Greetings, dear Nibs and peace to you! I have not heard from my Lord that calling him "Lord" is a problem... as it may have been for the Hebrews/Israel who, unfortunately, called "ba'al" (lord) many and various false gods and idols. It is a proper word used by me, however, in the context that I do (kyrios), because it accurately reflects MY view of his position in contrast to mine. I cannot dictate (nor do I) to any others what THEY should use, nor do I; however, I most often call him "my Lord". Which tends to cause some just as much chagrin as it seems you for using the term at all. This is curious to me, but another thread, entirely.
Anyway, we will just have to agree to disagree for now as to my use of it which I have absolutely no problem doing. I also have no problem continuing most of the discussion from this point, though, if you care to (and your response here suggests to me that you do). And so where I can respond I will and where I can't I will refrain.
There are multiple threads I've got going on here, and you've been on most if not all of them. Maybe you'll have noted that for me, like Band on the Run speaks the bigger picture, these topics aren't separate but intertwined.
I can see that for you, but I can't speak as to seeing it otherwise. No offense intended toward anyone - just my truth.
I believe that there are those among us who are of Israel, but not in the "spiritualized" sense as Pterist, BobCat, and I have been exploring together, but I truly believe that we are those who were spoken of as "the lost sheep of the house of Israel".
I absolutely agree. Israel in the flesh ("the Household of God"), as WELL as "those who go with" (i.e., Israel in spirit - he is not a Jew who is one on the outside; he is a Jew who is one on the INSIDE). Hence, I often address my comments to both, as well have been quite upfront speaking as to folks here who manifest themselves as Israel (in the flesh).
Paul was fighting for us.
Okay. You don't have to convince ME... although I don't "look" to Paul. Some of what he (?) wrote was true and accurate; some was not. In determining what is and what isn't, I simply ask my Lord. And what he has taught me to do is as he himself learned to do: choose the good and reject the bad (Isaiah 7:14-16). I choose... based on what HE tells me and how... not man (1 John 2:26-28).
What I haven't introduced here as of yet is that in that congregation there were likely Jews from Judah, people who were once from Israel but after being cast out as apostates were known as people of the nations (goyim) and there were other people of other nations. There was, and is, and will always be, Israel, Judah, and the rest of the body of believers.
I do not disagree with that, either.
I probably shouldn't even confuse this dicussion right now, but I suppose the point I'm making, perhaps in a Paul like manner??, is that the people in the context of the ONLY mention of Baal weren't Jews, but Israelites. And Paul points out that even Israel would be called, as the people of the nations, and that they would be redeemed as Hosea had prophesied.
I understand that, as well; however, to say that Judah never used the term "Lord" would be an error for David used it as did the Prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, Hosea, Zechariah, and Malachi. As did Sarah, Abraham, and Lot. Neither used the term "Ba'al" (which was a term adopted by those of the 10-tribe kingdom, Israel, for their worship of many and varied false gods/idols who they ACCEPTED as their "lord/master." "Ba'al" was not a god, per sem but the TITLE of the god worshipped. Much as we use "God" today, which is not the name of the MOST Holy One of Israel, JAHVEH... but how we identify Him. Same with "Ba'al" - "he" was referred to as "Ba'al"... or as "Ba'al Whatever." Or, in today's terms, "Lord Whatever." And so just like the words "God" and "god" are not detestable, although used to identify both the True God (JAHVEH) as well as false gods (i.e., "Jehovah")... the word "Lord" is not detestable. Unless one is using it to refer to a SPECIFIC "lord"... including a "ba'al."
For me, I use the term as meant by David and Sarah, et al.,... which would be "'adown" in Aramaic... and "kyrios" in Greek... and simply denotes a position of master, husband, owner, possessor, etc. Which my Lord is, at least with reference to me.
And what did Hosea prophesy regarding those "my people"? It brings us back to those who would no longer refer to their God as "my baal" but rather "my husband".
Yes, I agree. Which is what the Hebrew "'adown" (and not "adonai", which refers to the MOST Holy One of Israel, and not my Lord, the HOLY One of Israel)... or Greek "kyrios" means: master, king, husband, prince, father, superintendent of household affairs, and priest. And that is why MY Lord IS... to and for me.
