COMBINATION OF [1]  THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] Discourse on the Whether Christ is Divine:
 
[1]   SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 289A]
 
 
Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.  21  Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.John 4:20 – 21,[authorized King James Bible; AV]
 
Here we have an interesting conversation between Jesus (Yeshua) and a Samaritan women at a well where she says her ancestors said they should worship is a specific mountain, but the Jews say you should worship in Jerusalem.  But Mark reports Jesus (Yeshua) as saying at Mark 14:58, [AV] “We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.”  Clearly showing that worship should be in faith and truth, not necessarily at a particular place.  In fact dthe Prophet Malachi made this fact known before the arrival of Jesus (Yeshua) when he wrote under inspiration as Malachi 1:11, [AV] “For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the LORD of hosts.”  
  
TO LEARN MORE ABOUT RELIGION AND THE BIBLE, GO TO, 
 
1) http://iris89.conforums.com/ 
 
2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/ 
 
3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/ 
 
4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/ 
 
5) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/ 
 
6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/ 
 
7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/ 
 
To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/thread/1417398076/last-1417398076/Digital+Book+On+18+Part+Follow+Christ+Bible+Study 
 
Your Friend in Christ Iris89 
 
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to WWW.JW.ORG!
 
 
[2]    Discourse on the Whether Christ is Divine:
 
Many claim are made with respect the Divinity of Jesus Christ, but when we use a little reasoning on the subject it is seen as much ado about nothing.
 
Sure he is divine as clearly shown by common sense as follows:
 
The son of a dog is a dog; whereas, a son of Almighty God (YHWH) is of course a god or godlike thus divine. This is clearly shown by the meaning of the word as follows:
 
(from Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary)
divine (GOD-LIKE) adjective
connected with a god, or like a god:
The Ayatollah described the earthquake in Iran as a divine test.
Some fans seem to regard footballers as divine beings.
England have fallen so far behind in the championship that their only hope of victory is divine intervention (= help from God).
Just because you've been promoted that doesn't give you a divine right (= one like that of a god) to tell us all what to do.
 
Oxford Dictionary
divine = /d"van/ adjective (-r, -st) 1 of, from, or like God or a god; sacred. 2 colloquial excellent. verb (-ning) 1 discover by intuition or guessing. 2 foresee. 3 practise divination. noun theologian. divining-rod dowser's forked twig. divinely adverb.
 
Wordsmyth Dictionary
1. a religious scholar or clergyman. Similar Words exegete , minister , cleric , clergyman , bishop , theologian , prelate , priest , religious
2. Definition 2. (cap.) God (usu. prec. by the). Synonyms Godhead {godhead (2)} , Divinity {divinity (2)} , Omnipotent {omnipotent} , Omniscient {omniscient} , God {god (2)} , Deity {deity (4)} Similar Words celestial
3. Definition 3. (sometimes cap.) the spiritual or godlike, as opposed to the earthly or worldly. Similar Words divinity
 
The American Heritage(r) Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. Divine
SYLLABICATION: di·vine PRONUNCIATION: /61/wavs/43/D0304300.wav/61/wavs/43/D0304300.wavd-vn ADJECTIVE: Inflected forms: di·vin·er, di·vin·est
1a. Having the nature of or being a deity. b. Of, relating to, emanating from, or being the expression of a deity: sought divine guidance through meditation. c. Being in the service or worship of a deity; sacred. 2. Superhuman; godlike. 3a. Supremely good or beautiful; magnificent: a divine performance of the concerto. b. Extremely pleasant; delightful: had a divine time at the ball. 4. Heavenly; perfect. NOUN: 1. A cleric. 2. A theologian. VERB: Inflected forms: di·vined, di·vin·ing, di·vines
TRANSITIVE VERB: 1. To foretell through or as if through the art of divination. See synonyms at foretell. 2a. To know by inspiration, intuition, or reflection. b. To guess. 3. To locate (underground water or minerals) with a divining rod; douse. INTRANSITIVE VERB: 1. To practice divination. 2. To guess. ETYMOLOGY: Middle English, from Old French devine, from Latin dvnus, divine, foreseeing, from dvus, god. See dyeu- in Appendix I. V., Middle English divinen, from Old French deviner, from Latin dvnre, from dvnus.
 
LEARN MORE AT   WWW.JW.ORG

COMBINATION OF [1]  THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2]   Short Digital Book On The Historic Jesus (Yeshua) Christ: (IN TWO PARTS, VOL 291A AND VOL 292A)
[1]    SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 291A]
 
 
My foot standeth in an even place: in the congregations will I bless the LORD.  Psalms 26:12, [authorized King James Bible; AV]
 
Almighty God (YHWH) does, 1 Samuel 2:9, [Rotherham Bible, RO] “The feet of his loving ones, he doth guard, But, the lawless, in darkness shall be silent,––For, by strength, shall no man prevail.”  An Psalms 68:26, says, [AV] “Thy God hath commanded thy strength: strengthen, O God, that which thou hast wrought for us.”  As Psalms 107:31 – 32, [AV] “Oh that men would praise the LORD for his goodness, and for his wonderful works to the children of men!  32  Let them exalt him also in the congregation of the people, and praise him in the assembly of the elders.”  All should praise Him per Psalms 111:1, [AV] “Praise ye the LORD. I will praise the LORD with my whole heart, in the assembly of the upright, and in the congregation.  2  The works of the LORD are great, sought out of all them that have pleasure therein.”  
  
TO LEARN MORE ABOUT RELIGION AND THE BIBLE, GO TO, 
 
1) http://iris89.conforums.com/ 
 
2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/ 
 
3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/ 
 
4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/ 
 
5) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/ 
 
6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/ 
 
7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/ 
 
To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/thread/1417398076/last-1417398076/Digital+Book+On+18+Part+Follow+Christ+Bible+Study 
 
Your Friend in Christ Iris89 
 
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to WWW.JW.ORG!
 
[2]    Short Digital Book On The Historic Jesus (Yeshua) Christ:
 
By Iris the Preacher
 
INTRODUCTION:
 
Worldly critics do not want to accept the Inspired Word of Almighty God (YHWH), the Bible, and are always trying to find fault with it and failing to apply the constraints given in it when applying logic and reasoning. In fact, they sometimes even label events whose understanding is simple if you apply the constraints therein given by calling them contradictions which they are not.
 
In addition, they often claim, without proof of course, that accounts about him by contemporary historians have been "doctored". Why, because they want to justify their none belief in their Creator, Almighty God (YHWH).
<<<"Interestingly, the first type of records comes from what are known commonly as "hostile" sources-writers who mentioned Jesus in a negative light or derogatory fashion. Such penmen certainly were not predisposed to further the cause of Christ or otherwise to add credence to His existence. In fact, quite the opposite is true. They rejected His teachings and often reviled Him as well. Thus, one can appeal to them without the charge of built-in bias. " [source - Apologetics Press :: Reason & Revelation, The Historical Christ-Fact or Fiction? by Kyle Butt, M.A., sub-part HOSTILE TESTIMONY]>>>.
 
Interestingly, as noted by E.P. Sanders in his book, "The Historical Figure of Jesus," at page 49, he noted that most of the First Century literature that survives unto today that mentions Jesus (Yeshua) was written by a small elite class of Romans that detested him and considered his as "merely a troublesome rabble-rouser and magician."[source - The Historical Figure of Jesus, by E.P. Sanders 1933, at page 49].
 
With respect C. Tacitus, It is well known that he hated Jesus (Yeshua) and regarded him as a troublesome rabble-rouser and had nothing positive to say about what he referred to as a "deadly superstition," but readily admitted that this individual that he hated had existed as we have seen previously. <<<" His testimony establishes beyond any reasonable doubt that the Christian religion not only was relevant historically, but that Christ, as its originator, was a verifiable historical figure of such prominence that He even attracted the attention of the Roman emperor himself!" [source - Apologetics Press :: Reason & Revelation, The Historical Christ-Fact or Fiction? by Kyle Butt, M.A., sub-part HOSTILE TESTIMONY]>>>.
 
Therefore the only conclusion is that Jesus (Yeshua) was a real person, and that more has been written about him than any other person in human history. <<<" Critics do not like having to admit it, but they cannot successfully deny the fact that Jesus had a greater impact on the world than any single life before or after. Nor can they deny the fact that Jesus died at the hands of Pontius Pilate." !" [source - Apologetics Press :: Reason & Revelation, The Historical Christ-Fact or Fiction? by Kyle Butt, M.A., sub-part HOSTILE TESTIMONY]>>>.
 
Michael Grant stated (in 1977) that the view is derived from a lack of application of historical methods: <<<"...if we apply to the New Testament, as we should, the same sort of criteria as we should apply to other ancient writings containing historical material, we can no more reject Jesus' existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned. ... To sum up, modern critical methods fail to support the Christ myth theory. It has 'again and again been answered and annihilated by first rank scholars.' In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary." [source - M. Grant, Jesus: An Historian's Review, pp. 199-200 , as provided by Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus on 03/19/2008]>>>.
 
