He doesnt exist. (((THEY))) do, and have done exactly what paul said.
Revelation 2:9
I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.
Revelation 3:9
Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.
John 8
47 He that is of God heareth God’s words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.
48 Then answered the Jews, and said unto him, Say we not well that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil? 49 Jesus answered, I have not a devil; but I honour my Father, and ye do dishonour me. 50 And I seek not mine own glory: there is one that seeketh and judgeth. 51 Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.
52 Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death. 53 Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom makest thou thyself? 54 Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing: it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God: 55 yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying. 56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad. 57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham? 58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
59 Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.
You'll find out the truth of it on judgment day, won't you tomi? The same word that you reject now as God's message to us will stand as your judge on that day.
Meantime, you can avoid finding yourself on the wrong side of that judgment by reading such books as F F Bruce's 'The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?', J B Phillips' 'Ring of Truth', or even B M Metzger's 'The Text of the New Testament - Its Transmission, Corruption and Restoration'. All three are top drawer scholars who will show all your skeptics a clean pair of heels where this subject is concerned. And there are many others I could cite, but I hafta draw the line somewhere.
So, either consider the evidence on the other side of that coin, or simply continue to spout your litany of half truths, gross misrepresentations of the facts, and even outright lies. While some readers might be fooled by your agnostic rationalism, hopefully the majority will see straight thru your unashamed appeal to and use of straw men.
Or were you perhaps just being deliberately provocative to draw a counterblast from me? Coz if so, then you know me far too well than is good for your own health.
"Then tell me Loquat what's your assertion ?"
Seriously? You can't work that out for yourself from the earlier exchange? All that vexatious drivel rotted your brain has it?
"Don't call me an agnostic"
"...mixed up like a packet of liquorish allsorts..."
"You have the gall to call it gods word."
"While your at it mate show me where I have lied."
Funny how the 1st & 3rd 'prophecies' flatly contradict each other, innit? The eschatology of the 1st immediately marks it out as false, so I'm gonna call 'false prophet' on all 3.
Yes indeedee Refreshed. The difference you ask? I'll let ya into a little secret.
Anything that glorifies Jesus, anything that preaches Him as the crucified and risen Lord of all creation who now sits at the Father's right hand, anything that maginifies Him to the personal cost of the messenger, anything that encourages us in these truths and helps us to grow in the faith, anything that emboldens us to be faithful witnesses to the salvation that is the free gift to all those who believe; all these, and more in similar vein, I would suggest are the true hallmarks of messages from God.
In clear contradistinction to all these, anything that puffs up or promotes the messengers, anything that flatters their ego, panders to their pride, or enriches them to the cost of their 'followers'; anything that leaves those followers spiritually impoverished [I wanted to slash my own wrists after just a few minutes of listening to Paula White]; any-thing that turns out to be proved false by the mere passage of time, anything that brings the faith into disrepute ........ well, those are just a few examples by way of illustration, but I hope you catch my drift.
Does that answer your question?
Sure glad I was finally able to answer a question from you without provoking the usual high horse reaction.
However, case in point. I thought that second name (Maurice Sklar) looked familiar, and sure enough, a cursory search confirmed this to be none other than the Sklar of Sadhu Sundar Selvaraj 'associate' fame, about whom Rainy and I have posted before. Except, of course, she was impressed by Selvaraj's 'revelations' - initially at least. This article is a good exposé of Sklar, Selvaraj's partner in crime - sorry - I mean prophecy:
https://endtimedelusion.com/2012/09/08/maurice-sklar-strikes-the-mother-lode-...
.......and it's interesting to note that this was originally a Benny Hinn 'prophecy' dating back to the late 80's. Hinn himself was 'only' 23 years out regarding Billy Graham's death, which is pretty good going for a false prophet.
But of special interest to me are the last few paragraphs of the article, which amount to an elaboration of what I have written above about distinguishing the true from the false. I'm glad to see that I'm not alone in thinking these might be sound principles that help us discern truth from falsehood.
