Red Heifer on Facebook
Someone posted comments on Facebook about the Temple Institute being delighted to announce the birth of a perfect red heifer in the USA. They unfortunately found some white hairs that disqualified the animal for sacrifice. This is all a part of the nonsense of modern religion that has nothing to do with Moses or Christ.
This low-quality video of Brother Gregory talking about the Red Heifer sacrifice of the Old Testament at a gathering on the desert was posted.
The following comment was posted to the group and one Greek teacher that did not like the idea that the Pharisees had it wrong.
This is only a small glimpse of what the original text was really all about. http://www.preparingyou.com/wiki/Red_Heifer
What I am saying is that we do not understand the metaphor of the Hebrew language. I know what I am saying seems drastically different from what we are commonly told. There is a lot more evidence that we have a faulty picture of what Israel was doing. No one you know goes to a lake and throws bread out on the water in the hope that it comes back. If we all know God does not want us to throw loaves of bread on the lake then why do you think he wants you to pile up stones, kill sheep or red heifers and set them on fire?
We take people through this step by step in some of our articles and free online books. I know it seems a shocker but once you understand what they were really doing it will begin to make perfect sense. And you won't have to re-translate the Bible to put it all together.
Jesus butted heads with the Pharisees all the time. They had instituted and promoted the Corban of that time through men like Herod. The real question is do Modern Christians have more in common with the Pharisees or Sadducee or even the Zealots than they do with the early Christians. There is all kinds of evidence to support what we are presenting to the world today, a much clearer picture of what was going on at the time. I will admit that hundreds of years of book and people burning and a controlled academia that there is less evidence than there should be but that is why I use common sources such as the Bible itself, trial records of the Christians and readily acceptable historical accounts. After that it takes common sense and the Holy Spirit.
There are over 40,000 Christian denominations. Many fundamentally disagree with the others on what Christ was saying. Some disagree so much about what the text actually says that they kill each other over their private interpretation.
Millions of people have died because some people think their interpretation is right. So because someone says they love God or Jesus or even Moses does that mean they have received the Holy Spirit and can understand the text of the scriptures?
Jesus says it is the doers... so who is doing what Jesus said to do and who, while professing him, are actually "making the word of God to none effect"?
I do not doubt the Holy Scriptures, Old or New. But I doubt all who say they believe really do believe.
I think many Modern Christians would hate the real Christ just like the Pharisees said they knew Moses and followed his ways, read his Torah but actually could not even recognize Jesus as the Christ nor what Christ was saying and how he and Moses were in agreement. So, what was the conflict between some of those Jews and Jesus? Like for instance Corban? http://www.hisholychurch.org/sermon/corban.php
If someone thinks that Jesus did not but heads with the pharisees about their doctrines they better check the text again.
Matthew 16:12 "Then understood they how that he bade [them] not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees." And they were not just called hypocrites but "dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness" and vipers... Matthew 3:7 "But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?"
If you read the text you need to do so with a fuller understanding of the text within history. http://www.preparingyou.com/wiki/Pharisees
God gives us the perfect way to know him. Hebrews 10:16 "This [is] the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;" This is just a continuation and repeat of Jeremiah 31:33 "But this [shall be] the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people."
You cannot find your way back to the tree of life by merely eating of the tree of knowledge. Our intellect will not save us. God reveals himself to those who will hear Him.
The law is not done away with but the Pharisees misunderstood the law. Moses and Christ were in agreement but the Pharisees did not know him nor God nor Christ. I speak generally here because of course some Pharisees repented, like Paul.
Repenting meant changing our minds and we cannot do that without God's Holy Spirit. What I write is not written to convince you of the truth but that false prophets and certain men crept in unawares that we might believe a lie.
The law is not done away with but Christ taught a different understanding of it. If we know more about the history and events of the time, we might see that many today are doing what the Pharisees did and getting the old and New Testament wrong. Certainly not the whole text but a good and clever lie includes a lot of truth. That is what we have today a lot of people who study the bible and miss some essential elements of the gospel and fail to apply them in faith.
I see Brandon Evans is making my point very well. I studied the Latin and the Greek back in the early '60 and learned the opinions of scholars and wanted to believe. But I also wanted to know the truth and something was not right. When I was willing to admit I could not figure out what was wrong then God began to help me see.
