Paul ~ Inventing a new saviour

Originally posted by 12.21.12
reply to post by justamomma

 

Yes I agree. All sides are wrong. The best way to not let the powers that be manipulate us, is not to take part in it.

I can't remember who said this, so anyone who knows, please feel free to give credit for this brilliant statement to its rightful owner and correct any mistakes I might have made... in essence the statement is that all that needs to be done for evil to rule is for good men to keep silent.

So, while I agree that choosing sides based on race, religion, or dedication to those in control is wrong, to not say anything is to be misguided.

I love the Jewish people with a great love, but I do believe that those who are blindly following their leaders are in the wrong. I believe that this applies to the others as well. I will state as much and we need more people who can see this to say as much as well. Time to take control back and to spread it to each individual so they can learn the meaning of being responsible for self.

reply to post by justamomma


Yes, I agree. Our revolution is a revolution of consciescness which seperates truth from all lies and empowers us to stay in control of the situation. The more people who know, the better off we all will be.

Hi Justamomma ....sorry about that ..I guess I should have used the quote thingy majig ....... it was to Badmedias post a few posts above
I would contribute more but whatever I may have to say about all of this I already said it in the other threads about Paul and the NT writers..I dont think I could add anything without just repeating myself ....lol ........I just wanted to respond to what Badmedia was saying .....



[edit on 6-1-2009 by Simplynoone]

Originally posted by Simplynoone
Hi Justamomma ....sorry about that ..I guess I should have used the quote thingy majig ....... it was to Badmedias post a few posts above
I would contribute more but whatever I may have to say about all of this I already said it in the other threads about Paul and the NT writers..I dont think I could add anything without just repeating myself ....lol ........I just wanted to respond to what Badmedia was saying .....

I agree 100% with what badmedia says to be honest. It has been a quick journey from the first time he and I encountered one another in another thread to come to the realization that what he is saying is right.

When he says god, just like when I say G.d, it is merely to identify. This however is not a defining term. Some call Him Allah, the Jewish have MANY names to describe the manifestations that are shown to them, some call Him Father, etc. These are all identifying labels but to limit this "Life Force" that DOES exist to one label is to worship the label and not the actual Life that again, DOES exist (if you have breath in your lungs, you have your proof!! and it is only you that limits His work in your life).

When badmedia says that we are gods... if I remember correctly, he has told me he simply means "sons... daughters" of G.d. This is true too and the proof, again, is in our lungs.

But to worship ANY ONE man, to worship the stars, to worship the trees, to worship a rock or wood (cross), to worship a race, to worship a government, money, or even ourself is idolotry. It binds us to the physical. This is what Judaism teaches (believe it or not). It is to recognize that Life in ourselves, in each other, and in all of creation.

Now, every religion has its idols worshiped by some... including Judaism. But to have expressions that are just recognitions of this Life that has breathed into Creation is not idolotry.... so long as the expression is merely a recognition of the Life.

Here is where this becomes important to understand. "Dubbya" said "god" told him to go to war with Iraq. Now, though I am not anti getting rid of ANYONE who wants to do things THEIR way in a way that violates OTHER'S ways, I am opposed to killing innocents to get to that one. I am all for lining up and doing away with those who are unsatisfied in this life because they are not in control of everyone, but there is no doubt that to take out the lives that JUST want to live and enjoy their time here is wrong.

To recognize the Life that breathed into us is to recognize that Life in one another. The only ones who will be going to hell are those who have created such a place in their mind and believe it... because we are co creators. If you condemn another to such a place, then that is where you will end up. Danger Danger in creating G.d as an image in your mind and thinking that your image is right and then condemning others for not agreeing.

Research project: Find out the first time that the number 13 is used in the bible (minus the chapter and verses) and see if you can't figure out the clue as to how we were warned of Paul, the 13th apostle. Clue: Genesis... found not long after the 13th chapter. I do believe these things are clues to us.

