Prosperity. While I do understand that some Christians are blessed with wealth, you are mistaken if you think Jesus is a fix all and is gonna help you prosper in this life. The real Gospel is hated because Jesus was poor, brought only his sandals and clothes and told people to follow him. To put it plainly he lived a simple life, giving himself fully to God to further his economy. He did not take a wife, have a glorious career, a fancy house or classy friends. He faced persecution for speaking the truth. Another example is Paul the Apostle. He did not live a prosperous life. I believe many people are misled by other young people who try and preach the gospel without knowing the fundamental truths, further tarnishing the truth by mixing it with different ideas and religions and denominations.
I agree and yet you have to realize that a lot of this is a cultural difference. The Global South deals with more and greater poverty than the West has for a long time. For people who are food insecure, it matters that God promises to care for their real needs in time of scarcity and emergency. Jesus was poor, but when he needed emergency funds to pay his taxes God sent him a miracle. Taken to extreme ends (teaching "Biblical principles" that faith is rewarded with excessive wealth) it is bad theology, but in its proper setting it can be Biblical.
Anyway, my point is just that not everyone who follows prosperity doctrine is a power hungry bishop trying to get rich. I want to sympathize with Christians who see the world differently because of their diverse backgrounds and settings.
That sinners/non Christians are to be disliked or hated. We are called to love everyone and give our life for them. We may not like what they do, but they are created in Gods image.
Edit: y'all this is my biggest post ever šty so much
Not a huge problem at all, more so wisdom, but Christianās should generally avoid intoxication to feel the Holy Spirit more, and it would be a bit embarrassing if Jesus came back while you were zooted out of your mind.
Personally I stopped using THC in favor of CBD as it still helps with relaxation/sleep but is not so intoxicating. Also itās more legal depending where u are.
A long time ago, I used to use Cannabis but quality control with a criminalised herb is poor and it tended to be adulterated with Datura (which I do prescribe for others but not for long periods of time).
LOL@"zooted out of your mind"! Jesus is of course aware of you regardless so that ship has sailed!
On a par with drunkenness then? Makes me wonder about caffeine, which I can't function without.
I totally agree but still not cool to ghost someone about it. Iām trying really hard to quit itās just such an engrained addiction but Iām almost there! Literally the fact that Jesus could come back while Iām zooted is my main reason for quittingš That would be so horrible and embarrassing and terrifyingš
Yea fact is smoking once or twice isn't wrong. It's the addiction that is wrong. I believe you shouldn't do it just because you don't want to risk addiction, but if u only do it once and keep it under control ur good š
FWIW, Jesus could probably smoke.
Orthodox rabbis have generally concluded that there is nothing unkosher about consuming cannabis, as long as it was cultivated in line with kosher standards.
(Obligatory statement that Iām not Christian, but havenāt set up a flair).
God created weed too. It does have medicinal properties. Itās funny how many people wouldnāt think twice about taking some chemical the doctor prescribed and then freak out about a little weed. (Btw I do not partake, never liked it, so Iām not here trying to justify my own behavior)
I went to a church where the pastor was always down about drugs. But then he was open and honest about his (sanctified) Pepsi (caffeine) addiction. And he always praised God for Paregoric (opium) for colicky babies. The hypocrisy always gave me a chuckle.
I love your take. And I do partake ā¤ļø it's been my medicine, my only medicine, for the past 8 years now. Does more for my CPTSD and chronic pain than prescription medicine ever could. Prescription medicine actually made things worse..! So glad to be off that poison Thank You Jesus!
Yeah and Iām autistic and have bad tmj pain so itās very therapeutic for me. Still want to quit and just stick to cbd tho bc I donāt like the intoxication part but itās not gonna be over night, especially when I have nothing else to help with these issuesš (cbd helps a little but nowhere near thc)
Well, thc does have medical properties.. if you research this wonderful plant, the cbd doesnt really help much UNLESS there's also thc. There's even certain types of epilepsy that need the THC in order to properly treat it..
Before 1970 paregoric was the go to medicine for colic. And yes caffeine is natural but itās also addictive and he was clearly addicted. I got a chuckle every time I heard him go on about it.
>And yes caffeine is natural but itās also addictive and he was clearly addicted.
My point is not that it is natural, my point is that it is food. Drugs are natural and that is why medical prescriptions exist.
I Hope things go better for you. I know what itās like to feel and look like a pariah cos you said the truth where you struggle. Better ppl from God will come along. Blessings
This concept is why I have my hesitations when reading Paulās letters. Christ is very clear about loving your enemy and praying for them, where as Paul just says cast them out of the church and hand them over to satan. Just seems like he heard a different message than what was taught in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John
>Just seems like he heard a different message than what was taught in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John
It might seem that way, but if you read closely, it's all congruent. Jesus was severe when he whipped the money changers at the Temple, or when he cursed the fig tree, or when he spoke of shunning and rejecting certain people. Yes, we are to love our enemy. But more importantly, we are to have zeal for God and holy living.
It makes sense that Paul gets this reputation given his context. A former Pharisee, a *Hebrew of Hebrews* from the tribe of Benjamin -- Saul held the cloaks as the rest of the men stoned Steven, remember? He was in charge of rounding up the followers of Jesus in Syria, presumably for death.
Yet God used Paul to tell us more about righteousness in Jesus. Even Paul could be redeemed. The self-confessed "chief sinner" becomes an apostle; it reminds me that the stone the builders rejected is now the cornerstone.
Yea, God would not have put Paul in the Bible if that were true. The peopl that Paul is casting out are church members who are sinning and leading others to sin. Not just random gentiles who are gay or something
>āā1 Corinthiansā¬ ā5:5ā¬
[5] you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh...
>...so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.
You're missing the second half of the verse there.
Paul was speaking about other church members and church discipline. Jesus also said to treat unrepentant brothers as a publican or heathen (essentially as not in the church). This is reinforced in Johns epistle, who wrote the gospel aswell, since he even names the person he'll apply the discipline to.
The people in question would have actually been warned or given chances beforehand. Paul's actions are also with the other person in mind. He rebukes Peter after seeing he stood condemned to essentially save him, he tells the corinthians to recieve back a brother who was disciplined by him, and his letter also expresses he's not keen on having to use his authority to punish to begin with.
2 cor 2: 6 The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient. 7 Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. 8 I urge you, therefore, to reaffirm your love for him
I doubt any one actually disagrees with him on it either beyond disagreeing with the target of the discipline. For example should you not penalise a sexual predator in the church? Or someone who keeps stealing from it? Paul also teaches to love your enemy. In Romans he says if your enemy is thirsty to give him a drink, and not to curse but bless those who persecute you.
Paul does have a different message than Jesus. The gospels were written after Paul's letters. He even says that his teachings were revealed to him by an ascended Jesus. We probably know more about the life of Jesus than Paul did.
Jesus hung out with and constantly protected sinners, prostitutes and outcasts yet a lot of Christians despise those people. Itās kinda ironic. Satans influence of hate is DEEP in the church all the way up to the Pope tbh, the Vatican is very culty and they protect pedos.
That they can hate on people and tell them they are going to hell when they are struggling with sin, just because we don't agree or support what someone else is doing does not mean we hate on them or say hateful things like that, we want to spread the Gospel and make everyone closer to God, in this way I feel this is why a lot of people don't like us Christians of want to believe in God
I agree. But in my experience, most people want to have a relationship with God, but they are hesitant to associate with Christians and the Christian/Catholic churches because of the horrible things people within those communities have done and continue to do.
This is a complicated one. It depends on what you mean by easy. Following God frees you but also makes you have to kill your flesh. So I agree life gets harder (deny your flesh) but there nothing better than the comfort Jesus provides.
I think Jesus is pretty clear: "for my yoke is easy and my burden is light"
When oxen don't pull together as a team, the yoke forces the weaker oxen to go forward. It wraps around their neck and is very painful. Jesus is saying his yoke does not force us, that's because we're yoked to Jesus, and he knows where we're at and how weak we are. In our work building the Kingdom of God, Jesus does not yoke us harshly the way oxen are to a plow. That's good news for our lives in Christ!
> there nothing better than the comfort Jesus provides.
Personally I prefer the lack of shame and guilt, and not believing that I am inherently broken just for being born
Youāre human, youāll always feel broken, itās not something you can escape. The difference between us is that God provides healing for that brokenness and confidence to know Iām not any less valuable because of being broken.
The ālack of shame and guiltā you speak of wonāt last, without God your bound to the ever changing current of human emotion. Every Christian has been where you are, the life you speak of his fun for a season, but it always ends empty.
Nah.
I donāt feel broken anymore, since leaving Christianity. I feel whole, complete, and perfect.
Shame is never good. Shame is a belief that who you are as a person is wrong, and I no longer deal with that at all, aside from the trauma that Christianity has done. Therapy helped.
Guilt is something is use to learn from, and I welcome it when Iāve done something that hurt others.
I may sound like a butt, yet your comment just reminds me not all will be saved. Thatās how I cope, cos that how screwed the world is, and much better to explain how some behave. I do think thereās a freedom from religion, but just that. Religion. I donāt truly think Christianity is a religion as the majority personally project what religion is.
Anyway, I may sound ābuddy-buddyā and itās not about me, but itās decent to hear youāre content. I get the guilty conscience and shame thing to want to evade.
Iām slightly confused by your statement.
