Your Christian Identity

[Windwalker]

I don't know, but Nero lived in the 60s B.C., prior to the destruction of Jerusalem, which was central to Revelations, and Revelations was supposedly written late in the 1st century.

I've mentioned several times that there was a popular belief that Nero would return from the dead and bring about the end of the world. That is the context and time period of when Revelation (singular, not Revelations in the plural) was written. There was other contemporary apocalyptic literature of the same time period viewing Nero returning in the same way Revelation does. From that article I strongly suggest you read through:

After Nero's suicide in AD 68, there was a widespread belief, especially in the eastern provinces, that he was not dead and somehow would return (Suetonius, LVII.1; Tacitus, Histories II.8; Dio, LXVI.19.3). Suetonius relates how court astrologers had predicted Nero's fall but that he would have power in the East (XL.2). And, indeed, at least three false claimants did present themselves as Nero redivivus (resurrected). The first, who sang and played the cithara or lyre and whose face was similar to that of the dead emperor, appeared the next year but, after persuading some to recognize him, was captured and executed (Tacitus, II.8). Sometime during the reign of Titus (AD 79-81) there was another impostor who appeared in Asia and also sang to the accompaniment of the lyre and looked like Nero but he, too, was exposed (Dio, LXVI.19.3). Twenty years after Nero's death, during the reign of Domitian, there was a third pretender. Supported by the Parthians, who hardly could be persuaded to give him up (Suetonius, LVII.2), the matter almost came to war (Tacitus, I.2). Such fidelity no doubt can be attributed to the magnificent reception (and restoration of Armenia) that Tiridates, the brother of the Parthian king, had received from Nero in AD 66 (Dio, LXII.1ff).

As popular belief in Nero's actual return began to fade, he no longer was regarded as an historic figure but an eschatological one. The Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah dates to the end of the first century AD and is one of the apocalyptic pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament. In an interpolation, the so-called Testament of Hezekiah, Isaiah prophesies the end of the world, when Beliar (Belial) the Antichrist will manifest himself as the incarnation of the dead Nero.

"And after it [the world] has been brought to completion, Beliar will descend, the great angel, the king of this world, which he has ruled ever since it existed. He will descend from his firmament in the form of a man, a king of iniquity, a murderer of his mother—this is the king of the world—and will persecute the plant which the twelve apostles of the Beloved will have planted; some of the twelve will be given into his hand. This angel, Beliar, will come in the form of that king, and with him will come all the powers of this world, and they will obey him in every wish....And he will do everything he wishes in the world; he will act and speak like the Beloved, and will say, 'I am the Lord, and before me there was no one.' And all men in the world will believe in him" (IV.1-8).
​

Beliar will perform miracles and seduce the followers of Christ until, at the Second Coming, "the Lord will come with his angels and with the hosts of the saints from the seventh heaven, and will drag Beliar, and his hosts also, into Gehenna [the figurative equivalent of hell]."

Nero also possesses the attributes of the Antichrist in the Sibylline Oracles, a collection of Jewish and Christian apocalyptic verses attributed to the prophecies of the ancient Sibyl, who identifies herself as a native of Babylon (III.786; also Lactatius, Divine Institutes, I.6) and a daughter (or daughter-in-law) of Noah (III.808ff). In Oracle V, which dates to the late first or early second century AD, Nero has become a resurrected and demonic power symbolic of Rome, itself. "One who has fifty as an initial [the Hebrew letter "N"] will be commander, a terrible snake [the serpent or dragon], breathing out grievous war....But even when he disappears he will be destructive. Then he will return declaring himself equal to God" (V.28ff). Here, Nero is manifested as the Antichrist, "that man of sin [lawlessness]...who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God...shewing himself that he is God" (II Thessalonians II.3-4).

The Sibyl presents Nero both as king of Rome (Oracle V, 138ff) and the means of God's retribution in destroying it (365). A matricide and megalomaniac, who presumed to cut through the isthmus of Corinth and was perceived as responsible for the destruction of the Jewish Temple in AD 70, Nero "will come from the ends of the earth" (363) as a champion of the East and an instrument of God's punishment. He will overthrow tyrants and "raise up those who were crouched in fear" (370) before falling in a final battle against the West. Then there will be peace and "no longer will anyone fight with swords or iron or with weapons at all" (382ff). In this expectation, as in Oracle IV (119ff, 1137ff) and Oracle VIII (70ff, 153ff), one perceives the hope raised by the False Neros among the oppressed provinces of the East.

