Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Would you like to be called "Satan"?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Would you like to be called "Satan"?

    Neither Yahushua nor “Jesus” or whoever never ever mentioned that he was going to die for anyone.

    At the end of his ministry when “Jesus” mentioned to his disciples that he was going to go to Jerusalem and die none of them believed that the death of HaMaschiach was a necessary event in the fulfilment of any prophecy. They believed all the opposite. It is Christianity that needs to have a human sacrifice for it to work. Christianity is deeply rooted in Heathenism.

    Mark 8:31 (NIV) He then began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again.
    32 He spoke plainly about this, and Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him.
    33 But when Jesus turned and looked at his disciples, he rebuked Peter. "Get behind me, Satan!" he said. "You do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men."


    Mark never met Yahushua personally. So all that he wrote comes from second and third hand sources and who knows how many editors. I don’t know where he got the idea that “the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again.” This was written many years after the facts, so it is easy to be a past tense prophet, too. This “MUST” happen should be fully investigated and documented. I did some extensive investigation and was unable to document myself from the Tanakh. So any help that can shed some light on this dark subject of human sacrifice to placate an allegedly angry Creator is welcome.

    On a side note on Mark’s script, we can see how well trained was Peter that he got a hold of “Jesus” and “took him aside” and rebuke him privately. Unlike Paul, Peter was trained by Yahushua. Paul never took Peter aside to rebuke him on his habit of not eating the unclean stuff the Heathen eat, but he rebuked him in front of everybody. There is a great lesson right here that practically all the preachers are missing. Of course, calling Peter, “Satan” was uncalled for and most likely never happened. Obviously, Mark wanted to make a point that to reject “Jesus” proposition in verse 31 can only be of the devil. Let’s face it, Peter was the holder of the keys of the kingdom. Can you imagine Peter walking about telling everybody, “Hey, ‘Jesus’ called me Satan.” Even if it really happened, I don’t think so. That is not really the best way to build anybody’s morale and self esteem, especially if the man in question has the keys of the kingdom. If Paul were to know this at Antioch when he publicly rebuked Peter, he would most likely avail himself of this information to totally discredit Peter in front of everybody reminding him that he was called, “Satan.” So I really question something that certainly looks like a Christian made up story. It is also a violation of HaTorah among the children of Israel to insult each other. “Sweet Jesus” is made to look like an unpredictable bitter cursing man. We see him calling the Pharisees, “brood of vipers,” and so on. Then he turns around and calls Peter, “Satan.” You just don’t know whom is he going to take on next. BTW, Mark was written many years after Paul wrote his letter to the Galatians, so Paul wouldn’t have known that Peter was called, “Satan.” Paul was probably dead by the time Mark was written. So it is under these circumstances that Christianity was put together and how the human sacrifice idea was stuffed in the mind of the Christians, not through documentation, but who wants to be called, Satan?

    1 Peter 3:18 (KJV) For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
    1 Peter 4:1 (KJV) Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin;


    In any case, the fact that the apostles didn’t understand the need of a human sacrifice to atone for the sin or sins of the world shows that the subject of dying for anyone was not covered during “Jesus” ministry. The statement made that the eyes of the apostles were closed to the truth and they were walking in the darkness until after the resurrection doesn’t make any sense. It doesn’t take long to sense that Yahushua’s apostles (Jews) were always in the dark. They had to be clarified and explained every story that they heard, while Paul’s disciples (Gentiles) were always full of all knowledge and so on. Actually, they were capable of understanding everything in a few short days. Also, they were more familiarized with the offering of a human sacrifice to peace an angry mighty one than the Jews were.

