₦airaland Forum

babafemi1000:
Okay, so it wasn't God who required his blood.

But then, to establish a covenant, there needs to be a shedding of blood. Jesus' blood was shed in this case.

If it wasn't God who required it, who then?

The devil? (As is in your first explanation to me about ransom:

"He laid down his life for his sheep to be free from the devil"

Have you forgotten what Jesus said.
If you had known what this means: ' I want mercy and not sacrifice ,' you would not have condemned the innocent.
Matt 12:7.
God desires mercy and not sacrifice,not even the blood of Jesus.
Yes,He laid down His life to die so that He can deliver us from the devil. You know Adam gave this world to the devil,whereby relinquishing all powers of the earth to the devil. After Jesus resurrected,He said
Then Jesus came up and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
Matt 28:18.
Jesus came to this earth to establish the kingdom (will,rulership) of God on this earth.
Jesus also said,
I tell you the solemn truth, unless a kernel of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it remains by itself alone. But if it dies, it produces much grain.
John 12:24.

FOREWARD
With Credits to Soren Kierkegaard
This has to be said again, now:
„This has to be said; so be it now said,
Whoever thou art, whatever in other respects thy life may be, my friend, by ceasing to take part (if ordinarily thou doest) in the public worship of God, as it now is (with the claim that it is the Christianity of the New Testament), thou hast constantly one guilt the less, and that a great one: thou dost not take part in treating God as a fool by calling that the Christianity of the New Testament which is not the Christianity of the New Testament.”

S. Kierkegaard, 1854
When first I read these words, some forty years ago, I was enthralled. From that moment to this, S. K. has been my hero of the faith. What courage! What abandonment of all earthly care must he have had to proclaim them, for these words were published one hundred and forty-six years ago in a time when they could easily have cost him his life. Here was a man of integrity, a lonely witness to the Truth in the world, who loved God and the Truth and hated his life according to the Great Principle of Jesus.

Times have changed. Now religion is not taken that seriously. Anyone can say any radical thing publicly or otherwise and no one cares, or they make a joke of it, or they ignore it. So, I have perfect freedom to praise such words, words that I must admit I once envied – wishing I had been the one to say them first. Why then do I bother to praise them? It is the most one can do in an age that no longer cares about Truth.

My reader, you are to be praised also if you have read this far! Stay with me now and read what is really in my heart. You see, I have learned that S.K., courageous as he was and so fully dedicated to Jesus, was in error. Yes, in error! I required years to realize the error – so subtle that even such a religious genius as S.K. could overlook it. It is implicit – he assumed that the Christianity of the New Testament is the religion of Jesus and in this he was absolutely wrong. Yes! The Christianity of the New Testament is not the religion of Jesus. Whose religion is it if not that of Jesus?

The Christianity of the New Testament is the religion of Paul. It is the religion that emanates from what is called „The Church” and that was first identified at Antioch where „the disciples were first called Christians.” Please listen carefully, now, for this is critical: the religion of Paul, which is the Christianity of the New Testament, is not the religion of Jesus. It is the religion of Christendom. It is the religion of the churchmen but . . . it is not the religion of Jesus.

By failing to recognize this important distinction between the religion of Paul and that of Jesus, S.K. erred in his statement but his heart was right, for the religion of Jesus is the religion of S.K. No, the churchmen were not and are not taking God for a fool by calling that the Christianity of the New Testament that is not the Christianity of the New

Testament. The churchmen were, and are, precisely correct in calling that the Christianity of the New Testament that is the religion of the church, of Paul and of Christendom, for it is indeed the Christianity of the New Testament. No, they were not and are not taking God for a fool; they are only making fools of themselves by believing that the Christianity of the New Testament is the religion of Jesus.

The Christianity of the New Testament, which is the Christianity of Christendom and of the churchmen to this day, is infinitely far removed from the religion of Jesus because of its powers of deception. It appropriates the name of Jesus. It honors and glorifies the name of Jesus. But it ignores precious words that he said in the world at so high a price. It takes its converts, young and old, and baptizes them. Then it teaches them the doctrine. Then it tells them, „Yes, it is true, you are now a Christian! You are a member of the church so you are partaker of the Christianity of the New Testament.” And of course the power of the deception is just this . . . it is perfectly true. They are indeed partakers of the Christianity of the New Testament but, unlike S. K., they are not partakers of Jesus and his religion.

Yes! This has to be said so let it be said now but in a different way:
Whoever thou art, whatever in other respects thy life may be, my friend, by ceasing to take part (if ordinarily thou dost) in the public worship of God, as it now is (with the claim that it is the religion of Jesus), thou hast constantly one guilt the less, and that a great one: thou dost not take part in treating God as a fool by calling that the religion of Jesus that is not the religion of Jesus but is only the Christianity of the New Testament.