The deal is I must freely share with others, fast and pray. I am not here to prove anyone wrong, or me right. I am here to share, and bear witness.
The law says we should not covet and peter says through covetousness we would be made merchandise and Paul quotes David who says what should have been for or welfare has become a snare and Jesus tells us to pray to our Father in heaven and call no man on earth Father and of course not to be like the rulers of the other nations who call themselves Benefactors but exercise authority.
We will not get the right answers until we admit we need the Holy Spirit to give us the right questions. http://www.preparingyou.com/wiki/Some_Questions
I believe there is enough in the Bible to understand the gospel. There is nothing that is essential that is really omitted that should keep you from understanding the Bible.
What is missing is understanding the full meaning of the words of the Old Testament and a willingness to see that we can be wrong about what we think is true. This is the same reason you had Sadducee, Pharisee and Essene along with lots of other sects and denominations. And why the Pharisee and many others could not except the true teachings of Christ today.
People talk about love and faith and believing in Jesus but the Pharisees said the same about Moses and Abraham but they were so much in conflict with Christ's doctrines and teachings that they wanted to trap him, accuse him, arrest him and kill him. They just did not want to see the truth because they would have to change their thinking, their minds to do so. They did not want to repent.
The word doctrine and teaching is the same. The verb διδάσκω is just about the only word in the New Testament used to produce the words teach or teachings or doctrines. To suggest that there is a difference between teachings and doctrines based on translations into English words is absurd and not an example of reasoning but rationalization.
There is the word παιδεύω or paideuo which appears as teach a few times but means to chastise. And there is the word σωφρονίζω or sophronizo that appears as a verb and also as an adjective which has to do with bringing one to their senses. No one is saying that there was no sacrifice. There was sacrifice and from the beginning there were stone altars but most of the time in the early text the talk about stone altars was about living stones. The same word in Hebrew you see as a gathering of stones is a "gathering of friends", men you trust.
Like killing a dove to make recompense for your sin. The same word in Hebrew for dove is the word for a "piece of your estate". But to the Pharisees they wanted to believe they were to kill a dove, not give up a piece of their estate. You do not have to re-translate the bible just understand the language and its metaphors.
The word Corban is from the Hebrew word meaning sacrifice which comes from the idea of drawing near. We have gone from the character of God and fail to love one another which often means sacrifice and particularly a freewill sacrifice.
The Pharisees were changing that and John, Jesus, Peter and Paul preached against what they were saying, teaching, or saying was now okay.
The Romans had done the same with their Qorban and it is why there was a conflict between Christians and the Roman government. The Christians were practicing "private religion" and the Romans outlawed private religion. Christians would not sign up for the public religions of the Romans because that would be calling the state their father. their benefactor, and Jesus said we were not to be that way.
Modern Christians are doing everyday what early Christians would not do because of the doctrines, teachings and opinions of modern Christians and Jews.
If you read the article on Corban I have already posted, you would or could see that your modern Corban is identical to the Pharisees and in conflict with Christ and his teachings and doctrines. You would have to be willing to see the truth and willing to repent. If not, you will rationalize that there must be no evidence.
There is a world of evidence that modern Christians are under a strong delusion and that their faith is false and that even though they profess Christ and do great signs and wonders they are actually workers of iniquity.
But that is good news because if they will have eyes to see and ears to hear they still have time to repent and seek the kingdom of God at hand.
But alas many are more in love with their personal doctrines, teachings and opinions than they are in love with the truth, the way and the light. http://www.preparingyou.com/wiki/Christian_conflict
Although you sound like you are contradicting my comments on the Greek language, I do not see anything you post that actually is correcting what I actually said about the Greek.
You go on and on about what you know about Greek but are completely off point and what you are saying has nothing to do with the fact that doctrines are what you teach and teaching is doctrine because it is the same word or root word in the Greek. The only reason I mentioned the Greek is you were suggesting, even saying, that there is a difference between doctrines and teachings, trying to lead us to believe that Jesus had no problem with the Pharisees doctrine just their teachings. Which of course is absurd.
Jesus disagreed with the Pharisees teachings and doctrines and so did Paul and we showed you where... in their Corban, which means sacrifice but also is translated treasury in the Bible's New Testament. Their Corban was being taught and done wrong according to Christ which was making the word of God to none effect.
