Peace or a Sword

Author: Tradesecret

Posts

Total: 119
Topic's author
#1
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,432
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
It's recorded in Matthew 10:34 that Jesus says:

"Do not suppose I have come to bring peace to the  earth.  I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn 'a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter in law against her mother in law a man's enemies will be the members of his own household."' 

Jesus is quoting from the Micah 7:6.  

What is Micah talking about in that particular chapter and why in the world would Jesus quote Micah in his time? 

After all, isn't Jesus supposed to the prince of peace  ( Isaiah 9:6) Didn't the angels sing  at his birth "glory o God in the highest and on earth peace to men on whom his favor rests". Luke 2:14

How can Jesus on one hand bring peace and on the hand tell us that he has not come to bring peace?  Is the simplistic answer to this that here is one of the many contradictions in the Bible or is there something else going on? 

I wonder how many of us have the capacity to think outside of the box.  How is it possible to reconcile such statements? 


#2
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,338
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@Tradesecret
At a superficial guess,
I'd say that he expected the values of Christianity to come into conflict with some other entrenched values,
That by following the values espoused by Christ,
People would come into conflict,
Though I suppose he believed it was for the best, that people's values/beliefs change and/or evolve.
#3
n8nrgim
n8nrgim's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,015
3
2
5
n8nrgim's avatar
n8nrgim
3
2
5
a couple ideas. the verse quoting jesus doesn't say that jesus condones people using the sword. it's possible jesus came to stoke division, and it just so happens peeps will use violence, not that jesus thinks it's ok. 

another idea. maybe jesus allows for self defense. self defense isn't necessary, such as jesus not fighting the crucifixion and when people turn the other cheek. but self defense is a person's right if they think it's the best course of action. jesus didn't say you have to turn the cheek, just that it's a good thing to do. (i think this is accurate, though i could be wrong)
#4
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,060
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
How is it possible to reconcile such statements.

By accepting the bible for what it is.

Multiple uncorroborated folk tales relative to a few people and places during a turbulent time of social development in one small corner of the Earth.


Latterly developed and used has a worldwide system of social oppression and control.

Believe this, do as we say and pay us for the privilege, or we will burn you at the stake.
#5
BrotherD.Thomas
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,145
3
3
7
BrotherD.Thomas's avatar
BrotherD.Thomas
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret

.
Miss Tradesecret, as a woman shown herewith: https://ibb.co/NFcsLgy that goes directly against Jesus’ words in 1 Timothy 2:12, whereas she is not to teach and in being SILENT towards men!

I am following Jesus’ inspired words in CORRECTING YOUR BIBLE STUPIDITY again, and again, and again:  ”As for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand in fear.” (Timothy 5:20)


As usual in your initial post, you brought forth the "candy-assed" version in Matthew 10:34 of Jesus referencing Micah 7:6, whereas the Luke 12:49-53 version shows our Jesus to be more dreadful and contradicting to His alleged peace on earth scenario that He preached to His Jewish creation!

OUR EVER LOVING, FORGIVING, AND CONTRADICTING JESUS SAID: "I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! But I have a baptism to undergo, and what constraint I am under until it is completed!  Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? NO, I tell you, but division.  From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.” (Luke 12:49:53)


The following passages, which are a few of many where Jesus promoted peace, are shown below in blatantly CONTRADICTING Jesus' statement above where He brought NO PEACE whatsoever amongst His Jewish creation:

JESUS SAID: "The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: who is Lord of all." (Acts 10:36)

JESUS SAID: "Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid." (John 14:27)

JESUS SAID: "Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God." (Matthew 5:9)


YOUR QUOTE REGARDING JESUS CONTRADICTING HIMSELF: "How is it possible to reconcile such statements?

Miss Tradesecret, now we have popcorn in hand and our favorite beverage, for you to now show us how you are going to use your Devil Speak to SPIN DOCTOR away the damaging passages of Jesus shown in your wussy version in Matthew 10:34 of not bringing peace, and my true version of Jesus' modus operandi referencing Micah 7:6 in Luke 12:49:53, where Jesus can't wait NOT TO BRING PEACE, but turmoil and unrest!

Ready? BEGIN:

.
 