Anyway, kind of went off there... but just saying, there is no man that will save this world... never has been and never will be. The only person that can "save" you is yourself. G.d is with you, but the only way that He can set you free is when you understand that He is not an image... not even of yourself.

FYI: I chose to express to Him my love through Judaism because it came via the people who first understood this Life.... when you understand this Life (identifying label only) aka G.d, you will understand.

[edit on 7-1-2009 by justamomma]

reply to post by justamomma

I can't remember who said this, so anyone who knows, please feel free to give credit for this brilliant statement to its rightful owner and correct any mistakes I might have made... in essence the statement is that all that needs to be done for evil to rule is for good men to keep silent.

Here you go.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke

Remember, Paul (Saul) was a persecutor of those who were being enlightened by Jesus' message and no doubt, the enlightened were growing despite the persecution..... this would mean loss for the Romans if the message spread to those who were not Jewish.

How would it be loss for the romans? After Constantine and the Nicene council decided how god was to be worshiped, they then began a campaign of slaughtering all those Christians who would not worship a man as God. What did they care? Any means necessary were taken to insure their power and status.

Many of these slaughtered people were of Gentile origin and were enlightened as a result of Paul's outreach.

The Romans wiped out, slaughtered, murdered those who would not worship a man as God. Then, as we all know, the scriptures were not allowed to be read by the common man. Still today people do not read the scriptures for themselves, relying on others to tell them what they say. This matter of Paul too is a piggybacking on what others say.

Paul (saul) was part of the elite Jewish circle (the ones to help execute Jesus) and they were known to be in cohorts with the upper elite of the Roman empire..... the conspiracy seems obvious to me.

Do you really mean to suggest that people cannot be changed?

I do not think the other apostles were idiots. If I can tell who has been transformed, then I would think that they had that same ability. Yes, at first Paul was held in suspicion because of his prior actions, but they accepted him and called him "beloved brother".

Paul, as many on this board are, was sent as an apostle AFTER the death of Jesus. Jesus in speaking to his disciples/apostles said: By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another." John 13:35

This haranguing of Paul that properly belongs on the bloody roman empire, well, it shows me that full love for one another is lacking.

To deny any apostle after the death of Jesus makes it all the easier to deny the message of any present day apostle and perhaps rightfully so.

Put the blame where it belongs: the Romans and those who continue to parrot that doctrine, which is the church of today.

Of course, if you wish for your own message to be diluted, continue misplacing who actually is responsible for the mess.

Originally posted by L.I.B.
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke

Hi L.I.B. Thank you! Yup, this is it.

How would it be loss for the romans? After Constantine and the Nicene council decided how god was to be worshiped, they then began a campaign of slaughtering all those Christians who would not worship a man as God. What did they care? Any means necessary were taken to insure their power and status.

Many of these slaughtered people were of Gentile origin and were enlightened as a result of Paul's outreach.

The Romans wiped out, slaughtered, murdered those who would not worship a man as God. Then, as we all know, the scriptures were not allowed to be read by the common man. Still today people do not read the scriptures for themselves, relying on others to tell them what they say. This matter of Paul too is a piggybacking on what others say.

Hmmm... You might want to help me out here. I can't figure out if we are agreeing or not. haha I think we are, but the way it is worded sounds like you don't seem to think so.

Do you really mean to suggest that people cannot be changed?

I did not say this, and of course I am not implying this either. What I am saying is that Paul's message that Jesus is G.d in the flesh is to objectify G.d and is contradictory to the essence of what Jesus taught and is contradictory to the Tanakh upon which it is supposedly based.

I do not think the other apostles were idiots. If I can tell who has been transformed, then I would think that they had that same ability. Yes, at first Paul was held in suspicion because of his prior actions, but they accepted him and called him "beloved brother".

Paul, as many on this board are, was sent as an apostle AFTER the death of Jesus. Jesus in speaking to his disciples/apostles said: By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another." John 13:35

This haranguing of Paul that properly belongs on the bloody roman empire, well, it shows me that full love for one another is lacking.