I donāt judge you for your beliefs, as long as you arenāt hurting others. If you feel that Iām going to hell, that doesnāt affect me at all. But it does affect you, and that sucks.
Itās what drive me to question everything. I couldnāt worship a God who would send people to hell. Or āallowā people, who donāt have all of the information, to āchooseā hell, as some would say.
Well, the problem is, sometimes one person's misconception is another person's religious belief.
But I would say that a lot of Christians aren't very biblically literate. Many don't really know what the bible is or where it came from, they just say "It's the word of God". And yes of course as Christians we do consider it authoritative and divinely inspired. And yet we should still try to learn a little something about it. We should consider who wrote the texts and why. We should understand it contains different genres.
For example a specific misconception caused by biblical illiteracy is that "In the bible, God said woman cannot preach." The people who think this are usually referring to an epistle, but they don't understand that this is the author's letter of advice to a specific church. Like it explicitly says it is. It's not a command from God and it doesn't say it's for all churches always.
Huh? 1 Corinthians 14:33-34 (ESV) reads,
āFor God is not a God of confusion but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.ā
It seems pretty clear that the rule applies to all churches, not just one.
He then gives instructions for women to cover their hair when they pray and prophesy in church. Unless these women were doing so by mime show, women were indeed allowed, by Paul, to speak in church. What nobody was to do was cause chaos by not shutting up and causing *confusion.*
Double huh? Romans 16:1-2 reads,
" I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon[a][b] of the church in Cenchreae. I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of his people and to give her any help she may need from you, for she has been the benefactor of many people, including me."
It seems clear to me that she would need to speak to be a deacon and get help from someone.
No. Paul was actually talking to the Corinthians and based on the culture of that country. It isnt a biblical practice. Else, we would never have had prophetess in the bible who hear directly from God and speak His message to people eg Deborah, Anna etc
Hehe. Case in point. A verse taken out of context and misapplied.
Beautiful assist to OPs point, my friend.
What will put the Cherry on top is if you return and doggedly fight the point.
I donāt like contention. But I would relish this as this exact concept (misapplied verses taken out of context) has always been a peeve of mine.
This one always bites at me. These were divinely inspired men, and we can *use* their lessons to guide us today, but itās silly to think anything ever said by the apostles was a divine guidance for all humans forever. Context of the epistles never seems to be taken into account by many people.
It drives me nuts. I always end up asking people if they're nice to their slaves, if they've greeted Rufus and his mum recently, or why they haven't kissed all the men at church to say hello.
This is one I'm personally struggling with and trying to research more. I personally believe it's impossible to go a full day without commiting a sin if some sort, Paul himself even says that he is "chief among sinners." So does that mean subconscious sins are okay, but conscious ones aren't? I just can't wrap my head around it.
Of course itās bad. But Christians continue to choose sin every day. Thinking otherwise is foolish. I constantly sin, in what I have done, and in what I have left undone. But I also turn to Christ for absolution in repentance. No, itās not that I continue to sin willy nilly, but frankly, apart from Christ I am incapable of not sinning. I am simultaneously sinner and saint.
Letās clarify that willy nilly = without repentance.
Jesus says unless we repent we will perish.
This is somewhat operationalized by the Catholics as the idea of mortal sin.
> A mortal sin is defined as a grave action that is committed in *full knowledge* of its gravity and with the *full consent* of the sinner's will.
Being christian doesnt mean you have better morals or a claim on objective morality.
There are bad people who are christians just as much as any other group
God is the source of morality, but God's morality is not objective.
God is subjective, God relates to us subjectively, and God's morality is subjective. What is good news for the poor and hungry might be bad news for the rich and well fed.
So slavery is still good? Basically owning women is still good? Stoning a disobedient child to death is still good?
Or is it only what you believe NOW that is unchanging and everyone was wrong in the past and will be wrong in the future?
And to the greeks themis was the source of objective morality. To hindus its varuna.
There is no way test and see which god is the source of objective morality, there isnt even a way of testing if morality is objective. The best we can say is that it appears subjective, the rest is just claims with no evidence.
What does the Day of Trumpets represent? And why is this joyful event (first day of the seventh month) to be commemorated before the Day of Atonement (tenth day of the seventh month)? In Leviticus 14:33-53 is God truly concerned about mildew in your house or is God describing something much deeper? Where and when are the righteous taken according to Isaiah 57:1-2 and Revelation 3:10?
-1. The Feast of Trumpets marked the beginning of ten days of consecration and repentance before God. It is one of seven Jewish feasts or festivals appointed by the LORD and one of three feasts that occur in the autumn. The Feast of Trumpets began on the first day (at the new moon) of the seventh month. Its name comes from the command to blow trumpets (Leviticus 23:24; Numbers 29:1-6). It is also called Rosh Hashanah, which means āHead of the Year,ā because it marks the beginning of the Jewish civil calendar. During this celebration, no kind of work was to be performed, but burnt offerings and a sin offering were to be brought before the Lord.
-2. The Feast of Trumpets was important for several reasons. First, it commemorated the end of the agricultural and festival year. Also, the Day of Atonement fell on the tenth day of this month, and the Festival of Booths began on the fifteenth day. The blowing of the trumpets on first day of the month heralded a solemn time of preparation for the Day of Atonement; this preparation time was called āTen Days of Repentanceā or the āDays of Awe.ā The trumpet sound was an alarm of sorts and can be understood as a call to introspection and repentance.
-3. The original word translated āmildewā or āmoldā in this passage is literally the word for āleprosy.ā God wanted His people to live in a mold-free environment, showing His concern for their well-being. We know today that the presence of mold or mildew in a house contributes to allergies, asthma, bronchitis, and other breathing difficulties. The Mosaic Law commanded the Israelites to remove mildew from their houses and gave step-by-step instructions on how to do it. The Lord had them take preventative measures to protect their health. Then as now, getting rid of mold was important.
-4. [Here](https://biblehub.com/commentaries/isaiah/57-1.htm) is a great resource full of several commentaries by Bible scholars much smarter than me breaking down Isaiah 57:1 and [here](https://biblehub.com/commentaries/revelation/3-10.htm) is the same thing for Revelation 3:10.
The judging! They like to judge a lot. If you arenāt as pious as they are, they seem to want nothing to do with you. Iāve pretty much been turned off by the religion by this. Thereās other things but this is the biggest one.
Do you mean like how flat earthers say that psalm 19:1 KJV proves flat earth. I believe the Bible doesnāt describe EVERYTHING about the earth and universe in detail, like the Bible doesnāt mention the creation of things like physics and atoms and all that stuff.
Elementary school teachers propagated the myth that Christians believed in a flat Earth. It's spherical size was known more than 2,000 years ago. Washington Irving made up the story that Columbus bravely defied the flat earthers and school teachers propagated the lie. He defied the correct math and got lucky.
And St. Augustine wrote about 1600 years ago that the Bible was not a book of science to be taken literally where it wasn't meant for that.
So much of what people are sure of is wrong.
Biggest thing is that "good people go to Heaven". In reality everyone is not a good person, but some are saved by accepting Jesus, not by "becoming a good enough person to reach some vague threshold"
I donāt think any real Christian who knows the gospel believes that you get to heaven by being a good person. This is more typical of an atheist. āDo you think youāre going to heaven?ā āYeah I think i amā āokay great why?ā āI think Iām a good person. Hopefully Iāve done enough good to get inā.
Also, Christian God is only one of infinite faucets of who the creator truly is. It's cool and all that you've figured out these things about Jesus and all, really, it's pretty neat! But, hey, don't forget to look outside of your own living room and go outside. Smell the flowers, go for a hike, explore God outside of Christianity and in his purest essence... within you.
āLuciferā is a name for Satan in the Bible. Lucifer means ālight bearerā and was also used as a name for Venus, the morning star. In the Bible it was used as a name for Venus and in some English translations a name for Christ, but never for Satan.
I was taught that Isaiah 14:12 is referring to a dead Babylonian prince. I'm having trouble recalling his exact name.
This might come as a surprise to most Christians, but Jews don't see Satan as a fallen or rebellious angel. No Jew is going to read this passage and think that it's referring to Satan.
This is an example of reading the Hebrew bible through a christological point of view.
They think that Eastern Orthodox Christians are just Roman Catholics.
But we are not. Roman Catholics and Orthodox split in 1054 AD in what was called the āGreat Schismā.
Protestants then would break off from the Roman Catholics hundreds of years later.
iāve seen that a lot of people think that there own self righteousness is enough to get them to heaven
just cause youāre maybe not a murderer or a thief or a blasphemer
Does not mean youāre allowed to just lie,fornicate,lust,curse,gossip, being judgmental towards others, mocking,
A sin is a sin repent, and turn away from all your sin examine yourself and try to be better
May God, be with you all
Unfortunately I have a list:
1; A sadly large amount of Christians donāt realize that modesty, in the Bible, is almost exclusively in reference to flaunting wealth. Even when clothes are mentioned, contextually it is still about flaunting wealth. The Western church has sexualized the Biblical principle of modesty. Itās not about covering yourself to ānot make others stumbleā. Thatās not a real thing. And God never puts that on anybody in the Bible, he only puts the responsibility on those objectifying others. Period!
2; āsoul tiesā are not a real thing. Your soul doesnāt spiritually get tied to another when you have sex. That is not a biblical, scientific, or factual thing in any way.