PREFACE
The immediate task is to state why I am designating Paul by the descriptive term, „the stranger.” supplemental to this task is to also identify the „strangers” who have followed Paul. Then the task of the volume that follows, in four books, is to justify this designation. The immediate task together with its supplement can be performed in few words; the second task will require more because of the two thousand years of false testimony that has molded and cemented Christendom’s exaltation of the man to the status of „Saint Paul.” It will require more than a few words to counter the false testimony of the two thousand years.
The immediate task begins here with the simple statement, which everyone knows and will not dispute, that Paul (or Saul) of Tarsus was a stranger to the small fellowship of Jesus’ disciples that rallied around the Twelve after the Ascension. He was never a member of their fellowship, though he may have sometimes been in the crowds that gathered about Jesus. If he had been a disciple of the Pharisee, Gamaliel, as he claimed (Acts 22:3), he would have been in Jerusalem during Jesus’ ministry in that city. I do not question this claim, as exposure to Pharisaism readily explains his early antagonism toward the little flock of disciples. He was surely aware of the activities of Jesus and of his resurrection. There is even a probability that he was in some way involved with the arrest and trial of the Lord. Perhaps it was about then that he signed on to the police force of the High Priest and, powered by the zealotry of extreme Pharisaism, began to persecute the little flock. Thereafter he was a stranger no more!

Nevertheless, he was a stranger on the day Jesus gathered his little flock about him and began to
teach:
Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber; but he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the gatekeeper opens; the sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. A stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers (John 10:1-5).

There is an intriguing change of number in the last sentence of this utterance. It begins in the singular, „A stranger,” as though Jesus had a particular individual in mind. Then it continues in the singular, ” . . . but they will flee from him,” again as though he spoke of a particular person. Only then does he switch to the plural in emphasizing that the sheep not only will flee from this „stranger” but will not heed the voices of the many „strangers” they were certain to encounter. Now we back up to the beginning of the utterance and discover that the singular prevails there also as we hear Jesus saying, „he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door, but climbs in by another way,” he continues, „That man is a thief and a robber.” Over against „that man” he then proceeds to point to another single person, himself, ” . . . but he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep.”

It is my position that Jesus foresaw the activities of Paul and here designated him „the stranger,” „that man” who is „a thief and a robber.” I do not mean that he knew the identity of this stranger and could have pointed to Paul in the crowd and said, „There is the man.” (Although he was capable of that.) Anyone in his position would have known the terrible hostility that his disciples must face after his departure and the strength of the powers to oppose them – powers that would

surely unite under an energetic and charismatic leader for the purpose of robbing him of his sheep. „That man” could oppose them in either of two ways: first, as a violent enemy intent on physically destroying them and second, as a non violent enemy coming to them in the guise of a shepherd and intent on leading them astray into spiritual destruction. Paul did both. First, violently and by his own testimony, he hounded them and hunted them to death and imprisonment. Second, non-violently, he changed his tactics, approached them in the guise of a true shepherd and led them astray from the Truth. It is certain that Jesus was not referring to some satanic spiritual power, because he clearly designated him, „That man.”

Then who are the „strangers” of the last sentence of this utterance? These are the myriad clergymen who, following Paul, have throughout the two thousand years been climbing in „by another way” than the door and stealing the sheep. They are strangers to the Good Shepherd and his little flock. It is not only that Paul is „the stranger.” No, he is only the first of a long line of strangers, a line that continues today to perform its terrible task.

Jesus allowed for only one flock of sheep, his „little flock,” and he allowed for only one shepherd,
saying,
And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will
heed my voice. So there shall be on flock, one shepherd (John 10:16).
Without a doubt he has only himself in mind as he points to himself as the „good shepherd.” There is only one good shepherd. All the others, beginning with Paul, must, then, be included in the designation, „strangers.”

We get a better view of this exclusion of all others as shepherds of his little flock by observing that the tasks of a shepherd are basically three: leader, feeder and protector. These three functions are clearly implicit in, for example, Psalm 23. „Heleads me beside the still waters,” and, „He

leads me in paths of righteousness,” define the first function. He is a feeder when „he makes me
lie down ingreen pastures” and when „thoupreparest a table before me in the presence of my enemies.” He is a protector when „Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil; for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.”

Jesus surely had this Psalm in mind when he identified himself as the Good Shepherd, for it begins, „The Lord is my shepherd.” We note here again the singular number. It likewise must have been fundamental in his attack on the fear of death. When he commanded his disciples, „Neither be ye called leaders” (Matthew 23:10) he was effectively eliminating „shepherd” from their job description.

