Deleted
Joined: Nov 22, 2024 7:58:31 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2012 7:33:51 GMT -5
Happy.. Hmmm.. The biggest problem and challenge is miss-interpreting the word of God that miss-represents God that lessens its effectiveness. Lack of true revelation knowledge is really the core of this matter.. The Pharisees were most noted for doing so as well as a host of others in our today's world.. Great read here, by the way. 
|
|
Tiny
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 21:22:34 GMT -5
Posts: 13,508 
|
Post by Tiny on Jul 27, 2012 10:56:28 GMT -5
Certain versions have sentences added. Some have poor translations. It's important to have a concordance handy (or a transliterated Bible version) to indicate what the original language says. Additionally, any Bible worth reading will have added words in italics. One of the reasons the Dead Sea Scrolls were such a momentous discovery was because they proved how accurately Biblical texts have been preserved over the centuries. The reports by the first linguists to study the scrolls are entertaining to read. They couldn't believe that aside from some spelling changes (which are disclaimed to have no effect whatsoever on the meanings of the words), the most authoritative biblical texts of the 20th century were utterly identical to those from thousands of years earlier. Exactly! This is what I've been trying to tell others for years that claim that the bible has lost translation and changed over the centuries. You said it better than I ever could! Didn't the contents of the Bible go thru a big editing session back in the 12th century? Does that matter? |
|
trevorw2539
Junior Member
Joined: Jul 5, 2012 4:03:27 GMT -5
Posts: 147
|
Post by trevorw2539 on Jul 27, 2012 11:39:22 GMT -5
That's exactly it Virg, Christianty is based on the Rabbi who was the Messiah life..  I hear ya Mrs. Weltz, the Catholic church is one the the larges land owners on Earth. It was all part of the plan. "The Christianity of the New Testament simply does not exist. Millions of people through the centuries have little by little cheated God out of Christianity, and have succeeded in making Christianity exactly the opposite of what it is in the New Testament" (pp. 32–33). - Sören Kierkegaard, Attack Upon Christendom Agree to a great extent. Interesting quote Trevor, I think Christianity did exactly what JC wanted it to do. Jesus said, "Perhaps people think that I have come to cast peace upon the world. They do not know that I have come to cast conflicts upon the earth: fire, sword, war. For there will be five in a house: there'll be three against two and two against three, father against son and son against father, and they will stand alone." The Roman Army's Secret Christians - Decoding the Ancients www.history.ca/ontv/titledetails.aspx?titleid=117598  ,  , and  (Now all you have to do is look after yours. ) Investing: Basics & Beyond notmsnmoney.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=startinvestingYour Money notmsnmoney.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=financeSmart Spending notmsnmoney.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=smartspendingI reject the Gospel of Thomas. It is quotes put together by an unkown writer claiming to be a disciple. While some of the quotes can be verified by comparing the Gospels, others are clearly misquotes. Some are clearly against Christ's words in the Gospels. Taking quotes out of context can lead to misleading interpretations. While some stand on there own they can be interpreted in different ways by individuals. The quote you use does not appear in that form in the Gospels. The Gospel of Thomas is clearly Gnostic in its compilation as indicated in its 'preface' 'Secret sayings of Jesus'. Jesus used simple words and parables so the people could understand. Where they did not, he explained. There are no 'secret sayings of Jesus'. After His death and resurrection what they could not 'understand' in spiritual terms became clear. Violence against the person and Jesus teachings do not go together. Oh yes, the overturning of the tables in the Temple. No-one was physically hurt. Financially perhaps. One thing that is the most difficult in the christian life is anger. If we follow Christ's example then the only anger that should play a part in Christians lives is that of seeing people hurting other people. If someone hurts us, as Christians we should follow Christ's example 'Father, forgive them, they know not what they do'. And THAT is one of the 'virtues' I sadly fail on often. If we see injustice against others we have a right to be angry and protest. Matthew 23. Oh crumbs, I'm preaching. Sorry.  |
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448 
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jul 27, 2012 11:43:14 GMT -5
The issue of which texts are included in "the Bible" is somewhat more involved. The texts themselves are unchanging, but different churches (most notably, the Catholic church) have disagreements in some cases on which ones should be included in the Bible proper.
