Monday, 29 June 2015

Infantile misuse of Biblical texts

This particular abuse of the text was found on the Mandatory Facebook page.

The context of stoning has NOTHING to do with smoking marijuana or any drug that gets you stoned, it is to do with stoning someone to death, the practice of pelting rocks at them until they die, not smoking weed every day till you are in a drug induced high.

It is anachronistic to read back later definitions of words into the biblical text and as far as abuse goes, this is an egregious misuse of the text.

Answering Judaism.

Saturday, 27 June 2015

What is the true rainbow?

As you all may be aware, the rainbow has been used in reference to celebrating the fact that homosexual marriage has been legalized in America. Facebook now has a feature where you can change your profile image to a rainbow colour to join the "celebration".

How demonic, This is truly a profaning of the rainbow. The true meaning of the rainbow is NOT to be a celebration of homosexuality, what the true meaning of the rainbow is the promise that God himself will never flood the world with destruction:

"Genesis 9:8 Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him: 9 “I now establish my covenant with you and with your descendants after you 10 and with every living creature that was with you—the birds, the livestock and all the wild animals, all those that came out of the ark with you—every living creature on earth. 11 I establish my covenant with you: Never again will all life be destroyed by the waters of a flood; never again will there be a flood to destroy the earth.”

12 And God said, “This is the sign of the covenant I am making between me and you and every living creature with you, a covenant for all generations to come: 13 I have set my rainbow in the clouds, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and the earth. 14 Whenever I bring clouds over the earth and the rainbow appears in the clouds, 15 I will remember my covenant between me and you and all living creatures of every kind. Never again will the waters become a flood to destroy all life. 16 Whenever the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and all living creatures of every kind on the earth.”

17 So God said to Noah, “This is the sign of the covenant I have established between me and all life on the earth.”"

This is the reason the rainbow was seen in the sky, a reminder to God that he will never again destroy earth with a flood. For man to pervert the rainbow into a celebration of gay marriage, is truly reprehensible.

Answering Judaism.

Honour your parents: When and where?

"Exodus 20:12 “Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you."

Of the moral commands that apply to us today, this one certainly does and is often overlooked.

Let us get one thing out of the way that Jesus said before we press on:

"Matthew 10:37 Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me."

Jesus says that we are to love him more than our parents. Jesus DOES NOT mean that you are to hate, disparage or hurt your parents, but what he does expect is for all of his followers to love him more than them, but NOT to the exclusion of them. See here on Matthew 10:34: http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/did-jesus-dishonour-his-parents-and.html

What do I mean by not to the exclusion of them? Simple, Jesus himself said the following to the Pharisees:
"Mark 7:6 He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:

“‘These people honor me with their lips,
    but their hearts are far from me.
7 They worship me in vain;
    their teachings are merely human rules.’[b]
8 You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.”

9 And he continued, “You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe[c] your own traditions! 10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and mother,’[d] and, ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’[e] 11 But you say that if anyone declares that what might have been used to help their father or mother is Corban (that is, devoted to God)— 12 then you no longer let them do anything for their father or mother. 13 Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”"

The Pharisee's tradition caused them to serve God at the EXPENSE of their parents, essentially trying to deny that they had responsibility to help their parents when they are old. This is an extreme position to take and Jesus denounced the Pharisees for it.

Jesus doesn't expect you to NEVER care for your parents period, otherwise he wouldn't of condemned the Pharisee's tradition and he would of simply let them be if that was the case.

Mosaic Law called for your death with respect to not honoring your parents.
"Exodus 21:15 “Anyone who attacks[c] their father or mother is to be put to death."

"Leviticus 20:9 “‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death. Because they have cursed their father or mother, their blood will be on their own head."

While Christians are not under the Old Testament law and the death penalty is not applicable to the Christian church, it does stress and express how seriously God takes honoring one's parents.

If you think about it, being banned from using your PS3 or XBOX (or whatever game console you use) or being banned from hanging out with your friends via being grounded is a mercy compared to being put to death eh?

Paul himself even stresses the importance of obeying one's parents:
"Ephesians 6:1 Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. 2 “Honor your father and mother”—which is the first commandment with a promise— 3 “so that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy long life on the earth.”[a]

4 Fathers,[b] do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord."

"Colossians 3:20 Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases the Lord.

21 Fathers,[c] do not embitter your children, or they will become discouraged."

This exhortation is carried through the NT, Just reading Romans 1 we see the following:
"Romans 1:28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them."

This is indeed quite serious.

Is there a time where disobedience to your parents is allowed, Yes, but only ONE context. If your parents tell you to violate what God has said in his word, Only then can you disobey, but if your parents tell you to do something that is good in God's sight, like help them out, tidy your room or something like that, then carry out what they say. Disobedience to parents is only allowed IF they tell you to disobey God, that's it.

Be bereans and let me know what you think.

