| Author |
 Topic  |
|
BatKol
Advanced Member
USA
735 Posts |
 Posted - 10 Apr 2004 : 20:33:00
|
Robert-James said: The Most High lives in the Now, yes, He was and shall Be, but Now is where we will find Him.
Steve: And He can be found and relied on for salvation. BELTESHAZZAR was rescued from the lion's den. Paul, the ROMAN CITIZEN was sealed away from 40 Jews who put a curse on themselves to eat no food until Paul was dead. They failed while the Bible tells of Paul's sucess via the LEX ROMANA. This same Paul, by the way, proclaimed "I stand at Ceaser's judgement seat, where I ought to be judged". Over half of the NT is credited to Paul who was both a CITIZEN of ROME as well as a Citizen of Heaven. Something you would consider a traverse and a service of two masters according to your doctrine.
Robert-James: the men of Israel formed their own government, in 1776. Hidden within this, was the fact, that all Lawful men can carry the government upon their shoulder.
Steve: And it was dismantled militarily by YHWH via the Union Army during the Civil War. You can still see their AGENTS policing their conquest today. They extract TAXES from you when you go to their CORPS to buy your gas, electric, food, etc.. Your wilfull use their military SCRIPT proves you recognize the value of the 4th Kingdom FRN SCHEME. Clearly Daniel 11:45 has not happened. 4th Kingdom is not yet destroyed, else you would not have to be paying their TAX when you go to the CORPS.
Robert-James: So many have not Crowned Yahushuah King, and they, by their own words-actions, are ruled over by the Civil government of Rome.
Steve: Paul, the ROMAN CITIZEN was both a Citizen of Heaven as well as
ROME. He also claimed Yahushua as King but also claimed, "I stand at Ceaser's judgement seat, where I ought to be judged". This statement of Paul stands in denial of your doctrine.
Robert-James: All hidden in plain sight, though few have eyes to see, Truth. Israel...The Prince. A Nation of kings and priests.
Seek the Higher ground, Zion.
Steve: The 4th Kingdom is here in plain sight. Their existance is proof of the unfulfillment of Daniel 11:45.
|
 |
|
|
Robert-James
Advanced Member
uSA
353 Posts |
Posted - 11 Apr 2004 : 19:28:05
|
We find that the Jesuits were loosed upon the Union, as it is boldly called, the Civil war. Civil and Rome are the same.
Sorry BatKol, I don't have a dog in the fight about Paul's citizenship. I ponder greatly our citizenship...today. |
|
|
|
BatKol
Advanced Member
USA
735 Posts |
Posted - 12 Apr 2004 : 07:58:22
|
Robert-James,
I am going to look into this Civil War a bit more. Your comment about
Civil and Rome being the same thing really struck me. If I remember the info from Wangrund concerning the Lieber Code correctly, this might be a key to understanding how the 4th Kingdom implemented ROMAN
STATUTES after the surrender and defeat of America.
As for Paul, I can't think of a topic I have studied more in the past six - seven months. I am sure if you or somebody finds the answers to my questions concerning him, it will be posted.
Peace to you on this rainy morning,
Steve
|
|
|
|
Robert-James
Advanced Member
uSA
353 Posts |
Posted - 12 Apr 2004 : 10:23:54
|
Greetings,
www.tuppersaussy.com and "Rulers of Evil" will give one a greater understanding of Jesuit power, and its attempt to kill the one Nation that was not under its dominion.
Yes, civil law is the same as Roman law, even stated so in Black's law.
So, all the person's clamour for their civil rights? Indulgences are still being sold, in the form of "licenses".
Jefferson Davis was Jesuit trained, as was Gen. Beauregard {whatever] the man who started the CIVIL war, by firing upon the Union at Ft. Sumpter. Judah Benjamin, the Jewish treasurer of the Confederacy, was in direct correspondence with Rome. Lincoln knew it all, a man caught in the middle, unable to expose the RELIGIOUS war being fought.
"My people are destroyed for a lack of knowlege". |
|
|
|
Oneisraelite
Advanced Member
uSA
833 Posts |
Posted - 12 Apr 2004 : 10:25:10
|
Greetings and salutations in the name of the King, brothers and sisters:
Peace be unto the house.
