Abraham & Sarah Never Happened?

[David Merrill]

Yes BL; that is the claim;


Peace and joy are found in the truth.

I know you might have written more into your post provided the time. So I will simply ask the reader to combine Babylon with Rome like in the culture of Israel from 520 BC had it. Then also consider that the doctrine of Christianity, the Epistles of Paul, were put to writing by and large while Paul was in Roman protective custody, in Rome. Romans 13 for example was written by a Roman citizen.

[BLBereans]

Interesting take on Paul. The idea that: instead of seeking asylum and protection as a willing Roman citizen, he was jailed against his will and used the opportunity to write Divinely inspired scripture is dismissed by you as faulty and archaic? I suppose we all need to justify our foundational beliefs by interpreting events and history in a way that fits our understanding.

The belief that matter and the physical realm is either an illusion or inherently bad leads to certain interpretations. The belief that matter and the physical realm is real and was created by our supernatural and spiritual Father in Heaven as "good" leads to other interpretations.

The beauty of it is that God is pro-choice. He did not create programmed robots to obey Him mindlessly; He created us with the ability to think and choose what we will believe and who we will worship. We will all get exactly what we want in the end.

[David Merrill]

Paul was in protective custody because the Sanhedrin had a capital conviction for treason against Israel. At least that is my reading. Two years in Tyre under jail conditions followed by maybe three years in Rome. Paul's choice was to risk the Sanhedrin capturing and executing him.

[allodial]

Even if you take everything Paul said out of the NT texts, and leave only the OT and the four gospels, you still have a consistency. All of the Epistles were internal to the Christ's assembly. Furthermore, the events surrounding Jesus's crucifixion and resurrection caused many Romans to really consider the difference between the doctrines of the Pharisees and the doctrines that Jesus taught.

Re: Abraham & Guilt
I'm not sure why Abraham would have had a reason to feel guilty about having married his half sister especially with the likelihood of him being among the exempted royalty class and that he was not under Mosaic law. Mosaic law was specific to a period. This doesn't mean that similar laws would be lacking. But Moses was over Israel subsequent to the exodus from Egypt. I'm not sure why that would be construed to have made Moses into a universal sovereign or trustee over all mankind.

Re: Paul & Moses
The parallels between Moses and Paul are astonishingly worth looking into. If one can ask "Where did Paul get the right or authority?" One can also ponder the same regarding Moses.

Re: Babylon, Rome and Salvation
That God was not out to protect the syncretism that resulted from Babylonian occupation or exile is clear in the Pentateuch alone.

Re: Resurrection & Necromancy
Furthermore, there is nothing in OT that suggests resurrection by a de jure priest to have been necromancy or for any full resurrection to have been necromancy. Consultation of the dead for divination was AFAIK deemed to be necromancy. If resurrection were necromancy, what of Elijah? What of God giving breath to Adam? What state was Adam in before he was given breath? Alive or dead? Necromancers fiddle around with death for the sake of gaining power or knowledge.

Is an executioner a necromancer? Are those who stone someone necromancers because they bring about death? Then why would someone be a necromancer for bringing about life or giving breath?

Re: Jesus and Moses Parallel
Looking at the text Moses Was Not A Magician we see a parallel in that Jesus said: "Truly, truly, I say to you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he sees the Father do: for what things soever he does, these also does the Son likewise."

Re: Paul In Custody
Paul confessed to being a Roman citizen. And the scepter had departed from Judah for over 30 years prior. The Romans under their own law had authority to protect Paul as a Roman citizen from harm from the Sanhedrin which had been stripped of authority exactly as foretold in Genesis:

The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and to him shall the gathering of the people be. Genesis 49:10

It is also translated: "until he to whom it belongs". This is even written about in Rabbinical writings of the time and after--they know the scepter had departed but could not see that the one to whom it belongs had come. Babylonian syncretism perhaps made it difficult to discern? They didn't have authority to execute Jesus, they didn't have authority over Paul either. With Paul being a Roman citizen, the Romans owed him protection.

Re: Deuteronomy Curses & Confusion of Mind
It might be possible that one reason those Pharisees in syncretism could not see is because of the Deuteronomy 28 curses:

"The Lord will afflict you with madness, blindness and confusion of mind. 29 At midday you will grope about like a blind person in the dark. --Deuteronomy 28:28"

Re: Paul
There is at least once instance when Paul speaks his own opinion, he makes it clear that it is his own opinion. That doesn't strike me as something someone with low integrity would do. Those with a knowledge of the OT and NT can nonetheless discern even if Paul were to make a mist-statement.