Catholic Bibles include the deuterocanonical books, which are the writings of certain "minor" prophets that are acknowledged to be "profitable for spiritual edification and instruction" but not a part of Biblical canon. The OT texts included in the Bible were largely determined by which texts were quoted by Christ and the apostles. Herein lied the problem, because not all of the texts accepted as canon in Hebrew scripture were explicitly quoted, leading to a schism of opinions as to which ones should be included in the Bible proper.
All of the texts still exist, of course, it's just that some are omitted from some versions of the Bible. When studying the Bible, it's useful to have supplemental copies of the writings of the "minor" OT prophets on hand. I won't say that they're "ancillary" since we are to live "by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God", but many tend to be shorter books of a nature that would be more of interest to a student of Biblical history.
|
|
Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger
Senior Associate
Viva La Revolucion!
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 12,758
|
Post by Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger on Jul 27, 2012 13:49:17 GMT -5
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jul 27, 2012 16:02:30 GMT -5
There are only four major "variants", Ham. The term "picked and chosen" implies that the process was subjective (it was not), and that what is considered canon differs significantly from variant to variant (it does not).
Trevor's analysis of The "Gospel of Thomas" is spot on. More recently there was a "Gospel of Judas" hoax that was almost instantly debunked for the same reason: it was a mess of lies and contradictions (not even being internally consistent). There is a process to these things.
|
|
Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger
Senior Associate
Viva La Revolucion!
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 12,758
|
Post by Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger on Jul 27, 2012 16:48:44 GMT -5
Seriously? Wow! How many different versions of revelations do you think there were? No, it's not spot on. In fact, the Gnostics and the Jewish Zealots that accepted Christ as the Messiah are where Islam orignated. What do you think Moe was before he started Islam  |
|
trevorw2539
Junior Member
Joined: Jul 5, 2012 4:03:27 GMT -5
Posts: 147
|
Post by trevorw2539 on Jul 27, 2012 17:14:59 GMT -5
Ahamburger quote. Reject whatever you want Trevor, as Virg has pointed out above, many different sects of Christianity have picked and chosen what to include in their bible from all of the different sources over the years. The fact is the truth will set you free!
The truth will set you free.
What is truth? There is much that is put forward as 'Christian' truth. As Christians we have to be aware and 'test the spirits'. A Gospel such as that of Thomas which promotes itself/the writer (13), I have great reservations. A gospel of gnostic tradition, I have great reservations. Jesus never spake in riddles, nor did he hide meanings from simple folk.
The fact that different sections of christianity have chosen to include or not certain books does not mean they refuse their adherents the right to read and study them. These books all contain some truth/understanding.
Autobiographies are written to reveal the lives of famous people. Not everything is included, but enough to give a picture of the person and their lives. Books are written by others about that person and often show how they are seen by the writer. This does not affect the main revelations but can add to it.
The Bible is the main revelation of 'God' and his dealings with men. The other books can give us another viewpoint. But they all point to God and his ways primarily.
The test of a book is whether it glorifies God and reveals HIS ways.
I find the later 'gospels' often have other intentions.
But that's only my opinion
|
|
trevorw2539
Junior Member
Joined: Jul 5, 2012 4:03:27 GMT -5
Posts: 147
|
Post by trevorw2539 on Jul 27, 2012 17:28:59 GMT -5
Ahamburger quote. No, it's not spot on. In fact, the Gnostics and the Jewish Zealots that accepted Christ as the Messiah are where Islam orignated. What do you think Moe was before he started Islam.