To deny any apostle after the death of Jesus makes it all the easier to deny the message of any present day apostle and perhaps rightfully so.

Put the blame where it belongs: the Romans and those who continue to parrot that doctrine, which is the church of today.

Of course, if you wish for your own message to be diluted, continue misplacing who actually is responsible for the mess.

Isaiah 8: 20 "To the law and to the testimony (the prophets): if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them."

First commandment:
In letter: Do not have any other gods before Me.
In spirit: Thou shalt love the Lord your G.d with all your heart, soul, and mind.

Paul broke these in message by focusing on a man as G.d.

He also broke the rule of thumb you cited in that he taught others to worship a man. That is not love. That is entrapment. When you love someone, you set them free entirely through understanding and light. Paul did not do this.. he did the complete opposite and he did in such a cunning way that those who worship a man actually believe they are free and yet they have not the light in them according to Isaiah 8: 20. They are "free" in their mind from having to regard the purpose of the letter of the law, but they still act selfishly, worship another god, and teach others to do the same (thereby, failing even to fulfill the spirit of the Law which *is* (when understood in the light of G.d) the fulfillment of the letter).

And who sent him?? Since he doesn't comply with the standards set in Isaiah 8: 20 or even the one you gave, we can be sure it wasn't G.d who sent him.

Loving one another does NOT involve accepting lies. Now, in the case that whole of the New Testament is a parable (if it is), then Paul is just representative of the rebellion against the truth. Therefore, am I really even speaking against a man? No... even if he existed... I am speaking against the lies he taught that entrap people by turning them to worship an image and not G.d.

Apostle, as it was determined THEN, was a term given to those who had been enlightened by Jesus face to face. Therefore, since Paul claims his message after the death of Jesus, he could NOT be an apostle, neither can there be any modern day apostles.

Even if you believe in the physical ressurection of Jesus.. right before he acended he said that he was going to prepare a place for the people and that he would leave behind the Holy Spirit.... NEVER did he say that he would appear to anyone HIMSELF... therefore, Paul's lie saying that Jesus, himself, sent him. He HAD to say that because that was the only way he could deem himself an apostle.. but since Jesus made it clear that he would not be in the world, well... come on, the logic should be clear and the lie should be as well.

I blame the false message... the false message was attributed to a man called Paul. He is representative of the false message. I don't necessarily see Paul as a man so much as a lie. *shrugs*

I did enjoy your post though



[edit on 7-1-2009 by justamomma]

reply to post by justamomma

Isaiah 8: 20 "To the law and to the testimony (the prophets): if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them."

Refers to Isaiah 8: 14 to 19...

14. And he shall be for a sanctuary;
but for a stone of stumbling
and for a rock of offence
to both the houses of Israel,
for a gin and for a snare
to the inhabitants of Jerusalem.

15. And many among them
shall stumble, and fall, and broken,
and be snared, and be taken.

16. Bind up the testimony,
seal the law among my disciples.

17. And I will wait upon the Lord,
that hideth his face
from the house of Jacob,
and I will look to him.

18. Behold, I and the children
whom the Lord
hath given me are for signs
and for wonders in Israel
from the Lord of hosts,
which dwelleth in mount Zion.

19. And when they shall say
Seek unto them that have familiar spirits,
and wizards that peep, and that mutter;
should not a people seek unto their God ?
for the living to the dead ?

20. To the law and to the testimony:
if they speak not according to this word,
it is because there is no light in them.

reply to post by justamomma


In a nutshell, the OT was the Age of the Law, and the NT(i.e. post-crucifixion/resurrection) is the Age of Grace.

reply to post by The Matrix Traveller


That whole context is a warning... 8: 20 is the given rule to be able to discern the truth from the lie.

"satan" appears as the angel of light does he not? how do we decipher what we are allowing ourselves to be deceived with from the truth?