Answering Judaism.

PS. Jesus even tells John to look after his mother, which is honouring your parents biblically, but not in the Romanist sense of praying to her or asking her to go to God and other blasphemous doctrines of Rome. See my articles on Mary here:
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/shoehorning-roman-doctrines-into.html
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/mary-greatest-woman-who-ever-lived.html
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/mary-greatest-woman-who-ever-lived-2.html
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/catholic-dogmas-three-things-worthy-of.html

Difference between propaganda and fact

Propaganda is defined here: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/propaganda

Engaging in propaganda, information used to harm a person or a group, was very common in WW2 in Nazi Germany and many others also engage in it today.

If one is seeking expose a ministry or an individual that is spreading falsehood, they must be able to back their points up and demonstrate such. If they are incorrect on a certain point, they need to be honest enough to correct themselves and instead refute what the person ACTUALLY says, not a caricature of what that person is saying. We all mistakes in haste and need to be willing to admit them.

A propagandist will usually twist facts to sway people to their cause, which is despicable to say the least. This includes defaming a persons character with lies and deception, rather than establish facts about the person, drawn from the individuals actions.

If the person you respond to in question responds, read carefully what they have said and engage the argument. False ministers of the word need to be brought down via the truth, not brought down via lies and propaganda.

Jesus Christ is not honoured when he seeks Christians engage in lies, thus if you are an  apologist for a biblical ministry, seek to uphold the truth when you respond to the person, do not engage in deceiving your audience about a person, for that is a wicked way of the world.

Sometimes, but not always, a person can check the claims of the propagandist and realise they have been led astray, when they actually find out what the position of the defamed individual actually is.

Let us be called to a higher standard in all matters of faith and conduct.

Answering Judaism.

Thursday, 25 June 2015

Trinity: A response to David Brainerd

What it says on the tin. I'll just dive in this time.
Well, if you haven't gotten to the point 2 minutes in, then I doubt you'll ever get to it.
+David Brainerd I have to mention the Trinity Delusion's point first THEN address the point.

Now here are the points in question by David
+bobo577 Well as to your response, you just don't get it. The Holy Spirit is not referred to as "he" except in Trinitarian biased English translation. In Greek "he" is not referred to as "he" because of the neuter gender of spirit.

I comment on the point on neuter in this article here: http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/challenge-from-facebook-unitarian.html


+bobo577 Being and person are equivalent terms. We do not ever mean something distinct from the person which they can share with another person when we say being. Trinitarians don't speak human language but Satan's language.
Being is what you are, person is who you are, they are not equivalent terms. It's not that hard. Furthermore the comment given is an ad homenim rather than an actual point.


+bobo577 God didn't inspire the Bible for Greek philosophers but for fishermen and tentmakers, etc. common men, and common men use the term being to mean the same as person. God speaks the language of the average man, not of sophists like Athanasius and Sam Shamoun. So OUR definition of terms (us common men) IS GOD'S definition of terms. You philosopher types are accepting Satan's definition of terms.
Instead of attacking Sam Shamoun and Athanasius, why don't you actually address what they are saying? Philosophy has it's time and place and using certain terms to explain the Trinity doesn't mean Trintarians are accepting Satan's definition of terms.

What is wrong with trying to explain the Trinity biblically by using "philosophical" terms? Just because a term is not in the Bible, doesn't make it so. Not to mention even the average man would and could use terms to distinguish between person and being.


+bobo577 As to the quotation "in him dwells the fulness of the godhead bodily" this means he is NOT God. If he were God, God would not dwell in him, because he would BE God. This is merely saying that the Holy Spirit (here called the fulness of the godhead) was given to him beyond measure (John 3:34) and dwells in him bodily beyond measure.
Robert M. Bowman makes the following observation regarding Colossians 2:9 and 1:19:
"Some argue that Colossians 2:19 ("and you have come to fullness in him") shows the "fullness" of verse 9 doesn't not mean that Jesus has God's very nature. The reasoning seems simple enough: Paul says that we have the fullness, not that we're God by nature; therefore, saying that Jesus has fullness doesn't make him God by nature, either. But this argument misconstrues the relationship between the two statements. Paul is not saying that believers have the fullness of deity dwelling in them bodily as well! Rather, he is saying that God's fullness is found in Christ personally, those who are united to Christ (who are "in him") have the fullness of God's power and love working in their lives. In both cases it is God's fullness, but in the case of Christ it resides in him personally and bodily, whereas in our case that fullness is meditated to us through our relationship with Christ"

and

"Finally we should comment on the argument that Paul's statement in Colossians 1:19- that God "was pleased" for all his fullness to dwell in Christ-proves Christ was not always deity. In context, Paul i referring to the incarnation. He is saying that God was pleased to be fully incarnated in the human Jesus of Nazareth. "It is the same Jesus, crucified and buried but risen again, and now alive for everyone as Christ the Lord, in whom the totality resides." Colossians 1:19 and 2:9 on their own do not address directly the question of the nature of the Son prior to his incarnation."
(Robert Bowman and J. Ed Komoszewski, Putting Jesus in his Place: A Case for the Deity of Christ).

