Thursday, June 19, 2008
Star Wars Made Me This Way! Trailer Two!
I'm not in this trailer either, they are saving me for the movie itself 'cause my Jar Jar is just that good hehe BUT here is the second released trailer:
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Earthquake Machines? Japan, Greece and Benjamin Fulford
I have been having a nice conversation via my AllExperts service with a person about the prophets and related topics. Like so many others, this person has been having dreams of massive destruction and the coming fall of the US. I'm not going to post it all here, but I thought this extract of my reply might encourage some interesting conversation. As all thoughtful and awakening people, this person is seeking more info:
Hi again,
There are countless sources of good information. Consider for instance:
"Infowars" and the work of Alex Jones: http://www.infowars.com
This site features links to countless topics and investigations with solid evidence as well as a link to Alex's radio program.
America: Freedom to Fascism: http://www.freedomtofascism.com
This is the now deceased Aaron Russo's movie and the website/movement it spawned. Lots of good info here.
Another solid source of info is the book: The Creature from Jekyll Island. This book details the creation of the Federal Reserve Bank that, since 1913, has been controlling our currency and guiding the nation into the NWO. It can be found at Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble and elsewhere.
Do web searches on related terms including:
Bilderberg group
Mark of the Beast
RFID
REAL ID
Federal Reserve
North American Union
Infowars
And so on. There is a vast wealth of information still available on line even though much has been pulled and more disappears every day.
Be aware that without accepting the "Mark" it will be impossible to pay property taxes etc. and so those who refuse it will lose their homes once we get to that point. Part of your preparation might be camping excursions into the remaining forests and research on ways to avoid tracking devises etc. once there. This way you can lead people away from the cities if that's your decision when the time comes.
Also, just to be clear, I am NOT saying these things are going to happen in earnest this Autumn. My point is that many many people, including me, are receiving dreams, visions and other "hits" that it MIGHT begin that early.
The REAL ID system was planned to begin in 2004 but due to opposition still has not been released/required and when it is it may not include the RFID chip as originally intended. There are many people working hard to postpone the rise of the Rex Mundi with some successes, as the prophets said:
II Thess 2:6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
These "hinderers" will continue to hinder him as long as possible (contrast my piece here: http://www.allfaith.com/Religions/Noahide/sheep.html). We can not stop his coming to power but we are slowing it. This adds to the uncertainty but is a vital work, allowing more people to understand the importance of resisting/rejecting the NWO, the coming Mark/implant and the global ruler.
This is not a topic that can be fully presented in a single reply or even a book. It is a constantly unfolding series of not always obvious or even related events that requires a lot of "reading between the lines," prayers and deductive logic.
There is a LOT we don't know.
There are many possibilities, far too many for them all to be true.
For instance, are you familiar with Benjamin Fulford? For info on him see my: http://www.allfaith.com/Religions/Noahide/fulford.html
The Japan and Greek Quakes:
Fulford claims -- and has the background and connections to be taken seriously -- that he is part of a group of Asian co-conspirators who plan to take down the Fed, the Bilderbergs and the entire New World Order very soon. He is from Canada (which is still a British Commonwealth and the UK is part of the EU), a Jew that dislikes Judaism and Israel, from an Elite (ie Bilderberg connected) family and who now lives in Japan and who, along with this secret society has declared war on the Novus Ordo Mundi (the New World Order).
Months ago he claimed the NWO has an "earthquake machine." He publicly threatened a frontal info-assault on the NWO early this summer. MANY PEOPLE find the recent devastating Japan earthquake to be more than coincidental. Today's earthquake in Greece COULD BE a retaliation by Fulford to show that his group also has access to an earthquake machine (or the ability to cause similar destruction by other means).
Greece is where many believe the Rex Mundi will be from (via the Merovingian House) because it was also part of the Assyrian Empire and the coming Son of Perdition is referenced as "The Assyrian."
Now, Mr. Fulford sounds like he is in opposition to the NWO but consider: the Rex Mundi will first be hailed as the bringer of peace and global unity and stability according to the prophets. This is precisely what Fulford claims to be doing and "good cop/bad cop" is not a new method for deceiving the gullible.
Again, there are MANY possibilities and very few facts at this level of possibility/consideration.
It is not only easy to err, but impossible to avoid wrong assumptions. We are, as I said before, 'gazing into a glass darkly'. Anyone who claims to have all the answers is being disingenuous at best. NONE OF US DO.
The links I included above should give you a LOT of solid evidence to work with.
Write back any time,
~ John of AllFaith
Hi again,
There are countless sources of good information. Consider for instance:
"Infowars" and the work of Alex Jones: http://www.infowars.com
This site features links to countless topics and investigations with solid evidence as well as a link to Alex's radio program.
America: Freedom to Fascism: http://www.freedomtofascism.com
This is the now deceased Aaron Russo's movie and the website/movement it spawned. Lots of good info here.
Another solid source of info is the book: The Creature from Jekyll Island. This book details the creation of the Federal Reserve Bank that, since 1913, has been controlling our currency and guiding the nation into the NWO. It can be found at Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble and elsewhere.
Do web searches on related terms including:
Bilderberg group
Mark of the Beast
RFID
REAL ID
Federal Reserve
North American Union
Infowars
And so on. There is a vast wealth of information still available on line even though much has been pulled and more disappears every day.
Be aware that without accepting the "Mark" it will be impossible to pay property taxes etc. and so those who refuse it will lose their homes once we get to that point. Part of your preparation might be camping excursions into the remaining forests and research on ways to avoid tracking devises etc. once there. This way you can lead people away from the cities if that's your decision when the time comes.
Also, just to be clear, I am NOT saying these things are going to happen in earnest this Autumn. My point is that many many people, including me, are receiving dreams, visions and other "hits" that it MIGHT begin that early.
The REAL ID system was planned to begin in 2004 but due to opposition still has not been released/required and when it is it may not include the RFID chip as originally intended. There are many people working hard to postpone the rise of the Rex Mundi with some successes, as the prophets said:
II Thess 2:6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
These "hinderers" will continue to hinder him as long as possible (contrast my piece here: http://www.allfaith.com/Religions/Noahide/sheep.html). We can not stop his coming to power but we are slowing it. This adds to the uncertainty but is a vital work, allowing more people to understand the importance of resisting/rejecting the NWO, the coming Mark/implant and the global ruler.
This is not a topic that can be fully presented in a single reply or even a book. It is a constantly unfolding series of not always obvious or even related events that requires a lot of "reading between the lines," prayers and deductive logic.
There is a LOT we don't know.
There are many possibilities, far too many for them all to be true.
For instance, are you familiar with Benjamin Fulford? For info on him see my: http://www.allfaith.com/Religions/Noahide/fulford.html
The Japan and Greek Quakes:
Fulford claims -- and has the background and connections to be taken seriously -- that he is part of a group of Asian co-conspirators who plan to take down the Fed, the Bilderbergs and the entire New World Order very soon. He is from Canada (which is still a British Commonwealth and the UK is part of the EU), a Jew that dislikes Judaism and Israel, from an Elite (ie Bilderberg connected) family and who now lives in Japan and who, along with this secret society has declared war on the Novus Ordo Mundi (the New World Order).
Months ago he claimed the NWO has an "earthquake machine." He publicly threatened a frontal info-assault on the NWO early this summer. MANY PEOPLE find the recent devastating Japan earthquake to be more than coincidental. Today's earthquake in Greece COULD BE a retaliation by Fulford to show that his group also has access to an earthquake machine (or the ability to cause similar destruction by other means).
Greece is where many believe the Rex Mundi will be from (via the Merovingian House) because it was also part of the Assyrian Empire and the coming Son of Perdition is referenced as "The Assyrian."
Now, Mr. Fulford sounds like he is in opposition to the NWO but consider: the Rex Mundi will first be hailed as the bringer of peace and global unity and stability according to the prophets. This is precisely what Fulford claims to be doing and "good cop/bad cop" is not a new method for deceiving the gullible.
Again, there are MANY possibilities and very few facts at this level of possibility/consideration.
It is not only easy to err, but impossible to avoid wrong assumptions. We are, as I said before, 'gazing into a glass darkly'. Anyone who claims to have all the answers is being disingenuous at best. NONE OF US DO.
The links I included above should give you a LOT of solid evidence to work with.
Write back any time,
~ John of AllFaith
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Same Gender Marriage and Romans Chapter One
As my state, California, is now accepting same gender marriages many Christians are again asking what the Bible really says about this issue. The general assumption is that the Bible condemns it. IT DOES NOT! In my previous blog I share the beautiful biblical story of King David and his husband Jonathon. Over the next few days I plan to post various of my studies on what the Bible does and does not say on this subject. I invite your comments whether you agree or disagree with my views on this (and other) issues. The two main sections of scripture I usually see people pointing to is Romans 1 and the account of Sodom of Sodom. I'll post about Sodom tomorrow insha'allah. For now:
John of AllFaith's
Biblical Questions
Biblical Answers
Correctly Understanding Romans One
A Study by Pastor John © 1999 (revised 8-1-2006)
This study can be viewed in my video section as well
To begin with, please read Romans chapter 1. I'll be using the Authorized King James Version throughout. As editions do vary, I'd recommend using the KJV now. Later you can check the newer paraphrases if you'd like.
Our CONTEXT begins at 1:15 and 16:
"So, as much as in me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to you that are at Rome also.
For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek."Paul, through inspiration of the Holy Spirit, begins the topic by stating that he is talking about the Gospel of Jesus and how it must be preached and practiced, and how those who love God will accept it joyfully. We note, for the purposes of this study, that lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered (LGBT) Christians do accept the Gospel both readily and joyfully. This study exists to demonstrate that neither the Bible in general or Romans 1 in particular prohibits this community from accepting and living the Gospel fully.
Verse 18:
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
The wrath of God is revealed from Heaven onto those who hold this truth in unrighteousness. We are therefore speaking of people who hold God's spiritual Truth and salvation in unrighteousness, i.e.. we are discussing abuses which are done in the name of religious truth. Devout Christians do not knowingly do this regardless of the sexual orientation.
Verse 19:
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath showed it unto them.
"Because that which may be known of God..." Again, religious truth is the topic, not sexual orientation or even sexual morality. 'That which may be known' of God' is that which has been revealed in the Holy Scriptures and by the Holy Spirit. These things attest to God's righteousness and should be honored.