We know that many, particularly those who are OF the world, may hate us for what we are about to say, but it is something that we have been putting off far too long for fear of offending, but to be True to our King we can no longer conceal the understanding we have been freely given. Please know that this is not an accusation against anyone or their particular beliefs, it is not meant to hurt anyone, it is simply what we perceive to be the “truth of the matter” and we give it to you in brotherly Love.
It is felt on this end that we are at an impasse unless we can come to a consensus on what an ‘elohiym, translated most often ‘god’, ‘gods’ or ‘God’, in the English, is. This is the crux of the whole matter. If we could agree on what this word ‘elohiym means, much of this discourse would be unnecessary.
The ‘religionists’ say it means “the Supreme Being”, period, end of story; there are no other gods other than God.
GOD, n.
1. The Supreme Being; Jehovah; the eternal and infinite spirit, the creator, and the sovereign of the universe.
But the Scripture tells us otherwise. It tells us that there are other gods [215 times in the KJV]; that there are false gods.
Exodus 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
1Corinthians 8:5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)
GOD, n.
2. A false god; a heathen deity; an idol.
It tells us “Ye are gods”.
Psalm 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
Yahuchanan [John] 10:34 Yahushua [Jesus] answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
In what way could WE be ‘gods’? If Yahweh is the Supreme Sovereign [King] of the universe, and WE are the children of Yahweh, would not His children be His princes and princesses?
GOD, n.
3. A prince; a ruler; a magistrate or judge; an angel [literally a messenger].
Now, if we wrap all of these together we get the definition of ‘elohiym, and its English equivalent, ‘god’. The following definition, we feel, is the sum total of all of the above.
4. Any person or thing exalted too much in estimation, or deified and honored as the chief good.
Thus we can state that the definition of ‘god’ is “e, all of the above” and summarized by definition #4; i.e. “Any person or thing…honored as the chief good.”
To clarify this we must figure out what it means to be, “the chief good”.
‘Good’ as it is used here is a noun. What does the noun ‘good’ mean?
GOOD, n. That which contributes to diminish or remove pain, or to increase happiness or prosperity; benefit; advantage [privilege]; opposed to evil or misery.
Thus, we can extrapolate that a god is someone or something that is the “highest [chief] provider of good”, that is to say, “That which contributes to diminish or remove pain, or to increase happiness or prosperity; benefit; advantage [privilege]; opposed to evil or misery.”
We further perceive that the word ‘elohiym is a “twisting together” of multiple concepts, five concepts to be exact, rolled together, Judge, Lawgiver, King, Saviour and last, but hardly least, Creator [Father or Founder].
But to continue, another way to say this is, whoever or whatever is our “benefactor” is our “god”.
Luke 22:25 And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors.
BENEFAC'TOR, n. He who confers a benefit…
CONFER', v.t. 1. To give, or bestow…
This word is particularly used to express the grant of favors [also know as grace], benefits and privileges to be enjoyed, or rights, which are to be permanent; as, to confer on one the privileges of a citizen; to confer a title or an honor.
So, with the above understanding of what a god is, who or what should we apply to for the “privilege” of using the modern day mode of movement [one tiny example]? What god do we pray to [make application to] for our benefits, advantages, privileges, favors [grace] and protection? [Note: Do a word study on “apply” and all the key words associated with it, and you will find that it means to “make supplication” or to “pray”.
Most of us, you will find, “apply” to, i.e. “pray” to two gods, for some, it is “the LORD” AND the STATE; for others, it is to JESUS AND the STATE; and still others of us will supplicate to Yahweh [or some variation thereof] AND the STATE.
The STATE is a god when it confers benefits [social welfare], privileges [licenses], advantages [favoritism] and protection. Dear brothers and sisters, if we cannot come to agreement on this most important of topics, all other communion [conversation] falls flat on the ground, dead as a doornail!
When we said we don’t care what Daniel appears to have done, we don’t care what Paul seems to have done, it is with this understanding…
Mattithyahu [Matthew] 6:24a No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other.
