Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: The Commandments

Expand Messages
  • Phillip Wilson
    Under God s Law as with our criminal laws the proper process was to be followed whether she/he was caught in the act or not. One reason I would think that she
    Message 1 of 1863 , Feb 1, 2008
      Under God's Law as with our criminal laws the proper process was to be
      followed whether she/he was caught in the act or not.

      One reason I would think that she had not gone through the ritual is
      that she was not restrained. After being found guilty she would not
      have been allowed to run free. Some people think the potion was poison
      and after the ritual she would have been dead if guilty.

      Phillip




      --- In TruthorTradition@yahoogroups.com, JACK HIGGINS
      <mourice65red@...> wrote:
      >
      > Hi Phillip
      > This ritual of drinking a potion may have been need, if she had
      not been caught in the act, or if she denied it. She may have denied
      it, but because the Pharisees were tempting Jesus to go aginest the
      law, they would have had there three witnesses need to prove guilt,
      provided she had not yet had a trial. I can assume she did, and you
      can assume she did not, but we don't know based on the scriptures. And
      in this case that is all we have to go on. Maybe Bollenger was there,
      and knows something we don't.
      >
      > Jack
      >
      > Phillip Wilson <pclarkw@...> wrote:
      > It seems obvious to me that their sin was denying her
      due process according to God's Law. Under God's Law no one was to be
      executed until the Elders or Priests authorized it.
      >
      > Bullinger pointed out how this ritual applies in this case, however
      through my Biblical studies I was familiar with the ritual before I
      read the scenario laid out in the Companion Bible. The woman was to be
      taken to Priests and a potion was made which the accused woman was to
      drink. If she had a reaction (a swelled belly as I recall) she was
      declared guilty.
      >
      > A great many people (including members of this forum) believe that
      Jesus was a Pharisee. His understanding of God's Law vs. "The
      Traditions of Men" was superior no doubt. Even Jesus pointed pointed
      out the self righteousness of the Jews based on their knowledge and
      observance of the Law.
      >
      > I don't recall that I have criticized your knowledge of the Bible.
      >
      > "And that my friend has nothing to do with how well I know the bible."
      >
      >
      > Phillip
      >
      > ----- Original Message ----
      > From: JACK HIGGINS <mourice65red@...>
      > To: TruthorTradition@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 12:09:40 PM
      > Subject: Re: [TruthorTradition] Re: The Commandments
      >
      >
      > Hi Phillip
      > How much of an athority does one have to be to know the law.
      The story in question is quite clear. "Let the one who is amoung you
      without sin cast the first stone." Has nothing to do with anykind of
      ritual to prove guilt or innocents.
      > John 8:
      > 4- They said to Him, "Teacher, this woman was caught in adultery,
      in the very act.
      > 5- now Moses, in the law, commanded us that such should be stoned.
      But what do you say.
      >
      > These were Pharisees who were accuseing her, the law experts of
      that day. They were testing Jesus, trying to build a case aginest
      Jesus so they could accuse Him. They had an open and shut case aginest
      the woman. Jesus did not defend her guilt or innocents, but instead
      accused the accusers. "Let the one amoung you who is with out sin cast
      the first stone at her." It was not a question of her guilt or
      innocents. She was cought in the act, the very act. So Bollenger, a
      19th century expert on God's law, is going to question the Pharisees,
      who were the experts of God law, as it was given by Moses, and they
      were there in the first century, and they were the accusers. You say,
      and I guess you are going by what bollenger, said about some ritual
      that proved guilt or innocent, when the whole stroy had nothing to do
      with guilt or innocents, but mercy, love, and understand, according to
      Jesus who is the only true expert of the law, the only true expert on
      love and mercy in connection
      > to the law, and anything else, pertaining to God. And that my
      friend has nothing to do with how well I know the bible.
      >
      > Jack
      >
      > Phillip Wilson <pclarkw@yahoo. com> wrote:
      > Jack:
      >
      > Your sarcasm directed toward great theologians is very tiring. E. W.
      Bullinger was one of the great Hebrew and Greek Scholars of the 19th
      century and a modern authority on God's Law. By the time of his death
      I assure you that he had forgotten more about the Bible than you and I
      will ever know. If you have never used the Companion Bible I highly
