8 thoughts on “Do I LOVE the LORD or Not BY CHARLES SPURGEON!!”

1. I’m not sure what you mean by “BLOCK WORDPRESS”. I’m guessing you mean the block letters. No need to reply, Kristi. I can’t help anyway. I’ll prayo that whatever the problem is, you can get it changed.

   When I wrote for a blog, it was a wordoress blog. We had a few problems with it ourselves. Could not ever resolve most of them. Thankfully they were only nuisances. They didn’t prevent us from posting.

   LikeLiked by 1 person

   Reply

   • the reason I DO NOT LIKE THIS ANYMORE BECASUE I CANNOT MAKE EDIT HTML AND I CANNOT MAKE BLUE AMYMORE!!

     I DO NOT LIKE WORDPRESS ANYMORE!!

     LOVE ❤ ALWAYS AND SHALOM, YSIC ❤

     KRISTI ❤

     LikeLiked by 3 people

   • The devil is messing with you because you make a difference. It happens to me all the time. I have to pray and bind Satan in so many areas or I would not have a blog. I ‘ll put your blog in my prayers. Maybe the problems will stop. Satan is a creep! Love you, Kristi!

     LikeLiked by 2 people

   • I’LL be Praying too. I wish there was something more I could do. If I think of anything I’ll let you know.

     Heavenly Father, we lift up to You our beloved sister in Christ, Kristi PLease take this cause of hers into Your charge and give her assistance! I ask this in the holy name of Jesus. Amen.!!

     LikeLiked by 1 person

   • T’shuva remembers the oath sworn to the Avot they they alone would father the chosen Cohen people. The brit cut with the Avot: 1. They alone would father the chosen Cohen People. 2. The chosen Cohen People would forever inherit the oath sworn land of Canaan. Korach did not rebel against either basis of the brit cut with the Avot by HaShem.

     Korach’s rebellion rejected the leadership of Moshe and Aaron. No different than the much later NT and Koran rejected the prophetic mussar of Moshe and Aaron. Historic/Conservative and Reform Judaism likewise reject the prophetic mussar foundation of the Torah as well. Korach and his 250 “leaders” rejected Moshe’s Sanhedrin court of 71.

     Just as in the rebellion lead by the ערב רב antisemites murdered the entire Sanhedrin which Moshe established prior to his aliya unto Har Sinai, so too Korach’s rebellion likewise rejected the 2nd Great Sanhedrin; just as the ערב רב threatened to kill Aaron so too Korach threatened to kill Moshe and Aaron. The 2nd Sinai commandment centers upon ערב רב Israelites worship of other Gods. His rebellion against the leadership of Moshe and Aaron negated the מלאך status of Moshe sent to Egypt – together with Aaron – by HaShem, to take Israel out of g’lut and bring them to the oath sworn land of Canaan.

     The ערב רב just as לשון הרע וגאווה the dominant tuma spirits which promoted rage and hatred by which רשעים slaughtered the first Great Sanhedrin which Yitro rebuked Moshe to establish, so too the Wilderness generation in the day of Korach still clung to the domination of tuma middot rather than tohor middot – the Horev revelation of the Oral Torah. Therefore post the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev, Korach in point of fact rejected the Oral Torah, together with the doomed/cursed Wilderness Generation!

     This Torah mussar defines the av tuma avoda zara of the Assyrian imported Shomronim who converted out of fear of lions, the Tzeddukim, Karaites, rabbinic statute law which replaced Oral Torah פרדס inductive logic for Greek syllogism deductive logic as expressed through statute halachic religious codes! Yovel and Sanhedrin lateral common law courts of Capital Crimes and Torts fundamentally require that the chosen Cohen People rule the oath sworn land of Canaan. Just as Israel rebelled against Moshe and Aaron, the heads of the Great Sanhedrin and attempted to conquer Canaan – with no tohor middah obligation to rule conquered Canaan with righteous judicial justice – no different than the kings of the 10 tribes of Israel – so too Korach and his 250 sought to replace the Great Sanhedrin Court with a different judicial system.