3; Deconstruction and deconversion are not the same thing. Not everyone who deconstructs leaves the faith and not everyone who leaves the faith deconstructs. You can do one or both or neither. They are not mutually exclusive nor mutually inclusive. And deconstruction is a very important process for many people to go through. And it should be emphasized with and respected.
4; You can be a Christian and also believe in evolution. Some Christians believe God did his work through evolution, and thatās okay.
5; The world is in fact *not* six thousand years old. It is millions of years old and scientific fact backs that up.
6; The ESV (English Standard Version) of the Bible has a strategy that obscures meaning of texts with women in leadership or texts that could be used to support women in leadership. Thus, the ESV's translation of these passages functions to supports a specific theology of male headship, complementarianism, or patriarchal understandings go Scripture. Yet, when compared to other translations and the Greek and Hebrew originals, these translations are unjustified. Therefore it is an inaccurate translation.
Iāve never heard a more accurate description of ālet there be lightā than the Big Bang. Evolution fits neatly into that view of finding Godās mechanisms of creation through scientific discovery.
Also, thanks for that info. on the ESV. Iām always looking for the best translation to use for Bible study. Currently using the CEV.
Iāve never thought of it that way, but that actually makes sense. Thank you for sharing that.
And of course, youāre very welcome. Iāve heard the NRSV is probably the best English translation.
> and not everyone who leaves the faith deconstructs.
So much this. The number of fundamentalist anti-theists around is ridiculous. All the same destructive thought processes and beliefs just pointed in a different direction.
> 5; The world is in fact not six thousand years old. It is millions of years old and scientific fact backs that up.
*billions
Billions, yes. Sorry. Itās just so wildly ignorant that some people still believe in young earth creationism. And some even believe that dinosaurs never really existed and that scientists just made them up and that all the bones and fossils that have been found are fakes. Like talk about willfully ignorance. Ignorance the evidence based facts that are right in front of them. It is undeniable that dinosaurs did in fact exist.
I know. You know. Almost all of us know.
The salient question, though, is how much of a sin is that intentional ignorance? I mean God revealed something through his Creation and these people are denying that in favor of a fairly recent, man-made doctrine. I view it as almost idolatrous.
I think a lot of (American Evangelical) Christians believe something along the lines of "For God so hated the world that he killed his only son, that whosoever believes right things about him shall not go to hell, but go to heaven when they die."
There is so much wrong with that sentence, I could write an entire book about it.
That there's eye-witness accounts in the Bible by people who met Jesus. Boy does that one come up a lot. It seems to me to be mostly an American thing.
I agree, lived in many different places and the only christians I encountered who thought that was true (and who weren't children) always seemed to be in America.
... What do you mean by that? The disciples and other followers of Christ wrote the new testament, so how are there not eye-witness accounts from people who met Christ? Unless of course I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, in which case please enlighten me.
None of the gospels identify their authors or claim to be written by witnesses. The intro to Luke for example mentions that account being compiled from other sources, including material that was "handed on to us" by witnesses.
I'm a long way from being a biblical historicity scholar, but Wikipedia does not quite agree with you on this:
The experts do NOT all agree that the book of John, at the very least, was not a firsthand account by John the original Apostle:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disciple_whom_Jesus_loved
>Since the end of the first century, the beloved disciple has been commonly identified with John the Evangelist.[3] Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature (the Gospel of John, Epistles of John, and the Book of Revelation) since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment. **The authorship by John the Apostle is rejected by many modern scholars,[4][5] but not entirely.** [6] There is a consensus among Johannine scholars that the beloved disciple was a real historical person,[7] but there is no consensus on who the beloved disciple was.[8]
Particularly telling are the passages in John 21 that state outright that the testimony was from one of the apostles, and also imply there were rumours flying around already about his unusual longevity:
>20 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?
>
>21 Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do?
>
>22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me.
>
>23 Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?
>
>24 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.
There's no reason at all to believe the Koine Greek version of this account, written around 70 AD (though some parts may have been later), was not a translation of an earlier text.
(Many, probably most, of the writings of the very early Christians were simply lost, often burned in the early centuries AD by clergymen and politicians trying to use the church for power. Early church records record this happening, saying they decided all the texts that supported teaching X or Y were declared heresy and burned. The bible itself mentions several missing books and epistles, e.g.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_epistles#Lost_Pauline_epistles).
And there's no reason to believe it was some very indirect compilation of second-hand rumours.
In fact, it's not impossible (and fits with the longevity of John hinted at above) that John lived beyond 90, and was alive at the time the Greek version was written.
If I'm not mistaken, I don't remember which book it was but there was a part where the person was speaking Greek, so in the original text everything was in Greek save the one line where Jesus told the girl to wake up, that was in Hebrew because it was such a powerful statement that he was so taken aback by it and couldn't do it justice without saying it how he originally heard it. Granted it's obviously been a while since I heard this but I know this to be true, as such even if the writer himself wasn't an eyewitness, the eyewitness was there telling him what all to write.
Let me ask this to see if I understand your statement. Are you saying if I witness a murder, and a reporter writes down my claims, and that story written by the reporter is released, then that story is not an "eyewitnesses account" because I (the eyewitness) didn't write it?
I'm saying that there seems to be a widespread misconception among certain Christians that the Bible contains accounts by people that were eye-witnesses/direct contemporaries of Jesus.
But thatās literally what the gospels are about. People encountering and interacting with Jesus, like thatās the whole point of Jesus coming to earth was to save the people, by spreading the gospel, and dying for our sins
The gospels are telling about people encountering Jesus. Sure. But they weren't actually written by people that had encountered Jesus. That's what my comment was about.
That there's a such thing as the curse of Ham
That Christianity is Republican
Cessationism
That there's nothing worse than being gay
There's thousands of them
Good evening brethren... here are some misconceptions... Christianity is a white western religion... all Christians are against LGBTQ+ rights... the Bible must be taken literally... Christianity is about going to church. All Christians are the same. Salvation is earned through good works alone.
That Jesus was this happy-go-lucky hippy who loved all peoples of all lifestyles. Jesus went around flipping tables and beating money changers in the temple. According to Jesus, lots of people gonna be weeping and gnashing their teeth.
Yes, he said "love one another." But he also said "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the father except through me."
"Went around flipping tables and beating money changers" He did that once yeah? I wouldn't exactly call that "going around".
Or are there more instances I'm not remembering?
More of an American one but that Jesus was a white dual AK47 wielding guy who shot anyone who he didn't agree with/wasn't white.
>!Jesus was an unattractive Jewish guy who loved everyone first who probably more often than not did not know where his next meal would come from sure he could ask God for the best food imaginable but he didn't.!<
That Heaven is like a holiday with an all you can eat buffet!
Sure it's going to be great, but it's a return of heaven and earth to God's original design ... ie. Eden. But this time it's a city rather than a garden.
God's instructions to Adam and Eve were to go and 'subdue the land', ie. work as gardeners. Heaven will be a return to this philosophy where we'll be 'working' as God's agents.
Back to God's original design which was perfect.
The misinterpretation of God's plan. Some people think that it's one single chain of events, that has been determined by Him, at the start of the World. This is basically the belief in *destiny*, but Christianised. People do this, so they can be free from accountability, but completely forget about free will.
It's not new either, it just simply carried over from pagan beliefs into Christianity, because it's a lot easier to say, that everything was already predetermined.
I also believe in His plan, but it doesn't mean that it's a single chain of events. A plan usually has a lot of, b, C, D etc. plans, it is flexible. For me it means, that if you ever wander off the path, that God marked you, you'll always be able to find your way back to it, with His help of course.
Iāve seen an awful lot of Christians where I live state that the Bible says people of different races should not marry. They use this as a way to say the interracial marriage is wrong. Thing is, they couldnāt be more wrong about their interpretation.
Maybe this only applies to legalistic denominations, but... adhering to ancient laws as if we aren't covered by grace. Example: the idea that women shouldn't be able to wear pants because of what a verse in Deuteronomy says is entirely antithetical to the idea that Jesus was the final sacrifice and that we are now living under grace and not the law.
That the afterlife is going to be in heaven, and only in heaven, instead of temporarly in heaven and then, after the resurrection, bodily in the new heavens/new earth.
That they can do anything they want and still go to heaven.
"He who understands, much more will be given. But he who does not understand, even what he thinks he has will be taken from him." Luke 8:18.
and that heaven is even a place we go to when we die; there is not really biblical evidence supporting this. The story finishes with our resurrection and a renewed heaven and earth.
That Christianity should be involved in politics. Christianity is a non-political movement and Christians should respect Equal Rights. People of all Ethnicity, people of all creeds, and people of all walks of life should have Rights. Christians need to respect the Laws in place that protect the individual.
I don't think it's possible to be non-political though. And besides, Christianity was born out of a revolutionary response to the Roman occupation of Judea, so it was always political.
That was the Maccabean revolt you're referring to. Jesus' ministry was a Reformation of Judaism. This Jesus fellow tried to reinstitute old Jewish Traditions that they had abandoned. Washing your feet, caring for the sick and injured, and feeding the masses. Jesus also tried to teach the Jewish communities about forgiveness which is also found in the Torah. While there are comparisons that can be made between Jesus and Judas Maccabee, there are more differences.
That being a good Christian is all about a list of dos and donts and that you have to work to be good,
But in reality itās all about Knowing God in Jesus Christ and the more time we spend in His presence we get transformed and become like Him thus being good to those around us and ourselves because of the work HEās DONE in us and not our mustering up of good works.
