Letters on Homestead Heritage: Community or cult?

For seven years, we've shared fence lines with members of Homestead Heritage on three sides of our land. Full Story
Baaah

Austin, TX

#6485 Mar 30, 2013
And even Roman pantheons are hierarchical.

But no, your pantheon is equal. Three doing a divine dance in equal tripartite harmony.

Makes sense for me, the One Baaah.

Me myself and I dancing alone. All of us with a separate mind will and consciousness.
Baaah

Austin, TX

#6486 Mar 30, 2013
Boyarin is not alone, though.

We too see the God in heaven as morphing into two beings in heaven and then back to Godhead...

the visions of the prophets and Stephen that of TWO persons in the one God. Morphing back and forth, one having characteristics of the Father and one having characteristics of the Son. And these both becoming ONE somehow in shape, form and essence.

Denying the singular NEPHESH which God gave Jesus at birth, his own soul and will. Deciding in some hippyish sense that all of this comes together in one God of three or two heads. Two heads become one. Jesus gets older, and now he is the Ancient One? And the Ancient One died? What?

How confused, how Gentile. How GOYIM.

Congratulations. We wonder why our prayers are not answered. Maybe our hearts are inherently pagan?
Baaah

Austin, TX

#6487 Mar 30, 2013
Thing is, Boyarin's linking of the term "Son of Man" to the vision of Daniel in chpt 7 is quite enlightening to me, having never studied either extensively...

either the term or the vision.

But his attribute of DIVINITY to both figures is also
cause for me to wonder

how he ever got to be a bestselling Christian author.

If one God GIVES another God all dominion and authority, then is this not by definition a pantheon?

Aren't pantheons by definition not Jewish? Not for them even possible?

Here we go again. The ancient plot and tension and issue between Jew and Christian.

Can't get over it, can you? That's because you are SHTUCK in your arthritic presuppositions.

I hate to point out the obvious. Maybe if I had 2 or three post-graduate degrees you would listen?
Baaah

Austin, TX

#6488 Mar 30, 2013
Or maybe it is I whom am SHTUCK in my own arthritic presupposition that Shema is primal and binding and absolute?

If it isn't, then God is a liar.

He made it the Great Command. He told you to say it twice a day, put it on your porch and door...your hand and RIGHT THERE BETWEEN YOUR EYES.

Just like a yoga meditator, the THIRD EYE is your Shema... and this gets abrogated, modified or shucked aside and glossed over?

NOT HARDLY. PUT the Shema on your forehead and recite it twice a day.

YOU WILL SEE that THIS precept is the precept above ANY precept under the sun.

God is One. THIS is the One True God of Israel.

And if THIS precept is modified then NO PRECEPT is absolute.
Baaah

Austin, TX

#6489 Mar 30, 2013
Maybe if I am a basketball player and cannot dribble, I can still play, if my rebounding and shooting are good...

Maybe if I am a farmer and can't grow beans I can still be called a farmer if I can grow tomatoes and carrots...

But can I call myself a CHRISTIAN if I deny Shema?
Their FIRST and MOST PRIMAL precept of all?

3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

Who said this line, and isn't the first half the Shema?

Does this compute, thee who said I wasn't SPIRITUAL ENOUGH to get into your congregation?
Baaah

Austin, TX

#6490 Mar 30, 2013
Someone respond to this last post.

It really says all I have to say.

I can say it this way or that way. But you have to respond SOME way in order to make my indignation go away.

HH, mainliners all. We are the remnant of the remnant. Very few of us understand the issue here.

Jesus is not God. Jesus said so in Jn 17:3. Respondez to THIS one sil vous plait.

And Baaah will go on to other pastures.
Baaah

Austin, TX

#6491 Mar 30, 2013
The one accusation that I am a Jehovah's Witness is a stark irony...

since they believe YHWH is the One True God also.

CAN you be a Christian without the Baptism of the Holy Spirit?

I don't know for sure. DO I have to know all things?

I know one thing. Shema is true.

AofG: no.

UPC: yes.

God:??(we will see, blind men).
Baaah

Austin, TX

#6492 Mar 30, 2013
eRRP.

AofG: yes, you can be a Christian without the Holy Spirit baptism

UPC: reborn again MEANS you were baptized in the Holy Spirit.

JW: whadya mean jellybean. We don't flop around or speak in tongues.

Sorry. Time to go now. Maybe I need a nap.
Baaah

Austin, TX

#6493 Mar 30, 2013
Oyveh, I just woke up. I have said again and again Jesus never said he was/is God.

