Letter from Pontius Pilate

greenspun.com : LUSENET : The Christian Church : One Thread
LETTER TO TIBERIUS CAESAR FROM PONTIUS PILATE

(The original of this letter is in the library of Rome. An authenticated copy is in the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C.)

A young man appeared in Galilee preaching with humble unction, a new law in the Name of the God that had sent Him. At first I was apprehensive that His design was to stir up the people against the Romans, but my fears were soon dispelled. Jesus of Nazareth spoke rather as a friend of the Romans than of the Jews. One day, I observed in the midst of a group of people a young man who was leaning against a tree, calmly addressing the multitude. I was told that his name was Jesus. This I could easily have suspected, so great was the difference between Him and those who were listening to Him. His golden coloured hair and His beard gave to His appearance a celestial aspect. He appeared to be about thirty years of age. Never have I seen a sweeter or more serene countenance. What a contrast between Him and His hearers with their black beards and tawny complexions. Unwilling to interrupt Him by my presence, I continued my walk but signified to my secretary to join the group and listen. Later, my secretary reported that never had he read in the words of all the philosophers, anything that compared to the teachings of Jesus. He told me that Jesus was neither seditious nor rebellious, so we extended to Him our protection. He was at liberty to act, to speak, to assemble, and to address the people. This unlimited freedom provoked the Jews - not the poor but the rich and powerful.

Later, I wrote to Jesus requesting an interview with Him at the Praetorium. He came. When the Nazarene made His appearance I was having a morning walk and as I faced Him my feet seemed fastened with an iron band to the marble pavement and I trembled in every limb, as a guilty culprit, though He was calm. For some time I stood admiring this extraordinary Man. There was nothing in Him that was repelling nor in His character, yet I felt awed in His presence. I told Him that there was a magnetic simplicity about Him and His personality that elevated Him far above the philosophers and teachers of His day. All in all He made a deep impression upon me and everyone because of His kindness, simplicity, humility and love.

Now, Noble Sovereign, these are the facts concerning Jesus of Nazareth and I have taken tirne to write you in detail concerning these matters. I say that such a man who could convert water into wine, change death into life, disease into health, calm the stormy seas, is not guilty of any criminal offence and as others have said, we must agree truly this is the Son of God!

Your most obedient servant,

PONTIUS PILATE

---------------------------

Has anyone ever seen this letter before and/or would you know how to authenticate it?

-- Anonymous, March 07, 2000

Answers

Now, Now Lee.....

You must be more loving or you'll have people on this board jumping down your throat. :o)

-- Anonymous, March 07, 2000

Congratulations Connie!!

You just hugged and kissed with a man who believes that the white man (specifically the British) are the chosen race and that Jesus was not Jewish and that the Jews were never the chosen people. It's the false doctrine called "Bristish-Israelism."

But, from your theological perspective......who cares. Let's all give 'em a big hug.

-- Anonymous, March 08, 2000

Mark:

You ARE desperate to prove your "Anglo-Israel" Nonsense art you Mark? Having failed miserably to show that your "Anglo-Israel" nonsense from the scriptures you now go searching for some other documents to demonstrate that Jesus Christ was a "white" man. You just cannot bear to accept the fact that he was born Jewish and was from the tribe of JUDAH of the linage of David through Mary. It is just simply unbearable for you to think that it just might be possible that he was of the Jewish race and did not have any, not any of the "European" characteristics that you want so desperately for Him to have so that you can claim that he is the leader of the "lost Ten tribes" of Isareal which you cannot even prove were ever LOST!

You still have completely failed to even attempt to answer the questions that were put to you about this egregiously false doctrine you so desperately feel a RACIST need to promulgate! Ezekiel 37:15- 21 remains an insurmountable obstacle to your errroneous theory and you have not even begun to discuss it. You are just like Nelta. When you cannot answer you run away until you think every one has forgotten about your absolute nonsense and complete opposition to all that true!

Now I challenge you to return to the thread where I challenged you to answer my questions from the word of God concerning Ezekiel 37:15-22 and deal with the facts that you are still afraid to face instead of rumaging around in some dusty old museum trying to find something- just anything- that will allow you to hold on to you RACIST false doctrine of "Anglo-Israelism" which attempts to make Great Britian and the United States into the true Israel.

For the Lion of the Tribe of Judah,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 07, 2000

Mark:

Incidentally, the above document is definately not authentic in that it is completely out of harmony with everything that the word of God says is true about both Jesus Christ and Pontius Pilate. I will return later when I have time to show that such is the case. All you have to do however, if you were honest, is simply read what the scriptures have to say about both of these characters and you will find that this document is without doubt, like most documents pointed to by those who preach this "Anglo-Israel" nonsense. THe entire idea is nothing but a farce and it is not even a very clever one at that!

For the Lion of the Tribe of Judah,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 07, 2000

It very well could be a farce. Do you know how to check it out?

Knowledge biased on prejudice will get you/us no where.

What is it you are basing your assumings on?

-- Anonymous, March 07, 2000

Mark:

Are you also unable to read? I have already told you that the facts of the word of God which we know to be authentic in the things that it says about Christ and Pontus Pilate prove this document to be just like you and your entire "Anglo-Israel" Nonsense, pure fabrication! I also told you that I would give specifics when I have time and you pop back in to attempt to make it appear that I am merely assuming.

I tell you what. If you will return to our discussion of Ezekiel 37:15-22 which you are still running from and attempt to answer my questions I will give you the evidence you need to know that this document is similar with your doctrine. It is a complete farce. How does that sound?

Or maybe you would like to affirm that this document is authentic and offer eveidence to prove that it is such and I will deny it. How does that sound?

Your "anglo-Israel" hogwash is definately just as much a lie as is this document. Maybe you can give us the Library of Congress number so that we can all go see this document for ourselves and then report back to you as to it's authenticity. Have you seen this document yourself? Can you even tell us how to find it in the "Library of Congress" It is you, Mark that is assuming that this document is even real. You have not even given us any evidence that the document actually exist but you want us to assume, with you, that it is "authentic". If you really want us to examine a document as to it's authenticity then you must at least tell us where and how we can find and view this document ourselves first hand. We of course must settle for a "copy" that you CLAIM is in the "library of Congress. Now if you know, in fact that it is there then you should be able to tell us just where we can go there and find it. For if you have found it yourself you should know it's exact location. So why do not you just dig that information up and we will examine this document for you?

As I said, I will show this document to be a farce because it is contrary to all that the scriptures teach concerning Pilate and Christ. But I will leave that for now. For the very first thing I challenge concerning any "document" as to whether it is authentic or not is the question "does it even exist?" So you need to offer proof that this document does exist and then we can begin our process of examinaing it. So tell us Mark, What is the Library of Congress number for this document that you "CLAIM" or at least assume actually exsist. That is step one. We wait for your answer.

For the Lion of the Tribe of Judah,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 07, 2000

I have a book at home called, "Christian Origins outside the New Testament," by F.F. Bruce, which contains all the historical references to Jesus and early Christianity outside the Biblical writings (Roman historians, Jewish Talmuds/Targum/Mishnah, etc.). This letter neither appears as an authentic source material or a hoax: it doesn't appear at all. It also doesn't appear in Josh McDowell's very thorough work, "Evidence that Demands a Verdict." In fact, I have studied the historical evidences for many years, and this is the very first time I have ever heard such tripe. I would therefore discount it as a recent hoax concocted by British-Israelite proponents.