*drumroll* .... Isaiah 8: 20

There are people who believe in Jesus as G.d to the point that in churches, they are allowing themselves to be physically beat up.. they are trusting the "signs" and "wonders" that ARE happening because they believe in a man name Jesus? ... Their blind faith has deceived them to the point that they allow pastors to take their earnings, their dignity, and ultimately their self esteem.. because when they are away from the signs and wonders, they still feel empty.

How could this be avoided? Isaiah 8: 20.. The LAW of G.d: in letter says have no other gods before me.. In spirit, love the Lord your G.d with all your heart soul and mind. The TESTIMONY: the prophets the vessels for the word (testimony) of G.d have clarified the Law to us. In the testimony, over and over it is confirmed that G.d is not a man; G.d alone is our Saviour (he sent saviours... and then taught through the spirit how to free oneself spiritually; but HE is the Saviour saving us through these men).


So, if these poor (in spirit) souls understood how to decipher the lies from the truth via the keys given in Isaiah 8:20, they would know that a man is not G.d and that "to know thyself" means nothing outside of you will save your soul. It is from within... always was, always is, and always will be. There is no one man who will save the world.. that is what the Law and Testimony teach AND the Law and Testimony combined is the path to salvation... which comes from G.d which comes from knowing yourself which teaches you how to recognize yourself in others.

[edit on 7-1-2009 by justamomma]

I hate to tell you this Justamomma ..but Jesus is no longer just a man .....he was never just a man anyway ...he came as a man and did not require worship as he was here in fact he said all GLORY GOES TO THE FATHER ..but as he entered heaven he now sits at the RIGHT HAND OF GOD and the FATHER made him HEIR to the entire kingdom .......we do not worship a man ..we worship the FATHER IN SPIRIT we REJOICE IN CHRIST JESUS >..and if a believer UNDERSTANDS this ..they would never bow down and worship any Antichrist or Government or Mythria or any person ...or idol or anyone or anything ..THEY SHOULD BE WORSHIPPING IN SPIRIT ONLY .........

Jhn 4:20 Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.
Jhn 4:21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.
Jhn 4:22 Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.
Jhn 4:23 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.
Jhn 4:24 God [is] a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship [him] in spirit and in truth.
Phl 3:3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.



Hbr 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by [his] Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;


Psa 2:1 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
Psa 2:2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, [saying],
Psa 2:3 Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.
Psa 2:4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.
Psa 2:5 Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.
Psa 2:6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.
Psa 2:7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou [art] my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
Psa 2:8 Ask of me, and I shall give [thee] the heathen [for] thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth [for] thy possession.
Psa 2:9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.
Psa 2:10 Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.
Psa 2:11 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.
Psa 2:12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish [from] the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed [are] all they that put their trust in him.

We put our TRUST IN JESUS CHRIST we worship him in SPIRIT >.............

reply to post by justamomma

How would it be loss for the romans? After Constantine and the Nicene council decided how god was to be worshiped, they then began a campaign of slaughtering all those Christians who would not worship a man as God. What did they care? Any means necessary were taken to insure their power and status.

Many of these slaughtered people were of Gentile origin and were enlightened as a result of Paul's outreach.

The Romans wiped out, slaughtered, murdered those who would not worship a man as God. Then, as we all know, the scriptures were not allowed to be read by the common man. Still today people do not read the scriptures for themselves, relying on others to tell them what they say. This matter of Paul too is a piggybacking on what others say.

Hmmm... You might want to help me out here. I can't figure out if we are agreeing or not. haha I think we are, but the way it is worded sounds like you don't seem to think so.

I had read your statement: Remember, Paul (Saul) was a persecutor of those who were being enlightened by Jesus' message and no doubt, the enlightened were growing despite the persecution..... this would mean loss for the Romans if the message spread to those who were not Jewish. to suggest that Paul was like a secret agent for the Romans.

To which I disagree. The gentiles were gathered into belief of the One transcendent G.d of Israel, whom were at that time part of the Jewish religion and exempt from the 603 torah laws. These individuals no longer called Rome's Caesar G.d, how was that a loss to them since Judaism was always free from Rome's law to call Caesar G.d? They still paid their taxes after all.