Also regarding John 3:34:
"31 The one who comes from above is above all; the one who is from the earth belongs to the earth, and speaks as one from the earth. The one who comes from heaven is above all. 32 He testifies to what he has seen and heard, but no one accepts his testimony. 33 Whoever has accepted it has certified that God is truthful. 34 For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God[i] gives the Spirit without limit. 35 The Father loves the Son and has placed everything in his hands. 36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on them."

John 3:34 is not even talking about the same subject of Colossians 2:9, it is talking about Jesus being sent by the Father and that the Holy Spirit can be given to individuals without a limit to who he may give it to. This is NOT the same context as Colossians 2:9.


Answering Judaism.

Friday, 12 June 2015

3 points of interest, Quick response to cbd94

This is only going to be a quick response to cbd94 to three points raised in an article.
Point #1: This individual is not a Catholic, however he has come to accept certain Catholic beliefs after his own studying of the evidence. I pray he will convert to the Catholic faith as God has decreed that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church. There will not be exception this individual or any other individuals. God does not compromise on this issue.
God didn't decree anything about the Roman Catholic Church being the instrument of salvation. Quite to the contrary, If anything, the Roman Catholic Church is a puppet used to decieve people and keep many away from salvation. I'll at least commend cbd94 for not saying "Oh you guys are just separated brethren" and recognize these are salvation issues.

Point #2: Bobo577 is not a spokesperson for Christianity nor is he even a Christian. He has told me that he belongs to the Anglican "Church", which is a false institution that was solely created to allow a 16th century mass-murdering king to engage in adultery. Anglicans, along with all other Protestants, are members of a false religion and are not Christians in any sense.
I plan to leave the Anglican Church soon, not sure when, but soon. Having said that, there are Anglicans who are saved and ones who are not. Plus what about all the evil popes in history?

As for the subject of the Anglican history. I would need to look into it.

The subject of the origins of Anglicanism need looking into.

Point #3: I advise all Jews and other people who are seeking information on the Christian religion to avoid the blog of "Answering Judaism" because it doesn't teach authentic Christianity and instead teaches the Anglican and Protestant version of Christianity. Do you want to learn about Christianity or about the Protestant version? I advise people of good will to read Catholic blogs only on this issue.
Yeah because going to Roman Catholicism will work SO well for the Jews and they will be guilty of the same things Catholics are guilty of, necromancy, idolatry, etc, things in the OT they were chastised for and were EXILED for. I won't talk about the issues here and now, I have other papers on this:
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/mary-greatest-woman-who-ever-lived.html
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/biblical-and-manmade-tradition.html
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/forced-celibacy-doctrine-of-demons.html
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/more-roman-catholic-and-eastern.html
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/more-roman-catholic-and-eastern_7.html
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/catholic-dogmas-three-things-worthy-of.html
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/12/shoehorning-roman-doctrines-into.html
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/sola-scriptura-response-to-quinque-viae.html

That's all I have to say. To all readers, just study, pray and look into these things.

Answering Judaism.

Addendum 13th of July 2015: Yesterday I came across this link and I am surprised I found it so quickly.

Go here regarding the history of Anglicanism: http://anglican.org/church/ChurchHistory.html
One of the points in the article, is this:
"There is a public perception, especially in the United States, that Henry VIII created the Anglican church in anger over the Pope's refusal to grant his divorce, but the historical record indicates that Henry spent most of his reign challenging the authority of Rome, and that the divorce issue was just one of a series of acts that collectively split the English church from the Roman church in much the same way that the Orthodox church had split off five hundred years before."

This is isn't to defend Henry the VIII's issue on divorce, but hopefully it will bring to light certain issues regarding him. I would suggest cbd94 actually carefully looks into the issue before rashly making claims.

Saturday, 6 June 2015

Heresy of Mormonism: How many Gods exist?

It is very important to know that Christianity and Mormonism are not cut from the same cloth and believe very different things about the Gospel and one of the aspects of Mormonism is polytheism, something that indeed separates it from true Biblical Christianity, ONE of many things.

The Bible makes it abundantly clear over and over that there are NO other Gods besides YHWH. Here are many of the texts affirming this:

"Deuteronomy 4:35
You were shown these things so that you might know that the LORD is God; besides him there is no other."

"Deuteronomy 32:39
"See now that I myself am he! There is no god besides me. I put to death and I bring to life, I have wounded and I will heal, and no one can deliver out of my hand."

"Psalm 18:31
For who is God besides the LORD? And who is the Rock except our God?"