However, if you are skeptical of my testimony, I would suggest a letter to the Library of Congress would quickly ascertain whether or not this letter is an authentic first century document. Be prepared for a "no" answer, because that is what you will receive.

-- Anonymous, March 07, 2000

Brother Danny:

You are right. I had better watch my manners! I must treat this false teacher as if he were nothing more than a "Christian from a different background"! Ha! May God spare us from this false sense of "LOVE"! Ha!

It does make you wonder don't it?

THanks Brother,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 07, 2000

Amen brother John:

We are waiting to hear from the "Library of Congress" on this one! Ha!

YOur Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 07, 2000

Hello, Dear Mark Hillyard,

I have not heard of the subject which E. Lee brought up, but his unChristlike response is quite shocking to me. The ridiculing from his cohorts is also appalling.

There is nothing of a Christ-honoring attitude in their words.

Have you read the 'Restoration Movement' thread? This is from a group who says that Christian unity is their goal. They are very leagalistic and would make good poster boys for 'Pharisees of the year'. I AM angry now, but I've got 'til sundown (18 hours) to deal with it.

I wasn't angry with what they said to me, but they savaged Barry, who has not been back, that I've noticed. They are bullies, and I was glad to see a new poster tell them to clean up their acts.

They have none of the 'fruit of the Spirit' in their words or attitudes.

And they are wrong doctrinally on baptism, too.

Let's pray for them, forgive them, love them, and turn them over to God.

In Jesus

-- Anonymous, March 08, 2000

I did no such thing. But let's say that he is not a Christian (and neither you nor I know); will he ever come to Christ if you are the only example of one he knows about?

'Speak the TRUTH in love'

-- Anonymous, March 08, 2000

Connie:

I now quote your words as follows:

"I have not heard of the subject which E. Lee brought up, but his unChristlike response is quite shocking to me. The ridiculing from his cohorts is also appalling."

With these words you admit that you have absolutely no idea what we are talking about but to you it does not matter I must be "loving" according to your definition of "love". You are another one of those who "loves" so much that you will not forcefully tell people the truth even if you know that they will lose their souls for believing a lie. " with all deciet of unrighteousness for them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. For this cause God sendeth them a working of error, that they should believe a lie: that they all might be judged who believed not the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness." (2Thess. 10-12). You pretend to "love" Mark but you have done absolutely nothing to correct his false teaching that is RACIST. His false "Anglo-Israelism" is a pernicious lie. But he does have something in common with you, Connie. He constantly makes ASSERTIONS without offering and evidence from the word of God to PROVE that his assertions are true. When arguments are offered from the word of God that prove his doctrine to be false he runs away without even attempting to answer. You do the same thing, Connie. For example, you assert that I do not "love" Mark. But you offer no proof that such is true. You assume that my harsh words indicate that I do not care about his soul. But you obviously have not read the MANY, lengthy post that I have written, which required a lot of my time and working early in the morning or late at night sometimes even when I an at work, because I care that he would learn the truth. He will surely be lost for teaching and believing the LIE that has obsorbed his very soul. But just because I do not use hypocritical "sweet" words that are nothing more than a pretence and a substitute for really caring enough to work hard at confronting him with clear evidence that is undeniable that his doctrine is in fact FALSE. What have you done to help this man know the truth? I doubt if you even understand the complex nature of the "RACIST" lie that he is teaching and you probably would have absolutely no idea of how to "Convict this gainsayer" ( Titus 1:9).

Now the apostles of Christ had a completely different understanding of "preaching the truth in Love" ( Eph. 4:15 than you, Connie. You are of the mistaken notion that speaking the truth in love means that we are to always be SOOO sweet, gentle, dripping and oozing with sweet nectar and glowing with "piety"! You expect us to be so weak and halting in our speech than none could ever even comprehend that they have been "CRITISIZED". You expect that love requires that we be so careful that the "wolves in sheep's clothing" do not scatter when they see this shepherd coming who was so busy "hugging the sheep" to keep a staff in his hand to beat away the wolf who is devouring the flock.

But read these verses from the apostles and see that the great apostle Paul who told us to "speak the truth in Love" ( Eph. 4:15) and wrote the great Chapter on Love ( 1 Corinthians 13) was often very harsh in his rebukes of false teachers. So it is clear that "love" does not insist on an avoidance of strong peircing rebukes when they are needed.

Now Mark is full of "deceit and fraud and the apostle Paul ran into someone who, like our friend Mark, was also full of deceit and fraud. Notice these words that he spoke to him, "But Saul, who was also {known as} Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, fixed his gaze upon him, and said, "You who are full of all deceit and fraud, you son of the devil, you enemy of all righteousness, will you not cease to make crooked the straight ways of the Lord?" ( Acts 13:9-10).

Now I can just see our friend Connie running in between Paul and this LIAR and waving her hands and saying "Paul, your comments are so unchristian and unloving and there is no honoring of Christ in your words. Paul it does not matter how wrong you think this man is, Christ died for him and we must "speak the truth in love" as even YOU have admonished us to do. " I can only wonder which one Paul would have struck with blindness? Probably the one that was full of deceit and fraud because he could clearly see that Connie was already BLIND to the true meaning of "LOVE".

"II Peter 2:21 For it would have been better for them never to have known the way of righteousness than, after knowing it, to turn back from the holy commandment that was passed on the them, It has happened to them according to the true proverb, 'The dog turns back to its own vomit,' and 'The sow is washed only to wallow in the mud.'"

Do you think that Brother Peter should have, for we have no record that he did, apologized for his "disposition" in the above passage? Philippians 3:2 Beware of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of those who mutilate the flesh!

Do you think that Brother Paul should have apologized for referring to these "evil workers" as "dogs"?

"Gal. 5:12 I wish that those who unsettle you would mutilate/castrate/emasculate themselves!"

Was not this statement extremely harsh? Should Paul have apologized for what he said? Do you think that he honored Christ with these words?

Mt. 23:13-14 Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to. Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are. Did Christ dishonor himself with these extremely HARSH words?

Acts 13:9-10 But Saul, who was also {known as} Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, fixed his gaze upon him, and said, "You who are full of all deceit and fraud, you son of the devil, you enemy of all righteousness, will you not cease to make crooked the straight ways of the Lord?"

Paul accused this person of being a "son of the devil" should he have apologized for being so "harsh". Was he "unloving". Was he failing to preach the truth in Love? Did he fail to follow his own words found in 1 Corinthians 13?

1 Tim 6:3-5 If anyone advocates a different doctrine, and does not agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness, he is conceited {and} understands nothing; but he has a morbid interest in controversial questions and disputes about words, out of which arise envy, strife, abusive language, evil suspicions, and constant friction between men of depraved mind and deprived of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a means of gain.

Was Paul failing to be "kind" and "loving" by saying that these men were of "depraved mind and deprived of the truth"? Was he apparently behaving as if he alone had a "corner on the truth"? Should he have apologized for saying it?

