timothyu
Champion Author
Winnipeg
Posts:14,680
Points:175,405
Joined:May 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 25, 2007 2:31:07 AM
girl_wisdom.. I understand. God speaks to us each in different ways and in His own time. It is He who enlightens us at some point and comes face to face with us, not a church, it's flock or it's preachers. The only purpose they have is, like the Bible, to be a source of information we can use on our spiritual journey. Being bombarded or brainwashed is no substitute for understanding.
"Face piles of trials with smiles...It riles them to believe that you perceive the web they weave...And keep on thinking free"
|
Qadosh
Champion Author
Michigan
Posts:1,264
Points:107,920
Joined:Mar 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 24, 2007 6:57:45 PM
Absolutely, hence why I believe she has not been born again based on her testimony. When a person is born again they are transformed from darkness to light.
But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should show forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvelous light: Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy. (1 Peter 2:9-10)
Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever. For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the word of the Lord endureth forever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.
(1 Peter 1:23-25)
|
timothyu
Champion Author
Winnipeg
Posts:14,680
Points:175,405
Joined:May 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 24, 2007 6:23:18 PM
"Would you consider the possibility that you were never "saved"? Jesus said, "Except a man be born again, he can not see the kingdom of God".
Would you consider the possibility he meant that the Kingdom of God can be seen now, not after death, that in itself being the reborn experience?
|
Qadosh
Champion Author
Michigan
Posts:1,264
Points:107,920
Joined:Mar 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 24, 2007 3:23:53 PM
girl-wisdom, you said, " I was saved and baptized into that faith. I no longer attend church services. I haven't been in years. But I do remember sitting in the pews, listening to the sermon and watching all the people around me. And realizing that I never really felt any passion or faith like those around me seemed to feel. I didn't really fit in. Regarding faith, I felt empty. And nothing preached ever seemed to make much sense to me."
--> Would you consider the possibility that you were never "saved"? Jesus said, "Except a man be born again, he can not see the kingdom of God". Your own testimony speaks loudly to this; that you have never been born again. Turn to Jesus girl-wisdom, turn to Him and His Word alone. Don't go to a "church", just pray and ask the God of the Universe to reveal Himself to you through His Word as you study it for yourself, by yourself.
|
trinuclear
Champion Author
Albany
Posts:9,779
Points:601,410
Joined:Sep 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 19, 2007 7:07:32 AM
Interesting.....
>>>I can say now that I do not feel that Jeshua died for nothing. He paid with His life for what God asked him to do.<<<
Q: What do you think God asked him to do?>>>But if I can deny the virgin birth, and the resurrection and still be able to say to you that I love Jeshua and still feel his presence in my life, can you respect that?<<<
Respect, yes if that is what you really believe, but that does not mean that I agree with your position or have to accept it.
And yes I have one of those black/white viewpoints regarding Christianity, you are either a Christian or not. I do not see Jesus teaching a middle ground.....
Matt 4:19-20
19 Then He said to them, "Follow Me , and I will make you fishers of men." 20 They immediately left their nets and followed Him.
NKJV
Matt 8:18-22
And when Jesus saw great multitudes about Him, He gave a command to depart to the other side. 19 Then a certain scribe came and said to Him, "Teacher, I will follow You wherever You go."
20 And Jesus said to him, "Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay His head."
21 Then another of His disciples said to Him, "Lord, let me first go and bury my father."
22 But Jesus said to him, "Follow Me , and let the dead bury their own dead."
NKJV
Matt 16:24-27
Then Jesus said to His disciples, "If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me . 25 For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake will find it. 26 For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?
NKJV
John 21:22
22 Jesus said to him, "If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you? You follow Me ."
NKJV
Jesus was not interested in half hearted commitments....
Rev 3:14-16
"And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write,'These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God: 15 "I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. 16 So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth.
NKJV
One last thing before I have to go.....
Without the resurrection, the Christian faith is "empty" and in "vain". Verse 17 is the key...w/o the resurrection we are still in our sins...no atonement, no payment....Paul said:
1 Cor 15:12-19
Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen. 14 And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty. 15 Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up — if in fact the dead do not rise. 16 For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen.
17 And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins!
18 Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable.
NKJV
[Edited by: trinuclear at 6/19/2007 7:07:40 AM EST]
|
trinuclear
Champion Author
Albany
Posts:9,779
Points:601,410
Joined:Sep 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 18, 2007 6:08:48 AM
>>>I believe the early church actively sought out and "persuaded" any followers of Jeshua who's beliefs were not falling in line with the "dying and rising god myth" that Paul and his followers were perpetuating.<<<
Are you saying the Jesus (Jeshua) was NOT risen from the dead?
|
Qadosh
Champion Author
Michigan
Posts:1,264
Points:107,920
Joined:Mar 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 17, 2007 10:19:29 PM
Tri you said, "The church “recognized” the cannon. It did not decide which books went into the Bible. It affirmed and acknowledged what the church was already using."
