Which version of Christianity is the right one?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-03-2014, 10:06 AM (This post was last modified: 01-03-2014 10:11 AM by Deltabravo.)
RE: Which version of Christianity is the right one?
(24-02-2014 03:37 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(24-02-2014 12:15 AM)Drich Wrote:  If you have not been following any of my post to this point, then maybe you do not know I do not represent any specific domination or even a non denominational church. What I am representing is biblical Christianity. Meaning what I am writing about has been modeled in the bible, and if any of you wish to see book chapter and verse then ask for it. as i have been told not to "preach" unsolicited sermons.

That said I turn my attention to the question why there are so many sects of Christianity?

My response is there has always been. If you look at how the bible was compiled and written, more over the NT. you will see it is divided into the 4 gospel accounts (the stories of Christ) the book of Acts, which is the general establishment of the Church and the introduction of the Apostle Paul. Then we have the different letters or books to the different Churches or the first centuries equivalent of the different denominations of the church. The letters to the church at Corinth, Rome, Galatia, Ephesus, The letter to the Former Hebrew worshipers, all represented different denominational forms of worship. This is made evident in the letters themselves in how the various authors addressed the various forms of worship. God through the Apostles never set up a singular form of worship as He did with the Jews.

If God wanted us to adopt all of the ceremonies traditions and rules that most of you think of whenever Christianity is mentioned. He would have given to us. Christianity Biblical Christianity is about freedom from religion. The works found in the books of the NT attest to this fact. Paul Spends most of his time shooting down all of the different religious "have to's" the different churches and church leaders were making for themselves.

Christ told us (and this sentiment is also echoed by Paul) The whole of the law hangs on two commands. To Love our Lord God with all of our being,(Heart/ with all of your feeling, Mind/with all of your academic ability, Spirit/with all of your will and Strength/physical effort) and to love our neighbor as ourselves.

That is it. Those are the governing terms of Biblical Christian worship. Subsequently that is why there are so many different sects of Christianity as well. Because all of us are a little different and we have different strength, our adherence to our greatest command would have us worship alittle differently to meet our indivisual strengths. Honestly I do not even think this is a conscience effort for most, we just naturally want to do our best for God.

For instance a charismatic man would waste away his gifts in a strictly academic church or setting. and vise versa an academic would not be worshiping God with all of His abilities if he were to worship in a jump up and down charismatic setting.

Christ freed us from a singular rule driven worship and ceremonies type of service, unless this is the type of thing we need. "For what you bind on Earth will be bound in Heaven, and what you loose on Earth will be loosed in Heaven." Meaning for the one who seeks to worship Christ with all of his being his efforts are only bound by His heart.

Obviously one has to reconcile that with what has been written to regulate the church (the have to's for the most part) but outside of where the bible speaks you are free to worship how you see fit. Apparently there about 35,000 different combinations (give or take) of sanctified (Christ centered forms of fellowship.) where like minded believers come together to worship God with all of their being.

Someone asked which one is the correct one? the answer is none are on their own merit, yet all are under the atonement offered by Christ.
How is this possible? The same atonement that is offered when one willfully sins is also offered in abundance when one gives all of His heart, Mind, Spirit and Strength to God. Even if all that he has to offer falls short of another's standard.

The tricky thing here is not to talk yourself into lowering your "all in standard" to suit your current life style, lest you think God a fool or bound by loop holes you have created for yourself.

No.

You're no representative of "biblical Christianity." You're just spouting your own feel good nonsense. You appear to know nothing of the history.

The bible was written to control people. That'a all there is to it. It's propaganda. Promise the plebs heaven, threaten them with hell, and then tax their income. It's a licence to make money.

The reason there are so many denominations is that over the years many people didn't like being controlled by other Christians, so created their own little empires.

You're repeating the pattern with "your" (terribly unoriginal) interpretation, and your patronising, narcissistic attitude..."If you want to ask me a question feel free to Pm me or E/M me. I will not speak of it to anyone." You think you're a shining light, yet you're just another thoroughly brainwashed sheep desperate for some recognition.

While I agree with you that the bible was written for political purposes I think it can be interesting, if one is interested at all in such things, to look at it once it has been demystified. I happen to agree with Joe Atwill, as you know, that it was written by Jospephus (and possibly others) and I also believe (it appears, controversially) that if it was written as Joe Atwill says, after the conclusion of the Roman war against the Jews was concluded, that the figure of Jesus of Gamala is the most likely candidate as the priest who was crucified and taken down from the cross.

I think this is significant because of what is said a the beginning of the Gospel of John, that the notion of "god" is the same as the "word". This suggests a religion which actually doesn't preach what is typically said of it. I think the NT is written very cryptically. For instance, I sat down a while ago and did what Joe Atwill did with the resurrection stories in the gospels and it blew me away. It is obvious this is someone playing games because each one is completely different and in very central ways. Christianity supposed to be a proseletysing religion. In one Gospel Jesus tells the disciples to go abroad and spread the word. In another he tells them not to and to "tarry" in Jerusalem. The stories are mutally exclusive. In one Mary sees Jesus, in another she doesn't. Regardless of the intertextual theory of Atwill, whoever "put" this together knew that these were different.

