I'm a non-Christian, where can I post?

[lforrest]

So, I'm going to go ahead and bow out of this thread for now and explore the rest of the forum. The admin said I could post in any of the boards, so I am going to go and see what conversations are going on there. If you're interested in knowing more, you can always e-mail me, or send me your email address and I'll e-mail you, whatever, and then we can talk about whatever you like, but in this forum, I will try to respect the rules and not discuss things the admin would rather I don't discuss. Thanis for the welcome, everyone.

Well I said to post where you're able. You should have access to several but not all forums.

 

[Hidden In Him]

It's the Veridican Gospel of Jesus Christ, and it's not a new Gospel, it's a Gospel harmony. And I'm not an offshoot of the Branch Davidians. And my understanding is I can be in the non-Christian boards, which I am happy to stay in. I mean, you choose for your avatar the image of a Roman soldier with a bloody sword. Seriously? In a Christian forum? Whatever. I fully anticipate being kicked out--I always am.

I'm not assuring you that you will be, but I am posting you a healthy warning that your posts set off all kinds of red flags. Nothing personal.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

I am specifically speaking of water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of our sins per Acts 2:38(per Peter in Acts 2, 8, 10 and Paul in Acts 19).

Not, what the Mormons, RCC or baptists etc, say.

They reject the Apostles just like the OP does.

"Mormons" believe that baptism is done for the remission of sins, in the name of the the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

 

[Edward Gordon]

Well I said to post where you're able. You should have access to several but not all forums.

You did. And all the boards I want to be in seem to be available to me, and I appreciate that. I will not be promoting my religion in here. If God wants to draw someone to me, they will e-mail me, and we can talk off-forum. But in the forum, I know what it's about, and I wouldn't have been talking about any of this except people have been directly asking me about it, or falsely accusing me of things. Which I don't know why they do that when there are plenty of legitimate things they could accuse me of.

I'm not assuring you that you will be, but I am posting you a healthy warning that your posts set off all kinds of red flags. Nothing personal.

Well, I'm not your religion. So, there it is. Do Mormons set off red flags? What about Catholics? Am I a Christian? Yes, I mean, I think I am because I'm a follower of Christ--in the extreme. Am I part of traditional Christendom, no, I wouldn't say that I am. And neither would you, and so we understand each other. If you ask me about my faith, you're going to hear things you don't agree with. If you don't ask me about my faith, then you won't. So, you choose how many red flags you see.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

I am a Veridican.

Hmm - haven't heard of that "Variation" before, and never heard of Edward Gordon. Now and again that happens, but it's been a long while since the last time. Veridicanism, apprears to be a re-adjusted version of Catholicism - using re-defined Catholic terminology and concepts - Eucharist as an actual "Sacrament", and "Paradise" as a re-defined "Purgatory".

Since the entire Old Testament, and most of the New Testament is discarded as having no SPIRITUAL significance, naturally the BIBLCAL basis for Jesus/Messiah is lost and replaced by (I assume) E. Gordon's OPINIONS about how things work in HIS concept.

The primary operational concept is: "human spirit is transformed into Christ" which is essentially meaningless without further clarification, and there's the question of exactly HOW one gets the process rolling. The word "Faith" is bandied about, but since the Biblical definition of Faith is discarded, what is the veridicanist definition thereof??

There's some indication the Veridicians believe in Baptismal regeneration. It THAT the front door to the "faith"??

 

[Hidden In Him]

Well, I'm not your religion. So, there it is. Do Mormons set off red flags? What about Catholics? Am I a Christian? Yes, I mean, I think I am because I'm a follower of Christ--in the extreme. Am I part of traditional Christendom, no, I wouldn't say that I am. And neither would you, and so we understand each other. If you ask me about my faith, you're going to hear things you don't agree with. If you don't ask me about my faith, then you won't. So, you choose how many red flags you see.

At least I like your smilie, Lol.

Listen, I am being honest, forthright and direct here, just like you are being. Your posts make me so uneasy about who and what you could be that I can't even in good conscience engage in doctrinal discussion with you. I fear I might be entertaining what could potentially be a cult leader, and a dangerous one...

 

[GEN2REV]

Yeah, casting aside well over 90% of God's Word is a doozy.

The New Testament, alone, is only about 20% or 1/5th of the Bible. The Gospels are far less of a fraction than that.

Not sure there is a term for that level of cherry-picking. Besides, without the Old Testament, it is impossible to fully understand who Jesus really is.

Also, you are ignoring John chapter 6 that tells us that the real Eucharist, spirit-quickening, life-giving ritual, is the ingestion of God's Word as a whole.

Way too many contradictions for me.

 

[Edward Gordon]

At least I like your smilie, Lol.

Listen, I am being honest, forthright and direct here, just like you are being. Your posts make me so uneasy about who and what you could be that I can't even in good conscience engage in doctrinal discussion with you. I fear I might be entertaining what could potentially be a cult leader, and a dangerous one...

Fine.

Yeah, casting aside well over 90% of God's Word is a doozy.

The New Testament, alone, is only about 20% or 1/5th of the Bible. The Gospels are far less of a fraction than that.

Not sure there is a term for that level of cherry-picking. Besides, without the Old Testament, it is impossible to fully understand who Jesus really is.

Also, you are ignoring John chapter 6 that tells us that the real Eucharist, spirit-quickening, life-giving ritual, is the ingestion of God's Word as a whole.

Way too many contradictions for me.

Allow me to say it now for the twentieth time. We don't cast the Bible aside. And the Word of God is Jesus Christ. Cuz if it ain't, you have a real problem with the Chinese translation of the Holy Bible. Just sayin...

 

[lforrest]

Yeah, casting aside well over 90% of God's Word is a doozy.

The New Testament, alone, is only about 20% or 1/5th of the Bible. The Gospels are far less of a fraction than that.

Not sure there is a term for that level of cherry-picking. Besides, without the Old Testament, it is impossible to fully understand who Jesus really is.

Also, you are ignoring John chapter 6 that tells us that the real Eucharist, spirit-quickening, life-giving ritual, is the ingestion of God's Word as a whole.

Way too many contradictions for me.

An observation I made is that all scripture points to Christ in one way or another. And there is biblical support for that even in the gospels. Luke 24:27.

If Jesus Christ himself referenced the scriptures, and fulfilled prophecies written there, on what basis are Old Testament books rejected?

And Jesus himself wrote nothing I've heard of, except scribbles in the dust. John 8:6, Jeremiah 17:13

 

[GEN2REV]

Allow me to say it now for the twentieth time. We don't cast the Bible aside. And the Word of God is Jesus Christ.

You stated that your group only canonizes the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John - without looking back at your exact words - so how do you figure you aren't casting aside the rest of scripture just as modern Christianity casts aside all apocryphal/pseudepigraphal works that are not official canon?

 

[lforrest]

Allow me to say it now for the twentieth time. We don't cast the Bible aside.

Then why reduce the biblical Canon? The obvious answer would be that it is too retraining, so as to make it difficult to form new doctrines.

 

[Ferris Bueller]

...I'm not an alien.

...Suffice to say, it's you who chooses to be anonymous and "alien" in this forum. I'm using my full name and identity.

If you are not a natural Jew you are an alien, a foreigner, accepted into the community of God's people. I'm an alien. It's not a derogatory label, and it certainly has nothing to do with not using your real name on a public forum. The point is, there is to be the same law for the alien as there is for the natural Jew. And Jesus fully endorsed that law and so it must be included as official canon in your religion, too. It has to be. Because that was his doctrine.

 

[GEN2REV]

An observation I made is that all scripture points to Christ in one way or another. And there is biblical support for that even in the gospels. Luke 24:27.

If Jesus Christ himself referenced the scriptures, and fulfilled prophecies written there, on what basis are Old Testament books rejected?

And Jesus himself wrote nothing I've heard of, except scribbles in the dust. John 8:6, Jeremiah 17:13

Your own post supports my point. Luke 24:27 speaks of all the times in the OT that Jesus worked with the prophets of old to 'write' scripture. They are HIS Words as is all of scripture.

My goodness, Jesus wrote the entire Bible. Unless you believe in reconciling science with religion and evolution with creation, somehow, in the sense that the Bible is written by man, passed down by word of mouth around camp fires after we crawled out of the caves after evolving from monkeys.

Jesus is God, per countless scriptures, and Jesus made all things and wrote the entire Bible.

All scripture is God-breathed.
2 Timothy 3:16
Jesus wrote the Bible through holy men.
2 Peter 1:21

 

[Taken]

In fact, I do know a great deal about David Koresh and the Branch Davidians. As much as I am on their side, I think David Koresh got it wrong theologically. He applied it wrong. We ALL are to be Christ, not any one man. So, he saw himself as Christ, but he failed to realize that his mission was not that of a new Messiah. Jesus Christ was the Messiah. But all that notwithstanding, there would not be Veridicanism or a Veridican Church had David Koresh and the other 75 Branch Davidians not died at Mount Carmel on April 19, 1993. The Veridican Church is a direct result of the events at Waco, Texas.

I know little about “Vernon” aka David. But do know, under the Clinton administration’s approval and commanded force, American citizens who Freely chose their lifestyle privately in their own home, were disgustingly brutally attacked for weeks and murdered in their own homes, and the victims thereof were relentlessly attacked in the media for weeks and years thereafter, and the attackers praised and rewarded.
Disturbing then and equally disturbing now, observing “power sitters” approval of the same tactics.

Truly, I have no idea what you're saying, my friend. I'm sorry.