--> Very well said!
|
Qadosh
Champion Author
Michigan
Posts:1,264
Points:107,920
Joined:Mar 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 17, 2007 10:18:05 PM
girl_wisdom, "To me, it is ridiculous to think that only Christians are going to heaven, but I respect those who believe that and admire their convictions."
--> First, I do not think I "caught" you "dead to rights". I think that what you said was contradictory, however it is what most of the world believes; that there are no absolutes. I do, however, believe THAT is the most ridiculous concept on earth, because this world is full of absolutes. If the world is full of absolutes, why is it that people reject the idea that God has absolutes? I believe Jesus; He said, "And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. (John 3:19-20)
If the Word of God is True, then what you or I believe is irrelevant. The Lord Jesus said, "Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth."(John 17:17) Was He wrong? Jesus firmly believed that the Word of God was true. Jesus Created the entire Universe, do you think He does not have the power to ensure that His Word is not corrupted? I know His Word is true, in 18 years no one has ever shown me an error in Scripture with any substance; that would be impossible if the Bible was the ideas of men.
You say you believe Jesus was the greatest Prophet, yet you reject the idea that "only Christians" are going to heaven. The problem is that IS what Jesus said, "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." (John 14:6) Was Jesus lying?
There are over three hundred specific Prophecies that Jesus perfectly fulfilled when He came to earth and took the body of a man. As you correctly said, the vast majority of Jews had lost the meaning of the sacrifices and therefore were not looking for a heavenly Messiah to save them from their sins; their real need. They were looking for an earthly king to meet their earthly needs, as you aptly said. They were wrong, dead wrong. They should have known that Jesus was their long awaited Messiah, but they were just as secular as most people today.
They were not truly seeking the Lord or they would have found Him, those that did truly seek the Lord *knew* Jesus was Messiah. God is not hiding from us, it is our sins that have separated us from Him. ONLY Jesus can bridge that gap as you allude.
A Christian is a follower of Jesus. Something like 90 percent of Americans call themselves Christians, yet that word has no meaning any more, this Nation is anything, but "Christian" (Christ-like). A Christian, as defined by Scripture, is a born again follower of the Lord Jesus.
The Lord Jesus is God, He Created the universe. The choice is yours. I point you and all others to the Lord Jesus and His Word alone, not to a religion, but to the Creator of the Universe. I know Him personally and He will do the same for you, but you must come to Him in humility and Awe through His Word. I don't have a religion, I know my Maker personally!
|
trinuclear
Champion Author
Albany
Posts:9,779
Points:601,410
Joined:Sep 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 17, 2007 6:04:50 AM
I am very interested in hearing you explain more on what you said:
>>>I believe that Jeshua was the greatest prophet. It is because of Him that we can know the true God. But I do not call myself a "Christian".<<<
|
trinuclear
Champion Author
Albany
Posts:9,779
Points:601,410
Joined:Sep 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 17, 2007 6:01:27 AM
girl_wisdom,
You posted:
>>> It is my belief that what you refer to as "Scripture" were carefully chosen books - a few picked out of all the options they had to choose from when Constantine and the Council of Nicea decided. The books chosen as the New Testament were selected because they portrayed Jeshua and the role of the church and followers as the newly-founded Holy Roman Church wanted them to be portrayed.<<<
>>>Why is anything other than Matthew through Revelation considered false writings? Matthew through Revelation were also written by man. I urge you to learn the history of your faith.<<<
I am not sure where you got your church history from, but the way you described the process of the cannon coming together is just not how it happened.
There was a process that took place over 200-250 years as the early church grew and copies of the writings disseminated.
The church “recognized” the cannon. It did not decide which books went into the Bible. It affirmed and acknowledged what the church was already using.
These 27 books did not circulate together. Even though the letters of Paul were written to specific churches & people, they were also encouraged to be read to others.
1 Thessalonians 5:27
I charge you by the Lord that this epistle be read unto all the holy brethren.
“We do not know when, where or by whom” the gospels were brought together. But early on they were recognized as authorities by the early church as the 4 gospels.
Historically there did not seem to be an urgency for the church to define/acknowledge a cannon.
What caused the church to recognize a cannon?
AD 140, Marcion developed his own cannon. He was a heretic. His cannon was quite limited. He rejected all the OT. He only included Luke’s Gospel but he eliminated the first 2 chapters because they were too Jewish. He included Paul’s letters, but eliminated the Pastoral epistles.
