Religious Truths » Scripture of the Day

iris89 · 5/29/2021 7:44 pm

COMBINATION OF [1] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] PART 2, “LEARN REALITY ABOUT REGULAR AND MUSLIM SOCIETY - BOTH ARE BREAKING DOWN.’

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [356b]

Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you; 7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, 8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: 9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; 10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day. 2 Thessalonians 1:6 – 10, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

Yes, we should seek peace and pursue, and not seek vengeance per Romans 12:19, [AV] “Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.” Vengence belongs to Almighty God (YHWH) per Hebrews 10:30, “For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.” And as noted by Romans 1:18, [AV] “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;” God’s displeasure will be directed against those not living righteous lives per Romans 2:8, [AV] “But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,” If we be genuine followers of the Prince of Peace, Jesus (Yeshua), we will per Romans 8:17, [AV] “And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint–heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.”

[2] PART 2, “LEARN REALITY ABOUT REGULAR AND MUSLIM SOCIETY - BOTH ARE BREAKING DOWN.
The Qurayza Massacre

By the time the Banu Qurayza met their fate, Muhammad was wealthy and
powerful from his defeat of the other two tribes.

The Jews of the Banu Qurayza tasted Muhammad's wrath after their
leader half-heartedly sided with the Meccan army during a siege of
Medina (the Battle of the Trench). By then, Muhammad had evicted the
other Jews and declared that all land at Medina belonged to him, so
the original constitution of the town was no longer in effect. It is
important to note that the Qurayza did not attack the Muslims, even
after switching loyalties (contrary to another popular myth).

Although the Qurayza surrendered peacefully to the Muslims, Muhammad
determined to have every man of the tribe executed, along with every
boy that had reached the initial stages of puberty (between the ages
of 12 and 14). He ordered a ditch dug outside of the town and had the
victims brought to him in several groups. Each person would be forced
to kneel, and their head would be cut off and then dumped along with
the body into the trench.

Between 700 and 900 men and boys were slaughtered by the Muslims after
their surrender.

The surviving children of the men became slaves of the Muslims, and
their widows became sex slaves. This included the Jewish girl,
Rayhana, who became one of Muhammad's personal concubines the very
night that her husband was killed. The prophet of Islam apparently
"enjoyed her pleasures" (ie. raped her) even as the very execution of
her people was taking place.

In some ways, women were much like any other possession taken in
battle, to be done with however their captors pleased. But Muslims
found them useful in other ways as well. In fact, one of the methods
by which Islam owed its expansion down through the centuries was
through the reproductive capabilities of captured women. In addition
to four wives, a man was allowed an unlimited number of sex slaves,
with the only rule being that any resulting children would
automatically be Muslim.

Muhammad ordered that a fifth of the women taken captive be reserved
for him. Many were absorbed into his personal stable of sex slaves
that he maintained in addition to his eleven wives. Others were doled
out like party favors to others. (See MYTH: Muhammad was an
Abolitionist)

At one point following a battle, Muhammad provided instructions on how
women should be raped after capture, telling his men not to worry
about coitus interruptus, since "Allah has written whom he is going to
create." (See also MYTH: Muhammad Never Approved of Rape)

Following the battle against the Hunain, late in his life, Muhammad's
men were reluctant to rape the captured women in front of their
husbands (who were apparently still alive to witness the abomination),
but Allah came to the rescue with a handy "revelation" that allowed
the debauchery. (This is the origin of Sura 4:24 according to Abu
Dawud 2150).

The Origin of Islamic Imperialism

From Medina, Muhammad waged a campaign of terror, to which he openly
attributed his success (Bukhari 52:220). His gang of robbers launched
raids in which hapless communities were savaged, looted, murdered and
raped. The tribes around the Muslims began to convert to Islam out of
self-preservation.

The excuse for military campaign began to shrink to the point that it
hardly existed at all. Muhammad told his followers that Muslims were
meant to rule over other people. Supremacist teachings became the
driving force behind Jihad (see also MYTH: Muhammad Waged War Only in
Self-Defense) and Jihad became the driving force behind Islam.

The brutal conquest of the people of Khaybar, a peaceful farming
community that was not at war with the Muslims, is a striking example.
Muhammad marched in secret, took them by surprise and easily defeated
them. He had many of the men killed, simply for defending their town.
He enslaved women and children and had surviving men live on the land
as virtual serfs, paying Muslims an ongoing share of their crops not
to attack them again.

Muhammad suspected that the town's treasurer was holding out and had
his men barbarically torture the poor fellow by building a fire on his
chest until he revealed the location of hidden treasure. (See also
MYTH: Muhammad Never Approved Torture).

Afterwards, the prophet of Islam beheaded the man and "married" his
widow on the same day (she first had to pass through the hands of one
of his lieutenants). Given that the woman's father was also killed by
Muhammad, it isn't much of a stretch to say that true love had very
little to do with this "marriage."

A Life of Hedonism and Narcissism

Muhammad's personal life became the picture of hedonism and excess,
all justified by frequent “revelations” from an increasingly arbitrary
and capricious god In his later years, he frequently used his
influence for purely personal goals, including sex, wealth and power.
Allah's authority for him to pursue these earthly ambitions is even
immortalized in the Quran (suras 33 and 66, particularly).

The same man who earlier in his career had justified his claims as a
prophet by saying that he "asked for no reward" from others, reversed
course and began to demand a fifth or more of all booty taken from
conquered tribes. According to his biographers, he became fat from
living off this enormous share of ill-gotten gain. (See also MYTH:
Muhammad was a Brave Warrior who Trusted in Allah to Protect him)

In the span of a dozen years, he married eleven women and had access
to an array of sex slaves (see MYTH: Muhammad Married Multiple Women
as a Favor to them). When he wanted a woman, even if she were the
wife of another man, his own daughter-in-law, or a child as young as
6-years-old (see MYTH: Muhammad Condemned Pedophilia), Muhammad was
able to justify his lust and inevitable consummation with an appeal to
Allah’s revealed will for his sex life - which was then preserved
forever in the Quran, to be faithfully memorized by future generations
for whom it has no possible relevance.

The first verse of Sura 66 is a good example of this. It was narrated
by Muhammad to his wives shortly after two of them pressured him into
not visiting a favorite sex slave:

O Prophet! why do you forbid (yourself) that which Allah has made
lawful for you, seeking to please your wives? (Quran 66:1)
Allah (according to Muhammad) was so upset with his prophet for
denying himself an afternoon of pleasure with the concubine that Allah
had provided for him that it was a good thing for Muhammad that Allah
was a forgiving and merciful god! (For the Muslim faithful, it must
surely be a source of embarrassment that Allah evidently had more
interest in Muhammad's personal sex life than he did about tolerance
or universal love. The god of Islam encourages sex with slaves in
several other places as well).

Muhammad used eternal paradise and damnation to solicit strict
obedience to his every command: "Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Whoever obeys
me will enter Paradise, and whoever disobeys me will not enter it’”
(Bukhari 92.384).

Islam became centered completely around its founder. Of all the
prophets, new converts are required to affirm only the legitimacy of
Muhammad. The Muslim leader even shares the Shahada with Allah
("There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger"). To this
day, every Muslim must bow down five times a day "toward" Muhammad's
birthplace (Islam's "prophet" did not know the earth was round).

The prophet of Islam was also an extremely superstitious person,
leaving many bizarre rules for Muslims to follow, including which
direction they should defecate and how many stones they should wash
their anus with afterwards (any odd number... for anyone who's
curious). (See also MYTH: Muhammad did Away with Superstition).
Sketchy hygiene apparently left him with an annoying lice infection.

Not content with waiting for Allah to act on his behalf, Muhammad had
personal critics executed, including poets. One of these was a mother
of five children, who was stabbed to death by Muhammad's envoy after a
suckling infant was removed from her breast (see MYTH: Muhammad Never
Killed Women). Other innocent people were killed merely because they
were of a different religion, sometimes including children (see MYTH:
Muhammad Never Killed Children).

The glaring double standards of Islam were ingrained by the prophet of
Islam during his lifetime. This included commands to execute
apostates (those who wish to leave Islam) and evict people of other
religions from their homes.

An elderly woman named Umm Qirfa once ran afoul of Muhammad merely by
fighting back when her tribe was targeted by Muslim raiders.
Muhammad's adopted son tied the woman's legs separately to two camels,
then set the camels off in opposite directions, tearing the woman's
body in two. He also killed her two sons - presumably in gruesome
fashion - and made her daughter into a sex slave. (See also MYTH:
Muhammad Never Killed the Elderly).

Today's Muslims inherit this legacy of self-consumption and disregard
for those outside the faith. They may or may not agree with terrorist
attacks on non-Muslims, but they are nearly united in their belief
that the victims have no right to strike back, even if it is in
self-defense.

The Quran distinguishes Muslims from others, bestowing the highest
praise for believers while heaping the vilest condemnation on those
outside the faith. Islam is a true supremacist ideology. (See also
Is the Quran Hate Speech?)

The Taking of Mecca

Though many of the Arab and Jewish tribes were eliminated and absorbed
through military victory and forced conversion, the city of Mecca
remained.

In 628, six years after fleeing, Muhammad’s followers were allowed to
re-enter the city under an agreement whereby he set aside his title as
“Prophet of Allah.” This was a temporary ploy that enabled him to
gain a political foothold in the city through the same “fifth column”
activities that are still used today by organizations such as the
Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), which use their host’s
language of religious tolerance to disguise an ulterior agenda that
includes systematic discrimination against non-Muslims.

Many of his followers were disappointed that Muhammad had made
concessions to the Meccans, not understanding how it actually fit
perfectly with his ultimate agenda of domination. It was during this
time that he led the campaign against the Khaybar, to assuage their
lust for blood, women and loot.

Technically, Muhammad was the first to break the treaty with the
Meccans when he violated the portion of it that restricted him from
accepting members of the other tribe into his camp. His own people
also staged deadly raids on Meccan caravans (see MYTH: The Meccans
were the First to Break the Treaty of Hudaibiya). Although he
evidently had no personal obligation to the treaty, the prophet of
Islam held the other party to the letter of the law, particularly
after he amassed the power to conquer in overwhelming fashion.

The excuse that Muhammad eventually used to march his armies into
Mecca was provided when a tribe allied to the Meccans conducted a raid
on a tribe allied with the Medinans. Although a true man of peace
would have heeded the fact that his enemy did not want war, and used
non-violent means to resolve the tension while respecting sovereignty,
Muhammad merely wanted power and vengeance. (See also MYTH: Muhammad
always Chose Peace over War).

In just under a decade, Muhammad had evolved from trying to sell
himself as a Judeo-Christian prophet, seeking followers, to an Arab
warlord, seeking subjects, slaves and total dominance. The early
Quran (of Mecca) tells unbelievers to 'follow the example' of Muhammad
or suffer Hell. The later Quran (of Medina) tells unbelievers to
'obey' Muhammad or suffer death.

Following Mecca's surrender, Muhammad put to death those who had
previously insulted him (see also MYTH: Muhammad was a Forgiving Man).
One of the persons sentenced was his former scribe, who had written
revelations that Muhammad said were from Allah. The scribe had
previously recommended changes to the wording that Muhammad offered
(based on some of the bad grammar and ineloquent language of "Allah")
and Muhammad agreed. This caused the scribe to apostatize, based on
his belief that real revelations should have been immutable.

Although the scribe escaped death by "converting to Islam" at the
point of a sword, others weren't so lucky. One was a slave girl who
was executed on Muhammad's order because she had written songs mocking
him.

In what would also become the model for future Muslim military
conquests, those Meccans who would not convert to Islam were required
to accept third-class status. Not surprisingly, almost the entire
city - which had previously rejected his message - immediately
"converted" to Islam once Muhammad came back with a sword in this
hand. This included has adversary, Abu Sufyan, who was bluntly
ordered to "Submit and testify that there is no God but Allah and that
Muhammad is the apostle of Allah before you lose your head."

Those who would not convert to Islam were banned from the city a few
months later - again underscoring the dual ethics of Islam. When
Muhammad was previously banned from Mecca, he described it as a
"persecution" that justified his "slaughter" of those who prevented
him from performing the Haj. Yet, when he attained power, he
immediately chased anyone who would not convert to Islam from Mecca
and prevented them from performing the Haj.

To this day, people of other religions are barred even from entering
Mecca, the city where Muhammad was free to preach in contradiction to
the established religion. Islam is far less tolerant even than the
more primitive Arab religion that it supplanted. A person preaching
the original Arab polytheism on the streets of Mecca today would be
quickly executed.

Jihad and Jizya

Tellingly, some of the most violent verses in the Quran were handed
down following Muhammad's ascension to power, when there was no threat
to the Muslim people. The 9th Sura of the Quran exhorts Muslims to
Jihad and dominance over other religions:

"Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor
do they prohibit what Allah and His Messenger have prohibited, nor
follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the
Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they
are in a state of subjection." (9:29)

The verse that follows curses Christians and Jews by name and says
"May Allah destroy them" (as with other sections of the Quran, it is
unclear whether it is Allah or Muhammad speaking).

Before his death, Muhammad ordered 30,000 men to march on Christian
lands (which were Byzantine at the time). It is possible that he
believed false rumors of an army amassed against him, but there is
absolutely no evidence of such a force having been assembled.
Instead, Muhammad subjugated the local people and extorted
"protection" money from them - something that has come to be known as
the jizya (a tax that non-Muslims pay to Muslims).

Another episode from this period that offers insight into the legacy
of Muhammad is the forced conversion of the al-Harith, one of the last
Arab tribes to hold out against Muslim hegemony. Muhammad gave the
chief of the tribe three days to accept Islam before sending his army
to destroy them.

Not surprisingly, the entire people immediately embraced the Religion of Peace!

Most Arab tribes recognized Muhammad's quest for power and wisely
pledged their political allegiance without a fight. This quickly
presented a problem for his core band of followers, however, since
they had become used to living off of what could be stolen from others
via raids and battle.

Since it was against the rules to attack fellow Muslims, Muhammad
began demanding tribute from his new "converts" instead, but this
proved to be less profitable than the jizya - not to mention that it
carried the risk of internal resentment and strife.

Khaybar, the remote Jewish city that had been turned into a
sharecropper state on behalf of its Muslim masters was a more
preferable economic model for a growing Islamic empire that had become
dependent on extortion justified by religious superiority.

Years before attacking Christian and Persian lands, Muhammad wrote to
governors in each, telling them, "embrace Islam and you will be safe."
There was no mention of oppression or liberation cited as a
justification. The only threat these people faced would be from
Muslim armies. (Only six years later, 4,000 peasants in the
modern-day Palestinian region would be slaughtered for defending their
homes).

At the time, the wealth of other nations was an open source of envy
among Muhammad's followers, which he promised to rectify. The
subsequent military expansion that he set in motion may have been
sanctioned by Allah and powered by religious zealotry, but the
underlying motives of money, sex, slaves and power were no less
worldly than any other conqueror of the time.

The Legacy of Islamic Imperialism

Muhammad died of a fever in 632 at the age of 63, with his violent
religion spread over most of Arabia. His method of forcing others to
convert under duress had several negative consequences, beginning with
the civil wars that were immediately engaged in following his death.
Many tribes wanted out of Islam and had to be kept in the empire via
horrific violence.

Abu Sufyan, the Meccan leader who was literally forced to "embrace"
Islam at the point of a sword actually had the last laugh. He
skillfully worked his own family into the line of succession and his
son, Muawiya, became the heir to Muhammad's empire at the expense of
the prophet's own family. In fact, Abu Sufyan almost lived to witness
his son and grandson kill off Muhammad's own grandchildren and assume
control of the Islamic empire.

Muhammad's failure to leave a clear successor resulted in a deep
schism that quickly devolved into violence and persists to this day as
the Sunni/Shia conflict. His own family fell apart and literally went
to war with each other in the first few years. Thousands of Muslims
were killed fighting each other in a battle between Muhammad's
favorite wife, Aisha, and his adopted son, Ali.

Infidels fared no better. Through Muhammad's teachings and example,
his followers viewed worldly life as a constant physical battle
between the House of Peace (Dar al-Salaam) and the House of War (Dar
al-Harb). Muslims are instructed to invite their enemies to either
embrace Islam, pay jizya (protection money), or die.

Over the next fourteen centuries, the bloody legacy of this
extraordinary individual would be a constant challenge to those living
on the borders of the Islam’s political power. The violence that
Muslim armies would visit on people across North Africa, the Middle
East, Europe and into Asia as far as the Indian subcontinent is a
tribute to a founder who practiced and promoted subjugation, rape,
murder and forced conversion.

In Muhammad's words: "I have been ordered to fight the people till
they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they
say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we
slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we
will not interfere with them..." (Bukhari 8:387)

It is certainly the basis not just for modern day terror campaigns
against Western infidels (and Hindus and Buddhists) but also the broad
apathy that Muslims across the world have to the violence, which is an
obvious enabler.

As Indonesian cleric, Abu Bakar Bashir recently put it, "If the West
wants to have peace, then they have to accept Islamic rule." [source
- retrieved from
https://www.facebook.com/thegreateststoryevertoldretold/posts/424404047665539
on 4/18/2014] also [source - retrieved from
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1896693/posts on
4/18/2014]

APPENDIX 3, Muslim Woman Seeks to Revive Institution of Sex-Slaver
Front Page ^ | June 6 2011 | Raymond Ibrahim
Posted on 6/10/2011 1:52:47 AM by Ethan Clive Osgoode

Last week witnessed popular Muslim preacher Abu Ishaq al-Huwaini boast
about how Islam allows Muslims to buy and sell conquered infidel
women, so that "When I want a sex-slave, I go to the market and pick
whichever female I desire and buy her."

