Jesus wife fragment is a fake

by Christ Alone 494 Replies latest social current

tec

Zid, I think you misunderstood a point I was making to NC. I don't think all atheists are the same. There are angry atheists, militant atheists, happy atheists, scientific atheists, conspiracy theory atheists, ancient astronaut theory athiests, humanist atheists, intolerant atheists; tolerant atheists; apathetic atheists, etc, etc. Of course, neither are all theists the same.
Atheists have different POLITICAL views - some are conservative, some liberal, some independent; they have different LIFESTYLES - some are married, others just living together, some having one-night stands and others leading a gay/lesbian relationship or one-night-stand lifestyle...
You can insert theist where you have put atheist, and this sentence would still be correct.
Atheists have different SOCIAL views - some believe in charities and social works, while others cleave to a rugged individualism.
You could still insert theist here and this sentence would still be correct... though most christians that i know believe in charity/social work (which is not the same as saying that they DO these things).
It is generally ONLY within religous movements that one finds blind, mentally-numb, unquestioning loyalty.
You get it in nationalism and politics as well. You get it in pretty much everything with some people, even if those people do not represent the majority. But just because some follow that, does not mean that all or even most do... in any type of movement.
Peace,
tammy
tec

I'm not sure where you think my theology is close to the WT's.
Because you limit the full power of the Holy Spirit to a chosen few. You do not think that the Holy Spirit will lead others into all truth, you think others must listen to the "founding fathers" (or rather, what others who have come after for two thousand years have said that they taught...)
I haven't ever said that only the disciples were given the Holy Spirit. That wouldn't be consistant with the command of Jesus to go into the world and teach and make disciples and baptise them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. I've state that there is the need to get the correct foundational teaching about who Jesus Christ the man is from the church who was given the teaching authority(the apostles and later disciples that Jesus sent out). The Holy Spirit bears witness to this teaching in that He has caused the historic church to grow from the first small group of disciples that were sent out, each of these subsequent disciples that are brought into the church are given the gift of the Holy Spirit that is how the church grows from generation to generation
I know you never said that only the disciples were given Holy Spirit... but you limit the power OF that Holy Spirit; except among those first chosen few.
As well, Christ also said to his disciples that no man will call them teacher (there is ONE teacher: Christ).
They were (and there still are) WITNESSES to Christ. But it is Christ, the Spirit of Truth, who teaches and leads into all truth.

We can be certain that the "fathers" of the faith (including Jesus Christ) were receiving their visions and hearing from God can't we?...your voice...there is no "we" certainty, just "me" certainty. I'm not even sure why you compared their experience in founding the church to yours unless you think it is a means to validate what you are going through.
Depends on who you are referring to when you say 'we'. The 'we' back then were not all sure that anything was from God. The 'we' today is still not all sure.
And I am not 'going through' anything.

you said: "Even though He did say to go and make disciples, those disciples, according to you, could not then receive the promised gift of the Holy Spirit for themselves and be taught by that Spirit. They could only trust in men, and be taught by men."...point me to where I've said this, please.
My mistake. You say that they cannot be TAUGHT by the Spirit (in any real way that I can understand from you); but not that they do not recieve the Holy Spirit. I worded that wrong.
But as for the rest, that is what you are saying... unless we were the 'founding fathers' (though there is only ONE head: Christ; and so one 'founder'); we have to trust the men who claim to have the proper 'lineage' from them.

There is emphesis put on some doctrines over other doctrines depending on the denomination but the core dogma about who Jesus Christ is and what He only has done in His death, burial and resurrection has remained the same from the beginning...
It changed from the beginning. You can see that clearly just from looking at the apostles creed vs. the nicene creed. The nicene creed 'added' to the apostles creed.
Him being the Christ, his death and resurrection, that He saves and gives Life, that he is the Son of God... and the command to look to and listen to Him. None of these things have changed.
didn't Jesus Christ disfellowship/ex-communicate the pharisees from Himself, His disciples and the kingdom, Tammy?
You sure about that?
They rejected Him. They killed Him. They 'disfellowshipped/ex-communicated' Him and his disciples from their temple.
As for the things on love: let me ask you a question Michelle. Of those who have not been given an opportunity to know Christ or God (but who do act in love toward their fellow man, golden rule, mercy, forgiveness and all that)... do you think those people are going to hell? If your answer is yes, I would like to bring up these promises that Christ made: Judge not, and you will not be judged. Forgive and you will be forgiven. Show mercy, and mercy will be shown to you. Give even a cup of cold water to one of the least of my (Christ's) brothers, and you will not lose your reward. (who is he talking to... all who belong to Him are his brothers and sisters... so who is it that will not lose his reward for doing good to his brothers and sisters?)
the theology of the historical/orthodox church from the time of the apostles to this very day is consistant with what Jesus Christ taught...all that He taught...not just the points that can make Him seem to be non-judgemental towards those who reject Him.
I would have to disagree on that. Does the church still teach that someone who commits suicide cannot be buried on holy ground, and is not going to heaven? What about not being called teachers? What about giving all you have to the poor? Christ did not sit in a huge cathedral, with gold and jewels dripping off him; with ties to political interests, etc. What good was any of that 'theology' when the church did not follow Christ, but instead followed its own interests, lying and saying that those were in the name of Christ? What good was that theology when native american children were being abused and deprived of their heritage and families?
So what good is theology without love? It is nothing without love, Michelle. Absolutely nothing. Love covers over a multitude of sins, Michelle. Not correct theology.
Peace,
tammy
NewChapter