His cannon was developed because of a dislike of divine justice, so he eliminated it.
The early church AD 62 -65 the church was using the term “writings / scripture” for the cannon.
2 Peter 3:15-16
15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
KJVBy AD 180 the gospels and Paul’s letters were circulating together.
Steps that the early church took to recognize what was the cannon.
• There was already a firm belief in the authority of the OT. To Jesus the OT was true, authorative and inspired. “Christ & the Bible” by John Wenham (3rd edition)
• Jesus also placed importance on His words. Sermon on the mount demonstrates this. you have heard…..say…I say…..Great commission: Go…teach…all that I have commanded you.
• In AD 95, Clement of Rome was quoting widely from the writings we know now as the NT. Polycarp also quoted from the NT.
• By AD 125 there is evidence, that most of the NT was assembled and used in large centers.
As the writings (that we know as the NT) they were accorded a high degree of authority. When the apocryphal books were read in the churches, they were never regarded with the same authority as the NT writings.
Councils that we have historical records of:
Synod of Laodicea => AD 363
Met to deal with other teachings/issues facing the church.
No private psalms or non conical should be sung / read in church services.
AD 367 => Athanasias, the Bishop of Alexandria, he wrote a letter to help the churches in Egypt. In his 39th Easter letter, he listed in order and in number the 27 books we have in the NT today. He said these books where “Divinely inspired scripture”.
Council of Carthage => AD 397
Aside from the canonical scriptures nothing is to be read in church under the name of divine scriptures. They list the 27 books in order of the NT today.
There were at least 3 other Gospels that claimed to be written by apostles
Gospel of Peter
Gospel of Thomas
Gospel of Phillip
There were two other Apocalypses, Apocalypses of Peter & Paul
There were several writings that had “Acts” Acts of Peter, Acts of Paul, Acts of Thomas,
Criteria the early church used to see & affirm the cannon:
• Writings that were associated with apostles
Mark is associated with Peter. Early church father said that Mark interpreted what Peter preached.
Luke is associated with Paul. He joins Paul in Acts 16 on his 2nd missionary journey.
• The date of writing.
The earliest fragment found was AD125
If the writing was too late, then the writing could not have been written by or associated with an apostle.
• Contents of the writings
What did they say bout Jesus?
(Gospel of Thomas / Peter & how did they compare to what the church was already using)
If it contradicted what was in use then it could not be inspired.
• Use in the churches
Were these writings acknowledged by the early churches?
The Bible was not just written by men. It is the inspired, infallible Word of God.
INSPIRATION: Deals with the process of giving scripture. It tells us HOW we got the Bible
INERRANCY: Deals with the result or product of inspiration. It tells what the Bible is like and what is in the Bible.
2 Tim 3:16-17
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
2 Peter 1:20-21
20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.Inspiration of Scripture defined:
(Millard Erickson, Christian Theology) Pg. 225
The supernatural influence of the Holy Spirit on the Scripture writers which rendered their writings an accurate record of the revelation or which resulted in what they wroth actually being the Word of God
The Holy Spirit superintended both the thoughts of the writers and choice of every word in giving scripture. This work of the spirit was so intense that each word in the original text was the precise word, and in the precise order, God wanted to use there.
The men who wrote the scriptures were not novices or new believers. They had vast experience and great knowledge. God had prepared them for a long time through their upbringing and circumstances so they would produce scripture exactly as God wanted it written.
John 14:26
26But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
There are over 5000 copies (whole books, pages, pieces of pages etc) of the NT in existence today. These date from ~125AD to 325AD. Of these 97% of NT copies agree. No doctrines of scripture hangs on the 3% where there are variances.
If the early church rejected certain books as not being inspired or containing false doctrine (as is the case with the Gospel of Thomas) why do you look at it as a source for guidance?
|
timothyu
Champion Author
Winnipeg
Posts:14,680
Points:175,405
Joined:May 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 16, 2007 1:42:27 AM
girl_wisdom... More, more
|
timothyu
Champion Author
Winnipeg
Posts:14,680
Points:175,405
Joined:May 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 15, 2007 5:40:51 PM
Tis why Jesus suggested ruling out the middle man. Too many guaranteed or your money back except shipping and handling opinions/interpretations and too much us against them which which only creates even less harmony. That is the way of the world, not God. Besides, picking on one church or the other is irrelevant. It is not a church that is anti-christ, it is an attitude, doing the opposite of ot twisting what Jesus taught.