The Christian poet Commodian (fl. AD 260) also writes of the Antichrist, when Nero will return from hell.

"Then, doubtless, the world shall be finished when he shall appear. He himself shall divide the globe into three ruling powers, when, moreover, Nero shall be raised up from hell, Elias shall first come to seal the beloved ones; at which things the region of Africa and the northern nation, the whole earth on all sides, for seven years shall tremble. But Elias shall occupy the half of the time, Nero shall occupy half. Then the whore Babylon, being reduced to ashes, its embers shall thence advance to Jerusalem; and the Latin conqueror shall then say, I am Christ, whom ye always pray to; and, indeed, the original ones who were deceived combine to praise him. He does many wonders, since his is the false prophet" (Instructions, XLI).

.......

Nero, too, was the sixth emperor, counting from Julius Caesar (as did Suetonius, for example, and Josephus, cf. Antiquities of the Jews, XVIII.2.2, where Tiberius is identified as the third). "And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come" (Revelation 17:10). The sixth (and last) of the Julio-Claudian emperors, it is Nero who "is" but who has been "wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed" (13:3)—Nero redivivus.
​

Source: Nero as the Antichrist

Also, please read this that shows when and for how long this belief that Nero would rise from the dead persisted back then. And bear in mind Revelation was written at that very time period, and fits the literature of the day. Nero Redivivus legend - Wikipedia

As for how one is to "love" according to Yeshua, well he said one was to "keep the commandments". (John 14:21) and (1 John 1:6)

Yes indeed. And what is his commandment, but to love? "Love works no ill. Love is the fulfillment of the law". "Love God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength, and love your neighbor as yourself, for on these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets". The commandment Jesus gave was to love. Not to pray for the end of the world so you can get your rewards as the special chosen one.

As for what this adulterous generation believes is love, apparently that is to fornicate with their neighbor's wife, or in today's world of demons, thy neighbor's male partner. (Matthew 16:4)

I mean God's Love, or agape Love. Do you know what that is like?

 

[2ndpillar]

I've mentioned several times that there was a popular belief that Nero would return from the dead and bring about the end of the world. That is the context and time period of when Revelation (singular, not Revelations in the plural) was written. There was other contemporary apocalyptic literature of the same time period viewing Nero returning in the same way Revelation does. From that article I strongly suggest you read through:

After Nero's suicide in AD 68, there was a widespread belief, especially in the eastern provinces, that he was not dead and somehow would return (Suetonius, LVII.1; Tacitus, Histories II.8; Dio, LXVI.19.3). Suetonius relates how court astrologers had predicted Nero's fall but that he would have power in the East (XL.2). And, indeed, at least three false claimants did present themselves as Nero redivivus (resurrected). The first, who sang and played the cithara or lyre and whose face was similar to that of the dead emperor, appeared the next year but, after persuading some to recognize him, was captured and executed (Tacitus, II.8). Sometime during the reign of Titus (AD 79-81) there was another impostor who appeared in Asia and also sang to the accompaniment of the lyre and looked like Nero but he, too, was exposed (Dio, LXVI.19.3). Twenty years after Nero's death, during the reign of Domitian, there was a third pretender. Supported by the Parthians, who hardly could be persuaded to give him up (Suetonius, LVII.2), the matter almost came to war (Tacitus, I.2). Such fidelity no doubt can be attributed to the magnificent reception (and restoration of Armenia) that Tiridates, the brother of the Parthian king, had received from Nero in AD 66 (Dio, LXII.1ff).

As popular belief in Nero's actual return began to fade, he no longer was regarded as an historic figure but an eschatological one. The Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah dates to the end of the first century AD and is one of the apocalyptic pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament. In an interpolation, the so-called Testament of Hezekiah, Isaiah prophesies the end of the world, when Beliar (Belial) the Antichrist will manifest himself as the incarnation of the dead Nero.

"And after it [the world] has been brought to completion, Beliar will descend, the great angel, the king of this world, which he has ruled ever since it existed. He will descend from his firmament in the form of a man, a king of iniquity, a murderer of his mother—this is the king of the world—and will persecute the plant which the twelve apostles of the Beloved will have planted; some of the twelve will be given into his hand. This angel, Beliar, will come in the form of that king, and with him will come all the powers of this world, and they will obey him in every wish....And he will do everything he wishes in the world; he will act and speak like the Beloved, and will say, 'I am the Lord, and before me there was no one.' And all men in the world will believe in him" (IV.1-8).
​

Beliar will perform miracles and seduce the followers of Christ until, at the Second Coming, "the Lord will come with his angels and with the hosts of the saints from the seventh heaven, and will drag Beliar, and his hosts also, into Gehenna [the figurative equivalent of hell]."