2 Cor 11:1-15 I wish that you would bear with me in a little foolishness; but indeed you are bearing with me. For I am jealous for you with a godly jealousy; for I betrothed you to one husband, that to Christ I might present you {as} a pure virgin. But I am afraid, lest as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds should be led astray from the simplicity and purity {of devotion} to Christ. For if one comes and preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted, you bear{this} beautifully. For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. Therefore it is not surprising if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their deeds.

Was Paul again being "caustic" here by calling those who preached another Jesus and a different gospel "deceitful workers" and "servants of Satan"? Connie would find this to be "Appaulling"!

Titus 1:9-13 holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, that he may be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict. For there are many rebellious men, empty talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, who must be silenced because they are upsetting whole families, teaching things they should not {teach} for the sake of sordid gain. One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, "Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons." This testimony is true. For this cause reprove them severely that they may be sound inthe faith

How about this place where Paul agrees with a Cretan prophet and therefore joined in calling the whole lot of them "liars", evil beast, and gluttons"? Why, Connie, don't you think this is just "appaulling"?

Paul, who wrote 1 Corinthians 13, did not see any prohibition to the use of "strong, blunt, severe, and yes harsh words" when the time, place and argument require it. Is it not possible that love itself could motivate such harsh words to come from our Savior's lips and also from His apostles?

Enough of these nonsensical, hypocritical uses of the word LOVE as if it means nothing more than making a diligent effort to avoid all harsh, strong, severe words that might offend.

Connie, even you display, according to your own definition of the word "love" an unchristian spirit with these words:

" Have you read the 'Restoration Movement' thread? This is from a group who says that Christian unity is their goal. They are very leagalistic and would make good poster boys for 'Pharisees of the year'. I AM angry now, but I've got 'til sundown (18 hours) to deal with it.

Now we are advocating unity upon the word of God as our only rule of faith and practice. We are not merely advocating unity.

Boy, Connie, you were really ANGRY! When I responded to Mark's nonsense I was not angry at all. Strange isn't it. Then you "lovingly" say that we would make good "poster boys for Pharisee's of the year". Yes, the legs of the LAME are always unequal! Maybe you should have waited until after sundown to write your response!

Then you falsely accuse them of "savaging" poor Barry with these words:

"I wasn't angry with what they said to me, but they savaged Barry, who has not been back, that I've noticed. They are bullies, and I was glad to see a new poster tell them to clean up their acts."

. Now I read what they wrote and the only thing that they "savaged" was Barry's arguments in support of doctrines that were contrary to the word of God. I can assure you that Barry himself is just fine!

Then you assert, without any proof- which is your habit- the following:

"They have none of the 'fruit of the Spirit' in their words or attitudes."

I do not agree. In fact I see a great much longsuffering in their words. They are also faithful to Christ and his word and this "faithfulness is also a fruit of the spirit along with longsuffering. So that is two fruits of the spirit that I see in their words. (Gal.5:22).

Then you make yet another assertion for which you offer absolutely no proof. You are consistent in this regard for you do nothing more than make assertions and you do not answer those who respond to you.

You assert but do not prove the following:

"And they are wrong doctrinally on baptism, too."

Now this is the second time that you have made this completely false assertion and you have not ever once even attempted to show evidence that this mere assertion of yours is true. I responded to you concerning this subject in another thread. In that thread I answered your false doctrine concerning baptism and you have completely ignored my arguments. So how can you say we are wrong about this matter when you have failed to even ATTEMPT to answer our arguments?

I am pasting my response to you on Baptism in this thread and I call upon you to no longer ignor it but at least attempt to answer it. The people reading in this forum can see when you RUN away from these arguments for fear that you may learn that it is in fact, you that is "wrong doctrinally about baptism."

I now post those two post concerning baptism which you claim to be wrong but you have made no attempt to show just how and wherein they are wrong. In this forum, Connie, assertions without proof from the word of God are useless! I paste these posts in one more attempt to persuade you to at least try to give an answer. These are the two post which you have completely ignored because you cannot answer them yet you still assert, without proof that we are "wrong doctrinally about baptism". Connie, proof is move valuable that assertion.

"Connie:

It is indeed very nice to meet you in this forum. I want to just make a comment concerning your post because it brings up something that I have noticed for quite some time. It seems that many in this forum, especially those who reject the truth that our Lord requires obedience of us -( " Though he was a son yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered; and being made perfect he became the author of eternal salvation TO ALL THEM THAT OBEY HIM". Hebrews 5:8,9)- do not like His commands for us to obey for it does not fit their "theology" which they have derived from "Calvin" or some other great human teacher and not from Christ. And Jesus also said "why call ye me Lord, Lord and do not the things which I say?" (Luke 6:46). He made it clear that not everyone that merely says "Lord, Lord" will enter the kingdom of heaven, " Not everyone that says to me Lord, Lord shall enter the kingdom of heaven but he that DOETH THE WILL OF MY Father which is in heaven". (Matthew 7:21).

Now it is the will of God that we believe in Christ (John 3:16; John 1:12;) which includes the very idea of obedience to Christ( John 3:38). We must also repent of our sins (Acts 3:19; Acts 2:38; Luke 13:3,5). We must confess our faith in Christ with our mouth before men all the days of our lives ( Romans 10:9,10; Matthew 10:32-34; 1 Timothy 6:12 -16;). We must be baptized (in water Hebrew 10:22; Eph 5:26; Acts 8:25-40; Matthew 3:14-17; John 3:23) for the remission of our sins ( Acts 2:38) in order to obey the gospel which is the good news that Christ died, was buried and raised again ( 1 Cor. 15:1-4; Romans 1:16; 2Thess. 1:7-11;) For the only way that we can obey the death burial and resurrection of Christ is by dying to our sins, being buried with Christ in baptism ( Notice it says being buried WITH Christ not in Christ) By baptism into death that like as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the father we also should walk in newness of Life" (Romans 6:3-5) Then we are told " IF we have been planted in the likeness of his death we shall also be in the likeness of his resurrection." (Romans 6:6 what if we are NOT planted in the likeness of his death?). WE are to be baptized into Christ. " For (Gar) we are all Children of God by faith in Christ Jesus for (gar) as many of you as have been Baptized INTO Christ have put on Christ. Gal. 3;26,27. Now this Greek word "gar" means "because". Therefore this passage says that we are all children of God by faith in Christ Jesus FOR( gar meaning because) we have been baptized into Christ. Now the plain teaching of Gal. 3;26, 27 is that we are children of God by faith because we have been baptized into Christ. In other words our faith has lead us to be obedient to the very command of Christ (MARK 16:16, " He that believeth and is baptized SHALL BE SAVED: he that believeth not shall be condemned.) Now Jesus has made it clear that baptism is connected with our salvation in the exact same way that faith is connected to our salvation.

Then, Connie, someone like you and others come along and assert concerning baptism, always without the slightest shred of PROOF, the following quotation of your words:

"I'll say it, even if Barry won't: It has nothing to do with salvation; obedience, yes; salvation, no."

