COMBINATION OF [1]  THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2]    Some Are Ignorant of The Difference Between an Objective Researcher and a Propagandist:
 
[1]       SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 708A]
 
I will give you insight and instruct you in the way you should go. I will give you advice with my eye upon you.  Psalmss 32:8  [New World Translation Revised: NWTr]
 
When parents watch their children play, they are often amazed by the inborn abilities the young ones have.   Can you confirm that from your personal experience?   One child may appear to have natural agility or athletic ability, while a sibling seems more at ease with board games or some art or craft.   But regardless of their children’s gifts, parents find pleasure in discovering their potential.
 
Almighty God (YHWH) too takes a keen interest in his earthly children. He sees his modern-day servants as ‘And I will shake all the nations, and the precious things of all the nations will come in; and I will fill this house with glory,’ says Jehovah of armies.  (Hag. 2:7,  [NWTr] )   They are precious particularly because of their faith and devotion. 
 
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 Are Ignorant of The Difference Between an Objective Researcher and a Propagandist:
 
INTRODUCTION:
 
Some are ignorant of the difference between an objective researcher and a propagandist and this article seeks to lay this difference bare.
 
An objective researcher go out and digs out the facts wherever they may be found and then presents them in the most honest way possible.  He/she does not cherry pick his sources by going to only sources written by ones of like belief.  In fact an objective researcher tries to go to either neutral sources and/or sources which definitely do not believe as he/she does, i.e. to be objective.
 
Whereas, a propagandist seeks to cherry pick his sources by using only those written by someone of his/her same belief.  This can readily be seen in much of Islamic writing, they cherry pick from only sources written by people who believe the same as they do.  Now of course any writings based on this method are biased and none objective.
 
AN EXAMPLE OF IGNORANCE OF THE DIFFERENCE:
 
As stated in the introduction, a researcher is objective and does not cherry pick his/her sources; whereas, a propagandist does.  Now let's look at some actual examples of ignorance with respect what an objective researcher does where the researcher was actually criticized for being objective and NOT picking writings of those who believed the same as the researcher.
 
<<<"It looks as if [[objective researcher]] did not do her research on the man she quoted and called a world reknown Bible scholar.  [[objective researcher]]  did not know that the person she was quoting from (Matthew Henry), believed in the Divinity of Jesus, that He is the True God.  [[objective researcher]]  does not believe this, she believes Jesus is a mere man and not Divine at all.
 
She is embarrased by this and therefore attacks my church and then spews forth a bunch of scripture that she thinks somehow will take the focus off of her ignorance.
 
[[objective researcher]] totally ignored the fact that she used a source that contradicted her own beliefs.
Here is the verse and the commentary by Matthew Henry regarding the fact that Jesus Christ ...............is GOD. The link to his proof points follows.[source - someone not knowing the difference between a researcher and a propagandist]>>>.
 
Clearly showing the fact that the person this individual who is ignorant of the difference between a researcher and a propagandist.  He clearly showed, without realizing it, that the researcher was not cherry picking and being completely objective as shown by the his/her use of items by renown scholars who believed differently than himself/herself.  The researcher answered this bit of nonsense as follows.
 
<<<"[[ individual who is ignorant of the difference between a researcher and a propagandist]] is completely wrong as I well knew that Matthew Henry was a mainstream religionist and that point alone made him a desirable person to quote as even he well knew the facts I was trying to bring out, and no one could say he believed as I do. Likewise I often quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia for the same reason. It shows even better the truth one is trying to bring out when you can show experts on the other side are in agreement with you, especially when you are dealing with a cultist.">>>.
 
This individual who is ignorant of the difference between a researcher and a propagandist went on to make the following false accusation.
 
<<<" yet she did the equivelent, out of not knowing what he taught. she is an opportunist propogandist.'">>>.
 
Other equally ignorant individuals make equally dumb statements such as,
 
<<<'You do not know Islam">>>.
 
After the mention of an event in the Netherlands,
 
<<<" The outspoken former Dutch legislator deserves the protection her country promised before she ran for parliament.
 
By Sam Harris and Salman Rushdie, October 9, 2007
 
As you read this, Ayaan Hirsi Ali sits in a safe house with armed men guarding her door. She is one of the most poised, intelligent and compassionate advocates of freedom of speech and conscience alive today, and for this she is despised in Muslim communities throughout the world. The details of her story bear repeating, as they illustrate how poorly equipped we are to deal with the threat of Muslim extremism in the West.
 
Hirsi Ali first fled to the Netherlands as a refugee from Somalia in 1992 after declining to submit to a forced marriage to a man she did not know. Once there, in hiding from her family, she began working as a cleaning lady. But this cleaning lady spoke Somali, Arabic, Amharic, Swahili, English and was quickly learning Dutch, so she soon found work as a translator for other Somali refugees, many of whom, like herself, were casualties of Islam. These women had been abused, mutilated, denied medical care and proper educations and forced into lives of sexual subjection and compulsory childbearing.
 
After attending the University of Leiden, Hirsi Ali began speaking publicly about the repression of women under Islam, and shortly thereafter she started receiving death threats from local Muslims. Her security situation eventually became so dire that she moved to the U.S. in 2002. However, she was soon contacted by Gerrit Zalm, then deputy prime minister of the Netherlands, who urged her to run for parliament. When Hirsi Ali voiced her security concerns, Zalm assured her that she would be given diplomatic protection wherever and whenever she needed it. She returned to the Netherlands with this assurance, won a seat in parliament and became a tireless advocate for women, for civil society and for reason.
 
The rest of her story is well known. In 2004, Hirsi Ali collaborated with Theo van Gogh on the film "Submission," which examined the link between Islamic law and the suffering of millions of women under Islam. The reaction from the Muslim community was nothing short of psychopathic, and it confirmed the necessity of Hirsi Ali's work and the reasonableness of her fears. Van Gogh, having declined bodyguards of his own, was gunned down and nearly decapitated on an Amsterdam street, and a letter threatening Hirsi Ali was staked to his chest with a butcher knife.
 
Hirsi Ali was immediately forced into hiding and moved from safe house to safe house, sometimes more than once a day, for months. Eventually, her security concerns drove her from the Netherlands altogether. She returned to the U.S., and the Dutch government has been paying for her protection here -- that is, until it suddenly announced last week that it would no longer protect her outside the Netherlands, thereby advertising her vulnerability to the world.
 
Hirsi Ali may be the first refugee from Western Europe since the Holocaust. As such, she is a unique and indispensable witness to both the strength and weakness of the West: to the splendor of open society and to the boundless energy of its antagonists. She knows the challenges we face in our struggle to contain the misogyny and religious fanaticism of the Muslim world, and she lives with the consequences of our failure each day. There is no one in a better position to remind us that tolerance of intolerance is cowardice.
 
Having recapitulated the Enlightenment for herself in a few short years, Hirsi Ali has surveyed every inch of the path leading out of the moral and intellectual wasteland that is traditional Islam. She has written two luminous books describing her journey, the most recent of which, "Infidel," has been an international bestseller for months. It is difficult to exaggerate her courage. As Christopher Caldwell wrote in the New York Times, "Voltaire did not risk, with his every utterance, making a billion enemies who recognized his face and could, via the Internet, share information instantaneously with people who aspired to assassinate him."
 
The Dutch Parliament will be debating Hirsi Ali's case this week. As it stands, the government's decision to protect her only within the borders of the Netherlands is genuinely perverse. While the Dutch have complained about the cost of protecting Hirsi Ali in the United States, it is actually far more expensive for them to protect her in the Netherlands, as the risk to her is greatest there.
 
There is also the matter of broken promises: Hirsi Ali was persuaded to run for parliament and to become the world's most visible and imperiled spokeswoman for the rights of Muslim women, on the understanding that she would be provided security for as long as she needed it. Zalm, in his capacity as both the deputy prime minister and the minister of finance, promised her such security without qualification. Most shamefully, Jan Peter Balkenende, the Dutch prime minister, has recommended that Hirsi Ali simply quit the Netherlands and has refused to grant her even a week's protection outside the country, during which she might raise funds to hire security of her own. Is this a craven attempt to placate local Muslim fanatics? A warning to other Dutch dissidents not to stir up trouble by speaking too frankly about Islam? Or just pure thoughtlessness?
 
The Dutch government should recognize a scandal in the making and rediscover its obligation to provide Hirsi Ali with the protection she was promised.
 
There is not a person alive more deserving of the freedoms of speech and conscience we take for granted in the West, nor is there anyone making a more courageous effort to defend them.
 
Sam Harris is the author of "The End of Faith" and "Letter to a Christian Nation." Salman Rushdie is a novelist whose works include "Midnight's Children," which won the Booker Prize, and "The Satanic Verses.">>>.
 
And this same individual then said the news is biased.
 
The reality is either an event occurred and/or it did not occur.    With respect an event, there is no necessity to know about the doctrines of a religion - it either happened or it did not happen.
 
Being objective is the accepting of reality per John 8:32, "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (Authorized King James Bible; AV).
 
THE PROPAGANDIST:
 
The propagandist on the other hand almost always uses biased material written by people of the same belief.   A quick reading of almost any Catholic or Islamic article clearly shows this as sources are almost always by members of the same group - hence none objective.
 
CONCLUSION:
 
As stated in the introduction and now shown to be true by example, An objective researcher go out and digs out the facts wherever they may be found and then presents them in the most honest way possible.  He/she does not cherry pick his sources by going to only sources written by ones of like belief.  In fact an objective researcher tries to go to either neutral sources and/or sources which definitely do not believe as he/she does, i.e. to be objective.
 
Whereas, a propagandist seeks to cherry pick his sources by using only those written by someone of his/her same belief.  This can readily be seen in much of Islamic writing, they cherry pick from only sources written by people who believe the same as they do.  Now of course any writings based on this method are biased and none objective.
 
LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT   WWW.JW.ORG

COMBINATION OF [1]  THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2]    DOCUMENTARY ON, THE GREAT FALLING AWAY AT THE END OF THE FIRST CENTURY:  (PART 2)[PART 1 IS 709A]
 
[1]       SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 710A]
 
And what great nation is there, that hath statutes and ordinances so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day?  Only take heed to thyself, and keep thy soul diligently, lest thou forget the things which thine eyes saw, and lest they depart from thy heart all the days of thy life; but make them known unto thy children and thy children’s children;  Deuteronomy 4:8  [New World Translation Revised: NWTr]
 
To the Israelites, Moses posed this question above.  Indeed, no other nation enjoyed those benefits. Under the reign of King Solomon, who in his youth sought to carry out Jehovah’s laws, the people “lived in security” and enjoyed peace and prosperity, “Judah and Israel were as numerous as the grains of sand by the sea; they were eating and drinking and rejoicing. Solomon ruled over all the kingdoms from the River to the land of the Philis?tines and to the boundary of Egypt. They brought tribute and served Solomon all the days of his life. Solomon’s food for each day was 30 cor measures of fine flour and 60 cor measures of flour, 10 fattened cattle, 20 pastured cattle, and 100 sheep, besides some stags, gazelles, roebucks, and fattened cuckoos.  For he controlled everything this side of the River, from Tiph?sah to Gaz?a, including all the kings on this side of the River; and he enjoyed peace in every region, all around him.  Judah and Israel lived in security, everyone under his own vine and under his own fig tree, from Dan to Beer-she?ba, all the days of Solomon”  (1 Kings 4:20 – 25,  [NWTr])
 
Regrettably, the Israelites eventually turned their backs on their God.  Through the prophet Jeremiah, God declared: “The wise have been put to shame. They have become terrified and will be caught.  Look! They have rejected the word of Jehovah, And what wisdom do they have?”  (Jeremiah 8:9,  [NWTr])    The result was that Jerusalem became “the bloodguilty city” full of “detestable things.” Finally it was brought to ruin and lay desolate for 70 years.—Ezekiel 22:2; Jeremiah 25:11.
  
