In regard to what Jesus said to Peter, it appears that the Apostle John's presumption is in error.

[The Third One]

@ScottA,

Sorry I missed your post #42.

I do NOT think Paul is the Antichrist. I do not even think Paul is an antichrist. Hardly. Again, Paul is very much the opposite of anything like that. Paul is TOTALLY PRO-"Christ." So much so, Paul's roots led him to "believe" that Jesus being "the Christ" (along with the Resurrection) totally eclipsed Paul's initial and WONDERFULLY important testimony about what's been done for us on the cross. Paul wrote it. Actually, he copyrighted it. Unfortunately, he did not accept it. The Holy Spirit's nickname for Paul is similar to Jesus' nickname for Peter. The Holy Spirit calls him, "Rocky." It would have been a whole different story for the Jesus Concept (and for post-first-century humanity), had Paul/Rocky truly accepted what's been done for us on the cross, and then, gave himself enough time to walk around with a "true acceptor" head on his shoulders for a good awhile. But, it didn't happen. Instead, Paul tried to fix "the cross," Before Rocky could get the concept of PERFECT-Grace even twenty feet out of the starting gate, the police pulled him over and beat him into submission. 616 denotes the mile marker.

We should place flowers and a cross at that exact spot in every copy of Rocky’s letter to the Romans, as mourners do for an enshrined loved one lost to a fatality along the roadway. Saying, as we pass, “That’s where they got him.”

The Tradition of the Elders is “the police force” that successfully arrested Rocky and beat him senseless. The “trouble and persecution” that “fell” Rocky was Rabbinic Judaism and the Mishnah. Rocky, our take-it-to-the-face Christian hero, was simply beaten to a pulp by the indoctrinated dogma of Mosaic Law. Decades of tradition, pounding blow after blow inside his head (the Word wilting with every stroke).

 

[The Third One]

How does Jesus' final speech about Peter (and ALL of us) being led off as a slaves, link to Romans 6:16? Tune in to Post #35

 

[jd01]

The Great Fire of Rome was in July 64 CE. Nero started his persecution of the Christians in the city no doubt soon after, say August September since Peter was in town and as the leader he would have been arrested. Tacitus states games were held in which Christians were executed, since the coliseum in town had been destroyed, they would have had to have been held at the Hippodrome outside Rome, on Vatican Hill - in keeping with the tradition of the site of Peter's grave under St. Peter's. Since Nero celebrated his 10th anniversary (a big deal) these games were likely held in October where one of the highlights would have been the execution of Peter. I suspect John heard of this and the manner of his death soon after, which prompted him to write his Gospel in later 64 to 65 CE. Hence he would have been able to allude to Peter's death. There are other hints that Peter was already dead when the Gospel was written. John did take liberties in this regard.

 

[ScottA]

ANOTHER took over.

Once Paul became privileged to this info (the Apostles’ insider talk about Jesus being “the Christ” and “the Son of God”), what should have remained a secret became the battle cry of a brand new Religion; of which, no one can dispute, Paul was greatly instrumental in creating.

@ScottA writes, “Then your accusation is against Jesus Himself.”

I must have missed something. My accusation? I don’t recall “accusing” anyone of anything.

These are not MY disciples. I did not command them to be silence about ME being “the Christ.” So, who am I to accuse them of anything? All I am doing is stating the facts.

FACT #1: We have a SERIOUS problem. It is 2022, and we are no better off (sin-wise) than the day before John the Baptist’s announcement about the sins of the entire world, being taken AWAY.

FACT #2: A huge contributing factor to this disaster is that we are run (like robots) by a Religion that found the whole “Christ” thing a more important thing than truly accepting what’s been done for us on the cross.

FACT #3: Jesus, absolutely, and without question, commanded his disciples to tell NO ONE that he is the Christ:

Matthew 16:20 (KJV) “Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.”

And:

Mark 8:30 (KJV) “And he charged them that they should tell no man of him (being the Christ).”

Even Luke carefully heeds the command of Jesus by NOT openly penning “the Christ” into his commentary. Instead, referring to it as “that thing”:

Luke 9:21 (KJV) “And he (Jesus) straightly charged them (the Twelve) and commanded them to tell no man that thing.”

It is a simple fact that what Jesus’ commanded these guys... was disregarded by them.

You had first accused Paul as being that "ANOTHER", that let "the cat out of the bag" about who Jesus was...when actually Jesus did too--so you have accused them both.

And the high priest stood up in the midst and asked Jesus, saying, “Do You answer nothing? What is it these men testify against You?” 61 But He kept silent and answered nothing.

Again the high priest asked Him, saying to Him, “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?”

62 Jesus said, “I am. And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.” Mark 14:60-62​

As for the state of things now in 2022, I did address it in post #42. But don't misunderstand what has been taking place all of this time since "It is finished" on the cross by Jesus Christ. As He explained, "And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd." Which is not to say there has been any delay to all that was promised--that is the lie of the evil servant of which He also taught.