And the New Testament is full of eyewitness accounts by the Apostles and Disciples of Jesus (Yeshua) that associated with him during his life and no such account exist for any other personage of antiquity.
 
THE REALITY:
 
WITH RESPECT FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS:
 
Worldly critics make the false claim which on the surface sound valid, but on closer examination are not. Let's look at one of these:
 
<<<" The Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, writing during the second half of the first century CE, produced two major works: History of the Jewish War and Antiquities of the Jews. Two apparent references to Jesus occur in the second of these works. The longer, and more famous passage, occurs in Book 18 of Antiquities and reads as follows (taken from the standard accepted Greek text of Antiquities 18:63-64 by L. H. Feldman in the Loeb Classical Library):
 
About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who wrought surprising feats and as a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing amongst us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared to them restored to life, for the prophets of God had prophesied these and countless other marvellous things about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.
 
This passage is called the Testimonium Flavianum, and is sometimes cited by propagandists as independent confirmation of Jesus' existence and resurrection. However, there is excellent reason to suppose that this passage was not written in its present form by Josephus, but was either inserted or amended by later Christians:
 
1. The early Christian writer Origen claims that Josephus did NOT recognize Jesus as the Messiah, in direct contradiction to the above passage, where Josephus says, "He was the Messiah." Thus, we may conclude that this particular phrase at least was a later insertion. (The version given above was, however, known to Jerome and in the time of Eusebius. Jerome's Latin version, however, renders "He was the Messiah" by "He was believed to be the Christ.") Furthermore, other early Christian writers fail to cite this passage, even though it would have suited their purposes to do so. There is thus firm evidence that this passage was tampered with at some point, even if parts of it do date back to Josephus.
 
2. The passage is highly pro-Christian. It is hard to imagine that Josephus, a Pharisaic Jew, would write such a laudatory passage about a man supposedly killed for blasphemy. Indeed, the passage seems to make Josephus himself out to be a Christian, which was certainly not the case.
 
Many Biblical scholars reject the entire Testimonium Flavianum as a later Christian insertion. However, some maintain that Josephus's work originally did refer to Jesus, but that Christian copyists later expanded and made the text more favorable to Jesus. These scholars cite such phrases as "tribe of Christians" and "wise man" as being atypical Christian usages, but plausible if coming from a first century Palestinian Jew. Of course, a suitably clever Christian wishing to "dress up" Josephus would not have much trouble imitating his style.
 
Philip Burns (pib@merle.acns.nwu.edu) has provided some of the following material on the following alternate versions or reconstructions of the Testimonium Flavianum.
 
One possible reconstruction of the Testimonium Flavianum, suggested by James Charlesworth, goes like this, with probably Christian interpolations enclosed in brackets: [source - not given by worldly critic posting same]>>>.
 
Now on close examination of this critics writings we see internal problems as follows to their false contentions regarding Jesus (Yeshua).
 
<<<" The early Christian writer Origen claims that Josephus did NOT recognize Jesus as the Messiah[[Thereby testifying to his real existence]][[Of course Josephus did not recognize him as the Messiah, but that is far different from that of recognizing his existence and is like saying an American did not recognize Adolph Hitler as his leader which in no way implies none recognition of his having existed.]][[As to calling him the Messiah, that would be like historian H.G. Wells calling Adolph Hitler the leader of the Axis Powers, and in no way implying his belief in him as his leader]], in direct contradiction to the above passage, where Josephus says, "He was the Messiah." Thus, we may conclude that this particular phrase at least was a later insertion. (The version given above was, however, known to Jerome and in the time of Eusebius[[Early scholars did not question whether Jesus (Yeshua) had existed, only later critics far removed in time from his day did]]. Jerome's Latin version, however, renders "He was the Messiah" by "He was believed to be the Christ.") Furthermore, other early Christian writers fail to cite this passage, even though it would have suited their purposes to do so. There is thus firm evidence that this passage was tampered with at some point, even if parts of it do date back to Josephus. ">>>.
 
Now let's look at another passage in Josephus' "Antiquities of the Jews" found on page 598 of "The Life and Works of Flavius Josephus,
 
<<<"Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the Sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned; but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done; they also sent to the king [Agrippa], desiring him to send to Ananus that he should act so no more, for that what he had already done was not to be justified; nay, some of them went also to meet Albinus, as he was upon his journey from Alexandria, and informed him that it was not lawful for Ananus to assemble a Sanhedrim without his consent." [source - The Life and Works of Flavius Josephus, translated by William Whiston, A.M. and Published by The John C. Winston Company, and containing the "Antiquities of the Jews" and the "Wars of the Jews" and other items, page 598]>>>.
 
Also, these critics willfully overlook what Josephus said with regard to John the Baptist as follows,
 
<<<"2. Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and that very justly, as punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist; for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and as to come to baptism; for the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness. Now when [many] others came in crowds about him, for they were very greatly moved [or pleased] by hearing his words, Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion, (for they seemed ready to do any thing he should advise,) thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties, bty sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it should be too late. Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod's suspicious temper, to Macherus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there put to death. Now the Jews had an opinion that the destruction of this army was sent as a punishment upon Herod, and a mark of God's displeasure to him." ." [source - The Life and Works of Flavius Josephus, translated by William Whiston, A.M. and Published by The John C. Winston Company, and containing the "Antiquities of the Jews" and the "Wars of the Jews" and other items, page 540.]>>>.
 
And now let's look at the passage in the Antiquities of the Jews that the critics like to claim was doctored in context, but goes right in the flow with everything else Josephus wrote,
 
<<<"...So he bid the Jews himself go away; but they bodily casting reproaches upon him, he gave the soldiers that signal which had been beforehand agreed on; who laid upon them such greater blows than Pilate had commanded them, and equally punished those that were tumultuous, and those that were not; nor did they spare them in the least; and since the people were unarmed, and were caught by men prepared for what they were about, there were a great number of them slain by this means, and others of them ran away wounded. And thus an end was put to this sedition.
 
3. Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was {the} Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him are not extinct at this day.
 
4. About the same time also another sad calamity put the Jews into disorder, and certain shameful practices happened about the temple of Isis that was at Rome. I will now first take notice of the wicked attempts about the temple of Isis, and will then give an account of the Jewish affairs. ..." [source - The Life and Works of Flavius Josephus, translated by William Whiston, A.M. and Published by The John C. Winston Company, and containing the "Antiquities of the Jews" and the "Wars of the Jews" and other items, page 535]>>>.
 
Now, Yes, Flavius Josephus was a Jew and almost certainly did not believe in Jesus (Yeshua) as the Christ, but he was employed by the Roman Army as a historian and dutifully recorded reality whether he agreed religiously with it or not, just as well-known Roman Chatholic historian Will Durant did, who wrote, "Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it ... pagan cultures contributed to the syncretist results. From Egypt came the ideas of a divine trinity ... [Caesar and Christ, page 595) (Lamson, Newton & Durant)]. The problem is critics do NOT want to recognize the objectivity of good historians and compilers of facts, but wish to unjustly use their objectivity to claim their works have been doctored and/or are just plain wrong.
 
Some claim what Josephus wrote are forgeries, but an examination of his work quickly shows this can not be the case.   Let's look at some of what he wrote in brief:
 
<<<"Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others [or, some of his companions]: and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, [source - "Antiquities of the Jews, from The Life and Works of Flavius Josephus as translated by William Whiston, A.M., published by the John C. Winston Co., of Philadelphia, page 598.]>>>.
 
And
 
<<<"2. Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from god, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the baptist; for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards god, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified before hand by righteousness.   Now when [many] others came in crowds about him, for they were very greatly moved [or pleased] by hearing his words, Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion, (for they seemed ready to do any thing he should advise,) thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties, by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it should be too late. [source - "Antiquities of the Jews, from The Life and Works of Flavius Josephus as translated by William Whiston, A.M., published by the John C. Winston Co., of Philadelphia, page 540.]>>>.
 
And,
 
<<<"3. Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher os such men as receive the truth with pleasure.   He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles.   He was [the] Christ.   And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned his to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him.   Ant the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day. [source - "Antiquities of the Jews, from The Life and Works of Flavius Josephus as translated by William Whiston, A.M., published by the John C. Winston Co., of Philadelphia, page 535.]>>>.
 
