teachmevp

It is interestring that humans being created in the image of Yahweh, breaks with other ancient conceptions of the humans. I see a little of this menials of Yahweh belief here. I see some are caught up into that vertical teaching, you know, Paul taught that horizontal teaching: we're here, we're going there; we're on earth, we'll be in heaven. Their are those that have taken that horizontal and turned it vertical: there's the cosmos and there's the heavenlies, but they still exist right how; so the rest of the world is down here on earth, but followers of Jesus have been translated already right now into the heavenly places. Why do some of you'ins believe this way?

You can think when you die, your heaven bound all you want; but that is only backwards teaching and believing, Apostle. Those of us that were awake during PFAL, remember the gathering together, that gathering together is coming soon!

I think these people got that breath life back, but they don't have that life Yahweh has within himself, or that life Yeshua is the first fruit from among the dead, to have within himself?

One can come to the conclusion, that Adam and Eve had access to the tree of life, as long as their will conformed to the will of Yahweh, there was no danger to their going on eternally, being immortal; Yahweh was taking his resting during this time. Clearly Yahweh’s plan for these two humans was to eat off the tree of life, but it was up to them. The logic of freedom of will, their has to be the freedom to disobey; so they learned that they have moral autonomy by making the defiant choice, the choice for disobedience. The very action that brought them a Yahweh-like awareness of their moral autonomy, was an action that was taken in opposition to Yahweh. The serpent omitted in his speech to Eve, having that good and bad knowledge is no guarantee that one will choose or incline towards the good. Yes, you’ll become like Yahweh, it’s true in one sense, but also in another; the serpent sort of omitted to point out that it’s the power of moral choice alone, that is Yahweh-like. So we see then that having knowledge of good and bad is no guarantee that one will choose or incline towards the good.

The access to the tree of life was block, the pursuit of immortally was futile; Yahweh raised Yeshua from among the dead, Yeshua is the frist and only one that has been raised from among the dead!

We could perhaps draw the conclusion that Adam and Eve had access to this tree of life, as long as their will conformed to the will of Yahweh, there was no danger to their going on eternally, being immortal. But once they discovered their moral freedom, once they discovered that they could thwart Yahweh and work evil in the world, and abuse and corrupt all that Yahweh had created, then Yahweh could not afford to allow them access to the tree of life. Perhaps herein is the Serpent’s shrewdness manifested, could Yahweh afford to allow them access to the tree of life, that would be tantamount to creating divine enemies, immortal enemies; how would Yahweh maintain the upper hand in his struggle with these humans who have learned to defy him. Perhaps the Serpent thought they would died on the spot, but Yahweh maintains the upper hand in this, the fact that they eventually must die; but access to the tree of life is blocked, no humans have access to immortality, and the pursuit of immorality is futile. That Serpent was not Satan, that Serpent acted on his own, his own reasonings, perhaps to see if or how Yahweh would modify his plans. So the concept of the divine image in humans, that's a powerful idea, that there is a divine image in humans and that breaks with other ancient conceptions of the human. Humans are not the menials of Yahweh!