Now, please note, I'm not making conjecture here but rather stating it as it was written. He said she (his people Israel) would no longer "my baal" (baal'i) but "my man" (ish'i). He said he would remove the names of the Baal's (baalim) from her mouth, and betroth her to him forever.
I absolutely agree. And so, there is no "Ba'al" (or FALSE lord) in my mouth... or in my heart.
“Yet the number of the children of Yisra’el shall be as the sand of the sea, which is not measured nor counted. And it shall be in the place where it was said to them, ‘You are not My people,’ they shall be called, ‘You are the sons of the living El.’ “And the children of Yehu?ah and the children of Yisra’el shall be gathered together, and appoint for themselves one head, and shall come up out of the earth, for great is the day of Yizre?el! (Hosea 1:10, 11 ISR98)
I have no dispute or disagreement with what the Prophet wrote... or your use here.
There are so many play on words going on in Hosea, it's beautiful! Great is the day of Yizre?el for the children of Yisra’el and the children of Yehu?ah!
I agree as well... which I why I have tried to help people see that Israel is NOT solely the Jews (2-tribe kingdom of Judah/Benjamin), but includes 10 others tribes (the kingdom of Israel)... or the"Samaritans"... as well. Many aren't able to grasp that, yet, due to the propaganda fomented by Judah as to the absorption... or loss... of those tribes. Hence, all anyone usually considers is the Jews... whom THEY believe to be the only "Israelites"... and the non-Israelite nations.
“And I shall sow her for Myself in the earth, and I shall have compassion on her who had not obtained compassion. And I shall say to those who were not My people, ‘You are My people,’ while they say, ‘My Elohim!’ ” (Hosea 2:23 ISR98)
No dispute there, either. Although, I'm not sure you're saying what I am here: that the "those" are the non-Israelite nations who JOIN to Israel. If so, my apologies - it's not clear.
The "her" is Yisra’el, not Yehudah.
YES! No argument from ME on that.
Now, the people of Israel — who we do not know how to identify today, but you can be sure they exist, even as the scriptures say that they themselves don't know that they are the children of Israel — are the ones who will no longer use call their God their "baal".
I can only speak for myself... but that time of identification arrived for me. When I was sealed I was told that I was Israel, of the tribe of BenJahMin... and so of "Judah". My Lord said it is Abraham's blood.... which speaks... that identifies Israel to the MOST Holy One of Israel, JAHVEH... so that even if MAN does not know who is Israel by blood, HE does. It was how my Lord came to "know" (as in "yada" by means of spirit) ME. It is how he comes to "know" ALL who belong to him, whether of Israel... or of the nations.
The research into defining the use of "baal" in Hosea (chapter 2) indicates Israel in their apostate state referred to their god as Baal as they fornicated in the high places.
Yes, I totally agree. They called their gods "Lord (Ba'al) This" and "Lord (Ba'al) That." Or just "Lord" (Ba'al). Again, as we use the term "God" today. But, again, you may be overlooking that that was a word they learned from the NATIONS to mean "lord"... and not one they learned from the MOST Holy One of Israel Himself, JAHVEH... which word Abraham, Israel, and Judah used as "'adown." Or, in Greek, "kyrios." In English... "Lord." Now, if it is that displeasing for me to use the word "Lord," so as not to stumble others, I CAN do what I did with "slave" (now "doulos")... and refer to my Lord as "my 'Adown." Since it's not a name, though, I would think it unnecessary. I would certainly consider it more pretentious that I wish to be.
Now, for me, personally, what spoke to me is that "baal" is translated "lord" and we know "lord" has taken over the proper name of our Father, and his Son.
