To the Christian that thinks the new direction of acceptance of the lgbtq community is against the teachings of the bible and causing the decline of Christianity. Listen to this speech by Rev. Calvin Roberson

The Church is imploding. Do not accelerate its decline with heresy.

Bishops are promoting the idea of sacramental sodomy. Repent!

Full speech: 12 minutes

Organized religion is a Fugkin joke.
Seriously.

Democrats are loosing support of their past traditional voting base. Thus they now romance the homosexuals and other sexual deviants. Gotta get the votes.

A portion of the Church is loosing its traditional base. Gotta bring the homosexuals into the fold. Gotta get the money.

Get that money is right. It’s now ok if marriage isn’t between one man and one woman. LOL

Not to the ones who are laughing all the way to the bank, or pursuing the fantasies of their sickness

Woke is an arrogance, the antithesis of Christian humility.

They’ll have to stand before the Lord one day and be judged.

This guy preached a pretty good message. Doubt they’ll listen.

DF

Seriously, you could be more respectful of the Christians on this board and keep those comments to yourself.

Jesus died for our sins.

That is what the video addressed. This young rev. Voicing his distaste of the council of bishops deciding to allow sodomy on the alter

The problem, it seems, is too many Christians can't differentiate between Christianity, and organized religion.

Neither can most non-Christians.

Anyone truly interested in adhering to the teachings of Christ wouldn’t be caught anywhere near 99% of the churches in this country.

Well, he's correct. Christianity has very little to do with organized religion.

Christianity is actions, not organizations. Organizations, regardless of their published goals or doctrines, are run by bureaucrats. Bureaucrats don't do good works in the name of Jesus, they do self-serving works in the name of furthering their own power, influence, and wealth.

Change my mind.

Prosperity theology is not Christianity.

Paul Bernard thinks organized cocksucking is the best thing ever

Jag should chime in and post some Bible verses 2 posts after he’s posted some sex talk or Corksucker liberal rant

As for me, and my house, we will serve the Lord.

It's all so simple.

The church isn't really imploding, but the older, mainline denominations have been systematically taken over by the left. Still plenty of good churches out there.

‘The Church’ has been hemorrhaging members in this country since the 90’s.

Is that the church's fault, or is that just an indication of where our society is heading?

That’s a good question.

This. Eastern Orthodoxy might be the last holdout among the mainline Christian churches.

100% agree with you.

The church wouldn’t be allowing itself to be circumvented unless it was the will of the membership.
The church is nothing more than a representation of its members, ie, society.

Phil Wickham has some great songs. This is one of my faves.....

The only hope Christianity has lies in the individual,
Which means strength and the courage to stand up for the teachings Even when it’s not the popular view.

The Bible clearly spells out how we will become more lawless, Godless, wrong becomes right, etc. This is really no surprise. America has a heart condition.

Closet gay phaggot preacherz ain’t helping the numbers

I used to think we were on the same page. Your last couple of posts show you to be just another campfire know nuthin' that likes to hear himself talk. Hope those are not expensive Pendleton Wollen Mills trade blankets you throw over any and everything you think you have a clue about.

When as a society we’ve somehow evolved to the point that we allow children to use litter boxes, indulging, even celebrating their psychosis, we deserve everything that’s going to happen to us in the near future.

We have all been told what is/did/going to happen, and Jack ain't wrong.

Rainbow colored Xmas lights on the parsonage I knew before that but jfc🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️

The real “church”, the Body of Christ, they who have come out from among them, is not and will not implode. The true church flourishes even amid hardship.

Organized religion long ago lost its savor and is being trodden under the foot of this society.

The blood washed, redeemed church will keep growing even as the apostate harlot dies.

Supposed to be a new order over taking the Baptist’s
Me and mine can worship in the woods and on the creek banks on sundays they can go fugk each other

This.... If your church is registered with a 501-3c it is operated by the gov not the Lord

That used to be the exception, not the rule. But I did go to golden corral last night and pretty declared society a lost cause.


But seriously, there are plenty of great churches out there. Most people have lost interest in Church. That's fine, it's not the Church's job to draw them in.

What IRS designation does a “real church” have?

^^^^^^^^^
Bingo

I think the message and the teachings of Jesus resonates with a lotta people. But I think it’s quite possible that a lotta the messengers of that message are what drives a lotta people away from it. The current generation of church leaders is losing the conversation with un-churched and de-churched people. In fact, they’re mostly not even in the conversation anymore. But they absolve themselves of any responsibility for this. Maybe they need to change their approach to the conversation itself, because their current approach to the conversation is making less and less of a difference every day.

I don’t think people expect perfection from ‘the Church’. But I do think that they expect GRACE from ‘the Church’...and when they don’t get ‘that’...they turn away from it. People in this country are migrating away from ‘the Church’ at an unprecedented rate. People are leaving ‘the Church’ because it’s lost its appeal. Many people once believed that ‘the Church’ offered solutions. But many people nowadays see ‘the Church’ as a problem. And I don’t think that un-churched or de-churched people see the problem as being with God or Jesus. I think they see the problem as being with ‘the Church’ itself; it makes Christianity unattractive and it drives people away. ‘The Church’ clearly doesn’t come across to un-churched and de-churched people as following Jesus' greatest commandment.

But it wasn't always that way. First century followers of Jesus set a precedent. Back then, there were only a handful of Jesus’ followers, and they didn't even have the New Testament...but time after time after time...they backed into this one simple idea ~ "What if we *never* lose sight of Jesus' greatest commandment...?" "What if Jesus’ greatest commandment IS the filter through which we interpret ‘all’ of the Old Testament, and ‘all’ of this new information that's beginning to roll in from the Apostle Paul and others...?" The early church was attractive and it drew people in.

But that's not what comes to mind when most people nowadays think of ‘the Church’. I think that the moment ‘the Church’ loses GRACE as its point of leverage, it loses its leverage.

Is following the teachings of Jesus and being a Christian organized religion?

Exactly everything going on in the world has been foretold, now is just the fulfilling of the prophecies.

That is a great speech, surprising that the guy hasn’t been cancelled by now, the fact that his father was a Black Jamaican guy might be the reason that he hasn’t been.

It'll be fine, Keep your Creator in your heart.
Be grateful and help each other. When people ask why you're the way you are, tell them.
Something better will come of it all.
I promise

Not in my opinion.

Those who run "organized" religion down most likely don't attend church, so why are they worried about it.

Maybe some of em’ are concerned about the mass exodus of people from the church that has been taking place in this country since the 90’s. And more importantly, maybe some of em’ are concerned about the faith of the next generation.

I think the reason fewer and fewer people are attending church has less to do with what the churches are teaching, and more to do with the people themselves. I am not defending the churches, because what has happened in some of the denominations concerning things as acceptance of homosexuality is a tragedy, but I think Satan has provided too many temptations for people to turn their backs on the church and God.

I
I think this is often true. It’s not hard to find a Bible believing church, at least around here. I’ve been to several in the last few months that fit the bill. Christ’s been the focus, nobody’s getting rich and rampant kindness has been the rule. Yea, they’re still full of sinners. That’s kinda the point.

I'm not sure that exodus is a bad thing. The Church is simply those who are God's. It's not that big building we need to go to on Sun. morning. The way religion has become polarized with every distinction it can use to please the crowd; it became a business above all else.

Those who seek will find, and to those who knock, the door will be opened. It is just possible that organized religion is not the correct place to find the true answers.

Yes.

Love it. Had that stuck in my head for about two weeks one time...


"You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart." ... Jeremiah 29:13 ... If you do not see God at work in our world, you are not looking...

Hey Good morning Antlers!


If a man or woman finds spirituality and comes to believe in God via whatever , and changes himself for the better, does it matter if the church is involved?
If the better version of a man communes with God regularly through thought and prayer, Dispences Love and Grace, Is humble and credits his Creator with his happiness and faith, Is clerical supervision even necessary?

Im not trying to be intentionally difficult , just curious what you think.

I agree with you about "the messengers" in your post above.
Also think what the church doesnt teach about how negatively the behavior of some believers effects their desire to take fellowship. Some Christians are a real turn off and damage the church as much as other forces do.

Good morning! I’m not antlers. But if you don’t mind I have some thoughts.

I doubt folks come to Christ in a vacuum. Acts 2:47, Romans 10:14 come to mind.

Hebrews 10:24-25 show the church must be involved in a believer’s life. John 13:34-35 also prove Biblical fellowship and community is a must.

I’m headed off to worship in just a bit because I love God and I love people. I hope to offer worthy worship to my Savior and inspiration to fellow believers.

If a man is truly born again, James 1:22 and 1:27 will come into play as well as many other truths and admonitions.

Blessings on you all!!!

Mat. 7:21 Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’
23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

Jesus put it point blank - while these modern preachers teach that homosexual marriage is ok, they are ignoring scripture and the word of God. While they might be preachers, supposedly trained in the Bible, they will be excluded from heaven and Jesus will say he never knew them. Homosex, cross dressing, trannies...these things are NOT ok and those who practice them without repentance will be bound for hell. Jesus said it himself.
I highlighted the words 'without repentance' because these sins will be forgiven if they repent. That's what Jesus came for and they aren't the unforgivable sin. But he will NOT forgive them without repentance. He'll say what he said in Matthew: "I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness."

Thx DugE!
I will read all you've left behind carefully.
Take Care

I agree. While a person can be a believer, and do good works, the number of people who do that and are not involved with a church are about as scarce as hens teeth. The Bible teaches us that Christian fellowship is a must, and that includes the church.

If someone is attending a church who's policies they don't agree with, and who believes that those policies go against the Bible and what God has taught us, then it is a very simple thing to find a church that they feel right about. Many times those same people will start not attending a church, using the excuse that they don't agree with what that church is teaching, and they next thing you know, they have gotten completely away from the Lord.

It's really not all that hard to find a church that is still teaching and preaching the word of God. It requires effort on your part to search them out, but the reward will be worth it.

Because a lot of those "organized" religions are championing deviancy in our culture, and propagandizing their attendees to accept it.

Absolutely.

When I refer to ‘the Church’, I’m not referring to a building. I’m referring to the body of believers ~ “those who are God’s”. I’m referring to Jesus’ ekklesia. And it is ‘that’ body of believers that studies by entities like the Pew Research Center have shown, that is declining. People are disassociating themselves from the faith of Christianity itself.

But brick and mortar churches, and the people who go to brick and mortar churches, and especially the leadership of brick and mortar churches…the ‘organized’ part of the faith of Christianity…they certainly play a role in these matters that we’re discussing.

Narrow is the gate.........what's going on in today's world should come as no surprise.

Good morning my friend. I feel ya’, and I can tell ya’ this:
My church is high in the mountains, and other wild country. And it doesn’t have a ceiling. I go all the time.

Good morning good folks.

Too often, a wayward minister has too much power in his church. Some can become literal tyrants. They're there to teach God's word, not to run people's lives. Some denominations have control of the ministers at the top level and they control it all. The local congregation has no say in what's taught. Other denominations have the control at the local level. They can have a lot of control to keep the teaching within God's word IF they will do it.

That he did, hung on the cross by organized religion of that time.

The Romans were goaded into the ghastly deed by the religious establishment.

So, we need to discern the difference between “religion” and true faith. There can be a difference, our job to discern that difference.

The spirit of religion is alive and well. Do not be deceived. Know who and whose you are.

DF

The actual 'Church' is the sum total of followers of Christ. A building houses a religion with sub denominations. The Church is the spiritual power of the Holy Spirit in each individual combined.

Jesus is a historical figure, his story is well known, pretty much every person on the planet knows who he is. The bible does not just reside in specific buildings. Anyone can hear of Jesus, read the bible, or not read the bible, recognize the Holy Spirit inside themselves, have a personal relationship with Christ... without ever having stepped in a church building. Participation with other people isn't necessary.

If going to a church building strengthens your personal relationship with Christ that's cool... so is being a monk on a mountain top, standing in a river with a fishing pole, listening to an elk bugle, sitting in your recliner, reading threads on the internet.

It's all good... no one path is better or mandatory.

Kent

I'm going to venture out on a limb here and say Big Boom, Thanks!

Never confuse "church" with "the church.". "The church" is invisible to man. Only God can see it in whole.

Christ said, “The coming of the kingdom of God is not something that can be observed, nor will people say, ‘Here it is,’ or ‘There it is,’ because the kingdom of God is in your midst.” Luke 17:20-21

What exactly is God's word that should be taught? Therein is the entire problem my friend, and I suspect the reason why anyone would disassociate themselves from the classification of Christian.

Personally, I attended "Church" regularly for over 20 years. I worked for the church for more than 5 and have been a licensed minister a good portion of that time. I don't attend a church today and likely never will again. I do not believe it is possible to teach the Gospel to anyone who has been brain washed by traditional Christianity as taught in this country since its founding.

Is this what you mean.....from Wikipedia.

Organized religion, also known as institutional religion, is religion in which belief systems and rituals are systematically arranged and formally established. Organized religion is typically characterized by an official doctrine (or dogma), a hierarchical or bureaucratic leadership structure, and a codification of rules and practices.

The Abrahamic religions are all largely considered organized (including Mainstream Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and the Baháʼí Faith), as well as some schools of thought within Indian religions (for example, Sikhism and Buddhism).