And,
 
<<<"Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus recorded information pertaining to Jesus, thus removing the only supporting source for His existence as being in the New Testament. In 115 A.D., Tactius wrote about the great fire in Rome, "Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberious at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths, Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man's cruelty, that they were being destroyed."
It is believed by some scholars that Tactius gained his information about Christ from official records, perhaps actual reports written by Pilate. Tactius also wrote about the burning of the Jerusalem temple by the Romans in 70 A.D. The Christians are mentioned as a group that were connected with these events. "All we can gather from this reference is that Tactius was also aware of the existence of Christians other than in the context of their presence in Rome," states Habermas. Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas, chief secretary of Emperor Hadrian, wrote, "Because the Jews at Rome caused continuous disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from the City." Chrestus is a variant spelling of Christ. Suetonius refers to a wave of riots that broke out in a large Jewish community in Rome during the year 49 A.D. As a result, the Jews were banished from the city....
 
WITH RESPECT P. CORNELIUS TACTIUS (AD 56 - C. 120):
 
(Cornelius Tacitus), c.A.D. 55-c.A.D. 117, Roman historian. Little is known for certain of his life. He was a friend of Pliny the Younger and married the daughter of Cnaeus Julius Agricola. In A.D. 97 he was appointed substitute consul under Nerva, and later he was proconsul of Asia. The first of his works was the Dialogus [dialogue], a discussion of oratory in the style of Cicero, demonstrating to some degree why Tacitus was celebrated as an eloquent speaker; this work was long disputed, but his authorship is now generally accepted. Tacitus then wrote a biography of Agricola, expressing his admiration for his father-in-law as a good and able man. His small treatise De origine et situ Germanorum [concerning the origin and location of the Germans], commonly called the Germania or Germany, supplies (along with the earlier account of Julius Caesar) the principal written material on the Germanic tribes. Archaeology bears out the accuracy of Tacitus, but the work is not objective; it is a picture of the simple Germans glorified by comparison with the corruption and luxurious immorality of the Romans. This moral purpose and severe criticism of contemporary Rome, fallen from the virtuous vigor of the old republic, also underlies his two long works, commonly called in English the Histories (of which four books and part of a fifth survive) and the Annals (of which twelve books-Books I-VI, XI-XVI-survive). The extant books of the Histories cover only the reign of Galba (A.D. 68-69) and the beginning (to A.D. 70) of the reign of Vespasian but give a thorough view of Roman life-persons, places, and events. The surviving books of the Annals tell of the reign of Tiberius, of the last years of Claudius, and of the first years of Nero. The account contains incisive character sketches, ironic passages, and eloquent moral conclusions. The declamatory writing of the Dialogus is replaced in the historical works by a polished and highly individual style, a wide range of vocabulary, and an intricate and startling syntax.[source - The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001-07].
 
And another encyclopedia said, <<<" Publius (or Gaius) Cornelius Tacitus (ca. 56 - ca. 117) was a senator and a historian of the Roman Empire. The surviving portions of his two major works-the Annals and the Histories-examine the reigns of the Roman Emperors Tiberius, Claudius, Nero and those that reigned in the Year of the Four Emperors. These two works span the history of the Roman Empire from the death of Augustus in 14 AD to (presumably) the death of emperor Domitian in 96 AD. There are significant lacunae in the surviving texts.
 
Other works by Tacitus discuss oratory (in dialogue format, see Dialogus de oratoribus), Germania (in De origine et situ Germanorum), and biographical notes about his father-in-law Agricola, primarily during his campaign in Britannia (see De vita et moribus Iulii Agricolae).
 
Tacitus' historiographical style in his major works is annalistic. An author writing in the latter part of the Silver Age of Latin literature, his work is distinguished by a boldness and sharpness of wit, and a compact and sometimes unconventional use of Latin."[source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia]>>>.
 
Now let's look at what this none Christian worshipper of the Unconquered Sun had to say about Jesus (Yeshua). <<<" The Roman historian Tacitus, writing in his Annals (c. 116) about the Great Fire of Rome (64), included an account of how the emperor Nero blamed the Christians in Rome for the disaster and initiated the first known persecution of early Christians by the Romans. This has become one of the best known and most discussed passages of Tacitus' works.[1] Although partly aimed at showing the inhumanity of the emperor, Tacitus' remarks have been studied more by modern scholars for information about his own religious attitudes and about the early history of Christianity.
 
Tacitus describes the support for the homeless provided by Nero and the rebuilding of the city, then refers to religious rituals carried out based on a consultation of the Sibylline Books.[2] However, none of this did away with the suspicion that the fire had been started on Nero's orders:
 
Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.
 
Tacitus then returns to the topic of Nero's reputation and the effect on it of these events: "Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man's cruelty, that they were being destroyed."[3]
 
References:
 
1. ^ Syme 533 n. 5 ("This famous chapter has provoked an enormous literature...").
 
2. ^ Tacitus, Annals 15.39-43.
 
3. ^ a b Tacitus, Annals 15.44, translated by Church and Brodribb.
 
[source - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia]>>>
 
The Catholic Encyclopedia said the following on C. Tactius,
 
<<<" We possess at least the testimony of Tacitus (A.D. 54-119) for the statements that the Founder of the Christian religion, a deadly superstition in the eyes of the Romans, had been put to death by the procurator Pontius Pilate under the reign of Tiberius; that His religion, though suppressed for a time, broke forth again not only throughout Judea where it had originated, but even in Rome, the conflux of all the streams of wickness and shamelessness; furthermore, that Nero had diverted from himself the suspicion of the burning of Rome by charging the Christians with the crime; that these latter were not guilty of arson, though they deserved their fate on account of their universal misanthropy. Tacitus, moreover, describes some of the horrible torments to which Nero subjected the Christians (Ann., XV, xliv). The Roman writer confounds the Christians with the Jews, considering them as a especially abject Jewish sect; how little he investigated the historical truth of even the Jewish records may be inferred from the credulity with which he accepted the absurd legends and calumnies about the origin of he Hebrew people (Hist., V, iii, iv)..
 
AND, Those who regard the passage as spurious,
 
First, there are those who consider the whole passage as spurious. The principal reasons for this view appear to be the following:
 
* Josephus could not represent Jesus Christ as a simple moralist, and on the other hand he could not emphasize the Messianic prophecies and expectations without offending the Roman susceptibilities;
 
* the above cited passage from Josephus is said to be unknown to Origen and the earlier patristic writers;
 
* its very place in the Josephan text is uncertain, since Eusebius (Hist. Eccl., II, vi) must have found it before the notices concerning Pilate, while it now stands after them.
 
But the spuriousness of the disputed Josephan passage does not imply the historian's ignorance of the facts connected with Jesus Christ. Josephus's report of his own juvenile precocity before the Jewish teachers (Vit., 2) reminds one of the story of Christ's stay in the Temple at the age of twelve; the description of his shipwreck on his journey to Rome (Vit., 3) recalls St. Paul's shipwreck as told in the Acts; finally his arbitrary introduction of a deceit practised by the priests of Isis on a Roman lady, after the chapter containing his supposed allusion to Jesus, shows a disposition to explain away the virgin birth of Jesus and to prepare the falsehoods embodied in the later Jewish writings.".[source - The Catholic Encyclopedia]>>>.
 
OTHER EARLY PAGAN WRITERS ON CHRIST:
 
Here is what some other early pagan writers who lived in the First Century had to say about Christ,
 
<<<"B. Suetonius, Another Roman writer who shows his acquaintance with Christ and the Christians is Suetonius (A.D. 75-160). It has been noted that Suetonius considered Christ (Chrestus) as a Roman insurgent who stirred up seditions under the reign of Claudius (A.D. 41-54): "Judaeos, impulsore Chresto, assidue tumultuantes (Claudius) Roma expulit" (Clau., xxv). In his life of Nero he regards that emperor as a public benefactor on account of his severe treatment of the Christians: "Multa sub eo et animadversa severe, et coercita, nec minus instituta . . . . afflicti Christiani, genus hominum superstitious novae et maleficae" (Nero, xvi). The Roman writer does not understand that the Jewish troubles arose from the Jewish antagonism to the Messianic character of Jesus Christ and to the rights of the Christian Church.
 
C. Pliny the Younger
 
Of greater importance is the letter of Pliny the Younger to the Emperor Trajan (about A.D. 61-115), in which the Governor of Bithynia consults his imperial majesty as to how to deal with the Christians living within his jurisdiction. On the one hand, their lives were confessedly innocent; no crime could be proved against them excepting their Christian belief, which appeared to the Roman as an extravagant and perverse superstition. On the other hand, the Christians could not be shaken in their allegiance to Christ, Whom they celebrated as their God in their early morning meetings (Ep., X, 97, 98). Christianity here appears no longer as a religion of criminals, as it does in the texts of Tacitus and Suetonius; Pliny acknowledges the high moral principles of the Christians, admires their constancy in the Faith (pervicacia et inflexibilis obstinatio), which he appears to trace back to their worship of Christ (carmenque Christo, quasi Deo, dicere).
 
