Sunday, August 29, 2010
GhostLuke24.pdf (application/pdf Object)
GhostLuke24.pdf (application/pdf Object): "- Sent using Google Toolbar"
The Naked Bible » Two editorial notes on the last Baptism Post
The Naked Bible » Two editorial notes on the last Baptism Post:
My response to the above post:
"Much, much ado about nothing.
Colossians 2:11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:
Do you think that Jewish circumcision had *anything* whatsoever to do with slicing sin off of the body? Paul is just desperate to have “Christ” be the end-all of the Jewish religion. He wants “Christ” to be seen in every Jewish figure. So here he creates an elaborate analogy. “As circumcision lops off some flesh, so God performed a lopping off of sins from your flesh, by your faith in Christ.” Or something like that. The elaborate “Reformed” notions of baptism being the new symbol of the new covenant are twisted and bizarre perversions of thought, as is easily demonstrated:
* the putting off of the flesh is not done by baptism but by faith, because it is done “without hands.” This is a way of saying “God does it” (as in Hebrews, where the temple is made without hands).
* Paul makes no mention of covenant, but rather of putting off sins from the flesh by faith.
* It is heinous to take a verse that says nothing about covenant and then to build a 60 foot structure on it, claiming that it is all **implied** by an unrelated verse. Such constructs are nauseating;
* You gentiles have **no interest** in the new covenant, as it was only made with the houses of Israel and Judah. See Jeremiah 1. (And by the way, all of the wranglings of preachers about how believers are “freed from the law” are the height of ignorance also, because the nations were never UNDER the law in the first place!
It is unwise to attempt to harmonize the 66 books of the Protestant canon (let alone the historic canon, which has 73 books) as if Paul and Matthew have the same things in mind. I mean, did passing through the red sea on dry land really baptize the Jews unto Moses? Was Jesus a rock following Moses? Did circumcision lob off sins from the flesh?
There were religious ideas and practices in Hellenistic Judaism that Paul et all appropriated to Christ in various ways. If you’re going down the “Reformed – baptism is the new covenant” path, then you are sitting hopelessly in the dark in a thick wood.
Sorry I’m not as nice a guy as you apparently are. I don’t know any other way to say it but straight out."
My response to the above post:
"Much, much ado about nothing.
Colossians 2:11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:
Do you think that Jewish circumcision had *anything* whatsoever to do with slicing sin off of the body? Paul is just desperate to have “Christ” be the end-all of the Jewish religion. He wants “Christ” to be seen in every Jewish figure. So here he creates an elaborate analogy. “As circumcision lops off some flesh, so God performed a lopping off of sins from your flesh, by your faith in Christ.” Or something like that. The elaborate “Reformed” notions of baptism being the new symbol of the new covenant are twisted and bizarre perversions of thought, as is easily demonstrated:
* the putting off of the flesh is not done by baptism but by faith, because it is done “without hands.” This is a way of saying “God does it” (as in Hebrews, where the temple is made without hands).
* Paul makes no mention of covenant, but rather of putting off sins from the flesh by faith.
* It is heinous to take a verse that says nothing about covenant and then to build a 60 foot structure on it, claiming that it is all **implied** by an unrelated verse. Such constructs are nauseating;
* You gentiles have **no interest** in the new covenant, as it was only made with the houses of Israel and Judah. See Jeremiah 1. (And by the way, all of the wranglings of preachers about how believers are “freed from the law” are the height of ignorance also, because the nations were never UNDER the law in the first place!
It is unwise to attempt to harmonize the 66 books of the Protestant canon (let alone the historic canon, which has 73 books) as if Paul and Matthew have the same things in mind. I mean, did passing through the red sea on dry land really baptize the Jews unto Moses? Was Jesus a rock following Moses? Did circumcision lob off sins from the flesh?
There were religious ideas and practices in Hellenistic Judaism that Paul et all appropriated to Christ in various ways. If you’re going down the “Reformed – baptism is the new covenant” path, then you are sitting hopelessly in the dark in a thick wood.
Sorry I’m not as nice a guy as you apparently are. I don’t know any other way to say it but straight out."
The Naked Bible » The Biblical Teaching on Baptism, Part 1
The Naked Bible » The Biblical Teaching on Baptism, Part 1: ""
My comments, inspired by the discussion above:
One of the earliest practices established for the Jews was washing:
Exodus 30:
17 ¶ And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
18 Thou shalt also make a laver of brass, and his foot also of brass, to wash withal: and thou shalt put it between the tabernacle of the congregation and the altar, and thou shalt put water therein.
19 For Aaron and his sons shall wash their hands and their feet thereat:
20 When they go into the tabernacle of the congregation, they shall wash with water, that they die not; or when they come near to the altar to minister, to burn offering made by fire unto the LORD:
21 So they shall wash their hands and their feet, that they die not: and it shall be a statute for ever to them, even to him and to his seed throughout their generations.
