|
|
Post by John on Apr 14, 2009 13:24:40 GMT -5
lol..no but seriously. i dontknow how to describe it any better, but yeah. i did it the best i could.
|
|
Jeordin
B'nai Elohim
GREEN
Posts: 107
|
Post by Jeordin on Apr 14, 2009 13:33:37 GMT -5
I got what you were saying. Every word like fer serious.
|
|
Jonatan
B'nai Elohim
BLUE
Posts: 260
|
Post by Jonatan on Apr 15, 2009 11:35:23 GMT -5
Look, Jeordin. If a gentile - who is anyone including you and me who are not Jews by origin accept Yeshua as his personal savior and become believer - christian (because term messianic is used only for those of Jews who accept Yeshua as their Messiah) as we are now, then everything is okay. Unless the two are believers, you can expect no good of it. Oh yeah, such mixed marriage CAN BECOME succesful, but there's no insurance from the side of unbeliever. I can mention some following dangers for anyone that would try to establish such marriage:
1. Such unbelieving husband can easily be infidel unto you, because he has no authority of God and His commandments to stop him from such sin
2. Even if he may be respectful to Lord's commandments, he may become idol to you instead of Lord
3. He may easily lead you astray from your Lord to things that God does not agree with. And even that you do not agree with those things that are sin because you are christian, his pressure (emotional pressure and other) may force you easily to do compromises with sin. If you know the story of Samson and Delilah or Israeli King Achab and his wife, Jezebel - take it as an example. If you do not know, read about Samson in Judges - Chapters 13-16. And Ahab and Jezebel - read from 1 Kings Chapter 16 till 2 Kings 9:37
Shalom, and good choice of husband for you by the Lord!
|
|
Jeordin
B'nai Elohim
GREEN
Posts: 107
|
Post by Jeordin on Apr 16, 2009 17:31:25 GMT -5
Ummm thanks for the verses, I've actually gotten ion to reading the Bible, because I've been sort of ADD lol
Yeah just to annoy my friend Jesse, I start saying betwixt and stuff lol
Uhh, I don't know what to say to the other thing. Thanks good luck to you and your wife or future wife
|
|
Jeordin
B'nai Elohim
GREEN
Posts: 107
|
Post by Jeordin on Apr 24, 2009 14:43:40 GMT -5
Actually, umm yesterday I was reading around my Bible and I found a verse in 1 Corinthians that I found very interesting and very opposite of what you said.
(Chapter 7)
12: But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
13: And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
14: For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy
well, not exactly a verse but you know
|
|
|
|
Post by walt on Apr 24, 2009 17:27:39 GMT -5
(because term messianic is used only for those of Jews who accept Yeshua as their Messiah) Where is that rule written. I've met plenty of non-jewish people that refer to themselves as Messianic. Not the term Messianic Jew would say they were of Jewish blood. |
|
|
|
Post by walt on Apr 24, 2009 18:01:27 GMT -5
So... it is easter. i thought that it would be a good time to start this thread. what do you guys think of the hollidays Christmas easter adn halloween? do you agree with the pagan roots theory? post away... this thread is a litttle broad so, whatever. Even if you strip away the pagan roots of christ(less)mas and easter - they are still a product of the herictical Roman catholic church. You STILL have to deal with this verse spoken by The Messiah:
"But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers.
"Elohim is spirit, and those who worship Him MUST worship in spirit and truth."
(John 4:23-24) That MUST makes it a COMMAND proceeding directly from Messiah. easter and christmas are NOT according to TRUTH (and of the wrong spirit) So at minimum, christians are just flapping their lips for naught, a work of the flesh that Yahweh doesn't accept. But then you add to that with easter: They are forsaking the Feasts of Yahweh for pagan traditions. They forsake the calendar Yahweh gives in Scripture with it's appointed keeping with the barley in favor of the pagan calendar with the equinox to set the date. They forsake eating lamb, which signifies Yahushua, for a pig which points further to the paganism, besides being an unclean animal. Then the egg dying, which also came from paganism where they dyed the eggs with the blood of sacrificed babies. NOT a pretty picture |
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 24, 2009 20:13:35 GMT -5
if all the pagan roots are stripped away form it than it is no longer celebrated in a defiled way by you. i see where you are coming from but really, the only thing that makes christmas so bad IS the pagan roots. if you switched those with holy godly roots (prbably to be done by a tzaddik) than you have as a final product: Yeshuas birthday celebrated the RIGHT way! :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by walt on Apr 24, 2009 20:32:18 GMT -5
if all the pagan roots are stripped away form it than it is no longer celebrated in a defiled way by you. i see where you are coming from but really, the only thing that makes christmas so bad IS the pagan roots. if you switched those with holy godly roots (prbably to be done by a tzaddik) than you have as a final product: Yeshuas birthday celebrated the RIGHT way! :-) If you stripped that pagan roots away, it's still a work of the flesh, a man-made holiday, not according to TRUTH. If it was in Scripture.... It's not, so it's not worth contemplating. What ifs are a distraction and a waste - vain imaginations. |
|
|
|
Post by itiswritten on Apr 24, 2009 23:16:36 GMT -5
Very good posts Walt. I use to be such a sweet, sweet thing till they got a hold of me.  |
|
Jonatan
B'nai Elohim
BLUE
Posts: 260
|
Post by Jonatan on Apr 25, 2009 7:08:34 GMT -5
(because term messianic is used only for those of Jews who accept Yeshua as their Messiah) Where is that rule written. I've met plenty of non-jewish people that refer to themselves as Messianic. Not the term Messianic Jew would say they were of Jewish blood. So what is so different if you or I say that you and I are christians. If everyone can be messianic (even we from gentiles) - I posted it because it's used term for Messianic Jews. Never heard anyone in Europe calling self 'messianic' - not when the one comes to Yeshua from gentiles. Maybe in America it's different. But I know how you mean it - but then it's the same if we say we are 'messianic' or if we say we are 'christians' - one is hebrew name, the next one is greek. |
|
Jonatan
B'nai Elohim
BLUE
Posts: 260
|
Post by Jonatan on Apr 25, 2009 7:33:00 GMT -5
Actually, umm yesterday I was reading around my Bible and I found a verse in 1 Corinthians that I found very interesting and very opposite of what you said. (Chapter 7) 12: But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
13: And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
14: For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holywell, not exactly a verse but you know I know Jeordin, about this verse. Formerly I wanted to post it for you - but it does not imply that we should get married with unbelievers. Paul says it in that case IF SOMEONE ALREADY is MARRIED with unbeliever. If someone accept Yeshua as his/her personal savior and Lord and is born again, while still married with husband or wife that are not yet believers, let him/her not leave his/her second part. It is truth what Paul says that unbeliever is sanctified by believing husband/wife. It is a great truth, because through intime life the two are becoming more and more one flesh - then one soul - and it proceeds even into spirit. Now, Jeordin, I understand your thoughts - you may think you can do a great heroism - if you marry someone unbelieving. But I advice you not to perform such extreme efforts - it is not sure if it succeed. Paul continues by statement that 'how know you IF you save your husband/wife' - the one who is unbelieving. 12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.
16 For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?
17 But as God hath distributed to every man, as the Lord hath called every one, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all churches.
18 Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.(1.Corinthians 7:12-18)Good that Paul mentioned also circumcision in this place. It helps you better understand the wohle problem - the emphasis is taken on HOW and FROM WHERE IS SOMEONE CALLED by Lord to Church. That's why I stated above to you that such marriage CAN BE SUCCESSFUL, but it's not sure. Now, if you have no husband already, look only for the one who is believer - you no longer live in unknowingness - only if you were born again in state of marriage with someone from the world (unbeliever), then you would follow the instructions given to you by Paul. Shalom and great wisdom to you by Lord in this matter. |
|
|
|
Post by walt on Apr 25, 2009 8:59:36 GMT -5
Where is that rule written. I've met plenty of non-jewish people that refer to themselves as Messianic. Not the term Messianic Jew would say they were of Jewish blood. So what is so different if you or I say that you and I are christians. If everyone can be messianic (even we from gentiles) - I posted it because it's used term for Messianic Jews. Never heard anyone in Europe calling self 'messianic' - not when the one comes to Yeshua from gentiles. Maybe in America it's different. But I know how you mean it - but then it's the same if we say we are 'messianic' or if we say we are 'christians' - one is hebrew name, the next one is greek. OK, didn't realize you weren't in America. Since christianity here disregards Torah, Shabatt, and The Feasts of Yahweh and The true names - when a disciple of Messiah has their eyes open to the place of these in their life - they take up the Hebrew terms Messianic as embracing the Hebrewness of their faith, rejecting the Greek mindset. Some of your bigger Messianic leaders here are not Jewish. christianity has a blind bias against things "Jewish", ie The Feasts are "Jewish" so they want nothing to do with them. So when people start seeing the offness of christianity - they don't want that lable. |
|
Jonatan
B'nai Elohim
BLUE
Posts: 260
|
Post by Jonatan on Apr 25, 2009 16:59:09 GMT -5
In that case I am messianic! If the atributes of christianity are replacement theology, lawlessness, ecumenism, RCC-tolerance, hellenism and paganism in 'hebraic look' - then I am rather messianic. But, on the other hand, we should clarify the true name of former christianity - it's just the same as messianism, only for preferers of greek language.
Shalom v'lehitra'ot
|
|
|
|
Post by walt on Apr 25, 2009 19:45:01 GMT -5
In that case I am messianic! If the atributes of christianity are replacement theology, lawlessness, ecumenism, RCC-tolerance, hellenism and paganism in 'hebraic look' - then I am rather messianic. But, on the other hand, we should clarify the true name of former christianity - it's just the same as messianism, only for preferers of greek language. Shalom v'lehitra'ot TOTALLY agree with you here - I don't refer to my self as a christian or Messianic - the term was what the lost refered to them as, not what Yahweh or the brethren used. I refer to my self as a disciple of Yahushua |
|
Jeordin
B'nai Elohim
GREEN
Posts: 107
|
Post by Jeordin on Apr 25, 2009 19:48:04 GMT -5
Actually, umm yesterday I was reading around my Bible and I found a verse in 1 Corinthians that I found very interesting and very opposite of what you said. (Chapter 7) 12: But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
13: And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
14: For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holywell, not exactly a verse but you know I know Jeordin, about this verse. Formerly I wanted to post it for you - but it does not imply that we should get married with unbelievers. Paul says it in that case IF SOMEONE ALREADY is MARRIED with unbeliever. If someone accept Yeshua as his/her personal savior and Lord and is born again, while still married with husband or wife that are not yet believers, let him/her not leave his/her second part. It is truth what Paul says that unbeliever is sanctified by believing husband/wife. It is a great truth, because through intime life the two are becoming more and more one flesh - then one soul - and it proceeds even into spirit. Now, Jeordin, I understand your thoughts - you may think you can do a great heroism - if you marry someone unbelieving. But I advice you not to perform such extreme efforts - it is not sure if it succeed. Paul continues by statement that 'how know you IF you save your husband/wife' - the one who is unbelieving. 12 But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.
13 And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him.
14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
15 But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.
16 For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save thy wife?
17 But as God hath distributed to every man, as the Lord hath called every one, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all churches.
18 Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.(1.Corinthians 7:12-18)Good that Paul mentioned also circumcision in this place. It helps you better understand the wohle problem - the emphasis is taken on HOW and FROM WHERE IS SOMEONE CALLED by Lord to Church. That's why I stated above to you that such marriage CAN BE SUCCESSFUL, but it's not sure. Now, if you have no husband already, look only for the one who is believer - you no longer live in unknowingness - only if you were born again in state of marriage with someone from the world (unbeliever), then you would follow the instructions given to you by Paul. Shalom and great wisdom to you by Lord in this matter. Thanks for everything you told me. I remebered that verse when I was reading your post so yeah. Ummm I highlighted that one bit in red because well, you set me straight and I wanted to set you straight. I would never marry someone to be a hero, so you obviously don't know what I'm thinking. I would only marry someone because I loved them. I'm sorry if I gave off that kind of "air." and to be quite honest I feel more for those who are really religious or into the history of religion. Like I said though thanks for the redt of the verse and letting me in on it's meaning. |
|
|
|
Post by pioneer on Apr 27, 2009 21:35:25 GMT -5
Dear Friend,
In the book of Acts 12: 4 KJV) intending after Easter to bring him---. This is the only place the word easter is found in the Bible! WHY? Who coined the word, did it ever proceed from the mouth of G-d? How did something like this become the most important Holy Day in Christianity? (Adonai says not to speak the name of another G-d)
Every dictionary and or encyclopedia will tell you this is another name for a goddess. The word should be Passover. King James used it (passover/paschah) 26 times then some strange reason he pops in the other word. Why?
Does your Bible have this word in it? Does your Church promote it as a Holy Day to the Lord? Does your Bible teacher know that this isn't the Truth, but teaches it just the same. If you answer yes to any one of these, then it's time to get a new Bible, a new Church, and a new Bible teacher! If your Church and teacher are teaching error, what in the name of G-d are you doing involved in false teaching? To paraphrase James, (4:17)The man who knows (to do right)-the truth and does not (do) speak it, to him it is sin.
Personally, I fear to teach (biblically) anything that isn't in plain language, since teachers will be held to a higher standard than his student will. I fear, not to teach since this what we are called to do. This the old adage, "between a rock and a hard place."
Martin Luther and Wm. Tyndale used the term Easter to translate the Bible. Tyndale died before he could correct his translations, he discovered his error, most do not.
Check out in an encyclopedia, Martin Luther, Wm. Tyndale and King James Bible, some insight is to be found. Then look up Marcionism and Gnosticism. How much of Marcion and Gnosticism is in the Christian church.
I believe the New Testament was written in Hebrew. If your savior is the Greek Christ, then in the words of a Gilda Radner charactor, "Never mind!"
Sincerely,
|
|
anochria
B'nai Elohim
Pastor of Aletheia Christian Fellowship
Posts: 194
|
Post by anochria on Apr 27, 2009 23:24:40 GMT -5
What good evidence can you get for this far flung conclusion?
The only evidence I could concede would be that possibly Matthew was originally written in Hebrew.
|
|
anochria
B'nai Elohim
Pastor of Aletheia Christian Fellowship
Posts: 194
|
Post by anochria on Apr 27, 2009 23:36:12 GMT -5
I've been hesitating to jump into this topic with anything so much as a dissenting voice, since there seems to be so much agreement here , but thought I might add a simple question-
in your minds, does "pagan culture" mean complete and thorough evil, or a mix of God's common grace and mankind's wickedness?
In other words, can anything good (that is, ultimately from God) exist in pagan culture?
|
|
|
|
Post by pioneer on Apr 27, 2009 23:56:30 GMT -5
What good evidence can you get for this far flung conclusion? The only evidence I could concede would be that possibly Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. Not one shred of tangible evidence! I believe it. My good friend and Rabbi believe it Dr. Roy Blizzard believes it, Dr. Bivins believes it, the Hebrew University back translated the gospels and what did they find, that about 90% of it back translated very easily, the other 10% refused to back translate, what were those things that refused to go back to Hebrew were those things that are suspect of being added. Like Acts 12:4. Refuses to go back because it is invented, has no Greek word for it! I love it! ;D So my friend it is a done deal for me, if you wish to do a Don Quixote and tilt with a windmill! Go for it. |
|
