Did They Need It?

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

January 10th, 2013, 12:56 am #71

Did Jesus have to supply wine for the wedding for the wedding to be a success? Was He fulfilling the desire to continue a tradition of having wine at the marriage celebration?
Which leads one to another thought.....considering the above dilemma and thought....would Jesus object to the tradition of instrumental music (compared to the tradition of voice only)? We don't need instruments to worship God (no more than they needed wine for a Marriage celebration), but the instruments would not preclude a meaningful worship to God (no more than wine would hinder a meainingful marriage celebration)......now would they???





HAPPY NEW YEARS!!!

=========================

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]David Fields, let's be honest and unashamed: claim [ ]the message you authored.[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

January 10th, 2013, 3:44 am #72

Did Jesus have to supply wine for the wedding for the wedding to be a success? Was He fulfilling the desire to continue a tradition of having wine at the marriage celebration?
Which leads one to another thought.....considering the above dilemma and thought....would Jesus object to the tradition of instrumental music (compared to the tradition of voice only)? We don't need instruments to worship God (no more than they needed wine for a Marriage celebration), but the instruments would not preclude a meaningful worship to God (no more than wine would hinder a meainingful marriage celebration)......now would they???





HAPPY NEW YEARS!!!

=========================

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]David Fields, let's be honest and unashamed: claim [ ]the message you authored.[/color]
[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Dave Fields,

The distinction between these two types of traditions has already been explained numerous times, but instrumental music lovers still don't get it.

Let's differentiate then by example:[/color]


--------- APOSTOLIC TRADITION ------ vs. --------- MAN-MADE (HUMAN) TRADITION ----

SPEAKING to yourselves in psalms and--|| Let the WORSHIP LEADER lead you to God's
hymns and spiritual songs, SINGING and|| holy presence; let the PRAISE TEAM of men
making melody in your heart to the----|| and WOMEN co-lead; and PLAY INSTRUMENTAL
Lord----------------------------------|| MUSIC unto the Lord



Last edited by Donnie.Cruz on January 10th, 2013, 4:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Anonymous
Anonymous

January 10th, 2013, 3:21 pm #73

Did Jesus have to supply wine for the wedding for the wedding to be a success? Was He fulfilling the desire to continue a tradition of having wine at the marriage celebration?
Which leads one to another thought.....considering the above dilemma and thought....would Jesus object to the tradition of instrumental music (compared to the tradition of voice only)? We don't need instruments to worship God (no more than they needed wine for a Marriage celebration), but the instruments would not preclude a meaningful worship to God (no more than wine would hinder a meainingful marriage celebration)......now would they???





HAPPY NEW YEARS!!!

=========================

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]David Fields, let's be honest and unashamed: claim [ ]the message you authored.[/color]
B said a few days ago...."We'd all like to know exactly when Rocky ripped Jude from his Bible, because he thinks that since Jude quotes the allededly uninspired Enoch, then Jude must also be uninspired."

That sort of statement, that analogy IS what makes this site despicable. Rocky NEVER inferred, from any notion or statement, that Jude must also be uninspired.

B's logic here is accusing Rocky of thinking "...that since Jude quotes the allededly uninspired Enoch, then Jude must also be uninspired."

This logic is false. Jude does quote Enoch, the person, but not necessarily the book. Jude never states that he gives credence to the book of Enoch. If the writings are similar from what Jude wrote and from what we see from the book of Enoch it may be only coincidental, as Jude NEVER gives credence that ALL or ANY of the book of Enoch to be inspired. THEREFORE if Rocky believes Enoch to be uninspired and an ADDITION to the Holy Word, it has nothing to do with what the writer Jude said.

FURTHERMORE this has nothing to do with one's (William Crump or "B") ability to logically think through these things, but his biased false notions on what HE believes to be right. He deliberately, falsely, and illogically sabotaged that accusation against Rocky.