You do not think that the Holy Spirit will lead others into all truth,
Interesting word choice. I get the impression that you don't really think there is a coherent truth---and the enables you to simply agree with most things people say they have been told by god, as long as it doesn't contradict your perception of Christ. In fact, these things can be quite opposite from each other, as long as they both support your notion of Christ, you will allow it to be true. Sort of a one on one truth---AS LONG as it doesn't contradict your truth.
tec

I get the impression that you don't really think there is a coherent truth---and the enables you to simply agree with most things people say they have been told by god, as long as it doesn't contradict your perception of Christ.
Truth - Christ.
Love is a coherent truth (granted our perceptions might differ). But love doesn't tend to be dogmatic. See Paul's definition for a great description of love.
In fact, these things can be quite opposite from each other, as long as they both support your notion of Christ, you will allow it to be true.
It doesn't really matter what I allow... but if something is not against Christ and His teachings (which are truth), then sure... I mean, what business is it of mine if it is not in contradiction with Christ and is in fact in support of Him, unless I have heard otherwise and speak as to that in discussion?
'He who is not against you, is for you.'
Peace,
tammy
NewChapter

It doesn't really matter what I allow... but if something is not against Christ and His teachings (which are truth), then sure... I mean, what business is it of mine if it is not in contradiction with Christ and is in fact in support of Him, unless I have heard otherwise and speak as to that in discussion?
Exactly. which is why I raise my eyebrow at your term 'truth'. It seems rather contrary to your whole theology, since there can be very drastic divergences, but still somehow be 'true'. I could also ask, what business is it of yours if they ARE in contradtion of your notion of Christ, which differs greatly from others notions of Christ, and would differ from your own notion of Christ had you lived 100 years ago or 100 years in the future. Your understanding is strongly driven by the culture you are in, and not the culture Christ was in. Truth just seems to be a pretty heavy word to be throwing around with such a loosey goosey acceptance of all things not contradicting.
tec

Christ is the Truth of God, and the word you objected to was part of a verse from the bible... in response to Michelle, on the Holy Spirit and his teaching and leading into all truth.
Also, if you are going to attempt to call me on 'drastic divergence'... an example would be nice.
Peace,
tammy
NewChapter

Okayeee---but you are not going to like it.
Dragons.
Spirits stored in bones and destroyed in fire---along with all future hope for the dead individual.
Also---destruction of bones in manners other than fire, destruction of the spirit. There must be something left over.
Water imprisoning spirits.
Never heard you oppose any of it, therefore I assume you accept it all as truth according to your understanding of Christ.
tec

Never heard you oppose any of it, therefore I assume you accept it all as truth according to your understanding of Christ.
You know what happens when you assume... yes ;)
Dragons... I have never seen a spirit, so I do not know, myself, what one looks like. I can follow the train of thought... but I, myself, do not know. So it could be true. It does not contradict any teaching of Christ (physical appearance means nothing), so what does it matter to me... when I myself do not know? There is no divergence. I cannot oppose something that I myself, do not know. And I have no need to oppose something that does not contradict Christ or His teachings. 'He who is not against you, is for you.'
Spirit in bones (there is more to it than that, but we can leave it at that)... I do not think that I accept that the spirit can be so easily destroyed as in cremation or some such thing. I have not been given understanding other than knowing that God protects those who belong to Him, and to trust in Him. So I do know it matters nothing at all to those who belong to Christ and God; because God will not lose one of those who belong to Him. The spirit of all who belong to Christ and God go under the altar upon their death. And what of those whose names are written in the lamb's book of life? (those who are not His brothers, because all who belonged to him - dead and alive - were resurrected to be with Him at the same time) I do not think the adversary can take those from Christ. They, too, belong to Him.
As to the rest, I trust God. He has worked to protect us from ourselves when we do stupid things in the past (such as adam and eve).
'Fire' does destroy... but I do not know if we can create that kind of 'fire'. I also don't know that this is symbolic or literal. I would lean more toward symbolic, but I do not know.
Water imprisoning spirits.
I do not know one way or the other. It does not contradict Christ and His teachings. Could well be true. I can even follow the reasoning. So I have no problem with it.
So again, no divergence, as stated above.
Peace,
tammy
myelaine

dear Tammy...
you said: "Because you limit the full power of the Holy Spirit to a chosen few"...I would hardly call millions and millions of people who have entered into the unity of the Father and Son since the beginning of the church "a few".

