Split Thread Signs of the End Times

[Crossbow]

They are not lies--it is you who like others have conjured up this notion which is false. I do not need to lie, I am not afraid to tell the truth.

Here is just one of your many lies from over five years ago:

So we will have to leave it at this point until as you say, I furnish you with enough evidence to prove that I speak for Yahweh.

Until then I will have to as I have said; abstain from posting and repeating what I have claimed for near on a decade now.

So thank you for affording me the opportunity to state what I have so often claimed.

 

[Crossbow]

That was said of the apostle Paul---Acts_26:24 At this point Festus interrupted Paul's defence. "You are out of your mind, Paul!" he shouted. "Your great learning is driving you insane."

To believe that the events recorded are true is not insanity,, when one contemplates the greatness of the Creator, and to further regard these events as repeatable is only logical.

As I said earlier, for the last several thousands of years, people who claim to have a personal encounter with a supernatural being have been known to go crazy.

 

[Dabop]

Nobody has to suffer for their sin--all can be forgiven, now surely you would not like to go to hell, so there is forgiveness. So what is wrong with proclaiming that--but the time will come when all people will pay attention.

Surely you do not want to go to Helham, so Odin will forgive you Paul, but the time has come when you must pay attention!!!!!

 

[halleyscomet]

I reiterate my offer to proof your drafts...

Thank you.

I have some major server migrations coming up in the next few days so I won't have much time for writing until that's done. PM me an email address and I'll send you an invite to the Google doc once I create one for the project.

You are so very wrong Mr Comet—everything I have stated is the curriculum of the Scriptures—it is you who has no idea of the truth.

While your refusal to elaborate when challenged is easy to write, it's not particular fun to read. You're particularly unimaginative when you're caught in a really, REALLY obvious lie, like the post above.

I think in the story I'll have to focus more on the reactions of others when you get into broken record mode.

 

[Dabop]

They are not lies--it is you who like others have conjured up this notion which is false. I do not need to lie, I am not afraid to tell the truth.

It is not a lie-- it is you is you who have conjured up this notion which is false. I do not need to lie, I am not afraid to tell the truth.

 

[Paul Bethke]

It's not a notion; it's a fact. This forum contains a written record of your dishonesty.

Now you are wrong, the Forum contains all that I have stated, and for that I am pleased as it can be used in time to come. I have not been dishonest in the least, it is you and others that have tried to discredit me, to no avail.

Clearly you are. When you were caught in the error in the Mizvot thread, you disappeared for several months. Since that was an error of pure fact, not something you could spin your way out of by variant interpretations, it's not something from which you can easily recover. So you ran away, almost like you're just playing to an audience.

You are wrong again—the Mitzvot is 613 commandments that were listed. Now to go through all of them in the way that was done would take a long time—I never ran away I just got tired of the stupidity that was present---to scrutinise me using the Mitsvot is something that I do not mind. Read the Mitsvot yourself and you will see how long it would take.
http://www.jewfaq.org/halakhah.htm http://www.jewfaq.org/613.htm

So in no way am I against the collection of laws that were compiled, because what Jesus concerning the Torah---Mat 5:17 -19 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfil them.
I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the Kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the Kingdom of heaven.

So why would I not be willing to discuss the validity of these laws?

Now be a good fella and read through this 613 Mitsvot, and you will see the futility in dealing with each one of these laws individually on the Forum.

You show very little insight into what it entails, to make unfounded statements.

You see in dealing with anyone who wants to come to repentance, we do not confront them with the 613 Mitsvot—we confront them first with their martial condition, then we proceed from there to other aspects of the law. Thereafter we present them with additional requirements of the law.

The 613 Mitsvot does not apply completely to a Gentile convert—it also does not apply to a Jew who lives outside of Israel—there is also the consideration that the Temple no longer exists, and the laws pertaining to Temple requirements are also suspended.

So now do we need to deal with those laws that are not applicable?

 

[Paul Bethke]

Thank you.

I have some major server migrations coming up in the next few days so I won't have much time for writing until that's done. PM me an email address and I'll send you an invite to the Google doc once I create one for the project.



While your refusal to elaborate when challenged is easy to write, it's not particular fun to read. You're particularly unimaginative when you're caught in a really, REALLY obvious lie, like the post above.

I think in the story I'll have to focus more on the reactions of others when you get into broken record mode.

Your problem is that you twist the truth so be a good fella and be truthful.

 

[JayUtah]

...it is you and others that have tried to discredit me, to no avail.

You claimed to be a prophet. We tested you, and you failed. You discredited yourself.

I never ran away I just got tired of the stupidity...