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]       DOCUMENTARY ON, THE GREAT FALLING AWAY AT THE END OF THE FIRST CENTURY:  (PART 2)
 
Let's see what Augustine had to say on it as reported in a Catholic source:
 
With respect the false doctrine of Apostolic Succession, Augustine had this to say per, <<<"In this same period of my priestthood< I also wrote a book against a letter of Donatus...In a passage in this book, I said about the Apostle Peter: 'On him as on a rock the Church was built.'...But I know that very frequently at a later time, I so explained what the Lord said; 'Thou art Peter, and upo9n this rock I will build my Church," that it be understood as built upon Him whom Peter confessed saying; "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,' and so Peter, called after this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon this rock, and has received 'the keys of the kingdom of heaven." For, 'Thou art Peter' and not 'Thou art the rock' was said to him. But 'the rock was Christ," in confessing whom as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter." [source="The Fathers of the Church--Saint Augustine, The Retraction," (Washington, D.C.; 1968), translation by Mary I Bogan, Booi I, p. 90. ]>>>.
 
The Bible clearly states that Jesus (Yeshua) Christ is the head of the congregation, that he is alive, so why would he need a successor(s)?
 
Hebrews 7:22-25 clearly says in the Douay Rheims Catholic Bible, "By so much is Jesus made a surety of a better testament. 23 And the others indeed were made many priests, because by reason of death they were not suffered to continue: 24 But this, for that he continueth for ever, hath an everlasting priesthood: 25 Whereby he is able also to save for ever them that come to God by him; always living to make intercession for us. 26 For it was fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens: 27 Who needeth not daily (as the other priests) to offer sacrifices, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, in offering himself. 28 For the law maketh men priests, who have infirmity: but the word of the oath (which was since the law) the Son who is perfected for evermore."(Douay Rheims Catholic Bible; DRCB).
 
This is ratified at Romans 6:8-10, "Now, if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall live also together with Christ. 9 Knowing that Christ, rising again from the dead, dieth now no more. Death shall no more have dominion over him. 10 For in that he died to sin, he died once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. "(DRCB); and further testified to at Ephesians 5:23-24, "Because the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ is the head of the church. He is the saviour of his body. 24 Therefore as the church is subject to Christ: so also let the wives be to their husbands in all things."(DRCB). So the Bible shows that no successor is necessary as Jesus (Yeshua) is alive and needs no successor.
 
Now, i***roup really were as the RCC claims the successors to the apostles you would expect they would be adhering to the teachings and practices of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ and his apostles. A Catholic Dictionary clearly states: "The Roman Church is Apostolic, because her doctrine is the faith once revealed to the Apostles, which faith she guards and explains, without adding to it or taking from it." [source = A Catholic Dictionary," by W.E. Addis and T. Arnold, page 176, published in London in 1957]. Now the question is one of fact, is this group really not adding to or taking from the faith as revealed by Jesus (Yeshua)and the Apostles, let's see:
 
Commentary on the Apostolic Succession which s a false tradition:
 
Now the Apostolic Succession false doctrine is that the 12 apostles have successors to whom authority has been passed by divine appointment. In the Roman Catholic Church (RCC), the bishops as a group are said to be the successors of the apostles, and the bishop of Rome, the Pope, is claimed to be the successor of Peter. It is maintained that the Roman pontiffs come immediately after, occupy the position and perform the functions of Peter, to whom Christ is said to have given primacy of authority over the whole church, but this is really not the case.
 
Let's take the first argument of the RCC that Peter was the 'rock' on which the church was built when in reality the 'rock' was Jesus (Yeshua) Christ. Let's now consider whom the Apostles Peter and Paul understood to be the 'rock,' the 'cornerstone as shown at Acts 4:8-12, " Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said to them: Ye princes of the people and ancients, hear. 9 If we this day are examined concerning the good deed done to the infirm man, by what means he hath been made whole: 10 Be it known to you all and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God hath raised from the dead, even by him, this man standeth here before you, whole. 11 This is the stone which was rejected by you the builders, which is become the head of the corner. 12 Neither is there salvation in any other. For there is no other name under heaven given to men, whereby we must be saved."(Douay Rheims Catholic Bible). And this is further testified to at 1 Peter 2:4-8, " Unto whom coming, as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men but chosen and made honourable by God: 5 Be you also as living stones built up, a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. 6 Wherefore it is said in the scripture: Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious. And he that shall believe in him shall not be confounded. 7 To you therefore that believe, he is honour: but to them that believe not, the stone which the builders rejected, the same is made the head of the corner: 8 And a stone of stumbling and a rock of scandal, to them who stumble at the word, neither do believe, whereunto also they are set."(DRCB); And further affirmed that Jesus (Yeshua) is the 'rock' at Ephesians 2:20, " Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone:"(DRCB).
 
Last we look at Matthew 16:18 which the RCC tries to twist its meaning to be that Peter is the 'rock,' but as we have seen already, Jesus (Yeshua) Christ is the 'rock,' " And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."(DRCB) clearly affirming that he, Jesus (Yeshua) Christ was the 'rock' to Peter, so no apostolic succession here.
 
Let's see what Augustine had to say on it as reported in a Catholic source:
 
With respect the false doctrine of Apostolic Succession, Augustine had this to say per, "In this same period of my priestthood< I also wrote a book against a letter of Donatus...In a passage in this book, I said about the Apostle Peter: 'On him as on a rock the Church was built.'...But I know that very frequently at a later time, I so explained what the Lord said; 'Thou art Peter, and upo9n this rock I will build my Church," that it be understood as built upon Him whom Peter confessed saying; "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,' and so Peter, called after this rock, represented the person of the Church which is built upon this rock, and has received 'the keys of the kingdom of heaven." For, 'Thou art Peter' and not 'Thou art the rock' was said to him. But 'the rock was Christ," in confessing whom as also the whole Church confesses, Simon was called Peter." [source="The Fathers of the Church--Saint Augustine, The Retraction," (Washington, D.C.; 1968), translation by Mary I Bogan, Booi I, p. 90. }
 
The Bible clearly states that Jesus (Yeshua) Christ is the head of the congregation, that he is alive, so why would he need a successor(s)?
 
Hebrews 7:22-25 clearly says in the Douay Rheims Catholic Bible, "By so much is Jesus made a surety of a better testament. 23 And the others indeed were made many priests, because by reason of death they were not suffered to continue: 24 But this, for that he continueth for ever, hath an everlasting priesthood: 25 Whereby he is able also to save for ever them that come to God by him; always living to make intercession for us. 26 For it was fitting that we should have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners, and made higher than the heavens: 27 Who needeth not daily (as the other priests) to offer sacrifices, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, in offering himself. 28 For the law maketh men priests, who have infirmity: but the word of the oath (which was since the law) the Son who is perfected for evermore."(Douay Rheims Catholic Bible; DRCB).
 
This is ratified at Romans 6:8-10, "Now, if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall live also together with Christ. 9 Knowing that Christ, rising again from the dead, dieth now no more. Death shall no more have dominion over him. 10 For in that he died to sin, he died once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. "(DRCB); and further testified to at Ephesians 5:23-24, "Because the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ is the head of the church. He is the saviour of his body. 24 Therefore as the church is subject to Christ: so also let the wives be to their husbands in all things."(DRCB). So the Bible shows that no successor is necessary as Jesus (Yeshua) is alive and needs no successor.
 
Have you ever wondered or considered whether the Apostle Peter was ever actually in Rome, and what the facts indicate? Rome is referred to in nine verses of the Word of God, and interestingly NOT one of these says that the Apostle Peter was there. In fact, 1 Peter 5:10-14 shows he was NOT in Rome, but in Babylon, " But the God of all grace, who hath called us unto his eternal glory in Christ Jesus, after you have suffered a little, will himself perfect you and confirm you and establish you. 11 To him be glory and empire, for ever and ever. Amen. 12 By Sylvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I think, I have written briefly: beseeching and testifying that this is the true grace of God, wherein you stand. 13 The church that is in Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you. And so doth my son, Mark. 14 Salute one another with a holy kiss. Grace be to all you who are in Christ Jesus. Amen."(Douay Rheims Catholic Bible; DRCB). Now some claim this was a cryptic reference to Rome, but would this be consistent with his assignment to preach to the Jews as indicated at Galatians 2:9, " And when they had known the grace that was given to me, James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship: that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision:"(DRCB), since there was a large Jewish population in Babylon. The "Encyclopaedia Judaica," Jerusalem, 1971, Volume 15, Column 755, when discussing production of the Babylonian Talmud, refers clearly to Judaism's 'great academies of Babylon' during the first part of the Common Era.
 
Now, i***roup really were as the RCC claims the successors to the apostles you would expect they would be adhering to the teachings and practices of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ and his apostles. A Catholic Dictionary clearly states: "The Roman Church is Apostolic, because her doctrine is the faith once revealed to the Apostles, which faith she guards and explains, without adding to it or taking from it." [source = A Catholic Dictionary," by W.E. Addis and T. Arnold, page 176, published in London in 1957]. Now the question is one of fact, is this group really not adding to or taking from the faith as revealed by Jesus (Yeshua)and the Apostles, let's see:
 
The Identity of God (YHWH):
 
The Catholic Encyclopedia clearly says, "The Trinity is the term employed to signify the central doctrine of the Christian religion." [source = "The Catholic Encyclopedia," 1912 edition, Volume XV, page 47. However the New Encyclopedia Britannica clearly states, "Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament....The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies." [source = " the New Encyclopedia Britannica," 1976, Micropaedia, Volume X, Page 126].
 
The New Catholic Encyclopedia clearly states, "There is the recognition on the part of exegetes and Biblical theologians, including a constantly growing number of Roman Catholics, that one should not speak of Trinitarinism in the New Testament without serious qualification. There is also the closely parallel recognition on the part of historians of dogma and systematic theologians that when one does speak of an unqualified Trinitarianism, one has moved from the period of Christian origins to, say, the last quadrant of the 4 th. Century." [source = "The New Catholic Encyclopedia," 1967, Volume XIV, page 295].
 
Also, the very concept of the Trinity, is shown to be just a myth in the New Testament (NT) at many places such as at many places, for example at John 17:3-5, " Now this is eternal life: That they may know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. 4 I have glorified thee on the earth; I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. 5 And now glorify thou me, O Father, with thyself, with the glory which I had, before the world was, with thee." (Douay Rheims Catholic Bible: DRCB), etc. clearly showing Jesus (Yeshua) as a distinct individual separate and apart from his Father (YHWH) and subject to his Father (YHWH) and carrying out his Father's (YHWH's) will. Also, there are countless other scriptures clearly showing that the Trinity is nothing more than an impossible myth.
 