Nero also possesses the attributes of the Antichrist in the Sibylline Oracles, a collection of Jewish and Christian apocalyptic verses attributed to the prophecies of the ancient Sibyl, who identifies herself as a native of Babylon (III.786; also Lactatius, Divine Institutes, I.6) and a daughter (or daughter-in-law) of Noah (III.808ff). In Oracle V, which dates to the late first or early second century AD, Nero has become a resurrected and demonic power symbolic of Rome, itself. "One who has fifty as an initial [the Hebrew letter "N"] will be commander, a terrible snake [the serpent or dragon], breathing out grievous war....But even when he disappears he will be destructive. Then he will return declaring himself equal to God" (V.28ff). Here, Nero is manifested as the Antichrist, "that man of sin [lawlessness]...who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God...shewing himself that he is God" (II Thessalonians II.3-4).

The Sibyl presents Nero both as king of Rome (Oracle V, 138ff) and the means of God's retribution in destroying it (365). A matricide and megalomaniac, who presumed to cut through the isthmus of Corinth and was perceived as responsible for the destruction of the Jewish Temple in AD 70, Nero "will come from the ends of the earth" (363) as a champion of the East and an instrument of God's punishment. He will overthrow tyrants and "raise up those who were crouched in fear" (370) before falling in a final battle against the West. Then there will be peace and "no longer will anyone fight with swords or iron or with weapons at all" (382ff). In this expectation, as in Oracle IV (119ff, 1137ff) and Oracle VIII (70ff, 153ff), one perceives the hope raised by the False Neros among the oppressed provinces of the East.

The Christian poet Commodian (fl. AD 260) also writes of the Antichrist, when Nero will return from hell.

"Then, doubtless, the world shall be finished when he shall appear. He himself shall divide the globe into three ruling powers, when, moreover, Nero shall be raised up from hell, Elias shall first come to seal the beloved ones; at which things the region of Africa and the northern nation, the whole earth on all sides, for seven years shall tremble. But Elias shall occupy the half of the time, Nero shall occupy half. Then the whore Babylon, being reduced to ashes, its embers shall thence advance to Jerusalem; and the Latin conqueror shall then say, I am Christ, whom ye always pray to; and, indeed, the original ones who were deceived combine to praise him. He does many wonders, since his is the false prophet" (Instructions, XLI).

.......

Nero, too, was the sixth emperor, counting from Julius Caesar (as did Suetonius, for example, and Josephus, cf. Antiquities of the Jews, XVIII.2.2, where Tiberius is identified as the third). "And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come" (Revelation 17:10). The sixth (and last) of the Julio-Claudian emperors, it is Nero who "is" but who has been "wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed" (13:3)—Nero redivivus.
​

Source: Nero as the Antichrist

Also, please read this that shows when and for how long this belief that Nero would rise from the dead persisted back then. And bear in mind Revelation was written at that very time period, and fits the literature of the day. Nero Redivivus legend - Wikipedia


Yes indeed. And what is his commandment, but to love? "Love works no ill. Love is the fulfillment of the law". "Love God with all your heart, mind, soul, and strength, and love your neighbor as yourself, for on these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets". The commandment Jesus gave was to love. Not to pray for the end of the world so you can get your rewards as the special chosen one.


I mean God's Love, or agape Love. Do you know what that is like?

