Baking Noodles

Thread starter #1


Senior Member
If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloke for their sin.

gordon 2

Senior Member
Noodle Cooking: Essentially this means that it's going to really make you think about the subject, or more likely confuse the person, as they won't be able to get a grasp on it. Noodle can be used as a slang term for brain, e.g. "Use your noodle!"
Ok. I'll bite, between trimming the hedge in this heat. So there is no way the run of the mill religious folk could understand that Jesus was God or the Messiah, because they were too far gone from the days when Adam wasn't thinking. From the sincerity of the nations return ( a remnant) from Babylon to the goings on latter when Jesus was about----someone had made a wrong turn...AGAIN! AGAIN!

It really does not apply to Christians who are Christian because he, she, them, they, y'all are with the Comforter. It took the comforter for folks to figure out that the Jews were at a dead end regards some sort of design which cleaved to some kind of intimacy with God.

We should not put the low down on Christians as Jesus put the low down on the Jews, his people or the people of his generation. They ain't the same folk. I mean Christians would not do as the Jews did right? RIGHT?

What the Jews had as a "no excuse" is that religion had become for the cult authorities basically politics. Their hearts were not unlike hearts captured by the politics of war. God was a propaganda tool and a man's life was of little value in facts and for the same folks who preached Righteousness. The ears were shut, the eyes were blind, too far gone...

They had all kinds of invalid excuses... but mainly "the people" "the nation" was their excuse. "You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish" They were hollow, shallow jerks who thought they were sincere examples of what was seriously needed. They had driven their nation to the dustbin of history ( again) ...except God does not give up on his people.

Middle East conflicts have sure brought out the stupid in people...

Ok... I'm cooled off ... hedge look out... I'm a trimming for you.
Last edited:
Thread starter #4


Senior Member
And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad.

gordon 2

Senior Member
The sons of perdition to a T. Sacrificing a saint, labeling him a blasphemer, to feed their pigs. Too far gone...

It seems to me now that if Christians are to Israel in their way, they are to Israel inwardly.

"Blessed is he that considereth the poor: the Lord will deliver him in time of trouble.

2 The Lord will preserve him, and keep him alive; and he shall be blessed upon the earth: and thou wilt not deliver him unto the will of his enemies.

3 The Lord will strengthen him upon the bed of languishing: thou wilt make all his bed in his sickness.

4 I said, Lord, be merciful unto me: heal my soul; for I have sinned against thee."


To think that man could be so far gone as to sell this relationship?

<iframe width="950" height="541" src="
" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Last edited:

gordon 2

Senior Member
And one of them, named Caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, Nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; And not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad.

This here verse sequence must be one of them for Baking Noodles or Noodle baking verses? Maybe? Kinda? What? I mean if your noodle is baked (done) it might mean one thing, but if you might what to include its ingredients in your dish well it might come to mean or make a dish something very different.

Bet there's plenty of spiritual dishes that one could stick a fork into and say its 'done' when potentially the 'undercooked' morsel mixed with masterful veiled vermin might very well bring death.

There's only One with the authority to say it is finished, and not to tickled ears. Beware the dogs of double-covenant mindedness who will sneak in to "spy out your true liberty" in Christ and parade added eats to the wood and the nails, and the resurrection by which only true and lasting life and freedom comes.
The undiluted gospel be good eats my friends. 🙌
Baking Noodles

There is not a single thing that the Lord instructed men to do... that is possible for men to do.
I once read a book in which the author, Daniel Whitby, assumed as axiomatic that "God would not instruct us to do what we can not do." and used that as the basis for claiming the innate power of man. That book was responded to by Jonathan Edwards with his Freedom of the Will, one of the cornerstones of 18th century Reformed Theology. Sovereignty at work.
Thread starter #10


Senior Member
Sin has an interesting component, result, ultimate consequence when followed in the light of Christ's righteousness. I do not mean "practiced" when I say followed...but rather more its trail and traits in its working, things found of an astrophysicist might say "I know something is there at such and such stellar coordinates because I can see effects centered from there on the heavenly bodies around it" Or the way a fissile material or event is noticed by the presence of certain rays or particles that testify of its being or having been. One might even say even the way we know one what is given off.

And perhaps I am being presumptuous in saying "ultimate consequence" for what I might see as some conclusion may have many other ramifications beyond it I don't yet see, and might even be prevented from seeing by my own presumptuousness of believing I see to the very end of a thing. God knows how often the conversation has come from His side provoked..."You thought you saw, didn't you?"

But seeing what one sees in limit does not dis-annul our liberty to speak, no matter how limited our sight may be shown later. One might even come to understand it is a rather precise operation whereby we are given, even encouraged to that we invite correction by it. But that is (seemingly) another matter.