    It is unprecedented in the Sacred Scriptures the need of a human sacrifice to atone for sin or sins of the world. In fact, while the Heathen around Abraham did offer human sacrifice to their idols, Abraham was probably so used to see it done that when Yahweh asked him to offer Isaac in sacrifice he didn’t hesitate, thinking maybe that it was the way it is. Yahweh used the occasion to teach us all that human sacrifice is not what Yahweh likes or wants from us. Human sacrifice is offered to idols for the benefit of the living, of course. That is the idea in Heathenism. Moshe was also tested along the same line. He offered himself as a human sacrifice to atone for the sin of Israel, but Yahweh said that it is not the way it is.

    Exodus 32:31-34 * So Moses went back to Yahweh and said, "Oh, what a great sin these people have committed! They have made themselves gods of gold.
    32 But now, please forgive their sin--but if not, then blot me out of the book you have written."
    33 Yahweh replied to Moses, "Whoever has sinned against me I will blot out of my book.
    34 Now go, lead the people to the place I spoke of, and my angel will go before you. However, when the time comes for me to punish, I will punish them for their sin."


    The lesson here is that no one is to die for someone else’s sin. Throughout the Sacred Scriptures we can read that the children are not responsible of the sins of their parents. They are subject to suffer the consequences, but they are not responsible for the sins of their parents. This is a misunderstood principle to accommodate the Christian doctrine of human sacrifice. So Yahushua or “Jesus” or whoever is not responsible and cannot possibly atone for the sins of his father Joseph and his mother Miriam and much less for the sins of others.

    2 Kings 14:5-6 * After the kingdom was firmly in his grasp, he executed the officials who had murdered his father the king.
    6 Yet he did not put the sons of the assassins to death, in accordance with what is written in the Book of the Law of Moses where Yahweh commanded: "Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sins."

    Ezekiel 18:20 * The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him.

    Psalms 49:7 * No man can redeem the life of another or give to Elohim a ransom for him--
    8 the ransom for a life is costly, no payment is ever enough--
    9 that he should live on forever and not see decay.

    Numbers 35:31 * "`Do not accept a ransom for the life of a murderer, who deserves to die. He must surely be put to death.
    33 "`Do not pollute the land where you are. Bloodshed pollutes the land, and atonement cannot be made for the land on which blood has been shed, except by the blood of the one who shed it.


    Yahweh made it abundantly clear that he doesn’t really want any sacrifice, but obedience.

    Jeremiah 7:21-24 * "`This is what Yahweh Almighty, the Elohim of Israel, says: Go ahead, add your burnt offerings to your other sacrifices and eat the meat yourselves!
    22 For when I brought your forefathers out of Egypt and spoke to them, I did not just give them commands about burnt offerings and sacrifices,
    23 but I gave them this command: Obey me, and I will be your Elohim and you will be my people. Walk in all the ways I command you, that it may go well with you.

    24 But they did not listen or pay attention; instead, they followed the stubborn inclinations of their evil hearts. They went backward and not forward.


    The Christian religion had to change all that to make it work. So they found a way of using a half way truth to justify human sacrifice. They quote part of Yahweh’s word and the rest they make up.

    Hebrews 10:5-10 (NIV) Therefore, when Christ came into the world, he said: "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but a body you prepared for me;
    6 with burnt offerings and sin offerings you were not pleased.
    7 Then I said, `Here I am--it is written about me in the scroll-- I have come to do your will, O God.'"
    8 First he said, "Sacrifices and offerings, burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not desire, nor were you pleased with them" (although the law required them to be made).
    9 Then he said, "Here I am, I have come to do your will." He sets aside the first to establish the second (i.e. the “prepared body” bit).
    10 And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.


    This is hogwash! Christianity is full of deception. If they can’t quote a truthful verse of the Sacred Scripture to back up their claims about the need of a human sacrifice, they make up one. This is not a case of a misquotation, but of an outright twisting of a square peg to fit a round hole. This is what the Sacred Scriptures have to say maybe about Israel in general and not necessarily of HaMaschiach in particular,

    Psalms 40:6-11 * Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but my ears you have opened; burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not require.
    7 Then I said, "Here I am, I have come-- it is written about me in the scroll.
    8 I desire to do your will, O my Elohim; your law is within my heart."
    9 I proclaim righteousness in the great assembly; I do not seal my lips, as you know, O Yahweh.
    10 I do not hide your righteousness in my heart; I speak of your faithfulness and salvation. I do not conceal your love and your truth from the great assembly.
    11 Do not withhold your mercy from me, O Yahweh; may your love and your truth always protect me.


