The two «Theria» of Revelation 13

a reply to: Matrixsurvivor

but there are numerous people in this world (who even still call themselves believers in Jesus) who see through Paul. (many are on this forum) Now, if YOU need to hold fast to Paul (basically because he's in a book that you pretty much worship on the same level as you do "god")

Yes I do agree with you in that there are numerous people who curse Saul/Paul and I agree that there are many here on ATS who will agree with you. But you are wrong in that I worship a book as I do a god. I assume you mean the English bible but even that is not true. I do try to understand the written and oral Torah but even that is a lifetime of study and way above my intellect.

I am disappointed to see that you will not even clarify your statement that Jesus' Father was not the same deity as Moses' Father. A very simple request which could help me understand your confusion. But out of this discussion comes the revelation that probably there are many people who simply are not taught the truth and probably do not want to learn the truth least it destroys their perspective in this life. Eternity is forever and worth the effort. Thanking you for the input.
God Bless You

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: Matrixsurvivor

but there are numerous people in this world (who even still call themselves believers in Jesus) who see through Paul. (many are on this forum) Now, if YOU need to hold fast to Paul (basically because he's in a book that you pretty much worship on the same level as you do "god")

Yes I do agree with you in that there are numerous people who curse Saul/Paul and I agree that there are many here on ATS who will agree with you. But you are wrong in that I worship a book as I do a god. I assume you mean the English bible but even that is not true. I do try to understand the written and oral Torah but even that is a lifetime of study and way above my intellect.

I am disappointed to see that you will not even clarify your statement that Jesus' Father was not the same deity as Moses' Father. A very simple request which could help me understand your confusion. But out of this discussion comes the revelation that probably there are many people who simply are not taught the truth and probably do not want to learn the truth least it destroys their perspective in this life. Eternity is forever and worth the effort. Thanking you for the input.
God Bless You

I'm not confused about it, Seede. Yahweh is not good. Can you prove he is? Saul was not good, can you prove he is?

I am not debating you, cause I know it won't matter . I know what I know. You don't. ..and that's OK with me.

a reply to: Seede

A common tactic used by psychopaths and taughtlessers to defame opponents in discussion is to say they didn't do enough work (and you didn't do that, did you?). I could make you site every verse, Seede, remember that. It would take weeks. What Matrix says is sound.

originally posted by: Sheraldo

You have tested those who call themselves apostles and are not, and you have found them to be liars.

Good post. I'm in agreement about Paul.

So am I, I am split-minded and test what Paul the Saintan 666 calls «everything», and I remain with my discoveries those whose good intentions were truly good. Saulus is Satan in sheeps' hide. He is everything Jesus warned us about. Read Acts 13 with a minimum of Hebrew language knowledge, Saulus calls the Son of Jesus for the Son of Satan(!) After that incident Saulus was known as a Paulus and would continually lie about him being a Roman citizen. Hence the Dragons' breath. I like dragons more than I detest Saulus.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Text A common tactic used by psychopaths and taughtlessers to defame opponents in discussion is to say they didn't do enough work (and you didn't do that, did you?). I could make you site every verse, Seede, remember that. It would take weeks. What Matrix says is sound.

I would not know how to determine the tactics of a psychopath and I do not know what taughtlesser is. Also I am not defending my own behavior because I have not offended anyone in their behavior. In fact the statement was made that Jesus' Father is not the same as the Jew's Father and that was totally ignored after I had requested clarification three times. Perhaps being the champion of this discussion, you could also answer that for your companion as he/she will not answer what he/she posted. I am still waiting for that answer.

As far as making me do anything it is very unreal to say the least. If you would care to discuss the apostle Paul's authenticity then I would be pleased to discuss one subject at a time. [that is if we are in the same theological subject matter.] But I will not cloud the discussion with a rant of multiple subject matter such as has been posted by Matrixsurvivor which, by the way, was not verified by source.

If you have the understanding that the English bible is the last word in Christian education then you are not very well learned in that subject and by your rant I am led to believe that you are not well versed in the Nazarene theology. There is far more authentic literature involved in understanding the NT MSS then you are able to understand or are privy to obtain. Simply because you can not see it in the NT MSS does not mean the pseudepigraphic literature is not true in either DSS or free literature.