Additionally, how was that a loss to them when Rome undertook a campaign later, after the Christians were no longer protected by being a sect of Judaism, when they slaughtered all those individuals whom knew G.d was more than a man and would not worship G.d as Rome proscribed by law?

Do you really mean to suggest that people cannot be changed?

I did not say this, and of course I am not implying this either.

It just came across that way... as a conspiracy that Paul was a consort to Rome's later actions, actions that took place approximately 200 years after Paul. Let us not forget it was Rome who worshiped a man as G.d... Caesar and it was Rome who decided how Jesus was supposed to be worshiped under penalty of death. If this law of worshiping Jesus as god was not followed, those individuals were killed.

What I am saying is that Paul's message that Jesus is G.d in the flesh is to objectify G.d and is contradictory to the essence of what Jesus taught and is contradictory to the Tanakh upon which it is supposedly based.

What can be pointed to and said that is not G.d?

I do not think the other apostles were idiots. If I can tell who has been transformed, then I would think that they had that same ability. Yes, at first Paul was held in suspicion because of his prior actions, but they accepted him and called him "beloved brother".

Paul, as many on this board are, was sent as an apostle AFTER the death of Jesus. Jesus in speaking to his disciples/apostles said: By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another." John 13:35

This haranguing of Paul that properly belongs on the bloody roman empire, well, it shows me that full love for one another is lacking.

To deny any apostle after the death of Jesus makes it all the easier to deny the message of any present day apostle and perhaps rightfully so.

Put the blame where it belongs: the Romans and those who continue to parrot that doctrine, which is the church of today.

Of course, if you wish for your own message to be diluted, continue misplacing who actually is responsible for the mess.

Isaiah 8: 20 "To the law and to the testimony (the prophets): if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them."

First commandment:
In letter: Do not have any other gods before Me.
In spirit: Thou shalt love the Lord your G.d with all your heart, soul, and mind.

Paul broke these in message by focusing on a man as G.d.

Again, it is the church that has twisted Paul's words. Paul's message was focused on a man as a savior... of which the Hebrew nation has had several. It just turned out that this particular man (Jesus) became the gentile's savior as well.

He also broke the rule of thumb you cited in that he taught others to worship a man. That is not love. That is entrapment.

Under penalty of death, Rome killed all those who would not worship G.d under their law. Before it was Caesar. That bloody empire then changed the man god to be worshiped to Jesus. Whom was doing the entrapment?

When you love someone, you set them free entirely through understanding and light. Paul did not do this.. he did the complete opposite and he did in such a cunning way that those who worship a man actually believe they are free and yet they have not the light in them according to Isaiah 8: 20. They are "free" in their mind from having to regard the purpose of the letter of the law, but they still act selfishly, worship another god, and teach others to do the same (thereby, failing even to fulfill the spirit of the Law which *is* (when understood in the light of G.d) the fulfillment of the letter).

I do not disagree with you, except it has not been proven to me "scripturally" that Paul did this. Yes, Paul did direct love towards Christ Jesus. And Jesus said: If you love Me, you will keep My commandments. John 14:15

How is that love any different than the love that Judaism holds for Moses?

Yes, many, but not all Christians have an idol! I just don't agree with making Paul the patsy.

continued...


edited for html

[edit on 7-1-2009 by L.I.B.]

[edit on 7-1-2009 by L.I.B.]

reply to post by justamomma


continuing on...

Apostle, as it was determined THEN, was a term given to those who had been enlightened by Jesus face to face.

No. Apostles are disciples whom are "sent".

Therefore, since Paul claims his message after the death of Jesus, he could NOT be an apostle, neither can there be any modern day apostles.

You may want to reconsider this, because...

Even if you believe in the physical ressurection of Jesus.. right before he acended he said that he was going to prepare a place for the people and that he would leave behind the Holy Spirit.... NEVER did he say that he would appear to anyone HIMSELF...