Celibacy of the Clergy of the Roman Church:
 
Pope Paul VI, in his encyclical, "Sacerdotalis Caelibatus," (Priestly Celibacy, 1967 in English), endorsed celibacy as a requirement for the clergy, but he admitted that 'the New Testament which preserves the teaching of Christ and the Apostles...does not openly demand celibacy of sacred ministers...Jesus Himself did not make it a prerequisite in His choice of the Twelve, nor did the Apostles for those who presided over the first Christian communities." [source = "The papal Encyclicals 1958-1981, published at Falls Church, Virginia, 1981, page 204]. The scriptures clearly show this NOT TO BE A RECOGNIZED PRACTICE AMONG THE APOSTLES in the 1 st. Century at 1 Corinthians 9:5, " Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas"; and at John 1:42, " And he brought him to Jesus. And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon the son of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, A stone."(DRCB). And at Mark 1:29-31 where reference is made to the mother-in-law of Simon, " And forthwith, when they were come out of the synagogue, they entered into the house of Simon and Andrew, with James and John. 30 But Simon's wife's mother lay sick of a fever, and anon they tell him of her. 31 And he came and took her by the hand, and lifted her up; and immediately the fever left her, and she ministered unto them. "(DRCB).
 
And the specific instructions with respect to qualifications of those seeking responsible positions in the congregation at 1 Timothy 3:2, " It behoveth therefore a bishop to be blameless, the husband of one wife, sober, prudent, of good behaviour, chaste, given to hospitality, a teacher, color](DRCB).
 
In fact, the requirement for Celibacy for priests, bishops, etc. is of pagan origin with the Buddist requiring it of their priest and monks before the Christian era per "History of Sacerdotal Celibacy in the Christian Church, by Henry C. Lea, London, 1932, fourth edition, page 6. Even earlier, the higher orders of the Babylonian priesthood were required to practice celibacy, according to "The Two Babylons," by Alexander Hislop of the Scottish church, New York, 1943, page 219.
 
Interestingly 1 Timothy 4:1-3 says, " Now the Spirit manifestly saith that in the last times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to spirits of error and doctrines of devils,
2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy and having their conscience seared, 3 Forbidding to marry, to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving by the faithful and by them that have known the truth."(DRCB).
 
The Bible Shows Separateness from the World not Attachment to It:
 
Pope Paul VI, when addressing the United Nations in 1965, said: "The peoples of the earth turn to the United Nations as the last hope of concord and peace; We presume to present here, together with Our own, their tribute of honor and of hope." [source = "The Pope's Visit," New York, 1965, Time-Life Special Report, page 26.
 
But John 15:18-19 clearly shows true Christians do NOT belong to the world, " If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. 19 If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." (DRCB); and James 4:4 says, " Adulterers, know you not that the friendship of this world is the enemy of God? Whosoever therefore will be a friend of this world becometh an enemy of God."(DRCB) clearly showing if the Pope was truly the successor of the Apostles he would not be saying, " the United Nations as the last hope of concord and peace," but would recognize Jesus (yeshua) Christ was the actual last hope as clearly shown in the Douay Rheims Catholic Bible and in The New American Bible (Catholic).
 
Jesus (Yeshua) Clearly Showed That Christians Do Not Resort To Cardinal Weapons in Their Warfare:
 
Catholic historian E.I. Watkin writes: "Painful as the admission must be, we cannot in the interest of a false edification or dishonest loyalty deny or ignore the historical fact that Bishops have consistently supported all wars waged by the government of their country. I do not know in fact of a single instance in which a national hierarchy has condemned as unjust any war...Whatever the official theory, in practice 'my country always right' has been the maxim followed in wartime by Catholic Bishops." [source = "Morals and Missiles," London, 1959, edited by Charles S. Thompson, pages 57 and 58].
 
Now, let's consider what the Bible clearly says at Matthew 26:52, " Then Jesus saith to him: Put up again thy sword into its place: for all that take the sword shall perish with the sword."(DRCB); and 1 John 3:10-12, " In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil. Whosoever is not just is not of God, or he that loveth not his brother.
11 ¶ For this is the declaration which you have heard from the beginning, that you should love one another. 12 Not as Cain, who was of the wicked one and killed his brother. And wherefore did he kill him? Because his own works were wicked: and his brother's just."(DRCB).
 
Therefore, in the light of the foregoing, it is readily apparent that those who claim to be the successors to the Apostles are NOT because they are neither practicing what Jesus (Yeshua) and his Apostles did, NOR are they teaching what Jesus (Yeshua) and his Apostles were.
 
Now, the Catholic church claims "the keys" were entrusted to the Apostle Peter, but what does the Bible show with respect to the "the keys" and what they were? Let's go look at the Bible evidence on this subject. First, the Biblical verse in question so all will know what is being referenced to, Matthew 16:18-20," And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven. 20 Then he commanded his disciples, that they should tell no one that he was Jesus the Christ."(DRCB). The Catholic church claims that when Jesus (Yeshua) said, "thou art Peter," and he was the 'rock' on which the church was to be built, but as previously shown, the 'rock' was Christ himself, and the expression 'thou art' was a common method of expression, then, as shown at John 1:49 and many other places, " Nathanael answered him and said: Rabbi: Thou art the Son of God. Thou art the King of Israel"(DRCB).
 
Revelation 3:5-8 actually makes certain just who "the key" is when Jesus (Yeshua) is shown as referring to the symbolic key used to open up privileges and opportunities to humans as himself, Jesus (Yeshua), and he only used the Apostle Peter as his agent to open up the way for the Gentiles, " He that shall overcome shall thus be clothed in white garments: and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life. And I will confess his name before my Father and before his angels. 6 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith to the churches. 7 And to the angel of the church of Philadelphia write: These things saith the Holy One and the true one, he that hath the key of David, he that openeth and no man shutteth, shutteth and no man openeth: 8 I know thy works. Behold, I have given before thee a door opened, which no man can shut: because thou hast a little strength and hast kept my word and hast not denied my name."(DRCB). [Brief detail on the Law of Agencies which is basically as follows, "Jesus (Yeshua) was God's (YHWH's) appointed agent in accordance with the 'Biblical law of agency' described as, "Scripture mentions something being done by Person A, whilst another mentions it being done by Person B. This is best understood when we grasp the Schaliach Principle, or the Jewish Law of Agency, which is expressed in the dictum, "A person's agent is regarded as the person himself." Therefore any act committed by a duly appointed agent is regarded as having been committed by the principle." (The Encyclopedia of the Jewish Religion, R.J.Z. Werblowski and Geoffrey Wigoder)].
 
Now, the Apostle peter was entrusted by Jesus (Yeshua) to open up to the Jews, Samaritans, Gentiles, the opportunity to receive God's (YHWH's) spirit with a view to their entering the heavenly Kingdom as shown by Acts 21:14-39, " But Peter standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and spoke to them: Ye men of Judea, and all you that dwell in Jerusalem, be this known to you and with your ears receive my words. 15 For these are not drunk, as you suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day: 16 But this is that which was spoken of by the prophet Joel: 17 And it shall come to pass, in the last days, (saith the Lord), I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy: and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams. 18 And upon my servants indeed and upon my handmaids will I pour out in those days of my spirit: and they shall prophesy. 19 And I will shew wonders in the heaven above, and signs on the earth beneath: blood and fire, and vapour of smoke. 20 The sun shall be turned into darkness and the moon into blood, before the great and manifest day of the Lord to come. 21 And it shalt come to pass, that whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. 22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him, in the midst of you, as you also know: 23 This same being delivered up, by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, you by the hands of wicked men have crucified and slain. 24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the sorrows of hell, as it was impossible that he should be holden by it. 25 For David saith concerning him: I foresaw the Lord before my face: because he is at my right hand, that I may not be moved. 26 For this my heart hath been glad, and my tongue hath rejoiced: moreover my flesh also shall rest in hope. 27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell: nor suffer thy Holy One to see corruption. 28 Thou hast made known to me the ways of life: thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. 29 Ye men, brethren, let me freely speak to you of the patriarch David: that he died and was buried; and his sepulchre is with us to this present say. 30 Whereas therefore he was a prophet and knew that God hath sworn to him with an oath, that of the fruit of his loins one should sit upon his throne. 31 Foreseeing this, he spoke of the resurrection of Christ. For neither was he left in hell: neither did his flesh see corruption.
32 This Jesus hath God raised again, whereof all we are witnesses. 33 Being exalted therefore by the right hand of God and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath poured forth this which you see and hear. 34 For David ascended not into heaven; but he himself said: The Lord said to my Lord: Sit thou on my right hand, 35 Until I make thy enemies thy footstool. 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know most certainly that God hath made both Lord and Christ, this same Jesus, whom you have crucified. 37 ¶ Now when they had heard these things, they had compunction in their heart and said to Peter and to the rest of the apostles: What shall we do, men and brethren? 38 But Peter said to them: Do penance: and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins. And you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. 39 For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, whomsoever the Lord our God shall call."(DRCB); and Acts 8:14-17, " Now, when the apostles, who were in Jerusalem, had heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John. 15 Who, when they were come, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Ghost. 16 For he was not as yet come upon any of them: but they were only baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then they laid their hands upon them: and they received the Holy Ghost."(DRCB).
 
And Acts 10:24-48 highlights this, " And the morrow after, he entered into Caesarea. And Cornelius waited for them, having called together his kinsmen and special friends. 25 And it came to pass that when Peter was come in, Cornelius came to meet him and falling at his feet adored. 26 But Peter lifted him up, saying: Arise: I myself also am a man. 27 And talking with him, he went in and found many that were come together. 28 And he said to them: you know how abominable it is for a man that is a Jew to keep company or to come unto one of another nation: but God hath shewed to me, to call no man common or unclean. 29 For which cause, making no doubt, I came when I was sent for. I ask, therefore, for what cause you have sent for me? 30 And Cornelius said: Four days ago, unto this hour, I was praying in my house, at the ninth hour and behold a man stood before me in white apparel and said: 31 Cornelius, thy prayer is heard and thy alms are had in remembrance in the sight of God. 32 Send therefore to Joppe: and call hither Simon, who is surnamed Peter. He lodgeth in the house of Simon a tanner, by the sea side.
33 Immediately therefore I sent to thee: and thou hast done well in coming. Now, therefore, all we are present in thy sight to hear all things whatsoever are commanded thee by the Lord. 34 And Peter opening his mouth, said: in very deed I perceive that God is not a respecter of persons.
35 But in every nation, he that feareth him and worketh justice is acceptable to him. 36 God sent the word to the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ (He is Lord of all). 37 You know the word which hath been published through all Judea: for it began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached. 38 Jesus of Nazareth: how God anointed him with the Holy Ghost and with power, who went about doing good and healing all that were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him. 39 And we are witnesses of all things that he did in the land of the Jews and in Jerusalem: whom they killed, hanging him upon a tree. 40 Him God raised up the third day and gave him to be made manifest, 41 Not to all the people, but to witnesses preordained by God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him, after he arose again from the dead.
42 And he commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that it is he who was appointed by God to be judge of the living and of the dead. 43 To him all the prophets give testimony, that by his name all receive remission of sins, who believe in him. 44 ¶ While Peter was yet speaking these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them that heard the word. 45 And the faithful of the circumcision, who came with Peter, were astonished for that the grace of the Holy Ghost was poured out upon the Gentiles also. 46 For they heard them speaking with tongues and magnifying God. 47 Then Peter answered: Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Ghost, as well as we? 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Then they desired him to tarry with them some days."(DRCB).
 