Jesus denies Divinity in Jn 17:3:

3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

This verse, more than any other Jesus affirms the Great Command -- the Shema, and furthermore says he is OTHER than the One True God of Israel:

that they might know thee the only true God

and says who this only True God is: YHWH the Father only.

You....ME. Juxtaposed. Remember Nothead's Rule of Juxtaposition:
When Jesus and God are juxtaposed, Jesus cannot be God in scripture.

Jesus Christ = ME. For those who do not get it.

What else is there to know? This verse says it all. Case closed, next.

Like a rock breaks scissors, Shema BREAKS the alleged divinity of Christ.

And Jesus further exemplifies the exact definition of Shema, which CANNOT include
himself into the God equation: YOU = the One True God. ME = the one whom YOU sent.
Baaah

Austin, TX

#6494 Mar 30, 2013
Think about it. There is no other way to interpret 17:3.

I have never heard one, anyway.
Baaah

Austin, TX

#6495 Mar 30, 2013
Some of you know Steven Avery, former HH.

I never met him myself, but tried to engage his 'high Christology' in personal emails. He refused, for good or bad. This was a year ago or so.

He was involved on Factnet posting in general in favor of HH. He posted a recent CARM forum post here regarding the Trinity.

http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php...

My response which I will post whenever I get off suspension:

In General Terms a Soul is a Person

Theo Book is on track and of same mindedness as me.

The original NEPHESH of a man is what God breathed into him, life.

And Life Eternal means in some way this nephesh is retained.

The DNA, genetics, and biology is transformed, or modified.
From 'flesh' to spiritual; and the spirit retains some aspects of the soul, don't ask me exactly what.

But again in general terms, self-consciousness, mind and will.

When God made man into His image, the FACE or what Wilson called a 'mask for actors' really
harkens back to Deuteronomy and Hebrew, not Greek language.

The first Command, Deut 5:7

anki ieue alei*k ashr eutzathi*k martz mtzrim m*bith obdim la ieie-l*k aleim achrim ol-phnoi

I YHWH Elohim of you I forth you from land of Egypt from house servants not he to*you elohim other ones ON FACES OF ME.

Ol-phnoi.

Translation: Thou shalt have none other gods before me.(KJV, I know you like this one)

Nothead translation: Thou shalt have none other elohim before me.

In the first primitive concepts of YHWH, his FACE was his person. And therefore in my own paradigm, the FACE of a man is in some way the same as God, since we are made in his image.

Tselem Strong's number 6754, with Aramaic counterpart 6755.

This concept of IMAGE or RESEMBLANCE was the beginning of the concept of PERSON.

And I believe this was rudimentary, and primitive since we don't know how many freckles God has, how long His hair is, probably white or at least so RADIANT we can't look at it...the IMAGE of YHWH is really a general, or rudimentary basis for the NEPHESH which firstly means a BREATHING CREATURE.

So then God cannot be a breathing creature since He is not created, not a creature.
But we as breathing creatures derive from Him not only in image, but in our self-consciousness,
intelligence and will. Or HEART, as Theo so aptly puts it. Things with a heart which breathes has a soul of some kind. Even fish, although how intelligent they are is debatable. Men are closer to God in these soulish, or nepheshish ways. I speculate, just a little.

The IMAGE was where the Bible started. Further revelation in general, intuitive terms means
the WILL and mind of man which derives from God.

Jesus considers God a testifier, and himself as one too. In Jn 8:

16 And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.

17 It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true.

18 I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.

19 Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also.

This passage for some mean that Jesus is saying he is equal as a man to God, counting God as a testifier (man).

I am adroitly more cohesive, saying that Jesus' logic rather makes man DERIVATIVE of YHWH, therefore making YHWH quite so much more a 'testifier'. Furthermore two testifiers are two PERSONS in the Judaic sense of the word, therefore making your own theory of God's ontology moot and void, Steven. Your 'high' Christology, whatever it is, cannot coincide with two testifiers.
Remember, according to the Shema AND the first command of Deut 5:7 there can be no other but YHWH the Father and the only True God. Two testifiers cannot a One God make.

Neither two souls. GOD-soul and derived MAN-soul.
Baaah

Austin, TX

#6496 Mar 30, 2013
Some of you know Steven Avery, former HH, who posted on Factnet generally in favor of HH; he posted on CARM forums about Trinity a week ago:

http://forums.carm.org/vbb/showthread.php...

I will post this next when I get off suspension in that thread:

In General Terms a Soul is a Person

Theo Book is on track and of same mindedness as me.

The original NEPHESH of a man is what God breathed into him, life.

And Life Eternal means in some way this nephesh is retained.