      recommend it. His notes are insightful and through
      >
      > Everything in the NT is rooted in the Law and the prophets. The
      Bible does not tell us exactly how Jesus dealt with the men trying to
      stone the woman. We do not know what Jesus wrote in the dirt. But
      Bullinger is points out the very important facts about the adultery
      ritual that almost everyone overlooks.
      >
      > I agree about a man not likely being executed for adultery but then
      again the only thing a man could do that was considered adultery under
      the Law was to sleep with another man's wife.
      >
      > Phillip
      >
      > ----- Original Message ----
      > From: JACK HIGGINS <mourice65red@ yahoo.com>
      > To: TruthorTradition@ yahoogroups. com
      > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 7:53:38 PM
      > Subject: Re: [TruthorTradition] Re: The Commandments
      >
      >
      > Hi Phillip
      > Which one of the book of the laws given by Moses did Bollinger
      write? All Jesus did was to show that her accuses were as guilty of
      brakeing the law as she was. Could be some of them were just as
      deserving of death under the law as she was. The could be part is
      speculation by me, scriptures don't say that. But a woman was more
      likely to be stoned for adultry than a man.
      >
      > Jack
      >
      > Phillip Wilson <pclarkw@yahoo. com> wrote:
      > According to E. W. Bullinger in his notes in the Companion
      Bible this was a case of the woman being denied due process. It may
      have led to the death penalty but the Law called for a ritual to be
      performed to find the guilt or innocence before any woman accused of
      adultery could be executed. These men had violated God's Law hence
      Jesus stopped them.
      >
      > You have yet to show me anywhere the Bible says there are exceptions
      to God's Law. You are only showing examples of adherence to God's Law.
      >
      > There are no exceptions.
      >
      >
      > Phillip
      >
      > ----- Original Message ----
      > From: JACK HIGGINS <mourice65red@ yahoo.com>
      > To: TruthorTradition@ yahoogroups. com
      > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 1:16:26 PM
      > Subject: Re: [TruthorTradition] Re: The Commandments
      >
      >
      > Hi Phillip
      > I forgot the exception Jesus showed. The woman who committed
      adulty, a clear violation of the law that called for death. In God's
      name Jesus showed mercy, love, and understanding. Love it's self makes
      an exception to the law. "Is it wrong to do good on the sabbath." In
      other words any work commited on the sabbath if done according to
      God's law of love is not sin, and makes an exception of the law given
      in writting, or tridition.
      >
      > Jack
      >
      > Phillip Wilson <pclarkw@yahoo. com> wrote:
      > God did not make an exception his Law he made his Law and
      there are4
      > no exceptions. Can you show anywhere in scripture where God told
      > anyone to make an exception to his Law? I am not looking for what you
      > think is an exception but where God told someone they did not have to
      > obey his Law.
      >
      > Phillip
      >
      > --- In TruthorTradition@ yahoogroups. com, JACK HIGGINS
      > <mourice65red@ ...> wrote:
      > >
      > > Even if God makes the exception a law, it is still an exception to
      > the original law.
      > >
      > > Jack
      > >
      > > Phillip Wilson <pclarkw@ > wrote:
      > > That's not an exception to the Law but the way God's
      > Law was written. There are many laws that govern how to deal with
      > death than just thou shalt not kill. As I continue to say according to
      > Jewish scholars there are 613 laws and they all carry equal weight
      > before God.
      > >
      > > Phillip
      > >
      > > ----- Original Message ----
      > > From: JACK HIGGINS <mourice65red@ ...>
      > > To: TruthorTradition@ yahoogroups. com
      > > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 6:37:39 PM
      > > Subject: Re: [TruthorTradition] Re: The Commandments
      > >
      > >
      > > Hi Phillip
      > > That is what I have been saying. There are exceptions to the law.
      > >
      > > Jack
      > >
      > > Phillip Wilson <pclarkw@yahoo. com> wrote:
      > > While it is true that no matter how death occurs it is
      > till death. We are not more dead if murdered than dying by a heart
      > attack. Nevertheless killing someone in self defense or by accident is
      > distinctly different than premeditated murder. And God's Law does make
      > that difference.
      > >
      > > Phillip
      > >
      > > ----- Original Message ----
      > > From: JACK HIGGINS <mourice65red@ yahoo.com>
      > > To: TruthorTradition@ yahoogroups. com
      > > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 11:45:18 AM
      > > Subject: Re: [TruthorTradition] Re: The Commandments