But no, all that He said would take place upon that very generation to whom He spoke, say "[you] will see" (--not some future generation), for He spoke to them personally--has come.

But I should think that since you believe you have determined things to be different than He said, that you too have believed what was taught by "false teachers" as it was foretold to occur--and therefore, that you are not ready to discuss the actual timing of events. If you can even conceive and are ready to hear how it could possibly be so, that what Jesus said about the timing as being "soon" during "this generation" all "that must shortly take place"--tell me, and we can discuss it.

 

[The Third One]

Hello @jd01,

I agree with you, for the most part. John, being the last living Apostle, he was certainly aware of Peter's death.

I would not go as far as to say that John "took liberties in this regard." I guess you would have to define for me exactly what you mean by that.

I think it is obvious that John DID know that Pete had died by crucifixion. And so, epiphany! THAT'S what Jesus must have been talking about when he told Pete, "When you are old, another will gird you and carry you where you do not want to go. Follow ME!"

John simply made an honest mistake. Jesus was saying, follow ME. Not "ANOTHER."

It seems that some people in this room are of the opinion, if we (as Christians) admit that John made a simple mistake, ALL IS LOST! We must tear down all of our John the Apostle statues and burn all of our Bibles -- for the Bible is in error!!! ALL is lost!

We DO need to take our Bible off the pedestal upon which we have put our Bible, and place it accordingly -- about five miles BELOW the Holy Spirit.

Jesus was neither talking about Peter's crucifixion nor encouraging him to pursue death by nail-puncture and suffocation.

Jesus was warning Peter about the outside RELIGIOUS influence that was soon going to turn Peter's head around.

In a very unhappy and cryptic mood, what was Jesus REALLY telling Peter?

That a Pharisee-Extremist was going to lead Peter AWAY from what Peter had been taught for the last 3 years.

And, what DID Jesus teach these guys for 3 years?

"Truly accept what I do for you, and ALL of your sins, past, present and future are forever turned into NOTHING. What does that leave, when you look at yourself in the mirror? A PERFECT person in and of God's Creation. Disregard Religion. Truly accept what I do for you... and then... simply 'BE' what you truly are. BE PERFECT, even as your Father in Heaven is PERFECT.”

I am sure we (those who have been following this thread) are all well aware, at this point, that Paul is "ANOTHER."

Jesus was telling Peter that Paul would become Peter's Master. That Paul would gird up Peter's tunic (as the slave that Peter was destined to become for Paul's teaching) and as Pete’s Master, Paul would send Peter out into the hot cotton fields, to work himself to DEATH.

Jesus knew good and well that Paul would give Peter (and ALL the rest of us) two choices. On which cotton plantation do you want to work yourself to DEATH? The SIN Plantation? Or the LAW Plantation?

Two paths. And, neither path has anything to do with what's been done for us on the cross. Both paths lead to the broad road of destruction, exactly as Jesus taught Peter (and the rest of the gang) for 3 years.

The Sin Planation is an obvious sinkhole. And, brothers and sisters, the Law Plantation is right next door and ALWAYS leads back to the Sin Planation.

 

[ScottA]

@ScottA,

Sorry I missed your post #42.

I do NOT think Paul is the Antichrist. I do not even think Paul is an antichrist. Hardly. Again, Paul is very much the opposite of anything like that. Paul is TOTALLY PRO-"Christ." So much so, Paul's roots led him to "believe" that Jesus being "the Christ" (along with the Resurrection) totally eclipsed Paul's initial and WONDERFULLY important testimony about what's been done for us on the cross. Paul wrote it. Actually, he copyrighted it. Unfortunately, he did not accept it. The Holy Spirit's nickname for Paul is similar to Jesus' nickname for Peter. The Holy Spirit calls him, "Rocky." It would have been a whole different story for the Jesus Concept (and for post-first-century humanity), had Paul/Rocky truly accepted what's been done for us on the cross, and then, gave himself enough time to walk around with a "true acceptor" head on his shoulders for a good awhile. But, it didn't happen. Instead, Paul tried to fix "the cross," Before Rocky could get the concept of PERFECT-Grace even twenty feet out of the starting gate, the police pulled him over and beat him into submission. 616 denotes the mile marker.

We should place flowers and a cross at that exact spot in every copy of Rocky’s letter to the Romans, as mourners do for an enshrined loved one lost to a fatality along the roadway. Saying, as we pass, “That’s where they got him.”

The Tradition of the Elders is “the police force” that successfully arrested Rocky and beat him senseless. The “trouble and persecution” that “fell” Rocky was Rabbinic Judaism and the Mishnah. Rocky, our take-it-to-the-face Christian hero, was simply beaten to a pulp by the indoctrinated dogma of Mosaic Law. Decades of tradition, pounding blow after blow inside his head (the Word wilting with every stroke).

As I said, there has been no delay to all that was promised.

 

[The Third One]

What is the worst problem with Paul “saving” you from one Master (SLAVERY to Sin) by throwing you into the clutches of yet ANOTHER Master? (SLAVERY to Obedience/Righteousness/the Law)??