If you are saying that Mohammed was a Gnostic before he started Islam, perhaps that proves my point about Gnosticism. It can lead you anywhere.
|
|
trevorw2539
Junior Member
Joined: Jul 5, 2012 4:03:27 GMT -5
Posts: 147
|
Post by trevorw2539 on Jul 27, 2012 17:43:47 GMT -5
Ahamburger. Quote.
No, it's not spot on. In fact, the Gnostics and the Jewish Zealots that accepted Christ as the Messiah are where Islam orignated. What do you think Moe was before he started Islam.
I don't understand your 'Jewish Zealots'. In Jewish history the recognised 'Zealots' probably started at the time of the Maccabees and were destroyed by the Romans in Jerusalem AD 70. 600 years before Mohammed
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 22, 2024 7:58:31 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2012 18:28:09 GMT -5
Atheists, agnostics and non Christians always seem to want to focus on the "differences" in minor issues. But, in reality, there are is much continuity between Protestants and Catholics and other denominations. They seem to think splitting hairs over minor points somehow invalidates the whole but it doesn't.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 22, 2024 7:58:31 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2012 18:44:28 GMT -5
Atheists, agnostics and non Christians always seem to want to focus on the "differences" in minor issues. But, in reality, there are is much continuity between Protestants and Catholics and other denominations. They seem to think splitting hairs over minor points somehow invalidates the whole but it doesn't. This one doesn't, Shoobz. In fact I was going to add, upon reading Virgil's 'expansion of Cranberry's thoughts', that the interest in 'contradictions' in the Bible concerns more those which pertain to deeper aspects of the religion -the purported nature of God, for instance, His will, the manner in which to most appropriately conduct oneself. These are questions which have potential consequences for those outside the circle of believers, whereas things like when Jesus was born are comparatively insignificant. |
|
Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger
Senior Associate
Viva La Revolucion!
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:22:04 GMT -5
Posts: 12,758
|
Post by Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger on Jul 27, 2012 23:59:26 GMT -5
I don't know Astro, when JC was born is pretty significant when you look at the massive political changes that occurred around his life. [/size] Truth is that around 30 AD there were secret meetings going on forging the Roman and Jewish religions in caves that we have just discovered recently. Truth is that JC had an apostle like Thomas so he would have associated with people like the Zealots to a point. In fact...
Zealotryen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zealotry If you read the wiki entry it goes into how after the Romans destroyed the Temple(while using the gold to build their coliseum in Rome at the same time I might add). They still had a battle left to finish these guys off. Then in 132 AD...Bar Kokhba revolt en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_Kokhba_revolt So while they put down the 73 revolt, they didn't kill it. At this point the Romans cast all Jewish folk out of Israel into the desert, regardless of if they were Jewish Christians that didn't take part in the revolt or not. Now we know that Thomas the Apostle was already out there spreading the word of Christ the way he seen it before this, just as the other apostles did; and that he was also most likely a Zealot since he was ready to be stoned for his beliefs. Then the Gnostics show up... Fast forward to guy named Moe who believed that JC was the messiah, but not in the way this new Abrahamic religion was talking about and viola a religion of zealotry is born based on parts of JC's gospel.
Interestingly enough, Simon the leader of the Zealot revolt in 132 was seen as the Jewish Messiah by the Jewish Zealotry at this point since Christ had failed to return and stop the Romans in the 70-100 AD siege as so many of his followers thought he would. The Church that proves this point...Armageddon Church www.armageddonchurch.com/ And a current fact, this is from the Zealotry entry on wiki... Whoever it was in those caves in Israel in 30 AD that started forging the religions of Rome and Israel knew the Zealots well enough that the one thing that all these crazy nut jobs would agree on was their bible.. The OT. Nothing like a new Sabbath and commandments coming from Rome to unite the crazies. Good Sabbath to you. |
|
ktunes
Senior Member
show your world to me...