Now did heaven wait on Peter to make decisions and then follow his lead? Not hardly as clearly shown by Acts 2:4, " And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost: and they began to speak with divers tongues, according as the Holy Ghost gave them to speak." And Acts 2:14, " But Peter standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and spoke to them: Ye men of Judea, and all you that dwell in Jerusalem, be this known to you and with your ears receive my words."(DRCB). And Acts 10:19-20 follows up with, " And as Peter was thinking of the vision, the Spirit said to him: Behold three men seek thee. 20 Arise, therefore: get thee down and go with them, doubting nothing: for I have sent them."(DRCB); and Matthew 18:18-19, " Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven. 19 Again I say to you, that if two of you shall consent upon earth, concerning anything whatsoever they shall ask, it shall be done to them by my Father who is in heaven."(DRCB).
 
Now, is Peter the judge as to who is worthy to enter the Kingdom as claimed? Well 2 Timothy 4:1-2, explains that the judge is NOT the Apostle Peter, but Jesus (Yeshua) Christ, himself, " I charge thee, before God and Jesus Christ, who shall judge the living and the dead, by his coming and his kingdom: 2 Preach the word: be instant in season, out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine."(DRCB). This Biblical fact that Jesus (Yeshua) is the judge and not the Apostle Peter is highlighted even further at 2 Timothy 4:8, " As to the rest, there is laid up for me a crown of justice which the Lord the just judge will render to me in that day: and not only to me, but to them also that love his coming. Make haste to come to me quickly."(DRCB)." [source - Discourse on the False Doctrine of Apostolic Succession Claimed by Some: (http://religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?board=succession&action=display&thread=1164996145 on 10/15/2007)]
 
 
Now their untruth is revealed in other ways such as the Apostle Peter wrote the book of 1 Peter about 62-64 AD in Babylon and the book of 2 Peter about 64 AD in Babylon so he was obviously alive in 64 AD.  Now with regard to exactly when and how he died there is much dispute and little real evidence.  But it can be stated that in 64 AD, the Apostle Peter was still alive.
 
Some of the conflicting information about the Apostle Peter is as follows:
 
<<<"As author James Hardy Ropes states:
The tradition, however, that Peter came to Rome, and suffered martyrdom under Nero (54-68 A.D.) either in the great persecution which followed the burning of the city or somewhat later, rests on a different and FIRMER basis....It is UNQUESTIONED that 150 years after Peter's death it was the COMMON BELIEF at Rome that he had died there, as had Paul. The "trophies" of the two great apostles could be seen on the Vatican Hill and by the Ostian Way...a firm local tradition of the death at Rome of both apostles is attested for a time NOT TOO DISTANT FROM THE EVENT. - [source - The Apostolic Age in the Light of Modern Criticism. New York. 1908. Pp. 215-216.]>>>.
 
<<<"However in Babylon Mystery Religion, by Ralph Woodrow:
There is no proof, Biblically speaking, that Peter ever went near Rome! The New Testament tells us he went to Antioch, Samaria, Joppa, Caesarea, and other places, BUT NOT ROME! This is a strange omission, especially since Rome was considered the most important city in the world![source - Babylon Mystery Religion by Ralph Woodrow]>>>.
 
<<<"Also in his book Ralph Woodrow said: Since the apostle Peter was known as Simon Peter, it is interesting to note that Rome not only had a "Peter," an interpreter of the mysteries, but also a religious leader named Simon who went there in the first century! This Simon, known to Bible Students as Simon the sorcerer (Acts 8:9), is said to have later gone to Rome and founded a counterfeit Christian religion there! -[source - Babylon Mystery Religion: Ancient and Modern, by Ralph Woodrow Evangelistic Association, Inc. Riverside, CA. 1992. P. 73.]>>>.
 
<<<"After the death of Simon Magus his followers saw a golden opportunity to "Christianize" the pagan theology that Magus promulgated in Rome during his lifetime. By associating the "Peter" or Grand Interpreter (Opener) of Rome with Peter the apostle they were able to fool the members of God's Church and have them think that the pope was the representative and successor of Peter the apostle. "And so," writes Alexander Hislop in The Two Babylons, "to the blinded Christians of the apostasy, the Pope was the representative of Peter the apostle, while to the initiated pagans, he was only the representative of Peter, the interpreter of their well-known mysteries" (P. 210).[reference - The Two Babylons by Reverend Alexander Hislop]>>>.
 
<<<" Hasting's Dictionary of the Apostolic Church says: "The author or FIRST REPRESENTATIVE [POPE] of this baptized heathenism...is Simon Magus, who unquestionably ADULTERATED Christianity with PAGAN IDEAS AND PRACTICES, with the aid and with the sanction of Christianity (so called) to set up A RIVAL UNIVERSAL (OR CATHOLIC) RELIGION"[source - Hasting's Dictionary of the Apostolic Church (Vol. 2, pp. 514, 566).]>>>.
 
<<<"This amalgam of paganism and Christianity mentioned above, was a result of Simon Magus witnessing the preaching of Philip and Peter in Samaria. He soon saw the awesome potential of Christianity as a TOOL for his own advancement. When Peter returned to Rome (just prior to his death) he "found the minds of the people strangely bewitched and hardened AGAINST the embracing of the Christian religion by the subtleties and magic arts of Simon Magus...." (Cave). By the middle of the second century, when Justin Martyr wrote his Apology (152 A.D.) "the sect of the Simonians appears to have been FORMIDABLE, for he speaks four times of their founder, Simon...." [source - Dictionary of Christian Biography, vol. 4, p. 682]>>>.
 
But, one thing we can be absolutely sure of as previously mentioned is that the Apostle Peter was still alive in 64 AD even if we can not be sure when or where he died and/or how.
 
Now the RCC falsely claims that Linus succeeded him, a false claim NOT born out in the Inspired Word of Almighty God (YHWH) - anywhere.
 
In fact even RCC documents kind of question this false claim as follows:
 
<<<" Pope Saint Linus (d. ca.79) was the second pope according to the Roman Catholic Church. According to Irenaeus[1], Jerome,[2] Eusebius,[3] John Chrysostom,[4] the Liberian Catalogue[5] and the Liber Pontificalis,[6] Linus was the second Bishop of Rome, succeeding Saint Peter and succeeded by Anacletus. Irenaeus identifies him with the Linus mentioned in 2 Timothy,[7] although this identification is not certain. The Liberian Catalogue and the Liber Pontificalis both date his Episcopate to AD 56-67 during the reign of Nero, but Jerome dates it to 67-78, and Eusebius dates the end of his Episcopate to the second year of the reign of Titus (80).
 
[b]Other sources disagree on Linus's place in the succession of Popes. Tertullian[8] says that Peter was succeeded by Clement I. The Apostolic Constitutions[9] says that Linus was the first Bishop of Rome, ordained by Paul, and was succeeded by Clement, who was ordained by Peter.
According to the Liber Pontificalis, Linus was an Italian from Tuscany, and his father's name was Herculanus. The Apostolic Constitutions names his mother as Claudia. The Liber Pontificalis also says that he issued a decree that women should cover their heads in church, and that he died a martyr and was buried on the Vatican Hill next to Peter. It gives the date of his death as 23 September, the date on which his feast is still celebrated.[10]" [source - The Catholic Encyclopedia]>>>.
So it is readily apparent that this false claim is just slippery conjecture not backed by fact, and clearly disputed by the Bible NOT mentioning any successor to the Apostle Paul.
 
This cult also claims that one Anacletus I succeeded Linus, but of course this false claim is not backed by the Inspired Word of Almighty God (YHWH).
 
In fact even RCC documents kind of question this false claim as follows:
 
<<<"According to Irenaeus[1], Jerome,[2] Eusebius,[3] John Chrysostom,[4] the Liberian Catalogue[5] and the Liber Pontificalis,[6] Linus was the second Bishop of Rome, succeeding Saint Peter and succeeded by Anacletus. Irenaeus identifies him with the Linus mentioned in 2 Timothy,[7] although this identification is not certain. The Liberian Catalogue and the Liber Pontificalis both date his Episcopate to AD 56-67 during the reign of Nero, but Jerome dates it to 67-78, and Eusebius dates the end of his Episcopate to the second year of the reign of Titus (80).
 
Other sources disagree on Linus's place in the succession of Popes. Tertullian[8] says that Peter was succeeded by Clement I. The Apostolic Constitutions[9] says that Linus was the first Bishop of Rome, ordained by Paul, and was succeeded by Clement, who was ordained by Peter." [source - The Catholic Encyclopedia]>>>.
 
So as can readily be seen this false doctrine of Apostolic Succession is nothing but smoke and mirrors.
 
FALSE CLAIMS ABOUT MATTHIAS MADE BY SOME MEMBERS OF THE RCC CULT:
 
First, One member of this cult even falsely claimed that Matthias was a successor to the Apostle Peter even though the Inspired Word of Almighty God (YHWH) clearly says of Matthias:
 
Acts 1:23, "And they appointed two, Joseph, called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias." (DRCB)
 
Acts 1:26, "And they gave them lot, and the lot fell upon Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles." (DRCB).
 
And even RCC documents deny this as follows:
 
<<<" The Greek Matthias (or, in some manuscripts, Maththias), is a name derived from Mattathias, Hebrew Mattithiah, signifying "gift of Yahweh." Matthias was one of the seventy disciples of Jesus, and had been with Him from His baptism by John to the Ascension (Acts 1:21-22). It is related (Acts 1:15-26) that in the days following the Ascension, Peter proposed to the assembled brethren, who numbered one hundred and twenty, that they choose one to fill the place of the traitor Judas in the Apostolate. Two disciples, Joseph, called Barsabas, and Matthias were selected, and lots were drawn, with the result in favour of Matthias, who thus became associated with the eleven Apostles. Zeller has declared this narrative unhistoric, on the plea that the Apostles were in Galilee after the death of Jesus. As a matter of fact they did return to Galilee, but the Acts of the Apostles clearly state that about the feast of Pentecost they went back to Jerusalem.
 
All further information concerning the life and death of Matthias is vague and contradictory. According to Nicephorus (Hist. eccl., 2, 40), he first preached the Gospel in Judea, then in Ethiopia (that is to say, Colchis) and was crucified. The Synopsis of Dorotheus contains this tradition: Matthias in interiore Æthiopia, ubi Hyssus maris portus et Phasis fluvius est, hominibus barbaris et carnivoris praedicavit Evangelium. Mortuus est autem in Sebastopoli, ibique prope templum Solis sepultus (Matthias preached the Gospel to barbarians and cannibals in the interior of Ethiopia, at the harbour of the sea of Hyssus, at the mouth of the river Phasis. He died at Sebastopolis, and was buried there, near the Temple of the Sun). Still another tradition maintains that Matthias was stoned at Jerusalem by the Jews, and then beheaded (cf. Tillemont, "Mémoires pour servir à l'histoire eccl. des six premiers siècles", I, 406-7). It is said that St. Helena brought the relics of St. Matthias to Rome, and that a portion of them was at Trier. Bollandus (Acta SS., May, III) doubts if the relics that are in Rome are not rather those of the St. Matthias who was Bishop of Jerusalem about the year 120, and whose history would seem to have been confounded with that of the Apostle. The Latin Church celebrates the feast of St. Matthias on 24 February and the Greek Church on 9 August. [Note: After this article was written, the Latin Church moved the feast of St. Matthias to 14 May.]
Clement of Alexandria (Strom., III, 4) records a sentence that the Nicolaitans ascribe[source - The Catholic Encyclopedia]>>>.
 