Because as a slave to SLAVERY ALTERNATE, you are one fork AWAY from being sold right back on to the Sin-Road — SLAVERY. As Jesus says, there is no guarantee you will “stay in the family forever.” A Master can always sell a slave to yet another Master. In this case? Right back to Master Sin. The age-old road upon which father Rocky (Paul) has put his "Church." SLAVERY. A road that comes to a fork... offering two roads. The continuation of SLAVERY (the Sin Road). And, SLAVERY ALTERNATE (the Righteousness Road).

The same Two-Option pick Rocky’s ancestors had to choose from in the old days, long before Jesus made the scene. Back then, a man could choose a Life of sin... or a Life of righteousness. Same choice that Paul and his "Church" is given us today.

We have completely lost sight of what Jesus taught. We have no idea how stupidly-easy it is to become TOTALLY sinless.

Duh. Truly accept, 100%, with no "ifs," "ands" or "buts," what's been done for us on the cross. Easy-peesy.

Only we cannot get ALL of the "ifs, "ands" and "buts" out of our way.

The IFs are the most disastrous. They are conditions or “extra-beliefs” Christians place upon what’s been done for us on the cross. An IF always ends with: Then your faith is futile and you are still in your sins.

IF... you don’t believe Jesus wasn’t really born of a virgin, then your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. IF... you don’t believe Jesus is GOD, then your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. IF... you deliberately keep on sinning after you have received “the knowledge of the truth,” then your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. IF... you don’t believe the Bible is completely without error, then your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. IF... you’re not a Christian… IF... you’re not a member of OUR church… IF... you don’t straighten up… IF... you ever commit a mortal sin… the list goes on and on and ON.

It’s a gift.

Simple.

The ONLY thing required to gain the paid-in-full power of the gift is to truly accept it. The need for anything else — especially a condition — makes it no longer a gift. Actually, it makes it “no longer.” May I be PERFECTLY clear? Psychologically, any “IF” turns the gift into NOTHING.

Same with the endless ANDs of Christianity:

Sure, you need to “believe” Jesus died for your sins… AND... you need to lead an obedient, righteous Life… AND... do *Good* works… AND... go to church… AND... be baptized… AND... tithe ten-percent of your income… AND... pray every day… AND... witness every day… AND... read your Bible every day… AND... continually repent of your sins… AND... put on the armor of Paul... AND... die to yourself... AND... become Christ-like… AND, AND, AND — the list goes on... AND on… AND on… AND on. (It never ends.)

The Holy Spirit compels me to say it again. The need to add ANYTHING to simply and truly accepting what’s been done for you on the cross actually dilutes and deprecates what’s been done for you on the cross.

“ANYTHING you ADD to it TAKES AWAY from it.”

If you’d like to confess something to someone, nice. If you choose to read your Bible, great. However... simply put, you do not NEED to. Needing to religiously follow any of these ANDs sends a strong message: What Jesus did for me on the cross is NOT enough.

The BUTs of Christianity come in ALL shapes and sizes; however, the worst of them are the ones that nullify the power of the cross by redirecting things toward MAN’S ability to gain righteousness for himself:

Sure, Jesus Christ died for your sins, BUT... deliverance means becoming transformed into the image of Christ and that transformation is a long process.

Sure, redemption is a FREE gift from God, BUT... unattainable without obedience to Christ and good works.

Yes, Jesus Christ died for your sins, BUT... sin still has power over you, so you must continually fight the devil. BUT... first, put on the armor of Paul.

Self-defeating nonsense. To put on “the armor of Paul” is exactly that.

A put-on.

 

[The Third One]

Try the simple Truth on for size. Your own realization of you truly accepting what’s been done for you on the cross is what casts ALL your sin AWAY — YOUR realization — ALL your sins. The ones you’ve committed, the ones you are supposedly committing and the ones you supposedly have yet to commit. Venial sins. Mortal sins. Unintentional sins. Intentional sins. Sins that you “believe” are sins. And, sins that others point their finger at you and convince you are sins. Sins you have committed seventy times. And, sins you have committed seventy times seventy times.

To say otherwise is to deprecate what’s been done for you on the cross.

He died for venial sins, BUT... not mortal ones.

He died for unintentional sins, BUT... not intentional ones.

Yes, he died for that sin, BUT... we can’t keep committing that same sin again and again and expect what Jesus did for us on the cross to take care of it.

The disease is psychological.

The cure is psychological.

Indoctrinated Christians are wrapped up in truckloads of “ifs,” “ands” and “buts.” Any one of which, psychologically, self-destroys the pure power of what’s been done for us on the cross.

Alas! What can we do??

Each and every one of these engrained “ifs,” “ands” and “buts” (attached in any way to what’s been done for us on the cross) must be dismantled and eliminated in order for a thinking person to TRULY ACCEPT what’s been done for us on the cross — 100% — with NO ifs, ands or buts.

Sin is a THINKING disease.

Jesus did NOT say that we need to "REPENT." "REPENT" is a falsehood and yet another "Church" OVERDUB.