Religions that are not considered organized religions, or only loosely so, include many indigenous and folk religions, such as traditional African religions, Native American religions and prehistoric religions, as well as Modern paganism, early Christianity and Hinduism.

In the United States, organized religion contributes $1.2 trillion USD to the economy annually, as of 2016.

Organized religion in America is heavily associated with community, with research demonstrating a causal "link between religion and civic activism".

If I may?
Love , Grace , Redemption.

Not a bad answer, but it's the redemption part that gets tricky.

How many church services focus of what you need to do to attain that redemption? Therein is my main criticism.

How many church services teach anything from the viewpoint that you have already attained, through grace and love, that redemption?

The only problem with the teaching that fishing or watching TV is equal to corporate worship is one that I can't and don't want to get past: The Bible. The Bible instructs us as "the church" to attend corporate worship. Corporate worship with the end goal of glorifying God is mandatory and it is better than being alone in nature or at home. Being alone in nature or at home may bless me for a season. Being with people of a kindred spirit and like, precious faith is priceless.

Jesus said He would build His church. If He is my Savior, I've been added to the church. Refusing to worship corporately is not only counterproductive, it's counterintuitive. Jesus said He who doesn't gather with Him scatters abroad. We can't gather apart from the Body of Christ. To teach a salvation that removes a command to worship isn't salvation at all.

If The Bible isn't our guide, then any teaching is OK. But not every teaching will lead to eternal life.

Something I bear in mind: He died for me. His is the Kingdom, the power, and the glory. His is the plan that matters. When I stand before Him, it won't be your word or my word that He uses as basis for judgment. It will be His. Corporate worship is the norm in both the OT and NT.

But you have to ask and repent to be forgiven.

When you mix the two most closed minded peoples ( Christians and Liberals) you are really asking for a train wreck .

And I think Revival is near.

I do believe that God sent His son into the world and when He did that He extended something to us that now we are responsible for extending to others. And that thing we’ve been called to extend to others is simply grace.

Grace when it comes to relationships and grace when it comes to us is like the oil in the machine. You know how machines work or you know enough about how machines work to know that oil is important. When you think about your car engine, the different parts in the engine of your car were designed specifically to work together but they are so specifically designed to work together that without oil they build up friction and then they destroy each other. And grace is like the oil in a relationship, and grace is like the oil in a family, and grace is like the oil in society. Grace enables folks who are different from each other to work together without destroying each other. Grace allows people who aren’t like each other, to like each other. Grace allows people who aren’t alike to get along in such a way that they’re able to accomplish amazing things even though they have differences. God initiated this. Jesus modeled this.

God extended grace to us when He sent Jesus into the world to us and for us. And we are most like our Heavenly Father when we extend grace to other people. I do believe that extending grace to other people is the greatest opportunity that we’ll ever have, relationally, while we’re on this earth.

A curious statement there, for sure. I fail to see much mixing of those two groups.

Lieberals lie when their mouth is moving. Several folks I consider to be Christians have posted on this thread. I don't consider them liars and I don't see them forcing illegal taxes, gun control, speech control, forced masking or jabs, school child grooming,acceptance of homosexuality or acceptance of Pedophilia or acceptance of govt sponsored illegal open borders or drug use on others.

JMHO.

Maybe, but even then, I have my doubts about what that really means. Do I have to verbally ask? That leaves out anyone who can't physically speak, so it must be just a thought. If ask and repent are just a thought or state of mind, does that mean I only need to want to do better?

See how convoluted it gets real quick? That's the reason you have so many denominations in the first place, because nobody can agree on what anything really means.

I still think that no matter how many leave the church as defined by the statistics, there are people seeking spirituality and truth, and even what those things really mean. Maybe they are looking for answers that traditional church wasn't providing. My point is that those who seek find, and those who seek truth will find truth. It may not be a bad thing that people are leaving traditional church as long as they are doing it for the right reasons, and if they are leaving for wrong reasons, then they are just taking up space anyway. If they are saved, they don't lose that just because they stopped attending. I trust God isn't worried, so no need for me to be either. I'm trying to be pessimistic about the whole thing.

Simmer down there uppity n00b. When you raise a topic for discussion, you'll get varying viewpoints. If you don't want them, don't start a thread. There was NOTHING in his post that was disrespectful to Christians.

I still identify as a Christian, at least by my definitions, and I agree that organized religion is a bad joke in general. There are a lot of good people involved just as there are lots of SOB's, you know, just like any other large group of people.

Very good. It seems to me it should also be stressed that homosexualiy would be wrong even if every church in the world said it was right. The reason is, it's against Nature. I've always liked this quote:

"Man is a social animal, and no one can secure what is desirable for himself except in partnership with others. According to Aristotle, if a man had all the health, wealth, freedom and power that he desired, but lacked friends, he would not even wish to live. But the root of all friendships, as it is the ground of the existence of the species, is that of a man and a woman. As nature is the ground of morality, the distinction of the sexes is the ground of nature. Nature---which forbids us to eat or enslave out own kind---is that which has within it the principle of coming-into-being. Mankind as a whole is recognized by its generations, like a river which is one and the same while the ever-renewed cycles of birth and death flow on. But the generations are constituted---and can only be constituted---by the acts of generation arising from the conjunction of male and female. The root of all human relationships, the root of all morality, is nature, which itself is grounded in the generative distinction of male and female.....Abraham Lincoln once said that if slavery is not unjust, then nothing is unjust. With equal reason it can be said that if homosexuality is not unnatural, nothing is unnatural. And if nothing is unnatural then nothing---including slavery and genocide---is unjust"

Harry V. Jaffa, Original Intent and the Framers of the Constitution: A Disputed Question.

IIRC wasn’t it Spurgeon who said you gotta get’em lost before you can get’em saved.

Bottom line, gotta preach sin and repentance. Don’t hear much of that today. You hear love and prosperity and self help. Not much of God’s wrath.

It’s not a cafeteria plan, pick and choose what you like.

Old Testament: They had to eat the whole Passover lamb.

Ps 119:160, the SUM of Thy Word is Truth. So the implication, hand picked parts of the whole Truth can lead to error and deception. And it does.

DF

Gotta include atheists in there with close minded group.

Raising a topic doesn’t give approval to be uncivil. I reject your rationale. Decorum and civility don’t have to be so lacking.

Amen, Brother Grimes. Anyone can look around and see God's presence in a child's laugh, in the stars of the Heavens, in the perfections of the seasons, in the majesty of the mountains or wind in the prairie, unless HE has blinded them.

No matter what one wishes or believes, it's getting pretty plain to see GOD was right when HE said our battle is not against flesh and blood but against the principalities of darkness and evil.

We can not fight and win against the commies, traitors, govt Neonazis, LGBTQ, trannies, child gromers, pedophiles, child killers for stem cells and adrenochrome, ......

It's coming down to the nut cutting and there will only be two choices, GOD or

poems for strength and hope

I understand that's the way you see it, but I don't agree. I don't think you accomplish anything by telling everyone how bad of a sinner they are and getting them to repent of it. Sinner repent was John The Baptist's message and most Baptists are still preaching it. Jesus preached the kingdom is here now and being one with God by faith. Jesus summed the whole of the law up in "Love God and your neighbor as yourself." Instead, we want to criticize our neighbor because he thinks your whole body has to be dunked when baptized, but we just sprinkle.

I think we get too caught up in the "this is what is says to do" stuff. We lose everyone arguing about things that don't matter at all. If we kept things as simple as they actually need to be, there would be no need for big church groups anywhere,and it would be hard to tell a church group from a bunch of good friends doing good things.

GODs prophecy has been fulfilled. GOOD has become Evil.

To the world, GOD (good) has become Evil (Satan). HE is moving now, and will show the World HIS Power.

In Ukraine, HE has Putin cutting the head off the Snake. The Kenites and Cananites are headed to the dust bin of history - and Hell.

I took my decorum down right after Christmas.

Related to the Christian concept of redemption is the word ransom. Jesus paid the price for our release from sin and its punishment (Matthew 20:28; 1 Timothy 2:6). His death was in exchange for our life. In fact, Scripture is quite clear that redemption is only possible “through His blood,” that is, by His death (Colossians 1:14).

Check out Billy Graham sermons. They’re on line. He preached sin and preached redemption. When we get away from that basic theology, we lose something.

DF

I'm sure you know all of these passages, but they're what I thought of when I read your post.

Romans 8
26 In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words; 27 and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.

Romans 10

9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.

[My commentary - God isn't going to exclude someone who is mute, but that person needs to confess as best he can. Also, to address an earlier post about the role of the concept of sin in salvation - we don't know we need a Savior unless we know that we are eternally separated from God by sin (and that we're all sinners). That doesn't mean someone has to get beaten down with how he's a sinner, but he has to realize it and repent and confess. If we get too deep into theology, we're getting away from God's revelation of what we NEED to know (2 Timothy 3:16-17) and start wasting time on what we WANT to know that God determined we didn't NEED to know on this earth. It's easy to get distracted trying to fill in what we think are knowledge we're missing.]

Hebrews 10
24 and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, 25 not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near.

Also, 1 Corinthians 12 talks about how every member of the body of Christ is important to the functioning of the body. Depriving the body of a believer's function leaves something lacking.

Meeting with other believers for fellowship and worship is a two-way connection between the believers horizontally - it isn't just for my benefit because my presence is (or should be) beneficial to others and the body as a whole. It's also two ways vertically with God. I understand the vertical is where one can argue he can worship God anywhere, but the horizontal connection with others in the body of Christ, for the proper functioning of the body, is not possible alone.

The problem with grounding the argument in religion is that it's not convincing to a nonbeliever. The Founding however appealed to both the "laws of nature (unassisted human reason) and of nature's God" (revealed Judeo-Christian mono-theism) for its moral authority. The Founders saw unassisted human reason ("the laws of nature") and revealed religion (the laws of nature's God") as pretty much in agreement on what constituted moral behavior and thus the behavior to be encouraged in the polity and culture. All of the Founders (whether explicitly theistic believers or religious skeptics inclined to rationalism) understood homosexuality to be a sexual perversion, to one degree or another and thus something to be discouraged. They either believed it was contra naturam (against nature) or against nature's God (revealed religion). This isn't surprising since homosexuality has been condemned equally by the greatest moral legislators of Athens (unassisted human reason) and Jerusalem (Judeo-Christian revelation). The Apostle Paul condemned it. God destroyed the cities of the plain (Sodom and Gomorrah) because of it. Blackstone made it a crime punishable by castration and Jefferson, in a criminal code written for the Commonwealth of Virginia, made it a felony.

In the famous aphorism of Jerry Falwell, "God created Adam Eve, not Adam and Steve"! Falwell was saying nothing more or less than what Jefferson and Blackstone believed true from a more non-theistic, rationalist perspective. The quote by Jaffa (which I cited previously in this thread) is in perfect agreement with Falwell's more theistic formulation: "the root of all friendships, as it is the ground of the existence of the species, is that of a man and a woman. As nature is the ground of morality, the distinction of the sexes is the ground of nature. Nature---which forbids us to eat or enslave out own kind---is that which has within it the principle of coming-into-being. Mankind as a whole is recognized by its generations, like a river which is one and the same while the ever-renewed cycles of birth and death flow on. But the generations are constituted---and can only be constituted---by the acts of generation arising from the conjunction of male and female. The root of all human relationships, the root of all morality, is nature, which itself is grounded in the generative distinction of male and female....."

It's interesting that the Preamble of the Constitution defines the ends of the Constitution as to "secure the blessings of liberty for ourselves and our posterity". A "blessing" is something God wants you to have; something He thinks is good for you. The "liberty" which is a "blessing" is therefore a liberty which God approves of. It is thus a liberty consistent with Judeo-Christian morality. It's not the "liberty" to steal, rape, plunder, use drugs or sell pornography, nor is it the "liberty" to elevate homosexualiy to the same moral plane as that eros which generates and perpetuates the species. In other words, "liberty", properly understood, is not "license".

We've decided as a society (well, the Supreme Court decided for us) to no longer criminalize homosexuality. Fair enough. That's probably a reasonable concession. Whether we today should regard it with the same moral abhorrence as in former times is certainly debatable. But that's no longer the issue and hasn't been for decades. The new moral code (the one that dominates or is trying to dominate the public square today) is that anyone with the temerity to question the alleged positive moral good of homosexuality must be hounded and driven not only from the public square but from polite society altogether. They must literally "shamed into the closet", i.e., completely ostracized and regarded as pariahs. To that end our moral betters tell us, without a moment's hesitation, that anyone having the least reservation about the "goodness" of homosexuality is a homophobe, i.e., mentally ill. If you've ever publicly questioned the "wisdom" of equating homosexuality with heterosexual eros (the latter being that which perpetuates the species and upon which every human being and every human friendship in the history of the world is ultimately dependent) good luck getting a judgeship, elected to public office or permitted to lead any organization with any degree of prestige in the public square. Ever told a joke about homosexuals? You're screwed! Today, Thomas Jefferson and Blackstone would probably be charged with thought (hate) crimes.

