete for as I AM your Father I place this crown of victory JESUS upon you now as your fire and sword .

Now breathe in My Breath for it is this that shall ignite their hearts in fire and the promise of a new covenant and Lord of lords " Jesus Christ " in whom I am well pleased ! \o/

Isaiah 11 1And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots:

2And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD;

3And shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of the LORD: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears:

4But with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth: and he shall smite the earth: with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.

5And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins.

6The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.

7And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.

8And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice' den.

9They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea.

10And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious.

11And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea.

12And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.

13The envy also of Ephraim shall depart, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off: Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim.

14But they shall fly upon the shoulders of the Philistines toward the west; they shall spoil them of the east together: they shall lay their hand upon Edom and Moab; and the children of Ammon shall obey them.

15And the LORD shall utterly destroy the tongue of the Egyptian sea; and with his mighty wind shall he shake his hand over the river, and shall smite it in the seven streams, and make men go over dryshod.

16And there shall be an highway for the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria; like as it was to Israel in the day that he came up out of the land of Egypt.

***I did not say it, Christ said it. IF one does not follow Christ, then they are followers of men and that could also include elevating Paul and Timothy as Father Paul or Father Timothy.***

Exactly so, yet when one focuses on a single sentence and ignores the context around it, one is also in error. Such is this claim. Do you also follow the next admonishment and refuse to call anyone Teacher? That means that you must not call anyone Doctor (which means teacher) also.

IF I had only focused on one single sentence you would have a point. I reverence NO flesh man, and that would include using the word 'Teacher' in that particular context. I do not go to a Doctor to feed my 'soul', and when Christ hung on that cross at His death the miracle of the 'veil' that hid the priest was rent from top to bottom, giving each and every individual who would, direct access to the Heavenly Father through Christ. No longer was the practice required to go through a flesh man presenting a blood sacrifice to confess ones sins. The Heavenly Father reads minds and hearts and IF one repents in the name of His Son, NO flesh man has any part of the action.

Paul never presented himself as Father replacement of the Heavenly Father ever. And Christ's point was to NOT call one father in the high 'religious' point of worship of any flesh man ON EARTH. His WORDS NOT mine.

Matthew 22 demonstrates the religious community in their questions why Christ said what he said regarding how to address the religious society ON EARTH. I am not going to type the whole chapter but 22:16 kinda sets the stage for why the response was given... And they sent out unto Him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, "Master, we know that Thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest Thou for any man: for Thou regardest not the person of men.. 17 Tell us therefore, What thinkest Thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?"

HERE is the difference in a flesh man and the Son of GOD.

18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, "Why tempt ye Me, ye hypocrites?

Notice in the Chapter 22 how the pious religious leaders called Christ 'Master' (teacher), but NOT in reverence but in ridicule. And Christ was yet teaching those who follow Him how to distinguish not by what is said but by what the religious leaders do. Neither Peter or Paul bound the practice of elevating any flesh being as being called 'Holy Father'.

***Matthew 23 was given to the disciples and the multitudes directly from Christ. It is an individual message as to know what would be in religious circles even unto this day.***

It was a public rebuke against the Jewish authorities, nothing more or less. If one does not comprehend Scripture (which is normal for personal interpretation), then one cannot be a Christian.

The Jewish authorities had no authority than what they were given by the powers that be from Rome. Even those the 'religious' leaders wanted Christ dead, they had no authority to carry out the deed, which is why they had to get Roman government authority.

Christ's instruction was timeless and yet specific for all 'free' minded peoples to test the 'fruit' of the tree, and it still is in effect to this day. We each individually are going to account for what we put into the 'gray' matter of our minds or spiritually speaking intellect of the 'soul' and Christ does not need a Church 'filter' to filter His WORDS to be acceptable to the traditions of flesh men.