    The Christians modified the Sacred Scriptures that they quote to make it say something completely different to justify the Heathen practice of human sacrifice. They replaced, “Open ears to Yahweh’s words” with, “Prepared a body” – Christians are anomial (i.e. lawless) so they feel they can get away with murder. The full truth is like Yahweh said through Jeremiah and all the prophets, “Walk in all the ways I command you that it may go well with you. But they did not listen or pay attention.”

    Micah 6:6-8 * With what shall I come before Yahweh and bow down before the exalted Elohim? Shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves a year old?
    7 Will Yahweh be pleased with thousands of rams, with ten thousand rivers of oil? Shall I offer my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?
    8 He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does Yahweh require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your Elohim.


    I can go on quoting Sacred Scripture page after page of instructions about how to atone for one’s sins and obviously human sacrifice is ruled off! When I stop and think about it I wonder what made the Christians for 2000 years so blind and deaf to Yahweh’s word.
    "...and the truth will set you free."--Jesus Christ

  • #2
    You have a point to be made,
    But you have to rember that the new testament as it were,
    was not written just after christ died. Or, even SOON after christ died. the only prophet(new testament) to even bother writing his own book was, i belive, peter(unless i am mistaken) most of the books were written a long time mostly 30 years plus after the man died. so not all things were fresh in thier heads you get my meaning... as far as the sacrifice things go from new to old testamant...rarely do schools of thought and religion mix books.. you understand me. and you are mixing books..This leads to confusion and anger then revelation after discovering more books. BUT then just reading one book makes one ignorant and blind as cows lead to slaughter..I have read many books and then later you read so many books you find instead of vast diffrences you find the vast diffrences are only in the ignorant who cannot read other books on thier own and listen to the words that the (pastor priest holy man whoever) says. I hope i am not being to Ambiguous :>
    "And the wise never grow old"

    Comment


    • #3
      Shalom Stranger,

      Let's not throw out the new test. just yet shall we. Let us try to be objective.

      Yahshua said this gospel was to be preached through out the four corners of the world.
      do we not see that this has come to be? almost 2000 years later?
      Did Yahshua not say to Peter that "Satan desired to sift him as wheat"?
      And has not the Catholic church done this very thing? In saying that Peter was the first pope and out from him came all the others? Though we know this is a lie. But then, is not Satan (The adversary) the "father of lies"?
      IN the physical, the "sun" (light) rises in the east and sets in the west. Is it not the "western world" that has taken the "eastern" faith, sent it to the four corners of the earth?

      Was Yahshuas testimony not; "It is not > I < that doeth the works, but the Father IN ME, HE doeth the works."

      Does Yah not say that He will make a New Covenant with the children? Now I know many say that the word for "New covenant" really means "re-new". BUT... in Hebrew SCRIPTURE, it says;
      "NOT LIKE the covenant I made with their father in the day that I took them and led them out of Egypt, which my covenant they break. But I will put my law in their INWARD parts...

      Is not Yahs > word < Yah? You know the old saying "we are as good as our word". For our "word" IS us.
      So how is this "renewed covenant" "Not" like the old, and yet is?

      In order to follow Yah, are "we" not to "die"? For how can one say "I follow the law of Moses" and not acknowledge that they must die to the flesh in order to do this? And further... How can one say "I do not follow the law of Moses, and not acknowledge that "sin kills". Either way... "we die".

      To go further... Yah says that he "rejoices" in HIS works. Not ours. Keep in mind Yahshuas testimony...
      "it is not I that doeth the works, but the Father in me, He doeth the works."