1 John 2:
15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
17 And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever. 18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.
|
irthekid
Champion Author
Twin Cities
Posts:8,226
Points:1,816,495
Joined:Jun 2005
|
Message Posted: Jun 15, 2007 4:50:32 PM
timothyu
I agree with your assessment. This would a fantastic topic for discussion, and I would like that discussion. I don't want qadosh's anti Catholic mess. So if we can keep the preaching out of it I would love to discuss the topic further.
|
timothyu
Champion Author
Winnipeg
Posts:14,680
Points:175,405
Joined:May 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 15, 2007 3:18:54 PM
Yup! Precisely as stated earlier why "Christianity" was given to the Gentiles. Not only did it create a distraction from the pre-Jesus politics but it kept Gentiles feuding amongst themselves, reducing the gospel of Jesus to human concepts once again instead of spiritual ones. It would be totally useless for a human with an agenda to keep things spiritual and not of this world. Nothing to personally gain that way. :)
Also.. regardless of girl_wisdom's resources or her lack of narrow mindedness, she has some interesting points which can either reinforce beliefs of those like minded OR the beliefs of those opposed. Either way, it is as these forums are intended. We're playing in the grey areas here otherwise there would be no discussion and that would obviously please some.
|
irthekid
Champion Author
Twin Cities
Posts:8,226
Points:1,816,495
Joined:Jun 2005
|
Message Posted: Jun 15, 2007 10:39:45 AM
so much for this topic, the conversation just ended and the preaching has begun. too bad.
|
Qadosh
Champion Author
Michigan
Posts:1,264
Points:107,920
Joined:Mar 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 15, 2007 10:05:39 AM
girl_wisdom you wrote, "I welcome debate, but I'm not open to conversion or "saving". it's pointless to put everything in to the wrong and right category. For me, it's about exchanging ideas and being open-minded."
--> However you just did what you call pointless. You said it is "pointless" to put things into "wrong and right category", yet you say you are not "open to conversion or "saving"". So you have just put something into a wrong category. Yet Jesus said, "You must be born again".
Jesus also said, "Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." (Matthew 7:13-14)
Please don't be deceived. You say that you want to "to learn more about Jeshua and his role in my life", yet you are making Him up. The non-canonical books are so, because they are frauds and obviously so, hence why I called them poison. God gave us the Canon of Scripture, not men. Men just decided on the obvious. The foundation of the "New Testament" is the "Old Testament". The non-canonical books do not line up with either.
It never ceases to amaze me that we live in a world of absolutes and strict laws in ALL Creation, yet when it comes to God, people believe they can make up whatever view they want of Him and somehow He is going to honor that. That is where many denominations come from including the one God calls, "The great whore".
The Word of God has thoroughly been established as Fact by Prophecy and God has said, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." (Exodus 20:3) When you make up a god after your own heart, you are putting a god before the true and living God.
You CAN know God, but you MUST be born again. There is right and wrong, as surely as there is night and day. God has provided a way to know Him, through His Son Jesus, but you must come His way, not your own.
|
irthekid
Champion Author
Twin Cities
Posts:8,226
Points:1,816,495
Joined:Jun 2005
|
Message Posted: Jun 15, 2007 8:59:01 AM
girl_wisdom
Thank you for holding your rant about St. Peter..for now.
FYI Constantine did NOT pick what scriptures were to be included in the bible. Constantine allowed for Church "fathers"/leaders to come out of hiding and meet in public to confirm the exact cannon of the bible. The scriptures that were chosen for the bible were the ones used for teaching and worship in the early church.
FYI The gnostics have a gospel end with Jesus offering to make Mary Magdelene a man so she could get into heaven. The gnostics believed women didn't go to heaven.
|
trinuclear
Champion Author
Albany
Posts:9,779
Points:601,410
Joined:Sep 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 14, 2007 7:06:48 AM
>>>The cloudy beginnings in the days, months and years after Jeshua's death on the cross. The hijacking of the early Jerusalem Church by Peter.<<<
>>>How sad that Jeshua's true message has been lost, possibly forever. I've been trying for years to wade through this mess, and at times I feel as if I've gotten nowhere. But I've placed alot of importance on the non-canonical scriptures and gnostic gospels.<<<
How exactly did Peter hijack the Jerusalem Church?
What do you do if a non-canonical and/or gnostic writings contradict scripture? Do you believe the Word of God or do you believe in the false writings of man?
|
timothyu
Champion Author
Winnipeg
Posts:14,680
Points:175,405
Joined:May 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 14, 2007 4:29:59 AM
girl_wisdom..."who were teaching the true, pure message of spiritual enlightenment through a personal relationship with God. As Jeshua himself put all emphasis on God, not himself, except as the messenger of God's truth."