Christ in His WORDS sowed the 'seeds' of truth as to what would be up to His return. He gave the required warnings for those that would to NOT be deceived, Matthew 24:1-6. Paul had to teach basic Christianity, 'milk' to the majority and yet he planted within his work the 'meat' of warning of what would be right up to the 'day' of the Lord. Peter wrote even regarding time before flesh man, and even how long a day is with the Lord. Peter gets used as having been given keys, but I can't find those who claim to now possess Peter's keys as being what Peter bound from his own writings.

******I did not say it, Christ said it. IF one does not follow Christ, then they are followers of men and that could also include elevating Paul and Timothy as Father Paul or Father Timothy.***
Exactly so, yet when one focuses on a single sentence and ignores the context around it, one is also in error. Such is this claim. Do you also follow the next admonishment and refuse to call anyone Teacher? That means that you must not call anyone Doctor (which means teacher) also.

IF I had only focused on one single sentence you would have a point. I reverence NO flesh man, and that would include using the word ‘Teacher’ in that particular context.***

What is the Teacher in that context? Dictionary.net says that rabbi means: Master; lord; teacher; — a Jewish title of respect or honor for a teacher or doctor of the law.

A teacher or a doctor of the law. Any teacher, in this context. Have you called anyone teacher in your life?

***I do not go to a Doctor to feed my ‘soul’, and when Christ hung on that cross at His death the miracle of the ‘veil’ that hid the priest was rent from top to bottom, giving each and every individual who would, direct access to the Heavenly Father through Christ. ***

If that is the pure and only explanation, then why did Christ take such pains to set up the Church and to teach the Apostles so painstakingly and so thoroughly?

***No longer was the practice required to go through a flesh man presenting a blood sacrifice to confess ones sins.***

That’s why He gave Peter and the Apostles the power to forgive sins. Good point.

***The Heavenly Father reads minds and hearts and IF one repents in the name of His Son, NO flesh man has any part of the action.***

God knows all - past present and future. Yet He has given us His Church and the priests in it the power to forgive sins. Therefore your statement is wrong.

***Paul never presented himself as Father replacement of the Heavenly Father ever. ***

No, I never said that he did. I quoted Paul extensively where he called himself the spiritual father of his flock and of Timothy, though. How do you reconcile that unless Paul is setting himself up as a subordinate spiritual Father to Christ - exactly the practice that the Church was instructed to do.

***And Christ’s point was to NOT call one father in the high ‘religious’ point of worship of any flesh man ON EARTH. His WORDS NOT mine.***

Your interpretation is. And it is not the one of the Apostles and the early Church; and reading Scripture in context, it is not the intent of Christ.

***HERE is the difference in a flesh man and the Son of GOD.***

Better be careful about the labels that you state. Some of the Scriptural Sons of God are angels. Some of them refer to powerful rulers and judges e.g. David. The giants of the OT were called Sons of God as well.

***Notice in the Chapter 22 how the pious religious leaders called Christ ‘Master’ (teacher), but NOT in reverence but in ridicule. And Christ was yet teaching those who follow Him how to distinguish not by what is said but by what the religious leaders do. Neither Peter or Paul bound the practice of elevating any flesh being as being called ‘Holy Father’.***

Yet Paul and to a certain extent the other Apostles referred to themselves as fathers and teachers (as well as to others e.g. Abraham).

***It was a public rebuke against the Jewish authorities, nothing more or less. If one does not comprehend Scripture (which is normal for personal interpretation), then one cannot be a Christian.

The Jewish authorities had no authority than what they were given by the powers that be from Rome.***

That has nothing to do with this subject. It was still a public rebuke of the Jewish authorities, if one reads the entire passage, and not a single verse.

***Christ’s instruction was timeless and yet specific for all ‘free’ minded peoples to test the ‘fruit’ of the tree, and it still is in effect to this day. We each individually are going to account for what we put into the ‘gray’ matter of our minds or spiritually speaking intellect of the ‘soul’ and Christ does not need a Church ‘filter’ to filter His WORDS to be acceptable to the traditions of flesh men.***

Christ doesn’t. Men do. Remember that the entire OT was God trying to get the Jew’s attention for more than a day at a time and failing. Even the mission of the early Christians to the Jews failed and it took Paul (and Peter and Thomas) going to the Gentiles to save the fledgling Church.

