1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Is modern Christianity off track?

Discussion in 'Interfaith Discussion' started by Desert Snake, May 10, 2018.

?

Is modern Christianity off track?

Poll closed Aug 18, 2018.
  1. Yes, modern Christianity has confused the deific nature of Deity

    100.0%
  2. No, my church is right, etc

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. Desert Snake

    Desert Snake Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    20,658
    Ratings:
    +1,697
    Religion:
    Satanism
    I believe that the original concept, which became Christianity, is Jesus worship. This does not mean that there is no concept of a higher God, it means that there is no distinction between 'God concept', and 'Jesus God concept'. I also am not arguing that there can be no 'trinity' concept, however that this trinity concept has been misunderstood, to mean some form of linear god to man idea, that was never intended as such, to mean. The Christian Bible can be read either way, since the deific titles are used interchangeably in many books of the New Testament. This alone might refute linear god to man concept, because if inferenced otherwise, how can you argue much of modern Christian theology, with any clarity?

    Votes and comments welcome
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
  2. lewisnotmiller

    lewisnotmiller Grand Hat
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    21,565
    Ratings:
    +14,508
    Religion:
    atheist
    Just a question, really.
    By modern Christianity, are you talking about mainstream Christianity since 325 (First Council of Nicaea)?
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  3. Desert Snake

    Desert Snake Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    20,658
    Ratings:
    +1,697
    Religion:
    Satanism
    Although I meant much more modern, like what we find with the adaption of 'yahweh' used in teaching/sermons, that council actually is an issue, of course.
    Since the early church encountered many 'heresies', but commonly and popularly noted the adherence to what it considered a non trinitarian type of worship, we could surmise a noted distinction between Council faith, and common or heretical faith.
    I think that partly what happened, is that the technically heretical faith of many Jesus adherents, simply employed a non distinctional trinity, while maintaining the traditional belief.

    I think a question is, was the trinity invented by the church, or adapted by the church, and explained in a way that deviated from the non distinctional understanding. The trinity, I believe, is an form of deific notation, originally, but has no conceptual differentiation within it. The differential being the names, not the nature, or persona, of 'God'.
     
  4. Estro Felino

    Estro Felino Believer in free will
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2014
    Messages:
    14,699
    Ratings:
    +5,892
    Religion:
    Pelagianism
    Btw the concept of heresy is very relative. The word heresy means "choice", so I think each choice should be respected.

    Problems arise when you make a religion more and more dogmatic (as Augustine did) and less pragmatic.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. outlawState

    outlawState Deism is dead

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2017
    Messages:
    571
    Ratings:
    +82
    Religion:
    Universal Protestant
    There can only be one answer to "has modern Christianity has confused the deific nature of Deity" which is "yes" where the New Testament teachings on the divine hierarchy in 1 Cor 11:3 are constantly rejected, for this reason (i.e. not reflecting the Trinity), or for that reason (i.e. not reflecting female-male equality). From 1 Cor 11:16 valid Christianity must espouse the divine hierarchy in 1 Cor 11:3, or be accounted heretical.

    Offensive doctrine lies not in the trinity of divine revelation, but in the philosophical Trinity construction devised by mankind which is a philosophical construct built upon the trinity of revelation. Again, offensive doctrine lies not in equating men and women as equal possessors of salvation, but in a philosophical construct of equality based upon the equality of such possession, allowing women to lord it over men.

    And by "modern Christianity" must be rendered "mainstream Christian doctrines" because they are as many personal variations of Christianity as their are individual believers, where each soul and conscience possesses a unique quantum of faith and knowledge and experience, and everyone is at different stages in knowing the divine; and where just because someone notionally belongs to a denomination does not mean that they agree with all of its doctrines and practices.
     
  6. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    14,649
    Ratings:
    +8,295
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    I believe any evaluation of modern Christianity should be determined in the context of the warnings given by Jesus and the apostles concerning an apostasy that was foretold after the death of the apostles.

    The book, The History of Christianity, published by Peter Eckler, stated:

    “If Paganism was conquered by Christianity, it is equally true that Christianity was corrupted by Paganism. The pure Deism of the first Christians, (who differed from their fellow Jews only in the belief that Jesus was the promised Messiah,) was changed, by the Church of Rome, into the incomprehensible dogma of the trinity. Many of the pagan tenets, invented by the Egyptians and idealized by Plato, were retained as being worthy of belief.”