CONNIE SAYS: BAPTISM HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SALVATION ( NO PROOF OFFERED OR NEEDED FOR CONNIE"S WORD IS ENOUGH SINCE SHE IS SAYING WHAT SHE KNOWS THAT MANY WANT TO HEAR).

CHRIST SAYS: "HE THAT BELIEVETH AND IS BAPTIZED SHALL BE SAVED: HE THAT BELIEVETH NOT SHALL BE CONDEMNED." MARK 16:16.

CONNIE SAYS: BAPTISM HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SALVATION. ( no proof given FOR It is not necessary for we are expected to believe it because Connie is a nice person and we all like her very much. She would not deliberately lie to us! Besides we do not want to offend her by implying that she does not have any real proof of her claim).

CHRIST SAID THROUGH PETER: " The like figure whereunto BAPTISM DOETH ALSO NOW SAVE US, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh but the ANSWER OF A GOOD CONSCIENCE toward God BY THE RESSURECTION OF CHRIST." (1 Peter 3:21).

CONNIE SAYS: BAPTISM HAS NO CONNECTION TO THE REMISSION OF OUR SINS.

CHRIST SAYS THROUGH PETER: " REPENT and BE BAPTIZED in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ FOR (eis, meaning in order to) the REMISSION OF YOUR SINS. (Acts 2:38).

We could go on and on this way but it should not be necessary.

Connie, you are in direct conflict with Christ and you say these things without even attempting to offer proof from the word of God. Now this is a big disappointment to me for I read where you CLAIMED the following, of course you offered no proof of this either: "The Holy Spirit instructs us and the Bible is our textbook; I prefer listening to the intructions of Paul, Peter, John, Matthew, James, et al, over Augustine, Calvin, Arminius, the 'Holy Fathers', the Pope, or any modern writer, including C.S. Lewis, Francis Schafer, or any modern writer.

Now if the Holy Spirit were instructing you , Connie, he would not teach you something contrary to the very words of Christ. Now the truth is that the Holy Spirit instructs us by having delivered the word of Christ to the apostles who wrote it down in the word of God for us to read and understand. If you are claiming that the Holy Spirit has divinely inspired you in your studies then how is it that you differ with Christ? For the Holy Spirit was to "take of His and deliver it to the apostles". (John 16;13; 14:26). I do doubt very seriously that it was the HOLY SPIRIT that brought you to these conclusions. We cannot tell which spirit it was for you have offered no proof from which to judge but it sounds a lot like the spirit of Calvin or worse the spirit of the great "father of lies" (John 6:44). But it most certianly is not the Spirit of Christ.

Now for someone who pretends to prefer "Paul, Peter, John, Matthew, et al," over other men, and I was happy to see you say this, you come in here and expect us to prefer YOUR words over Christ's own words (MARK 16:16) and the very words of Christ spoken through "Paul ( Gal. 3:26,27); Peter ( 1 Peter 3:21); John ( John 3:3-5; Titus 3:3-5). Matthew ( Matthew 28:19,20); et. Al."

I have noticed this pattern among those who oppose the idea that "baptism is for the remission of sins" (Acts 2:38) and is connected by the Lord to Salvation (Mark 16:16). They all do as you have done, Connie. They merely affirm and assert vehemently that it has NOTHING TO DO WITH SALVATION but they do not show us a passage in the entire word of God that says "baptism has nothing to do with salvation". All of the silly quibbles that men offer none have ever actually shown any place in the word of God that SAID baptism has nothing to do with salvation. They merely infer it because they do not want to believe the PLAIN statements of GOD'S word that make it clear that it DOES have something to do with salvation.

Now I will list this LONG string of passages again, though I am convinced that you will do as all of the rest have done. You will ignore them or most of them but you will not answer ALL of them. Then you will return with just one more assertion without proof and the fact that you appear unconvinced will satisfy you and many others that you have given a successful response. But those who are searching for the truth will know that you have failed and they will see the truth in spite of your efforts to avoid its clear import. The passages again are:

(Mark 16:16; Matthew 28:19,20; John 3:3-5; Titus 3:3-5;Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16; Acts 8:25-40; I Corinthians 1:10-14; Romans 6:3-6; Gal. 3;26,27; Eph 5:26; Hebrews 10:22; Acts 8:5-13;Acts 10:34-46; Acts 16:30-34; Acts 16:13-15;) Remember that even our Lord was baptized, in water, to fullfill all righteousness ( Matthew 3:13-17) and that John was in a place called Enon baptizing because there was "much WATER" there ( John 3:23). I say these things for those who are want to PERVERT the word of God by quibbling that baptism does not imply that the element is water. In the New Testament, most scholars agree that water is the understood element unless another element is specifically stated. For in the New Testament, among Christians Baptism was connected with water unless some thing other than water is meant. For this reason we read of the "Baptism of the Holy Spirit". Why is the Holy Spirit specified? Obviously to distinguish that from the common understanding of "water" connected among Christians with baptism. When the scriptures refer to the "Baptism of suffering" it specifies the element in order to distinguish it. Like wise the baptism of fire ect. Then remember that "there is ONE LORD, ONE FAITH, and ONE BAPTISM and ONE GOD who is above all and through all and in you all." Eph. 4:4.

The word of God mentions Baptism 127 times in the New Testament and in so many places, as I have shown it has something to do with salvation, Connie, notwithstanding. To neglect willfully that which our God has so abundantly sought to make clear to us, and to do so without even attempting to offer any proof to the contrary is an error that carries with it dire consequence for those who do not OBEY the gospel ( 2Thess. 1:7-11; 1 Cor. 15:1-4; Romans 6:3-6) shall be "PUNISHED with EVERLASTING DESTRUCTION from the presence of God and the glory of His power". (2Thess. 1:7-11). This is not a game in this forum, Connie, the souls of men and women are at stake. If you are going to claim anything at least "TRY" to offer "PROOF" from the word of God to support your claim.

SO Connie, I understand your assertions but I reject them if they are not accompanied by PROOF, especially when the WORD OF GOD is filled with passages that are teaching contrary to your claims.

I pray that our Lord will abundantly bless you, Connie, with the knowledge of his truth and that you will have joy, and everlasting life through Christ our Lord. " And ye shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free." (John 8:31,32). Then you end your post with the word "shalom" which means peace! There can be no peace when you are rebelling against the truth of God. No, Connie, no one who so blatantly defies the very teaching of Christ can expect to find "peace" with those who "Know and love the truth". That just will not happen. You are my friend because I do sincerely care that you follow Christ as all faithful Christians do, but I will not have any "peace" with the deceptions that lead men away from Christ and turn them away from obeying His commands found in His divinely inspired word.

Your Christian friend,

E. Lee Saffold

Connie:

In my last post I left off something that I had intended to say to you. It is just as well because it may be presented with more clarity if it is presented by itself.

I want to compare your words with the word of God just one more time. You have said concerning Baptism:

"I'll say it, even if Barry won't: It has nothing to do with salvation; obedience, yes; salvation, no."

You imply from this that obedience has nothing to do with salvation. For if obedience were essential to our salvation then anything necessary to obedience would also be essential to our salvation. In your above quote you agree that baptism has something to do with obedience but reject that it has anything to do with salvation.