Topic's author
#6
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,432
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Lemming
At a superficial guess,
I'd say that he expected the values of Christianity to come into conflict with some other entrenched values,
That by following the values espoused by Christ,
People would come into conflict,
Though I suppose he believed it was for the best, that people's values/beliefs change and/or evolve.

Thanks Lemming for your response. 

Although it is probably a superficial guess, there are quite interesting points you raise.  After all, in our day and age, values espoused in the bible and that which many Christians hold to are in direct conflict with those who are not Christian.   In our day these seem to be around morals and right and wrong and ethical behavior - what God thinks is ok v what humanity thinks is ok. 

It is clear that Jesus usage of the term "sword" is metaphorical not literal. Obviously if someone gets converted to Jesus and mentions it to his or her family, then depending upon how they react - will cause a division.  

I wonder what the differences in value were in Jesus time?  The context is about discipleship - sending workers into the harvest - and also a warning of the wolves who want to stop the work and discourage this work in the harvest.  

I concur with you. I think Jesus was still trying to do good. 
Topic's author
#7
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,432
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@n8nrgim
a couple ideas. the verse quoting jesus doesn't say that jesus condones people using the sword. it's possible jesus came to stoke division, and it just so happens peeps will use violence, not that jesus thinks it's ok. 

another idea. maybe jesus allows for self defense. self defense isn't necessary, such as jesus not fighting the crucifixion and when people turn the other cheek. but self defense is a person's right if they think it's the best course of action. jesus didn't say you have to turn the cheek, just that it's a good thing to do. (i think this is accurate, though i could be wrong)
Thanks n8nrgim for your response.  

You seem to be correct in this context. Jesus is not condoning people using the sword.  I do think the sword here is meant metaphorically.  Yet metaphorical swords divide families just as much as a literal sword.   

Why do you think Jesus is talking about self-defense? 
Topic's author
#8
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,432
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
How is it possible to reconcile such statements.

By accepting the bible for what it is.

Multiple uncorroborated folk tales relative to a few people and places during a turbulent time of social development in one small corner of the Earth.


Latterly developed and used has a worldwide system of social oppression and control.

Believe this, do as we say and pay us for the privilege, or we will burn you at the stake.
Hello Zed and thanks for your wooden response to the question. 

People can reconcile such statements by accepting it for what it is. 

I'm not sure how Jesus' words originally were intended for people to be burnt at the stake. 

If you go back a few verses in the passage (v.17) you will see that Jesus himself identified one of the types of wolves to be religious in nature. 

Jesus knows that where there is power - it will seek to maintain that power - and will not give it up lightly.  This is why he said be on your guard against such men. 

We need to be aware of the religious wolves in our society.   They might be other religions or they might be religious bigots in our churches.  Both attempt to dissuade people from taking up the work in the harvest.   His response in the first place is to be wise as serpents - in other words, avoid the fights if you are able to and also to be as innocent as doves.  Make sure you are above reproach. Wolves will try and make you bitter and will relish in you not being above reproach. They will make you pay for every stuff up you do. 






Topic's author
#9
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,432
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherD.Thomas
As usual in your initial post, you brought forth the "candy-assed" version in Matthew 10:34 of Jesus referencing Micah 7:6, whereas the Luke 12:49-53 version shows our Jesus to be more dreadful and contradicting to His alleged peace on earth scenario that He preached to His Jewish creation!

OUR EVER LOVING, FORGIVING, AND CONTRADICTING JESUS SAID: "I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! But I have a baptism to undergo, and what constraint I am under until it is completed!  Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? NO, I tell you, but division.  From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three. They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.” (Luke 12:49:53)


The following passages, which are a few of many where Jesus promoted peace, are shown below in blatantly CONTRADICTING Jesus' statement above where He brought NO PEACE whatsoever amongst His Jewish creation:

JESUS SAID: "The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: who is Lord of all." (Acts 10:36)

JESUS SAID: "Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid." (John 14:27)

JESUS SAID: "Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God." (Matthew 5:9)


YOUR QUOTE REGARDING JESUS CONTRADICTING HIMSELF: "How is it possible to reconcile such statements?