For some, perhaps, "lord" has taken over. It has not for me. When I refer to my Lord as "my Lord"... I am not referring to his name. His NAME... is Jah eShua, and he is the Chosen One (christ) of JAH (mischaJah). And I refer to him by that NAME; however, when I am referring to him, for example, in light of my relationship with him... and he with me... I use the term "my Lord." The same as I would with own dear husband in the flesh. I would not, for example, say, "This evening I'm making [hubby's name] roasted game hen with mashed garlic potatoes, beans, and cornbread." No, I would say, "This evening I'm making MY HUSBAND roasted game hen...". Now, I COULD state that as: "This evening I'm making my 'adown roasted game hen..." but I truly don't see the point.
But we don't talk about "baal". And well, as you point out, "lord" isn't "baal". Because when someone started translating from Hebrew and Greek to English they made the choice to translate both "baal", "adonai", and "kyrios" into "lord".
Perhaps because they all mean such... but not all have the same connotation. Indeed, they don't all QUITE mean the same thing:
"Ba'al" = Lord, as with regard to a false god... the one looked up to/followed by/owning/possessing such worshipers...
"Adonai" = "LORD", as in the MOST Holy One of Israel, JAHVEH... verses, my Lord, who is the HOLY (but not MOST) One of Israel...
"kyrios" = "Lord" as in ruler, king, master, owner, possessor, sovereign, prince, chief...
"'adown" = husband, prophet, prince, king, father, Moses, priest, and general superiority... all of which I recognize in MY Lord, as to ME.
And they rendered the name of YHWH (Yehowah; Jehovah, JHVH, et al.) as "the LORD".
Yes. Which they should not have done. That was part of the problem: "someone" decided the name of the MOST Holy One of Israel was too "sacred" to utter... which is ridiculous, considering that it was a name to be CALLED upon. How can one call upon a name they don't KNOW? Which is another point I've tried to make here, as to the importance of the name of the MOST Holy One of Israel... JAHVEH... and His Son, the HOLY One of Israel, JAHESHUA, the Chosen One of JAH (MischaJah).
But there were reasons they did (to try and obscure that name) as well as why it was permitted (to preserve the TRUE name from reproach).
Thus, referring to the Creator of the world, and his Son the savior, became the lowest common denominator—the personal name of the highest false god.
In the instances and manner you are referring to, yes. I agree. But not in all instances, sorry. It did when the exchanged the Name (of the MOST Holy One of Israel) for various TITLES; both, however, His Name... and the titles, where the writers included such... should have been properly preserved. As well as the name of my Lord, the HOLY One of Israel. Hence, my Lord's denunciation of the works of the scribes/copyists/secretaries... and their false styluses/pens.
You mentioned that you are of the bride. I am not refuting your claim, just offering clarity for those who may be interested for their personal sake, the variables involved.
I totally understand. I do not take issue with what you are trying to do - it is based on your current understanding... which you are currently receiving from your inquiry of men and their opinions, papers, reports, and books. And that's fine for you. For me, been there, dear one... and done that. Now, I walked as I have been taught by my Lord: by faith... and not sight.
The bride of Lamb is clearly his 144,000 chosen—and sealed—who stand with him at Revelation 14:1, which seems to coincide with Isaiah 4:5 (under the chuppah). She is of his family, as the history of brides chosen in ancient times were. She was chosen out of those given to him, as he never lost anyone given into his hand. She is the 12,000 out of the twelve tribes of Israel, and those distinctive cultural elements of her people, including the twelve apostles out of Israel, adorn her as the new city of peace founded by God. (See definition of Jeru-Salem.)
I used to think that, as well; however, my Lord corrected me when explained WHO those were... and who his "Bride" truly is. He explained that the 144,000 are from among the sons of Israel as fulfillment of JAH's promise to Abraham. In order to ensure that that promise is NEVER broken, Abraham's seed who make up this group are sealed. However, ALL of Israel was SUPPOSED to make up that "Bride"... and still will (because ALL Israel will be saved); unfortunately, when many REJECTED the king/husband HE chose for them... He opened up the "Way" (John 14:6) for people OF THE NATIONS to come into His "house".