Why then are we at all surprised with the emergence of the trans movement? Seems to me entirely predictable. If two men can marry---in other words, if a man can be a woman for purposes of "marriage" (and visa-versa) why can't a man actually be a woman in every other sense of the word and visa-versa? And since there's no moral difference between male and female (or so we're told), why should there be any moral difference (preference) between the human and the non-human? Some sick bastards are actually claiming to be animals (cats, bunnies, tigers). Who are apologists for homosexuality and transsexualism to say they're wrong? And if there's no moral difference between humans and animals, why can't humans be treated as animals? Apologists for homosexuality and transsexualism have literally nothing to say to Hitler or Stalin (or Jefferson Davis for that matter!) that isn't entirely idiosyncratic. Their "arguments" are on a slope so slippery, it's vertical!

This is where we are heading folks---that and the legitimation of adult/child sex.

No effort here to change your mind, for there is quite a bit of insight and truth in what you post. On the other hand, maybe some opening of view in a couple of areas. "Actions" - yes - but what before actions, and what alongside of actions?

I agree regarding the deleterious aspects of many religion organizations, and on the general nature of most bureaucrats. But, is the charge all inclusive? Are there not real people who work in/for religion organizations whose actions are openly supportive and representative of the best Christian principles, and whose organizations are likewise?

I won't say you can't find God in some big churches,or denominational ones.

I will say your best chance to hear his word, from the book, is to go into
some little church on a country road.


But I do know of one bigger one in a small town.
They aren't even tax exempt. Paying taxes to avoid any chance of
Government interference when the preacher speaks out against
government sponsored sins.

Look what happened to Jerusalem and the Temple in 70AD.

Judgement for rejecting God...killing the Messiah. He even told them it would happen.

Once I realized the (visible) church I was in was more interested in numbers than truth, I left.

The invisible church will never be destroyed.

I've said this before but it needs to be said again in every discussion about sexual sin.

1 Cor 6:18 Flee from sexual immorality. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the sexually immoral person sins against his own body.
19 Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God? You are not your own,

Note that word 'but'. It separates sin outside the body from sin against the body, the dwelling place of the Holy Spirit. This passage indicates that sexual sin is worse than other sins because it's against the Holy Spirit. Remember than the only unforgivable sin is also against the Spirit (this isn't it). You don't want to mess with the Holy Spirit.

The Holy Spirit is alive and active in the world today. Jesus is still in the forefront of the conversation in worldly matters... for or against doesn't matter, he's in people's minds regardless of the side of debate.

He is far from being confined in a building or book, he is out there, everywhere, no group is proprietary, is his favorite, speaks for him... no man has the empowerment of his will.

Personally I find church organizations are men attempting to empower themselves through God... some well meaning, others self serving... but all have the taint of man at some level.

Obviously we all exist in the world of man and carry our own taint, are subject to the human life experiences.

Jesus didn't come to save us in this world, but in our spiritual life. My personal relationship with Christ is spiritual, not physical. My guide in that relationship is the Holy Spirit, not a suit and tie at a pulpit.

The only man taint I bring to that relationship is my own,

Kent

And yet the "worse" sin, just like all the others, will be washed away with the redeeming blood of Christ, while the other "better" ones will still condemn the unforgiven. God doesn't grade on a curve. He uses a cross.

Very true, but it does say that it's worse. I suspect it's referring to how it affects us in this life, not in the next. Sexual sin is rampant. It will destroy a marriage and family. It's cost jobs and income/savings. It's got people killed. It's spread deadly diseases and is the most common cause of abortions.

You come to the unfounded conclusion that sin against the body is sin against the Holy Spirit. That is not what the passage says. What it says is that sexual sin is against your body, and you shouldn't treat your body like that because it doesn't belong to you anymore.

It isn't telling you that sexual sin is the worst sin in God's eyes. You only see it that way because of your focus on sin. The whole church focuses on how bad sin is and what we need to do about it. The biggest reason is so you can feel better about your small sins compared to somebody else's big sins.

All the while you argue about what is a sin and what isn't, and what's the proper method to get rid of sin. One argues you must be baptized, then you argue about how you should be baptized, then you argue about confession and repentance and any other thing you can think of that makes your group better than another group. If your focus was on grace rather than sin, you could understand that God took care of the sin problem through faith, and it don't matter a damn if you sprinkle or dunk, or any other thing Christians get bent out of shape over trying to take care of their own sin by correctly following instructions.

Sexual sin ‘is’ mentioned as being different than other sins...but to me, it’s NOT because it’s worse to God...but because when you sin sexually you hurt yourself deeply - it stays with you throughout your life - it’s worse for ‘you’.

Some go on and on about the "abomination" of homosexuality but they certainly don't give the same amount of credence to going on and on about the "abomination" of adultery or other sexual sins, like sex outside of marriage. And church pews likely contain a whole lot more people who are adulterers and practitioners of sex outside of marriage than they do homosexuals.

I do think this agenda-driven bullschit pertaining to forced indoctrination of this LGBTQ-whatever upon society at large (especially on children) is pretty evil and despicable. But I’m not a fan of any kind of forced indoctrination.

Preaching the evils of any kind of sin is pointless. That is the main reason I distance myself from any organized religion. If Churches would teach people who they are in Christ, instead of what they were without Christ, it would lead to less sin and more people doing good works because they wouldn't feel like they have to fix their sin before serving God. Instead, they preach a good old fashion hell fire and brimstone message, and the same people repent for the same thing every week. It might look good to have a bunch up front crying over sin, but it never accomplishes anything. People won't change until they realize they are changed, and they won't know they are changed until the church paints a picture of what salvation is rather than what it isn't.

This is fact! Money hungry is the only thing I would add.

Doesn't hurt to join some study groups. Development can be found outside the Sunday call to worship, which has to address those who are not a part of the flock as well as those who are deeply entrenched in their walk of faith.

Jesus would disagree......The Church is perfect, but is run by imperfect people. Name something that people haven't corrupted at some point. If you are a gun owner, saying a sweeping statement about the Church is exactly what the Left says about all gun owners when some murderous scumbag kills innocent people with a gun. Some organized religion is corrupt, but the Gospel and churches that represent it, and preach it correctly, are not.

The problem is when 'Religion' goes beyond the organizational structure that is 'Authorized'..........

There was no provision for synods, councils, conventions, headquarters and the like mentioned......

There's that "preach it correctly" thing again. The problem is everybody thinks differently. Your "preach it correctly" and mine would be totally different.

The Holy Spirit works within the speaker as well as within the listener.
Is that what is being questioned here?

You are talking about people who have found salvation, and your observations are probably true. On the other hand, someone who has not found salvation needs to understand what sin is, that it separates a person from God (eternally), and there is one antidote.

However, and I think we'd agree on this, messages from the pulpit should be mostly focused on the redeemed because they should be the vast majority of the audience. The unsaved, in general, should be reached outside of worship services, out in the world.

I think I know the category of churches you are describing, and they obviously have doctrinal failings. If those churches have that many members broken down about their sins every week, they aren't doing a good job discipling (making spiritually mature disciples of) their immature believers.

I would agree with most of what you are saying but I honestly don't think we need to explain what sin is or explain how it separates us from God. It is God who convicts anyone. People don't have to be told how bad they are to want change. God will make them want change. They just need to know change is possible and how good it is. If they don't want to change, no amount of preaching how evil they are will change anything.

The church needs to show them how to change, and I don't mean by telling them how to act. In order to act differently, a person has to think differently. The church has to teach people how to think but unfortunately it teaches them to think more about sin than anything else.

The scripture says anybody born again is a new creature, old things are passed away and all things are new, and all things are of God. Do churches talk about how we are all blameless before God because of Christ, or do they talk about all we need to do to be blameless? You better be baptized right, better take communion right, you better tithe, you better not forsake assembly, on, and on, and on.

You beat me to it.
I always chuckle when the "holy" proclaim God to be in the sin rating business. It's never not funny.
Yet they can't understand why the "unclean" see them as hypocrites.
I know in his mind the Rock thinks he is doing the world a favor. I understand how he gets there with the holiness & legalism he so dearly loves to cling to in his church.
Sadly, he is a stench (just as stinky as those he rebukes) to the Almighty's nostrils, just like the rest of us.
It's along the same lines as the Christians with racist views so rampant in these forums.

Almost always enjoy & learn from your posts on Christianity. Thanks.

Will all the sinners please stand up. I will.

Sin ONLY hurts people. Even sins like blasphemy.

Sin only "hurts" God in the sense that it interferes with His will that we all be united with Him.

Will those that are covered by the blood please stand up?

The best part is.....everybody gets to stand. Some just don't know it............yet.

I concern myself with the Direct relationship between The Lord and I , I will tell people about what I believe the Lord has done for me in my life. I will not get to excited when instutitions made up of Sinful people( we are all sinners at heart) start catering to "Those People " to boast their bottom line. The Book of Revelations does not limit itself to the sinful getting worse, The World as a whole will get worse before The next coming. All of what we are seeing The Lord knows would happen and He has a Plan for all of it.....

I binge-read this thread, so if I missed or repeat some points that have already been made, please forgive me.

The gentleman in the OP eloquently defends the faith. Those denominations and/or individual churches and/or individual church members who cave to the demands of the liberals of the world love the praise of men more than the praise of God. Let us pray that woke churches and their members repent of the heresies they are now embracing.

I disagree with the premise that organized religion is a joke. The church as an organization is ordained and promoted in the Bible. Pastors, elders, and deacons are positions/officers of the church organization and are specifically pointed to in the scriptures. It is organized religion that enabled Christianity to flourish and spread shortly after Christ’s resurrection. It is organized religion that sends missionaries around the world. It is organized religion that sends disaster relief teams to places that experience some sort of calamity. And it is organized religion that provides men the opportunity to study scripture and take that knowledge out to congregations around the world.

Do some churches lose sight of their original purpose? Yes, as does every other type of human organization: governments, corporations, schools, hospitals, etc. regardless of size. Are all of these things a joke as well? No, we need all of them. We need them to be better, not gone. Take schools as an example. I am a proponent of homeschooling. But I don’t advocate simply letting a child stay home and expecting them to teach themselves what they need to learn. They need a teacher, and they benefit from being with other students. (I do think that sometimes other students can be a detriment to learning, in which case homeschooling is better.) Likewise, a Christian cannot be expected to stay away from church (organized religion) and learn as much about Christ as well as he would in a church with fellow believers. I’m sorry, but I am afraid that many of those who avoid attending church while claiming to be Christian would often simply rather enjoy a second Saturday. I’m not questioning their salvation mind you, just their wisdom and possibly their commitment. It is certainly possible, particularly in the internet age, to engage in a course of self-study of the scriptures, but I can’t help but doubt that there’s much of this going on. Oh, and if one doesn’t attend a church there’s no collection plate to contribute to either.

I hope that this doesn’t come across as sounding holier than thou. For a period of years, I was not in church myself. I have had disappointments in churches (as organizations) and in church people (as individuals), so I understand how things can happen to sour people on church attendance. But I believe that when such things happen, we are supposed to forgive and move on. That may mean reconcile with the organization or individual one has a beef with, or it may mean literally moving on to another church, or it could involve both. Just remember that Christ is not the problem, He is the answer.

I quote Mahatma Gandhi: " I like your Christ. I do not like you Christians. You Christians are so unlike your Christ".

This thread clearly vindicates his opinion.

Hey how have ya been?

I was hopin' you'd get here.

Apparently diversity aint our strength?

I've read, Columbus, and his men had an Indian chef tied to a stake, all ready to set the wood on fire, and gave the chef one last chance to convert.
The chef said, if Heaven is full people like you, I don't want to go their.

I think Rock is good people just like 99% of church people. These people would help a stranger as far as giving them the shirt off their back. They really are the salt of the earth. The problem is anytime you place yourself in a group, you become susceptible to group think. You have to believe that your group is somehow a little better than a different group, else why join any specific group in the first place?

I'm sure most Christians can give all the technically correct answers about faith, grace, and redemption but when you carry those concepts to their fulfillment, there is really no need for organized religion other than doing good works, and any bunch of good people can do good works without being a part of a domination. To serve a useful purpose, the church has to become the "teacher" of what is necessary for salvation, and they basically sell that knowledge for a price. The standard is 10% of your income. Now to compete in this lucrative marketplace, it becomes necessary to specialize in the rules, and we get umpteen dozen different denominations arguing about the dumbest things imaginable.

Thus, the whole thing falls away from the simple gospel that God forgives you. Now go love yourself and everybody else to the best of your ability.

So, if someone doesn't walk into a building with a cross over it on sunday they aren't part of the 'Church', or of lesser understanding and lesser standing?

Kent

Christ is far from irrelevant in the world.

Kent

Even Satan's minions know of GOD.

Totally agree. He's sincere.
and wrong, sometimes.
As am I.

Religion?

Perhaps. Gandhi hated blacks too.

That was not Columbus.

I'll stand corrected, who then?

Gandhi had his faults just like the rest of us. I hear he liked to sleep naked with a bunch of young girls, but hey, who can blame him, right. I applaud him for giving it a good shot. At least he stood up for something, unlike some people.