      Now watch my friend. We are to "re turn" to the house of David, right? For David was for a "witness" to us. (Is. 55:3-4)

      "O' Yah, keep a lying tongue far from me". "O' Yah, I will follow after thy commands AFTER > THOU hast "enlarged" my heart. " " O' Yah, > GRANT ME < thy law graciously". "O' Yah, keep a covetous heart far from me". "O' Yah, enlarge my heart that I may obey thy commands".

      Now if David could keep a lying tongue far from him, a covetous heart far from him, or was able to follow Yahs commands... why was he ASKING YAH to do it?
      Did not Yahshua say; "ASK, and it shall be given"?

      "It is not I that doeth the works, but the Father in me"

      If David was able to make his heart pure, why did he ASK Yah to do it? "O' Yah, create in me a pure heart".

      Once we realize that Yahshua is not "G-ds" baby boy that was half human because of his mother like Hercules, >>> but HIS WORD "made flesh" (john 1) And realize that the "spirit of Yahshua was the spirit of prophecy" (rev.19

      And we "return" unto the house of David.. "O' Yah, grant me thy law graciously". Then we can see How Yahs "seed" or His Word, or that which proceeds out of HIS mouth, is what will come to be. And it is not "us" that does it, but HIM. Therefore we praise the "works of Yahs hands", not ours! Yes.. the "christian" world has got the world worshiping a man supposedly slain for our sins. But that is not what Yahshua said. Yahshua (The Word) says he will bring us unto the FATHER. Not to him, as a man, that lived years ago, so now just do what you want. But HE (The Word Made Flesh) would bring us unto the Father! AND he was a spirit of prophecy! Which is what is to take place in us. For the Word of Yah, is his truly "Only begotten". It was the first thing to proceed from Yah. It was how He (Yah) brought all things into being.
      Yah "said" (spoke a word) "let there be light". All "humans" must die Stranger. The difference is... are we going to die to ourselves? or to the Father?

      Once we "see" that all powers and principalities are of the Father, and NOT of us. That salvation does not come by our hand, but by HIS. That we have no "power", then we might as well be dead! For we have no "power" or "truth" or "Light" of our own. But ONLY have what is GIVEN to us by the Father! Again, it is not "us" that doeth the works, but the Father in us, HE doeth the works.

      Isa 10:15
      Shall the axe boast itself against him that heweth therewith? or shall the saw magnify itself against him that shaketh it? as if the rod should shake itself against them that lift it up, or as if the staff should lift up itself, as if it were no wood.

      Hope this helps,
      Love,
      D'

      Scriptures to consider:

      Psalm 40:2 He brought me up also out of an horrible pit, out of the miry clay, and
      set my feet upon a rock, and established my goings.
      Isaiah 45:9 Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with
      the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What
      makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands?

      Isaiah 29:16 Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the
      potter's clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall
      the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding?

      Isaiah 64:8 But now, O YHWH, thou art our father; we are the clay, and thou
      our potter; and we all are the work of thy hand.

      Jeremiah 18:6 O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the
      YHWH. Behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house
      of Israel.

      Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I
      the YHWH do all these things.

      Isaiah 43:1 But now thus saith YHWH that created thee, O Jacob, and he that
      formed thee, O Israel, Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy
      name; thou art mine.

      Isaiah 43:7 Even every one that is called by my name: for I have created him for my
      glory, I have formed him; yea, I have made him.

      Isaiah 44:2 Thus saith YHWH that made thee, and formed thee from the womb,
      which will help thee; Fear not, O Jacob, my servant; and thou, Jesurun, whom I have
      chosen.
      Isaiah 44:24 Thus saith YHWH, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the
      womb, I am YHWH that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone;
      that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

      Isaiah 54:17 No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue
      that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of
      the servants of YHWH, and their righteousness is of ME, saith YHWH.

      Zechariah 12:1 ... saith YHWH, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the
      foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.


