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 'Was' and 'Beginning' in John 1:1

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by tigger2, Aug 23, 2019.

  1. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    9,966
    Ratings:
    +5,237
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    Oh no! :eek: Is this a...."don't you know who I am?" response? On an internet forum credentials are pretty worthless because you can't verify who owns them and besides, it also depends on whether you are inclined to take much notice of them and their "theology" anyway....after all was Jesus a "Sharmanic Christian"?

    According to Wiki....
    "Shamanism is a practice that involves a practitioner reaching altered states of consciousness in order to perceive and interact with what they believe to be a spirit world and channel these transcendental energies into this world."

    Is this who you are? Should we be impressed? Is Jesus impressed? Just asking......?
     
  2. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    32,993
    Ratings:
    +4,087
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    Matthew was written as late as following the turn of the century. It’s not “based” on either Mark or Q. It borrows material from each, but it’s position and take on Jesus are unique. Q is certainly pre-70, in fact, its source material is possibly pre-40. Mark, though, was written post-70.

    In the exegetical and translational process, Holy Spirit guidance isn’t necessary, because we’re dealing with facts-as-we-have-them, and not beliefs or theology.

    The texts were written to specific audiences — whether you like it or not. In fact, the texts weren’t written as scripture, nor were they considered scripture when they were written. They were incorporated into the canon pretty early on, but they were specific documents written to specific groups. That’s what scholarly exegesis tells us. Theologically, they may well be “for all God’s people,” but we’re not talking theology here — we’re talking factual history.

    I thought your diatribe was funny, given that it really had nothing to do with the issue at hand in our exchange. I also find it funny that you lump me in with the same sort of imperialistic crowd that are all about maintaining the power base at any cost. I don’t in any way condone the church’s bloody history. It exists; it’s a matter of record, but I don’t condone it. I think the church went way off the rails in that regard. And don’t you dare insinuate that I would in any way be gleefully cheering from the sidelines. This part of your post only bolsters my assertion that you have no idea who you’re dealing with.

    I don’t believe you with regard to your postscript due to the dismissive and, frankly, disrespectful tone of your post. If you were really “of peace,” it would show in an attitude of listening and care. I just don’t see that. Sorry.
     
  3. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    32,993
    Ratings:
    +4,087
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    Yes I do, in matters of foundational teaching. But we part company pretty quickly when issues of power and entitlement come up.

    I don’t make that argument. Ever.

    Look again.
     
  4. Moz

    Moz Religion. A pox on all their Houses.

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2019
    Messages:
    363
    Ratings:
    +111
    Religion:
    FOLLOWER OF CHRIST
    If their were not weeds in the church where did the church approved violence come from?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    32,993
    Ratings:
    +4,087
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    It’s obvious he thinks I’m someone I’m not. This isn’t a power trip, it’s a “If you’re going to diss me, at least find out what I’m all about first” rebuttal.

    Yes! I believe Jesus was a shamanic teacher. He commanded nature, he brought balance, he restored health and wholeness, he taught equitable and right relationship, he put the community first above the individual. Energetically, he was a being of light.

    These are the things shamans embody and do. Forget your rather limited and stilted Wiki definition.

    I am who I am — whether you like it or not. And frankly, I don’t care if you’re impressed or not. My sense of balance and well-being doesn’t rise or fall on your opinion. Neither does the veracity of anyone’s spiritual practice.

    Nice “Christian” way to tear someone down who’s serious about their spiritual formation, and whose practices are very close to their heart. I’m sure “Jesus would be impressed” by that action.


    Because Jesus was all about the bullying and entitlement.
     
  6. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    32,993
    Ratings:
    +4,087
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    You’re missing the point. it. Doesn’t. Matter. Who the weeds are. wheat — weeds — it’s all the same. We’re all part of the church. In due course, they’ll be separated. We have no business doing that right now.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  7. Moz

    Moz Religion. A pox on all their Houses.