This week's depraved anachronism comes from a Muslim woman—Salwa
al-Mutairi, a political activist and former parliamentary candidate
for Kuwait's government, no less: She, too, seeks to "revive the
institution of sex-slavery."

A brief English report appeared over the weekend in the Kuwait Times
(nothing, of course, in the MSM):

Muslim men who fear being seduced or tempted into immoral behavior by
the beauty of their female servants, or even of those servants
"casting spells" on them, would be better to purchase women from an
"enslaved maid" agency for sexual purposes. She [Mutairi] suggested
that special offices could be set up to provide concubines in the same
way as domestic staff recruitment agencies currently provide
housemaids. "We want our youth to be protected from adultery," said
al-Mutairi, suggesting that these maids could be brought as prisoners
of war in war-stricken nations like Chechnya to be sold on later to
devout merchants.

The Arabic news website, Al Arabiya, has the sordid details, including
a video of Mutairi addressing this topic. I summarize and translate
various excerpts below (note: I am not making any of this up):
The Kuwaiti female activist begins by insisting that "it's of course
true" that "the prophet of Islam legitimized sex-slavery." She
recounts how when she was in Mecca, Islam's holiest city, she asked
various sheikhs and muftis (learned, authoritative Muslims) about the
legality of sex-slavery according to Sharia: they all confirmed it to
be perfectly legal; Kuwaiti ulema further pointed out that extra
"virile" men—Western synonyms include "sex-crazed," "lecherous,"
"perverted"—would do well to purchase sex-slaves to sate their
appetites without sinning. [[What a breach of morals this is.]]

Here's a particularly interesting excerpt from her taped speech on the
rules governing sex-slaves:

A Muslim state must [first] attack a Christian state—sorry, I mean any
non-Muslim state—and they [the women, the future sex-slaves] must be
captives of the raid. Is this forbidden? Not at all; according to
Islam, sex slaves are not at all forbidden. Quite the contrary, the
rules regulating sex-slaves differ from those for free women [i.e.,
Muslim women]: the latter's body must be covered entirely, except for
her face and hands, whereas the sex-slave is kept naked from the
bellybutton on up—she is different from the free woman; the free woman
has to be married properly to her husband, but the sex-slave—he just
buys her and that's that.

She went on to offer concrete suggestions: "For example, in the
Chechnyan war, surely there are female Russian captives. So go and buy
those and sell them here in Kuwait; better that than have our men
engage in forbidden sexual relations. I don't see any problem in this,
no problem at all."

Mutairi suggests the enslaved girls be at least 15 years-old.
She further justified the institution of sex-slavery by evoking 8th
century caliph, Harun Rashid—a name some may recall from Arabian
Nights bedtime stories; a name some may be surprised to discover
politically active Muslims modeling their lives after:

"And the greatest example we have is Harun al-Rashid: when he died, he
had 2,000 sex slaves—so it's okay, nothing wrong with it."
Mutairi's rationale is ultimately guided by a sense of efficiency, a
desire for the good of society: legalizing sex-slaves helps prevent
Muslim men from transgressing Allah's laws (as we have seen,
extramarital relations with fellow Muslim women is strictly forbidden,
but not with infidel sex-slaves, since they are scarcely considered
human). Thus, the institution of sex-slavery provides a convenient,
Sharia-compliant way of satiating the libidinous urges of Muslim men.
The Kuwaiti activist's blunt approach actually has universal
parallels. For example, in the West, some seek to legalize marijuana,
arguing that, since people use it anyway, let it be made compliant
with the law. In the Muslim world, we have those who seek to legalize
sex-slavery, arguing that, since Muslim men will use women anyway, let
it be made compliant with Sharia law.

Such are the inevitable differences between the Western mindset (based
on reason and universal rights) and the Sharia mindset (based on the
life of a 7th century Arabian caravan-raider and slave-trader).
Mutairi concluded by piously supplicating Allah: "Oh I truly wish this
for Kuwait, Allah willing—Oh Lord, Lord, you are bountiful…"
While she waits, Mutairi can take solace in the fact that, if
sex-slavery is not institutionalized in Kuwait, it thrives underground
throughout the Muslim world, where non-Muslim girls—mostly
Christians—are routinely abducted, enslaved, and forced into lives of
unspeakable degradation.

After all, just because a practice is not formally institutionalized
does not mean that those who deem it their divine right are not
practicing it. [source - retrieved from
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2732655/posts on 4/28/2014]
APPENDIX 4, When a girl is taken — usually by her mother — to a free
circumcision event held each spring in Bandung, Indonesia, she is
handed over to a small group of women who, swiftly and yet with
apparent affection, cut off a small piece of her genitals. Sponsored
by the Assalaam Foundation, an Islamic educational and social-services
organization, circumcisions take place in a prayer center or an
emptied-out elementary-school classroom where desks are pushed
together and covered with sheets and a pillow to serve as makeshift
beds. The procedure takes several minutes. There is little blood
involved. Afterward, the girl’s genital area is swabbed with the
antiseptic Betadine. She is then helped back into her underwear and
returned to a waiting area, where she’s given a small, celebratory
gift — some fruit or a donated piece of clothing — and offered a cup
of milk for refreshment. She has now joined a quiet majority in
Indonesia, where, according to a 2003 study by the Population Council,
an international research group, 96 percent of families surveyed
reported that their daughters had undergone some form of circumcision
by the time they reached 14.

The Assalaam Foundation runs several schools and a mosque in Bandung,
Indonesia’s third-largest city and the capital of West Java. The
photographer Stephanie Sinclair was taken to the circumcision event by
a reproductive-health observer from Jakarta and allowed to spend
several hours there. Over the course of that Sunday morning, more than
200 girls were circumcised, many of them appearing to be under the age
of 5. Meanwhile, in a nearby building, more than 100 boys underwent a
traditional circumcision as well.
According to Lukman Hakim, the foundation’s chairman of social
services, there are three “benefits” to circumcising girls.
“One, it will stabilize her libido,” he said through an interpreter.
“Two, it will make a woman look more beautiful in the eyes of her
husband. And three, it will balance her psychology.”
Female genital cutting — commonly identified among international human
rights groups as female genital mutilation — has been outlawed in 15
African countries. Many industrialized countries also have similar
laws. Both France and the U.S. have prosecuted immigrant residents for
performing female circumcisions.

In Indonesia, home to the world’s largest Muslim population, a debate
over whether to ban female circumcision is in its early stages. The
Ministry of Health has issued a decree forbidding medical personnel to
practice it, but the decree which has yet to be backed by legislation
does not affect traditional circumcisers and birth attendants, who are
thought to do most female circumcisions. Many agree that a full ban is
unlikely without strong support from the country’s religious leaders.
According to the Population Council study, many Indonesians view
circumcision for boys and girls as a religious duty.
Female circumcision in Indonesia is reported to be less extreme than
the kind practiced in other parts of the globe — Africa, particularly.
Worldwide, female genital cutting affects up to 140 million women and
girls in varying degrees of severity, according to estimates from the
World Health Organization. The most common form of female genital
cutting, representing about 80 percent of cases around the world,
includes the excision of the clitoris and the labia minora. A more
extreme version of the practice, known as Pharaonic circumcision or
infibulation, accounts for 15 percent of cases globally and involves
the removal of all external genitalia and a stitching up of the
vaginal opening.
Studies have shown that in some parts of Indonesia, female
circumcision is more ritualistic — a rite of passage meant to purify
the genitals and bestow gender identity on a female child — with a
practitioner rubbing turmeric on the genitals or pricking the clitoris
once with a needle to draw a symbolic drop of blood. In other
instances, the procedure is more invasive, involving what WHO
classifies as “Type I” female genital mutilation, defined as excision
of the clitoral hood, called the prepuce, with or without incision of
the clitoris itself. The Population Council’s 2003 study said that 82
percent of Indonesian mothers who witnessed their daughters’
circumcision reported that it involved “cutting.” The women most often
identified the clitoris as the affected body part. The amount of flesh
removed, if any, was alternately described by circumcisers as being
the size of a quarter-grain of rice, a guava seed, a bean, the tip of
a leaf, the head of a needle.

At the Assalaam Foundation, traditional circumcisers say they learn
the practice from other women during several years of apprenticing.
Siti Rukasitta, who has been a circumciser at the foundation for 20
years, said through an interpreter that they use a small pair of
sterilized scissors to cut a piece of the clitoral prepuce about the
size of a nail clipping. Population Council observers who visited the
event before the 2003 study, however, reported that they also
witnessed some cases of circumcisers cutting the clitoris itself.
Any distinction between injuring the clitoris or the clitoral hood is
irrelevant, says Laura Guarenti, an obstetrician and WHO’s medical
officer for child and maternal health in Jakarta. “The fact is there
is absolutely no medical value in circumcising girls,” she says. “It
is 100 percent the wrong thing to be doing.” The circumcision of boys,
she adds, has demonstrated health benefits, namely reduced risk of
infection and some protection against H.I.V.
Nonetheless, as Western awareness of female genital cutting has grown,
anthropologists, policy makers and health officials have warned
against blindly judging those who practice it, saying that progress is
best made by working with local leaders and opinion-makers to
gradually shift the public discussion of female circumcision from what
it’s believed to bestow upon a girl toward what it takes away. “These
mothers believe they are doing something good for their children,”
Guarenti, a native of Italy, told me. “For our culture that is not
easily understandable. To judge them harshly is to isolate them. You
cannot make change that way.” [source - retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/20/magazine/20circumcision-t.html?_r=0
on 5/4/2014]

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION - BOTH TRUE AND FALSE - AT WWW.JW.ORG

iris89 · 6/05/2021 7:06 pm

COMBINATION OF [1] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] THE GOSPEL OF BARNABAS IS NOT AN INSPIRED WRITING:

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [357B]

And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. 5 For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities. Revelation 18:4 – 5, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

This is made clear in Almighty God’s (YHWH’s) directions to His people in ancient times as given at Isaiah 52:10 - 11, [AV] “The LORD hath made bare his holy arm in the eyes of all the nations; and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of our God. 11 Depart ye, depart ye, go ye out from thence, touch no unclean thing; go ye out of the midst of her; be ye clean, that bear the vessels of the LORD.” We are warned not to indulge in unrighteous things at 2 Corinthians 6:17, [AV] “Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,” but to come out of false religions and have no further partaking in their unclean practices. As 1 Timothy 5:24, [AV] “Some men’s sins are open beforehand, going before to judgment; and some men they follow after.”

[2] THE GOSPEL OF BARNABAS IS NOT AN INSPIRED WRITING:

The Gospel of Barnabas is NOT an Inspired Writing of the Bible. Let's look at the facts with respect Aprocypha Books such as the Gospel of Barnabas.

THE APROCYPHA 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 Barnabas, 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 none 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.

THE EXTERNAL BOOKS QUOTED IN THE BIBLE:

There are many external books quoted by inspired Bible writers as references. Many are, "not aware that the Old Testament authors depended upon other writings as their sources which they freely admit. Among these are: the Book of the Wars of Yahweh (Num. 21:14), the Book of the Jashar (Josh 10:13; 2 Sam. 1:18), the Book of the Acts of Solomon (1 Ki 14:19; 2 Chr 33:18), the Book of the Annals of the Kings of Judah (1 Ki 14:29, 15:7), the Annals of Samuel the Seer (1 Chr 29:29), the History of Nathan the Prophet (2 Chr 9:29), the Annals of Shemaiah the Prophet and Iddo the Seer (2 Chr. 12:15), the Annals of Jehu the Son of Hanani (2 Chr. 20:34), and others. Some teach that Moses compiled the Book of Genesis from other writings that surely had to have been handed down and preserved by his forefathers. Genesis can be broken down into eleven separate history books, each being separated by colophons at the conclusion of the books. This is known to have been a popular style for such ancient writings. ...According to this theory we have eleven separate books having the following authors: Adam, Noah, and eight other authors which Moses merely compiled into one book. [source= Ronald G. Fanter Cutting Edge Ministries].

One of these books is still existent today, the Book of Jashar or as it is sometimes called the Book of the Just, and another, the Book of the Wars of Yahweh, is actually thought my most scholars to actually be the Book of Jashar. The Book of Jashar is quite interesting, but one must be careful in obtaining a copy as there are counterfeit books masquerading as the Book of Jashar which are not. Also, there is a counterfeit Book of the Wars of Yahweh which is of course a fake since as previously said, this book is thought to just be another name for the Book of Jashar.

THE 4 BOOKS OF MACCABEES:

This is by far the strangest case of all. The 4 Books of Maccabees are ranked by many as part of the Apocrypha; however, they should be ranked as history books of the 1 st. and 2 nd. Century roughly before the incarnation of our leader and savior, Jesus (Yeshua) Christ. Very strange is the fact that the Catholic church accepted only two of them into their Canon of Bible Books; whereas, there are four of them. The Greek Orthodox, however, accepted three of them, and only the Cathars accepted the fourth. Strange to say the least, but none should have been accepted as canonical as they are history books, and one would NOT THINK of accepting H. G. Wells, 'Outline of History," into the Bible cannon; we are getting into the absurd. However, they make excellent reading as history books that fill in the history of these two centuries.

WHAT IS AN INSPIRED BOOK?

First, 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.

Second, 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.

APPENDIX to the Gospel of Barnabas is NOT an Inspired Book of the Bible:

[1] One scholar, Malcolmite, wrote:

Some Muslims claim that the True Gospel is the "Gospel of Barnabas." This "true Gospel" was they say, written by Barnabas, who accompanied the apostle Paul on his first missionary journey (Acts 13:1-4). Modern scholarship, however, has this to say about the "Gospel of Barnabas":

There was also a "Gospel of Barnabas," referred to by several ancient authors, especially in the "Decree of Galasius" (500 AD); but there is no mention of its contents or character. However, there is in existence a long Italian manuscript under this title written from the Muslim standpoint and containing a strong element of Gnosticism. It was edited in 1907 by Lonsdale and Laura (M Roberts) Ragg, who held it to be the work of an apostate from Christianity, sometime between the 13th and 16th century. Like most of the patristic and medieval apocrypha, the work is highly imaginative, a work of fiction rather than of historical tradition, but it has a strongly marked ethical emphasis. (Encyclopedia Americana 1976 edition, page 247)

Because of the suspicious nature of this book very few have taken it seriously. And I suggest that anyone with a moderate education and well versed in the Bible or the Qur'an, who is familiar with the history and geography of Palestine will realize that this book is not divine. In fact to claim that this book is of divine origin is an outright embarrassment to the cause of Islam.

The "Gospel of Barnabas" contradicts the Qur'an and the historical background of Palestine in the days of Jesus.

The Identity of the Messiah

One of the main objectives of, this work is to remove the title "Messiah" from Jesus to the prophet Muhammad. This however, is contradicted by both the internal and external evidence.

The Qur'an is very clear in attributing the title Al-Masih (the Messiah) to none other than Jesus, son of Mary. This distinct title is used nowhere in all the Qur'an for any other prophet, including the prophet Muhammad.

... Christ Jesus (Al-Masih Isa) the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of God, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a Spirit proceeding from Him. (Sura 4:171)

Behold! the angel said: 0 Mary, God giveth thee glad tidings of a Word ftoni Him; his tiame will be Christ Jesus (Al-Masih Isa), the son of Afary, held in honor in this world and the hereafter. (Sura 3:45)

Muslims agree that Jesus was of Jewish descent, from of the lineage of the prophet David, who descended from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. However, the Qur'an also identifies Jesus as "the Messiah", so the statement in the Gospel of Barnabas that the Messiah is not Jesus, and is not of the seed of David or Isaac is clearly in direct opposition to the Qur'an.

And I note also that the writer, uses the name Jesus Christ. Thereby again totally contradicting himself, for the word "Christ" comes from the Greek language, and is the same title as the Arabic word "Masih." Both of which are translated "Messiah"! So the author uses the title Christ which means Messiah, in reference to Jesus and at the same time claims that Jesus is not the Messiah!

Scriptural and Traditional Inaccuracies

chap. 3: - Claims that Mary bore Jesus without any pain. The Qur'an, however, clearly says otherwise:

So she conceived him (Jesus), and she retired with him to a remote place. And the pains of childbirth drove her to the trunk of a palm-tree: She cried (in her anguish): "Ah! would that I had been a thing forgottn and out of sight!" (Sura 19:22-23)

chap. 23: - The claim is made that circumcision began with Adam. However, both Muslim tradition and the Bible say that this began with the community of Abraham, Isaac and Ishmael.

chap. 35: - It is said that man's navel was made from the spittle of Satan. Yet on page 50, chap. 39, the author says that the dog was created from Satan's spittle. But neither the Qur'an or the Bible indicate that Satan had any part in the creation of man's body, including his navel. Furthermore, most Muslims would agree that the Mighty Creator God certainly did not need help in creating man.

chap. 39: - Adam and Eve were supposedly forbidden to eat of the apples and the corn. However, the Qur'an relates the following:

0 Adam! dwell thou and thy wife in the Garden; and eat of the bountiful things therein as (where and when) ye will: but approach not this tree, or ye run into harm and transgression. (Sura 2:35)

It is quite possible that "apples" may have been on the forbidden tree, however we all know that "corn" does not grow on trees.

chap. 44: - The idea of the Promise or Covenant being made to the seed of Isaac is refuted. However, nowhere in the Qur'an is mention made of a "covenant" with Ishmael and his descendants. References of such a "Promise" or "Covenant" are in regard to the seed of Isaac which means Israel (Jacob) and his descendants. Thus in the Qur'an we read:

0 Children of Israel! call to mind the (special) favor which I bestowed upon you, and fulfill your Covenant with Me as fulfill My Covenant with you, and fear none but Me. (Sura 2:40)

chap. 105: - Mention is made of "nine heavens." The Qur'an speaks of only seven:

... Moreover His design comprehended the heavens, for He gave order and perfection to the seven firmaments; (Sura 2:29)

chap. 106: - Hell is spoken of as a place of intolerable snow and ice. But the Qur'an speaks of hell as a place of burning flames and boiling water.

chap. 112: - Jesus is reported to have said that He would not be raised into heaven until the Day of Judgment. But the following references of the Qur'an indicate otherwise:

Behold! God said: "O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself ..." (Sura 3:55)

Nay, God raised him up unto Himself: and God is exalted in Power, Wise. (Sura 4:158)

chap. 124: - It is stated that the Book of Psalms was given because of the corruption of the Books of Moses, and that the New Testament was given because of the subsequent corruption of the Psalms.