      Is. 29:17-
      summary; the deaf hear the words of the book, and the blind see out of
      darkness, and the terrible one is brought to naught and all that watch for
      iniquity (look for sin in others) will be cut off. that make a man an offender
      for a word, and lay a snare for him that reproveth in the gate, and turn aside
      the just for a thing of nothing.

      23 But when he seeth his children, the WORK of MINE HANDS, in the midst of
      him, they shall santify my name, and sanctify the Holy One of Jacob, and hsall fear
      the El of Israel.
      they also that erred in spirit shall come to understanding, and they theat murmured
      shall learn doctrine.

      PRAISE YAH! for He is Good!

      "At that day
      shall a man look to his Maker,
      and his eyes shall have respect
      to the Holy One of Israel."
      Isaiah 17:7

      Comment


      • #4
        Shabbat shalom DeAnna,

        I'm not discarding the NT. I only wish to be as objective as I can. Other Heathen religions didn’t make the same claim that "Jesus" made and they are still around and spreading, too. So durability and popularity is not proof of anything. I'm taking the word that I read at face value. You do a lot of interpretation so you can make the Scriptures say anything you want. That is the only way you can make Christianity work at least in fiction. I don't believe that you are addressing my objectivity. I'm concern about the personal character attributed to Yahushua. The way it is written in the NT is that "Jesus" called his fellow Jews "sons of the devil" (or "your father is the devil), One of the apostles was said to be a devil, too. Peter was called by the proper name of Satan. So Peter was not the first one to be called "pope" as much as the first one to be called "Satan". Paul was not called by that name.

        I am sure that there was a historical Yahushua or whatever was his name (honestly, nobody knows!), and then there is also a made up Iesous or "Jesus." Most likely Yahushua was an observant Jew who thought to be messiah. There were several other wannabe messiahs throughout history, even into our days. There is nothing wrong in desiring or even thinking to be "the" messiah. It is a matter of delivering the goods. After Yahushua's death many years went by before anyone started to write about him. Mostly of what is writtes is hearsay.

        Most of the NT was written or edited by people who never knew Yahushua personally. Paul said that the most important Christian doctrine is the resurrection. He said, "If Christ didn't resurrect vain is your faith." Being that the resurrection is so important to the Christian faith, how come there are 4 different stories about it? They should all agree. The church father who came up with the mystical need for having 4 "gospels" did us a favor. Anything that one "gospel" doesn't say right, the other does. In any court of law any contradicting testimony is challenged and even stricken off the record. Not so with the NT. The Christians accept the NT "as is" in spite of the many discrepancies in it. So I am not rejecting the NT as a document. I can read in it how Christianity got started. I don't believe that you addressed my concern about the request allegedly made by Yahweh of a human sacrifice to atone for any sin. It really puts Almighty Yahweh in a bad light as a blood thirsty Creator that can only be pleased shedding the blood of a righteous human being. I'm determined to proclaim the mercies of Yahweh until the last breath of my body. I'm in the search of the full truth and I really hope that Yahweh may have mercy on all of us.

        We can talk all we want about the world sacrificing "Jesus" and so on, but in essence we are dealing with HUMAN SACRIFICE to atone for sin. Nowhere in the Old Testament is even implied that Yahweh wants a human sacrifice offered to him by the Heathen outside the temple that he designated as the only place in the world where he accepts any sacrifice. In fact it clearly says that Yahweh did not and still does not really want sacrifice of any kind, only obedience. Sacrifices are needed only because of disobedience. Looking at it objectively as you say, the animal sacrifices were instituted only for our gastronomical pleasure and a way to restore fellowship with Yahweh. That is why animal sacrifices (i.e. big BBQs) for sins (i.e. HaTorah transgressions) will continue to be offered into the Olam HaBa.

