From Rod to Ark

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

He did. But you won't accept it. That's all.

He did, K? Then show me where; in your words. Maybe he did, and we are just too far apart--or too alike--for me to hear him, his way. You i can hear (there is no shame in this; it is what is; MB is heard by others, who need MB to hear), so show me, K, in the Bible, where Book is Logos. Where is Book = Word? Where is Book = Gospel? Pick one, or pick them all, i do not care. Pick some people to help you show me; as long as it is in your words ok.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

Lately it has been a stream of consciousness with him that makes understanding anything he says very difficult.

I am actually convinced that there is a mental issue, and I do not say that insultingly or for offence. He lives with his mother. He's older. And we see this confusion in his words. Nothing else can explain why he twists what we say as well.

[shazeep]

Ah, what have i been twisting? Maybe i also then twisted my account of myself, to impress you perhaps? Did you forget why i abandoned my life, to come live with mom? But that part....just isn't the part you remember right now, is it? You forget that part; you forgot that part. But that part changes the truth, doesn't it.

So then see how someone could convince you, from the Book, of what is not there, perhaps. And how someone could convince you, from the Book, of something there, that is not. Have you found a witness, for your "Book = God," yet, MB? Because, after all, only God is infallible, bro. Only God is perfect. There are no perfect words on a page, that can still lead you to Word.

For the simple reason that Ancient Hebrew is no longer spoken, is it. It has been corrupted, we call it, just like anything here gets corrupted. Like everything here gets corrupted.

Have you read where they wanted to put Him away, His family, Mike?

You still have a problem with

"Word does not = Book?" Even though we accept that Father is perfect, and Book is not Father? Book is--no, that is not right, is it? That is just what you are trying so desperately to maintain--Book was God~Breathed, into Ancient Hebrews, a looong time ago, Mike. What is amazing is that Word can even still be found in Book. Now, that is amazing, in a Book where Nests are now Mansions. Yes.


Why do we have so much controversy @
"What is the Gospel," do you think, Brother,
when we have 4 Gospels, hmm?

Don't worry, Mike, you don't have to answer any of my questions, ok.
Not right now.
This page is not going anywhere,
anytime soon.
It will be here, waiting for you, ok?

Now, would you like me to read you, as you have read me?
Made some prophecy about me? Would you like that,
oh Fearer of Fire, that you cannot point to,
that directly contradicts the Book you cling to?

I don't think you would, so i won't.
But you are welcome-
-since you do not appear to be prepared
to answer my questions to you, from the Book-
-to please tell me some more about
what you are convinced of, ok.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

So, now you don't want to Bible, MB? ok

See how you twist my words. And I already noted how twisting the bible's words would make twisting my words far easier. People who cannot talk honestly about what a person actually says, but have to twist others' words to converse, cannot be reaosned with. I told you many times to talk bible and you refused refused and refused again. You never dealt with context from verse to verse. And you say you wil now? No. You proved that's a lile.

You don't have to answer my questions, either, if you are afraid. See, i can't make you do anything, can i.

Not afraid at all. This very post here from you proves you are unreasonable and have to lie about someone's words to have a conversation. Why would anyone want to converse with you when you do this?

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by mfblume

See how you twist my words. And I already noted how twisting the bible's words would make twisting my words far easier. People who cannot talk honestly about what a person actually says, but have to twist others' words to converse, cannot be reaosned with. I told you many times to talk bible and you refused refused and refused again. You never dealt with context from verse to verse. And you say you wil now? No. You proved that's a lile.



Not afraid at all. This very post here from you proves you are unreasonable and have to lie about someone's words to have a conversation. Why would anyone want to converse with you when you do this?

Originally Posted by mfblume

See how you twist my words.

? I didn't just rephrase what you said, Mike? Maybe to make sure that i heard it right? Shall we go look again? Wadr you seemed to be dying to talk Bible, until i said i was ready to talk Bible, Mike.

Originally Posted by mfblume

Not afraid at all. This very post here from you proves you are unreasonable and have to lie about someone's words to have a conversation. Why would anyone want to converse with you when you do this?

Why indeed. Could you be a friend, then, and forgive me, and show me where i lied here, this one last time, so that i can apologize? And then i will withdraw from you, ok, MB? You will not hear a peep from me, ever again, ok?

>>>

Originally Posted by mfblume

You feign desire to discuss word and the multitude of times I tried to get you do actually do that only found you running and refusing. It's worn out now. Give it up. YOu obviously have mental issues, no offence intended, and it explains it all.

So now, you think you will just import replies, since you cannot answer a simple question, Mike? So then have a nice day, ok.

[mfblume]

You're either a chronic liar or mentally unstable. Which is it?

[KeptByTheWord]

Originally Posted by shazeep

He did, K? Then show me where; in your words. Maybe he did, and we are just too far apart--or too alike--for me to hear him, his way. You i can hear (there is no shame in this; it is what is; MB is heard by others, who need MB to hear), so show me, K, in the Bible, where Book is Logos. Where is Book = Word? Where is Book = Gospel? Pick one, or pick them all, i do not care. Pick some people to help you show me; as long as it is in your words ok.