Verse 20:
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
From what is visible we should know the invisible, i.e. God and God's truths are revealed through our senses. We can behold the handiwork of God all around us if we but look and these things confirm the existence of God, hence we have no excuse to deny God's existence.
Verse 21:
Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
These people being discussed knew God but chose to submit themselves to their "vain imagines" rather than to God. In other words, they invented new forms of religion, forms that satisfied their base urges and ungodly desires. We are still discussing religion here not sexuality.
Verses 22, 23:
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.These people claimed to be wise in their spiritual beliefs, and yet they were foolish, rejecting the true God, they worshiped false idols and "changed the glory of God into an image..." and worshiped that rather than the true God. Still, we're talking about religious practices and abuses, not sexuality. The Roman Empire, which would include Jewish Palestine, was filled with such worship. Pagan temples offered everything desirable and blasphemed the Creator of heaven and earth. Paul here condemns such worship.
Verse 24:
Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
"WHEREFORE..." Wherefore, i.e. because they rejected God and worshiped idols and followed the paths of their vain imaginations rather than worshiping the One True God... FOR THIS REASON God gave these people up to their lusts.
The CONTEXT of these lusts is the unauthorized desire-based religious practices of the day. These have nothing to do with modern day consensual sexual relationships, whether they be heterosexual or homosexual.
As was common throughout the very religious Roman Empire, such idol worship INCLUDED sexual 'sacrifices' and rites wherein the worshiper engaged in 'sex magic' with temple priests and/or priestesses in the guise of spiritual ecstasy -- AS THOUGH the temple prostitute were the Pagan deity incarnate. THUS, the context here has NOTHING to do with contemporary homosexuality among Christians (or otherwise).
Verse 25:
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
"WHO..." i.e. these people engaging in ritual sex magic and worshiping the Pagan idols, who were "exchanging the truth of God for a lie," and who were committing idolatry through their sex rites and thereby serving the created images and their own carnal desires rather than the true God, who alone is blessed for ever.
Verses 26, 27:
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet."FOR THIS REASON..." i.e. because these people exchanged the worship of the true God for idols and sex rites, God "gave them up" to their own carnal desires.
The natural use or purpose of sexuality according to the Bible is procreation AND building/sustaining strong marital relationships (comp. I Cor 7:2). These people however were using their sexuality "against nature" by employing it to worship the idols of false gods. Through such sexual activities they sought two basic goals: One was the physical pleasures of sexual congress and the other, perhaps more significant in this context, was the promised spiritual union with their gods and the acquiring of benefits thereof. This is not the goal of sexuality intended by God but as these people willfully rejected God, they were allowed to go their own ways. Again, this was very common at the time throughout the empire.
These worshipers were "working that which is unseemly." The use of the word "working" shows that there was a specific end result in mind, i.e. earning the blessings of the Pagan deities, the normal reason for all idolatry. All they received for their "work" however was venereal diseases "...and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was fitting..." The sex cults throughout the empire were hotbeds of sexual diseases and the worshipers often became infected.
THOSE WHO TWIST these scriptures by saying they refer to HIV in our contemporary culture -- and I know some of you are out there! -- need to consider that this verse is the only one in the Bible that can be TWISTED to include lesbians. Lesbians remain among the lowest at risk for HIV and, after years of education, the gay male community is no longer the highest at-risk group. If this dreadful illness were God's wrath against homosexuals neither would be the case, nor would children be so at risk, nor the disabled, nor those in need of blood transfusions etc..
Verse 28:
And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
"And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge...." The subject is still religious faith; it has not changed. These people did not want to acknowledge the true God's existence. They preferred to worship idols of their own imaginings and trust in dangerous sex rites for their salvation. AGAIN AND STILL the subject matter, the context, is not homosexuality but idolatry coupled with sex rites, heterosexual AND homosexual. FOR THIS REASON, because of their spiritual harlotry, God gave them over to a "reprobate mind" and allowed them to believe that their false worship was approved by God when in reality, they were in direct opposition to God's holy will due to their pseudo-spiritual abuses.
In sharp contrast with this, LGBT Christian ministries are growing like wild fire, individual independent churches, groups like the Alliance of Christian Churches, the Gay Pentecostal Alliance, The Evangelical Network, the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches and so on, are now home to thousands of sincere homosexual followers of Jesus who WANT God in their knowledge, their minds, their hearts and in their lives just as other Christians do. In addition to these ministries, more and more mainline churches and denominations are becoming "reconciling and affirming" of LGBT people. This fact alone demonstrates that these verses are not referring to gay and lesbian Christian people. As with any other community, lesbians and gays vary as to their acceptance and understandings of the Gospel message. A very large percentage of those who are not pro-Jesus have had their hearts hardened by abuses which well meaning Christians have subjected them to. The Church is failing miserably at evangelizing this community and will doubtless be held accountable by the one who said "Whoever comes unto Me I will in no case reject."
Verse 29-31:
Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents; without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:"
What resulted from their being "given over to a reprobate mind?" As a result of their religious rebellion against God, these developed the various moral weaknesses described in these verses. LGBT Christians, as all other Believers, seek to avoid such traits in their lives.
Verse 32:
Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
"Who knowing..." i.e. the people being discussed in the previous verses, these idolatrous worshipers who are filled with all unrighteousness etc., "knowing the judgment of God, that they who commit such things are worthy of death..." That idolatry merited the death penalty for Jews under the Mosaic Law is clear. As I explained elsewhere however, despite the two verses in Leviticus which are sometimes cited, homosexuality is not a capital offense nor even negatively commented upon in the Torah.
CONTEXT IS ESSENTIAL in understanding the Word. God loves YOU
Just as YOU are!
You are visitor number...
Who cares, I'm glad YOU'RE here!
Grace Inclusive Home Page Contact Pastor John The entire AllFaith.com domain is Copyrighted 1997-2008 by AllFaith.com and John of AllFaith. All are rights reserved. Do not duplicate or redistribute in any form anything on this domain without express written permission. Brief excerpts excepted. You are warmly invited to link to this site.
Monday, June 16, 2008
Same Gender Marriage Is Now A Reality! For Now....
Its about time!
Freedom and Equality minded people of all sexual orientations will be celebrating as California's first legally recognized same gender full marriage takes place this evening at 5:01 PM.
Mayor Gavin Newsom will marry the first couple tonight and tomorrow will be the blessed wedding day of people all over California as the state's same gender equality laws come into effect.
At last some good news!
At last a case of freedom on the rise in the US!
But wait...
This November a proposition will be on our ballot seeking to overturn this granting of Constitutional rights and most observers expect it to pass. The struggle continues! Those people who, in November, vote to again take away this Constitutional right will be joining like-minded people like Fred Phelps, Baptist Minister (of Westboro Baptist Church) and founder of Godhatesfags.com. This group is already setting up in San Francisco and elsewhere to protest the granting of marriage rights to these couples. Do you really want to be associated with such hateful people? Support freedom for all!
Why does legal equality for all frighten so many Americans?
Why are so many Christians determined to deny God's love and American civil liberties to 10-15% of the population (or more)?
The common answer: Because the Bible condemns homosexuality!
I see. So, you also deny equal rights to those who have heterosexual sex outside of marriage?
The Bible condemns that.
You also deny equal rights to those who commit adultery?
The Bible condemns that.
You also deny equal rights to those who practice abortion?
The Bible condemns that.
You also deny equal rights to those who lie and are known hypocrites?
The Bible condemns that.
You also deny equal rights to those who eat pork?
The Bible condemns that.
You also deny equal rights to those who drink to excess?
The Bible condemns that.
You also deny equal rights to those who fail to honor the Sabbath?
The Bible condemns that....
Do you deny equal civil rights to everyone whose lives are not harmonious with the Bible?
If not, why do you single out gays and lesbians while allowing others to enjoy their civil rights?
No wonder we're losing our rights! Who among us lives in complete harmony with the Bible? If this is the accepted criteria no one should be allowed to marry, to adopt, to serve in the military, etc!
BUT...
The Bible does NOT condemn homosexuality!
The Bible does NOT condemn same gender marriage!
ANYWHERE!
Not even in Leviticus!
Not so long ago most White Christians believed black skin was the "Mark of Cain" and justified slavery and the denial of civil rights to people of African descent.
The Bible does NOT teach that either!
But many believed it because that's what they were taught!
So, what does the Bible teach about Homosexuality?
Directly nothing!
Its a non-issue!
What does the Bible teach about same gender marriage?
Nothing?
NO!
It speaks to this!
Recognize these words?
These words, in various forms, are a traditional part of the standard Christian wedding service.
They are beautiful,
They are inspiring,
And...
They were spoken by two women in love!
They were spoken by Ruth and Naomi in Ruth chapter one!
"Well, yeah but that not what it meant.... They weren't..."
Then how about this? King David, the inspired Psalmist whose poetry continues to move the hearts of all who love HaShem, was probably the most macho and sexually active man in the Bible. The Messiah is predicted to "sit on the Throne of David" and rule the world. David was a holy man given to many human weaknesses. His torrid affairs with women are legendary, and yet did you know that the love of David's life was another man? Of this holy love the Bible tells us:
II Samuel 1:26 I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan; very pleasant hast thou been unto me. Thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women.
But that doesn't mean...
Yes it does!
Following is my study "Jonathon and David: A Biblical Account of Same Gender Marriage."
It was prejudice and ignorance, not the Bible, that caused so many White Christians to condemn African Americans. It IS prejudice and ignorance, not the Bible, that causes so many Christians to condemn the GLBT Communities (ie the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people).
NOWHERE does the Bible condemn these people!
If you have questions about what the Bible actually teaches I invite you to contact me!
Do so here and we can discuss this with other readers.
Do so privately by writing me here at AllFaith.com (or via the private e-mail link here) and we can discuss this privately.
Join my Yahoo Bible and Homosexuality e-group where we openly discuss these issues.
Visit my Grace Inclusive Website where I discuss every verse in the Bible used to condemn this community.
Or contact me at my AllExperts site.
The truth is: Whosoever Means Whosoever:
John 6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
Freedom and Equality minded people of all sexual orientations will be celebrating as California's first legally recognized same gender full marriage takes place this evening at 5:01 PM.
