| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 04/19/2004 7:52:52 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
This thread has 183 abuse reports. It’s now locked. Maybe you can all get along better on the next thread. |
Posted on 03/10/2004 9:37:27 PM PST by malakhi
| Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams |
I was looking for a good Guinness picture, and was horrified by what I had found. ;o)
Smithwick's Ale got 'em beat by 9 years. (Smithwick is a family name, btw) And I hear that it's now available in some locations in the US (New York, Boston, Chicago, San Francisco and Los Angeles).
Uh oh....bad news for us sabbath keepers.... :-)
2nd Century (100 CE): Displacement Theology
J-e-s-u-s, say the Christians, replaced Torah with 'grace' and displaced the Jews as the chosen people with goyim Christians - displacement (or replacement) theology. Christians became the "true Israel" and "true spiritual Jews," the Church claims, logically requiring that "Jews of the flesh" had been rejected by G-o-d. Jews, then, still claiming to serve Alühim, were labelled "wolves in sheep's clothing," impersonating and deceiving (ironically) "true believers." Jews were seen as enemies of G-o-d and the church. Earliest church historians described the Torah-observant and halakhic Netzarim Jews as belonging to "the wicked demon" Note (Satan).
"By the second century [i.e., 100 CE] the controversy over the Law had ceased to play the role which it had played at the earlier period. The Church had become predominantly Gentile in membership and almost exclusively so in leadership. Justin Note refers pityingly to some few [non-Jew geirim] who, from weakness, still observed the [Torah], and as a magnanimous concession on his part admitted that they might be saved, Note but he adds that other Christians would not venture to have any intercourse whatever with such persons. - The compromise arranged in [Ma'avar] and the concessions made by [Keipha] and [Shaul], had absolutely no further validity, Note and the actions of the [Netzarim shelikhim], approved in the 1st century, would, as Jerome Note and Augustine Note later agree, have been the rankest heresy once the Church was properly established. The field of controversy has shifted from the [Torah] to the promises, in other words, to the whole question of the fulfillment of all prophecy in the person of J-e-s-u-s Christ.
"We may at first wonder why the attempt to prove the reality of the Divinity of Christ made it necessary to falsify the whole of Jewish history, as the Gentile Church undoubtedly did, but if we study their approach to the problem we see that they were led on inescapably by the method of their own argumentation from the first legitimate assumption to the last and most extravagant fabrications. Note
"... The [Christian] Fathers insisted on [J-e-s-u-s' ] relation to Jewish prophecy and the divine history of His [sic] people. But ... they were compelled to interpret the whole of the Jewish scriptures in such a way as to support their own view. Note
... "The only alternative was to claim the whole of it for themselves and to antedate the rejection of the Jews and the emergence of the Church to the beginning of revealed history, by emphasizing the position of [Avraham] as the father of many nations, of whom only one, and that themselves, was chosen... Note
"The Messianic question once settled, there was an inevitable deduction to be made by the Christian writers. If J-e-s-u-s was the Messiah promised to Israel, then they were the true Israel. It is here that we see how inevitable was the defamation of the actual history of the Jews, for if the Gentiles were the true Israel, then the Jews had all the time been sailing under false colours. That [the Gentile Christians] were the true Israel they proved by innumerable passages from the prophets, in which G-o-d speaks of His rejection of His own people and His acceptance of the Gentiles. Little by little the Church was read back into the whole of Old Testament history, and Christian history was shown to be older than Jewish history in that [Christian history] dated from the creation, and not from Sinay, or even Avraham. Continual references to Christ were found in the Old Testament, and it was 'the Christ of G-o-d' who 'appeared to Abraham, gave divine instruction to Isaac, and held converse with Moses and the later prophets.
"In order to justify this reading of history, they were compelled to challenge the Jewish conception of the Law..." Note map[ping] out a consistent history of the Church in the Old Testament by contrasting it with every lapse from the ideal, while the sum of these lapses made up the whole of the history of the Jews. This method of rewriting history led later to the conclusion that the Jews were heretics, or apostates." Note
"The [Netzarim] of the [early] second century was no more the [Christian] Church of the fourth than was the Judaism of the second century the complete Judaism of the TalmudNote. . . .
We may correctly date the actual separation [i.e., the conception of Christianity and the Church; ybd] from the end of the 1st and the beginning of the second century. Note
This deliberate and connived denial of Jewish history is called displacement (or replacement) theology, and the Church is still entirely dependent on it today, with no choice but to deny Jewish history - from Jews being the true and spiritual children of Avraham, to the history of Yisrael and Yehudah (as opposed to "Palestine"), and even the Holocaust.
Acknowledging mishpat as the judgment of the Jewish Beit Din contradicted Christian hegemony. Therefore, Christian translators of the New Testament Note arrogated Mishpat as 'judgment', Note and read khuq completely out of the picture - distributing it between 'judgment,' Note righteousness', Note 'justification', Note and 'ordinances'. Note This allowed the goyim to read out the original judgments and statutes documenting the authority of the Jewish Beit Din and read in their own miso-Judaic judgments and statutes in their place. In this way, the Church disconnected the Judaic Scriptures from their Judaic context and opened the door for Roman hegemony - displacement theology. To avoid acknowledging the Beit Din system, KJV Note renders mishpat variously as "lawful," "manner," "ceremony," "fashion," "cause" and "ordinance." Khüqim is rendered as "statutes."
