even using Google or bing or any western searches even a.i. even using quotes to search is totally censored I can tell by comparing old searches I agree Yandex is the only one worth a damn
you have to attract white christians and to do so you need a Christianity free of judaizers, so no old testament, no gospels and no revelation, Paul and Christ alone, the rest ARE judaizers. this is a neo marionite church rejects the judaizers outright, makes the case for Paul and Jesus not actually being Jews also that we do not need the ot https://albany1845.wixsite.com/adventlearningcenter
My point is OT is unnecessary and unreliable, you yourself mention the various texts. You're basically saying Matthew is confused. Samson was a Nazirite, not from Nazareth. No where can this prophecy about Christ be found in the OT so is Matthew talking about a different OT or is Matthew wrong. That's the jist of my opinion, I could be wrong but it is based in Bible texts. Those texts you quoted do not say what Matthew says but wow nice try. Using your logic the word NZR means a city that doesn't exist yet and also is missing a letter to be Nazareth. how you went from Jesus is the NZR to Jesus came from Nazareth. Sorry not buying it
in the book of Matthew 2:23 where we are told that “Jesus came and resided in a city called Nazareth that what was spoken through the prophets might be fulfilled, ‘He shall be called a Nazarene.’” This statement does not appear anywhere in the Old Testament. In fact, at the time of the writing of the Old Testament, the city of Nazareth did not even exist! What texts are Matthew talking about? Not the ot but likely a different collection of texts or Matthew is wrong and proven false
When Paul mentioned ot texts he is always saying they're not binding on us. So they're not for us. The veil of Moses is a clear concise teaching about the ot.
The biblical canon was not around at the time of Paul. Scripture means Paul's letters prove otherwise. I can prove it.1 Cor 14:37. Paul never says the gospels or James etc are God's commands neither do those texts themselves.
The biblical canon was not around at the time of Paul. Scripture means Paul's letters prove otherwise. I can prove it.1 Cor 14:37. Paul never says the gospels or James etc are God's commands neither do those texts themselves.
You're assuming that scripture means the full canon of the Bible we have today. It doesn't it means Paul's letters! Paul says his letters are God's commands he doesn't say anything thing else is
Markshirley 0 points 2 months ago
because everyone knows it is a fraud, even the Jews admit it
/v/Christianity viewpost?postid=67e043f99117f
Markshirley 0 points 2 months ago
even using Google or bing or any western searches even a.i. even using quotes to search is totally censored I can tell by comparing old searches I agree Yandex is the only one worth a damn
/v/technology viewpost?postid=67e2d7e831396
Markshirley 0 points 2 months ago
yes Esther is the most fake and most gay
/v/Christianity viewpost?postid=67e043f99117f
Markshirley 3 points 2 months ago
I do like him so far but dont trust him. the guy who called out AIPAC the other day that the magas want to primary is better
/v/news viewpost?postid=67d98e26d1297
Markshirley 1 point 2 months ago
you have to attract white christians and to do so you need a Christianity free of judaizers, so no old testament, no gospels and no revelation, Paul and Christ alone, the rest ARE judaizers. this is a neo marionite church rejects the judaizers outright, makes the case for Paul and Jesus not actually being Jews also that we do not need the ot https://albany1845.wixsite.com/adventlearningcenter
/v/WhiteNationalism viewpost?postid=67d9a232ee6a1
Markshirley -1 points 3 months ago
try neo Marcionism it is liberating to be done with the old testament and the other Jewish books. Paul only.
https://albany1845.wixsite.com/adventlearningcenter
/v/Christianity viewpost?postid=67d884f66e6d4
Markshirley 1 point 3 months ago
fair enough I forgot about all the eastern vodka heads
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=67d831e4dea07
Markshirley 0 points 3 months ago
but are they drunkards? that's the difference. also do they brag about it so much?