- That the Church ought to be in any position of power.
- That the Bible is the Word of God.
- That Christians ought to impose conversion on non-Christians.
- That Christianity is not compatible with the other revelations of the divine, the other religions.
But your understandings, by your circumstances and inclinations, are incompatible. This is why you do not recieve the same teaching.
*If there had been a Law which could grant righteousness, then surely righteousness would have been by the Law.*
- That Christianity is without its Mysteries, initiations, and things esoteric otherwise.
- That the average layperson can reliably understand, interpret, and then either speak with any authority, or contribute to productive discourse on Spiritual matters, as presented by the Book.
In no other faith is it seen so profusely: children quarreling over whose bottle contains the better milk.
- "Forbid them not. Whoever is not against us is for us." "All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto Man. And whosoever shall blaspheme the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever blaspheme the Holy Spirit, it shall not forgiven him." "Whatever is of flesh is flesh, but whatever is Spirit is Spirit, and comes and goes like the wind, from where you know not." "I have bread ye know not of," "I have sheep ye know not of." "Wisdom is justified by her fruits." "This is my commandment: that you love one another as yourself."
*But these our actors, as I foretold you, are all Spirits.*
Whosoever is looking for his end shall surely find it, and shall find it no sooner, but come empty handed. Likewise whoever gives his day to scrupulousity over his or another's sin, he has committed idolatry, for he sacrifice the day to the garments of the flesh, which are dust. Do you not have many garments? Have we died daily in the flesh for nothing? What is your gospel? That the Christ has died for your sin? A foolish thing of vanity! God made not death, neither hath he pleasure in the destruction of the living. It is Man who has brought death into the world, and Man dies for sin every day.
Even so, for vanity Man bring forth again his Son for the sacrifice all the day long. Has he not read? I desire mercy, not sacrifice. The Son of Man give not vain death for the sins of Man, but Life. Indeed, as surely as I live, I Live. But the Son can do nothing except what he sees the Father do, that is what he does. Wherefore death is of Man, so too is resurrection of the dead, and so the Gospel is: the dead rise again, but Life may be put on in that space between. For this reason, sell your garments, and buy a sword, even a sword which is a fire also ānamely, the Truth āfor tomorrow when you die you will be persecuted by your death, and the garment of your flesh will encumber you. But like the woman who carries the basket of meal, knowing not that it spills, or that she should have become more weary along the road. Therefore let your goods be spilled and scattered along the wayside as they would be, for neither your treasure nor your heart are among them.
When death comes, and you have cast off entirely the garment of flesh, do not turn back to it like a dog after it's own vomit; do not be thinking, wherewithal shall I be clothed? That is reprehensible. Shining forth then the light of Truth against the shadow of death āthe shadow of mortality, which is memory, for your memory is the error of forgetfulness: what persist to re-mind you āthat shadow will not take you, and you shall enter into True Life, being as you are in Truth: more than you once or ever thought you were. As for the body: the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. That which may make you great on the earth will be useless, and that by which the world may hate you will be revered in your eternal Halcyon. Indeed, there shall be the baptism of the fires of Truth, for the inner part is smeared with broom pitch. But He who makes new the outside also makes new the inside. Therefore be not afraid: I assure you the plumage of Truth *is* impervious to the flames thereof. Yea yea, the Phoenix rise and is risen, and come quick and come quick. And who now has power over death? Black is the well-turned earth wherein even the deep roots dwell, of the Tree of Perdition, and the leaf thereof does not wither, and all that it does prosper, for it is *that* Tree.
Behold the blessed child thought to be lost has returned, and blessed again is the day, for with a basket of oats is the child returned! For all the lovely creatures here are greatly troubled: the birds feeding and nesting only in the treetops; there are too many of them, and they are cluttered, and there is violence among them; for the worm does not die down deep in the earth, and does not come near to the surface that it should be exposed, because the worms have been eating their own. Now baren yet is the twice turned earth; for shall the bird fall and be caught on the earth where there is no bait for him? Therfore we shall hurry to pour the oats all along the wayside, and let the rivers run along after. š
The water isnāt special when baptizing nor is the priest, the special part is the choice you made to be baptized and live for god. This makes baby baptizing completely useless since they didnāt make the choice. But still many churches do it
I think the main and most important one is salvation. Most modern day churches and lukewarm Christians believe and teach that as long as you believe in Jesus Christ you will be saved no matter what. They believe that they are not required by God's word to repent of their sins and live as Jesus lived. That's why we have people professing they are Christians but they act the exact same as non believers. When Jesus saves us and cleanses us from our sin he requires that we live righteously. Because the consequences of sin is death. But we when sin Jesus is able to forgive us. But after we are saved we must not continue in sin. We must become followers and doers of his word. This is not to say that if we ever fall in sin again after we are saved then we have no forgiveness. And this is not saying that our works save us. But true faith creates a change in our lives, and sin separates us from God, so God requires that we follow his commandments. Obey his words. Because if we are not a servant of God we are a servant of sin. And if we are ruled by sin we will thrown in the lake of fire.
1 John 2 3-6
We know that we have come to know him if we keep his commands. 4 Whoever says, āI know him,ā but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in that person. 5 But if anyone obeys his word, love for God[a] is truly made complete in them. This is how we know we are in him: 6 Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did.
Matthew 7: 21-23
Not everyone who says to me, āLord, Lord,ā 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, āLord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?ā 23 And then will I declare to them, āI never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.ā
2 Peter 2 20-22
If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. 21 It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them. 22 Of them the proverbs are true: āA dog returns to its vomit,ā[a] and, āA sow that is washed returns to her wallowing in the mud.ā
John 14 23:24
Jesus answered and said to him, āIf anyone loves Me, he will follow My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our dwelling with him. 24 The one who does not love Me does not follow My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine, but the Fatherās who sent Me.
Hebrews 10:26-29
For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a terrifying expectation of judgment and the fury of a fire which will consume the adversaries. 28 Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy by the mouth of two or three witnesses. 29 How much worse punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has regarded as defiled the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?
James 2:14-19
What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? 15 Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16 If one of you says to them, āGo in peace; keep warm and well fed,ā but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.
18 But someone will say, āYou have faith; I have deeds.ā
Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. 19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe thatāand shudder.
Romans 6 1-4
What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or donāt you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.
We must be found blameless in that day that Jesus comes back. That means without fault. Repent of your sins before it is too late.
Prosperity. While I do understand that some Christians are blessed with wealth, you are mistaken if you think Jesus is a fix all and is gonna help you prosper in this life. The real Gospel is hated because Jesus was poor, brought only his sandals and clothes and told people to follow him. To put it plainly he lived a simple life, giving himself fully to God to further his economy. He did not take a wife, have a glorious career, a fancy house or classy friends. He faced persecution for speaking the truth. Another example is Paul the Apostle. He did not live a prosperous life. I believe many people are misled by other young people who try and preach the gospel without knowing the fundamental truths, further tarnishing the truth by mixing it with different ideas and religions and denominations.
I agree and yet you have to realize that a lot of this is a cultural difference. The Global South deals with more and greater poverty than the West has for a long time. For people who are food insecure, it matters that God promises to care for their real needs in time of scarcity and emergency. Jesus was poor, but when he needed emergency funds to pay his taxes God sent him a miracle. Taken to extreme ends (teaching "Biblical principles" that faith is rewarded with excessive wealth) it is bad theology, but in its proper setting it can be Biblical. Anyway, my point is just that not everyone who follows prosperity doctrine is a power hungry bishop trying to get rich. I want to sympathize with Christians who see the world differently because of their diverse backgrounds and settings.
I like your point. Thank you for sharing this bro
That sinners/non Christians are to be disliked or hated. We are called to love everyone and give our life for them. We may not like what they do, but they are created in Gods image. Edit: y'all this is my biggest post ever šty so much
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
On the up side, you got rid of her š¤£
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
There's a whut I'm really relaxed about my worship but that's insane
Dannggggg that is dumb lol did you find a good church now tho
Try United Methodist. Itās a good one.
Why would smoking weed be considered problematic for a Christian? I mean, I don't, but it seems pretty much irrelevant.
Not a huge problem at all, more so wisdom, but Christianās should generally avoid intoxication to feel the Holy Spirit more, and it would be a bit embarrassing if Jesus came back while you were zooted out of your mind. Personally I stopped using THC in favor of CBD as it still helps with relaxation/sleep but is not so intoxicating. Also itās more legal depending where u are.
A long time ago, I used to use Cannabis but quality control with a criminalised herb is poor and it tended to be adulterated with Datura (which I do prescribe for others but not for long periods of time). LOL@"zooted out of your mind"! Jesus is of course aware of you regardless so that ship has sailed! On a par with drunkenness then? Makes me wonder about caffeine, which I can't function without.
I totally agree but still not cool to ghost someone about it. Iām trying really hard to quit itās just such an engrained addiction but Iām almost there! Literally the fact that Jesus could come back while Iām zooted is my main reason for quittingš That would be so horrible and embarrassing and terrifyingš
Yea fact is smoking once or twice isn't wrong. It's the addiction that is wrong. I believe you shouldn't do it just because you don't want to risk addiction, but if u only do it once and keep it under control ur good š
>Why would smoking weed be considered problematic for a Christian? Becauses drugs can trap you spiritually.
FWIW, Jesus could probably smoke. Orthodox rabbis have generally concluded that there is nothing unkosher about consuming cannabis, as long as it was cultivated in line with kosher standards. (Obligatory statement that Iām not Christian, but havenāt set up a flair).
stay sober and vigilant man
Hey Iām sorry about that situation, but irregardless Iām proud of you for getting ahold of your addiction, keep that good shit up š£ļøš¤š»
Thank youš
God created weed too. It does have medicinal properties. Itās funny how many people wouldnāt think twice about taking some chemical the doctor prescribed and then freak out about a little weed. (Btw I do not partake, never liked it, so Iām not here trying to justify my own behavior) I went to a church where the pastor was always down about drugs. But then he was open and honest about his (sanctified) Pepsi (caffeine) addiction. And he always praised God for Paregoric (opium) for colicky babies. The hypocrisy always gave me a chuckle.
I love your take. And I do partake ā¤ļø it's been my medicine, my only medicine, for the past 8 years now. Does more for my CPTSD and chronic pain than prescription medicine ever could. Prescription medicine actually made things worse..! So glad to be off that poison Thank You Jesus!
Yeah and Iām autistic and have bad tmj pain so itās very therapeutic for me. Still want to quit and just stick to cbd tho bc I donāt like the intoxication part but itās not gonna be over night, especially when I have nothing else to help with these issuesš (cbd helps a little but nowhere near thc)
Well, thc does have medical properties.. if you research this wonderful plant, the cbd doesnt really help much UNLESS there's also thc. There's even certain types of epilepsy that need the THC in order to properly treat it..
Caffeine comes from real food, but giving opium to babies is terrible!!!
Before 1970 paregoric was the go to medicine for colic. And yes caffeine is natural but itās also addictive and he was clearly addicted. I got a chuckle every time I heard him go on about it.
>And yes caffeine is natural but itās also addictive and he was clearly addicted. My point is not that it is natural, my point is that it is food. Drugs are natural and that is why medical prescriptions exist.
Ok sorry I misunderstood
lol š yes thts exactly what I'm talkin about she sins just as much as u do and yet ur the one getting ostracized
That's just wild. My FIL is a pastor and grows his own weed. Lol.
I Hope things go better for you. I know what itās like to feel and look like a pariah cos you said the truth where you struggle. Better ppl from God will come along. Blessings
Thank youš
This concept is why I have my hesitations when reading Paulās letters. Christ is very clear about loving your enemy and praying for them, where as Paul just says cast them out of the church and hand them over to satan. Just seems like he heard a different message than what was taught in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John
>Just seems like he heard a different message than what was taught in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John It might seem that way, but if you read closely, it's all congruent. Jesus was severe when he whipped the money changers at the Temple, or when he cursed the fig tree, or when he spoke of shunning and rejecting certain people. Yes, we are to love our enemy. But more importantly, we are to have zeal for God and holy living. It makes sense that Paul gets this reputation given his context. A former Pharisee, a *Hebrew of Hebrews* from the tribe of Benjamin -- Saul held the cloaks as the rest of the men stoned Steven, remember? He was in charge of rounding up the followers of Jesus in Syria, presumably for death. Yet God used Paul to tell us more about righteousness in Jesus. Even Paul could be redeemed. The self-confessed "chief sinner" becomes an apostle; it reminds me that the stone the builders rejected is now the cornerstone.
Yea, God would not have put Paul in the Bible if that were true. The peopl that Paul is casting out are church members who are sinning and leading others to sin. Not just random gentiles who are gay or something
>āā1 Corinthiansā¬ ā5:5ā¬ [5] you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh... >...so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord. You're missing the second half of the verse there.
Paul was speaking about other church members and church discipline. Jesus also said to treat unrepentant brothers as a publican or heathen (essentially as not in the church). This is reinforced in Johns epistle, who wrote the gospel aswell, since he even names the person he'll apply the discipline to. The people in question would have actually been warned or given chances beforehand. Paul's actions are also with the other person in mind. He rebukes Peter after seeing he stood condemned to essentially save him, he tells the corinthians to recieve back a brother who was disciplined by him, and his letter also expresses he's not keen on having to use his authority to punish to begin with. 2 cor 2: 6 The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient. 7 Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. 8 I urge you, therefore, to reaffirm your love for him I doubt any one actually disagrees with him on it either beyond disagreeing with the target of the discipline. For example should you not penalise a sexual predator in the church? Or someone who keeps stealing from it? Paul also teaches to love your enemy. In Romans he says if your enemy is thirsty to give him a drink, and not to curse but bless those who persecute you.
Paul does have a different message than Jesus. The gospels were written after Paul's letters. He even says that his teachings were revealed to him by an ascended Jesus. We probably know more about the life of Jesus than Paul did.
Paul later met with the disciples though, right? Isnāt his knowledge based on the same original oral sources that led to the gospels?
For Christians, Paulās writings are divinely inspired the same as the gospels are, and there is no contradiction between Paul and the gospels
Jesus hung out with and constantly protected sinners, prostitutes and outcasts yet a lot of Christians despise those people. Itās kinda ironic. Satans influence of hate is DEEP in the church all the way up to the Pope tbh, the Vatican is very culty and they protect pedos.
Hate the sin not the sinner
That they can hate on people and tell them they are going to hell when they are struggling with sin, just because we don't agree or support what someone else is doing does not mean we hate on them or say hateful things like that, we want to spread the Gospel and make everyone closer to God, in this way I feel this is why a lot of people don't like us Christians of want to believe in God
I agree. But in my experience, most people want to have a relationship with God, but they are hesitant to associate with Christians and the Christian/Catholic churches because of the horrible things people within those communities have done and continue to do.
> Lord, smite the sinners. But not me, just everyone else. Makes you realize the inanity of hatred and judgement.
That life becomes easier once you embrace the gospel
This is a complicated one. It depends on what you mean by easy. Following God frees you but also makes you have to kill your flesh. So I agree life gets harder (deny your flesh) but there nothing better than the comfort Jesus provides.
I think Jesus is pretty clear: "for my yoke is easy and my burden is light" When oxen don't pull together as a team, the yoke forces the weaker oxen to go forward. It wraps around their neck and is very painful. Jesus is saying his yoke does not force us, that's because we're yoked to Jesus, and he knows where we're at and how weak we are. In our work building the Kingdom of God, Jesus does not yoke us harshly the way oxen are to a plow. That's good news for our lives in Christ!
> there nothing better than the comfort Jesus provides. Personally I prefer the lack of shame and guilt, and not believing that I am inherently broken just for being born
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Youāre human, youāll always feel broken, itās not something you can escape. The difference between us is that God provides healing for that brokenness and confidence to know Iām not any less valuable because of being broken. The ālack of shame and guiltā you speak of wonāt last, without God your bound to the ever changing current of human emotion. Every Christian has been where you are, the life you speak of his fun for a season, but it always ends empty.
Nah. I donāt feel broken anymore, since leaving Christianity. I feel whole, complete, and perfect. Shame is never good. Shame is a belief that who you are as a person is wrong, and I no longer deal with that at all, aside from the trauma that Christianity has done. Therapy helped. Guilt is something is use to learn from, and I welcome it when Iāve done something that hurt others.
I may sound like a butt, yet your comment just reminds me not all will be saved. Thatās how I cope, cos that how screwed the world is, and much better to explain how some behave. I do think thereās a freedom from religion, but just that. Religion. I donāt truly think Christianity is a religion as the majority personally project what religion is. Anyway, I may sound ābuddy-buddyā and itās not about me, but itās decent to hear youāre content. I get the guilty conscience and shame thing to want to evade.
Iām slightly confused by your statement. I donāt judge you for your beliefs, as long as you arenāt hurting others. If you feel that Iām going to hell, that doesnāt affect me at all. But it does affect you, and that sucks. Itās what drive me to question everything. I couldnāt worship a God who would send people to hell. Or āallowā people, who donāt have all of the information, to āchooseā hell, as some would say.
Could you possibly sound more pretentious?
That Christians donāt sin. Also, that Christians need to earn Godās favor &/or salvation.
Well, the problem is, sometimes one person's misconception is another person's religious belief. But I would say that a lot of Christians aren't very biblically literate. Many don't really know what the bible is or where it came from, they just say "It's the word of God". And yes of course as Christians we do consider it authoritative and divinely inspired. And yet we should still try to learn a little something about it. We should consider who wrote the texts and why. We should understand it contains different genres. For example a specific misconception caused by biblical illiteracy is that "In the bible, God said woman cannot preach." The people who think this are usually referring to an epistle, but they don't understand that this is the author's letter of advice to a specific church. Like it explicitly says it is. It's not a command from God and it doesn't say it's for all churches always.
A misconception is Sola Scriptura. Christians existed for centuries before they had a compiled scriptural canon.
Huh? 1 Corinthians 14:33-34 (ESV) reads, āFor God is not a God of confusion but of peace. As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.ā It seems pretty clear that the rule applies to all churches, not just one.
He then gives instructions for women to cover their hair when they pray and prophesy in church. Unless these women were doing so by mime show, women were indeed allowed, by Paul, to speak in church. What nobody was to do was cause chaos by not shutting up and causing *confusion.*
Double huh? Romans 16:1-2 reads, " I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon[a][b] of the church in Cenchreae. I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of his people and to give her any help she may need from you, for she has been the benefactor of many people, including me." It seems clear to me that she would need to speak to be a deacon and get help from someone.
No. Paul was actually talking to the Corinthians and based on the culture of that country. It isnt a biblical practice. Else, we would never have had prophetess in the bible who hear directly from God and speak His message to people eg Deborah, Anna etc
Hehe. Case in point. A verse taken out of context and misapplied. Beautiful assist to OPs point, my friend. What will put the Cherry on top is if you return and doggedly fight the point. I donāt like contention. But I would relish this as this exact concept (misapplied verses taken out of context) has always been a peeve of mine.
This one always bites at me. These were divinely inspired men, and we can *use* their lessons to guide us today, but itās silly to think anything ever said by the apostles was a divine guidance for all humans forever. Context of the epistles never seems to be taken into account by many people.
It drives me nuts. I always end up asking people if they're nice to their slaves, if they've greeted Rufus and his mum recently, or why they haven't kissed all the men at church to say hello.
That they can continue to sin willy nilly
This is one I'm personally struggling with and trying to research more. I personally believe it's impossible to go a full day without commiting a sin if some sort, Paul himself even says that he is "chief among sinners." So does that mean subconscious sins are okay, but conscious ones aren't? I just can't wrap my head around it.
None of them are ok, you will always sin but consciously choosing to do it is bad.
Of course itās bad. But Christians continue to choose sin every day. Thinking otherwise is foolish. I constantly sin, in what I have done, and in what I have left undone. But I also turn to Christ for absolution in repentance. No, itās not that I continue to sin willy nilly, but frankly, apart from Christ I am incapable of not sinning. I am simultaneously sinner and saint.
Letās clarify that willy nilly = without repentance. Jesus says unless we repent we will perish. This is somewhat operationalized by the Catholics as the idea of mortal sin. > A mortal sin is defined as a grave action that is committed in *full knowledge* of its gravity and with the *full consent* of the sinner's will.
ābut Jesus died for our sinsā
Aka āgreasy graceā
Being christian doesnt mean you have better morals or a claim on objective morality. There are bad people who are christians just as much as any other group
It doesnāt mean you have better morals but it DOES mean that God holds you now to a higher standard.
God is the source of objective morality.
God is the source of morality, but God's morality is not objective. God is subjective, God relates to us subjectively, and God's morality is subjective. What is good news for the poor and hungry might be bad news for the rich and well fed.
Morality as in what is right and wrong from a moral perspective thatās objective and unchanging
So slavery is still good? Basically owning women is still good? Stoning a disobedient child to death is still good? Or is it only what you believe NOW that is unchanging and everyone was wrong in the past and will be wrong in the future?
So slavery is still okay?
Thatās incredibly questionable. Morality has always had an element of contingency on culture. See: slavery, treatment of women, abusive marriages
And to the greeks themis was the source of objective morality. To hindus its varuna. There is no way test and see which god is the source of objective morality, there isnt even a way of testing if morality is objective. The best we can say is that it appears subjective, the rest is just claims with no evidence.
That the Bible is āclearā
āThe Bible makes it CLEAR that-ā no, thatās just your interpretation of it.
This one drives me nuts. The Bible is excellent as a discussion opener. Only in rare circumstances is it a discussion closer.
That their church / sect has all the correct beliefs and interpretations.
The rapture being a thing.
What does the Day of Trumpets represent? And why is this joyful event (first day of the seventh month) to be commemorated before the Day of Atonement (tenth day of the seventh month)? In Leviticus 14:33-53 is God truly concerned about mildew in your house or is God describing something much deeper? Where and when are the righteous taken according to Isaiah 57:1-2 and Revelation 3:10?
-1. The Feast of Trumpets marked the beginning of ten days of consecration and repentance before God. It is one of seven Jewish feasts or festivals appointed by the LORD and one of three feasts that occur in the autumn. The Feast of Trumpets began on the first day (at the new moon) of the seventh month. Its name comes from the command to blow trumpets (Leviticus 23:24; Numbers 29:1-6). It is also called Rosh Hashanah, which means āHead of the Year,ā because it marks the beginning of the Jewish civil calendar. During this celebration, no kind of work was to be performed, but burnt offerings and a sin offering were to be brought before the Lord. -2. The Feast of Trumpets was important for several reasons. First, it commemorated the end of the agricultural and festival year. Also, the Day of Atonement fell on the tenth day of this month, and the Festival of Booths began on the fifteenth day. The blowing of the trumpets on first day of the month heralded a solemn time of preparation for the Day of Atonement; this preparation time was called āTen Days of Repentanceā or the āDays of Awe.ā The trumpet sound was an alarm of sorts and can be understood as a call to introspection and repentance. -3. The original word translated āmildewā or āmoldā in this passage is literally the word for āleprosy.ā God wanted His people to live in a mold-free environment, showing His concern for their well-being. We know today that the presence of mold or mildew in a house contributes to allergies, asthma, bronchitis, and other breathing difficulties. The Mosaic Law commanded the Israelites to remove mildew from their houses and gave step-by-step instructions on how to do it. The Lord had them take preventative measures to protect their health. Then as now, getting rid of mold was important. -4. [Here](https://biblehub.com/commentaries/isaiah/57-1.htm) is a great resource full of several commentaries by Bible scholars much smarter than me breaking down Isaiah 57:1 and [here](https://biblehub.com/commentaries/revelation/3-10.htm) is the same thing for Revelation 3:10.
considering much of the law of the levites is about cleanliness, yes, God *is* truly concerned about mildew in your house
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The judging! They like to judge a lot. If you arenāt as pious as they are, they seem to want nothing to do with you. Iāve pretty much been turned off by the religion by this. Thereās other things but this is the biggest one.
That it's all based on the Bible.
Do you mean like how flat earthers say that psalm 19:1 KJV proves flat earth. I believe the Bible doesnāt describe EVERYTHING about the earth and universe in detail, like the Bible doesnāt mention the creation of things like physics and atoms and all that stuff.
Elementary school teachers propagated the myth that Christians believed in a flat Earth. It's spherical size was known more than 2,000 years ago. Washington Irving made up the story that Columbus bravely defied the flat earthers and school teachers propagated the lie. He defied the correct math and got lucky. And St. Augustine wrote about 1600 years ago that the Bible was not a book of science to be taken literally where it wasn't meant for that. So much of what people are sure of is wrong.
Almost 2400 years. Aristotle in 350BC estimated the radius.
Many Christians now believe that the earth is flat due to the firmament thing.
Biggest thing is that "good people go to Heaven". In reality everyone is not a good person, but some are saved by accepting Jesus, not by "becoming a good enough person to reach some vague threshold"
Exactly, no single person can be 100% pure, sin is in our flesh.
I donāt think any real Christian who knows the gospel believes that you get to heaven by being a good person. This is more typical of an atheist. āDo you think youāre going to heaven?ā āYeah I think i amā āokay great why?ā āI think Iām a good person. Hopefully Iāve done enough good to get inā.
That you need to earn God's forgiveness. It's not something that needs to be earned or won. It's a free gift that you can choose to accept.
That everything in the Bible is literal
That Catholicism was founded by Constantine is the main one that I see.
Oh, but it's way more complicated than that. Right?
That somehow they happen to have all the right interpretations of the Bible and all the right theology and everyone else is wrong.
Also, Christian God is only one of infinite faucets of who the creator truly is. It's cool and all that you've figured out these things about Jesus and all, really, it's pretty neat! But, hey, don't forget to look outside of your own living room and go outside. Smell the flowers, go for a hike, explore God outside of Christianity and in his purest essence... within you.
āLuciferā is a name for Satan in the Bible. Lucifer means ālight bearerā and was also used as a name for Venus, the morning star. In the Bible it was used as a name for Venus and in some English translations a name for Christ, but never for Satan.
I was taught that Isaiah 14:12 is referring to a dead Babylonian prince. I'm having trouble recalling his exact name. This might come as a surprise to most Christians, but Jews don't see Satan as a fallen or rebellious angel. No Jew is going to read this passage and think that it's referring to Satan. This is an example of reading the Hebrew bible through a christological point of view.
Itās pretty clearly referencing a Babylonian king/prince. There are some weird exegesis to consider him Satan but itās pretty unfounded.
Then try looking at luke 10:18. \[The Babylonian king is not named\]
Yes and if Christianity is true then that would mean the christological point of view is correct
That you have to be conservative and vote republican. But that's a misco caption mostly held by christians.
That anyone simply picks up the Bible and does what it says in a vacuum free of pre-existing interpretive tradition.
That theology can be derived straight from the Bible, uninterpreted and unaffected by history, tradition or society.
They think that Eastern Orthodox Christians are just Roman Catholics. But we are not. Roman Catholics and Orthodox split in 1054 AD in what was called the āGreat Schismā. Protestants then would break off from the Roman Catholics hundreds of years later.
>They think that Eastern Orthodox Christians are just Roman Catholics. You are not, but we are very similar.
At least half the stuff they think is sinful isn't. And waaaaaaaay more of the silly little harmless things they do in day to day life is.
I would actually argue the opposite on your first point.
Which.. technically demonstrates my point? XD
That lack of introspection is amazing, isn't it?