And so, the prophecy was that He would take of THE NATIONS "a people for His name." These would not be called "Jehovah's Witnesses", though. Together with Israel, they are called "JAHeTsidqenuw" or "JAH is Righteousness." (Jeremiah 23:6; 33:16). That NON-Israelites... or "the great crowd" are PART of this "Bride"... the "her" that is the NEW Jerusalem... is the very basis of the NEW Covenant. Which is born out in SO many things it's unmistakable:
1. One does not have to be an Israelite by blood (hence, the mixed crowd who left Egypt WITH Israel... with whom there was to be ONE law with... and so ALSO were circumcised, ALSO ate the Passover, ALSO put blood on their doorposts, ALSO passed through the Red Sea, ALSO ate the manna and ALSO drank from the rock-mass WITH Israel, that rock-mass being Christ);
2. As shown by the acceptance of Ruth, Rahab, and the non-Israelite Gentiles after the outpouring of holy spirit at Pentecost 30 CE
3. Which is what Christ means when HE said, "I have OTHER sheep NOT of this fold (Israel) and those I must bring TOO, and they (too) will listen to MY voice and become ONE flock (with) ONE shepherd;
4. Paul's repeated addressing of the matter, from those being grafted in as "unnatural" branches, to replace those "lopped off" due to their lack of faith... to his explanation of how by means of the Christ the "fence" between Israel and the nations... the LAW Covenant was removed, so that ANY could now come in... as well as his admonishment to those of the nations that they were FELLOW citizens of the "holy ones" (Israel)... and WITH them were being built up into a place (temple) for God to inhabit by spirit.
Thus, "she" is the NEW Jeru-Salem... made up of (at least) 144,000 from among the sons of Israel... AND an unnumbered amount "from EVERY nation, tribe, tongue, and people." TOGETHER... these make up the "Bride" of Christ, the "Beloved City"... those who "render sacred service to God day and night IN HIS TEMPLE."
The body of Christ is the whole of those bought from the earth, who were all bought from the earth to reign as a kingdom of Kings and Priests. This is both the 144,000 and the great multitude. While the 144,000 are distinct, she is also a part of his body, as his betrothed wife, and a part of his household.
Yes, and so I'm not sure I understand your comment, above. If the WHOLE is his Body... then the WHOLE is his Bride. Flesh of HIS flesh... and bone of HIS bone. A man is not a head, with one part of his body his Bride... and another part... what?
The great multitude are of Abraham their father, who was promised to be the father of a great multitude of nations, which is inclusive of any who believe in his seed, including members of Israel and Judah. Neither Jew nor Greek (Hellene), nor Scythian nor Barbarian, free nor slave, are distinctions in the body of Christ. We are all one.
I agree except that it is not the great multitude that is "of" Abraham, per se; they are of EVERY nation, tribe, and tongue... INCLUDING Abraham... but not LIMITED to Abraham.
The body of Christ however, is distinct from the Lamb.
I must disagree, in part. Yes, the Lamb is the HEAD of the Body. Hence, the Body of Christ is not the Lamb; the HEAD of the Body is the Lamb.
The bride is of the Lamb, not the body of Christ.
She is OF the Lamb, yes... in that she is his "Body." Christ IS the Lamb ("Look! The LAMB OF GOD that takes away the sins of the world!")
The wedding is based in the customs of his culture. The sheep and the lamb, and the shepherd are all distinct to the writings of Israel.
Not sure what the distinction you're referring to is yet... but the Lamb and shepherd are one.
However, the Christ is the Lamb, sacrificed, and who is raised to become the shepherd, the one head appointed over the children of Judah, the children of Israel, and who reigns with his chosen family, bought out of the earth, both his bride and his body as one family, in one household, fellow citizens in the New Jerusalem above, which decends to reign upon the earth.
Somehow, I think you've contradicted yourself... and more than once... with this statement.
http://www.exaltednamebible.com/exalted-name/other-names/lord-master/
See, what?? I am not sure what your reference is to.
I don't know how to get through to you AGuest.
And that's the thing that has me puzzled: why are you trying... WANTING... to "get through" to ME? There are hundreds, if not thousands, of posters here. Yet, you are trying to get through to me. Is there no one else in the earth who will receive your message? You haven't been sent to ME, else my Lord would have told me. So, what's your agenda? Why are you NEEDING to get through to ME?