However, this line is nowhere to be found in the scriptures of the Qur'an. To the contrary, the Holy Books of the Bible are spoken of as light and guidance to mankind. Had the Books of the Bible been corrupted, the Qur'an would not have contained the following admonitions:

If only they had stoodfast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that was sent to them from their Lord, they would have enjoyed happiness from every side. (Sura 5:66)

0 ye who believe! Believe in God and His apostle, and the scripture which He hath sent to His apostle and the scripture which He sent to them before him. And who denieth God, His angels, His Books, His Apostles, and the Day of Judgment hath gone far, far astray. (Sura 4:136)

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION - BOTH TRUE AND FALSE - AT WWW.JW.ORG

iris89 · 6/06/2021 3:35 pm

COMBINATION OF [1] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] SOME MISUNDERSTAND THE USAGE OF FIRSTBORN - LITERAL VS. FIGURATIVE - AND PHILLIPIANS 2:6

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [358B]

And because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold. Matthew 24:12, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

Jesus (Yeshua) said of these whose love had grown cold for righteousness at Matthew 7:23, [AV] “And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” Many in the end times will be as shown at 2 Timothy 3:2, [AV] “For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,”

[2] SOME MISUNDERSTAND THE USAGE OF FIRSTBORN - LITERAL VS. FIGURATIVE - AND PHILLIPIANS 2:6

INTRODUCTION:

It appears some are having a problem differentiating the very simple; to wit, the difference between the literal usage of first born or only begotten and the figurative usage of first born. In the case of the literal usage as with respect to Jesus (Yeshua) Christ first born literally means the first of creation in keeping with Colossians 1:15, "who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation;" (American Standard Version; ASV); and Colossiana 1:18, "And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence." (ASV); Revelation 1:5, "and from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, and the ruler of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loveth us, and loosed us from our sins by his blood;" (ASV); Luke 2:7, "And she brought forth her firstborn son; and she wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn." (ASV); Romans 8:29, "For whom he foreknew, he also foreordained to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren:" (ASV); and Revelation 3:14, "And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God:" (ASV).

LITERAL USAGE EXAMPLES:

This literal use also is shown in its usage with others, for example Hebrews 11:28, "Heb 11:28 By faith he kept the passover, and the sprinkling of the blood, that the destroyer of the firstborn should not touch them." (ASV); which refers to Exodus 12:21-27, "Then Moses called for all the elders of Israel, and said unto them, Draw out, and take you lambs according to your families, and kill the passover. 22 And ye shall take a bunch of hyssop, and dip it in the blood that is in the basin, and strike the lintel and the two side-posts with the blood that is in the basin; and none of you shall go out of the door of his house until the morning. 23 For Jehovah will pass through to smite the Egyptians; and when he seeth the blood upon the lintel, and on the two side-posts, Jehovah will pass over the door, and will not suffer the destroyer to come in unto your houses to smite you. 24 And ye shall observe this thing for an ordinance to thee and to thy sons for ever. 25 And it shall come to pass, when ye are come to the land which Jehovah will give you, according as he hath promised, that ye shall keep this service. 26 And it shall come to pass, when your children shall say unto you, What mean ye by this service? 27 that ye shall say, It is the sacrifice of Jehovah's passover, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, when he smote the Egyptians, and delivered our houses. And the people bowed the head and worshipped." (ASV).

FIGURATIVE USAGE:

Whereas the symbolic or figurative usage refers to a special level or status as shown clearly by Exodus 4:22, "And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith Jehovah, Israel is my son, my first-born:" (ASV) which is clearly symbolic as it is referring to a nation and NOT an individual and this is quite clear; to wit, it showed that the true God (YHWH) of Abraham regarded the Ancient Nation of Israel as something special, the number one nation among nations. And this figurative use is further shown in Exodus 4:23, "and I have said unto thee, Let my son go, that he may serve me; and thou hast refused to let him go: behold, I will slay thy son, thy first-born." (ASV) so there is no excuse for anyone failing to see this is figurative and NOT literal usage.

Also, 2 Chronicles 21:2-3, "2 And he had brethren, the sons of Jehoshaphat: Azariah, and Jehiel, and Zechariah, and Azariah, and Michael, and Shephatiah; all these were the sons of Jehoshaphat king of Israel. 3 And their father gave them great gifts, of silver, and of gold, and of precious things, with fortified cities in Judah: but the kingdom gave he to Jehoram, because he was the first-born." (ASV), clearly shows the figurative usage as Jehoram was NOT the literal firstborn, but the symbolic firstborn as his father considered him the most important and gave him the kingship.

PHILLIPPIANS 2:6 CLEARLY SHOW CHRIST DID NOT CONSIDER HIMSELF EQUAL TO HIS FATHER:

Some will contend otherwise on the basis of Philippians 2:6, "who, existing in the form of God, counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped," (ASV) based on the defective Authorized King James Bible (AV) rendering of same which is misleading, "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:" (AV).

This fact, that God's Son, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) is a separate spirit being from his Father (YHWH) is even made much clearer if we view more than one scripture at a time:

"Let Christ himself be your example as to what your attitude should be. For he, who had always been God by nature, did not cling to his prerogatives as God's equal, but stripped himself of all privilege by consenting to be a slave by nature and being born as mortal man. And, having become man, he humbled himself by living a life of utter obedience, even to the extent of dying, and the death he died was the death of a common criminal. That is why God has now lifted him so high, and has given him the name beyond all names, so that at the name of Jesus "every knee shall bow", whether in Heaven or earth or under the earth. And that is why, in the end, "every tongue shall confess" that Jesus Christ" is the Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (Philippians 2:5-11 J B PHILLIPS Translation of the NEW TESTAMENT)

The J.B. Phillips Translation of the New Testament makes clear the Son's, Jesus's (Yeshua or YHWH saves) attitude with respect to being obedient to his Father, Almighty God (YHWH). It states, "Let Christ himself be your example as to what your attitude should be." Which clearly shows that all genuine followers of the Son should also be humble. Also, it clearly says, "For he, who had always been God by nature, did not cling to his prerogatives as God's equal, but stripped himself of all privilege by consenting to be a slave by nature and being born as mortal man." That although he was existing as a spirit creature just like his Father (YHWH) that he gave no thought to being the equal of his Father (YHWH), but was subordinate and obedient to him in clear conformity to " But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." (1 Corinthians 11:3 AV). Clearly then, he, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) can not then be a member of a co-equal trinity of beings in a Trinitarian Godhead since he is neither equal to his Father, nor did not always exist as did his Father (YHWH) " And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;" (Revelation 3:14 AV) and " Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:" (Colossians 1:15 AV).

His subjection was made quite clear as follows, "And, having become man, he humbled himself by living a life of utter obedience, even to the extent of dying, and the death he died was the death of a common criminal." Clearly he, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves) was doing the will of his Father (YHWH) . In fact, when tempted by Satan the Devil he stated " Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." (Matthew 4:10 AV), " Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God." (John 20:17 AV), "21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father. 22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews. 23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. 24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. 25 The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. 26 Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he." (John 4:21-26 AV).

Of course, since Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH) is Almighty God (YHWH) only begotten Son, he is also a God, but a lessor one; therefore, The First Commandment of the Ten Commandments, " Thou shalt have no other gods before me." (Exodus 20:3 AV), is not violated since he is neither equal to or before his Father.

Since he has proved his obedience to his Father (YHWH), his Father (YHWH) has " That is why God has now lifted him so high, and has given him the name beyond all names, so that at the name of Jesus "every knee shall bow", whether in Heaven or earth or under the earth. And that is why, in the end, "every tongue shall confess" that Jesus Christ" is the Lord, to the glory of God the Father." And his Father has subjected all things onto his Son, except himself, "17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. 18 Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. 19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. 20 ¶ But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. 21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming. 24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. 25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death." 27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." (1 Corinthians 15:17-28 AV). Therefore, it is clear that Almighty God, the Father (YHWH) is the superior one since he has put all things under his Son, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves), except himself, and could not do so unless he was above or superior to his Son. Also, it is clear that after he accomplishes his Father's purpose, he, Jesus (Yeshua or YHWH saves), will subject himself to his father, "And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all." This clearly shows that Trinitarian Theology and Dualism Theology are false dogma and should be clearly rejected by all Christians.

COMMENTS BY OTHER BIBLE SCHOLARS ON PHILIPPIANS 2:5 -11:

Bible Scholar, Theodore Beza, stated:

2:5 2 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
(2) He sets before them a most perfect example of all modesty and sweet conduct, Christ Jesus, whom we ought to follow with all our might: who abased himself so much for our sakes, although he is above all, that he took upon himself the form of a servant, that is, our flesh, willingly subject to all weaknesses, even to the death of the cross.
2:6 Who, being in the d form of God, e thought it not robbery to be f equal with God:
(d) Such as God himself is, and therefore God, for there is no one in all parts equal to God but God himself.
(e) Christ, that glorious and everlasting God, knew that he might rightfully and lawfully not appear in the base flesh of man, but remain with majesty fit for God: yet he chose rather to debase himself.
(f) If the Son is equal with the Father, then is there of necessity an equality, which Arrius that heretic denies: and if the Son is compared to the Father, then is there a distinction of persons, which Sabellius that heretic denies.
2:7 But made himself of g no reputation, and took upon him the h form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
(g) He brought himself from all things, as it were to nothing.
(h) By taking our manhood upon him.
2:9 3 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a i name which is above every name:
(3) He shows the most glorious even of Christ's submission, to teach us that modesty is the true way to true praise and glory.
(i) Dignity and high distinction, and that which accompanies it.
2:10 That at the name of Jesus k every knee should bow, of [things] in heaven, and [things] in earth, and [things] under the earth;
(k) All creatures will at length be subject to Christ.
2:11 And [that] l every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ [is] Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
(l) Every nation. [Beza, Theodore. "Commentary on Philippians 2". "The 1599 Geneva Study Bible". 1600-1645.]

Bible Scholar, Matthew Henry, said:

Note, this scholars comments cover more than Philippians 2:5-11, it cover Philippians 2:1-11.
The apostle proceeds in this chapter where he left off in the last, with further exhortations to Christian duties. He presses them largely to like-mindedness and lowly-mindedness, in conformity to the example of the Lord Jesus, the great pattern of humility and love. Here we may observe, I. The great gospel precept passed upon us; that is, to love one another. This is the law of Christ's kingdom, the lesson of his school, the livery of his family. This he represents (v. 2) by being like-minded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind. We are of a like mind when we have the same love. Christians should be one in affection, whether they can be one in apprehension or no. This is always in their power, and always their duty, and is the likeliest way to bring them nearer in judgment. Having the same love. Observe, The same love that we are required to express to others, others are bound to express to us. Christian love ought to be mutual love. Love, and you shall be loved. Being of one accord, and of one mind; not crossing and thwarting, or driving on separate interests, but unanimously agreeing in the great things of God and keeping the unity of the Spirit in other differences. Here observe, 1. The pathetic pressing of the duty. He is very importunate with them, knowing what an evidence it is of our sincerity, and what a means of the preservation and edification of the body of Christ. The inducements to brotherly love are these:-(1.) "If there is any consolation in Christ. Have you experienced consolation in Christ? Evidence that experience by loving one another.'' The sweetness we have found in the doctrine of Christ should sweeten our spirits. Do we expect consolation in Christ? If we would not be disappointed, we must love one another. If we have not consolation in Christ, where else can we expect it? Those who have an interest in Christ have consolation in him, strong and everlasting consolation (Heb. 6:18; 2 Th. 2:16), and therefore ought to love one another. (2.) "Comfort of love. If there is any comfort in Christian love, in God's love to you, in your love to God, or in your brethren's love to us, in consideration of all this, be you like-minded. If you have ever found that comfort, if you would find it, if you indeed believe that the grace of love is a comfortable grace, abound in it.'' (3.) "Fellowship of the Spirit. If there is such a thing as communion with God and Christ by the Spirit, such a thing as the communion of saints, by virtue of their being animated and actuated by one and the same Spirit, be you like-minded; for Christian love and like-mindedness will preserve to us our communion with God and with one another.'' (4.) "Any bowels and mercies, in God and Christ, towards you. If you expect the benefit of God's compassions to yourselves, be you compassionate one to another. If there is such a thing as mercy to be found among the followers of Christ, if all who are sanctified have a disposition to holy pity, make it appear this way.'' How cogent are these arguments! One would think them enough to tame the most fierce, and mollify the hardest, heart. (5.) Another argument he insinuates is the comfort it would be to him: Fulfil you my joy. It is the joy of ministers to see people like-minded and living in love. He had been instrumental in bringing them to the grace of Christ and the love of God. "Now,'' says he, "if you have found any benefit by your participation of the gospel of Christ, if you have any comfort in it, or advantage by it, fulfil the joy of your poor minister, who preached the gospel to you.'' 2. He proposes some means to promote it. (1.) Do nothing through strife and vain glory, v. 3. There is no greater enemy to Christian love than pride and passion. If we do things in contradiction to our brethren, this is doing them through strife; if we do them through ostentation of ourselves, this is doing them through vain-glory: both are destructive of Christian love and kindle unchristian heats. Christ came to slay all enmities; therefore let there not be among Christians a spirit of opposition. Christ came to humble us, and therefore let there not be among us a spirit of pride. (2.) We must esteem others in lowliness of mind better than ourselves, be severe upon our own faults and charitable in our judgments of others, be quick in observing our own defects and infirmities, but ready to overlook and make favourable allowances for the defects of others. We must esteem the good which is in others above that which is in ourselves; for we best know our own unworthiness and imperfections. (3.) We must interest ourselves in the concerns of others, not in a way of curiosity and censoriousness, or as busy-bodies in other men's matters, but in Christian love and sympathy: Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others, v. 4. A selfish spirit is destructive of Christian love. We must be concerned not only for our own credit, and ease, and safety, but for those of others also; and rejoice in the prosperity of others as truly as in our own. We must love our neighbour as ourselves, and make his case our own. II. Here is a gospel pattern proposed to our imitation, and that is the example of our Lord Jesus Christ: Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, v. 5. Observe, Christians must be of Christ's mind. We must bear a resemblance to his life, if we would have the benefit of his death. If we have not the Spirit of Christ, we are none of his, Rom. 8:9. Now what was the mind of Christ? He was eminently humble, and this is what we are peculiarly to learn of him. Learn of me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, Mt. 11:29. If we were lowly-minded, we should be like-minded; and, if we were like Christ, we should be lowly-minded. We must walk in the same spirit and in the same steps with the Lord Jesus, who humbled himself to sufferings and death for us; not only to satisfy God's justice, and pay the price of our redemption, but to set us an example, and that we might follow his steps. Now here we have the two natures and the two states of our Lord Jesus. It is observable that the apostle, having occasion to mention the Lord Jesus, and the mind which was in him, takes the hint to enlarge upon his person, and to give a particular description of him. It is a pleasing subject, and a gospel minister needs not think himself out of the way when he is upon it; any fit occasion should be readily taken. 1. Here are the two natures of Christ: his divine nature and his human nature. (1.) Here is his divine nature: Who being in the form of God (v. 6), partaking of the divine nature, as the eternal and only begotten Son of God. This agrees with Jn. 1:1, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God: it is of the same import with being the image of the invisible God (Col. 1:15), and the brightness of his glory, and express image of his person, Heb. 1:3. He thought it no robbery to be equal with God; did not think himself guilty of any invasion of what did not belong to him, or assuming another's right. He said, I and my Father are one, Jn. 10:30. It is the highest degree of robbery for any mere man or mere creature to pretend to be equal with God, or profess himself one with the Father. This is for a man to rob God, not in tithes and offerings, but of the rights of his Godhead, Mal. 3:8. Some understand being in the form of God - en morphe Theou hyparchon, of his appearance in a divine majestic glory to the patriarchs, and the Jews, under the Old Testament, which was often called the glory, and the Shechinah. The word is used in such a sense by the Septuagint and in the New Testament. He appeared to the two disciples, en hetera morphe - In another form, Mk. 16:12. Metemorphothe - he was transfigured before them, Mt. 17:2. And he thought it no robbery to be equal with God; he did not greedily catch at, nor covet and affect to appear in that glory; he laid aside the majesty of his former appearance while he was here on earth, which is supposed to be the sense of the peculiar expression, ouk harpagmon hegesato. Vid. Bishop Bull's Def. cap. 2 sect. 4 et alibi, and Whitby in loc. (2.) His human nature: He was made in the likeness of men, and found in fashion as a man. He was really and truly man, took part of our flesh and blood, appeared in the nature and habit of man. And he voluntarily assumed human nature; it was his own act, and by his own consent. We cannot say that our participation of the human nature is so. Herein he emptied himself, divested himself of the honours and glories of the upper world, and of his former appearance, to clothe himself with the rags of human nature. He was in all things like to us, Heb. 2:17. 2. Here are his two estates, of humiliation and exaltation. (1.) His estate of humiliation. He not only took upon him the likeness and fashion of a man, but the form of a servant, that is, a man of mean estate. He was not only God's servant whom he had chosen, but he came to minister to men, and was among them as one who serveth in a mean and servile state. One would think that the Lord Jesus, if he would be a man, should have been a prince, and appeared in splendour. But quite the contrary: He took upon him the form of a servant. He was brought up meanly, probably working with his supposed father at his trade. His whole life was a life of humiliation, meanness, poverty, and disgrace; he had nowhere to lay his head, lived upon alms, was a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief, did not appear with external pomp, or any marks of distinction from other men. This was the humiliation of his life. But the lowest step of his humiliation was his dying the death of the cross. He became obedient to death, even the death of the cross. He not only suffered, but was actually and voluntarily obedient; he obeyed the law which he brought himself under
as Mediator, and by which he was obliged to die. I have power to lay down my life, and I have power to take it again: this commandment have I received of my Father, Jn. 10:18. And he was made under the law, Gal. 4:4. There is an emphasis laid upon the manner of his dying, which had in it all the circumstances possible which are humbling: Even the death of the cross, a cursed, painful, and shameful death,-a death accursed by the law (Cursed is he that hangeth on a tree) -full of pain, the body nailed through the nervous parts (the hands and feet) and hanging with all its weight upon the cross,-and the death of a malefactor and a slave, not of a free-man,-exposed as a public spectacle. Such was the condescension of the blessed Jesus. (2.) His exaltation: Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him. His exaltation was the reward of his humiliation. Because he humbled himself, God exalted him; and he highly exalted him, hyperypsose, raised him to an exceeding height. He exalted his whole person, the human nature as well as the divine; for he is spoken of as being in the form of God as well as in the fashion of man. As it respects the divine nature, it could only be the recognizing of his rights, or the display and appearance of the glory he had with the Father before the world was (Jn. 17:5), not any new acquisition of glory; and so the Father himself is said to be exalted. But the proper exaltation was of his human nature, which alone seems to be capable of it, though in conjunction with the divine. His exaltation here is made to consist in honour and power. In honour; so he had a name above every name, a title of dignity above all the creatures, men and angels. And in power: Every knee must bow to him. The whole creation must be in subjection to him: things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, the inhabitants of heaven and earth, the living and the dead. At the name of Jesus; not at the sound of the word, but the authority of Jesus; all should pay a solemn homage. And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord -every nation and language should publicly own the universal empire of the exalted Redeemer, and that all power in heaven and earth is given to him, Mt. 28:18. Observe the vast extent of the kingdom of Christ; it reaches to heaven and earth, and to all the creatures in each, to angels as well as men, and to the dead as well as the living.- To the glory of God the Father. Observe, It is to the glory of God the Father to confess that Jesus Christ is Lord; for it is his will that all men should honour the Son as they honour the Father, Jn. 5:23. Whatever respect is paid to Christ redounds to the honour of the Father. He who receiveth me receiveth him who sent me, Mt. 10:40.
[Henry, Matthew. "Commentary on Philippians 2". "Matthew Henry Complete Commentary on the Whole Bible". 1706.]