Paul, however, provides for many shepherds, and himself he claims to be a feeder. His
„shepherd” provision is stated in Ephesians 4:11:
And his gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists,
somepastors and teachers . . ..
The Greek for „pastors” here is precisely the same word translated „shepherd” in John 10. Then,
of course, while never designating himself as a pastor or shepherd, he sees himself as a feeder:
I fed you with milk, not solid food, for you were not ready for it. (I Corinthians 3:2)
When we look about us in Christendom, we can hardly see the sky for the horde of shepherds, or „pastors” that the church supplies to the world. It is my position that these are those whom Jesus designated „strangers,” and that they bring themselves under condemnation by accepting the designation, pastor, all in total ignorance of the significance of their Lord’s words. Be assured that I thoroughly understand the power of this deception because I was once one of them . . . and I was wrong. If there is hope for me, there must be hope for all.

Scholar8200:
Besides, if you really are a disciple, you wont cherrypick: the Spirit reminded the disciples of all that Jesus said but did not lead them into all Truth hence you accept the Gospel that pertains to the former and reject the Epistles that pertain to the latter!
In other words Jesus was right regarding one but wrong regarding the other hence you reject it!

Hmmm! My sheep hear my voice,the voice of a stranger they won't follow. I am not cherry picking. Jesus said if you CONTINUE IN MY TEACHINGS. He never said i will speak through someone later. He said i will send the Holy Spirit. It is a personal thing. No one will teach His neighbor that know ye the Lord,for the law will be written in their heart. They will be taught by God not by Paul. I can claim i saw Jesus and i can perform miracles. Paul,epistles are not from the Holy Spirit. Pls get it

AmunRaOlodumare:
I suggest people to read books about the early history of Christianity (up to Constantine at least).

I read a couple of books but this one is pretty good:
Christianity: The First Three Thousand Years by Diarmaid MacCulloch

www.amazon.com/Christianity-First-Three-Thousand-Years/dp/0143118692/

I'm not a christian or follower of any Abrahamic religions but I'm interested in History (especially of Africa but the world too).

I don't think it's fair to say Jesus didn't create Christianity because Paul (who probably never met him or heard him preaching) was very important in the history of Christianity. It's evident that what Jesus was preaching to the Jews wasn't exactly the form of Christianity there's is today in its various forms and denominations. All religions change with time. Even Christianity today is not a single block. There's catholic, protestant, orthodox, ethiopian, independant churches, gnostic, mormons, etc. Saying Jesus didn't create what would become Christianity because it's different now than it was before is not fair imo.

Jesus was a Jewish itinerant preachers like there was many of them at that time among Jewish people. Preaching different views and branches of Judaism at that time (Sadducee, Pharisees, Essene, itinerant preachers, etc). There's John the baptist, the teacher of Jesus but there was also many other ones. Itinerant preaching was part of the culture of the Jewish people at that time. Like Christianity and Islam today, Judaism also had different branches. There was no normative Judaism. All the early disciples of Jesus were Jews. Even Paul later on first started preaching in Synagogues among converted gentiles speaking Koine Greek (Jesus was speaking Aramaic not Koine Greek like Paul). Beside John the Baptist mentioned in the bible, there's other itinerant preachers like Jesus mentioned in the Bible like Elijah and Jeremiah.

In general, in Jewish history, there was a lot of messiah claimants (messiah announced in the Jewish tradition):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Messiah_claimants Some more popular like Simon of Peraea and Jesus, some less popular. John the Baptist was the teacher of Jesus.

Jesus was also a revolutionary. While still preaching the religion of his ancestor (Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, fidelity to the law of Moses, torah, etc) to fellow Jewish people, he was opposed the the Sadducee temple leaders/priests/jewish elite, who were also roman collaborators. Israel was under Roman occupation at the time of Jesus.

Hmmm! Jesus never preached what Christianity is preaching. He never left heaven to come and establish another religion. He came for something more than that. For we all know that religion is earthly,it is established by man. God never created any religion.
John the Baptist was not the teacher of Jesus,if Jesus had any teacher,the teacher is God. John the Baptist was only His fore runner,a messenger sent before Him to make straight the path. Jesus was more than a preacher,He is the Son of God. He came to bring the kingdom of God to earth.

Scholar8200:
Here is another personal opinion sans a shred of scriptural evidence!

I did not get you pls

hydeehip:
[color=#006600][/color]

BROS I Sincerely agree wit u thru d explanatn nd ur understandin which many christians will nt agree wit, even d bible said "seek d truth and d truth shall set you free"

31 Then Jesus said to those Judeans who had believed him, "If you continue to follow my teaching, you are really my disciples 32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."
John 8:31-32.
Jesus never said,seek the truth and the truth shall set you free.

