Crusaders?

Cup-of-Ruin · Nov 12, 2009

There is no prayer for those who reject the word made flesh, there are no prayers for those who do not believe, there are no prayers for those who do not confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, for thos the do not confess are as John says antichrists, there are no prayers for antichrists. If one prays to God for the salvation of those that do not confess that He is Lord, that that is registered as a sin on your part, it is a sin against the holy spirit. Christ says "Unless ye repent ye shall all likewise perish", that is a statement of fact, that is no a plea, He is not asking, He is telling, that's an order.

How should we pray Lord?

Jesus says;

"Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed by Thy Name, Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done, on earth as it is in hevean, give us this day our daily bread, and forgive us our debts as we forive our debtors, and lead us not into temptation but deliver us from evil, For Thine is the Kingdom, the power and the glory forever and ever."

Now that is a prayer, Amen.

Peacefulcrusader · Nov 13, 2009

Cup-of-Ruin said:

Hi Cup of ruin.

As a fellow Christian I must warn you to continue with what you're doing here, saying that it's a sin to pray to God to save the unsaved. We pray for the will of God to happen, and the will of God is that people should get saved. So what you call "a sin" is in harmony with the Prayer of the Lord - which you quoted yourself.

You also should know that a "sin against the Holy Spirit" is a very special sin. To count this sin on the befalf of all Christians who pray for the will of God to happen in the lives of the lost - that they may be saved, is nothing but shocking. I hope that you can back all your accusations up with biblical material - including wide and depthful discussions of all the verses which seem to oppose your arguments here.

in Christ, Magnus

Peacefulcrusader · Nov 13, 2009

Cup-of-Ruin said:

Hi Cup. I'll give some comments to this as well. To take on the last part fist; your intepretation of the Sermon on the Mount is very peculiar. You know of course that the Apostles repeat much of this throughout the New Testament? It's true that Christ was sent to the lost of Israel, but the Apostles were at least sent to the gentiles as well. So how can it be that they speak of similar things in the Apostolic epistles of the New Testament?

Concerning the Samaritans it may be true that some of them were mixed with the lost tribes of the north (the Kingdom of Israel), but it is also true that many people of the ten tribes were deported to the north during the Assyrian occupation. An important reason for the bad relations between the Jews and the Samaritans was that the Jews looked upon the Samaritans as unclean in their worship of God, since they were of mixed origin and didn't follow the strict rules of OT worship. (Well, the Jews weren't perfect either, no humans are, but at least they thought themselves to be better).

Cup-of-Ruin · Nov 13, 2009

Peacefulcrusader said:

Cup-of-Ruin said:

Greetings,

The Gentiles (ethnos ) are the lost sheep of Israel, I have addressed this in my thread "who are the Gentiles".

Now the case in point John 4; Jesus goes to Samaria very early in His ministry, this land was; "called Sychar (very important word for those who wish to find the lost tribes as I have done), near to a parcel of ground that Jacob gave his son Joseph." 4:5. And Jesus went to Jacob's well and there he met a woman of Samaria and she was descended from Jacob "Art thou greater than our father Jacob, which gave us this well and drank thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle." 4:10. As you can read from the Bible the Samaritans were decended from Jacob/Israel...This woman said she did indeed worship the true God as the fathers did and that they awaited now the Messiah, clearlly they were familiar with scripture and the words of the prophets and awaited the Messiah as He was written of coming, again if they were not Israel they would not have been awaiting Messiah. Then Jesus saya "I am he" and the woman believed straight away as she would guided by the spirit that testified to her, and in the next verses we see that the Samaritans are converted on mass, the Israelites of Samaria were some of the first Christians and they were in Jacob's land and descended from Jacob. Christ fulfills His mission there to His satisfaction and departs to Gallilee.

Peacefulcrusader · Nov 13, 2009

Cup-of-Ruin said:

Peacefulcrusader said:

Hi Cup. First, you have an interesting explanation concerning the Samaritans. I'm sure many would be better off reading that, and trying to figure things out more.