A very important and often overlooked point girl_wisdom . It wasn't I believe, just that He put the emphasis on the message, not the man, and in saying He was the way was more than likely referred to the fact that His message, His spiritual, not worldly gospel was the way, not just Him alone literally. The people of Israel were looking for a messiah, a king, a flesh and blood leader to take them out of their continual bondage. His emphasis was on God, not Him as a human leader. Jesus came to free their spirits, not their flesh. Wasn't what they were looking for as it was a concept unfamiliar to their worldly brains, much like today where even spiritual matters are seen in physical terms. Upon realizing this, that He was not their mortal saviour against oppression, the people of Israel turned against Him and blamed Him for passing Himself off as something they... not He, claimed. Typically human.
To take things an important step further than what I originally wrote, the real threat to the priests was more than just His ideal of "a personal relationship with God" weakening the need for priests. That did play a part, a part more applicable today with gentiles actually, but the religion of the day was more interested from the time of Solomon with politics and power (what they saw as their birth right from God) than spiritual salvation, something that is once again coming to the forefront today. They learned from Moses and his 40 years in the desert that change in their favour comes with long term patience, even centuries if need be. Jesus' nation was historically, as is evident from their writings, notorious for turning against God making the job easy for Satan who was and is to this day alive and well and still in charge, subverting where possible to draw God's "chosen people", the Hebrew nation and the rest of us step-family Christians, away from Him.
There was a plan afoot to quietly gain control over the oppressors, even over the Roman Empire itself. It had required discipline and strict adherence to the priests' political authority using religion to lead, influence change, and control the people with no room for diversion or questions that would weaken their movement. Jesus overturning the tables of the money changers and Judas and the silver coins were clues as to how this would come about. Money is power and whoever controls the purse strings controls the nations. Jesus was not interested in their worldly politics but His teachings would weaken the unity of the movement none the less. People would be drawn away and would see their historical religion in a new light, one not beneficial to worldly thought and schemes. Look at the nations today, especially America, divided amongst themselves, playing us and them games, weakening their overall strength, neighbour against neighbour, father against son. Where have we heard that before? Monarchies could not be easily influenced so the were eliminated or turned into mere figure heads. Governments on the other hand, are pushovers to influence, money, and corruption. The movement which stays unified and untainted will end up reigning supreme over all of them. Our running all over the place in the name of a multitude of rights and causes today just weakens things further. The movement back then was not interested in spiritual matters but in worldly ones. Satan's influence? Jesus needed to be eliminated for dividing the people and His church, if not eliminated by the likes of Paul, changed back to pursuing worldly ideals by the likes of Paul. Mark up another one for Satan? "Christianity" was given to the Gentiles to weaken them instead and create dissension as we have seen throughout history and especially today while the original religion from which Jesus grew, remained intact even with It's people later spread throughout the world. In a non spiritual sense, one has to admire the continuity and resolve but then again, it is all written to be in the Bible.
To understand this is to understand the whole big picture of what happened then, through the middle ages and now. It shows how relevant anti-christ, not "the" anti-christ is in biblical prophecy, anti-christ being those who were against Christ and His gospel, having a different worldly agenda that I just spoke of, how it still exists today quietly working behind the scenes, the real power behind all thrones, and how that once the thrones are no longer necessary, it will arise as the world leader compliments of the religious diversions which weakened in the beginning the Roman Empire, society, oppressors, so called freedom and democratic politics, the false prophet one might say. Jesus is destined to return to set His people straight once and for all, this time with a sword, and make life downright miserable as is written in Revelations for the worldly and especially Israel the nation (not to be confused with country) until they repent, then cast the domination of the world and worldly matters, all things anti-christ, into the abyss along with those who refuse to give up the old ways. There is no room for them in the new world and they shall remain outside the new city. It's all about God, Satan and God's "chosen people". It's their history, their books, their story, their Messiah. So it is written, so it is done.
|
Qadosh
Champion Author
Michigan
Posts:1,264
Points:107,920
Joined:Mar 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 12, 2007 2:05:08 AM
girl_wisdom, you choose scraps of poison over the Bread of life. Jesus, Yeshua, died for you, as His Holy Word proclaims. Do you know Him?
|
timothyu
Champion Author
Winnipeg
Posts:14,680
Points:175,405
Joined:May 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 11, 2007 12:49:56 PM
girl_wisdom... I agree about Constantine but if his mother was such an influence I am left wondering why then were women removed from any position in the new religion and left to organizing church suppers? Perhaps she was just caught up in a cause, seeing herself as a self appointed voice for the Holy Land, much the same as what we see today with the female idle rich taking on causes, thinking it somehow makes them mini-saints. Watching her and her nutty ways may have given Constantine the idea in the first place, unite the masses and they would all get so nutty over Christianity they'd do and believe anything. As an alternative, were these two ancient examples of modern televangelists, taking trips to the Holy Land, special offers on relics and involving themselves in politics? Funny how nothing has changed in scheming circles. The bottom line is that someone, then as now, is always using Jesus as a means to THEIR ends, not His.