The priests did not approach God without washing. There are various ordinances, and various practices developed in the intertestamental years under rabbinic Judaism:
Mark 7:
1 ¶ Then came together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from Jerusalem.
2 And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault.
3 For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders.
4 And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables.
5 Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands?
6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
John's Mikveh (and you should read this if you are not familiar with this):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikveh
John's Mikveh had a new but apparently frequently adopted feature in that participation in the ritual cleansing was a rite of passage into a cult. People who were baptized became followers of the cult leader:
Acts 19:3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John’s baptism.
Acts 19:4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
Matthew then says that the name that believers should be baptized into is the name of the father (God), the son (the cult leader) and the holy breath. Here is where their allegiance would be.
Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in [EIS=into] the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Paul was sensitive to the issue:
1 Cor 1:
13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in [EIS=into] the name of Paul?
14 ¶ I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;
15 Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.
1 Corinthians 10:2 And were all baptized **unto Moses** in the cloud and in the sea;
1 Corinthians 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all **baptized into one body**, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
If Jesus were not resurrected, then to be baptized into him would be to be baptized into a dead person, never to rise again.
1 Corinthians 15:29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?
Galatians 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
Now, I am of the opinion that the NT authors consciously commandeered as many Jewish themes as they could possibly think of for the new cult. In other words, Paul was of the mindset that if Jews had an intertestamental interest in joining a cult by identification with the person who baptized them, or into a cult, then by golly Christ will be the one in who's name, person and cult that the believers should be baptized.
In other words, Paul would co-opt this new-fangled, extra-biblical practice of his contemporaries because it was one more expedient way to harness Judaism's appeal and structure for the new religion. It was such a popular element of the Hellenistic Jewish landscape that you see all of the writers of the NT appropriating it in various ways.
But Paul was ignorant of Matthew's command to baptize. For him, like other religious practices of the Jews, he just wanted what he considered the nectar - he wanted them as symbols to describe "Christ." He said:
1 Cor 1:
16 And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.
17 ¶ For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
Matthew wanted to make "disciples" but Paul wanted to make "believers."
My comments, inspired by the discussion above:
One of the earliest practices established for the Jews was washing:
Exodus 30:
17 ¶ And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
18 Thou shalt also make a laver of brass, and his foot also of brass, to wash withal: and thou shalt put it between the tabernacle of the congregation and the altar, and thou shalt put water therein.
19 For Aaron and his sons shall wash their hands and their feet thereat:
20 When they go into the tabernacle of the congregation, they shall wash with water, that they die not; or when they come near to the altar to minister, to burn offering made by fire unto the LORD:
21 So they shall wash their hands and their feet, that they die not: and it shall be a statute for ever to them, even to him and to his seed throughout their generations.
The priests did not approach God without washing. There are various ordinances, and various practices developed in the intertestamental years under rabbinic Judaism:
Mark 7:
1 ¶ Then came together unto him the Pharisees, and certain of the scribes, which came from Jerusalem.
2 And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault.
3 For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders.
4 And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables.
5 Then the Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands?
6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.
9 And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.
John's Mikveh (and you should read this if you are not familiar with this):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikveh
John's Mikveh had a new but apparently frequently adopted feature in that participation in the ritual cleansing was a rite of passage into a cult. People who were baptized became followers of the cult leader:
Acts 19:3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John’s baptism.
Acts 19:4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
Matthew then says that the name that believers should be baptized into is the name of the father (God), the son (the cult leader) and the holy breath. Here is where their allegiance would be.
Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in [EIS=into] the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Paul was sensitive to the issue:
1 Cor 1:
13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in [EIS=into] the name of Paul?
14 ¶ I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;
15 Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.
1 Corinthians 10:2 And were all baptized **unto Moses** in the cloud and in the sea;
1 Corinthians 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all **baptized into one body**, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
If Jesus were not resurrected, then to be baptized into him would be to be baptized into a dead person, never to rise again.
1 Corinthians 15:29 Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?
Galatians 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
Now, I am of the opinion that the NT authors consciously commandeered as many Jewish themes as they could possibly think of for the new cult. In other words, Paul was of the mindset that if Jews had an intertestamental interest in joining a cult by identification with the person who baptized them, or into a cult, then by golly Christ will be the one in who's name, person and cult that the believers should be baptized.
In other words, Paul would co-opt this new-fangled, extra-biblical practice of his contemporaries because it was one more expedient way to harness Judaism's appeal and structure for the new religion. It was such a popular element of the Hellenistic Jewish landscape that you see all of the writers of the NT appropriating it in various ways.
But Paul was ignorant of Matthew's command to baptize. For him, like other religious practices of the Jews, he just wanted what he considered the nectar - he wanted them as symbols to describe "Christ." He said:
1 Cor 1:
16 And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.
17 ¶ For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
Matthew wanted to make "disciples" but Paul wanted to make "believers."