But concerning the other part, I was talking about the fact that the Apostles spread about in the world spreading the gospel to all kinds of people, Greeks, Romans, Ethiopians and many, many more - throughout history spreading even to Northern Europe, America, Sub-Saharan Africa, Asia and beyond. My point was that eventhough Christ was sent to the lost sheep of Israel, his wish for the Apostles and all disciples was to spread the gospel to the whole world. You shouldn't limit the words of Christ (and the New Testament as a whole) only to the people of Israel. Are you descended of Israel yourself?

Cup-of-Ruin · Nov 13, 2009

Peacefulcrusader said:

Yes they would if they have ears to hear, the Church and all it's present forms is today for the most part Apostate and do not teach as they should, God will bring out those He wants and testify to them alone in the wilderness.

Gospel first was to go to a remnant of Judah, Jesus' very first diciples and Apostles were from the tribe of Judah, Judah was to bring the Gospel to the lost tribes, the scattered sheep and also the larger part of Judah that did not return to Judea and had already gone out from Judah, but the very first diciples and Apostles except Judas were all from Judah. in the case of the Romans whom decended from the Trojan Kings who were from the Israelite Dara - 1 Chron. 2:6. Galatians and Greeks were also Israelites, so were the Britons, Irish, etc. Israel was so numerous they could no be numbered, like the sand, this is all recorded in the Bible and we have the father of many nations - Abraham, God kept all his promises He gave to Abraham as it is written in Genesis. Now after Judah recieved the Gospel and followed Christ they shone the light on the ethnos Gentiles, who were the lost sheep, and then as we know from the Book of Hebrews the Gospel goes to all who are descended from Eber which is indeed a great many people, who knows how many are descended from Eber? Then of course because the Gospel is for all men and women descended from Adam it went to them, to the ends of the earth as it is written.

Yes.

greatkraw · Nov 13, 2009

So we started off with the Crusades and ended up with British Israelism thanks to Cup of Ruin.

No surprises there then.

jcspartan · Nov 13, 2009

Ancilla said:

I think you are absolutely right. We are to pray for our enemies--and not just to see them cursed and die. Ro 12:17-21, with its call for love towards enemies is clear at least as far as I read. If we are to go into the world and make diciples of all nations we must pray for those who are not saved and, in some cases, are hostile to us. That is a responsibility given to all believers in accordance with the role God gives--plant, water, harvest. God does allow for self-defense at least it is implied in Luke 22:36 Jesus said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. ." If you are killed before you share the gospel to a non-believer there is not much spreading of the gospel. But these are personal madates.

I also see scripture as saying the State is ordained and lifted up by God (Romans 13:1). There are civil mandates apart from personal mandates that govern individual action. The State has an obligation to keep order Romans 13:4-6 4 For he (civil authority) is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, [you should dread him and] be afraid, for he does not bear and wear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant to execute His wrath (punishment, vengeance) on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore one must be subject, not only to avoid God's wrath and escape punishment, but also as a matter of principle and for the sake of conscience. 6 For this same reason you pay taxes, for [the civil authorities] are official servants under God, devoting themselves to attending to this very service.

To me this justifies police and the military as, in Roman times, the police force was the military. Annecdotally Christ did not condemn the centurion in Matt 8:6-13. Jesus actually praised the centurions faith and did not mention the need for the centurion to go sin no more as Jesus did at other time

Matt 8: 6-13 6"Lord," he said, "my servant lies at home paralyzed and in terrible suffering." 7Jesus said to him, "I will go and heal him." 8 The centurion replied, "Lord, I do not deserve to have you come under my roof. But just say the word, and my servant will be healed. 9 For I myself am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. I tell this one, 'Go,' and he goes; and that one, 'Come,' and he comes. I say to my servant, 'Do this,' and he does it." 10 When Jesus heard this, he was astonished and said to those following him, "I tell you the truth, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith. 11 I say to you that many will come from the east and the west, and will take their places at the feast with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. 12 But the subjects of the kingdom will be thrown outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth." 13Then Jesus said to the centurion, "Go! It will be done just as you believed it would." And his servant was healed at that very hour.