But the scriptures teach that our obedience has very much to do with our salvation. " For though he were a son yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered and being made perfect he became the AUTHOR OF ETERNAL SALVATION TO ALL THEM THAT OBEY HIM." Hebrews 5:8,9.

Now, it should be clear to the candid and discerning that OBEDIENCE IS ESENTIAL TO SALVATION for Christ is the AUTHOR of ETERNAL SALVATION to whom? TO ALL THEM THAT OBEY HIM! That is whom! Not to those who DISOBEY Him but to ALL who OBEY Him.

Therefore Baptism, which by your own admission has something to do with obedience, and obedience has to do with our salvation (Heb. 5:8,9), does, in fact, have very much to do with salvation!

You very own words defy your beliefs.

Your friend in Christ,



-- Anonymous, March 08, 2000

Connie;

I wrote this in another thread but I am going to write it again here and add to it a bit. To begin with, let me say that I respect your heart for Christ and your deep-seated feelings. I am not much of an emotional Christian, and I often envy those, especially women, who feel such strong joy and love. We all have our gifts, and in some sense I feel yours is greater to mine.

Regarding Mark and out "mean spiritedness" toward him: We were quite nice to Mark in the beginning, and if you go back and read earlier threads you will see that. But his views got more and more heretical as time went on, and there has come a point where we have basically said, "enough!" (Jesus did that with the disciples once when they were talking nonsense.) Paul admonishes the Corinthian church, because they did the opposite of what we are doing: they put up with teachers that taught false gospels and were easy on them. "For if someone comes to you and preaches ... a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough" (2 Corinthians 11:4).

When Jesus went into the temple, did he pat the moneychangers lovingly on the head and say, "now now, you shouldn't be doing this?" NO! He took a WHIP, began BEATING THEM soundly, OVERTURNING their tables, and DRIVING them out! I know of so many Christians who believe in the namby-pamby, lukewarm "Peace-Love" Christ (who is more a flower child hippie Christ), who cannot come to terms with the Christ who HATED false religion so much that he would quite literally BEAT UP those who would make a mockery of God's word, CALL THEM really rude NAMES, and ANGRILY tell them they were all going straight to HELL!

Now I'm not advocating physically assaulting anyone, I am just trying to make a point. When I discuss religion with a Mormon or a Jehovah's Witness, I am nice and polite -- to a point. But when it becomes clear that there is a hardened heart with a love for the lie which will not listen when the truth is clearly presented to them, well you gotta draw a line somewhere.

Nate's verse from Titus 3:10, "Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him" is very apropos. I usually go far beyond the second time with people. And I think we all have in these insipid Aryan-Israel threads. But there comes a time when Christian love must give way to Christian REBUKE.

Rebuke isn't always nice. Even the sound of the word is ugly. But it is sometimes necessary. In fact, it is sometimes COMMANDED in the scripture (2 Timothy 3:16, 4:2; Titus 2:15). Paul in fact tells Titus to rebuke with all authority, and let no one despise him for it. Do you now despise us for our sharp rebuke of false doctrine? Have we now become your enemy by telling you the truth?

Your Brother in Christ,

-- Anonymous, March 08, 2000

Mark:

Where are you? I thought that you might have a "Library of Congress" reference number for us by now so that we can go there and find this document that you have not begun to prove even exist.

You told us the following:

"(The original of this letter is in the library of Rome. An authenticated copy is in the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C."

Now if you knew this to be true when you diliberately told us that it was true then you should already know the Library of Congress reference number. All you have to do is tell us what that number is and we will examine this document. But until you give us such evidence it is clear to all of us that you have tried to perpetrate a FRAUD in this forum by claiming that an "Authenticated copy" of this document is in the Library of Congress when in fact such is clearly NOT THE TRUTH.

I quess that we should not expect anything better from one who is teaching "Anglo-Israelism" which is just as much a FRAUD as is this document that you have falsely told us was in the Library of Congress.

For the Lion of the Tribe of Judah,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 09, 2000

(Ezek 37:16 KJV) "Moreover, thou son of man, take thee one stick, and write upon it, For Judah, and for the children of Israel his companions: then take another stick, and write upon it, For Joseph, the stick of Ephraim, and for all the house of Israel his companions:"

Lee,

I have answered this and many of the questions posed to me. The problem is that you people are so angry you refuse to read. But you will continue to defend your stand on the Jews being the WHOLE HOUSE OF ISRAEL when the very Word of God stands opposed to that view. THERE ARE TWELVE TRIBES.

You asked me to answer your question re: the Sticks. I will answer that again.

King David was promised to have a seed of his sitting on the Throne of the Lord. David was of Judah and the Lord called his house the House of David. Look it up!

(Jer 33:17 KJV) "For thus saith the LORD; David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel;"

Where in the World is the Royal Throne. The throne of the Lord which was begun with David and was said of Solomon...(1 Chr 29:23 KJV) "Then Solomon sat on the throne of the LORD as king instead of David his father, and prospered; and all Israel obeyed him."

This throne exists today! Know of any Royal thrones in the world?

RACIST? You people are so angry with the word of God it is amazing.

FUNNY YOU DON'T THINK IT RACIST FOR THE JEWS TO DECLARE BEING THE CHOSEN OF GOD AFTER THEY MURDERED HIM. AND ARE ANTI CHRIST.

The description of Jesus in the Letter fits well with the description of King David...(1 Sam 17:42 KJV) "And when the Philistine looked about, and saw David, he disdained him: for he was but a youth, and ruddy, and of a fair countenance."

Lee,

I quess that we should not expect anything better from one who is teaching "Anglo-Israelism" which is just as much a FRAUD as is this document that you have falsely told us was in the Library of Congress.

For the Lion of the Tribe of Judah,

I asked if there was a way to verify this.

As of right now I have a source from the Library of Congress re: Letters of Pilate. It will take time to order and research the replies I have received from the Library of Congress. I was told that it is in there. I will find out.

Try reading my answers honestly.

If I am wrong re: Israel then answer these questions.

(Mat 10:6 KJV) "But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

Why did Jesus say they were lost if they were not lost as is posed so many times by different people on this forum?

Where is the Throne of the Lord with the seed of David ruling over Israel?

Where is the Great Company of Nations?

Where is the Great Nation?

Upon whom did the Word light? (Isa 9:8 KJV) "The Lord sent a word into Jacob, and it hath lighted upon Israel."

YE THAT FOLLOW AFTER RIGHTEOSNESS

Why did God instruct us to listen up...(Isa 51:1 KJV) "Hearken to me, ye that follow after righteousness, ye that seek the LORD: look unto the rock whence ye are hewn, and to the hole of the pit whence ye are digged."

(Isa 51:2 KJV) "Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah that bare you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and increased him."

By the way, I may be short of perfect but I am not a hairy tick.

I know you guys missed me but I am having trouble with my computer.

Remember...(Dan 12:10 KJV) "Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand."

-- Anonymous, March 13, 2000

Mark:

You said:

"You asked me to answer your question re: the Sticks. I will answer that again."