Second, some members of the RCC cult even claim that the Inspired Word of Almighty God (YHWH) is not the only authentic source, clearly showing, His obviously ignorant of the fact that the Bible is NOT the product of one committee or strongman. It has over 40 individual writers who wrote under divine inspiration/guidance putting the thoughts of God (YHWH) into the words of men much as transcribing secretaries today taking transcription and then later typing it out. In other words one real author, God (YHWH), and many scribes each of whom wrote in his own style over a period of approximately 1,600 years. All of what people call or consider inconsistencies are really not such, but most often just a problem of translation and/or understanding, i.e., lack of understanding of what the original writer writing in his own language and culture meant/said in his original writing. What is remarkable, is the writers over such a period of time all wrote in harmony when even most posters on threads on this forum can not even stay on track or subject over a period of a few days and/or weeks at most with the original subject of the thread. This fact of harmony over a period so great as to almost stagger the imagination shows that it had one guiding force or author who divinely inspired its writers as humans of their own volition can not keep on track over short periods of time.
 
To wit, the Bible is the ONLY book God (YHWH) ever inspired men to write as his scribes. In other words, God is its author and men only put his thoughts given to them by divine inspiration into their own words, the words of men. Not only that, all the other writers of later so called religious guidance books borrowed from it and made changes in accord with their strong man or so called prophet. Take the example of Joseph Smith who borrowed from it to write the Book of Mormon, but failed to give credit or source to the Bible and twisted some borrowed things into bizarre distortions. Other examples are of course the bizarre writings of David Koresh the Prophet of the Branch Dividians of Waco, Texas; and the Quran, etc.
 
Third, members of this cult readily forget what the Bible says at 2 Peter 1:19-21, "And we have the more firm prophetical word: whereunto you do well to attend, as to a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn and the day star arise in your hearts.  20  Understanding this first: That no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.  21  For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time: but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost." (DRCB); and 2 Timothy 3:16-17, "All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice:  17  That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work." (DRCB).
 
CONCLUSION:
 
As Jesus (Yeshua) Christ said at John 5:31-39 that clearly shows how dumb the way of the RCC cult is,
 
"If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.
32  There is another that beareth witness of me: and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true.
33  You sent to John: and he gave testimony to the truth.
34  But I receive not testimony from man: but I say these things, that you may be saved.
35  He was a burning and a shining light: and you were willing for a time to rejoice in his light.
36  But I have a greater testimony than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to perfect, the works themselves which I do, give testimony of me, that the Father hath sent me.
37  And the Father himself who hath sent me hath given testimony of me: neither have you heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape.
38  And you have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him you believe not.
39 Search the scriptures: for you think in them to have life everlasting. And the same are they that give testimony of me." (DRCB).
 
Also, John 10:35 says, "If he called them gods to whom the word of God was spoken; and the scripture cannot be broken:" (DRCB) which clearly shows the scriptures, the Bible, is the authentic Inspired Word of Almighty God (YHWH) for mankind to follow since it can not be broken.
 
Therefore, so much for the apostate (counterfeit) so called Christian groups that came into being by being part of the great falling away instead of remaining genuine (true) followers of Christ.
 
LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT   WWW.JW.ORG[/b]

COMBINATION OF [1]  THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2]    Research Subject Selection:
 
[1]              SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 712A]
 
Later Jehovah’s angel came and sat under the big tree that was in Ophrah, which belonged to Joash the Abiez?rite. His son Gideon was beating out wheat in the winepress in order to hide it from Midian.   Jehovah’s angel appeared to him and said: “Jehovah is with you, you mighty warrior.”   At this Gideon said to him: “Pardon me, my lord, but if Jehovah is with us, why has all of this come upon us? Where are all his wonderful acts that our fathers related to us, saying, ‘Did Jehovah not bring us up out of Egypt?’ Now Jehovah has deserted us and given us into Midian’s hand.”   Jehovah faced him and said: “Go with the strength you have, and you will save Israel out of Midian’s hand. Is it not I who send you?”   Gideon answered him: “Pardon me, Jehovah. How can I save Israel? Look! My clan is the least in Manasseh, and I am the most insignificant in my father’s house.”   But Jehovah said to him: “Because I will be with you, you will strike down Midian as if they were one man.”   Judges 6:11 – 16  [New World Translation Revised: NWTr]
 
Many Bible accounts make it clear that Jehovah sees not only the good in his servants but also their potential.   For example, when Gideon was chosen to set God’s people free from Midianite oppression, he must have been stunned by the angel’s greeting: “Jehovah is with you, you mighty warrior.” It seems clear that at the time, Gideon felt anything but “mighty.”   He acknowledged his doubts and his own sense of insignificance. But as the ensuing conversation revealed, Jehovah certainly had a much more positive view of his servant than Gideon had of himself.
 
Jehovah trusted Gideon to deliver Israel because He had observed his skills. For one thing, Jehovah’s angel had noticed how Gideon threshed wheat with all his might.   Something else had caught the angel’s attention.   In Bible times, farmers usually beat out grain in an open area to take advantage of the wind, which would blow away the chaff. Surprisingly, Gideon was secretly threshing wheat in a winepress in order to conceal his meager harvest from the Midianites.   What a clever strategy!   No wonder that in Jehovah’s eyes, Gideon was more than a cautious farmer—he was a shrewd man. Yes, Jehovah saw his potential and worked with him.  
 
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]       Research Subject Selection:
 
INTRODUCTION:
 
Research subjects of the data mining variety are almost endless; therefore, the researcher must define what he/she wants to research and why.
 
First, The researcher must ask himself or herself is the subject worth researching, i.e., does it have a strong possibility of being important and whether it has or has not been adequately covered by other researchers/writers.
 
Second, Is there an issue involved with multiple possibilities or is there no diversity of opinion on the outcome of the subject.  If there are no multiple possibilities and/or diversity of opinion on the outcome of the subject, there is no reason to research it, i.e., if all major players agree on the outcome, no investigation should be undertaken.
 
Third, Is there a strong possibility the results of the research will be educational or add new knowledge?  If it is judged that there is NOT a strong possibility that the results will be useful - then no research is warranted.
 
If the answer to any of these preliminary items before doing research is NO none should undertaken; to wit,Items lacking importance should NOT be researched.
 
EXAMPLE OF APPLICATION OF THE THREE GUIDING PRINCIPLES TO UNDERTAKING RESEARCH:
 
Some years ago, I was looking into doing research on the accuracy of Bible canon as it effected an important subject; to wit, which Bible books are inspired and why.
 
I first took an overview of both the New Testament and the Old Testament, but I quickly narrowed my research down to the Old Testament only.  Why?  Simple, there was a large and important discrepancy with regard to which books various groups included in their translations of the Old Testament.
 
Whereas, all groups seemed in complete agreement with which were the inspired books of the New Testament with any disagreement having been resolved for over a millennium.  Bibles by Protestant groups, Roman Catholic Church (RCC), the Eastern or Orthodox Church, the Anabaptist, the Mormons, the Unitarians, independent of denomination translations such as those by James Morfit, Dr. J. J. Griesbach, in his word-for-word translation from Koine Greek found in the Vatican Manuscript #1209, "La Bible du Centenaire" by L'Evangile selon Jean, by Maurice Goguel," The Bible-An American Translation by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed, "Das Neue Testament," by Ludwig Thimme, The New Testament by James L. Tomanek, "Das Evangelium nach Johannes" Siegfried Schulz, "Das Evangelium nach Johannes" by Johannes Schneider, "Das Evangelium nach Johannes" by Jurgen Becker Harwood, Translator's NT, Barclay NT, Scholar's Version, Young's Literal Translation, Becker's Translation, Translation by Lyder Brun (Norw. professor of NT theology), Bibel in heutigem Deutsch, The New Testament in An Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Achbishop Newcome's New Translation: With a Corrected Text, The Emphatic Diaglott, by Benjamin Wilson, 1884 (Darby 1884 Version; Darby) Version, Today's English Version, etc. all had the exact same canon.  NO ISSUE HERE WORTHY OF RESEARCH AS NO VARIANCE OF OPINION.
 
However, the Old Testament was a very different case.  There were plenty of different canons and NO agreement on them.  The RCC had one canon, the Copts had another, the Protestants had another, the Anabaptist had another, etc.  So as can be seen the proper place for research was on the Old Testament with respect canon due to lack of agreement on same.  It meant all three criteria as listed in the INTRODUCTION.
 
As I started my research, the subject started to get away from me as it proved to have many more facets than my preliminary cursory research had revealed; to wit, the subject proved much bigger and more diverse than appeared on the surface.  When all was said and done, I ended up writing three separate research reports on Old Testament Bible canon instead of one due to the many facets of the subject.  The names of my research products are:
 
Old Testament Bible Canon - Beginning:, which can be read at,
 
http://religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=canon&thread=1163276361
 
A Second Look Including The Thinking of Jerome:, which can be read at,
 
http://religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=canon&thread=1163276574&page=1
 
Bible Canon - A Challenging Addition On The Subject of The Apocrypha:, which can be read at,
 
http://religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=canon&thread=1163276825&page=1
 
THE SUBJECT OF THE APOCRYPHA:
 
In doing my research on the Old Testament Bible canon a most salient feature with respect differences came to the forefront, some translations had Apocrypha books included in them and there was no consistency with respect which ones were included.  The most unusual finding, as best I can remember, was with respect the Apocrypha books - four - of Maccabees, which were excellent history books for filling in an era between of the Old Testament about 400 BC and the start of the CE even though they were of course no more inspired than were the works of Flavius Josephus, the great historian of the first century.
 
However, one group the RCC included the first two books of Maccabees in their canon, but not the other two - strange indeed.  Also, one other group included some of the works of Maccabees in their canon, but not the same ones as the RCC.  I have never figured out why if you include one Apocrypha book of a series written by the same group in your canon why you would not include all.  One small middle eastern group even included in their canon an Apocrypha book that said God had a girl friend, I believe this Apocrypha book was Susanna, but I am no longer sure.
 
WHAT IS THE APOCRYPHA OR DEUTERCANONICAL BOOKS?
 
