Split Thread Signs of the End Times

[Foster Zygote]

That is your problem, you speculate--it seems to you!!

One thing is certain: you've shown remarkable reluctance to answer a simple question in a straightforward manner. Given the lack of information, one can only formulate plausible possibilities. These speculations are certainly not regarded by myself as certainties, nor as the only possibilities.

The only reason I asked was because I couldn't help but wonder about the marital experience of someone declaring such moral absolutes regarding marriage. I expected a brief answer to the effect that you'd been married for X years, or that you had never been married, or that you had once been married but no longer were, etcetera. Had you indicated that you'd been divorced I certainly wouldn't have regarded that as anything to be ashamed of. But the way you've responded makes me think it's likely that you are divorced, and you do think it's something to be ashamed of.

 

[Paul Bethke]

An infalliable, omnipotent and omniscient being can't exercise discretion in meeting out his vengeance?

In what way would that be?

that would be because studies have shown that the presence of the death penalty does not deter crime. Probability of getting caught and certain punishments of a sort deemed fair by society at large have been demonstrated in a wide variety of societies to be more effective in lowering crime rates, along with greater real opportunities for social advancement lower the crime rates. Studies done in Great Britain during the time of the Bloody Code indicated that juries were less likely to convict if they felt the punishment was out of proportion to the crime (this was an era where you could be hanged for stealing 5 shillings of linen)

Justice must be as God decreed—put to death, murders, rapist, and kidnappers, plus those who will not cease from violence.

Except those stable homosexual pair bonds that do exist in nature.

Should your children be denied Yahweh's heaven because you or your wife wore clothing without blue fringe or was made of mixed fibres?

There is no suggestion that this will result in eternal damnation.

Is it better for children to witness a loveless and failed relationship, or for them to live in a home where the parents resent each other?

How can a person have a loveless relationship, just shows you how corrupt people have become!
Marriage should be that of love, that is why adultery is so damaging---if one cannot love the first person, then one may not love the second person.

You'll note that Pharaoh lived and that only the children suffered death for Pharaoh's hard heart here. Punishment was inflicted on innocents rather than the guilty

I think that Pharaoh did suffer as the Hebrews suffered when their children were drown, they were also innocent.

Those children weren't taught respect, they were killed. Even if used as an example this only teaches the 11th commandment - "Thou shalt not get caught."

Well they were caught.

And it is also a great example of a disproportionate sentence. Children who mock others can be corrected in a multitude of ways other than by killing.

It was not so much as mocking but disrespect for a prophet.

Oddly no, that is not how most conflicts have been waged since the dawn of recorded history. Genocide is actually fairly rare, and the mass enslavement that is referenced here has not been the practice of pretty much any European, First Nation, African, Middle Eastern or Asian people. Such black or white options tend to make wars far more costly for both sides and as such are typically avoided. You'd know that if you read books other than the Bible and understood them.

They the Hebrews were to teach the inhabitants of the land to revere Yahweh, so becoming slave would subject them to the holy life that God required, so they had the opportunity for salvation.

Evidence that Ham had children when he was cursed? The story has him married, but there is no mention of any children. The curse is laid on his future children for the sin of seeing his Dad passed out drunk and going to get help.

No he showed no respect for his father as did his brothers. (Gen 10:6 The sons of Ham: Cush, Mizraim, Put and Canaan. )

You're reading your personal belief into those verses. They say violent and corrupt - nothing about sexual immorality.

Not so, the word corrupt specifically refers to sexual immorality, coupled with violence.
There was only two commands at the time and the one is adultery referring to a man having only one wife, as Noah and his sons had.

Corrupt refers to that which God has decreed but man has disregarded, a man can only be held responsible if there is a law. Now law no sin.

So man corrupted what the Creator ordained as marriage.--- Mat 19:4-6 "Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female, ‘and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'?
So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."

 

[Border Reiver]

The truth will certainly when put into practice set one free. Those children and those who heard about the event will have tread with respect.

The children will not learn respect - what they will learn is fear. Fear is not the key to respect, the keys to respect that I use in my military and personal life are:

a. Professional competence;
b. Consistent behaviour;
c. Treating other persons with respect;
d. Admitting when I'm wrong and correcting the problem.