Halakhah, the collection of mishpat and Khüqim, and the beit din system are described in Torah and Tan"kh in terms of shaphat mishpat - lit. "judging the judgment," of the Beit Din. Most people are somewhat aware of this with respect to the Beit Din Ha-Gadol - more popularly known as the 'Great Sanhedrin' - but fail to notice the continuity of the lower batei-din which continues the unbroken chain today.
**************************
Jesus accepted honor and worship
Jesus demonstrated His divinity in yet another way when He said, “. . . All should honor the Son just as they honor the Father” (John 5:23). Over and over again, Jesus told His disciples to believe in Him as they would believe in God. “Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me” (John 14:1).
Jesus received worship on many occasions without forbidding such acts. A leper worshipped Him (Matthew 8:2). A ruler worshipped Him with his plea to raise his daughter from the dead (Matthew 9:18). When Jesus had stilled the storm, those in the boat worshipped Him as the Son of God (Matthew 14:33).
A Canaanite woman worshipped Him (Matthew 15:25). When Jesus met the women who came to His tomb after His resurrection, they worshipped Him, as did His apostles (Matthew 28:9, 17). The demon-possessed man of the Gadarenes, “when He saw Jesus from afar . . . ran and worshiped Him” (Mark 5:6). The blind man whom Jesus healed in John 9 worshipped Him (verse 38).
The First and Second of the Ten Commandments forbid worship of anyone or anything other than God (Exodus 20:2-5). Barnabas and Paul were very disturbed when the people of Lystra tried to worship them after their healing of a crippled man (Acts 14:13-15). In Revelation 22:8-9, when John the apostle fell down to worship the angel, the angel refused to accept worship, saying, “You must not do that! . . . Worship God!” (Revelation 22:8-9, NRSV).
Yet Jesus accepted worship and did not rebuke those who chose to kneel before Him and worship. *****************************
Now was Jesus mad and/or sacrilegious when he accepted worship that could only be due to God?
Mat 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
"God with us" when referring to the birth of Jesus Christ certainly sounds like Matthew thought Jesus was "God with us".
Joh 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
Thomas called Jesus "Lord" AND "God".
I was more impress with the look on the male faces!
Also read the personal letters give a meanful expression!
"Worship" of Yahshua is NOT "Worship" of God!
Ok, among the many passages of the New Testament that presents Yahshua as being the object of "worship" is Matthew 14:33.p Mt 14:33 33 Then they that were in the ship came and worshipped him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God. Here we have a clear situation - one of many recorded in the New Testament - of Yahshua being "worshipped", yet those worshipping him did not worship him as YHVH but as the Son of YHVH, which to them, actually meant that they recognized him as Messiah or as an empowered, righteous agent of the Almighty God. Although many think the term "worship" is only applicable to "God", in fact the term relates to showing reverence even to a fellow man. The "divine worship" understanding Christian teachers apply to situations where Yahshua was shown reverence is often an intentional attempt to bias and misinform, since they know the Greek term rendered as "worship" does NOT necessarily refer to divine worship. As the Strong's Lexicon points out, the Greek term is simply "used of homage shown to men and beings of superior rank".
Quoting from the Enhanced Strong's Lexicon for the Greek term rendered "worship":
Strong's Number 4352 proskunevw [proskuneo /pros·koo·neh·o/] v. From 4314 and a probable derivative of 2965 (meaning to kiss, like a dog licking his master's hand); TDNT 6:758; TDNTA 948; GK 4686; 60 occurrences; AV translates as "worship" 60 times. to kiss the hand to (towards) one, in token of reverence. among the Orientals, esp. the Persians, to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence. in the NT by kneeling or prostration to do homage (to one) or make obeisance, whether in order to express respect or to make supplication. used of homage shown to men and beings of superior rank. to
the Jewish high priests. to God.
to Christ.
to heavenly beings.
to demons.
So, we CLEARLY see that "worship" most certainly is NOT limited to worship of God. It is irrefutable! In fact, the term can even apply to "worship" of demons!
Mat 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
"God with us" when referring to the birth of Jesus Christ certainly sounds like Matthew thought Jesus was "God with us".
Why is this such a gem? Yeshua, who will rule and sit on David's throne in God's kingdom, in the "athid lavo" (millenium if you will), this entire concept cannot be considered "God with us"?
Ah. So that's what they're called? :-)
Joh 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
Thomas called Jesus "Lord" AND "God".
My previous response covers this as well.
Hmmm YHWH tells us to keep the Sabbath/Saturday Holy. The Pope tells us to keep Sunday Holy. Who to trust? Who to believe? Decisions, decisions.......
Think my trust and faith will remain with YHWH. ;)
And so it seems that the Pope is indeed trying to push the Sunday 'issue'.
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.