|
Qadosh
Champion Author
Michigan
Posts:1,264
Points:107,920
Joined:Mar 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2007 11:03:53 PM
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
(1 Timothy 2:5-6)
I agree with you that their is only One mediator and the modern day Priesthood is a perversion. God calls Roman Catholicism the "great whore" Revelation 17:1. I agree that the True Jesus would be put to death today as well, if left to the hands of the clergy. Pastors are supposed to be the greatest servants of all, not the most served! Reverend is a Title that NO man should take for himself, yet "For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God." (John 12:43) None of this should surprise a follower of Jesus, because He said this is how it would be.
Are you a born again follower of Jesus alone Timothyu?
|
timothyu
Champion Author
Winnipeg
Posts:14,680
Points:175,405
Joined:May 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2007 10:34:31 PM
"there is absolutely no middle man or protocol needed between mankind and the Christ or God when He said "I am the Way". Nor would it be beneficial to derive from His words a movement or religion, as in no time at all someone would step in and twist it to divert attention from it's truths, as was done with the words of Jesus"
"Christianity seemed, almost from the very start, to be lead back to a system of priests, like those who had Jesus crucified in the first place, making darn sure this time they were in charge and NOT irrelevant to a relationship with God as Jesus taught."
"The answers are all there in the few written words of Jesus. Ever hear a salesman say this product sells itself? Then what is he even speaking to you for if that were true? Priests and preachers and religions are what have muddled the clear, consistent format - those few words in the first four books of the New Testament which sell themselves"
Those three statements sum up the train of thought behind the post.
The priests had Jesus crucufied. Why?? The same would hold true today. Far too many churches today are in it for themselves, using Jesus in conjunction with their own agendas, political, financial, self glorification, etc.
|
Qadosh
Champion Author
Michigan
Posts:1,264
Points:107,920
Joined:Mar 2006
|
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2007 8:22:05 PM
timothyu, so what exactly are you trying to say? Jesus said the Word of God was True and that it spoke of Him, He said, "Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life."
(John 5:39-40)
I was born again in June of 1989, I had quite a hate for Christians prior to getting saved. I met God that night in June, through His Word alone, I did not "get religion" I met the Creator of heaven and earth. I know Him personally and I know His Word is true. I will not point people to "my" ideas and thoughts, but to Scripture, because as Jesus said, "Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth." (John 17:17)
So what is truth in your opinion? I know that when I became born again I did not EVER want to step foot in another "church". I thought they were ALL corrupt, well that was just ignorance; they are almost all corrupt, but there is always a remnant. ;-)
|
timothyu
Champion Author
Winnipeg
Posts:14,680
Points:175,405
Joined:May 2006
|
Message Posted: May 31, 2007 3:59:33 PM
Discussion is about discussion is it not? About any train of thought that may pop up, expecially in this section. Not about waving your personal banner or playing the I'm right, you are wrong game. Perhaps I'm wrong and the purpose of this forum is to create hostility between opposing camps. We play with ideas I assume and come to conclusions together. To bad the us against them idea is so ingrained into some people's heads. Nothing to contribute here. Lot less problems in the world also without that attitude.
|
Pastafarian
Champion Author
Philadelphia
Posts:2,111
Points:413,955
Joined:Jul 2006
|
Message Posted: May 31, 2007 9:50:22 AM
timothyu wrote, "Nothing says I have to stand behind what I write...."
Ah, I see. Carry on, then.
|
timothyu
Champion Author
Winnipeg
Posts:14,680
Points:175,405
Joined:May 2006
|
Message Posted: May 30, 2007 4:59:20 PM
Pastafarian... simple misunderstandings :)
"I read a long post from you with lots of "answers." Are you recanting all that?"
I claim to represent neither one side or the other on these forums but prefer to play the role of one who puts forth ideas designed to stir up discussion and hopefully of ideas off the beaten path but still attached to in this case, Christianity to avoid getting bogged down in complacent thinking and acceptance. None of us are experts on anything, despite what we may think. This is a religious discussion forum so putting down ideas for discussion and enjoying the responses, pro or con is what this is all about, is it not? Nothing says I have to stand behind what I write, but at the end of the day it's interesting where all these different threads lead to compliments of all of us. PerhaPS in the process it leads us to think deeper, in this case about religious subjects, possibly learning something new, or just strengthening our own beliefs whether pro or con.