      > >
      > >
      > > Hi Soj
      > > Call it what you will, "Thou shalt not kill" is thou shalt not
      > kill, except under these conditions, or exceptions. Kill is kill, call
      > it murder, or justice. Kill called by any other name is still kill. In
      > the beginning there was only one way a person would die, and that was
      > to disobey God the Father, and man did, and the whole thing changed.
      > Man became able to do what He could not do. Before man was put out of
      > the garden he could not kill, because death depended on the
      > commandment of God. God said when you eat of this tree you will die,
      > in other words only God could kill. Man could not do evil until he ate
      > of the tree.
      > >
      > > Jack
      > >
      > > sojourning <learningtorah2001@ yahoo.com> wrote:
      > > In the commandment, the word kill is translated from the
      > Hebrew ratsach (Strong's H7523), it means, 1) to murder, slay, kill.
      > Maybe a good way to translate it would be, thou shalt not be a
      > murderer, with the intent to murder. There seems to be a lot of Hebrew
      > words that can be translated kill/slay/murder. I think it is clear by
      > the teaching of scripture that thou shalt not kill has to do with the
      > act of murder, not utterly destroying an enemy when under God's
      > command. That's why I asked Jack for scripture for what he is saying
      > about there being exceptions to the commandment not to kill.
      > > When God sent them in to destroy their enemies, that was not
      > making an exception to the commandment, it was something completely
      > different. Most of Numbers 35 is concerning murder, what is meant by
      > murder.
      > > Num 35:15 These six cities shall be a refuge, [both] for the
      > children of Israel, and for the stranger, and for the sojourner among
      > them: that every one that killeth [nakah (Strong's H5221)] any person
      > unawares may flee thither.
      > > And if he smite 05221 him with an instrument 03627 of iron 01270,
      > so that he die 04191 , he [is] a murderer 07523 : the murderer 07523
      > shall surely 04191 be put to death 04191 . And if he smite 05221 him
      > with throwing 03027 a stone 068, wherewith he may die 04191 , and he
      > die 04191 , he [is] a murderer 07523 : the murderer 07523 shall surely
      > 04191 be put to death 04191 . Or [if] he smite 05221 him with an hand
      > 03027 weapon 03627 of wood 06086, wherewith he may die 04191 , and he
      > die 04191 , he [is] a murderer 07523 : the murderer 07523 shall surely
      > 04191 be put to death 04191 . The revenger 01350 of blood 01818
      > himself shall slay 04191 the murderer 07523 : when he meeteth 06293
      > him, he 01931 shall slay 04191 him. The revenger of blood himself
      > shall slay the murderer: when he meeteth him, he shall slay him.
      > > NLT - Num 35:22 - But suppose someone pushes another person
      > without premeditated hostility, or throws something that
      > unintentionally hits another person, or accidentally drops a stone on
      > someone, though they were not enemies, and the person dies. If this
      > should happen, the assembly must follow these regulations in making a
      > judgment between the slayer [nakah (Strong's H5221)] and the avenger,
      > the victim's nearest relative. They must protect the slayer from the
      > avenger, and they must send the slayer back to live in a city of
      > refuge until the death of the high priest. But if the slayer leaves
      > the city of refuge, and the victim's nearest relative finds him
      > outside the city limits and kills him, it will not be considered murder.
      > > NLT - Num 35:30 - All murderers must be executed, but only if
      > there is more than one witness. No one may be put to death on the
      > testimony of only one witness.
      > >
      > > --- In TruthorTradition@ yahoogroups. com, "Tim H" <THardesty@ .>
      wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Hi sojourning, I'm pretty sure you
      > > > already know this which is why I'm
      > > > surprised you didn't mention it.
      > > > Probably just an oversight. Anyway,
      > > > the Hebrew word for "kill" in thou
      > > > shalt not kill, is better translated
      > > > as "murder" instead of "kill." I'd
      > > > say that makes a significant difference.
      > > >
      > > > In Christ,
      > > > Tim H
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > > sojourning wrote:
      > > > > The commandment, or "word" of the LORD
      > > > was that thou shalt not kill. So the
      > > > question is, is it okay to kill?
      > > > >
      > > > > And also, if God used his people to
      > > > carry out his judgment on a people whose
      > > > wickedness had come to its full, would
      > > > that be killing? or judgment?
      > > > >
      > > > > Who ever sheds man's blood, by man shall
      > > > his blood be shed. So the first shedding