Masters in the above verse is the Greek kurios, and is translated, God, Lord or master; take your pick!! If it makes one feel better to choose master and leave the other two off, so be it…but as for me and my house, we shall serve Yahweh.
M`ASTER, n. [L. magister, compounded of the root of magis, major, greater.] 1. A man who rules, governs…
“Nations that want protectors, will have masters.”
Choose you this day whom you will serve…
It is done. |
Edited by - Oneisraelite on 12 Apr 2004 10:48:19 |
|
|
|
BatKol
Advanced Member
USA
735 Posts |
Posted - 13 Apr 2004 : 09:41:23
|
brother Robert said: When we said we don’t care what Daniel appears to have done, we don’t care what Paul seems to have done, it is with this understanding…
Mattithyahu [Matthew] 6:24a No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other.
Steve: Since you posted your message twice in two different forums I will repeat this question to you so those viewing this thread can see the application of your understanding of the first commandment as it relates to this instance in the Bible:
In light of your statement concerning the first commandment and serving two masters:
Did Paul, according to your understanding, traverse and break the first commandment when he proclaimed in Acts 25:10 that he "stands at Ceaser's Judgement seat, where he ought to be judged"?
Peace,
Steve
|
Edited by - BatKol on 13 Apr 2004 09:47:13 |
|
|
|
Robert-James
Advanced Member
uSA
353 Posts |
Posted - 13 Apr 2004 : 20:49:46
|
Ya think these modern black robed judges are, right now, judging between the sheep and goats? Think Paul knew this was happening in Rome? Paul "was" a lawyer. Anyone with a social security number, is not guaranteed any Constitutional protection. No American has a ss#.
Man's law recognizes; no man can serve two master's. [Mechan on Agency, 3rd ed., sec.298}
If, if, we could get it through our heads, that the beasty governments have a duty to YHWH to fulfill. {And they will eventually be discarded.}
The U.S.Government is as such, fictious and this includes the {S]tate.
The U.S. is a Federal Corporation 28 U.S.C. 3002 {15}, and its citizens are also corporations, and shown to all by the created fictional identity, Mr/Mrs. ALL CAPS. Most all Christians are DEAD in Christ, because of their govt. created status. Paul says to "arise from the dead". Oops, one more thing, leave the govt. benefits in the grave.
Since man states emphatically that the U.S. government is fictious. The question begs, "where is real government?" Yahushuah said, when ye are born again, you'll see it. And your love for Father and his Kingdom, will compel one to Walk the Way...home.
Resurrect means to stand up and start walking. How many cripples did Yahushuah/Peter heal?
Don't forget, scriptured is layered three times in meaning. And the first layer is mostly very religious!!! |
|
|
|
BatKol
Advanced Member
USA
735 Posts |
Posted - 13 Apr 2004 : 21:18:32
|
Robert-James said: Ya think these modern black robed judges are, right now, judging between the sheep and goats? Think Paul knew this was happening in Rome? Paul "was" a lawyer.
Steve: And don't forget both a ROMAN CITIZEN as well as a Citizen of Heaven.
Robert-James said: Anyone with a social security number, is not guaranteed any Constitutional protection. No American has a ss#.
Steve: Constitution, UCC.. whatever. If we don't have a global Torah World Order it's all exile.
Robert-James: If, if, we could get it through our heads, that the beasty governments have a duty to YHWH to fulfill. {And they will eventually be discarded.}
Steve: Yes! It's exactly as YHWH plans because all authority is appointed by Him. Our mess is because of the curses of Deut 28, Lev 26.
Robert-James: Paul says to "arise from the dead".
Steve: and SLAVE or Free can be a part of "the body of Christ".
Robert-James: Don't forget, scriptured is layered three times in meaning. And the first layer is mostly very religious!!!
Steve: Yes, the Talmud explains it as Peshat, Remis and Sod. The first layer is 'literal'. |
|
|
|
Oneisraelite
Advanced Member
uSA
833 Posts |
Posted - 25 Apr 2004 : 07:35:34
|
Greetings and salutations in the name of the King, brothers and sisters:
Peace be unto the house.
The following is our opinion, obviously you may completely disagree if you like; We will not be offended.
Now, to continue on with our study of the word "god"...