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:10:29 GMT -5
Posts: 3,885
|
Post by ktunes on Jul 28, 2012 1:14:01 GMT -5
personally, i believe that the bible is mankind's "owners manual" so to speak...you know, when you buy an appliance, you get a book in untold amounts of translations that give you the skinny on how the product works...
confusion results because it's not a collection of books that can be read like a novel, meaning reading it from page 1 thru the end, and having it make sense...so many pick and choose parts of it to make their point on the particular subject, such as the op and many "religious types" are the worst offenders...
to get the true perspective on any given subject in the bible, one really needs a concordance and look up all the passages where the subject is mentioned...one also needs to take into account the context in what is being stated...for example is the subject really about what foods are ok to eat or salvation for those other than israelites...
|
|
trevorw2539
Junior Member
Joined: Jul 5, 2012 4:03:27 GMT -5
Posts: 147
|
Post by trevorw2539 on Jul 28, 2012 7:36:13 GMT -5
Reply 229. May I offer the full quote.
Taking the Greek word zelotes in Acts 22:3 and Galatians 1:14 of the New Testament to mean a 'Zealot' with capital Z (the earliest Greek manuscripts are uncials or all capital letters), an article[11] by Mark R. Fairchild suggests that Paul the Apostle may have been a Zealot, which might have been the driving force behind his persecution of the Christians (see stoning of Saint Stephen) before his conversion to Christianity, and his incident at Antioch even after his conversion.
While most English translations of the Bible render this Greek word as the adjective "zealous", the word is a noun meaning 'adherent, loyalist, enthusiast; patriot, zealot'. A 'Zealot' with capital Z, however, would suggest a member of the particular Zealots, the group that emerged in Jerusalem ca. AD 6 according to Josephus, see above. In the two cited verses Paul literally declares himself as one who is loyal to God, or an ardent observer of the Law, but see also Antinomianism in the NT. This does not necessarily prove Paul was revealing himself as a Zealot. A translation (the Modern King James Version of Jay P. Green) renders it as 'a zealous one'. Two modern translations (Jewish New Testament and Alternate Literal Translation) render it as 'a zealot'. The Unvarnished New Testament (1991) renders Galatians 1:14 as "...being an absolute zealot for the traditions...". These translations may not be inaccurate, but it is disputed by those who claim it gives the wrong association with the "Zealots
|
|
trevorw2539
Junior Member
Joined: Jul 5, 2012 4:03:27 GMT -5
Posts: 147
|
Post by trevorw2539 on Jul 28, 2012 8:09:41 GMT -5
Quote:Today, members of some units of the Israel Defense Forces, climb Masada and declare "Masada Shall Not Fall Again", in Hebrew, at their graduation from basic training.
There is an Italian army today. Hardly the same army as the Roman army of 1500-2000 years ago
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 22, 2024 7:58:31 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2012 11:38:04 GMT -5
I don't know Astro, when JC was born is pretty significant when you look at the massive political changes that occurred around his life. Hamburger, thanks for your response. It may be significant to you but it's not to me -at least, I should add, not when stood against those other things I mentioned. Just from a casual glance of the thread here one can see things which appear ostensibly as contradictions. For instance the underlying theme that God loves everyone… and yet everyone who doesn't recognise this is condemned to damnation. On the surface it doesn't make for 'common sense', and so far the only explanations offered have been variations on the "If it seems contradictory it's because you haven't understood it"-response. Well, I'm not denying that this could be true - my natural inclination towards Taoist philosophy has taught me that appearances of the contradictory are often simply due to a poverty of comprehension, and that through developing one's comprehension these apparent dichotomies can be transcended - however, no such method of transcending the conflicting notions here has been given. Which is a little surprising because imo this is something which limits access to Christianity. |
|
trevorw2539
Junior Member
Joined: Jul 5, 2012 4:03:27 GMT -5
Posts: 147
|
Post by trevorw2539 on Jul 28, 2012 13:41:12 GMT -5
