Crossing the Jordan into the Inner Meaning [New Church, Open]

Spirit and Life Bible Study ^ | Wed Nov 28, 2012 | Rev Dr Johnathon Rose

[DaveMSmith]

Everything in the Old Testament history leads up to the crossing of the Jordan, and yet the way the story is told in Joshua 3 and 4 has major inconsistencies and problems. Is there another way to read it?

Can the Bible be taken literally?

[Natural Law]

"Here is some good information"

What is ignored by those who reject the authenticity of the Septuagint is that in the six centuries leading up to the Birth of Jesus there were far more Jews living outside of Judea than were living in it and that the vast majority of Jews did not speak Hebrew. The largest concentration of Jews in the world was in Alexandria and the predominant language spoken by Jews was Greek. By the 3rd century BC, that the large Greek-speaking Jewish populations in Egypt and the Eastern Mediterranean, as many as ten generations removed from Israel, needed to have their Scriptures translated into the vernacular language. Hebrew had become an archaic language limited to the scholars. In most of the synagogue services, a extemporaneous Greek translations were often given as the Hebrew Scriptures were read. Because of the inconsistencies a reliable Greek translation of the Scriptures was needed to facilitate orthodoxy and an understanding of Scripture in the synagogues. The Septuagint served this purpose. Like the Hebrew versions of the Mishnah and Gamarah it was transcribed from the written and oral traditions. Books were not written for inclusion.

One of the least discussed facts on this forum is the existence of the Aramaic Gamarah. Written in Babylon in the 5th Century BC it would have been the second most widely used version in the Galilee and the one most likely known to the illiterate or semi-literate disciples and Apostles.

Also ignored is that there was no single Jewish Canon. That did not happen until the second century AD and in response to Christianity.

Peace be with you.

[DaveMSmith]

Ah yes, the list. Addressed over and over in discussions for years. Now, you say it's 'heresies condemned by the Church' ... what happened to 'cultic [sic] nature'? Do you know the difference or are you just throwing derogatory language out there to start something? And which 'the Church' are you referring to? You don't mention your Church affiliation on your profile page. You'll need to provide a link to some leader 'condemning' my faith.

On vicarious atonement:
I believe Luke 24:47 and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
I don't believe in taking from Christ' merit for my own. I'm responsible for self-examination and repentance and asking the Lord's help to break the habit. I believe that we inherit evil from our parents and ancestors plus what we take on ourselves. To think God holding a grudge against the human race because of Adam and Eve that could only be satisfied by sacrificing His son is silly. If Jesus' blood washed away all sin, why is there so much sin in the world?

On the Trinity:
I believe in the Trinity of person within the ONE Lord God Jesus Christ, who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Deity of Holy Spirit:
False - the Holy Spirit (breath) is not a separate person but that which Proceeds from the Lord... His action.... Love and Wisdom.

All religions lead to the Lord:
The death of the material body does not mean the end to learning about the Lord or His true nature. Christianity is still punishable by death in some cultures... would a just God condemn these folks?

Acts and Epistles:
This was discussed on the last thread. These Bible Studies include these books.

Physical Resurrection:
Jesus Christ is the only one capable of that. After death of the body, our substantial spirit awakes in the world of spirits.

[daniel1212]

The argument is that of an argument from silence, that if Jesus did not say something was wrong then it is sanctioned (which is the same red letter hermeneutic homosexuals use in arguing the since Jesus did not mention homosexuality, and condemn loving monogamous ones, then this is sanctioned).

However, the fallacious nature of this has been made evident (see replies), as to be consistent, RCs must not only accept books found in the LXX which are not in the RC canon, but applied consistently in principle, even more books such as Enoch* (Jude. 1:14,15; Enoch 1:9)

See update comments here. http://peacebyjesus.tripod.com/ancients_on_scripture.html#LXX

*Some in the LDS believed that the original Book of Enoch was an inspired book, and it is similar to the Book of Moses. Yet Enoch also tells of over 400 foot height angelic offspring, and of angels (stars) procreating with oxen to produce elephants, camels and donkeys. (7:12-15; 86:1-5.) But Smith himself was a lover of fantasy, and produced his own.

