The past topics I have seen on this forum, make the Christian life seem so complicated. What parts of the Bible to believe? How to interpret? Etc. For myself, I first believe you either accept all of the Bible as truth, or non of it. If some of it is not true, by what means do you judge? Second, I don't need a denomination, a religion, a theology. I don't believe God wants having a relationship with him to be clouded by all the garbage and politics. I have faith. I believe that is all we need. As Charles Stanley says, "Obey God, and leave the consequences to Him." It's that simple. Some things are not for us to understand, no matter how smart we think we are. It's that simple!
Christianity should be simple but the sad reality is that it isn't.
You have people, more importantly lawmakers, who believe in an interpretation of scriptures that limits the rights of certain kind of people. You need people to also study the scriptures and create a counter argument against those people. Because if you did not have people to rise up and challenge the interpretation of Scriptures, we would still have slavery, women would still not be allowed to vote or have the rights a man has, and LGBTQ people would still be arrested for showing their affection to someone...even in the privacy of their own homes.
Even Charles Stanley condemns homosexuality based on his interpretation. Which I do not agree with. So his own stance is not simplistic. He practices simplicity within his own realm of theology but when it comes to other influences of Christianity, he is not simple as seen in this video:
How can I extend love to someone in a sinful lifestyle? (Ask Dr. Stanley) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnXZq0NtO3I#)
The simplicity of Christianity disappeared before Paul even wrote his first letter. If Christianity was so simple, Paul would had no need to write letters to the Churches in Corinth and Galatia because he wrote those letters to try to quell debates and indifference within the church body. The same types of arguments continue to this day.
Even the sayings of Christ are not simple. The parables are one main point of this. To this very day, Christians have different viewpoints on what the parables meant. The wedding party and the guests is one parable that has shaped many different spheres of Christian influence. Some would say that parable is proof that God tosses people into hell. Others say the parable is theological proof for Pre Destination, others say it is a parable to be ready for God's return. Some say it is a parable about the Eucharist and others say it is about the promised day of seeing God and being invited at God's table.
Christianity isn't the only religion or faith that is like this. Spirituality is just not simple since the diversity is so great.
Hey Annah. It's always been said, the Bible is subject to interpretaion. I believe the reason that is true is because, God wants to have a unique relationship with all of us. What you get out of a certain passage of scripture might not be what God reveals to me, from the same source. I also believe, either you believe all of the Bible, or non of it. Even the pharisees professed to know God, when they did'nt know him at all.
I will just state, I enjoy Dr. Stanley's teachings. He is a man of God.
Just an addition. What does it matter what any religion states? In all of Jesus's teachings, there is one simple message. That being,"Believe in me." "Believe in me and all things will be added to you." So, why do we look to complicate that simple message? Obedience! Trusting! Faith! Things that people look to take out of society. Things that we need to bring back.
Quote from: Beth Andrea on October 15, 2011, 12:43:22 PM
I note, with wry irony, that your entire post does not mention the one element which defines Christianity (and I was one, for many years)....
1. Everyone has sinned;
2. Jesus was killed on the cross to atone for our sins;
3. He then was resurrected, which showed that death (which is the wages of sin) can be overcome, if one accepts Christ as their Lord and Savior.
Simple. End of argument. All else is made by man, and should be discarded.
And not every Christian believe in those points.
For example, I do not believe in Patriarchal Sin (meaning you were born into sin because of Adam and Eve)
You also have Christians that beleive that the death of Christ was not because of atonement of sins. The fact that God would strap his son on a tree to be slaughtered to appease the holy wraith doesn't sit well for some. You have Christians who believes he was murdered because they were not ready to hear his message.
You even have Christians who do not believe in the Resurrection.
Christianity is very complicated by its very nature! It is anything but simplistic and even those who say they are simplistic are really not when they encounter someone who does not believe in everything they do.
Simple. John 3:16. Sums up the whole Bible. Either you believe or you don't. To make things more complicated than that....is to deceive.
Quote from: mowdan6 on October 15, 2011, 01:05:50 PM
Simple. John 3:16. Sums up the whole Bible. Either you believe or you don't. To make things more complicated than that....is to deceive.
John 3:16 is not that simple because there are many ways to interpret it.
One way to interpret is that Jesus came to bridge the gap between God and humankind. And those who proclaim Jesus as their Savior will go to heaven. Those who have not will go to hell.
Another way to interpret it is that Jesus came for everything...the entire world....regardless if they believe him or not and all "are saved."
So, that verse is more complicated than you think as there are different ways to see it....even the simple ones.
Hi Annah. The Bible says. We are not to know everything. That God;s ways are higher than ours. You are taking having a simple faith in God to making it a complicated problem. From what you have said, you are studying to be a pastor. Are you looking to teach a belief that is unattainable, or that is a simple faith in Jesus? We can question, but again it is not all for us to know. As Jesus said, "Blessed are those that believe and have not seen."