I used to attend a church in South Oklahoma City. The first time I ever went there, I was zoomin’ around on my VTX 1800 on a late Saturday afternoon...having no intention of goin’ to church...and I saw their sign out front that said “Services Tonight at 6 pm”. I looked at my watch, it was 5:50 pm...and I swear I just felt led to go...so I whipped into the parkin’ lot, and went in, wearin’ my shorts and tank top and tennis shoes. From the get-go, to say I was “blown away” woulda been an understatement. At the end of the service, they passed around some wicker baskets for a collection...and the pastor said, “if you’re an adult, and you’re in need of food or shelter or clothing, if you see some money in that basket that would help you meet this need, please feel free to reach in there and take it.” I was floored. I continued to go to that church for the remainder of my time in Oklahoma. And that pastor said the same thing about that, every time, at the end of the service when a collection was being taken. I’d never experienced anything like that before at a church, nor have I experienced anything like that since, at a church.

I haven't seen who actually did the deed, but it was during an expedition to Cuba by Velázquez, after Hatuey arrived there to stir up the Cuban caciques and waged guerilla war against the Spanish. Not saying Hatuey didn't have some points, but understand that the Spanish were not all, not nearly all, practicing Christians. Instead of getting your stories from communists (https://www.zinnedproject.org/news/tdih/hatuey/ ), you should read the accounts by Columbus (who should probably be declared a saint if he has miracles attributed to his intercession) and Cortez. Both were great Christian men except Cortez seems to have had an attachment to adultery (Don't know if he overcame that). I don't know what the situation was in the islands, but Cortez ushered in an era of unprecedented peace and prosperity to Mexico and Central America.

There's one reason to not like Christians. I'm sure they did not approve of that!

Yep

Yep

A lot of churches problems any of them small or large is to many chiefs not enough Indians tell me otherwise

Yep

If we think we’re ok, not bad people, do good stuff, etc, why the need for Jesus.

Not knowing that one doesn’t know is to be deceived. Satan’s been proposing the “goodness of man” for eons. He’s good at it, has had lots of practice.

He told Eve, God didn’t really mean what he said. Ya reckon?

He’d been telling people that same line forever. Lots of folk believe it. Why not. It sounds good, gives us cover for what we want to do, anyway. After all, we’re good people. Right.

So, until we realize that we’re sinners, we don’t need salvation.

Paul in the New Testament tells us not to be ignorant of such things. But many are. Broad is that road.

Hmm….

DF

Yes, I want to be in that number.

When we can see other people the same way that Jesus sees them, and when we can feel towards them what Jesus feels towards them, then we’ll know that we’re gettin’ it done. That, to me, is the epitome of the Law of Christ that the apostle Paul mentioned ~ which is an allusion to Jesus’ all-encompassing New Commandment that He gave to His apostle’s at the Last Supper.

Hmmmm

So when is the last point where a sinner can “realize it”?
Works gets you nothing, eternally….pro or con. But you knew that.
Maybe they don’t believe because they are constantly reminded by “Christian’s”
that they don’t measure up to Paul’s standards….

P.S. neither did Paul.

Paul did confess that he was chief of sinners.

We’re all sinners.

The question, what do we do about it.

But, we must like Paul, come to the realization that we’re sinners, embrace the cross, ask for forgiveness, receive the gift of eternal life.

That can’t happen as long as we’re deceived into thinking we’re pretty good folks. We aren’t. Only through Christ.

What does your church preach?

DF

What part does repentance play in salvation? John and Jesus both endorsed it as a prerequisite.

Repentance means in essence changing course, changing direction.

If we keep moving toward where we’re headed, we gonna eventually get there.

Seems a change of course would be in order to get where we want to end up.

That analogy isn’t hard to figure out.

DF

Scott F;
Good evening my friend, I trust you and yours are getting livable weather down there and you're all well.

It's good to see you dropping by, perhaps your ears were ringing as I was chatting with my better half coming back down from Kelowna a couple days back and you came up.

The context was when you and I and perhaps others - that part's gone now - decided we'd read the book of James every day for a month. For me there were a bunch of things that stuck with me and I appreciate being part of it.

On the Eastern Orthodox subject, if you want to really go down some deep philosophical discussions, there's a young fellow named Jonathan Pageau who became a believer in the Orthodox Church, who has a YouTube channel.

From our conversations in your truck cab and on our back deck, I'd think you might enjoy some of what he has to say or at least like me have to really think about what he's saying.

All the best of our Lord's blessings to you all my friend.

Dwayne

It preached fork over the money, so the church could save me.

I feel little if any guilt as a "sinner". I'm good to people and generous. This baloney about we're all sinners is just that, and Christians have done me far more harm in my life than any other group or religion.

I never saw Jesus gather a group and tell them all how sinful they are and how much they need to repent. That's the job of the Holy Spirit. If Christians were so much better people that sinners could see a difference, there would be more repentance.

Respectfully, I think that's because people are blind to that sort of thing, just like we are all but blind to pain. Just like you can't "see" pain, you can't see what others are going through. Walking through a grocery store, you can't see if someone screwed around on their spouse and is now enjoying up to 18 years of custody battles and contested custody swaps.

For this sort of thing, you have to look at statistics. Statistics say that deeper devotion to God is good for us. Shallowness, not so much.

for ones self to realize that transgression(s) has been committed, against that self, is Essential to correct the way life goes forward from there?

There is no spiritual progress without that realization.

We pray "Forgive us Lord as we forgive those who transgress against us"

Im beginning to believe forgiving ones self is just as essential.

It is. You see this problem a lot with teenagers. Until you love yourself as Christ loves you, you can't love anyone else. It's the acceptance, and love of, our mutual humanity that is key.

Bravo!

Repentance isn't saying you're sorry all the time... if I was God and had to hear that tiresome chit all day I'd pull the plug on humanity.

It's not words it's an act, each day or hour, whatever... trying to do/be better than before, an honest attempt. Forget what another person is doing, look at yourself.

That's what other's will see in you, show them repentance don't tell them... when someone hears a christian say they are a sinner, can't help but sin, but just need to repent/ask forgiveness, that person is like... ya, right...

Jesus told the woman at the well to go and sin no more, knowing full we all can't just start being perfect, but it's the attempt in every moment that counts... he didn't tell her to go and moan and weep and beg for forgiveness constantly.

Kent

Some Pentecostal churches teach that if you sin, you lose your salvation so you need to be saved again, over and over. There's one here that has daily services so you can go get saved after losing it every day. I had a co-worker who went there. I asked him if he needed to be saved again after every sin and he said yes. I said what if you walked out of a service with nice new salvation, got in your car, intentionally ran a stop sign (which is a sin), hit a truck and died. Did you lose your salvation running that stop sign and would you go to hell for it? He had no option other than to say yes according to his church's teaching.

i agree with you wholeheartedly. I think it’s imperative my man. Just as Jesus extends forgiveness and grace to others, then we are also to extend forgiveness and grace to others. And…just as Jesus extends forgiveness and grace to us, then we are also to extend forgiveness and grace to ourselves.

vs unorganized?

It seems to me that whenever a person "wakes up" for lack of a better term, and examines their life, and wants to be a better person, that is the moment they are really born again. What inside you, could want to be better than you, if not God?

But I think it’s often easier for us to extend forgiveness and grace towards others than it is to extend forgiveness and grace towards ourselves. It often is with me.

I've always seen religion as a bad joke, because I see religion as all the nonsense and rules that men make up to explain what they don't understand.

Now that revival that recently broke out, has nothing to do with religion. It is simply about all the things religion tries to explain and control.

Ed Brady, radio preacher in Austin, Minnesota, "You have to forgive yourself."

Jesus and the Apostles speak about the Church in no uncertain terms. While it is generally true that all believers are a part of the universal church that truth does not exclude the specific instruction that we are to be a part of the church as represented by the local congregation.

Throughout this thread many have made the claim that involvement with a local congregation is not necessary and is detrimental to the health of the believer and personal faith/experience. I’ve never seen this view supported anywhere in scripture.

There are many reasons to be involved in the local congregation. A primary reason is that God only comes to men the way that He has determined. That is through the word and sacrament. The word comes to us through the preacher. That is a principle established in scripture.
Christ is not revealed to us through nature, esoteric or existential experience but through the word.

To qualify my statement I understand the reluctance to participate. After living through some very bad church experiences similar to the experiences shared on this forum I find it hard to like being around church people. However, I can’t divorce my reluctance from the instruction and benefit of being in service.

Christ is given to us in our Baptism, through the Word delivered by the preacher and through the sacrament. How can it be good or healthy to limit this reality in the life of a believer?

That's why I hate all the condemnation teaching that goes on in churches. It seems every pastor thinks he needs to guilt the congregation into repenting. People have a hard time understanding grace and redemption because so much sin and repentance is preached.

If pastors would preach the new birth and how you are now completely blameless before God, maybe people would start seeing themselves as new creations rather than just old sinners and get free from the baggage carried by old sinners.

Church of Christ?

Believers who have been forgiven of their sins by accepting Christ WILL stand before Him for a complete and open accounting of both the good and bad which they have done their entire lives. That day is the day of the Judgement Seat of Christ.

That event will not be the deciding factor to entry into the Kingdom, as that is to be found in the Book of Life, but I'm quite sure it will be a solemn time of accountability in front of Christ and God Almighty. Not done in private, mind you, so all will be made known and revealed.

We have been made aware that day is coming, so we should never forget WHY we should make the right choices in life, do the right things according to His word and NEVER lose the desire to pray for strength and forgiveness when we strive to but fail in living our lives as perfect as Christ did.

Quote Jesus, not Paul, where we must go to a church.

Jesus isn't waiting outside for us to be baptized by a preacher.

There is no physical path to God/Christ/Holy Spirit.

Kent

Boom, while at the same time not realizing that those definitions actually "limit" the parameters within which their Creator is able to function within their beliefs?

I see pics of what the Webb Telescope is sending back and realize that everything we're seeing was "created" into being by "Him/Her".

Limitless
Infinite
Without Beginning or End.

Sorry , tangent thought , but Y'all are stuck with me

I have never been in a church that preached pay me so you can be saved. I have heard of a few though.

Last churches I've been to didn't even have offerings.

You are all sinners. You and I both. We sin every last day. Though we hopefully do good every day. If you think you aren't a sinner every day then you need to take a long hard look at yourself.

As to folks you think are Christians doing the most damage, I have not found that to be the case at all. Genuine Christians have been the most sharing folks we have ever known. Just because some purport to be Christian though...

The path to Christ is found in MANY forms. Once that decision is made to accept Him, the believer is charged with the command to grow in the Spirit, to love one another and to place the Father/Son/Holy Spirit above all else in your life.
To do that, one MUST find direction and instruction in the Word.

If the Holy Spirit lives within you, listen to it. It will direct you, convict you and lead you to the place where you can grow in your faith.

It is easier to let the world around you drown out that HS call from within. So many folks do just that. We will have to account for it.

Our hasn't passed a plate in years. They have an offering box on a wall but most people do their giving online now.

I’m curious as to why you would ask that question. I never said anything about being the only church going to heaven. It’s going to a church of Christ were my only option I would never go to church.

That is not true, and probably unfortunate for you. Modern American Evangelicalism has divorced Christ from the spoken word, absolution, and the sacrament.

Do you believe that a particular person died on a particular day a very physical and painful death for very specific purpose that impacted all of mankind?

Didn't you mean resurrection as the impact?

Death is just death.

Kent

Repentance, as I understand it, is a change of the heart. A humble realization that of ourselves we are and always will be unworthy to stand before a holy God. Once one repents in this way, the significance of what Jesus did can be fully grasped. Our sinful nature is still in us, but Christ's sacrificial death atones for our sins, past, present, and future. Repentance is not simply "I need to be a better person".

There is no need for preachers to berate people over this and try to guilt-trip folks into coming forward during a service or putting more money into the church's coffers. But acknowledgement of our sins is essential to keep us in a right relationship with God, which should be marked by gratitude for what Christ has done for us.

Churches that re-define sin and gloss over our constant need for forgiveness from God should implode. But I believe that there are still quite a few that uphold the standards of scripture, allowing for the fact that some aspects of scripture are interpreted differently in different churches/denominations. Every church has its own sort of atmosphere and not everyone will fit into every church's distinct culture. But I maintain that it is worth seeking out one that is both biblically sound and comfortable to be a part of.

Kent, death was paying the tab. The promise to pay fulfilled.

The Resurrection proved to all God's power over physical death. His promise to be with us for eternity.

WT

I suppose because of this statement.
"A primary reason is that God only comes to men the way that He has determined. That is through the word and sacrament. The word comes to us through the preacher. That is a principle established in scripture.
Christ is not revealed to us through nature, esoteric or existential experience but through the word."

Actually Rom.2:20 says that God is revealed by nature.

Do you really think God can't speak to you except through a preacher? Go read Heb. 8:9-11 which says that God will make a new covenant where he is in men's hearts and men will know him without teachers.

What do you mean by "constant need for forgiveness"?

If by that you mean a constant remembrance of grace, then I agree. If, however, you mean a constant guilt over sins, then you missed the point of grace.

"8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us."
1 John 1:8-10

A constant reminder of our weak human nature even during our walk of faith. Romans 6.

Do you believe that all of the specific particular work of Christ through His sinless life, sacrificial death and resurrection accomplished tangible spiritual benefits?

You left out verse 7 which is the one for Christians. You know, the one that says he cleanses us from all sin.