And while you were avoiding the real issue here you also seem to be getting upset and impatient.
I am not trying to argue or upset anyone. I am just sharing the facts that many people who think they are Christians are actually doing the opposite of what Christ taught, His doctrines, and are also doing much like the Pharisees did and taught which opposes Christ. You cannot have faith in the real Christ and oppose what he said and even do the opposite of what he said to do. We are not to be coveting our neighbors' goods through men who call themselves benefactors but exercise authority one over the other. Christ made that very clear and early Christians were killed because they refused to sign up for the benefits of those men, who were the fathers of the earth Jesus spoke of earlier. http://www.preparingyou.com/wiki/Benefactors
The difference between διδαχή translated doctrine, as you say, is subtle. The Greek word is even defined "teaching, that which is taught". As far as διδασκαλία, it is also defined as teaching and even translated teaching at least once. It simply means more like instruction. But you are trying to say that doctrines are different than teachings as if Jesus disagreed with their teachings but not their doctrine. There really is no significant difference warranting such a conclusion. Thayers does not really agree with you, nor does Strong's concordance.
As far as Holy Matrimony and state marriages, they are different. Holy Matrimony has no legal significance without a marriage contract, that is how most people got married for centuries unless they were slaves or serfs. Marriage license with the state is a three-party contract with the state giving the state jurisdiction over the union. They can put it asunder and force the couple to give up their children and divide their property because you made a contract with them.
I did not make that up. It is the law. What did Jesus say? Mattheww 19:6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
But modern Christians have given men the power to put that union established by God asunder. They make covenants with the state, covenants are contracts and contracts are covenants. What does the Bible say about that? Exodus 23:32 Thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor with their gods.
And what about Exodus 34:15 Lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and they go a whoring after their gods, and do sacrifice unto their gods, and [one] call thee, and thou eat of his sacrifice;
I am sure you do not want to admit that making contracts with the state is making covenants with the inhabitants.
But the real hangup is probably the word for god and gods, and God. They are the same words and they are also defined by Thayer's and Strong's concordance. In the Old and New Testament times they did refer to rulers, judges and even magistrates and they become your ruling judges because you make contracts and covenants with them. You do that to get their benefits, their welfare as David says. And their welfare is a trap and snare, and why Paul quoted David and why he and Christ said to live by charity instead of applying to benefactors who exercise authority. They only give you what they take from your neighbor but it appears most people claiming to believe in Christ think it is okay to covet their neighbors' goods through men who exercise authority one over the other. It is very Clear Christ does not agree with that and so most people saying they are Christians do not really agree with Christ.
Another point is all those covenant/contracts with the rulers, judges and magistrates that you make to get those benefits at your neighbor's expense... they require oaths, swearing under penalty of perjury. What did Jesus say about taking oaths and swearing... What did James say about it? But above all things, my brethren, swear not...
Of course, you can rationalize that these were only certain kinds of oaths but early Christians would die rather than take the same oaths modern Christians take at the drop of a hat. Of course, you can rationalize that there is a difference between the covenants the testaments were talking about and the ones you make every day with ruling judges but if you are willing to know the truth, you should know that there are gods many http://www.hisholychurch.org/sermon/godsmany.php
I am not dependent on Lexicons but you said Christ disagreed with their teachings but not their doctrines as if there is a difference and the truth is there really isn't much of a difference between the two at all and Christ was against their doctrine and what they taught because they taught their doctrine.
I am sorry Barry but Michael is wrong. He is really just avoiding the real issue making false accusations like saying things like "Your entire "anti-civil government" theology is mostly just nonsense.".
I am all for civil government. I am not against civil law at all. Civil law is the law people make for themselves. They do that with contracts between the parties.
But centralization of power is centralization of corruption because, again, power corrupts. A good cult would want you to come under their authority. We want you to take back your responsibilities.
For centuries the church has stated when it performs a marriage that it is not a party to it. For centuries the Church did not unite people be the authority vested in them by the state but by God alone.
State marriages are a three-party contract with the state and the state becomes a party. That is not the way it used to be. That gives the state much more power, and power corrupts.