     This central Torah theme, likewise taught through the death of the two eldest sons of Aaron for offering “strange fire”. How does the Torah define “strange fire”? The korban of Cain serves as the basis by which HaShem reject the premise that the seed of the Avot determined through birth – first born son. Hevel’s korban accepted because that korban dedicated wisdom time-oriented Av commandments as קדוש קדושים. Time oriented wisdom commandments defines the k’vannah of the Aggadic creation story. The dedication of Torah wisdom as the “heart” k’vannah of Torah commandments separates the lower/secondary commandments which serves as precedents which elevates commandments which do not require k’vanna from Av commandments which do require k’vanna.

     This כוונה בסיסי makes an eternal separation between קדוש discerned from קדוש קדושים. The משל model of the Mishkan instructs this mussar as does Rabbi Yechuda’s interpretation of בכל לבבך\כם of tefillah דאורייתא – קריא שמע. The vision to conquer Canaan and rule this land with righteous Sanhedrin common law defines the mussar rebuke of Natan against David. Where the latter’s Yatzir Ha’Ra evil eye jealously sought to copy and duplicate how Goyim worship their Gods. The mussar of “blood on his hands” directly rebukes David’s failure to judge Uriah through a Sanhedrin courtroom rather than rely upon a רשע general to do his dirty work.

     T’NaCH commands mussar. T’NaCH not a history book. The mussar of prophetic mussar separates tohor middot from tumah middot which dominates the heart. Specific details throughout the Ages, compares to the facets of a diamond. Each witness testifies based upon his limited perspective. The Front, Side, Top views of a blue print look radically different from one another but together they permit the contractor to see a three dimensional vision from a two dimensional sheet of paper. The k’vannah of kre’a shma – to accept the yoke of the kingdom of Heaven, stands upon the basis: תורה לא בשמים היא. This foundation, like the oaths sworn to the Avot does not change like a woman’s fashion of dress.

     Just as HaShem does not change from Spirit to words, so too the 13 Oral Torah middot does not change the “pronoun” רוחה קודש unto profane words. The 13 Horev Oral Torah middot – not “rules of interpretation”. The latter rabbinic middot of Hillel, Akiva, Yishmael, and Ha’Galil function as “rules of interpretation of Mishna and Gemara sugyot. The Oral Torah middot spirits, either they or tuma spirit rule the heart.

     This Torah vision shares no common ground with the later Protestant notion of “Free Will”. The struggle of Yaacov vs. Esav in the womb of Rivka has nothing whatsoever to do with Calvinism! To swear a Torah blessing requires שם ומלכות, just as does cutting a Torah oath brit with the Avot! The word ONE in the opening verse of kre’a shma shares no portion with the Universal monotheism av tuma avoda zara preached by both Xtianity and Islam. A bnai brit Cohen accepts the oaths sworn by the Avot as ONE with his dedication to walk before HaShem and be Holy.

     Talmud – the study by which abstract tohor middot attain a k’vanna which a Cohen can dedicate most holy to HaShem – as expressed through the medium of Sanhedrin common law court judicial rulings as understood through the discipline of Gemara halachic precedents which re-interpret the language of a specific Mishna viewed from different halachic precedent perspectives.

     LikeLiked by 1 person

   • Wish to express my debt of gratitude to David Redpath

     How do you prove “faithfully transcribed” when there’s not enough physical evidence to write a decent obituary for this gospel messiah. I submit to you that Paul … if a spy sent to undermine the new religion … he did a bang up job at it according to Luke’s version of the book of Acts.

     “The original is lost” means no physical manuscript written or dictated by Caesar did not survive. It does not mean the work itself vanished. The scribes copied the text by hand over many centuries, and those later copies serve as the witnesses from which modern editions prepared.

     The church destroyed all early Torah Hebrew manuscripts and it publicly burned the Talmud in Paris 1242. Before the Dead Sea Scrolls, the oldest complete Hebrew T’Nakh, specifically the Aleppo Codex of around 930 ce, but even that an incomplete followed by the Leningrad Codex from about 1008 ce.