Mayor Gavin Newsom will marry the first couple tonight and tomorrow will be the blessed wedding day of people all over California as the state's same gender equality laws come into effect.
At last some good news!
At last a case of freedom on the rise in the US!
But wait...
This November a proposition will be on our ballot seeking to overturn this granting of Constitutional rights and most observers expect it to pass. The struggle continues! Those people who, in November, vote to again take away this Constitutional right will be joining like-minded people like Fred Phelps, Baptist Minister (of Westboro Baptist Church) and founder of Godhatesfags.com. This group is already setting up in San Francisco and elsewhere to protest the granting of marriage rights to these couples. Do you really want to be associated with such hateful people? Support freedom for all!
Why does legal equality for all frighten so many Americans?
Why are so many Christians determined to deny God's love and American civil liberties to 10-15% of the population (or more)?
The common answer: Because the Bible condemns homosexuality!
I see. So, you also deny equal rights to those who have heterosexual sex outside of marriage?
The Bible condemns that.
You also deny equal rights to those who commit adultery?
The Bible condemns that.
You also deny equal rights to those who practice abortion?
The Bible condemns that.
You also deny equal rights to those who lie and are known hypocrites?
The Bible condemns that.
You also deny equal rights to those who eat pork?
The Bible condemns that.
You also deny equal rights to those who drink to excess?
The Bible condemns that.
You also deny equal rights to those who fail to honor the Sabbath?
The Bible condemns that....
Do you deny equal civil rights to everyone whose lives are not harmonious with the Bible?
If not, why do you single out gays and lesbians while allowing others to enjoy their civil rights?
No wonder we're losing our rights! Who among us lives in complete harmony with the Bible? If this is the accepted criteria no one should be allowed to marry, to adopt, to serve in the military, etc!
BUT...
The Bible does NOT condemn homosexuality!
The Bible does NOT condemn same gender marriage!
ANYWHERE!
Not even in Leviticus!
Not so long ago most White Christians believed black skin was the "Mark of Cain" and justified slavery and the denial of civil rights to people of African descent.
The Bible does NOT teach that either!
But many believed it because that's what they were taught!
So, what does the Bible teach about Homosexuality?
Directly nothing!
Its a non-issue!
What does the Bible teach about same gender marriage?
Nothing?
NO!
It speaks to this!
Recognize these words?
These words, in various forms, are a traditional part of the standard Christian wedding service.
They are beautiful,
They are inspiring,
And...
They were spoken by two women in love!
They were spoken by Ruth and Naomi in Ruth chapter one!
"Well, yeah but that not what it meant.... They weren't..."
Then how about this? King David, the inspired Psalmist whose poetry continues to move the hearts of all who love HaShem, was probably the most macho and sexually active man in the Bible. The Messiah is predicted to "sit on the Throne of David" and rule the world. David was a holy man given to many human weaknesses. His torrid affairs with women are legendary, and yet did you know that the love of David's life was another man? Of this holy love the Bible tells us:
II Samuel 1:26 I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan; very pleasant hast thou been unto me. Thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women.
But that doesn't mean...
Yes it does!
Following is my study "Jonathon and David: A Biblical Account of Same Gender Marriage."
It was prejudice and ignorance, not the Bible, that caused so many White Christians to condemn African Americans. It IS prejudice and ignorance, not the Bible, that causes so many Christians to condemn the GLBT Communities (ie the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people).
NOWHERE does the Bible condemn these people!
If you have questions about what the Bible actually teaches I invite you to contact me!
Do so here and we can discuss this with other readers.
Do so privately by writing me here at AllFaith.com (or via the private e-mail link here) and we can discuss this privately.
Join my Yahoo Bible and Homosexuality e-group where we openly discuss these issues.
Visit my Grace Inclusive Website where I discuss every verse in the Bible used to condemn this community.
Or contact me at my AllExperts site.
The truth is: Whosoever Means Whosoever:
John 6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
John of AllFaith's
Biblical Questions
Biblical Answers
Biblical Questions
Biblical Answers
| Jonathon and David A Biblical Account of a Same Gender Marriage A Sermon by Pastor John © June 1998 updated 8-5-2006 |
- Welcome to Lavender Road Metropolitan Community Church!
- Through scriptures, synagogues, churches, books and movies the fame of King David has been widely proclaimed. And rightly so! David was a passionate and powerful person whose zeal for life was only surpassed by his devotion to God and his unmistakable humanity. In David we see how a fallen human being with obvious imperfections can become one of God's most useful and respected servants. If David can do it, so can we!
- Because of his love for God and country, David boldly slew the giant Philistine Goliath and performed many other Herculean acts. He spared the life of King Saul, despite Saul's intent to destroy him. He valiantly led the armies of Israel against all her enemies.
- David was also the most famous ancestor of Jesus the Christ. Our Savior isn't called the Child of Abraham or the Child of Moses, but is universally celebrated as the Son or Child of David:
- "And when the chief priests and scribes saw the wonderful things that he did, and the children crying in the temple, and saying, Hosanna to the son of David; they were sore displeased" (Matt. 21:15).
- More than any other Biblical character, David fully typifies the extremes of human nature and divine potential. II Sam. 11:1-15 tells us that in order to marry Uriah the Hittite's wife Bathsheba, David had Uriah sent to the front lines to die! Such unscrupulous actions stand in sharp contrast to his beautiful Psalms by which ones soul is lifted into the ecstasies of pure love of God. Through his varied and colorful experiences Jews, Christians and Muslims all find in David a macho image of what a man should be. He was, in modern parlance, a man's man, a true macho man.
- But, how about us? Is there anything in this powerful servant of God's varied experiences that would recommend him to lesbian and gay Christians as an example? What would you say if I told you that David was, at the very least, bisexual and that the love of his life was another man? What if the man traditional Jewish/Christian/Islamic religion promotes as the epitome of godliness, the standard to be emulated by all godly people, was among the five to fifteen percent of any given population whose sexual orientation is not heterosexual? Absurd? Blasphemous? Well, lets see.
- If you would like to follow along in your Bibles, please turn to the Book of I Samuel.
- After killing Goliath, the Gath Philistine, David went to King Saul for an honorific ceremony. Following that meeting, it appears, David met Saul's gay son Jonathan. It was, if we take the Scripture literally, love at first sight. I Samuel 18:1, in the Authorized King James Version, tells us that: "... the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him [David] as his own soul."
- Jonathan loved (Hebrew: 'ahab which includes both family and sexual love) David at first sight. Their souls were knit together (Hebrew:Qashar which is to tie, physically or mentally in love, league). Their feelings were very strong, love at first sight, however at this point their love could be interpreted as platonic, although platonic love is almost never referred to as love at first sight.
- At Saul's insistence, David moved into the royal household and things quickly heated up between Jonathan and David. I Samuel 18:3,4, in the Byington Translation, says that they: "pledged themselves to each other, in the love that he had for him ..." and "Jonathan stripped off the robe he had on and gave it to David..." This ritualistically represented the establishment of a love covenant relationship between the two men: What's mine is yours, what's yours is mine. From this point on there is no question about their relationship being platonic. This sharing of garments, covering the other, shows it was more than that in context of their culture.
- Shortly after Jonathan and David consummated their love, Jonathan's father Saul arranged for David to marry his daughter (Jonathan's sister) Merab. Could it be that Saul knew about their love and was trying to intervene by offering David his daughter instead? The Jewish people, at this time, were still as homophobic as anyone else (though it was due to their desire for offspring, not over any alleged moral concerns). The only condition Saul set for the marriage was that David be "valiant" for him (I Samuel 18:17).
- "And Saul said to David, Behold my elder daughter Merab, her will I give thee to wife: only be thou valiant for me, and fight the LORD'S battles. For Saul said, Let not mine hand be upon him, but let the hand of the Philistines be upon him."
- Why did Saul give his daughter to David in marriage? This was before the real problems we know about arose between the two men. Marrying the king's daughter elevated a person and was considered an honor, however in this case, Merab was given to David to bribe him into going off to battle the Philistines believing that in such a battle David would be killed. Why would Saul, at this point, want David killed? We only know of one reason from the text, his relationship with Jonathan. AND why would Saul first marry David to Merab? As king, Saul could have ordered David to join the war without giving up his daughter to David. There's only one reason, to explain the closeness between Jonathan and David. "Sure they were close, David was his brother-in-law!" There's no other logical explanation for this turn of events.
- The idea of being "valiant" here in the Hebrew is two-fold. First, to be valiant David was to be bën, (a father to children); and secondly, he must be chayil (a good fighter). Now, one might expect the condition of loyalty to the king as a good soldier, but why would Saul also make David promise to father children? The obvious contextual answer, in light of the preceding verses, is that this was Saul's way of saying: "Hey look, your a good fighter, the people love and respect you, but this thing with my son has got to stop. You just need a good woman" (which is still a common misconception by those who view homosexuality as anything other than a natural orientation).
- Granted, these verses are insufficient by themselves to establish conclusively that Jonathan and David were lovers, although I think its pretty clear already. A more orthodox assessment of the situation might be that Jonathan accepted David as a compatriot and that the act of exchanging clothing with him would indicate Jonathan's bestowal of his royalty on David as a political commitment. After all, these texts do not specifically state that they were lovers. Among the problems with this view is that as the prince Jonathan had no such authority to confer the equivalent of knighthood on another, such would have been treason.
- However this is only the beginning.
- At 19:2 the plot thickens. Due to reasons not revealed in the text, Saul wanted David killed. While the text, as it has come down to us, does not specifically say so, it is quite feasible that David and Jonathan's continuing relationship may have been largely responsible for Saul's determination to do away with David. Saul obviously intended for Jonathan to succeed him to the throne and for this Jonathan needed to "valiant" himself. In such a homophobic culture, an openly gay king would have been unheard of. Jonathan's homosexuality, in Saul's mind, would have constituted a threat to Saul's continuing lineage. Nothing in the text contradicts this idea and it would explain the passion with which Saul sought David's death. Looked at objectively, this is by far the most likely cause of Saul's determination to have David killed and his giving his own daughter to him.