D. Other pagan writers
 
The remaining pagan witnesses are of less importance: In the second century Lucian sneered at Christ and the Christians, as he scoffed at the pagan gods. He alludes to Christ's death on the Cross, to His miracles, to the mutual love prevailing among the Christians ("Philopseudes", nn. 13, 16; "De Morte Pereg"). There are also alleged allusions to Christ in Numenius (Origen, "Contra Cels", IV, 51), to His parables in Galerius, to the earthquake at the Crucifixion in Phlegon ( Origen, "Contra Cels.", II, 14). Before the end of the second century, the logos alethes of Celsus, as quoted by Origen (Contra Cels., passim), testifies that at that time the facts related in the Gospels were generally accepted as historically true. However scanty the pagan sources of the life of Christ may be, they bear at least testimony to His existence, to His miracles, His parables, His claim to Divine worship, His death on the Cross, and to the more striking characteristics of His religion." ).[source - The Catholic Encyclopedia]>>>.
 
 JEWISH SOURCE OF THE FIRST CENTURY ON CHRIST:
 
<<<"Philo, who dies after A.D. 40, is mainly important for the light he throws on certain modes of thought and phraseology found again in some of the Apostles. Eusebius (Hist. Eccl., II, iv) indeed preserves a legend that Philo had met St. Peter in Rome during his mission to the Emperor Caius; moreover, that in his work on the contemplative life he describes the life of the Christian Church in Alexandria founded by St. Mark, rather than that of the Essenes and Therapeutae. But it is hardly probable that Philo had heard enough of Christ and His followers to give an historical foundation to the foregoing legends." ).[source - The Catholic Encyclopedia]>>>.
 
And,
 
SEE PART 2 OF Short Digital Book On The Historic Jesus (Yeshua) Christ:
IN VOL 292A
 
LEARN MORE AT   WWW.JW.ORG

COMBINATION OF [1]  THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] Some Misunderstand the Usage of Firstborn - Literal Vs. Figurative - and Phillipians 2:6
 
[1]    SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 293A]
 
 
But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.  Hebrews 11:6, [authorized King James Bible; AV]
 
However, as testified to at 2 Timothy 3:2 – 3, [AV] “For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3  Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,”  Men can only be justified by faith if they believe in the son of Almighty God (YHWH), Jesus (Yeshua) as shown at Galatians 2:16, [AV] “Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.” 
  
TO LEARN MORE ABOUT RELIGION AND THE BIBLE, GO TO, 
 
1) http://iris89.conforums.com/ 
 
2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/ 
 
3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/ 
 
4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/ 
 
5) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/ 
 
6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/ 
 
7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/ 
 
To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/thread/1417398076/last-1417398076/Digital+Book+On+18+Part+Follow+Christ+Bible+Study 
 
Your Friend in Christ Iris89 
 
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to WWW.JW.ORG!
 
[2]    Some Misunderstand the Usage of Firstborn - Literal Vs. Figurative - and Phillipians 2:6
 
INTRODUCTION:
 
It appears some are having a problem differentiating the very simple; to wit, the difference between the literal usage of first born or only begotten and the figurative usage of first born. In the case of the literal usage as with respect to Jesus (Yeshua) Christ first born literally means the first of creation in keeping with Colossians 1:15, "who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation;" (American Standard Version; ASV); and Colossiana 1:18, "And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence." (ASV); Revelation 1:5, "and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loveth us, and loosed us from our sins by his blood;" (ASV); Luke 2:7, "And she brought forth her firstborn son; and she wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn." (ASV); Romans 8:29, "For whom he foreknew, he also foreordained to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren:" (ASV); and Revelation 3:14, "And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God:" (ASV).
 
LITERAL USAGE EXAMPLES:
 
This literal use also is shown in its usage with others, for example Hebrews 11:28, "Heb 11:28 By faith he kept the passover, and the sprinkling of the blood, that the destroyer of the firstborn should not touch them." (ASV); which refers to Exodus 12:21-27, "Then Moses called for all the elders of Israel, and said unto them, Draw out, and take you lambs according to your families, and kill the passover. 22 And ye shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the blood that is in the basin, and strike the lintel and the two side-posts with the blood that is in the basin; and none of you shall go out of the door of his house until the morning. 23 For Jehovah will pass through to smite the Egyptians; and when he seeth the blood upon the lintel, and on the two side-posts, Jehovah will pass over the door, and will not suffer the destroyer to come in unto your houses to smite you. 24 And ye shall observe this thing for an ordinance to thee and to thy sons for ever. 25 And it shall come to pass, when ye are come to the land which Jehovah will give you, according as he hath promised, that ye shall keep this service. 26 And it shall come to pass, when your children shall say unto you, What mean ye by this service? 27 that ye shall say, It is the sacrifice of Jehovah's passover, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, when he smote the Egyptians, and delivered our houses. And the people bowed the head and worshipped." (ASV).
 
FIGURATIVE USAGE:
 
Whereas the symbolic or figurative usage refers to a special level or status as shown clearly by Exodus 4:22, "And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith Jehovah, Israel is my son, my first-born:" (ASV) which is clearly symbolic as it is referring to a nation and NOT an individual and this is quite clear; to wit, it showed that the true God (YHWH) of Abraham regarded the Ancient Nation of Israel as something special, the number one nation among nations. And this figurative use is further shown in Exodus 4:23, "and I have said unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me; and thou hast refused to let him go: behold, I will slay thy son, thy first-born." (ASV) so there is no excuse for anyone failing to see this is figurative and NOT literal usage.
 
Also, 2 Chronicles 21:2-3, "2 And he had brethren, the sons of Jehoshaphat: Azariah, and Jehiel, and Zechariah, and Azariah, and Michael, and Shephatiah; all these were the sons of Jehoshaphat king of Israel. 3 And their father gave them great gifts, of silver, and of gold, and of precious things, with fortified cities in Judah: but the kingdom gave he to Jehoram, because he was the first-born." (ASV), clearly shows the figurative usage as Jehoram was NOT the literal firstborn, but the symbolic firstborn as his father considered him the most important and gave him the kingship.
 
PHILLIPPIANS 2:6 CLEARLY SHOW CHRIST DID NOT CONSIDER HIMSELF EQUAL TO HIS FATHER:
 
Some will contend otherwise on the basis of Philippians 2:6, "who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped," (ASV) based on the defective Authorized King James Bible (AV) rendering of same which is misleading, "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" (AV).
 
This fact, that God's Son, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) is a separate spirit being from his Father (YHWH) is even made much clearer if we view more than one scripture at a time:
 
"Let Christ himself be your example as to what your attitude should be. For he, who had always been God by nature, did not cling to his prerogatives as God's equal, but stripped himself of all privilege by consenting to be a slave by nature and being born as mortal man. And, having become man, he humbled himself by living a life of utter obedience, even to the extent of dying, and the death he died was the death of a common criminal. That is why God has now lifted him so high, and has given him the name beyond all names, so that at the name of Jesus "every knee shall bow", whether in Heaven or earth or under the earth. And that is why, in the end, "every tongue shall confess" that Jesus Christ" is the Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (Philippians 2:5-11 J B PHILLIPS Translation of the NEW TESTAMENT)
 
The J.B. Phillips Translation of the New Testament makes clear the Son's, Jesus's (Yeshua or YHWH saves) attitude with respect to being obedient to his Father, Almighty God (YHWH). It states, "Let Christ himself be your example as to what your attitude should be." Which clearly shows that all genuine followers of the Son should also be humble. Also, it clearly says, "For he, who had always been God by nature, did not cling to his prerogatives as God's equal, but stripped himself of all privilege by consenting to be a slave by nature and being born as mortal man." That although he was existing as a spirit creature just like his Father (YHWH) that he gave no thought to being the equal of his Father (YHWH), but was subordinate and obedient to him in clear conformity to " But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." (1 Corinthians 11:3 AV). Clearly then, he, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) can not then be a member of a co-equal trinity of beings in a Trinitarian Godhead since he is neither equal to his Father, nor did not always exist as did his Father (YHWH) " And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;" (Revelation 3:14 AV) and " Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:" (Colossians 1:15 AV).
 
His subjection was made quite clear as follows, "And, having become man, he humbled himself by living a life of utter obedience, even to the extent of dying, and the death he died was the death of a common criminal." Clearly he, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) was doing the will of his Father (YHWH) . In fact, when tempted by Satan the Devil he stated " Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." (Matthew 4:10 AV), " Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God." (John 20:17 AV), "21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. 22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. 23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. 24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. 25 The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. 26 Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he." (John 4:21-26 AV).
 
Of course, since Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH) is Almighty God (YHWH) only begotten Son, he is also a God, but a lessor one; therefore, The First Commandment of the Ten Commandments, " Thou shalt have no other gods before me." (Exodus 20:3 AV), is not violated since he is neither equal to or before his Father.
 