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2019
    Messages:
    363
    Ratings:
    +111
    Religion:
    FOLLOWER OF CHRIST

    Otherwise you would not be arguing that the faith has never been corrupted by weeds.
    I don’t make that argument. Ever.

    So there were weeds in the faith. You started this by identifying the weeds as outsiders and definitely not false christians. Now you say their ARE weeds in the church..... So the parable of the wheat and weeds may point to them possibly.... perhaps.
     
  8. Moz

    Moz Religion. A pox on all their Houses.

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2019
    Messages:
    363
    Ratings:
    +111
    Religion:
    FOLLOWER OF CHRIST
    Ah. so the wheat and weeds ARE all part of the church like i said when this all started.

    Is it possible that the weeds were involved in the formation of christendom's doctrines? Just possible mind you, no commitment needed.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Moz

    Moz Religion. A pox on all their Houses.

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2019
    Messages:
    363
    Ratings:
    +111
    Religion:
    FOLLOWER OF CHRIST
    The reason some scholars date matthew to after 70ce is they do not believe that it was possible to predict the destruction of the temple, the writter of Matthew must have know it happened and inserted the story as a false proof.

    The same reasoning they use to place daniel in the 200s and not the 500's bce
     
  10. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    32,993
    Ratings:
    +4,087
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    Wheat and weeds comprise humanity — including, but not limited to, the church.

    The church is not infallible. It is, after all, a human institution. That was Matthew’s point: Don’t waste your time trying to ferret out the weeds through setting false distinctions. Your whole “Christendom vs. the ‘real church’” thing is such a distinction.

    The JWs aren’t infallible or immune, either. Matthew is all about entitlement. In the Kingdom, no one is better than anyone else, more “saved” than anyone else, more righteous than anyone else.

    The whole thing revolved around Matthew’s premise that it was the outsiders, that is, his own displaced believers, who were the “true Israel,” no matter what the entitled Pharisees said.

    So your question really runs counter to what Matthew was bringing out in the parable under discussion. Don’t distinguish between JW and Christendom. God will figure it out when the time comes.
     
  11. Moz

    Moz Religion. A pox on all their Houses.

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2019
    Messages:
    363
    Ratings:
    +111
    Religion:
    FOLLOWER OF CHRIST
    Okey Dokey.
     
  12. Moz

    Moz Religion. A pox on all their Houses.

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2019
    Messages:
    363
    Ratings:
    +111
    Religion:
    FOLLOWER OF CHRIST
    It is the height of hypocrisy to claim one does not condone the violence of christendom while refusing to examine the cause of the violence.
     
  13. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    9,966
    Ratings:
    +5,237
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    It appears as if you have no problem 'dissing' others.....I was under the impression that if you "diss" it out, you can probably receive it back. :shrug:

    Are you saying that you are on equal footing with Jesus Christ? He was the recipient of holy spirit which he received at his baptism. Before that he was just plain old Jesus, the very well behaved and extremely intelligent carpenter's son.

    When he received the power of God's spirit, even his disciples could could perform miracles 'in Jesus' name'.
    At Pentecost, they received the holy spirit themselves and were empowered to perform supernatural feats. But the apostles were the only ones who could pass the gifts onto others, so when the apostles died, the gifts died with them. Further mention of these gifts in connection with the 'last days', was related to the power of the devil.
    We see today a very imperfect imitation of the "gifts" demonstrated in those churches who claim to manifest the "gifts of the spirit". Its a very poor form of mimicry IMO....although I have yet to see anyone "slain in the spirit" mentioned in the Bible.

    OK...what do you do that makes you believe that you have the truth? Do you rely on spiritual experiences or on Bible knowledge?

    We can all say that.