***Christ in His WORDS sowed the ‘seeds’ of truth as to what would be up to His return. ***

Not as such. He created the foundation and pillar of Truth - the Church.

***He gave the required warnings for those that would to NOT be deceived, Matthew 24:1-6. ***

Deceived about what? There was nothing written down at this point. Acts outlines the gradual realization of the Apostles that Jesus wasn’t going to come back next week or next month or next year and they had better do something about figuring out just what it was that they were supposed to believe.

***Peter wrote even regarding time before flesh man, and even how long a day is with the Lord.***

Can you explain what this means please?

***Peter gets used as having been given keys, but I can’t find those who claim to now possess Peter’s keys as being what Peter bound from his own writings.***

Does that mean that if Peter didn’t write it, that it didn’t happen? How did an illiterate fisherman learn how to write anyway? He didn’t tell us. Does that mean that he really didn’t write anything and that other people wrote it for him?

***It was a public rebuke against the Jewish authorities, nothing more or less. If one does not comprehend Scripture (which is normal for personal interpretation), then one cannot be a Christian. The Jewish authorities had no authority than what they were given by the powers that be from Rome.***

That has nothing to do with this subject. It was still a public rebuke of the Jewish authorities, if one reads the entire passage, and not a single verse.

Really, were the Herodians under the Jewish authorities? Christ spoke to all represented 'religious' authorities and it was a timeless rebuke for those with ears to hear and eyes to see.

Paul says the entire OT is our script as to what would be again, our warning, to bring an end to this flesh age. I already quoted that for you. Christ at His death already went to those that returned to the Maker that sent them and offered them salvation before He revisited those alive in the flesh, to let them see and hear Him. IPeter 3:18-20

The 'mission' was to preach the Gospel, not rewrite the gospel and set up a church for the people to worship. Christ is our Savior, our kinsman Redeemer not flesh men.

None of us have any clue how many accepted Christ during the time he was 'in the tomb'

***Christ in His WORDS sowed the ‘seeds’ of truth as to what would be up to His return. ***

Not as such. He created the foundation and pillar of Truth - the Church.

But we commoners have the whole book, the WORD, to test the fruit of 'TRUTH' whether there is Christ still in any church. Or maybe that church left their first love, Christ, and founded themselves some earthly 'holy fathers'.

***He gave the required warnings for those that would to NOT be deceived, Matthew 24:1-6. ***

Oh but there was WRITTEN even at this point the who, what, when, where, and why of that tribulation I mean deception. As Christ would ask, Have you never read? According to Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21, all WORDS from Christ Himself are events/actions that Christ said would take place drawing to a close this flesh age. We are well down the road given Christ said that for the elect sake 'time' would be shortened.

***Peter wrote even regarding time before flesh man, and even how long a day is with the Lord.***

Can you explain what this means please?

Very simple to find what Peter 'bound' upon this earth he wrote it down.

IIPeter 3, the whole chapter. Peter says verse 1 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance;

2 That ye may be mindful of the *words* which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:

3 Knowing this *FIRST* that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

4 And saying, "Where is the promise of His coming?

for since the (snicker) fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation."

Peter just make Moses the lawgiver part of his writing, because 'the beginning' is what the WORD Genesis means and it is in the Book of Genesis where we are the 'days' of creation is described by Moses a long time after the event.

5 For this they willingly are ignorant of,

(And Peter could not have more accurately described what is known and taught this day than were he to be here right now describing public/religious education.)