        When “Jesus” went about his daily routines, nobody was thinking of fattening the "Lamb of God" for the slaughter, or was there? The idea of killing a human being for atonement is of Heathen origin. And to add that the "Father was pleased" with the bloody sacrifice of his "son" turns my stomach over. If Isaiah 53 were in reference to “Jesus” then it must apply 100 per cent to him, not only the parts that seem to match. According to the record, “Jesus” was not really rejected by the people that he said that he came to save. The people wanted to make him king by force. He was awfully popular. The populace was with him to the very last moment. So it is impossible to say that the rejected servant of Isaiah 53 is talking about "Jesus."

        "Jesus" never really interceded for the Jews. He only complained a lot about them and condemned them. Actually, he didn’t really need to intercede for anyone. “Jesus” is on record that he forgave sins on the spot without any human being dying “sacrificially” on a "cross" or shedding any blood for any reason. HaTorah knowledgeable people around him complained saying that only Yahweh can forgive sins. The issue of human sacrifice for the atonement of sins never came up. He mentioned that he was going to die, but that was it. So as far as interceding for anyone… "Jesus" prayed for his 12 disciples, but not for the world. He said so. The only persons he really interceded for were the Roman soldiers who were nailing him to the “cross” or stake or whatever. Otherwise, he handled the forgiving of sins all by himself by telling the person that his/her sins are forgiven. However, those who didn;t agree with him didn;t fare that well at all. He sent them to hell, or whatever such place.

        We believe what we like to believe, I guess. You probably don’t know that animal sacrifices were mainly to be offer for INVOLUNTARY sins or sins by error, not by willful sin. Animal sacrifice was not the only means to atone for any such sin, so was a few measures of flour. Flour was equally effective to atone for sins. In fact, no priest was necessary to atone for any sin, either. If the Israelite was so far away removed from his land that if he were to only repent and pray all his sins were forgiven. Also, calling on the sacred name of Yahweh brings salvation. So this "sweetest story ever told" of HUMAN SACRIFICE doesn’t make any sense.

        The real "new covenant" is not in effect yet. When it will become effective it will affect the house of Israel and the house of Judah. Period! You know that the Christians don't abide by HaTorah, so it has nothing to do with Christianity.
        "...and the truth will set you free."--Jesus Christ

        Comment


        • #5
          Stranger wrote:
          We believe what we like to believe, I guess. You probably don’t know that animal sacrifices were mainly to be offer for INVOLUNTARY sins or sins by error, not by willful sin. Animal sacrifice was not the only means to atone for any such sin, so was a few measures of flour. Flour was equally effective to atone for sins. In fact, no priest was necessary to atone for any sin, either. If the Israelite was so far away removed from his land that if he were to only repent and pray all his sins were forgiven. Also, calling on the sacred name of Yahweh brings salvation. So this "sweetest story ever told" of HUMAN SACRIFICE doesn’t make any sense.

          The real "new covenant" is not in effect yet. When it will become effective it will affect the house of Israel and the house of Judah. Period! You know that the Christians don't abide by HaTorah, so it has nothing to do with Christianity.
          You and I think very much alike, Stranger.
          Sandy

          Comment


          • #6
            Well is it also not a "Heathen" philosophy for say cannibalistic rites.(ie communion.)But since this is about sacrifice i wont delve into cannibalism.
            Flour was not the only sacrifice that was concidered. Honey and beeswax was concidered a "live" offerings. In many churches still, beeswax mixed with parrifin is still concidered a live offering mixed with candles in the catholic church (dont belive me look in a cathlioc church supply catologue)Offerings(ie small sacrifices) are also incences and such burned in a cencer at many church meetings. to get "his" attn.
            this practice harkens back way beyond OT&NT (ie archeology records of before mesopotaian(?s) times all written in cuniform.

            blessed be all
            Sekhet
            "And the wise never grow old"

            Comment


            • #7
              New Covenant beginning....

              Shalom Stranger and Sandy and Sekhet,

              I too cannot get this human sacrifice thing. Yah forgave in the OT long before the NT arrived. The ultimate discovery of all the devoted, is that obedience is better then sacrifice. Look at the group of ancient people called the Mayans and human sacrifice. They disappeared for killing humans. Who are these gods who want human blood?

