Dearest 'Pom... may you have peace!
The Hebrew word above is transliterated "baneey" which is the word for "son" in Hebrew. okay?
Actually, the word has about eight definitions... and you have been misled into believing it is the one you've chosen. You are in error. You have listened to 'earthling' man... I have listened to my Lord. Try the very last definition, okay?
Gal 3:16
16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say "and to seeds," meaning many people, but "and to your seed," meaning one person, who is Christ.
That is the 'promise' that by means of Abraham's seed, Christ, the nations would bless themselves. And it IS by means of Christ that that occurs. However, Abraham's seed became as many as the sands of the sea...
Liar. There is only ONE seed, Christ.
Unfortunately, it you that is in error. Isaac was the seed of Abraham... as was Ishmael. Yes? There are two right there. Then Abraham had other children by his wife after Sarah. More seed, yes? The entire nation of Israel, by means of being the seed of Jacob, his grandson, are the seed of Abraham. However, the promise that the nations would BLESS themselves... applied to only ONE of those seeds, my Lord, the Son of God, JAHESHUA MISCHAJAH. That is the meaning of Galatians 3:16.
Get the sense that Jesus is the ONLY BEGOTTEN SON. The only direct division/seperation out of God the Father, which came after Satanic rebellion, which is why Christ seperated from the Father in the first place, to rectify.
Again, you are in error. Adam... was also God's son. My Lord is my Father's 'only-begotten' son in the SAME way that Isaac was Abraham's
'only-begotten' son... both were 'begotten' by the FREE wives of God and Abraham. Abraham's OTHER son, then, ISHMAEL, was ALSO an 'only-begotten' son... by Hagar, just as ADAM was an 'only-begotten' son... by the Earth. Both Abraham and my Father REFERRED to Isaac and my Lord as their 'only-begotten' sons because, by means of having been 'born of' their FREE wives, they were LEGITIMATE sons, NOT ILLEGITIMATE... and thus... HEIRS. Okay?
After his being BEGOTTEN from the Father, Jesus then created ALL OTHER LIVING THINGS that are physical, making him also a "father".
Again, you are in error. GOD... created all things... and He used MY LORD... to do it. My Lord was the 'conduit' of life... and it was THROUGH HIM, FOR HIM... and BY MEANS of him... that all things were created.
The Bible also shows that Christ is resposible for the lives of the angels, making him their "father" too.
Christ is 'responsible' for the angels, in that they are PART of the inheritance he received... FROM THE FATHER. "All AUTHORITY has been given me..."
The Most Holy Father handed ALL THINGS over to the Son
Yep.
(Who is an everlasting Holy Father in his own right)
He is an 'eternal (or everlasting) father, 'Pom, because it is by means of HIM... that we receive holy spirit so as to be CONCEIVED as 'sons' as well. My Father conceived Him and Adam, by means of His holy spirit. He has granted to my Lord, His SON... to conceive US... by means of that same spirit, which was given that Son... and it placed in US.
so that all may be reconciled back unto the Most Holy Father.
Yep, the things in the heavens... AND the things on earth.
Angels FULLY retain their sonship (baneey) to Christ
Angels are not 'sons' to my Lord... they are SERVANTS to him... and us.
(since He DID create them, he IS their "father")
Hmmmm... I find it 'funny' that you believe this, when the BIBLE that you put so much trust in says that the angels were there when creation of the earth began, and yet, my Lord was the FIRSTBORN... of all creation. He is the Light... that was 'created' on the 'first' day... between which my Father put 'enmity' with the Darkness. But then, you knew that, didn't you?
we though, need to be adopted back to God as "sons of light" because of sin.
