Question:
Hiya Sandie, I have been to different site..like Google, besides the Talk City one I get from my provider. Google lists the threads. You click on the topic to get the listing of all the posts made under that topic. Sandie? Your posts show up there no problemo. However on my server I get one long scroll that covers everything posted. Each thread is laid out in order. On my server Sandie, whenever you post it begins a new thread and does not appear in the list under the originating post. This might be confusing for some folks. I wanted you to be aware of this. Damo http://community.webtv.net/damodara/MyStoryasIseeit
Response:
Hi Damo, damod…@webtv.net wrote: > Hiya Sandie, > I have been to different site..like Google, besides the Talk City one I > get from my provider. > Google lists the threads. You click on the topic to get the listing of > all the posts made under that topic. > Sandie? Your posts show up there no problemo. > However on my server I get one long scroll that covers everything > posted. Each thread is laid out in order. > On my server Sandie, whenever you post it begins a new thread and does > not appear in the list under the originating post. > This might be confusing for some folks. > I wanted you to be aware of this. > Damo
Yes, I know that… on my server, it usually shows up in the thread, though not usually under the post I’m replying to. Sometimes it shows up wherever. Sorry if that confuses anyone. I’ve had this address for a long time and there are other things about it that I like. But thanks for letting me know 
Sandie — For info about this service, see http://anon.twwells.com/help/ or e-mail: h…@anon.twwells.com — for an automatically returned help message ad…@anon.twwells.com – for the service’s administrator ano…@anon.twwells.com — anonymous mail to the administrator
Response:
Hi Brian, – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Oracle_AT_Delphi wrote: > As for the Jew/Gentile point, I think it was Gods will that the Gosple > should come to the gentiles, and I don’t think this is in disagreement with > what Jesus thought. What do you think the following parable means: > Mark 12:1-12 > He (Jesus) then began to speak to them in parables: "A man planted a > vineyard. He put a wall around it, dug a pit for the winepress and built a > watchtower. Then he rented the vineyard to some farmers and went away on a > journey. At harvest time he sent a servant to the tenants to collect from > them some of the fruit of the vineyard. But they seized him, beat him and > sent him away empty-handed. Then he sent another servant to them; they > struck this man on the head and treated him shamefully. He sent still > another, and that one they killed. He sent many others; some of them they > beat, others they killed. > "He had one left to send, a son, whom he loved. He sent him last of all, > saying, ‘They will respect my son.’ > "But the tenants said to one another, ‘This is the heir. Come, let’s kill > him, and the inheritance will be ours.’ So they took him and killed him, > and threw him out of the vineyard. > "What then will the owner of the vineyard do? He will come and kill those > tenants and give the vineyard to others. Haven’t you read this scripture: > " ‘The stone the builders rejected > has become the capstone[1] ; > the Lord has done this, > and it is marvelous in our eyes’[2] ?" > Then they looked for a way to arrest him because they knew he had spoken > the parable against them. But they were afraid of the crowd; so they left > him and went away.
This group of verses covers a lot of ground. It explains that God repeatedly sent his servants (the prophets) to Israel, even sending his own son whom they rejected and killed. The tenants represented the religious leaders, who spoke and acted for the nation when they rejected Jesus. They did not produce good "fruit" through their leadership, so God gave the "vineyard" to others. Israel had been promised the kingdom of God if they would be faithful. (Exodus 19:5, 6) Since they broke that covenant (Luke 13:34, 35), God opened the kingdom to people who "produce fruits" (Matt. 21:43) from all the nations (Revelation 5:9, 10). So the good news was eventually preached to everyone, including Jews and gentiles. What do you think? Sandie — For info about this service, see http://anon.twwells.com/help/ or e-mail: h…@anon.twwells.com — for an automatically returned help message ad…@anon.twwells.com – for the service’s administrator ano…@anon.twwells.com — anonymous mail to the administrator
Response:
ANON-Name: Oracle_AT_Delphi Sandie, – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->> My question, is who did God give the vineyard to? IMHO It meant giving it to >> the gentiles, but that is my broad interpreation. Did Jesus mean that God >> would give it to another Jewish sect? which would be contrary to my >> position, but is still a possible interpretation. Did God mean give it too a >> non-Jewish sect, the Roman Catholic church, the JW’s? >> Brian >God gave it to "a nation producing its fruits", the early Christian >congregation. At the time, they referred to their group members as belonging to >"The Way", as they called it. >They followed Jesus’ example and instructions, traveling great distances to >spread the "good news of the kingdom". In increasing their numbers, and in other >ways, such as healing people, they produced good "fruit". >To enable them to give the message quickly to people in many lands, God gave the >disciples supernatural power to speak other languages. The apostles and those >they traveled with even had the power to raise the dead. >All these miracles convinced many that God’s favor was now on this new nation, >which Paul referred to as the "Israel of God". Many of them had been born into >the Jewish nation, but joined followers of Christ from all nations/countries. >I don’t think God gave the vineyard to gentiles; Jews were prominently included >as individuals in the new Christian nation, with Jesus as leader. The apostles >were Jewish and were the core of the early Christian congregation. >While on earth, Jesus spoke repeatedly and at length about the kingdom of God. >It was the main topic of his teaching. He could say "the kingdom has arrived, is >near, is close at hand, is among you", etc. because he represented it, as the >future king. >Sandie
Good responce. My only problem with it, is where are the followers of "the way" today? Who are they? Surely the vineyard hasn’t been destroyed. If God gave the vineyard to the subsequent followers of Jesus after penticost, there should still be a group of followers of the way. Using this reasoning there is a good case the the RCC is the offspring of this group and has been entrusted with care of the vineyard. I’m too cynical to think that any one group or sect has the God given authority to represent God on earth, to the exclusion of all others. I do have faith in people who follow Christ or have a heart toward God, poeple who worship Him in truth and in love, this to me, is the Israel of God, and yes jews, amounst others I count in this group. The kingdom of God is intended for everyone, IMHO, all are free to accept it or reject it. Reguardless of race, creed or colour. The jewish/gentile dichotomy is a Jewish thing, though it is scripturally based. My point about giving the vineyard to others was to erase the dichotomy, but you have to believe the NT to see this. Brian — For info about this service, see http://anon.twwells.com/help/ or e-mail: h…@anon.twwells.com — for an automatically returned help message ad…@anon.twwells.com – for the service’s administrator ano…@anon.twwells.com — anonymous mail to the administrator
Response:
ANON-Name: Oracle_AT_Delphi – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->I wrote: >> As for the Jew/Gentile point, I think it was Gods will that the Gosple >> should come to the gentiles, and I don’t think this is in disagreement with >> what Jesus thought. What do you think the following parable means: >> Mark 12:1-12 >> He (Jesus) then began to speak to them in parables: "A man planted a >> vineyard. He put a wall around it, dug a pit for the winepress and built a >> watchtower. Then he rented the vineyard to some farmers and went away on a >> journey. At harvest time he sent a servant to the tenants to collect from >> them some of the fruit of the vineyard. But they seized him, beat him and >> sent him away empty-handed. Then he sent another servant to them; they >> struck this man on the head and treated him shamefully. He sent still >> another, and that one they killed. He sent many others; some of them they >> beat, others they killed. >> "He had one left to send, a son, whom he loved. He sent him last of all, >> saying, ‘They will respect my son.’ >> "But the tenants said to one another, ‘This is the heir. Come, let’s kill >> him, and the inheritance will be ours.’ So they took him and killed him, >> and threw him out of the vineyard. >> "What then will the owner of the vineyard do? He will come and kill those >> tenants and give the vineyard to others. Haven’t you read this scripture: >> " ‘The stone the builders rejected >> has become the capstone[1] ; >> the Lord has done this, >> and it is marvelous in our eyes’[2] ?" >> Then they looked for a way to arrest him because they knew he had spoken >> the parable against them. But they were afraid of the crowd; so they left >> him and went away. >This group of verses covers a lot of ground. It explains that God repeatedly >sent his servants (the prophets) to Israel, even sending his own son whom they >rejected and killed. The tenants represented the religious leaders, who spoke >and acted for the nation when they rejected Jesus. They did not produce good >"fruit" through their leadership, so God gave the "vineyard" to others.
I agree that that is the general gist of the parable. >Israel had been promised the kingdom of God if they would be faithful. (Exodus >19:5, 6) Since they broke that covenant (Luke 13:34, 35), God opened the kingdom >to people who "produce fruits" (Matt. 21:43) from all the nations (Revelation >5:9, 10). So the good news was eventually preached to everyone, including Jews >and gentiles. >What do you think?