AmunRaOlodumare:
Everything you say is ok. I even mentioned earlier Matthew 15:24 where Jesus basically says that he came only for Jewish people. You have the right to your own interpretations of what Jesus said and what Christianity means to you.

Everything we know about Jesus comes from what humans, early and later Christians, wrote about him. So you and I can't claim to know historical Jesus more than any of the past people. Even them, those who wrote things in the bible and other early christian works (Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Mary, James, Gospel of Mark, Paul, etc), didn't have full knowledge of the historical Jesus.

People who wrote in the Bible and other early Christians works, wrote what was important to them and their christian communities at the time of their writings. What they wrote was influenced by what they knew about Jesus and their current social situation. After the disappearance and end of influence of the first christian church called the Jerusalem Church. Different branches of Christianity started to develop away from the Jerusalem Church and its Jewish roots. For example, IIRC Mark's gospel seems closer to its Jewish roots while John the least closer iirc. It's influenced by the political situation of their christian communities when "Mark" and "John" wrote their gospels. John's christian community at the time must have faced harsh criticism and opposition from Jewish people in the roman empire practicing Judaism. Paul on the other hand was more concerned in making Christianity as something acceptable to the Romans authority (respecting the law, a slave must obey its master, etc). At the time, Romans view Christians just as another Jewish sect. Every writers in the Bible and other early christian works were influenced by the current situation of their community.

After the fall of the Jerusalem Church (which was led by the brother of Jesus, James). The first Christian Church. There was many different branches of Christianity. Different communities. Maybe the Ethiopian Church or the Protestants or the Catholics (with a large influence of paul) or the Gnostics have a message closer to Jesus's message or not. Clearly Jesus didn't write directly anything in the Bible. It doesn't really manner. What is important is what Christianity has become and what it means to you. Personally, since I'm not a christian or followers of any Abrahamic religions I see Christianity as a very influential religions (especially because of the Roman empire in Europe, and later, European colonialism) among many other equally interesting religions in the world (Buddhism, African religions, Chinese and Native Americans religions, Shinto, Islam, different branches of Christianity, Druidism, new religions, etc, etc). I guess I'm a bit more interested in African religions because I'm African.

In term of history, it seems the 4 Gospels chosen by the Roman Church (and other gospels like the Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Mary, etc), beside the influence of the christian community the writers were part of, were also influenced by a collection of Jesus saying called Q source. This Q source must have been similar to the Gospel of Thomas in its form. That is a collection of Jesus sayings. The Q source doesn't exist anymore.

Since Jesus didn't himself leave any writings or recorded messages, what is Christianity (a word Jesus didn't know), is what early Christians writers in the past and what Christians today make out of it.

Yes, Jesus said He came for the lost sheep of Israel. He preached,taught in their synagogues and performed miraculous signs. With all this,they did not believe in Him.
So He said,
For this reason I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit.
Matt 21:43.
He also told His disciples to preach to the ends of the earth.
You will make a very big mistake referring to Jesus disciples as Christians.

babafemi1000:
Thank you for this detailed explanation.

Still in learning mode, when Jesus said in matt 26:28 "this is my blood of the new covenant which is shed for many for the remission of sins", what did he mean? Especially as he also had said earlier that "..and to give his life as a ransom for many". (Matt 21:28)

Funny both verses occur in the 28th verses. Do they mean the same thing or different things?

These are honest questions.

The Spirit is the one who gives life; human nature is of no help! The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life.
John 6:63.
If you read through John 6,Jesus was saying He is the bread of life. Eat my flesh and drink my blood. After this saying,many disciples left Him. Afterwards,He said to those that can bear and endure His saying. The Spirit is the one who gives life,the human nature is of no help that means my flesh and my body are of no help,the Spirit is the one who gives life. The words that i speak to you are Spirit and are life.
According to Matthew,was He giving a prophecy because He had never died then talk less of being resurrected.
We can actually link Matthew 26 John 6. They are the same.
Can pls answer my honest question, why will God need the blood of His son before He forgive sins,knowing fully well what Jesus taught about forgiveness? Jesus said if you forgive those that sin against you,your heavenly father will forgive you your sins vice versa.

hydeehip:
[color=#006600][/color]

The law Jesus was referring to was the law God gave Moses,the ten commandments. The summary of this law is to love God with your every thing and love your neighbour as yourself.
When Jesus was telling the young rich ruler,He only mentioned the ten commandments not other laws.
He was not referring to other laws,i learnt that they were over 600 laws if i am not mistaken. Eating pork etc. Part of this other laws are laws Jesus intentionally broke and He revised some. Let me remind you,part of these supposed laws- don't work on Sabbath, which Jesus disobeyed,stone to death those that commit adultery ,you must not plant two different crops on the same land,to mention few.
Jesus said believe and continue in my teachings John 8:31.

efficiencie:
na wa o...some ppl just open their mouth and satan filled it...Was Paul a commissioner? Paul commissioned nothing. The name Christian was used by the citizens of Antioch to labelled the believers in Christ...Christ told Cephas that upom this rock will i build my church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it...Read the Bible without your blindfold of prejudice!