BTW - You still haven't responded to my question as to whether you are DavePerez/King Solomon. If you don't respond, I am going to assume you are... and, again, we can just agree to disagree and move on. But IF you are, I must ask: what are you doing here? The forums has rules... and my understanding is that the owners have asked you to leave. Yet, you "sneak" back under different avatars. I gave you an invite to continue the discussion elsewhere so that (1) you wouldn't HAVE to break the forum rules, and (2) I wouldn't be a part of you doing so.
Of course, if you are NOT DP/KS... you only need say so, in which case, both you and I can dismiss what I've stated above.
You asserted being enlighted, chosen, spoken to, and spoken for, yet you cannot seem to hear?
I did not assert enlightenment. I have been chosen. I am spoken to. Not sure what you mean by "spoken for", unless you mean as part of the Bride, in which case, yes, I openly profess that. And I do hear. Now, that I am not hearing YOU... is supposed to mean what to me? You are not my master, my leader, my teacher, my Lord, my king, my husband, my redeemer, my savior, the Fine Shepherd, the Door, the Way, the Truth, the Tree of Life... or the Life. You are not the Lamb, the Bridegroom, the Holy Spirit, the HOLY One of Israel... OR the Chosen One of JAH (MischaJah)... so on what basis do you assert I SHOULD hear... indeed, listen... to you?
Can you not hear me please?
I am sorry, I truly cannot. Not on the issues you've raised that my Lord has not told me... and my spirit does not bear witness to the truth of. I am sorry that does not comport with you... but I don't know what to tell you... except maybe don't take it so hard. Let go... and let God. You know?
I speak softly, kindly.
I have not heard you speak... so I wouldn't know. Even so, your's is the voice of a stranger. And I don't listen to the voice of strangers any longer. Again, I am sorry if that's hard for you to receive... but it is the truth. As one who seems to spend a lot of time "researching" and speaking with others in an effort to FIND the truth, I think that would be something you could readily receive. If not, you might consider examining... truthfully... why that is.
My Father, the spirit of his son which he sent into my heart, the spirit of truth his son sent to be my companion and helper, and the communion among the members of the body of Christ where when two or more meet there he is in their presence is something which is not foreign to me.
Okay, I can receive that.
The only concept foriegn to my experience is audibly hearing external to my flesh a voice. Perhaps I've been mistaken in my understanding of your personal expression—are you hearing his voice within you, or hearing—a word associated with flesh and literal and audible, external and not of the spirit?
I hear in both manners (Genesis 22:11; Exodus 3:4; 1 Samuel 3:2-10; Proverbs 8:4-7; John 10:27; 14:23; Romans 8:9, 10) as part of the purpose of my anointing (1 John 2:26-28) and as one of the features that came with that gift to ME (1 Corinthians 12:10). Do ALL hear as I do? No. CAN all? Absolutely, yes. They only need ask... and for the right purpose: the building up the Body of Christ. Now, of course, many SAY they want the same gift/ability; however, they often fall into the category of the son that SAID he would go out... but when the time came... didn't/wouldn't. Which is why I have not asked for the gift of the spirit that is healing - I don't have courage... faith... and love... enough for that. I KNOW this about myself... and so would not ask for a gift I might renege on using. That would be... horrible, IMHO. If JAH and/or Christ want me to have it WITHOUT my asking... then I'm sure they will give it to me. For THEIR purpose, not mine... and so at the "proper" time. Until then... I'm doing what I should with my "portion"... and not lamenting that I don't have "more."
I'm posting this two days after having written it. I was busy this weekend!
Yes, I understand. I am pretty glad you HAVE a life outside of this place, actually. Seems few do.
I think, perhaps if you can see into the wonderful world I see — you'll see the story underneath the story, you can see, as the scriptures tell us the spirit shows us the things to come. (John 16:13) It's important to respect and not "spiritualize" the distinctions in the scriptures.
That's your take and you are entitled to it. Please don't take offense if I don't agree...
Israel, then Israel and Judah, Jews and Christians, and finally Israel and Christians.