Saturday, August 28, 2010
HaselGen1ANE.pdf (application/pdf Object)
A study contrasting Israeli creation mythology with its neighbors.
HaselGen1ANE.pdf (application/pdf Object): "- Sent using Google Toolbar"
HaselGen1ANE.pdf (application/pdf Object): "- Sent using Google Toolbar"
Is genetically grafted produce kosher? - Kosher Q&A
Is genetically grafted produce kosher? - Kosher Q&A: "- Sent using Google Toolbar"
OT covenant ANE covenants Pt1.pdf (application/pdf Object)
OT covenant ANE covenants Pt1.pdf (application/pdf Object): "- Sent using Google Toolbar"
Friday, August 27, 2010
Author: More teens becoming 'fake' Christians - CNN.com
Author: More teens becoming 'fake' Christians - CNN.com: "- Sent using Google Toolbar"
Sunday, August 22, 2010
The Magnitude of Muslim Atrocities
"...Sacrifice of honor for victory or material gain was deemed as worse than death..."
The Magnitude of Muslim Atrocities: "Sacrifice of honor for victory or material gain was deemed as worse than death."
The Magnitude of Muslim Atrocities: "Sacrifice of honor for victory or material gain was deemed as worse than death."
Saturday, August 21, 2010
God's Value System
Today I stumbled across a very interesting young man on his website.
God's Value System: ""
I like this guy. I like what he has to say.
But, alas, in the final analysis, it is all donkey dust.
What he says is that we can be successful in our relationships with others if we adopt God's value system. All well in good, I say, but the fact of the matter is that in the scriptures, **God can't get along with anyone!!!**
This is a well-intentioned presentation. I think the guy is probably sincere, and as wholesome as apple pie. But deluded.
Religion is not about successful relationships. It is about "weeding out" those who are not "to spec." Scripture compares the sinners to "chaff" that the wind drives away, and to dead branches to be burned.
God is, in the scriptures, **seething** with loathing, anger, hatred and violence.
So, enjoy his speech, but know this: God loathes you and will ultimately crush you under his heel, if the scriptures are to be believed.
God's Value System: ""
I like this guy. I like what he has to say.
But, alas, in the final analysis, it is all donkey dust.
What he says is that we can be successful in our relationships with others if we adopt God's value system. All well in good, I say, but the fact of the matter is that in the scriptures, **God can't get along with anyone!!!**
This is a well-intentioned presentation. I think the guy is probably sincere, and as wholesome as apple pie. But deluded.
Religion is not about successful relationships. It is about "weeding out" those who are not "to spec." Scripture compares the sinners to "chaff" that the wind drives away, and to dead branches to be burned.
God is, in the scriptures, **seething** with loathing, anger, hatred and violence.
So, enjoy his speech, but know this: God loathes you and will ultimately crush you under his heel, if the scriptures are to be believed.
This anecdote is actually taken straight from a Catholic Catechism by Joseph Baxter.
A certain monarch caused the figure of an angel to be carved in white marble. From the left hand of this statue hung a silver ring attached to a thin silken cord, while the right hand held a golden ring suspended from a diamond chain. The king's son and daughter asked their father what these two rings were intended to signify. He answered : "I will give the rings to whichever of you can guess their meaning aright." Then the prince said : " The rings are doubtless emblems of friendship and love." The king replied : " That is quite right. But why is one ring made of gold and the other of silver?" The princess answered: "The silver ring signifies human friendship and affection. That friendship, that affection, cannot be relied upon; it hangs, as it were, by a slight cord which is easily broken. The gold ring signifies the love of God for man ; that is firm and unchangeable ; it cannot be broken." The king praised his children for the good answers they had given ; he gave the silver ring with the silken cord to the prince, and the gold ring with the chain of diamonds to the princess.
Modern student struggles to explain the Reformation
"...The Catholic church sold indulgences as a form of remission control. Luthar was into reorientation mutation. An angry Martin Luther nailed ninety-fve theocrats to a church door. The Pope's response was to declare Luther hereditary..."
The brilliant painter, Raphael...
Once while working on a frescoe in the Vatican, Raphael became irritated by the constant criticism coming from a couple of observing cardinals. One complained that, "The face of the apostle Paul is far too red". Raphael answered back, "He blushes to see into whose hands the church has fallen".
Mark Twain's advice
Once a notoriously tough businessman told Mark Twain, "Before I die I mean to make a pilgrimage to the Holy Land. I will climb Mount Sinai and read the Ten Commandments aloud at the top." Disgusted, Twain replied, "I have a better idea. You could stay at home in Boston and keep them."
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Sunday, August 8, 2010
Friday, August 6, 2010
YouTube - A Literal Interpretation of Genesis 1 Cosmology
This very young man truly gets what I've been trying to say...
YouTube - A Literal Interpretation of Genesis 1 Cosmology
YouTube - A Literal Interpretation of Genesis 1 Cosmology
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)