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Dave Fields__________[/color]
Last edited by Donnie.Cruz on January 11th, 2013, 2:25 am, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Share

B
B

January 10th, 2013, 5:46 pm #74

It seems that Dave gets his back up whenever someone mentions "Enoch." Just roll with it, dude. Don't be (too) embarrassed that ya couldn't show us where the Scriptures explicitly limit the biblical canon to only 66 books. Rocky couldn't do it, either. If ya don't think Enoch (who was INSPIRED enough to make a prophecy about God that Jude quoted) deserves a place in the biblical canon, well, you do have free will, which means you are "free" to make all the decisions you want...no matter how really, really wrong they may be.
Quote
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

January 10th, 2013, 6:10 pm #75

Did Jesus have to supply wine for the wedding for the wedding to be a success? Was He fulfilling the desire to continue a tradition of having wine at the marriage celebration?
Which leads one to another thought.....considering the above dilemma and thought....would Jesus object to the tradition of instrumental music (compared to the tradition of voice only)? We don't need instruments to worship God (no more than they needed wine for a Marriage celebration), but the instruments would not preclude a meaningful worship to God (no more than wine would hinder a meainingful marriage celebration)......now would they???





HAPPY NEW YEARS!!!

=========================

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]David Fields, let's be honest and unashamed: claim [ ]the message you authored.[/color]
There is not a command, example, inference or REVERENT place for playing instruments when God ONLY calls us into assembly to Rest, Read and Rehearse the Word. Just in case there are some little Jimmy Jump Ups, it EXCLUDES vocal or instrumental rejoicing or high-sounding rhetoric. That is because however you teach it the COMMANDED RESOURCE in the Old and New Testaments is to "use that which is written for our learning."

There is no command, example or remote inference that DISCIPLES could possibly use "machines for doing hard work mostly in making war and in creating the anxiety or shock and awe to create mental excitement which is the laded burden.

Both the Canonical and None canonical literature ALWAYS associates the use of musical machines--which have the power to disable your rational or spiritual mind--with Making war, soliciting sexual customers, or NOT-commanded God-repudiating sacrificial systems "to make the lambs dumb before the slaughter."

It is of BIBLICAL PROPORTIONS that most groups and especially Church of christ "scholars" mounted a sudden and violent attack upon those who NEVER used instruments making THEM into the agents of the Devil. They KNOW and PLAN to sow massive discord (create dissonance or madness) to try to force people to do what they do not want to do and up to half will flee Babylon (worship teams) because of the OUTED PERSONA when they may not have strong Biblical foundations.

Quote
Like
Share

Anonymous
Anonymous

January 10th, 2013, 6:39 pm #76

Did Jesus have to supply wine for the wedding for the wedding to be a success? Was He fulfilling the desire to continue a tradition of having wine at the marriage celebration?
Which leads one to another thought.....considering the above dilemma and thought....would Jesus object to the tradition of instrumental music (compared to the tradition of voice only)? We don't need instruments to worship God (no more than they needed wine for a Marriage celebration), but the instruments would not preclude a meaningful worship to God (no more than wine would hinder a meainingful marriage celebration)......now would they???





HAPPY NEW YEARS!!!

=========================

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]David Fields, let's be honest and unashamed: claim [ ]the message you authored.[/color]
You never answered my question...."God has already listed every sin known to man. Name something that occurs, in thought or deed, which isn't listed?"

B said "Don't be (too) embarrassed that ya couldn't show us where the Scriptures explicitly limit the biblical canon to only 66 books."
I have already replied with the following...

The Preacher's Files
Sermon outlines, Bible Studies, Audio Sermons and more by preachers for the church of Christ.
By Mike Riley

Is The Bible Complete?

Additionally, James 1:25 states, But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth [therein], he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed. The word perfect in this passage is translated from the Greek word, teleios which signifies having reached its end (telos), finished, complete, perfect. In James 1:25, the word is referring to the complete revelation of Gods will and ways, whether in the completed Scriptures or in the hearafter (Vines, 1996, p. 466).

I left out a few paragraphs from Mr. Riley because I had already posted the whole file PLUS B (William Crump) and everyone else had seen the whole file too.