I see it a bit differently: Israel... then Israel/Samaria/Bethel/Oholah and Judah/Judea/Jerusalem/Oholibah... then Jews... then Jews (Judah) and Samaritans (Israel)... then Jews and Samaritans and the nations... then christians (Jews first, then Samaritans, then the nations)... Israel (the 144,000) and the nations (great crowd)... who constitute the entire Bride/Body of Christ... and so... the NEW Jerusalem, whose name is "JAHeTsidqenuw" or "JAH is Righteousness."
There will be a time, and that time may even be now, when the children of Israel will be gathered rousing out of blindness as if waking from sleep, a dream that spanned more than 50 generations.
I agree: that time may be now. I know that it is to that House that I have been sent, to the extent those of her "children" are here, in THIS "city"...
When they awaken, with eyes with which they may see, and with ears with which to hear, they as Hosea prophesies will no longer have the name of the Baal's upon their lips, and "Afterward the children of Israel shall return, and seek Yehowah ???? their God, and David their king, and shall come with trembling to Yehowah ???? and to his blessings in the last days."
Well, I mean, I profess that I DO see and hear, so... But, again, we disagree as to having "Ba'al" on our lips by using the word "Lord". Even so, I have learned that it is Israel who is NOT a part of the Bride who come trembling, those who are saved AFTER the full number of the nations have come in. Those who make up the Bride do not have a God... or husband (Christ)... for whom they must approach with trembling. They are loved... as a man loves is OWN flesh... and so THEY approach with rejoicing! Israel that remains asleep, though, until the very last hour... and so miss the arrival of the Bridegroom... will certainly approach with trembling. Not out of fear, though, but out of contrition.
My heart gets funny when I think about those children. I love them as if they were my family. I want to find them, meet them, talk to them.
I am working on that "love." I love those who love my Lord... easily. Because they show themselves to be a loving people. But Israel IS a hard-headed, hard-hearted, stiff-necked house... and so it's not always easy with them. I love them, as a sister loves her brothers... but I don't necessarily LIKE them. And so I have to always pray for the fruit of my Father's spirit that IS love. As well as long-suffering... joy... mildness... kindness... heck, all of them! I am imperfect, I truly know this. So, I am not about to try and deceive folks and say I am overflowing with love. That would be a lie... and an attempt to fool you, Israel, my Lord... and the MOST Holy One of Israel, JAH of Armies. I would rather speak the truth as to this... and beg for help where I need it... than to try and fool... and "win"... people... by stating a false love. Sorry, but I have not learned from my Lord to be that way.
Since there seems no way to do that, I just go about my time waiting for the due time to arrive, telling the stories my Father told me (through the scriptures).
And since, I am a foremost sinner, not just in my own conduct and choices... but in my heart... because I DON'T always love (easily)... or forgive (readily)... I must go about MY time... trying to tell others who are like me that there IS a ransom, a savior... One who CAN blot out their sins and errors... as he has blotted out mine!... with his BLOOD... by means of which any who partake of it can remove the "stain" of their errors... so as to stand before the throne of God with a CLEAN conscious... and having NO condemnation... if they WANT such. Not that they have to listen to me... or believe me... or follow me. Indeed, doing so will gain them NOTHING. But that there IS one they can listen to... believe and have faith in... and follow... so as to drink from him now... and later, from a river/fountain of waters of life. Perhaps by doing that, I will be counted worthy to drink so one day... me and my entire household.
That's all I'm sayin'... and really have ever said. I can only put it out there, though... because I know what has occurred with and for ME. Whether others hear... and seek the same One so as to receive the same thing... or refrain... which is entirely their choice and prerogative... is on them. And I do not judge them. It is not my place... or desire... to do so.
SO! I'm thinking perhaps you and I are done, at least with this topic? I truly thank you for your time... and attention... wish you nothing but peace. Should we engage in future discussions I would ask only that you keep in mind that there may be things on which we will have to agree to disagree, but if you can handle that... well, then, I'm open to discussion.
Again, peace to you and yours!
A doulos of Christ,
SA