Posts Tagged ‘David’

I’m so tired of lemmings like Franklin Graham who I consider a fraud, him and his cowardly pops. They’re always arguing about sin. what is sin? Show from your bible one scripture that defines sin…I’ll wait…still waiting. Since most won’t tell you or can’t tell you, I will. 1Jn3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. The second question, what is the law; his word. The 913 presets no one teaches and for good reason. You can begin to see the utter ridiculousness this is. What bothers me, Franklin comments on a movie he hasn’t seen. He trivializes the life of a young man name Chiron who has to deal with a drug addicted Mother and him being confused about why kids are picking on him calling him a faggot at around the age of 7.  In England a cigarette is known as a faggot(just saying). He moves on up through to his middle years to adult hood. As an adult he gets into the trap game(selling drugs) as transforming his body and mind to be strong in order to never be weak again. The story is somewhat of a true story, the parts about his mother and gayness. Blacks represent a certain sphere of gay men, we can’t hide from it. What I don’t understand is the weapon of the bible that is so regularly chosen to prove a point. Watch Moonlight for what it is, a complicated love story of people trying to figure out life and its meaning an how to maneuver and guard themselves.

We have confusing ideas about sex and what sex is. We have preferences, mine happens to be with a woman. I refuse to use ideas of not having a women to populate with. If you look to the bible and the gospel according to Paul, sex wasn’t for enjoyment, it was for the purpose of giving birth and populating. Again society has to be looked at for it dictates the morals, not the bible. The bible through high minded thinking can be a good thing. However it can’t be made to be superior to the people who don’t believe in it. Many people believe different things in many ways. If you look at it carefully, don’t all the Abrahamic religions believe pretty much the same thing? Also look at all other religions they have moral codes as well. Sorry but the bible can’t be looked to for sex, a first century standard compared to a twenty first century standard. Even if we look at their standard for homoeroticism , it is viewed differently. It was about dominance. When I say it was about dominance I’m speaking of sexual conquest either by the female or male. Sex within that culture was myopic centered. It was frowned upon to be weak. The dominate person has to always be on top. When it comes to women being viewed in a certain light. The fullness of that is for another day. Theirs a lot of inconsistencies where that is involved.

Within the bible people chose what they want to believe. As I’ve said in the past “people derive our values form scripture but live by the values they insert.” This is not an odd statement. People chose the lives they want to live and justify it by their personal convictions. They put personal interpolations instead of following the holy writ. Stop using the guise of the bible, we have no idea how/why people are the way they are. I accept you as you are and what you do in your bedroom is your private business, nothing more. In writing this only the surface is being scratched in which we can have a proper conversation. These differences will be debated till the sun turns cold. Allow me this caveat, differing views are a must to have proper dialogue, same with interracial relationships. All the same, just a different con.

We can’t contend without the homoerotic story of David and Jonathan. This story proves problematic, especially within the looking on ones nakedness. Scholars debate wether the story is a homoerotic act or not. All I will say is, if it took place in todays context it would be considered a relationship between two men. Except the story takes place during a different time when sexuality is viewed differently. Read 1Sam chapters 18, 19, 20 for yourself. I’ll leave with this to show my meaning of comparing something that was written for a different time for a different group, think on it and ponder it. 2Sam1:26 I grieve for you, Jonathan my brother; you were very dear to me. Your love for me was wonderful, more wonderful than that of women.

Written/Posted by John the Revelator

davidandGoliathmovie-HisIt’s amazing how we come across a topic. I was simply reading an article that crossed referenced another site, in doing so I came across a movie that will be released in 2015 aptly entitled “David and Goliath”, which is currently being filmed in Morocco.  My personal grievance if you can call it that, is how Christians get upset with a movie like Noah, which they claim got it wrong by not sticking to the script. How outraged are they going to be by this movie not sticking to the script. In my estimation probably not at all. Before I continue, I simply want to say this outright. This is a great story that has great symbolism. The first five books of the bible known as the Pentateuch can not be proven. This is all faith based. Please read this quote before you continue.

“There was a third white destroyer: a missionary who wanted to replace all knowledge of our way with fables even our children laughed at then. We told the white missionary we had such fables too, but kept them for the entertainment of those yet growing up – fables of gods and devils and a supreme being. We told him we knew soft minds needed such illusions, but that when any mind grew among us to adulthood it grew beyond these fables and came to understand that there is indeed a great force in the world, a force spiritual and able to shape the physical universe, but that that force is not something cut off, not something separate from ourselves.It is an energy in us, strongest in our working, breathing, thinking together as one people; weakest when we are scattered, confused, broken into individual, unconnected fragments”. – (Ayi Kwei Armah, quoted in Chapter 2, Religion and Ideology, “Yurugu: An African-Centered Critique of European Cultural Thought and Behaviour”, Marimab Ani, 1996, Africa World Press).