My question, is who did God give the vineyard to? IMHO It meant giving it to the gentiles, but that is my broad interpreation. Did Jesus mean that God would give it to another Jewish sect? which would be contrary to my position, but is still a possible interpretation. Did God mean give it too a non-Jewish sect, the Roman Catholic church, the JW’s? Brian — For info about this service, see http://anon.twwells.com/help/ or e-mail: h…@anon.twwells.com — for an automatically returned help message ad…@anon.twwells.com – for the service’s administrator ano…@anon.twwells.com — anonymous mail to the administrator
Response:
Hi Brian, spoiler, warning, scripture discussion ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! Oracle_AT_Delphi wrote: > My question, is who did God give the vineyard to? IMHO It meant giving it to > the gentiles, but that is my broad interpreation. Did Jesus mean that God > would give it to another Jewish sect? which would be contrary to my > position, but is still a possible interpretation. Did God mean give it too a > non-Jewish sect, the Roman Catholic church, the JW’s? > Brian
God gave it to "a nation producing its fruits", the early Christian congregation. At the time, they referred to their group members as belonging to "The Way", as they called it. They followed Jesus’ example and instructions, traveling great distances to spread the "good news of the kingdom". In increasing their numbers, and in other ways, such as healing people, they produced good "fruit". To enable them to give the message quickly to people in many lands, God gave the disciples supernatural power to speak other languages. The apostles and those they traveled with even had the power to raise the dead. All these miracles convinced many that God’s favor was now on this new nation, which Paul referred to as the "Israel of God". Many of them had been born into the Jewish nation, but joined followers of Christ from all nations/countries. I don’t think God gave the vineyard to gentiles; Jews were prominently included as individuals in the new Christian nation, with Jesus as leader. The apostles were Jewish and were the core of the early Christian congregation. While on earth, Jesus spoke repeatedly and at length about the kingdom of God. It was the main topic of his teaching. He could say "the kingdom has arrived, is near, is close at hand, is among you", etc. because he represented it, as the future king. Sandie — For info about this service, see http://anon.twwells.com/help/ or e-mail: h…@anon.twwells.com — for an automatically returned help message ad…@anon.twwells.com – for the service’s administrator ano…@anon.twwells.com — anonymous mail to the administrator
Response:
Hi Damo, spoiler, warning… God, Christ, scriptures ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! damod…@webtv.net wrote: > Oh…gotta clear up a point. > The rest of the apostles felt a person had to become a jew first and > then accept Christ.
They did for a while, but they finally got that straightened out, as Acts chapter 15 explains. > I’ve always felt that the real juice of the matter is that a person > first has to believe in God before the Christ story holds up. > To believe in Christ, I have always felt, implies a pre-exsisting belief > in God.
I agree. > This was why the idea of making people jews before making them > Christians was seen to be important to the jewish apostles.
For one thing, yes… under the Law, gentiles had to come to know the true God and worship as the Jews did, so some of the apostles reasoned circumcision would be necessary with Christianity, too. But after Christ died, the Law became obsolete. (Hebrews 8:6-13) Their heritage was important, though. God had revealed himself to the Jews first… they were his chosen people, and Jesus came through that bloodline. Jews were the first Christians; Jesus was their promised Messiah. He fulfilled the Law covenant with his sacrifice as the Lamb of God. The Jews were the only ones who could *really* understand the full importance of his message, and the rest of the world was to receive the message through them. (Yet Israel as a nation didn’t recognize Jesus as the Messiah, and that was prophesied, too.) But the individuals who did accept him helped to change the world. Jesus came to his own people first. After Jesus’ death, his disciples preached to only the Jews for a set/limited period of time. Eventually, the message was given to the gentiles/people of the nations. After Cornelius (a Roman army officer) received God’s holy spirit, Peter realized that God was accepting people from all nations, so he let the other disciples know, and they all started sharing the good news with gentiles as well as Jews. Acts 10 has that account. > But Paul was > willing to accept most any…Mitra and other cults at the time also > believed in the "One God" concept and so were easy converts.
Yes, Paul was familiar with the various gods, and was a good communicator. And by then, AFAIK, the disciples were preaching to the gentiles. I especially like Paul’s speech in Athens where he mentions their statues/altars inscribed "To An Unknown God"… he said "well, the God whom I proclaim is in fact the one whom you already worship without knowing it." His mention of resurrection from the dead got quite a mixed reaction. (Acts 17:22-31) > Personally…..I can’t understand how someone can "accept Jesus" unless > they have already accepted God as an exsistant circumstance.
Good point. > I believe the apostles felt the same way.