Metanoeo.

Jesus said, we need to change our way of thinking.

 

[ScottA]

I am sure we (those who have been following this thread) are all well aware, at this point, that Paul is "ANOTHER."

But not the another Jesus spoke of.

 

[face2face]

But not the another Jesus spoke of.

Is this thread making sense to you? I'm struggling to understand it;s point.
Maybe someone can sum it up in a paragraph or two.

 

[ScottA]

Is this thread making sense to you? I'm struggling to understand it;s point.
Maybe someone can sum it up in a paragraph or two.

I would summarize it in this way:

Forum member "The Third One" has determined that Jesus left things well in hand to be soon on track with what He came preaching, but then Paul came in and bumped Peter out of lead position of building the church and introduced Pharisaic foundations deflecting the church into a 2,000 year rabbit hole.
​

Which I would complement him on--not for his content and assumption--but for the fact that He is not asleep.

​

Jesus, Peter, and Paul all explained it better...and the church did exactly what was foretold of them, which began with the spirit of antiChrist already at work way back then.

 

[face2face]

I would summarize it in this way:

Forum member "The Third One" has determined that Jesus left things well in hand to be soon on track with what He came preaching, but then Paul came in and bumped Peter out of lead position of building the church and introduced Pharisaic foundations deflecting the church into a 2,000 year rabbit hole.
​

Which I would complement him on--not for his content and assumption--but for the fact that He is not asleep.

​

Jesus, Peter, and Paul all explained it better...and the church did exactly what was foretold of them, which began with the spirit of antiChrist already at work way back then.

So it's commonly understood that Peter took a little longer to catch up to where Paul was however 3 years being taught of the Lord in Arabia would do that. Peter was commissioned to take the Gospel to the Jews and Paul to the Gentiles. It is true that Catholicism has its roots in Judaism no doubt about that!

Does "the third one" have some contention against Paul?

 

[The Learner]

Hi @face2face,

Now, we’re talking. (Literally)

You state, “I’m not certain what you are making of this word ‘Gird.’”

Okay. Let’s try this again. In his Good-Bye Speech, Jesus specifically warns Peter that “Another will gird you.” Basically, to gird one’s self is to transform a tunic into a diaper around your hips. It allows mobility for hard labor (you can find the full details of this process on my second post in this thread).

We have indisputably established that Jesus is certainly NOT warning Peter about one of the Roman “Nailers” (at Pete’s crucifixion site) — some party to the execution squad, who will take the time and courtesy to gird Peter’s tunic around Peter’s loins, so that Peter can look presentable... before they slaughter him to death. Quite impossible. Why? Because, by order of the Roman Crucifixion Handbook, condemned men are ALWAYS crucified entirely naked.

Thus, the problem with YOUR theory:

You need to account for WHOM Jesus means by “ANOTHER.” Yet, even more perplexing, why on earth would ANOTHER person be girding Peter?

Actually, not so perplexing at all. There is one (and only one) reason why any living man (man 1) would be girded by ANOTHER man (man 2). Only if man 1 is a SLAVE, being prepared for hard labor by his MASTER, man 2.

Jesus warns Peter, “You will extend you hands.”

John mistakenly assumes, this means, “hands extended” out to Peter’s left and right. As in crucifixion. That is one of the big reasons John assumes that this is Jesus’ way of “Signifying by what death (crucifixion) Peter should glorify God” (John 21:19). Oops. John overlooked the, “ANOTHER will GIRD you” part — which completely rules out the idea that Jesus is talking about Peter’s death by crucifixion.

Yes, Jesus warns Peter that Peter will extend his hands outward. (Re-picture that image.) Extended out IN FRONT of Peter. Jesus is telling Peter what the future holds for him — that Peter will be led off as a slave... by ANOTHER... who “will gird you, and carry you where you do not want to go.” Not to martyrdom.

To slavery. Where no one wants to go.

This is nowhere near as complicated as you are trying to make it out to be. Concentrate on Jesus’ Good-Bye speech in its entirety. You are disagreeing, without considering what comes earlier in the speech. Jesus — reminding Peter of his FREEDOM.

Real FREEDOM — that Peter is destined to willingly trade off... for slavery.

EVERY BIT OF THIS is contained within the Good-Bye speech. And, THAT is what you need to address. But, first, take your time to reexamine the entire Good-Bye speech. Even THAT will do you no good unless you get your head out of the Box. Try your best to read it without the Church whispering in your ear. You have been Church-Taught HOW you are supposed to interpret these verses. Get your head out of the Box, and reexamine it... from every angle.

You write, “Peter being prepared to die… is actually false, because he denied his Lord three times.” I guess you must have forgotten what you, yourself wrote, only two sentences prior, “Peter was now fully aware how he would die, compare 2 Peter 1:14.”

Peter’s past “three times denial” is high octane gasoline for his present martyr fire: “I’ll never let THAT happen again!”

AND: “I’LL show ’em just how well I can die!”

 

[The Learner]

It makes sense that they would put dippers on those on a cross, not to see human waste products.