The upshot of all this though is that our friend apparently rejects the historic Christian faith coz of what he's pleased to call its association with organised religion, etc., yet he's happy to quote false prophets instead. I can only assume he approves of the messages of these false prophets. BTW, did I mention that these prophets were false? No? Then please allow me to correct that heinous omission - they are all false prophets. All of them. False.
All of which goes to prove that old adage that the person who rejects belief in God will believe anything.
They can be just as false, like the one you quoted and I immediately found error in. Alexander was it? If I found error that quickly in a small portion of his book that you quoted, then how much more would I find if I read his whole book?
As vekky's reply suggests, you have a strange concept of what constitutes error. By your definition, yes, you will indeed find 'error' in every single paragraph of his writings. Like me, he belongs to the 'Jacked Up' school of prophetic interpretation - just like every inspired writer of the NT in fact.
His interpretation of the symbolic significance of Hosea's wife is a widely held view within the ranks of conservative scholarship, and is even advocated by no less an authority than the mighty Hengstenberg himself. In fact, those who hold this view are only slightly outnumbered by those who believe she was an historical person, even though she is still regarded by them as a type for faithless Israel. To call this 'error' is a severe case of over-egging the pudding, and greatly devalues any impact your criticism of him might have had.
But by all means continue to deprive yourself of the rich pickings that are available to you in his writings, lest you unwittingly fall victim to yet more such grievous 'errors'.
and dont think for one second that anything has changed for the better.
Almost 50 years ago I was shown a photo of an unusual cloud formation. It looked uncannily like the 'classical' representations of Jesus' image with which we are all familiar. The owner of the photo claimed this miraculous appearance of Jesus' image in the clouds was proof of His imminent second advent.
Of course, I knew then this was complete nonsense, but I kept my own counsel. I didn't want to hurt this old man's feelings, so I feigned mild amazement at this wonderful 'sign'. This brother must be with his Lord by now, and hopefully he now knows what he didn't know when he showed me that photo.
Pieces of burnt toast or cloud formations that look like Jesus are not signs of His coming, but the febrile atmosphere created by sensationalised apocalyptic expectations (eg Left Behind) misleads many into seeing exactly these kind of 'signs' in the ordinary and mundane.
Unless, of course, you are one of those who believes that 'imminent' can mean more than 50 years away.
Refreshed: I'm sure there are many variants on the same theme, and at least a few of them forgeries by some imaginative and over-zealous photographers. The photo I saw was exclusively aerial, so evidently not the same image as the one belonging to your uncle. It was also quite blurred and impossible to judge scale, coz there was nothing else in the image against which to gauge it.
Agreed re. Freemasonry - it's just one of many corruptions of Christianity. The Gnosticism that plagued the early church is arguably its antecedent. You don't hear so much about Rosicrucians these days. I wonder where they've all gone?
.
Interesting exchange that also yielded a link that led directly to the photo in question:
http://www.euro-tongil.org/swedish/english/ej50.htm
Sometimes I amaze myself by my powers of recollection. So the photo I saw was already 20+ years old. A total to date of 67 yrs and counting. As a precursor sign of the second advent, I'd say that was a pretty poor show. Who's to say another 67 years won't pass before that happens? Or more even?
Yet another reason we should all avoid date-setting.
Add This Forum To Your Favorites!
Challenge the message and not the messenger!
The first person to resort to name calling and personal attacks automatically loses the debate!
Personal attack is often the best indication that the writer knows his logic is flawed and therefore tries to deflect attention by attacking the opponent, instead of attacking the arguments of the opponent.
Forum Stats:
forum viewed 1,348,435 times
2,550 messages
221 topics
topics per page limited to: 8
average number of messages per page: 94
27 pages
CureZone Newsletter is distributed in partnership with www.netatlantic.com
Copyright 1999 - 2024 www.curezone.org