Yes. Many of the gentiles knew only of their own gods; the apostles had to introduce God to them, so that they could understand how Jesus fit into the picture as God’s son and the Messiah. Out of context, the concept of Jesus’ role, his ransom sacrifice etc., makes little sense and alienates many from Christianity. So it’s important for Christians to also be familiar with the Hebrew scriptures. Jesus quoted them often… he knew them by heart. Oh, yeah, of course he would… he *is* the "Word of God" In the NT, Paul’s letter to the Hebrews is very helpful in explaining the law covenant and its parallels, symbolism and fulfillment in Jesus. > And Paul was, indeed, a wild card at the time of emerging Christianity. > I got it all wrong…right? > Damo
No. That is, I think you’re making alot of sense, Damo. Sandie — For info about this service, see http://anon.twwells.com/help/ or e-mail: h…@anon.twwells.com — for an automatically returned help message ad…@anon.twwells.com – for the service’s administrator ano…@anon.twwells.com — anonymous mail to the administrator
Response:
Hi Michelle, ending wrote: > "Sandie" <anon-25…@anon.twwells.com> wrote in message > news:aa6n6u$1omj$1@server.junkproof.net… > > I agree with your own understanding of scripture, that eternal life is a > > gift from God, and we can’t attain it ourselves. We can only accept the > > gift with gratitude and love for the God who gave it, following Christ’s > > example. > What about starving children in Africa that don’t "know" about Christ? Or > Aborigines way out in the bush?
No one can be held accountable for what they don’t know. Our concept of justice came from somewhere… IMHO the same one who created it also can fulfill that justice. The entire inhabited earth is supposed to get the message before the end… if someone did not, then I’m sure God would do the right thing. > They go to hell????
No. Hell is the grave. We all go there eventually. It’s just unconsciousness, not torment. But hell eventually will be gone, along with death. > Why does corrupt, > greedy, Western Civilization think that if they believe in Jesus they will > go to heaven and shove this doctrine down the rest of the world’s throats?
Jesus doesn’t approve of that behavior, IMHO. > God can be found in the sun and the stars and the trees. God is everywhere. > Just because you cannot read a book and don’t know about Jesus does not > necessarily mean you cannot get to heaven. > Pisses me off the way the corrupt, greedy, weak, feeble minded Western World > shove Religion and Jesus down the throats of people that don’t NEED Jesus. > Some people are naturally righteous and kind and loving, they don’t need to > learn it from a BOOK. > If Western Civilization has to be TAUGHT about these things via the example > of Jesus then pity them.
I understand your sentiments. We all would benefit by living closer to the earth. That is exactly what God wants too, and he’ll make it happen. Miss you much… Sandie "You are the result of the love of thousands of souls." — For info about this service, see http://anon.twwells.com/help/ or e-mail: h…@anon.twwells.com — for an automatically returned help message ad…@anon.twwells.com – for the service’s administrator ano…@anon.twwells.com — anonymous mail to the administrator
Response:
"Berty" <adamskiraspu…@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b0c38c05.0204260414.252b103f@posting.google.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I go through stages. Sometimes I think it is possible > that he could be real and at times i think it is all > nonsense. You caught me at a time when I was in the > God doesn’t exist mood. On the other hand believing > in God is really for free, costs nothing and following > his rules aren’t too difficult. So why not give him > the benefit of the doubt? I do envy your believe > that he is real to you though. I am more sceptical > when I look at the world arround me. But I think it > is better to be sceptical of the love of God than > sceptical of the love of humans. I knew a person > who was sceptical of human love and didn’t wanted > to engage a relationship because of that, but on the > other hand was a true believer of the love of God. > I think that is really so sad, no love on earth and > perhaps no love at all after death too.
There is so much love after death it is not true. And when you understand it, you’ll realize it’s been here all along. Michelle
Response:
"Arnhild Alm?" <aialm…@online.no> wrote in message <news:lqUw8.3980$ph2.83290@news4.ulv.nextra.no>… > I believe in God, he is real to me. > "Berty" <adamskiraspu…@yahoo.com> skrev i melding > news:b0c38c05.0204220051.6c8bb55@posting.google.com… > > "Arnhild Alm?" <aialm…@online.no> wrote in message > <news:%lkv8.1435$ph2.32190@news4.ulv.nextra.no>… > > > God is love > > This is also a contradictio in terms. > > A being that doesn’t exist, cannot have emotions. > > Berty
I go through stages. Sometimes I think it is possible that he could be real and at times i think it is all nonsense. You caught me at a time when I was in the God doesn’t exist mood. On the other hand believing in God is really for free, costs nothing and following his rules aren’t too difficult. So why not give him the benefit of the doubt? I do envy your believe that he is real to you though. I am more sceptical when I look at the world arround me. But I think it is better to be sceptical of the love of God than sceptical of the love of humans. I knew a person who was sceptical of human love and didn’t wanted to engage a relationship because of that, but on the other hand was a true believer of the love of God. I think that is really so sad, no love on earth and perhaps no love at all after death too. Berty
Response:
On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 19:50:19 GMT, "Arnhild Alm
If you like this post and would like to receive updates from this blog, please subscribe our feed.