Tell yourself that, if it makes you comfortable in your denial. You ran away because you insisted, on the basis of an English translation that you mistakenly thought was literal, that a certain name of God appeared where it was, in fact, a different name of God in the original Hebrew. You had claimed you didn't need a knowledge of the original languages in order to read the Bible properly. You were proven wrong. You claimed you carefully chose your translations in order to avoid the errors that would inevitably arise in translation. You were proven wrong again.

So why would I not be willing to discuss the validity of these laws?

Because you don't follow them, as you claimed you did. And you made up an excuse for that, blaming your critics for their "stupidity" when in fact they demonstrated a better understanding than you.

You couldn't stand the heat, so you ran away.

 

[JayUtah]

The 613 Mitsvot does not apply completely to a Gentile convert—

That's not what you claimed. Here is the thread. You have been invited to continue the debate there where you left off, allegedly because of the "stupidity" of your interlocutors. But now it seems you really do want to resurrect that debate. Instead of behaving condescendingly toward your critics, why don't you go over there and pick up with the answers that were left hanging after your retreat.

 

[Paul Bethke]

Again, which people will suffer more?

For what sins?

How does the redemption of a former racist increase that suffering?

This is one reason you have no followers "Paul." You fall part and morph into a broken record when asked for clarification.

Ohhh, that's a really good analogy for you. I'll have to figure out how to use it in the sort story I'm working on.



That worked a bit better than I thought it would, at least for a first draft of the scene.

You are expert at twisting what I have stated---why do you indulge in such stupidity.
I said the more they increase the more the people will suffer—numerically.

 

[Dabop]

Why do you indulge in such stupidity Paul?

 

[Slowvehicle]

How very...odd...(and dishonest) that you pretend this:

I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the Kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the Kingdom of heaven.

...and this:

The 613 Mitsvot does not apply completely to a Gentile convert—it also does not apply to a Jew who lives outside of Israel—there is also the consideration that the Temple no longer exists, and the laws pertaining to Temple requirements are also suspended.

...do not contradict each other. Your errors and untruths continue.

(BTW, as a further demonstration that you are not capable of dealing honestly with OT Hebrew,"mitzvot" is plural..."mitzvah" would be the singular.

So now do we need to deal with those laws that are not applicable?

And yet, you, personally, seem to be setting yourself up as the arbiter of which of the "laws" can be "made to disappear"...where above, you quoted a source that said none might.

Careless of you (or heretically hybristic)...

 

[asydhouse]

And a very good day to you—nice of you to join the show---you probably understand that LOVE has only one application----1John_5:3 This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome.

As I expected, you are impervious to the message Jesus tried to give you.

Why are you incapable of acknowledging the best of human nature, empathy and compassion for your fellow creatures (not just humans, but that would be a start!), which your creator made part of the instinctual human nature?

Love is the action of the human being, inspired by the instinct for empathy and compassion.

It would be impossible to have empathy for a god, and compassion for a god is a nonsensical notion (although I would feel sorry for any divinity which had to put up with the leaches that attach themselves to the notion of a god, sucking at the god with their supplicance)… I seem to have created a word there…

So the counterfeit love that you arrogate for your notion of god, the biblical monster, is a husk devoid of the actuality of human love, which I subscribe to as the only divinity manifest in this world, the kind consciousness which acts in empathy and compassion to share the joy of being with each other.

You share no joy, and bring only empty threats and gleeful sadism. Your god is your devil.

Keep it to yourself. You show us only ugly.

 

[halleyscomet]

You are expert at twisting what I have stated---why do you indulge in such stupidity.

I like to write as a hobby. Particularly evil individuals inspire speculation about what other stories are happening around them. For example, stories about the people who work WITH "The Joker" have tended, for me, to be more interesting than stories about the Joker / Batman conflict in and of itself.

A character inspired by you who is a shut-in and a recluse would not be very interesting, as it would be VERY difficult to make you a sympathetic character. Taking your claims of a living wife and being actively engaged with people in the real world at face value however opens up a host of possibilities. It's already a divergence from the "real" you as you've presented yourself here, but it makes for a potentially interesting story.

Yes, the character will reflect your stated racism and religious absurdity, but the character itself will be so divorced from the way you've presented yourself here that it's not a "lie" but "artistic license." I've already decided, for example, that the character is not a recluse and social pariah, at least when the story opens.

Your "Methinks he doth protest too much," reaction to the suggestion earlier in the thread that your wife may have had lovers before you has inspired one of the major plot lines of the story. You reacted too viscerally and with too much hostility for me to believe you didn't already harbor doubts of our own.

I said the more they increase the more the people will suffer—numerically.

Increase in what?

What is increased by a man being saved from racism by a Jewish friend?

You claim an increase in a something you refuse to define will i turn cause suffering. What is the something that you think will increase?

