A KING IN COW PASTURES

[Josheb]

Hmmmm... The truth will not be posted because it is seldom understood?

Whether or not a King per se is legally in line for the throne and entitled to it by patriarchal heritage is largely a matter of politics. Unlike the democratic elections of presidents, it’s not a matter of political opinion, however. Monarchs are descended from previous monarchs, and even though it’s in the Bible, since I’m continuous about the first amendment clause relaying to separation of church and state in “real life” I don’t just slash law essays around about it on pages that claim to be about religion. I just assumed that you were located in the United States, I mean, do you REALLY want me to go into detail and explain parliamentary process and monarchy to you? It’s in Aristotle. Aristotle wrote everything in Greek, so as a classics expert you’ll just find his simple explanations really easy! (Humor). But in all seriousness, you should study that. Jesus Christ was either the messiah, or not, in a good theological debate, but Herod claims to be the King, while a usurper. Herod wasn’t the high priest or even from the tribe of Levi, Judas was. You’re just confused because the partial picture of Herod shown in the gospels only depicts his religious charges against Jesus Christ, which were prompted by Judas, who at least had the status of hereditary Levite. For Herod it’s about secular Kingship. There had been many kings of Israel before, and if you ever notice that Tempe Old Testament contains two books titled Kings and a book on specifically secular and timely Israelite affairs called Deuteronomy, you’ll learn a lot about the life of Christ as messiah by making sure you separate church from state in your Bible study and be sure to consider passages about Christ, who came as a prophecies messiah, religiously separate from passages about Herod, of whom it can be confirmed by studying bloodlines in parallel tandem with religious requirements for membership in the state was not even King, let alone a prophet or god or anything. I know it’s confusing, I’ve been in drama heavy “mystery” kinda churches before that a super-political, they have zero credibility.

That is not an answer to my question. Am I to understand the truth will not be posted because it is seldom understood? Yes or no?

 

[Homework]

That is not an answer to my question. Am I to understand the truth will not be posted because it is seldom understood? Yes or no?

The original post didn’t make sense, dude man. First off, the writer is acting like you can learn a moral lesson from the villain, Nebuchadnezzar. I thought that over, because Mark is perfectly clear about the fact that Jesus, who is the real main character in the whole entire book, was born in a lowly cattle shed himself, but I’m totally not seeing what junior figures that means. Nebuchadnezzar is outside of occupied Jerusalem on campaign, going berserk in battle for seven years, then he comes back in. Sure. I read Daniel, and as a matter of fact it didn’t even say anything about cows in that passage, the beasts in Daniel’s dreams are described differently than as cattle, and also, I’m not seeing a Daniel in vision per se connection to this particular passage that Junior wrote about. I mulled it over. Jesus was born out in the stables/barn, to be sure, and he went away from Bethlehem to Egypt to escape Herod’s Antifa as a small boy, but where’s dude man’s parallel? Jesus came back to Judea to minister, was executed, ministered to souls in hell for three days (it’s that it? Being a king in a pasture does sound kinda hellish, surf baggie, I feel ya), and then returned, meat Paul as well as other disciples, and ascended. Alright, the two stories are similar, as well as both being in the Bible, but can you enlighten me just a little bit more about how you see a deep theological and prophetic connection between Jesus Christ and Nebuchadnezzar? C’mon! Yer just smoking something out on the surf pier!

 

[Josheb]

The original post didn’t make sense, dude man. First off, the writer is acting like you can learn a moral lesson from the villain, Nebuchadnezzar. I thought that over, because Mark is perfectly clear about the fact that Jesus, who is the real main character in the whole entire book, was born in a lowly cattle shed himself, but I’m totally not seeing what junior figures that means. Nebuchadnezzar is outside of occupied Jerusalem on campaign, going berserk in battle for seven years, then he comes back in. Sure. I read Daniel, and as a matter of fact it didn’t even say anything about cows in that passage, the beasts in Daniel’s dreams are described differently than as cattle, and also, I’m not seeing a Daniel in vision per se connection to this particular passage that Junior wrote about. I mulled it over. Jesus was born out in the stables/barn, to be sure, and he went away from Bethlehem to Egypt to escape Herod’s Antifa as a small boy, but where’s dude man’s parallel? Jesus came back to Judea to minister, was executed, ministered to souls in hell for three days (it’s that it? Being a king in a pasture does sound kinda hellish, surf baggie, I feel ya), and then returned, meat Paul as well as other disciples, and ascended. Alright, the two stories are similar, as well as both being in the Bible, but can you enlighten me just a little bit more about how you see a deep theological and prophetic connection between Jesus Christ and Nebuchadnezzar? C’mon! Yer just smoking something out on the surf pier!