Yes, Jesus did say that he would appear after his death:

A little while, and you will no longer see Me; and again a little while, and you will see Me." John 16:16

Jesus DID appear several times after his death to many different people. To this day, Jesus and the Father are appearing to people... and, this appearing of Jesus is not restricted to visions or dreams.

Also, the other apostles confirm it and also say what it means:

Beloved, now we are children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we will be We know that when He appears, we will be like Him, because we will see Him just as He is. 1 John 3:2

I would not say it if I did not know it to be true.

...therefore, Paul's lie saying that Jesus, himself, sent him.

You might want to reconsider.

There are other departed Jewish tzaddik whom in the present time appear to the living.

He HAD to say that because that was the only way he could deem himself an apostle.. but since Jesus made it clear that he would not be in the world, well... come on, the logic should be clear and the lie should be as well.

Do you remember the story about the disciples who were bringing things into the community for equal sharing and how that one couple who dropped dead before Peter because they had lied? The story is in Acts 5:1-10. If Paul were lying... he too would/could have shared the same fate.

I blame the false message...

I do too.

...the false message was attributed to a man called Paul.

He is representative of the false message.

That has yet to be proven to me scripturally.

I don't necessarily see Paul as a man so much as a lie. *shrugs*

And so, it is no wonder that so much of the bible is taken out of context... Lucifer is Satan... oh wait, no he isn't! Lucifer was the king of Babylon.

Can't have it both ways as I see it. Take only some parts in context, and other parts as we might wish it to be.

reply to post by justamomma


I love your Choice of Words...

which comes from G.d which comes from knowing yourself which teaches you how to recognize yourself in others.

An echo of my own words...

Do you agree or disagree with Gnosticism ???

Please Note:

I am Not Gnostic!

Nor do I belong to any religious Sect....

But have studied many Gnostic writings in my early years.

Oh by the way, I am interested in why you use the word ?

G.d

And Not God ?

Peace.

[edit on 7-1-2009 by The Matrix Traveller]

The problem with Paul is not that complicated. He praises the idol of Jesus constantly, and then tells people to do things opposite of what Jesus said to them.

Jesus taught people they were the authority, Paul taught people that they must submit to authority(Romans - the name of the book and those who are the authority). Paul teaches people they must believe and accept Jesus, Jesus says that those who truly believe will do what he says(not what Paul says). Jesus tells them not to make leaders of themselves, Paul does exactly this.

The entire idea that you need Paul to understand Jesus is just somewhat nuts in itself I do believe. Is it not to say that Jesus alone was not good enough? And why does Paul receive and tell instructions after the death of Jesus that went against the life of Jesus?

It's not like when I found the truth and seen it in the bible I just automatically developed a grudge for Paul. It developed after people always using the words of Paul as a way of saying Jesus is wrong. All the time this happened, over and over. And in many cases, these were things Jesus said specifically not to do.

I honestly fail to see why I need Paul to understand Jesus.





[edit on 7-1-2009 by badmedia]

reply to post by badmedia

I honestly fail to see why I need Paul to understand Jesus.

You don't. He merely has teachings that can be helpful to us. Plus, not opposing him enhances your message.

It is, I agree, hard to get through to those who do not understand that when Paul was talking about the law, he was not talking about what Jesus said to do, but was instead speaking of the other 603 Mosaic laws.

It's the faith versus works issue too.




[edit on 7-1-2009 by L.I.B.]

Originally posted by L.I.B.
Yes, Jesus did say that he would appear after his death:

A little while, and you will no longer see Me; and again a little while, and you will see Me." John 16:16

Jesus DID appear several times after his death to many different people. To this day, Jesus and the Father are appearing to people... and, this appearing of Jesus is not restricted to visions or dreams.

But Jesus does say he will appear to people in visions and dreams. That is how those who see him will see him. And that is how he manifests to people. You were the one who pointed this out to me.

This is all explained in John 14, which was the same chapter that got me to look towards the bible.