The state has jurisdiction to dissolve their licensed marriage even when neither party wants it. It happens. But worse than that it can dissolve parental rights and does so unjustly many times regularly.
I have been in court rooms for over 50 years and my father before me. You have no idea of the injustice that goes on there and it will continue to get worse unless people start tending to what Jesus called the "weightier matters".
State Marriage contracts are just one way you waive rights. "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many Citizens, because of respect for the law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their rights due to ignorance." U.S v.Minker, 350 U.S. 179, 187
In other words, they lack knowledge. And the worst part of this is they often want to say they see and so their sin remains just like the Pharisees. Things are changing as they were changing before and after Christ. History repeats itself. Rome was instituting marriage licenses too as it went from a republic to a centralized imperial power. The eventually required birth registrations. The only reason to register was to get the benefits. There was lots of free bread, government benefits, from the Roman Government. Christians were persecuted because they did not sign up for those benefits as you see with the trial of Speratus, Narzalis, Cittinus; Donata, Secunda, and Vestina.
Christians did not participate because that would make the state their Father. It would be applying to men who call themselves benefactors but exercise authority one over the other.
Jesus was clear in Matthew 20:25. Mark 10:42, and 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. But ye shall not be so:" But it is so with modern Christians. A hundred years ago the Church took care of almost all social welfare for Christians but now they apply/pray to the state. What the state gives is not charity.
They only give away what they take from our neighbor or borrow against the future of our children which Peter calls covetous. Peter told us 2 Peter 2:14 "Having eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin; beguiling unstable souls: an heart they have exercised with covetous practices; cursed children:"
Instead of dealing with the facts you say things like "you refuse to recognize legal authority in governments" which is absolutely false. We not only recognize it we are showing you how they get legal authority. They get it by you waiving your rights to get benefits, voluntarily taking oaths and lacking knowledge about the "weightier matters".
Of course, most people have to go to the State to get benefits from those authoritarian benefactors because the Church is not tending to the daily ministration like we see in Act 6.
So why is every government looking more and more like Rome and less and less like the early Church? When acts 6 was picking men they trust to take care of their widows and orphans and needy, the Roman government and the Pharisees had a system in place that did the same, but did not rely on freewill offerings.
See the trial of Speratus, Narzalis, Cittinus; Donata, Secunda, and Vestina. http://www.preparingyou.com/wiki/Christian_conflict
As to exousia meaning liberty, it is translated liberty in the Bible, and right, and it means the right to choose. Of course, like I showed you, when you give government the right to choose for you, it will have your liberty or power over you. It will make you send your children to school, it will make them learn what it wants to teach them and you won't have the right to choose anymore. Then you will say they have the exousia, the power to choose for you because you gave it to them.
God endows people with rights and people endow governments with rights. When the voice of the people endowed Saul with the right to rule over them it was called a rejection of God. God said he (Saul) would take, take and take and take, make his instruments of war, and put your sons in harms way for his purposes; and when you cry out God will not hear you... sound familiar? Samuel 8. I am all for government but according to the ways of God. That seems foreign to most modern Christians because they think they see already.
Anyway, as Michael said.
Instead of making false accusations about being anti-government and a cult you should let me know why your church does not take care of all the needy of your congregations by faith, hope and charity. Why do you apply to men who call themselves your benefactors but merely use their authority to take from your neighbor. And why are you not gathering together to take care of your social welfare by charity instead of giving your government more and more power to bury your children in endless debt?
We are not anti-government but we are anti stupidity. We are pro responsibility. We are pro individual rights because rights and responsibilities go hand and hand and God endowed us with both. We are pro-life, home education, home health, community assurance.
In the Old Testament the entire country was supported by "freewill offerings" through a network of ministers. Moses told the people to love their neighbor as themselves and their network of social welfare insisted upon a moral code. It was not a top-down society but a bottom up. The Levite minister was literally a public servant serving the tents of the congregations where through that network of charity the high-priest was the best servant of servants.
This is what John the Baptist and Christ and the early Church was doing. It was not what Judea, Herod and the Pharisees were doing. Herod had created a social welfare system that operated like the "one purse" of Proverbs 1. You signed up and you had to pay based on requirements set by the Sanhedrin. It was no longer charity or loving your neighbor.