"Isaiah 43:10
"You are my witnesses," declares the LORD, "and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me."

"Isaiah 44:6
"This is what the LORD says-- Israel's King and Redeemer, the LORD Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no God."

"Isaiah 44:8
Do not tremble, do not be afraid. Did I not proclaim this and foretell it long ago? You are my witnesses. Is there any God besides me? No, there is no other Rock; I know not one.""

"Isaiah 45:6
so that from the rising of the sun to the place of its setting people may know there is none besides me. I am the LORD, and there is no other."

"Isaiah 45:18
For this is what the LORD says-- he who created the heavens, he is God; he who fashioned and made the earth, he founded it; he did not create it to be empty, but formed it to be inhabited-- he says: "I am the LORD, and there is no other."

"Isaiah 45:21
Declare what is to be, present it-- let them take counsel together. Who foretold this long ago, who declared it from the distant past? Was it not I, the LORD? And there is no God apart from me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none but me."

"Isaiah 46:9
Remember the former things, those of long ago; I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me."

"Joel 2:27
Then you will know that I am in Israel, that I am the LORD your God, and that there is no other; never again will my people be shamed."

It is very clear from the scripture that there are NO other Gods. What you have are emphatic statements.

Now here are some possible objections to respond to:

"Oh but it means the only God of this planet in those contexts?"
The statements don't imply such a thing, In fact it demonstrates that there is only ONE, period. Other gods are called demons in the scriptures, both the Old Testament and the New Testaments:

"Deuteronomy 32:17

17 They sacrificed to false gods, which are not God—
    gods they had not known,
    gods that recently appeared,
    gods your ancestors did not fear."

"Psalm 106:37 They sacrificed their sons
    and their daughters to false gods."

"Revelation 9:20

20 The rest of mankind who were not killed by these plagues still did not repent of the work of their hands; they did not stop worshiping demons, and idols of gold, silver, bronze, stone and wood—idols that cannot see or hear or walk."

Several more texts could be cited to bring home the point that the other gods of the nations or even the hypothetical scenario that there are supposed gods on other worlds, they would all be worthless idols or even demonic entities. Although the Mormons do not worship these entities, To say that there are other gods that exist, is certainly not a biblical thing to say.

The Old Testament even goes as far as telling us not to invoke deities in and oath or even, not uttering the names of false gods on your lips. This is quite serious.

"What about 1 Corinthians 8:6?"
Let's read:
"1 Corinthians 8:4 So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that “An idol is nothing at all in the world” and that “There is no God but one.” 5 For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), 6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live."

The text is not saying that polytheism is acceptable or is even something Paul acknowledges. What is actually being talked about is that while the world claims that there are many gods, Paul and the Christians affirm and know that there is only ONE God and ONE Lord. See my comments on 1 Corinthians 8:6 here in this article:
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/response-to-savedbybaptisms-arguments.html

"What about Psalm 82:6?"
The text in question doesn't teach that men can become Gods or that they are Gods. As I have said before, What Jesus is using in the context is an a fortiori argument or an argument from a yet stronger reason to further demonstrate his deity, which most anti-Trinitarians overlook. Keith Thompson, CEO of Reformed Apologetics Ministries explains this point better than I do in his documentary "Word of Faith Teachers: Origins & Errors of Their Teaching" which can be found here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KIA06kDRw4 Watch from position 56:51-1:00:28).

Watch the section in question if you want to understand what the text itself means.

"If we are polytheists, What about you? don't you believe in the Trinity?"
The Trinity is not polytheistic at all.  It teaches that in the very being or essence of God, there exist Three Distinct persons, Not three beings in one being or three persons in one person . There are not three separate Gods, but one Eternal God which the TANAKH and the NT make very clear. Hence the Trinity isn't polytheistic in the slightest.

"Why don't you pray like in James 1:5 to see if the Book of Mormon is true?"
Let's see what James 1:5 saying:
"James 1:2 Consider it pure joy, my brothers and sisters,[a] whenever you face trials of many kinds, 3 because you know that the testing of your faith produces perseverance. 4 Let perseverance finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything. 5 If any of you lacks wisdom, you should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to you. 6 But when you ask, you must believe and not doubt, because the one who doubts is like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed by the wind. 7 That person should not expect to receive anything from the Lord. 8 Such a person is double-minded and unstable in all they do."

The context has nothing to do with asking if a certain book is true, what it is talking about is if you are uncertain about something and you need the wisdom, God will grant it if you ask. This text cannot be used to prove the book of Mormon or other.

(I have asked God if the Book of Mormon is true and he said NO if any one is curious.).