Ahamburger Quote. Fast forward to guy named Moe who believed that JC was the messiah, but not in the way this new Abrahamic religion was talking about and viola a religion of zealotry is born based on parts of JC's gospel. Correct quote should be 'Fast forward to guy named Moe who did not believe that JC was the messiah, even in the way this new Abrahamic religion was talking about and voila a religion of zealotry was not born on parts of JC's Gospel. Moe claims that the religion was a revelation from God/Allah. Though I admit it's strange it bears a twisted likeness to the Bible. Muslims do believe that Isa (A.S.) was sent down as a Prophet of Allah (God), but he (Jesus) is not God or Lord, nor the son of God. Muslims do not believe that Isa (A.S.), also known as Jesus by Christians and others, is dead or was ever crucified. We believe that he was raised to heaven and is there, and will descend at the appointed time, end all wars, and bring peace to the world. Like Jesus (A.S.), Muhammad (Peace be upon him) is also a Prophet and Messenger. Muhammed (P.B.U.H.) is the last Prophet, though, and there is none after him. www.islam.tc/prophecies/jesus.html |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 22, 2024 7:58:31 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 28, 2012 15:10:15 GMT -5
to get the true perspective on any given subject in the bible, one really needs a concordance and look up all the passages where the subject is mentioned...one also needs to take into account the context in what is being stated...for example is the subject really about what foods are ok to eat or salvation for those other than israelites...  |
|
|
|
Post by femmefatale on Jul 28, 2012 15:38:25 GMT -5
to get the true perspective on any given subject in the bible, one really needs a concordance and look up all the passages where the subject is mentioned...one also needs to take into account the context in what is being stated...for example is the subject really about what foods are ok to eat or salvation for those other than israelites...   |
|
ktunes
Senior Member
show your world to me...
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 8:10:29 GMT -5
Posts: 3,885
|
Post by ktunes on Jul 29, 2012 3:10:43 GMT -5
good example of what i mentioned above...what does the bible say about damnation???...you'd be surprised...it's not what most teach it is...  get a concordance, look up the word "hell"...see what the hebrew and greek definitions are, read what the context around each scripture is, and you can see which definition the author intended...the picture will get a little clearer... a lot of folks defend their faith just off what they know from what they were taught from there youth...and there is obviously a lot of confusion on the subject of religion...the bible states it in multiple locations...one of the four horseman is actually false religion...with the way things are going, it shouldn't be too much longer before it's made clear... |
|
cranberry49
Familiar Member
'Sometimes the simple things are the prettiest'
Joined: Jul 15, 2011 21:09:58 GMT -5
Posts: 734
|
Post by cranberry49 on Jul 29, 2012 5:39:06 GMT -5
good example of what i mentioned above...what does the bible say about damnation???...you'd be surprised...it's not what most teach it is... get a concordance, look up the word "hell"...see what the hebrew and greek definitions are, read what the context around each scripture is, and you can see which definition the author intended...the picture will get a little clearer... a lot of folks defend their faith just off what they know from what they were taught from there youth...and there is obviously a lot of confusion on the subject of religion...the bible states it in multiple locations...one of the four horseman is actually false religion...with the way things are going, it shouldn't be too much longer before it's made clear... Damnation=death. Simply put, if you choose to follow and believe in God, then you live for eternity. If not. You die. You cease to exist. To be forever cut off from God and his son Jesus. |
|
trevorw2539
Junior Member
Joined: Jul 5, 2012 4:03:27 GMT -5
Posts: 147
|
Post by trevorw2539 on Jul 29, 2012 10:09:08 GMT -5
KTunes quote.
'get a concordance, look up the word "hell"...see what the hebrew and greek definitions are, read what the context around each scripture is, and you can see which definition the author intended...the picture will get a little clearer...'
a lot of folks defend their faith just off what they know from what they were taught from there youth...and there is obviously a lot of confusion on the subject of religion...the bible states it in multiple locations...one of the four horseman is actually false religion...with the way things are going, it shouldn't be too much longer before it's made clear...