Back in the "olden days", many people had a direct relationship with a higher power. They came to be known as Gnostics. Christians demonized them and labeled them heretics. The reason was obvious - they didn't need the the power hungry bishops and arch-bishops, the same people who made them heretics.
I was born into a Catholic family. My mother was Episcopalian and converted to Catholicism in order to marry my father. She was pressured into doing so and really never embraced the Catholic religion. My father was one of those people who gave the impression he was a good Catholic but didn't practice it in every day life. That was pretty common back then as there was a huge social pressure to do things like attend church and, of course, make donations.
Like most kids, I picked up on this. So I really never succumbed to the brainwashing of the whole Catholic thing. But I did attend a Catholic grade school, high school and college, the latter two run by the Jesuits. For anyone who doesn't know, the Jesuits had a reputation for being VERY strict. So I was exposed to a lot of pressure to conform to the Catholic teachings.
I tried to be a good little Catholic but for some reason I was always skeptical towards the nuns and priests. I just didn't believe they were sincere in their teachings. To me it came across as "Do as I say, not as I do." And this was decades before the priest abuse scandal broke.
But during that time I did have a personal relationship with some higher power that I called God. It was just between the two of us. So I guess that made me an Gnostic. But all the while my understanding of what was expected of me to be a good person was to treat others well. Be nice, be helpful, be considerate. Simple things like that. Following all the mumbo jumbo many hang their hat on never made sense to me. It seemed to me completely antiquated and not at all relevant to life in the present. It would be like speaking in Old English to a group of New York construction workers.
So yes, I agree, Christianity, and any other religion, isn't that complicated nor does it have to be. And the people who make it so... well, we know why they do.
Quote from: mowdan6 on October 15, 2011, 01:36:32 PM
Hi Annah. The Bible says. We are not to know everything. That God;s ways are higher than ours. You are taking having a simple faith in God to making it a complicated problem. From what you have said, you are studying to be a pastor. Are you looking to teach a belief that is unattainable, or that is a simple faith in Jesus? We can question, but again it is not all for us to know. As Jesus said, "Blessed are those that believe and have not seen."
The Bible also says:
2 Timothy 3:16-17
All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.
and
Acts 8:30 ESV
So Philip ran to him and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet and asked, "Do you understand what you are reading?"
If I never bothered to dwell in the readings, to learn the Hebrew and Greek and to understand the exegetical process of Biblical Interpretation, then I would be giving my church a great disservice if all I do is sit there and say "it's simple" and not bother to argue against the "simple" teachings that homosexuality is immoral and same sex marriage is illegal because the Bible says so.
So....if you dis-believe the Bible....Why are you studying to be a pastor?
Quote from: mowdan6 on October 15, 2011, 01:52:03 PM
So....if you dis-believe the Bible....Why are you studying to be a pastor?
Yeah, because i study the bible, use it, and I find scriptures where homosexual bigots misread the text, then i don't believe in it. How ignorant. Im done with this thread. This is troll bait and i wont fall for it.
The world is more complex than your ecclesiastical opinions on what is right and what is wrong. Something to remember...especially when a pastor points a fnger at you and tells you that you are gong to hell because you're gay.
And im not just a christian pastor. I also practice withcraft. I am interfaith and embrace all religions.
I guess I am open like that because I am simple
So are your beliefs. I have faith in God, that His ways will prevail.
Quote from: mowdan6 on October 15, 2011, 02:20:35 PM
So are your beliefs. I have faith in God, that His ways will prevail.
I have faith in God too. And it is a wondrous thing to have. The most miraculous thing I have discovered s that God loves everyone.
So mote it be and God bless.
Hey Annah. God bless you also. And you are right. My faith in God, is the best thing I have. Thankful we can have this debate and still live in the peace of God. And live in love for each other.
Amen to that :)
At first I wasn't going to say anything as I do not like getting involved in squabbles about scripture. I would rather just post that which might help babes in Christ so their faith isn't ruined and they commit suicide.
But, when you see people do something that may anger God it isn't very loving to sit back and say nothing.
Having said thus I want to say something in Paul's defense using Peter.
Matthew 16:13-17
[13] When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
[14] And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
[15] He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
[16] And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
[17] And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
Peter must have been chosen of God for Matthew to bear witness of him as receiving a revelation from the Lord. Since this was also born witness of by Jesus it is safe to assume that by two or three witnesses (God, Jesus and Matthew) that Peter would have been a credible witness.
What else is there about Peter's walk with the Lord?
Matthew 17:1-9
[1] And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart,
[2] And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.
[3] And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.
[4] Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.
[5] While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.
[6] And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid.
[7] And Jesus came and touched them, and said, Arise, and be not afraid.