You'll note that fear that I'll have them eaten by bears is not on the list. I was taught years ago that the instant you have to rely on threats to ensure compliance you've lost whatever respect you had and it will take a lot to get it back.

Sometimes it is better to be a slave of a kind person that be under the rule of tyranny.

No, it is better to live free.

To be a slave or a citizen of a tyranny is to be compelled to obey by fear - even that kind old slavemaster can still sell you away from your family and loved ones, use you as they see fit and have you killed because you are property and have no more rights than a chair.

Apartheid had the remedy to set people free from the tyranny that they were subject to by their constant tribal factions.

By enforcing tribal distinctions, compelling people to live where they are told to live, work only where they had permission to do so, denying them the opportunity to have a say in how they are governed, etc. Essentially move from one tyranny to another.

Now this is true freedom---the blacks under the rule of the ANC government are in no way free, they are in more dire straits than in the Apartheid era.

Except they do have a say in their governance, etc.

So what the blacks could have had is now lost—because they did not appreciate what they had.

Hard to appreciate being considered less of a person because your skin has more melanin.

Had the circumstances of apartheid been reversed - ie. Afrikaners have to live in ghettos, being subject to pass laws,etc. how much do you think you would appreciate it?

 

[Paul Bethke]

There's this thing called a "dictionary." The American Noah Webster for example was well known for writing a very popular one that's still kept up to date and in print. A dictionary definition is more than good enough for this situation. To be nice and tautological, we'll use the dictionary definition from dictionary.com:

http://www.dictionary.com/

I know what kidnapping is so what is your point

Since the law is concerned with the action and not the intention, we can ignore the "especially for use as a hostage or to extract ransom" part of the definition.
For example, grabbing a virgin, carrying her somewhere and raping her in order to "defile" her and force her to marry you would mean you HAVE kidnapped someone.

That is correct—but what has that got to do with me.

Grabbing a black man and taking him somewhere for extra-judicial "punishment" as a result of accusations by a white woman would include kidnapping.

That is so—but what has that to do with me?

No, but God demands I ask them of you. We are commanded to "test the spirit" and as part of that I am testing your claim that you adhere to the full law as it applies to Christians. To that end I am going though the 613 primary laws as listed by Jewish scholars. Your refusal to answer the questions is in and of itself another example of you failing the test. You are a liar and a false prophet, and you prove that fact again and again on every page of this thread. Frankly, it's the only thing you're really consistent on.

That is what you say but you have got all things mixed up.

If you WERE a prophet you'd welcome this challenge and respond. Since you're NOT, your reluctance and heel dragging is to be expected.

I have responded, so what is your problem. I have answered all the question put to me. I am not afraid of answering any question that is appropriate to the topic. You have deviated from what is the topic and have made me the centre of your focus.

There is absolutely no way that you can discredit me I am blameless in all respects.
I am not a liar, nor a false prophet as I have always referred to the Scriptures as the source of what I proclaim. You may not like my emphasis, but that is still what is true to the Scriptures.

Now even if I were false which I am not—the Scriptures are still the means of proclaiming the truth.

 

[halleyscomet]

Had the circumstances of apartheid been reversed - ie. Afrikaners have to live in ghettos, being subject to pass laws,etc. how much do you think you would appreciate it?

If it comes back to South Africa that's likely the form it will take, with the whites overthrown and killed or enslaved. It only took shape with the minority dominant because it was backed by an invading foreign colonial power.

The most effective means up subduing a population long term it through economic advancement. A pauper who has family and friends who starved to death is MUCH easier to radicalize than a middle class kid.

 

[Paul Bethke]

The children will not learn respect - what they will learn is fear. Fear is not the key to respect, the keys to respect that I use in my military and personal life are:

a. Professional competence;
b. Consistent behaviour;
c. Treating other persons with respect;
d. Admitting when I'm wrong and correcting the problem.

You'll note that fear that I'll have them eaten by bears is not on the list. I was taught years ago that the instant you have to rely on threats to ensure compliance you've lost whatever respect you had and it will take a lot to get it back.