When Paul talked about nature and natural law, he is simply demonstrating that no man will have an excuse to say that there is no God. That’s not a new interpretation but rather‘s or conditional long hill, interpretation of that scripture. The knowledge of Christ comes through the word. The word must be preached. I forget if it’s Paul, or one of the other fossils that says how they believe in Leslie, hear the word an hour will they hear the word, unless they have a preacher.

as to the existential work of the Holy Spirit, the argument, but this is the way God communicates to all of mankind and especially believers comes in a great question. Is very easy to find example of an example of how people hear from God on an issue. Three people will “hear from God“ and yet each one of them will have a different interpretation of the saying that God was supposed to be telling them and these different interpretations being in conflict with each other.

Scripture from the beginning of Genesis to the end of revelation is quite explicit in teaching that God reveals himself through the Holy Spirit and the word concerning Christ. We really don’t have an option beyond that or we deviate from scriptural teaching.

Without question, scripture teaches that we are born and raised dead in our trespasses and sins. We have no remnant of God likeness within us. That is never taught in Scripture. that being the case and us being broken and falling humanity, even after coming to say it is irrational to think that we can somehow have random experiences from God that contradict scripture yet that is the common thing seen throughout modern Christianity in America.

Jesus's sacrifice was being born a human, his example of death and resurrection is of going home.

Kent

I thought we had established that already!

The entire letter was addressed to believers.

You would think so, but I think some have more faith in their sin than in their redemption. At least it seems like it when they always talk about sin but hardly mention redemption.

I'm led to believe the most important thing to keep in the forefront is the price paid for our redemption, and the following gift of the Holy Spirit.
It is the beginning of the walk of faith. The new man is not a servant to the old man.
But when we stumble, we must ask for support and forgiveness of our failures based on the conviction of the Spirit which resides inside us.
Yes, the greater price of sin has already been paid in full. The forgiveness is already there. But there will be an accounting of our actions during our walk with Christ as well.
Can we do it on our own? Maybe some reach that level of righteousness. I know I fall short daily. Prayer and supplication is the answer.

So you don’t believe that the very particular death burial and resurrection of Christ on a particular day for the sins of the world, had a very real physical implications for you spiritually?

I think it's important to make a distinction between the words sin and sinner. I don't think it's profitable for a saved person to think of himself as a sinner any longer. That's not at all saying we shouldn't realize that all saved people sin. It seems to me that to identify as a sinner is to forget the change that took place to make you a new creation. Saved people sin but that doesn't make them sinners in the same sense as the unsaved.

I'm not saying Christians should deny sinning, just that they should identify as a saint rather than as a sinner, placing more emphasis on the solution than the problem.

Huh?

Back in context... quote me Jesus saying we had to go to a church... you know like physically in a physical building with a cross on it, on a sunday.

Kent

Agree.

We no longer have a sin nature, but do mess up from time to time. David sinned but then he ran to the Lord. Saul sinned, but sought man. If our relationship with the Lord is thru our pastor or someone, like Saul with Samuel, we may end up about like he did.

Check out Rock Chuck's post on page 3. He mentioned Matt 7:21-23, where "Christians" pled their case before the Lord based on all they had "done" for Him... His reply, "I never knew you". It's hard not to feel some grief for those folk, doing good stuff for God and it not being of God.

Just as there are RINO's, there are also Christians in name only. They're ever learning, never coming to the knowledge of Truth.

Check out Jag's post on page 7 about the Ashbury phenomenon. You'll see how people react when the Holy Spirit descends on a place.

The Lord said He was coming for a church without spot or wrinkle. And, there is always that remnant. I guess we could label Christians in name only, CINO's.

Don't be a CINO. Know who and whose you are.

DF

Psalm 122:1

I was glad when they said to me,
“Let us go to the house of the Lord.”

James 5:14

Is anyone among you sick? Then he must call for the elders of the church and they are to pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord;

Luke 4:16

And He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up; and as was His custom, He entered the synagogue on the Sabbath, and stood up to read.

Matthew 5:24

leave your offering there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present your offering.


It's such a basic concept, like fasting, does it need to be worded as an "Thou shalt"?

Did Paul write letters to each individual in the areas he wrote to or did he write to churches? The churches that would read his letters to the congregations.

Romans 3 supports and explains redemption, to those who were subject to the Law as well as the Gentile. But to identify as a saint requires more. Much more. A righteous walk with Christ without additional sins occurring is fundamental.

The problem of temptation is ever-present. Difficulty lies in understanding forgiveness of the backslider believer who is not following the straight and narrow in their daily walk. Is it automatic? Do they have to acknowledge their shortcoming before God?

Commandment has been given to forgive others, multiple times if necessary in order to receive God's forgiveness when we stumble.

So just because a believer has been forgiven of original sin as well as ALL their sins, we can not simply disregard the mistakes made during our daily walk with Christ. These reminders are found throughout the NT. We will all stand an accountability before Christ.

My question is specific to IZH27's claim of...

Jesus and the Apostles speak about the Church in no uncertain terms. While it is generally true that all believers are a part of the universal church that truth does not exclude the specific instruction that we are to be a part of the church as represented by the local congregation.

Among other things...

I asked him to quote Jesus not Paul.

Instead he takes off on tangents and projects words and ideals about me completely out of context.

Last time he had to finally admit he was wrong about what I said.

Kent

Do you not believe that Paul was speaking in persona Christi?

You don't believe the Bible? That's not standard Christianity. If you don't believe the Bible, there's no point in anyone quoting it to you.

I'm just wondering how we'd take disagreements to elders if there was no organization with a building to ordain elders. How would the letters of Paul and Peter be read to a congregation if they didn't meet somewhere?

The Bible doesn't explicitly command everything, we have to use our God-given reason just a little.

Well, that phrase was part of a sentence about churches that minimize sin, and thus minimize Jesus. We are either sinful or sinless, and if a church is telling everyone that they are sinless and whatever they want to do is fine, then that is not a church I'd want anything to do with.

My understanding is that we are never without sin in this life, and thus never without the need for grace/forgiveness. You have to acknowledge the constant need for grace to be in constant remembrance of it, or so it seems to me. Acknowledgement of our sins need not, indeed should not, equate to feelings of guilt. Maybe not a great analogy, but if I am pitching and the batter hits a home run off me, then I acknowledge that I threw a bad pitch but there is no guilt over it and I don't dwell on it. It happened; next batter, next pitch, move on. No one expects me to pitch a perfect game every time I pitch.

I think we basically agree, just a difference of phrasing.

I sure as heck don’t believe that Jesus is bound by the covers of a book, a book that didn’t even exist when Christianity first began. Nor do I believe that He ‘only’ reveals Himself to us through the Bible, and/or through the sacraments, and/or through the words of a preacher.

He told those closest to Him that He had much more to say to them, but at the present time it would be more than they could understand. So He promised to send them the Holy Spirit…who would reveal to them what the Son and the Father would have the Holy Spirit disclose to them…and guide them into “all truth”.

To me, Jesus’ life example is the strongest example. And the Holy Spirit is the strongest mentor.

KRP. You said the following.

There is no physical path to God/Christ/Holy Spirit.

Kent

Everything about Christianity is about a physical pathway to God. Outside of salvation we are dead in trespasses and sins. Spiritually mentally and physically. Everything about the work of Christ and our being saved relates to a very tangible and real set of events that involved Christ. If there is no physical pathway there is no regeneration, no justification no sanctification and no promise of the resurrection from the dead.

I believe that I was addressing a very specific thing that you said and trying to confirm what it is that you believe with the context of what you wrote.


As to Christ specifically saying church building and steeple I won’t play that game. That straw man approach is the same that people use to say that there is no trinity.


Christ established the church. He founded it upon the apostles. They were inspired by the Holy Spirit to establish and deal with the church. We have the book of Luke Acts and most of the epistles to establish the fact, not opinion, that Christ, as head of the Church, established the church as a physical representation seen in the local body AND in the representation of all who believe. Neither of those things cancel the other.

If you don’t like church, church people or don’t want to go to church that’s on you. If you insist that God is found in esoteric or existential experience that’s on you. God and the Holy Spirit didn’t tell you that because it is antithetical to scriptural teaching and the clear historical record of the church.

Truly that is some weird chit... esoteric or existential and all that.

Kent

It’s not weird at all and then it is. It’s Gnosticism which was a heresy that the apostles fought and what you and several others propose as being real Christianity.

Again you project... I'm shocked...

Kent

It isn’t projection to understand church history, understand deviations from biblical teaching, hear and understand what someone is saying that they believe and to clearly see where that fits.

To be projection would mean that I hold your view etc. I don’t.

You projected your view of me being Gnostic.

This exact same thread subject happened in October. At that time you expressed that after trying you couldn't ascend and transcend.

I said no, you can't ascend and transcend, first time I've ever used those words in my life, your words, in a response.

Later you claimed that I said I had ascended and transcended, elw jumped in and asked if I was gnostic.

Eventually you apologized.

My faith of God, Christ and the Holy Spirit is well documented in that thread...

as is all the same players that frequent these threads.

Kent

Having to
repent,
rinse
& repeat over & over
to see paradise
is saying Christ's blood was not enough.

He died.
It covered ALL sin.
Forward & Backward.
Every bit of it.


Now, some are stuck on the "you have to accept the gift to receive it's promises."
I believe with all my heart that God is aware of that "problem". Also, that he has a plan for his children.
ALL of them.
And when that "plan" comes to the fallen and is completely revealed, those sinners will appreciate Christ's blood more than we do.
Cause we expect it.

I don’t think that I apologized. I think that EFW may have. I see no need to apologize for making honest observations during a conversation.

To say that someone who practices gnostic principles is not to say that that person is not a Christian so I’ve not said that nor have I meant to imply it.

That you hold to Gnostic beliefs and practices is fairly obvious. What you are before God I’ll not comment on. That is between you and God.

Gnosticism has, unfortunately, filtered it’s way into some Christian churches. Especially those all about self improvement, striving to become healthy, wealthy and wise.

Now it may not be packaged as classic Gnosticism with ascend and transcend but subtle features do slip in.

Buddhism is somewhat Gnostic in nature. There are a number of forms, not always that easy to pick out without deeper analysis.

If the Church focuses on Jesus and Jesus alone, it’s not so likely to slide into error.

It’s when we add to or take away from the Gospel that we become vulnerable to such, become deceived by the enemy.

DF

Gnostic, I've heard the term but never looked into the meaning, sounded like something to do with Celtic druids or something.

"If the Church focuses on Jesus and Jesus alone, it’s not so likely to slide into error."

Yes, exactly what I've said, I will add the Holy Spirit in that focus also... and as individuals also.

Stick with Christ and listen to the Holy Spirit, you can't go wrong.

Kent

Yep[/quote]


Scott F;
Good evening my friend, I trust you and yours are getting livable weather down there and you're all well.

It's good to see you dropping by, perhaps your ears were ringing as I was chatting with my better half coming back down from Kelowna a couple days back and you came up.

The context was when you and I and perhaps others - that part's gone now - decided we'd read the book of James every day for a month. For me there were a bunch of things that stuck with me and I appreciate being part of it.

On the Eastern Orthodox subject, if you want to really go down some deep philosophical discussions, there's a young fellow named Jonathan Pageau who became a believer in the Orthodox Church, who has a YouTube channel.

From our conversations in your truck cab and on our back deck, I'd think you might enjoy some of what he has to say or at least like me have to really think about what he's saying.

All the best of our Lord's blessings to you all my friend.

Dwayne[/quote]

Good evening Dwayne. We became Orthodox a little over three years ago. Best move we ever made. This probably won't surprise you but my baptismal name I'd James.

Same here, but in 2017, after many years in rebellion against how I was brought up.

the mainstream Christian Church in America kicked Jesus to the curb years ago.

I enjoyed reading this.

If you don’t mind, which church do you attend? That has not been my experience at all. I’ve mostly been in Baptist, Covenant and now Wesleyan churches. Jesus is pretty much front and center. I can save you a seat.

Here is a true question, not a gottcha question, anyone can answer.

What were the main subject matters in the last 4 sermons you attended in your church?

Not really remembering is a fine answer also.

Or if you'd rather, what subject matters were preached that really resonated with you and how often would you say that happened this last year.

Kent

every sermon covers a selected set of chapters of the Holy Bible, discussed in context of the day, and context of the present, and focuses on Jesus actions and words, disciples actions and the surrounding communities actions and backgrounds... slow long walks through Mathew and our small gatherings of two dozen at most, listen and discuss...

not preaching as much as explaining and contextualizing the word of the new testament's. been that way for several years with our Pastor Bill...

For me I find there is a wide difference in what is related to Jesus in the bible and all the rest. There is an intimacy in what he said and the context when he said it... an inclusion you can feel.

The rest of the bible is human history and preaching, ok in itself but the best you can say for the preaching is it's normal common sense... and the worst is some of it can be contradictory.

But the Jesus part, the simpleness yet deepness, the acceptance, the servitude, the caring, brotherhood, patience, welcomeness, selflessness and resurrection... it's so far above all the rest, it's all that really matters.

Meat vs crumbs.

The reason organized church is in decline is it serves a lot of crumbs.

Kent

Another issue is Jesus speaks to our spirit, the rest speak to our humanity.

Kent

For me there is a huge difference in what Jesus taught and what he said and did not say about himself and what has been said about him and his doctrine and teachings beginning shortly after he left the earthly scene all the way up until today.