     Prior to these earliest surviving manuscripts of the Hebrew T’Nakh, scholars compared earlier fragment manuscripts like the Nash Papyrus and ancient Greek translations. Hence the Dead Sea Scrolls almost 1000 years earlier, supplied a large collection of Hebrew manuscripts from roughly 250 bce to 70 ce, which permitted scholars to directly compare medieval manuscripts with these much earlier manuscripts.

     The Mishna compiled not as a past history of non existent Sanhedrin courts in either the first or second temple Eras but rather a prophetic vision of mussar of how Jews – once they reconquer the oath sworn lands – sanctify צדק צדק תרדוף. The Mishna does not teach history anymore than does the T’NaKH. Both command prophetic mussar. Hence the sages refer to the Talmud as the Oral Torah! A blatant contradiction of terms immediately obvious to any scholar of the T’NaKH.

     As previously mentioned the Talmud instructs that in Capital Crimes trials only “orally communicated eye witness testimony” permitted as “evidence”. The church slaughtered Jews throughout its bloody violent history wherein it relied upon theocracy and creed to determine guilt or innocence. This represents a completely different legal system than the Torah mandates.

     The author of the Book of Acts, by church accounts – the non Jew Luke. The stoning of the first martyr of the church Stephen. Luke records in that Acts 6–7 presents accusations, an appearance before the council, and a question from the high priest before Stephen’s speech. Acts 7 then says the council’s members rushed him out and stoned him, with the witnesses placing their garments at Saul’s feet. Many church accounts identify Luke as a Gentile, though that conclusion – inferred rather than stated explicitly in NT texts.

     The problem with this account multiple. Stephen never tried before a Sanhedrin court. The manner of stoning both in that case and later when Paul traveled to Damascus duplicate one another – both men never tried before a Capital Crimes Sanhedrin court. (The idea that an actual Sanhedrin court existed the Talmud invalidates in the Capital Crimes trial of Herod. Neither Tribal Yichus nor Yovel liberty existed throughout the 2nd Temple period. Even in the period of Shaul and David these two primary pre-conditions did not exist. Shaul slaughtered the Cohonim of Nov based upon the testimony of one [not two witnesses]. David ordered the death of Uriah without his standing trial before a Sanhedrin court. King Shlomo judged the Capital Crime case of the 2 prostitutes before his own court!)

     “Faithfully transcribed” – not something scholars prove as an absolute. They compare surviving manuscripts, translations, and quotations to identify where copies agree, where they differ, and which readings – likely earlier. That can provide substantial confidence in particular passages, but it cannot restore a lost original with certainty—or show that the events a text narrates actually happened. The New Testament’s manuscript tradition contains variants, and textual criticism makes those visible rather than assuming perfect copying.

     The Talmud describes the worst death penalty as stoning due to the mutilation of the body. A platform high enough to cause separation of body limbs upon impact, a naked prisoner lead up the steps and pushed face first off the platform to a jagged boulder below. The Talmud states that the two witnesses never required thereafter to place a heavy stone upon the man’s heart because the trauma of the initial fall no man ever survived.

     “Sometimes words have to meanings” Zepplin Stairway to Heaven. Paul as a spy clearly speculation but what’s interesting that church dogmatic readings never once considered the possibility. Paul preached that circumcision not a valid commandment for Goyim. This undercut the commandment of brit melah which validated the oath alliance brit cut between Avram לשמה at the brit between the pieces. The prophet Yehoshua validate this mitzva when Israel entered the land did brit melah and kept Pesach! Pesach – the liberation of the 12 Tribes from Egypt serves as the foundation precedent for keeping the mitzva of Yovel as a Torah commandment.

     The Mishna compiled not as a past history of non existent Sanhedrin courts in either the first or second temple Eras but rather a prophetic vision of mussar of how Jews – once they reconquer the oath sworn lands – sanctify צדק צדק תרדוף. The Mishna does not teach history anymore than does the T’NaKH. Both command prophetic mussar. Hence the sages refer to the Talmud as the Oral Torah! A blatant contradiction of terms immediately obvious to any scholar of the T’NaKH.