Mark you have never answered my argument from Ezekiel 37:15-21. You said that we couldn't combine Judah and Israel without reaching the wrong conclusion. I showed you that in Ezekiel 37:15-21 GOD combined them into one.

Now you claim to answer it again. You did not touch that argument in the first place. In fact I challenge you to come back in here and copy and paste your answer that you gave already. Then I look for your response again in this post but I still do not see one. It seems that what you mean by answer is that you "mention" the argument. Now just "mentioning" the argument does not answer it.

Tell us Mark how it is that God Joined Judah and Israel together into one and you say that it cannot be done without reaching the wrong conclusion. God did it in Ezekiel 37:15-21 and he reached the right conclusion.

It is not the word of God that we are against Mark. It is your abuse and ignorance of the word of God that we are against.

I notice that you admit that you did not know that this so-called "letter from Pilate" was actually in the Library of Congress. But you told us, and I quote your exact words, "(The original of this letter is in the library of Rome. An authenticated copy is in the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C.) " Now if you did not know that this document really existed why did you tell us that it actually existed and that an "authenticated" copy of it was, in fact, in the "Library of Congress". I am waiting for you to prove that it is because I already know that it is not. So be careful when you make your next attempt at fraud concerning this letter. I am telling you now that I know for a fact that this document is not authentic and that there is no such "authenticated" document in the Library of Congress. So we still wait. In fact the time that you have been gone from the forum was sufficient for you to verify this document was in the Library of Congress or not. You just do not have any help for your "Anglo-Israel" nonsense, do you Mark?

Your Christian Friend,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 13, 2000

I am guessing that there may actually be such a document in the Library of Congress. Besides great works of the ages, the LoC is also a repository of all the flotsam and jetsam of the ages. Just because something is "in the Library of Congress" does not automatically stamp it as a valid historical document or that any reputable historians or archaeologists accept it. The Smithsonian Institution has copies of the Book of Mormon in their library, but they do not in any way acceot it as being a valid historical/archaological document source; in fact, they publish a statement to that effect. I am sure that if it does indeed exist in the LoC (which I am still in doubt of) it will be noted to be a patently fraudulent work.

-- Anonymous, March 13, 2000
Mark;

You say the "Jews" "murdered" Christ. I find your logic troubling on several grounds, other than the obvious racist one.

First, I have already pointed out that in the New Testament, whenever the gospel writers spoke of the "Jews," they meant specifically the corrupt leadership, not the entire race. You continue to ignore this fact.

Second, the "Jews" delivered him over to the Romans, and it was the Romans that actually put Him to death. Pilate turned his back on Him. Why do you not feel any such vile hatred toward Italians? (Or do you?!)

Third, He came willingly to die, He gave Himself up at the Cross. He could have called 10,000 angels ... but He did not! You make it sound like he was a helpless, hapless victim, like the "Jews" had any power over him at all. HA! AS IF!

Fourth, it was YOU who put Jesus to death, because it is clear in the NT that He came to die for YOUR sins. You should hate yourself most of all! YOU murdered Christ! You filthy Christ-killer!

Fifth ... since Jesus came to die, as He Himself stated in so many words, why are you so angry that He was "murdered"? True Christians praise God that he gave Himself freely as our sacrifice for the sin- debt we could not pay!

Sixth, He's alive again with a glorious spiritual body anyway, so what difference does it make who slew his natural body?

I could continue point after point, but this is just plain silliness and I have better things to do with my time.

Shalom,

-- Anonymous, March 13, 2000

Amen, John.

-- Anonymous, March 13, 2000
Actually, the scripture says He could have called 12 legions of angels, which is about 72,000 angels. The song takes "poetic license". Does "He could have called 12 legions of angels..." or "He could have called 72,000 angels ..." sound as poetic to you?

-- Anonymous, March 13, 2000
yes, 6000 per legion, not including 666 centurians and other officers, which would bring it to a grand total of 79992. Hows that, Mr. Nit-picky? :^ neener neener neener!

-- Anonymous, March 13, 2000
Just checking in in case some of you have missed me.

So far this is all I have gotten re: letters

I can't figger out how to get them to send the material via the net so I guess I'll send them a letter.

If there is anyone out there who knows more about this type of thing then give a go at it. I don't know if this document has the particular letter in it but it should be interesting.

Subject: Opac Call Number Browse Search for BT440 P585 1849

LC Control Number: 99478217

Type of Material: Book (Print, Microform, Electronic, etc.)

Personal Name: Pilate, Pontius, 1st cent.

Main Title: An interesting narrative of the Saviour Jesus Christ / by Pontius Pilate ; translated from the Latin by M. Swan.

Caption Title: Pilate's narrative of our Saviour, Jesus Christ

Published/Created: Canterbury, N.H. : [Shaker's Press], 1849.

Related Names: Swan, M. MacLean, J. P. (John Patterson), 1848-1939, former owner. Shaker Collection (Library of Congress)

Description: 16 p. ; 15 cm.

Notes: Cover title. "Shakers' Press, Canterbury, N.H."--P. [1]. "Translated and abridged from the 'Courier des Etas Unis'"--P. [1]. LC copy purchased from J.P. MacLean in 1906; stamped YA 25556.

References: MacLean, J.P. Shaker lit., 411

Subjects: Jesus Christ--Trial. Pilate, Pontius, 1st cent. Shakers.

LC Classification: BT440 .P585 1849

______________________________

CALL NUMBER: BT440 .P585 1849 Copy 1 Purchased from J.P. MacLean in 1906; stamped YA 25556. -- Request in: Rare Book/Special Collections Reading Room (Jefferson LJ239) -- Status: Not Charged

====================================================================== ================================================================ LIBRARY OF CONGRESS ONLINE CATALOG Library of Congress 101 Independence Ave., SE Washington, DC 20540

DO NOT use email to REPLY to THIS message. Email REPLIES will NOT be answered.

For questions about SEARCHING the Library of Congress Online Catalog, email: lconline@loc.gov

The catalog records included in this email message were searched by a researcher using the Library of Congress Online Catalog, either from a workstation in a Library reading room or from some other location. Researchers working in the Library's public reading rooms are solely responsible for the legal implications of their activities, such as copying, uploading or downloading files, and/or posting electronic mail. In its public reading rooms, the Library permits research-related email only. The Library will not assume or accept liability for any violations of these conditions by researchers.

-- Anonymous, March 19, 2000

John Wilson,

I reply with the Word of God.

And a Quote from Focus on the Family, Fighting Fair, by Laurie Kehler March issue.

"Name-calling is like swearing; it shows you don't have anything intelligent to say. More important it attacks the other person's character."

(1 Th 2:14 KJV) "For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judaea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews:"

(1 Th 2:15 KJV) "Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men:"

Try looking to the Word of God and not your emotions.

-- Anonymous, March 19, 2000

Congratulations Connie!! You just hugged and kissed with a man who believes that the white man (specifically the British) are the chosen race and that Jesus was not Jewish and that the Jews were never the chosen people. It's the false doctrine called "Bristish-Israelism."

But, from your theological perspective......who cares. Let's all give 'em a big hug.