My guess is different from Atwill. He says the Flavians knew the joke. I don't think so. I think the joke was on them. I believe, although I haven't had time to research this, that Josephus was a friend of Jesus of Gamala and he deliberately wrote these contraditions into the bible to say to people who could figure it out, that it wasn't to be taken as truthful at all. It was written in such a way that eventually it would all unravel. That is why it was only possible to read the bible in Latin until the reformation.

Anyway, the part about "the word" is significant. There is a psychological theory called "logotherapy" attributed to Viktor Frankl who was a concentration camp survivor http://www.rjgeib.com/thoughts/frankl/frankl.html

Frankl was a camp psychiatrist and helped prisoners by getting them to look at their "purpose". He had a 100 % success rate in preventing suicides which is a paradox considering where he was...

The point is that this concept of examining one's purpose, one's meaning, one's logic or logos may, I theorize, be at the center of the teachings which are in the NT. Pagan gnosticism ideas are similar to Buddhistic/Vedic ideas in that in Buddhism the starting point is to understand that at the center of our understanding of the human condition is "anxiety" and that the path out of anxiety...about life, about anything, is to be mindful, to consider one's condition, to examine one's purpose.

Perhaps that is simplistic but if one looks at the NT idea of the "word" as being central, it is a very profound message and one worth considering on its merits rather than as being bound to a godman and resurrection. Some things one has to put down to simple ignorance but the idea of dealing with one's anxiety by embracing and loving one's purpose in life is very profound. I think by writing the bible the way it is so that intelligent people would eventually see it was a fiction, whoever (Josephus) wrote it anticipated that we would discover that he was only talking about a real person and a philosophy of life that he shared with that person, ie., gnostic vedism in which one found release from anxiety by way of embracing one's purpose and loving others as one loves oneself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-03-2014, 10:24 AM
RE: Which version of Christianity is the right one?
(01-03-2014 10:06 AM)Deltabravo Wrote:  if one is interested at all in such things,


Did you catch the name on the door of the forum you're in?
Sadcryface

When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-03-2014, 10:31 AM
RE: Which version of Christianity is the right one?
(01-03-2014 09:31 AM)Deltabravo Wrote:  I do despair for mankind if this thread is any indication.

I am not a Christian but if one reads the Gospel of John it starts with "In the beginning was the word...the word was God".

Which makes it pretty clear that in this religion "god" is not a fairy or an old man in the sky. It is what the Greeks called the "logos", which some....me, for instance...would interpret as meaning "purpose". If one could do a "search and replace" on the bible then one would not have God at all but "The Word" or "the Purpose of Life". If that is so, then we are being exhorted to "love one's purpose in life" and to love others as one loves oneself.

Save you despair and drama for the Oscars, Drama Queen.
Too bad you also know nothing about the Bible and the cultures that produced it.
The Gospel of John was created by Greek Gnostic Christians. The "word" to them meant something far different than it did to Hebrew Christians, and to us today.

"Which makes it pretty clear that in this religion "god" is not a fairy or an old man in the sky" is not a complete sentence in the English language, BTW. If you feel you need to correct others. maybe you should go get an education, yourself.

Your interpretation of something you clearly know nothing about is totally irrelevant. Doing a "search and replace" with "presentist" (and wrong) interpretations of the complex issues of ancient Near Eastern literature is a sure-fire way to ensure you get it wrong. You can interpret it any way you want. It doesn't make it either correct, or have any relationship to the context or meaning the authors intended. You can make up anything you want. No wonder you're a fan of Ellis.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
01-03-2014, 10:54 AM
RE: Which version of Christianity is the right one?
(28-02-2014 05:36 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Hi! Welcome!

There's nothing like a grand entrance!

I want someone like you as my right hand man.

Thank you. My pleasure.

[Image: geoImcXGIQOmfb0Jil2zp_6od392QbLCXCF9r49S...boA1w=w300]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TheWordsoftheBeast's post
01-03-2014, 10:55 AM
RE: Which version of Christianity is the right one?
(01-03-2014 06:39 AM)Deltabravo Wrote:  I have come to "believe" that Christianity is much older than the Jesus story and that the clue to it is in the name. The idea of crucifying someone wasn't invented for Jesus. It has a symbolism, otherwise the whole episode would have been incomprehensible. Linguistically, christ is just two syllables, a rolled, deep throat "Chrrr" followed by "Is" with a final "t" which denotes a condition "of" whatever proceeds it as in "colored". for instance. This word is in all language and is the same as "haris" in Sanskrit, "aris" in Greek etc. It simply denotes an old god who the Egyptians called Horus but goes back even further.

Is this your own idea, or is there some source for this? On its face, it makes little sense at all.

