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

Re: Pearls before Swine (was Re: Is there any need for a Constitution? (was: Re: what then? (Re: [AbolishStatuteLaw] Learn the history of America or suffe...)))

Expand Messages
  • Ardeshir Mehta
    Hello Steve, I had not replied to this partly because most of your friend s arguments are directed at Peter, not at me; however, seeing that Peter is not
    Message 1 of 6 , May 1, 2010
      Hello Steve,


      I had not replied to this partly because most of your friend's arguments are directed at Peter, not at me; however, seeing that Peter is not replying, if I might make so bold, I would venture to reply thus:

      1. 

      Your friend wrote. *inter alia*:


      [...] neither of these men [referring to Peter and myself] understand what the bible says of itself – that it is a spiritual book, speaking of spiritual things, and discerned only by men filled with the Spirit of God.  Here is one instance to which I refer:

      1Corinthians 2:9-16 [...]



      For someone or some text to CLAIM to be telling the truth is not proof of the actual truth of what they say. If it were, then pretty much EVERYONE and EVERY TEXT would be telling the truth! Thus the Bible's claim to be telling the truth cannot be relied upon no matter how much the Bible CLAIMS to be telling the truth. 

      (This is extremely simple, to the extent that even schoolchildren understand it, at least above a certain age. One can't prove that one is telling the truth simply by CLAIMING to be telling the truth.)

      2.

      Re. Jesus' claims to be God, there are enough ambiguities to permit several inconsistent interpretations. One possible interpretation runs as follows:

      Jesus does indeed say "[...] he that hath seen me hath seen God", but he also says "[...] my father is greater than I". In addition, he implies, in the Lord's Prayer, that God is the father of ALL of us, not just of him; which in turn would seem to imply, in the language of the King James Version, that "he that hath seen ANYONE hath seen God". In that sense, yes, Jesus claimed to be God, but no more than anyone else is God.

      And most of the time Jesus refers to himself, albeit obliquely, as the "son of man". And given the NUMEROUS times he uses the term "son of man" for himself, the preponderance of evidence points to the fact that he claimed to be a man too: indeed, predominantly. 

      The reasonable conclusion from the above is, that Jesus claimed to be God, yes, but also claimed that we too are God or at the very least sosn (and daughters) of God: every single one of us. This is supported by the fact that he said words to the effect (Luke 17:6) that if his listeners had "faith only as great as a grain of mustard seed", they could move mountains, and nothing would be impossible for them - implying once again that they were in reality God, they just didn't have enough faith to act on that reality. It is also supported by the fact that he said words to the effect that the sabbath (which was presumably ordained by God) was made for man, not man for the sabbath.

      Of course, we have no definite proof that Jesus ever said any of these things: there is just the word of the Bible - which came into existence many centuries after Jesus, and of which the original cannot be found anywhere - that he ever said anything of the kind, or indeed that he existed at all in any sense other than in the sense that, say, Hamlet or King Lear existed. And as pointed bout above, just because the Bible says something cannot be taken as proof that what it says is the truth, no matter how much the Bible itself may claim that it is.

      3. 

      Regarding private property, Christopher is right; it was Louis Charles, not your friend, who was pushing for private property as being sanctioned by Jesus. This is evident from the e-mails quoted below.

      4.

      Regarding this exchange:

      Peter states - “I am my own wise man. Is that why you are so resentful?”

       

      Proverbs 3:7 “Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the LORD, and depart from evil.”

      Proverbs 10:8 “The wise in heart will receive commandments: but a prating fool shall fall.”

      Proverbs 26:12 “Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit? [there is] more hope of a fool than of him.”

      Proverbs 14:12 “There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof [are] the ways of death.”


      ... I shall leave it to Peter to reply.


      I am posting this exchange on the discussion groups in the "Cc:" line as well.


      Cheers.


      +++++



      On 26-Apr-10, at 8:47 PM, Steve Campbell wrote:

      Ardeshir and Peter,
      My friend was wondering if you got this and if so, were you going to reply?
      And Ardeshir, I was wondering if you posted this to the three yahoo groups listed above in the "cc"?
      Steve

      --- On
      Sun, 4/25/10, Steve Campbell <callstevec1@...> wrote:

      From: Steve Campbell <callstevec1@...>
      Subject: Re: Pearls before Swine (was Re: Is there any need for a Constitution? (was: Re: what then? (Re: [AbolishStatuteLaw] Learn the history of America or suffe...)))
      To: "Christopher Grech" <inamalta@...>, "Ardeshir Mehta" <ardeshir@...>, "Peter Wakefield Sault" <peter.sault@...>
      Cc: RestoreUSA@..., "Louis Charles" <lcharles14@...>
      Date: Sunday, April 25, 2010, 8:29 AM

      This is from my friend who responded earlier. - sc


      Steve,

       

      For Ardeshir, Peter. And Chris:

       

      It is clear from both Ardeshir’s arguments:

       

      I do not see why a person - like Peter, or myself - who does not believe in Christ or the Bible cannot be accurate in his or her interpretations of the Bible from a LINGUISTIC point of view

       

      and Peter’s:

       

       “The Bible is not your private property. It's just a book, with a long, bloody history and it has repeatedly been corrupted by those like you who think only they know the real truth behind its words

       

      that neither of these men understand what the bible says of itself – that it is a spiritual book, speaking of spiritual things, and discerned only by men filled with the Spirit of God.  Here is one instance to which I refer:

       

      1Corinthians 2:9-16

       

      But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

      But God hath revealed [them] unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

      For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

      Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

      Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.

      But 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.

      But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

      For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.

       

      The above is why neither Ardeshir nor Peter will ever be able to fully understand or discern the truth contained in the Bible, because to them, by their own admission, it is just like any other book (non-spiritual) written by men (not the Spirit of God) and therefore they cannot receive what it says to them.  The Bible will be only foolishness to Ardeshir and Peter.

       

      For Peter: “Show me where Jesus equated himself to or with any god you care to name.” Sir, you ask again for what I have already given you on 4/22, but you failed to respond the first time, so here it is again:

      Jesus absolutely claimed He was God.  The scribes and Pharisees on more than one occasion were exceedingly angered by Jesus’ words to them, to the point that they immediately sought to kill Him on the spot!. What do you think it was that He said to them that would give them legal occasion to kill him?

      Consider God’s words to Moses in Exodus 3:14

      And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.”

      Here God clearly calls himself ‘I AM’, which indicates his eternal existence, having no beginning and no end, He simply exists, and therefore He is ‘I AM’.

      Now notice this exchange between Jesus and the Pharisees in John 8:53-59: He claims for himself the name I AM, which the Pharisees took as blasphemy, punishable by stoning.

                  “Art thou greater than our father Abraham, which is dead? and the prophets are dead: whom
      (Message over 64 KB, truncated)

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