[8] And when they had lifted up their eyes, they saw no man, save Jesus only.
[9] And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen again from the dead.
We know that Peter did speak of this after the Lord arose from the dead. It is interesting that the Lord chose three to reveal himself to. The three pillars of the church so to speak.
I won't go into all the other references about Peter such as when the angels told the women Go tell the disciples and Peter that the Lord has arisen from the dead. Peter was probably singled out as assurance for his forgiveness after denying the Lord 3 times.
But, what did Peter say about Paul?
If Paul was a false witness or not chosen of God Peter would know and say as much.
2 Peter 3:13-16
[13] Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.
[14] Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.
[15] And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
[16] As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
According to Peter who was chosen of God, had the keys to the kingdom of God, saw Jesus transfigured and told when to speak about what he witnessed on the mount of transfiguration the Apostle Paul was given wisdom.
If the Apostle Paul was given wisdom we know that wisdom came from above. If not Peter who was close to Jesus would have said he was a heretic and not a brother.
Peter also said the things which Paul wrote and spoke in his epistles was hard to be understood. They still are for many today.
Peter says that those who wrest with them do so unto their own destruction. How much more when they call him a false prophet and such.
Psalm 105:13-15
[13] When they went from one nation to another, from one kingdom to another people;
[14] He suffered no man to do them wrong: yea, he reproved kings for their sakes;
[15] Saying, Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm.
For brother Paul to have wisdom given him he must have been anointed of God.
Is this else where?
1 Chronicles 16:22
[20] And when they went from nation to nation, and from one kingdom to another people;
[21] He suffered no man to do them wrong: yea, he reproved kings for their sakes,
[22] Saying, Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm.
The reason I post these things is because we need to be sure of what we are being taught. The quickest way to damn one's self isn't being gay, straight, transgender or cisgender.
The quickest way to damn one's self is to lash out or speak against one anointed of God. It is blasphemy of the Holy Ghost.
Proverbs 6:16-19
[16] These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
[17] A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
[18] An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
[19] A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.
You all can believe what you want but at least I have a clean conscience in warning. It is better not to say anything than to badmouth one anointed of God. It's worse when it may lead to ruining the faith of a fellow transgender that relies on those scripture for support and comfort in troublesome times.
Were there twelve Apostles?
Who was the twelfth? Matthias.
Were there any other disciples?
70 others that walked away.
Who was Paul?
The Apostle to the Gentiles. The other twelve ministered in Jerusalem to the Jews.
Like I said. Believe what you want but take care with your words. If you offend God with his own word he has exalted that above his name and doesn't take it lightly.
I will bless you all now by staying out of the conversation and returning to just making a post now and then when I feel it may help someone.
Take care.
There are 37,000 flavors of christianity
one for every day of the yr times 100 yrs
God speaks to our hearts
the only treasures we have are in our hearts
God judges the heart
people judge the appearence
Quote from: Del on October 15, 2011, 04:35:37 PM
For brother Paul to have wisdom given him he must have been anointed of God.
Is this else where?
The reason I post these things is because we need to be sure of what we are being taught. The quickest way to damn one's self isn't being gay, straight, transgender or cisgender.
The quickest way to damn one's self is to lash out or speak against one anointed of God. It is blasphemy of the Holy Ghost.
The "Blasphemy of the Holy Ghost" has been different or had different actions to blaspheme the holy spirit more times than there has been centuries. If you cuss you Blaspheme, if you yell at God you blaspheme, if you're gay you blaspheme, etc etc.
Countless of Commentaries all have different views on how does one actually blaspheme the holy spirit. Some say by lying because the Holy Spirit killed Ananias and Sapphira because they lied to Peter about the giving of their lands. Personally, I think Peter had them killed (but that is for an entirely different thread).
Quote
Proverbs 6:16-19
[16] These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:
[17] A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
[18] An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
[19] A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.
You all can believe what you want but at least I have a clean conscience in warning. It is better not to say anything than to badmouth one anointed of God. It's worse when it may lead to ruining the faith of a fellow transgender that relies on those scripture for support and comfort in troublesome times.
If you look in Leviticus, eating shrimp is an abomination of God too. I try not to dwell upon Torah or Hebrew laws as much. Now, I do agree one should not lie, etc etc but I do not lie not because the OT tells me not too, but because my conscious (and HS maybe?) directs me to.
QuoteWere there twelve Apostles?
Who was the twelfth? Matthias.
Were there any other disciples?
70 others that walked away.
Who was Paul?
The Apostle to the Gentiles. The other twelve ministered in Jerusalem to the Jews.
Like I said. Believe what you want but take care with your words. If you offend God with his own word he has exalted that above his name and doesn't take it lightly.
I will bless you all now by staying out of the conversation and returning to just making a post now and then when I feel it may help someone.
Take care.