    Do you think that many of the Jews in Jesus' day were sincere in their beliefs and worship? It is obvious that Jesus did not promote the teachings of the Pharisees or the Sadducees because he denounced them at every opportunity, in no uncertain terms (Matthew 23) forcing people to make choices about who to believe. If those Jews believed their religious leaders more than they believed the words of God's own son, then that was left to them. If Jesus' words at John 6:44; 65 are true, then no one can come to the son without an invitation from the Father. That means that God is choosing us as much as we choose him. If we have no invitation, then we have no real connection to God....so what about all those whom Jesus rejects at the judgment? (Matthew 7:21-23) Are they sincere in their beliefs? They seem to be under the impression that they are serving God as disciples of his son, yet Jesus calls them "workers of lawlessness" and tells them to 'get lost'. How does that work?

    As part of the prophesy on the "last days" or "the end of the age" (Matthew 24:3) Jesus said that the whole world would receive a "witness" concerning the truth about God's Kingdom. (Matthew 24:14) Most people in Christendom do not have a clear idea about just what the Kingdom is, or what is the good news about it? So how can they preach about something they know so little about? Do they preach anyway? I see that it was a command, not a recommendation. (Matthew 28:19-20)

    If you call us out.....we will return serve, to defend our faith as Jesus did. We will defend what the Bible teaches over man-made doctrines that dishonor God and his son. We will explain scripture that clarifies Bible teachings.

    Jesus was all about the truth and he made known his Father's displeasure at those who failed to promote it.

    If people today are confused about Christianity, its because the Christian faith has suffered the same fate as Judaism......"I think" became "I believe"....They made "I think" into "God says"......but man's thoughts are not God's thoughts.The Bible explains itself.

    You are as entitled to believe as you wish, but so are we all. Unless you have informed choice...there is no choice to make. What we post on these boards is food for thought.....we want people to chew things over and come to their own conclusions because, at the end of the day, no one can tell a free willed being what to believe....not even God.
     
  14. Oeste

    Oeste Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Messages:
    1,093
    Ratings:
    +389
    Religion:
    Christian
    Interesting! I believe the whole problem with Arianism could very well be that by its very nature it lacks substance.

    Are you referring to your statement regarding philosophers?

    The vast majority of Arians on this forum have no idea whether they are talking with a Modalist or a Trinitarian and constantly confuse the two, and even when told have no idea what the difference is, let alone what it means.

    You can use it to differentiate between Trinitarian and Oneness Christology.

    No. That’s Arianism.

    For those who consider scripture a “philosophical interjection”, sure.

    The hypostatic union is not difficult to understand. Jesus is completely God and completely man, not half god, half man or some unique blend as the Eutychians and Monophysitists were claiming. You really need to read the history of the church to understand how and why certain doctrines came about..

    I know.

    I reached a similar impasse when I was Arian which is why I undertook a study of scripture on my own.

    Aaah.. I think we may have found the linguistic gymnastics mentioned earlier.

    Really? But who on earth uses "Blue" as a replacement for God?
     
  15. Oeste

    Oeste Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Messages:
    1,093
    Ratings:
    +389
    Religion:
    Christian
    Isn't spiritual channeling how your Governing Board determines "Divine truths" today?
     
  16. Oeste

    Oeste Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Messages:
    1,093
    Ratings:
    +389
    Religion:
    Christian
    Gee, I thought the verse said "sons of the wicked one" and not "fake Christians".

    Perhaps Jesus should have said "...but the weeds are <insert whatever racial, religious, political, or ethnic group you don't like here> and the enemy who sowed them is the Devil".
     
  17. Moz

    Moz Religion. A pox on all their Houses.

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2019
    Messages:
    363
    Ratings:
    +111
    Religion:
    FOLLOWER OF CHRIST
    Hi

    Oeste said:
    Likewise the Word can be fully God without God being fully and wholly the Word.

    They are your words not mine. You never even touched that one i noticed. But yes... the word is NOT fully God. A very non trinitarian thing to say.