 

[The Learner]

Start at In regard to what Jesus said to Peter, it appears that the Apostle John's presumption is in error.

 

[ScottA]

Does "the third one" have some contention against Paul?

I should let him answer.

 

[The Third One]

@The Learner,

The Romans did not put diapers on anyone condemned to a cross. No one had camera-equipped cell phones in the first century to capture a picture (for us) of the Grim-Reality of Roman crucifixion. But, please... do not be naïve enough to trust the paintings that, yes, ALL of us have seen — paintings, which are nothing more than the (centuries-later) artistic work of prudes, who literally dressed-up the Truth.

Hanging naked in public was part of the punishment of Roman crucifixion (and an additional deterrent... for onlookers).

@facetoface asks yet another beautiful question. Beautiful, because his question is so wonderfully honest. “Is this thread making sense to you?” he admits that he is “struggling to understand its point.” Again, may I commend facetoface. And, thank him for his honesty. I agree wholeheartedly with his suggestion: “Maybe someone can (or should) sum it up (for us) in a paragraph or two.”

@ScottA is the most brilliant participant (thus far). Not to take anything AWAY from the rest of you participants and onlookers. The thing is, one must first be awake — in order for one to start making sense of ALL this. Actually, one needs to be awake... to start making sense.

As for face2face’s request (the submitting of “two paragraphs”)? We have only one contestant.

ScottA writes, “I would summarize it in this way:

1) “Forum member ‘The Third One’ has determined that Jesus left things well in hand to be soon on track with what He came preaching, but then Paul came in and bumped Peter out of lead position of building the church and introduced Pharisaic foundations deflecting the church into a 2,000 year rabbit hole.

2)“Which I would complement him on — not for his content and assumption — but for the fact that He is not asleep. Jesus, Peter, and Paul all explained it better...and the church did exactly what was foretold of them, which began with the spirit of antiChrist already at work way back then.”

Dear people, we ALL need to wake up. ScottA is awake (more so than many); yet, still... only partially awake. In my humble, yet considered opinion, about 10% awake.

ScottA is well informed to recognize that I am not asleep. Neither is the Living God. Thus the distinction, “Living.”

I don’t know if anyone else in here recognized it. Our Father in Heaven recently winked at ALL of us in here. By way of ScottA’s typo. Notice (if you would), ScottA capitalized “He” in reference to me, The Third One: ie: “…the fact that He is not asleep.” Truthfully, the typo is Reality, only in the sense that these are not my Words that I have been sharing with you. Well, granted, they have become my words; but, only after me being pummeled by Him (GOD)... into awakeness (if I can take the liberty to coin a word). Not to be confused with “wokeness” (lol).

Whether it was a typo (or not) is something only ScottA can confirm — to himself and/or to the rest of us, if he’d like. Either way, (to us and especially to himself) ScottA is being as honest as face2face. We ALL need to be honest with each other. Honest as Nathaniel; for, yes, Jesus declared the Apostle Nathaniel to be the most honest man Jesus knows. If it was not a typo, and ScottA meant to add the capitalization there, well then, I would say that my assessment of ScottA’s “awake-Stock” has almost doubled. Making him more like 18% awake. (lol)

I have been talking to The Living God of Light about these things for a good while, now. Much of what us Christians have been dogmatized to “believe” went down in flames in His many conversations with me — with me playing “the Christian solider,” fighting much the same fight that some of you in this very room have been fighting. But, I sure did learn a few things. Not that I was particularly “chosen” by God as something “special.” We have ALL been chosen. We are ALL special. I just happened to be available. Purely one in ten billion. The right place. The right timing. No better no worse than anyone else.

I have not been in a Christian chat-room for quite some time. Why I came to this one is of no human design. I closed my eyes and picked one. It was simply time to enter one again. So, here I am... with you wonderful people (I mean that sincerely), persuaded, as I am, by the Living God of Light to express my humble, yet considered opinion about what “the cross” means to me.

Actually, there is only one special me-thing about it.

I can honestly take the oath. Hooked up to a lie detector. Subpoenaed into a court of law (or before Congress). Hand on the King James. The Truth, the whole Truth, and not any other thing but the God’s-honest Truth. I have truly accepted that ALL of my sin has been taken AWAY by what’s been done for me on the cross. I have accepted it, 100%. No ifs. No ands. No buts.