My last word on this subject is that if you are not of the Christian theological understanding [and I suspect that to be the case] then I do not wish to banter theological differences. It would be best for us to discuss and not argue. If you are of the Christian theology then I would be pleased to discuss theological facts [if there is such a thing.]

a reply to: Matrixsurvivor

I'm not confused about it, Seede. Yahweh is not good. Can you prove he is? Saul was not good, can you prove he is?

No more can I prove theology than you can prove theology. Theology is likened to the unknown and is basically a faith based mentality. Once theology is proven it then graduates into fact or facts. You have your god and I have my God but in both cases it is still theology. But nevertheless of which theological god prevails, when all is done is when the truth will be shown or perhaps will not be shown. That is the sadness of theology. There is a toss of the coin by each of us as to whether it will not appear or that it will appear. What are the odds of each? It's all theology.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Still waiting on those historical accounts that prove Paul to be the snake that you allege he was.

He definitely was a snake. Why do Christians always say, "cite chapter and verse, please" (like being polite somehow makes you like Jesus, lol).
If you guys know your bibles so well, you shouldn't need "chapter and verse". Or, "show me the historical accounts"....man, ya'll are definitely caught up in this matrix.

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: Matrixsurvivor

I'm not confused about it, Seede. Yahweh is not good. Can you prove he is? Saul was not good, can you prove he is?

No more can I prove theology than you can prove theology. Theology is likened to the unknown and is basically a faith based mentality. Once theology is proven it then graduates into fact or facts. You have your god and I have my God but in both cases it is still theology. But nevertheless of which theological god prevails, when all is done is when the truth will be shown or perhaps will not be shown. That is the sadness of theology. There is a toss of the coin by each of us as to whether it will not appear or that it will appear. What are the odds of each? It's all theology.

I know, Seede. I'm so done with theology it makes me want to puke. I do believe when we exit these bodies, we are finally free. I hope to give you a fist bump when that day comes, for both of us. Hopefully, none of this junk will matter anymore.
Either way, I wish you the best.

I'm just curious...WHY do Christians feel the need to so adamantly defend Paul? Not only Paul, but the bible? Can any of you see that you have been stuck in a box, and if the god you so readily go to bat for was "all that"....he wouldn't need anyone to do so. Yet, Christians all over seem to think it's their solemn duty to defend their creator. Like, he can't defend himself.
Why do either one of those need "defending"?? Especially with people who have no qualms with Jesus. It's quite interesting if you actually step back and look at the big picture.

originally posted by: Matrixsurvivor
I'm just curious...WHY do Christians feel the need to so adamantly defend Paul? Not only Paul, but the bible? Can any of you see that you have been stuck in a box, and if the god you so readily go to bat for was "all that"....he wouldn't need anyone to do so. Yet, Christians all over seem to think it's their solemn duty to defend their creator. Like, he can't defend himself.
Why do either one of those need "defending"?? Especially with people who have no qualms with Jesus. It's quite interesting if you actually step back and look at the big picture.

It's just a little frustrating to constantly read/hear people attacking the Bible with theories based on half-truths, especially when they fail to cite historical records to support their claims.

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest

originally posted by: Matrixsurvivor
I'm just curious...WHY do Christians feel the need to so adamantly defend Paul? Not only Paul, but the bible? Can any of you see that you have been stuck in a box, and if the god you so readily go to bat for was "all that"....he wouldn't need anyone to do so. Yet, Christians all over seem to think it's their solemn duty to defend their creator. Like, he can't defend himself.
Why do either one of those need "defending"?? Especially with people who have no qualms with Jesus. It's quite interesting if you actually step back and look at the big picture.

It's just a little frustrating to constantly read/hear people attacking the Bible with theories based on half-truths, especially when they fail to cite historical records to support their claims.

Why is it frustrating? Aren't others free to decide what they want?
What is so telling is Christians HAVE to be right. The Bible HAS to be true, thus anyone pointing out discrepancies in it, or who choose to reject parts of it, are criticized, told they are demon possessed or listening to lies, or going to hell. Or, it turns into a big PROVE IT match.
It's all so ridiculous.
I don't see any concern for the person who challenges it or rejects it (which if you do want to emulate Jesus... would be the case). No, all I see is disdain, anger, smugness, and ego paraded about.
If you think the Bible is the end all and be all of truth in this world, more power to you.