Nero was a "nothing burger", and simply the 5th horn (Caesar) of Julius Caesar's dictatorial takeover of the Roman Republic. Julius Caesar was the "beast" of Revelation 13:3, in whom the "earth followed", and whose standing was used to "overpower the saints" (those who keep the Commandments) (Revelation 14:12) (Daniel 7:21). The overpowering of the saints was done by destroying Jerusalem twice, once by Caesar's coruler Pompey, and the other by Titus, with future persecution by the Roman church and her crowned kings, such as the expulsion of the Jews from Spain, along with the Inquisitions. The demon spirit of Caesar/Kaiser/Czar is to return (Revelation 16:13) in the form of the 8th head of the beast (Revelation 17:11) who will have 10 horns with power for 1 hour, who apparently "burn" (Revelation 17:16) the Jews (harlot) as with respect to the leader of the 3rd Reich (3rd Roman empire), in the form of Hitler. Nero ruled for around 14 years, not 42 months (Revelation 13:5) like did Caesar from the time he crossed the Rubicon until he was "slain" by the Senate. The Roman church may be mad at Nero for supposedly killing Peter and Paul, but they were always doomed to be "annihilated" per Zechariah 11:8, along with Judas Iscariot (Zechariah 11:12-13). I suggest that you get your burgers at Wendy's if you are looking for meat in your diet. As for what the Roman church believes, well, they believe that the Pope, supposedly Peter's heir, is "Christ on earth", but that is also not true, and the pope, the new Pontifex Maximus (Pontiff) is not going to rise, but he is going to "fall" (Isaiah 22:25).

 

[Windwalker]

Nero was a "nothing burger", and simply the 5th horn (Caesar) of Julius Caesar's dictatorial takeover of the Roman Republic. Julius Caesar was the "beast" of Revelation 13:3, in whom the "earth followed", and whose standing was used to "overpower the saints" (those who keep the Commandments) (Revelation 14:12) (Daniel 7:21). The overpowering of the saints was done by destroying Jerusalem twice, once by Caesar's coruler Pompey, and the other by Titus, with future persecution by the Roman church and her crowned kings, such as the expulsion of the Jews from Spain, along with the Inquisitions. The demon spirit of Caesar/Kaiser/Czar is to return (Revelation 16:13) in the form of the 8th head of the beast (Revelation 17:11) who will have 10 horns with power for 1 hour, who apparently "burn" (Revelation 17:16) the Jews (harlot) as with respect to the leader of the 3rd Reich (3rd Roman empire), in the form of Hitler. Nero ruled for around 14 years, not 42 months (Revelation 13:5) like did Caesar from the time he crossed the Rubicon until he was "slain" by the Senate. The Roman church may be mad at Nero for supposedly killing Peter and Paul, but they were always doomed to be "annihilated" per Zechariah 11:8, along with Judas Iscariot (Zechariah 11:12-13). I suggest that you get your burgers at Wendy's if you are looking for meat in your diet. As for what the Roman church believes, well, they believe that the Pope, supposedly Peter's heir, is "Christ on earth", but that is also not true, and the pope, the new Pontifex Maximus (Pontiff) is not going to rise, but he is going to "fall" (Isaiah 22:25).

I prefer to stick with the better argued and attested to understanding of the book of Revelation in the context of the Nero Redivivus legend - Wikipedia

While you may think Nero was a "nothing burger", those of the day of John of Patmos certainly didn't think he was. The book of Revelation, as well as several other very similar apocalyptic books of that same time period, didn't think so either as they were directly about Nero coming back to life. Nero as the Antichrist

I note that you do not provide any scholarly support for your speculative interpretation of Revelation. I know there is a lot of this type of false church propaganda silliness that was made popular by this discredited book: The Two Babylons.

Might that not be the true source of your inspiration?

Again though, I think this whole conspiracy-theory minded theology misses the point of the Gospel altogether. It makes the Gospel all about who wins this war as in on team Jesus and wins, or team antichrist and dies. I do not hear Love in all of this. Is that what the Gospel is to you? The book of Revelation read through the distorted lens of the "we're the true church versus the false church" theology?

 

[2ndpillar]

I prefer to stick with the better argued and attested to understanding of the book of Revelation in the context of the Nero Redivivus legend - Wikipedia

While you may think Nero was a "nothing burger", those of the day of John of Patmos certainly didn't think he was. The book of Revelation, as well as several other very similar apocalyptic books of that same time period, didn't think so either as they were directly about Nero coming back to life. Nero as the Antichrist

I note that you do not provide any scholarly support for your speculative interpretation of Revelation. I know there is a lot of this type of false church propaganda silliness that was made popular by this discredited book: The Two Babylons.

Might that not be the true source of your inspiration?

Again though, I think this whole conspiracy-theory minded theology misses the point of the Gospel altogether. It makes the Gospel all about who wins this war as in on team Jesus and wins, or team antichrist and dies. I do not hear Love in all of this. Is that what the Gospel is to you? The book of Revelation read through the distorted lens of the "we're the true church versus the false church" theology?

