Posts by JosephMalik

10

Royal Icing recipe required for wedding cake......and advice etc HELP!!!!!!

by Gill in

jw
friends

i have recently volunteered to make a wedding cake!

i have not made one since i was about 15.....hence, a long time ago!

but i remember being particularly good at the icing bit.

JosephMalik

Gill,

You will find several versions here. Just search for Royal Icing.

http://www.foodnetwork.com/

Joseph

11

Matt 5:17-20. What does it mean to be called least in the kingdom?

by Steve J in

hi folks,.

as this seems to be the only place to get my questions answered, (and i've got lots of them) i thought i'd give this one a try.. when speaking about the commandments at matthew 5:17-20 jesus said any who break one of the least of these and teaches others to that effect would be called least in the kingdom of the heavens.

does it mean there is still hope for such ones, as being considered least would suggest to me that you would still be remembered.. also, at 1 corinthinas 6:9 where the apostle paul says fornicators and adulterers, (those who break the commandments) will not inherit the kingdom is he taking a harder line than jesus and in effect contradicting him?.

JosephMalik

How though do we now view the letters of Peter, James and John? Do they have any place in the Scriptures if they are the work of apostates and what about The Revelation, what are we to make of that?

Steve J,

Apostasy does not have to be a permanent condition. We can repent somewhere during it and try to correct our errors. That is what James did. His letter was a correction from this apostasy as he finally threw out his support for the Law covenant by no longer keeping the Law and reduced his new found views to this: 9 But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors. 10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. 11 For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty. There were other things in it as well showing that James no longer supported his views on keeping the Law for salvation. This is why he wrote his letter to the Jews that supported his older views. 1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting. Not that it mattered much by then for Jews or Gentiles. The book of Hebrews settled the matter once and for all and the best that James could hope for is to help Jews everywhere that were still following the views he once supported at Jerusalem. So much for the WT governing body. But at least James who’s policies nearly killed Paul now turned away from this apostasy and we can see it in his letter. Pretty tough to do for such a proud man.

Peter was less of a problem but the scriptures show that he was not corrected when Paul rebuked him at Antioch. Peter ran down to Jerusalem for support and did not change his views until much later when Paul finally visited them at Acts 15 (Gal 2:1-10) to review the matter the first time. Peter then found himself running into the same problems that Paul did and said: 2 Pet 3: 9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. He focused on the death of Christ as an assurance and Godliness or good conduct. He also supported Paul in this effort and said: 2 Pet 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. So the matter was not a minor one. Twisting the scriptures is destructive. At least their Jewish views were based upon truth and did serve this purpose for a long time. The twisting that the WT and others do never was truth and often kills those supporting it. Their blood and party card views are just a few examples of this.

John really took notice of the damage all this caused the faith and wrote about love and much deeper Christian views than the others. But John now came down pretty hard on apostasy also. He saw first hand the damage it did over a long period of time. So John said of such ones: 1 John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us. 20 But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things. And there are many such examples in his letters. This one on apostasy pertains to present WT views when John said: 1Jo 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. And again: 2Jo 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. Why? Because even John did not believe at first and made this mistake himself as did the rest of the apostles. Such wrong views continued to this day however inspite of this revelation. This became an issue only after His death and resurrection. And since Christ promised to return the same way he went up (in the flesh) it makes all of the WT and their teachings apostate. All their invisible and spiritual rantings become bogus apostate thoughts with millions victimized by them. John came around early and was blessed as a result resulting in his letters and the Revelation. That is what I make of it.

Joseph

P.S. For some time now I have thought Paul was the apostate, because he was so scathing of the Jerusalem Elders and apostles, in scriptures such as Gal 2:1-9 & Phil 3:2-4.

And they deserved it. But Paul as the new man on the block was also highly respectful of them and unwittingly let them get away with their apostasy for a long time. But we also see him mature and excell in the faith. Like many of us today who find ourselves in this situation. Some simply cannot bring themselves to believe that they are being used and abused by those teaching them who they have come to respect.