ScottA compliments my alertness (ye-haw! J) but not my “content and assumption” (awwhh! pouty-face L — lol) As for the substance of ScottA’s “two paragraph” summation, I will briefly mention (in one long paragraph) a few items. Some of them... big items. ScottA is right on the money about “Pharisaic foundations deflecting the church into a 2,000 year rabbit hole.” True, but not even half the problem. The rotten religious “Reality” we are Living in is much worse than that. As for, “Paul came in and bumped Peter out of lead position of building the church.” Fifty points. That hits the outer rim of center-target. But, I’ll do ya one better than that. Jesus had no intention of building any “Church.” Learn the Truthful-Translation of Matthew 16:18 (Original Greek): “Upon this rock I will build of me my gathering, and the gates of Hell will not overcome it.” It is a reckless diminishment (for our publishing Bible-Makers) to overdub “my gathering” with “my church.” Neither God nor Jesus “has” a church. Hence, to amalgamate “church” with “my” is profane. “The Church” is entirely man’s invention. There is no Church “of” GOD. Jesus would no more start a church than Groucho Marx would start a country club. No doubt, it is arduous to the ear for a Mature-Christian to even hear such “content” (much less agree with it) but, I can assure you, it is no “assumption” on my part. To know the Truth of this, one must go ALL the way back to the original Greek. The gates of Hell will not overcome Jesus’ gathering. By sacred pledge, Jesus clearly defines his gathering: John 12:32 (Original Greek): “And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw ALL men to myself” — ALL of humanity. It is a Biblical fact that, once Hell has served its purpose — and is emptied of ALL human souls ever put therein — Hell itself will be incinerated. An empty Hell, my dear friends, is thrown into Fire Lake. Yep. “The Good News” is a lot gooder than most Church-Taught Christians can imagine. As for, “the spirit of antichrist”? The word “antichrist” first appeared in John’s epistles. The word is found nowhere else in the Bible. According to John, the term applies to anyone (or any spirit) who would declare one of three lies: 1, (1John 2:22) “the lie, that Jesus is not the Christ”; 2, (1John 4:3) “the lie, that Jesus was not sent to us by God”; and, 3, (2 John 1:7) “the lie, that Jesus Christ did not actually come to us in the flesh.” Jesus never mentioned the word (antichrist) once. And, why would he? Jesus didn’t even want his Apostles to mention the word “Christ” nor “the Son of God” to anyone. That is also the God’s-honest Truth. Some crafty accuser may be stupid enough to say, well then, what you are saying makes Jesus an antichrist. (Buzzer sound!) Wrong. Jesus (the Christ), telling his closest followers not to tell anyone that he is the Christ, does not make Jesus an antichrist nor anti-Christ. It simply means, Jesus is divinely intelligent and ALL-Seeing. He was trying to prevent yet another big problem. A big, serious problem that Christianity and, consequentially, the entire world has inherited (in spite of what Jesus commanded his crew). That problem being, that Jesus, himself, would become more important (to us)... than what he did for us on the cross. So, where did the word “antichrist” come from? Wives-tales and scuttlebutt. 1 John 2:18, is the first time John ever speaks of it. Upon him declaring, “the last hour, it is” (whatever you’d like to make of that), John “officially” incorporates the word “antichrist” into “Scripture” by starting with, “You may have heard (rumors) about...” (LOL) That’s a great way to start Christian Dogma. (LOL) With gossip. Well, thanks to our beloved brother, John’s commentary (Thanks, John!) now the word “antichrist” is “Holy Scripture,” hermetically protected in a mayonnaise jar that modern-day Fundamental Christians call, “Inerrancy.” You may also find it funny to know (both funny ha-ha and funny-amazing) that the same word does not appear once in the Book of Revelation — you know, John’s Book of Revelation — as in “The Antichrist.” The perverted “Eschatology” of connecting the word “antichrist” with “the Beast” in Rev, Chapter 13, is pure folklore and non-Biblical. We could talk about that in great detail, too, if you’d like. I get the idea that ScottA would love to talk about it. (Am I right, Scott?) Me too. For different reasons, I’d bet. To me, it’s as fun as watching cartoons. “Eschatology.” That’s a twenty-dollar Christianeese word that comes to us from the Greek word, “éskhatos” (meaning “last”).

 

[The Third One]

Back to face2face’s question. What is the point of this thread? Our beloved brother, ScottA, has given me the green-light: “I (ScottA) should let him (The Third One) answer.” Okay. Here are my “two paragraphs”:

1) As individuals, we ALL need to know, take and (consequentially) possess... the most important of ALL possible Realities: “I have truly accepted, 100%, with no “ifs,” “ands” or “buts,” that ALL of my sin (ALL “evils” that anyone, including myself could ever accuse me of) has been taken AWAY by what’s been done for me on the cross.” Then... I can go on with my Life, in full-possession of that Reality. Simple.

2) Our Religion has made the possession of that Reality worse than difficult. The “ifs,” “ands” and “buts” (weaved and cross-stitched throughout Christianity) make that Reality practically impossible for anyone to truly accept — much less, so that “ALL of humanity” can truly accept it. Our Father is of the opinion that we can still undo this psychological mess. Oh, yes. The problem is not spiritual. The problem is and has always has been psychological. The cancerous mental disease that we took into our thinking (“The Knowledge of Good & Evil”) is psychological. The cure that Jesus gives us (What’s-Been-Done-For-Us-On-the-Cross) is also psychological. The truly accepted cure renders us PERFECTLY FREE of our cancerous mental disease. “FREE-Indeed,” as Jesus says. FREE as little children. “Truly, truly I say to you. When you were young (as Peter walked with Jesus for over 3 years, his mind became ‘young’ again — ‘young’ like a little child) you tied a strap around yourself (total FREEDOM) and walked where you wanted to walk (even on water). But when you are old, you will extend your hands and another will gird you, and carry you where you do not want to go.” To slavery. Somehow…Peter’s (and the entire world’s) cross-bought FREEDOM got... twisted back... into slavery. How? By the way of “Another.” Although another starts out strong, authentically leading us down the True Jesus-Path, soon after, another adds a fork in the Path. Another offers us two (and only two) old roads to choose from. Neither of these old roads have anything to do with the cross-bought FREEDOM that has been paid for us in-full. To the contrary. Both roads offered lead to slavery.