[Godzilla]

On the Trinity: I believe in the Trinity of person within the ONE Lord God Jesus Christ, who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Modalism being taught - not trinity.

Deity of Holy Spirit: False - the Holy Spirit (breath) is not a separate person but that which Proceeds from the Lord... His action.... Love and Wisdom.

Oh course contrary to what the scripture indicates.

All religions lead to the Lord: The death of the material body does not mean the end to learning about the Lord or His true nature. Christianity is still punishable by death in some cultures... would a just God condemn these folks?

Universalsim

Acts and Epistles: This was discussed on the last thread. These Bible Studies include these books.

And while "included" in these so called bible studies - they are rejected by the Borg as scripture.

Physical Resurrection: Jesus Christ is the only one capable of that. After death of the body, our substantial spirit awakes in the world of spirits.

The heresy of this is clear - particularly since they reject Acts and the Epistles as scripture, they ignore the teaching of the Apostles on our bodily resurrection. They are still blind to it from Revelation as well.

Ah yes, the list. Addressed over and over in discussions for years. Now, you say it's 'heresies condemned by the Church' ... what happened to 'cultic [sic] nature'? Do you know the difference or are you just throwing derogatory language out there to start something? And which 'the Church' are you referring to? You don't mention your Church affiliation on your profile page. You'll need to provide a link to some leader 'condemning' my faith.

It is apparent from the heresies listed above you are guilty of being part of a cult.

[DaveMSmith]

You seem very good at attaching labels.

I know of a local non-denominational cult - the leader puts on quite a show for the 'good-looking' people in town. He tears apart families for his own ends - by tearing down what others believe.

Our process of salvation is very similar to that of Catholics. Are they a cult, too?

[BlueDragon]

Do you think that offering some intro search terms will assist in some here dropping assorted nonsensical claims?

Melito of Sardis. Origin. Jerome whom they have sainted. Flavius Josephus. The Jews of Jerusalem vs. Jews of Egypt. Which of those last two would most likely have accurate & most valid opinion concerning what was holy writ (at the time of Christ) and what was not? A slight question that is not!

The Jews in Egypt (approx 3rd century BC) had lost their ability to understand Hebrew which gave rise to the Greek translation, as to need & desire for it. Considering how there are differing Septuagints (differing in what was included) is a another strong hint. Claiming to follow it now raises the question -- which one? there is evidence of itself having evolved prior to Jerome. Jerome translated the books in dispute under protest, adding certain warnings concerning them... his translation did not settle or define the canon as some here claim. To claim that conflates the request for translation itself into being the act of definition --- but throws out the translator's warnings at the same time. This too ignores later council discussions (as to canon) in the wider world of Catholicism, and later close details of proceedings of Trent regarding the issue. There was hesitancy even then.. the committee vote was less than overwhelming.

Circling the target (target=rhetorical hobby horses)

Viva la REFORM-olution!

Following Maccabees now, simply has to be a mistake. They did not throw off their oppressors in any lasting fashion, but brought assured destruction down upon their heirs instead. History proves that well enough. Can not it be seen that they miss-used the word of God (even adding to it, their own self promotional legend) figuratively declaring they could run out in front of it and force the issue? God did not fight for them then, fully as they desired for Him to do. Years later, Jerusalem destroyed, the temple there, utterly.

One simply must follow that pillar of fire, not get ahead, being impatient, helping God out.

Ishmael. Where did he come from but an early effort to "help God fulfill" His own promise?

[stfassisi]

What is ignored by those who reject the authenticity of the Septuagint is that in the six centuries leading up to the Birth of Jesus there were far more Jews living outside of Judea than were living in it and that the vast majority of Jews did not speak Hebrew. The largest concentration of Jews in the world was in Alexandria and the predominant language spoken by Jews was Greek. By the 3rd century BC, that the large Greek-speaking Jewish populations in Egypt and the Eastern Mediterranean, as many as ten generations removed from Israel, needed to have their Scriptures translated into the vernacular language. Hebrew had become an archaic language limited to the scholars. In most of the synagogue services, a extemporaneous Greek translations were often given as the Hebrew Scriptures were read. Because of the inconsistencies a reliable Greek translation of the Scriptures was needed to facilitate orthodoxy and an understanding of Scripture in the synagogues. The Septuagint served this purpose. Like the Hebrew versions of the Mishnah and Gamarah it was transcribed from the written and oral traditions. Books were not written for inclusion.