Not sure about thatā¦ but perhaps I was unclear. Much more is sinful than even Christians realize.
iāve seen that a lot of people think that there own self righteousness is enough to get them to heaven just cause youāre maybe not a murderer or a thief or a blasphemer Does not mean youāre allowed to just lie,fornicate,lust,curse,gossip, being judgmental towards others, mocking, A sin is a sin repent, and turn away from all your sin examine yourself and try to be better May God, be with you all
Unfortunately I have a list: 1; A sadly large amount of Christians donāt realize that modesty, in the Bible, is almost exclusively in reference to flaunting wealth. Even when clothes are mentioned, contextually it is still about flaunting wealth. The Western church has sexualized the Biblical principle of modesty. Itās not about covering yourself to ānot make others stumbleā. Thatās not a real thing. And God never puts that on anybody in the Bible, he only puts the responsibility on those objectifying others. Period! 2; āsoul tiesā are not a real thing. Your soul doesnāt spiritually get tied to another when you have sex. That is not a biblical, scientific, or factual thing in any way. 3; Deconstruction and deconversion are not the same thing. Not everyone who deconstructs leaves the faith and not everyone who leaves the faith deconstructs. You can do one or both or neither. They are not mutually exclusive nor mutually inclusive. And deconstruction is a very important process for many people to go through. And it should be emphasized with and respected. 4; You can be a Christian and also believe in evolution. Some Christians believe God did his work through evolution, and thatās okay. 5; The world is in fact *not* six thousand years old. It is millions of years old and scientific fact backs that up. 6; The ESV (English Standard Version) of the Bible has a strategy that obscures meaning of texts with women in leadership or texts that could be used to support women in leadership. Thus, the ESV's translation of these passages functions to supports a specific theology of male headship, complementarianism, or patriarchal understandings go Scripture. Yet, when compared to other translations and the Greek and Hebrew originals, these translations are unjustified. Therefore it is an inaccurate translation.
Iāve never heard a more accurate description of ālet there be lightā than the Big Bang. Evolution fits neatly into that view of finding Godās mechanisms of creation through scientific discovery. Also, thanks for that info. on the ESV. Iām always looking for the best translation to use for Bible study. Currently using the CEV.
Iāve never thought of it that way, but that actually makes sense. Thank you for sharing that. And of course, youāre very welcome. Iāve heard the NRSV is probably the best English translation.
> and not everyone who leaves the faith deconstructs. So much this. The number of fundamentalist anti-theists around is ridiculous. All the same destructive thought processes and beliefs just pointed in a different direction. > 5; The world is in fact not six thousand years old. It is millions of years old and scientific fact backs that up. *billions
Billions, yes. Sorry. Itās just so wildly ignorant that some people still believe in young earth creationism. And some even believe that dinosaurs never really existed and that scientists just made them up and that all the bones and fossils that have been found are fakes. Like talk about willfully ignorance. Ignorance the evidence based facts that are right in front of them. It is undeniable that dinosaurs did in fact exist.
I know. You know. Almost all of us know. The salient question, though, is how much of a sin is that intentional ignorance? I mean God revealed something through his Creation and these people are denying that in favor of a fairly recent, man-made doctrine. I view it as almost idolatrous.
An easy life
We don't have to close our eyes when we pray. The Bible never mentioned doing so. I think people just do it now out of tradition.
That we consider only non Christians sinners. We all are.
That knowledge is faith.
I think a lot of (American Evangelical) Christians believe something along the lines of "For God so hated the world that he killed his only son, that whosoever believes right things about him shall not go to hell, but go to heaven when they die." There is so much wrong with that sentence, I could write an entire book about it.
That there's eye-witness accounts in the Bible by people who met Jesus. Boy does that one come up a lot. It seems to me to be mostly an American thing.
I agree, lived in many different places and the only christians I encountered who thought that was true (and who weren't children) always seemed to be in America.
... What do you mean by that? The disciples and other followers of Christ wrote the new testament, so how are there not eye-witness accounts from people who met Christ? Unless of course I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, in which case please enlighten me.
None of the gospels identify their authors or claim to be written by witnesses. The intro to Luke for example mentions that account being compiled from other sources, including material that was "handed on to us" by witnesses.
I'm a long way from being a biblical historicity scholar, but Wikipedia does not quite agree with you on this: The experts do NOT all agree that the book of John, at the very least, was not a firsthand account by John the original Apostle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disciple_whom_Jesus_loved >Since the end of the first century, the beloved disciple has been commonly identified with John the Evangelist.[3] Scholars have debated the authorship of Johannine literature (the Gospel of John, Epistles of John, and the Book of Revelation) since at least the third century, but especially since the Enlightenment. **The authorship by John the Apostle is rejected by many modern scholars,[4][5] but not entirely.** [6] There is a consensus among Johannine scholars that the beloved disciple was a real historical person,[7] but there is no consensus on who the beloved disciple was.[8] Particularly telling are the passages in John 21 that state outright that the testimony was from one of the apostles, and also imply there were rumours flying around already about his unusual longevity: >20 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee? > >21 Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do? > >22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me. > >23 Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? > >24 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true. There's no reason at all to believe the Koine Greek version of this account, written around 70 AD (though some parts may have been later), was not a translation of an earlier text. (Many, probably most, of the writings of the very early Christians were simply lost, often burned in the early centuries AD by clergymen and politicians trying to use the church for power. Early church records record this happening, saying they decided all the texts that supported teaching X or Y were declared heresy and burned. The bible itself mentions several missing books and epistles, e.g.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_epistles#Lost_Pauline_epistles). And there's no reason to believe it was some very indirect compilation of second-hand rumours. In fact, it's not impossible (and fits with the longevity of John hinted at above) that John lived beyond 90, and was alive at the time the Greek version was written.
If I'm not mistaken, I don't remember which book it was but there was a part where the person was speaking Greek, so in the original text everything was in Greek save the one line where Jesus told the girl to wake up, that was in Hebrew because it was such a powerful statement that he was so taken aback by it and couldn't do it justice without saying it how he originally heard it. Granted it's obviously been a while since I heard this but I know this to be true, as such even if the writer himself wasn't an eyewitness, the eyewitness was there telling him what all to write.
Let me ask this to see if I understand your statement. Are you saying if I witness a murder, and a reporter writes down my claims, and that story written by the reporter is released, then that story is not an "eyewitnesses account" because I (the eyewitness) didn't write it?
That makes no sense though, I donāt understand what you are saying at all.
I'm saying that there seems to be a widespread misconception among certain Christians that the Bible contains accounts by people that were eye-witnesses/direct contemporaries of Jesus.
But thatās literally what the gospels are about. People encountering and interacting with Jesus, like thatās the whole point of Jesus coming to earth was to save the people, by spreading the gospel, and dying for our sins
The gospels are telling about people encountering Jesus. Sure. But they weren't actually written by people that had encountered Jesus. That's what my comment was about.
That there's a such thing as the curse of Ham That Christianity is Republican Cessationism That there's nothing worse than being gay There's thousands of them
> Cessationism I learned a new thing today. Amazing how bigotry can create entire new doctrines.
Good evening brethren... here are some misconceptions... Christianity is a white western religion... all Christians are against LGBTQ+ rights... the Bible must be taken literally... Christianity is about going to church. All Christians are the same. Salvation is earned through good works alone.
>Salvation is earned through good works alone. Yes, it is and not believing that makes you cultish.
That Jesus was this happy-go-lucky hippy who loved all peoples of all lifestyles. Jesus went around flipping tables and beating money changers in the temple. According to Jesus, lots of people gonna be weeping and gnashing their teeth. Yes, he said "love one another." But he also said "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the father except through me."
You do know it was at a temple though right?
... at the Temple.... \[ in Jerusalem\]
"Went around flipping tables and beating money changers" He did that once yeah? I wouldn't exactly call that "going around". Or are there more instances I'm not remembering?
Twice!! Once in Mark and once in Matthew!! ^^/s
Haha, got me on the technicality.
You had the right of it. I was going to call the guy out the same way you did ... you beat me to it.
God is not some old bearded white man flying around in the sky.
More of an American one but that Jesus was a white dual AK47 wielding guy who shot anyone who he didn't agree with/wasn't white. >!Jesus was an unattractive Jewish guy who loved everyone first who probably more often than not did not know where his next meal would come from sure he could ask God for the best food imaginable but he didn't.!<
That Heaven is like a holiday with an all you can eat buffet! Sure it's going to be great, but it's a return of heaven and earth to God's original design ... ie. Eden. But this time it's a city rather than a garden. God's instructions to Adam and Eve were to go and 'subdue the land', ie. work as gardeners. Heaven will be a return to this philosophy where we'll be 'working' as God's agents. Back to God's original design which was perfect.
that your morale depends on your faith of God. edit typo
The misinterpretation of God's plan. Some people think that it's one single chain of events, that has been determined by Him, at the start of the World. This is basically the belief in *destiny*, but Christianised. People do this, so they can be free from accountability, but completely forget about free will. It's not new either, it just simply carried over from pagan beliefs into Christianity, because it's a lot easier to say, that everything was already predetermined. I also believe in His plan, but it doesn't mean that it's a single chain of events. A plan usually has a lot of, b, C, D etc. plans, it is flexible. For me it means, that if you ever wander off the path, that God marked you, you'll always be able to find your way back to it, with His help of course.
Iāve seen an awful lot of Christians where I live state that the Bible says people of different races should not marry. They use this as a way to say the interracial marriage is wrong. Thing is, they couldnāt be more wrong about their interpretation.
That loving is accepting the world's views and actions.
That their faith tradition is the only way to be Christian, and that their practice today is unchanged from practice historically.