Bible Scholar, Barton W. Johnson, stated:

5-8. Let this mind be in you. He points to Christ as the example of humility and consecration to the good of others. 6. Who, being in the form of God. He refers to the state of our Savior before he took human form. His form was divine. "He had a glory with the father before the world was." See John 1:1; 2 Cor. 4:4; Heb. 1:3, etc. Thought it not robbery to be equal with God. The Revision says, "Counted it not a prize." The meaning is not entirely clear, but probably is that "Having a form of glory like God, he did not count it a prize which must be clung to tenaciously, especially when he appeared upon the earth, that he should be equal with God, that is, appear in a divine form, but was willing to lay aside his glory and make himself a servant." 7. Emptied himself. Of the divine form and glory, and took the form of a servant, of our own race, a race whose duty it is to serve God. The divine glory was exchanged for human lowliness. 8. He humbled himself. Note the infinite condescension: (1) The form of God and sharing the divine glory. (2) He divests himself of this. (3) Nor does he then take the divine form, or even the form of an angel, but of lowly, sinful man. (4) But this is not all. He not only takes the form of man, but the mortality of the flesh, and dies. (5) Nay, more; he dies the most shameful and painful of all deaths, even the death of the cross.

9-11. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him. His wonderful humility had been shown, but it is the law of the universe that he that humbleth himself shall be exalted. Therefore God lifted him up from the grave to the heavens, gave all power into his hands (Matt. 28:18), and gave him a name above every name. The idea is an authority, a position, above that of all intelligences. This exaltation made the humble name, Jesus, a name above every name. 10. That at the name of Jesus. That name, by the exaltation, has become the name of the King of kings. It is supreme. Hence, every knee in all the universe bows to its majesty. Under the earth. In the under-world, hades, the abode of the dead. 11. And that every tongue should confess. All the universe is called to confess him as Lord, and thus glorify God. All will yet confess him, either in joy or shame. [Johnson, Barton W. "Commentary on Philippians 2". "People's New Testament". 1891.]

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION - BOTH TRUE AND FALSE - AT WWW.JW.ORG

iris89 · 6/08/2021 1:45 pm

COMBINATION OF THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND THE RARE FRUIT TREES AND VEGETABLES - the Matico With the Scripture of the Day first.

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [359B]

Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you; 7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, 8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: 9 Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; 10 When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day. 2 Thessalonians 1:6 – 10, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

Yes, we should seek peace and pursue, and not seek vengeance per Romans 12:19, [AV] “Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.” Vengence belongs to Almighty God (YHWH) per Hebrews 10:30, “For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.” And as noted by Romans 1:18, [AV] “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;” God’s displeasure will be directed against those not living righteous lives per Romans 2:8, [AV] “But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,” If we be genuine followers of the Prince of Peace, Jesus (Yeshua), we will per Romans 8:17, [AV] “And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint–heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.”

[2] Hi Everyone: the Matico

Here is a Commentary on Bountiful Trees and Vegetables God (YHWH) has provided for mankind, specifically the Matico (Piper aduncum) is a flowering plant in the family Piperaceae. Like many species in the family, the Matico tree has a peppery odor.

The fruits are used as a condiment and for flavoring cocoa.[3] It is sometimes used as a substitute for long pepper.

Traditional medicine
In the Amazon Rainforest, many of the native tribes use matico leaves as an antiseptic. In Peru, it was used for stopping hemorrhages and treating ulcers, and in European practice in the treatment of diseases of the genitals and urinary organs, such as those for which cubeb was often prescribed.[4]

Characteristics
Matico is a tropical, evergreen, shrubby tree that grows to the height of 6 to 7 meter (20 to 23 ft) with lance-shaped leaves that are 12 to 20 centimeter (5 to 8 in) long. It is native to Southern Mexico, the Caribbean, and much of tropical South America. It is grown in tropical Asia, Polynesia, and Melanesia and can even be found in Florida, Hawaii, and Puerto Rico. In some countries Matico is considered as an invasive weed.[2] In parts of New Guinea, although Matico is notorious for drying out the soil in the areas where it is invasive, the wood of this plant is nonetheless used by local residents for a myriad of uses such as for fuel and fence posts.[5]

Etymology
According to legends, the plant was discovered by a wounded Spanish soldier named Matico.[2] He learned, presumably from the local tribes, that applying the leaves to his wounds stopped bleeding, and it began to be called "Matico" or "soldier's herb". It was introduced into the profession of medicine in the United States and Europe by a Liverpool physician in 1839 as a styptic and astringent for wounds.[2]

Notes
1. ^ Barlow, Prof. Snow (2003). "Sorting Piper names". University of Melbourne. Retrieved 2007-03-29.
2. ^ a b c d Taylor, Dr. Leslie (2006). "Technical Data Report for Matico (Piper aduncum, angustifolium)" (PDF). Raintree Nutrition, Inc. Retrieved 2007-03-29.
3. ^ Seidemann, Johannes (2005). World Spice Plants: Economic Usage, Botany, Taxonomy. Springer. p. 289. ISBN 3-540-22279-0.
4. ^ Remington, Joseph P. (Ed); Horatio C. Wood (1918). "The Dispensatory of the United States of America". Retrieved 2007-03-29.
5. ^ Siges, T.; A.E. Hartemink, P. Hebinck & B.J. Allen (2005). "The invasive shrub Piper aduncum and rural livelihoods in the Finschhafen area of Papua New Guinea". Human Ecology 33 (6): 875–893. doi:10.1007/s10745-005-8214-7. Retrieved 2007-04-16. (source - retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piper_aduncum on 3/25/2013)

In Genesis 1:11-13, "And God said, Let the earth put forth grass, herbs yielding seed, and fruit-trees bearing fruit after their kind, wherein is the seed thereof, upon the earth: and it was so. 12 And the earth brought forth grass, herbs yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit, wherein is the seed thereof, after their kind: and God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening and there was morning, a third day. (American Standard Version, ASV)[for more details, go to www.jw.org].

Pictures of this plant and its fruit can be viewed at, http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=Piper+aduncum+Matico&qpvt=Piper+aduncum+Matico&FORM=IGRE

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION (BOTH TRUE AND FALSE) GO TO WWW.JW.ORG

iris89 · 6/09/2021 12:40 pm

COMBINATION OF [1] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] INTENTIONALLY CORRUPTED BIBLE TRANSLATIONS BY BELIEVERS IN FALSE GODS:

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [360B]

And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, 7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters. Revelation 14:8 – 7, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

This scripture shows the conditions that will exist at the culmination of the end times, and Revelation 8:13, [AV] “And I beheld, and heard an angel flying through the midst of heaven, saying with a loud voice, Woe, woe, woe, to the inhabiters of the earth by reason of the other voices of the trumpet of the three angels, which are yet to sound!” gives additional detail. But this shall not occur until per Matthew 24:14, takes place, [AV] “And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.” And as Acts 1:8, shows, [AV] “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.”

[2] INTENTIONALLY CORRUPTED BIBLE TRANSLATIONS BY BELIEVERS IN FALSE GODS:

INTRODUCTIONS:

For many years some translators have left the true God (YHWH) out of their translations and/or used it only minimally in keeping with a Jewish superstition that it was to 'Holy' to pronounce and might be used in vain. Now insincere translators and/or their staff have gone a major step further is some cases. Translators and/or their staff that believe in false gods and/or goddesses have now started replacing the true God (YHWH) of Abraham's name with that of some local deity. Unbelievable but true. Should we be surprised at this wicked act by some insincere translators and/or their staff? No, as 2 Corinthians 4:4, "in whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not dawn upon them." (American Standard Version; ASV).

EXAMPLES OF INTENTIONAL CORRUPTIONS BY BELIEVERS IN FALSE DEITIES:

Here are some actual examples of the false mythical local gods of Satan the Devil actually being substituted for the name of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham in some Bibles by insincere translators and/or their staff to usurp his position and give deference to local deities - false puppet gods of the ruler of this system per Ephesians 2:2, "wherein ye once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the powers of the air, of the spirit that now worketh in the sons of disobedience;" (ASV). These wicked ones of course have not given attention to Ephesians 2:2, just quoted; nor to John 14:30, "I will no more speak much with you, for the prince of the world cometh: and he hath nothing in me;" (ASV); nor John 16:11, "of judgment, because the prince [Satan the Devil] of this world hath been judged." (ASV).

A translation, the Chickewa Bible - 'Buku Loyera' - used in Malawi, Mozambique, and Zambia, renders the Tetragrammation (YHWH) - the name of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham's as "Chauta," the name of a tribal god meaning 'Great One of the Bow.' But the wicked translators of this version claim to be worshipping true God (YHWH) of Abraham when they are not. Their justification for using "chauta" is the fact that most local people use this term to mean god, but in fact this is wrong as there is actually another term for god strictly as a title. Also, they could have and should have used the Tetragrammation (YHWH) - the name of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham.

One notable intentional corruption of one version of the Bible, The Authentic New Testament by Hugh J. Schonfield occurred because an evil member of his staff substituted the name of an Arabian tribal mythical Moon god, "Allah," in place of the name of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham by one of his staff who was a member of Islam. However, proofreaders quickly caught this and later editions of this Bible, The Authentic New Testament by Hugh J. Schonfield (Sd) have no such ungodly error. Unfortunately, 'game play' by evil ones such as that just mentioned occur from time to time.

Of course intentional evil corruption's with respect the name of the true God (YHWH) of Abraham are not the only intentional corruption's that occur. One African translation, for example, refers to the Apostle Luke as a witch doctor. And the 'Tuvaluan Bible takes evil liberties with Jude 23, saying, "Show intense love for sodomites: just be careful you are not affected by their sodomy." However, the original text of Jude 23, "and some save, snatching them out of the fire; and on some have mercy with fear; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh." (ASV) never even mention sodomites nor sodomy; whereas, sodomy is condemned at Romans 1:24-29, "Wherefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts unto uncleanness, that their bodies should be dishonored among themselves: 25 for that they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. 26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile passions: for their women changed the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another, men with men working unseemliness, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was due. 28 And even as they refused to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up unto a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not fitting; 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity; whisperers," (ASV). Now let's look at the reality with respect false gods and goddesses.

FALSE GODS, OF COURSE, ARE NOTHING BUT FIGMENTS OF THE IMAGINATION

There exist many false gods which are figments of the imagination and some of these such as Molech, Ashtoreth, Baal, Dagon Merodach, Zeus, Hermes, Artemis, etc. are mentioned in the Bible. Let's look at a few instances, Leviticus 18:21, "And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD." (AV); Judges 2:13, "And they forsook the LORD, and served Baal and Ashtaroth." (AV); Judges 16:23, "Then the lords of the Philistines gathered them together for to offer a great sacrifice unto Dagon their god, and to rejoice: for they said, Our god hath delivered Samson our enemy into our hand." (AV); Jeremiah 50:2, "Declare ye among the nations, and publish, and set up a standard; publish, and conceal not: say, Babylon is taken, Bel is confounded, Merodach is broken in pieces; her idols are confounded, her images are broken in pieces." (AV); Acts 14:12, "And they called Barnabas, Jupiter; and Paul, Mercurius, because he was the chief speaker." (AV). Some of these gods exist until today, usually under new names.

The old middle eastern Moon god who has gone by many names is still well venerated. This is shown by "The Archeology of The Middle East" which states, "The religion of Islam has as its focus of worship a deity by the name of "Allah." The Muslims claim that Allah in pre-Islamic times was the biblical God of the Patriarchs, prophets, and apostles. The issue is thus one of continuity. Was "Allah" the biblical God or a pagan god in Arabia during pre-Islamic times? The Muslim's claim of continuity is essential to their attempt to convert Jews and Christians for if "Allah" is part of the flow of divine revelation in Scripture, then it is the next step in biblical religion. Thus we should all become Muslims. But, on the other hand, if Allah was a pre-Islamic pagan deity, then its core claim is refuted. Religious claims often fall before the results of hard sciences such as archeology. We can endlessly speculate about the past or go and dig it up and see what the evidence reveals. This is the only way to find out the truth concerning the origins of Allah. As we shall see, the hard evidence demonstrates that the god Allah was a pagan deity. In fact, he was the Moon-god who was married to the sun goddess and the stars were his daughters.

Archaeologists have uncovered temples to the Moon-god throughout the Middle East. From the mountains of Turkey to the banks of the Nile, the most wide-spread religion of the ancient world was the worship of the Moon-god. In the first literate civilization, the Sumerians have left us thousands of clay tablets in which they described their religious beliefs. As demonstrated by Sjoberg and Hall, the ancient Sumerians worshipped a Moon-god who was called many different names. The most popular names were Nanna, Suen and Asimbabbar. His symbol was the crescent moon. Given the amount of artifacts concerning the worship of this Moon-god, it is clear that this was the dominant religion in Sumeria. The cult of the Moon-god was the most popular religion throughout ancient Mesopotamia. The Assyrians, Babylonians, and the Akkadians took the word Suen and transformed it into the word Sin as their favorite name for the Moon-god. As Prof. Potts pointed out, "Sin is a name essentially Sumerian in origin which had been borrowed by the Semites." [source - The Archeology of the Middle East]"[additional references - "South Arabia's stellar religion has always been dominated by the Moon-god in various variations" (Berta Segall, The Iconography of Cosmic Kingship, the Art Bulletin, vol.xxxviii, 1956, p.77).; Isaac Rabinowitz, Aramaic Inscriptions of the Fifth Century, JNES, XV, 1956, pp.1-9; Edward Linski, The Goddess Atirat in Ancient Arabia, in Babylon and in Ugarit: Her Relation to the Moon-god and the Sun-goddess, Orientalia Lovaniensia Periodica, 3:101-9; H.J.Drivers, Iconography and Character of the Arab Goddess Allat, found in Études Preliminaries Aux Religions Orientales Dans L'Empire Roman, ed. Maarten J. Verseren, Leiden, Brill, 1978, pp.331-51); Richard Le Baron Bower Jr. and Frank P. Albright, Archaeological Discoveries in South Arabia, Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press, 1958, p.78ff; Ray Cleveland, An Ancient South Arabian Necropolis, Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press, 1965; Nelson Gleuck, Deities and Dolphins, New York, Farrar, Strauss and Giroux, 1965).; Another Aramaic Record of the North Arabian goddess Han'Llat, JNES, XVIII, 1959, pp.154-55.