Now William Crump, what say you? Would what you crooned about...be considered a deliberate false statement, since you did NOT respond to my post? Regardless of what you think or believe, you did not respond with a reply, only an illogical question, which is not acceptable. You should know that going back to medical school days.

It is unfortunate that you are upset.

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Dave Fields______________[/color]
Last edited by Donnie.Cruz on January 11th, 2013, 2:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

January 10th, 2013, 6:43 pm #77

Did Jesus have to supply wine for the wedding for the wedding to be a success? Was He fulfilling the desire to continue a tradition of having wine at the marriage celebration?
Which leads one to another thought.....considering the above dilemma and thought....would Jesus object to the tradition of instrumental music (compared to the tradition of voice only)? We don't need instruments to worship God (no more than they needed wine for a Marriage celebration), but the instruments would not preclude a meaningful worship to God (no more than wine would hinder a meainingful marriage celebration)......now would they???





HAPPY NEW YEARS!!!

=========================

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]David Fields, let's be honest and unashamed: claim [ ]the message you authored.[/color]
When Paul outlawed female "authority"

http://www.piney.com/BabEaGifts.html

Fittingly Inanna got the father god Ea drunk before sealing the authority from him. That is the claim of the Vineyard or New Wineskings hostile takeover.

Research shows that the meaning of authentein changed dramatically over a period of 1,100 years. When we first find it in classical literature of the 6th century B.C., the word usually meant "to initiate" or "to be responsible for a murder." Jumping ahead to 200 or 300 A.D., this word usually meant "to claim ownership of property" either rightfully or wrongfully through fraud. During the same period it could also mean "to usurp power." However around the time the New Testament was written, the most common meaning of authentein was "to be, or claim to be the author or the originator of something." To underscore the point with a pun, this appears to be the authentic translation of authentein, the crucial verb of 1Timothy 1:12.

Musical worship teams ORIGINATED by claiming the authority of Jesus Christ: "to lead you into the presence of God." They will always ORIGINATE their version of truth: Paul in 1 Corinthians asks "Did the word ORIGINATE with you?" Of course, rhetoric has always been one of those effeminate roles and it comes as no surprise that they violated the same lay by ORIGINATING their own sermons.

The troublers at ACU seem bent on RESTORING women prophets or prophesiers. The prophesiers in all recorded history were most often women who gained power over males resulting in charismatic forms of what they laughingly call "worship services"--when Jesus sais that the kingdom DOES NOT come with observation meaning RELIGIOUS OBSERVATIONS they have abandoned themselves to perform.

The end-time Babylon Mother is the same Beginning Time Mother who was worshipped by the Jewish women at the temple. The Bible makes it certain that the Jerusalem Temple like all such institutions was plagued by both male and female prostitutes seeking whom they may devour.

I didn't say that THEY are guilty: I just say that they will never find any Biblical or other exception.

Quote
Like
Share

B
B

January 10th, 2013, 8:24 pm #78

You never answered my question...."God has already listed every sin known to man. Name something that occurs, in thought or deed, which isn't listed?"

B said "Don't be (too) embarrassed that ya couldn't show us where the Scriptures explicitly limit the biblical canon to only 66 books."
I have already replied with the following...

The Preacher's Files
Sermon outlines, Bible Studies, Audio Sermons and more by preachers for the church of Christ.
By Mike Riley

Is The Bible Complete?

Additionally, James 1:25 states, But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth [therein], he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed. The word perfect in this passage is translated from the Greek word, teleios which signifies having reached its end (telos), finished, complete, perfect. In James 1:25, the word is referring to the complete revelation of Gods will and ways, whether in the completed Scriptures or in the hearafter (Vines, 1996, p. 466).

I left out a few paragraphs from Mr. Riley because I had already posted the whole file PLUS B (William Crump) and everyone else had seen the whole file too.

Now William Crump, what say you? Would what you crooned about...be considered a deliberate false statement, since you did NOT respond to my post? Regardless of what you think or believe, you did not respond with a reply, only an illogical question, which is not acceptable. You should know that going back to medical school days.

It is unfortunate that you are upset.