The separate responsibility of the state verses the responsibility of the individual has profound implications for how a nation defends itself. Had the crusades been organized as a state function and not as a theocratic edict I would be more comfortable with what took place. If that was the case Byzantium would not have been invaded by the crusaders. As it was the Church mandated it (The German King was excomminicated for not taking part in a crusade or supporting one) and special dispensation was given to kill in the name of Jesus. Then to add insult to injury, several of the crusaders like the Normans used the situation to expand their own economic power.

Peacefulcrusader · Nov 13, 2009

Hi Cup of Ruin.

I wonder if you are able to properly defend your claim that it is a sin against the Holy Spirit to pray to God that his will be done to people who don't believe in Christ - (so that they can be saved, since that is the good will of God for all humans). You also call all Christians who don't have the same understanding as you concerning your theories about the lost sheep of Isarel apostates, a very serious accusation as well.

I see now that you're a strong supporter of greatkraw calls "British Israelism". I've debated with others before who have similar thoughts. I don't find all of these theories convincing. They seldom correspond well with "conventional" facts about the origin of different nations - well, that said, these facts are not ncessarily correct, and if the Bible really proved otherwise, I would trust the Bible. Still, there are passages in the Bible which seem to trouble even your arsenal of Biblical support for this "British Israelism". What about Genesis 10, it points to many nations which are not of Israel (one of those mentioned in Genesis 10, Arpaxad, is supposedly the forefather of Eber and Abraham). Javan of Genesis 10 is the Greeks, but you have identified the Greeks as Israelites... By the way, "Galatians" are originally Celts, they spread from Austria to all corners of Europe, giving names to "Cantabria - Celtiberia", "Gallia", "Galatia" etc. How do you understand this?

Peacefulcrusader · Nov 13, 2009

greatkraw said:

Yes, our co-debator surely led this debate astray. But the seriousness of his accusations against most Christians (not only here, but in the world as a whole), must be confronted somehow. The best would have been to make a separate thread dealing with this. Or perhaps the best is to just continue debating the original topic, excluding the Israelism-discussion.

Cup-of-Ruin · Nov 13, 2009

Peacefulcrusader said:

Long before Jacob/Israel, your reading Genesis 10:21-31 the decendents of Shem through Eber and they were called "Gentiles"! This is confirmed in many quality historical sources, Gentiles are Shemites always have been they are descended from Shem-Eber, the Greeks like the Romans and Britons, Celts are all Shemites, like Jacob/Israel was also descended from Shem and Eber and Abraham, just like the Lord Himself who came from "Galilee of the Gentiles" Matthew 4:15....The Galatians were Celtic that is correct, they were Shemites, gentiles and came through the line of Jacob/Israel, they made their way out of Assyrian Captivity crossing the Caucuses Mountains via 'Israel Pass' to the Black Sea and then into Europe.

MahogonySnail · Nov 13, 2009

It's very unlikely that the tribes in assyrian captivity escaped, they would have been all killed, that was their judgement by God.

This is a good read:
http://www.rickross.com/reference/black_hebrews/black_hebrews14.html

Dr Rivka Gonen, an archaeologist and the curator of Jewish ethnography at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem, believes the 10 tribes have disappeared for good.
She says it is inconceivable that people exiled thousands of years ago would have retained any semblance of their Jewish heritage.
Gonen said that even in the Bible it says the 10 tribes were conquered because they were not practicing Jewish customs and worshipped idols. She says there is no reason to expect they kept Jewish rituals in exile when they didn't do it at home.
"Wherever you find a tribe claiming they belong to the 10 lost tribes, you always find the fingerprints of Christian missionaries or romantics who came with the Bible and when they found vague similarities of names and customs, they immediately saw it as proof," Gonen said.
She says the methods used to trace the lost tribes is not at all scientific either anthropologically or linguistically as many languages have words which sound similar and rituals like circumcision are not uniquely Jewish.
Many of the theories border on the absurd, says Gonen, like the British-Israelites who claim the British people are from the 10 tribes or those who say the Danes are from the lost tribe of Dan. "People are attracted to mysteries of the past and this is one of them because the tribes were exiled and God promised they would return," she said.

jcspartan · Nov 13, 2009

MahogonySnail said:

thanks for posting the link it helps.