John 14

7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

21He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

22Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?

23Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

abode means

# A dwelling place; a home.
# The act of abiding; a sojourn

So thus, they will come dwell inside of him, being present with that person, but not present unto the world.

And of course, this is also when the person recieves the holy spirit.

He goes on in verse 27 to say that he doesn't give as the world gives.

And why is Paul so special that he gets a physical manifestation, but countless other people do not get it? Time and time again people look to the external for answers. People tell me all the time - why doesn't god just appear to me. And I have to tell them to look internally, not externally. And yet, Paul is so apparently so special that he gets physical manifestations and is told to do things that others were told not to do. And I'm not supposed to think it sounds a bit fishy, especially in light of his contradictions?

I would be more apt to believe that Paul was saying the vision itself was alot like a physical manifestation, because a vision is alot like it. But I know what I seen was not physical, and the surroundings I was in were not the surroundings I was in physically.

reply to post by badmedia

Yes, Jesus did say that he would appear after his death:

A little while, and you will no longer see Me; and again a little while, and you will see Me." John 16:16

Jesus DID appear several times after his death to many different people. To this day, Jesus and the Father are appearing to people... and, this appearing of Jesus is not restricted to visions or dreams.

But Jesus does say he will appear to people in visions and dreams. That is how those who see him will see him. And that is how he manifests to people. You were the one who pointed this out to me.

Yes, but what I pointed out to you was from the old testament. Numbers 12:6.

Jesus also manifests, in the flesh, to people.

I'll have to get to the rest of your post later... I'm trying to beat a deadline right now. Perhaps around 8-9pm central time? I hope anyway.



oh how I wish I wouldn't keep messing up the html requiring edits!

[edit on 7-1-2009 by L.I.B.]

reply to post by L.I.B.


I think you have misconstrued what I was saying L.I.B. But that's okay. I may have been unclear.

Let's start over.

We have a message (represented by Jesus) and then we have a lie (represented by Paul). If the NT is valid, then this is the only way in which it can be valid. The Hebrew Scriptures representing the Letter.. life and death.. the New Testament representing the spirit of the Law.. LIFE and DEATH.

The Letter represents the Negative charge and the spirit represents the positive.. when you have both, your vision is clear. Both the spirit and the letter were *given* in the Hebrew Scriptures. And both are *validated* in the New Testament.


Jesus, who was careful how he worded things, said in Mark 13,

5. And Jesus answering them began to say, Take heed lest any man deceive you:

6. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.

He clearly states what he means. For many shall come in my name *IN THE NAME OF JESUS*.... saying(,) *I* am Christ. He is not talking about random people claiming to be saviors of the world... he touches on that a little further on in the context.

This must be understood in the Spirit because I can't get anymore clear than that.


Now Paul does just that. He comes in the name of Jesus and claims that HE is Christ.

Philip 2:10-11
That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

He is not being careful with his wording. He is misunderstanding the message of Jesus *because* he was not sent by Jesus.

Jesus was merely here to enlighten the Jewish people that they were the messiah spoken of in Isaiah. As a collective, they were to be that light to the world (as Jesus clearly stated to *them*.. not the gentiles).

Jesus was not the messiah because the messiah's reign is forever (Jesus died.. but yes, he left the light with the Jewish people)...he was merely the one whose message was meant to enlighten the collective messiah so that they in turn could be a light to the world, thus setting the world free from the bonds of greedy power that seeks to destroy.

HOWEVER... Paul came in and took that message to the gentiles before the enlightenment could hit the Jewish people fully, thus the message was manipulated.. badda bing... Jesus is now worshiped as G.d.

Paul (the message of) objectifies G.d thus enabling the power to be maintained over the people.

Do you really not *hear* what I am *saying*?

And to those saying that the letter of the Law has no effect today, you are misleading people with your words... though, I know it is unintentional because you have been misled.

