HaHaHaHaHa! "Inaccurately translated"! That is about the best DODGE one can come up with. So anytime you disagree with the Bible, "it has been inaccurately translated"!
Christendom's Teachings verses the Bible
- Thread starter Aunty Jane
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
amigo de christo
Well-Known Member
BINGO . they all do this . mormons and all . But lambs simply cling to the glorious truth of our LORD and feast daily upon the holy bible
whereby they grow by the power of the SPIRIT , wise unto salvation through faith in Christ .
Let all that draws breath praise the glorious LORD GOD ALL MIGHTY , FATHER of our LORD and Savoir JESUS CHRIST
for the great mercies of His grace given us in Christ JESUS . Lift those hands , enoch , and praise and thank the LORD . STAY DUG in THE BIBLE .
.....Unlike your good self we actually back up what we say.....I haven't seen you back up a single thing with any direct scriptural evidence for the assumptions you make about the nature of God....relying on the 'weeds' of Christendom to provide you with your beliefs. Twisting the scriptures began many centuries ago, but you think the Bible was written by Kings James....
I provided the evidence for the mistranslation, which as usual, you brush aside because you cannot respond to a single argument....and you think we are indoctrinated....look in the mirror.
Perhaps reading 2 Peter 3:9-14 might help...
"The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. 10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed.
11 Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of people ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness, 12 waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be set on fire and dissolved, and the heavenly bodies will melt as they burn! 13 But according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.
14 Therefore, beloved, since you are waiting for these, be diligent to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. 15 And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, 16 as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures."
So who are 'twisting the scriptures' and when did this 'twisting' or distortion begin? Since Peter wrote that around 64C.E., apparently the 'weeds' were starting to sprout even then.....so imagine how 'twisted' things became given the time that Christendom has existed, beginning with the RCC.
All your doctrines originated with them.....and you trust those who brought you "Mary the mother of God" and "purgatory", "the murderous Inquisition" and "Popes" to furnish you with the truth of God's word...?
Any challenge to your faith and you run away, because you cannot defend the indefensible.
It is not the majority who will be saved at the judgment because even though God wishes that all would repent....the majority will not, hanging onto the lies they have come to love.....its a pity, but already written in God's word. (Matthew 7:13-14) Only a "few" (compared with the volume of people professing to be "Christians") will make the cut. They won't like what Jesus will say to them...(Matthew 7:21-23)
Jehovah's day is coming.....are you ready? Lets wait and see....the world is falling apart as we can all see.....
Sanctimonious...much?
The "Lambs" are all supposed to have one Shepherd who feeds them all the same "food".....Christendom can't make up its mind what to feed any of them....so they are dying of malnutrition, in case you hadn't noticed.
People are abandoning Christendom in droves and attaching themselves to big "entertainment churches" that feed them emotional junk food to make them feel good. Christianity is not an emotion...it is a way of life based on an accurate understanding of the word of God.If you think all God wants is praise, then what kind of a God is that?..... "Praise me or you will burn in hell"?
Nice god you have there.
St. SteVen
Well-Known Member
Interesting topic. Thanks.
As a Christian Universalist, I ended up with different conclusions.
But I respect you for doing your homework and arriving where you did.
I consider myself to be a recovering evangelical.
So, I am still sorting through my baggage to toss out what doesn't work for me.
I respect anyone who can take a step back and demand proof for what they have been led to believe.....not to be swayed by the dictates of men, but those who can back up what they say in perfect harmony with what the entirety of scripture teaches....it is one book with one author and it tells one story.....we have to have the big picture or the dead pixels created by Christendom’s teachings will distort all of it.
I wish you well in your journey.
There is a sad day of reckoning coming where souls that have rejected God's word as TRUTH will be weighed in the balance & found wanting.
May all find grace in his love for he desires none to perish. The way has been provided by God, the Father; Jesus said " I AM the way, the truth and the life"!
May all find grace in his love for he desires none to perish. The way has been provided by God, the Father; Jesus said " I AM the way, the truth and the life"!
St. SteVen
Well-Known Member
What is "God's word as TRUTH"?
There is no consensus in Christianity as to what that actually is.
According to your premise, we're all toast.
Excellent comment.
Looking at Christendom, there are literally thousands of “denominations”, as well as those who refuse to be identified with a known denomination, all claiming to teach the truth....and then there are the ‘lone rangers’ who are so sure that God has revealed his truth only to them....and the undecided are left in this pit of confusion created by the devil...the sower of these “weeds”.
So how can we find the diamond in that pile of broken glass...?
The answer to that is who we are at heart, because God is choosing us as much as we think we are choosing him.
John 6:44, 65....
“No man can come to me unless the Father, who sent me, draws him. . . . .This is why I have said to you, no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.”
So the final choice is made by God, not just us. We have to be of the caliber that God is looking for and Jesus is his appointed judge. Nothing escapes his notice as he can read hearts....the most treacherous figurative organ in the human body.....
Jeremiah 17:9-10....
“The heart is more treacherous than anything else and is desperate.
Who can know it?
10 I, Jehovah, am searching the heart,
Examining the innermost thoughts,
To give to each one according to his ways,
According to the fruitage of his works.”
So who is the person God sees?
St. SteVen
Well-Known Member
Great post, thanks!
I would say, God sees everyone.
Perhaps the more important question is: Who sees Him?
Christendom assumes that calling yourself a Christian automatically makes you one, but when one is baptized, it is a public acknowledgment (usually in front of witnesses) that you are undergoing the biggest change that one can make in their life......that is to dedicate yourself to doing God's will before your own.
When Jesus presented himself for baptism, he was a mature man, 30 years of age and he wasn't coming to John as someone who was repenting of sins...because he had none. So how did John's baptism differ from the "Christian" baptisms that was performed later?
Of what is full immersion baptism a symbol? And can it apply to infants?
What are your thoughts?
Last edited:
St. SteVen
Well-Known Member
I agree.
I have been criticized recently on the forum for writing that: "A ceremony is an outward sign of an inward reality."
And that statement in reference to baptism. Or more specifically to believer's (adult/of age children) baptism.
No one was baptized in the name of John. It was a baptism of repentance, which was good. Baptism in Jesus' name was another thing. And though Jesus disciples were baptizing people, it doesn't appear that the baptism in Jesus' name began until after the outpouring at Pentecost.
Acts 19:4-6 NIV
Paul said, “John’s baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” 5 On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6 When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues[a] and prophesied.
Full immersion, as I understand it, is a symbol of the death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.
I accept infant baptism as a practice of Catholic and high church denominations.
They have their reasons and scriptural/tradition support for it. So, I make no issue with them.
(build bridges, not walls) But...
To me, baptism is not a salvation issue. So, whether believer's baptism or infant baptism, okay either way.
However, in my church, believer's baptism is done. Babies are dedicated to the Lord.
A question for you:
The end of the Gospel according of Matthew, we find the Great Commission (as it is called)
instruction us to baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
Yet in the Book of Acts and the rest of the NT we see baptisms in Jesus' name only.
Which is correct?
Matthew 28:19-20 NIV
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”
That is what we believe also, baptism is confirmation that your dedication is already a reality.....it's like the wedding ceremony of an engaged couple. The intent is already established, and the ceremony just follows as confirmation of the commitment.
Actually, we see it as following the model set by Jesus.....when he presented himself for baptism, it was the beginning of a new course in his life.....one that he knew would end in his death. His baptism was a symbolic death and resurrection signalling the beginning of his role as Messiah.
As his disciples, we too need to be baptized as "Christians" and this involves our personal dedication to God and all that it involves in being a 'footstep follower of Christ". (1 Pet 2:21) Our baptism also needs to be full immersion....and we need to live up to the meaning of it every day. But because of sin, sometimes we stumble, but if we are repentant, we can seek God's forgiveness on the basis of Christ's blood.
Infant baptism is not something supported by scripture at all IMV...."tradition" yes, but "scripture", no way.....because no person can be baptized by proxy, and no person can come to Christ in baptism without the ability to make conscious vows along with the ability to take responsibility for what baptism means.
Jesus was not baptized until he was 30 years old, so we will not baptize infants because we believe what Paul said in 1 Cor 7:10-16 concerning the situation of believing parents with unbelieving mates....
"To the married people I give instructions, not I but the Lord, that a wife should not separate from her husband. 11 But if she does separate, let her remain unmarried or else be reconciled with her husband; and a husband should not leave his wife.
12 But to the others I say, yes, I, not the Lord: If any brother has an unbelieving wife and she is agreeable to staying with him, let him not leave her; 13 and if a woman has an unbelieving husband and he is agreeable to staying with her, let her not leave her husband. 14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in relation to his wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in relation to the brother; otherwise, your children would be unclean, but now they are holy. 15 But if the unbelieving one chooses to depart, let him depart; a brother or a sister is not bound under such circumstances, but God has called you to peace. 16 For wife, how do you know whether you will save your husband? Or, husband, how do you know whether you will save your wife?"
This shows that unbelieving mates are sanctified in relation to their believing spouses...'otherwise their children would be unclean, but now are viewed as holy'. So the children are safe on the merit of their believing parent(s) until they are of age to make their own dedication.....there is no chronological age for that because individuals are different and mature at different ages.
In our view "the great commission" is a command rather than a mere suggestion, to go out and actively preach the Kingdom message. It involves seeking people out and actively teaching those who want to learn, "all the things Christ commanded" so that they were then in a position to understand the role played by all three of those vital elements on their journey to where they were confident to take the serious step of baptism. The Father, his son and the holy spirit have always played a role in the outworking of Jehovah's purpose. We acknowledge all three, but do not combine them into one God.
Its not just words to say, but it involves a full understanding of what your baptism means, in the big scheme of things.
In the first century the disciples were sent out to find the 'deserving' ones....
Matthew 10:11-15....
"Into whatever city or village you enter, search out who in it is deserving, and stay there until you leave. 12 When you enter the house, greet the household. 13 If the house is deserving, let the peace you wish it come upon it; but if it is not deserving, let the peace from you return upon you. 14 Wherever anyone does not receive you or listen to your words, on going out of that house or that city, shake the dust off your feet. 15 Truly I say to you, it will be more endurable for the land of Sodʹom and Go·morʹrah on Judgment Day than for that city."
They went "from house to house" (Acts 20:20) looking for those "rightly disposed for everlasting life".
Acts 13:45-51...shows us what reception they got....especially when they started to preach to the Gentiles!
Paul wrote...
"When the Jews saw the crowds, they were filled with jealousy and began blasphemously contradicting the things Paul was saying. 46 Then Paul and Barʹna·bas boldly said to them: “It was necessary for the word of God to be spoken first to you. Since you are rejecting it and do not judge yourselves worthy of everlasting life, look! we turn to the nations. 47 For Jehovah has commanded us in these words: ‘I have appointed you as a light of nations, for you to be a salvation to the ends of the earth.’”
48 When those of the nations heard this, they began to rejoice and to glorify the word of Jehovah, and all those who were rightly disposed for everlasting life became believers. 49 Furthermore, the word of Jehovah was being spread throughout the whole country. 50 But the Jews incited the prominent women who were God-fearing and the principal men of the city, and they stirred up persecution against Paul and Barʹna·bas and threw them outside their boundaries. 51 So they shook the dust off their feet against them and went to I·coʹni·um."
This is what "shaking the dust off" means.....it was customary for Jews to wash the feet of all who came in to them as a gesture of hospitality, but refusal to do so was an insult to the visitor, so Jesus said to "shake the dust off" against them, as a sign that this house was undeserving of their time and attention.....so they were to move on.
St. SteVen
Well-Known Member
That being the case, why would you then not recognize infant baptism as a meaningful religious ceremony?
The child will be confirmed later in life. Are we so strict with biblical models that we discount tradition all together?
Or worse, to consider nullified an infant baptism?
Did the Apostle disobey the Great Commission command by baptizing in Jesus' name alone?
Does this not turn the tables, so to speak, on your topic subject?