              The New Covenant has begun. I am a witness. Several mystical manifestation in this regard have happened to me, none that I was previously conscious of and that are all confirmed twice and thrice. Yah has showed me that it is only the beginning of the gathering by the heart reigns and has much to do with the latter rain and the sealed. I can also tell you that it will be felt and known by true Israel. This gathering is profound. It is a manifestation of the restoration of Elijah as well.

              The SODE of this manifestation, in the sacrifices being restored, must have something to do with hyssop and the blood. Let's reason this a moment.

              Exodus 29: 14 But the flesh of the bullock, and his skin, and his dung, shalt thou burn with fire without the camp: it is a sin offering.

              Notice that this offering is made outside the camp and it is of skin and dung. Well, literally, we know that both smell atrocious. But skin is symbolical of that which is the enemy of the Spirit or that which happens upon leaving the garden. Elohiym gave them coats of skin to wear. Outside the Garden. Look at this next one.

              Levitcus 4:11 And the skin of the bullock, and all his flesh, with his head, and with his legs, and his inwards, and his dung,
              12 Even the whole bullock shall he carry forth without the camp unto a clean place, where the ashes are poured out, and burn him on the wood with fire: where the ashes are poured out shall he be burnt.

              Here we have the skin, and all his flesh, head, legs, his inwards and his dung.

              Obviously, these things are not qodesh. In taking from the New Testament those things which are in the old, such as

              Isaiah 26: 20 Come, my people, enter thou into thy chambers, and shut thy doors about thee: hide thyself as it were for a little moment, until the indignation be overpast.
              21 For, behold, the LORD cometh out of his place to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity: the earth also shall disclose her blood, and shall no more cover her slain.

              This in combination with Seek ye First the Inner Kingdom. The inner chambers also coincide with the passover and the indignation, the Ark's inner chamber, whether it be Noah or the Ark of the Covenant, and the way a Jew prays at the wailing wall. If you hold the bible to your face and read it at a very close range so that the voice bounces back at you, it makes you feel like an inner chamber. The Torah Covering, the tent and the tabernacle are all Drash and SODE of this inner application and esoteric meaning of the sacrifice scriptures. Thus, my point is that the expendable things and those taken outside of the city, are skin, dung, legs, head. The blood is poured on the altar as the offering. A New testament scripture about the Blood, the Water and the Spirit testify and these three are one become important in this reasoning. The Spirit moved upon the face of the waters and blood is never burned, but poured out though hyssop. What do you think?

              One last thing: Being called Satan. Two things here objectively speaking: If you have been purified, you are able to discern spirits immediately. I just had a supposedly spiritual woman and her children stay with me. She too was a covenant keeper, but almost like a child with an adult tool. She was riddled with confusion, while her four children were all blessed. Three times while she was in my home, I had to fight demons, and I received several attacks to my physical being. This woman was carrying the ways of the devil, and brought them into my sanctuary, even though she was calling on Yah's Name. The day she left, all invasion left. Should I call her Satan? I wouldn't do that. She was my sistren.

              After the study with the goat sacrifice and the hegoat blood cleansing the sanctuary, it would seem that it was prophesied that the Abomination should do what it was sent to do. But why would he say that stopping him was Satanic if the hegoat was Satan. Consider this. This girl who stayed with me was acting like a Satan and yet she will probably gossip because of my intolerance of her spirits she vexed my house with, that I am Satan. You get it. She is acting on Satan's behalf but will call me Satan. I will not call her Satan however, she is my sistren. But as long as she chooses to act satanically, I have to stay seperate from her. She will say that I am Satan for making this decision rather then allowing her to oppress me further. He was Satan but called someone else Satan. The lost are known to accuse others of that which they are. The accuser does this also. They are in denial. Satan thinks he is God, remember? He lifts himself above God. Am I making sense here?