"I feel in my hear that Mormonism is true"
A feeling in the heart doesn't make something true, in fact, the heart is deceitful above all things (Jeremiah 17:9). Our hearts must never be used as the criteria of truth, many can make this claim that they believe that their religion is true because their heart says so. See the following paper: http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/spiritual-experiences-what-can-they.html?m=1

"You need the Book of Mormon to understand the Bible"
Says who, Some fellow who never knew the apostles directly but claimed revelation? I am sorry, The Bible is what is to be used as a witness for or against the book of Mormon, you don't need the book of Mormon to supplement the Bible, nor can it supplement the Bible.

More objections may be looked into if the Lord Wills

Answering Judaism.

Vindication

While browsing on the internet, I came across something unusual.

As you guys may or may not be aware, I went to the Paltalk Help Lobby to check if I had been hacked, because I was convinced my bobo577 nic had been hacked into and stolen.

However, I came across something strange.

I came across two images that were present on Answering Abraham (The link had been deleted).

It was really weird and these are the images:
And
I was quite suspicious of the supposed claim that the nic was me, especially when mysty_mysty had said it was a clone and it turns out, It was so.

How it was done I don't know, but somehow the screenshot or whatever was used was edited in a bid to frame me. What is weird is that the screenshots were not present on the site and yet, these two images were present on the site before the deletion of the link.

It would seem very odd for mysty to say it was a clone when my name was supposedly there. I had expressed concerns that I had been hacked and that there someone who hijacked my nic. I was told that there was a possibility that the text had been edited. As it turns out, it had been edited in a bid to frame me. Whoever edited it to claim it was me, I do not know and frankly, I do not care.

What matters is God has vindicated me of the lies about me.

What we have in front of us on this page is the original screenshot before it was edited. If this is so, I am glad I have proof of my innocence. However, it is worth being cautious in case there is a risk of having the bobo577 account being hacked again.

If you see anyone claiming to be me. Call them to the mic and test them. if they refuse, BOUNCE them. Engage in a conversation with them in the room when they get on the mic to test if it is a recording or actual person.

I praise YHWH of hosts for vindicating and answering me.

Answering Judaism.

PS. The Paltalk Lobby didn't say that the text had been edited just to clarify. The images were also present in a Google image search despite the links removal.

Pros and Cons of Written and Oral debates

Both forms of debates have their own advantages and disadvantages. Neither approach is wrong, but there are things that need to be explained regarding these different styles. Let's first look at Oral.

Oral
Oral debates themselves can convey significant amounts of information to the public in a setting where many can gather round to hear what is being said and test it. There is indeed no question that this kind of debating can be useful in a given context, same with ANY form of debating. Plus, there are audience members that learn quite well through a presentation, it makes it a more personal interaction.

The biggest problem with oral debates and yes there are a few, are these:
1. While there is plenty of information to convey, not all the issues relevant to the debate topic can be fit within a small timescale and making a debate too long can wear out an audience.

2. Not every single debater is suited for this kind of debating, this requires one to be a very good speaker, articulate and not ramble. It also requires one to be constantly alert and on their toes, not to mention they must listen attentively and not lose focus.

3. The audience will not have time to check sources UNLESS the debate is conducted on Paltalk, or any media that is similar. 

While I have engaged in a dialogue with NITEMARE'S DEN and DACON9, I admit I wasn't 100% prepared for the conversation with them. A written debate is my personal preference. 

Written
Rabbi Yisroel Blumenthal of yourphariseefriend.com explains that with written debates, you can have all the arguments on the table and spend time putting out an argument. You can find his video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BtgWdU6vKw

A written debate allows one to think about what the other side is saying and then provide a satisfactory response. There is no limit to the arguments that you can present to the table in this context.

As cbd94 recently pointed out to me, there are disadvantages to this as well and yes, he is correct on this.

1. There is a risk of an individual just skimming through the article rather than taking the time to read

2. Not everyone can read an article for a long time and it is can be quite tiring.

3. There is no verbal communication, only written, hence there is almost a less personal interaction. Even on an open discussion forum there isn't that. (This is a point I myself concluded.)

Conclusion
Depending on the person, I say each to his own with respect to the issue of written or oral. To those who don't debate but like to observe them, I let you come to your own conclusion on the debate style you prefer.

Answering Judaism.

Lies lies more lies

A recent rumour has gone around claiming the following, that I have caused a division in Sam Shamoun's marriage and thus they are splitting up.

This is another lie. I don't know Sam Shamoun's wife, or his children. I only know him.

I have never had any contact with Shamoun's wife nor his children and I am not one who wants to hurt a fellow Christian brothers marriage.

Seriously, I have better things to do with my time than putting to death these rumours.

Answering Judaism

Tuesday, 2 June 2015

The heresy of Universalism: Examination of proof texts used by them.

I shall be taking a look at some texts raised by Answering Abraham on the subject of Universalism. I will take a look at some of the biblical texts raised and some of the points raised but not all. We'll have to see what the Lord Wills.