Re: What Jesus Drew On the Ground
At John 8:6 I know of someone who a vision where I saw what Jesus wrote on the ground. Now I could have dismissed it but shortly thereafter, someone else thousands of miles away saw the same thing and published it online. They were trying to stone a woman for adultery. What else could Jesus draw on the ground but the symbol of their own spiritual adultery--their involvement in a secret society of kind might have something to do with it.

Re: God and the Supernatural
From what I recall, in the OT, during exodus, when there was no water, miracles were used to bring about water. If there was water available, then the miracles were no longer needed.

Yes BL; that is the claim;


Peace and joy are found in the truth.

I know you might have written more into your post provided the time. So I will simply ask the reader to combine Babylon with Rome like in the culture of Israel from 520 BC had it. Then also consider that the doctrine of Christianity, the Epistles of Paul, were put to writing by and large while Paul was in Roman protective custody, in Rome. Romans 13 for example was written by a Roman citizen.

Joseph was placed into Egyptian custody in consequence of his own brothers' crimes. Consider that in some way Moses was in Egyptian custody until the Exodus. Josephus was in Roman custody in consequence of being taken captive. The Babylonian Talmud was written or compiled during Babylonian exile (i.e. i.e. during Babylonian custody). The crown or mantle of Babylon itself came to be in the custody of the (Etruscan) Romans in consequence of Attalus III's will. To this day reign of the king of Babylon continues. On that note, regarding Paul I'm not sure what is so special or outstanding about Paul having been in Roman custody.

[David Merrill]

Even if you take everything Paul said out of the NT texts, and leave only the OT and the four gospels, you still have a consistency. All of the Epistles were internal to the Christ's assembly. Furthermore, the events surrounding Jesus's crucifixion and resurrection caused many Romans to really consider the difference between the doctrines of the Pharisees and the doctrines that Jesus taught.

Thank you for itemizing.

Re: Abraham & Guilt
I'm not sure why Abraham would have had a reason to feel guilty about having married his half sister especially with the likelihood of him being among the exempted royalty class and that he was not under Mosaic law. Mosaic law was specific to a period. This doesn't mean that similar laws would be lacking. But Moses was over Israel subsequent to the exodus from Egypt. I'm not sure why that would be construed to have made Moses into a universal sovereign or trustee over all mankind.

This guilt was a consequence of realizing the nature of natural law. 50% recombined DNA is bad especially when compounded over generations.

Re: Paul & Moses
The parallels between Moses and Paul are astonishingly worth looking into. If one can ask "Where did Paul get the right or authority?" One can also ponder the same regarding Moses.

I can see a few off the bat.

Re: Babylon, Rome and Salvation
That God was not out to protect the syncretism that resulted from Babylonian occupation or exile is clear in the Pentateuch alone.

Please describe... I think I may be miseducated about syncretism.

Re: Resurrection & Necromancy
Furthermore, there is nothing in OT that suggests resurrection by a de jure priest to have been necromancy or for any full resurrection to have been necromancy. Consultation of the dead for divination was AFAIK deemed to be necromancy. If resurrection were necromancy, what of Elijah? What of God giving breath to Adam? What state was Adam in before he was given breath? Alive or dead? Necromancers fiddle around with death for the sake of gaining power or knowledge.

I had to look through several dictionary definitions to apply necromancy to resurrection.

Is an executioner a necromancer? Are those who stone someone necromancers because they bring about death? Then why would someone be a necromancer for bringing about life or giving breath?

No. The executioner kills. It is not necromancy if the executioner does not bring the dead back to life.

Re: Jesus and Moses Parallel
Looking at the text Moses Was Not A Magician we see a parallel in that Jesus said: "Truly, truly, I say to you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he sees the Father do: for what things soever he does, these also does the Son likewise."

Agreed. We have the power to heal. Some have tried to master God - cabala.

Re: Paul In Custody
Paul confessed to being a Roman citizen. And the scepter had departed from Judah for over 30 years prior. The Romans under their own law had authority to protect Paul as a Roman citizen from harm from the Sanhedrin which had been stripped of authority exactly as foretold in Genesis:



It is also translated: "until he to whom it belongs". This is even written about in Rabbinical writings of the time and after--they know the scepter had departed but could not see that the one to whom it belongs had come. Babylonian syncretism perhaps made it difficult to discern? They didn't have authority to execute Jesus, they didn't have authority over Paul either. With Paul being a Roman citizen, the Romans owed him protection.