The "kingdom" of Daniel 2:44-45 whereas the "kingdom" set up by "the God of heaven" will crush all the kingdoms of the nations mentioned in Daniel 2, is the same kingdom brought about by the "son of man" in Matthew 24:30 who will bring about an event on the level of the flood of "Noah", and no one will know the time when it comes, even though there is a sign given (Matthew 24:32-33), whereas the "evil slave" will be cut in pieces and thrown into a place where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, which will be outside of the gates (Revelation 22:15), a "place with the hypocrites" (Matthew 24:51), such as those who eat the leaven of the Pharisees. The same place the "tares"/"wicked", and those who "commit lawlessness" are thrown (Matthew 13:30 & 41-42 & 49-50). Your "inspiration" seems to be taken from the files of the "daughters of Babylon" (Revelation 17:5), who are the source of "abominations", and whose power came from the beast of Rome, whose authority came from the "dragon" (Revelation 13 & 17). You may have Wikipedia as your source of knowledge, but that is like saying you rely on government experts for your health. One can lead you to death as well as the other. As for Nero, his authority came from Julius Caesar, whose power came from the "dragon" (Revelation 13:3-4), the "devil"/Satan.

 

[Windwalker]

Your "inspiration" seems to be taken from the files of the "daughters of Babylon" (Revelation 17:5), who are the source of "abominations", and whose power came from the beast of Rome, whose authority came from the "dragon" (Revelation 13 & 17).

Did you just call Jesus' teaching on the Two Great Commandments, and his Beatitudes, the daughter of Babylon? I take my inspiration directly from the words of Jesus as they appear in the Bible. I've never been a Catholic.

So from what I have said about "Love works no ill", and "Love is the fulfillment of the Law", how is it you hear the spirit of abomination in any of that? Can you please explain that to me, and anyone else puzzled by your position against Divine Love?

You may have Wikipedia as your source of knowledge,

I guarantee you Wikipedia is not my sole source of knowledge. I simply quote it because it's more accessible to you to read, than me copying reams of texts out of my library at home, which you would be unlikely to read anyway, in that you don't seem to even read the simple things I've shared from multiple non-Wiki online resources. Did you even read any of those?

And BTW, only one link was to Wikipedia, and that was about this: Nero Redivivus legend - Wikipedia

but that is like saying you rely on government experts for your health.

I rely on health experts. Who do you rely upon for health information? Your church pastor?

Again, why is it you are so focused on the death and destruction parts of the Bible as the core meaning of the Gospel to you? I asked before, do you understand what God's Love is? Have you ever experienced Divine Love personally?

Do you think Jesus was all about you not getting punished with everyone else you imagine God wants to destroy with a vengeance?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

If you identify as Christian, what is your belief, or view on cussing - profanity - using abusive speech or words.
I'm referring to those words which most news media and TV channels censor.

@Kenny @InChrist and others, I would really like to hear your side on this.
Could you also identify what faith you identify with (by faith, I mean "denomination").

I'm Catholic and I cuss like a sailor. My mom taught me well.

"Cuss words" are just words and have many usages and meanings, depending on context. Sometimes they're inappropriate, sometimes they're cruel when used certain ways against others, sometimes they're fun and sometimes they're the only words that truly capture the moment.

 

[2ndpillar]

Did you just call Jesus' teaching on the Two Great Commandments, and his Beatitudes, the daughter of Babylon? I take my inspiration directly from the words of Jesus as they appear in the Bible. I've never been a Catholic.

So from what I have said about "Love works no ill", and "Love is the fulfillment of the Law", how is it you hear the spirit of abomination in any of that? Can you please explain that to me, and anyone else puzzled by your position against Divine Love?

The "great commandment, is to love the LORD your God, and the second is to love your neighbor, and both encompasses all 10 commandments. You have to love God and your neighbor, and the way to do that is don't have other gods before Me, no idols, etc. and do not kill, steal, commit adultery, bear false witness against your neighbor, or even covet your neighbor's wife or goods.

Matthew 22:38: “Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and the great commandment. And the second is like unto it: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” "On these commandments depend the whole Law and the prophets"

To enter into the kingdom, one must be more righteous than the Pharisees (Matthew 5:20), and not to even look at a woman with lust (Matthew 5:28). As for beatitudes, that is not about "love" for one's neighbor, that is about who is blessed and who is not. According to Yeshua, if you don't clothe, feed or give drink to your neighbor, you are looking at "eternal punishment" (Matthew 25:31-46) with respect to the coming of the "son of man" and "inheriting the kingdom". As for the "daughters of Babylon", well that would be all the pagan religions stemming from Nebuchadnezzar through today's Roman church and her daughter Protestant churches, who like yourself, quote the false prophet Paul per Romans 13:8-10, and apparently deem that as gospel, whereas it is but the tare seed of the "enemy" placed "among" the "good seed" of the "son of man". (Revelation 13). It is Yeshua who came to fulfill the Law and the prophets, and not to do away with them (Matthew 5:17).