Now this is what *THEY* are WILLINGLY ignorant of,

that by the WORD of God the heavens were of *OLD*, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

Peter is not talking about Noah's flood and there is a second witness by one of those 'holy prophets', in Jeremiah 4:22-26. I really do like verse 22 of these WORDS Jeremiah was told to pen.... For My people is foolish, they have not known ME; they are a sottish (check out what that word sottish really means) children, and they have none understanding: they are wise to do evil, but to do good they have no knowledge.

Back to Peter and his writing IIPeter 3:6 Whereby the world that *WAS*, being overflowed with water, perished:

7 BUT the heavens and the earth which are *NOW*, by the same WORD are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

BUT, beloved, be NOT ignorant of this one thing,

that one day is with the LORD as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

9 The LORD is not slack concerning His promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

10 BUT the *day* of the LORD will come as a thief in the night; in which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,

12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the *day* of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?

13 Nevertheless we, according to His promise look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.(quoting Isaiah 65:17 & 66:22)

14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of Him in peace, without spot, and blameless.

15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also, according to the wisdom given unto him, had written unto you;

16As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction.

17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own steadfastness.

BUT grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To HIM be glory both now and forever. Amen.

***Peter gets used as having been given keys, but I can’t find those who claim to now possess Peter’s keys as being what Peter bound from his own writings.*** Does that mean that if Peter didn’t write it, that it didn’t happen? How did an illiterate fisherman learn how to write anyway? He didn’t tell us. Does that mean that he really didn’t write anything and that other people wrote it for him?

Is this your church's teaching? Dissing Peter?

******It was a public rebuke against the Jewish authorities, nothing more or less. If one does not comprehend Scripture (which is normal for personal interpretation), then one cannot be a Christian. The Jewish authorities had no authority than what they were given by the powers that be from Rome.***
That has nothing to do with this subject. It was still a public rebuke of the Jewish authorities, if one reads the entire passage, and not a single verse.

Really, were the Herodians under the Jewish authorities? Christ spoke to all represented ‘religious’ authorities and it was a timeless rebuke for those with ears to hear and eyes to see.***

Religiously, they were. Jesus specifically names the scribes and the Pharisees. It is still a public rebuke of them and does not translate to Roman or Greek religious authorities.

***Christ doesn’t. Men do. Remember that the entire OT was God trying to get the Jew’s attention for more than a day at a time and failing. Even the mission of the early Christians to the Jews failed and it took Paul (and Peter and Thomas) going to the Gentiles to save the fledgling Church.

Paul says the entire OT is our script as to what would be again, our warning, to bring an end to this flesh age.***

If we act as the Jewish people did, then we would be doomed to repeat the OT style happenings over and over again. Remember that all of the Apostles believed that Jesus would come back in their lifetimes, and much of their early thought was to that end. That is one (certainly not only) of the reasons that John’s Gospel, written as late as it was, is very different than the other three. Another difference is the identification of Jesus as divine. The Synoptic Gospels and Paul do not identify Jesus as divine.

***Christ at His death already went to those that returned to the Maker that sent them and offered them salvation ***

Can you elaborate on exactly what you mean here? I sense that your understanding differs from the Church and would like to understand if there is any.

***Not as such. He created the foundation and pillar of Truth - the Church.

But we commoners have the whole book, the WORD, to test the fruit of ‘TRUTH’ whether there is Christ still in any church.***

If you do not have a Catholic Bible, you do not have the whole book. And, if you read the introductory verses of John, you will realize that the WORD is Jesus; the word is Scripture. A very big difference especially when one realizes that the words (except for the claim of Moses), are the words of men who were inspired by God and not dictated by Him.

******Peter gets used as having been given keys, but I can’t find those who claim to now possess Peter’s keys as being what Peter bound from his own writings.*** Does that mean that if Peter didn’t write it, that it didn’t happen? How did an illiterate fisherman learn how to write anyway? He didn’t tell us. Does that mean that he really didn’t write anything and that other people wrote it for him?

Is this your church’s teaching? Dissing Peter?***

Of course not. Your claim appeared to be that if Peter didn’t expressly write it, then it didn’t happen or had validity. My point is that Peter started out as an illiterate fisherman and wound up writing some of Scripture. Therefore not all of Scripture contains all of God’s instructions that He would have us know.