Lol. Was Jesus a commissioner too? I expected that reply from you,you are ready to defend your religion.
The word “Christians” was first used by the unbelievers to identify the church goers in Antioch who listened to Paul and Barnabas teach for one year. The people called Christians were disciples of Paul and Barnabas. They were not disciples of Jesus.
Paul never preached the same message as Jesus preached and taught. Jesus was from the Father,Paul was from?
Jesus told Peter on this rock(of revelation that Jesus is the son of God) i will build my church.
The word church ( Greek is kurios- lord's house) was used instead of the word ekklesia(called out ones). I don't know why ekklesia was substituted for kurios.
And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Matthew 16:18
I will build my called out ones,little ones,my flock and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

cckris:
A Christian can NEVER join you in worshiping Satan. Just leave the Bible for Christians.

worshipping satan,i don't get you. Jesus is who i follow. I worship God by believing and follow Jesus

Scholar8200:
By what criteria do you accept Gospel according to Luke but reject Acts of the Apostles written by the same author? Or by which do you accept Gospel according to John and reject 1,2,3 John and Revelations by the same author? Or by what do you accept Mark and jettison 1 & 2 Peter?Your claims suggest the apostles were inspired only when they wrote the Gospels and this you neither can prove nor could it ever be so!

And since Jesus said there are many things which the Spirit will teach but whish He would not say it means they were not to be found in any of the Gospels.
Besides, if we claim the Spirit came to make us islands of knowledge, by what do we test the spirits?
In John 15, Jesus specifically gave a criteria that NO ONE can ever fulfil but the 12 viz being with Him in His earthly ministry from the beginning! And He linked their witness with that which will be revealed by the Spirit!
15:26But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father,eventhe Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
15:27And ye also shall bear witness, because ye have been with me from the beginning.
John 15:26,27




So was Peter the only one at the Council in Acts 15?
And where did you get that from? Afterall you dont accept the Epistles!
Peter described inspiration thus,''...holy men of God spake as they were moved of the Holy Ghost''
Sometimes what was said was historical, or for the present or the future.

Illustration
I once read that the publishing house(Zondervan publishers) that published NIV bible also published one occultic or devilish book(the satanic bible). Should we now say that because it published an occultic book(the satanic bible),NIV bible is occultic or satanic,knowing fully well that is just only a publishing house(Zondervan publishers) that can publish any damn book?
Luke wrote Luke and Acts, John wrote John and also 1,2,3 John and revelation. Mark wrote Mark(the testimony of Peter),Peter wrote 1,2 Peter.
As i will always say,the gospels are clear accounts of Jesus's life only. I believe in the book of Luke not because Luke wrote it but because it contains the words of Jesus(accounts of Jesus life) same goes to other gospels.
I don't believe in revelation because it contradicts Jesus's teachings in the gospels .
Test spirits. I don't know about that but i remember Jesus saying
4 When he has brought all his own sheep out, he goes ahead of them, and the sheep follow him because they recognize his voice. 5 They will never follow a stranger, but will run away from him, because they do not recognize the stranger's voice."
John 10:4-5
His sheep will hear only His voice and no other voices not even the voice of those that claim that they saw Him
He also said
26 When the Advocate comes, whom I will send you from the Father - the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father - he will testify about me, 27 and you also will testify, because you have been with me from the beginning.
John 15:26-27.
The Holy Spirit will testify of Jesus and take of Jesus and give it unto. How can this same Holy Spirit contradicts Jesus in epistles and revelations.
Talking about Paul,he is something elsewhere. Paul is a false apostle and also a stranger.
4 When he has brought all his own sheep out, he goes ahead of them, and the sheep follow him because they recognize his voice. 5 They will never follow a stranger, but will run away from him, because they do not recognize the stranger's voice."
John 10:4-5.
Paul never knew Jesus,and does not want to know Him. He laid more emphasis on Jesus's death and resurrection rather His life because he didn't know him. He had opportunity to learn from Peter and James but he did not.
The Holy men Peter was referring to was the Prophets(contextual reading),he was not referring to Paul and others.

Empiree:
The dude is confused But do I blame him? No. You know why?. I have proved it before using Quran, why christian doctrines will always differ. Quran said so in Sura 5:14




"And from those who call themselves Christians, We took their covenant, but they have abandoned a good part of the Message that was sent to them. So We planted amongst them enmity and hatred till the Day of Resurrection (when they discarded Allah's Book, disobeyed Allah's Messengers and His Orders and transgressed beyond bounds in Allah's disobedience), and Allah will inform them of what they used to do".