Beowolf had a bar mitzvah?

When I lived in Japan there was a small group of Japanese that felt they were descendents of one of the lost tribes. I had no idea that this was as wide spread as it is now or that British-Israelism was as developed as it is now. It does not square with any aspect of historical study I have ever taken part in and history was my focus in three different universities. I realize Cup-of-Ruin that secular schools mean nothing the linguistic and historical documentation just don't support

Cup-of-Ruin · Nov 13, 2009

MahogonySnail said:

It's very unlikely that the tribes in assyrian captivity escaped, they would have been all killed, that was their judgement by God.

This is a good read:
http://www.rickross.com/reference/black_hebrews/black_hebrews14.html

Dr Rivka Gonen, an archaeologist and the curator of Jewish ethnography at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem, believes the 10 tribes have disappeared for good.
She says it is inconceivable that people exiled thousands of years ago would have retained any semblance of their Jewish heritage.
Gonen said that even in the Bible it says the 10 tribes were conquered because they were not practicing Jewish customs and worshipped idols. She says there is no reason to expect they kept Jewish rituals in exile when they didn't do it at home.
"Wherever you find a tribe claiming they belong to the 10 lost tribes, you always find the fingerprints of Christian missionaries or romantics who came with the Bible and when they found vague similarities of names and customs, they immediately saw it as proof," Gonen said.
She says the methods used to trace the lost tribes is not at all scientific either anthropologically or linguistically as many languages have words which sound similar and rituals like circumcision are not uniquely Jewish.
Many of the theories border on the absurd, says Gonen, like the British-Israelites who claim the British people are from the 10 tribes or those who say the Danes are from the lost tribe of Dan. "People are attracted to mysteries of the past and this is one of them because the tribes were exiled and God promised they would return," she said.

"James, a servant of god and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the Twelve Tribes which are scattered abroad, greetings." KJV. Book of James 1:1

Well that puts a stop to that nonsense.

Cup-of-Ruin · Nov 13, 2009

jcspartan said:

Your're right secular education produces dim-witted factory fodder for the beast system, perhaps you would like to try some real Historical and Archeological evidence instead of blindly following the mass indoctrination of your childhood.

MahogonySnail · Nov 13, 2009

There's really no excuse for your ignorance Cup of Ruin, this theory you present has been disproven by DNA evidence:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Israelism#Criticism

Middle Eastern populations...are closely related and...their Y chromosome pool is distinct from that of Europeans. (Nebel, 2001.)[32]

Cup-of-Ruin · Nov 13, 2009

MahogonySnail said:

Wikipedia is a popular opinion site and links page, no need to post any wikipedia as a reference because it is not, I wont read it anyway.

jcspartan · Nov 13, 2009

Cup-of-Ruin said:

What would you read?

Cup-of-Ruin · Nov 14, 2009

jcspartan said:

In regards to?

jcspartan · Nov 14, 2009

Cup-of-Ruin said:

In regard to the tangent we are on now related to the Jewish diaspora providing the foundation for English/Anglo-Saxon culture

You discount the Universities, secular sources, bu,t you have had to go to some extra-Biblical source to get some of your informed opinion in place.

Is there an acceptable source to go to that you would provide a valid counter arguement? Or is any source that questions your stand automatically invalid?

Crusaders?

Cup-of-Ruin

Guest

Peacefulcrusader

Guest

Peacefulcrusader

Guest

Cup-of-Ruin

Guest

Peacefulcrusader

Guest

Cup-of-Ruin

Guest

greatkraw

Guest

jcspartan

Guest

Peacefulcrusader

Guest

Peacefulcrusader

Guest

Cup-of-Ruin

Guest

MahogonySnail

Banned

jcspartan

Guest

Cup-of-Ruin

Guest

Cup-of-Ruin

Guest

MahogonySnail

Banned

Cup-of-Ruin

Guest

jcspartan

Guest

Cup-of-Ruin

Guest

jcspartan

Guest