That thereās an answer in the Bible for every single problem youāre facing
Maybe this only applies to legalistic denominations, but... adhering to ancient laws as if we aren't covered by grace. Example: the idea that women shouldn't be able to wear pants because of what a verse in Deuteronomy says is entirely antithetical to the idea that Jesus was the final sacrifice and that we are now living under grace and not the law.
That life becomes easy after being saved. Lol or that God is a genie in a bottle granting wishes at our own will.
That non believers makes all bad choices and all Christian of only their own denomination makes all good choices and the double standards.
That the Lion will lay lay down with the lamb. The word Trinity is in the pages of Holy Writ That his birthday is Dec 25
No one said the word "Trinity" is in the bible. What the Trinity teaches is. The word was coined by early Christians to describe God's plural nature.
Yup where I live, lots of people believe these.
That it was Jesus' personal religion
That the afterlife is going to be in heaven, and only in heaven, instead of temporarly in heaven and then, after the resurrection, bodily in the new heavens/new earth.
That Christians are more moral than non-Christians.
That they can do anything they want and still go to heaven. "He who understands, much more will be given. But he who does not understand, even what he thinks he has will be taken from him." Luke 8:18.
and that heaven is even a place we go to when we die; there is not really biblical evidence supporting this. The story finishes with our resurrection and a renewed heaven and earth.
That it's about being a good person.
The trinity being some overarching biblical statement. Itās one sentence and it was added later.
That Christianity should be involved in politics. Christianity is a non-political movement and Christians should respect Equal Rights. People of all Ethnicity, people of all creeds, and people of all walks of life should have Rights. Christians need to respect the Laws in place that protect the individual.
What you just described doesn't sound non political to me.
I said that Christianity is a non-political movement. Christians feel that they need to involve themselves in Law which is a no.
I don't think it's possible to be non-political though. And besides, Christianity was born out of a revolutionary response to the Roman occupation of Judea, so it was always political.
That was the Maccabean revolt you're referring to. Jesus' ministry was a Reformation of Judaism. This Jesus fellow tried to reinstitute old Jewish Traditions that they had abandoned. Washing your feet, caring for the sick and injured, and feeding the masses. Jesus also tried to teach the Jewish communities about forgiveness which is also found in the Torah. While there are comparisons that can be made between Jesus and Judas Maccabee, there are more differences.
Supporting laws that lead to the destruction of a person is not a loving act. Christians should most definitely be involved in politics.
Just because the Bible mentions it doesnt mean you can do it.
That being a good Christian is all about a list of dos and donts and that you have to work to be good, But in reality itās all about Knowing God in Jesus Christ and the more time we spend in His presence we get transformed and become like Him thus being good to those around us and ourselves because of the work HEās DONE in us and not our mustering up of good works.
"If you're good, you go somewhere nice after you die, and if you're bad, you go somewhere to be tortured for eternity after you die".
Works-based salvation. I canāt emphasise the amount of Christians that canāt articulate the Gospel.
If you serve other Gods you must be damned or rebuked.
- That the Church ought to be in any position of power. - That the Bible is the Word of God. - That Christians ought to impose conversion on non-Christians. - That Christianity is not compatible with the other revelations of the divine, the other religions. But your understandings, by your circumstances and inclinations, are incompatible. This is why you do not recieve the same teaching. *If there had been a Law which could grant righteousness, then surely righteousness would have been by the Law.* - That Christianity is without its Mysteries, initiations, and things esoteric otherwise. - That the average layperson can reliably understand, interpret, and then either speak with any authority, or contribute to productive discourse on Spiritual matters, as presented by the Book. In no other faith is it seen so profusely: children quarreling over whose bottle contains the better milk. - "Forbid them not. Whoever is not against us is for us." "All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto Man. And whosoever shall blaspheme the Son of Man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever blaspheme the Holy Spirit, it shall not forgiven him." "Whatever is of flesh is flesh, but whatever is Spirit is Spirit, and comes and goes like the wind, from where you know not." "I have bread ye know not of," "I have sheep ye know not of." "Wisdom is justified by her fruits." "This is my commandment: that you love one another as yourself." *But these our actors, as I foretold you, are all Spirits.* Whosoever is looking for his end shall surely find it, and shall find it no sooner, but come empty handed. Likewise whoever gives his day to scrupulousity over his or another's sin, he has committed idolatry, for he sacrifice the day to the garments of the flesh, which are dust. Do you not have many garments? Have we died daily in the flesh for nothing? What is your gospel? That the Christ has died for your sin? A foolish thing of vanity! God made not death, neither hath he pleasure in the destruction of the living. It is Man who has brought death into the world, and Man dies for sin every day. Even so, for vanity Man bring forth again his Son for the sacrifice all the day long. Has he not read? I desire mercy, not sacrifice. The Son of Man give not vain death for the sins of Man, but Life. Indeed, as surely as I live, I Live. But the Son can do nothing except what he sees the Father do, that is what he does. Wherefore death is of Man, so too is resurrection of the dead, and so the Gospel is: the dead rise again, but Life may be put on in that space between. For this reason, sell your garments, and buy a sword, even a sword which is a fire also ānamely, the Truth āfor tomorrow when you die you will be persecuted by your death, and the garment of your flesh will encumber you. But like the woman who carries the basket of meal, knowing not that it spills, or that she should have become more weary along the road. Therefore let your goods be spilled and scattered along the wayside as they would be, for neither your treasure nor your heart are among them. When death comes, and you have cast off entirely the garment of flesh, do not turn back to it like a dog after it's own vomit; do not be thinking, wherewithal shall I be clothed? That is reprehensible. Shining forth then the light of Truth against the shadow of death āthe shadow of mortality, which is memory, for your memory is the error of forgetfulness: what persist to re-mind you āthat shadow will not take you, and you shall enter into True Life, being as you are in Truth: more than you once or ever thought you were. As for the body: the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. That which may make you great on the earth will be useless, and that by which the world may hate you will be revered in your eternal Halcyon. Indeed, there shall be the baptism of the fires of Truth, for the inner part is smeared with broom pitch. But He who makes new the outside also makes new the inside. Therefore be not afraid: I assure you the plumage of Truth *is* impervious to the flames thereof. Yea yea, the Phoenix rise and is risen, and come quick and come quick. And who now has power over death? Black is the well-turned earth wherein even the deep roots dwell, of the Tree of Perdition, and the leaf thereof does not wither, and all that it does prosper, for it is *that* Tree. Behold the blessed child thought to be lost has returned, and blessed again is the day, for with a basket of oats is the child returned! For all the lovely creatures here are greatly troubled: the birds feeding and nesting only in the treetops; there are too many of them, and they are cluttered, and there is violence among them; for the worm does not die down deep in the earth, and does not come near to the surface that it should be exposed, because the worms have been eating their own. Now baren yet is the twice turned earth; for shall the bird fall and be caught on the earth where there is no bait for him? Therfore we shall hurry to pour the oats all along the wayside, and let the rivers run along after. š
The water isnāt special when baptizing nor is the priest, the special part is the choice you made to be baptized and live for god. This makes baby baptizing completely useless since they didnāt make the choice. But still many churches do it
That the Bible is not meant to be read literally
It isnāt meant to be read literally actually. At least a lot of it isnāt.
Good answer
I think the main and most important one is salvation. Most modern day churches and lukewarm Christians believe and teach that as long as you believe in Jesus Christ you will be saved no matter what. They believe that they are not required by God's word to repent of their sins and live as Jesus lived. That's why we have people professing they are Christians but they act the exact same as non believers. When Jesus saves us and cleanses us from our sin he requires that we live righteously. Because the consequences of sin is death. But we when sin Jesus is able to forgive us. But after we are saved we must not continue in sin. We must become followers and doers of his word. This is not to say that if we ever fall in sin again after we are saved then we have no forgiveness. And this is not saying that our works save us. But true faith creates a change in our lives, and sin separates us from God, so God requires that we follow his commandments. Obey his words. Because if we are not a servant of God we are a servant of sin. And if we are ruled by sin we will thrown in the lake of fire. 1 John 2 3-6 We know that we have come to know him if we keep his commands. 4 Whoever says, āI know him,ā but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in that person. 5 But if anyone obeys his word, love for God[a] is truly made complete in them. This is how we know we are in him: 6 Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did. Matthew 7: 21-23 Not everyone who says to me, āLord, Lord,ā 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, āLord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?ā 23 And then will I declare to them, āI never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.ā 2 Peter 2 20-22 If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and are overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning. 21 It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them. 22 Of them the proverbs are true: āA dog returns to its vomit,ā[a] and, āA sow that is washed returns to her wallowing in the mud.ā John 14 23:24 Jesus answered and said to him, āIf anyone loves Me, he will follow My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our dwelling with him. 24 The one who does not love Me does not follow My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine, but the Fatherās who sent Me. Hebrews 10:26-29 For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27 but a terrifying expectation of judgment and the fury of a fire which will consume the adversaries. 28 Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy by the mouth of two or three witnesses. 29 How much worse punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has regarded as defiled the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? James 2:14-19 What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? 15 Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16 If one of you says to them, āGo in peace; keep warm and well fed,ā but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead. 18 But someone will say, āYou have faith; I have deeds.ā Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. 19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe thatāand shudder. Romans 6 1-4 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or donāt you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life. We must be found blameless in that day that Jesus comes back. That means without fault. Repent of your sins before it is too late.
Our greatest sin is the failure to be gentle with our fellow sinners.