Psalm 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. [Genesis 3:22]
Something to keep in mind here that in both the Hebrew and the Greek we find in Strong's dictionaries under the word "god"...the word "magistrate".
We, in modern times, have come to think of a magistrate as equivalent to a judge, however, this is a very modern interpretation of the word.
MAG'ISTRATE, n. [L. magistratus, from magister, master; magis, major, and ster, Teutonic steora, a director; steoran, to steer; the principal director.] A public civil officer, invested with the executive government or some branch of it. In this sense, a king is the highest or first magistrate, as is the President of the United States.
Very interesting, we find that in the UNITED STATES that the President is the highest or first "magistrate". We can assure you that this "PERSONAGE" is not our highest or first "magistrate"! He may be the second-highest magistrate, IF he writes, reads, obeys and teaches the Ten Commandments and does not bethink himself above his brethren and nothing more.
“The Hebrew kings did not rule in their own right, nor in name of the people who had chosen them, but partly as servants and partly as representatives of Jehovah [Yahuwah], the true King of Israel.” Easton’s Bible Dictionary
Another thing we discover is that magistrate and master come from the same root word..."magister" [underlined and bolded].
M`ASTER, n. [L. magister, compounded of the root of magis, major, greater.] 1. A man who rules, governs or directs...men...
We also find in the New Testament that it can be interchangeable with the word "god" [In Act 19:20 the Greek word used for "master" is tranlated "god"].
Now, here is where it gets interesting, if the above definition of master, i.e. ruler or governor of men is truth, it lends new meaning to this verse of the Scripture...
Mattith'yahu [Matthew] 6:24 No man can serve two masters...
That means that this verse could be read several ways: No man can serve two masters. No man can serve two magistrates. No man can serve two rulers. No man can serve two governors. No man can serve two directors. No man can serve two gods. All of which are correct, IF these three words are indeed interchangeable as it appears they are.
We must understand that "there be [are] gods many", i.e. masters, magistrates, rulers, governors, directors etc. at many different levels. For example, at the family level there is "one" who, judges, makes the laws, is ruler and saves. He is a “minor god", if you will. Now, before anyone thinks that we are being blasphemous, keep in mind that it is not us who said this:
Psalm 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. [Genesis 3:22]
If his "laws" or “rules” are within the parameters of the Ten Commandments then he is a righteous [just] ruler of his household but if they are not, then he is "before" [against] Yahuwah.
Psalm 95:3 For Yahuwah is a great God, and a great King above all gods.
This scenario holds true in businesses and governments as well, if they do the Will of Yahuwah, then they are righteous [just] and will not be a threat to good works. However, when they think to usurp the throne of Yahuwah and no longer follow His Moral Law, the Ten Commandments of Yahuwah, and even ban them in some cases, they are now "before" [in His Face, i.e. against] Him. When the creature thinks to enslave Yahuwah's People for their own greedy purposes they become especially evil, they are then referred to as tyrants, i.e. going well beyond their lawful authority as "minor governors", i.e. “minor gods”, within Yahuwah's jurisdiction [king dom], for they no longer following Yahuwah’s perfect Lawe of libertie.
Romans 1:25 Who changed the truth of Yahuwah into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
All, INCULDING the leaders of the nations, are to be obeisant [show deference] to Yahuwah, and serve Yahuwah…“the Higher Power” for it is written:
Thou shalt worship Yahuwah thy ‘Elohiym, and him only shalt thou serve.
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el, NOT the STATE OF ISRAEL. |
Edited by - Oneisraelite on 25 Apr 2004 09:25:16 |
|
|
|
BatKol
Advanced Member
USA
735 Posts |
Posted - 25 Apr 2004 : 09:08:31
|
Greetings brother Robert and family,
You said: If his "laws" or “rules” are within the parameters of the Ten Commandments then he is a righteous [just] ruler of his household but if they are not, then he is "before" [against] Yahuwah. Also you said... All, INCULDING the leaders of the nations, are to be obeisant [show deference] to Yahuwah, and serve Yahuwah…“the Higher Power” for it is written: Thou shalt worship Yahuwah thy ‘Elohiym, and him only shalt thou serve.