didn't Jesus Christ disfellowship/ex-communicate the pharisees from Himself, His disciples and the kingdom, Tammy?
"You sure about that?
They rejected Him. They killed Him. They 'disfellowshipped/ex-communicated' Him and his disciples from their temple."
...Jesus heard their "case" and judged them didn't He?...were they, at any point, asked to enter into fellowship with Him? His disciples? or were they told that they wouldn't enter into the kingdom?...He sounded pretty firm on His ruling...the church, however, remembering that they were shown mercy by Jesus Christ may disfellowship or ex-communicate a person but they also welcome back a repentant sinner...just like God has shown them to do.
you said: "As for the things on love: let me ask you a question Michelle. Of those who have not been given an opportunity to know Christ or God (but who do act in love toward their fellow man, golden rule, mercy, forgiveness and all that)... do you think those people are going to hell?" ...I kinda thought you would continue your "law of love" arguement...I've commented in other posts to you and others about what I believe about those who HAVEN'T heard the gospel. Lets bring this a little closer to home, shall we?...Tammy, are there ANY gentiles here who don't have the law?...or haven't heard the gospel of Jesus Christ?...NOT likely...that IS the power of God in and for the church...2 cor 10:3-6...ephesians 6:10-17...I'll ask you again: "When gentiles do by nature the things of the law they are a law unto themselves...the nature of the law is an eye for an eye...therefore, do unto others as you would have them do unto you...what has this got to do with people being forgiven solely on the basis of their apprehending the shed blood of Jesus Christ for their salvation?"...since NONE of the people here are without the law (unless they are saved by the shed blood of Jesus Christ) they will be judged by the law...and you know that NO ONE can keep the law. How is your "law of love" going to cover them? The Holy Spirit has succeeded in using the ministrations of the church to bring these people here AND their every thought captive to Christ in order that they make a decision FOR Jesus Christ and you're letting them off the hook, so to speak, by feeding them a lie, your "law of love" ...Jesus said in john 8:24 "Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins." and here almost 2000 years later you say, words to the effect, surely you will not die...
the theology of the historical/orthodox church from the time of the apostles to this very day is consistant with what Jesus Christ taught...all that He taught...not just the points that can make Him seem to be non-judgemental towards those who reject Him.
you said: "I would have to disagree on that. Does the church still teach that someone who commits suicide cannot be buried on holy ground, and is not going to heaven? What about not being called teachers? What about giving all you have to the poor? Christ did not sit in a huge cathedral, with gold and jewels dripping off him; with ties to political interests, etc. What good was any of that 'theology' when the church did not follow Christ, but instead followed its own interests, lying and saying that those were in the name of Christ? What good was that theology when native american children were being abused and deprived of their heritage and families?
you said: "So what good is theology without love? It is nothing without love, Michelle. Absolutely nothing. Love covers over a multitude of sins, Michelle. Not correct theology."
...are you making a distinction between theology and doctrines or those within the church who are disciples of Jesus Christ and those who are not?...are you taking into account the protestant reformation which saw the church grow and mature in its formation of doctrine (not theology)? theology is the study of God and how He relates to the world. christian theology is the study of how God relates to the world and His church. Which makes me wonder...why do you go on about the sins of the church but you wont cover or forgive the multitude of them?...you hold those sins against the the church and bring them up to suit your purpose...is that Christ like?
you said: "It [doctrines] changed from the beginning. You can see that clearly just from looking at the apostles creed vs. the nicene creed. The nicene creed 'added' to the apostles creed."...
...the theological and scholarly consensus was clarified in a written document for the benefit of those who were to teach and preach so that it would be known throughout the congregations that this wasn't just the opinion of a few people. this theology of God would form a sound foundation in which Jesus IS the cornerstone. With that many witnesses anyone can and should trust, put faith in and continue to build faith in the God expoused in that theology. that theology witnessed by the Holy Spirit held the hearts of men until recently, Tammy. With the advent of contrary cults and sects that came up with their own theology and subsequently caused men to follow other doctrines as well...mens hearts hardened and many no longer want to endure even sound theology...they would prefer to wander their own way...even when Jesus sends out shepherds to bring them back...
let me ask you, has your lord done his job as far as shepherding you into a great flock of his sheep?
love michelle
myelaine

dear Tammy...
you said: "And what of those whose names are written in the lamb's book of life? (those who are not His brothers, because all who belonged to him - dead and alive - were resurrected to be with Him at the same time) I do not think the adversary can take those from Christ. They, too, belong to Him."
the book of daniel tells us that those who sleep in the dust will be resurrected some to everlasting life in Christ (in bodies like the resurrected body of Jesus Christ) and some will be resurrected to shame and everlasting contempt(in bodies like the resurrected body of Jesus Christ)...if these ones belong to Christ, why are they resurrected to shame and everlasting contempt?...wouldn't these resurrection bodies be inhabited by the same ones that Jesus says will be thrown into the outer darkness of hell where their worm dieth not? that place where their will be weeping and gnashing of teeth?...that place "created" for satan and his fallen angels...
please explain.
love michelle

Jesus wife fragment is a fake

Share this