For example, you claimed that Jesus went to visit those who returned to the Maker that sent them. The verses that you quote do not quite support this. Where else are you getting information from?

And this business of a day? Thousands of years ago, the ‘day’ which was the earth’s turning period was closer to 25 hours than 24 - a fact proven by putting humans in a totally dark environment for weeks and letting them sleep naturally until they would normally wake up. Without exception they established a normal schedule of nearly 25 hours. If the 25 hours was normal early on in man’s development, let’s extrapolate back millions of years - the earth’s revolution about the sun which is supposedly relatively constant - and we find that a ‘day’ was millions of years. Therefore a ‘day’ has no meaning to your prior post in relation to the ‘day’ of now.

A Catholic dissing Peter? That made my day. Thanks.

******It was a public rebuke against the Jewish authorities, nothing more or less. If one does not comprehend Scripture (which is normal for personal interpretation), then one cannot be a Christian.

The Jewish authorities had no authority than what they were given by the powers that be from Rome.

*** That has nothing to do with this subject. It was still a public rebuke of the Jewish authorities, if one reads the entire passage, and not a single verse.

Really, were the Herodians under the Jewish authorities? Christ spoke to all represented ‘religious’ authorities and it was a timeless rebuke for those with ears to hear and eyes to see.

*** Religiously, they were. Jesus specifically names the scribes and the Pharisees. It is still a public rebuke of them and does not translate to Roman or Greek religious authorities.

You could not be more wrong. Matthew 23:36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.

Matthew 11:16 But whereunto shall I liken this generation? It is like unto children sitting in the markets, and calling unto their fellows, Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all things be fulfilled.

Matthew 24 is where Christ say what events would take place before He would return, then he injects a instruction, Now learn a parable of the fig tree: When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer is nigh:

That parable only fits at a particular time and establishes when this generation that Christ kept referencing, is going to be here walking here on this earth, in flesh when all these thing will be fulfilled. Is it that summer yet?

Paul says the entire OT is our script as to what would be again, our warning, to bring an end to this flesh age.

*** If we act as the Jewish people did, then we would be doomed to repeat the OT style happenings over and over again. Remember that all of the Apostles believed that Jesus would come back in their lifetimes, and much of their early thought was to that end. That is one (certainly not only) of the reasons that John’s Gospel, written as late as it was, is very different than the other three. Another difference is the identification of Jesus as divine. The Synoptic Gospels and Paul do not identify Jesus as divine.

It does not matter what any one flesh being believes, Christ said I have foretold you all things, and He personally selected his disciples and through them we have His instruction.

Paul did not say 'act' like anyone. He said These things happened unto them for ensamples (examples): and they are written for our admonition, (warning) upon whom the ends of the world (age) are come.

Paul did not say/write anything new. Solomon says the same thing in Ecclesiastes 1:9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.

10 Is there any thing whereof it may be said, 'See this is new? it hath been already of *OLD* time, which was before us.

11 There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that shall come after...

Of course in a gravity bound flesh body there is NO remembrance, but Paul said what happened to them is our script for what would be again for to WARN us. And even Peter used the same language IIPeter 3:1 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance;

2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour; (Note Peter did not address any of the writers, or himself as 'Father' Anybody, so Peter did not bind that claim, that came from traditions of men.)

***Christ at His death already went to those that returned to the Maker that sent them and offered them salvation ***

Can you elaborate on exactly what you mean here? I sense that your understanding differs from the Church and would like to understand if there is any.

I am not sure exactly what you are asking me to elaborate? We are told the soul returns to the Maker that sent it. Luke tells us about the gulf that separated the rich man from Lazarus who was in the bosom of Abraham. Now how is it possible to have Abraham in heaven having repented if he had not had opportunity to accept Christ? Which is why Peter says that Christ went to the 'spirits' held in prison until Chirst in the tomb went and offered them salvation to set them free.