Steve: I cannot find anywhere where the Kings of the Nations (non-Israelite)are bound to follow the terms of the Covenant given at Sinai. The only ones bound to the Covenant given at Sinai are Israelites. The Israelites breached the terms of this Covenant and are experiencing the curse of bondage per Deut 28. The kings of the Nations are to play an important role during Israel's exile:
Isaiah 60:10 And the sons of strangers shall build up thy walls, and their kings shall minister unto thee: for in my wrath I smote thee, but in my favour have I had mercy on thee.
Isaiah 60:16 Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Nations, and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I, YHWH am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.
The ingathering of the exiles has not happened yet:
Ezek 28: 25 'Thus says YHWH Elohim, "When I gather the house of Israel from the peoples among whom they are scattered, and will manifest My holiness in them in the sight of the nations, then they will live in their land which I gave to My servant Jacob.
26 "They will live in it securely; and they will build houses, plant vineyards and live securely when I execute judgments upon all who scorn them round about them. Then they will know that I am YHWH their Elohim."
YHWH gave the definition of a righteous King in Deut 17 and anything else for an Israelite is exile including hybrids such as "Republics",
"Democracies", etc.
If your rendering of the first commandment is correct, as it stands ONLY within the ten words, then even submiting to a Deut 17 King would be a breach of the first. You had said earlier that only the ten commandments written in stone stand forever and that all others were nailed to the cross, did you not? Yet you quote many other scriptures from Torah not found in the ten commands and elsewhere to give further explaination of the first word.
Having said that, and giving serious study to your ideas, we find it essential to know if the Covenant given by YHWH in Exodus 34:10 - 28 is still binding according to your conceptual view point.
Peace to you on this beautiful morning!
Steve
|
Edited by - BatKol on 25 Apr 2004 09:19:34 |
|
|
|
Oneisraelite
Advanced Member
uSA
833 Posts |
Posted - 26 Apr 2004 : 06:16:19
|
'elohiym [god] = supreme [chief] being
SUPRE'ME, a. [L. supremus, from supra.] 1. Highest in authority; holding the highest place in government or power.
CHIEF, a. 1. Highest in office or rank; principal... Webster's 1828 Dictionary of American English
Who is the "Supreme Being" of men [this includes women]
Who is the "supreme being" of PERSONS?
Who is the "supreme being" of a family [according to the Scripture]?
Who is the "supreme being" of a business?
Who is the "supreme being of a CORPORATION?
Who is the "supreme being" of a courtroom?
Who is the "supreme being" of a STATE?
Who is the "supreme being" of the UNITED STATES?
Who is the "Supreme Being" of the universe?
Answer; the creator.
For though there be that are called 'elohiym [gods], whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be 'elohiym [gods] many, and lords many,) But to us there is but one 'Elohiym [God], the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Yahushua, the Messiah, by whom are all things, and we by him.
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el, NOT the STATE OF ISRAEL. |
Edited by - Oneisraelite on 26 Apr 2004 07:02:53 |
|
|
|
BatKol
Advanced Member
USA
735 Posts |
Posted - 26 Apr 2004 : 07:47:36
|
Yes, YHWH creates everything and nothing happens that is not scripted into his ultimate plan.... since He is the Creator of all. He creates the Good and the evil.
However, Only the Israelites are under the Covenant given specifically to them at Sinai.
Having said that, and giving serious study to these ideas, we find it essential to know if the Covenant given by Supreme Creator YHWH in Exodus 34:10 - 28 is still binding according to the "No CONTRACTS" conceptual view point. Why we can't get a strait answer to this, after the many, many posts between the participants on the thread is very suspicious.
Peace to all on this wet morning!
Steve |
Edited by - BatKol on 26 Apr 2004 07:49:27 |
|
|
|
Manuel
Advanced Member
USA
762 Posts |
Posted - 26 Apr 2004 : 14:22:03
|
Sowie BAT-KOL! you remind me of a "wretched" wo-man always wanting to have the last word to hide your "tracks."