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Dave Fields______________[/color]
Since B knows that the Scriptures do not explicitly limit God's Word to 66 books, B can easily accept them as the CURRENT canon but would have no problem if other books like Enoch were proven beyond the shadow of a doubt to be inspired and worthy to be members of the canon.

On the other hand, Dave, who has closed his mind and has emphatically stated that God's Word is absolutely complete at 66 books, that it could never be expanded, would blow a gasket, lose all control, and suffer deep depression (or much worse) if Enoch or other books became part of the canon. Dave reminds me of the short-sighted head of the U.S. Patent Office in the 19th century who, according to legend, wanted to close the patent office, because "everything that could be invented has been invented." Although that is just a legend, Dave's similar, short-sighted attitude is real. Dave believes that, because MEN decided on the biblical canon, then no further books could possibly be inspired. Consider the absurdity of such an attitude, given the FACT that the Scriptures do not limit God's Word to a certain number of books.

It is unfortunate that Dave takes the word of MEN and is so quickly eager to limit and deny what God is certainly capable of doing.

Quote
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

January 10th, 2013, 9:49 pm #79

Did Jesus have to supply wine for the wedding for the wedding to be a success? Was He fulfilling the desire to continue a tradition of having wine at the marriage celebration?
Which leads one to another thought.....considering the above dilemma and thought....would Jesus object to the tradition of instrumental music (compared to the tradition of voice only)? We don't need instruments to worship God (no more than they needed wine for a Marriage celebration), but the instruments would not preclude a meaningful worship to God (no more than wine would hinder a meainingful marriage celebration)......now would they???





HAPPY NEW YEARS!!!

=========================

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]David Fields, let's be honest and unashamed: claim [ ]the message you authored.[/color]
The Epistle of Barnabas: another opinion the Judaizers have to trump.

http://www.piney.com/FathEpBarna.html

Most religionism including the CHANGE or ecumenical rage among the not-ready-for-prime-time scholars and their dupes, want to restore the church to the Jacob-curse and God-abandoned Monarchy under the tribe of Levi. That is the ONLY positive "command" they hear by "a spirit" telling them that God commanded instrumental praise. The senior pastor system is also built upon the King Set over us who believes that HIS agenda it to deliberately sow discord and force you to JOIN the world instead of COMING OUT of the World.

We repeat that they PROMOTE their own agenda and have not a jot or tittle of support and indeed all recorded literature repudiates them as being evil. Jesus refused to PRAY for the World they want to join in a WORLD CONVENTION. God HIDES from the wise or SOPHIST: a sophist is a technically trained speaker, singer, instrument player or actor. Jesus called them hypocrites by pointing to Isaiah and Ezekiel 33 naming speakers, singers, instrument players and the ONLY audience they can collect.

The Epistle of Barnabas preserved complete in the 4th century Codex Sinaiticus where it appears at the end of the New Testament.

The Bible as we have it radically REPUDIATES musical instruments as the weapon of the Devil. There is no recorded example of the people assemblying for singing with instruments. All of the Church fathers and founders of denominations understood that there is NO RATIONALE for instruments and that instruments as at Mount Sinai stirs up the NEW WINESKIN and sexual urge.

Last edited by Ken.Sublett on January 10th, 2013, 9:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Anonymous
Anonymous

January 11th, 2013, 4:19 am #80

Did Jesus have to supply wine for the wedding for the wedding to be a success? Was He fulfilling the desire to continue a tradition of having wine at the marriage celebration?
Which leads one to another thought.....considering the above dilemma and thought....would Jesus object to the tradition of instrumental music (compared to the tradition of voice only)? We don't need instruments to worship God (no more than they needed wine for a Marriage celebration), but the instruments would not preclude a meaningful worship to God (no more than wine would hinder a meainingful marriage celebration)......now would they???





HAPPY NEW YEARS!!!

=========================

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]David Fields, let's be honest and unashamed: claim [ ]the message you authored.[/color]
:}


Just got to smile.......

Another good day!

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]David Fields________

(Surely you deserve credit for your smile.)[/color]
Last edited by Donnie.Cruz on January 11th, 2013, 5:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Share