-- Danny Gabbard, Sr. (PYBuck12pt@cs.com), March 08, 2000.

What is wrong with being a WHITE MAN? Your statement falls under the Focus Article quoted above.

________________________

Danny,

Ever been held by the Spirit of God? Didn't think so.

Held is the only way I can describe it. He doesn't posses. He guides and teaches, and Comforts. Ever been comforted by the Holy Spirit?

Haven't heard anyone answer my questions above.

Re: The sticks. Read the answer real slow and think about it. And I will say it again. Judah and Israel were seperated by God as I pointed out many times...(2 Chr 11:3 KJV) "Speak unto Rehoboam the son of Solomon, king of Judah, and to all Israel in Judah and Benjamin, saying,"

(2 Chr 11:4 KJV) "Thus saith the LORD, Ye shall not go up, nor fight against your brethren: return every man to his house: for this thing is done of me. And they obeyed the words of the LORD, and returned from going against Jeroboam."

This is where God seperated Judah from Israel and if you take the time to notice there where reps from all Israel for the reason that these people of Israel wanted to stay with the Temple Worship in Jerusalem.

And I will say it again that if you look to the Jews to have fullfilled the Great Nation, and the Great Company of Nations and all the other prophecies re: Israel you will come to the wrong conclusion. Because it is not correct. The Jews are not even as the stars...(Gen 22:17 KJV) "That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;"

(Gen 22:18 KJV) "And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice."

It is estimated that there are approx 16,000,000 Jews in the world today. Could be more but it does not equal the stars or the sand.

And how many nations want to be as the Jews? Whereas nations would want to be like Ephraim and Manasseh(Gen 48:19 KJV) "And his father refused, and said, I know it, my son, I know it: he also shall become a people, and he also shall be great: but truly his younger brother shall be greater than he, and his seed shall become a multitude of nations."

(Gen 48:20 KJV) "And he blessed them that day, saying, In thee shall Israel bless, saying, God make thee as Ephraim and as Manasseh: and he set Ephraim before Manasseh."

Every nation wants to be "as Ephraim and as Manasseh:" Look how they copy us. And eventually they will copy our ways re: The God of Israel, and His fair and equal LAWS OF THE KINGDOM. That'll take some time because as a Nation we are still short of Highly Spiritual and Humble before the Lord.

Do you follow after righteousness? Then obey Gods Word!

(Isa 51:1 KJV) "Hearken to me, ye that follow after righteousness, ye that seek the LORD: look unto the rock whence ye are hewn, and to the hole of the pit whence ye are digged."

(Isa 51:2 KJV) "Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah that bare you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and increased him."

-- Anonymous, March 19, 2000

Mark:

The title of the document you are looking for is:

LETTER TO TIBERIUS CAESAR FROM PONTIUS PILATE

You will notice that none of the documents mentioned in your recent post detailing what you have received thus far from the library of Congree contains this title.

I am certain that there is much in the library of Congress about Pilate and letters written by him etc but the document that you claim to be in the library of Congress is not there but you can continue your search for it is interesting that you have not found it yet!

It is also interesting that you told us that it could be found there when you started this thread and now we see you frantically searching but still have not found it. Your claim was "(The original of this letter is in the library of Rome. An authenticated copy is in the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C.)" But now you cannot find it. So you made a claim without knowing if it were true. Now you just cannot find it can you Mark? Do not worry, keep looking for this is only the first step in proving a document to be authentic. First you have to prove that it exist. Now that step has been and remains a very difficult task for you doesn'y it?

Oh well we will wait. I am keeping the information that I have found until you exhaust your frantic search for this fraudulent document.

So we wait Mark.

For the Lion of the Tribe of Juda,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 20, 2000

E. Lee Saffold,

If you had read my post carefully you would have noted that I asked a question re: this letter. Read the last line posted here from the original.

"Has anyone ever seen this letter before and/or would you know how to authenticate it?"

-- Mark Hillyard (foster@inreach.com)

I am having a difficult time with my computer. If you cannot help with this then don't sit and worry about it.

By the way, what is it that has got your britches in a bunch over this letter? If it is not authentic then so what?

But as you have seen above I am attempting to prove or disprove the Letter. Just thought I could emlist the help of bore competent computerkinda guys to help.

However, it does point out what I have stated in the past re: the description of Jesus and His being the Son of David.

(1 Sam 16:12 KJV) "And he sent, and brought him in. Now he was ruddy, and withal of a beautiful countenance, and goodly to look to. And the LORD said, Arise, anoint him: for this is he."

This is the description of David. Now if Jesus is the Son of David then he would resemble David. Why does that bother you?

And no one has bothered to answer my questions re: the Great Nation and the Great Company of Nations, etc.

If Gods Word is to stand then we must have a Great Nation and a Great Company of Nations, a Royal Throne, and a descendant of King David sitting on it as I have pointed out with the Word of God.

(Micah 4:1 KJV) "But in the last days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of the house of the LORD shall be established in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; and people shall flow unto it."

(Micah 4:2 KJV) "And many nations shall come, and say, Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, and to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for the law shall go forth of Zion, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem."

The second part of this, IMO, will only be fullfilled after Jesus returns.

The first part is obvious and it is true that many people from many nations are flowing into the US. Jesus predicted this when he said... (Mat 13:31 KJV) "...The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field:"

(Mat 13:32 KJV) "Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof."

The birds being the different people who would come to our Great and God Blessed Land to enjoy the bounty God poured out on us. Some would come to destroy us.

(Mat 13:34 KJV) "All these things spake Jesus unto the multitude in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them:"

(Mat 13:35 KJV) "That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world."

-- Anonymous, March 21, 2000

I got tired of waiting, so I went to the Library of Congress myself and did a search of their catalog, which turned up only five titles relating to Pontius Pilate and Tiberius. They were:

No mention of this fictional letter, unless it is in one of Clough's books, which would put it among the other spurious works, where it belongs.

For the King of the Jews,

-- Anonymous, March 21, 2000

Mark: You Said:

If you had read my post carefully you would have noted that I asked a question re: this letter. Read the last line posted here from the original. "Has anyone ever seen this letter before and/or would you know how to authenticate it?"

You are right Mark. You did say that you wanted to know if this work could be authenticated. I see that you were merely quoting someone else who had told you that it was authenticated in the Library of Congress. I apologize to you for that mistake. For it is evident that though you have hoped that it could be authenticated and that you intended to leave the impression that it was possible that such a document does exist out there that could be authenticated you did not yourself say that it was in fact authentic. I appreciate your correction for that is the truth. SO you were not lying when you quoted someone else who was in fact lying when they claimed that it was authentic. Please accept my apology for I did misunderstand.

Now I also want you to notice however that it is not authentic and if you will read Johns post you will see that it has not been authenticated and I still wait for you to find this document. One thing is for sure. It has not yet been proven to be authentic and we know that you have tried very hard havent you? Keep trying for it is just not authentic and we will see wont we?

Then you say:

By the way, what is it that has got your britches in a bunch over this letter? If it is not authentic then so what?