BLAH...BLAH,BLAH,BLAH... BLAH...BL...B. |
|
|
|
Oneisraelite
Advanced Member
uSA
833 Posts |
Posted - 27 Apr 2004 : 06:10:55
|
Now, to continue with this thought of “minor ‘elohiym [gods]”, the next logical question is, “is Romans thirteen telling us to follow them regardless of the fact whether they are Lawful or not”?
If it is, it is going directly against the Word of Yahuwah:
Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil...
Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith Yahuwah, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith Yahuwah Almighty.
We see, once again, from Easton’s Bible Dictionary, that the “guidelines” for ancient Hebrew kings were to be our example, not always the kings themselves, in fact, seldom the kings themselves.
The Hebrew kings did not rule in their own right, nor in name of the people who had chosen them, but partly as servants and partly as representatives of Jehovah, the true King of Israel.
So who is the highest magistrate [master] in the corporate GOVERNMENT? Is it Yahuwah?
A public civil officer, invested with the executive government of some branch of it. In this sense, a king is the highest or first magistrate, as is the President of the United States.
We see from this that the PRESIDENT of the CORPORATION is considered “the highest or first magistrate”, which in the preceding posts we have discovered means “master”.
Let it be known, we are not anarchists; we do not seek to usurp the throne of the Rightful King, but rather re-establish it and once more declare liberty throughout the land.
AN'ARCH, n. [See Anarchy.] The author of confusion; one who excites revolt.
If the head of the GOVERNMENT were to submit to the Superior Authority, write, read daily and obey the Moral Law of Yahuwah, the Ten Commandments, and not bethink himself above his brethren [and above the Law] he would not be a threat to good works. In its simplest form, this means that if a man has harmed no one or infringed on their liberty, he would not be persecuted.
PER'SECUTE 1. ...to harass with unjust punishment or penalties for supposed offenses...
On the other hand, if he does not submit himself to the Higher Authority, he himself becomes the “anarch”, usurping the Lawful Authority, not only bethinking himself above his brethren, but above Yahuwah Himself.
This man [or men] becomes a Nimrod.
So does “Nimrod” use the Ten Commandments of Yahuwah as his measuring stick or does he forbid them in his COURTROOMS because they are incompatible with “his” law, contradistinct [having opposite qualities] to “his” law?
If Yahuwah’s Ten Commandments are moral, and the adversaries laws are contradistinct to these, then they are IMMORAL. If Yahuwah’s Law, the Ten Commandments, are “the perfect Lawe of libertie” and the adversary’s law is contradistinct to these, then they are “THE PERFECT LAW OF BONDAGE”. Perhaps now we see why brother Yahu’aqob [James, the Righteous] said these immortal words:
Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with Yahuwah [God]? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of Yahuwah [God].
Once again, we must recognize that “world” does not mean the earth, it means “the arrangement”.
Thayer Definition:
1) an apt and harmonious arrangement or constitution, order, government
…and sometimes, not so “apt and harmonious”, unless of course, one recognizes that “People get the Government they deserve”, in which case it is “apt and harmonious” with the beliefs and behaviour of its people.
And too, we must keep this definition in mind when we read, “My kingdom is not of this world…”
Of course it is not “of this world”; this world means, “this constitution [make up], this order, and this government”. Would He have any part in the “prince of this world” or his concept of order, “out of chaos comes order”, who on a daily basis intentionally breaks each and every one of the Ten Commandments of Yahuwah? One would certainly hope not.
Yahuchanan [John] 14:30 Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me.
So that there is no misunderstanding, here is the general definition of a “prince” from Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of American English and Easton’s Bible Dictionary, respectively:
PRINCE, n. prins. [L. princeps.] 1. In a general sense, a sovereign; the chief and independent ruler of a nation or state. Hence, a chief in general...
Prince – The title generally applied to the chief men of the state.
And again, as stated at the outset, you may disagree with any or all of this; that of course, is your prerogative. Yahuwah willing, this may continue.
Peace to all.
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el, NOT the STATE OF ISRAEL. |
Edited by - Oneisraelite on 27 Apr 2004 06:50:44 |
|
|
|
Oneisraelite
Advanced Member
uSA
833 Posts |
Posted - 27 Apr 2004 : 06:16:42
|
Sorry, brother Manuel, it would seem that I too go BLAH, BLAH, BLAH...