All these mythical gods are not merely inferior to Almighty God (YHWH). In most cases they are nenexistent - strictly figments of human imagination. The Bible refers to these gods at Deuteronomy 4:28, " And there ye shall serve gods, the work of men's hands, wood and stone, which neither see, nor hear, nor eat, nor smell." (AV). The Bible clearly teaches that God (YHWH) is the only true God (YHWH).

Therefore it is no wonder that the scriptures sternely warn against worshipping any other deith other than Almighty God (YHWH) Exodus 20:3, the first of the Ten Commandments states, " Thou shalt have no other gods before me." (AV), and the second of the Ten Commandments states, " Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:" (AV).

CONCLUSION:

As can be seen from the foregoing, evil and wicked ones have intentionally tried to corrupt some Bible translations. This is being done by evil translators or in some cases by wicked members of their staff in order to try and justify the worship of false gods and/or to make wicked practices such as sodomy seem acceptable to the true God (YHWH) of Abraham when it is NOT. All must be on guard and not let themselves be tricked by these evil machinations being directed by none other than Satan the Devil.

Let's remember, to venerate a god that does not even exist is a great insult to the Creator (YHWH), and worshippers of false gods are described at Romans 1:25, "for that they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.." (ASV).

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION - BOTH TRUE AND FALSE - AT WWW.JW.ORG

iris89 · 6/11/2021 8:43 am

COMBINATION OF [1] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] COMMON SENSE ON THE SON OF GOD NOT BEING GOD (YHWH)

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [361B]

Hear the word of the LORD, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrah. 11 To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats. 12 When ye come to appear before me, who hath required this at your hand, to tread my courts? 13 Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting. 14 Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth: they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them. 15 And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your hands are full of blood. Isaiah 1:10 – 15, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

All of these offerings and sacrifices were required by the Old Law Covenant, but the people were carrying them out in a very disrespectful way. They were giving reverence to false gods and idols, and not Almighty God (YHWH). This greatly displeased the true God as shown by Amos 5:21 – 27, [AV] “I hate, I despise your feast days, and I will not smell in your solemn assemblies. 22 Though ye offer me burnt offerings and your meat offerings, I will not accept them: neither will I regard the peace offerings of your fat beasts. 23 Take thou away from me the noise of thy songs; for I will not hear the melody of thy viols. 24 But let judgment run down as waters, and righteousness as a mighty stream. 25 Have ye offered unto me sacrifices and offerings in the wilderness forty years, O house of Israel? 26 But ye have borne the tabernacle of your Moloch and Chiun your images, the star of your god, which ye made to yourselves. 27 Therefore will I cause you to go into captivity beyond Damascus, saith the LORD, whose name is The God of hosts.” As the prophet Isaiah wrote under inspiration at Isaiah 43:24, [AV] “Thou hast bought me no sweet cane with money, neither hast thou filled me with the fat of thy sacrifices: but thou hast made me to serve with thy sins, thou hast wearied me with thine iniquities.” And Malachi 2:17, [AV] “Ye have wearied the LORD with your words. Yet ye say, Wherein have we wearied him? When ye say, Every one that doeth evil is good in the sight of the LORD, and he delighteth in them; or, Where is the God of judgment?” These ancient Israelites had gone astray and were winning God’s displeasure as are many religions that are claiming to follow Him today, but are really worshiping false gods which are puppets of His arc enemy, Satan the Devil.

[2] COMMON SENSE ON THE SON OF GOD NOT BEING GOD (YHWH):

INTRODUCTION:

Many try and claim that Jesus (Yeshua) is God (YHWH), but a son can NOT be his Father as we all know.

First, they wrongly claim that he, the Son of God, Jesus (Yeshua), is part of a Trinity. Yet nowhere does the Bible use the word trinity or triune or words of similar input.

Second, the Bible clearly refers to Jesus (Yeshua) as the Son of God (YHWH)

Matthew 8:29, "And, behold, they cried out, saying, What have we to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God? art thou come hither to torment us before the time?" (Authorized King James Bible; AV).

Matthew 26:63, "But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God." (AV)

Matthew 27:40, "And saying, Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself. If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross." (AV)

Matthew 27:43, "He trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if he will have him: for he said, I am the Son of God." (AV)

Matthew 27:54, "Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God." (AV)

Mark 1:1, "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;" (AV)

Also there are many more scriptures testifying to the fact that Jesus (Yeshua) is the Son of God (YHWH) clearly showing he is NOT his Father, God (YHWH).

Third, some deceived ones refer to biased or bad translations of John 1:1 to try and justify the., spirit beings, the Son and the Father are mentioned. Hence no trinity of any kind. In addition, John 1:2 clearly shows that no duality is being referred to since it says, "The same was in the beginning with God." (AV), and you can NOT be with someone and be that someone as we all know.

Fourth, some attempt to support this false doctrine by saying it existed before an apostate church adopted it at the Council of Nicea of 325 AD to win the good favor of a pagan Roman Emperor, Constantine, a worshipper of the Unconquered Sun who wanted its adoption so as to have religious unity in his empire since the pagans believed in a trinity.

Now let's consider what the trinity false doctrine is.

STANDARD DEFINITION OF THE TRINITY:

The false doctrine of the trinity is defined as follows:

The Trinitarian dogma, The Cyclopoedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, New York 1871, by John M'Clintock and James Strong, Vol. II, page 560-561, states, "We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance. For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is all one: the glory equal, the majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost.....The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal...So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Ghost almighty...So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet there are not three Gods, but one God...The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone; not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding...And in this Trinity none is afore or after other; none is greater or less than another. But the whole three persons are coeternal together, and coequal. So that in all things, as is afore said, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped. He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity." [this is the Athanasian Creed quoted in the above mentioned Cyclopoedia].

From this definition, we can see the false doctrine of the Trinity consist of a claimed three persons who are "coeternal together, and coequal." If these conditions do NOT EXIST, there can be NO trinity.

JESUS AS THE SON OF GOD (YHWH):

The Bible clearly states that Jesus (Yeshua) is the Son of God (YHWH). Now let's look at the facts from the Bible:

1 John 4:15, "Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God." (AV)

1 John 5:5, "Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?" (AV)

1 John 5:10, "He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son." (AV)

1 John 5:12, "He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life." (AV)

1 John 5:13, "These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God." (AV)

1 John 5:20, "And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life." (AV)

Now we noted in all the above Scriptures it calls Jesus Christ (Yeshua) the Son of God; interesting since if the Trinity was true, it would read God the Son instead of the Son of God. Since it reads the same in every translation I know of except one "feminists" biased Bible, where it reads Daughter of God which I am sure none of you would agree with. Therefore, it is self evident that Jesus is God's (YHWH) son and not God the Son as would be technically necessary for the trinity to be true.

Also, The Bible clearly shows that Jesus (Yeshua), the Son of God (YHWH), could not be co-eternal with his Father, God (YHWH) since God (YHWH) had to give him life as clearly shown by John 5:26, "For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;" (AV).

In addition, Jesus (Yeshua), himself, testified to the fact that he lives because of his Father, God (Yeshua) at John 6:57, "As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me." (AV). And Jesus (Yeshua), himself, testified that he is NOT co-equal with his Father, God (YHWH) at John 14:28, "Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I." (AV) and we well know that Jesus (Yeshua) does not lie.

In fact, just before his execution, Jesus (Yeshua), the Son of God (YHWH) even prayed to his Father, God (YHWH) to have the glory he had along side his Father, God (YHWH) before he was born on earth at John 17:5, "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." (AV); and this is in harmony with John 6:62, "What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" (AV); and why he could say that he existed before Abraham at John 8:58, "Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am." (AV) as he had existed for untold eons in heaven along side his Father, God (YHWH), after his Father, God (YHWH) had created him as the first or beginning of creation per Revelations 3:14, "And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God:" (AV).

So, it is clear from the Bible that Jesus (Yeshua) is neither co-eternal with his Father, God (YHWH) who always existed and had no beginning; nor co-equal as testified to by Jesus (Yeshua) himself.

JOHN 1:1 IS NO SUPPORT FOR THE TRINITY:

Many try and support the trinity based on the standard biased/bad translational construct of same, but on close examination even the bad translation of this scripture does NOT support the trinity. Now let's look at the scripture in context in the Authorized King James Bible at John 1:1-4, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.[Now note it says the Word was with God, then it says the Word was God. Of course both can NOT be true as one can NOT be with someone and be that someone so it is quite obvious we have a mistake in grammar/translation here, so let's look at the next scripture, John 1:2 for clarification.], 2 The same was in the beginning with God. [This scripture helps clarify what John intended when he wrote the scripture in that it clearly shows that the Word, Jesus (Yeshua) was with God (YHWH), and was NOT God (YHWH). The next scripture clearly shows that God (YHWH) used Jesus (Yeshua) as his Master Worker with respect to creation after he, God (YHWH) created him which is brought out at Proverbs 8:30-31, "Then I was by him, as a master workman; And I was daily his delight, Rejoicing always before him, 31 Rejoicing in his habitable earth; And my delight was with the sons of men." (American Standard Version; ASV)], 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

THE TRINITYDID NOT ORIGINATE WITH THE COUNCIL OF NICEA OF 325 AD:

The doctrine of the trinity existed for eons before the Council of Nicea of 325 AD. It was a standard false doctrine of the pagans (heathens). Let's look at the facts:

"To understand how the Trinity wormed its way into so called Christianity we need to know the political and social climate of the first three centuries after the passing of Jesus (Yeshua) and his apostles, and why true faith deteriorated into compromise; and then total acceptance by the mainstream so called Christian groups, not withstanding its violation of the Word of God, the Holy Bible. Now let's look at that period and try an insert ourselves mentally into it.

In the early church the apostles needed to refute another rising belief system gnosticism. It considered matter to be evil and sought salvation through knowledge. Gnosticism also focused on the "mysteries" meant only for the intellectuals to understand. Christ, the gnostics said, entered Jesus at baptism and left just before he died on the cross. The Apostle John particularly addressed this budding heresy: "Many false prophets, have gone forth into the world, You gain knowledge of the inspired expression from God by this: Every inspired expression that confesses Jesus Christ as having come in the flesh originates with God, but every inspired expression that does not confess Jesus does not originate with God. Furthermore, this is the anti-christ's [inspired expression] which you have heard was coming, and now it is already in the world." (*25). Jesus' humanity was repulsive to gnostics. After the Apostles died, Christians responded to gnosticism by claiming not only did Jesus Christ come in the flesh as the Son of God.

By the third and fourth centuries, Christians were weary of Pagan persecution. The temptation was to compromise. Besides, the Pagan emperor Constantine needed Christians to salvage his shaky empire. Constantine embraced; howbeit only on his deathbed. However, he saw Christianity as a tool he could use to firm up his shaky empire. To this opportunity for political intrigue, and happy blend of politics and people was the chief triumvirate of Roman gods Jupiter, Juno and Minerva. Jupiter was the principal deity of Roman mythology and Juno was the next highest divinity. Minerva, the "offspring of the brain of Jupiter" was regarded as the "personification of divine thought, the plan of the material universe of which Jupiter was the creator and Juno the representative" (26). Many Pagan ideas, in fact, were incorporated into Christianity. "Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it" (*26).

Roman Emperor Constantine needed to make his subjects feel secure if he were to maintain control of the empire; he wanted to rule a unified empire, be it pagan and/or Christian. But first he would have to find a way to end the dispute over the divinity of Jesus-was he a man or God? So he ordered his Christian bishops to meet at Nicaea in 325 A.D. to settle the matter once and for all. To do this, "he made himself the head of the church, and thus the problems of the church became his responsibilities. As a whole the Western Empire with its Roman influence, with some exceptions, had accepted Tertullian and his new theory of the Trinity in the early part of the previous century, but in the East the church adhered more closely to the older formula of baptism in the name of Jesus, or Jesus the Christ. Especially was this true with the Armenians, who specified that baptism "into the death of Christ" was that which alone was essential (*28) .

Now let's see how Constantine got the Trinity. As previously shown, The Roman Empire at this time was being torn apart by religious differences between pagans, mostly Sun God worshippers, and Christianity. Constantine the Emporer was a worshipper of the Unconquered Sun, but he was a very pragmatic individual and saw the need to bring religious unity to his empire. The central doctrine of the pagans was the dogma of a Trinity that they had received from earlier pagans in Babylon (Chaldea). In this, the pagan Emperor, Constantine, saw a possibility for unifying his empire if he could only lead the majority of the Christians to accept a Trinity or a Duality. He knew however that he had to make them think it was their own idea. To this end, he, the Roman emperor Constantine summoned all bishops to Nicaea, about 300, but even though it was the emperor's direction, only a fraction actually attended.

This council went on for a very long time and the emperor worked behind the scene to get support for a Trinity or a Duality. This effort was not completely successful, but finally he got a majority and declared under imperial degree
that this hence forth would be the central doctrinal pillar of the Christian church, which by this time was apostate. Even with this declaration by the emperor himself not all bishops signed the creed. (*29).

So is was the political product of an apostate church, an apostate church that allowed a pagan Roman Emporer, Constantine, to tell it which dogma to accept at the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D., and then have it rammed down their throats as blessed dogma by another Roman Emporer, Theodosius, at the Council of Constantinople in 381 A.D. This in direct violation of God's (YHWH's) word found in the Bible " Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." (James 4:4 AV), " 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." (John 15:19 AV).
Their solution was to create a creed making it illegal for anyone to believe Jesus was not the same as God by inventing the notion of a Trinity. This intellectual tower remained in full force for well over a thousand years, until the Reformation. (*29).

Contrary to popular belief, it was not Constantine's fourth century Council of Nicea in A.D. 325 that formalized the "Doctrine of the Trinity." The Athanasian Creed in the fifth century finally included the three, "the godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost...the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal So likewise the Father is God, the Son is God and the Holy Ghost is God; and yet they are not three Gods, but one God." Furthermore, this creed added that belief in the trinity "is necessary to everlasting salvation." Strong belief led to action. "Probably more Christians were slaughtered by Christians in these two years ([A.D.]342-3) than by all the persecutions of Christians by pagans in the history of Rome." (*30).

The fact is Christianity never conquered paganism--paganism conquered Christianity. (*31).

References:
*25 - New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, 1984 revision, (pages 1517 and 1519, 1 John 7; also 1 John 4:1-3).
*26 - McClintock & Strong's Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, Vol. 6
*27 - Lamson, Newton & Durant, Will, "Caesar and Christ," cited from Charles Redeker Caesar and Christ, W. Duran (page 595).
*28 - ENCYLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, 11th Edition, Vol. 3, (page 366).
*29 - Payne, Robert, "The Holy Fire: The Story of the Early Centuries of the Christian Churches in the Near East" (1957); BETHUNE-BAKER, J,F. "An Introduction to the Early History of Christian Doctrine". Methuen; 5th Ed., 1933 and ENCYLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, 11th Edition, Vol. 3, (page 366); David, Francis and Blandrata, Georgio, "De falsa et vera unius Dei Patris, Filii, et Spiritus Sancti cognitone" [Latin](The False and True Knowledge of the Unity of God the Father, Son, and Holy spirit), 1566 A.D.; Eklof, Todd F., "David's Francis Tower, Strength through Peace," (06-16-02); The New Encyclopedia Britannica: " Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126. (1976); Parkes, James, "The Foundation of Judaism and Christianity," 1960; Durant, Will. "Caesar and Christ." New York: Simon. 1944. Vol. 3 of The Story of Civilization. 11 vols. 1935-75.
*30 - Durant, Will, "Age of Faith,"
*31 - Jonas, Hans, "The Gnostic religion: the message of the alien God and the beginnings of Christianity," 2nd ed., 1963."
[source - Discourse on Mainstream Religion by Iris the Preacher 2003]
[[can be read in its entirety at, http://preacher.proboards7.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=views&thread=1146761205&page=1 ]]

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION - BOTH TRUE AND FALSE - AT WWW.JW.ORG

iris89 · 6/12/2021 12:04 pm

COMBINATION OF [1] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] THE GOSPEL OF JUDAS IS NOT AN INSPIRED WRITING:

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [362B]

The word of the LORD came again unto me, saying, 16 Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions: 17 And join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand. Ezekiel 37:15 – 17, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

This may seem strange and cause individuals to ask what is the meaning of joining together of the two sticks. Actually this was a message of hope given to the Prophet Ezekiel to let him know that the unification of Israel at that time was to take place where Israel was being restored to Israel. To understand this message, we must understand what the two sticks signified and what Ezekiel wrote on them. On one he wrote, “For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions,” and on the other, “For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions.” The symbolic significance of joining the two sticks together symbolized the coming together once more of the ancient nation of Israel.

[2] THE GOSPEL OF JUDAS IS NOT AN INSPIRED WRITING:

The Gospel of Judas is NOT an Inspired Writing of the Bible. Let's look at the facts with respect Aprocypha Books such as the Gospel of Judas.

THE APROCYPHA 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 Barnabas, 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 none 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.