That is not an answer to my question. Am I to understand the truth will not be posted because it is seldom understood? Yes or no?


Btw, we do not learn from Neb. We learn from God and God's use of Neb as part of His revelation. Now, please answer the question asked so we can move forward with the discussion.

 

[Homework]

That is not an answer to my question. Am I to understand the truth will not be posted because it is seldom understood? Yes or no?


Btw, we do not learn from Neb. We learn from God and God's use of Neb as part of His revelation. Now, please answer the question asked so we can move forward with the discussion.

I see where you’re going with that. I was looking more at passages in which Jesus talked about light and darkness having nothing to do with each other, and said to beware of false prophets and false messiahs. You learn something from Nebuchadnezzar? Did you or Adam and Eve learn something from satan, the tree snake and the forbidden fruit in the garden of Eden, too? Well that’s your private interpretation of the Bible.

 

[Josheb]

I see where you’re going with that. I was looking more at passages in which Jesus talked about light and darkness having nothing to do with each other, and said to beware of false prophets and false messiahs. You learn something from Nebuchadnezzar? Did you or Adam and Eve learn something from satan, the tree snake and the forbidden fruit in the garden of Eden, too? Well that’s your private interpretation of the Bible.

Thank you for your time but that is still not an answer to the question asked and I will not continue until the question asked has been answered.

I see where you’re going with that.

Then please answer the question asked.


Am I to understand the truth will not be posted because it is seldom understood? Yes or no?



Take your time. I have to go now, but I'll return later to view the answer to the question asked.

 

[Homework]

Thank you for your time but that is still not an answer to the question asked and I will not continue until the question asked has been answered.

Then please answer the question asked.


Am I to understand the truth will not be posted because it is seldom understood? Yes or no?



Take your time. I have to go now, but I'll return later to view the answer to the question asked.

You have to understand the fact that Nebuchadnezzar is Buddha and grasp that fact. I haven’t read everything you love posted on this little site place, so I don’t know if you’re a Christian or not, you might just be an inquiring philosopher, or a skeptical inquirer, or a psych bot. Do you really think that eastern and modernist religions and ideology are true, or what? The fact is that they aren’t made up per se (Satan exists), but that if you carefully research their late origins in the literature within your own language, you will find out that during the Scottish enlightenment, around the era of David Hume, what happened was that some British people and later a few other Northern Europeans including Napoleon Boneparte and Adolph Hitler (of France and Denmark respectively), who had family heritage and pedagogical learning in Christian/Crusader countries leaves through their histories if Jerusalem and picked out Baal as god in the part of the histories where Elijah says directly to make a decision between the two possibilities for godhood, and then off they went, diligently following Ahab, Jezebel, Evil Merridock, Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar, Sennacherib, and so forth and so following. Nebs-nebs is an invading Egyptian Pharaoh who took over Jerusalem. I don’t have to pay any attention to him as an intellectual at all, he’s just a foreigner and a spy. Did you get as far as the scene where Babylon was weighed in the balance and found wanting? The Baal worshippers (Buddhism is Baal worship) are executed.

 

[David Lamb]

You have to understand the fact that Nebuchadnezzar is Buddha and grasp that fact. I haven’t read everything you love posted on this little site place, so I don’t know if you’re a Christian or not, you might just be an inquiring philosopher, or a skeptical inquirer, or a psych bot. Do you really think that eastern and modernist religions and ideology are true, or what? The fact is that they aren’t made up per se (Satan exists), but that if you carefully research their late origins in the literature within your own language, you will find out that during the Scottish enlightenment, around the era of David Hume, what happened was that some British people and later a few other Northern Europeans including Napoleon Boneparte and Adolph Hitler (of France and Denmark respectively), who had family heritage and pedagogical learning in Christian/Crusader countries leaves through their histories if Jerusalem and picked out Baal as god in the part of the histories where Elijah says directly to make a decision between the two possibilities for godhood, and then off they went, diligently following Ahab, Jezebel, Evil Merridock, Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar, Sennacherib, and so forth and so following. Nebs-nebs is an invading Egyptian Pharaoh who took over Jerusalem. I don’t have to pay any attention to him as an intellectual at all, he’s just a foreigner and a spy. Did you get as far as the scene where Babylon was weighed in the balance and found wanting? The Baal worshippers (Buddhism is Baal worship) are executed.

Nebuchadnezzar is Buddha? How does that work? Buddha was born in what we now call Nepal, not Babylon.

 

[Homework]

Nebuchadnezzar is Buddha? How does that work? Buddha was born in what we now call Nepal, not Babylon.