    Confirmation of this is seen in the warning of this apostasy from true Christianity, in Paul's words..... “In later times some will depart from the faith by giving heed to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons.” (1 Timothy 4:1)

    John 20:17, after his resurrection, Jesus is quoted as saying to Mary Magdalene...."Stop clinging to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. But go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.’”

    Jesus calls the Father his God...so can God have a God? Does one part of God worship an equal part of himself?

    Since, according to the New Catholic Encyclopedia, the Trinity teaching was not fully developed until “the last quadrant of the 4th century,” we have to ask: 'Is it possible that the Trinity doctrine is a result of that apostasy?'

    Consider too, that far from bringing people closer to the Father, the Trinity doctrine has actually caused him to be replaced. In Protestant teaching, this has led to the Father’s being relegated to a position of near-total obscurity. If you ask anyone to whom they are referring when they say “Praise the Lord!” and they will invariably answer, “Jesus Christ, of course!”

    "Jah" or "Yah" (shortened form of the tetragrammaton YHWH) occurs 50 times in the Hebrew Scriptures, 26 times alone, and 24 times in the expression “Hallelujah,” which is, literally, a command to “praise Jah.” (Jehovah. Psalm 148:1-6) But because there was a substitution of the divine name with his title "Lord"...that phrase became "Praise the Lord".

    This problem resulted from the Jewish tradition of not uttering the Divine Name when reading their scripture.
    By substituting a title instead of God's name, the identity of the Lord Jesus became tied up with the Lord Jehovah so that they became indistinguishable.
    Jesus never once claimed to be God, nor did he say that he was equal in any way to his Father.

    Since we find no explicit doctrine of a "godhead" in the NT at all, don't we have to ask where such an idea came from?

    All of the first Christians and Bible writers were Jews, so a deviation from their monotheistic God would have been an abhorrence to them. (Deuteronomy 6:4)

    A simple Google search will reveal where the idea originated...

    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]

    Pagans had trinities...Jews did not. The first Christians did not believe in a three headed god.

    The Catholic Church, true to her pagan Roman roots, made her god acceptable to her pagan citizens.

    Anyone who disagreed with the Church was considered a heretic...but could it be that the biggest heresy was committed by the Church itself, fulfilling prophesy? [​IMG]
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  7. lewisnotmiller

    lewisnotmiller Grand Hat
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    21,565
    Ratings:
    +14,508
    Religion:
    atheist
    I'm not especially strong on this theologically, but I do have pretty good knowledge of Byzantine history. Are you interested in that view, or more just the theology?
    Fine either way, just wouldn't bother getting out my books/fact checking if it's more a theological discussion you're interested in.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Jumi

    Jumi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2014
    Messages:
    9,881
    Ratings:
    +5,459
    Religion:
    Secular theist (none)
    Why would the Church even make Christianity spread if they were pagan at heart?
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  9. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    14,649
    Ratings:
    +8,295
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    Why did they want to promote their religion? It was a power trip of monumental proportions if you look at what the church came to be...and the influence it had on the lives of the population.

    With their imposing buildings....with opulent interiors, despite the fact that a great many Catholic people were dirt poor.

    [​IMG] [​IMG]
    [​IMG] [​IMG]

    Their ornately dressed priesthood....

    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]

    Can you tell me when Christ ever promoted any of those things? He predicted that the "weeds" of fake Christianity, sown by the devil, would take over and would not treat the flock with care.

    They became drunk with power and saturated themselves in their man made traditions just like the Pharisees before them had done.

    This is NOT Christianity.....IMO, it is not even close. [​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  10. Trackdayguy

    Trackdayguy Speed doesn't kill, it's hitting the wall

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2018
    Messages:
    964
    Ratings:
    +562
    Religion:
    Universalist - Pelagianism - believer
    I know some lovely people who call themselves Christians, but I also know some lovely people who aren't. I would say your question "is Christianity of track", is the understatement of the year, maybe decade.

    I was part of it for years, learnt a lot of stuff that bought big change to my life and family, but like most things that are man made it usually ends up about money & power.

    My advice is: Keep away it has little to do with the Carpenter from Galilee.
     
    #10 Trackdayguy, May 10, 2018
    Last edited: May 10, 2018
  11. Trackdayguy

    Trackdayguy Speed doesn't kill, it's hitting the wall

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2018
    Messages:
    964
    Ratings:
    +562
    Religion:
    Universalist - Pelagianism - believer
    YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS.........
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Jumi

    Jumi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2014
    Messages:
    9,881
    Ratings:
    +5,459
    Religion:
    Secular theist (none)
    They could have kept a pagan religion and done the same. Instead they dismantled the pagan religions. If the idea was to disseminate paganism, it's counterproductive.