- When Jonathan learned of Saul's plans to kill David, he quickly warned him, as a lover would. The reason for this warning is quite interesting. The Authorized King James Version (the textus receptus), the Masoretic Text (the Hebrew Bible), and The Revised Standard Version all agree that Jonathan quote, "delighted much in David." The Byington translation says that "Jonathan liked David very much," The Jerusalem Bible says "Jonathan held David in great affection," while the NIV paraphrase says "but Jonathan was very fond of David," and so sought to divert Saul's wrath.
- Was Jonathan's fondness for David simply platonic? The Hebrew text says literally that Jonathan desired (châphèts) David. This is the same word used in verses such as Genesis 34:19 where Shechem sexually desired Dinah.
- At I Samuel 20:24-30 the homosexual aspect of their relationship becomes undeniable:
- 24 So David hid himself in the field: and when the new moon was come, the king sat him down to eat meat.
25 And the king sat upon his seat, as at other times, even upon a seat by the wall: and Jonathan arose, and Abner sat by Saul's side, and David's place was empty.
26 Nevertheless Saul spake not any thing that day: for he thought, Something hath befallen him, he is not clean; surely he is not clean.
27 And it came to pass on the morrow, which was the second day of the month, that David's place was empty: and Saul said unto Jonathan his son, Wherefore cometh not the son of Jesse to meat, neither yesterday, nor to day?
28 And Jonathan answered Saul, David earnestly asked leave of me to go to Bethlehem:
29 And he said, Let me go, I pray thee; for our family hath a sacrifice in the city; and my brother, he hath commanded me to be there: and now, if I have found favour in thine eyes, let me get away, I pray thee, and see my brethren. Therefore he cometh not unto the king's table.
30 Then Saul's anger was kindled against Jonathan, and he said unto him, Thou son of the perverse rebellious woman, do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse to thine own confusion, and unto the confusion of thy mother's nakedness?
- Here Jonathan desperately attempts to defend David from his father's wrath. Saul's response is unmistakable, and for too many of us quite familiar! The Authorized King James Version is surprisingly candid here: "Thou son of the perverse rebellious woman, do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse to thine own confusion, and unto the confusion of thy mother's nakedness?" In The New King James Version Saul becomes angry with Jonathan for lying to him about David's whereabouts, and so shouts: "You son of a perverse, rebellious woman! Do I not know that you have chosen the son of Jesse [David] to your own shame, and to the shame of your mother's nakedness?"
- What could be more clear? Saul here calls Jonathan a shameful pervert ('âvâh). Depending on where the English translations place the comma (ancient Hebrew didn't use them), before or after the words perverse and woman, he may even be calling his son a perverse woman, in other words, a homosexual, directly. Different versions handle it variously. But regardless, Saul here accuses Jonathan directly: "Don't lie to me, I know about you and David, you're a couple of sexual perverts who shame both me and your mother!"
- After this emotional event, Jonathan and David met secretly in the woods. The biblical record of their rendezvous at 20:41 is charged with love and sexual passion as they intimately kiss and embrace.
- "And as soon as the lad was gone, David arose out of a place toward the south, and fell on his face to the ground, and bowed himself three times: and they kissed one another, and wept one with another, until David exceeded."
- "...until David exceeded." What does this mean? The Hebrew word used here is Gadal and is an interesting word to use. It literally means "to grow, become great or important, promote, make powerful, praise, magnify, do great things." Now, this was one of the low points in David's life. His mentor, King Saul, was seeking his death, Jonathan had just come into the woods where he was hiding to tell David he needed to flee for his life. As in English, the context in which a word is used can alter its meaning. In this case, David obviously didn't remain hidden in the woods until becoming the great leader he eventually became. The only other possible meaning for this phrase is they embraced and kissed until David had "grown" or become erect, until he, and obviously Jonathan, became "great" or "swollen" and had made physical love. This is the only conceivable meaning.
- After this touching scene, David fled from Saul's wrath, kissing his lover good-bye.
- At 23:16-18 Jonathan again meets David in the woods and the two re-swear their undying love and devotion:
- 16 And Jonathan Saul's son arose, and went to David into the wood, and strengthened his hand in God.
17 And he said unto him, Fear not: for the hand of Saul my father shall not find thee; and thou shalt be king over Israel, and I shall be next unto thee; and that also Saul my father knoweth.
18 And they two made a covenant before the LORD: and David abode in the wood, and Jonathan went to his house.
- If this was a heterosexual couple there would be no doubt about how the episode should be understood: David was again living in the forest. Jonathan went to him, encouraged him in God and the two men made a "covenant" to one another before God. What was this covenant? The text clearly tells us with yet another unmistakable confirmation about their marriage: "thou shalt be king over Israel, and I shall be next unto thee." In other words, You David will be the king and I will be, so to speak, your queen!
- You recall how I interpreted Saul's accusation that Jonathan and David were "sexual perverts who shame both me and your mother!" Here Jonathan confirms this understanding. Not only does he promise loyalty to David, to be his "queen," he also says, "I shall be next unto thee; and that also Saul my father knoweth." Saul knows what? It is obvious!
- II Samuel 1:26 tells us that after Saul and Jonathan's death, David remembered his lover fondly and lamented: "I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan; very pleasant hast thou been unto me. Thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women."
With the possible exception of certain of his Psalms to God, one seeks in vain for any description of love more profound or heartfelt from David than this. He had sex with women, many of them, but these relationships seem to have been little more than sexual conquests of political expediency, with the possible exception of his relationship with Bathsheba. But clearly Jonathan was the love of David's life. He loved him with a love surpassing all others. Jonathan was David's husband and one true love, the others meant nothing by comparison.
- Such a profound love is a wonderful example for all gay and lesbian people. Despite what we are told by the homophobic culture in which live, and as many of us have discovered on our own, like David and Jonathan, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered people can indeed find lasting love, both with God and with one another.
- David and Jonathan are not alone in the Biblical record. The potential depths of lavender love was perhaps never expressed more beautifully than as the Bible presents the commitment of two great Biblical women, Naomi and Ruth:
Wherever you go, I will go;
And wherever you lodge, I will lodge;
Your people shall be my people,
And your God, my God.
Where you die, I will die,
And there will I be buried.
Yahveh do so to me, and more also,
If anything but death parts you and me.
- Rejoice in the Love of God and the sexual orientation you have been given by our Creator! May the endless and matchless blessings of our Heavenly Lover and God be with you all.
Good night.
BIBLICAL VERSIONS EMPLOYED
- AV: Authorized (King James) Version, New Scofield edition, Oxford University Press, New York, 1967
- BT: Stephan T. Byington Translation, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, 1972 (please note: this is not the New World Translation by the same publishers).
- HS: The Holy Scriptures: A Jewish Bible According to the Masoretic Text, "SINAI" Publishing, Tel Aviv, Israel, 1977
- JB: The Jerusalem Bible, Doubleday, New York, 1968
- NIV: The New International Version, International Bible Society, East Brunswick, NJ, 1978
- RSV: The Revised Standard Version, American Bible Society, New York, 1971
You are visitor number...
Who cares, I'm glad YOU'RE here!Grace Inclusive Home Page Contact Pastor John
The entire AllFaith.com domain is Copyrighted 1997-2008 by AllFaith.com and John of AllFaith. All are rights reserved. Do not duplicate or redistribute in any form anything on this domain without express written permission. Brief excerpts excepted. You are warmly invited to link to this site.
'He caved': British Prime Minister Gordon Brown caves into Bush's pressure. War with Iran Next Step?
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown made it clear that the UK was pulling out of the US/NWO War Of Terrorism against Islam and Iraq. Good for him!... But...
He Caved.
He has now not only reversed his position on the utterly unjust US war and occupation of the people of Iraq, he has agreed to send MORE BRITS to kill and die in Afghanistan and to help pave the way for the US/NWO invasion and subsequent occupation of Iran!
Not that I as an American have ANY room to talk, but... Shame on him!
He was so close to doing a global good!The war heats up!
The fall of the US draws closer!
Here's an AP wire story on this latest disgrace:
Bush embraces Britain's moves on Iran, Afghanistan
By DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press Writer2 hours, 35 minutes ago
President Bush, ending a weeklong trip through Europe on Monday, warmly welcomed Britain's pledge to tighten sanctions against Iran and to send more troops to increasingly violent Afghanistan.
The president and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown used a joint news conference to show solidarity on an array of vexing foreign policy matters — chiefly Iran, Iraq and Afghanistan. Bush dismissed reports he had differences with Brown on Iraq, where Britain has cut its troops.
"I have no problem with how Gordon Brown is dealing with Iraq," Bush said. "He's been a good partner."
The two leaders, both weakened by low public approval, traded compliments and emphasized common stands on such other global problems as Zimbabwe, Myanmar and Darfur and a stalled world trade pact. They then headed to Belfast where, along with Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen, they were to visit the Protestant and Catholic leaders of Northern Ireland's power-sharing government.
In London, Brown praised Bush for his "steadfastness and resoluteness." Said Bush of Brown, "He's tough on terror and I appreciate it."
The prime minister came ready with twin announcements that helped buoy Bush's position.
Brown said Britain will freeze assets of Iran's largest bank in a further move to discourage the country from developing nuclear weapons. And he announced that Britain was sending more troops to southern Afghanistan, upping London's commitment to the highest level ever.
On Iran, Brown used almost the identical language that Bush has chosen in trying to build world pressure against Iran. The United States and other Western nations fear Iran is pursuing uranium enrichment as means to develop nuclear weaponry, a charge the Tehran government denies.
"I will repeat that we will take any necessary action so that Iran is aware of the choice it has to make — to start to play its part as a full and respected member of the international community, or face further isolation," Brown said. He said Britain was starting a new phase of sanctions on oil and gas.
Britain's new deployment of about 230 engineers, logistical staff and military trainers to Afghanistan will boost the number of British forces in the country to more than 8,000, most based in Helmand province in the south.
Brown showed no distance from Bush on the strategy in Iraq. The prime minister said he would not order an arbitrary withdrawal of the 4,000 remaining British troops until the task is done, and there would be no trade-off by moving troops out of Afghanistan.
"In Iraq there is a job to be done and we will continue to do the job and there will be no artificial timetable," Brown said.