The original article can be found here: http://www.answeringabraham.com/2015/05/introduction-and-defense-of-trinitarian.html

This will not necessarily be in order just to clarify.

Let's take a look at the relevant texts. They have been copied from the articles with AA's highlights present for all to see:

""For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. (For rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person perhaps someone might possibly dare to die.) But God demonstrates his own love for us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, because we have now been declared righteous by his blood, we will be saved through him from God's wrath.For if WHILE WE WERE ENEMIES WE WERE RECONCILED TO GOD through the death of his SonHOW MUCH MORE, since we have been reconciled, will we be saved by his life? Not only this, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received this reconciliation. So then, just as sin entered the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all people because all sinned– for before the law was given, sin was in the world, but there is no accounting for sin when there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam until Moses even over those who did not sin in the same way that Adam (who is a type of the coming one) transgressed. But the gracious gift is not like the transgression. For if the many died through the transgression of the one man, HOW MUCH MORE DID THE GRACE OF GOD and the gift by the grace of the one man Jesus Christ MULTIPLY to the many! And the gift is not like the one who sinned. For judgment, resulting from the one transgression, led to condemnation, but the gracious gift from the manyfailures led to justification. For if, by the transgression of the one man, death reigned through the one, how much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one, Jesus Christ! Consequently, just as condemnation for all people came through one transgression, so too through the one righteous act came righteousness leading to life for all peopleFor just as through the disobedience of the one man many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of one man many will be made righteous. Now the law came in so that the transgression may increase, but where sin increased, grace multiplied all the more, so that just as sin reigned in death, so also grace will reign throughrighteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." (Romans 5:6-21)"

Paul refers to in the context what happened at the time of conversion, namely while the believers before their conversion were lost and were enemies of God, Christ has now set them free. The text is explicit to point out that the exclusivity of salvation, the position that Christ ALONE saves, is evident not only on a surface reading, but also a careful handling and exegesis of the text.

While the grace of God may be open to all, that doesn't mean all will receive, only Christ himself can quicken the individual and bring about redemption. It is by the grace of God that man can come into the faith.

Salvation is open to all, but unless man is quickened and repents toward God, he shall NOT be the recipient of eternal life.

"Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will trouble, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? As it is written, "For your sake we encounter death all day long; we were considered as sheep to be slaughtered." No, in all these things we have complete victory through him who loved us! For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor heavenly rulers, nor things that are present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in creation will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Romans 8:35-39)"

I have spoken on this text in another article:
http://answering-judaism.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/comments-on-romans-8-and-other-texts.html

In addition to the article provided, The text in context is referring to the believers in Jesus and who will separate them from the Love of God. The unbelievers are already condemned and separated from God and it is their own sin that will keep them away from God and his presence for eternity. The statement of not being separated from Christ by external means are only applicable to those are in Christ Jesus, Not to those are not of his sheep.

"For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead?...For I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers and sisters, so that you may not be conceited: A partial hardening has happened to Israel until the full number of the Gentiles has come inAnd so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: "The Deliverer will come out of Zion; he will remove ungodliness from Jacob. And this is my covenant with them, when I take away their sins." In regard to the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but in regard to election they are dearly loved for the sake of the fathers. For the giftsand the call of God are irrevocableJust as you were formerly disobedient to God, but have now received mercy due to their disobedienceso they too have now been disobedient in order that, by the mercy shown to you, they too may now receive mercyFor God has consigned all people to disobedience so that he may show mercy to them all. Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how fathomless his ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor? Or who has first given to God, that God needs to repay him? (Romans 11:15;25-35)"

The believers in Jesus are the ones who have received mercy, since Paul is addressing those particular churches. There is nothing even in the text to suggest that "all" literally means all men will be saved. The usage of the word all has to be defined.

"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creationfor all things in heaven and on earth were created by him– all things, whether visible or invisible, whether thrones or dominions, whether principalities or powers– all things were created through him and for himHe himself is before all things and all things are held together in him. He is the head of the body, the church, as well as the beginning, the firstborn from among the dead, so that he himself may become first in all things. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in the Son and through him to reconcile all things to himself by making peace through the blood of his cross– through him, whether things on earth or things in heaven." (Colossians 1:15-20) "

Who is the body that Jesus is the head of in the context, the church, not the unbelievers. Jesus is sovereign over all, but not all submit to his Lordship. The emphasis on ALL here is on the nature of Jesus, namely where all things derive their existence from, who is the one by all things consist and that Christ is has dominion over creation as YHWH God. Paul is NOT saying that all human beings are going to be saved, he is only making the point on who is the creator and sustainer of of all things, namely Jesus Christ.