Fear is a good thing, without fear there is no order, because people become lawless, today there is no fear in South Africa, and one can see the rioting and lawlessness that are current.
Fear will result in respect—if that fear is a holy fear.

There must be an appropriate consequence for anarchy. It is evident in the schools, there is no fear and the result is mayhem.

The one incident that brought about a holy fear is recorded in the Acts. This resulted in people not repeating the sin for which the couple lost their lives.( Act 5:10-11 At that moment she fell down at his feet and died. Then the young men came in and, finding her dead, carried her out and buried her beside her husband.
Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.

No, it is better to live free.
To be a slave or a citizen of a tyranny is to be compelled to obey by fear - even that kind old slavemaster can still sell you away from your family and loved ones, use you as they see fit and have you killed because you are property and have no more rights than a chair.

No one is free, most are subject to fear, in one way or another. Was this not the problem with America and Britain and Belgium, and all the other nations that took slaves—there was no similarity in Apartheid.

By enforcing tribal distinctions, compelling people to live where they are told to live, work only where they had permission to do so, denying them the opportunity to have a say in how they are governed, etc. Essentially move from one tyranny to another.

It may seem that way on paper, but that is not so—the biggest problem that exist is the degree of breading that takes place—the land cannot accommodate the upsurge of people.

The blacks live in squalor worse than one can imagine, but yet they just keep on breading, the amount of single mother is colossal—children who grow up not knowing who their fathers are. That is not freedom. And do not blame Apartheid for this, this is the present corrupt ANC government.

Except they do have a say in their governance, etc.

They do not have a say in the Government—they are regulated by fear, fear that their ancestors will bring a curse on them if they do not vote for the ANC.

Hard to appreciate being considered less of a person because your skin has more melanin.
Had the circumstances of apartheid been reversed - ie. Afrikaners have to live in ghettos, being subject to pass laws,etc. how much do you think you would appreciate it?

You see Sir, what makes the difference is not so much the skin colour, but the customs and traditions, these are at variance with the laws of the Creator.

Besides the fact as whites we do not want to intermarry and have half breed children.
This is an injunction we have adopted from the Torah.

So in relocating the people and infrastructure was provided in the form of schools hospitals, clinics police stations and what else was necessary for their well being.

Did not other nations also have segregation?

 

[kmortis]

Knock off the personalization. Get back to the discussion of the end times.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: kmortis

 

[halleyscomet]

Fear is a good thing, without fear there is no order, because people become lawless, today there is no fear in South Africa, and one can see the rioting and lawlessness that are current.

Fear will result in respect—if that fear is a holy fear.

Nope. Fear does not lead to respect. Fear leads to fear. Both can result in compliance, but compliance through fear is transitory. The moment the source of that fear is gone, a father dies or faith in a god falters, compliance built upon fear shatters like a glass goblet struck by a hammer.



Look at the Soviet Union. They ruled through fear. They hemorrhaged their best minds and eventually collapsed.

 

[halleyscomet]

Besides the fact as whites we do not want to intermarry and have half breed children.

Speak for yourself. Multiracial families give the DNA a chance to breathe, intermingling genetic material. I've been in interracial relationships. Heck, many people consider my marriage to a Jewish woman to be interracial.

This is an injunction we have adopted from the Torah.

We covered this earlier in the thread. Your claim that the Torah bans interracial marriages is a bald faced lie.

Did not other nations also have segregation?

Sadly yes, for example the Besides the fact as whites we do not want to intermarry and have half breed children. This is an injunction we have adopted from the Torah. ... Did not other nations also have segregation?[/QUOTE]"]US Capital Hill Interns are a workforce that would probably make you wax poetic about apartheid not being dead yet.

 

[Paul Bethke]

Nope. Fear does not lead to respect. Fear leads to fear. Both can result in compliance, but compliance through fear is transitory. The moment the source of that fear is gone, a father dies or faith in a god falters, compliance built upon fear shatters like a glass goblet struck by a hammer.



Look at the Soviet Union. They ruled through fear. They hemorrhaged their best minds and eventually collapsed.