Exactly,dear brother!

[Rashputin]

Why, Thank you

[metmom]

Then provide the Scripture that supports purgatory.

Something from Jesus’ own teaching would be nice.

Surely He wouldn’t have neglected to teach on so important a subject. Where is it?

[metmom]

No believer is unclean as they have been cleansed by the blood of Jesus and have been forgiven of their sins, having been clothed with the righteousness of Christ.

Purgatory can’t work because it’s not suffering which rids one of sin, but shedding of blood.

Without the shedding of blood there is NO forgiveness of sins. - Hebrews 9:22

Jesus learned obedience from His suffering. - Hebrews 5:8

Suffering produces endurance - Romans 5:3

There is not ONE verse that says suffering cleanses us from sin or obtains forgiveness from God for it. Catholics need to read the Bible and see what it has to say about suffering instead of spouting off on something they know nothing about. Our suffering is not pleasing to God and it does not obtain ANYTHING from God for us. It’s not a blackmail tool to twist His arm into giving us what we ask for which is used for.

I’ve had Catholics tell me to offer up my suffering to God as prayer and that He would answer it because of my suffering.

Hogwash.......

Jesus didn’t teach us to pray that way.

[Godzilla]

Not labels - righteous judgement of false teachings and doctrine.

No your process of ‘salvation’ is not similar to Catholics - not in the slightest, and I’m sure that based upon your stated doctrines they would reject you as a cult just like they do mormons.

Perhaps it is because your Borg doesn’t accept Paul’s letters that you fail to see the standard and differences in challenging false teachings by Christians. That is your loss.

[Natural Law]

"No believer is unclean as they have been cleansed by the blood of Jesus and have been forgiven of their sins, having been clothed with the righteousness of Christ."

The Church does not attempt to explain how we are cleansed or to explain God's timeless omnipresence, only to affirm that the cleansing happens. Regardless of how you try to define or explain that cleansing process or attempt to explain when it happens, it is Purgatory.

Peace be with you.

[Godzilla]

Our process of salvation is very similar to that of Catholics. Are they a cult, too?

Catholic's Apologetics Info has the Borg listed as a False Religious Denomination.

[Elsie]

Alas, given that they've found copies of several of those books in Hebrew that predate the Greek versions, that particular reasoning isn't worth much.

Well; those copies might have been written in Hebrew; but...

...were they ever INCLUDED into "Hebrew" scripture?

[Elsie]

. So, Danial is gone due to not being originally written in Hebrew ....

You seem to be hung up on the language it was written in; instead of the content.

[Elsie]

So far; no one’s ever tested my response.

[Rashputin]

LOL, uh, LOL, sure.

Those who can barely stand upright due to the weight of the beam in their own eye love to stir up divisions among Christians. When I encounter folks like that I obey Scripture and don't throw pearls before such swine.

"Where is it?"

have a nice day

[Elsie]

This is the key question behind the rancor on the Religion Forum; if holding only the "right" version and interpretation of God's Word is necessary for Salvation, how does that make us different than the Gnostics?

You've got it!

We mere men have ADDED so much; in EACH of our 'interpretations'; that the simpleness of Christ's love is lost!

---

 

John 6:28-29

Then they asked him, “What must we do to do the works God requires?”

Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.”

---

1 John 3:21-24

Dear friends, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God and receive from him anything we ask, because we keep his commands and do what pleases him. And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us. The one who keeps God’s commands lives in him, and he in them. And this is how we know that he lives in us: We know it by the Spirit he gave us.

It just CAN'T be that simple!

Let me help you; ahem; understand...

[Elsie]

I’m not looking for an out and you being in error is of no consequence to me in any way.

Hopefully; no consequence will come to you if we are right; also.

[Elsie]

Whoo!

Select the pull-down menu tab and pull it to the right so all that text is not jammed up in a narrow column on the left of your screen!