It seems "Christians" want the Jesus they want, no matter if it conflicts with the Jesus that walked among us and taught among us for a ministry of 3 years.

The New Covenant that was implemented by Jesus Himself…in simple terms is…a promise of redemption and salvation by God to people as individuals rather than as a nation, and on the basis of God's grace rather than a person's adherence to the Mosaic Law.

Solid

Yeah, the Jesus we "create" isn't gonna be the Jesus of the Bible.

Check out Rev 22:19. Seems pretty straight forward to me.

“And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.”

KJV, BTW.

DF

DF: Wasn't John specifically referring the book The Revelation of Jesus Christ that he wrote? Not necessarily the book of, say Ruth?

I'll have to look it up but I believe Daniel may have a similar admonition.

Not sure. Don’t think I’d want to be messing with any of it.

DF

Edited to add Gal, 1:9b "...if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed".

This , again and again. Short and sweet. Thanks!

Is remember the Sabbath still on? It's one of the big ten. And the Sabbath ain't Sunday.

Just curious what y'all think.

I do know Jesus made it a point to heal on the Sabbath. He was obviously baiting in his critics so he could remind them that they would untie their jack-ass or ox and water him on the Sabbath.

I think Jesus was all for the law but he wasn't going to make an ass out of the law by making it a no exceptions unreasonable thing.

The Jewish leaders had decided that God's law was too vague or something and had added a bunch of rules to the original law. Jesus was violating the pharisees' laws, not Gods.

The pharisees were basically like our lawyers. They didn't make up new laws, but they were incredible sticklers who made up complicated ways to keep the law. For instance, God's law said to keep his words before your eyes, meaning to think of what his words throughout the day. Instead, the pharisees made little miniature "Ark of the covenant" boxes with tiny copies of the law inside and strapped them to their foreheads.



They were just like Christians today who continue to argue over specifics in God's words all the while missing the overall meaning.

If you ever decide to stand at the pulpit again, I'd do my best to come and listen.

Read the epistles and you’ll see that the church has always been in a dire state.

The entire canon is the story of how people are messed up and hopeless apart from the grace of God in Christ.

He has pursued our wandering hearts since He called out for Adam & Eve after our Fall and we’ll continue to evade Him and He’ll continue to pursue.

There will always be a remnant of those He preserves for Himself in spite of our best efforts, praise His life giving name.

What a nice thing to say. Hope you have a great day.

There's a line that appears several times in the OT law: "You shall not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk." It's been argued many times about what God meant but many scholars believe that the Canaanites had a fertility ritual where they did that. God didn't want the Hebrews participating in pagan rituals. It was as simple as that.

The Pharisees decided that they knew better than God so they needed to define what God meant. They went from what God said to saying you can't eat meat and milk in the same meal, then to you can't cook meat and milk in the same pot. Then it got to where you couldn't eat meat and milk in the same day in case it got mixed in your stomach.
It kept growing and it's still with kosher Jews today. Some will actually have 2 kitchens in their homes. One is used for cooking with meat, the other for cooking with milk. They're very careful to never serve anything from both kitchens at any meal for fear of mixing meat with milk.
It's become absurd and totally misses God's intent.

Much of this stuff comes from the Talmud, not the Torah. The Talmud wasn't developed until long after the fall of Jerusalem in 70AD. It was developed by the Jews in exile.

Legalism to that degree keeps people in a constant place of guilt. Hard to imagine how folks who practice legalism to that degree are ever at peace with God.

I don't think they are ever at peace. They will never have the Peace that passes understanding while stuck in their understanding.

Christians look in the Old Testament and they see Jesus. Legalist look at the New Testament and all they see are rules.

They can't see the Truth with a "veil" over their face.

But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. 15 Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. 2 Cor 3:14-15 (NIV)

DF

Enthralling

It’s ironic that when you read the accounts of Jesus’ life in the Gospels, that the men who knew the Law and the Prophets the best…that the men who followed the Mosaic Law to the Nth degree…didn’t even recognize Jesus.

They did recognize him. They also recognized that their power would be at an end if they let Jesus be what he was - the messiah. They talked God but they were at war with him. Jesus and John the Baptist called them a brood of vipers for a reason.

The Lord came to fulfill the law, not abolish it.

But, the Sabbath was OT, new Christians started worshiping on Sunday, the day the Lord arose from the dead. And that tradition has persisted for 2,000+ years.

I have Seventh Day friends who love the Lord. I just think they may be stuck a bit in tradition. That's their thing, not mine.

You know, I think those who really love the Lord are blessed inspite of doctrinal quirks. We may not all interpret Scripture exactly the same. What do ya'll think?

DF

They found the idea that they’d need a Savior like Him to be offensive because they had (in their minds) earned salvation for themselves by their adherence to the law of Moses.

As you say, those who knew the OT best missed the whole point of the exercise… that man cannot “work” his way out of fallenness but must rely wholly and solely upon the grace of God.

This is the point where both legalisms and liberals (theologically speaking) miss the bud to this day, and there will always be people in the visible church who make these errors.

It’s just human nature.

If not for the resurrection, I wonder how many of us today would recognize Him? His own disciples somewhat misunderstood him during his ministry.

Paul and the other disciples made it clear that us gentiles are NOT under the law. That was for Jews only. When they met in Jerusalem to decide how to handle the gentiles, they decided that the gentiles weren't under it. They only required a few things from the gentiles - avoid sexual sin, don't eat meat that was strangled, and don't eat blood. Even circumcision was dropped. This passage makes it clear that this came from God himself, through the Holy Spirit, that the gentiles were exempt from the law.

Acts 15:28 For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements:
29 that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well.

And the only reason those things were even mentioned…the “not eating meat from strangled animals, and from blood, and food polluted by idols...” is because those things were really offensive to Jews and it would cause fellowship problems within the ekklesia. He’s saying to the Gentiles to not cause strife with their fellow Jewish Christians over these particular cultural sensitivities, and to be gracious towards them. Go along to get along.

The sexual immorality part speaks for itself.

1 Corinthians 1:10.

quick image upload

You can't understand what Jesus meant when he said he came to full fill the law, not abolish it unless you understand lots of things. First that doesn't mean Jesus liked the law, at least not in the sense that you might think.

The law was only there for one purpose. It was "NOT" there to show a man how to live. At least not in any useful sense. God gave the law in response to his people telling him they could keep any commandments he asked of them. God gave the law to show everyone that nobody could keep it. Nobody could keep up with and do everything that would be necessary to be perfect on their own merits. The whole purpose of it was to cause anyone to realize that their only protection came from the sacrifice made when they didn't keep the law.

When Jesus said he came to fulfill the law, he meant that he came to be the one and only sacrifice ever needed so that by that sacrifice everyone would be well with God.

If you look at it in that light, there is now no law except the law of love which fulfilled every expectation of God through faith in His sacrifice, which is really just God saving us all by himself.

With genuine respect, I say the following: I've read most of what you've written here and don't find it much different from what's been said/taught in several Christian churches that I've attended. It seems that you've mostly parted ways with the church (small c). I'm not clear on where your beliefs differ that much. If I'm understanding, you've gone from a warrior to a watcher, so to speak. I'm not diminishing the value of what you post here, as this is certainly an outreach. I just wonder if the "belief gap", if you will, is as great as you think. Apologies in advance if I'm misunderstanding, and best wishes to you.

"Blessed Assurance, Jesus is mine, Praising my Saviour all the day long."

I'm not as fundamental as that post might have suggested. I was trying to illustrate how even fundamental Christians lose sight of the big picture, even when it is spelled out in scripture. It has been my experience that most Christians focus on the rules, so pointing out how rules never mattered except to illustrate that no rules could accomplish anything is amusing to me.

I wouldn't be able to tell you what I am at the moment except that I look for truth everywhere I can. That's a hard thing to find. It mostly means knowing you don't really know very much beyond personal experience.

Yea,I may be a watcher at this point,but I'm still interested in the game,just not so sure about the rules anymore.

That's where Paul was clearing up claims that some were of Peter, some from Apollos. He was pointing out to those factions that it's all about the Cross of Christ.

And in v 18, he pointed out that the message of the Cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to the saved, it's the "Power of God".

So, as some here have already posted, focusing on Jesus and the Cross vs. depending on various factions (the wisdom of man) is the way to go.

DF

Thanks for your gracious reply to my post, which was a bit intrusive, to say the least. A forgiven sinner myself, I’m now a child of God. I’ve done nothing to deserve this title. I couldn’t. Rules? I try to live as Christ commanded. Not in some futile attempt to earn my salvation, but to please my Heavenly Father and to better live out my witness. Sure, I fall short , but once in a while I get it right. 😀

The Pharisees were constantly dogging’ Jesus everywhere He went, and they’d tell Him “your followers don't observe the tradition of the elders.” The tradition of the elders, also sometimes called the Oral Torah, was just a buncha laws made up by legalists to prevent people from accidentally breakin’ the Law of Moses and…according to them…defile themselves and put themselves at odds with God.

For example, the Mosaic Law said you can’t do business on the Sabbath. But the ‘tradition of the elders’…or the Oral Torah…said you're not even allowed to touch money on the Sabbath ~ because if you’re not allowed to even touch money on the Sabbath ~ then you won't accidentally do business on the Sabbath. The legalists just made this schit up as they went along, tweakin’ it as time went by.

The Law of Moses was difficult enough to keep on it’s own. We know that from the testimony of first century Jews themselves; the Apostle Peter made that crystal clear, as did James (the brother of Jesus).

So they (Peter and James), as church leaders, made it crystal clear that Jesus’ followers (Gentiles ‘or’ Jews) were not bound by the Law of Moses in any way whatsoever. At all. Anymore. Peter made it crystal clear that there was now no longer any distinction between Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians, and that Jewish Christians would “be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus”…NOT by abiding by the mosaic Law…just as Gentile Christians are.

The Jews had never been saved by the law of Moses. That law was only to teach them to have faith in the sacrifice. All failed under that law and had to make appropriate sacrifices. To top it off a sacrifice for everybody was made for everything and anything you might have missed every year that covered you for the whole year. It was always their faith in God, through the means of sacrifice that saved them, rather than in the keeping of law.

I agree. But ‘they’ thought otherwise. Even to this very day, some think that abiding by a few of those 613 rules that they’ve cherry-picked…like not eatin’ frog legs and obeying the sabbath…is gonna get em’ there.

Well, the bible did predict that babylons waters would dry up! Babylon the great the world empire of false religion is about to see what it like when the image of the wild beast/ the united nations turns on her and completely destroys her. Serves her right for committing spiritual fornication with the kings of the earth! The fact is Jehovah's Witnesses exposed false religion and all her hypocrisy 100 years ago. Now almost everyone can see it

Despite their smug arrogance and self-righteousness, they knew Him not, nor the voices of the prophets which they read every sabbath. But your point is well-taken.

The resurrection is what ultimately and finally and definitively convinced 1st century Jesus followers, and others in the 1st century who’d refused to follow Jesus, that Jesus was who He claimed to be. When He rose from the dead, it convinced His closest followers…who had all run away by that time…and it also convinced people who’d decided not to follow Him, that He was who He claimed to be.

And the resurrection has been convincing people ever since. The story of Jesus wasn’t even worth telling apart from the resurrection. Apart from the resurrection, no one would have even documented the life of Jesus. Apart from the resurrection, He was just another wannabe rabbi that went off the rails and threatened the legalists. Apart from the resurrection, He was just another promise maker who’d failed to keep His promises.

The reason we even know His name, and the reason His name is proclaimed throughout the world today…even though His teachings and claims about Himself were profound…is because He rose from the dead. His resurrection punctuated everything He taught and claimed about Himself.

I think the evidence shows that there really was a man named Jesus 2000 years ago who walked the earth and performed miracles and predicted His own death and resurrection ~ and accomplished it…! And the evidence for that is very good. There were Mosaic Law following Jews converting completely to Jesus’ brand new belief system and paying for it with their lives. If a man can predict His own death and resurrection…and pull it off…I’m gonna go with whatever He says.

I agree 100%

Before Jesus, the Jews had the Torah and the law. They did add a lot of regulations that God didn't give them and they ignored all of the prophesies of Jesus. Where things really went south is after the fall of Jerusalem. Rome shipped them all over the known world and they gathered into small colonies here and there. Then their scholars started getting together to discuss the law. After a couple centuries, they had developed the Talmud, a huge gathering of insane regulations that attempted to interpret what God really meant when he wrote the law. What they decided God meant was often the exact opposite of what God intended.

The best example I know of is one that I've posted about before: Deut 14:21 ......"You shall not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk. This shows up a couple more times in Exodus. Scholars say that the Canaanites had a fertility ritual where they did this. Then they'd sprinkle the broth over their land or animals to induce the gods to give them better crops. God didn't want the Hebrews to follow pagan gods or rituals. It's that simple.
However, the Jewish scholars of the Talmud went to work on it. They completely ignored the pagan ritual and tried to figure out what God REALLY meant. First, they decided that you couldn't boil any meat in any milk, not just goat. Then, in case of cookware contamination, you couldn't cook meat in any vessel that had ever held milk and vise versa. Then you couldn't eat milk and meat at the same meal in case they mixed in the stomach. Then you couldn't eat milk and meat on the same day. It kept growing and it's still with us today. Many modern kosher houses actually have 2 kitchens. They cook meat in one and milk in the other and they can't used both kitchens on the same day.
All of this because God didn't want them performing pagan rituals.