I’m only trying to take back the impression I clearly gave you in my first reply, which I think you took to mean “You are irrelevant.” I wasn’t commenting on you, I was commenting on Nebuchadnezzar. Nebuchadnezzar isn’t relevant to me, and I don’t pay attention to Nebuchadnezzar. I know that sounds awfully chicken winged and very much like a 1960s draft dodger, but I’m highly attached to the fifth postulate of Euclid’s Elements. Like parallel lines that don’t meet over infinite distance in infinite time, Good and Evil have nothing to do with each other. Life is too short for me to stop and smell the Baal Stables, even though I may well have a place on my mantle for a long stemmed rose.

There have been many “Buddhas” in history. It’s a title rather than a name, and means “one who woke up”. You can study Buddhology at Naropa University in Colorado, and I don’t imagine that it’s thoroughly boring, given the explosive history of Southeast Asia, but I think I might not be their kind of candidate for admission. Buddhism goes so far back in history that whichever Buddha you’re thinking about might have lived before Nepal even got its name and territory drawn on the map.

 

[David Lamb]

I’m only trying to take back the impression I clearly gave you in my first reply, which I think you took to mean “You are irrelevant.” I wasn’t commenting on you, I was commenting on Nebuchadnezzar. Nebuchadnezzar isn’t relevant to me, and I don’t pay attention to Nebuchadnezzar. I know that sounds awfully chicken winged and very much like a 1960s draft dodger, but I’m highly attached to the fifth postulate of Euclid’s Elements. Like parallel lines that don’t meet over infinite distance in infinite time, Good and Evil have nothing to do with each other. Life is too short for me to stop and smell the Baal Stables, even though I may well have a place on my mantle for a long stemmed rose.

There have been many “Buddhas” in history. It’s a title rather than a name, and means “one who woke up”. You can study Buddhology at Naropa University in Colorado, and I don’t imagine that it’s thoroughly boring, given the explosive history of Southeast Asia, but I think I might not be their kind of candidate for admission. Buddhism goes so far back in history that whichever Buddha you’re thinking about might have lived before Nepal even got its name and territory drawn on the map.

But if Nebuchadnezzar isn’t relevant to you, why even mention him in your post let alone make the claim that he was (a) Buddha?

 

[David Lamb]

I’m only trying to take back the impression I clearly gave you in my first reply, which I think you took to mean “You are irrelevant.” I wasn’t commenting on you, I was commenting on Nebuchadnezzar. Nebuchadnezzar isn’t relevant to me, and I don’t pay attention to Nebuchadnezzar. I know that sounds awfully chicken winged and very much like a 1960s draft dodger, but I’m highly attached to the fifth postulate of Euclid’s Elements. Like parallel lines that don’t meet over infinite distance in infinite time, Good and Evil have nothing to do with each other. Life is too short for me to stop and smell the Baal Stables, even though I may well have a place on my mantle for a long stemmed rose.

There have been many “Buddhas” in history. It’s a title rather than a name, and means “one who woke up”. You can study Buddhology at Naropa University in Colorado, and I don’t imagine that it’s thoroughly boring, given the explosive history of Southeast Asia, but I think I might not be their kind of candidate for admission. Buddhism goes so far back in history that whichever Buddha you’re thinking about might have lived before Nepal even got its name and territory drawn on the map.

Just to add to my previous reply, you seem to be under a misapprehension. I have just read through this thread again, and I cannot find anywhere were you wrote, "You are irrelevant" to me.

 

[Homework]

But if Nebuchadnezzar isn’t relevant to you, why even mention him in your post let alone make the claim that he was (a) Buddha?

I didn’t mean it that way. I can understand haw someone be important enough to write up in a history book is “relevant”, I’m trying to express the dogmatic moral opinion that I don’t take moral lessons from villains.

Maybe I’m too Christian.

 

[David Lamb]

I didn’t mean it that way. I can understand haw someone be important enough to write up in a history book is “relevant”, I’m trying to express the dogmatic moral opinion that I don’t take moral lessons from villains.

Maybe I’m too Christian.

Ah, that is clear now. Thanks.

 

[Homework]

I have literally no idea who wrote this post initially! I mean I don’t know who the person is, the screen name and avatar are clearly visible. Whoever he is, I’ll retract a little tiny bit of what I said earlier, the kid is way hung up on kings, and I might shouldn’t have dissed his politics just because I’m a US citizen (no kings in country, bro.)

Still, Nebuchadnezzar was a baal worshiper. The alleged “king” here WORSHIPPED BAAL which means that he venerated an idol stature of a baby COW! Even if I was a Greek subject and a monarchist like Aristotle, I’d sack this particular kings head off!