First, let's consider what they are as defined by the Columbia Encyclopedia, sixth edition, by Columbia University Press. This encyclopedia defines the Apocrypha as, "(pk´rf) (KEY) [Gr.,=hidden things], term signifying a collection of early Jewish writings excluded from the canon of the Hebrew scriptures. It is not clear why the term was chosen." In reality they were nothing but uninspired writings, many purporting to be written by other than who was actually their author, or basically illegitimate and lacking credence. In fact, the real author of only one of the Apocrypha is actually known. Some religions, unfortunately, have included some of the Apocrypha in their Bibles, but even these were few in number. A list of most of the Apocrypha follows:
 
1 Clement, 1st Apocalypse of James, 2 Clement, 2nd Apocalypse of James, 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, Acts of Andrew, Acts of Apollonius, Acts of Carpus, Acts of John,Acts of Paul, Acts of Perpetua and Felicitas, Acts of Peter, Acts of Peter and the Twelve, Acts of Pilate, Acts of the Apostles, Acts of Thomas, Additions to the Book of Esther, Anonymous Anti-Montanist. Anti-Marcionite Prologues, Apelles, Apocalypse of John, Apocalypse of Peter, Apocryphon of John, Apollonius, Apology of Aristides, Aristo of Pella, Ascension of Isaiah, Athenagoras of Athens, Authoritative Teaching, Bardesanes, Baruch, Basilides, Eel and the Dragon, Book of Elchasai, Book of Thomas the Contender, Books of Jeu, Caius, Celsus, Christian Sibyllines, Claudius Apollinaris, Clement of Alexandria, Colossians, Coptic Apocalypse of Paul, Coptic Apocalypse of Peter, Dialogue of the Savior, Diatessaron, Didache, Didascalia, Dionysius of Corinth, Discourse on the Eighth and Ninth, Dura-Europos Gospel Harmony, Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach, Egerton Gospel, Epiphanes On Righteousness, Epistle of Barnabas, Epistle of Mathetes to Diognetus, Epistula Apostolorum, Excerpts of Theodotus, Fayyum Fragment, Fifth and Sixth Books of Esra, Fronto, Galen, Gospel of Judas, Gospel of Mary, Gospel of Peter, Gospel of Philip, Gospel of the Ebionite, Gospel of the Egyptians, Gospel of the Hebrews, Gospel of the Nazoreans, Gospel of the Savior, Gospel of Thomas
Gospel of Truth, Hegesippus, Heracleon, Hippolytus of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, Infancy Gospel of James, Infancy Gospel of Thomas, Inscription of Abercius, Irenaeus of Lyons, Isidore, Judith, Julius Cassianus, Justin Martyr, Kerygmata Petrou, Letter from Vienna and Lyons, Letter of Jeremiah, Letter of Peter to Philip, Lost Sayings Gospel Q, Lucian of Samosata, Mara Bar Serapion, Marcion, Marcus Aurelius, Martyrdom of Polycarp, Maximus of Jerusalem, Melchizedek, Melito of Sardis, Muratorian Canon, Naassene Fragment, Octavius of Minucius Felix, Odes of Solomon, Ophite Diagrams, Origen, Oxyrhynchus 1224 Gospel, Oxyrhynchus 840 Gospel, Pantaenus, Papias, Passion Narrative, Passion of the Scillitan Martyrs , Philostratus, Pistis Sophia, Pliny the Younger, Polycarp to the Philippians, Polycrates of Ephesus, Prayer of Azariah and the Song of the Three Jews, Prayer of Manasseh, Preaching of Peter, Ptolemy, Quadratus of Athens, Rhodon, Secret Book of James, Secret Mark, Serapion of Antioch, Shepherd of Hermas, Signs Gospel, Sophia of Jesus Christ, Suetonius, Susanna, Tacitus, Tatian's Address to the Greeks, The Additions to the Book of Daniel, Tertullian, Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, Theophilus of Antioch, Theophilus of Caesarea, Tobit, Traditions of Matthias, Treatise on the Resurrection, Trimorphic Protennoia, Valentinus, Victor I, Wisdom of Solomon, etc.
 
As can be seen many of these illegitimate books try to give themselves credence by closely mimicking the names of actual legitimate canonical books of the Bible. These books are often called the pseudepigrapha? The term is a transliteration of the Greek plural noun that literally means "with false superscription". According to Webster's Third New International Dictionary (p. 1830), the term can be defined as, "spurious works purporting to emanate from biblical characters". The Random House Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language defines the term as, "Certain writings (other than the canonical books and the Apocrypha) professing to be Biblical in character, but not considered canonical or inspired. These are NOT lost books, just NOT legitimate books of Bible cannon.
 
Interesting there really is a lost book of the Bible, 4 John, mentioned elsewhere in the New Testament, but no copy of it has ever been found so my conclusion is that nothing contained in it could be of great importance for us or Almighty God (YHWH) would have made sure it was preserved.  I discovered this in a very careful reading of the New Testament, but have found no reference to by any other so my research product on it may well be the only one.  For those who care to read it, it is at Discourse on a Lost Book of the Bible:, which can be read at,
 
http://religioustruths.proboards59.com/index.cgi?board=biblical&action=display&thread=1163273589
 
If you do read it, send me your comments as a PM.
 
LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT   WWW.JW.ORG
 

COMBINATION OF [1]  THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2]    PART 2 OF -- WHY SWEAT APPARENT BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS:
 
 
[1]    SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [VOL. 714A]
 
For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption.  Psalmss 16:10   [authorized King James Bible; AV]
 
One reason why we know that Jesus was raised from the dead is that his resurrection took place “according to the Scriptures.” As quoted above.    God’s Word foretold the resurrection. For example, David wrote that God’s chief “loyal one” would not be left in the Grave.  On the day of Pentecost 33 C.E., the apostle Peter applied that prophetic verse to Jesus, saying: “Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:  24  Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.  25  For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved:  26  Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope:  27  Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption..”  (Acts 2:23 – 27,  [AV]) and “He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.”  (Acts 2: 31,  [AV]).
 
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]        PART 2 OF -- WHY SWEAT APPARENT BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS:
 
  So Griesbach was right; the earliest text was Western. (I, myself, prefer to describe it as the Peripheral text -- after all, the name "Western text" is just such an obvious misnomer, in light of the fact that it's the eastern MSS that are its key representatives. See this article _where I explain this matter some more.) And he was working at the time when the ancient Old Syriac Aramaic gospels -- our main Western/Peripheral texts today -- were still unknown to scholarship! Yet, still and all, he put this whole puzzle together quite easily, using the Syriac Penutsta as his reference.
 
Sure, he was a very talented biblical scholar. But, still, how could TC wander in the wilderness so long after him? Are our modern TC scholars really so incompetent?
 
Maybe so... But, in my view, it's mostly their political bias that's to blame. They are simply not brave enough to challenge today's academic-ecclesiastical consensus -- something that Griesbach obviously wasn't afraid to do even back in the eighteenth century! [SOURCE - Yuri].
 
DR. GRIESBACH TRANSLATION FROM KOINE GREEK TO ENGLISH THE GREEK ENGLISH PORTION OF THE EMPHATIC DIALOGTT CLEARS UP AN APPARENT BIBLE CONTRADICTION:
 
With respect the Emphatic Dialogtt, the word-for-word section was done by a very renown Koine Greek expert and Bible scholar, Dr. Griesbach. the standard or 'flowing-language' part, this was done by a newspaper reporter, Bengemin Wilson, who was not a translator, but knew how to take from what Dr. Griesbach had done as a word-for-word translation and put it into flowing English. Reporters would naturally be good at this.
 
"Now with respect to one scripture to which the poster pointed special attention, John 1:1, I had reached exactly the same conclusion as Dr. Griesbach, but from a very different analysis as follows:
 
"John 1:1 could in no way support the doctrine of the Trinity, as follows:
 
John 1:1, "When all things began, the Word already was. The Word dwelt with God, and what God was, the Word was" (New English Translation; NEB)
John 1:1, " In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." (American Standard Version; ASV)
 
Neither mention in any way more than two beings, yet a trinity of anything requires three similar things.
 
However, in very careful careful analysis as an independent thinker and using my knowledge of language and translation constructs, I am able to prove it can not even support a Duality. Let's take the poor construct of this verse found in the Authorized King James Bible (AV) which is as follows and break it down into its three sub-constructs.
 
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
 
Sub-construct # 1 "In the beginning was the Word."
 
Sub-construct # 2 "and the Word was with God"
 
Sub-construct # 3 "and the Word was God."
 
It is clear that there is a mutually exclusive condition existing between sub-construct # 2 and # 3 in that sub-construct # 2 clearly says, "the Word was with God" which clearly denotes two distinct beings, one with the other; whereas, sub-construct # 3 clearly says, "and the word was God," now obviously both can NOT be true. No individual can be with another individual and at the same time be that other individual so obviously both can NOT be so. When we look at how the New English Translation; NEB, renders these two sub-constructs we get two sub-constructs that no longer are mutually exclusive thus accurately reflecting the intent or thought of the original writer, see sub-construct #2 "The Word dwelt with God," and sub-construct # 3 "and what God was, the Word was."
 
Of course the New English Translation; NEB, would clearly be in line with the fact that a Son, Jesus (Yeshua), would be a lot like his Father (YHWH); therefore, he would be both divine like his Father (YHWH) and a god. To use an analogy to make this even clearer, we would expect a son dog to be a lot like father dog; a dog pure and simple; so we would also expect a son of God to be both divine and a god.
 
In fact some Bible translations even use a god such as "And the word was a god" The New Testament in An Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Achbishop Newcome's New Translation: With a Corrected Text. Both this rendering and that of the NEB say the same thing in different words with the NEB making it quite clear that both the Father (YHWH) and the Son, Jesus (Yeshua), are of the same substance which is clearly delineated at Philippians 2:1-11, "there is therefore any exhortation in Christ, if any consolation of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any tender mercies and compassions, 2 make full my joy, that ye be of the same mind, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind; 3 [doing] nothing through faction or through vainglory, but in lowliness of mind each counting other better than himself; 4 not looking each of you to his own things, but each of you also to the things of others. 5 Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; 8 and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient [even] unto death, yea, the death of the cross. 9 Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and gave unto him the name which is above every name; 10 that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of [things] in heaven and [things] on earth and [things] under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (American Standard Version; ASV). Clearly testifying that the Son is of the same substance as the Father (YHWH), but just not as great as his Father (YHWH) as he himself testified to at John 14:28, "Ye heard how I said to you, I go away, and I come unto you. If ye loved me, ye would have rejoiced, because I go unto the Father: for the Father is greater than I." (ASV). Of course this would have to be the case or Exodus 20:3 , "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." (ASV) would be violated.
 
So as can be seen the more common rendering of John 1:1 can not be correct as its sub-constructs are mutually exclusive, a physical impossibility." [by Iris the Preacher, 2004].
 
So this seeming contradiction is NOT that at all, but just a biased and bad translation from the original Koine Greek into English; once more giving another example where an apparent contradiction is actually NOT one at all. It is nothing more than a failure by some translators to correctly render what the original writer stated when writing in his language. However, many translators, not just Dr. Griesbach, have translated this passage in line with the thinking of the original writer, some of them are:
 
"<2> "the nature of the Word was the same as the nature of God" [example of Bible using, Schonfield, 1976]"
 
"<3> "The Word dwelt with God, and what God was, the word was." [example of Bible using, The New English Bible, NEB, 1961-present standard Bible agreed to by most denominations in the United Kingdom]"
 
"<4> "And the word was a god" [example of Bible using, The New Testament in An Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Achbishop Newcome's New Translation: With a Corrected Text.]"
 