Interesting that they had no authority over Paul? I think that consent was Paul going into Jerusalem.

Re: Deuteronomy Curses & Confusion of Mind
It might be possible that one reason those Pharisees in syncretism could not see is because of the Deuteronomy 28 curses:

Yes!

Re: Paul
There is at least once instance when Paul speaks his own opinion, he makes it clear that it is his own opinion. That doesn't strike me as something someone with low integrity would do. Those with a knowledge of the OT and NT can nonetheless discern even if Paul were to make a mist-statement.

The whole interpretation Pragmatism is about how Paul was a participant in the writing of the Gospel of Mark. I cannot say that I would have stayed for execution.

Re: What Jesus Drew On the Ground
At John 8:6 I know of someone who a vision where I saw what Jesus wrote on the ground. Now I could have dismissed it but shortly thereafter, someone else thousands of miles away saw the same thing and published it online. They were trying to stone a woman for adultery. What else could Jesus draw on the ground but the symbol of their own spiritual adultery--their involvement in a secret society of kind might have something to do with it.

I am curious about that symbol.

I imagine, maybe not a vision that Jesus wrote out the ineffable Name of God and in doing so expressed an authority they associated only with the Cohen Gadol - the high priest.

Re: God and the Supernatural
From what I recall, in the OT, during exodus, when there was no water, miracles were used to bring about water. If there was water available, then the miracles were no longer needed.

I sometimes wonder if the difference between magic and miracles is whether or not you put God out there or are inside Him.

Joseph was placed into Egyptian custody in consequence of his own brothers' crimes. Consider that in some way Moses was in Egyptian custody until the Exodus. Josephus was in Roman custody in consequence of being taken captive. The Babylonian Talmud was written or compiled during Babylonian exile (i.e. i.e. during Babylonian custody). The crown or mantle of Babylon itself came to be in the custody of the (Etruscan) Romans in consequence of Attalus III's will. To this day reign of the king of Babylon continues. On that note, regarding Paul I'm not sure what is so special or outstanding about Paul having been in Roman custody.

[xparte]

If i understand why two thief's and Christ shared the same fate but not all 3 had the same destiny why is CAPITAL CRIME and theft the distinctive feature or dominant idea in an artistic or literary composition.now before us BLB i enjoy allodial ease and organization on any title/topic and Davids rocky moutain high in the Colorado neon cold beer refreshing disscusions and MJ with a Texas size try this first all horns in. and BLB your willingness to chuckle for that Abraham Hicks his/hers message its not my two thieves science thats agreeing that Christ was talking for God and the conversation got distorted only one thief got the message all Christ,s have the same message if one adds or subtracts a message is that just a thief's doing his [JOB] supersaturation just following orders and we know that never works on a final judgement Gods truth is nature distorted by who else but his creation can compliment the message or complicate it both at the same time the [thief ] betray one thief or meet nature in the middle no empty crosses just one message is to great for a tomb. a message in LATIN means papal/bill Christ is a True Bill a message thats registered never comes guilt/or debt free.

[allodial]

This guilt was a consequence of realizing the nature of natural law. 50% recombined DNA is bad especially when compounded over generations.

That is IMHO presumptive of defect or fallen state. Those in a fallen state might be more likely to compound carnality or flaws. Thusly, they would be restricted from reproduction in close relations. A diverse pool would provide dilution with time, not to mention allowing God to participate in mate selection through prayer, etc.

Please describe... I think I may be miseducated about syncretism.

The mixing of God's truths with those of men's vain imaginations or with false/strange gods--foreign law mixed with domestic law can result in a new system and either way brings the ramifications of conflicts of law. But consider the benevolent side of of exile: if A has a son who was raised in a way contrary to his rules, A's laws requires that he be punished severely but considering that the son was raised contrary he then applies the contrary law by putting the son under the care of of a distant cousin--this way the son avoids punishment but has to leave his father's house (see Genesis 1-4). The placement under the foreign law is a blessing but it does not necessarily directly make the son suitable for direct service of father--but tutors could help him, unless the son rejects the tutors. Someone being placed on probation is much the same.

It seems that with time, Israel and Judah started picking up ideas of nationality and nationhood from foreigners and began to loose sight of the Original Plan. When kings started relying on alliances with Egypt or Assyria, it was clear that they weren't getting the Message.