    I daresay it's something all religions have. Buildings for their own purposes, not for the purpose of feeding or teaching the poor to take care of themselves.

    That's why I'm asking, what would be the point to take a religion and masquerade as another. They were in charge, they could have picked any religion, there still seems to be no reason why they would create a religion to just put up an act.

    And the Pharisees were the folks critical of power at their time being too close to the pagans... now the cycle continues.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Desert Snake

    Desert Snake Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    20,658
    Ratings:
    +1,697
    Religion:
    Satanism
    Fine. I think it's all part of the discussion, because the way the churches, or Bible writers as well, wrote about the religious belief, informs of what they were adhering to, theologically. Hence history, word and concept meaning, is all presentable in an discussion that involves the theology.
     
  14. Hockeycowboy

    Hockeycowboy Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,118
    Ratings:
    +4,902
    Religion:
    Christian
    Mainstream Christianity, i.e., Christendom, has been off track for over 1900 years, right after the last Apostle, John, died. (Even during their lives, false teachings were cropping up.- 2 Timothy 2:16-18; Titus 1:10-11,16)

    For one thing, Jesus never told his followers -- or future ones -- to worship him...only to obey and follow him. He always directed worship to his Father, the God of Israel. John 4:23-24;John 20:17.

    Worshipping Jesus was not an original concept of Christianity...it was / is a corrupted concept, just as the concepts mentioned in Timothy and Titus.

    I know the arguments..."I and my Father are one"; "If you have seen me, you have seen the Father." Did Jesus mean literally? Then Who was he praying to, when he said "My Father"?-- Matthew 26:39; Matthew 26:42.
    Obviously, Jesus was using hyperbole.

    Did the First-century Christians worship Jesus? If you read the prayer recorded at Acts of the Apostles 4:24-30, they weren't praying to Jesus, rather, they called Jesus, God's "holy servant."
     
    • Like Like x 2
  15. Desert Snake

    Desert Snake Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    20,658
    Ratings:
    +1,697
    Religion:
    Satanism
    Following your line of reasoning, you should be against the usage of the word 'God', since God is a name derived from a "pagan" source. Hence, why are you using it? If you are against the pagan adaptation or usage of god names and inferences, that should be the pre-eminent or most important subject, according to your argument.
     
  16. Jainarayan

    Jainarayan ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2011
    Messages:
    21,405
    Ratings:
    +9,822
    Religion:
    śrī kṛṣṇasya sevāyām - “In Lord Krishna’s service”
    I don't disagree with any of this. On reflection, I can't think of anywhere Jesus taught any kid of theology or worship. His audience was simple, so he taught a simple message. He taught loving devotion to God, or as Hindus call it bhakti. I think the "I and my Father are one" and "If you have seen me, you have seen the Father." comments are quite radical for his time and place, and smack of an eastern mysticism, which I think he was heavily influenced by. He took a big chance with that one, and I think it still hasn't paid off.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Hockeycowboy

    Hockeycowboy Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,118
    Ratings:
    +4,902
    Religion:
    Christian
    I appreciate your input. I'm sure you would agree that, to understand anything, to have the correct meaning, context is imperative.

    The "I and my Father are one" statement is from John 10:30. A few chapters later, @ John 17:11, where Jesus was praying to his Father, he said about his disciples, "that they may be one, just as we are one"

    Regarding Jesus' "If you have seen me, you have seen the Father," Colossians 1:15-16, describes Jesus as "the image of the invisible God" (An image is not the real thing); and Hebrews 1:3 says he is "the exact representation...": i.e., not the real thing.

    Take care.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    14,649
    Ratings:
    +8,295
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    Anything that is worshiped can be termed a "god", inasmuch as the worshiper attributes to it might greater than his own and venerates it.

    Among the Hebrew words that are translated “God” is ʼEl, (probably meaning “Mighty One; Strong One.” Genesis 14:18) It is used with reference to Jehovah, to other gods, and to men. So I am wondering which "word" you are referring to?

    It is also used extensively in the makeup of proper names, such as Elisha (meaning “God Is Salvation”) and Michael (“Who Is Like God?”). In some places ʼEl appears with the definite article (ha·ʼElʹ, literally, “the God”) with reference to Jehovah, thereby distinguishing him from other gods. (Genesis 46:3; 2 Samuel 22:31)

    At Isaiah 9:6 Jesus Christ is prophetically called ʼEl Gib·bohrʹ, “Mighty God” (not ʼEl Shad·daiʹ [God Almighty], which is applied to Jehovah at Genesis 17:1).