Things we need to consider, the gathering together is a coming. The Assyrians are spared, and Jonah is furious, the very idea of a prophet being sent to Nineveh=Nineveh the capital of the hated Assyrian empire, the home of the people who had destroyed the Northern Kingdom of Israel and the ten tribes of Israel in 722BC, dispersing those ten tribes forever, the nation that had then laid siege to Jerusalem and exacted tribute from Judah for many years=Nineveh appears as another Sodom, Yahweh is going to punish them for immorality, but not necessarily for idolatry. But the stronger problem for Jonah seems to be the lack of punishment for the wicked. Jonah is indignant that the Assyrians didn’t get what they so richly deserved: didn’t Jonah say this would happen, that Yahweh always forgives, he’s this slow to anger, compassionate guy; he always repent, the wicked are never punished! It seems Jonah is fed up with the way Yahweh is doing things, his mercy perverts his justice, and some things ought not to be forgiven; people must be held to account for their evil actions, how can Yahweh not do justice! As Jonah is leaving the city to sulk, seems his complaint is twofold. If your going to punish the wicked then just push them; they deserve it. And if you’re planning to spare them, then just spare them and don’t waste my time with messages and oracles. As Jonah sits in a little booth that he has constructed, Yahweh causes a leafy plant to grow over him, providing shade and saving him from a good deal of discomfort; and the plant is to be the source of a final lesson for Jonah. How could Yahweh not be compassionate? For even the most evil of peoples are no less his creation that he has cared for than precious Israel. And if they will only turn to Yahweh in humility, he’ll wipe the slate clean, he’ll show compassion and forgive. It is only human to long for the punishment of the wicked; but Yahweh longs for their re-formation, their turning. Their is the moral law of the Noahide covenant, and it’s for this that Yahweh has decreed punishment, and Jonah is a champion of divine justice. Jonah believes that sin should be punished, he’s outraged at Yahweh’s forgiveness. But Jonah learns that a change of heart is enough to obtain mercy, and that the true role of the prophet is perhaps to move people to reformation and turning.

Romans just keep that Greek system going on, with a Roman legal twist. Now there’s one thing that the Romans made even more of, than the Greeks had made of, and this the patron-client structure. This is a bit more of a distinctly Roman institution, even a legal institution; but it’s important for understanding both the Roman Empire, as well as early Christianity and its patron-client relations. The household structure of a Roman household was this=the Roman household was constructed like a pyramid, not a triangle. At the top of it is the head of the household, the man, ‘the oldest man of the household.’ Under him is his sons, his daughters, and then at the bottom are his slaves, and here are his freedmen, freed persons. And then also we consider, in some ways, free people who may exist as clients. But legally the word client refers to the freed slaves of the man of the household. Now where’s the wife in this picture, why isn’t the wife and mother in there? Because legally she’s actually not part of this man’s household. She remains part of the household of her father, and she’s legally under the control of her father probably, or her brothers, if her father is dead; or her grandfather, if her grandfather is still alive. But since life expectancy in the Ancient World was much less than ours, they didn’t have usually several generations in these households. The wife though is legally a part of her own household over here. Why did the Romans do that? That’s very different from the Greeks, very different from other people in the Ancient Mediterranean. Why did they want to make sure that the daughters stayed in the households of their fathers? They did this because they didn’t want the upper-class in Rome, who were the elite, they didn’t want anyone household, or any small group of households, to become too powerful. And if you have women marrying off into other families, and then they leave the household of their fathers, and they are officially and legally in a household with somebody else, that may end up increasing those households that have intermarriage coming in and not so much intermarriage going out. By keeping women under the household of the men of their original family, the upper-class Romans tried to balance these different households in size and importance. They didn’t care about the lower-class really. The lower-class didn’t really count much. What they cared about-because the Roman republic by this time was basically a bunch of every important households, wealthy men and their households, and they were the members of the Senate, they were the knight class, they were the people who ran Rome. So they didn’t want one king to arise, and they didn’t want a small coterie of leaders to arise. They wanted there to be some kind of balance of power among the several major households of Rome, the families of Rome. Now slaves, when a slave is freed in the Roman Empire, they didn’t become a free man, they became a freed man, and that was legally different. So the status of salve was lowest, freed persons was next highest in Roman Law; and free people were next; but even though they became freed, they were still considered a member of this guy’s household, as his client and his freedman, and they owed certain duties to him. Only in the Roman Empire could slavery actually start being a way that you can move up in society, because you could=if you were a talented slave, your owner might free you. When he freed you, if he was a Roman citizen, you would automatically become a Roman citizen also, and your children would be Roman citizens. And although you were a freedman, which was lower in status than a free person=there were some privileges you couldn’t have=your children would be, if they were born after you’ve been freed, would be free people, not freed. So within a couple of generations, people could move up from being the lowest slaves to two generations of being free Roman citizens. So Roman slavery and the freedom of that was actually one way that a few people in the Ancient World recognized some kind of social mobility, which was very rare in the Roman Empire. This will be very important, because Christians started out as house churches, and their house churches fit sometimes the model of a Greek ekkiesia, ‘the voting body of the Greek citizens, an assembly,’ but sometimes the model of the Roman household; and so this household structure becomes very important.