Excellent advise. For further help I recommend reading various commentaries on the particular passage of scripture. This can often give anothers perspective on the subject. Matthew Henrys commentary is excellent as a spiritual commentary, though it is a little dated. There are many on the internet that can be accessed.
Not sure about the horseman. Revelation has been interpreted in more ways than the rest of the Bible. Interpreted in terms of the time of Christ, of the time of the early church, Middle ages and the final days of man. False religion, in terms of the corruption of Christianity, started very early in its history.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 22, 2024 7:58:31 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2012 10:16:12 GMT -5
good example of what i mentioned above...what does the bible say about damnation???...you'd be surprised...it's not what most teach it is... get a concordance, look up the word "hell"...see what the hebrew and greek definitions are, read what the context around each scripture is, and you can see which definition the author intended...the picture will get a little clearer... a lot of folks defend their faith just off what they know from what they were taught from there youth...and there is obviously a lot of confusion on the subject of religion...the bible states it in multiple locations...one of the four horseman is actually false religion...with the way things are going, it shouldn't be too much longer before it's made clear... Damnation=death. Simply put, if you choose to follow and believe in God, then you live for eternity. If not. You die. You cease to exist. To be forever cut off from God and his son Jesus. Not to split hairs, but nobody ceases to exist. I think some people assume death is annihilation. But, there is Heaven or Hell. There is eternal joy or eternal suffering. Ceasing to exist would be a blessing but we are eternal beings. |
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jul 29, 2012 12:17:20 GMT -5
As numerous posters have pointed out, that isn't a scriptural view. Eternal life is a reward given only to the sons of God in Jesus Christ. The everlasting fire is a place of destruction. We are judged, our (finite) sins are either forgiven us or repaid, and then we either destroyed or saved—the judgment lasts eternally. No "second chances". The Faustian notions of hell were brought in by pagan interests, like so many other things. The word "hell" itself translates into four different words in the Bible, as ktunes aptly points out. "Hell" in Old English was the name of a root cellar. You would wait until "hell froze over" in the winter and then store your perishables within during the summer. There are many scriptures to prove the unilateral nature of eternal life. A few regarding the destruction of the wicked in hell are: "‘For behold, the day is coming, burning like an oven, and all the proud, yes, all who do wickedly will be stubble. And the day which is coming shall burn them up,’ says the Lord of hosts, ‘That will leave them neither root nor branch’" (Malachi 4:1). And Jesus' own words in Matthew: "And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell" (Matthew 10:28). "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Romans 6:23). "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish* but have everlasting life" (John 3:16). *the meaning of the word in the original Greek is "suffer complete ruin or destruction". Typically where people get confused is in the use of the term "eternal judgment", mistakenly taking it to mean "eternal torment". Of course, it is eternal judgment. You're either granted life or death, and that judgment lasts forever. The word "judgment" is indeed different from "torment"; "eternal torment" is never once used in the context of humankind. Others also get confused with the term "everlasting fire". But again, it is an everlasting fire—and one that's very good at destroying things, as numerous scriptures make clear. The term "everlasting" is invoked to impress upon us the unavoidable nature of the punishment for our sins—namely, destruction. The Bible clearly tells us that no soul escapes judgment. Nobody is lost in the cracks. God doesn't simply "give up caring", and hell doesn't "fill up" such that some men escape judgment. It is a raging fire, never to be extinguished, and its power to consume and destroy will not languish. You may not consider this "comparatively insignificant", but the fact remains that 99% of reported 'Christians' celebrate the pagan festival of Christmas (a Holy Day found nowhere in the bible, and whose observance is starkly condemned), and do not celebrate the Biblical Holy Days, which reveal God's wonderful plan for the salvation of all mankind. The fact that the very premise of Christmas is a provable fraud is not an insignificant finding. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 22, 2024 7:58:31 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2012 14:42:40 GMT -5
