Gotta tell ya Reg, I am! concerned about your soul.

For brevities sake: R>, G> designate our previous remarks. Supplied for context. G- indicate my present reply., G> designate our previous remarks. Supplied for context. G- indicate my present reply., G> designate our previous remarks. Supplied for context. G- indicate my present reply. designate our previous remarks. Supplied for context. G- indicate my present reply. designate our previous remarks. Supplied for context. G- indicate my present reply.

G> "Jesus was/is Priest, Prophet and King." "Jesus was/is Priest, Prophet and King." "Jesus was/is Priest, Prophet and King."

R> I always think of him as a teacher and that's the quality I think stands out the most about him based on what we know. I always think of him as a teacher and that's the quality I think stands out the most about him based on what we know. I always think of him as a teacher and that's the quality I think stands out the most about him based on what we know.

G- And yet you reject his primary message as it concerns 'your' own eternal soul.

Jesus was a Priest in that he ministered unto his people and ultimately, presented himself on his Father's altar as the sacrifice to end sacrifices, for the redemption not only of men from their sins but in due time, the redemption of the entire creation. 14* ¶ For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; 15* Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; 16* And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: 17* And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. 18* For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father.

Jesus was Prophet in that he called men to repentence, because he could and did teach them what was to come all the way out in to eternity, that they might avoid the damnation he variously referenced(Rev 20:11-15), and detailed(Luke 16b), in his words.

And, though Jesus did not exercise his Kingly perogatives, excepting in his obedient restraint to his Fathers will, he did promise he would return to take possession of his kingdom. And, as previously noted scripturally, Jesus will return as the warrior King of Kings, and he states he will slay the armies of this world who will be aligned together to thwart his glorious return for the purpose of taking up residence here on earth(during the Millenium & after). Naturally, they will be not even a momentary match. This is the King who the Sanhedrin was expecting from prophecy, while undoubtedly thinking they would remain in power, lol, speaking of wise of this world. They weren't interested in 'the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the world'.

Joh 18:36* Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.

R> I just can't fathom a Jesus that would wish to be called King I just can't fathom a Jesus that would wish to be called King I just can't fathom a Jesus that would wish to be called King

G- Which, sadly Reg, illustrates both your limited understanding of the breadth of God's world view, and your rejection of God's son, since you reject the texts declaring he holds the office of King. You might recall he was mocked as King of the Jews by those who supported his crucifixion. (Do note: Joh 15:26* But when the Comforter is come, whom I[Jesus] will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:

Jesus is going to expect every man to bend his knee to him come the Great White Throne Judgement. I'm thinking it is going to akin to British Royal except more so..

Also, in your reading what the disciples wrote of what Jesus said, did you notice he was regularly referred to as Lord? And that, he did not dissaude anyone, not even once.