Since he has proved his obedience to his Father (YHWH), his Father (YHWH) has " That is why God has now lifted him so high, and has given him the name beyond all names, so that at the name of Jesus "every knee shall bow", whether in Heaven or earth or under the earth. And that is why, in the end, "every tongue shall confess" that Jesus Christ" is the Lord, to the glory of God the Father." And his Father has subjected all things onto his Son, except himself, "17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. 18 Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. 19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. 20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. 21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. 24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. 25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death." 27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." (1 Corinthians 15:17-28 AV). Therefore, it is clear that Almighty God, the Father (YHWH) is the superior one since he has put all things under his Son, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves), except himself, and could not do so unless he was above or superior to his Son. Also, it is clear that after he accomplishes his Father's purpose, he, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves), will subject himself to his father, "And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." This clearly shows that Trinitarian Theology and Dualism Theology are false dogma and should be clearly rejected by all Christians.
 
COMMENTS BY OTHER BIBLE SCHOLARS ON PHILIPPIANS 2:5 -11:
 
Bible Scholar, Theodore Beza, stated:
 
2:5 2 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
(2) He sets before them a most perfect example of all modesty and sweet conduct, Christ Jesus, whom we ought to follow with all our might: who abased himself so much for our sakes, although he is above all, that he took upon himself the form of a servant, that is, our flesh, willingly subject to all weaknesses, even to the death of the cross.
2:6 Who, being in the d form of God, e thought it not robbery to be f equal with God:
(d) Such as God himself is, and therefore God, for there is no one in all parts equal to God but God himself.
(e) Christ, that glorious and everlasting God, knew that he might rightfully and lawfully not appear in the base flesh of man, but remain with majesty fit for God: yet he chose rather to debase himself.
(f) If the Son is equal with the Father, then is there of necessity an equality, which Arrius that heretic denies: and if the Son is compared to the Father, then is there a distinction of persons, which Sabellius that heretic denies.
2:7 But made himself of g no reputation, and took upon him the h form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
(g) He brought himself from all things, as it were to nothing.
(h) By taking our manhood upon him.
2:9 3 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a i name which is above every name:
(3) He shows the most glorious even of Christ's submission, to teach us that modesty is the true way to true praise and glory.
(i) Dignity and high distinction, and that which accompanies it.
2:10 That at the name of Jesus k every knee should bow, of [things] in heaven, and [things] in earth, and [things] under the earth;
(k) All creatures will at length be subject to Christ.
2:11 And [that] l every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ [is] Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
(l) Every nation. [Beza, Theodore. "Commentary on Philippians 2". "The 1599 Geneva Study Bible". 1600-1645.]
 
Bible Scholar, Matthew Henry, said:
 
Note, this scholars comments cover more than Philippians 2:5-11, it cover Philippians 2:1-11.
The apostle proceeds in this chapter where he left off in the last, with further exhortations to Christian duties. He presses them largely to like-mindedness and lowly-mindedness, in conformity to the example of the Lord Jesus, the great pattern of humility and love. Here we may observe, I. The great gospel precept passed upon us; that is, to love one another. This is the law of Christ's kingdom, the lesson of his school, the livery of his family. This he represents (v. 2) by being like-minded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind. We are of a like mind when we have the same love. Christians should be one in affection, whether they can be one in apprehension or no. This is always in their power, and always their duty, and is the likeliest way to bring them nearer in judgment. Having the same love. Observe, The same love that we are required to express to others, others are bound to express to us. Christian love ought to be mutual love. Love, and you shall be loved. Being of one accord, and of one mind; not crossing and thwarting, or driving on separate interests, but unanimously agreeing in the great things of God and keeping the unity of the Spirit in other differences. Here observe, 1. The pathetic pressing of the duty. He is very importunate with them, knowing what an evidence it is of our sincerity, and what a means of the preservation and edification of the body of Christ. The inducements to brotherly love are these:-(1.) "If there is any consolation in Christ. Have you experienced consolation in Christ? Evidence that experience by loving one another.'' The sweetness we have found in the doctrine of Christ should sweeten our spirits. Do we expect consolation in Christ? If we would not be disappointed, we must love one another. If we have not consolation in Christ, where else can we expect it? Those who have an interest in Christ have consolation in him, strong and everlasting consolation (Heb. 6:18; 2 Th. 2:16), and therefore ought to love one another. (2.) "Comfort of love. If there is any comfort in Christian love, in God's love to you, in your love to God, or in your brethren's love to us, in consideration of all this, be you like-minded. If you have ever found that comfort, if you would find it, if you indeed believe that the grace of love is a comfortable grace, abound in it.'' (3.) "Fellowship of the Spirit. If there is such a thing as communion with God and Christ by the Spirit, such a thing as the communion of saints, by virtue of their being animated and actuated by one and the same Spirit, be you like-minded; for Christian love and like-mindedness will preserve to us our communion with God and with one another.'' (4.) "Any bowels and mercies, in God and Christ, towards you. If you expect the benefit of God's compassions to yourselves, be you compassionate one to another. If there is such a thing as mercy to be found among the followers of Christ, if all who are sanctified have a disposition to holy pity, make it appear this way.'' How cogent are these arguments! One would think them enough to tame the most fierce, and mollify the hardest, heart. (5.) Another argument he insinuates is the comfort it would be to him: Fulfil you my joy. It is the joy of ministers to see people like-minded and living in love. He had been instrumental in bringing them to the grace of Christ and the love of God. "Now,'' says he, "if you have found any benefit by your participation of the gospel of Christ, if you have any comfort in it, or advantage by it, fulfil the joy of your poor minister, who preached the gospel to you.'' 2. He proposes some means to promote it. (1.) Do nothing through strife and vain glory, v. 3. There is no greater enemy to Christian love than pride and passion. If we do things in contradiction to our brethren, this is doing them through strife; if we do them through ostentation of ourselves, this is doing them through vain-glory: both are destructive of Christian love and kindle unchristian heats. Christ came to slay all enmities; therefore let there not be among Christians a spirit of opposition. Christ came to humble us, and therefore let there not be among us a spirit of pride. (2.) We must esteem others in lowliness of mind better than ourselves, be severe upon our own faults and charitable in our judgments of others, be quick in observing our own defects and infirmities, but ready to overlook and make favourable allowances for the defects of others. We must esteem the good which is in others above that which is in ourselves; for we best know our own unworthiness and imperfections. (3.) We must interest ourselves in the concerns of others, not in a way of curiosity and censoriousness, or as busy-bodies in other men's matters, but in Christian love and sympathy: Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others, v. 4. A selfish spirit is destructive of Christian love. We must be concerned not only for our own credit, and ease, and safety, but for those of others also; and rejoice in the prosperity of others as truly as in our own. We must love our neighbour as ourselves, and make his case our own. II. Here is a gospel pattern proposed to our imitation, and that is the example of our Lord Jesus Christ: Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, v. 5. Observe, Christians must be of Christ's mind. We must bear a resemblance to his life, if we would have the benefit of his death. If we have not the Spirit of Christ, we are none of his, Rom. 8:9. Now what was the mind of Christ? He was eminently humble, and this is what we are peculiarly to learn of him. Learn of me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, Mt. 11:29. If we were lowly-minded, we should be like-minded; and, if we were like Christ, we should be lowly-minded. We must walk in the same spirit and in the same steps with the Lord Jesus, who humbled himself to sufferings and death for us; not only to satisfy God's justice, and pay the price of our redemption, but to set us an example, and that we might follow his steps. Now here we have the two natures and the two states of our Lord Jesus. It is observable that the apostle, having occasion to mention the Lord Jesus, and the mind which was in him, takes the hint to enlarge upon his person, and to give a particular description of him. It is a pleasing subject, and a gospel minister needs not think himself out of the way when he is upon it; any fit occasion should be readily taken. 1. Here are the two natures of Christ: his divine nature and his human nature. (1.) Here is his divine nature: Who being in the form of God (v. 6), partaking of the divine nature, as the eternal and only begotten Son of God. This agrees with Jn. 1:1, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God: it is of the same import with being the image of the invisible God (Col. 1:15), and the brightness of his glory, and express image of his person, Heb. 1:3. He thought it no robbery to be equal with God; did not think himself guilty of any invasion of what did not belong to him, or assuming another's right. He said, I and my Father are one, Jn. 10:30. It is the highest degree of robbery for any mere man or mere creature to pretend to be equal with God, or profess himself one with the Father. This is for a man to rob God, not in tithes and offerings, but of the rights of his Godhead, Mal. 3:8. Some understand being in the form of God - en morphe Theou hyparchon, of his appearance in a divine majestic glory to the patriarchs, and the Jews, under the Old Testament, which was often called the glory, and the Shechinah. The word is used in such a sense by the Septuagint and in the New Testament. He appeared to the two disciples, en hetera morphe - In another form, Mk. 16:12. Metemorphothe - he was transfigured before them, Mt. 17:2. And he thought it no robbery to be equal with God; he did not greedily catch at, nor covet and affect to appear in that glory; he laid aside the majesty of his former appearance while he was here on earth, which is supposed to be the sense of the peculiar expression, ouk harpagmon hegesato. Vid. Bishop Bull's Def. cap. 2 sect. 4 et alibi, and Whitby in loc. (2.) His human nature: He was made in the likeness of men, and found in fashion as a man. He was really and truly man, took part of our flesh and blood, appeared in the nature and habit of man. And he voluntarily assumed human nature; it was his own act, and by his own consent. We cannot say that our participation of the human nature is so. Herein he emptied himself, divested himself of the honours and glories of the upper world, and of his former appearance, to clothe himself with the rags of human nature. He was in all things like to us, Heb. 2:17. 2. Here are his two estates, of humiliation and exaltation. (1.) His estate of humiliation. He not only took upon him the likeness and fashion of a man, but the form of a servant, that is, a man of mean estate. He was not only God's servant whom he had chosen, but he came to minister to men, and was among them as one who serveth in a mean and servile state. One would think that the Lord Jesus, if he would be a man, should have been a prince, and appeared in splendour. But quite the contrary: He took upon him the form of a servant. He was brought up meanly, probably working with his supposed father at his trade. His whole life was a life of humiliation, meanness, poverty, and disgrace; he had nowhere to lay his head, lived upon alms, was a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief, did not appear with external pomp, or any marks of distinction from other men. This was the humiliation of his life. But the lowest step of his humiliation was his dying the death of the cross. He became obedient to death, even the death of the cross. He not only suffered, but was actually and voluntarily obedient; he obeyed the law which he brought himself under as Mediator, and by which he was obliged to die. I have power to lay down my life, and I have power to take it again: this commandment have I received of my Father, Jn. 10:18. And he was made under the law, Gal. 4:4. There is an emphasis laid upon the manner of his dying, which had in it all the circumstances possible which are humbling: Even the death of the cross, a cursed, painful, and shameful death,-a death accursed by the law (Cursed is he that hangeth on a tree) -full of pain, the body nailed through the nervous parts (the hands and feet) and hanging with all its weight upon the cross,-and the death of a malefactor and a slave, not of a free-man,-exposed as a public spectacle. Such was the condescension of the blessed Jesus. (2.) His exaltation: Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him. His exaltation was the reward of his humiliation. Because he humbled himself, God exalted him; and he highly exalted him, hyperypsose, raised him to an exceeding height. He exalted his whole person, the human nature as well as the divine; for he is spoken of as being in the form of God as well as in the fashion of man. As it respects the divine nature, it could only be the recognizing of his rights, or the display and appearance of the glory he had with the Father before the world was (Jn. 17:5), not any new acquisition of glory; and so the Father himself is said to be exalted. But the proper exaltation was of his human nature, which alone seems to be capable of it, though in conjunction with the divine. His exaltation here is made to consist in honour and power. In honour; so he had a name above every name, a title of dignity above all the creatures, men and angels. And in power: Every knee must bow to him. The whole creation must be in subjection to him: things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, the inhabitants of heaven and earth, the living and the dead. At the name of Jesus; not at the sound of the word, but the authority of Jesus; all should pay a solemn homage. And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord -every nation and language should publicly own the universal empire of the exalted Redeemer, and that all power in heaven and earth is given to him, Mt. 28:18. Observe the vast extent of the kingdom of Christ; it reaches to heaven and earth, and to all the creatures in each, to angels as well as men, and to the dead as well as the living.- To the glory of God the Father. Observe, It is to the glory of God the Father to confess that Jesus Christ is Lord; for it is his will that all men should honour the Son as they honour the Father, Jn. 5:23. Whatever respect is paid to Christ redounds to the honour of the Father. He who receiveth me receiveth him who sent me, Mt. 10:40.
[Henry, Matthew. "Commentary on Philippians 2". "Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible". 1706.]
 