Thank you :)
But for me I have little concern. I just believe in a God full of love. I actually call God my Father and Mother and use both He and She interchangeably when talking about Her in Church.
I see God so full of love that it would be silly to try to obey all these rules and laws. I go by two commandments. Love your neighbor and love your God. I let everything else fall into place.
Plus, if God commands us to forgive, then I expect God to do the same.
I appreciate your desire to simplify matters, I really do. But unfortunately the reality is far more complicated than the minimalist ideal, because no one agrees on the details. Without a consensus on the details, it's pretty darn hard to boil everything down into a simple, yet profound expression. The best that's ever been done for your everyday life, in my view, is this:
"For all the law is fulfilled in one word, [even] in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." Galatians 5:14
And even THAT is oversimplifying the religion to a massive degree. You've got to deal with issues of the Christian community's structure (should it be hierarchical or flat?), how to attain salvation, who can attain salvation (is it available to everyone at all times [Universalism], available to everyone until death [Arminianism], or available only to the elect [Calvinism]?), what happens to souls which do not attain salvation (temporary punishment for rehabilitation [Universalism], eternal punishment for punishment's sake, or simple deletion [Annihilationism]?)
These aren't matters which one can simply ignore. They're important (and entirely fair) questions that have practical, everyday value to Christians. And since the answers to these questions are so varied in nature, we can't simply compress them all into one mega-faith.
Christianity was created with the idea one should follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. And that's where things get complicated because, to the best of my knowledge, Christ never put any of his teachings or beliefs down in writing. One must rely on interpretations of others, and I think that's where the waters get very cloudy.
If you want to be a Taoist, read the Tao Te Ching, written by Lao Tzu. Yes, you will need to do some interpretations but all interpretations begin with what Lao Tzu wrote. Not so with Christianity. You have to begin with what OTHER people wrote, who no doubt did some interpreting themselves, and then take it from there. And by the time it gets to you no doubt some pope, bishop, priest or some other religious figure has told you how to interpret those words of those who interpreted what Christ said or what someone else said Christ said. And then there's the people you're not even supposed to read like Mary Magdalene and Judas, two people who knew Christ very well.
The biggest problem I had with Catholicism was the huge degree by which all the religious figures who professed expertise had in their interpretation of Christ's teachings. I eventually concluded I'm better off not asking anyone anything but rather figuring it out on my own.
In the History of Christianity classes I had taken, multiple interpretations really took off once Christianity became Rome's state religion.
Fundamentally, Christianity "according to the teachings of Jesus" was simplistic. We started to make it complicated by trying to define the essence, nature and spirit of Jesus, The Holy Spirit, et al.
For example, you had the Council of Nicea (325 CE) to define a Christian. Then you had the Council of Constantinople (in 381 then in 553 and in 680 CE) to define it more and then you had the Council of Chalcedon (451 CE).
I find it interesting that the Council of Chalcedon stated:
Following the holy Fathers we teach with one voice that the Son [of God] and our Lord Jesus Christ is to be confessed as one and the same [Person], that he is perfect in Godhead and perfect in manhood, very God and very man, of a reasonable soul and [human] body consisting, consubstantial with the Father as touching his Godhead, and consubstantial with us as touching his manhood; made in all things like unto us, sin only excepted; begotten of his Father before the worlds according to his Godhead; but in these last days for us men and for our salvation born [into the world] of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God according to his manhood. This one and the same Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son [of God] must be confessed to be in two natures, unconfusedly (Eutyches), immutably (Arian), indivisibly(Nestorius), inseparably [united](Arian and Apollynariam), and that without the distinction of natures being taken away by such union (Eutyches, Polynaros), but rather the peculiar property of each nature being preserved (Nestorius)and being united in one Person and subsistence, not separated or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son and only-begotten, God the Word, our Lord Jesus Christ, as the Prophets of old time have spoken concerning him, and as the Lord Jesus Christ hath taught us, and as the Creed of the Fathers hath delivered to us.
Everything I underlined and bolded were the people I added in that the creed was personally attack as those people had different interpretations. Even the early church writers such as Justin The Martyr were defined as heretics based on their beliefs.
Everyone ("heretics" included) used passages of the New Testament to define their beliefs. One of the biggest reasons why we have the definitions of orthodox religion today is because of the Emperors backing up the Bishops who concluded that their interpretations were right. One example we have in this is the Emperor's daughter, Hilaria believed that Mary should have been the Theotokos (Mother of God). The orthodox Bishops said that was wrong. It should be Christotokos (The Mother of Christ). The Emperor of Rome was offended that the bishops would disagree with his daughter. So in the Council of Ephesus, the Orthodoxy Bishops made it official that Theotokos would be the word. This became Orthodoxy because the Emperor's daughter wanted it to be so. Just like many other reasons why things became orthodoxy.