You may not consider this "comparatively insignificant", but the fact remains that 99% of reported 'Christians' celebrate the pagan festival of Christmas (a Holy Day found nowhere in the bible, and whose observance is starkly condemned), and do not celebrate the Biblical Holy Days, which reveal God's wonderful plan for the salvation of all mankind. The fact that the very premise of Christmas is a provable fraud is not an insignificant finding. You brought the matter of Christ's birthday up in your "expansion of Cranberry's thoughts" -thoughts she had presented in conversation with me. However, whilst your expansion was probably relevant to her comments, it was less so to my own -the reason being that the matter of Christ's birthday is insignificant to me when compared to the other points I mentioned. I've no doubt that, in itself, it would be a worthy topic to discuss though. |
|
trevorw2539
Junior Member
Joined: Jul 5, 2012 4:03:27 GMT -5
Posts: 147
|
Post by trevorw2539 on Jul 29, 2012 15:09:47 GMT -5
With respect I suggest there are no 'Holy Days'. There are days set apart to remember the actions of Christ. Only the Church has decided that they are 'Holy Days'. IMO we do not need 'Holy Days' like the Hebrews. In the OT the presence of God was to be found in the Tabernacle and then the Temple. It was important then for God to set aside 'Holy Days' for the people to come to where he dwelt for the specific purposes of worship and to sacrifice for their sins - Day of Atonement, and to offer thank offerings - First fruits etc. As Christ is with us we do not need to come into his presence to worship. That we do so is to share with each other in worship and celebrate together. The actual day we do so is not important. As long as we set aside one day a week for that purpose, and agree the day we follow God's command to 'gather together in His name'. Most denominations use Sunday, others Saturday. Easter is not a 'Holy Feast'. It is simply a feast of remembrance and celebration. 'Do this in remembrance of me'. Though it is important. Its symbolism is related to that of the Jewish Passover. Why, oh why, has the Established churches made a simple 'religion' a complicated set of rules and unnecessary rituals.  |
|
cranberry49
Familiar Member
'Sometimes the simple things are the prettiest'
Joined: Jul 15, 2011 21:09:58 GMT -5
Posts: 734
|
Post by cranberry49 on Jul 29, 2012 17:30:55 GMT -5
Damnation=death. Simply put, if you choose to follow and believe in God, then you live for eternity. If not. You die. You cease to exist. To be forever cut off from God and his son Jesus. Not to split hairs, but nobody ceases to exist. I think some people assume death is annihilation. But, there is Heaven or Hell. There is eternal joy or eternal suffering. Ceasing to exist would be a blessing but we are eternal beings. Sorry, but I don't see it the way you do. According to the bible, the soul can/does die. So, if the soul dies, what's left to torment forever and ever? The body itself? That would make no sense. The body would burn up! The bible clearly states that 'the soul that sins will die.' Then the bible says that the 'dead know nothing.' So, what would be the point of burning something that 'knows nothing?' Therefore, yes, some will 'cease to exist.' We are not eternal beings as we have been taught by various religions. It's just not biblical. See, we are the 'soul.' God breathed life into every 'soul.' This means the life-force itself is the 'soul.' Not something that lives on after we die. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 22, 2024 7:58:31 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2012 17:51:53 GMT -5
 I have a question.. And especially directed towards Virgil.. Can I ask you of what your particular Christian cultural backdrop is.. You know, like, Baptist, Lutheran. Pentecostal, etc.. I have, on the shelf of my mind, (a teaching on) what you've just shared concerning the fires of hell.. I say on the shelf because I have not trashed the teachings. I've been taught, but never did the study myself on the eternal/tormenting/ forever fires of hell that they were indeed a forever existing burning of those who did not accept Jesus Christ while they lived. Very interesting to hear this same teaching again.. So, are you saying that the lost would be burned up, like in no longer existing? I sure am waiting for the follow-ups.. Trevor.. Religion is sets of rules and rits is why.. Faith ain't. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 22, 2024 7:58:31 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2012 17:55:41 GMT -5
Oh Femme Femme.. Thanks for the increase. Right back at you.. |
|