      > > > of blood would be murder, the second would
      > > > be justice. The snetence of death was upon
      > > > some sins (transgressions of the law)in
      > > > order to keep evil from Israel.
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > -- In TruthorTradition@ yahoogroups. com, "a521b8" <a521b8@>
      wrote:
      > > > > >
      > > > > > what about the wars that were faught?
      > > > > > what did God do?
      > > > > > did God stand for or against His people Israel fighting??
      > > > > >
      > > > > > --- In TruthorTradition@ yahoogroups. com, "sojourning"
      > > > > > <learningtorah2001@ > wrote:
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > Jack, what are you saying here? Sounds like you are saying
      that
      > > > > it
      > > > > > okay
      > > > > > > to kill.
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > >
      > > > > > > --- In TruthorTradition@ yahoogroups. com, JACK HIGGINS
      > > > > > <mourice65red@ >
      > > > > > > wrote:
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > Hi Soj
      > > > > > > > Scriptures teach, there are exceptions to the rule of law.
      > > > > Even
      > > > > > in the
      > > > > > > OT it is taught. "Thou shalt not kill." and look at the
      > > > > exceptions
      > > > > > to
      > > > > > > that law.
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > Jack
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > sojourning learningtorah2001@ wrote:
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > Tim,
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > If one is just going by the teaching of scripture, and not
      > > > > Church
      > > > > > > > tradition, then what reason would they have for not keeping
      > > > > > Sabbath?
      > > > > > > > Keeping Sabbath is one of the main teachings of scripture.
      > > > For
      > > > > > most of
      > > > > > > > my life as a believer, I didn't think the keeping of
      Sabbath
      > > > > > applied
      > > > > > > to
      > > > > > > > those who were after Christ. But from studying scripture
      and
      > > > > > looking
      > > > > > > at
      > > > > > > > Church history and seeing where and when and why so many
      > > > > doctrines
      > > > > > > came
      > > > > > > > into the Church, I now believe we "are" to keep the Sabbath.
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > Nearly everyone here agrees that Jesus said the Sabbath was
      > > > > made
      > > > > > for
      > > > > > > > man, but yet there are few that believe man should have the
      > > > > > Sabbath
      > > > > > > that
      > > > > > > > God made for him.
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > If we really believe that the Sabbath was made for man, not
      > > > > vice
      > > > > > > versa,
      > > > > > > > then why should we reject what was made for us? Man was
      > > > > > > > not made for the Sabbath, but God made the Sabbath for man.
      > > > It
      > > > > may
      > > > > > > just
      > > > > > > > be my opinion, but I believe it is opinion based on
      > > > scripture,
      > > > > > and I
      > > > > > > > believe when one is guided by the spirit, it is the
      direction
      > > > > the
      > > > > > > spirit
      > > > > > > > will guide. Jesus is our example, he kept the Sabbath, he
      > > > kept
      > > > > > all of
      > > > > > > > God's commandments, so did the apostles, including Paul. It
      > > > > was
      > > > > > only
      > > > > > > > once the Gentiles came into authority in the Church and
      began
      > > > > to
      > > > > > > > villainize the Jews and their customs, and to allegorize
      the
      > > > > > teaching
      > > > > > > of
      > > > > > > > scripture, that the law and the scriptures began to be evil
      > > > > > spoken of.
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > I believe that by not keeping the Sabbath mankind is
      > > > rebelling
      > > > > > against
      > > > > > > > God. God gave us the Sabbath, but so many of us are being
      > > > > > deprived of
      > > > > > > > what God gave. Not keeping Sabbath is just one of the many
      > > > > ways
      > > > > > that
      > > > > > > man
      > > > > > > > is in rebellion.
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > Even when we are forced to work on Sabbath by employers, we
      > > > > can
      > > > > > still
      > > > > > > > agree with what the word says. We should be speaking out
      > > > > against
      > > > > > > people
      > > > > > > > being forced to work on God's holy day. But for the most
      part
      > > > > the
      > > > > > > Church
      > > > > > > > just sits back and says nothing. The Church should be like a
      > > > > > > conscience
      > > > > > > > to the nations, and corporations, and businesses of all
      > > > kinds,
      > > > > the
      > > > > > > > Church should be a voice speaking out against all