"<5> "and the Word was divine" [example of Bible using, The Bible: An American Translation, by J.M.P. Smith and E.J. Goodspeed. }"
 
"<8> "the Logos was divine" [example of Bible using, The New Testament: A New Translation, by James Moffat]"
 
"<9> "r war bei Gott und in allem Gott gleich"[He was with God and in all like God] [example of Bible using, Haenchen (tr. By R. Funk), 1982]"
 
"<10> "Gott (von Art) war der Logos" [God (of Kind/kind) was the Logos/logos] [example of Bible using, Die Bibel in heutigem Deutsch, 1980]"
 
Of course, now is the time for some definitions, TO assist understanding:
 
To All Concerned: When discussing the question on whether use of "Deity" for John's use of "theos" within the third clause is proper, might there be something else to consider? de·i·ty noun [-ties pl{ural}.] 1. A god, goddess, or divine person. 2. Divine nature or status; godhead; divinity. - the Deity, God. [<F{rench}. déité <L{atin}. deus, god]. "Funk & Wagnalls New Practical Standard Dictionary of the English Language; Britannica World Language Edition, Compiled Under the Direction of the Editorial Staff of Encyclopaedia Britannica; 'Em-ha-type Method of Pronunciation.'" Funk, Charles Earle (b.1881- d.?), Editor. 2 vols. vol. 1 - A-P. vol. 2 - Q-Z. (New York, New York; Funk & Wagnalls Co., 1955), vol. 2 (braces ours). PE1625 .S712 1955 / 56001830.
 
- <*> - de*i*ty (de'-te) n....1. A god or goddess. 2. Divinity. 3. Deity. God. ?< Lat{tin}. deus.?. "The American Heritage Dictionary." 3rd Edition. (New York, New York: Dell Publishing, A Division of Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc.; Houghton Mifflin Company, 1992), p. 227 (braces ours). PE1628 .A623 1992 / 92-851.
 
- <*> - de*i*ty / de'eitee,...1 a god or goddess. 2 divine status, quality or nature. 3 (the Deity) God. "The Oxford American Dictionary of Current English." (New York, New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 205 (bold theirs). PE1628 .O8617 1999 / 99-39972.
 
- <*> - de*i¦ty (de'? te) n....1. the state of being a god; divine nature; godhood. 2....[3.] - the Deity God. "Webster's New World Dictionary of American English." 3rd College Edition. Neufeldt, Victoria (b.?-d.?), Editor-in-Chief. Guralnik, David B. (b.1920-d.2000), Editor-in-Chief Emeritus. (New York, New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc., 1994), p. 363. PE1628 .W5633 1993 / 93-2961.
 
- <*> - de*i*ty (de' i te)...1. a god or goddess. 2. divine character or nature; divinity: Her deity is manifest in her actions. 3. the estate or rank of a god: The king attained deity after his death. 4. the character or nature of the Supreme Being: the deity of Christ. 5. a person or thing revered as a god or goddess: a society in which money is the only deity. 6. the Deity, God; Supreme Being. "The Random House College Dictionary, Based on the Random House Dictionary of the English Language, the Unabridged Edition." Urdang, Laurance (b.?-d.?), Editor-in-Chief; Flexner, Stuart Berg (b.?-d.?), Managing Editor. (New York, New York: Rand McNally and Company, 1968, 1969, 1972, 1973), p. 350. PE1625 .R29 / 73-175504.
 
- <*> - Deity (di * ti)...1. the state or rank of a god; godhood; the personality of a god; godship; esp[ecially] with poss[ive] pron[oun]. b. The divine quality, character, or nature of God; Godhood, divinity; the divine nature and attributes, the Godhead. c. The condition or state in which the Divine Being exists. Obs. 2. A divinity, a divine being, a god; one of the gods worshiped by a people or a tribe. b. An object of worship; a thing or person deified. 3. (with capital) A supreme being as creator of the universe; the Deity, the Supreme Being, God. (Especially as a term of National Theology, and without explicit predication of personality.) "The Compact Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary, Complete Text Reproduced Micrographically." 2 vols. (Oxford, Great Britain: Oxford University Press, 1971), vol. i - a-o, p. 675 (152) (parenthesis theirs). PE1625 .N53 1971 / 72-177361.
 
- <*> - Although this approach to the subject may seem to some to be a bit too simplistic, does anyone else see what I am seeing? Please take note that, although "Deity" has the meaning of "God" (with capitals for both), "deity" means "a god." Therefore, when it is that Bowman (or, for that matter, any others) attempt to use "Deity" for John's second use of "theos," they are, in fact, just substituting another term which, when spelled with a capital "D", means the same thing as "God." If, on the other hand, they wish to be utilizing a term to somehow convey something different than this, they must either use "deity" or "a deity" instead. Whereas, each of these dictionaries give "a god" as the first meaning to use of the term (with all but one spelling it in all lower case), it should be noted that it is not untill the later definitions do we find its use (when capitalized) to mean "God", 'the Supreme being.' Furthermore, there is this: "[The Biblical use of the term] 'God' does not connote a 'divine essence' that can be shared by a number of beings, even though there may be a number of beings who are called 'god.' In this sense, theos functions slightly differently than does the English term 'deity.' Although we use 'deity' to refer both to God ("the Deity") and to a property (as in the "deity of Christ"), 'god' does not refer to a characteristic or property the possession of which renders one 'divine.' Rather, 'God' in biblical texts and Jewish thought either refers to the one and only God or, when used of a human figure, relates that figure to God by the exercise of some divine prerogative that is further exercised by God's authority." Taken from: Thompson, Marianne Meye (b.?-d.?), Professor of New Testament Interpretation, Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, California. "The God of the Gospel of John." (Grand Rapids, Michigan: W.B. Eerdmans, c2001), Chapter 1, "The Meaning of 'God,'" p. 46. BT102 .T525 2001 / 2001-040379.
 
COMMENTS ON CONSTRUCTS:
 
My husband favors construct # 5 ; whereas I favor constructs # 3 and # 4 ; however when you reason on any of these seven, they in essence are saying the exact same thing, but in different words. They are all recognizing that Jesus (Yeshua) Christ is divine in their own way and that he is God's (YHWH's) only begotten son. This fact is clearly shown in the Bible at Philippians 2:1-11, "If there is therefore any exhortation in Christ, if any consolation of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any tender mercies and compassions, 2 make full my joy, that ye be of the same mind, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind; 3 [doing] nothing through faction or through vainglory, but in lowliness of mind each counting other better than himself; 4 not looking each of you to his own things, but each of you also to the things of others. 5 Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: 6 who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men; 8 and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedient [even] unto death, yea, the death of the cross. 9 Wherefore also God highly exalted him, and gave unto him the name which is above every name; 10 that in the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of [things] in heaven and [things] on earth and [things] under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father" (ASV). Obviously all thinking people should believe the Bible and not accept the opinions of man.
 
As can easily be seen from these two examples, apparent contradictions in the Bible are NOT that at all, but just lack of understanding.
 
BIBLE SHOWN RELIABLE BY ACCURATE PROPHECY ABOUT JESUS (YESHUA):
 
Is there a way to prove inspiration or, at least, intelligently present evidence for its inspiration? The answer is "Yes!" One of the best ways to prove inspiration is by examining prophecy. There are many religious books in the world that have many good things to say. But only the Bible has fulfilled prophecies--with more fulfillments to come. The Bible has never been wrong in the past, and it won't be wrong in the future. It claims inspiration from God, " All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:" (2 Timothy 3:16 AV). Since God is the creator of all things " Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;" (Isaiah 44:24 AV), then He (YHWH) is also the creator of time. It is under His control. Only God, then, would always be right about what is in the future, our future.
 
Fulfilled prophecy is strong evidence that God is the author of the Bible because when you look at the mathematical odds of prophecy being fulfilled, you quickly see a design, a purpose, and a guiding hand behind the Bible. If just one prophecy failed, then we would know that God is not the true God, because the creator of all things, which includes time, would not be wrong about predicting the future. " When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him." (Deuteronomy 18:22 AV). And "Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me; 10 declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done; saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure;" (Isaiah 46:9-10 American Standard Version of 1901).
 
One writer and mathmatician, Peter Stoner has figured out the possibilities of the fulfillment of just eight (8) prophecies happening, let alone 100 having been fulfilled, and had this to say:
 
The following probabilities are taken from Peter Stoner in Science Speaks (Moody Press, 1963) to show that coincidence is ruled out by the science of probability. Stoner says that by using the modern science of probability in reference to eight prophecies, 'we find that the chance that any man might have lived down to the present time and fulfilled all eight prophecies is 1 in 1017." That would be 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000. In order to help us comprehend this staggering probability, Stoner illustrates it by supposing that "we take 1017 silver dollars and lay them on the face of Texas. They will cover all of the state two feet deep.
"Now mark one of these silver dollars and stir the whole mass thoroughly, all over the state. Blindfold a man and tell him that he can travel as far as he wishes, but he must pick up one silver dollar and say that this is the right one. What chance would he have of getting the right one? Just the same chance that the prophets would have had of writing these eight prophecies and having them all come true in any one man."
Stoner considers 48 prophecies and says, "we find the chance that any one man fulfilled all 48 prophecies to be 1 in 10157.
 
The estimated number of electrons in the universe is around 1079. It should be quite evident that Jesus did not fulfill the prophecies by accident." [ excerpt from book Evidence that Demands a Verdict by Josh McDowell.]
 
EXAMPLES OF A FEW OF THE PROPHECIES FULFILLED IN JESUS (YESHUA OR YHWH SAVES):
 
PROPHECY FULFILLED WHEN JESUS WAS CRUCIFIED
 
[ 1. Betrayed by a friend - Psalms 41:9 - John 13:18-27 - 460 BCE ]]
 
[ 2. Thirty (30) of silver thrown in Temple - Zechariah 11:13 - Matthew 27:3-5 - 518 BCE ]
 
[ 3. Betrayed for thirty (30) pieces of silver - Zechariah 11:12 - Matthew 26:14-15 - 518 BCE ]
 
[ 4. Potters field bought for thirty (30) pieces of silver&Zechariah 11:13 - Matthew 27:6-10 - 518 BCE ]
 
[ 5. Forsaken by His disciples - Zechariah 13:7 - Mark 14:27-50 - 518 BCE ]
 
[ 6. Falsely accused by false witnesses - Psalms 35:11-21 - Matthew 26:59-61 - 460 BCE ]
 
[ 7. Remained silent before accusers - Isaiah 53:7 - Matthew 27:12-14 - 732 BCE ]
 
[ 8. Was wounded and bruised - Isaiah 53:4-6 - 1 Peter 2:21-25 - 732 BCE ]
 
[ 9. Spit upon and beaten - Isaiah 50:6 - Matthew 26:67-68 - 732 BCE ]
 
[ 10. Was mocked - Psalms 22:6- 8 - Matthew 27:27- 31 - 460 BCE ]
 
[ 11. Fell under the cross (stauros) - Psalms 109:24- 25 - John 19:17, Luke 23:26 - 460 BCE]
 
[ 12. Had hands and feet pierced - Psalms 22:16 - John 20:24-28 - 460 BCE ]
 
[ 13. Was crucified with thieves - Isaiah 53:12 - Matthew 27:38 - 732 BCE ]
 
[ 14. Prayed for His enemies - Isaiah 53:12 - Luke 23:34 - 732 BCE ]
 
[ 15. His own people rejected him - Isaiah 53:3 - John 19:14-15 - 732 BCE]
 
[ 16. Was hated without cause - Psalms 69:4 - John 15:25 - 460 BCE ]
 
[ 17. Friends stood aloof - Psalms 38:11 -Luke 22:54; Luke 23:49 - 460 BCE ]
 
[ 18. People wag their heads - Psalms 22:7; Psalms 109:25 - Matthew 27:39 - 460 BCE]
 
[19. He was stared at by people - Psalms 22:17 - Luke 23:35 - 460 BCE]
 
[ 20. Gamblers divided his clothes - Psalms 22:18 - John 19:23-24 - 460 BCE ]
 