Britain has 4,000 troops remaining in Iraq on the outskirts of Basra. British forces withdrew from their base in Basra's city center last year and began to focus only on training Iraqi security forces. Britain suspended plans to remove another 1,500 troops after fighting broke out in Basra in March — a development Bush highlighted Monday as a positive sign that Brown would only yank out troops as conditions merited.
Questioned about his own reflections on Iraq, Bush offered no apologies.
He said that history will judge how the United States waged the war — whether more troops should have been deployed and whether they should have been positioned differently. But he said he had no doubts about deposing Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. "Absolutely it's necessary," the president said.
The president, without getting specific, said the United States can help calm mounting tensions between Afghanistan and Pakistan.
He spoke sympathetically of the conditions that led Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai to threaten to send troops into Pakistan as a means to target terrorists. But he stopped short of endorsing any such cross-border incursion.
"Obviously, it's a testy situation there," Bush said. "And if I'm the president of a country and people are coming from one country to another — allegedly coming from one country to another — to kill innocent civilians on my side, I'd be concerned about it."
Karzai said Sunday that Afghanistan has a right to send troops into Pakistan because Taliban militants cross over from Pakistan to attack Afghan and foreign forces. Bush called for leaders of Afghanistan and Pakistan to hold talks and share intelligence as both confront notorious Taliban leaders.
In the brutal standoff in the African nation of Zimbabwe, Brown called on President Robert Mugabe to allow a United Nations human rights envoy as well as election monitors to enter the country. "Mugabe must not be allowed to steal the election," he asserted.
Mugabe faces opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai in a June 27 presidential runoff. Opposition supporters say they have been arrested, burned out of their homes, beaten and killed. Diplomats trying to investigate the violence have been harassed by police.
Bush praised the prime minister's strong words and said the U.S. would work with Britain to try to achieve fair elections.
Sunday, June 15, 2008
Let's Talk Prophecies and Prophets
On my InterFaith Prayer List a poster recommends a very interesting and controversial website on prophecies about the devastation happening this year. Here's that post and my response. What are your thoughts?
Join My InterFaith Prayer Group
What are your views:
Join My AllFaith Group
What are your views:
- * What makes one a prophet?
* What if their prophecies fail?
* Is it possible to predict the future?
* Can we change the future?
* How much stake do you place in the prophecies?
* What are your thoughts on 2012?
I know many of you have read from this site. But you have
not read this page. I read it way back before any of these
"plagues" were taking place, at least not on the scale they
are recently, and people were saying these things would
never happen, but now they are, so I'm convinced it's all
legitimate, and that there's more to come.....unfortnate
it's real.
http://www.theamericannightmare.org/7_PLAGUES__D-D.html
not read this page. I read it way back before any of these
"plagues" were taking place, at least not on the scale they
are recently, and people were saying these things would
never happen, but now they are, so I'm convinced it's all
legitimate, and that there's more to come.....unfortnate
it's real.
http://www.theameri
My reply:
Hi friends,
I appreciate that this is primarily a prayer list rather than a forum for discussion, but as more and more prophecies, dreams, etc. are being revealed/given/made concerning the coming devastation that will soon (it is believed by many of us) rock this nation to its foundations, I think it may be helpful to discuss if/how we can know what to pray for and about, how to determine which prophecies are true and which are false and possibly address the question of whether making/accepting such prophecies creates the paradigms for such negative manifestations.
Sound interesting or worthwhile? What are your thoughts?
Like many many other people I believe we are entering into a very difficult period of time and, like many others, I have been having dreams, visions and "hits" about this Autumn specifically for, in my case, the last 2 years or so and in general terms since 1969.
A great many people, including many religionists, ancient calendar creators, past and present psychics, readers, seers, scryers, prophets, dreamers, scientists and others, are pointing to Dec. 20, 2012 or thereabout as a key period of global transformation: as the end of the world, as the date the Antichrist/Rex Mundi will arise, or as the general date when a new and better world will begin (the dawning of the Age of Aquarius). What will happen is debated but that something huge is on the horizon is commonly accepted now by many of us.
There has not been so many "prophetic revelations" since the mid 1800s. Paula here indirectly raises this question with her latest reference to this prophetic website: http://www.theamericannightmare.org
In my opinion, this is a very interesting site, I've been reading it for quite a while now, and it raises a question that I would like your thoughts on.
The author of these prophecies faces a problem in that according to the Bible one claiming to be a prophet, whose prophecies do not come to pass, is to be stoned to death as a false prophet.The author has been off on several points. Does this mean we should reject his warnings and information?
Like many others, including yours truly, he has been correct on much of what he has predicted for this year so far. Many of us predicted the recent floods, earthquakes, fires, droughts, famines, salmonella outbreak, political and religious scandals, economic woes etc. that are only now beginning if we are correct, and we see massive devastation far worse hitting this Fall, I keep getting hits about October.
BUT then there are other prophecies he has made on the site that have not come to pass and the religious spin he places on his warnings are not in some cases accurate (in my humble opinion). Does his accurate predictions mean he is accurate on all points? Surely not! What do you think?
I usually refer to "getting hits" or feelings that this or that may happen or I reference my dreams (such as my "dream of melting cake": http://www.allfaith.com/Mystory/dream508.html) rather than claiming to make "prophecies" per se. Indeed, I am clear that thus far I have "received no clear Word" from God as a prophet of these things.
About a year and a half ago on my Y! 360 site and elsewhere I said I believed the 2008 presidential campaign would be between McCain (who at the time had been written off by almost all the "talking heads") and Hillery (who it now appears has lost her bid). I was certain this would be the ticket (I thought McCain would just barely win but wasn't as certain as I was of the competitors in the race). I felt sure about this, but I was apparently wrong. Obama won. I'm not 'pointing fingers' here.
I mention this because it seems to me that sometimes what is "prophetic" is not so clear. I find this site to be simultaneously fascinating and frustrating, but this is my main issue with it. He claims to be ultimately authoritative and to reflect the unabashed revelation of prophetic truth. But he errs on points. What does it mean that he (me, and others) get some things right and some wrong when the Bible clearly says:
De 18:17 And HaShem said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken.
18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.
20 But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.
21 And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which HaShem hath not spoken?
22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of HaShem, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which HaShem hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.
Your thoughts?
I appreciate that this is primarily a prayer list rather than a forum for discussion, but as more and more prophecies, dreams, etc. are being revealed/given/made concerning the coming devastation that will soon (it is believed by many of us) rock this nation to its foundations, I think it may be helpful to discuss if/how we can know what to pray for and about, how to determine which prophecies are true and which are false and possibly address the question of whether making/accepting such prophecies creates the paradigms for such negative manifestations.
Sound interesting or worthwhile? What are your thoughts?
Like many many other people I believe we are entering into a very difficult period of time and, like many others, I have been having dreams, visions and "hits" about this Autumn specifically for, in my case, the last 2 years or so and in general terms since 1969.
A great many people, including many religionists, ancient calendar creators, past and present psychics, readers, seers, scryers, prophets, dreamers, scientists and others, are pointing to Dec. 20, 2012 or thereabout as a key period of global transformation: as the end of the world, as the date the Antichrist/Rex Mundi will arise, or as the general date when a new and better world will begin (the dawning of the Age of Aquarius). What will happen is debated but that something huge is on the horizon is commonly accepted now by many of us.
There has not been so many "prophetic revelations" since the mid 1800s. Paula here indirectly raises this question with her latest reference to this prophetic website: http://www.theamericannightmare.org
In my opinion, this is a very interesting site, I've been reading it for quite a while now, and it raises a question that I would like your thoughts on.
The author of these prophecies faces a problem in that according to the Bible one claiming to be a prophet, whose prophecies do not come to pass, is to be stoned to death as a false prophet.The author has been off on several points. Does this mean we should reject his warnings and information?
Like many others, including yours truly, he has been correct on much of what he has predicted for this year so far. Many of us predicted the recent floods, earthquakes, fires, droughts, famines, salmonella outbreak, political and religious scandals, economic woes etc. that are only now beginning if we are correct, and we see massive devastation far worse hitting this Fall, I keep getting hits about October.
BUT then there are other prophecies he has made on the site that have not come to pass and the religious spin he places on his warnings are not in some cases accurate (in my humble opinion). Does his accurate predictions mean he is accurate on all points? Surely not! What do you think?
I usually refer to "getting hits" or feelings that this or that may happen or I reference my dreams (such as my "dream of melting cake": http://www.allfaith.com/Mystory/dream508.html) rather than claiming to make "prophecies" per se. Indeed, I am clear that thus far I have "received no clear Word" from God as a prophet of these things.
About a year and a half ago on my Y! 360 site and elsewhere I said I believed the 2008 presidential campaign would be between McCain (who at the time had been written off by almost all the "talking heads") and Hillery (who it now appears has lost her bid). I was certain this would be the ticket (I thought McCain would just barely win but wasn't as certain as I was of the competitors in the race). I felt sure about this, but I was apparently wrong. Obama won. I'm not 'pointing fingers' here.
I mention this because it seems to me that sometimes what is "prophetic" is not so clear. I find this site to be simultaneously fascinating and frustrating, but this is my main issue with it. He claims to be ultimately authoritative and to reflect the unabashed revelation of prophetic truth. But he errs on points. What does it mean that he (me, and others) get some things right and some wrong when the Bible clearly says:
De 18:17 And HaShem said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken.
18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.
20 But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.
21 And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which HaShem hath not spoken?
22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of HaShem, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which HaShem hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.
Your thoughts?
John of AllFaith
Saturday, June 14, 2008
Welcome to Paradise! Scenes From The Fire
This video and breaking news can be seen here at the Paradise Post newspaper.
Devastation is breaking loose throughout the US right now. Here's a peek at at what's happening here in my area.
My family is not in danger from these fires. Several friends are.May we all be praying for God's help and protection as people around the US and elsewhere face what is now happening and what is yet to come.
~John of AllFaith
Friday, June 13, 2008
TIM RUSSERT DIES FROM APPARENT HEART ATTACK
Anyone else smell something fishy?
I wonder what he knew....
I wonder what We the People might have known....
TIM RUSSERT DIES FROM APPARENT HEART ATTACK
By CHARLES HURT June 13, 2008 --
Posted at 3:21 p.m.; Updated at 4:07 p.m.
Tim Russert, NBC journalist and political heavyweight host of "Meet the Press," has died after collapsing at NBC's Washington news bureau. He was 58 years old.