"I wouldn't do your homework for you." This is the sure sign of someone who can find no support for his assertions: "Go find support for my assertions yourself."
No..... meaning you are on your OWN search for God or whatever. Do it yourself, don't leave it to someone else to do it for you or tell you the answers.
"So God is content to have people fail in their search for the truth, wind up in hell for eternity, because he doesn't want to be *bored*?"
First of all, you twisted it. No one said God was bored. I said we would be boring. Big difference. Besides, I doubt God could be bored with such a bunch of ignorant clowns as humans tend to be.
He's also the one who spoke of separating the wheat from the chaff. Heck, they even do it on American Idol and I don't hear any complaints about that. Course, like you and God, I don't believe in that show either. Think of it as looking for the ideal employees. Some are hired, some given the options of other positions, some rejected. With God He WANTS TO HIRE EVERYBODY, prefers none seek alternate positions, and rejects no one, THEY REJECT Him and end up somewhere else by choice. So, if someone blows something, are they saying God is automatically at fault, not them, because He being God, should be covering their responsibility challenged butts?? PS - Hell is not an issue here but there's a great thread if you are interested.
"How about just making the truth available in a clear, consistent format?"
EXACTLY what this thread is about. The answers are all there in the few written words of Jesus. Ever hear a salesman say this product sells itself? Then what is he even speaking to you for if that were true? Priests and preachers and religions are what have muddled the clear, consistent format - those few words in the first four books of the New Testament which sell themselves and if you want to get into why religions prefer politics over truth, a few of the books that were rejected as being contradictory to the need for organized religion. "Look under a rock and you shall find Me" as an example. However on the other hand, I would also bet that these forums and possibly the hypocrisy of some churches has done more to get you thinking than if neither existed.
"He's never been about control, only about choice, *but* he told the Hebrew people flat out what they must do."
All parents for example, make flat out commands to children, do they not? Is it control or establishing a boundary that if pressed or ignored could lead to pain, disaster, or failure. Much better than having no boundaries at all and definitely not control but love.
"So what is it about "personal" that rules out clarity, agreement and peace?"
That one question of yours I realized I didn't quite get in relation to my statement and sorry, still don't. Could be I confused myself with that one. :) I think?... what you refer to was in accord with the statement "Does the personal nature of that path mean it must cause confusion and bickering--and violence" that could be the problem." I didn't say the personal path was causing those problems. I said outside influence was and the personal search was the best way to clarity, ignoring the trash out there or seeing it for what it is.
"I would say there's no reason to believe there's a God."
Your choice. No condemnation here. Personally in accordance with this thread, I would be inclined to say there is no religion, but a God and umpteen ways to come to realization of the fact.
"I don't believe there *is* a God. I wouldn't blame God for anything, any more than I'd blame fairy dust. What are you getting at?"
That is fine yet at the same time references to religions and sending people to hell, etc. by you, shows that some of your beliefs may be based on religions or people who say God does these things and it doesn't settle well with you. So, no you are not blaming God, but you are blaming religions for these assertions. That is the point behind this thread. Does mankind have the right by way of human religion, to antagonize those who might otherwise discover God in their own ways?
|
timothyu
Champion Author
Winnipeg
Posts:14,680
Points:175,405
Joined:May 2006
|
Message Posted: May 30, 2007 3:30:49 PM
trinuclear... sorry about the style. Habit.
"IMO, The Church Inc. in America has inoculated the population a large against true Christianity."
It's true and is more than evident by some of the posters here that more people have been turned off to Christianity than drawn to it by too many rotten apples preaching from what should be a perfect Christian barrel. But then again who but the Man in the New Testament would be eligible to step forward and hand out seals of approval to guide the consumer. Perhaps if seekers spent more time on His words and less listening to "preachers" they would still have an interest.
|
Pastafarian
Champion Author
Philadelphia
Posts:2,111
Points:413,955
Joined:Jul 2006
|
Message Posted: May 30, 2007 12:01:50 PM
timothyu wrote, "You mistake me for someone who claims to have the answers and that is the entire point."
I read a long post from you with lots of "answers." Are you recanting all that?
"I wouldn't do your homework for you."
This is the sure sign of someone who can find no support for his assertions: "Go find support for my assertions yourself."
I asked, "So why doesn't God control and lead the masses to the truth?"
timothyu responded, "I dunno. Maybe because then we'd all end up being boring companions."
So God is content to have people fail in their search for the truth, wind up in hell for eternity, because he doesn't want to be *bored*?
timothyu wrote, "Would waving a magic wand to skip the whole process make them better adults or just playing the game but never knowing why the right way to do something works better than the other way?"