The accuracy of the bible has/is always been sketchy, we are finding more information daily that proves the validity of it’s stories. The first discrepancy we have is Goliath height. He would have been around 6 and half feet tall. This is according which story you choose to use.  Others have said he was between 9 and 10 feet tall. Let us now dig into the bible. Before I continue, a question must be asked. Who wrote the bible? If it was God then he did a bad job of preserving it. You have to bend yourselves into a pretzel simply for it to make sense or you can take the easy way out like most do and believe it by faith.

This the story: 41 And the Philistine came on and drew near to David, with his shield-bearer in front of him. 42 And when the Philistine looked, and saw David, he disdained him; for he was but a youth, ruddy and comely in appearance. 43 And the Philistine said to David, “Am I a dog, that you come to me with sticks?” And the Philistine cursed David by his gods. 44 The Philistine said to David, “Come to me, and I will give your flesh to the birds of the air and to the beasts of the field.” 45 Then David said to the Philistine, “You come to me with a sword and with a spear and with a javelin; but I come to you in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have defied. 46 This day the Lord will deliver you into my hand, and I will strike you down, and cut off your head; and I will give the dead bodies of the host of the Philistines this day to the birds of the air and to the wild beasts of the earth; that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel, 47 and that all this assembly may know that the Lord saves not with sword and spear; for the battle is the Lord’s and he will give you into our hand.”

48 When the Philistine arose and came and drew near to meet David, David ran quickly toward the battle line to meet the Philistine. 49 And David put his hand in his bag and took out a stone, and slung it, and struck the Philistine on his forehead; the stone sank into his forehead, and he fell on his face to the ground.

50 So David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and with a stone, and struck the Philistine, and killed him; there was no sword in the hand of David. 51 Then David ran and stood over the Philistine, and took his sword and drew it out of its sheath, and killed him, and cut off his head with it. When the Philistines saw that their champion was dead, they fled.

1. David did (1 Samuel 17:50) – “Thus David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and a stone, and he struck the Philistine and killed him; but there was no sword in David’s hand.”

2. Elhanan did (2 Sam. 21:19)- “And there was war with the Philistines again at Gob, and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam.”

3. Elhanan killed Lahmi, Goliath brother. (1 Chronicles 20:5) says, “And there was war with the Philistines again, and Elhanan the son of Jair killed Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam.” This is NOT the correct answer; that Elhanan killed Goliath’s brother.

You can’t have 3 versions of the same story. We can look at other clues as to it wasn’t David who slayed Goliath. Simply read 1Sam 17.

PROBLEMS WITH THE STORY

 

1. Someone else other than David killed Goliath

2. David killed and unarmed man. David allied himself with the philistines while they made war with Saul

3. The name Goliath is used twice in the story, was later added to the story

4. Much of the story of David and Goliath is missing from most of the texts. For further reading check out “The Bible in History by Dr. Bruce Metzger Pg 96-107. These errors are more likely attributed to the scribes. In what Dr. Metzger calls Unintentional changes, errors, faulty eyesight, faulty hearing, of the mind, of judgement, intentional changes, as well as many more.

5. If David found favor in Sauls sight. After David killed Goliath he brought the head of Goliath to Jerusalem 1Sam 17:54. During this time Jerusalem didn’t come into the hands of the Israelite’s until David was King.

6. The version crediting Elhanan, David was already King. Elhanan was a member of Davids elite fighting force(Davids mighty men or the Gibborim).

As I mentined copyist error, KJV surely bares this out. KJV   19 And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim, a Beth-lehemite, slew the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam. RSV 19 And there was again war with the Philistines at Gob; and Elha′nan the son of Ja′are-or′egim, the Bethlehemite, slew Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam. The KJV version, true to form mistranslate “slew the brother Goliath the Gittite”, should read, “Elhanan slew Goliath, not his brother”! “Again” depends on who are you asking. When we look at 1Chron 20:5 the narrative is Jesus will come from the line/linage of David.