THE EXTERNAL BOOKS QUOTED IN THE BIBLE:

There are many external books quoted by inspired Bible writers as references. Many are, "not aware that the Old Testament authors depended upon other writings as their sources which they freely admit. Among these are: the Book of the Wars of Yahweh (Num. 21:14), the Book of the Jashar (Josh 10:13; 2 Sam. 1:18), the Book of the Acts of Solomon (1 Ki 14:19; 2 Chr 33:18), the Book of the Annals of the Kings of Judah (1 Ki 14:29, 15:7), the Annals of Samuel the Seer (1 Chr 29:29), the History of Nathan the Prophet (2 Chr 9:29), the Annals of Shemaiah the Prophet and Iddo the Seer (2 Chr. 12:15), the Annals of Jehu the Son of Hanani (2 Chr. 20:34), and others. Some teach that Moses compiled the Book of Genesis from other writings that surely had to have been handed down and preserved by his forefathers. Genesis can be broken down into eleven separate history books, each being separated by colophons at the conclusion of the books. This is known to have been a popular style for such ancient writings. ...According to this theory we have eleven separate books having the following authors: Adam, Noah, and eight other authors which Moses merely compiled into one book. [source= Ronald G. Fanter Cutting Edge Ministries].

One of these books is still existent today, the Book of Jashar or as it is sometimes called the Book of the Just, and another, the Book of the Wars of Yahweh, is actually thought my most scholars to actually be the Book of Jashar. The Book of Jashar is quite interesting, but one must be careful in obtaining a copy as there are counterfeit books masquerading as the Book of Jashar which are not. Also, there is a counterfeit Book of the Wars of Yahweh which is of course a fake since as previously said, this book is thought to just be another name for the Book of Jashar.

THE 4 BOOKS OF MACCABEES:

This is by far the strangest case of all. The 4 Books of Maccabees are ranked by many as part of the Apocrypha; however, they should be ranked as history books of the 1 st. and 2 nd. Century roughly before the incarnation of our leader and savior, Jesus (Yeshua) Christ. Very strange is the fact that the Catholic church accepted only two of them into their Canon of Bible Books; whereas, there are four of them. The Greek Orthodox, however, accepted three of them, and only the Cathars accepted the fourth. Strange to say the least, but none should have been accepted as canonical as they are history books, and one would NOT THINK of accepting H. G. Wells, 'Outline of History," into the Bible cannon; we are getting into the absurd. However, they make excellent reading as history books that fill in the history of these two centuries.

WHAT IS AN INSPIRED BOOK?

First, 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.

Second, 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.

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION - BOTH TRUE AND FALSE - AT WWW.JW.ORG

iris89 · 6/14/2021 1:43 pm

COMBINATION OF [1] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] JESUS (YESHUA) CAME FROM WHERE?

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [363B]

Many are the afflictions of the righteous: but the LORD delivereth him out of them all. Psalms 34:19, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

A warning is given to the wicked to leave alone the righteous at Proverbs 24:15, [AV] “Lay not wait, O wicked man, against the dwelling of the righteous; spoil not his resting place:” We must remain in the faith and encourage others to do the same as shown at Acts 14:22, [AV] “Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.”
And all that lead righteous lives will receive persecution just as Jesus (Yeshua) did as told at 2 Timothy 3:12, [AV] “Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.” But we will not suffer more persecution than we can endure per 1 Corinthians 10:13, [AV] “There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.”

[2] JESUS (YESHUA) CAME FROM WHERE?

INTRODUCTION:

Many wonder from where came Jesus (Yeshua), but the Bible provides the answer which is that Jesus (Yeshua) lived in heaven before he came to earth. The prophet Micah prophesied that he would be born on earth in the small town of Bethlehem, and also that his origin was from long ago at Micah 5:2, "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." (Authorized King James Bible; AV). In fact, Jesus (Yeshua) said at John 3:13, "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven." (AV); and John 6:38, "For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me." (AV); and John 6:62, "What and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?" (AV); and John 17:4-5, "have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do. 5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was." (AV). Let's face it, as the first created spirit creature in heaven, Jesus (Yeshua) had a special relationship with Almighty God (YHWH).

JESUS IS THE ONLY BEGOTTEN SON OF ALMIGHTY GOD (yhwh):

Jesus (Yeshua) is Almighty God's (YHWH's) most precious Son, and for good reason. He is called the first born because he was the first of the creation of Almighty God (YHWH) as shown by Colossians 1:15, "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:" (AV); and Revelation 3:14, "And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;" (AV). Now why is this Son so special to Almighty God (YHWH)? Let's see what John 3:16 says, "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (AV) which shows he is the first or only begotten Son. This makes him the only one directly created by God (YHWH). Also, he is the only one Almighty God (YHWH) used to assist him in creation as a master worker as shown by Colossians 1:16, "For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:" (AV), and he is called the 'Logos' or Word as Almighty God (YHWH) used him as his spokesman to deliver Messages and instructions per John 1:14, "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." (AV) to the Father's, Almighty God's (YHWH's) other sons, both spirit and human.

JESUS NOT EQUAL TO ALMIGHTY GOD (YHWH):

Some wrongly claim that Jesus (Yeshua) is equal to his Father, Almighty God (YHWH), but let's look at the facts. Jesus (Yeshua) was the first created being as previously shown; therefore he had a beginning, whereas Almighty God (YHWH) had no beginning. In fact, Jesus (Yeshua), the only-begotten Son never ever considered himself equal to his Father, and when tempted by the Devil, he clearly said at Matthew 4:9-10, "And saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me. 10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." (AV). Here he showed that his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) is greater than himself and testified to that fact at John 14:28, "Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I." (AV); and 1 Corinthians 11:3, "But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." (AV); and as Genesis 17:1 says, "And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect." (AV).

FACTS ON THE FATHER (YHWH); THE SON, JESUS (YESHUA); AND THE HOLY SPIRIT:

Some believe that Almighty God (YHWH) consist of three persons - the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. These three are said to be equal in power and co-eternal. They call this imaginary combination the Trinity or triune god, but neither the word Trinity or triune appear anywhere in the scriptures, nor is the idea found there.

These misguided ones point to the biased translation of John 1:1 in many Bibles that reads, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." (AV), and overlook what is said at John 1:2, "The same was in the beginning with God." (AV) and John 1:14 where Jesus (Yeshua) is clearly shown to be the Word, "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." (AV). Now since the Word is called god, some conclude that the Son and the Father must be part of the same God, but is this so?

First, let's bear in mind that this part of the Bible was originally written in Koine Greek, and that a number of translations did not use the phrase "the Word was God." Why not? Based on their knowledge of Koine Greek, these translators concluded that the phase should be translated differently such as "and a god was the Logos." [example of Bible using, Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Jurgen Becker Harwood, 1979], "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], "the nature of the Word was the same as the nature of God" [example of Bible using, Schonfield, 1976], "and the Word was divine" [example of Bible using, The Bible: An American Translation, by J.M.P. Smith and E.J. Goodspeed.], etc. So according to these and other translations the Word is NOT Almighty God (YHWH) himself. Of course the Word is referred to as "a god," where the term "god" means "mighty one," and Greek Scholar Jason BeDuhn from the Northern Arizona University has to say: "The Greek phrase is theos en ho logos, which translated word for word is "a god was the word." Some translators so translate such as : "and the Word was a God." [The New Testament, by James L. Tomanek], etc.

Now let's look at the subject from logic and grammar and see reality. First consider what the Apostle John writes at John 1:18, "No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." (AV), yet we know that many humans saw Jesus the Son of God (YHWH) so if Jesus (Yeshua) were Almighty God (YHWH) this scripture would NOT be true. Clearly Jesus (Yeshua) lived among us as testified to at John 1:14, "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." (AV).

Now at John 1:2, John clearly writes, "The same was in the beginning with God." And we well know that someone can NOT be with someone and be that person also, and Jesus (Yeshua) himself clearly testifies to this distinction at John 17:3, "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." (AV). And John sums up the matter at John 20:31, "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name." (AV). Now, notice, that Jesus (Yeshua) is called, not God (YHWH), but the Son of God (YHWH). So clearly this additional information provided in the Gospel of John shows that John 1:1 should be understood that Jesus (Yeshua), the Word, is "a god" in the sense that he has a high position in heaven and now sits at the right hand of his Father, Almighty God (YHWH), see Hebrews 10:12, "But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;" (AV); and is also shown as standing at the right hand of his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) at Acts 7:55, " 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," (AV); and Romans 8:34, " Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us." (AV).

Now the Apostle Matthew showed at Matthew 24:36, "But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only." (AV). This scripture is just another confirmation that Jesus (Yeshua) is NOT his Father, Almighty God (YHWH); how so? Jesus (Yeshua) here testifies that his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) knows more than himself; now if they were one and the same, he would know the same facts as his Father. Therefore since he does not, he cannot be equal. Of course some will say that 'Jesus had two natures, and here he speaks as a man. But even if this were so, then what about the Holy Spirit? If it is part of the same God as the Father, almighty God (YHWH), why does Jesus (Yeshua) not say that it knows what the Father knows?

FATHER AND SON HAVE A CLOSE RELATIONSHIP:

Almighty God (YHWH) and his only begotten or firstborn Son, Jesus (Yeshua) enjoy a close relationship for eons in heaven before the creation of earth. This is shown at John 3:35, "The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand." (AV) and John 14:31, "But that the world may know that I love the Father; and as the Father gave me commandment, even so I do. Arise, let us go hence." (AV).

This beloved Son, Jesus (Yeshua) was of course much like his Father, and that is why Colossians 1:15, "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:" (AV). Jesus (Yeshua), even as a human, closely resembled his Father, Almighty God (YHWH) in many ways, in that he reflected his Father's qualities and personality.

He was a very obedient Son who willingly left heaven and came down to earth to live as a human being. Now you may wonder how it was possible for a spirit creature to be born as a human. This was accomplished per Luke 1:30-35 as follows, "And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. 31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. 32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: 33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. 34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? 35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." (AV); to wit, his life force was transferred to the womb of a Jewish virgin named Mary, thus she gave birth to a perfect son and named him Jesus (Yeshua).

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION - BOTH TRUE AND FALSE - AT WWW.JW.ORG

iris89 · 6/18/2021 10:04 pm

COMBINATION OF THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND THE RARE FRUIT TREES AND VEGETABLES - Medicago lupulina With the Scripture of the Day first.

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [364B]

Blessed is the man whom thou chastenest, O LORD, and teachest him out of thy law; 13 That thou mayest give him rest from the days of adversity, until the pit be digged for the wicked. Psalms 94:12 – 13, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

It is important to learn Almighty God’s (YHWH’s) statues as testified to by Psalms 119:71 – 72, [AV] “It is good for me that I have been afflicted; that I might learn thy statutes. 72 The law of thy mouth is better unto me than thousands of gold and silver.” If we are counted as among the righteous ones loved by God, He will per Hebrews 12:6 - 7, [AV] “For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. 7 If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?” And Isaiah 54:13, [AV] says, “And all thy children shall be taught of the LORD; and great shall be the peace of thy children.” Always remember that, 2 Peter 2:9, [AV] “The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished:”

[2] THE RARE FRUIT TREES AND VEGETABLES - Medicago lupulina

Here is a Commentary on Bountiful Trees and Vegetables God (YHWH) has provided for mankind, specifically Medicago lupulina, Black Medick

Scientific Name(s): Medicago lupulina
Abundance: plentiful
What: seeds
How: raw or roasted, ground into flour
Where: sunny fields, lawns, and neglected areas
When: late winter through summer
Nutritional Value: starch

Black medick is often mistaken for clover but these leaves are coarse, rough-edged and grow off prostate runners all branching out from a central taproot. The edible seeds grow one per seedpod and can be eaten raw or roasted then grown into flower once they turn black.

Being mostly starch, it should be possible to use Black Medic to produce alcohol. The starch must be broken down into simple sugars for the yeast. The easiest way to do this to combine the crushed seeds with the amylase enzymes found in saliva…in other words, the traditional “spit beer” made by many primitive cultures where a starchy material is chewed and then spit into a large pot to ferment for several days to produce a weak alcoholic drink. Luckily, high concentrations of the necessary enzyme are also found the sprouts of barley and other grains, which can be bought from brewer supply stores.

Black medick forms a symbiotic partnership with rhizobium bacteria which allows it to turn atmospheric nitrogen gas into a form usable by plants. This makes it a beneficial plant to let grow in your garden as it fertilizes nearby plants with this nitrogen.
Labels: Plentiful, Raw, Spring, Summer, Sunny, Weed, Winter, Yards,Yellow Flower
,[source - retrived from http://www.foragingtexas.com/2006/03/black-medic.html on 3/23/2015]

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].

Picture and other information can be viewed at http://www.foragingtexas.com/2006/03/black-medic.html

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION (BOTH TRUE AND FALSE) GO TO WWW.JW.ORG

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!

iris89 · 6/20/2021 6:29 pm

COMBINATION OF [1] THE SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY AND [2] CROSS WORSHIP IS PAGAN AND NOT FOR TRUE CHRISTIANS

[1] SCRIPTURE OF THE DAY [365B]

Fret not thyself because of evil men, neither be thou envious at the wicked; 20 For there shall be no reward to the evil man; the candle of the wicked shall be put out. Proverbs 24:19 – 20, [authorized King James Bible; AV]

We should not be envious of the wicked and their prosperity per Proverbs 23:17 – 18, [AV] “Let not thine heart envy sinners: but be thou in the fear of the LORD all the day long. 18 For surely there is an end; and thine expectation shall not be cut off.” As on Psalmist wrote at Psalms 9:17, [AV] “The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God.” And Psalms 73:27 – 28, [AV] makes the point on the end results of both the wicked and the righteous as follows, “For, lo, they that are far from thee shall perish: thou hast destroyed all them that go a whoring from thee. 28 But it is good for me to draw near to God: I have put my trust in the Lord GOD, that I may declare all thy works.” And the same point is made by Proverbs 13:9, [AV] “The light of the righteous rejoiceth: but the lamp of the wicked shall be put out.”

[2] CROSS WORSHIP IS PAGAN AND NOT FOR TRUE CHRISTIANS

INTRODUCTION:

The Encyclopedia Britannica calle the cross, "the principal symbol of the Christian religion; but genuine (true) Christians do NOT use the cross in worship. Why? First, Jesus (Yeshua) did not die on a cross. Second, the cross is actually a pagan symbol that was NOT used by Christians during the first three centuries of Christianity. This symbol was first brought forth to become a part of Christendom by a pagan Roman Emperor, Constantine, a worshipper of the Unconquered Sun. He did this to further his own political goal of straightening his empire by obtaining religious unity between pagans and Christians by having the Christians go apostate and accept a symbol that would make it easier for pagans to accept so called Christianity. Let's look at the facts.

CONSTANTINE AND HIS CLAIMED VISION OF THE CROSS:

The pagan Roman Emperor, Constantine, a worshipper of the Unconquered Sun, was in a weak position at the beginning of his reign due to his empire being divided religiously between Christians and pagan worshippers of the Unconquered Sun. He knew he had to take action to try and unite his empire religiously if he wanted to strengthen it. The Roman Emperor Constantine needed to make his subjects feel secure if he were to maintain control of the empire; he wanted to rule a unified empire, be it pagan and/or Christian. But first he would have to find a way to end the dispute over the divinity of Jesus-was he a man or God? So he ordered his Christian bishops to meet at Nicaea in 325 A.D. to settle the matter once and for all. To do this, "he made himself the head of the church, and thus the problems of the church became his responsibilities. As a whole the Western Empire with its Roman influence, with some exceptions, had accepted Tertullian and his new theory of the Trinity in the early part of the previous century, but in the East the church adhered more closely to the older formula of baptism in the name of Jesus, or Jesus the Christ. Especially was this true with the Armenians, who specified that baptism "into the death of Christ" was that which alone was essential [reference - ENCYLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, 11th Edition, Vol. 3, (page 366)].

And, By the third and fourth centuries, many Christian bishops were weary of Pagan persecution. The temptation was to compromise. Besides, the Pagan Emperor Constantine needed Christians to salvage his shaky empire. Moreover, he saw Christianity as a tool he could use to firm up his shaky empire. To this opportunity for political intrigue, and happy blend of politics and people was the chief triumvirate of Roman gods Jupiter, Juno and Minerva. Jupiter was the principal deity of Roman mythology and Juno was the next highest divinity. Minerva, the "offspring of the brain of Jupiter" was regarded as the "personification of divine thought, the plan of the material universe of which Jupiter was the creator and Juno the representative" Many Pagan ideas, in fact, were incorporated into Christianity. "Christianity did not destroy paganism; it adopted it" [reference - McClintock & Strong's Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, Vol. 6].

To start to put his plan into motion to unite his empire religiously, he claimed to have seen a Vision of the Cross in a premonition that he had before the battle against Maxentius. According to this premonition, he would have been victorious if he had substituted the imperial eagles on the soldiers' standards with the cross, thus officially recognizing the Christian religion. The view of Rome (on the right in the background) with the reconstruction of its ancient monuments is worth noting.[reference - Encylopedia Britannica].

After his successful battle against Maxentius, he started to put his plan into operation to apostate the Christians to unite his empire religiously. Now let's see how Constantine got the Trinity. As previously mentioned, The Roman Empire at this time was being torn apart by religious differences between pagans, mostly Sun God worshippers, and Christianity. Constantine the Emperor was a worshipper of the Unconquered Sun, but he was a very pragmatic individual and saw the need to bring religious unity to his empire. To this end he wanted a symbol for Christians and false doctrines that the pagans could also accept. In this, the pagan Emperor, Constantine, saw a possibility for unifying his empire if he could only lead the majority of the Christians to accept the pagan symbol of the cross as a Christian symbol and some pagan doctrines he could bring about religious unity. He knew however that he had to make them think it was their own idea. To this end, he, the Roman emperor Constantine, a pagan worshipper of the Unconquered Sun, summoned all bishops to Nicaea, about 300, but even though it was the emperor's direction, only a fraction actually attended.