I wonder if he had his note pad, I thought I read somewhere, the Martindale is always taking notes or thing like that?

I didn't know VeePee taught that welfare system junk, wow. It is cool watching this whole thing coming apart, but scary too; I was thinking that the body has to off the earth, in order for this collapses to really take off; but Socks said it best. A rolling stone gathers no moss.

For Paul, all the enjoyments that we will experience at the gathering together are still in the future; like horizontal. We’re here, we’re going there, we’re on earth, we’ll be in heaven. Ephesians and Colossians, they’ve taken this horizontal and turned it vertical. There’s the cosmos and there’s the heavenlies but they all still exist right now, so the rest of the world is down here on earth, but followers of Jesus have been translated already right now into the heavenly places, and they already enjoy these benefits.

According to Paul, we have been baptized into death. But some by taking the Colossians account that has=the author kind of acts like they’ve been not only buried in baptism but also risen in baptism, and read it back into Romans 6. That’s not what Paul said in Romans 6, he doesn’t say they have been raised yet. Paul teaches we have been buried, but then he says, “So we too might walk in newness of life,” that’s not happened yet, according to Paul. “If we had been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly be reunited with him in a resurrection like his.” We have been baptized into death, but not raised yet. The gathering together is a coming, we get to be with our Father and our brother.

I remember seeing some show about Pink Floyd, about 'the brick in the wall' tour, they showed them building that wall in front of the band. You being a stone, if they put you in that wall, that would miss up the show, if that makes sense? You are no brick.

Like a tiger stalking the mangrove swamps of the Bay of Bengal, this Serpent stalked with shrewdness; yet at that time the tiger and the Serpent did't strike fear into the heart of every living being. Its in the nature of a wild beast, men can teach like wild beasts, could that be a wild nature, seems like Titus I think called some people wild beasts or something like that? That gathering together is a coming!

It is interestring, that Satan had nothing to do with this garden that Yahweh planted in Eden. Evil is a product of human behavior, not a principal inherent in the cosmos; Man's disobedience is the cause of the human predicament, that's what allowed Satan and his clan to infiltrate. Human freedom can be at one and the same time an omen of disaster, as a result of this infiltration; and a challenge to do good, true godliness means imitation of Yahweh, the exercise of one's power in a manner that is godlike, good, life-affirming; and a opportunity, the moral choices and actions of humans have consequences that have to be borne by the perpetrator. Here we can clearly see that spirit has nothing to do with being created in the image of Yahweh? That gathering together is a coming!

It is interestring, how this Serpent was the shrewdest of all the wild beasts; a nature of a wild beast, like a tiger. Like a tiger that stalks the mangrove swamps of the Bay of Bengal, this Serpent stalked the possibly of the opposition of Yahweh, stalking the ideal of tricking these humans, to bring them down to this Serpents playing field, a nature of a wild beast. This Serpent stalking the curiosity of breaking the command, are these humans able to choose their actions in conformity with Yahweh's will or in defiance of Yahweh's will; stalking the logic of freedom of will, their has to be the freedom to disobey? That gathering together is a coming, don't get tricked!

That was a good show, got me to thinking; should I get a bunch of food, camping gear; should I get ready, I don't know. With that gathering together a coming, how much of this will the body have to go through, I don't know. What are your thoughts on getting ready for this crash?

cman, coming for and coming with; don't mean anything to you?