Miss Tradesecret, now we have popcorn in hand and our favorite beverage, for you to now show us how you are going to use your Devil Speak to SPIN DOCTOR away the damaging passages of Jesus shown in your wussy version in Matthew 10:34 of not bringing peace, and my true version of Jesus' modus operandi referencing Micah 7:6 in Luke 12:49:53, where Jesus can't wait NOT TO BRING PEACE, but turmoil and unrest!
Hello Brother and thank you for your response. 

I will give you the benefit of the doubt and not simply ignore you. Nevertheless, you will play by the correct rules or I will ignore you. 

Firstly, you have intentionally misdirected the conversation by quoting from another passage and NOT addressing the one I provided. Neither passage is weak or wussy. 

Secondly, you omitted to discuss Micah 7.  Is there a reason for this save and except it does not agree with your position.

Thirdly, the Luke 12 passage only illustrates my point - it does not weaken it.  Jesus on one hand came to bring peace and on the other he said do not presume that I come to peace. 

Fourthly, all your verses do is confirm what I said. It does not answer or address the question.  You really should read the question. I have already indicated that this notion of the peace and the sword appear to be contradictory.  Did you even read that? So you agree with me that it appears that way? Excellent. 

Now answer the question. I raised the question. I am seeking people's views on it. The other posters at least attempted to provide a reason. You have just regurgitated everything I said.  And YES - in doing so you confess you don't have the capacity to think outside the box.  You confess you don't have the capacity to reconcile such statements. 

Hence I will give you the benefit of the doubt once. But not a second time. 

Please answer the question if you are able to? And if you merely think it cannot be reconciled, then refrain from answering since you have already stated that is your view. There is no need to waste either your time or mine. 

If you had read and comprehended my question - you would understand that there is no need for me to address the verses you have provided. Why you ask? Because each of those verses are saying exactly what I stated in the first place. And that is that there appears to be an apparent contradiction.  

Thanks in anticipation. 




#10
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
Nothing Jesus says  is compatible with the Old Testament. If you follow Christ, Christ not Paul, then you are not following the God of Abraham. Therefore the Jews/people who believe what he preaches will turn on those who choose to continue to follow the God of Abraham and the Law. 
#11
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,608
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
think outside of the box

Can you explain what you mean by "think outside the box"?
#12
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,060
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
Realistic response no problem Trade.....Refer to it as wooden if you must.

And there are no recordings of Jesus's words.....Just after the event hand me down tales, recorded by those that possessed the ability to do so.....In their own words.

Translated and reworked many times since, by other literary scholars in their own words.....And so on.

And now it's your turn to reinterpret things.

No problem.....If it makes you happy, then I'm happy. 


Topic's author
#13
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,432
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
Nothing Jesus says  is compatible with the Old Testament. If you follow Christ, Christ not Paul, then you are not following the God of Abraham. Therefore the Jews/people who believe what he preaches will turn on those who choose to continue to follow the God of Abraham and the Law. 
Thanks Poly.  

I think everything Jesus says is compatible with the OT.  For example his comments here are compatible with Micah 7.  I also take the view that Paul and Jesus were on the exact same page.  Both were following the same God of Abraham.  Interestingly I agree that some Jews did turn on Jesus - because they thought he was not following Abraham and the Law. Yet, from my perspective it was not Jesus who did not follow the law or Abraham, it was those who turned on Jesus who were not following Abraham.  Surely this is part of what Jesus explained when he pointed out to the Pharisees that they did not follow Moses. 

Thanks for your thoughts. 
Topic's author
#14
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,432
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
think outside of the box

Can you explain what you mean by "think outside the box"?
Fair enough.  In this topic it is about not just assuming these are contradictions but thinking of ways that might find a way to reconcile them.  For example, how might the Jews have considered a messiah might bring peace to the land of Israel and perhaps relief from the Romans? And how might that compare to what Micah's point was in his prophecy? 
Topic's author
#15
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,432
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
Realistic response no problem Trade.....Refer to it as wooden if you must.

And there are no recordings of Jesus's words.....Just after the event hand me down tales, recorded by those that possessed the ability to do so.....In their own words.

Translated and reworked many times since, by other literary scholars in their own words.....And so on.

And now it's your turn to reinterpret things.

No problem.....If it makes you happy, then I'm happy. 

Hi Zed, for me wooden is a very literal translation of what I asked.  That's ok. I don't have a problem with you doing so. 