There are different kinds of fear—there is fear of man and fear of God, now the fear of God is a good thing—Jesus put it this way----(Luke 12:4, 25 "I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more. But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who, after the killing of the body, has power to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear him.

The fear of man will control you, but the fear of God will set you free.
Faith is based on fear---(Psa_33:18 But the eyes of the LORD are on those who fear him, on those whose hope is in his unfailing love,

I can assure you (hc) (I hope you do not mind if I call you hc) that when you encounter the presence of this holy Creator you will tremble with fear, better now to face him, than when you stand before him to be judged.

You see (hc) the END time will be when God makes his appearance, so those who have made his acquaintance here on earth will be able to stand in his presence without fear.

It is also stated that the fear of God will keep one from sinning—(Exo 20:20 Moses said to the people, "Do not be afraid. God has come to test you, so that the fear of God will be with you to keep you from sinning.")

But why am I preaching again—you know all these things?

 

[Paul Bethke]

Speak for yourself. Multiracial families give the DNA a chance to breathe, intermingling genetic material. I've been in interracial relationships. Heck, many people consider my marriage to a Jewish woman to be interracial.

So do you eat the kosher diet or does your wife eat the ham?

We covered this earlier in the thread. Your claim that the Torah bans interracial marriages is a bald faced lie.

Big words for a person who claims to know a few things—(Deu 7:2-4 and when the LORD your God has delivered them over to you and you have defeated them, then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy.
Do not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons, for they will turn your sons away from following me to serve other gods, and the LORD's anger will burn against you and will quickly destroy you.

So we see that not to intermarry with people who have cultures and traditions contrary to the faith is the wisest thing to do.

Now Ezra after the people returned from Babylon entreats the people to remember the Torah, and the stipulations about intermarriage.—( Ezr 9:12 Therefore, do not give your daughters in marriage to their sons or take their daughters for your sons. Do not seek a treaty of friendship with them at any time, that you may be strong and eat the good things of the land and leave it to your children as an everlasting inheritance.'

So as I stated we have chosen to follow the precepts that were laid down for Israel, as our ancestors also came into a foreign land where people were living contrary to the injunctions of the Torah.

I am not saying that everything about Apartheid was good, but it would have been far better for the black people now, if Apartheid had been left to complete the program.

Sadly yes, for example the US Capital Hill Interns are a workforce that would probably make you wax poetic about apartheid not being dead yet.

 

[halleyscomet]

So do you eat the kosher diet or does your wife eat the ham?

I don't keep kosher.

Big words for a person who claims to know a few things

We covered that in the discussion about intermarriage among converts. The verses you keep bringing up are about intermarriage with pagan tribes. People who converted were no longer considered "foreign" by those standards. Several biblical examples and citations were brought up. It was even brought up that your preferred interpretation of Peter's dream of the net abolishes the racial and cultural barriers established in the Old Testament, explicitly endorsing intermingling between the races, as witnessed by Peter accepting the first Gentile convert to Christianity.

Now, the Bible does say a number of things against interfaith marriages, and you can make a Biblical argument against them. but arguments against interracial marriages require you to lie about the context and meaning of several verses, as well as their relevance after Peter and Paul's battle over the Gentile Christians.

Oh, did you hope I would forget the content of that discussion?

 

[Paul Bethke]

I don't keep kosher.



We covered that in the discussion about intermarriage among converts. The verses you keep bringing up are about intermarriage with pagan tribes. People who converted were no longer considered "foreign" by those standards. Several biblical examples and citations were brought up. It was even brought up that your preferred interpretation of Peter's dream of the net abolishes the racial and cultural barriers established in the Old Testament, explicitly endorsing intermingling between the races, as witnessed by Peter accepting the first Gentile convert to Christianity.

Well the black people of Africa were pagans and the majority of them still hold to pagan traditions, so the injunctions of the Torah are of relevance.

Now, the Bible does say a number of things against interfaith marriages, and you can make a Biblical argument against them. but arguments against interracial marriages require you to lie about the context and meaning of several verses, as well as their relevance after Peter and Paul's battle over the Gentile Christians.