Isaiah 11:10 (Tanakh) Isaiah 11:10 (NLT) John 7:42 (NLT)
10 In that day the stock of Jesse that has remained standing shall become a standard to peoples–Nations shall seek His counsel andhis abode shall be honored. 10 In that day the heir to David’s throne
will be a banner of salvation to all the world.  The nations will rally to him,
and the land where he lives will be a glorious place.
42 “For the Scriptures clearly state the  Messiah will be born of the royal line of David, in Bethlehem, the village where King David was born.”

1Chron was written centruries after the verse in 2Sam 21:17, so we wonder how maybe the translation was changed. Around 1 Sam 17:55 this verse is giving credence to David. If David was the killer Saul would have known David was already a favorite in the royal court 1 Sam 16:21-22

CONCLUSION

 As I embarked on this study I didn’t realize the of information written about this particular topic was so vast. The main conclusion or the truth is usually defined by the person telling the story. In reading one of the my commentary’s, I realized chap 21 from 2 Sam is/was completely omitted. I will end this by saying this. The Old Testament is a fairy tale, most likely adapted by English translators. The story of “The Philistine from Gath vs David”, reads like it was copied from Thor throwing A hammer at Hrungnir and striking him in the forehead. In simply dealing with this one story, they’re to many problems that present themselves, from the many versions about the height also who killed the giant. People of faith generally excuss this one or two ways. One, they may say well you’re not a believer or they hit you with the super spiritual. It doesn’t matter cause I know Jesus. That fine and all, but you do have to give and answer to those who may ask. Any who, this is a faith based issue. It doesn’t matter if it’s grounded in truth or fallacy.  Lastly, I heard an interview with the writer/directory. He says he wants to stay to the script, you know, literal translation. That will be difficult since you do not have the original (manu-script).

Written by John the Revelator

2361764570_2d37a74d5a_o

In my ongoing series kicking over sacred cows I wanted to tackle the very controversial subject; was Jesus(Yashua) black. I could simply say “NO” and that would be it. We have to look at why. In dealing with this subject it opens up other unanswered questions. The first thing that comes to mind is King David.

From the scholarly work “The Real Jesus” by Garner Ted Armstrong Pg 54 “Jesus could have been either blond, redheaded, or dark-headed. There is no way to really tell. If we may speculate, it may be reasonable to postulate that Jesus could have looked somewhat like his physical ancestor, David. There is evidence that David was “ruddy” in complexion, meaning he was fair skinned, and probably red haired. Jesus was from David’s own lineage, and that David was in fact a type of Jesus Christ, if there is any such “type and anti-type,” perhaps Jesus could also have been fair and red haired (freckle-faced also?).”

The second issue is, in most pictures we always see a long haired Jesus. The Apostle Paul forbade long hair on a man (1 Cor 11:14). In (Rev 9:4) men with long hair had teeth of Lions, being described as demons. Hollywood has sold nominal Christians a bill of goods of a blatant lie. The third issue corresponds with the second issue that has to do with graven images. They are forbidden but walk into any room or look at the “Passion of the Christ”, which was a good movie; except for the long haired Jesus part (Ex 20:4).

Lastly, before we answer the text that most people use to substantiate the Messiah as being black. Allow me to ask this question; what does it matter? The messiah represented all races, he doesn’t show partiality. Look at the case for Moses whom married an Ethiopian/Cushite woman. Depending on who you ask, she was either white or black; Ethiopian(light colored) by geography. As the story goes Mariam was struck with leprosy. This really occurred because of her position as a prominent woman or person (Ex 1, Ex 15). Race was the pretext issue.

For the reason we are here. This is where I disagree with the black church for saying the Messiah is black by using an obscure verse out of context.

13 And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.

14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;

15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.

Remember this first, the book of revelation simply means a revealing. Also it can’t be taken literally. John was in a vision, a trance like state like Peter was in Acts 10. Revelations is full of allegory. Read again the description of the Messiah, this was his glorious state in which John saw and described. It was an 8 fold description of Yashua.

1. His body was clothed with a garment down to the feet and girded with golden girdle (v 13, Cp. Dan 15:5)

2. His hair was white like wool and snow (v 14, Dan 7:9)

3. His eyes were as as a flame of fire (v 14, 19:12, Dan 10:6, Hab 1:13)

4. His feet were like fine brass (v 15, 10:1, Dan 10:6)

5. His voice like many waters (v 15, 8:5, Heb 12:26, Dan 10:6)

6. His right hand held 7 stars, which were the pastors of the 7 churches (v 16)

7. His mouth had a two-edged sword coming out of it (v 16, Eph 6:17, Heb 4:12)

8. His countenance(face) shone like the sun (v 16, Dan 10:6)

All in all we showed what the Messiah probably looked like. The answer I leave you with is, he was probably all the above. This comes from-Origin And Growth Of Races pg 2

“Thus the word “Adam” literally has the meaning of “red clay” in the Hebrew language and denotes that Adam was created of red clay. The composition of red clay is such that its color can be made to vary by changes in moisture, heat, and sunlight. Red clay, under the sun’s ray will change to pink, yellow, or black. Similarly, we have in Adam, the red-clay man, the original from which developed white, yellow-brown, and black races.”