     Both the church and mosque push the false narrative of history. Neither this nor than understands that the Torah defines prophesy as mussar applicable to all the seed of Avram sworn at the brit between the pieces and sealed with the sign of this brit – the mitzva of brit melah. Paul’s declaration of non bnai brit Goyim as exempt from keeping brit melah fundamentally invalidates his testimony as does Muhammad’s declaration that Avraham placed Yishmael upon the altar at the Akedah. An interesting fact: Paul’s letter precede the publication of all the gospels. This to invalidates that the chicken precedes the egg.

     Conclusions:

     Luke establishes a teacher-student lineage between Gamliel and Saul. What it doesn’t state is any operational directive from Gamliel to Paul. The church has never seriously entertained that Gamliel’s famous “wait and see” posture might have serve as a deliberate containment tactic rather than neutral agnosticism. If Gamliel correctly predicted the movement would either collapse or prove divine, and Paul then restructured it around faith-logic detached from commandments, the outcome conveniently serves P’rushim interests: the Jesus movement becomes non-threatening to Jerusalem because it no longer claims political messianic authority over Israel.

     The Aleppo Codex (Tiberias → Jerusalem), Leningrad Codex (Cairo → St. Petersburg), and the Dead Sea Scrolls (Qumran caves) all survived outside Latin Christendom’s reach. The Masoretic tradition flourished in Tiberias, Baghdad, Cairo — Abbasid and Fatimid territories. Latin Church-dominated Europe preserved the Vulgate and Greek NT manuscripts, not Hebrew Torah codices. This geographic fact, not speculation about the intentions of Paul.

     Dogmatic exegesis reads the NT as flat theological testimony: events happened, meanings simplified & transparent, Paul absolutely sincere. The spy hypothesis presented, therefore functions as a reductio — not asserting literal espionage, but demonstrating that the text can sustain a politically strategic reading without violating its own internal data. If both readings fit the same sentences, then “the obvious meaning” – never forced or proven by the text – but instead imposed by creedal assumptions.

     The Stephen/Damascus parallel – two stonings with no valid capital trial, witnesses depositing garments at Saul’s custody in both cases (Acts 7:58, 22:20), and Saul immediately transitioning from persecutor to primary architect of Torah-free Gentile inclusion. A two-dimensional reader sees conversion. A reader alert to narrative construction sees choreography.

     Gamliel-as-handler theory does not require advanced knowledge how Saul would attempt to undermine the false messiah movement among the Jews in Judea and Caesar as the Son of God in Rome. Rather this possibility weighs how Yechuda Maccabee fought and defeated the Syrian Greek empire. The B’HaG rules that the lights of Hanukkah a mitzva from the Torah. The Rambam rejected this chiddush as out of hand.

     However, based upon the Creation story of בראשית as the thesis statement of Av Torah wisdom commandments which require k’vanna contrasted by later Toldoth commandments in the next three Books of the Written Torah wherein the latter secondary mitzvot serve as בניני אבות ראיות by which a down stream generation of the brit cut between the pieces Israel can interpret the k’vanna of Written Torah wisdom commandments by means of the actual 13 tohor middot revelation of the “Oral Torah” at Horev ה’ ה’ אל רחום וחנון ערך פנים רב חסד ואמת etc … The warp\weft Halacha/Aggada opposing threads throughout the Talmud serve to weave prophetic mussar as the k’vanna of ritual commandments which in and of themselves alone do not require k’vanna any more than do the toldoth commandments introduced in the three Books after בראשית.

     Political revolution most essentially requires shattering the “ethical containment force”. The Ari’s kabbalah touching the metaphor of the Tzimtzum and the evil shattered klippot, an interpretation which has influenced how I personally understand why Civil War become so horrifically bloody and violent. It seems to me that the בראשית aggadic story which describes pre creation as chaos and anarchy serves as the basis of all Civil Wars throughout the annuls of Human history. A “messiah” whose followers abandon brit milah and Torah law becomes a detached religious sect with no jurisdictional claim over Israel. The parallel between Stephen and Saul (Acts 7:58, 22:20) – the linchpin. In both cases, the witnesses place their garments at Saul’s feet.