Well, sort of. We were sent here, 'Pom, to be hidden in 'earthen vessels', until such time as my Father could FERTILIZE us, by means of His holy spirit. We are the 'seed' of the woman, His 'free' wife, Jerusalem Above. In the spirit realm, however, an enemy existed that attempted to 'devour' that seed BEFORE it could be fertilized... and born. That seed was first carried in Adam... and he SOLD IT... into sin and death. It has been transported since that time... in 'earthen vessels'... through Seth, to Noah, to Abraham, Isaac, David... to my Lord. He, my Lord, then transferred that seed... into US... those of us who put FAITH in him. Such 'fertilization and conception', dear 'Pom, takes place... IN... the Ark of the Covenant. So, such ones must make their way BACK to that Ark... BACK to the NEW Covenant... so as to receive such spirit in order to one day be 'born'... IN the spirit. As long as we are in that Ark, we are 'safe'... for the 'cover'... or PROPITIATORY... which is my Lord, will keep us from the Adversary.
We are 'adopted' because... DUE TO SIN... while awaiting such fertilization by GOD... we received the spirit of ANOTHER 'father'... Death and Darkness. By our sin, HE 'conceived' us. However, my TRUE Father, JAH OF ARMIES, has conceded to take ALL such seed BACK... 'adopt' it back... by means of my Lord.
>>You exercise the same 'spirit' of Paul<< You are correct.
Which, on MANY occasions was a spirit of zeal... but without accurate knowledge. Paul taught Pharisaical 'law'... and had to be corrected. He taught judging... and had to recant. In addition, as I said, MOST of what Paul(?) wrote was to the 'nations'. I know the 'law' of my Father, however, for it is written... on my heart.
Acts 13:8-11
9 Then Saul, who was also called Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked straight at Elymas and said, 10 "You are a child of the devil and an enemy of everything that is right! You are full of all kinds of deceit and trickery. Will you never stop perverting the right ways of the Lord?
And for what REASON did Paul(?) say this of Elymas the sorceror? Because this one was trying to KEEP people from hearing the 'good news'. Which is what YOU are doing here.
You twist my words and Paul's. I do not question the Lord speaking to a woman. It's a woman teaching a man in a "church" setting that is wrong, and that problem goes back to the garden. Eve userped Adam's headship.
Ahh, but you do question it. My Lord spoke to such a woman... and told HER... 'go get your husband'. Now, would she have not had to TELL the man what she had been TOLD? And, indeed, did she not do just as she was directed? Why did my Lord not go find the man and invite him himself? And did not my Lord appear to Mary and tell HER to go tell the men? What was their response?
I, too, hear the voice of my Lord... and I obey. He has said to me... "Speak what I tell you"... and so I do. If, then, sharing what has been given ME with MEN is a 'crime' under the Law Covenant, then indeed, I am guilty. However, I am not UNDER the Law Covenant, but under a NEW Covenant, which is a 'law'... of love. And just as I receive... I give. Thus, the Spirit... AND THE BRIDE... keep saying, "Come!"
My Lord and my Father are MERCIFUL, 'Pom, and not dogmatic. They know that out of obedience... AND out of my heart's ABUNDANCE... I speak. If, then it is righteous in YOUR eyes to obey men... rather than obey God, decide for yourself. As for ME, I cannot STOP speaking about the things I have seen and heard. And, if it is also 'righteous' in YOUR eyes to 'judge the houseservant of another', please... don't let ME stop you. I am but a mere servant, with no such 'authority'. I leave the sorting out of the matter, then, to my Lord.
You are neither the "seed" or Deborah (a prophetess) nor anything like her,
Indeed, I am 'seed', both of Abraham AND of the 'woman' (Rev. 12:17). No, I am not Deborah (though I don't know how you would know whether I am 'anything like her', for in truth you KNOW neither of us. As for being a 'prophetess', I myself would not put such a title on myself. However, one of my 'gifts', by means of holy spirit... is that of prophesying, as well as discerning inspired utterances. And I will not deny that spirit, 'Pom... nor it's 'gifts'... for you or anyone else. For it has been revealed to ME, by my Lord, that to do so... would be blasphemy AGAINST that spirit. And I would caution YOU, in YOUR speaking against it as well. While you may not KNOW that you are in danger of doing it, ignorance will not necessarily 'cover over' it. I understand your 'zeal', truly, as does my Father and my Lord, but zeal does not, in and of itself, make right. Ask your leader, Paul.
of which there was only ONE woman in the OT/NT as one backed with the leadership role and POWER of God just as there is only ONE seed of Abraham. Why? To make known that God chooses whoever HE wants, man or woman to do His will. GOD CHOSE only ONE woman to lead Israel to make plain a point to the Jewish men who would frequently put woman in derision and degradation. God chose only ONE woman to lead Israel to make plain a point that only God makes ALL LAW. And with that choosing of Deborah, was the backing of His POWER.