 

[Paul Bethke]

You claimed to be a prophet. We tested you, and you failed. You discredited yourself.

A prophet is one that speaks the very words of the Creator as stipulated in the Torah---I have on all occasions referred to those words. I was wrong in my predictions, but not wrong in my presentation of the exact words of God.

Tell yourself that, if it makes you comfortable in your denial. You ran away because you insisted, on the basis of an English translation that you mistakenly thought was literal, that a certain name of God appeared where it was, in fact, a different name of God in the original Hebrew. You had claimed you didn't need a knowledge of the original languages in order to read the Bible properly. You were proven wrong. You claimed you carefully chose your translations in order to avoid the errors that would inevitably arise in translation. You were proven wrong again.

God in the Hebrew language has many names that are prescribed to him, which we who are not familiar with, these names that describe the attributes of the Creator. So if I mistakenly used one of his names out of context that is not that serious.

I mostly use the name Yahweh. So if I quote from a translation that used his name incorrectly that is not a serious matter so long as it is understood that I refer to the God of Israel as the Creator.

The English translations have used names other than the prescribed names of God, that depicts his attributes.

NIV Preface In regard to the divine name YHWH, commonly referred to as the Tetragrammaton, the translators adopted the device used in most English versions of rendering that name as “LORD” in capital letters to distinguish it from Adonai, another Hebrew word rendered “Lord,” for which small letters are used. Wherever the two names stand together in the Old Testament as a compound name of God, they are rendered “Sovereign LORD.”

Because for most readers today the phrase “the LORD of hosts” and “God of hosts” have little meaning, this version renders them “the LORD Almighty” and “God Almighty.” These renderings convey the sense of the Hebrew, namely, “he who is sovereign over all the ‘hosts’ (powers) in heaven and on earth, especially over the ‘hosts’ (armies) of Israel.”

For readers unacquainted with Hebrew this does not make clear the distinction between Sabaoth (“hosts” of “Almighty”) and Shaddai (which can also be translated “Almighty”), but the latter occurs infrequently and is always footnoted. When Adonai and YHWH Sabaoth occur together, they are rendered “the Lord, the LORD Almighty.”

http://www.bible-researcher.com/niv-preface.html

Because you don't follow them, as you claimed you did. And you made up an excuse for that, blaming your critics for their "stupidity" when in fact they demonstrated a better understanding than you.

You couldn't stand the heat, so you ran away.

I have responded to a lot of post which takes a lot of my time—and do not always have the time to respond to every one—you can see that I have responded to over 900 posts.

You are correct, I do not follow all 613 Mitsvot, because they do not all apply to me and other believers in Yeshua the Messiah. For one I am not a resident of Israel.

You show your ignorance in your statements, typical of most people on the Forum who have participated. You see when you are bias you do not see the truth, because you are intent on harping on nonsensical items!

Here are some of the 613 Mitsvot---Treatment of Gentiles
53. To love the stranger (Deut. 10:19) (CCA61). See Love and Brotherhood.
54. Not to wrong the stranger in speech (Ex. 22:20) (CCN49).
55. Not to wrong the stranger in buying or selling (Ex. 22:20) (CCN50).
56. Not to intermarry with gentiles (Deut. 7:3) (CCN19). See Interfaith Marriages.
57. To exact the debt of an alien (Deut. 15:3) (affirmative).
58. To lend to an alien at interest (Deut. 23:21) According to tradition, this is mandatory (affirmative).

Here are some more
82. Not to have intercourse with a woman, in her menstrual period (Lev. 18:19) (CCN132).
83. Not to have intercourse with another man's wife (Lev. 18:20) (CCN124).
84. Not to commit sodomy with a male (Lev. 18:22) (CCN116).
85. Not to have intercourse with a beast (Lev. 18:23) (CCN117).
86. That a woman shall not have intercourse with a beast (Lev. 18:23) (CCN118).
87. Not to castrate the male of any species; neither a man, nor a domestic or wild beast, nor a fowl (Lev. 22:24) (CCN143).


The Decalogue is the place where all people must be examined.

 

[Border Reiver]

You are correct—it appears that the stipulation of laws, does not stop people from breaking those very laws---the Kingdom of God will in all aspects prevent people from violating the cardinal laws.

Jas_2:8 If you really keep the royal law found in Scripture, "Love your neighbour as yourself," you are doing right.

Not so long as people are people.

Humans break any and all laws put in front of them by society. The Kingdom of God would be no different.

All the Kingdom of God is is someone else's idea of what the perfect society would be. As the scribes and priests are the ones who wrote it down, you can bet your bottom rand that they would be the top dogs there - and hey, they are.