This council went on for a very long time and the emperor worked behind the scene to get support for the cross as a symbol of Christianity and for the pagan doctrine of the trinity. This effort was not completely successful, but finally he got a majority and declared under imperial degree that this hence forth would be the central doctrinal pillar of the Christian church, which by this time was apostate. Even with this declaration by the emperor himself not all bishops signed the creed.

So is was the political product of an apostate church, an apostate church that allowed a pagan Roman Emporer, Constantine, to tell it which symbols and dogma to accept at the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D., and then have it rammed down their throats as blessed dogma by another Roman Emporer, Theodosius, at the Council of Constantinople in 381 A.D. This in direct violation of God's (YHWH's) word found in the Bible " Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." (James 4:4 AV), " 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." (John 15:19 AV).
Their solution was to create a creed making it illegal for anyone to believe Jesus was not the same as God by inventing the notion of a Trinity. This intellectual tower remained in full force for well over a thousand years, until the Reformation. [references - Payne, Robert, "The Holy Fire: The Story of the Early Centuries of the Christian Churches in the Near East" (1957); BETHUNE-BAKER, J,F. "An Introduction to the Early History of Christian Doctrine". Methuen; 5th Ed., 1933 and ENCYLOPEDIA BRITANNICA, 11th Edition, Vol. 3, (page 366); David, Francis and Blandrata, Georgio, "De falsa et vera unius Dei Patris, Filii, et Spiritus Sancti cognitone" [Latin](The False and True Knowledge of the Unity of God the Father, Son, and Holy spirit), 1566 A.D.; Eklof, Todd F., "David's Francis Tower, Strength through Peace," (06-16-02); The New Encyclopedia Britannica: " Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126. (1976); Parkes, James, "The Foundation of Judaism and Christianity," 1960; Durant, Will. "Caesar and Christ." New York: Simon. 1944. Vol. 3 of The Story of Civilization. 11 vols. 1935-75.]

JESUS (YESHUA) DID NOT DIE ON A CROSS:

In classical Greek the word (stau·ros') is rendered "stake." This denotes an upright stake, or pole, and there is no evidence that the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures used it to designate a stake with a crossbeam. The book The Non-Christian Cross, by John Denham Parsons, states: "There is not a single sentence in any of the numerous writings forming the New Testament, which, in the original Greek, bears even indirect evidence to the effect that the stauros used in the case of Jesus was other than an ordinary stauros; much less to the effect that it consisted, not of one piece of timber, but of two pieces nailed together in the form of a cross. . . . it is not a little misleading upon the part of our teachers to translate the word stauros as 'cross' when rendering the Greek documents of the Church into our native tongue, and to support that action by putting 'cross' in our lexicons as the meaning of stauros without carefully explaining that that was at any rate not the primary meaning of the word in the days of the Apostles, did not become its primary signification till long afterwards, and became so then, if at all, only because, despite the absence of corroborative evidence, it was for some reason or other assumed that the particular stauros upon which Jesus was executed had that particular shape." [source - The Non-Christian Cross by John Denham Parsons, London, 1896, pp. 23, 24.]

The Companion Bible points out 'Stau-ros' never meant two pieces of timber placed across one another at an angle...Ther is nothing in the Greek of the New Testament even to imply two pieces of timber. [reference - The Companion Bible].

Also, in some Bible texts, Bible writers used another word for the instrument of Jesus' death, and that was the Koine Greek word 'xy'lon'. This word was used at Acts 5:30, "The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree." (Authorized King James Bible; AV); and Acts 10:39, "And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree:" (AV); and Galatians 3:13, "Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:" (AV); and 1 Peter 2:24, "Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed." (AV). Thus the word simply means 'timber' or a stick, club, or tree.

The book [in German] "Das Kreuz und die Kreuzigung" [The Cross and the Crucifiction] states, "Trees were not everywhere abailable at the places chosen for public execution; thererfore a simple beam was sunk into the ground. On this the outlaws, with hands raised upward and often also with their feet, were bound or nailed." [source - Das Kreuz und die Kreuzigung [The Cross and the Crucifiction] by Hermann Fulda].

However, the most convincing proof of all comes from the Bible, the word of God (YHWH) where the apostle Paul wrote at Galatians 3:13, ""Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree:" (AV), which he quoted from Deuteronomy 21:22-23, "And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him on a tree: 23 His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God;) that thy land be not defiled, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance." (AV). This scripture clearly refers to a stake or timber and not a cross. Also, since such a means of execution made the person 'a curse,' it would not be proper for true Christians to decorate their homes with images of Jesus (Yeshua) Christ impaled and/or make pictures of it.

FIGURATIVE USE;

A Bible dictionary states, ""Torture stake" sometimes stands for the sufferings, shame, or torture experienced because of being a follower of Jesus Christ. As Jesus said: "Whoever does not accept his torture stake and follow after me is not worthy of me." (Mt 10:38; 16:24; Mr 8:34; Lu 9:23; 14:27) The expression "torture stake" is also used in such a way as to represent Jesus' death upon the stake, which made possible redemption from sin and reconciliation with God.-1Co 1:17, 18.

Jesus' death on the torture stake was the basis for removing the Law, which had separated the Jews from the non-Jews. Therefore, by accepting the reconciliation made possible by Jesus' death, both Jews and non-Jews could become "one body to God through the torture stake." (Eph 2:11-16; Col 1:20; 2:13, 14) This proved to be a stumbling block for many Jews, since they insisted that circumcision and adherence to the Mosaic Law were essential for gaining God's approval. That is why the apostle Paul wrote: "Brothers, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? Then, indeed, the stumbling block of the torture stake has been abolished." (Ga 5:11) "All those who want to make a pleasing appearance in the flesh are the ones that try to compel you to get circumcised, only that they may not be persecuted for the torture stake of the Christ, Jesus. Never may it occur that I should boast, except in the torture stake of our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom the world has been impaled to me and I to the world." (Ga 6:12, 14) For confessing Jesus' death on the torture stake as the sole basis for gaining salvation, Paul was persecuted by the Jews. As a consequence of this confession, to the apostle the world was as something impaled, condemned, or dead, whereas the world viewed him with hatred, as a criminal impaled on a stake.

Persons who embraced Christianity but who afterward turned to an immoral way of life proved themselves to be "enemies of the torture stake of the Christ." (Php 3:18, 19) Their actions demonstrated that they had no appreciation for the benefits resulting from Jesus' death on the torture stake. They "trampled upon the Son of God" and 'esteemed as of ordinary value the blood of the covenant by which they were sanctified.'-Heb 10:29."[source - Insight on the Scripture, Vol. 2].

CONSTANTINE'S MOTIVES HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH JESUS (YESHUA):

Let's face it, there is absolutely no evidence that for the first 300 years of Christianity that those claiming to be Christian used the cross in worship. This only came about in the fourth century when the pagan Emperor Constantine needed to unite his empire religiously as previously shown. Now, we can differ as to his motives, but they had absolutely nothing to do with Jesus (Yeshua) Christ, but had everything to do with his pragmatic need to strengthen his empire through religious unity.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia admits, "The cross is found in both pre-Christian and non-Christian cultures." [source - New Catholic Encyclopedia]; while various other authorities have linked the cross with nature worship and pagan sex rites.

[[[[Additional Information.

The book The Non-Christian Cross, by John Denham Parsons, states: “There is not a single sentence in any of the numerous writings forming the New Testament, which, in the original Greek, bears even indirect evidence to the effect that the stauros used in the case of Jesus was other than an ordinary stauros; much less to the effect that it consisted, not of one piece of timber, but of two pieces nailed together in the form of a cross. . . . it is not a little misleading upon the part of our teachers to translate the word stauros as ‘cross’ when rendering the Greek documents of the Church into our native tongue, and to support that action by putting ‘cross’ in our lexicons as the meaning of stauros without carefully explaining that that was at any rate not the primary meaning of the word in the days of the Apostles, did not become its primary signification till long afterwards, and became so then, if at all, only because, despite the absence of corroborative evidence, it was for some reason or other assumed that the particular stauros upon which Jesus was executed had that particular shape.”—London, 1896, pp. 23, 24.
AND,
Was Christ Hung on a Cross?

TO MANY millions of people the answer to this question seems as simple as the three-letter word “Yes”. To serious students of both ancient history and the Bible the answer is even simpler, as simple as the two-letter word “No!” But two answers as far apart as these open up between them a great gulf that all truth seekers must be able to bridge in order to stand on the solid ground of truth.

It is common knowledge in this enlightened age that the Bible was not first set down in English. Consequently, to settle the question as to whether Christ was hung on a cross or not it is necessary to consult the original Hebrew and Greek languages in which the Bible was written. By God’s grace manuscript copies of the original accounts, some of which copies date back to within fifty years of the originals, are available to scholars. Besides these, the original words are defined and explained in dictionaries or lexicons written in modern English, if that is the only language you read. And, in addition, there are dependable encyclopedias, histories, etc., to which reference can be made.

The Catholic Digest magazine, May, 1948, page 108, had the following to say on the subject of the cross: “Long before the birth of Christ the cross was a religious symbol. On the site of ancient Troy discs of baked clay stamped with a cross, were recently discovered. Two similar objects were found at Herculaneum. The Aztecs of ancient Mexico carved the cross on amulets, pottery, and temple walls. Many traces of use of the cross by North American Indians have been discovered. Buddhists of Tibet see in the cross a mark of the footprint of Buddha. The Mongolians draw a cross on paper and place it on the breasts of their dead. Egyptian inscriptions often have the Tau (T) cross. They considered the scarab (beetle) sacred because markings down the back and across the thorax form a T. A cross of this form was used as a support for the arms of Hindu ascetics in India who were wont to sit for days and nights in a Buddhalike attitude. The crux ansata (handled cross) has a loop serving as a handle. For the Egyptians this cross was a symbol of life and in their sign language meant ‘to live.’” See also The Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, page 517; the footnote on pages 312, 313, of Gibbon’s History of Christianity, Eckler’s edition, 1891.

But how was the cross a “symbol of life” to the pagans? Well, a father, the male, is life-giver to his children by and through the mother. Hence, those sex-worshiping pagans, under the inspiration of the Devil and his demons, constructed a phallic image of the erected male genitive organ, with a crossbar toward one end to represent the testes. Carrying the symbolism a step further in the crux ansata, the loop on the top, which pious religionists choose to describe as a “handle”, represented the female genitive organ joined to the masculine symbol. That these diabolical facts are true, see the following references: Funeral Tent of an Egyptian Queen, by Villiers Stuart; Masculine Cross and Ancient Sex Worship, by Sha Rocco; Two Babylons, by Alexander Hislop; Essays on the Worship of Priapus, by Richard Payne Knight.
Reference to the original languages in which the Bible was written will show beyond a question of doubt that Christ was never hung on any pagan cross. Hence, the use of the word “cross” in the English-language Bibles is a mistranslation. On this, the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures, in its appendix, on pages 768-771, in commenting on Matthew 10:38, where the Greek word ??????? (stau·ros?) first appears and which is translated “cross” in most Bibles, states:

“This is the expression used in connection with the execution of Jesus at Calvary. There is no evidence that the Greek word stau·ros? meant here a ‘cross’ such as the pagans used as a religious symbol for many centuries before Christ to denote the sun-god. On the ancient sculptures of Egypt may be seen representations of their gods bearing the so-called crux an·sa?ta, a T-cross with a loop at the top, it being a phallic symbol of life. In Babylonian inscriptions Tammuz was signified by a heart from which sprang a single or a double cross.

“India, Syria, Persia, as well as Babylon and ancient Egypt, have all yielded objects marked with crosses of various designs, including the swastika among the early Aryans. This betrays the worshiping of the cross to be pagan.
“In the classical Greek the word stau·ros? meant merely an upright stake or pale, or a pile such as is used for a foundation. The verb stau·ro?o meant to fence with pales, to form a stockade or palisade, and this is the verb used when the mob called for Jesus to be impaled. To such a stake or pale the person to be punished was fastened, just as when the popular Greek hero Pro·me?the·us was represented as tied to a stake or stau·ros?. The Greek word which the dramatist Aes?chy·lus used to describe this means to fasten or fix on a pole or stake, to impale, and the Greek author Lucian used a·na·stau·ro?oas a synonym for that word. In the Christian Greek Scriptures a·na·stau·ro?o occurs but once, at Hebrews 6:6. The root verb stau·ro?o occurs more than 40 times, and we have rendered it ‘impale’, with the footnote: ‘Or, “fasten on a stake or pole.’”

“The inspired writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures wrote in the common (koi·ne?) Greek and used the word stau·ros? to mean the same thing as in the classical Greek, namely, a stake or pale, a simple one without a crossbeam of any kind or at any angle. There is no proof to the contrary. The apostles Peter and Paul also use the word xy?lon to refer to the torture instrument upon which Jesus was nailed, and this argues that is was an upright stake without a crossbeam, for that is what xy?lon in this special sense means. (Acts 5:30; 10:39; 13:29; Galatians 3:13; 1 Peter 2:24) At Ezra 6:11 we find xy?lonin the Greek Septuagint (1 Esdras 6:31), and there it is spoken of as a beam on which the violator of law was to be hanged, the same as at Luke 23:39; Acts 5:30; 10:39.
“The fact that stau·ros? is translated crux in the Latin versions furnishes no argument against this. Any authoritative Latin dictionary will inform the examiner that the basic meaning of crux is a ‘tree, frame, or other wooden instrument of execution’ on which criminals were impaled or hanged. (Lewis-Short) A cross is only a later meaning of crux. Even in the writings of Livy, a Roman historian of the first century B.C., crux means a mere stake. Such a single stake for impalement of a criminal was called crux simplex, and the method of nailing him to such an instrument of torture is illustrated by the Roman Catholic scholar, Justus Lipsius, of the 16th century. We present herewith a photographic copy of his illustration on page 647, column 2, of his book De Cruce Liber Primus. This is the manner in which Jesus was impaled.

“Religious tradition from the days of Emperor Constantine proves nothing. Says that monthly publication for the Roman Catholic clergy, The Ecclesiastical Review, of September, 1920, No. 3, of Baltimore, Maryland, page 275: ‘It may be safely asserted that only after the edict of Milan, A.D. 312, was the cross used as the permanent sign of our Redemption. De Rossi positively states that no monogram of Christ, discovered in the catacombs or other places, can be traced to a period anterior to the year 312. Even after that epoch-making year, the church, then free and triumphant, contented herself with having a simple monogram of Christ: the Greek letter chi vertically crossed by a rho, and horizontally sometimes, by an iota. [Artwork—Greek characters] The oldest crucifix mentioned as an object of public worship is the one venerated in the Church of Narbonne in southern France, as early as the 6th century.’

“After showing the pagan origin of the cross, The Encyclopædia Britannica, Vol. 7, of edition 11, page 506, says: ‘It was not till the time of Constantine that the cross was publicly used as the symbol of the Christian religion.’ That was but logical, for Emperor Constantine was a worshiper of the pagan sun-god, whose symbol was a cross. Other experts have pointed out that ‘before the fourth century the cross was not used as a Christian emblem in the East any more than in the West’.

“Rather than consider the torture stake upon which Jesus was impaled a relic to be worshiped, the Jewish Christians like Simon Peter would consider it to be an abominable thing. At Galatians 3:13 the apostle Paul quotes Deuteronomy 21:23 and says: ‘It is written: “Accursed is every man hanged upon a stake.’” Hence the Jewish Christians would hold as accursed and hateful the stake upon which Jesus had been executed. Says the celebrated Jewish authority, Moses Mai·mon?i·des, of the 12th century: ‘They never hang upon a tree which clings to the soil by roots; but upon a timber uprooted, that it might not be an annoying plague: for a timber upon which anyone has been hanged is buried; that the evil name may not remain with it and people should say, “This is the timber on which so-and-so was hanged.” So the stone with which anyone has been stoned; and the sword, with which the one killed has been killed; and the cloth or mantle with which anyone has been strangled; all these things are buried along with those who perished.’ (Apud Casaub. in Baron. Exercitat. 16, An. 34, Num. 134) Says Kalinski in Vaticinia Observationibus Illustrata, page 342: ‘Consequently since a man hanged was considered the greatest abomination—the Jews also hated more than other things the timber on which he had been hanged, so that they covered it also with earth, as being equally an abominable thing.’

“The evidence is, therefore, completely lacking that Jesus Christ was crucified on two pieces of timber placed at a right angle. We refuse to add anything to God’s written Word by inserting the pagan cross into the inspired Scriptures, but render stau·ros? and xy?lon according to the simplest meanings. Since Jesus used stau·ros? to represent the suffering and shame or torture of his followers (Matthew 16:24), we have translated stau·ros? as ‘torture stake’, to distinguish it from xy?lon, which we have translated ‘stake’, or, in the footnote, ‘tree,’ as at Acts 5:30.”

The gulf of speculation having thus been bridged, Christians today stand on the solid ground of provable facts when they emphatically declare that Christ was never hung on a pagan cross of phallic origin.
AND

The words "cross" and "crucify" are mistranslations, a "later rendering," of the Greek words stauros and stauroo. According to Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, STAUROS denotes, primarily, an upright pole or stake. The shape of the two-beamed cross had its origin in ancient Chaldea and was used as the symbol of the god Tammuz. In the third century A.D., pagans were received into the apostate ecclesiastical system and were permitted largely to retain their pagan signs and symbols.