Yes, and that was then... and this is now. Again, you belie the prophet Joel... and Peter's reiteration of that prophesy. And why IS that? Indeed, Paul prohibited women FROM AMONG THE NATIONS... because it was AGAINST THE LAW... but the prophesy was spoken to... and was to come to BE upon... Israel. And I have told you my ancestry.
Paul never taught woman were prohibited from speaking in public. He taught that TEACHING of men by woman in a "church" setting was prohibited. It imitates Eve teaching Adam that the fruit was OK to eat. WRONG.
Dearest 'Pom... I ask you... what 'authority' did Paul use to assert this prohibition? Did he not say it was according to the 'law'? Why, then, do you ASSUME that he was referring to the LAW COVENANT, when such individuals, the nations, were not UNDER the Law Covenant... never HAD been... and never COULD be... for that Law... was 'impaled' with my Lord so that even the JEWS were no longer under it? Why would you place Paul in a position of trying to put people BACK under the Law Covenant when that is the VERY thing he preached against?! Did Paul perhaps 'contradict' himself? Think, 'Pom, before you answer this one. Okay?
Man made law is man made tradition. If what you say is true then Paul is guilty of teaching man made laws and traditions as teachings of God
Then why would he TEACH to 'be in subjection to the superior authorities?' Do not such 'authorities' stand placed in their relative positions... BY God? Forget Paul, why then did my Lord say give to him 'who calls for honor, honor' and him 'who calls for tribute, tribute'? Did not my Lord pay the head tax? He was the SON OF GOD... what TAX did he owe? But... he paid it, and admonished his disciples to adhere to the law... of the land... as LONG as they did not 'overstep the commandments of God.'
and he is guilty of violating his own recorded counsel:
Col 2:8 See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.
This has absolutely nothing to do with 'civil' law, 'Pom. This is TRADITIONS and PHILOSOPHIES and PRINCIPLES of this world. If you can't tell the difference between these... and civil law... I am not sure I can help you 'see' it. Again, you can ask Paul. Indeed, he MIGHT answer you... and you MIGHT hear HIS 'voice', since you are HIS 'sheep'. John 10:1-6, 27
Wouldn't Paul then be taking the Christian congregation captive into man's laws and traditions and basic principles of this world? Yes he would.
No, he wasn't. He made a 'concession' for the safety of the congregation. The men would get the information and disseminate to the women... for THEIR safety... and that of the congregation. Christians were under a GREAT amount of persecution and many, particularly the Jews, would use ANY excuse to drag them before a court official... and even, perhaps, to the lions.
Did he by teaching the silence of woman in the "church" setting? No he didn't.
Answered above.
He would also be guilty of defying Christ himself by teaching Roman law and tradition as Christian teaching:
Civil law... is not 'tradition', 'Pom. And there is NOTHING wrong with tradition... so long as they do not OVERSTEP THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD. Paul was 'entrusted' with a people... and their safety was at risk. You must understand, the public meeting places were synagogues, which mainly permitted men to come in and speak PUBLICLY. THAT... was a 'tradition. Synagogues... were NOT established by God. The TEMPLE was. DUH!
And if that's the case, then Paul was leading the church astray into hypocrisy, totally condemned by Christ:
No, he wasn't. You've entirely missed the point of the matter, the basis, and have completely misunderstood what 'tradition' is. Making codes to ensure that buildings are safe is a civil law... one for the GOOD of the people. However, building them without a 13TH FLOOR... is 'tradition', which has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with safety... or people. It is just a 'tradition' among builders and architects. Learn the difference... and get the sense of it, 'Pom.