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
....... What if I told you that St. Paul was the equivalent of a Nazi SS Hauptsturmführer? Or a petty SA private trying to save his own Jewish skin? What if I told you that The Seven Caesars were the Antichrist (the false Caesars) and that St. Paul served as their False Prophet?

What if someone told you Barrack Obama wiretapped them......

a reply to: Matrixsurvivor

The challenge is not the frustrating part. Its trying to discuss these claims that have no merit or historical support. That's the frustrating part. That's largely why I have been less active on this thread. None of these Paul bashing theories are supported with historical content. This will be my third request for historical citations.

But you're right. Its not worth the frustration. So if you want to believe in a historically inaccurate fantasy, more power to you.

originally posted by: Rex282

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
....... What if I told you that St. Paul was the equivalent of a Nazi SS Hauptsturmführer? Or a petty SA private trying to save his own Jewish skin? What if I told you that The Seven Caesars were the Antichrist (the false Caesars) and that St. Paul served as their False Prophet?

What if someone told you Barrack Obama wiretapped them......

Nah , it was Trump...

a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Historical accounts? thought we were taking about early christianity, you know as well as me that there are no historical accounts. People like st. Paul et al were eager to destroy all such things, so nothing has survived.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

So because you allege, there are no historical accounts to support anything you say, its all Paul's fault? How is that objective?

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Profesor Robert Eisenman wrote a book called Jesus Brother of James and the Dead Sea Scrolls. His work is amazing and he shows compelling evidence that Paul was a Herodian and even tried to kill James, the brother of Jesus.

a reply to: Sheraldo

Profesor Robert Eisenman wrote a book called Jesus Brother of James and the Dead Sea Scrolls. His work is amazing and he shows compelling evidence that Paul was a Herodian and even tried to kill James, the brother of Jesus.

I have read said book by Eisenman and it reeks with his theology and not necessarily facts. One should remember that Eisenman was a pious Jew first and foremost who has a personal vendetta against the man Saul/Paul. Paul abandoned Judaism and in doing so is an enemy of the rabbinic crowd of which he kissed with a treacherous farewell. I was greatly disappointed in Eisenman's literature simply because he used his prominent scholarly expertise to sell his theological faith. To me that is not accepted as honest and quite frankly full of rabbinic Judaic authority.

There is some evidence that Saul/Paul did throw James from an unknown height in a heated argument and did leave James
thinking he was dead but that was before the conversion of Saul/Paul.

But Eisenman's theory that Saul was a Herodian is absolutely fantastically untrue in most all scholarly papers. Eisenman tries to sell the theology that Saul/Paul was a Hellenistic Herodian when in fact there is much evidence that Saul/Paul was a disciple and student of of the Hebrew school of Gamallel. In fact the young Saul was either a member or scribe of the Jerusalem Sanhedrin. His master (Gamallel) was the Nasi (Head) of the Jerusalem Sanhedrin at that time. In outside literature, of various sorts, it is stated that Saul was appointed to replace Gamallel eventually and one cannot be of any membership in the Sanhedrin and be a Greek.

It is also known by scholars that a death penalty must be verified and witnessed by a member of the Sanhedrin. It is strongly believed that Saul was that witness as he consented to the death of Stephen. Acts 7:54-60 -- One could not possibly have been a Herodian and have had that authority. This and much more that Eisenman tried to sell is very disappointing. He mixes just enough facts to sell his Judaism.

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

Historical accounts? thought we were taking about early christianity, you know as well as me that there are no historical accounts. People like st. Paul et al were eager to destroy all such things, so nothing has survived.

What in this world are you trying to sell? That is about the most untrue statement that I have ever read. Paul had no influence in the destruction of the historicity of the synagogue of James. Destruction of the Nazarene history came from the Roman Empire in two waves of destruction. The first being in 70 c.e. under Titus and the most complete in 135 c.e. under Hadrian. In the later event Paul was dead.

Paul had no authority in the synagogue of James before or after it was established and in fact the synagogue's historicity was stolen, changed and re emerged as the Roman Church later in the 2nd century. Paul was long dead by this time and had nothing to do with the liturgy or canonization of any literature. You simply do not know what you are talking about.