It is not a matter of lying as you say, it is a matter of relevance. The Torah is not outdated but still forms the basis of faith.

Oh, did you hope I would forget the content of that discussion?

Why would I want you to do such a silly thing—we are covering the same ground and I am still of the same convictions, that the intermarrying with the native people of the land is contrary to the faith.

 

[Craig B]

<snip weird scriptural citations> But why am I preaching again—you know all these things?

I don't have any idea why you're preaching. You are aware that far from "knowing all these things" I think that your use of the Bible is completely nonsensical. As I have stated, you seem to regard the Sxriptures as a compendium of magic spells, rather than a source of information about the thinking of people who lived long ago.

 

[Slowvehicle]

<snip for palatability>
So we see that not to intermarry with people who have cultures and traditions contrary to the faith is the wisest thing to do.

Oddly enough, the passage does not mention "interracial" marriage...

Now Ezra after the people returned from Babylon entreats the people to remember the Torah, and the stipulations about intermarriage.—( Ezr 9:12 Therefore, do not give your daughters in marriage to their sons or take their daughters for your sons. Do not seek a treaty of friendship with them at any time, that you may be strong and eat the good things of the land and leave it to your children as an everlasting inheritance.'

Which (surprise!) also does not, in any way, mention "interracial" marriage...

So as I stated we have chosen to follow the precepts that were laid down for Israel, as our ancestors also came into a foreign land where people were living contrary to the injunctions of the Torah.

1. What do you mean, "we"?

2. The "injunctions" to which you pretend are not "of the Torah".

I am not saying that everything about Apartheid was good, but it would have been far better for the black people now, if Apartheid had been left to complete the program.

I wonder what you mean by "complete the program". Is that like the "final solution"?

ETA: I have been on the road all day--many have capably made the same points...ninjas abound!

 

[Craig4]

But Sir you are so very, very wrong, he is the Creator, and if you resist his will you condemn yourself to hell, so he is not willing that you should go to hell.

So he tells you what not to do in order to avert your destiny, which you will go to. You see there are only two places that people can end up in—the one is with God, and the other is without God, which is hell.

Your god needs to learn his place. That place is not in the bedroom of consenting adults. He's not welcome nor is permitted there.

 

[Craig4]

There are a lot of people that are harmed if they commit adultery. To take another man’s wife, is not consenting. To have sex with a virgin and not remain with her is diabolical.
There are so many repercussions with adultery. The aftermath of adultery has far reaching effect on children---yes there is a lot of harm from two consenting people to commit adultery.

I did say anything about having sex with a woman who is married. How is having sex with a virgin if both parties consent diabolical?

 

[abaddon]

Well the black people of Africa were pagans and the majority of them still hold to pagan traditions, so the injunctions of the Torah are of relevance.

Are you declaring yourself to be an athiest with regard to their unproven gods?

It is not a matter of lying as you say, it is a matter of relevance. The Torah is not outdated but still forms the basis of faith.

Right. Just as the torah withered the grass at the 2010 World Cup.

Why would I want you to do such a silly thing—we are covering the same ground and I am still of the same convictions, that the intermarrying with the native people of the land is contrary to the faith.

Your faith. None other. And yours is a fantasy like all of the rest of them.

 

[Border Reiver]

Fear is a good thing, without fear there is no order, because people become lawless, today there is no fear in South Africa, and one can see the rioting and lawlessness that are current.

Fear will result in respect—if that fear is a holy fear.

Order that is derived solely from fear is fragile. History is full of examples of the breakdown of order based on fear - as soon as people are in a position where they fear death less than that which causes the fear, then such order is doomed. As soon as the fear apparatus is relaxed, then the order is doomed.

There must be an appropriate consequence for anarchy. It is evident in the schools, there is no fear and the result is mayhem.

Perhaps the schools should try earning the respect of the students then.

The one incident that brought about a holy fear is recorded in the Acts. This resulted in people not repeating the sin for which the couple lost their lives.( Act 5:10-11 At that moment she fell down at his feet and died. Then the young men came in and, finding her dead, carried her out and buried her beside her husband.

Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.