Even still, I support your liberty of conscience to disbelieve. A uniquely American idea codified about 230 years ago, well, following the Republic of Vermont Constitution of 1777. Which Constitution also outlawed slavery, the first place on the continent.)

~~~

R> In all honesty, I think his protest was stern but peaceful. I think it highlights his desire to teach and the lesson in this case was a rather large one that I think required the sort of disturbance he created. He never hurt anyone and it baffles me that people use this passage to attempt to show Jesus was not a pacifist. In all honesty, I think his protest was stern but peaceful. I think it highlights his desire to teach and the lesson in this case was a rather large one that I think required the sort of disturbance he created. He never hurt anyone and it baffles me that people use this passage to attempt to show Jesus was not a pacifist. In all honesty, I think his protest was stern but peaceful. I think it highlights his desire to teach and the lesson in this case was a rather large one that I think required the sort of disturbance he created. He never hurt anyone and it baffles me that people use this passage to attempt to show Jesus was not a pacifist.

It also highlights an aspect of Jesus I really like...the rebel Jesus...he was here to tear down the old ways.

G- There was more than a little righteous indignation in the 'temple' during that incident Reg. A multitude! of merchants and moneychangers were driven out by one man, lol, along with their multitude of critters for eating and temple sacrifice, and other merchandise. You need to reread the context Reg, Jesus wasn't rebeling, he was defending 'the old ways', the Mosiac Law, his Fathers ways for his people. The rebels were those sinning against his Father, making his temple a house of merchandise, every one of whom knew they were 'rebelling against the old ways'. Most especially the Pharisees and Sadducees who made up the Sanhedrin, and surely profited from the arrangement. Driven is used because they were 'driven out' which is a tad bit more proactive than a disturbance. R> He also was defending the honor of his father...righteous stuff bro...but nothing there to say that he didn't believe in being a pacifist...no sir...no how...no way. He also was defending the honor of his father...righteous stuff bro...but nothing there to say that he didn't believe in being a pacifist...no sir...no how...no way. He also was defending the honor of his father...righteous stuff bro...but nothing there to say that he didn't believe in being a pacifist...no sir...no how...no way.

How many pacifists do you know that command an army. He was righteous! like no human before or since, but that multitude of merchants and religious leaders were not driven from the temple because of Jesus' passive resistance, :), now were they?

R> I'm not at all a big fan of Revelations. It's book that basically just causes a lot of trouble. It's not meant to be read as a literal forecast of the future but as a sort of dreamy warning from my obviously warped perspective. I'm not at all a big fan of Revelations. It's book that basically just causes a lot of trouble. It's not meant to be read as a literal forecast of the future but as a sort of dreamy warning from my obviously warped perspective. I'm not at all a big fan of Revelations. It's book that basically just causes a lot of trouble. It's not meant to be read as a literal forecast of the future but as a sort of dreamy warning from my obviously warped perspective.

G- I would be curious about your ideas of how Jesus' Revelation causes a lot of trouble. So you're saying John recording the Revelation of Jesus Christ is warped and not to be taken literally. Be careful there Reg, really! I take comfort in the end results. Dreamy? Have you studied it? Now if you'd written 'dire', with a positively smashing ending, I could have gone along with that. :)

R> I hate the fact that people try to turn it into a Nostradamus thing I hate the fact that people try to turn it into a Nostradamus thing I hate the fact that people try to turn it into a Nostradamus thing

G- Quite unlike Nostradamus, Jesus is prophecing the future:), as it will occur. Doesn't matter whether anyone understands, or believes it, presently.

R> ...and it's one of the most horrifically misinterpreted books in the bible ...and it's one of the most horrifically misinterpreted books in the bible ...and it's one of the most horrifically misinterpreted books in the bible

G- True enough, generally but it is understandable with the right help believing God will keep his word.

R> ...I kind of wish when the committee chose which books to include this one was one of the ones they dropped. It's the big Las Vegas finale to me...I bet they dug that at the time. ...I kind of wish when the committee chose which books to include this one was one of the ones they dropped. It's the big Las Vegas finale to me...I bet they dug that at the time. ...I kind of wish when the committee chose which books to include this one was one of the ones they dropped. It's the big Las Vegas finale to me...I bet they dug that at the time.

G- I have to guess that means you doubt that the Master of the universe could control the decisions those men made? I say he could, even if the committee hadn't been made of God fearing men who relied upon God to direct them in the solemn duty presented them. By, I should add, the proper authority to order preparation of scripture, a King.

In the beginning God created...

...wrapping up with:

John the beloved Apostle: Rev 21:1* ¶ And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. 2* And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. 3* And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. 4* And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. 5* And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. 6* And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely. 7* He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son. 8* But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

And the conclusion:

Rev 22:16* I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star. 17* And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely. 18* For I[Jesus] testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19* And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. 20* ¶ He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus. 21* The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

G- You are limiting yourself Reg. And more to the point, you are limiting the teacher you esteem. You suggest you think Jesus(but only his transcribed words) is a pretty cool teacher and yet, what you call the Book of Revelation is a prophetic letter that should properly be titled as it begins:

1:1* ¶ The Revelation of Jesus Christ, ...

which God gave unto him, to shew unto HIS SERVANTS things which must shortly come to pass; and he[Jesus] sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John: <<< 2* Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.

G- I grant you, John reported with nearly 2000 year ago eyes but did you get the epistle in question is insufficiently titled, given the introductory line: 1:1* ¶ The Revelation of Jesus Christ ... The only letter attributed directly to Jesus in scripture.

~~~

G> He is denoted by many names in scripture Reg. How about this one, the son of perdition. Or the prince of the power of the air. He is denoted by many names in scripture Reg. How about this one, the son of perdition. Or the prince of the power of the air. He is denoted by many names in scripture Reg. How about this one, the son of perdition. Or the prince of the power of the air.