Quote:I think it is more important to look at the history of the time, independently of the NT and see what happened and when. For my part, I am satisfied, for the time being, that the Christianity of the new testament is a from of gnosticism which was circulating amongst a Jewish sect at the time and that the NT is a fictionalization of some events involving the Jewish high priest, Jesus of Gamala, who was a real person and who is similar in some ways to Jesus but whose timeline is later than the NT Jesus: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/1st-cen...2013-03-04

It's possible. I'm of the opinion, that the Jesus of the NT is a constructed character composed to undermine the memories of several leaders of the Jewish rebellions. For this to hold, you have to date the Gospels (in finished form) to no earlier than about 132CE. But there isn't anything prohibitting such a dating.

...pay your taxes, obey authority, no need for sacrifices or the temple you would perform them at, your kingdom is not of this earth - this is obvious Roman propaganda addressed to undermine the causes of the Jewish uprisings.

Softly, softly, catchee monkey.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes toadaly's post
01-03-2014, 10:56 AM
RE: Which version of Christianity is the right one?
(01-03-2014 10:31 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(01-03-2014 09:31 AM)Deltabravo Wrote:  I do despair for mankind if this thread is any indication.

I am not a Christian but if one reads the Gospel of John it starts with "In the beginning was the word...the word was God".

Which makes it pretty clear that in this religion "god" is not a fairy or an old man in the sky. It is what the Greeks called the "logos", which some....me, for instance...would interpret as meaning "purpose". If one could do a "search and replace" on the bible then one would not have God at all but "The Word" or "the Purpose of Life". If that is so, then we are being exhorted to "love one's purpose in life" and to love others as one loves oneself.

Save you despair and drama for the Oscars, Drama Queen.
Too bad you also know nothing about the Bible and the cultures that produced it.
The Gospel of John was created by Greek Gnostic Christians. The "word" to them meant something far different than it did to Hebrew Christians, and to us today.

"Which makes it pretty clear that in this religion "god" is not a fairy or an old man in the sky" is not a complete sentence in the English language, BTW. If you feel you need to correct others. maybe you should go get an education, yourself.

Your interpretation of something you clearly know nothing about is totally irrelevant. Doing a "search and replace" with "presentist" (and wrong) interpretations of the complex issues of ancient Near Eastern literature is a sure-fire way to ensure you get it wrong. You can interpret it any way you want. It doesn't make it either correct, or have any relationship to the context or meaning the authors intended. You can make up anything you want. No wonder you're a fan of Ellis.

I smell troll. Do you?

When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-03-2014, 10:56 AM
RE: Which version of Christianity is the right one?
(28-02-2014 04:37 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(28-02-2014 04:27 PM)TheWordsoftheBeast Wrote:  None of them are correct, let alone good for you. What a sad religion you have, needing to cleansed of your humanity from birth. The stench of your own animalistic origins is too rank for you. If you had any pride, any celebration for life in you, you would never curse your origins and nature in such a servile, weak, manner. Carry on being a hypocrite you worm, confess and try again. You will always fail, because sin does not exist. There is no god. There is no heaven. Live until you curse your god for all the misery you inflict upon yourself, and die a hollow empty death. We will see which of us has had an existence worth remembering.

Welcome to the forum...why don't you introduce yourself so we can learn a bit more about ya?

I am a satanist, if you hadn't gathered that already.

I keep the majority of my personal information private, although i would be willing to answer questions about satanism if people are unfamiliar.

[Image: geoImcXGIQOmfb0Jil2zp_6od392QbLCXCF9r49S...boA1w=w300]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-03-2014, 10:58 AM
RE: Which version of Christianity is the right one?
(28-02-2014 08:48 PM)Drich Wrote:  meh...
Drinking Beverage

Nothing to say little sheep? How quaint, like a dog that is kicked and rolls on its back.

[Image: geoImcXGIQOmfb0Jil2zp_6od392QbLCXCF9r49S...boA1w=w300]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-03-2014, 10:59 AM
RE: Which version of Christianity is the right one?
(01-03-2014 10:56 AM)TheWordsoftheBeast Wrote:  
(28-02-2014 04:37 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  Welcome to the forum...why don't you introduce yourself so we can learn a bit more about ya?

I am a satanist, if you hadn't gathered that already.

I keep the majority of my personal information private, although i would be willing to answer questions about satanism if people are unfamiliar.

But not the Worship Satan kind?

When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-03-2014, 11:01 AM
RE: Which version of Christianity is the right one?
(28-02-2014 08:50 PM)Drich Wrote:  When logic and reason fail you, I see your goto.

You lie so often, I think you would prefer to be a satanist, or maybe you already are. If you are going to lie, at least be good at it. Everyone knows that reason and logic don't lead to theism, especially not Christianity. If you respected either, you wouldn't be here as a theist.

[Image: geoImcXGIQOmfb0Jil2zp_6od392QbLCXCF9r49S...boA1w=w300]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: