Conscious212
New member
judahxulu;980016 said:
^ This is irrefutable.
Last edited:
^ This is irrefutable.
DoUwant2go2Heaven
New member
judahxulu;980016 said:
You even stating that you disregard the entire NT tells me that you have no idea about what salvation is. You can't pick and choose what book of the Bible you will believe. It's not a smorgasbord of some of this and some of that. The Bible is not a buffet my brother. You have to eat it all. Line upon line. Here a little and there a little. So whatever presuppositions you have are already ingrained into your thinking, but thank the Lord that greater is He that is in me, than He that is in the world. So my prayer for you is that you will come to see the light with the information that the Lord will provide.
Now in regards to your question about the Lost sheep of Israel. The Lord's personal mission was to the Jews. Under the first commission his apostles were directed to go only to the Jews "But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Mt 10:6). It would be impossible to evangelize the Gentiles without setting aside the Jewish customs, the law of Moses, and arousing the bitterest prejudice of the Jews. Hence it was the divine plan that the Son should keep the law blameless during his ministry. It was only when the Jews crucified him that the handwriting of ordinances was nailed to the cross; "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;" (Col 2:14), the wall of partition between Jews and Gentiles broken down; "For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;" (Eph 2:14), and all prepared for the Great Commission which bade his disciples go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature; "And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." (Mr 16:15).
Last edited:
DoUwant2go2Heaven?;980440 said:
Still being slick about it I see...If you are going to refer to waht I have said dont be so obviouisly deceptive in your paraphrasing.I said I don't consider the NT to be the infallible Word of God in its entirety. That does not = totally disregarding as I know there is a common source Aramaic text that was used in forming the gospels. This is far from disregard. this is studying to show myself approved. This is not disregards but it taking heed to the prophet Isaiah when he wrote "if they speak not to the law and testimony there is no light in them".
No the Bible is not a buffet. It is a collection of books that were written long before it was called the bible in an entirely different language. Those who decided what was to to be put into the Bible or left out of it were not scribes, prophets or priests. The New Testament was determined by men who were not commissioned by the God of Abraham, Issac and Jacob. I follow the instructions of that God who said "seek ye the old paths". The English (mis)translation of the Hebrew Tanach smashed together with the Koine Greek gospels with contradictory accounts, written at least a half a century after the fact plus a series of correspondence from a self-appointed apostle does not the infallible word of God make. The ancient Greeks and Romans were not a friend to Yeshua, his people or the God they all called on. Neither was any euro-gentile you could think of who has put his sweaty little paws on the text in question. No matter how many stories you make up you cant escape that historical and spiritual reality.
You are very bold with your hypocrisy too..Am I not supposed to notice that you avoided my referring to the fact that there were SONS of God written of all up in through the Tanach (OT) effectively negating the "only begotten son" fallacy? Am I not supposed to notice the fact that YHWH refers to Israel as His son, even his firstborn? Am I supposed to not notice you failed to identify where Yeshua HIMSELF spoke of Christianity or a new religion?
As for your piss poor rebuttal, those verses from the epistles of Paul are not Yeshua speaking so they are irrelevant.
On to the juicy stuff....
I'm soooooo glad you mentioned the 16th chapter of Mark.
The earliest manuscripts for it end abruptly at 16:8.. Yes sir..Papyrus-45, the Codex Vaticanus and the Codex Sinaiticus all end at 16:8. You were saying what was infallible now... Huh?
Anyway...
Its funny how you use the term "The Great Commission" but dont know or ACT like you dont know how it came about. Leave it to Judah to give maximum exposure.
There are a variety of endings to the 16th chapter of Mark that were tacked on after the 8th verse added in later manuscripts by Christian forgers.
Alternate Ending 1-- the Marcan Appendix
This ending is what appears in your King James Bible. It was added by a 2nd century copyist of the original manuscript. this addition to the original text differs in style and vocabulary from the rest of the text It was determined to be canonical by the 16th century Catholic Church during the Council of Trent. In the NIV Bible there is a footnote after verses 9-20. Its says thus : The earliest manuscripts and some other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20. Scholars have proven that the forged ending differs in vocabulary and style from the rest of the manuscript. This also explains how the story just jumps around all crazy between the verses 14-15. More than likely rthe dude forging it was using different sources to corroborate his forgery. Its obviously a start of the origins of the tendecy of Christians to make stuff up. Most of yaals doctrine is based on this Marcan Appendix. Sorry, buddy, the Great Commission never happened.
Alternate Ending 2- The Codex Bobiensis- its a Latin manuscript from the 4th century. It picks up at verse 8..but cuts off the middle of it. Instead of the women keeping quiet about the whole thing, in this version it is translated as:
"But they reported briefly to Peter and those with him all that they had been told. And after this, Jesus himself sent out by means of them, from east to west, the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation."
Alternate ending 3- The Freer Logion a/k/a Codex Washingtonensis - Written between the 4th and 5th centuries. This used the format of Alternate version 1 up until the 15th verse. it ended at the 15th but added the following in between verses 14 and 15:
Later he appeared to the eleven themselves as they were sitting at the table; and he upbraided them for their lack of faith and stubbornness, because they had not believed those who saw him after he had risen. And they excused themselves, saying, 'This age of lawlessness and unbelief is under Satan, who does not allow the truth and power of God to prevail over the unclean things of the spirits. Therefore reveal your righteousness now'--thus they spoke to Christ. And Christ replied to them, 'The term of years of Satan's power has been fulfilled, but other terrible things draw near. And for those who have sinned I was handed over to death, that they may return to the truth and sin no more, that they may inherit the spiritual and imperishable glory of righteousness that is in heaven'."
Proselytizing, speaking in tongues, snake handling, healing the sick and casting out devils in the name of Jesus is part of this forgery. So is belief and baptism as the basis of slavation, which is evidenced further by the contradictions concerning this criteria within the NT- mainly in the Gospel of John and most of Pauls epistles.
This just ONE demonstration of the GROSS fallibility and falsehood ingrained within Christianity and hows its proponents have manipulated ancient texts to prove whatever point they wanted to at the time they did it.
Long story short, your whole post is garbage. I come with the Truth. Truth is knowable, provable and doable.
Now I know you are just going to rattle off some random Paul quotes in response, but Im glad there are smart people here that will not just take either of our words for it but go and look for themselves with the references Ive given thus far.
Additional Sources;
. "Mark, Chapter 16, New American Bible," Footnote 2
Mohamed Ghounem & Abdur Rahman,
Gospel of Mark?
C.M. Laymon, Ed,
Interpreter's One Volume Commentary on the Bible
J.R. Kohlenberger III
"Precise Parallel New Testament"
Last edited:
Members online
No members online now.