              Love Ishshah Yir'iyayh
              Woman who fears Yah
              Truth Seeker
              The fear of the YHVH is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.

              Comment


              • #8
                Shabbat Shalom Ishshah Yir'iyayh,

                We both have something in common. We fear Yahweh and we are seeking the truth.

                The point that I wanted to make in my post is in reference to a different event. As I read your comments I realize that you are applying symbolism to fit the occasion. The NT is full of that. That is why there are so many different brands of Christian "churches." Each one comes up with its own interpretation of the symbolism for anything. They developed a technique that allows them to "spiritualize" anything into a dogma that nobody can question and that it must be accepted by a blind faith. Otherwise, Christianity doesn't make sense. They apply symbolism only when it is convenient. They do it so naturally that if you are exposed to Christianity you can't help to apply symbolism to explain your own daily experiences. Blaming "Satan" for anything is of NT vintage. In the first place the Tanakh is teaching us to respect HaSatan.

                Zechariah 3:1-2 * Then he showed me Yahushua the high priest standing before the angel of Yahweh, and Satan standing at his right side to accuse him.
                2 Yahweh said to Satan, "Yahweh rebuke you, Satan! Yahweh, who has chosen Jerusalem, rebuke you! Is not this man a burning stick snatched from the fire?"


                HaSatan is one of Yahweh's servants. Only Yahweh has the right to rebuke him. I'm not sure how this matter of name-calling came about among the Christians, but I believe that it is grounded in the NT. I went back to read my original quote and I discovered to my amazement that I never cease to be amazed reading the NT. The "gospels" say that Peter took "Jesus" aside and rebuked him privately, but "Jesus" turned around and in front of everybody he christen Peter with the name of "Satan." He also called him "Peter," earlier. So here we have Kepha, or rather "Simon Peter," a.k.a. "Simon son of Jonah," a.k.a. "Simon son of John," a.k.a. "Peter" (i.e. "Rock" in the Greek jargon), a.k.a. "Satan" and a.k.a. "the first pope."

                Mark 8:31 (NIV) He then began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and after three days rise again.
                32 He spoke plainly about this, and Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him.
                33 But when Jesus turned and looked at his disciples, he rebuked Peter. "Get behind me, Satan!" he said. "You do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men."

                Matthew 16:17 (NIV) Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven.
                18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
                19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."

                John 21:15 (NIV) When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon son of John, do you truly love me more than these?"
                "Yes, Lord," he said, "you know that I love you."
                Jesus said, "Feed my lambs."
                16 Again Jesus said, "Simon son of John, do you truly love me?"
                He answered, "Yes, Lord, you know that I love you."
                Jesus said, "Take care of my sheep."
                17 The third time he said to him, "Simon son of John, do you love me?"
                Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, "Do you love me?" He said, "Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you."
                Jesus said, "Feed my sheep."


                "Jesus" delivers the keys of the kingdom to "Satan."
                "Jesus" charges the care of his "sheep" to "Satan."
                Symbolically speaking, of course...


                In my humble opinion, the real "new covenant" will be established with the house of Israel and the house of Judah at the same time that there will be peace on Earth, no more wars, no more killings, no more sickness, no more poverty, no more Satan, no more hate, and so on... Then the whole world will benefit, but until then we must make out the best we can out of this world.

                Have a great Shabbat you all!
                "...and the truth will set you free."--Jesus Christ

                Comment


                • #9
                  An interesting post, Stranger.

                  Have you ever noticed that there has never been any problem with the translating or transliterating of the word Satan? It has stayed the same from Hebrew into Greek and on into English, but yet we are told the name of the Most High is unknown or forgotten. And we have a multitude of different pronunciations among those who say it is known.
                  • Satan Hebrew #7853 njf
                  • Satan Greek #4566 Satan
                  • Satan English
                  Note: I hope everyone can see the Hebrew and Greek fonts.
                  Sandy

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X