JM

11

Matt 5:17-20. What does it mean to be called least in the kingdom?

by Steve J in

hi folks,.

as this seems to be the only place to get my questions answered, (and i've got lots of them) i thought i'd give this one a try.. when speaking about the commandments at matthew 5:17-20 jesus said any who break one of the least of these and teaches others to that effect would be called least in the kingdom of the heavens.

does it mean there is still hope for such ones, as being considered least would suggest to me that you would still be remembered.. also, at 1 corinthinas 6:9 where the apostle paul says fornicators and adulterers, (those who break the commandments) will not inherit the kingdom is he taking a harder line than jesus and in effect contradicting him?.

JosephMalik

At Galatians 5:2-4 Paul also says; "If you become circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you."

Why then as recorded at Acts 16: 1-3 did Paul circumcise the Gentile Timothy himself?

Steve J,

For the same reason that he went into the temple to take the Nazarite vows forced upon him by James in Jerusalem. It was done to overcome the prejudice that they had for someone not circumcised or keeping the Law. It was done to buy the time needed to reason with them. And as you have reasoned correctly it did compromise Paul’s message and this did not work out well for him in Jerusalem. But as you know the Bible records both the good and the bad attempts at advancing the faith and such compromise was not Paul’s best work also visible by his acceptance of their compromising letter some fourteen years earlier. That this was not Paul’s policy or religious view however is revealed at: Ga 2:3 But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised: It was not done to comply with any religious requirement in mind as such Jews required. And as we can see it was not always successful in achieving the desired result. Luke a witness and companion of Paul therefore revealed all the dirt that resulted and caused him no end of problems so that we could avoid the same outcomes and this is why he came to record the apostasy that existed in Jerusalem with James, John, Peter and the thousands in Jerusalem that included other apostles as well along with their decisions. Luke made it clear why our Lord picked Paul instead of one of such others in Jerusalem to be His apostle. This personal selection in effect was a rejection of Matthias who was appointed without His approval by a supposed biblical method. This is how things were them and we can now see how unapproved men can inject themselves into and dominate the faith to its detriment if we remain asleep to these realities.

Joseph

11

Matt 5:17-20. What does it mean to be called least in the kingdom?

by Steve J in

hi folks,.

as this seems to be the only place to get my questions answered, (and i've got lots of them) i thought i'd give this one a try.. when speaking about the commandments at matthew 5:17-20 jesus said any who break one of the least of these and teaches others to that effect would be called least in the kingdom of the heavens.

does it mean there is still hope for such ones, as being considered least would suggest to me that you would still be remembered.. also, at 1 corinthinas 6:9 where the apostle paul says fornicators and adulterers, (those who break the commandments) will not inherit the kingdom is he taking a harder line than jesus and in effect contradicting him?.

JosephMalik

However, circumcision predates the law, as it was a vital part of the Abramic Covenant,

Steve,

Yes, but that is not what was meant by its use. It was the most physical and visible aspect of keeping the Law and therefore served to exemplify the idea of keeping all of the Law for salvation in a way they could all see. Thus we still found Christian Jews worshipping in the synagogues long after our Lord's sacrifice observing it as well. This is where Paul found them and the reason why he went to them. And not just Jews mind you, but Christian Jews like James, John and Peter at least for a time, thousands of them. Thus James said to Paul: Acts 21:20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law: 21 And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs. Paul was doing that of course so was he wrong? No! The thousands of brothers in Jerusalem were wrong and were still doing that so now Paul had to fight for his life to survive and reason with them again. Before this could happen they did this to him: 23 Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them; 24 Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law. 25 As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication. That was James and the others speaking around fourteen years after the problem was supposedly already resolved and now Paul was caught in a trap threatened by such thousands which nearly cost him his life. Romans saved him not James and the others. Circumcision abbreviated this concept of keeping the Law and this struggle was detailed in much of Paul's letters. Its use by then had nothing to do with health benefits. The WT misses the point as do many others.