^
Covenant talking about in this verse is the belief in Muhammad(Quran) and Jesus(Injeel). Because you rejected Quran, Allah says that you (Christians) will never concord on the same theology till Last Day. Isn't Quran correct?. I am going to add the brother, rexben in my list of another lone "christian" who believes in parts of the Book(Bible) but reject other parts. Matter of fact Quran speaks of that as well in Sura Baqarah (2:85)




"...............Do you then believe in a part of the Book and disbelieve in the other? What then is the re ward of such among you as do this but disgrace in the life of this world, and on the day of resurrection they shall be sent back to the most grievous chastisement, and Allah is not at all heedless of what you do."




Thats a clear warning and admonishment for you rexben. You will NEVER see any Muslims to reject part of Quran. Rejection of any verse of Quran take you outside te fold of Islam. Islam makes sense right?

Empiree,i wish you read to understand and not read to ask questions. Pls change,its for your own good. I wish you understood my last quote on your comments.
You have failed to understand that i am not a Christian. There are people that have close views or believes to christians and aren't christians(Anabaptists etc).
Lol. We planted amongst them enmity and hatred till the day of resurrection. What a good religion to follow. A selfish one for that matter.
I have nothing to do with either Christians and Muslims. Christianity,Islam,Buddhism,Judaism,etc are all in the same boat called religion. Each claims that theirs is the only true religion.Each fight,kills to defend its beliefs. All i do is to teach people to obey the commands of Jesus which can be found in Matthew,Mark,Luke and John and not to follow religion because it is evil. Matthew 28:20.

babafemi1000:
rexben you mentioned earlier that "Jesus was a ransom for our souls" and not "a sacrifice" as is commonly taught today. Kindly explain please. I want to know the truth.

Thanks.

just as the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."
Matt 20:28.
Paul brought the concept of sacrifice. Jesus never said He was a sacrificial lamb. All He said relating to sheep is that He is the good shepherd. He laid His life for His sheep as a ransom and not as a sacrifice.
Ransom,is a payment made to release the hostages or captives from the captor.
His sheep are the hostages and the devil is the captor. So,if you are not of Jesus you are automatically of the devil. Either of your Father, God or of your father,the devil.
He laid down His life as a ransom for His sheep to be free from the devil.
Sacrifice is made to a deity to appease it. So how will God delight in the blood of His son to be appeased,it sounds absurd. The sheep are under bondage of the devil not under the bondage of God,so how will you now appease God when devil is the one holding hostage.
Some might say,God is created the devil. That i know very well. But should He be appease before He should do what He needs to do? Or you will say God is angry with man? Have you forgotten John 3:16.
God cannot force man out of devil's custody. Man was created with the ability to make choices(the mind).
Jesus came to the earth to show man an escape route which is to believe in Jesus and God. To also be the disciple of Jesus by continuing in His word as recorded in Matthew,Mark,Luke and John only . So,man chooses to stay in the custody or leave. It is a matter of choice.

Scholar8200:
Paul was not the only apostle. How about the others? Do you reject their writings? And did Jesus not say that there will be those that will believe on Him through their (apostle's) words? And did not these apostles attest and verify Paul's ministry to the gentiles as being from The Lord Himself?
Pls address these questions.


Here you contradict He Whom you claim to follow:

20 Teach these new disciples to obey all the commands I have given you. And be sure of this: I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”
matthew 28:20

Firstly,the reason why the gospels was recorded and documented was because of Matthew 28:20. Jesus said teach all that I HAVE COMMANDED,TAUGHT,SHEW YOU. So that was why the life of Jesus was recorded.
Peter was the only one that recommended Paul. Peter was actually intimidated by Paul. You know Paul was an instinctive writer and preacher,he was also educated. Pls do check want Paul meant when He said the scriptures are inspired by God

Scholar8200:
In the Bible, you have, among others, portions of history, records and direct quotes of men etc all these were included by the Spirit's inspiration for a purpose.

Hmmm. Pls do check my new post,SCRIPTURES ARE SIGNPOSTS. You will get to know why. Thanks

Scholar8200:
So do i assume you also reject Revelations?