"For if only in this life we have hope in Christ, we should be pitied more than anyone. But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleepFor since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead also came through a manFor just as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made aliveBut each in his own order: Christ, the firstfruitsthen when Christ comes, those who belong to himThen comes the end, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father, when he has brought to an end all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be eliminated is death For he has put everything in subjection under his feet. But when it says "everything"has been put in subjection, it is clear that this does not include the one who put everything in subjection to him. And when all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will be subjected to the one who subjected everything to himso that God may be all in all. Otherwise, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, then why are they baptized for them? (1 Corinthians 15:19-29)"

There are two different alls that are being conveyed here. In Adam, all man are dead in sin and transgression, depraved and unfit for doing good. We have inherited the sin of Adam, the adamic nature.

The all in Christ statements are not saying all men are in Christ, we have a secondary all that is present. The all will be made alive in Christ refers to those who have been drawn to Christ and are under his lordship. Not every human on this planet submits or is even in Jesus' flock, hence the all who are made alive in Christ, cannot refer to those who are enslaved to another religion but only to those who belong to Jesus. Even the context says "those who belong to him".

As for the baptism of the dead, Paul is referring to a practice by pagans and using them as an illustration to drive the point home that even the pagans know that there is a Day of Reckoning. The baptism for the dead is not a reference to Christian baptism, but to pagan baptism.

"For the love of Christ controls us, since we have concluded this, that Christ died for all; therefore all have diedAnd he died for all so that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for him who died for them and was raised. So then from now on we acknowledge no one from an outward human point of view. Even though we have known Christ from such a human point of view, now we do not know him in that way any longer. So then, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; what is old has passed away– look, what is new has come! And all these things are from God who reconciled us to himself through Christ, and who has given us the ministry of reconciliation. In other words, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting people's trespasses against them, and he has given us the message of reconciliation. Therefore we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making His plea through us. We plead with you on Christ's behalf, "Be reconciled to God!" God made the one who did not know sin to be sin for us, so that in him we would become the righteousness of God. (2 Corinthians 5:14-21)"

"And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world." (1 John 4:14)"

The very context of the two passages speaks itself, it even EXPLICITLY says " if anyone IS IN CHRIST". Only those who are in Christ Jesus will be the recipients of eternal life and if God has quickened an individual, they will only receive eternal life IF they repent. Only those in Jesus who have repented and accepted his offer of salvation will be reconciled to God. Those who are not in Christ are not a new creation, they are dead and lost.

"Jesus said, "This voice has not come for my benefit but for yours. Now is the judgment of this world; now the ruler of this world will be driven out. And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself." (Now he said this to indicate clearly what kind of death he was going to die.)" (John 12:30-33 )"

Ellicot has an interesting comment on this particular context:
"Will draw all men unto me.—Better, . . . unto Myself. The words “all men” are not to be limited by interpretations which refer them to nations, or to elect persons within nations; but are to be taken in all the fulness of their width as meaning simply what they say—“all.” The drawing unto Himself is the assertion of His reign over the world, from which the prince of evil shall be cast out. He will Himself be the centre of the new kingdom, from which none shall be shut out. These Greeks who are drawn to Him now are the first-fruits of the harvest of which the whole world is the field, and of which the last day is to be the great ingathering. The word “draw” occurs once in the New Testament, besides this passage, in a moral sense (John 6:44; comp. Note on it there). It is accomplished in the work of the Holy Spirit, whose mission to the Church was dependent on the ascension of our Lord (John 7:39John 16:7); and the promise is fulfilled even in the case of those who resist the Holy Spirit’s influence. They are drawn by the moral power of the life and death and resurrection of Christ brought home to them by the Holy Ghost; but no moral power can compel a will which is free. (Comp. Note on John 6:37.) The whole mission-work of the Church and every effort which Christianity brings to bear upon the evil of the world implies this moral drawing; and implies, too, the power of man to reject it. But we may not say this moral power is not leading men to Christ, where we can least trace it, and we may not say that there is any limit where its influence ends. (Comp. Note on 1Peter 3:19.)" http://biblehub.com/commentaries/john/12-32.htm

"I have come as a light into the world, so that everyone who believes in me should not remain in darkness. If anyone hears my words and does not obey them, I do not judge him. For I have not come to judge the world, but to save the world. The one who rejects me and does not accept my words has a judge; the word I have spoken will judge him at the last day. (John 12:46-48)"

Jesus isn't denying he will judge on the last day. Looking at both texts from John 12, just read in between the verses at the context and you'll see what the context is actually saying:
"34 The crowd spoke up, “We have heard from the Law that the Messiah will remain forever, so how can you say, ‘The Son of Man must be lifted up’? Who is this ‘Son of Man’?”

35 Then Jesus told them, “You are going to have the light just a little while longer. Walk while you have the light, before darkness overtakes you. Whoever walks in the dark does not know where they are going. 36 Believe in the light while you have the light, so that you may become children of light.” When he had finished speaking, Jesus left and hid himself from them."

Why is Jesus telling his hearers to believe in the light? There wouldn't be such an exhortation if universalism is even remotely true.