According to The Companion Bible, crosses were used as symbols of the Babylonian Sun-god. The evidence is complete; the Lord was put to death upon an upright stake, not on two pieces of timber placed at an angle.

According to Encyclopaedia Britannica, in the Egyptian churches the cross was a pagan symbol of life borrowed by the Christians and interpreted in the pagan manner.

According to Greek dictionaries and lexicons, the primary meaning of stauros is an upright pale, pole, or stake. The secondary meaning of "cross" is admitted to be a "later" rendering. In spite of the evidence, almost all common versions of the Scriptures persist with the Latin Vulgate's crux (meaning cross) as the rendering of the Greek stauros.

The most accepted reason for the "cross" being brought into Messianic worship is Constantine's famous vision of "the cross superimposed on the sun" in A.D. 312. What he saw is nowhere to be found in Scripture. Even after his so-called "conversion," his coins showed an even-armed cross as a symbol for the Sun-god. Many scholars have doubted the "conversion" of Constantine because of the wicked deeds that he did afterwards.

After Constantine had the "vision of the cross," he promoted another variety of the cross, the Chi-Rho or Labarum. This has been explained as representing the first letters of the name Christos (CH and R, or, in Greek, X and P). The identical symbols were found as inscriptions on rock, dating from ca. 2500 B.C., being interpreted as "a combination of the two Sun-symbols." Another proof of its pagan origin is that the identical symbol was found on a coin of Ptolemeus III from 247-222 B.C.

According to An Illustrated Encyclopedia of Traditional Symbols, the labarum was also an emblem of the Chaldean sky-god. Emperor Constantine adopted the labarum as the imperial ensign. According to Dictionary of Mythology Folklore and Symbols, the symbol was in use long before Christianity. Chi probably stood for Great Fire or Sun. Rho probably stood for Pater or Patah (Father). The word labarum yields "everlasting Father Sun."

CJB execution-stake SISR stake SSBE torture stake
NWT torture stake
Versions using Cross: AAT, AB, AIV, ANT, BNT, CENT, CEV, CLNT, CNT, CTNT, DHB, DRB, EBR, EDW, EVD, GW, HBME, HBRV, IB, IV, JWNT, KJV, KLNT, KTC, LB, LBP, MCT, MNT, MRB, MSNT, NAB, NAS, NBV, NCV, NEB, NET, NIV, NJB, NKJ, NLT, NLV, NNT, NRS, NSNT, ONT, PRS, REB, RNT, RSV, SARV, SGAT, SNB, SV, TCNT, TEV, TJB, TM, WAS, WET, WNT, WTNT, YLR. [SOURCE - RETRIEVED FROM Melissa ON 11/16/2013]

AND,

The NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon
Strong's Number:   4716

Original Word
Word Origin
stauroß
from the base of (2476)
Transliterated Word
TDNT Entry
Stauros
7:572,1071
Phonetic Spelling
Parts of Speech
stow-ros'
Noun Masculine

Definition
1. an upright stake, esp. a pointed one
2. a cross
a. a well known instrument of most cruel and ignominious punishment, borrowed by the Greeks and Romans from the Phoenicians; to it were affixed among the Romans, down to the time of Constantine the Great, the guiltiest criminals, particularly the basest slaves, robbers, the authors and abetters of insurrections, and occasionally in the provinces, at the arbitrary pleasure of the governors, upright and peaceable men also, and even Roman citizens themselves
b. the crucifixion which Christ underwent

NAS Word Usage - Total: 27
cross 27

NAS Verse Count
Matthew
5
Mark
4
Luke
3
John
4
1 Corinthians
2
Galatians
3
Ephesians
1
Philippians
2
Colossians
2
Hebrews
1

Total
27

Greek lexicon based on Thayer's and Smith's Bible Dictionary plus others; this is keyed to the large Kittel and the "Theological Dictionary of the New Testament." These files are public domain.

Bibliography Information
Thayer and Smith. "Greek Lexicon entry for Stauros". "The NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon". . 1999. [SOURCE - RETRIEVED FROM http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/nas/stauros.html ON 11/16/2013]

AND,

NOT A CROSS TO BE FOUND
Rev. Dr. Michael T. Welhous
One of the reasons why I pursued a degree in Christian ministry, and became an ordained Nondenominational Christian minister, was because I became increasingly disturbed at what I heard coming from the pulpits of the various churches I attended. I had been studying the Scriptures for many years, and it amazed me that the congregations were not hearing the simple truths contained in God’s word. I felt the need to share with people the truth about what the Bible actually says about various things. All to often, people accept what the various members of the clergy state as fact, without questioning it and without taking the time to verify their statements.
Most of these truths are not difficult to understand. They are simple Scriptural facts that are not being conveyed to the people. One such truth is the fact that most English translations of the Bible refer to a “cross,” yet the fact is that the word “cross” is an inaccurate translation of the original Greek word stauros. Simply put, a “cross,” i.e., two intersecting beams of wood, is nowhere to be found in the Bible!
The cross has become the foremost symbol in Christendom, so this would obviously be disturbing news to many Christians who have crosses hanging on their walls, around their necks, on loved ones graves, in front of their churches, on the alter of their churches, and even mentioned in songs they sing.
The question, however, must be asked: “Since nothing in the ancient Greek manuscripts which were compiled to form the New Testament portion of the Bible, suggests nor implies an instrument composed of two intersecting beams of wood, then where did the term, image, and subsequent symbol come from?”
First, there is no doubt that the Greek word stauros has been inaccurately translated as “cross.” In Classical Greek literature, stauros simply meant “an upright stake or post.” The verb stauroo meant “to fence with pales (stakes), to form a stockade (a barrier constructed from stakes or timbers driven upright into the ground one beside the other).” There is nothing at all found in the Scriptures to suggest a crossbeam of any kind at any angle, therefore, staurosmeans the same thing in the Bible, as it did in Classical Greek writings.
Second, there is another Greek word used by the New Testament writers when describing the execution of Jesus. It is the word xylon, which means “timber,” and by implication “a stick, club or tree.” Notice again that there is nothing to suggest a crossbeam of any kind or at any angle. Consider the following references where xylon occurs, and notice that it is consistently translated “tree.”
Acts 5:30 “The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a tree.”
Acts 10:39 “And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews,
and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree.”
Acts 13:29 “And when they had fulfilled all that was written of him, they took him down
from the tree, and laid him in a sepulchre.”
Galatians 3:13 “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse
for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree.”
1 Peter 2:24 “Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being
dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.”
Interestingly, when we read the Septuagint, which was the Greek translation of the Old Testament written in the same koine, i.e. “common” Greek as the New Testament, we find xylon at Ezra 6:11. There it is spoken of as “timber” on which the violator of the law was to be hanged.
“And a decree has been made by me, that every man who shall alter this word, timber
shall be pulled down from his house, and let him be lifted up and slain upon it, and his
house shall be confiscated.” (Ezra 6:11, The Septuagint – An English Translation)
If we were to read the Bible in the original languages – Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek – we would NEVER have the mental picture of a “cross.” Even when the Bible began to be translated into Latin, translators used the Latin word crux, which also does not specifically suggest a two-beam intersecting instrument.
The Latin dictionary by Lewis and Short states that the meaning of crux was “a tree, frame, or other wooden instruments of execution, on which criminals were impaled or hanged.” In the writings of Livy, who was a Roman historian of the first century B.C., crux means merely a stake.
“[Crucifixion] was an ancient mode of capital punishment, and is said to have been devised by Semiramis. It was in use by the Persians, Assyrians, Egyptians, Carthaginians, Scythians, Greeks, Romans, and ancient Germans. It was a most shameful and degrading punishment, and among the Romans was the fate of robbers, assassins, and rebels. It was especially the punishment of criminal slaves. There were several kinds of crosses used.” (Manners And Customs Of The Bible, James M. Freeman, page 394, paragraph 2.) [Semiramis was a Mesopotamian queen.]
Since there were many kinds of impalement instruments used by the Romans and the other nations, to definitively identify any particular “cross,” and relate to others that it is the exact type of “cross” that Jesus died on, especially given the Scriptural evidence of simply a “stake” and “tree,” is for a clergy member or Bible teacher, irresponsible at best!
In writing to the believers in Galatia, Paul said, “though we [i.e., the apostles], or an angel
from heaven, publicly announce any other gospel to you than that which we have publicly
announced to you, let him be eternally condemned. As we said before, so say I now
again, if any man publicly announce any other gospel to you than that you have received,
let him be eternally condemned.” (Galatians 1:8-9) Given Paul’s exhortation, we must
make every effort NEVER to add anything to God’s word by publicly announcing something
that simply is not what the Bible is announcing. The Bible speaks of the “stake” and the “tree,” NEVER a “cross.” [SOURCE - RETRIEVED FROM http://www.devotedservants.com/cross.htm ON 11/16/2013]
AND
Where was Jesus put on when he was crucified?

Mohd Elfie Nieshaem Juferi (MENJ) has invested his creativity into creating the following little problem:
In Mark 15: 32, we are told that Jesus was put on a "cross" to be crucified:
Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.
The word for "cross" here in Greek is "stauros", which James Strong defined as:
(4716) from the base of 2476; a stake or post (as set upright), i.e. (specifically) a pole or cross (as an instrument of capital punishment); figuratively, exposure to death, i.e. self-denial; by implication, the atonement of Christ: --cross.[1]
Yet in I Peter 2:24, we are told that Jesus was crucified on the "tree":
Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.
The word for "tree" in Greek is "xulon", and is defined by Strong as:
(3586)from another form of the base of 3582; timber (as fuel or material); by implication a stick, club or tree or other wooden article or substance: --staff, stocks, tree, wood.[2]
The error here is obvious. The Greek word "stauros" means definitively a "cross". There is no double meaning employed to the word. Whereas the word xulon can be translated interchangeably as "wood", "staff", "tree", etc. but in the case of I Peter 2:24, it is translated as "tree". Now we need to ask why would the word xulon was used in the first place when there is a more definitive word for it, "stauros", if the verse really intends to mean the "cross"?
It is therefore obvious that the word xulon is indeed used for "tree" in I Peter 2:24, and therefore there is a contradiction with Mark 15: 32.
RESPONSE:
The only obvious error is Menj's misreading and manhandling of both the biblical texts and his own lexical sources. He claims that "stauros" definitely means "cross", all the while ignoring the very own lexicon he quotes which states:
(4716) from the base of 2476; A STAKE OR POST (as set upright), i.e. (specifically) A POLE or cross (as an instrument of capital punishment); figuratively, exposure to death, i.e. self-denial; by implication, the atonement of Christ: --cross.[1]
Furthermore, do notice the different meanings given by Thayer's Lexicon for "xulon":
3586 xulon {xoo'-lon}
1) wood
a) THAT WHICH IS MADE OF WOOD
1) AS A BEAM from which any one is suspended, a gibbet, A CROSS
2) a log or timber with holes in which the feet, hands, neck of prisoners were inserted and fastened with thongs
3) a fetter, or shackle for the feet
4) a cudgel, stick, staff
2) a tree
AV - tree 10, staff 5, wood 3, stocks 1; 19    (Source: Blueletter Bible)
Notice how this same word is used elsewhere in the NT:
"‘Am I leading a rebellion,’ said Jesus, ‘that you have come out with swords and CLUBS (xulon) to capture me?’" Mark 14:48
No one assumes that "xulon" here means tree, that is unless of course one wants to claim that the soldiers were armed with actual trees! And:
"Upon receiving such orders, he put them in the inner cell and fastened their feet in the STOCKS (xulon)." Acts 16:24
"If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, WOOD (xula), hay or straw." 1 Corinthians 3:12
This demonstrates that "xulon" means different things in different contexts and doesn't always refer to an actual tree. Since Strong's lists "cross" as a plausible meaning of "xulon", this in itself refutes Menj's alleged contradiction.
Second, 1 Peter 2:24 is not the only place where Peter refers to Christ being crucified on ‘a tree’:
"The God of our fathers raised Jesus from the dead - whom you had killed by hanging him on a tree (epi xulou)." Acts 5:30
"We are witnesses of everything he did in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem. They killed him by hanging him on a tree (epi xulou)." Acts 10:39
Interestingly, Luke who recorded Peter's speeches in Acts also wrote that Jesus was crucified on a cross (stauros):
"But they kept shouting, ‘Crucify him (staurou)! Crucify him (staurou auton)!’ ... As they led him away, they seized Simon from Cyrene, who was on his way in from the country, and put the cross (ton stauron) on him and made him carry it behind Jesus ... When they came to the place called the Skull, there they crucified him (estaurosan auton), along with the criminals - one on his right, the other on his left." Luke 23:21,26,33
That Luke could mention Jesus being crucified on a cross while recording Peter's statements that Jesus was hanged on a "tree" demonstrates that these Christians saw no problem with these statements. Unlike Menj, they realized that both "stauros" and "xulon" could be used interchangeably in referring to Christ's crucifixion. This is further seen from the Apostle Paul:
"When they had carried out all that was written about him, they took him down from the tree (tou xulou) and laid him in a tomb." Acts 13:29
Paul says that Christ was brought down from the tree. Yet the same Paul speaks of Jesus being crucified on a cross:
"For the message of the cross (tou staurou) is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." 1 Corinthians 1:18
quot;Brothers, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross (to skandalon tou staurou) has been abolished." Galatians 5:11
"May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ (en to stauro tou Kuriou hemon 'Iesou Christou ), through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world." Galatians 6:14
Paul clues us in as to why both Peter and he could speak of Christ hanging on a tree:
"All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: ‘Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.’ Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because, ‘The righteous will live by faith.’ The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, ‘The man who does these things will live by them.’ Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: ‘Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree (epi xulou).’ He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit." Galatians 3:10-14
The phrase refers to one who is accursed of God for failing to obey the commands. Christ being crucified on a cross was a sign that Christ had become a curse for us since he had become our sin bearer, taking upon himself the punishment that we deserved in order that we who believe may be forgiven by God. In the words of the Apostle Peter:
"To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps. ‘He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth.’ When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly. He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree (to xulon), so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed. For you were like sheep going astray, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls." 1 Peter 2:21-25
Messianic Jewish believer, Dr. David H. Stern sums it up best. In his comments on Acts 5:30, Stern writes:
Stake. Greek xulon, which KJV renders "tree" here and four other places (10:39, 13:29; Ga. 3:13; I Ke [Sam- Peter] 2:24), all referring to what Yeshua was hanged on until he died. Yeshua was not hanged on a tree, but on a stavros, usually translated "cross" and in the JNT translated "execution-stake," as explained in Mt 10:38N. The word "xulon" is used instead of stavros in these five placesbecause all of them quote or allude to Deuteronomy 21:22-23, where the Hebrew word is "'etz," normally rendered into Septuagint Greek as "xulon." Both Hebrew 'etz and Greekxulon can mean "tree, wood, stake, stick" depending on context. In Deuteronomy 21:22-23, where the subject is hanging, an 'etz is any piece of wood which a person can be hanged, i.e. a stake (perhaps if metal gallows had existed, a different word would have been used). If Luke had meant a tree and not a stake, the Greeks had a word for it, "dendron," which he could have used but didn't. Therefore, while at Mt 26:47 and Mk 14:48 xulon means "stick," at Lk 23:31 and Rv 18:12 it means "wood," and at Rv 2:7 it has to mean "tree," here it means "stake"... (Stern, Jewish New Testament Commentary [Jewish New Testament Publications, Inc., Clarksville Maryland, 1996], p. 237; bold emphasis ours)
In light of the preceding considerations, we once again see that Menj has failed to prove a real bonafide contradiction in the Scriptures. His criticisms only expose his lack of understanding regarding the historical and cultural context in which the New Testament was written.
In the service of King Jesus forever, the crucified and risen Lord of eternal glory. Amen. [source - retrieved from http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/stauros.htm on 11/16/2013]
AND,
ull Definition of STAURO-
: cross <stauromedusae> <stauroscope>
Origin of STAURO-
LL, fr. LGk, fr. Gk stauros pale, stake, cross
This word doesn't usually appear in our free dictionary, but the definition from our premium Unabridged Dictionary is offered here on a limited basis. Note that some information is displayed differently in the Unabridged.
To access the complete Unabridged Dictionary, with an additional 300,000 words that aren't in our free dictionary, [SOURCE - RETRIEVED FROM http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/stauro- ON 11/16/2013]

LEARN MORE ABOUT THE BIBLE AND RELIGION - BOTH TRUE AND FALSE - AT WWW.JW.ORG

Index
» General Discussion
» Scripture of the Day

5/29/2021 7:44 pm #2551

Re: Scripture of the Day

6/05/2021 7:06 pm #2552

Re: Scripture of the Day

6/06/2021 3:35 pm #2553

Re: Scripture of the Day

6/08/2021 1:45 pm #2554

Re: Scripture of the Day

6/09/2021 12:40 pm #2555

Re: Scripture of the Day

6/11/2021 8:43 am #2556

Re: Scripture of the Day

6/12/2021 12:04 pm #2557

Re: Scripture of the Day

6/14/2021 1:43 pm #2558

Re: Scripture of the Day

6/18/2021 10:04 pm #2559

Re: Scripture of the Day

6/20/2021 6:29 pm #2560

Re: Scripture of the Day

Index
» General Discussion
» Scripture of the Day

Board footera