Yes sir

Scriptures are signposts.
38 nor do you have his word residing in you, because you do not believe the one whom he sent. 39 You study the scriptures thoroughly because you think in them you possess eternal life, and it is these same scriptures that testify about me, but are not willing to come unto me so that you may have life.
John 5:38-40.
According to Jesus,the scriptures are signpost,they only testify about Jesus.
NOTE:
When Jesus was talking about scriptures,He was referring to the Hebrew scripture/bible. John 5:39. When Paul was talking about the scriptures being given by the inspiration of God,he was also referring to the Hebrew bible. 2Timothy 3:16. This Hebrew bible is what protestants or pentecostals call the OLD TESTAMENT. Jesus or Paul was not referring to the whole bible.
Signpost: a post bearing a sign that gives directions or shows the way. All the scriptures can do for you is to show you Jesus.
Pls,when a signpost shows you the way to a particular place or shows you the particular place,what are you going to do next? Is it to sit and stay will the signpost,or to go to the place in question?
The scriptures have actually showed us Jesus,why are we still sitting and staying with it when we are to go and meet Jesus for life.
According to the passage above,Jesus never calls His words scripture. So,you will be wrong by calling Jesus's words scriptures. He never calls Matthew,Mark,Luke and John scriptures.
Come to Jesus today,stop romancing the signpost. The best it can do is to show you Jesus,it can not give you life. Jesus is the only one that can give life. He is the way,the truth and the life. John 14:6.
After getting to the destination,pls do you still need the signpost? No,you don't need it any longer.
After leaving the signpost to come to Jesus.
31 Then Jesus said to those Judeans who had believed him, "If you continue to follow my teaching, you are really my disciples 32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."
John 8:31-32.
Jesus says believe in Him. Also continue to follow His teachings as recorded in Matthew,Mark,Luke and John only. They are clear words of Jesus. Jesus teachings are not in all books of the bible. It can only be found in the gospels.
He also said,
I tell you the truth, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will never enter it."
Mark 10:15.
2 He called a child, had him stand among them, 3 and said, "I tell you the truth, unless you turn around and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven! 4 Whoever then humbles himself like this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
Matt 18:2-4
To follow Jesus,you receive His words as a little child.

Empiree:
You Are OYO man

Lol. I am not on my own. The Holy Spirit is with me

PastorAIO:
You don't want people to repent and be forgiven.

The relevant passage is Luke chapter 19.

For this reason I speak to them in parables: Although they see they do not see, and although they hear they do not hear nor do they understand.
Matt 13:13.
Parables aren't meant for everybody to understand. They are meant for disciples of Jesus. No matter how hard you try,you can't understand.
Pastor AIO,in order for you to repent or be forgiven,you first need to be born again,born from above. Jesus replied, "I tell you the solemn truth, unless a person is born from above, he cannot see the kingdom of God."
John 3:3.
To be born again simply means to be born the second time. And this second birth is a spiritual birth.
All you need to do is to believe in God and Jesus His son. You then continue in His words,teachings,so that you might become His disciple. John 8:31.
10 When he was alone, those around him with the twelve asked him about the parables. 11 He said to them, "The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those outside, everything is in parables,
Mark 4:10-11.
In order to understand parables,you must be a disciple of Jesus because it is the secret of the kingdom of heaven.
If you are not a disciple,you don't have any business knowing the secret of the kingdom of heaven because its of no use to you.

Empiree:



You confused man?






So you dont believe in other Books in the the Bible like this one?

Jesus said if you continue in my words,teachings then you are my disciple John8:31. As a disciple of Jesus,i am to follow only Jesus's words,teachings.
How am i confused,are trying to say that the whole books of the bible are Jesus teachings,words? No,Jesus teachings are recorded on in Matthew,Mark,Luke and John.

Empiree:
this contradicts another bible verse

Look,i don't follow the bible,i follow Jesus. I read and believes on in the words of Jesus not the bible. John 8:31-32,i continue in His words as recorded in Matthew,Mark,Luke and John only.

PastorAIO:
Regardless of when the act will be committed can we or can we not say that it is a violent act?

And Secondly, The cast of characters in the parable. Who are they that it will be okay for the acts committed to not be considered violent.

Parables are stories about the kingdom of heaven. The casts are not real,they represents people or things that are real. The casts are not real.
10 When he was alone, those around him with the twelve asked him about the parables. 11 He said to them, "The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those outside, everything is in parables, 12 so that although they look they may look but not see, and although they hear they may hear but not understand, so they may not repent and be forgiven . "
Mark 4:10-12

PastorAIO:
When a passage is a parable does that mean that it's contents are not to be taken as objective reality?

What I mean is, for example, most references to hell fire in the bible are found in parables and such where Jesus says that there will be 'gnashing and grinding of teeth'. Can we dismiss the fiery furnaces thus described as not being objectively real but simply part of a parable.

check this out.10 When he was alone, those around him with the twelve asked him about the parables. 11 He said to them, "The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those outside, everything is in parables, 12 so that although they look they may look but not see, and although they hear they may hear but not understand, so they may not repent and be forgiven . "
Mark 4:10-12

PastorAIO:
If it has nothing to do with this thread then why did you bring it up?