Bible Scholar, Barton W. Johnson, stated:
 
5-8. Let this mind be in you. He points to Christ as the example of humility and consecration to the good of others. 6. Who, being in the form of God. He refers to the state of our Savior before he took human form. His form was divine. "He had a glory with the father before the world was." See John 1:1; 2 Cor. 4:4; Heb. 1:3, etc. Thought it not robbery to be equal with God. The Revision says, "Counted it not a prize." The meaning is not entirely clear, but probably is that "Having a form of glory like God, he did not count it a prize which must be clung to tenaciously, especially when he appeared upon the earth, that he should be equal with God, that is, appear in a divine form, but was willing to lay aside his glory and make himself a servant." 7. Emptied himself. Of the divine form and glory, and took the form of a servant, of our own race, a race whose duty it is to serve God. The divine glory was exchanged for human lowliness. 8. He humbled himself. Note the infinite condescension: (1) The form of God and sharing the divine glory. (2) He divests himself of this. (3) Nor does he then take the divine form, or even the form of an angel, but of lowly, sinful man. (4) But this is not all. He not only takes the form of man, but the mortality of the flesh, and dies. (5) Nay, more; he dies the most shameful and painful of all deaths, even the death of the cross.
 
9-11. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him. His wonderful humility had been shown, but it is the law of the universe that he that humbleth himself shall be exalted. Therefore God lifted him up from the grave to the heavens, gave all power into his hands (Matt. 28:18), and gave him a name above every name. The idea is an authority, a position, above that of all intelligences. This exaltation made the humble name, Jesus, a name above every name. 10. That at the name of Jesus. That name, by the exaltation, has become the name of the King of kings. It is supreme. Hence, every knee in all the universe bows to its majesty. Under the earth. In the under-world, hades, the abode of the dead. 11. And that every tongue should confess. All the universe is called to confess him as Lord, and thus glorify God. All will yet confess him, either in joy or shame. [Johnson, Barton W. "Commentary on Philippians 2". "People's New Testament". 1891.]
 
LEARN MORE AT   WWW.JW.ORG

COMBINATION OF THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND THE RARE FRUIT TREES AND VEGETABLES.   With the Scripture of the Day first.
 
[1]      
SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 295A]
 
 
And Enoch walked with God after he begat Methuselah three hundred years, and begat sons and daughters:  Genesis 5:22, [authorized King James Bible; AV]
 
Enoch was a pre-flood person who walked with God unlike his contemporaries and won his approval in a wicked pre-flood world.  And the same is true with respect Noah per Genesis 6:9, [AV] “These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.”  And the first King of Palestine (Israel), King David also acknowledged he walked with Almighty God (YHWH) at Psalms 23:1, [AV] “The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want.”  Showing he had God’s backing because of this.
  
TO LEARN MORE ABOUT RELIGION AND THE BIBLE, GO TO, 
 
1) http://iris89.conforums.com/ 
 
2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/ 
 
3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/ 
 
4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/ 
 
5) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/ 
 
6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/ 
 
7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/ 
 
To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/thread/1417398076/last-1417398076/Digital+Book+On+18+Part+Follow+Christ+Bible+Study 
 
Your Friend in Christ Iris89 
 
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to WWW.JW.ORG!
 
[2]    THE RARE FRUIT TREES AND VEGETABLES:
Here is a Commentary on Bountiful Trees and Vegetables God (YHWH) has provided for mankind, specifically the Melothria scabra is a vine grown for its edible fruit. Fruit are about the size of grapes and taste like cucumbers with a tinge of sourness. Vernacular names include mouse melon, Mexican sour gherkin, cucamelon, Mexican miniature watermelon and Mexican sour cucumber.
This plant is native to Mexico and Central America, where it is called sandita (little watermelon). It is believed to have been a domesticated crop before western contact began.  (Source - retrieved from   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_sour_cucumber  on  3/23/2013)
Melothria scabra, family: Cucurbitaceae (same botanical family as cucumbers, squash and melons, but they are in a different genus and species), is a vine grown for its edible fruit. The oval-shaped, grape-sized fruits have a whitish flesh and taste like cucumbers with a tangy hint of citrus (from the skin). Other names include mouse melon, Mexican sour gherkin, cucamelon, Mexican miniature watermelon, Mexican sour cucumber, Mexican mini-gherkin, "cuka-nut", in France, “concombre à confire” (preserving cucumber) or “sandia de raton” (mouse melon in Spanish). This plant is native to Mexico and Central America. It is believed to have been a domesticated crop before Western contact began.
 
M.scabra is becoming quite popular with home gardeners in the U.S., as the fruits offer a unique flavor. The nearly disease and pest -resistant climbing vines are vigorous growers (approx. 6-10 feet) producing small yellow flowers that are replaced by tons of light-green fruits with darker mottling resembling Lilliputian watermelons. The fruits are perfect for use in stir-fry, salad, chopped and added to salsa, or eaten fresh off the vine as a snack, and their crunch makes them great for pickling too.
 