Television sources said Russert was recording a voice-over when he collapsed in the studio today.
An ambulance rushed to the studio and a source at the network said Russert was briefly revived. But, the broadcasting lion apparently passed away either on the way or at a local Washington D.C. hospital.
Former NBC anchor Tom Brokaw announced news of Russert's death at 3:39 p.m.
"The news division will not be the same without his strong, clear voice," a solemn Brokaw said.
Sources said the network allowed itself to be scooped by other media outlets as it tried to contact Russert's wife Maureen and son Luke, who just graduated from Boston College.
Russert had just returned from a family vacation in Italy last night.
Russert, who rose from the inside world of politics where he was former New York Gov. Mario Cuomo's press secretary and one-time chief of staff to the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, was able to successfully cross over to political journalism and rise to become one of its leading lights.
In his role as host of the seminal Sunday morning political program "Meet the Press" - which he took over in 1991 - he became renowned for his hard-nosed interviews where he frequently cornered some of Washington's cagiest political figures with tough questions.
Russert joined NBC News in 1984. In April 1985, he supervised the live broadcasts of the Today program from Rome, negotiating and arranging an appearance by Pope John Paul II - a first for American television. In 1986 and 1987 Russert led NBC News weeklong broadcasts from South America, Australia and China.
In 2008, Time Magazine named him one of the world's 100 most influential people.
THIS IS A DEVELOPING STORY. PLEASE REFRESH FOR UPDATES.
Could Obama Be The False Prophet? Cal Thomas Says Yes, I Say No.
In a word: NO!
In the following reply I explain why it is impossible that Obama might be either of these two foretold men, and touch on related topics.
I begin with a brief update on the fires that are still currently raging near my home. Thanks for the notes of concern and the prayers. We're fine.
After that, I include the unedited Cal Thomas piece. What are your thoughts? Do you believe he is/might be the False Prophet or Antichrist? If so, why?
Howdy Bro,
Our power came back on much earlier than they expected (yay!).
20,000 plus acres have burned here so far. Dozens of homes are gone, more are threatened. The fires came to the parking lot of Joe's school (Butte College) but were stopped before burning the buildings. The fire line is about 5 miles away, we were not evacuated (so far). They just announced the fire is 16% contained now but continues to rage... The main concern now is that around 2:00 this afternoon the south winds are expected to start and that could blow the flames into the town of Paradise itself up the canyons.
As for this post...
Cal can say whatever he wants, there is absolutely, unequivocally NO WAY Obama could possibly be the False Prophet OR the AntiChrist. No Way.
The prophecies tell us more than enough to know this.
Obama COULD theoretically be the "closet Muslim" some still suspect, he could be part of the Muslim Brotherhood Project: See my http://www.allfaith.com/Religions/Islam/brotherhood.html for my article on the brotherhood... BUT I no longer think this is at all likely of him. I believe this was important to careful check out but in my opinion no evidence exists for this concern.
BUT if the prophets are correct, he could not possibly be the False Prophet. He does not fulfill the essential prophecies.
The False Prophet will be the head of "Babylon the Great" (the Vatican -- the "City of Seven Hills" -- ie the Pope at that point in future-history). The present Pope was a "Hitler Youth" and that understandably makes some folks suspicious, but he is not, at least not at this point, the False Prophet either. Babylon the Great will not and can not exist as "Mystery Babylon" until the rise of the Rex Mundi (Antichrist/Dijal) and the False Prophet will lead the Vatican and her "daughters" (ie the Anglican, Protestant and heterodox denominations) in the embrace of the Rex Mundi/Antichrist. Obama would have to be elected Pope to meet this essential prophetic requirement and that's not likely ;-).
One reason so people are sneering at the biblical prophecies today is that whenever some leader rises or some event happens so many Christians proclaim "This is the Antichrist!" or "This is the False Prophet!" etc. We see an example of this here. Cal cites a verse about "antichrists" and the artical asks whether Obama might be "The Antichrist." There are many "antichrists" but only one Antichrist according to the Bible.
As you know, I am 110% convinced that these are the Last Days and that THE Antichrist (Rex Mundi, Dijal, Little Horn, Son of Perdition) and his False Prophet will soon rise, BUT it is vital to base everything carefully on the Scriptures and the Prophets lest we be viewed as "Chicken Littles." There is absolutely no way Obama is the False Prophet and Cal Thomas knows better than to scare people with such lies. He knows better.
At this point I'm not sure who if either of them I will support in the general election, if it happens. Neither of them is qualified in my opinion and neither are trustworthy enough for this important job. This will absolutely be a lesser of two evils election.
Obama is putridly pro-abortion
McCain is disturbingly wishy washy on abortion.
Obama's views about Israel are unclear. He just said he opposes dividing Jerusalem which is good, but he also a history of supporting the so-called Palestinians which could be problematic. We simply don't know his views on Israel or his real views on how the US should deal with them.
Obama promises to end the war in Iraq as soon as possible, which is too open ended.
McCain says the same but seems content to leave them there indefinitely. His 100 year war comment was taken out of context.
Obama supposedly will order the biggest tax increase since WW 2 at a time when many Americans are suffering like we haven't since the Depression.
McCain supposedly will slash social programs and services leaving millions of people, probably including us, in much worse shape then we are already in while allowing the rich to become even richer. Many more people would be homeless and the divide between and poor would become even more pronounced.
NEITHER of them have a viable answer to the gas or energy emergency.
NEITHER of them has presented a viable solution to health care.
NEITHER of them has offered a viable solution to global warming.
NEITHER of them has promised to seal the southern border to protect the US
NEITHER of them has promised to fight the outsources of US jobs (McCain is emphatic in his support for "the global economy").
NEITHER of them has stated any intention of restoring Habeas Corpus.
NEITHER of them have stated any intention of doing away with the Nazi-style Department of Homeland Security.
NEITHER of them has shown any intention of beefing up the privacy rights and protections of the American people.
NEITHER of them has even hinted at doing away with or even limiting the power of the Federal Reserve that is destroying our economy and pushing for the North American Union.
NEITHER of them have commented on the North American Union to my knowledge nor their support OR opposition to it.
NEITHER of them to my knowledge have taken a position on the REAL ID propgram.
NEITHER of them shows ANY interest in stopping foreign companies from buying up the US. including our highway systems, ports, railroads and other infrastructure.
NEITHER of them shows ANY interest in checking cargo coming into our harbors. Right now only 5% is checked!
This list could go on and on...
The point is, NEITHER of these men is qualified to be president in my opinion and neither of them is demonstratively committed to restoring the independence or security of the US and neither of them will, in all likelihood, do ANYTHING to halt the advance of the coming Rex Mundi.
BUT/AND NEITHER of them is mentioned in ANY biblical prophecy, for good OR ill.
For the Rex Mundi and his False Prophet we must look elsewhere.
The good news is, it APPEARS that Hillary will not become Queen, at least not this time. Hopefully she not become the VP. It appears this isn't going to happen thank God.
The bad news MAY BE that Bush will refuse to leave office. Legally he doesn't have to now if he or any one of five cabinet members SAYS there is a "danger of terrorism." No evidence is needed, just the statement.
MANY people, including me, are having dreams and getting "hits" that something very serious MAY happen this Fall, perhaps in October, and that Bush will use this event as the justification to remain in office. My second most recent dream about this is retold here: http://www.allfaith.com/Mystory/dream508.html if you are interested.
In light of the fires raging throughout my state right now one has to wonder... hehe.
Thanks for sharing this piece,
~ John
My brother forwarded:
From: ...@bellsouth.net
Sent: 12/06/08 4:05:33 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time
Subj: Obama, the false prophet on the ballot
6/12/2008 12:01:00 AM
Obama, the false prophet on the ballot
By Cal Thomas
Barack Obama's presidential campaign plans to strike at the heart of the Republican base by attempting to woo Evangelical Christians and Roman Catholics to his side.
The Christian Broadcasting Network's David Brody first broke the story on his blog "The Brody File." Obama's campaign for the conservative Christian vote, which has largely gone to the Republican presidential candidate in recent elections, has been dubbed the "Joshua Generation Project." Joshua, Moses' successor, led the Israelites into the Promised Land. It wasn't the group that fled Egypt in the Exodus, though. They died in the wilderness, lacking faith in God's promise. It was the next generation that Joshua led into Canaan. Apparently, if we have enough faith in Obama, he will lead us all into a new America, but if we vote for John McCain, we will demonstrate a lack of faith (in Obama) and die in the political badlands.
Obama is better at biblical language and imagery than any Democrat in modern times. He certainly beats Howard Dean, now the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, who once offered Job as his favorite New Testament book. This is cynical manipulation of the devout and it is no better when Democrats do it than when Republicans use religious language for partisan advantage.
Obama has declared himself a committed Christian. He can call himself anything he likes, but there are certain markers among the evangelicals he is courting that one must meet in order to qualify for that label.
Some insight into Obama's "Christianity" comes from an interview he gave in 2004 to Chicago Sun-Times religion editor Cathleen Falsani for her book, "The God Factor: Inside the Spiritual Lives of Public People."
"I'm rooted in the Christian tradition," said Obama. He then adds something most Christians will see as universalism: "I believe there are many paths to the same place, and that is a belief that there is a higher power, a belief that we are connected as a people."
Falsani correctly brings up John 14:6 (and how many journalists would know such a verse, much less ask a question based on it?) in which Jesus says of Himself, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." That sounds exclusive, but Obama says it depends on how this verse is heard. According to Falsani, Obama thinks that "all people of faith - Christians, Jews, Muslims, animists, everyone - know the same God." (Her words.)
Evangelicals and serious Catholics might ask if this is so, why did Jesus waste His time coming to Earth, suffering pain, rejection and crucifixion? If there are many ways to God, He might have sent down a spiritual version of table manners and avoided the rest.
Here's Obama telling Falsani, "The difficult thing about any religion, including Christianity, is that at some level there is a call to evangelize and proselytize. There's the belief, certainly in some quarters, that if people haven't embraced Jesus Christ as their personal savior, they're going to hell." Falsani adds, "Obama doesn't believe he, or anyone else, will go to hell. But he's not sure he'll be going to heaven, either." Again, that is contrary to what Evangelicals and most Catholics believe.