Joseph

11

Matt 5:17-20. What does it mean to be called least in the kingdom?

by Steve J in

hi folks,.

as this seems to be the only place to get my questions answered, (and i've got lots of them) i thought i'd give this one a try.. when speaking about the commandments at matthew 5:17-20 jesus said any who break one of the least of these and teaches others to that effect would be called least in the kingdom of the heavens.

does it mean there is still hope for such ones, as being considered least would suggest to me that you would still be remembered.. also, at 1 corinthinas 6:9 where the apostle paul says fornicators and adulterers, (those who break the commandments) will not inherit the kingdom is he taking a harder line than jesus and in effect contradicting him?.

JosephMalik

As this seems to be the only place to get my questions answered, (and I've got lots of them) I thought I'd give this one a try.

When speaking about the commandments at Matthew 5:17-20 Jesus said any who break one of the least of these and teaches others to that effect would be called least in the kingdom of the heavens. What did he mean by least?

Steve J,

It is not just the verses you refer to but the entire series being discussed that set the context for "least" and answers your question. The verses you used put it this way: 18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

The kingdom of heaven is also called the kingdom of God by others and means the same thing. What makes this confusing is the word "least." It was used another way in Mt 11:11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he. And in Lu 7:28 For I say unto you, Among those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist: but he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.

So keep the word "least" in the context in which it is being used. There are some simple rules to getting into the kingdom but not necessarily the same ones at the same time. And the word "lease" is not being derived from the same Greek word in these texts. We do not always get such detail from a translation. So what then is being said?

In Matt 5:19 we are taught that breaking the law and teaching others to break the Law is destructive enough to prevent entering the kingdom. This makes us a goat. It is like a sin against the holy spirit. The WT does this with their doctrines on the humanity and deity of Christ, partaking, blood the GB, disfellowshipping and others. They and their followers are condemning themselves without ever noticing it and their conduct reflects that as well. They should have stuck to the scriptures and not depended on someone else. Entering the kingdom means that we must be found as a sheep, wheat or holy ones (the seed of Eve) at the time of His coming in the clouds. Otherwise we will be found to be a goat, weed, condemned, sinful (the seed of the serpent) and therefore destroyed in the symbolic fire. This is the context of "least" here.

In Matt 11 and Luke we have another "least" to describe this kingdom and who will inherit it. Here we learn that anyone who makes it good or bad is greater than John. How so? Those not saints, goats, weeds or condemned but still decent human beings and still found in the book of life at such a time who enter into this kingdom will be immortal human beings. This is because there is only one kind of resurrection by Christ and a prescribed time for it during this kingdom so everyone that enters into this Kingdom as a saint, a sheep, or wheat will be immortal and greater than John. But not everyone that enters this kingdom will be justified the way the holy ones already are over which the second death has no authority. So not all will be "great" as such Saints but some will be "least" and will need more time and instructions to get to this level and pass the final test awaiting them. They have the opportunity to wash their robes in the blood of the Lamb at this time, which is something the saints have already done. They are identified as the Nations that are also found in this kingdom along with the saints who minister to them. And we will find Christians here that thought they were faithful slaves but when examined were cast out as evil slaves and yet decent enough to be resurrected or changed like the thief that died with our Lord and enter this kingdom and given this same opportunity. Paul is not taking a harder line but simply adds a warning as to what our conduct should be and details further what we should be as human beings to be found as a sheep. And only the Judge will know for sure who is who at this time so every possibility cannot be considered here. Anyway this is my take on it Steve.

Joseph

14

Book of Matthew

by bite me in

here's a question that came up in a bible study... why would matthew include a lineage at the very begining of his book?.

.