Jesus began to speak first to his disciples, saying: "Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy."If that's the case then EVERY SINGLE THING PAUL EVER WROTE is corrupted and contaminated
No, it's not. You simply misunderstood his intent, is all.
... and he condemns himself by his own words TWICE
I think that along with 'tradition', you might want to ask for an understanding of the word 'hypocrisy', as it is meant by my Lord. Paul will help you out, won't he?
How could Paul be guilty of all the above and yet be filled with the Holy Spirit, which is mentioned many times?
How did Peter, who was ALSO filled with the holy spirit, commit hypocrisy and bias? People 'err', 'Pom, as Paul did on MANY occasions, but not the one we're speaking of here. Again, it is YOU who misunderstand his intention, and have tried, like MOST men, to make it 'law'. The ONLY 'law' the Body of Christ is under, however, dear 'Pom... is the 'law'... of love.
If you say is true, then even God is guilty of letting one of his chosen ones teach basic principles and traditions and laws of men as teachings of God in the congregations. God then would have been guilty of letting the Bible be contaminated with the laws and traditions of men being desseminated to the congregations as HIS commands.
I would caution you to be careful, 'Pom. In your 'zeal' for Paul, and your desire to be 'right', you are attempting to misstate the FACTS of our discussion and interchange, and what I was permitted to share WITH you, by means of holy spirit. I have not faulted Paul, but explained, by means of that spirit as I received it from my Lord, what the TRUTH of the matter was... whethere you 'hear'... or you 'refrain'. But you are hearing what you wish, rather than what I was given to share... and thus, might place yourself in a position to 'sin with your mouth'. Again, I caution you.
Paul did not teach Roman law in the Christian congregation as you teach. You have been deceived.
You're kidding, right? Tell me, if Roman law was of no consequence, why then did my Lord even HAVE to see Pontius Pilate? Why then did Luke write both his gospel account AND the book of Acts to Theophilus, a Roman ruler who engaged Luke to do so? 'Pom, ALL true christians are subject to the laws of the land... insofar as they do not OVERSTEP the commandments of God. Women were not COMMANDED to speak; therefore, prohibiting them from doing so... for the safety of the congregation is not 'teaching Roman law in the christian congregation.' Surely, you are more intelligent than this...
Now you bring this deception to "Adam" as God's truth and want "him" to eat.
No, I spoke the truth, as I said... whether you hear... or you refrain.
Sorry, not THIS "Adam."
Indeed, and you have spoken rightly, for did you know that the name 'Adam', is actually the Hebrew word 'ad-ham' which means EARTHLING ... or 'physical' man? For my Father AND my Lord, too, are 'men'... but spiritual. With that said, I now say to YOU:
"For who among men knows the things of a man except the
SPIRIT of man that is in him? So, too, no one has come
to know the things of God, except the SPIRIT of God.
Now, WE received, NOT the spirit of the world, but the
spirit... WHICH IS FROM GOD, that WE might know the things
that have been kindly given US... BY God. These things
WE speak, NOT with words taught by HUMAN wisdom (such as
the misrendering of 'bane'), but with those taught by
SPIRIT, as WE combine spiritual... with SPIRITUAL.
"But... a PHYSICAL man does not RECEIVE the things of
the spirit of God, for they are FOOLISHNESS to him; and
he CANNOT get to know them, because they are EXAMINED...
SPIRITUALLY. However, the SPIRITUAL man examined indeed
ALL things, but he himself is NOT examined by ANY man.
For "who has come to know the mind of JAH, that he may
instruct Him?" But WE... do have the mind... of Christ."
With all of that said, dearest 'Pom, I again wish you peace... and the 'enlightenment' that comes from the TRUE Light, my Lord, the Son of God, JAHESHUA MISCHAJAH.
I am your servant... and a slave of Christ,
SJ