"As it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, "The voice of one shouting in the wilderness: 'Prepare the way for the Lord, make his paths straight. Every valley will be filled, and every mountain and hill will be brought low, and the crooked will be made straightand the rough ways will be made smoothand all humanity will see the salvation of God.'" (Luke 3:3-6)"

"What do you think? If someone owns a hundred sheep and one of them goes astray, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go look for the one that went astray? And if he finds it, I tell you the truth, he will rejoice more over it than over the ninety-nine that did not go astray. In the same way, your Father in heaven is not willing that one of these little ones be lost. (Matthew 18:12-14)"

Putting aside the issue of loosing ones salvation or not, let's look carefully. In Matthew, Jesus is speaking about himself going after one of the believers who are going astray and him bringing that believer back. The sheep in context are believers, not unbelievers. As for the context of Luke, all men will see the salvation of God, but not all recieve salvation.

"This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for ALL men — the testimony given in its proper time."(1 Timothy 2:3-6)"

"The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance." (2 Peter 3:9)"

"This saying is trustworthy and deserves full acceptance. In fact this is why we work hard and struggle,because we have set our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of believers. (1st Timothy 4:9-10)"

"He IS the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world." (1 John 2:2)"

In the four texts, Christ is the Saviour of all men, but not all men will be saved, simply because the atonement of Jesus will only cover those who have repented and in the Old Testament as AA should know, the Day of Atonement or Yom Kippur would only cover the Jewish people who repented, not every single Jew. No Repentance, No Salvation, plain and simple.

God desires man to come to repentance and without repentance, you will perish. A call to repentance is part and parcel of the Gospel.

There is one particular point that comes to mind that AA brings up which I wish to repond to:
"The first part almost answers itself. If Universalism is true, and you whom possess a truth seeking and truth bearing property have no choice but to value and desire truth (the contrary is impossible), then you will participate in the truth and be a Christian Universalist. This reason alone is sufficient but what are some other factors? If Christian Universalism is true, then the Triune God created you to be loved by him with his image bearing property inferred on you to love others, to love your Creator and seek and desire God’s love, this nature you possess then is inescapable and only fulfilled by the Triune Lord of the Creation. Your spiritual and emotional needs would be best met in full abundance by your Creator. The unique Christian Triune God exists and no other uncreated Creator exists, hence all other religions are incomplete, inadequate or incompatible with reality, aka: false. "

The only way to love the creator God, is to believe in Jesus and it's only through Jesus that we can know the Father. Any other religion will NOT bring you to salvation nor will help you come closer to God. Every man cannot have their spiritual and emotional needs met unless the God of the Bible has dominion over their life in the sense of being under his Lordship.

Furthermore, to quote the words of David Pawson "Christians KNOW the love of God because they have experienced it and are in position to UNDERSTAND it". To preach God's love without the individual experiencing  it and understanding it is very dangerous, for it gives the audience the impression that God is tolerant and indulgent and overlooks sin. God's love itself can only be understood once one has been regenerated.

"You should have the same attitude toward one another that Christ Jesus had, who though he existed in the form of God did not regard equality with God as something to be grasped, but emptied himself by taking on the form of a slave, by looking like other men, and by sharing in human nature. He humbled himself, by becoming obedient to the point of death– even death on a cross! As a result God exalted him and gave him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow– in heaven and on earth and under the earth– and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2:5-11)"

"They sang a new hymn: "Worthy are you to receive the scroll and to break open its seals, for you were slainand with your blood you purchased for God those from every tribe and tongue, people and nationYou have appointed them as a kingdom and priests to serve our God, and they will reign ON THE EARTH." Then I looked and heard the voice of many angels in a circle around the throne, as well as the living creatures and the elders. Their number was ten thousand times ten thousand– thousands times thousands–all of whom were singing in a loud voice: "Worthy is the lamb who was killed to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and praise!" Then I heard EVERY CREATURE– in heaven, ON EARTH, UNDER THE EARTH, in the sea, and ALL THAT IS IN THEM– singing: "To the one seated on the throne and to the Lamb be praise, honor, glory, and ruling power forever and ever!" And the four living creatures were saying "Amen," and the elders threw themselves to the ground and worshiped. (Revelation 5:9-14)"

The context of those confessing Jesus as Lord in Philippians 2 is a reference to what will happen when Jesus returns. Unbelievers realize their beliefs and life were wrong and though they bow the knee to Jesus, but it is too late for them to come to Jesus and be saved and they shall go away into everlasting fire and judgement.

The individuals found in revelation are those who PRAISE YHWH as their God, not those who deny him or give lip service to him. Those who are singing in the context have salvation and are not lost. People who deny Jesus or pay lip service, will not truly glorify Jesus at all.

More articles may be written if the Lord Wills, but that may be another time.

Answering Judaism