    Btw........IF you google Father Brother Son analogy you will find that it is the very definiton of modalist teaching, except for the pentecostal oneness mob of course who are desparetely trying to stay in the "acceptable" doctrine club. It seems though that main stream christianity view the use of that reasoning as heretical as arianism.

    It's ok to be modalist if you want but you should at least understand that the orthodox trinitarians view us both as outside the club
    Peace.
     
  18. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    9,966
    Ratings:
    +5,237
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    In Revelation, which refers to the time of the end and the return of Christ as judge of all the world.....

    "And I heard another voice out of heaven say: “Get out of her, my people, if you do not want to share with her in her sins, and if you do not want to receive part of her plagues. 5 For her sins have massed together clear up to heaven, and God has called her acts of injustice to mind."

    What does Revelation 18:4-5 refer to, and what is this command in reference to? Why is she called "Babylon the great"? What connection does this "city" have to original Babylon?

    You see, it matters a great deal who the "weeds" are because of who planted them. The ones who are "weed-like" in their faith would become obvious by their "fruits" (actions)....not in imitation of Christ...but in imitation of the devil whose main MO is violence and bloodshed on a grand scale...throw in immorality on the same scale and you will see a pattern....unless you have been "blinded" (2 Corinthians 4:3-4)

    If we are commanded to remove ourselves from "Babylon the great" because of the weight of her sins, then if we fail to do so, we will go down with her....that is the warning. We have to take decisive action.
    Since this command is addressed to God's "people", then don't we need to ask how they got into "Babylon the great" to start with?

    Just as apostate Judaism held "the lost sheep" captive with nowhere to go until Jesus came to release them and lead them out of that corrupt 'pen' and in to a new clean one, so Christendom held God's anointed ones captive until 'the time of the end'. Only at this time did God reveal who 'Babylon the great' was. Once identified, God's people could get out of that corrupt organization and remove the shackles of her false doctrines. The truth set them free!
    Daniel foretold a 'cleansing, whitening and refining' of God's people in "the time of the end". (Daniel 12:9-10) Only in this time period would God reveal abundant knowledge. Those who refused the cleansing and refining would be granted no understanding at all.

    Unless people know where their doctrines originated from, they will never see the connection to original Babylon and therefore never see themselves held captive in Babylon the great or the need remove themselves.

    By the time Jesus comes as judge.....the separating has already been accomplished.

    1 Peter 4:16-18...
    "But if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not feel ashamed, but let him keep on glorifying God while bearing this name. 17 For it is the appointed time for the judgment to start with the house of God. Now if it starts first with us, what will the outcome be for those who are not obedient to the good news of God? 18 “And if the righteous man is being saved with difficulty, what will happen to the ungodly man and the sinner?

    'Judgment starts with the house of God'.......professed Christians. (Matthew 7:21-23)
     
  19. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    32,993
    Ratings:
    +4,087
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    We all are. Jesus calls us “sisters and brothers,” not “slaves.”

    As are we all.

    Except that they are succeeded by their successors.

    All aspects of the church are human institutions and are imperfect.

    Both.

    Not the ones Jesus called out as “hypocrites” and “snakes.”
    Yet, some Pharisees followed him, and he attended their dinner parties. So no, it’s not so obvious.

    All are invited.

    Jesus doesn’t reject anyone.

    Remember that Matthew is at odds with the Judaic Establishment. This is metaphoric “code language.”

    That’s what I disagree with. Your overwhelming entitlement and ease at throwing others under the bus. What you’re defending is your interpretation — not some secret “absolute knowledge.”

    So then why are you all about the bullying?

    Still about the business of dividing into wheat and weeds, I see.

    It appears as though you’re shoving it down our throats, and forcing us to your conclusions.
     
  20. sojourner

    sojourner Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2006
    Messages:
    32,993
    Ratings:
    +4,087
    Religion:
    Christian/Shamanic
    Please try to focus in. We’re talking about Matthew. Revelation is not germane to the topic.
     
Loading...