Here's Obama again: "I don't presume to have knowledge of what happens after I die. When I tuck in my daughters at night and I feel like I've been a good father to them, and I see that I am transferring values that I got from my mother and that they're kind people and that they're honest people, and they're curious people, that's a little piece of heaven."
Any first-year seminary student could deconstruct such "works salvation" and wishful thinking. Obama either hasn't read the Bible, or if he has, doesn't believe it if he embraces such thin theological wisps.
Obama can call himself anything he likes, but there is a clear requirement for one to qualify as a Christian and Obama doesn't meet that requirement. One cannot deny central tenets of the Christian faith, including the deity and uniqueness of Christ as the sole mediator between God and man and be a Christian. Such people do have a label applied to them in Scripture. They are called "false prophets."
E-mail nationally syndicated columnist Cal Thomas at calthomas@tribune.com.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Does the Bible Require Marriage?
Another Q & A
What's your understanding/opinion about this?
My reply:
Hi Ricky,
A large portion of our traditions are just that, traditions, however biblically speaking marriage is much more than simply a civil contract. It is a holy state of life.
The Bible does support the institution of marriage. For instance:
Hebrews 13:4 Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge.
This and similar verses make it plain that marriage is more than just tradition or an attempt to appease others, as this poor paraphrase of Romans 12:17 implies.
Another consideration here is the version of the Bible you are using. The NIV (which I believe is the one you are using) is not based on the Textus Receptus (the received texts) upon which the Christian religion was established. I discuss this inferior paraphrase (its not even a translation of its own deficient texts and source materials) here: http://www.allfaith.com/Religions/Christianity/kingjames.html
Romans 12:17, as presented here, sounds terrible. Here is that verse in the Authorized King James:
17 Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men.
18 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.
This doesn't mean to be an appeaser, it simply means that as a Believer one should seek to live an honorable lifestyle.
The Mormon belief in eternal marriage that transcends death is clearly unbiblical:
Luke 20:34 And Jesus answered and said to them, "The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage.
35 "But those who are counted worthy to attain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage.
Again,
Psalm 78:63 The fire consumed their young men, And their maidens were not given in marriage.
This lack of marriage in the present world is presented as a bad thing even though in the coming world of the Kingdom marriage, as we know it, will cease to exist. Marriage is, biblically speaking, a holy estate. Those who would be leaders in the Church are commanded to be the husbands of one wife (I Tim 3:2,12 and Titus 1:6).
Marriage is used as the example of God's relationship with Israel.
Jer 31:32 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the Lord.
And Jesus' relationship with the Church, where he is described as the bridegroom to the bride, the Church.
The question is, what makes a marriage? Here the Bible is largely mute. It seems to be question of cultural norms. Jesus attended the wedding feast in Cana which was quite a bit party (Matt 22) and uses the wedding night as an example of properly watching and watching for the coming of Messiah (Matt 25:10, Luke 12:36 etc).
On the other hand, marriages are sometimes presented as very simple acts of sexual union:
Gen 24:67 Then Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah's tent; and he took Rebekah and she became his wife, and he loved her. So Isaac was comforted after his mother's death.
From a social/cultural point of view, marriage offers arguably important legal and financial protections for people, especially for women and kids, but biblically speaking marriage as an institution is ours to define. Going by this verse, a committed Christian couple could justifiably 'pledge their trove' to one another and to God, make love, and then declare themselves married.
The New Testament does forbid marriage with non-believers (II Cor 6:14). Jewish tradition requires Jews to only marry Jews.
On the other hand, Paul argues that for those who wish to fully serve God it would be preferable not to marry. In this well know clause however there is an important caveat regarding your question:
I Corinthians 7:1 Now concerning the things of which you wrote to me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.
2 Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband.
Obviously sexual relations outside of marriage are regarded as fornication and/or adultery and condemned, even if done in secret (ie more is present in these teachings that merely appeasing the societal views of others).
3 Let the husband render to his wife the affection due her, and likewise also the wife to her husband.
4 The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. And likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.
5 Do not deprive one another except with consent for a time, that you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again so that Satan does not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
6 But I say this as a concession, not as a commandment.
Sexuality in the marriage bed is hence viewed as an obligation for the Believer, not merely an allowance. Married people are directly commanded to (try to) satisfy the sexual needs and urges of their spouse. But notice what comes next.
7 For I wish that all men were even as I myself [ie single, Paul was probably a widower at this point). But each one has his own gift from God, one in this manner and another in that.
8 But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am;
9 but if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
Again, if the Believers can handle celibacy that is the preferred course according to Paul, if they can not, they should marry. Sexual relationships outside of marriage are forbidden.
10 Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord: A wife is not to depart from her husband.
11 But even if she does depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. And a husband is not to divorce his wife.
12 But to the rest I, not the Lord, say: If any brother has a wife who does not believe, and she is willing to live with him, let him not divorce her.
13 And a woman who has a husband who does not believe, if he is willing to live with her, let her not divorce him.
14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy.
This is important. Not only is marriage "holy" it sanctifies both the partner and the children.
So, this is my opinion.
Put more succinctly, marriage is a biblically approved institution and for most people a mandated state of life-long monogamy.
"Legal marriage" is not required, although it is advisable for various reasons. Biblical marriage occurs between two committed people in the sight of God. The rest is tradition and culture.
Hope this helps,
~John of AllFaith
Me performing the marriage rite for two wonderful people.
What's your understanding/opinion about this?
Questioner: Ricky
Private: no
Subject: Confusion About Marriage
Question:
Charles F. Pfeiffer, et al (editors) Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia
Moody Press, Chicago, 1975, page 1082
Marriage is nothing but a cival contract, and the actually intercourse is the combination of two as one?
Romans 12:17 . . . Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody.
2 Corinthians 8:21 For we are taking pains to do what is right, not only in the eyes of the Lord but also in the eyes of men.
1 Thessalonians 4:12 so that your daily life may win the respect of outsiders . . .
So we don't have to go through marriage, but we DO have to go through marriage because people want us to? >.<
Note: How did I get on this marriage stuff anyway? I was just trying to see if pre-marital sex was a sin. >.<
http://net-burst.net/singles/premarital.htm#morality < CONFUSING SITE!!!
Note: I still don't know the answer to my question >.< going back to Ask.com
http://www.teachingpages.co.uk/topicPresentation/articlePremaritalSexPart1 < Also uses scriptures to hint that it is the intercourse that is the bond and not the actual marriage! What is the real answer? Provide scriptures, please, these guys did. Is it the ceremony, or the action that is the real union?
Private: no
Subject: Confusion About Marriage
Question:
Charles F. Pfeiffer, et al (editors) Wycliffe Bible Encyclopedia
Moody Press, Chicago, 1975, page 1082
Marriage is nothing but a cival contract, and the actually intercourse is the combination of two as one?
Romans 12:17 . . . Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody.
2 Corinthians 8:21 For we are taking pains to do what is right, not only in the eyes of the Lord but also in the eyes of men.
1 Thessalonians 4:12 so that your daily life may win the respect of outsiders . . .
So we don't have to go through marriage, but we DO have to go through marriage because people want us to? >.<
Note: How did I get on this marriage stuff anyway? I was just trying to see if pre-marital sex was a sin. >.<
http://net-burst.net/singles/premarital.htm#morality < CONFUSING SITE!!!
Note: I still don't know the answer to my question >.< going back to Ask.com
http://www.teachingpages.co.uk/topicPresentation/articlePremaritalSexPart1 < Also uses scriptures to hint that it is the intercourse that is the bond and not the actual marriage! What is the real answer? Provide scriptures, please, these guys did. Is it the ceremony, or the action that is the real union?
My reply:
Hi Ricky,
A large portion of our traditions are just that, traditions, however biblically speaking marriage is much more than simply a civil contract. It is a holy state of life.
The Bible does support the institution of marriage. For instance:
Hebrews 13:4 Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge.
This and similar verses make it plain that marriage is more than just tradition or an attempt to appease others, as this poor paraphrase of Romans 12:17 implies.
Another consideration here is the version of the Bible you are using. The NIV (which I believe is the one you are using) is not based on the Textus Receptus (the received texts) upon which the Christian religion was established. I discuss this inferior paraphrase (its not even a translation of its own deficient texts and source materials) here: http://www.allfaith.com/Religions/Christianity/kingjames.html
Romans 12:17, as presented here, sounds terrible. Here is that verse in the Authorized King James:
17 Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men.
18 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.
This doesn't mean to be an appeaser, it simply means that as a Believer one should seek to live an honorable lifestyle.
The Mormon belief in eternal marriage that transcends death is clearly unbiblical:
Luke 20:34 And Jesus answered and said to them, "The sons of this age marry and are given in marriage.
35 "But those who are counted worthy to attain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage.
Again,
Psalm 78:63 The fire consumed their young men, And their maidens were not given in marriage.
This lack of marriage in the present world is presented as a bad thing even though in the coming world of the Kingdom marriage, as we know it, will cease to exist. Marriage is, biblically speaking, a holy estate. Those who would be leaders in the Church are commanded to be the husbands of one wife (I Tim 3:2,12 and Titus 1:6).
Marriage is used as the example of God's relationship with Israel.
Jer 31:32 not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the Lord.
And Jesus' relationship with the Church, where he is described as the bridegroom to the bride, the Church.
The question is, what makes a marriage? Here the Bible is largely mute. It seems to be question of cultural norms. Jesus attended the wedding feast in Cana which was quite a bit party (Matt 22) and uses the wedding night as an example of properly watching and watching for the coming of Messiah (Matt 25:10, Luke 12:36 etc).
On the other hand, marriages are sometimes presented as very simple acts of sexual union:
Gen 24:67 Then Isaac brought her into his mother Sarah's tent; and he took Rebekah and she became his wife, and he loved her. So Isaac was comforted after his mother's death.
From a social/cultural point of view, marriage offers arguably important legal and financial protections for people, especially for women and kids, but biblically speaking marriage as an institution is ours to define. Going by this verse, a committed Christian couple could justifiably 'pledge their trove' to one another and to God, make love, and then declare themselves married.
The New Testament does forbid marriage with non-believers (II Cor 6:14). Jewish tradition requires Jews to only marry Jews.