I'll remind you:



the reason you gave for why that is not a violence promoting verse is that we have to realise 'the timing of fulfilment and the characters that would be involved'.

It appears that you are saying that the act of beheading your enemies is NOT a violent act if done at a certain timing, and who the character who does it is.
Of course you can just deny this if you want, but if that is not what you are saying then explain what you're say in rephrased words.

Now this has been the flow of the conversation so I don't know why you're suddenly afraid to answer the question of who the characters are, even lying that it has nothing to do with this thread when you're the one that brought it up.

Pls can we get the biblical reference for the parable you guys are talking about.

Empiree:
^ when it comes to violence bible verses or undesirable phrases, it is always "parables". I hail thee. Christians dont carry last

Jesus never preached violence,He prevented His disciples from fighting,. He also rebuked His disciples when they asked Him to call down fire from above. He taught us not to resist an evil person. We should love our enemies,bless those that curse us. What more prove do you need. Be born again today Mr Empiree,Jesus loves you,He wants you to be among His flock.

Scholar8200:
That was a parable. Else, show us how John or Andrew executed this command.


1 Samuel 11:13
13 And Saul said, There shall not a man be put to death this day: for to day the Lord hath wrought salvation in Israel.


That was a Theocratic nation making that oath of their own volition, not applicable to other nationalities.
Here is the context:

And they entered into a covenant to seek the Lord God of their fathers with all their heart and with all their soul; 13 that whosoever would not seek the Lord God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. 14 And they sware unto the Lord with a loud voice, and with shouting, and with trumpets, and with cornets. 15 And all Judah rejoiced at the oath: for they had sworn with all their heart, and sought him with their whole desire; and he was found of them: and the Lord gave them rest round about.
2 Chronicles 15:12-15 They were even happy to do so!
God created all things.



That's a man to his spouse. God instituted marriage and everything (+ve) that goes on therein.

That's the report of two perverse girls, not a command from a prophet.

My ADVICE is always read thoroughly before asking questions.

I love your comments,they are accurate. The truth still remains that the bible is not the word of God. You can attest to it that many people spoke even demons,devil,humans out of lusts and pleasures of life,prophets spoke etc. Why do we call it the word of God? Are you calling this people words the word of God. God is not the one speaking when e demon is speaking etc. I am not a muslim,i a disciple of Jesus that believes on His word. John 8:31-32

Scholar8200:
That was a parable. Else, show us how John or Andrew executed this command.


1 Samuel 11:13
13 And Saul said, There shall not a man be put to death this day: for to day the Lord hath wrought salvation in Israel.


That was a Theocratic nation making that oath of their own volition, not applicable to other nationalities.
Here is the context:

And they entered into a covenant to seek the Lord God of their fathers with all their heart and with all their soul; 13 that whosoever would not seek the Lord God of Israel should be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. 14 And they sware unto the Lord with a loud voice, and with shouting, and with trumpets, and with cornets. 15 And all Judah rejoiced at the oath: for they had sworn with all their heart, and sought him with their whole desire; and he was found of them: and the Lord gave them rest round about.
2 Chronicles 15:12-15 They were even happy to do so!
God created all things.



That's a man to his spouse. God instituted marriage and everything (+ve) that goes on therein.

That's the report of two perverse girls, not a command from a prophet.

My ADVICE is always read thoroughly before asking questions.

I love your comments,they are accurate. The truth still remains that the bible is not the word of God. You can attest to it that many people spoke even demons,devil,humans out of lusts and pleasures of life,prophets spoke etc. I am not a muslim,i a disciple of Jesus that believes on His word. John 8:31-32

Scholar8200:
Op, Jesus in John 16:12 said He had many things to say but the disciples could not bear them then and said the Holy Ghost would reveal same when He comes and these are found in the Epistles. Disregarding those Epistles is disregarding Jesus Himself dont you think?

12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.

Jesus said the Holy Spirit not a man called Paul. Did you know why everyone that is born again has the Holy Spirit? It is because it is written"they will be taught by God","no one will have to tell His neighbor to know the Lord,because the law will be written in their heart. So you can see that Paul should not teach you,the Holy Spirit should teach you

petkoffDrake:
Guy no time

No time for your Father (if He is actually your Father). What can it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his soul. The life of a man that not consists in the abundance of things He owns.

Empiree:
but other prophets and messangers made the same claim in their time, that they are the only way to God. So it makes sense when Jesus said that at that time.

Jesus was or is not a messenger. Don't compare Him with liars that came to the earth deceiving people. He came from the Father and returned to the Father. No matter the arguments,you can change the truth. Jesus is the son of God. John 3:16. For God so love the world that He gave HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON(JESUS).

Empiree:
So he was born by God? (astagfurllah)

meaning?