      injustices.
      > > > > And
      > > > > > the
      > > > > > > > Church should be setting an example to all people, and
      > > > > upholding
      > > > > > God's
      > > > > > > > laws, not speaking against them.
      > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > --- In TruthorTradition@ yahoogroups. com, "Tim H"
      THardesty@
      > > > > wrote:
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > Hi sojourning, I don't think that most
      > > > > > > > > people like myself who do not believe
      > > > > > > > > Christians are subject to observing
      > > > > > > > > the Sabbath deny it to anyone who
      > > > > > > > > does believe we are subject to it.
      > > > > > > > > My question is would it be loving
      > > > > > > > > God or our neighbor for anyone to
      > > > > > > > > point the finger of condemnation at
      > > > > > > > > those whose understanding from reading
      > > > > > > > > Scripture is that we are not subject
      > > > > > > > > to observing it?
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > In Christ,
      > > > > > > > > Tim H
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > >
      > > > > > > > > > sojourning wrote:
      > > > > > > > > > What do you think God's definition
      > > > > > > > > of love would be? If God made a Sabbath
      > > > > > > > > for all mankind, and he did, would it be
      > > > > > > > > loving God or our neighbor to deny man
      > > > > > > > > of his Sabbath?
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ------------ --------- --------- ---
      > > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
      > Search.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ------------ --------- --------- ---
      > > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
      > Try it now.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ------------ --------- --------- ---
      > > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
      > Try it now.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ------------ --------- --------- ---
      > > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ------------ --------- --------- ---
      > > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ---------------------------------
      > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ---------------------------------
      > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
      Search.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ---------------------------------
      > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.
      Try it now.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ---------------------------------
      > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
      Search.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ---------------------------------
      > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ---------------------------------
      > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
      Search.
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > ---------------------------------
      > Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
      Search.
      >
    • psalms 130
      Hello Sea, No point, just the definition of ruwach for those that might not have known. Sea s Email wrote: #ygrp-mkp {
      Message 1863 of 1863 , Feb 26, 2008
        Hello Sea,
        No point, just the definition of ruwach for those that might not have known.

        Sea's Email <seawife@...> wrote:
        I am not sure what point you are making here Psalms.
         
        Shalom
         
        Sea
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2008 7:15 PM
        Subject: Re: [TruthorTradition] The Commandments

        Strong's Ref. # 7307
        Romanized  ruwach
        Pronounced roo'-akh
        from HSN7306; wind; by resemblance breath, i.e. a sensible (or even violent) exhalation; figuratively, life, anger, unsubstantiality; by extension, a region of the sky; by resemblance spirit, but only of a rational being (including its expression and functions):
        KJV--air, anger, blast, breath, X cool, courage, mind, X quarter, X side, spirit([-ual]), tempest, X vain, ([whirl-])wind(-y).


        Sea's Email <seawife@...> wrote:
        Ruach is breath Jack.  It is not a ghost.
         
        Shalom
         
        Sea
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2008 4:53 AM
        Subject: Re: [TruthorTradition] The Commandments

        Hi
           Talking about man in Ecc. 12:7 and what happens when life is removed from the man, the author says, Then the dust will return to the earth as it was, And the spirit will return to God who gave it.
         
        Jack



        Isaiah 40:28 Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard? The everlasting God, Jehovah, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary; there is no searching of his understanding.


        Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.