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=67d831e4dea07
Markshirley -1 points 3 months ago
yep drunkard Irish peeps aka the Appalachian people
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=67d831e4dea07
Markshirley 0 points 3 months ago
ok and not ALL Jews hate Christ
/v/PaddysPub viewpost?postid=67d828eb07fa4
Markshirley 7 points 3 months ago
wonder if the FACT Biden was held as incompetent by his own staff that said he couldn't stand trial will play a role here
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=67d822c82af03
Markshirley 0 points 3 months ago
all Irish are liberal fags
/v/PaddysPub viewpost?postid=67d828eb07fa4
Markshirley 2 points 3 months ago
yeah I hate these yuppie faggots
/v/TellUpgoat viewpost?postid=67d82d0f48955
Markshirley -2 points 3 months ago*
My point is OT is unnecessary and unreliable, you yourself mention the various texts. You're basically saying Matthew is confused. Samson was a Nazirite, not from Nazareth. No where can this prophecy about Christ be found in the OT so is Matthew talking about a different OT or is Matthew wrong. That's the jist of my opinion, I could be wrong but it is based in Bible texts. Those texts you quoted do not say what Matthew says but wow nice try. Using your logic the word NZR means a city that doesn't exist yet and also is missing a letter to be Nazareth. how you went from Jesus is the NZR to Jesus came from Nazareth. Sorry not buying it
/v/Christianity viewpost?postid=67b37f2e98e25
Markshirley -2 points 3 months ago
in the book of Matthew 2:23 where we are told that “Jesus came and resided in a city called Nazareth that what was spoken through the prophets might be fulfilled, ‘He shall be called a Nazarene.’” This statement does not appear anywhere in the Old Testament. In fact, at the time of the writing of the Old Testament, the city of Nazareth did not even exist! What texts are Matthew talking about? Not the ot but likely a different collection of texts or Matthew is wrong and proven false
/v/Christianity viewpost?postid=67b37f2e98e25
Markshirley -1 points 3 months ago
When Paul mentioned ot texts he is always saying they're not binding on us. So they're not for us. The veil of Moses is a clear concise teaching about the ot.
/v/Christianity viewpost?postid=67b37f2e98e25
Markshirley -2 points 3 months ago
The biblical canon was not around at the time of Paul. Scripture means Paul's letters prove otherwise. I can prove it.1 Cor 14:37. Paul never says the gospels or James etc are God's commands neither do those texts themselves.
/v/Christianity viewpost?postid=67b37f2e98e25
Markshirley -2 points 3 months ago
The biblical canon was not around at the time of Paul. Scripture means Paul's letters prove otherwise. I can prove it.1 Cor 14:37. Paul never says the gospels or James etc are God's commands neither do those texts themselves.
/v/Christianity viewpost?postid=67b37f2e98e25
Markshirley -1 points 3 months ago
You're assuming that scripture means the full canon of the Bible we have today. It doesn't it means Paul's letters! Paul says his letters are God's commands he doesn't say anything thing else is
/v/Christianity viewpost?postid=67b37f2e98e25
Markshirley -1 points 3 months ago
Show me where some texts besides Paul claim they are God's commands?
/v/Christianity viewpost?postid=67b37f2e98e25
Markshirley -2 points 3 months ago
Yeah explain the veil of Moses. He knows the old testament is an obstacle
/v/Christianity viewpost?postid=67b37f2e98e25
Markshirley 0 points 3 months ago
Link doesn't work
/v/funny viewpost?postid=67b3c4fc76c6c
Markshirley 1 point 3 months ago
Nothing more pagan than the Jewish cult of Yahweh
/v/California viewpost?postid=67b3c46723935
Markshirley -1 points 3 months ago
Hey pal I figure if I use wix I can't be called an antisemite
/v/Christianity viewpost?postid=67b37f2e98e25
Markshirley -1 points 3 months ago
Besides Paul's claim in 1 Corinthians 14:37 nowhere else do texts in the NT claim to be scriptures
/v/Christianity viewpost?postid=67b37f2e98e25