There are literally no recorded conversations of Julius Caesar either from his own era.  Nor of many people in ancient history. 

Whereas the material we have of what Jesus was alleged to have said in the Gospels has a very significant credibility level. 

The thing about translated works and even the reworkings is that we mostly have very early records.  Earlier than almost every other work from those periods - and more of them.  The quantity and quality of ancient documents is a pretty specialized field. 

I actually am not trying to reinterpret anything. I am simply asking questions. 

Pleased you are happy.  Mostly, I am a happy person. 
#16
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,608
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
think outside of the box

Can you explain what you mean by "think outside the box"?
Fair enough.  In this topic it is about not just assuming these are contradictions but thinking of ways that might find a way to reconcile them.  For example, how might the Jews have considered a messiah might bring peace to the land of Israel and perhaps relief from the Romans? And how might that compare to what Micah's point was in his prophecy.

So you want us to use conjecture & guess work? Assume?  To think in an original and creative way? To use our imagination? And in ways that are not limited or controlled by rules or tradition?






#17
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,204
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
Happy people reading a bible.  
Angry people reading a bible. 
Into
A happy person translating scriptures. 
Angry person translating scriptures. 

Who could ever possibly guess what it is that they might make their God tell them next ?

Fingers crossed , it is good.



#18
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,971
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
How can Jesus on one hand bring peace and on the hand tell us that he has not come to bring peace?  Is the simplistic answer to this that here is one of the many contradictions in the Bible or is there something else going on? 

I wonder how many of us have the capacity to think outside of the box.  How is it possible to reconcile such statements? 
Isn’t this what you call post-modernism?  
#19
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,971
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Nothing Jesus says  is compatible with the Old Testament. If you follow Christ, Christ not Paul, then you are not following the God of Abraham. Therefore the Jews/people who believe what he preaches will turn on those who choose to continue to follow the God of Abraham and the Law. 
Isn’t the Abrahamic God, the same God of Islam? 
#20
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,060
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
There is a religious box.

And then there are atheists who think outside that box and easily reconcile stuff.
#21
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@Reece101
Isn’t the Abrahamic God, the same God of Islam?
Islam is based off of Judaism the same as Christianity is. But the god of Abraham is the god of the Jews and Islamics aren't Jews. Not really sure what your point is we're discussing Christianity and Jesus. Just like I'm constantly told not to discuss my pagan beliefs in Christian topics I'm not discussing Islamic beliefs and Christian topics.
#22
rosends
rosends's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 806
3
2
6
rosends's avatar
rosends
3
2
6
-->
@Tradesecret
Micha is talking about what he is observing about his own time and the sadness of the situation that he witnesses. By the end of the chapter, he speaks of a future in which the people return to God and God to the people. I don't know why Jesus would quote this as a status he would try to bring about.
#23
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,971
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Islam is based off of Judaism the same as Christianity is. But the god of Abraham is the god of the Jews and Islamics aren't Jews. Not really sure what your point is we're discussing Christianity and Jesus. Just like I'm constantly told not to discuss my pagan beliefs in Christian topics I'm not discussing Islamic beliefs and Christian topics.
Point is, does it matter about it being Abrahamic? 
#24
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@Reece101
I didn't realize I had to explain that the Bible deals with the Old Testament which is the God of Abraham and the New Testament which is Jesus Christ. That should be self-evident if you're going to be in a religion form debating religion that's kind of a basic premise you should have latched on too. Because honestly if you're not participating in a religion it really has nothing to do with you.
#25
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,971
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
I didn't realize I had to explain that the Bible deals with the Old Testament which is the God of Abraham and the New Testament which is Jesus Christ.
I think you’re confused with what I mean, so you’re just spitting out basic facts. 

We know the OT is synonymous with violence, but is it because of Abrahamic roots? Or is it something more?


That should be self-evident if you're going to be in a religion form debating religion that's kind of a basic premise you should have latched on too. Because honestly if you're not participating in a religion it really has nothing to do with you.
Calm down. 
#26
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,060
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
@Poly

Interestingly there is very little difference between regional Jews and regional Muslims.....Effectively the same people, just brainwashed with different guff.

And GOD the concept is a GOD or 7.9 billion GODS.....It makes no difference.