I'm convinced that Daniel saw the bread and wine of Babylon to be similar but not the same as the bread and wine of Melchezidek, that they were entreating or baiting him into syncretism.

Agreed. We have the power to heal. Some have tried to master God - cabala.

God is very personal, one can simply ask. One doesn't need to study mysticism. When the white cord stopped turning red and years passed, it might be that people started to turn to various practices as a means of finding remedy.

Interesting that they had no authority over Paul? I think that consent was Paul going into Jerusalem.

He might have put himself in harms way by traveling to Jerusalem. Putting a hit on him isn't lawful authority. Consider, while they didn't have lawful and governmental authority to put Jesus to death and so asked Pilate & co. to judge him, the scepter had departed and remained departed even through Paul's sojourn (lifetime).

I am curious about that symbol.

I imagine, maybe not a vision that Jesus wrote out the ineffable Name of God and in doing so expressed an authority they associated only with the Cohen Gadol - the high priest.

Two triangles--one pointing up, one pointing down superimposed on each other. (Some suggest Amost 5:26 and Acts 7:43 to be pertinent). Something to do with Remphan which is also misspelled easily in Arabic as "Ramadan". However, your idea is plausible. But in the context, their spiritual adultery being pointed out while they accused the woman of adultery makes perfect sense and would be why they made exit--afterall, the law they were alleging to be enforcers of was against they themselves. This also resonates with John 5:45 (hardly 3 chapters before John 8:6) "Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust."

I sometimes wonder if the difference between magic and miracles is whether or not you put God out there or are inside Him.

You know, the revelations I have been given is that pop culture these days has errantly thrown mingled the term magic in with witchcraft. Magic is such a generic term which even used to describe natural phenomena. That is, I came to the conclusion (contrary to pop-armchair programming) that taking a purist view of the word magi/magic (relates to the term magistrate) has to do with applying wisdom--nothing to do with sorcery. We all feel, think or speak and our emotions, thought and speech can affect reality within and without. If we know that giving compliments and saying positive things will inure to better health and relationships, that is wisdom applied--its not subversive and it doesn't necessarily go against any laws. People's thoughts, will and feelings can effect others and this occurs naturally. So I'm not so sure that placing a positive and healthy reign on one's feelings would amount to sorcery or witchcraft. However, for the subverters or poisoners of good and noble things, that might be a wholly different matter.

Each man or child or woman has a domain granted them--especially inwardly. When someone seeks to subvert someone else's domain or will without consent and for unlawful purposes (such as using toxins or mercury--a frequent component of voodoo spells), or if someone seeks to pervert or undermine lawful order even with lies and sophistry--the it might be well to throw up red flags as pertains to witchcraft or sorcery. Witchcraft relates to rebellion for a good reason: subversion of good order (this can be simply through group lying or PSYOPS). Unlike de jure miracles, witchcraft and sorcery may involve appealing to spirits, powers or principalities that are at enmity with God. Witchcraft relates to the word pharmakeia--poisoners of men (consider voodoo even its under the guise of 'vaccinations') or of poisoners of lawful systems/societies (governments, families).

Those miracles associated with Jesus or Moses are said to have purely involved requests made to God or to have been in consequence of faithful reliance upon promises made by God. Consider also their lives being purposed around God's will--which is obviated something like this: love God and love thy neighbor as much as you love yourself (the more you love your yourself the more you'll love your neighbor perhaps?). So AFAIK, exercising divine or lawful spiritual authority, such would neither be witchcraft nor sorcery. In both the OT and the NT authority was given by way of anointing.

A key point being that, there seems to be an intentional spin put to popular language so as to re-color the past. Another method of sedition by syntax? The Constitution has been attacked in that way: project a modern meaning onto a clearly conflicting past meaning as a way of hoodwinking people. Consider that vampires, favored by many these days, seem to be of class of necromancers.

[allodial]

Also, it may very well be that refusal for cause is a way to stave off undesirable and creeping side effects of 'conflict of laws'.

[David Merrill]

Thank you for such a simple take on R4C!

This is what is helpful to me. To be able to speak truthfully in simple terms and in a short enough time to keep the listener's attention.

The conflict of laws is METRO organization public policy verses constitutions and statutes. Like I brought up about the oaths of office. One might use the emotionalism of cyberspace, social media, to sway the audience to persuade the judge that this is the best thing, NOT to hear the case at all.