Now just to be clear here I have NOT quoted specific scripture but you know where to find Luke's own description and I have already quoted Peter's words.

John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but He That came down from heaven, even the Son of man Which is in heaven.

The soul/spirit is place in the flesh at conception and when the flesh dies the soul returns to the Maker that sent that soul. Luke describes when the point in time, Emmanuel -God with us- came to dwell in flesh at the conception of Mary.

***Not as such. He created the foundation and pillar of Truth - the Church.

But we commoners have the whole book, the WORD, to test the fruit of ‘TRUTH’ whether there is Christ still in any church.

*** If you do not have a Catholic Bible, you do not have the whole book. And, if you read the introductory verses of John, you will realize that the WORD is Jesus; the word is Scripture. A very big difference especially when one realizes that the words (except for the claim of Moses), are the words of men who were inspired by God and not dictated by Him.

I think there is a Catholic Bible around here someplace, I married into a very liberal Catholic family and they talk religion just like you do. The difference I find is that these Catholic members literally believe there is a 'social gospel' and liberal politicians quote from that gospel so they always vote for liberal politicians. It will take an overt act from the Heavenly Father to convince them otherwise. And they have Catholic Bibles, and they go to church on a regular basis.

John said John 1:1 In the beginning (that means Genesis) was the WORD, and the WORD was with God, and the Word was God.

Genesis 1:1 In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth.

Jesus was there as Moses penned in Genesis 2:9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the *tree of life* also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil..

Christ is the *tree of life* but that 'life' would not be offered to any soul until Christ paid the price. Hebrews 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also Himself likewise took part of the same; that through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, that is the devil;

Verse 2 of Genesis 1 infers the reaction to the pride of the evil one but no elaboration is given here, but planted else where Jeremiah and Peter speak about that world (age) that was. NO evil had yet been recorded as having happened but there he was symbolized as a tree with the knowledge of good and evil, in the garden also as recorded by Ezekiel 28:13.

Moses penned the first prophecy, Genesis 3:15 and only half of that prophecy has take place.

Christ gave Moses all the credibility any one can possibly give. And every time Christ quoted the prophets He made them one and the same of Him saying I have foretold you all things. Which is why Peter and Paul referenced the writings of the prophets as being where the warnings of what would be again could be found.

******

Peter gets used as having been given keys, but I can’t find those who claim to now possess Peter’s keys as being what Peter bound from his own writings.

*** Does that mean that if Peter didn’t write it, that it didn’t happen? How did an illiterate fisherman learn how to write anyway? He didn’t tell us. Does that mean that he really didn’t write anything and that other people wrote it for him?

These are your words, I certainly would never call Peter an illiterate fisherman.

Is this your church’s teaching? Dissing Peter?

** Of course not. Your claim appeared to be that if Peter didn’t expressly write it, then it didn’t happen or had validity. My point is that Peter started out as an illiterate fisherman and wound up writing some of Scripture. Therefore not all of Scripture contains all of God’s instructions that He would have us know. For example, you claimed that Jesus went to visit those who returned to the Maker that sent them. The verses that you quote do not quite support this. Where else are you getting information from?

Hopefully, you got the answer from above.

Peter did not get into the particulars of how many hours there are in a day. Time as per the length of a day began at sunset to sunset was counted for a day. NOT how many hours were/are in any given day. Peter was telling us how the Heavenly Father marks time and one of our so called 24 hour days would hardly be much more than a twinkling of the eye on the Heavenly Fathers time chart. I keep hearing the claim of some church being the oldest church, 2,000 years old, but Peter says that is only a couple of days on the Heavenly Father's calendar.

A Catholic dissing Peter? That made my day. Thanks.

Calling Peter an illiterate fisherman was a bit of a shocker to my eyes. Obviously Christ did not consider him an illiterate fisherman and when I read what Peter penned there is nothing illiterate about what he said.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.