Who said anything about waving a magic wand or skipping the whole process? How about just making the truth available in a clear, consistent format? Is that so much to ask when the alternative is eternal damnation?
timothyu wrote, "He was never about control but about choice and understanding. When for example, He did tell the Hebrew people flat out what they must do, they still rebelled."
Let me make sure I understand what you're saying. He's never been about control, only about choice, *but* he told the Hebrew people flat out what they must do.
I asked, "What is it about 'personal' that rules out clarity, agreement and peace?"
timothyu answsered, "Acceptance of anything we believe to be genuine is personal and not by command, is it not?"
It is. So what is it about "personal" that rules out clarity, agreement and peace?
timothyu wrote, "From what I have written, what would you say?"
I would say there's no reason to believe there's a God.
timothyu wrote, "Do you take responsibility for your own life and actions? Do you always dump on someone else when it comes to blame? Then why God? Do you expect someone to do everything for you? Why should God?"
You lost me. I don't believe there *is* a God. I wouldn't blame God for anything, any more than I'd blame fairy dust. What are you getting at?
|
trinuclear
Champion Author
Albany
Posts:9,779
Points:601,410
Joined:Sep 2006
|
Message Posted: May 30, 2007 5:37:29 AM
Timothyu,
Very interesting (although a bit hard to read as one long paragraph), and I would tend to agree with the premise of what you wrote.
IMO, The Church Inc. in America has inoculated the population a large against true Christianity.
|
timothyu
Champion Author
Winnipeg
Posts:14,680
Points:175,405
Joined:May 2006
|
Message Posted: May 29, 2007 11:54:34 PM
You mistake me for someone who claims to have the answers and that is the entire point. Even if I did, I wouldn't do your homework for you. It's all around us to figure out for ourselves. That is why in the process we discuss and put forth ideas, reaching our own conclusions while caring for others as we would have them care for us (use CH as an example) and living God's word leaving less time to dream up ways to take advantage of it. we'd also have no time for those who did.
"So why doesn't God control and lead the masses to the truth?"
I dunno. Maybe because then we'd all end up being boring companions. He supposedly already has boring angels whom He controls and for the most part, who obey His every command like good little robots with wings. We're supposed to be the new and improved model aren't we? How would you like a bunch of lobotomised people for your only friends. He will control and lead someday, according to the Bible, by breaking the hold outs' spirits like a wild horse saving what he can of the stubborn but I don't think they'd be considered the pick of the crop as a result. I'm sure God wants us to function as individual pockets of colour in a rainbow, not all part of some mindless shade of whatever. We've chosen to rebel like some kid who has to test the waters or try it their way before learning to become proper adults. Many of them fail to do so also. Would waving a magic wand to skip the whole process make them better adults or just playing the game but never knowing why the right way to do something works better than the other way? That's not even how animals work live or learn. You're not a robot to be programmed by others, just yourself, right? He was never about control but about choice and understanding. When for example, He did tell the Hebrew people flat out what they must do, they still rebelled. We're dumb as the come. Few are worthy of the truth except those who earn it and accept it for what it is, unchanged. The rest end up at the dollar store.
"What is it about "personal" that rules out clarity, agreement and peace?"
Acceptance of anything we believe to be genuine is personal and not by command, is it not?
"Is God willing to lead everyone peacefully to the truth but not able? Able but not willing? Neither able nor willing?"
From what I have written, what would you say?
Do you take responsibility for your own life and actions? Do you always dump on someone else when it comes to blame? Then why God? Do you expect someone to do everything for you? Why should God?
|
Pastafarian
Champion Author
Philadelphia
Posts:2,111
Points:413,955
Joined:Jul 2006
|
Message Posted: May 29, 2007 10:32:23 PM
timothyu: "Masses can be controlled and mislead."
So why doesn't God control and lead the masses to the truth?
timothyu: "That is, and always has been a matter between them and God. I believe that is why God has been allowing this to happen all along and there is such confusion and bickering over the same God in the world, let alone amongst so-called Christians. Finding God and the Truth has always been a personal matter and experience... drawn from what is available out there to learn from."
That, I suppose, is your answer. Let's suppose you're right, and finding the truth must necessarily be a personal matter. Does the personal nature of that path mean it must cause confusion and bickering--and violence, let's remember? What is it about "personal" that rules out clarity, agreement and peace?
Is God willing to lead everyone peacefully to the truth but not able? Able but not willing? Neither able nor willing? Which are you saying it is? (Apologies to Epicurus)
[Edited by: Pastafarian at 5/29/2007 10:39:30 PM EST]
|