Meaning, the practice of baptizing according to the Great Commission WORDING violates the actual practice
of the early church as recorded in the NT scriptures. What happened?
I was a bit shocked when this was pointed out to me.
I had ONLY known of baptism in the name of all three persons of the Trinity.
Yet, I was hard pressed to find an example from Acts to Revelations.
Is the purpose of your topic to shed a poor light on other denominations that don't
follow the practices of your denomination? If so, I would say that's a bit divisive.
Build bridges, not walls.
Last edited:
Hillsage
Well-Known Member
You say; "hell was well known by the time of Jesus."? Are you sure? Was "the time of Jesus" 725 years after Jesus died? Just because a word is in 'modern' bibles and red ink, doesn't mean it ever crossed the lips of Jesus, or anyone else.
GOOGLE question; "when was the word hell invented?"
GOOGLE's answer;
About 17,400,000 results (0.46 seconds)
The modern English word hell is derived from Old English hel, helle (first attested around 725 AD to refer to a nether world of the dead) reaching into the Anglo-Saxon pagan period.
I think I already responded to this but the post may have been deleted??? Oh well....
Because of the way that the word “hell” is understood today, it does not convey the original meaning of the words used in the scriptures and understood by those who wrote about it. It is such an unsatisfactory translation of these original Bible words, that Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, unabridged, under “Hell” says: “fr[om] . . . helan to conceal.” The word “hell” thus originally conveyed no thought of heat or torment but simply of a ‘covered over or concealed place.’ In the old English dialect the expression “helling potatoes” meant, not to roast them, but simply to place the potatoes in the ground or in a cellar.
It was Christendom's adoption of the concept of "hellfire" from the Greeks, and also involved their belief in immortal souls who could be tortured after death that explain why there is no "hell of eternal torment" in the scriptures. The Bible has no such place of eternal torture...just eternal death.....because one has to be alive to feel pain....the dead are dead, according to Eccl 9:5, 6, 10.....the dead are in an completely unconscious state.
The meaning given to the word “hell” is that portrayed in Dante’s Divine Comedy and Milton’s Paradise Lost, which meaning is completely foreign to the original definition of the word. The idea of a “hell” of fiery torment, however, dates back long before Dante or Milton. The Grolier Universal Encyclopedia, under “Hell” says: “Hindus and Buddhists regard hell as a place of spiritual cleansing and final restoration. Islamic tradition considers it as a place of everlasting punishment.” The idea of suffering after death is found among the pagan religious teachings of ancient peoples in Babylon and Egypt. Babylonian and Assyrian beliefs depicted the “nether world . . . as a place full of horrors, . . . presided over by gods and demons of great strength and fierceness.” Although ancient Egyptian religious texts do not teach that the burning of any individual victim would go on forever, they do portray the “Other World” as featuring “pits of fire” for “the damned.”
I cannot understand why anyone would think a loving God would torture anyone eternally....what is the point of punishment for its own sake?
Under God's law punishment was in line with the severity of the crime....where is the justice in an eternity of suffering for a short lifetime of sin? And its inherited sin at that!
And punishment was often meant to lead one to repent and so as then to receive forgiveness.I would never worship a cruel and unjust God...
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
I just read a book Wild At Heart by John Eldridge who said this verse has caused more damage to Christians psyche than almost any other.
We can trust our heart because of what God said later in the OT.
And I will give you a new heart, and I will put a new spirit in you. I will take out your stony, stubborn heart and give you a tender, responsive heart.
Ezekiel 36:26
We who are saved do not have the heart Jeremiah wrote of. We have the heart Ezekiel wrote about.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
There is evidence the baptizing in the name of 3 was a 4th century addition. PM me for more info.
Wrangler
Well-Known Member
Speaking of dodge, I noticed neither of you touched her plain questions written in English.
But if you read verse 9 again it shows that the person mentioned in the previous verse has a God who anointed him.
Does God have a God?
Does God anoint himself?
Can God be his own servant? (Acts 4:27)
Can God be his own High Priest? (Hebrews 3:1)
What nonsense!
You want the verse to mean what your doctrine says despite reason and a plain reading of the text.
Similar threads