So the very action that brought Adam and Eve a godlike awareness of their moral autonomy, was an action that was taken in opposition to Yahweh. So we see then that having knowledge of good and bad is no guarantee that one will choose or incline towards the good. That's what the Serpent omitted in his speech. The Serpent said if you eat of that fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and bad, you'll become like Yahweh. It's true in one sense, but it's false in another, the Serpent sort of omitted to point out that it's the power of moral choice alone, that is godlike. That gathering together is a coming, wake up to this people!

That's Alexander teaching, what your teaching? Alexander also used what is called ‘religious syncretism,’ Alexander took this tendency of syncretism, of mixing together different religious traditions from different places, and he used it as a self-conscious propaganda technique. Alexander even started claiming divine status for himself. Alexander went around passing out rumors that his mother had actually been impregnated by the god Apollo, when he appeared as a snake in her bed. So, Alexander is putting himself forward as divine. Why? This is not a Greek tradition, but it’s very much a tradition in the East for kings to be considered by their people to be gods. Alexander says, “Well, if they can be gods, I can be a god.” So Alexander starts spreading rumors that he is divine himself. Alexander probably even believed it; and so he had a god father, he had a human mother, and so then he would identify himself with whoever was a god in the different places. So Alexander would identify himself as a Greek god with a Persian god. Alexander would identify the goddess Isis with some Greek goddess; and so all the time these different gods from different places were basically all said to be simply different cultural representations, different names, for what were generally the same gods all over the place. Also, though, what they would do is sometimes they wouldn’t try to simply say these gods are the same. What they would just do is add on more gods. They’d get to Syria, “Look at all these god that the Syrians worship. Well, we’ll just add those into our pantheon of gods too.” And this is part of what ancient religion was like, is that people were not exclusive. You didn’t have to worry. Just because you worshiped one god, doesn’t mean you couldn’t worship another god or several gods or five gods or a hundred gods. Gods knew who everybody was-they weren’t particularly jealous, in that sense. So this is the way people did it. But what Alexander and his successors did, was they made sort of a conscious, propagandistic decision to use religious syncretism to bind together their kingdoms. The gathering together is a coming, wake up to this people!

People like me that have been worked over by the Way, should have the right to reason the word with like minded reasoners. Yahweh’s oath to preserve the Davidic dynasty, would lead eventually to a popular belief in the invincibility of the Holy City. In addition, the belief in Israel’s ultimate deliverance from enemies became bound up with David and his dynasty. So even when the kingdom fell finally to the Babylonians in 586BC, the promise to David’s House was believed to be eternal. The community looked to the future for a restoration of the Davidic line or Davidic king, or a messiah. Now the Hebrew word messiah simply means anointed, one who is “meshiach” is anointed with the holy oil. That is a reference to the fact that the king was initiated into office by means of holy oil being poured on his head. So King David was the messiah of Yahweh, the king anointed by or to Yahweh. And in the exile, Israelites would pray for another messiah, meaning another king from the House of David appointed and anointed by Yahweh to rescue them from enemies and reestablish them as a nation at peace in their land as David had done. The Israelites today hope for a messiah, but thats political and national. That is going to involve the restoration of the nation in its land under a Davidic king; that’s at the end of the day of Yahweh! As for the body Paul talked about, that gathering together is a coming, wake up to this people.

I'm sorry, I thought people on this forum took PFAL. Just showing a little what VeePee taught; actually VeePee wasn't too far off, sometimes it seems VeePee was told to teach what he taught. Some of his actions though, I wouldn't cast the first stone though. No fight, fact! That gathering together is a coming, wake up to this people.

This gathering together is a coming, Yahweh is going to send Yeshua to gather it up; but never you mind, don't you teach it could have happen all ready, didn't that happen in the bible, some whatever went around and said, the gathering together all ready happen, causing unrest among the body. Your mind cannot comprehend, what you are going to stand in front of here soon, but it is your hour.

Vain babbling Apostle, get ready for that millstone around your neck.

The gathering together is a coming. Say what you want, say what you will, but that gathering together is a coming.