“Do Not Pass ‘Go’ — Go Directly To...” Romans 6:16.

Were it up to me, we would already be discussing Romans 6:16 in great detail. Yet, not one of you theologians nor Christian apologists have questioned or made one comment to me about ALL of what I have already posted about it. That’s PERFECTLY okay. We can take this as slow as you would like, and keep banging AWAY at what Jesus told Peter in his farewell speech. That’s PERFECTLY fine with me. But, just to give you “the GPS” on where this is heading... once we finally get around to taking a very good look at Romans 6:16, a huge discussion will ensue. That discussion may lead us wherever logic (propelled by the absolute Truth of the Holy Spirit) takes us.

I can hear it now. What about this? And, what about that?

The Holy Plan of God is to kill every “if,” “and” and “but” in the process. Within the mix of it, God will teach us the true Words of Jesus. Specifically, “RANSOM,” “AWAY,” “PERFECT,” “FREEDOM” and “ALL.”

Doesn’t it sound like great fun?

As far as I’m concerned, it will be. Let us continue being kind to each other; and, I promise you, this will be enlightening. And, entertaining. God has specifically commanded me to keep it fun. Quite serious as ALL this stuff certainly is, He does not want this discussion to become a dismal boor. Initially, it may be a tough ride for some of you (if you insist on staying in the Box). Lord willing, I will try my best to help you step out of it (so you can look at the lopsided shape of it... from the outside... of the cardboard structure). Albeit, sometimes, tougher than trying to deprogram a Moonie, I give you my solemn pledge: I will try my best to help.

Allow me a moment to bring any newbies up to speed on the initial topic, which I have clumsily entitled: “In regard to what Jesus said to Peter, it appears that the Apostle John’s presumption is in error.” The Holy Spirit lovingly refers to this thread as: “Door Number One.” Always, the Holy Spirit, with such beautifully simple language.

Anyway, back to the grind.

Esteemed brother or sister, @The Learner: you are stating a universal Christian assumption, based upon how we have ALL been Church-Taught to see these verses. That... to tie someone’s hands and to “gird” someone, are the same thing.

It is simply out of the question to gird someone’s hands.

Factually, to “gird” someone is the involved process of converting a tunic around the loins. Not the hands. Jesus warns Peter that both will happen to Peter. That “Peter will extend his hands” and that “another will gird him.”

We ALL take it for granted (and rightfully so) that when Jesus says, “you will extend your hands” Jesus means that Peter’s hands will be tied.

John assumes that Jesus means, hands extended outward to the left and to the right... tied to a cross. You (The Learner) presume (as do I) that Jesus is predicting that Peter will, willingly, extend both of his hands, out in front of him... tied together. Only, like John (with Peter’s crucifixion in mind), you envision Peter, being led off, with his hands tied in front of him... to be crucified.

I see Peter being led off, with his hands tied in front of him... as a slave — for two indisputable reasons.

1.) Jesus is not only talking about what “another” will do with Peter’s hands. That “another” will tie Peter’s hands in front of him and lead him off as a slave; like a donkey. A human-donkey, who forgot most of what Jesus taught for 3 years. And, of course, this actually did happen, exactly as Jesus predicted that it would. With stars in his eyes, Peter ended up following “another,” a Pharisee-Extremist, who put the old and the new together, to form a brand new Religion. Obviously, Peter disregarded that specific Jesus-Warning as well: “Do not put new wine in old wineskins.” Moreover…

Jesus is also talking about what “another” will do with Peter’s loins.

“Another will gird you.”

 

[The Third One]

To gird (one’s self) means to transform a tunic up above the knees and around the hips, like a diaper. @facetoface argued that Jesus is not being literal here. On the contrary, Jesus is being totally specific here. There is only one reason anyone girds himself (and one reason alone). To provide mobility, in preparation for hard labor. Here (in his Good-Bye Speech) Jesus is even more specific than that. There is only one reason (and one reason alone) “another” will gird you. Only if you were a slave, being prepared by your master, for hard labor.