Maybe this answers the question or sheds serious light on the subject at hand.

written by John The Revelator

Image

Introduction
What is it to be a slave unto him, such a fitting title? What is it to be a slave unto him? What is a slave?
SLAVE, SLAVERY (Heb. ‘evade, servant, slave, Gr. doulos, bondslave, servant). While the Hebrew and Greek words are very common in the Bible, the English word slave is found only twice (Jer 2:14; Rev 18:13), and the word slavery does not occur at all in KJV, because both the Hebrew and the Greek word involved are more often rendered “servant.”
Among the Hebrews, slaves could be acquired in a number of ways: as prisoners of war (Num 31:7-9), by purchase (Lev 25:44), by gift (Gen 29:24), by accepting a person in lieu of a debt (Lev 25:39), by birth from slaves already possessed (Exod 21:4), by arrest if the thief had nothing to pay for the object stolen (22:2-3), and by the voluntary decision of the person wanting to be a slave (21:6). Slaves among the Hebrews were more kindly treated than slaves among other nations, since the Mosaic Law laid down rules governing their treatment. They could gain their freedom in a number of ways (Exod 21:2-27; Lev 25:25 ff.; Deut 15:12-23). Slavery continued in NT times, but the love of Christ seemed to militate against its continued existence (Eph 6:5-9; Gal 3:28).
Within the scripture the Father refers to us as slaves, servants, or friends. This is an amazing contrast to what blacks had to endure for 400 years. If only the oppressors had read the plain teachings of the Bible.
In this lesson we will deal with the subject of what is it to be a slave unto him as well as what he requires from us; not expect! We will also look at the relationship between law and sin. This is a lesson I’ve never heard spoken or taught.
This teaching or lesson will change your perspective and thinking of about your relationship.