Jesus didn't come because man was getting it right... and Jesus isn't coming back because man saw the light and is getting it right after he came, went home.

Kent

I think that the greater message of the OT in relation to the mixing of Temple worship and paganism applies to us and is part and parcel to this thread topic, the OP.

Error is always the mixing of. They did it and we do it. It is nothing new and is a part of our sinful nature, the nature that we still possess even though redeemed.

When we look at the error in the OT and in the NT it is NEVER defined as “not listening to the Spirit or our inner God-spark”. Error is ALWAYS corrected by the admonition of the preacher calling the people back to the word. Quick examples; king Josiah and Paul’s instruction to the Corinthians. Return to the word. Return to what you were taught. Abandon what you feel (my emphasis).




Abraham was declared righteous because of faith not works. His faith was in the person and word of God to provide a messiah, lamb, sacrifice. Abraham’s faith looked forward on time as did all of the OT saints. Ours looks back in time. All look to the same Christ and the same events. That being the case, why do so many make the claim that there is a different means or way to God OT to NT. IF that is the case, nothing in the NT makes any sense.

Jesus's part of the NT makes sense.

Kent

To answer the original question, not hardly.

I don’t know what you’re saying. That’s a very broad statement.

Actually, it narrows it down.

Kent

The historical New Testament documents are the original Christian documents. The Old Testament scriptures didn’t become the first part of the Christian Bible, first. Early Jesus followers were enamored with Jesus, and they, ‘not’ the Jews themselves, saw that the Hebrew scriptures pointed to the Messiah, who they recognized and believed to be Jesus. So these early Jesus followers ‘only’ became enamored with the Hebrew scriptures because they were enamored with Jesus. They didn’t give two craps about Judaism. And they eventually adopted the Hebrew scriptures as Christian Scriptures ‘because’ they told of Jesus. They couldn’t have cared less about Judaism or the Law of Moses.

I look to certain parts of the Hebrew scriptures for inspiration and motivation, but ‘not’ for application. Christianity began ‘after’ the resurrection, and the Christian Bible exists ‘because of’ the resurrection. Jesus and His apostle’s appropriately leveraged the Law and the Prophets to make their case to their Jewish brethren in the first century. But when preaching to Gentiles in the first century, Jesus’ apostle’s leveraged a more recent development ~ the resurrection. When you watch a man crucified, and you know He died, and you know He was buried…and a few days later you share a meal with Him on the beach…your faith doesn’t need any ancient props. Those current events more than suffice.

Christianity doesn’t need to be propped up by the Hebrew Scriptures; Christianity can stand on its own two nail-scarred, resurrection, first century feet.

When Jesus taught about himself from the OT scriptures He condemned the Pharisees because the knew the scriptures but didn’t recognize Him IN the scriptures. He clearly told them that the Law and Prophets (texts) prophesied about Him.

I’m gonna go with red letter words, those things that Christ said and taught. Jesus either lied to us and the OT has no bearing whatsoever on the NT or He didn’t lie and the whole of the scriptures are a progressive revelation of grace by faith.

Based on the words of Christ and not upon human speculation, all scripture matters because the whole of scripture is about Christ.

Maybe you two know more than the incarnate son?

These are “red letter words”, things that Jesus Himself “said and taught”: “I have much to say to you, but you are not able to grasp it now. When the Spirit of truth comes, He will guide you into all the truth,…”. I put a lotta stock in the mentoring and advocacy of the Holy Spirit. The same power of God that raised Jesus from the dead was sent to His followers in Spirit, to actually dwell within them. Nah. I just don’t see things the way that you see them on this particular matter. Christianity doesn’t exist ‘because of’ the Bible, it’s the other way around, the Bible exists ‘because of’ Christianity. Without the resurrection there would be no Christianity, and without Christianity there would be no ‘the Bible’.

Christianity…which is based on an actual event in history…would still be true even if the Bible was nonexistent.

I think the Pharisees DID recognize him. They also recognized that if people followed Jesus, they'd very quickly quit following the Pharisees. Their power and income would diminish rapidly. A real messiah was a threat to them.

RC.

Jesus, who knew their minds, told them all about themselves, that they didn’t know him. I’ve gotta go with what He said. However, I don’t believe that His statement in any way excludes your observation about the power struggle. They definitely were threatened.

Antlers.
I’ve heard the reasoning behind the verse that you quoted. The problem is that the verse is specifically written to the disciples. The evidence of what was said is seen in the authority that they demonstrated.

That verse is generalized to all who are of the faith but the evidence for that being the case doesn’t exist. When the apostles were correcting errors in the church we never hear them telling people that they were in error for not listening to or following the Holy Spirit. They were always pointed back to the departure from the Word and the traditions that they were taught.

As to the objectivity of Christ, removing Him from the OT, God placing Him in the text, deconstructs the clear message of the text, the direct words of Christ Himself. To do so removes the objectivity of His incarnation and all that He taught and leaves His story captive to the telling of secular historians.

Yeah, we clearly disagree on this matter. Jesus promises that every single person who trusts in Him will receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. And I have confidence that He makes good on His promises.

I don’t deny the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit, role of the Holy Spirit and function of the Holy Spirit is nothing like charismatic doctrine teaches.

Nowhere in the instruction of scripture, OT or NT, do we see an example of the believer being pointed back to their inner being and private interaction and revelation from the Holy Spirit. That concept is a false doctrine developed by isolating verses out of context.

As we have discussed issues over the years and as I’ve read but not responded to many of your related posts I have to say that I never know where you are going. There are times that you use scripture to support your views. Other times you deny scripture and your views are based on personal interpretation (?). This leaves your views in a totally subjective sphere.

I so appreciate the conversation and that you are honest and open about your views. That’s always a good thing. However, I have to take everything that you say with a spoonful of salt because we have no common basis for agreement. Subjectivity is not the basis for agreement. Take away scripture and sound understanding of scripture and objectivity is erases leaving Platonic philosophy in its wake.

As to your 2nd and 3rd paragraphs, that is how I see Paul. Very contradictory to Jesus and often to himself.

One of the major defects of our day is mistaking feelings for the Holy Spirit.

Matthew 12 gives stern admonishment for speaking wrongly about the Holy Spirit.

There are many verses in the Bible to support exactly what the Holy Spirit does for the believer. It is a subject which must not be taken lightly.

It would seem to me that these verses contradict your opinion.

Hebrews 8:8-12
King James Version

8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

9 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord.

10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:

11 And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.

12 For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.

The point of the Holy Spirit is to have guidance in this present life. If you always find your answers in the written word, you will only know the answers God gave someone else. That can be a powerful tool and likely won't lead you down the wrong path but neither will it give you specifics for your situation.

I think one of the greatest things I ever learned was that God wanted me to be more concerned about what he was telling me to do than what he told Paul or Peter to do.

I believe it will come down to the question of whether Jesus taught righteousness through keeping the law.

Want to clear understanding of what Christ taught about the law and the gospel is reached that confusion will disappear.

What's your take on it?

Who is Abraham saved by faith? Or was Abraham safe by keeping the law?

When God gives antlers a personal interpretation on an issue through the Holy Spirit, and God gives you a personal revelation on olthe same issue through the Holy Spirit and you find your conclusions and be at odds with each other and incompatible you have a problem.

This happens all the time without exception in religious circles where personal interpretation and personal revelation is practiced. I have seen this to be the truth through observation for 45 to 50 years. When this occurs by whose authority and by what standard is the conflicting revelation resolved?

This view is not biblical but is based on a mixing of Christian thought with Platonic philosophy.

All I know is this.

The mainsteam denominations are losing members.

If I were a bigwig at one of them I'd find out why. And do something about it.

Why don't they?

The biwigs know why and are simply "managing the growing crisis" to suit their own selfish ends. Leadership to a solution is not their purpose.

Your argument is a non-argument. It wouldn't matter one whit if 2 people thought they had different personal revelation through the Holy Spirit or if they simply disagreed about what the scripture actually said as written. You can rarely get different denominations to agree whether they are claiming to be sticklers of the written word, or whether they claim to have divine revelation. It's all the same.

These arguments happen because Christians are so hung up on following the rules, what the rules actually are, and making sure everyone follows the correct rules. It's really simple. The guidance of the Holy Spirit is not so you can tell someone else what to do. It's so you will know what to do. God can give me and Antlers a personal interpretation and neither will be at odds as long as we aren't trying to force on each other what God told us to do as individuals. There would be zero benefit in having the Holy Spirit if God couldn't give you direction specifically tailored to you and your situation.

If one looks closely, men of God who demonstrate their leadership and teaching through their fruits are not losing members. If anything true teaching is growing in followers.

True, that.

When you have a ‘personal’ relationship with someone, that relationship is NOT standardized, it’s personalized and individualized.

Asserting that God ‘only’ reveals Himself to us through the Bible is, to me, just another form of legalism. I do NOT believe that the Creator of the universe is bound by the covers of a book ~ a book that didn’t even exist when Christianity first began.

I'm not sure whether the Pharisees truly recognized him as the Messiah or not. But he was certainly not the kind of Messiah they expected. Whether they rejected him out of unbelief because he wasn't what they expected, or because he was a threat to their positions of prestige and power, I can't say. Probably some of both.

Probably for similar reasons that CNN doesn't seem to care about losing viewers.

If the Holy Spirit is what is guiding you, scripture will never be contradicted. If something seems contradictory to scripture, then look again at the scripture or listen more closely to the Holy Spirit; in fact, make sure it is the Holy Spirit you are listening to. I know for me that sometimes Satan will perch on my shoulder and try to tell me things that I should not listen to.

So God, through the Holy Spirit, being culpable for giving conflicting truth to two different people is an OK thing?

The Holy Spirit helps us recognize and understand the truth revealed in scripture and aids our faith and understanding. It is not new knowledge but knowledge that already exists in scripture. The Word of God is called the sword of the Spirit.

The Holy Spirit enlightens our soul and helps us discern spiritual things and guides us to understanding, 1 Corinthians 2:8-16. Those who are truly saved are constantly enlightened by the indwelling Holy Spirit. It is application of saving grace which the unsaved are unable to experience, grasp, or understand. The blind can’t perceive the truth revealed to them.

Without the guidance of the Holy Spirrit, we have to depend on faith in ourselves and our tiny feeble human minds. Again, the blind can’t perceive the light and the truth revealed to them. The world does not see or know the helper, the comforter, advocate, intercession. John 14:26. The Holy Spirit reveals the meaning of Jesus, showing us, teaching us, and explaining what Jesus said and taught. The Holy Spirit illuminates and reveals the meaning of scripture and works through scripture.

Those are facts that have been verified. But I don’t think anyone is leaving for any reason that has anything to do with Jesus. And I don’t think anyone is leaving for any reason that has anything to do with the original version of Christianity either.

I do think a lot of what makes American Christianity nowadays so resistible are things that ‘the church’ should have been resisting all along. But you’ll be hard-pressed to find many in ‘the church’ who are willing to take ‘any’ responsibility at all for the facts that you stated in your post above.

Luke says that they didn’t know Him as the Messiah, nor did they know the voices of the Prophets that they read every sabbath.

I don’t think they recognized Him as the Messiah at all. But He clearly was a threat to them.

This is where the points of difficulty comes into these conversations. What is the role of the Holy Spirit and the life of the believers? Is it a misconstrued idea of the Holy Spirit leading you all into all truth, a verse specifically written to and for the disciples, addressing their future role as apostles.

I can’t find in scripture, through the teachings of Christ and the apostles, where we ever see them telling us to go back and listen to the Holy Spirit’s leading? I don’t recall any verses other than the that antlers quoted which was instruction given to the disciples/apostles. What I consistently see throughout the witness of history and scripture is a continual admonition, when an error, to go back to the word and traditions that were established by the Apostles.

I think that it’s a fair question to ask if He is EVER the messiah that any of us expect. They certainly hated him. Maybe in that hate they are a reflection of ourselves.

And Paul’s Epistle to the Romans was specifically written to the Christians in Rome. Do you not think that any of what he said to them is applicable to you…? And Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians was specifically written to the Christians in Galatia. Do you not think that any of what he said to them is applicable to you…? And Paul’s Epistles to the Corinthians were specifically written to the Christians in Corinth. Do you not think that any of what he said to them is applicable to you…? And Paul’s Epistles to the Thessalonians were specifically written to the Christians in Thessalonica. Do you not think that any of what he said to them is applicable to you…? And Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians was specifically written to the Christians at Philippi. Do you not think that any of what he said to them is applicable to you…? And Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians was specifically written to the Christians in Ephesus. Do you not think that any of what he said to them is applicable to you…? The same can be said of Paul’s Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon. They were all ‘specifically’ written to the above individuals. Do you not think that any of what he said to them is applicable to you…?

Are you not a disciple (follower) of Jesus…? When He said “follow Me” to His earliest disciples (followers), do you not think that invitation is extended to you as well…?

Don't forget the unforgivable sin - Mk 3:22-30. The Pharisees saw Jesus casting out demons. They knew what power Jesus was using to do it but they said it was the power of Satan. Jesus laid it to them and told them that calling the Holy Spirit evil was a sin that won't be forgiven. They'd crossed the line. They knew who Jesus was and what power he had behind him but they were trying to put him down in the sight of the people.