If this document is not authentic, Mark, then your original effort to leave the impression that documents do exist to support your false claim that Jesus was a white man with blond hair looking very European are ridiculous, now arent they? Christ was from the Tribe of Judah and would physically have their appearance wouldnt he? You can still go to Israel today and find people who are from the Tribe of Judah and they do not look very European do they? The major problem is that you have an intense desire to prove that Jesus Christ had white skin and blond hair. Now why do not you tell us why you have your britches in a brunch over Christ being a White man with blond hair? Now if your britches were not in such a brunch over that matter I doubt if you would even care if this fraudulent document was authentic or not, now would you? You see, even though you cannot prove this document to be authentic you still insist on saying the following:

However, it does point out what I have stated in the past re: the description of Jesus and His being the Son of David.

Now this document, if authentic, would support, though it would not conclusively prove, your contention that Christ was a white man. But the problem remains that you cannot prove it to be authentic now can you? We are only in the first stage of examining the authenticity of this document, which is to prove that it even exists and so far you have not done that much, now have you? So if your britches were not in a brunch over Christ being a white man in order to prove your false Anglo-Israel racist doctrine then I do not think our britches would be very crumpled about this document. In fact we would not even be discussing it because you would not have ever even noticed it, now would you?

Then you complain that no one has answered your questions as follows: And no one has bothered to answer my questions re: the Great Nation and the Great Company of Nations, etc.

I tell you what, if you will answer my questions concerning Ezekiel 37:15-21, which I have constantly asked you to answer, I will discuss this question that you have asked. But if you will read you will notice that your question has been answered but I am willing to do it again but only after you answer the question that I have put to you about Ezekiel 37:15-21. I do not mean that you merely "mention the argument" as you have done often but that you actually respond and attempt to offer a reasonable answer. This you have never even tried to do! You see, Mark, you want people to respond to your questions but you do not want to respond to any one who ask you the hard questions, now do you?

For the Lion of the Tribe of Judah,

E. Lee Saffold



-- Anonymous, March 21, 2000

Daniel recorded that "the kingdom shall not be left to other people," If Gods word is to be considered accurate then the kingdom is left to Israel. Christians sing such songs as "Sheep of His Pasture" etc. always remembering that we are Gods People. You/we claim to be working for the Kingdom.

(Dan 2:44 KJV) "And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever."

(Dan 2:45 KJV) "Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure."

Notice also that the Robbers of thy people will attempt to fullfil the vision...(Dan 11:14 KJV) "And in those times there shall many stand up against the king of the south: also the robbers of thy people shall exalt themselves to establish the vision; but they shall fall."

Usury is one of the main tools used to rob people. Check out the history of usury. Who are the robbers. Look at the banking industry, the Federal Reserve, look at all those financial tools which are used to rob us.

This may take a while, some know it already but can't place the situation correctly. You know we are being robbed. Most Americans know they are being robbed.

Who is doing the robbing? (Rev 2:9 KJV) "I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan."

And God has spoken against those that would attempt to establish the vision and who are also robbing the people...(Ezek 36:5 KJV) "Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Surely in the fire of my jealousy have I spoken against the residue of the heathen, and against all Idumea, which have appointed my land into their possession with the joy of all their heart, with despiteful minds, to cast it out for a prey."

If you would go back and read my posts you will notice that I have answered the Ezekiel 37 question several times. You might also study the history of the Jutelanders. God has seen to it, as I have pointed, out that Israel would leave "waymarks" in order to lead back to the point where Israel was sent into exile and lost their identity as prophecied.

We are Israel! And all others who would join themselves to Israel via Jesus Christ.

-- Anonymous, March 23, 2000

Mark:

Now you are lying deliberately again with these words:

If you would go back and read my posts you will notice that I have answered the Ezekiel 37 question several times. You might also study the history of the Jutelanders. God has seen to it, as I have pointed, out that Israel would leave "waymarks" in order to lead back to the point where Israel was sent into exile and lost their identity as prophecied.

You have not answered the argument from Ezekiel 37:15-22 at ALL! It took me a long time and constant prodding to get you to even mention the argument. But that is all you have done. You merely mention claim to have answered without even attempting to do so.

I have looked back through the post and there is no ANSWER to EZEKIEL 37:15-22 to be found anywhere. Therefore you have deliberately lied in claiming to have answered that argument. This is just another of your tactics to run from and avoid this argument. I can tell you Mark that everone in this forum can read and they have not read an answer from you on Ezekiel 37:15-22.

I challenge you to go back to the thread where I have made the Argument and just try to answer it. If you like I will bring that original argument over to this thread so you can attempt to answer. But your statement that you have answered this argument several times is nothing short of a DELIBERATE LIE. But we should not be surprised because your entire ANGLO ISRAEL nonsense is nothing but a complete LIE as well. None of us are shocked that a false teacher like you would stoop to the level of deliberate lying to avoid facing the truth.

Mark, all liars shall have their part in the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone.

You are plunging headlong in that direction because of your lies. I also notice that you have not found your precious document that you hope so much to authenticate, now have you?

For the Lion of the Tribe of Judah,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 23, 2000

and FYI, Mark: Making a counter-claim is not the same as answering an argument. I have seen you make a lot of counter-claims but with no solid evidence to back it up.

-- Anonymous, March 23, 2000
What part of my Ezek 37 answer is confusing you? The Word of God part?

Another word of God part...(1 Chr 5:2 KJV) "For Judah prevailed above his brethren, and of him came the chief ruler; but the birthright was Joseph's:)"

Judah received the Sceptre and Joseph received the Birthright. That is plain!

If you try to fit the Birhtright and the Sceptre into being fulfilled by the Jews then you are wrong!

There are also several divisions of Judah, one of them being The House of David!

Then there is the Scarlet thread situation...(Gen 38:28 KJV) "And it came to pass, when she travailed, that the one put out his hand: and the midwife took and bound upon his hand a scarlet thread, saying, This came out first."

(Gen 38:29 KJV) "And it came to pass, as he drew back his hand, that, behold, his brother came out: and she said, How hast thou broken forth? this breach be upon thee: therefore his name was called Pharez."

(Gen 38:30 KJV) "And afterward came out his brother, that had the scarlet thread upon his hand: and his name was called Zarah."

And the Scarlet thread incident is a long study of itself. So unless your interested I'll leave it there for now.

The Royal House of David exists. The birthright people exist. Judah was to rule over Israel via the House of David which exists. Simply look to the word of God. It is there and it is real.

Jesus said there would be false Jews. That is people calling themselves Jews but are only Jews in the religious sense as the Scriptures point out is the case.

(Est 8:17 KJV) "And in every province, and in every city, whithersoever the king's commandment and his decree came, the Jews had joy and gladness, a feast and a good day. And many of the people of the land became Jews; for the fear of the Jews fell upon them."

(Acts 2:4 KJV) "And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance."

(Acts 2:5 KJV) "And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven."

(Acts 2:6 KJV) "Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language."

These were Religious Jews. Not, in most part, Of Judah, see the verse quoted above.

It will take a while to unravel the situation but I know you can do it, just Look into the Word of God.

It is not racist it is the Word of God. We, the USA with all our defects are the Great Nation.

Take care.

-- Anonymous, March 24, 2000

Moderation questions? read the FAQ