Nearly everything Jesus says relates to What’s-Been-Done-For-Us-On-the-Cross. So, then... how does What’s-Been-Done-For-Us-On-the-Cross relate to Peter, being prepped by his master (Paul) for hard labor? Truly, there is not one thing hard nor laborious about truly accepting what’s been done for us on the cross. For, “Jesus’ yoke” upon us “is easy and his burden is light.” Truly accepting What’s-Been-Done-For-Us-On-the-Cross is as easy as activating your credit card. (One simple call.) ALL you need do is truly take What’s-Been-Done-For-Us-On-the-Cross. Your part (in this) is as light of a burden as landing on “Community Chest” (in Monopoly) and simply... taking... your Get-Out-Of-Jail-For-FREE card. It’s that simple. Right? Yikes! I’m asking that question to a group of people who have been religiously taught a repetitive and rigorous religious routine that is anything but simple! Christian dogma teaches that, besides everything else that is religiously required of you, the very best you can possibly do... is die for “the cause”!

2.) Peter wanted to die for “the cause.” The Holy Spirit confirms it. To martyrdom (by way of crucifixion) is exactly where Peter wanted to go. That’s a very important fact. Why? Because, in his Good-Bye speech, Jesus specifically tells Peter that “another will take (Peter) where (Peter) does not want to go.” To much worst than “martyrdom.” To slavery.

Jesus’ “Prediction-Come-True” is totally confirmed by the two-roads-to-slavery offered at Romans 6:16.

Who is “another”? First, our beloved sister, @L3astAmOngManyB13ss3d, got it right. Next, it is clear, our beloved brother, @ScottA... “understands”... whom I think “another” is; but, yet, ScottA disagrees with my “assumption,” offering, by his own pen, no alternative for “the another Jesus spoke of,” other than ghostly allusions to the unknown boogie-man possessed by the spirit of antichrist. Good luck with that assertion.

“Another,” as Jesus cryptically refers to him (in his Good-Bye speech), is none other than Paul of Tarsus.

That is not an “accusation against Paul” (as ScottA was, at one point, accusing me of — wow, how ironic, jeeese). Neither I (nor Jesus) is accusing Paul of being another-antichrist, nor another-devil, nor another-wicked criminal (although, the facts are indisputable, that Paul was indeed a documented murderer). Jesus is simply referring to Rocky/Saul/Paul of Tarsus as being... another-person. Another-guy. “Hey Peter... and oh, no... my sheep, too! Another-human being will gird you, and carry you where you do not want to go!”

The proof is clearly found at Romans 6:16, where Paul crashes the airplane. From there (as Paul takes to his feet and starts his walk (from the crash site), the evidence only piles up, higher and higher. The proof goes from incontrovertible to overwhelming. For, after Romans 6:16, the disaster only gets worse and worse, as Paul continues onward.

I find it remarkable that no one in this room has commented (yet) on Romans 6:16.

Romans 6:16, is actually the hub of this thread.

Jesus predicts (in his Good-Bye speech) that our FREEDOM (brutally earned for us on the cross) will be reversed into slavery. Paul fulfills that prophecy. Paul’s reversal (at Romans 6:16) throws the “FREE-Indeed” part of the Good News, right back into slavery. That’s the huge discussion that we should be having, right now. For, that is what happened to the Christian “Faith” — (as ScottA correctly assess) — “early on.” And, is still happening, to this very day.

Christian dogma is, at least, 95% in error. I know that figure may be hard for a Mature Christian to hear (much less comprehend), but, God as my Witness, that is actually a conservative figure. Way too much for us to chew up in one meal. So, for sure, we have to take it slowly, one little bite at a time.

I think we are ready to proceed to the hub (Romans 6:16). See posts #35-37 — please, take the time to read them carefully.

Yes, we started this thread with the Good-Bye Speech... because... of our Savior’s specific and very sad Good-Bye to Peter. Sad, indeed. For “back to slavery” is what Jesus saw... in the future... for Peter and “the sheep.”

And, that leads us directly into Romans 6:16.

Thank you ALL for your participation. Love and peace to you ALL.

Have a nice Sunday,

The Third One

 

[L.A.M.B.]

I believe in God with all my heart, mind, and soul. Matthew 22:35-38 ( cxt )
He presents himself in the Father, (who is a spirit ) John 4:22-25 ( cxt) the Son,
( God made flesh to dwell among us for a time to complete the perfect salvation), John 1:12-15
( cxt) and the Holy Spirit, ( who abides with us as our teacher, comforter, transforming us by his fruit)!
1Corinthians 2:8-11 ( cxt)

I am a simple woman who believes the Word is inspired by the Holy Ghost, written by chosen ,holy, anointed men!
2 Timothy 3:14-17 ( cxt)
There is no need for a diploma in seminary nor bible college! We do not need outside sources to solidify the Word if we have the TRUE HOLY SPIRIT leading us. Romans 8:7-10 ( cxt ) Try the spirits to see whether they be of God ! 1 Corinthians 2:10-13 ( cxt ); 1 John 4:4-7
( cxt)

God does not lie ! Numbers 23:17-20
( cxt) He will Never lead us astray from his TRUTH, and HIS WORD IS TRUTH, John 17:15-18 (cxt) so let every man be a liar ! Romans 3:2-5 ( cxt)

If what someone says goes against the Word of God, then he falls into 2 categories, he is either an infidel or a liar !