 

[Josheb]

Arial & Josheb: It is called systemic reformation, encompassing all areas of life. Give some thought to King Nebuchadnezzar. He was not an Israelite, yet God used him to demonstrate His power and control.....​

The problem with that viewpoint is that God did not strike the Israelites insane. This op conflates what happened to Israel with what happened to Nebuchadnezzar.... and then attempts to assign God's manipulation and punishment of an unsaved non-believer to the saved, regenerate and indwelt believers in the Church. The op also equate reform with punishment.

Through the process of sanctification, the Church is always reforming, yet there is no place in the entire New Testament where the entire Church is punished, especially not with insanity. Even the seven churches in Revelation are told their suffering is to be endured for the sake of reward and God's presence, not exile into a wilderness stripped of all its cognitive faculties.



In Matthew 12 Jesus is accused of being in league with the pagan god Beelzebub, a devil. Jesus confronts that accusation by telling his accusers they have stepped beyond the limits of God's grace by attributing the work of the Holy Spirit to the devil (who is himself enslaved to sin by his own disobedience). There is no forgiveness for that act. Nowadays we hear a certain segment of Christendom criticizing the Church, claiming it is in need of reform because (in the case of this op) the Church is like Nebuchadnezzar. It's like the pagan Nebuchadnezzar and NOT like the unfaithful Israel who was exiled because it has a covenant relationship with God (which Nebuchadnezzar did not have.

The Church is the temple of God in which the Holy Spirit lives and works.

It is, therefore, absolutely necessary that any and all judgment of the Church NOT attribute the work of the Holy Spirit to devils (or sin). This also means that every single preacher, teacher, and/or ordinary Christian who practices such judgment has run the risk of committing the so-called unforgivable sin . It is not that reform is never needed. Nor is it that criticism of religious institutions is unneeded. The absolute, necessary concern is that such things never breach the boundary of attributing the sinful flesh or the influence of demons to the Spirit. Jesus hyperbolically polarized the situation with the following comment: The one who is not with me is against me; and the one who does not gather with me scatters.



And, sadly, there is one specific sect within Christianity that does that often. It is Dispensational Premillennialism or, more generically, modern futurism. You, @Buff Scott Jr., and most of the rest of you, have read me comment on the history of this practice before. When the sects of the Restoration developed in the 19th century they all held to a pair of core beliefs: 1) The Church is corrupt and, therefore in need of restoration, and 2) because Jesus was coming back sometime in the 19th century it was incumbent for people to join that sect and follow its teaching so as to shed the corruption and be restored to their version of a New Testament era church. This was true of all the Restoration movement sects.

The problem is they were all working from a misguided ecclesiology (a mistaken definition of the Church). and a misguided understanding of the Church in the New Testament (which was a very messy place). You, @Buff Scott Jr., being a modern futurist, naturally fall prey to the misguided teaching of that theology. You, also therefore, end up practicing misguided ops like this one in which the house that God builds is compared to a pagan man God struck insane.

That is a really bad ecclesiology.

There is one more important point about Dispensational Premillennialism that contributes to the problem of mistaken attribution. Dispensational Premillennialism 1) hold to a two-people, two-kingdoms theology and 2) elevates (its) ecclesiology as a critical doctrine within Christianity when 3) the rest of Christendom does neither. For the rest of Christendom Christology and soteriology are preeminent and Israel is irrelevant to Christian ecclesiology and eschatology. God has only one people, one kingdom, and both fall within His singular divine purpose.

1 Corinthians 3:16-17
Do you not know that you are a temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? If anyone destroys the temple of God, God will destroy that person; for the temple of God is holy, and that is what you are.

Be careful judging so as not to destroy the Church. The devil wants Christians judging the Church and one another. He wants that to happen to the point of hubris (attempting to sit on God's throne and make decisions that are the Spirit's alone). We are not Nebuchadnezzar, and God has not struck His Church insane, and He does not punish us, He disciplines us for the sake of sanctification.

 

[Homework]

I’m seeing it. Spiritualists and Great Awakening people have a slant on the fall of Jerusalem to Sennacherib and his army who besieged the walls from outside (narrow minded people, all the think about is the synagogue and they forget the army’s tents).

There is more than one usage employing in this thread for the word fall. The Israelite army fell, and the walks of Jerusalem fell. This is known as being due to the fact that apostasy occurred within the walls, and among the watchmen on and along the walls. There are several chapters in Proverbs about it, which is a book by Solomon. Some loose women were having seed babies in the city, and they secretly worshiped Baal in fertility rites.

These people are the ones from whom present day law gets its definition of prostitution, a practice by women of becoming pregnant with and giving birth to children whom they dedicate to foreign gods, and then they contact foreign worshippers of those idols, soliciting state intervention on behalf of their religious babies.

It’s connected to chain migration and illegal immigration, also to population replacement via theology replacement (changing the god worshipped in the local temple; altering the liturgy of the services to reflect foreign beliefs).