Our Lord gave us an example that we refer to as the foot washing attitude. Jn 13:5-17
Foot washing is a well known practice. It was a courtesy shown to guest in their homes. It was necessary because of the dusty roads. The Messiah practiced what he taught in Mk 10:43-44 that the greatest must be a servant.
How does this relate to us as followers? During our reign of fun for a season we realized at some point something was wrong in our life. At that time we wanted a relationship not religion. You realize he accepts you; you repent and allow him in your life. You are now cleansed by the blood; at that point you sign and give your life up. You are now bought with a price. During the transformation you’ve become a slave or servant or friend to him and his word. You gave up all your legal rights. This is what most believers do not understand, you don’t just become born anew and that’s it. There is more involved, the Father has written a blue print for our lives; in other words a legal binding contract. What is the contract?
Slavery differed from what took place in history compared to what the Bible says. Slavery in the modern world was purely based on domination and economics. Problems with the so called Forefathers were that the missionaries were not pure in their intentions. The Forefathers used the Bible in a manipulative way. Due to manipulating and taking away from the scripture they have left a stain on the world that can never be removed or remedied. The same as God winks at ignorance he must have winked at slavery. Slavery in itself did exist. Slaves were acquired as prisoners of war, purchases, gifts, debt, birth, arrest if payment for stolen items couldn’t be paid for. The Mosiac Law laid down rules for treatment of slaves. The practice continued in the NT. Love eradicated the practice Eph6:5-9, Gal3:28
Slavery was used to control the human spirit. When you control the human spirit you control their entire being. The best tool for doing that is lifting the scriptures out context for further ones agenda. To further your understanding of this issue in which I personally believe Christopher Columbus, the missionaries, were agents of evil. Their history has been well documented from rape, murder and many other atrocities. Read a great work-The Dark Side of Christian History by Helen Ellerbe.
Notice the Father calls this a covenant. Covenant-Law, a formal agreement that is legal, especially one under the seal, legal contract. As I stated earlier we are under a contract, to break this contract is a severe penalty.
1Cor 6:19-20 What? Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of god, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.
1Cor 7:23 Ye are bought with a price; be not ye the servants of men.
Rev 3:15-16 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
When we deal with the subject of the law it adds a wrinkle to the face of many. Thoughts of “here we go again”, creeps in the minds of those who say it was done away with. Why all the petratude for the word? Let’s take a look at the most basic of the law, the 10 commandments. Everyone thinks, fine the 10 suggestions. Why? The fourth is the sticking point; the Sabbath and keeping it holy. I know their many schools of thought pertaining to this issue. I will dispel a few.
One of the biggest problems we face is we think the Bible is an American book. Sorry, it isn’t. Remember the words of the Messiah.
Matt 15:24 I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Isreal.
Remember, God’s plan was to offer salvation firstly to the Jews then the Gentiles.
Jewish New Testament Commentary pg. 53 Yeshua’s personal mission prior to his death and resurrection was only to the Jews, God’s people. After the Holy Spirit was given, the gospel would reach gentiles even in “the farthest parts of the earth” (Ac 1:8), who would be grafted into Israel through the Messiah (Rom 11:16-24)
With basic understanding to the scripture we have to look at whom it was by and for. What is sin? Most people answer that as anything that is against God. While that could be true it is not a satisfactory answer; what do the scriptures say?
JNT 1Jn 3:4 Everyone who keeps sinning is violating torah(law)-indeed, sin is violation of Torah(law). This scripture alone deals with what sin is. So what is so wrong with following what the simple teaching is? How is it that so many have gotten so far away from his teachings to create their own doctrines?
Simply put the law teaches us how to live. The definition of the word law clearly means teaching. The law has two roles educational and judicial. This is an excerpt taken from a teaching by Vance Stinson-Paul and the Law.
The law, then, has two roles:
First, it is our instructor (the educative role), revealing to us God’s way of life-the path he desires that we follow. It expresses the goo and perfect will of God, not only explicitly through its many commandments, statutes, and judgment, but implicitly through the creational and historical narratives. Second, the law acts as our custodian (the judicial role), but only until we come to conversion through faith in Christ. By indentifying us as sinners and demanding punishment for our sins, the law holds us in custody. Knowledge of the law’s high standards increases our moral awareness and personal responsibility, thus eliminating ignorance as an excuse. Now, sin becomes exceedingly sinful. But when we come to conversion through faith in Christ, the law’s role as custodian is abolished. No longer can the law demand our death, for God has declared us “Not guilty!” No longer can the law declare us transgressors, for the record of our sins has been blotted out. The curse of the law has been removed (Galatians 3:13). The Messiah himself states JNT Matt 5:17-19 “Don’t think that I have come to abolish the Torah(law) or the Prophets. I have come not to abolish but to complete. Yes indeed! I tell you that until heaven and earth pass away, not so much as a yud(smallest letter in the Hebrew alphabet) or a stroke will pass from the Torah(law)-not until everything that must happen has happened. So whoever disobeys the least of these Mitzvot(commandments) and teaches other to do so will be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. But whoever obeys them and so teaches will be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.
God gave his word to his chosen people. How can we be so cavalier to come in and change his teaching? We are called to follow as freemen in God’s eyes 1Cor 7:22-23.
The law is the most important element to convict the sinner; but the law cannot save. Grace is what gives the person the ability to repent of his unrighteousness. Grace also gives us the ability to live holy before a Holy Father Heb 12:14, Math 5:48. As mentioned law and grace both differ but they work together.
In writing this my first thought was the disciplines in religion. When I look at Islam, I thought about legalism, the prayer rug, the Sabbath. When I looked at Judaism I thought basically the same thing. What mostly pressed on my mind was how Islam mirrored Judaism, the strict code of ethics as well as life style. I thought to myself again. Why is religion so loose, I then had to look at myself and my disciplines and where I am in my personal walk? God offers freedoms according to our level of maturity pertaining to his word. So a man thinketh so is he, how do we look at the situation.
The Father has given us a blue print to live by. He’s given us all the tools we will ever need. He’s given us his law as well as grace. If we chose to live rigorous life styles that’s fine, the problem we can’t place our personal convictions on others. WE all learn and understand at different paces in our lives and our walk.
The law is the most important teaching within a believer’s life. It gives us knowledge, understanding, and wisdom. It teaches us how to stand upright. The law is the revelation of the will that we must forever endure Ps 119:89, 111:7-8
1. The law is the standard which men will be judged Rom 2:12-16
2. Faith is needed in keeping his law Heb 11:6, Rom 14:23
3. Fear the Father and keep his commandments Eccl 12:13
4. Obedience is commanded, without your praise and worship is an abomination to him 1Jn5:3, Prv28:9.