The plant grows best in a fertile, well-drained soil with a pH between 6.5 and 7.5 with full sun. Squash are warm season plants that are somewhat adapted to cool conditions. They tolerate monthly mean temperatures from 18 to 27°C (64 to 80°F), but grow best when temperatures are between 75 and 85°F (24 and 29°C) during the day and between 60 and 70°F (16 and 21°C) at night[1]. It can only be reproduced by seeds.
 
Little information about the nutritional value or medicinal uses is available.
 
Note: Do not confuse this species with Melothria pendulosa, which can be found grwoing wild from the Southeastern United States to Argentina. It bears some of the popular names, such as mini-Gurke, Mexican Sour Cukes, Cuca-melon, Mexikanische Ziergurke, Mexican Sour Cucumbers (Guadeloupe Cucumber, Creeping ucumber). M. pendulosa is similar in size and appearance, and, has a definite “cucumber” taste with a slight tartness. The light green, crisp fruits of M. pendulosa are used by some people at this stage in salads and for pickling, but as they mature to a dark green they grow mushy, and when fully ripe (black) are considered to be an extremely effective purgative, or as some have referred to it - the mother of all laxatives!  (source - retrieved from  http://holisticlifestylecommunityblog.blogspot.com/2013/03/melothria-scabra-mexican-sour-cucumber.html#.UU3LwDfkpw0 on  3/23/2013)
 
In Genesis 1:11-13, "And God said, Let the earth put forth grass, herbs yielding seed, and fruit-trees bearing fruit after their kind, wherein is the seed thereof, upon the earth: and it was so. 12 And the earth brought forth grass, herbs yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit, wherein is the seed thereof, after their kind: and God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening and there was morning, a third day. (American Standard Version, ASV)[for more details, go to  www.jw.org].
 
See pictures of this rare fruit and other rare fruits at,  http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Melothria+scabra+Mexican+Sour+Cucumber&qpvt=Melothria+scabra+Mexican+Sour+Cucumber&FORM=IGRE
 
Now to know the truth, go to:
 
1) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/
 
2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/
 
3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/
 
4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/
 
5) http://religious-truths.forums.com/
 
6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/
 
7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/
 
 
Your Friend in Christ Iris89
 
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth."Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to www.jw.org!
 
 

COMBINATION OF [1]  THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] Origin Of The Cross
 
[1]     SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 297A]
 
The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender.   Proverbs 22:7,  [authorized King James Bible; AV]
 
However, the end results of the poor downtrodden and the rich abusing them are given at James 2:5 – 7, [AV] “Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?  6  But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats?  7  Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called?” 
  
TO LEARN MORE ABOUT RELIGION AND THE BIBLE, GO TO, 
 
1) http://iris89.conforums.com/ 
 
2) http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/ 
 
3) http://religioustruths.lefora.com/ 
 
4) http://religioustruths.boardhost.com/ 
 
5) http://religioustruths.forumsland.com/ 
 
6) http://religioustruthsbyiris.createmybb3.com/ 
 
7) http://religioustruths.forumotion.com/ 
 
To enjoy an online Bible study called “Follow the Christ” go to,http://www.network54.com/Forum/403209/thread/1417398076/last-1417398076/Digital+Book+On+18+Part+Follow+Christ+Bible+Study 
 
Your Friend in Christ Iris89 
 
Francis David said it long ago, "Neither the sword of popes...nor the image of death will halt the march of truth. "Francis David, 1579, written on the wall of his prison cell." Read the book, "What Does The Bible Really Teach" and the Bible today, and go to WWW.JW.ORG!
 
[2]   Origin Of The Cross
 
[source – retrieved from  http://www.thewordsofeternallife.com/cross.html  on 7/07/2010]
 
 
A tradition of the Church which our fathers have inherited, was the adoption of the words "cross" and "crucify." These words are nowhere to be found in the Greek of the New Testament. These words are mistranslations, a "later rendering," of the Greek words stauros and stauroo. Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words says, "STAUROS denotes, primarily, an upright pole or stake...Both the noun and the verb stauroo, to fasten to a stake or pole, are originally to be distinguished from the ecclesiastical form of a two-beamed cross. The shape of the latter had its origin in ancient Chaldea (Babylon), and was used as the symbol of the god Tammuz (being in the shape of the mystic Tau, the initial of his name)...By the middle of the 3rd century A.D. the churches had either departed from, certain doctrines of the Christian faith. In order to increase the pretige of the apostate ecclesiastical system pagans were received into the churches apart from regeneration by faith, and were permitted largely to retain their pagan signs and symbols. Hence the Tau or T, in its most frequent form, with the cross piece lowered, was adopted..." [1]
 
Dr. Bullinger, The Companion Bible, appx. 162 states, "crosses were used as symbols of the Babylonian Sun-god...It should be stated that Constantine was a Sun-god worshipper...The evidence is thus complete, that the Lord was put to death upon and upright stake, and not on two pieces of timber placed at any angle." [2]
 
Rev. Alexander Hislop, The Two Babylons, pp. 197-205, frankly calls the cross "this Pagan symbol...the Tau, the sign of the cross, the indisputable sign of Tammuz, the false Messiah...the mystic Tau of the Chaldeans (Babylonians) and Egyptians--the true original form of the letter T--the initial of the name of Tammus...the Babylonian cross was the recognized emblem of Tammuz." [3]
 
In the Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th edition, vol. 14, p. 273, we read, "In the Egyptian churches the cross was a pagan symbol of life borrowed by the Christians and interpreted in the pagan manner." Jacob Grimm, in his Deutsche Mythologie, says that the Teutonic (Germanic) tribes had their idol Thor, symbolised by a hammer, while the Roman Christians had their crux . It was thus somewhat easier for the Teutons to accept the Roman cross. [4]
 
Greek dictionaries, lexicons and other study books also declare the primary meaning of stauros to be an upright pale, pole or stake. The secondary meaning of "cross" is admitted by them to be a "later" rendering. At least two of them do not even mention "cross," and only render the meaning as "pole or stake." In spite of this strong evidence and proof that the word stauos should have been translated "stake," and the verb stauroo to have been translated "impale," almost all the common versions of the Scriptures persist with the Latin Vulgate's crux , a "later" rendering of the Greek stauros. [5]
 
While it is true that stauros means stake or pole, it does not rule out that a cross piece was not attached to it. Look at modern times for example. A post often has something else attached to it like a wire fence, a mail box, or even a sign. The Greek word "stauros" itself does not explain whether anything is, or is not attached to it. Even early Christian writers spoke of the cross as having four limbs pointing above, below, and to both sides. Irenaeus mentioned the cross as "two in length, and two in breadth." Justin Martyr spoke of the cross as having "one beam placed upright" and "the other beam fitted on to it." [6]
 
Historical evidence points to Constantine as the one who had the major share in uniting Sun-worship and the Messianic Belief. Constantine's famous vision of "the cross superimposed on the sun," in the year 312, is usually cited. Writers, ignorant of the fact that the cross was not to be found in the New Testament Scriptures, put much emphasis on this vision as the onset of the so-called "conversion" of Constantine. But, unless Constantine had been misguided by the Gnostic Manichean half-Christians, who indeed used the cross in their hybrid religion, this version of the cross superimposed on the sun could only be the same old solar cross, the symbol of the Sun-deity, the centre of cosmic religion, the astrological religion of Babylon. [7]
 
The fact remains: that which Constantine saw, is nowhere to be found in Scripture. We read in the book of Johannes Geffcken, The Last Days of Greco-Roman Paganism. p. 319, "that even after 314 A.D. the coins of Constantine show an even-armed cross as a symbol for the Sun-god." [8]
 
Many scholars have doubted the "conversion" of Constantine because of the wicked deeds that he did afterwards, and because of the fact that he only requested to be baptized on his death-bed many years later, in the year 337. So, if the vision of the cross impressed him, and was used as a rallying symbol, it could not have been in honour of our Saviour, because Constantine is attested of by his persistent use of images of the Sun-deity on his coins that were issued by him up to the year 323. Secondly, the fact of his motivation to issue his Sunday-keeping edict in the year 321, which was not done in honour of our Saviour, but was done because of the "venerable day of the Sun," as the edict read, is proof of his continued allegiance to Sol Invictus. We shall expand on this laster on. [9]
 
Where did the cross come from, then? J.C. Cooper, An Illustrated Encyclopedia of Traditional Symbols, p.45, aptly summarizes it, "Cross--A universal symbol from the most remote times; it is the cosmic symbol par excellence." Other authorities also call it a sun-symbol, a Babylonian sun-symbol, an astrological Babylonian-Assyrian and heathen sun-symbol, also in the form of an encircled cross referred to as a "solar wheel," and many other varieties of crosses. Also, "the cross represents the Tree of Life, the age-old fertility symbol, combining the vertical male and horizontal female principles, especially in Egypt, either as an ordinary cross, or better known in the form of the crus ansata, the Egyptian ankh (sometimes called: the Tau cross), which had been carried over into our modern-day symbol of the female, well known in biology. [10]
 