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el, NOT the STATE OF ISRAEL. |
|
|
|
BatKol
Advanced Member
USA
735 Posts |
Posted - 27 Apr 2004 : 07:29:35
|
Man-u-ill,
So far you have shown yourself to be a little cheerleading punk who likes to quip non-sense instead of stepping into the ring to debate me man to man. You consistently like to insert your commentary sound bites but never once have taken the challenge to go toe to toe with me on these issues. Such is the style of your ilk.
Why don't you get back on the sidelines and tend to the water cooler, cute pictures, laundry duty, etc?
There are no covering tracks here with my points, they are here out in the open for all to see. So do us a favor and keep to your cheerleading and spanglish lessons and leave this topic to those willing to stay in the ring.
If you are man enough, I publicly challenge you to take a swing at this one simple question:
Is Exodus 34:10 - 28 still valid today?
What say ye? Are you man enough to give this one little question a shot or will you decline and prove yourself to be only a pointless cheerleader? 
Sincerely,
Steven John Webb |
Edited by - BatKol on 27 Apr 2004 09:18:25 |
|
|
|
BatKol
Advanced Member
USA
735 Posts |
Posted - 27 Apr 2004 : 09:50:12
|
Greetings brother Robert,
Your posts are most certainly NOT blah, blah, blah. This topic is of the utmost importance so don't mind me for staying aboard for the duration.
you said: Now, to continue with this thought of “minor ‘elohiym [gods]”, the next logical question is, “is Romans thirteen telling us to follow them regardless of the fact whether they are Lawful or not”?
If it is, it is going directly against the Word of Yahuwah:
Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil...
Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith Yahuwah, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith Yahuwah Almighty.
Steve: Teacher, I have two questions! Was the Rome which was in power when Paul's Romans 13 was written 'Lawful' as it pertains to your usage of the word? Another related question: Was Babylon 'Lawful' during Daniel's time?
Note that both of these men had direct interaction with their GOVTS while still keeping Torah. Daniel was so perfect in following both BABLY LAW and Torah that his conspirators had to create a new STATUTE just to trap him (3rd Kingdom). Paul's STATUS enabled him privildged access to a venue wherein he declared his innocence concerning both Torah and LEX ROMANA (4th Kingdom). As of yet, the 4th Kingdom today has not kept us from facing towards Yerusalem to make prayer and supplication. Check out Ezek 14 and see what was said about Daniel's righteousness as it pertains to the surviving the hell of hells if and when it breaks loose!
Peace to you all and thanks for giving us a helping hand in very important matters. We love and respect you always!
Steve |
|
|
|
Manuel
Advanced Member
USA
762 Posts |
Posted - 27 Apr 2004 : 10:09:00
|
No offense to you oneisraelite, but there is more here than meets the eye.
I have seen these "quarrels" more than one can expect, and can tell you it is not out of thin air.
I recall, just as an example, during my "younger years," I was "dating" a wo-man with young child.
The situation was going well, I thought, until the mother "in law" and my "girlfriend," told the little daughter to call me "daddy." Out of "natural instinct" I told the little youngster that I would be her friend, not "daddy" and her father was always her "daddy." "Things where never the same after that!!!! Boy... did I strike a nerve!!
Yeap! There was more there than I could have imagined too!
The BLAH, BLAH, BLAH which I am writting of is more of my lack of humbleness when things get to the point where I just cant seem to find the words to explain it in detail. For example: What does the "CURSE OF THE MOMMY SYNDROME" sound like?
Manuel
|
|
|
|
BatKol
Advanced Member
USA
735 Posts |
Posted - 27 Apr 2004 : 11:17:54
|
Man-u-ill,
If you are man enough, I publicly challenge you to take a swing at this one simple question:
Is Exodus 34:10 - 28 still valid today?
What say ye? Are you man enough to give this one little question a shot or will you decline and prove yourself to be only a pointless cheerleader?
Sincerely,
Steven John Webb
|
|
|
|
Manuel
Advanced Member
USA
762 Posts |
Posted - 27 Apr 2004 : 11:29:40
|
"And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ."
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Logic 101 .. Do the concepts hold up?