 

[Crossbow]

Your problem is that you twist the truth so be a good fella and be truthful.

The truth is:

That none of the Paul Bethke predictions have ever come to pass,
That Paul Bethke has been quite untruthful many times, and
That the Paul Bethke sanctimonious musings are nothing but sanctimonious crap.

 

[JayUtah]

A prophet is one that speaks the very words of the Creator as stipulated in the Torah--

Among other things. A prophet also claims to predict the future. In that claimed capacity, you proposed to predict the future.

I was wrong in my predictions...

That makes you a false prophet. And that in turn calls into question your ability to act in the capacity that is the subject of this thread: to predict the end times.

You attempted to excuse that error by saying you had failed to account for certain pertinent things mentioned in scripture. You were asked to reconcile that failure with your earlier claims to infallibility, and you have not yet done so. You were asked to produce the specific scripture passages you alluded to, which you say excuses your failure to predict the wilted grass. You have not yet done so.

God in the Hebrew language has many names that are prescribed to him...

Irrelevant. The question at hand was which name was used in a particular passage in the original text. In the context of the question being discussed, the particular name used had relevance. You were simply wrong about which name the Hebrew employed. This is not a matter of interpretation. This is a matter of knowing what the actual text said. It is a question of facts you didn't know but needed to have known.

The English translations have used names other than the prescribed names of God, that depicts his attributes.

Irrelevant. The names in question were transliterations into English of the Hebrew. You didn't know which one was being used because you cannot read Hebrew. You wrongly believed a certain English edition told you the proper transliteration, because you did not research the edition.

For readers unacquainted with Hebrew...

You do not read or understand Hebrew. You are in no position to attempt to teach others how properly to read and understand Hebrew. Nor does this interpretational tap-dance bear in the least on errors of fact that you have made.

You are correct, I do not follow all 613 Mitsvot, because they do not all apply to me...

Asked and answered. You have questions awaiting you in the thread where you told a different story. Please continue that discussion there.

You show your ignorance in your statements, typical of most people on the Forum who have participated.

No, the ploy of calling your critics stupid evaporated the moment you were caught in the factual errors associated with your claims. Since this correlated to your swift departure followed by a lengthy absence, it's fairly clear you're just bluffing on this point. You know you were caught, and you left in order to save face.

 

[abaddon]

Do you know what a prophet is?

My dictionary says:

Prophet

1.
a. A person who speaks by divine inspiration or as the interpreter through whom the will of a god is expressed.
b. One of the highest-ranking leaders of the Mormon church, considered by the faithful to be divinely inspired, and responsible for establishing and revising doctrine.
2. A person gifted with profound moral insight and exceptional powers of expression.
3. A predictor; a soothsayer.
4. Absolutely not anyone called Paul Bethke.


Now, how about you share the exact details of your so-called prophecy.

 

[Paul Bethke]

I like to write as a hobby. Particularly evil individuals inspire speculation about what other stories are happening around them. For example, stories about the people who work WITH "The Joker" have tended, for me, to be more interesting than stories about the Joker / Batman conflict in and of itself.

A character inspired by you who is a shut-in and a recluse would not be very interesting, as it would be VERY difficult to make you a sympathetic character. Taking your claims of a living wife and being actively engaged with people in the real world at face value however opens up a host of possibilities. It's already a divergence from the "real" you as you've presented yourself here, but it makes for a potentially interesting story.

Yes, the character will reflect your stated racism and religious absurdity, but the character itself will be so divorced from the way you've presented yourself here that it's not a "lie" but "artistic license." I've already decided, for example, that the character is not a recluse and social pariah, at least when the story opens.

Your "Methinks he doth protest too much," reaction to the suggestion earlier in the thread that your wife may have had lovers before you has inspired one of the major plot lines of the story. You reacted too viscerally and with too much hostility for me to believe you didn't already harbor doubts of our own.



Increase in what?

What is increased by a man being saved from racism by a Jewish friend?

You claim an increase in a something you refuse to define will i turn cause suffering. What is the something that you think will increase?

Perhaps as a writer you do not understand English and as a result you go off on a tangent. But it shows me that what I have stated is misconstrued.

So I do not need to go over things more than once—or maybe I have to repeat myself ten times.

My standpoint is very simple—a person will be judged on their marital status, whether it is a sanctified marriage or adulterous.

Now very simply—if there are 1000 people, they will suffer for their sins, and if they increase to be 100000 people it means more people will suffer for their sins—it is numerical.

So if a 1000 people commit adultery and suffer for their sins, and there is an increase of 10000 people committing adultery they too will suffer for their sins—numerical.

So what was meant, was the more people that sin they will suffer. So the population has increased considerably over the years so more people will suffer if they sin—numerical.