On the other hand, Paul argues that for those who wish to fully serve God it would be preferable not to marry. In this well know clause however there is an important caveat regarding your question:
I Corinthians 7:1 Now concerning the things of which you wrote to me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman.
2 Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband.
Obviously sexual relations outside of marriage are regarded as fornication and/or adultery and condemned, even if done in secret (ie more is present in these teachings that merely appeasing the societal views of others).
3 Let the husband render to his wife the affection due her, and likewise also the wife to her husband.
4 The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. And likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.
5 Do not deprive one another except with consent for a time, that you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again so that Satan does not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
6 But I say this as a concession, not as a commandment.
Sexuality in the marriage bed is hence viewed as an obligation for the Believer, not merely an allowance. Married people are directly commanded to (try to) satisfy the sexual needs and urges of their spouse. But notice what comes next.
7 For I wish that all men were even as I myself [ie single, Paul was probably a widower at this point). But each one has his own gift from God, one in this manner and another in that.
8 But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am;
9 but if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
Again, if the Believers can handle celibacy that is the preferred course according to Paul, if they can not, they should marry. Sexual relationships outside of marriage are forbidden.
10 Now to the married I command, yet not I but the Lord: A wife is not to depart from her husband.
11 But even if she does depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband. And a husband is not to divorce his wife.
12 But to the rest I, not the Lord, say: If any brother has a wife who does not believe, and she is willing to live with him, let him not divorce her.
13 And a woman who has a husband who does not believe, if he is willing to live with her, let her not divorce him.
14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; otherwise your children would be unclean, but now they are holy.
This is important. Not only is marriage "holy" it sanctifies both the partner and the children.
So, this is my opinion.
Put more succinctly, marriage is a biblically approved institution and for most people a mandated state of life-long monogamy.
"Legal marriage" is not required, although it is advisable for various reasons. Biblical marriage occurs between two committed people in the sight of God. The rest is tradition and culture.
Hope this helps,
~John of AllFaith
Me performing the marriage rite for two wonderful people.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
More on Mahavisnu, Lord Brahma, the Individual Soul and More
I previously posted a question about the nature and activities of Lord Brahma here. I discussed in general terms the nature of not only Lord Brahma but also of Maha Visnu and the path of liberation for the Soul. I have received and replied to a follow-up question and will present it here now. Both posts can be found at this blog or on my SriJagannatha web site: http://www.srijagannatha.com/brahma.html
---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------
- QUESTION: Great answer but still I am not clear in these questions
Can a brahma retire by voluntry?
If human wants to break and come out of this life death life death cycle what can he do?
or is it something like people can never come out?
if it is so how do a person got into this trap???
My reply:
Hi Ananth,
The question is based on an inaccurate premise. Gods don't "retire."
Lord Brahma's service is his reason for being. He IS Brahma. This is his nature. Does HaShem, God as presented in the Bible retire? Does Allah retire? Does Ahura Mazada retire?
No, God does not need vacations, retirements, etc. Spiritual beings are not under the limited constrictions of material beings. God is more, always more.
As I explained in my initial reply: As for the jiva getting out of material existence, this is the process of the various yoga systems. According to the system (sadhana) one practices one can gradually be elevated and leave the material multiverses and return Home to the spiritual realms of existence.
To go a bit farther with this, there are many such spiritual disciplines including the following. "Yoga" means "to link" so yoga systems are how we "link" with the Spirit:
Bhakti yoga: Devotion: Through devotion to God the soul is elevated and accepted by the Beloved. This is the path followed by many Hindus, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Sikhs and so on. In my opinion, this is the highest and most effective yoga system. Of this system Sri Krsna says:
Bhagavad Gita 12:1: Arjuna asked [Sri Krsna]: Who is the most knowledgeable in yoga [ie in linking with God and spiritual Truth], those who are thus always yoked to You through devotion, or those who are yoked to the transcendent Unmanifested [ie as prescribed in the works of Sri Sankara, the Buddhists and others]?
12:2: The Blessed One replied: Those who fix their minds upon Me [ie God] and are always yoked to My worship with faith, being so transcendentally endowed, they are the most knowledgeable in yoga in My opinion (Source: my translation: http://srijagannatha.com/gita/gita12.html)
Bhakti Yoga is manifested in countless ways, some are esoteric, some are Tantric, some are more servant based, etc.
Karma Yoga: Through deliberately practiced action. This popular system seeks to avoid all negative and positive karma (action/reactions) in order to achieve a karmic equilibrium wherein one stops accumulating Karma. This is usually done in conjunction with Bhakti Yoga.
Jnana Yoga: Through the acquiring of knowledge. This is the essential intellectual disciplines.
Dhyana Yoga: Through deep meditation techniques the yogi seeks to achieve Nirvana or Samadhi and thereby "transcend" material existence.
Hatha Yoga: Through disciplining the body once seek to transcend it.
Etc.
There are countless yoga systems and most people combine various disciplines rather than strictly following one.
The result of the various systems are described in various ways. Hinduism is VERY diverse. Some believe the soul merges with the totality of existence (in nir-guna brahman) and individual existence ceases. Others believe the individual soul transcends the material existence (sa-guna brahman) and attains spiritual existence as described by the scriptures as Goloka Vrndavana and other spiritual realms/planets. These are non-material realms where samsara (rebirth) and dukkha (all suffering) ceases to exist. This realm transcends our abilities to fully understand but are described in some detail in the various Indian scriptures and treaties as elsewhere.
According to many Hindu masters, the "Heaven" of the Christians is actually known in the Vedic Scriptures as Brahma Loka (the planet/realm of Lord Brahma). This is said to be the highest, most elevated of all material existences. After a life on Brahma Loka the jiva almost surely proceeds to the eternal realms of the Spirit (nir-guna brahman).
This state of be-ing is described by Hindu sage Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu as acintya bheda-abheda, the state of being simultaneously, inconceivably, one with and distinct from acintya bheda-abheda tattva (the Person of God, who is simultaneously, inconceivably, one with and distinct from existence. This of course is but a very basic overview of this material.
However most Hindus are not as concerned about leaving the material realms as they are about properly existing in this one. This is because of the belief, as taught by Master Y'shua (ie Jesus of Nazareth) that "the Kingdom of God is within." For one who attains oneness with Spirit liberation is already achieved. Hence many sadhus (teachers) encourage us to "be here now," to live fully in this moment and this place as though we had already attained Spiritual Oneness. Consciousness is a vital key to all Hindu systems.
Hence the material realms (our planet/realm is called Bhuva Loka) are not "traps," they are more like schools or proving grounds in which we develop spiritual consciousness (if we take advantage of the opportunities provided in the human form of life).
The details of how this works varies with the school of thought.
But again, as the Gita tells us:
9:8: Supported by My material nature, I dispatch the multitude of beings again and again. All these act instinctively in material nature as if by constraint.
9:9: O conqueror of riches, I am not bound by these activities; as if indifferent, I am sitting unattached to them all.
9:10: Due to My presiding over material nature, both the moving and the unmoving come forth, O child of Kunti, and by reason of this the world continues to revolve.
9:11, 12: Fools deride Me when I resort in human form, not knowing My superior nature as the Great Lord of all beings.
Their hopes, actions and knowledge are all fruitless, they are senseless, demonic and unholy, indeed, they are stupefied by material nature.
9:13: On the other hand, O child of Partha, great souls resort unto the divine nature and worship with an undeviated mind, knowing Me to be the immutable source of all beings.
9:14: Always chanting My glories and pursuing Me, with discipline prostrating [themselves] before Me, always resolute in devotion, [the great souls] worship Me.
9:15: Others sacrifice with the sacrifice of knowledge, worshiping Me in oneness, duality, in diversity and in the universal form.
9:16-19: I am the ritual, I am the sacrifice, I am the oblation to the ancestors, I am the medicinal herb, I am the sacred chant, I am the ghee, I am the fire and I am the offering.
I am the father of this universe, the mother, the preserver, the grandfather, the object of knowledge, the purifier, the sacred syllable OM, the Rig Veda, the Sama Veda, and the Yajur Veda.
I am the goal, the sustainer, the lord, the witness, the abode, the refuge, the friend, the origin, the dissolution, the foundation, the receptacle and the imperishable seed.
I give heat, I send forth and withhold the rains, I am immortality as well as death; I am, O Arjuna, both being and non-being.
9:20, 21: Those who know the three Vedas, who drink the soma, whose sins are purified by sacrificial worship of Me, and who pray for passage to the heavenly planets, such holy people attain the planet of Lord Indra and there enjoy the celestial pleasures of the devas in heaven.
After enjoying the vast heavenly planets, their pious merits being well spent, they again enter this mortal world. Thus following the laws of the three Vedas, they go and return due to their desire to desire.
9:22: But those who worship Me with undeviated intent, who have no other object and who are are always yoked in devotion, upon them I confer happiness and carry them through.
9:23, 24: Also those who are devotees of other gods, and who worship them, endowed with faith, they actually worship Me alone, O son of Kunti, but by a lesser method.
I indeed am the Enjoyer and God of all sacrifices, but not knowing Me in truth they fall down.
9:25: Those who worship the gods go to the gods, those who worship the ancestors go to the ancestors, those who worship ghosts go to the ghosts, but those who worship Me go to Me.
9:26: If one offers Me a leaf, a flower, a fruit or some water with devotion I will accept it. I accept what is offered by one whose mind is pure.
9:27: Whatever you do, whatever you eat, whatever you offer (in sacrifice), whatever you give away (in charity), whatever austerities you perform, O child of Kunti, do it all as an offering unto Me.
9:28: Thus freed from auspicious and inauspicious fruitive reactions, you will be liberated from the bondage of karma [action]. With the mind firmly established in the yoga of renunciation, you will be liberated and come to Me.
9:29: I am equitable towards all beings; none are hateful and none are dear to Me. But those who worship Me with devotion are in Me and I am in them.
9:30, 31: Even if one's actions are abominable, if such a one worships Me with exclusive devotion that person should be considered virtuous due to that integral determination.
Such a person soon becomes a righteous soul and attains eternal peace. O child of Kunti, boldly declare that My devotee shall never perish! (source: http://srijagannatha.com/gita/gita9.html)
"God is One, The Sages use different names."
Hope this clarifies matters,
~ John of AllFaith
~ Jagannatha Prakasa
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)