The DNA, genetics, and biology is transformed, or modified.
From 'flesh' to spiritual; and the spirit retains some aspects of the soul, don't ask me exactly what.

But again in general terms, self-consciousness, mind and will.

When God made man into His image, the FACE or what Wilson called a 'mask for actors' really
harkens back to Deuteronomy and Hebrew, not Greek language.

The first Command, Deut 5:7

anki ieue alei*k ashr eutzathi*k martz mtzrim m*bith obdim la ieie-l*k aleim achrim ol-phnoi

I YHWH Elohim of you I forth you from land of Egypt from house servants not he to*you elohim other ones ON FACES OF ME.

Ol-phnoi.

Translation: Thou shalt have none other gods before me.(KJV, I know you like this one)

Nothead translation: Thou shalt have none other elohim before me.

In the first primitive concepts of YHWH, his FACE was his person. And therefore in my own paradigm, the FACE of a man is in some way the same as God, since we are made in his image.

Tselem Strong's number 6754, with Aramaic counterpart 6755.

This concept of IMAGE or RESEMBLANCE was the beginning of the concept of PERSON.

And I believe this was rudimentary, and primitive since we don't know how many freckles God has, how long His hair is, probably white or at least so RADIANT we can't look at it...the IMAGE of YHWH is really a general, or rudimentary basis for the NEPHESH which firstly means a BREATHING CREATURE.

So then God cannot be a breathing creature since He is not created, not a creature.
But we as breathing creatures derive from Him not only in image, but in our self-consciousness,
intelligence and will. Or HEART, as Theo so aptly puts it. Things with a heart which breathes has a soul of some kind. Even fish, although how intelligent they are is debatable. Men are closer to God in these soulish, or nepheshish ways. I speculate, just a little.

The IMAGE was where the Bible started. Further revelation in general, intuitive terms means
the WILL and mind of man which derives from God.

Jesus considers God a testifier, and himself as one too. In Jn 8:

16 And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.

17 It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men is true.

18 I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.

19 Then said they unto him, Where is thy Father? Jesus answered, Ye neither know me, nor my Father: if ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also.

This passage for some mean that Jesus is saying he is equal as a man to God, counting God as a testifier (man).

I am adroitly more cohesive, saying that Jesus' logic rather makes man DERIVATIVE of YHWH, therefore making YHWH quite so much more a 'testifier'. Furthermore two testifiers are two PERSONS in the Judaic sense of the word, therefore making your own theory of God's ontology moot and void, Steven. Your 'high' Christology, whatever it is, cannot coincide with two testifiers.
Remember, according to the Shema AND the first command of Deut 5:7 there can be no other but YHWH the Father and the only True God. Two testifiers cannot a One God make.

Neither two souls. GOD-soul and derived MAN-soul.

By all accounts, Jesus had a separate mind, soul and will from his Father. Therefore he cannot be God.
Baaah

Austin, TX

#6497 Mar 30, 2013
My link to Avery's post was deflected by a registration requirement. This was Avery's post on CARM. If I broke any copyright law then sorry.

Sue me. Good luck I haven't any moolah.

Used to be you could directly link to a CARM post.
Now they have heightened security it would seem.

Hi,

Robert Dick Wilson (1856-1930) gives us a short section on the difficulty of using the word "person" or "persons" in describing God.

Studies in the book of Daniel: a discussion of the historical questions (1917)
Robert Dick Wilson
http://books.google.com/books...

... Are there three persons in the Trinity? That depends on your definition of person. Is a corporation, an animal, or a plant, a person? That again depends on a definition.

But the definition of a term in its present uses may differ from the definition of the term in its former, or original use. Thus the word person originally meant "a mask for actors." Later, it meant a "part acted on the stage." Then we have its theological, legal, grammatical, and biological uses, all strictly defined. Last of all, there are its common uses to denote an individual human being, or even "the body of a human being, or its characteristic appearance or condition."

From the present uses of the word person in English, we learn: First, that it is never used in the sense of its Latin etymon; secondly, that in the sense of "a part acted on the stage," it has become obsolete; and thirdly, that it has several different uses in common speech and at least four different connotations in as many different sciences. It may be remarked, further, that in no other language, ancient or modern, do we find the word used in just these senses, nor any other single word exactly corresponding to it. To confirm this statement, it is only necessary to turn up an English-Latin, English-French, English-German, or English-what-you-will dictionary.

And I believe you could say that similar definitional difficulties in definition arise in the use of the word "Trinity" as well. While Wilson mixes this question with Bible translation issues, really neither "person" or "Trinity" tends to come from translational areas, more from confessional and creedal expositions. Thus I have extracted the salient part from Wilson that simply focuses on the English word "person".