It divided the community and therefore society and the effect was making the plan of God to none effect. It corrupted the rulers who squandered the treasury/corban and weakened the people so that they thought their neighbor was no longer their business.
This is what the world is doing today. In America we used to take care of the needy through charity. Now we think it is the job of the government and what we do for the needy is token in comparison but it makes us feel good. We sit and eat with rulers and with great appetite for their benefits. Proverbs 23 also says to put a knife to your throat when we sit and eat with a ruler.
Public education is welfare. It is a socialist scheme based on forcing your neighbor to pay in for what you want for free. We even call it free education but it is not free nor supported by free will offerings. It is based on force and it is out of control with little or no moral compass. We recently saw a father arrested for speaking up about his 14-year-old daughter being forced to read pornography. Other moral behavior is promoted as mere choices and non-biblical values are taught to children. The same is true of healthcare and welfare of all kinds where the people are forced to equally support sloth and moral degeneracy without discretion. This loss of freewill choice is because we have accepted that it is okay to force our neighbors to pay for what we want and now our neighbor is forcing us to pay for what is immoral. It is destroying what made America great. It is a system not based on charity but upon force. It is the opposite of what John the Baptist taught and the antithesis of what Jesus and even Moses taught and it counters what made America and even Rome great. It is based on a covetous nature and has replaced what the Church use to do as matter of the charitable course set by Christ.
Just as an example the Amish were exempt from recent imposing of health care because they are already taking care of one another. Why are not all Christ Church doing that? Because someone brought in the damnable heresies that it is okay to covet your neighbors' goods as long as you get the government to do the dirty work. Peter was right when he said that through covetousness you would be made merchandise, human resources used to finance evil and you would even curse your children with debt and the bondage of debt. http://www.hisholychurch.org/news/articles/notsecuress.php
I am sorry that Michael chooses to avoid the issue and make false accusations about us denying the deity of Christ. But he should understand that Christ was talking about a system exactly like what modern Christians depend upon today. There is a cognitive disconnect we see all the time because people find it hard to believe they might be wrong and have something to repent.
When the state pays Social Security it is doing it with funds it is taking from the future of your children. It is not children choosing to care for their parents. Children think it is the job of government to take care of their parents. I and my wife worked in a convalescent home when we met. Old people were literally dumped there by their children.
They could do that because social security and Medicare would pay so they thought it was okay to "no more to do ought for [their] father or [their] mother. That is the way it works in America today and the respect for the elderly is waning amongst the youth even faster. Social Security and state social welfare run by men who exercise authority is making the word of God to non-effect. While some will want deny it this modern system of social welfare that is growing with leaps and bounds and early Christians would not join under pain of death is just like the Corban system set up by Herod the Great and the Pharisees and exactly what Christ was talking about when he said it made the word of God to none effect. Modern Christians may say Lord Lord and that they believe but they are not doing what Christ said and the early Church did. In fact, many who think they are doing great things in the name of Christ are actually workers of iniquity. But there is time to repent.
This is where you are wrong Michael and it takes us back to the beginning. Once you realize that the Stone altars of Abraham and Moses were actually a gathering of men to receive the freewill contributions of the people in faith, hope and charity under the perfect law of liberty just like the early Church and their network of congregations of ten families linked together in the tens hundreds and thousands then you will begin to understand where we went wrong. But if you insist upon thinking that God wanted us to mindlessly pile up stones and kill sheep and set them on fire then you might think that religion was just what you think about God and not what you do.
Corban or sacrifice was a social welfare system, and either it is done by charity or force which was the message of the prophets from Abraham to John the Baptist. Pure Religion was how you took care of the needy of your society as James tells you, unspotted by the cult of Rome and similar systems of force.
The words Government and Religion are mentioned 5 times each in the Bible but most people have redefined religion to what they think, rather than what they do. The difference between the Corban of Rome and the Pharisees and the religion of John, Jesus and the early Church was the latter was private and the former was public. This was already explained in the link on Christian conflict which cited the actual trial and appeal of the Christians who were put to death because they would not join the public Roman "cult" which was nothing more than their social security system, their Qorban, having outlawed private religion which was the social welfare system of the church. One was supported by taxes and the other by charity and they altered the nature of society. People have changed the meaning of Religion. http://www.preparingyou.com/wiki/Public_religion