JosephMalik

Bite Me,

It is all about the authority that can be imputed to Jesus at birth. Matthew traced the seed back to Abraham and his people. Luke traced the lineage another way back to Adam and the human race. This was better as it gave this Son authority over more people than Matthew but still fell short as to the reason that Jesus could offer himself for the human race. Even as the stepfather Joseph’s acceptance of Mary’s Son bestowed his approval and lineage upon Him. Therefore this Jesus could take on authority such as Abraham. David or any that the others mentioned. John resolved this problem by tracing the lineage back to the Word that created the human race in the beginning. You should be able to see by the questions posed in this thread that this would some day become an issue and need to be resolved. And this is why John also called the Word God since in keeping with the meaning of this term the Word did have real authority over the entire human race including Adam.

Joseph

14

Book of Matthew

by bite me in

here's a question that came up in a bible study... why would matthew include a lineage at the very begining of his book?.

.

JosephMalik

the lineage pretends that Jersus is of david, which of course cannot be as his father was not human according to the myth and his mother was a levite sister of elizabeth thedreamer, Good point. This could be why John went so far back. Jesus was the Father of the entire human race, Adam included. So an argument like this one would not make any difference. He had the qualifications for redeeming it regardless. Joseph

14

Book of Matthew

by bite me in

here's a question that came up in a bible study... why would matthew include a lineage at the very begining of his book?.

.

JosephMalik

yknot,

Even better John provided the lineage going further back than Adam as it was missing in the other accounts. You know the one that says: 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 The same was in the beginning with God. . .10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. 11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not. This lineage was used to introduce Jesus when He was still known as the Word. John did fills like this and they are very visible in his Gospel account.

Joseph

40

I know ur gonna hate this but i gotta ask.

by XOCO in

as some of u may know i'm still currently a j-dubbie and i'm enrolled in the tms and i'm starting to prepare for my talk in dec.17.

but my question is .

how has the transfiguration vision been fulfilled?

JosephMalik

How has the transfiguration vision been fulfilled?

Xoco,

The transfiguration account describes a transfiguration first and then a vision. Mt 17:2 There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light. We know what happened to Moses when just his face was radiant. I take it that this was the time when our Lord was given the immortality that Adam would have attained if he had eaten from the tree of life. That it was no normal event which we can simply dismiss is easily shown by: Mt 17:5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him. It explains how our Lord could now give immorality to the human race for which He would sacrifice Himself. 2Ti 1:10 But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel: In this way not simply a human life but an immortal human life documented in the text was offered for us thus making everlasting life possible once again. 2Pet 1:16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount. This glory which the Father also had (1 Tim. 1:17) is the immortality now offered to all other humans (1 Tim 6:16) because of this sacrifice. This is my take on it.

Joseph

9

The Two Bibles

by ProdigalSon in

[we are;] for we are not peddlers of the word of god as many men are, but as out of sincerity, yes, as sent from god, under gods view, in company with christ, we are speaking.

2 corinthians 2:17, new world translation of the holy scriptures.

heres what was translated as peddlers: kapeleuo from kapelos (a huckster); to retail, that is, (by implication) to adulterate (figuratively): - corrupt.

JosephMalik

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2Pe 3:16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

Zack

All scripture is inspired, but not every word found in scripture bears the same weight. Some are essential for salvation, while others for reproof, for correction, for instruction and such. The overall content and purpose is inspired but not each word. If this was not so then we could never show what the falsehood was. So Paul is now breaking it down for us. For example the letter that the Corinthians wrote to Paul was not inspired and while Paul used the information contained in it and corrects it, their words and thoughts derived from their letter should not have been taken as inspired. Peter supported Paul’s letters as part of the sacred text but all this still applies as Peter shows us that his texts were abused even then. Misuse of such texts existed then as it does today with those that still follow the Corinthians and their doctrinal views found in Paul’s letters. It is not a small matter but as Peter stated they do this to their own destruction. You may be aware that the WT still follows what the Corinthians taught. And today we must also compensate for error that has crept in by copyists, deterioration, deliberate tampering and translation as well. All this is manageable if we use care when we study it.

Joseph