If Wilson is correct, then many of the arguments about "Trinity" are barely worthwhile, as the semantic issues are not addressed and the two sides of an argument are using different definitions.

Your thoughts welcome.

Yours in Jesus,
Steven Avery
Bayside, NY
Baaah

Austin, TX

#6498 Mar 30, 2013
Two former HH actively posting on CARM.

And another former Oneness Pentecostal, Forever4Truth whom is Unitarian.

And Smit who is a preacher of Apostolic variety on the Oneness Pentecostal forum. Representing the old guard, by the way.

Sooner or later HH will join the fray, whether on Carm or somewhere else in the ethers. How do I know this?

The ethernet is where the action is. The last wilderness. Are you a vital Body of Christ?
Then get with it. Start your polemic.

All truth is describable in God's language.
At least all truth God wants us to know.
Baaah

Austin, TX

#6499 Mar 30, 2013
Is English God's language?

Not exactly. But the foundation of language is the intelligence of YHWH.

For the Jew, this started with Hebrew.

Thus the Hebrew defines the fundamentals in the OT.

As original source language. This is why all other languages by Jewish tradition are 'commentaries'.
Baaah

Austin, TX

#6500 Mar 30, 2013
Boyarin goes off the Deep End:

Makes a link from Daniel's vision of two divine Gods in Heaven to the Ancient Caananite duality of two Gods, El and Baal...

Really, orthodoxy is defined by the Bible itself.
Go to Exodus 3 again. Here God defines Himself as One Being, and One Being only.

There are no TWO Gods. We are polytheist or what? What makes the two Gods One God? Shared electrons or what?

The Jews knew what shared electrons meant? What?

See how scholarship can make you loco en la cabeza?

Do I need to read his book any further?

Boyarin is BONKERS.
Baaah

Austin, TX

#6501 Mar 30, 2013
See how the TRINITY of YHWH is really polytheism?

And the BINITY is no better since it too cannot BUT contradict Shema?

You know this isn't algebra, or advanced calculus.

Once you get past the singular ONE of YHWH, you are in no-man's land. PAST SHEMA. Contradictory to Shema.

God is ONE. One what? One BEING. This is Being more than we are being, being inferior beings...

but and yet one God-Being. THE BEING is one being.

THOSE BEINGS are more than one. Plain simple language.

Two Gods are two Beings. Since when are they One Being? Since you rationalized it?

The truth still stands. Shema cannot be circumvented.

And Boyarin by page 48 STILL has not addressed Shema.

Is this because he is Gentile in his heart? Possibly?
Baaah

Austin, TX

#6502 Mar 30, 2013
Ego eimi ho own. I am the Being.

Anki ieue alei*k. I YHWH elohim-of*you. I am YHWH your God.

Trin view:'elohim' is a plural form of 'eloha'.

Farts. Then all pronouns in that sentence would also be in the plural form.

11,000 times this is NOT true.'Elohim' is the designation for a singular Being using a plural form of 'powers' or 'majesty'. All Jews are in agreement here.

Pretty much across the board. Dead and alive they still agree. Check it out, your plural God won't hunt.

or fly in the clouds.

Since: Feb 12

Location hidden

#6503 Mar 30, 2013
Hey Baaah, you wouldn't happen to know who "Nothead" is over at CARM, would you?
I lived to tell the truth

Jackson, NJ

#6504 Mar 31, 2013
Happy Resurrection Sunday/Easter everyone!!!

32 Christian -You can still post your testimony. There are those on this website who do want to hear from you.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Waco Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Who do you support for State Board of Education... (Oct '10) 37 min 98 Degree Diarrhea 595
seeking online slave Dec 8 mossy seaman 2
lee francis....new D.J. Nov 30 bro 2
Who do you support for State Board of Education... (Oct '10) Nov 29 Fartology 752
Review: Texas Animal Medical Center (Aug '13) Nov 25 Leachmark707 3
doug mathis Nov 18 baylor bear 1
Staci Fox Nov '14 Curious 1
Waco Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Waco People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Waco News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Waco

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 11:00 am PST

Yahoo! Sports11:00AM
Two days after surgery, DeMarco Murray practices
NBC Sports 1:34 PM
Andre Johnson practices as Texans weigh quarterback options
NFL 1:47 PM
One Preview: Passing and rushing yardage leaders meet in Big D
NBC Sports 4:53 PM
Randle, Dunbar wait on status of Cowboys' Murray - NBC Sports
Bleacher Report 5:55 PM
Indianapolis Colts vs. Dallas Cowboys Betting Odds, Analysis, NFL Pick