But this thing in this matter of sin (that to this very day, hour, moment at least) that I believe cannot either be accurately seen, known and (please understand the usage of this word) "appreciated" apart from the light of Christ, and owes any or all understanding of its working to His light alone, can come this to a man: "I really can't help myself".

Admittedly the "how" of how a thing is said may seem to imply certain matters. But no less, the "how" a thing is heard also has implications. Think "the boy who cried wolf."

His true desperation ends in being utterly denied. The boy's prior overuse through his folly has affected (at least so much as the usual "moral" of the story goes) the hearing (and acting) of others.

But the others are no less subject to query "Yes, you can claim it is the boy's fault for your confusion of his and the flock's estate...but...why is it you do not know the difference between casual folly and the call of true desperation?"

(Ya remember as they came down the mountain Joshua thinking it was the sound of war in the camp...but Moses knew it was just revelry?)

And also takes a "clear hearing" to one who knows the difference between the saying of things in the "how" of how he hears. If the townspeople have the right to say...we are blameless here for he brought this grief upon himself by "making us" (through his constant folly) eventually respond (by lack of thereof) "as we did". They again, are no less then open to query.

If it is not enough the boy has paid dearly for his folly with his shame before you (and the loss of the flock)...why do you need excuse for yourself? If one tries to add guilt to the boy...(who has seen the price of his folly) then your own is now in play "Why do you then not know the difference between hearing truth...and folly?"
You admit then to your own deceivable-ness!

I do not intend to draw any broad parallel through that story, but only make some silly point about how, and in what estate a thing may be said, and no less how things are heard. When the boy was foolish and jesting they took him seriously, when desperate they ignored him.

But who would have a God who can be fooled?

The "clear hearer" can be the only judge. Unaffected by "priors" because He cannot be deceived or confused as to what is of true desperation (or honest)...and what is simply casual, or of folly.

So it is. A man can come to say "I really can't help myself." And some may hear only excuse, a casual dismissal, an easy out. God knows.

But another hearer who hears "clearly" to see inside the man may say "yes, this is precisely, and the very place I have been causing you to be directed so that you may learn the truth in the way no other way it might be taught". You are not God, I am.
You are creature, I am not. You can, and will...fall short...I cannot.

But like the Oracle said to Neo immediately before she told him what would soon bake his noodle "oh, and don't worry about the vase..." and he turning to see what she was talking about..."What vase?" knocked it over. And with his apologizing she reminds him, "I said don't worry about it...I'll get one of my kids to fix it". "How did you know?, He asks. Only then did she say, "Now what's really going to bake your noodle later on is 'would you still have broken it if I hadn't said anything?' "

Are we familiar with this scripture?

It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.

Only when two enter into, or better, only can two enter any form of relationship when it is clear to each whom they are. And God has never been confused or in error about whom He is. Nor about what man is. Man...not so much. All of man's being is created for finding out. And that... "to be" only from God. Who alone knows all things.

And so Paul found himself a slave to be what he was made to be with no ability nor power against. Once he saw all things in a "this way"...but was persuaded by a "that power" to see "I did not see as well as I thought". Once he knew himself only as created "one way"...then learned of being made new.

"I really can't help myself!" (I am what I am by the grace of God)

Jesus teaches not only be careful how we speak, but no less, "be careful how you hear".

"Apart from me, you can do nothing"

What part of that remains questionable?

Is more context necessary? If this is at all fitting to "what can receive it"...that is, if being a disciple in believing Christ, and all of Jesus' words are spirit and life in His speaking of them...and a new creature is able, no better, only a new creature can receive them...(and is even so made new only by the word of Christ) or to even "hear them"...of what "innate" ability has anything to make itself from what is passing and passed away (in and of Adam) into something else?

What will it say "it did"?

I repented? I believed? I obeyed? I did anything...that has led/caused/initiated me to now come to believe I "can't" of anything? That endows the "old creature" with even more ability to having any do of itself!

Look! I changed myself into a believer!

"Look what I did (or even do) to discover I can't do anything of myself!" Ha ha ha ha ha. That's funny no matter what you are. Do you think that laughter derisive? Then, get on the other side where we all may laugh at ourselves. Can you? Can I?

Being laughable can be taken two ways. "At" something ridiculous...or a thing made able to laugh.

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

What man "made himself" as ready, or able, to receive Him? He either has and does...or shows something else by nature.

Or...a mind to be "re" each of us has.
Last edited:
Thread starter #11


Senior Member
He said "I don't have to do anything. That would make me subject to a compelling"

I said..."OK. But you do do stuff"

"Yes" He said.

"Why?" I asked.

"Yes!" He said.