Inanutshell
Earthly men were created and made men.
Earthly animals were created and made animals.
There was no “extinction” man.
There was no “evolvement” of an animal to become a man.

 

[Ferris Bueller]

I mean, you choose for your avatar the image of a Roman soldier with a bloody sword. Seriously? In a Christian forum?

"10When Jesus heard this, He marveled and said to those following Him, “Truly I tell you, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith.
13Then Jesus said to the centurion, “Go! As you have believed, so will it be done for you.” And his servant was healed at that very hour."
Matthew 8:10-13​

 

[lforrest]

My goodness, Jesus wrote the entire Bible. Unless you believe in reconciling science with religion and evolution with creation, somehow, in the sense that the Bible is written by man, passed down by word of mouth around camp fires after we crawled out of the caves after evolving from monkeys.

I am not the original poster, but butted in. Sorry if there was any confusion. I intended to point out that rejecting any book without red letters makes no sense, as the red letters are what the disciples remembered Jesus saying with the help of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Ferris Bueller]

I don't reject them at all. And I greatly respect the entire Holy Bible, and I'm not a Jew. And I think you're becoming insulting now.

No, it's not an insult.
The point is, we're here to tell our side of the story. This is not a one way platform for you to tell us all about your religion. It's a two way street here. We're going to challenge your beliefs...politely, of course. And the best way to speak to you is going to be to use your own recognized and accepted canon of scripture, which you have said are the gospels. There's nothing in them you reject, so you are going to at least consider what we present to you from them. But if we quote Paul, or Peter, or James you will simply decide that is part of their writings that you do not accept and the discussion will be over. And so it's not worthwhile, at this point, to share what they say. So there's no insult intended. I just know what we should be saying to you so as to not be wasting your time or ours. This is the same way that one should talk to a natural Jew who has rejected the gospel of Jesus...use their own scriptures to show them the truth. I'm going to do that with you in regard to your beliefs to the extent I am capable of doing that.

 

[Mantis]

@ Edward Gordon Was Netflix' "Waco" an honest representation of the Branch Davidians and their leader?

 

[Edward Gordon]

An observation I made is that all scripture points to Christ in one way or another. And there is biblical support for that even in the gospels. Luke 24:27.

If Jesus Christ himself referenced the scriptures, and fulfilled prophecies written there, on what basis are Old Testament books rejected?

And Jesus himself wrote nothing I've heard of, except scribbles in the dust. John 8:6, Jeremiah 17:13

That's exactly right. That's why we don't reject the other books of the Bible. Personally, I'm studying Daniel right now. But Veridicans follow ONLY Jesus Christ. The rest of the holy bible is there for wisdom and historical context. And, more than that, I think it's very important in order to show the spirit of Christ, especially the Psalms and Isaiah. And like with the 5th chapter of Acts, it shows the mindset and spirit of the apostles, especially Peter, and that's another discussion.

BUUUTTTT, we follow ONLY Jesus Christ as our teacher. So, when it comes to "authority," or what takes precedence. It is the life and teachings of Jesus Christ. And perhaps its symbolic: If our canon is only Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Revelation, Thomas, and the Veridican Gospel of Jesus Christ. it reinforces that we are sole followers of Jesus Christ.

Then why reduce the biblical Canon? The obvious answer would be that it is too retraining, so as to make it difficult to form new doctrines.

Well, the easy answer is that we are not classic Christians. I mean, we just aren't. We are Christ-ians in that we "follow" Christ, but to compare us to say, Baptists, would really be comparing apples and oranges. We are not Latter-Day Saints, but there is a similarity there. That is you only get so far condemning them for the way they are not like Presbyterians. Because they are not Presbyterians and never claimed to be.

And yes, you are correct, this is a new doctrine. But I would argue that it is an end-times doctrine and it is the only doctrine that makes sense if one is going to follow Jesus Christ. I mean, that's prima facie: We follow ONLY Jesus Christ; thus, we are true followers of Jesus Christ. And this religion could not have existed before 1988 (when the Gospel of Thomas was first published in English) and 1993 following the massacre of the Branch Davidians at Waco respectively.

 

[Edward Gordon]

@ Edward Gordon Was Netflix' "Waco" an honest representation of the Branch Davidians and their leader?

From a timeline perspective, yes. But David Koresh is always presented as a raving, yelling, cruel madman, and all interviews, videos, and testimony of surviving Branch Davidians does not support that. I don't make a habit of defending David Koresh, because I do think he was theologically wrong. But, you'll never see me judging him either, because I know he was used by God to do and be exactly who he was. I respect him, and them, and I feel sorry for them. But I think they're in the Kingdom of God now. And probably sin-for-sin, I'm a worse human being than Koresh, or I certainly feel that way, so I hope he is in heaven because if he's not, I sure won't be. But I think he is, and I think God loves me, too.

And may I say, especially in these end times, be very careful what you believe that the world hands you to believe.