That chapter doesn't cast the church into a positive light does it?

A couple sells some of their own property and gives part of it to the Church. The "spirit of God", feeling cheated kills the husband. The wife is allegedly killed for the same reason. Greedy bastard isn't Yahweh, not wanting to let people keep even part of what they owned if the church feels they should have it.

No one is free, most are subject to fear, in one way or another. Was this not the problem with America and Britain and Belgium, and all the other nations that took slaves—there was no similarity in Apartheid.

Only because apartheid was instituted after the abolition of slavery.

All slaveholding states are subject to fear and are ruled by it - fear of what the slaves will do once they decide it is better to die trying to be free rather than live in chains. Even Israel was afraid of their slaves.

And all Yahweh wants is slaves - slaves to his will, bound by the fear of his punishment to doing his will and calling it loving Him. Never questioning his orders.

But like all slaveholders Yahweh is afraid, afraid of the slaves realizing how powerful they are and how weak He really is.

 

[Paul Bethke]

Order that is derived solely from fear is fragile. History is full of examples of the breakdown of order based on fear - as soon as people are in a position where they fear death less than that which causes the fear, then such order is doomed. As soon as the fear apparatus is relaxed, then the order is doomed.

Well then there must not be a relaxing of fear, otherwise as you say, the people will rebel.
There are numerous events recorded in the Scriptures where rebellion was curbed by an increase in fear. That which is pertinent, is recorded in Numbers chapters 16 and 17. The rebellion of Korah

(Num 16:1 Korah son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, and certain Reubenites—Dathan and Abiram, sons of Eliab, and On son of Peleth—became insolent
Num 16:2 and rose up against Moses. With them were 250 Israelite men, well-known community leaders who had been appointed members of the council.

You can read the event and see how this rebellion was subdued.
One cannot have insolence in the military can we?

Perhaps the schools should try earning the respect of the students then.

No Sir the students have absolutely no respect, so there is nothing to earn---students are kids who think they know everything, but lack understanding, history has recorded all the student riots that have resulted in enormous damage to property and loss of life—one cannot earn the respect of a crocodile.

That chapter doesn't cast the church into a positive light does it?
A couple sells some of their own property and gives part of it to the Church. The "spirit of God", feeling cheated kills the husband. The wife is allegedly killed for the same reason. Greedy bastard isn't Yahweh, not wanting to let people keep even part of what they owned if the church feels they should have it.

Perhaps you have not taken in account that these two, husband and wife lied to the congregation, they wanted the glory so they deceived the people into thinking that they had given all.
One cannot have people of that caliber, who should abide by the covenant, but yet violate it-
-Act 5:3-5 Then Peter said, "Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land?
Didn't it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn't the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied to men but to God."
When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died. And great fear seized all who heard what had happened.

So it was God who revealed this to Peter, who then took the appropriate action to curb any further lying.
This did not stop people from joining the Church, it insured that they would not commit the same sin as Ananias and his wife.- Act 5:14 Nevertheless, more and more men and women believed in the Lord and were added to their number.

Only because apartheid was instituted after the abolition of slavery.
All slaveholding states are subject to fear and are ruled by it - fear of what the slaves will do once they decide it is better to die trying to be free rather than live in chains. Even Israel was afraid of their slaves.
And all Yahweh wants is slaves - slaves to his will, bound by the fear of his punishment to doing his will and calling it loving Him. Never questioning his orders.
But like all slaveholders Yahweh is afraid, afraid of the slaves realizing how powerful they are and how weak He really is.

Does not the military run on fear, fear of the repercussion if an order is not carried out—look at all the armaments that nations have, one being fearful of the other—look at the result of the recent terror attacks, can one say that these people are justified in their act of terror, they think that through these acts they will achieve their goals.

Again we live in an environment of fear, fear that cases people to act irrationally.

So from the Scripture I see that the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, the terror of God is a good antidote for crime.
Deut_26:8 So the LORD brought us out of Egypt with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm, with great terror and with miraculous signs and wonders.
So it is the signs and wonders that will cause terror, it is known as the Day of the LORD>

But it has been good to share notes with you!