As stated above, the indisputable sign of Tammuz, the mystic Tau of the Babylonians and Egyptians, was brought into the Church chiefly because of Constantine, and has since been adored with all the homage due only to the Most Hight. The Protestants have for many years refrained from undue adoration of, or homage to, the cross, especially in England at the time of the Puritans in the 16th and 17th centuries. But lately this un-Scriptural symbol has been increasingly accepted in Protestantism. We have previously discussed "the weeping for Tammuz," and the similarity between the Easter resurrection and the return or rising of Tammuz. Tammuz was the young incarnate Sun, the Sun-divinity incarnate. This same Sun-deity, known amongst the Babylonians as Tammuz, was identified with the Greek Adonis and with the Phoenician Adoni, all of them Sun-deities, being slain in winter, then being "wept for," and their return being celebrated bu a festivity in spring, while some had it in summer--according to the myths of pagan idolarty. [11]
 
The evidence for its pagan origin is so convincing that The Catholic Encyclopedia admits that "the sign of the cross, represented in its simplest form by a crossing of two lines at right angles, greatly antedates, in both East and the West, the introduction of Christianity. It goes back to a very remote period of human civilization." It then continues and refers to the Tau cross of the pagan Egyptians, "In later times the Egyptian Christians (Copts), attracted by its form, and perhaps by its symbolism, adopted it as the emblem of the cross." [12]
 
Further proof of its pagan origin is the recorded evidence of the Vestal Virgins of pagan Rome having the cross hanging on a necklace, and the Egyptians doing it too, as early as the 15th century B.C.E. The Buddhists, and numerous other sects of India, also used the sign of the cross as a mark on their followers' heads. "The cross thus widely worshipped, or regarded as a 'sacred emblem,' was the unequivocal symbol of Bacchus, the Babylonian Messiah, for he was represented with a head-band convered with crosses." [13]
 
After Constantine had the "vision of the cross," he ahd his army promoted another variety of the cross, the Chi-Rho or Labarum. This has subsequently been explained as representing the first letters of the name Christos, But again, this had a pagan origin. They were found as inscriptions on rock, dating from the year ca. 2500 B.C.E., being interpreted as "a combination of two Sun-symbols, known as the Ax- or Hammer-symbol of the Sun- or Sky-deity, and the + or X as the ancient symbol of the Sun, both of these signs having a sensual or fertility meaning as well. Another proof of its pagan origin is found on a coin of Ptolemeus III from the year 247-222 B.C.E. [14]
 
A well-known encyclopedia describes the Labarum (Chi-Rho) as, "The labarum was also an emblem of the Chaldean (Babylonian) sky-god and in Christianity it was adopted..." Emperor Constantine adopted this Labarum as the imperial ensign and thereby succeeded in "uniting both divisions of his troops, pagans and Christians, in a common worship... [15]
 
According to Suicer the word (labarum) came into use in the reign of Hadrian, and was probably adopted from one of the nations conquered by the Romans." It must be remembered that Hadrian reigned in the years 76-138 C.E., that he was a pagan emperor, worshipped the Sun-deity Serapis when he visited Alexandria, and was vehemently anti-Judaistic, beign responsible for the final near-destruction of Jerusalem in the year 130 C.E. [16]
 
Another dictionary relates the following about the Chi-Rho, "However, the symbol was in the use long before Christianity, and X (Chi) probably stood for Great Fire or Sun, and P (Rho) probably stood for Pater or Patah (Father). The word labarum (la-baar-um) yields everlasting Father Sun." [17]
 
Let me give you one last thing to dwell on. In Ezekial 9, it speaks of a mark that was placed upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations that be done in the midst thereof (Eze 9:4). The Pulpit Commentary says that According to the best interpretation of the text the mark seems to have been a cross. According to Harper's Bible Commentary the letter tau in Near Eastern languages could be written as "+" or "T" and so it was not unnatural for early Christian writers, such as Origen and Tertullian, to see in this a type of the cross of Christ. Now remember, it was the Lord who had commanded that the mark (or "T") be placed on the forehead of the righteous. If this was a symbol of Tammuz which God despised, then why would He have this mark put on the foreheads of those men? If the pagans who worshipped Tammuz whose symbol was a cross, as Hislop tells us, then placing this mark on the righteous would be inconsistent when looking at the context, for only eight verses earlier (Eze 8:14) Tammuz worshipped was condemned! [18]
 
There are a number of interesting things I could point to about the so-called history of these pagan origins. The sad truth is that most “pagan origin” claims come from the work of an Alexander Hislop. For those who have taken the time to check out Hislop, they will discover that his research on the pagan origins is often contradictory. Read what “The Saturday Review” dated September 17, 1859, p. 340. had to say about Hislop’s work:
 
In the first place, his whole superstructure is raised upon nothing. Our earliest authority for the history of Semiramis wrote about the commencement of the Christian era, and the historian from whom he drew his information lived from fifteen hundred to two thousand years after the date which Mr. Hislop assigns to the great Assyrian Queen. The most lying legend which the Vatican has ever endorsed stands on better authority than the history which is now made the ground of a charge against it.
 
Secondly, the whole argument proceeds upon the assumption that all heathenism has a common origin. Accidental resemblances in mythological details are taken as evidence of this, and nothing is allowed for the natural working of the human mind.
 
Thirdly, Mr. Hislop’s method of reasoning would make anything of anything. By the aid of obscure passages in third-rate historians, groundless assumptions of identity, and etymological torturing of roots, all that we know, and all that we believe, may be converted…into something totally different.
 
Fourthly, Mr. Hislop’s argument proves too much. He finds not only the corruptions of Popery, but the fundamental articles of the Christian Faith, in his hypothetical Babylonian system…
 
We take leave of Mr. Hislop and his work with the remark that we never before quite knew the folly of which ignorant or half-learned bigotry is capable. [19]
 
Now about C.J. Koster's book "Come Out Of Her, My People", Roy Ingle, a Christian book reviewer, had the following to say:
 
C.J. Koster's COME OUT OF HER, MY PEOPLE was given to me by a lady who left our church for the radical Messianic Jewish followers such as Koster and Michael Rood. I read the book with great doubts about the book since most serious Messianic Jewish Gentiles I have met were simply bizarre. This book did nothing more than confirm this view.
 
Koster appears to have taken most of his information from the cult, the Assemblies of Yahweh. His insistance upon using the various Hebrew names for God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit go from poor understandings of the Greek language to flat out denials. His writing style is poor and the structure of the book appears to not have been very well thought out. Koster appears mad throughout the book at the "established Church" and he seems mad enough to essentially condemn anyone who calls the holy Scriptures "the Bible" or calls Yahushua "Jesus" or has a cross up in their meetings or calls their assemblies "church" or who worship on Sunday (or some other day other than Saturday and dare not call the days or months by its Greek names!) than they are going to burn forever. Further, any follower of the Messiah not keeping the entire Law of Moses is lost! Ironically, few Jews have "converted" to Messianic Jewish roots despite Koster's belief that this will usher in a great harvest of Jews into the kingdom of Elohim. Could it be they see the error of the Sacred Name Movement as do many Gentiles such as I?
 
For me, Koster and the rest of the radical Messianic follwers are nothing more than the Pharisees of Acts 15. They seek to add to the salvation given to us by Jesus Christ (Acts 15:9-11). They want us to keep the Law of Moses but not one person (including themselves) is capable of doing so (Galatians 3:11). How sad that these men have dived into a works salvation that focuses on rules rather than on Christ's atoning sacrifice (Colossians 2:11-23). I for one thank God that I am free from the curse of the Law (Galatians 3:13-14) and that Jesus brings no condemnation (Romans 8:1-4; Galatians 5:1-13). [20]
 
 
[1] C.J. Koster (Come Out Of Her My People)
 
[2] Ibid
 
[3] Ibid
 
[4] Ibid
 
[5] Ibid
 
[6] Ibid
 
[7] Ibid
 
[8] Ibid
 
[9] Ibid
 
[10] Ibid
 
[11] Ibid
 
[12] Ibid
 
[13] Ibid
 
[14] Ibid
 
[15] Ibid
 
[16] Ibid
 
[17] Ibid
 
[18] Ralph Woodrow (The Babylon Connection?), p. 59
 
[19] The Saturday Review, dated September 17, 1859, p. 340
 
[20] Reviews Written by Roy Ingle, http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A11OBEH2ZCVAHX/104-1507350-3632721?_encoding=UTF8&display=public&page=9
 
LEARN MORE AT   WWW.JW.ORG