    In Greek "THEOS" (god) has the same meaning as the Hebrew. Because there were many gods in Greek religious thought, there was no word for the "one God" of Judaism. And since the Jews had stopped using the Divine Name, the only way to distinguish "Jehovah" from their many gods was to use the definite article, (the) in much the same way as they did in Hebrew....and like we would use the definite article to demonstrate "THE Brad Pitt" from someone who merely had the same name.

    Well, if you think it through, there was only one "God" in the beginning before any living creature was created, so all other "gods" would be a plagiarizing of his status, as far as I can see.

    The need to distinguish between "gods" only came about as humans invented them (with a little help from the wannabe "god" in Eden.) He wanted the worship that would naturally go to the Creator, so subverting that worship away from the true God, he gets it all by default.

    I can't see how your argument stands. :shrug: Sorry.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Desert Snake

    Desert Snake Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    20,658
    Ratings:
    +1,697
    Religion:
    Satanism
    God is a personal name that is also used for Hebraic names of God. It is not a title being used as a name. God has more than one name, or title, and the English usage of God, as a name, conforms to the Hebraic usage.


    Therefore, the question, still stands, why do you use a "pagan" origin name for deity? I know why I use God as a name, but the question is, do you use God as a name, and if so, why.
     
  20. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    14,649
    Ratings:
    +8,295
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    You don't seem to understand the agenda at work here. Jesus warned that the devil would produce a counterfeit "Christianity" that would take people away from the worship of the true God. Its how he gains worship for himself, because what is taken away from God, goes to him by default. He is the only other real "god" in existence but he masquerades as any number of them. He goes by all sorts of names in all sorts of religions instituted by his dupes.....he doesn't care how he subverts worship, as long as it doesn't go to Jehovah.

    The buildings that the first Christians used for worship were rather humble. There is a reason why the Temple that was destroyed in Jerusalem was never rebuilt. It was no longer needed for God's worshippers once the Messiah had fulfilled his role. The temple and priesthood were pictorial of heavenly things. (1 Corinthians 3:16-17)

    Places of worship should reflect the honor that naturally goes to the God who is worshipped there, but not to the extent of taking from worshippers to give to the opulent lifestyle of their clergy.

    The Pope lives in a gold inlaid palace with servants...when did Jesus do that? When did Jesus ignore the poor to give undue attention to the rich and fraternize with world leaders? (James 4:4) Jesus' lifestyle was just the opposite of what Christendom displays. (Matthew 8:20)

    To corrupt something that belongs to Jehovah is how the devil thumbs his nose at the true God. He did it with Judaism and he's done the exact same thing with Christendom....but since God has left written instructions for his worshippers, there is no real excuse to be taken in. Sadly the majority are misled, just as Jesus demonstrated. In Judaism, few responded to his message because they placed their trust in their religious system over the pure truth that he was preaching. Those who did respond saw the truth in what he preached straight away. We have an acute 'hypocrisy meter' and those who hate hypocrisy as God does, will see it clearly. Jesus said that the road to life was "cramped and narrow" and that the majority would not choose it but instead take the easy road that leads to destruction. (Matthew 7:13-14) Most people are too lazy or too afraid to be different. We want to blend in, not stand out......but unless we stand out, there is no future for us.

    Adopting a thin veneer of "Christianity" whilst living a selfish, materialistic or immoral life will never win 'Brownie points' with God. In Christianity, you can't have your cake and eat it too. o_O

    Matthew 16:24-26...."Then Jesus said to his disciples: “If anyone wants to come after me, let him disown himself and pick up his torture stake (stauros) and keep following me. 25 For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it. 26 Really, what good will it do a man if he gains the whole world but loses his life? Or what will a man give in exchange for his life?"

    'Disowning ourselves and picking up our torture stake to keep following Christ implies what?
    If we have the courage of our convictions then we will exhibit the same courage as Jesus' first century followers. Like Jesus, look what they had to endure in order to serve the true God. Their greatest enemies were their own people. (Matthew 10:32-36)

    The Pharisees were the biggest hypocrites on the planet according to Jesus. Read his denunciation at Matthew 23 and see why Jesus exposed them.

    The devil is like the 'Pied Piper'.....he plays the right tune and people blindly follow him into destruction. He knows what his fate is, but he gains satisfaction by taking as many down with him as he can con. :(
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
Loading...