If i understand why two thief's and Christ shared the same fate but not all 3 had the same destiny why is CAPITAL CRIME and theft the distinctive feature or dominant idea in an artistic or literary composition.now before us BLB i enjoy allodial ease and organization and Davids rocky moutain high in the Colorado neon cold beer disscusions and MJ with a Texas size try this first . and BLB your willingness to chuckle for that Hicks his two thieves science Christ was talking God and

Again, I enjoy a quick overview from observer perspective. My point is focused on the Sanhedrin and other courts were bound by law and so they were not so draconian as to be executing thieves. BARRABAS is believed to be Peter, in Pragmatism anyway, which may be to say that I am the only one who believes it. BARRABAS is like John DOE today - meaning "My Father's Son". So it is much easier to imagine if it was a three-hour torture that Peter might be willing to turn himself in for "Murder" which was the non-capital rendition of carrying a lethal weapon (sword) in Jerusalem during the Holidays in Jerusalem. This scenario straightens out the Jurisdiction too, for Allodial.

Simply put, the Sanhedrin had no punishment statutes severe enough for what Jesus had done. Jesus had rightly accused the Sanhedrin of usury in the worst possible sense - the Gentile moneychangers in the Temple were a Herodean franchise! They confronted Jesus before he did it, about pretending to be King and Jesus revealed that he was crowned by Archelaus' prophet John BAPTIST.

Otherwise what I am doing is reverse engineering the synchrotism. I am finding out in Christianity Explored style classes and prayer studies where these erroneous interpretations originate in the Old Testament. The Sacrifice comes from Abraham on Mount Moriah (Temple Mount) about to execute pubescent Isaac, before a God who allegedly was ordering it out of some insecurity that Abraham believed He existed. The Blood of the Lamb substitution of Jesus on the Cross bleeding for sacrifice goes back to the Passover Lamb; which when you examine closely was not a sacrifice but a form of identification - the Blood of the Lamb.

Now I remind people that both of these have several interpretations. Mine is the simplest for me. Thank you for enduring the discomfort of viewing sacrifice as a way to appease a wrathful God. It strikes me contrary that God is Love, and then again...

[allodial]

re: life, death and the power to give life

Death and life are in the power of the tongue. --Proverbs 18:21

"By the word Jesus declared, 'Lazarus come forth. And he that was dead came forth, bound hand and foot with grave clothes: and his face as bound about with a napkin. Jesus SAITH unto them, loose him and let him go.' John 11:43-44" (source: The Tongue: The Rudder of Your Destiny, By Gideon A. Smart).

Hosea references rescue from the hands of Sheol. That is pretty strong and clear language.

"From the hand of Sheol I do ransom them, From death I redeem them, Where is thy plague, O death? Where thy destruction, O Sheol?" --Hosea 13:14 (YLT)

On a similar note, faith in God's promise regarding looking upon the brazen serpent saved Israel from the sting of death. Similarly, faith in God's promise in the NT provided also salvation from the sting of death.

“Where, O death, is your victory? Where, O death, is your sting?” The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 57 But thanks be to God! He gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. 1 Corinthians 15:55-57

Re: the Cross and Brazen Serpent and salvation through believing/faith
The circumstance of the brazen serpent was a very clear OT scenario of salvation through faith--salvation from death by serpent. The cross was yet another circumstance of salvation through faith with Passover-style 'identification'. AFAIK it was always salvation through faith, rather than works. In the OT temple did the congregation do any work or did high priest do the work? The annual sprinkling of the blood it seems was also active through faith. Thus, Hebrews 10:4: "For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins".

And Jehovah saith unto Moses, 'Make for thee a burning serpent, and set it on an ensign; and it hath been, every one who is bitten and hath seen it -- he hath lived. --Numbers 21:8

Now consider, the bite should have caused death but it did not for those who looked upon the brazen serpent ('the hair the the dog that bit you' comes to mind). So they SHOULD have technically died, right? But, due to divine intervention, they did not die--they lived.

Re: Abraham and Isaac
I would still suggest that a key point of the Abraham and Isaac scenario was that reverence for living God (rather than idols) and the contrast between Abraham those who willingly sacrificed their children to idols.

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding. Proverbs 9:10

The contrast between those of his day who may have readily sacrificed babes to idols and his willingness to sacrifice to a living God + the fact that the sacrifice was not required.