[ 21. He became very thirsty - Psalms 22:15 - John 19:28 - 460 BCE ]
 
[ 22. He was given gall & vinegar - Psalms 69:21 - Matthew 27:34 - 460 BCE ]
 
[ 23. He committed himself to God - Psalms 31:5 - Luke 23:46 - 460 BCE ]
 
[ 24. His forsaken cry - Psalms 22:1 - Matthew 27:46 - 460 BCE ]
 
[ 25. His bones not broken - Psalms 34:20 - John 19:32-36 - 460 BCE ]
 
[ 26. Was buried in tomb of a rich man - Isaiah 53:9 - Matthew 27:56-60 - 732 BCE ]
 
[ 27. A darkness came over the land - Amos 8:9 - Luke 23:44-45 - 804 BCE ]
 
[ 28. His heart was broken - Psalms 69:20;Psalms 22:14 - 460 BCE ]
 
[ 29. His side pierced - Zechariah 12:10 - John 19:34-37 - 648 BCE ]
 
PROPHECIES FULFILLED CONCERNING HIS BIRTH
 
[ 1. Born of the seed of women - Genesis 3:15 - Galatians 4:4 - 1513 BCE ]
 
[ 2. Born to a virgin Hebrew - Isaiah 7:14 - Matthew 1:18-25 - 732 BCE ]
 
[ 3. Children are killed by Herod - Jeremiah 31:15 - Matthew 2:16-18 - 580 BCE ]
 
[ 4. Born of the family line of Jesse - Isaiah 11:1 - Luke 3:32 - 732 BCE ]
 
[ 5. Born into the Tribe of Judah - Genesis 49:10 - Revelations 5:5 - 1513 BCE ]
 
[ 6. Born in Bethlehem - Micah 5:2 - Matthew 2:1-6 - 717 BCE ]
 
[ 7. Seed of David - Jeremiah 23:5 - Luke 3:31 - 580 BCE ]
 
[ 8. Seed of Jacob - Numbers 24:17 - Luke 3:34 - 1473 BCE ]
 
[ 9. Seed of Isaac - Genesis 21:12 - Luke 3:23-34 - 1513 BCE ]
 
[ 10. Seed of Abraham - Genesis 22:18 - Matthew 1:1 - 1513 BCE ]
 
PROPHECIES ON HIS PERSONALITY
 
[ 1. His zeal for this Father (YHWY) - Psalms 69:9 - John 2:15-17 - 460 BCE ]
 
[2. His existence before creation - Micah 5:2 - 1 Peter 1:20 - 717 BCE ]
 
[ 3. He shall be called Lord - Psalms 110:1 - Acts 2:36 - 460 BCE ]
 
[ 4. Called Immanuel (God with us) - Isaiah 7:14 - Matthew 1:22-23 - 732 BCE ]
 
[ 5. Anointed by the Spirit (HS) - Isaiah 11:2 - Matthew 3:16-17 - 732 BCE ]
 
[ 6. He is a Prophet - Deuteronomy 18:18-19 - Acts 3:18-25 - 1473 BCE ]
 
[ 7. He will be a Priest - Psalms 110:4 - Hebrews 5:5-6 - 460 BCE ]
 
[ 8. He will be a Judge - Isaiah 33:32 - John 5:22-23 - 732 BCE ]
 
[ 9. He will be a King - Psalms 2:6 - John 18:33-37 - 460 BCE ]
 
PROPHECIES CONCERNING HIS PUBLIC MINISTRY
 
[ 1. Will be preceded by a messenger - Isaiah 40:3 - Matthew 3:1-3 - 732 BCE ]
 
[ 2. He would perform miracles - Isaiah 35:5-6 - Matthew 9:35 & 11:4 - 732 BCE ]
 
[ 3. Ministry to begin in Galilee - Isaiah 9:1-2 - Matthew 4:12-17 - 732 BCE ]
 
[ 4. Would teach with parables - Psalms 78:1-4 - Matthew 13:34-35 - 460 BCE ]
[ 5. He would preach in temple - Malachi 3:1 - Matthew 21:10-12 - 443 BCE ]
 
[ 6. Enter Jerusalem on a donkey - Zechariah 9:9 - Matthew 21:1-7 - 518 BCE ]
 
[ 7. Stone of stumbling to Jews - Isaiah 28:16; Psalms 118:22 - 1 Peter 2:6-8 - 732 BCE ]
 
[ 8. Light to Gentiles - Isaiah 49:6 - Acts 13:46-48 - 732 BCE ]
 
PROPHECIES CONCERNING HIS RESURRECTION AND ASCENSION
 
[ 1. Raised from the dead - Psalms 16:8-11 - Acts 2:24-31 - 460 BCE ]
 
[ 2. Only begotten Son of God (YHWH) - Psalms 2:7 - Acts 13:32-35 - 460 BCE ]
 
[ 3. Ascended to God (YHWH) - Psalms 68:18 - Ephesians 2:8-10; John 6:26 - 460 BCE ]
 
[ 4. Seated at the Right Hand of God (YHWH) - Psalms 110.1 - Hebrews 1:3-13 - 460 BCE]
 
OTHER, SO CALLED HOLLY BOOKS, HOWEVER HAVE REAL CONTRADICTIONS, NOT JUST APPARENT CONTRADICTIONS:
 
Let's look at other so called Holy Books and see some real contradictions.
 
The eastern "scriptures" have no interest in history, because this is the world of illusion from which we are to be delivered. Ancient polytheistic religions likewise had no interest in history. Their gods acted only in myths, removed as far as possible from real history.
 
The Koran is almost entirely assertions of Allah. It has very little historical interface, and what there is contains clear inaccuracies.
 
Sura 26:55-60 says that the Israelites under Pharaoh were but "a scanty band" (in contrast to the multitude mentioned in Ex. 1:9) and that in leaving Egypt they forsook "their gardens and fountains and splendid dwellings" (in contrast to their slavery and hardship mentioned Ex. 1:11-14). This renders the whole motive for Israel's deliverance obscure.
 
Sura 5:119 reflects Muhammad's gross misunderstanding of the Trinity-that it is composed of the Father, Jesus and Mary.
 
The Book of Mormon makes many historical references, but it too is full of historical anachronisms and geographical inaccuracies.
 
1 Nephi 2:5-8 states that the river Laman emptied into the Red Sea. But there has never been any river that emptied into the Red Sea, either in historic or prehistoric times.
 
Alma 46:15 states that believers were called "Christians" back in 73 BC-fully seven decades before Jesus was even born![source - Xenos Christian Fellowship Christian Principles Unit 3: Provisions for Spiritual Growth]
 
CONCLUSION:
 
As can easily be seen from the examples given, that when an apparent contradiction is researched and studied in depth, it proves to be NOT a contradiction, but a lack of understanding on the part of those calling it a contradiction. The Caliph Saladin, for example, once claimed the John 1:1 was a contradiction based on his reading of the Latin Vulgate of Jerome, but as we have seen, it was NOT a Bible contradiction. It was simply a failure on the translators part to adequately capture the understanding of what the original writer writing in his own language and culture meant/said in his original writing.
 
Likewise, we can see from all the prophecies about Jesus (Yeshua) that the Bible truly is inspired and the word of God (YHWH). As brought out by one writer, it would have been mathematically impossible for them to have all been fulfilled without God (YHWH) having given them and maneuvered events to have them fulfilled. Also, it proves the harmony of the Bible throughout, i.e., the New Testament is simply the fulfillment of the Old Testament.
 
LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT   WWW.GW.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. 717A]
 
But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,  56  And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.  57  Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord,  58  And cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man’s feet, whose name was Saul.  59  And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.  60  And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.  Acts 7:55 – 60   [authorized King James Bible; AV]
 
For sure, why we know that Jesus’ resurrection occurred is the zeal that his disciples showed in proclaiming it.   Zealously bearing witness to the  resurrection of the Christ exposed them to persecution, suffering, and death.   If Jesus had not been raised up—if it was all a hoax—why would Peter risk his life to proclaim Christ’s resurrection to the religious leaders, who hated Jesus and had plotted his death?   It was because Peter and the other disciples were certain that Jesus was alive and was directing the work that God wanted done.   Moreover, Jesus’ resurrection assured his followers that they too would be resurrected.   For instance, Stephen died with the conviction that there would be a resurrection of the dead.—Acts 7:55-60.
 
Another  reason why we know that Jesus was resurrected is that we have evidence that he is now ruling as King and is serving as Head of the Christian congregation.   As a result, true Christianity, not counterfeit,  is flourishing.   Would this be happening if Jesus had not been raised from the dead?   In fact, we would probably never have heard of him had he not been resurrected.   But we have solid reasons to believe that Jesus is alive and is now guiding and directing us as we proclaim the good news far and wide.  
 
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]       Here is a Commentary on Bountiful Trees and Vegetables God (YHWH) has provided for mankind, specifically the Helianthus tuberosus, Jerusalem Artichoke
 
Abundance: rare
What: tubers
How: raw, cooked
Where: fields, wastelands
When: winter
Nutritional Value: carbohydrates, minerals
Dangers: may cause gas
 
Jerusalem artichokes thrive in neglected waste areas and produce a large amount of starchy tubers. This makes them an excellent plant for guerrilla gardening in vacant lots and other urban-blighted areas. They belong to the same family as sunflowers and produce similar flowers in the late summer/fall. 
 
As the tuber grow during the summer they are filled with a large starch molecule called inulin. Inulin tastes sweet but is a very complex carbohydrate which the human digestive system can not break down to extract any usable calories. Tubers eaten in the summer or fall will give you some minerals, a few vitamins, and some fiber but the inulin starch will just pass through the digestive track. Sidenote: some bacteria in the gut can eat this inulin and after doing so this bacteria will produce quite a bit of methane gas...which may lead to excessive flatulence.
 
However, after the first frost of the year the tuber starts producing a slow-acting enzyme which breaks the inulin down into simple sugars that the plant will use to grow new stalks in the spring. We can digest/metabolize these simple sugars. This means if we have to wait until late winter to harvest the tuber to get calories from them.
 
If possible leave the tubers in the ground during winter and just dig them up as need. This works great in Houston or other southern climates. Tubers stored in a refrigerator tend to get mushy for some reason. If you are up north store the tubers outside in a covered wooden box filled with loose, dry sand.
 
Jerusalem artichoke tubers were a staple food of many Native American tribes and were spread throughout North America via trade between tribes. However, they were not actively cultivated like corn, squash, beans or other well-known native crops. The tubers were buried and then the plants were usually just ignored until late winter when the natives were running low on stored food. At this time the women would go searching for field mouse homes to raid for Jerusalem artichoke tubers. The mice loved the tubers and would spend a great deal of time digging them up and stockpiling them around their nest. The women would then just steal them from the mice.
 
These plants are somewhat rare in the wild so if you do find them it is best just to take 5-10 tubers and plant them somewhere on your own property. They will then rapidly form your own stand of Jerusalem artichokes and within two years you'll have all the tubers you could want.    [sourc - retrieved from  http://www.foragingtexas.com/2008/08/jerusalem-artichoke.html   on  7/2/2015]
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].
 
To view this plant, go to, http://www.foragingtexas.com/2008/08/jerusalem-artichoke.html
 
LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION – BOTH TRUE AND FALSE – AT   WWW.JW.ORG