#27
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,608
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@rosends
Micha is talking about what he is observing about his own time and the sadness of the situation that he witnesses. By the end of the chapter, he speaks of a future in which the people return to God and God to the people.

I don't know why Jesus would quote this as a status he would try to bring about.

That will be because the author of Mathew's gospel is desperate to link Jesus to the Old Testament prophesise as the expected Messiah that Yahweh or his royal envoy /regent that will reign over a kingdom of peace. This of course is only what Christians interpret parts the book of Micah to mean. 

The author Mathew reaches for his trusty Old Testament many times in an attempt to prove to his Jewish audience that Jesus is the promised "prince to come". In Matthew,  we read Jesus is forever fulfilling one prophecy or another from the Old Testament with Jesus forever telling his disciples “for it is written” (but never tells us where it is written)?; and the author of Mathew's gospel was often putting words into the mouth of Christ.  Matthew’s gospel only says Jesus is quoting Micah. It is nothing more that hearsay.
In truth, no one knows who wrote Mathew`s gospel. But that of course is another argument entirely.

The author of Mathew's gospel uses not only selected passages from Micah. For instance he also uses:
M 1:23
Isaiah 7:14
Born of a virgin
M2:5–6
Micah 5:2
Born in Bethlehem
M2:14–15
Hosea 11:1
Come out of Egypt
M12:18–21
Isaiah 42:1–4
Bring hope to the Gentiles
M13:14–15
Isaiah 6:9–10
Many would not understand His teaching
M13:34–35
Psalm 78:2
Speak in parables
M15:7–9
Isaiah 29:13
Opposed by hypocrites
M21:4–5
Zechariah 9:9
Arrive riding a donkey
M21:42
Psalm 118:22–23
Rejected by some to their own undoing
M22:44
Psalm 110:1
Recognized by David as Lord
M26:31
Zechariah 13:7
Followers would scatter at His death
M27:9–10
Zechariah 11:13
Betrayed for 30 pieces of silver
M27:35
Psalm 22:18
Lots cast to divide His clothes
M2:16–18
Jeremiah 31:15
Birth would cause grief and the death of children
M3:3
Isaiah 40:3
Announced by a forerunner
M4:15–16
Isaiah 9:1–2
Minister in Galilee
M8:17
Isaiah 53:4
Bring healing
M11:10
Malachi 3:1
Announced by a forerunner


Micha is talking about what he is observing about his own time

He was indeed , Rosi.  How the society around him in general had deteriorated. Corruption in high places, greed, breakdown of family, the down trodden, the poor , disenfranchised etc etc.

And I don't doubt for a second the Jews of Jesus' time were  experiencing much of the same under Roman rule.  And as we in the 21st century are experiencing  in our time , imo. Same old same old.

It comes in cycles at the end of every age. Out with the old and in with the new. Only, the rulers of the old are extremely reluctant to relinquish power to the new....... without a fight.
#28
Deb-8-a-bull
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,204
3
2
3
Deb-8-a-bull's avatar
Deb-8-a-bull
3
2
3
I am but a poor scripture decipherer  /  translator.  

Sooooooooooo.
I'VE  BEEN  SECRETLY  JUDGING   YOU  LOT.

The correct answer  for the meaning of a scripture lies with 

Everything Stephen thinks it means .  +     All  the magic bits from tradesecret and  brutals posts meaning  +   A tiny dash of hate from the  brothert T'


Thus giving you the closest thing to the " correct " meaning of a scripture.  

A formula for eliminating  bias if you will 
All of S plus T and B magic bits into 1/4  B hate. 
STBt 





#29
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
-->
@Reece101
Just because I say something you don't like doesn't mean I'm not calm. The fact that you were wrong is why you feel like I'm upset and then I'm not calm. And if you're going to take things personal there's no point to discuss anything with you further thanks for your input.
#30
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,608
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Everything Stephen thinks it means 

Well in the case of this particular thread, Deb, Micah is clear about what he is seeing and writing about.  I don't think anything other than that which Micha is conveying.;, the signs of his times.  

The author of Matthew's gospel is taking verses from various OT accounts/stories, to prove that Jesus is the one "prophesised" about. <<< I don't think that, Deb, Mathew's account shows it.