I guess I really don't understand your question "Where is book = gospel"?

I just don't get exactly what you want or are asking. Are you trying to imply that the books compiled into one book are not specifically mentioned as one book? Or what? I don't know what answer I'm to look for.

To summarize simply how I would define the Bible - the Bible is comprised of 66 books that indeed were written by men, and have been preserved and passed down to us for thousands of years. The Bible comprises the oldest pieces of literature known in the world. You can search to find pieces of literature that date older than the oldest piece of writing in the Bible, and won't find it.

I will agree with you that interpretations of the Bible that we have are varied and wide. However, there are things written over and over and over and over in the each of the different books that teach the same principles that we can understand are a foundation that we can stand on, and have stood the test of time.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

I guess I really don't understand your question "Where is book = gospel"?

I just don't get exactly what you want or are asking. Are you trying to imply that the books compiled into one book are not specifically mentioned as one book? Or what? I don't know what answer I'm to look for.

My point there is that we have 4 "Gospels" in the Book, K, but we have 85.5 MILLION hits for "What is the Gospel?" when you search that.

Because, of course, the Gospel is not in the Book, either; the Gospel is "Good News;" from the roots "Proclaimer of 'Well Done!'" as Lex will tell you. So my question up there, "Where is Book = Gospel?" is just asking for the Witnesses to the Gospel being contained in the Book. Where are the witnesses that testify that the Gospel is recorded in the Book, so that i can say, to people looking for the Gospel, "It is right in here." Even as i grant you It is def full of trails of crumbs to the Gospel, and even defines the Gospel, when you look deeper, because It is not even defined until you ask Lex, that i can see. You have to seek even to get the definition, huh?

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

To summarize simply how I would define the Bible - the Bible is comprised of 66 books that indeed were written by men, and have been preserved and passed down to us for thousands of years. The Bible comprises the oldest pieces of literature known in the world. You can search to find pieces of literature that date older than the oldest piece of writing in the Bible, and won't find it.

I will agree with you that interpretations of the Bible that we have are varied and wide. However, there are things written over and over and over and over in the each of the different books that teach the same principles that we can understand are a foundation that we can stand on, and have stood the test of time.

Well, we are going to disagree, i guess, starting at "66 Books," and getting serious--since that part really doesn't matter--at "preserved," that's a biggie, being as how you don't even have a Hebrew NT, and then "passed down," i mean, passed down how, K? Pretty much like that line of people, where the first guy repeats what they heard to the next guy, and so on, right? And then we continue the debate at "the oldest in the world," which i sort of agree, and sort of don't, because we have writings that are bordering on 20,000 years old, K, that are in the Bible, true enough, pre-Hammurabi stuff, but they didn't call it the Bible then, did they?

And as to those foundations--glad you mentioned them, btw, those foundations--i gotta say that one of your foundations is that someday you are going to get a Mansion, somewhere, isn't that right, K? And a corrollary to it is "Assuming you avoid hell, which accepting Christ as Your Personal Lord and Savior is all about." Is that pretty close, to some of your foundations?

Find the wine, K. Find the Word, which is obscured, right there on those pages, on purpose, like It's meant to be. You won't be setting that Book down anytime soon, ok? Although you will be led to some pretty ancient renderings, i guess. Eventually. If you seek them. I guess.

But you're going to lose your Mansion in the sky, let me warn you about that right now, ok. That
foundation will disappear, ok. You keep that, just kept that as long as you need it,
until it becomes an anchor, perhaps. No hurry, in this race.

[shazeep]

"Where is Book = Gospel" is not plain? Where are the Witnesses that say "Book = Gospel?" What is wrong with my brain, i wonder? I put it down to vaccinations, personally.

[mfblume]

This error that says things in the bible were obscure on purpose is patently wrong, and another example of scripture taken out of context.

PARABLES were the issue and subject, not the entire bible.

Folks who go into error are rife with this sort of mishandling of passages. Look at the context (that word again - context will save more people from this error than anything else)...

Mark 4:10-12 And when he was alone, they that were about him with the twelve asked of him the parable. (11) And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables: (12) That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.

The entire bible is not written in such a way so that those that are outside the kingdom may not know the mystery of the kingdom, but rather THE PARABLES HE SPOKE ALONE are spoken in such a way as to not relate the message to people.

PARABLES are written in such a way so as to enlighten the heart that seeks God in an amplified manner than a message without parables accomplishes. But the miracle is that parables also doubly hide the message to people whose hearts are not right and do not truly seek God.

So, plain teaching is NOT AT ALL a parable. So we cannot apply that statement in verse 12 to the whole bible. JUST TO PARABLES. That's what is hidden in the NEW TESTAMENT. The message of the PARABLES.

Now, the Old Testament Law in general was vague and obscure since it never showedd the end conclusion of what it's purpose was. It just led to it, never showing what it was.

That's why Paul said this:

2 Corinthians 3:12-13 Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great plainness of speech: (13) And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished:

But plain teaching is plainness of speech. So don't let anyone tell you this nonsense that the overall bible, including plain teaching in epistles is purpose meant to be obscure. That's a lie.