The Letter of the Law, as it applies to all, makes perfect sense when the spirit of the Law is understood correctly. Just as your left eye alone would not give you perception, neither can you have perception of G.d without both the letter and the spirit.

Question: What are the universal laws of mankind for? (the ones given to the Jewish people for all of mankind.... they are not the 10 commandments mind you).

Remember: We may need the spirit of the law to understand, but it does not negate the purpose of the Letter.

Edited to add a word missed: "Just as your left *EYE* alone would not give you perception......"

[edit on 7-1-2009 by justamomma]

reply to post by badmedia



We are supposed to read the OT as well as the new ....why ..for our EXAMPLE >..Why should we have to read about the Apostles because they were also an example for us .............
Also the WHOLE BODY is ONE IN THE LORD >.that INCLUDES PAUL he is part of the body ...if you discard even part of the body it is like chopping an arm or a leg off .....and you my friend have chopped off just about the entire body (except for yourself ) .......you claim Paul is a false teacher you claim that if a believer reads the word and believes it they are deceived (Which is a very dangerous doctrine to be teaching) you claim that everyone will recieve dreams visions and have no need for the bible ...When there are also dreams and visions that are NOT FROM GOD >>how would they discern which ones are from God or not ? If they are CONTRARY to the word of God (thats how) ......

People dream of Jesus all the time that does not mean they are dreaming of the Jesus who died and rose again ...how about Mythria he goes by the name of Master Jesus ...how do you know your not getting dreams from ANOTHER JESUS ? .....and your being taught another gospel ...

Just be aware that God does give dreams to people (I have many) but they are not all from God and dreams can also deceive .........
Jer 23:32 Behold, I [am] against them that prophesy false dreams, saith the LORD, and do tell them, and cause my people to err by their lies, and by their lightness; yet I sent them not, nor commanded them: therefore they shall not profit this people at all, saith the LORD.
Jer 29:8 For thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Let not your prophets and your diviners, that [be] in the midst of you, deceive you, neither hearken to your dreams which ye cause to be dreamed.


I just dont see how you can skip over everything Paul wrote when he brought more people to the Lord than ANY APOSTLE ....how could he have done that if he was of satan ? >>He couldnt have ..

And the Jews and Romans would not have sought to kill him if he wasnt a great threat to them (They were children of the devil ) and they killed him .
They would not have killed ONE OF THEIR OWN >.......

Originally posted by L.I.B.
Yes, but what I pointed out to you was from the old testament. Numbers 12:6.

Jesus also manifests, in the flesh, to people.

I'll have to get to the rest of your post later... I'm trying to beat a deadline right now. Perhaps around 8-9pm central time? I hope anyway.

oh how I wish I wouldn't keep messing up the html requiring edits!

I coulda swore what you pointed out to me was in Acts. Numbers is old testament. What you pointed out to me was Jesus saying this is how he would appear, and so it couldn't have been from the old testament.

As far as I can tell, the Numbers quotes is where it says there is an exception for moses, but this is because moses is faithful. Obviously at the time Paul was not.

Numbers 12:6 And he said, "Hear my words: If there is a prophet among you, I the LORD make myself known to him in a vision; I speak with him in a dream.

7 Not so with my servant Moses.He is faithful in all my house.

8 With him I speak mouth to mouth, clearly, and not in riddles, and he beholds the form of the LORD. Why then were you not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?"

Now, this is actually closer to what I experienced. As it was the father, not Jesus that I seen. I can't exactly say 7 and 8 is what I experienced, because it wasn't physical - but what I saw in my vision was as if it was physical, and I did see a form. It was like a pure light being, no distinguishing features, just the form itself. The room I was in was a perfect white, had no beginning or end and the form was like it was filled with sun, a golden light. So I did see a form.

But my hair didn't turn white or any of that other stuff, and I don't remember any accounts of that also happening to Paul. So I am more apt to call it a vision. Didn't know that would make me a prophet though, that is somewhat interesting. Thought everyone would get the same upon getting the holy spirit.







[edit on 7-1-2009 by badmedia]