I read what the OT scriptures have to say, what Jesus had to say, some of what Paul had to say, and what some of y'all have to say.

Confusing.

So I just go back to the OT, the gospels in the NT, and what Jesus' brother and his publicly chosen apostles had to say after weeding out the parts of the NT that are obvious forgeries.

And I just dismiss what others say about Jesus if it doesn't agree with what Jesus said about the law and the prophets, God the creator the one that sent him, or himself

Blaise Pascal said that people almost invariably arrive at their beliefs not on the basis of proof but on the basis of what they find attractive.

And ‘then’ they go looking for reasons to substantiate their belief.

I think you and Pascal are onto something.

Rock Chuck,

There is another unforgivable sin. It is found in Revelation: Anyone taking the mark of the base or the number on the hand or their forehead cannot be forgiven.

I think that all of us, to some degree, tend to cherry-pick information that confirms our chosen existing beliefs, while dismissing any information that contradicts our chosen existing beliefs.

What we find attractive is not a sound means of sorting fact from fiction

That is a statement of quite limited reach, by a mere mortal - just one more of those among us who assume that humans can determine infallible ways to verify "truth".

The matter of human attraction, and beliefs based on such, functions in a completely separate realm. Could not that realm be much more meaningful with regard to life and death - particularly in the eternal sense?

What Blaise Pascal said above applies to one’s chosen belief that God doesn’t exist just as it applies to one’s chosen belief that God does exist.

And the mantra of “sorting fact from fiction” sure went out the window for those who chose to get fully vaccinated and fully boosted with the Covid shots. They selectively spout that mantra of “sorting fact from fiction” towards Christianity (for example), while completely dismissing that same mantra of “sorting fact from fiction” when they chose to get fully vaccinated and fully boosted with the Covid shots. Proof positive that what Blaise Pascal said above has much merit.

Watching a church which used to have the pews filled every Sunday whittle itself down to the organist and the preacher on sundays is a sad sight

True, but that kind of goes with not receiving Jesus before you die. Those who take the mark will be making their final decision, Jesus or Satan. It's their final choice.

I don’t think that the word “church” should have ever appeared in the New Testament. Nor do I think that it should have ever become part of the culture of Christianity either. It’s not just a mistranslation. It’s a misdirection.

The ‘powers that be’ made Jesus’ ekklesia…the collective body of believers...a physical location, a building.

Most of the New Testament is a word-for-word translation from the Greek that it was written in, but the word “church” is an exception. The word “church” is not a translation; it’s a substitution. And a misleading substitution at that.

The word “church” is a derivative of the German word “kirche”, meaning house of the Lord or temple. This word of German origin was used to interpret, rather than translate, the Greek term ekklesia throughout most of the New Testament.

The Greek term ekklesia is mistranslated as “church” over a hundred times in the New Testament, but in Acts 19:32…a passage describing a city in uproar…it’s translated differently, and correctly.

“The assembly was in confusion: Some were shouting one thing, some another. Most of the people did not even know why they were there.”

Ekklesia was not, and is not, a religious word. It does not mean church or house of the Lord or temple. The word ekklesia was widely used to describe a gathering of people, an assembly of people, or a civic gathering. Or as was the case in Acts 19, a gathering of rioting idol manufacturers.

An ekklesia was a gathering of people for a specific purpose ~ any specific purpose. It is not a building, and it is not a physical location. It’s a collection of people with a specific purpose ~ a movement.

Many have simply stopped showin’ up at a physical location. Many others have disconnected from the movement itself.

I think that if the the ekklesia of Jesus nowadays wants people to stop leavin’…if the movement itself wants Christianity to be attractive again…then maybe it’s time to take another look at the original movement that Jesus started 2,000 years ago.

Problem ain’t the people it’s the closet gay preacher

Studies done by nonpartisan fact tanks such as the Pew Research Center since the 1990’s show otherwise.

earlybird, I'd love to tell you the story of the two (more or less) gay women I used to hang with occasionally in Tucson, and being woke up on a Sunday and being told to "Clean up, WE'RE going to church".

If I hadnt gone to that service, on that day, with those two strumpets ..... I'm not sure I would have ever come to know and love our Creator in the way I do today.

Gays likely aint the problem, and my best guess is God loves them too?

I suspect the preacher at the church I attend as a deacon may have somewhat of an issue. He is kind of girly in that he relates socially better with the women and sits with them if we have an eating meeting. He is constantly railing on and on about homosexuality to the point I wonder if he has a problem with it. He isn't much younger than Joe Biden and I have suggested to him it is time to go.

And we have gone down to about 25-30% of what our attendance was 12 years ago.

I don’t have a problem with gays but I’ll be damned if I’m gonna be preached to by one.My kids are teens and “will not” be influenced by one either.His stance is it takes a village to raise kids well my village raises our own.

I can respect that

The gay pride Xmas lights on the parsonage directly across from the church put the icing on the cake for me.I had suspicions but that there verified it.We’re a old school community that don’t adjust well to change.

Local Methodist church had 4 woman preachers in a row old school folks frown upon those things.That church was started in the 1860s it’s dead now.

God loves murderers too. What's the point?

The true Church will never implode. It will endure to the end.

The Devil’s children, on the other hand, are led like sheep to the slaughter. They never know what they stand for.

What is the mark of the beast? The social security number?

I can worship the lord on the creek bank or in the garden less drama and easier on the pocket book

Way off the mark, as usual. Maybe you can't understand what is said, or don't want to understand because actually understanding the remark doesn't appeal to you.

If your concern is your pocketbook, you aint worshipping the Lord.

My money won’t support closet gay preachers was the meaning

I am very much in agreement there! Homosexuality is an abomination unto the Lord.

Prime example of why this week church were members of but no longer attend had biz mtg.Closet gay preacher was denied more funds for his whatever campaign for the 5 youth “which used to be 30-40”.He told head deacon “I could choke you to death right now” this ain’t no lie 😳😳The head treasurer resigned on the spot who is also the organist

I've been wondering lately if it could be something like Elon Musk's neurolink. If it becomes like he envisions it will make a human interface completely with the web. There would be no speed difference between human mind and digital information.

I envision if a human does such a thing, they won't really be human anymore. Once connected I think they could lose the ability to make a choice anymore. The choice would have been made when they decided to join the hive mind. Elon is blanketing the whole earth with satellites where everyone would be connected everywhere always.

If the definition of the Beast isn't an electronic god we created, that we become one with through a cybernetic connection implanted in the body, it at least could be.

Indeed - and too often.

I dont understand what it is you are asking Tyrone

You are certainly correct

Salvation, eternal life and reunion with familiy and friends in an afterlife is an attractive proposition, and the foundation of Pascals Wager.

I’ll take a wack at it from the 20,000 foot perspective, the macro-overview IMO. We have many unbelievers now in the seminaries, and thus the pastors who come from them. By unbelievers, I mean deniers of the scriptures as without error in the original autographs (all are versions today are very accurate without any differences in doctrine) and particularly deniers of the miraculous; for example, many deny the historicity of Genesis when most Hebrew experts agree the Hebrew of Genesis is of the historical genre, not poetry other any other type of literature. The evangelical church is filled with this apostasy. Don’t confuse the institutional church with the true church scattered throughout, and even outside the institutional church. Another problem is Biblical ignorance among those who profess to be Christians.

Thus, in regard to Genesis, many pastors/churches deny a six day creation of ch1, a literal Fall of ch 3, and a worldwide flood of ch 6, and on. These ch’s 1-11 contain the foundational orthodox Christian doctrines like why we need a savior; that sin begets death; of created male and female and the institution of marriage and the family. Thus the church has lost its “salt” and is informed by the culture rather than the other way around. Pastors don’t want to be unpopular or thought ant-intellectual.

Of course Biblical prophecy is another ignored genre of the Bible which includes many OT books and of course Revelation. These scriptures speak to a tribulation, a literal millennium, and Christ’s second coming. In His second coming, Christ does not come as a lamb slain from the foundations of the world, but as the Lion of Judah, in judgement and destruction of unbelievers. The eternal death of unbelievers does not make for an uplifting Sunday morning. This is an unpopular teaching to “itching ears” and most contemporary pastors won’t touch Revelation with Pinocchio’s nose.

The bias against the supernatural (the whole Bible is a supernatural book) is that a six day creation, the Fall, the worldwide flood, Jesus’ miracles, etc., is anti-intellectual, and unsophisticated now. Many pastors don’t believe in this literally or are themselves confused over it. When you read Genesis and don’t accept what it says how it says it, you’ve become the authority instead of God. No can do.

How did this happen to the seminaries, the theologians, and the pastors? As far as the confusion over eschatology (the end times) it goes back to Augustine, through the RCC, through the Reformation, and is largely unchanged to even today. Most churches hold to amillennialist eschatology.

As to denying the historicity of Genesis, many of todays problems in the church and the culture are the result. This goes all the way back to the Enlightenment, and then in the 19th century with Charles Lyle, the father of modern geology (even though he was trained as a lawyer) who wanted to have an alternative to the narrative of Moses in Genesis — meaning the origin of all things without a God as the creator. He greatly influenced the elites in Europe and Charles Darwin with whom he was acquainted.

C. Darwin’s “Origins” (Darwin was a disaffected, fallen Christian) is what’s called historical science — a belief in what he (and unbelievers) want to believe how the origin of all things came to be. Materialistic Evolution was/has never been observed, is not repeatable; is based on speculation and findings having to be qualified according to preconceptions. This even includes the radioisotope aging most take as “gospel”. All of this is in contrast to operational science, which is the hard science of the lab — the science of observation, experiment and the repeatability of findings.

I know many here believe in materialist evolution as fact. Indeed, it isn’t. It’s the default theory to explain of things without the God of the Bible. It’s been called Satan’s biggest lie yet. But it’s the same manner in which he tempted Eve — as to the six-day creation, “did God really say/mean that?”

Darwin of course influenced Marx, Hitler, and others, giving them an answer to the origins of all things again without a God one has to be accountable to.

In the 1800’s the early 1990’s to the present, the institutional church was bewildered and accepted this all as fact. It is not fact, it’s speculative theory based on the first presumption of “no God.”

In the Higher criticism movement (of scripture) in Europe of the late 1800’s into the 1900’s, and especially in Germany, theologians, in the context of evolution, denied all the miracles of the scriptures. It started and accelerated the decline of church in Europe but all these things affected the institutional church worldwide.

All of this weakened the church and it lost its moral authority; after all when you can’t take Genesis literally, what else could you deny from that point on? About anything you don’tlike, or seems distasteful. This is where the church is today. It’s why denominations dither weakly for decades over homosexuality, and other issues.

On the micro level, I agree with Dirtfarmer’s comments — you (I) are sinners. Unless we confess, repent of them, and then live in gratitude to God for what He’s done (a free gift) for us, we will pay the penalty of our sins ourselves. Eternally.

Contrary to that great theologian, Oprah Winfrey, we don’t each have our own truth. The only real truth is the eternal truth revealed in the scriptures. If you don’t have a church, pastor, and leadership that teaches those truths, you are wasting your time, and you should leave.

EDIT: I forgot another reason for the church’s fear of rebutting evolution at the beginning. Remember that the RCC put Galileo into a lifetime of house arrest for his heliocentric teaching that the sun is the center of our solar system, not the earth as was their belief (Ptolemaic system) from a misinterpretation of a text in Joshua wherein the “sun stood still”. There was great embarrassment over this and eventually they had to issue an apology.

The church remembered this and was loathe to be found on the wrong side of OBSERVABLE science. However materialistic evolution of molecules-to-men is/was not observable. Again, it’s historical science not operational science.

Do you believe the earth was created less than 10,000 years ago, there was a flood that covered all land on earth, that the earth we know was created in six 24 hour days (less than 10,000 years ago)?

As to dinosaurs. We have the bones.

There is only one reality; the universe as it is. Which does not conform to what we may happen to believe about it. What we find appealing or meaningful may have little or no bearing on how the world works.

The most recent studies show that the decline of Christianity in America is mainly due to people leaving Christianity and choosing to have no religious affiliation at all. They’re not converting to other religions, and they’re not becoming atheists (atheists remain in the single digits in America). It’s Christians deciding they are not Christians anymore, and they’re simply disaffiliating from the faith. They’re known as the “nones” and this group is…and has been…growing by leaps and bounds. And while a great many in this group still affirm God’s existence and even still pray, they do not wanna be connected to any religious identity or group. It’s often not really a great change in beliefs, but affiliations.

My apologies. I thought you were advocating treating unrepentant sinners as if their sins were not actually sins.

We are good Tyrone , Take Care

Ichibod

The Church is imploding, but not HIS church. Somebody just got some bad freaking news.

Jesus consorted with tax collectors, murders, prostitutes, sinners of every kind. He came to save them. However, one of his most pointed statements was "Go, and sin no more". He never, ever said their sin was ok. We are to do the same. Tell sinners the truth and do what it takes to lead them to salvation but never, ever tell them that their sin is acceptable to the Lord because it isn't.

There’s a lotta wise dude’s here when it comes to the subject matter that is discussed on these type of threads. But I really and especially appreciate the insight from RHClark, There_Ya_Go, krp, and AKA_Spook.