R> I don't hold what they call him in as high regard as his own words. I don't hold what they call him in as high regard as his own words. I don't hold what they call him in as high regard as his own words.

G- And yet, you reject the most crucial of his word as they apply to your eternal soul. Too, I wasn't referring to Jesus, or is that a Freudian deallibob. Those names were in reference to the coming peacenik mass murderer. Who, btw, the world will absolutely adore.

FYI: In addition, as with 'the prince of the power of the air' above, Jesus' many names and titles are also instructive to the student of scripture.

~~~

G> You may recall that scripture is not a linear textbook Reg: You may recall that scripture is not a linear textbook Reg: You may recall that scripture is not a linear textbook Reg:

R> I do and think that's an important point. It has many authors and was assembled by committee. I do and think that's an important point. It has many authors and was assembled by committee. I do and think that's an important point. It has many authors and was assembled by committee.

G- That's not what I meant by linear. Yet:

16* All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17* That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

R> It's more word of man than word of God and that is where we likely head in different directions. I don't have the faith to believe it was all written with Divine Providence. It's more word of man than word of God and that is where we likely head in different directions. I don't have the faith to believe it was all written with Divine Providence. It's more word of man than word of God and that is where we likely head in different directions. I don't have the faith to believe it was all written with Divine Providence.

G- Men inspired by the Almighty. Important distinction. I know, regarding Jesus, you lack faith and it saddens me, but hey, I thank God for free will(liberty of conscience). You may yet allow God to quicken your heart by faith. The curious thing to me is that most of what we men believe about the world around us, is in reality, second hand information(usually more distant) but that we accept by faith.

R> It's been translated and retranslated over the years and not always with the interests of God in mind. It's been translated and retranslated over the years and not always with the interests of God in mind. It's been translated and retranslated over the years and not always with the interests of God in mind.

G- Again, I take comfort in the promise of the 12th Psalm and God's power to make it so. (:

~~~

G> God made it[scripture] inscrutable apart from assistance from himself on purpose, as is stated throughout. God made it[scripture] inscrutable apart from assistance from himself on purpose, as is stated throughout. God made it[scripture] inscrutable apart from assistance from himself on purpose, as is stated throughout.

R> That's faith not fact. Just as a point of reference on my part. I'm not being a critic either, I can't say nor would I that your view or mine is better...just different. That's faith not fact. Just as a point of reference on my part. I'm not being a critic either, I can't say nor would I that your view or mine is better...just different. That's faith not fact. Just as a point of reference on my part. I'm not being a critic either, I can't say nor would I that your view or mine is better...just different.

...whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

G- No Reg, that is fact. That very idea is contained in the passage you regurgitated later in the letter that I am replying to, to prove you and the Mickster are fools for God.

'the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned'

G- Ah C'mon Reg :), you are being a critic! You are refuting the text Man, please:) (Isa 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD:), part of reasoning is critical analysis, putting issues in the balance, the necessary mechanics of thinking. It can be a good thing too! The proof is the fact that you, like most non Christians, Christians and their churches leaders, pick and choose what to believe and how to define what is scripture/ scriptural, despite the scripture' testimony of itself. It's pretty apparent y'all don't believe God is very powerful and that by extension that y'all think yerself smarter than Jesus when you deny his definition of scripture, truth is not relative. Joh 5:39* Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me[Jesus].

Previously I provided, one or two passages illustrating God's opinions regarding the natural man being unable to comprehend things of the Spirit(scripture being spiritual). Based on the overall language associated with this topic, I conclude that God counts on worldly men to utilize their own prejudiced, self interested, understanding to lead them in to the ditch of their choosing. (1Co 1:27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise[of this world]; ...) 'the blind leading the blind.'

Contrarily! as with my one example of men not being created in the image of God, folks of all stripes believe all sorts of stuff is scriptural that ain't. Which I have to tell you is going to be mighty embarrassing when each of us 'meet the Truth face to face'(Neville's).

(Just an aside: something that long confused me was Christians wearing crosses? If the cross is such a positive symbol for Christianity, why do we see everybody and their uncle wearing them?)

13* Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: 14* That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. Be assured, I support your liberty of conscience(short of inciting preemptive strikes) but being in Jesus is decidedly superior to being without Jesus. If Jesus were not risen from the dead, we would not be having this conversation. 1 Cor 15. Jesus Christ is decidedly superior to any other diety spoken of among men precisely because of the resurrection. Likewise the scriptures defined doctrinal certainty of individual resurrection is superior to all other suppositions, including most denominational ones. Which is why worldly men and organizations are fine with Christianity as long as the Lord Jesus Christ is little mentioned by name, and especially not revered(aloud or quietly, particularly among children). Stealing his authority for the state is the goal.

Proof: Some of the present FEMA co-opting(1st response training) of ministers are specific about Jesus being minimized if not omitted from their future sermons. The schools in their diversity can detail non Christian belief systems, indigenous spiritism but nothing of the Christianity that accounted for the origins of this nation. If one does an over-view of the past half decade of international conferences related to religion and education, one finds the goal is to come up with some sort of unifying religious system, and that they are facilitating their predetermined consensus that the person of Jesus Christ must be downplayed to the point of elimination of mention. (Jesus Christ is a divisive figure y'know.) I have to think that is because, like the Sanhedrin of Jesus' day, todays religious leaders reject him because he's not the God they wish for themselves nor humanity as a whole.

Although I support the principle of equal treatment before the law, the notion of all men being created equal(& all the social commentary in support the theory thereof) is patently absurd. Besides being intellectually dishonest.

A footnote, Natural Law was the basis of the American judicial system at its founding, but since the 1860's, has gradually been displaced in favor or Maritime, Commercial, and with the emphasis of late being, International Law.

~~~

R> 1Cor 3:18* ¶ Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. 19* For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.(that there's the answer to Edlorah's recurring question:) 1Cor 3:18* ¶ Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. 19* For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.(that there's the answer to Edlorah's recurring question:) 1Cor 3:18* ¶ Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. 19* For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.(that there's the answer to Edlorah's recurring question:)

R> It is a funny thing that the more you learn, if you have any sense of self-awareness, the more foolish you feel. I revel in my foolishness! As does my pal Mick. It is a funny thing that the more you learn, if you have any sense of self-awareness, the more foolish you feel. I revel in my foolishness! As does my pal Mick. It is a funny thing that the more you learn, if you have any sense of self-awareness, the more foolish you feel. I revel in my foolishness! As does my pal Mick.

G- True enough. Obviously, you are not applying the whole of the passage as intended, or else, you would be worshipping Jesus Christ, instead of denying his deity. Also, I dare say, the people on this board, including DB, view you as 'wise in this world' while my faith is considered foolishness. Also, the few avowed Christians here, never support the Lord or the scripture, when we have these discussions.

18* For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.

~~~

G> In closing: I've got a simple but common misassumption all sorts, including Christians and preachers, declare, 'Well after all, we're all created in God's image". It's not true nor is it scriptural. Quite the contrary. The answer is in Genesis 6. In closing: I've got a simple but common misassumption all sorts, including Christians and preachers, declare, 'Well after all, we're all created in God's image". It's not true nor is it scriptural. Quite the contrary. The answer is in Genesis 6. In closing: I've got a simple but common misassumption all sorts, including Christians and preachers, declare, 'Well after all, we're all created in God's image". It's not true nor is it scriptural. Quite the contrary. The answer is in Genesis 6.

R> Well, that "image" phrase I would avoid, I agree...but I would say in all things there is the spark of the divine. Well, that "image" phrase I would avoid, I agree...but I would say in all things there is the spark of the divine. Well, that "image" phrase I would avoid, I agree...but I would say in all things there is the spark of the divine.

G- I am not saying to avoid the phrase. I am saying those who say humanity 'is created in God's image' -regardless their credentials or position- are flat out wrong. And to warn you to be mindful of them because this is but a simple matter, not a mystery of God. Because in fact, scripture states that men are not created in God's image. Only Adam was. FYI:) scripturally, 'image' is a deeper topic than you may be crediting it.

R> I hope you are enjoying life as well. My wife is a Christian, that's true, but she does not seem worried for my soul... I hope you are enjoying life as well. My wife is a Christian, that's true, but she does not seem worried for my soul... I hope you are enjoying life as well. My wife is a Christian, that's true, but she does not seem worried for my soul...

24* And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, 25* In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;

respects