     This indicates a transfer of legal authority. If Saul functions as the “handler”, or at least the agent of the Sanhedrin’s strategic pivot, his subsequent “conversion” serves as the essential mechanism by which the movement becomes derailed & redirected from a Jewish reformist sect into a Gentile-friendly faith Abracadabra Aramaic – now you see it now you don’t. The Talmud learns the Hanukkah lights from the Mishnaic Shabbat lights. The B’HaG hence holds both this and that, when does as a wisdom commandment (a רשות wisdom commandment for women and men). By the way I learn mesechta Shabbat key term מלאכה, this verb distinguished from the toldot verb עבודה. The latter revers to all secondary positive and negative Torah commandments and ritual Talmudic halachot whereas the former weave in T’NaCH prophetic mussar as the k’vanna which makes an aliya to the Torah wisdom-time oriented Av commandments!

     In short: The Torah revelation – a living legal-prophetic system (Warp/Weft). The NT, as constructed by Luke and Paul, rather a fixed theological narrative that breaks that system. The “spy” reading highlights the strategic outcome of that break.

     LikeLike

2. I’m writing this reply to Kristi. I don’t know if it’s going to list that way.

   Kristi, wendaswindo is right when she says that the reason you’re having trouble is that you’re making a difference. The disciples had the same problem:
   “And they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name. And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ.” * ( Acts 5:41-42 ) But I and I am sure almost all your regular visitors will pray that you may have more rejoicing and less suffering, including less problems with your blog.

   There is one comment on this page that should be answered. Here’s God’s answer:
   “No man also seweth a piece of new cloth on an old garment: else the new piece that filled it up taketh away from the old, and the rent is made worse. And no man putteth new wine into old bottles: else the new wine doth burst the bottles, and the wine is spilled, and the bottles will be marred: but new wine must be put into new bottles.” ( Mark 2:21-22 )

   And also:
   “But now hath he [that is, Jesus] obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.” ( Hebrews 8:6-7 )

   KIng Jesus established with His own blood the new covenant, which means:
   “In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.” ( Hebrews 8:13 )

   Those who deny King Jesus should consider the Holy Spirit’s warning:
   “He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.” ( Hebrews 10:28-30 )

   That is not, repeat NOT, me or any other human being threatening anyone. That is the Holy Spirit’s warning that those who reject the sacrifice of King Jesus on the cross have nowhere to hide and no excuse on the Judgment Day.

   LikeLiked by 1 person

   Reply

3. I forgot to bold again. Let’s see if WordPress will allow me to post it again and bold it:
   I’m writing this reply to Kristi. I don’t know if it’s going to list that way.

   Kristi, wendaswindo is right when she says that the reason you’re having trouble is that you’re making a difference. The disciples had the same problem:
   “And they departed from the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name. And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ.” * ( Acts 5:41-42 ) But I and I am sure almost all your regular visitors will pray that you may have more rejoicing and less suffering, including less problems with your blog.

   There is one comment on this page that should be answered. Here’s God’s answer:
   “No man also seweth a piece of new cloth on an old garment: else the new piece that filled it up taketh away from the old, and the rent is made worse. And no man putteth new wine into old bottles: else the new wine doth burst the bottles, and the wine is spilled, and the bottles will be marred: but new wine must be put into new bottles.” ( Mark 2:21-22 )

   And also:
   “But now hath he [that is, Jesus] obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.” ( Hebrews 8:6-7 )

   KIng Jesus established with His own blood the new covenant, which means:
   “In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.” ( Hebrews 8:13 )

   Those who deny King Jesus should consider the Holy Spirit’s warning:
   “He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.” ( Hebrews 10:28-30 )

   That is not, repeat NOT, me or any other human being threatening anyone. That is the Holy Spirit’s warning that those who reject the sacrifice of King Jesus on the cross have nowhere to hide and no excuse on the Judgment Day.

   LikeLiked by 1 person

   Reply