I rely on health experts. Who do you rely upon for health information? Your church pastor?

Again, why is it you are so focused on the death and destruction parts of the Bible as the core meaning of the Gospel to you? I asked before, do you understand what God's Love is? Have you ever experienced Divine Love personally?

Do you think Jesus was all about you not getting punished with everyone else you imagine God wants to destroy with a vengeance?

As for "health experts" you should have listened to Congress today regarding the lies given out by the health experts with respect to covid. There were around 6 million covid deaths worldwide, previous to the million current Chinese deaths, and most can be laid at the feet of the top health experts. As for the punishment for iniquities, "everyone will die for their own iniquities" (Jeremiah 31:30). No one escapes death, despite what Paul, the false prophet may have told you. As for those who suffer the plagues of the nations/Egyptians, well just go ahead and break the commandments, but you had best to have good health insurance, and be willing to suffer the consequences. (Dt 28:1-14) If your sins were forgiven, you would not need your physician.

Deuteronomy 28:1-14), Moses turns to the subject of God’s chastening discipline upon them if they depart from His law. He points out that God will curse them and He will smite them with all types of afflictions and that ultimately they will be scattered over the face of the earth.

 

[nPeace]

OK then, what if God made it materialise?

You might as well have asked, what if the Bible isn't actually a book from God... but you have suggested that, haven't you?
So, can you determine if it is, or not?
Why would anyone want to identify themselves as Christian, if the very book Christianity is based on, is not something they are convinced is true? That makes no sense.
That's equivalent to someone pretending to love their wife, when they really don't... Being a hypocrite.

Don't you think it would be best for such a person to be honest?
So, my title is appropriate Eddi. What's your Christian identity? Do you have one? Do you lose it at times? Is it something one can strip off, and put back on, like they would a shirt?

I will have a look over your questions and will give you some kind of reply

The thing is, I have got a busy few days ahead and consider doing so a big job

But yes, I will reply, since you replied to me

It is on my medium-term to-do list - classified non-urgent and non-important

Just don't hood your breath for it, that's what I'm saying

What, hold my breath on RF? Funny.

 

[Eddi]

You might as well have asked, what if the Bible isn't actually a book from God... but you have suggested that, haven't you?
So, can you determine if it is, or not?
Why would anyone want to identify themselves as Christian, if the very book Christianity is based on, is not something they are convinced is true? That makes no sense.
That's equivalent to someone pretending to love their wife, when they really don't... Being a hypocrite.

Don't you think it would be best for such a person to be honest?
So, my title is appropriate Eddi. What's your Christian identity? Do you have one? Do you lose it at times? Is it something one can strip off, and put back on, like they would a shirt?

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to take lessons on being an authentic Christian from a person who believes Jesus is not God but is in fact the Archangel Michael and whose spiritual authority is a group of eight guys in New York

I don't have to take such holier-than-thou nonsense and I won't

I believe in God, I believe that Jesus is God, I believe Jesus created the universe, I believe he died for my sins, I believe he rose from the dead and ascended into Heaven and will at some point return and I try my best to live accordingly, because he is my Lord and Master

I am therefore an authentic Christian.....

 

[nPeace]

So your argument is that if Jesus started the work, then therefore what you believe and teach must be what Jesus started because he wouldn't not finish what he started? Is that the line of thinking?

If you did read that in my post, It would be understandable if you came to such a conclusion, but since you didn't read that, I don't understand how you could have arrived at such a suggestion.

I'm saying to you, that Jesus is not clueless regarding who belong to him - in other words, his disciples / followers, and who don't - imitation / apostate Christians.

I'm saying to you, that if Jesus were to put foot on this earth again... which he won't, he would go to those who are indeed carrying out the work he started nearly two thousand years ago, and join them as the one taking the lead, in preaching the good news of the kingdom to every tribe, nation, and people - on the street... in the market places... on the beaches... in the parks... at every door... you get the picture.
...because it's his work, which he is overseeing.

So the methods - going to every village, town, and country; the message - the good news of the kingdom of God; and the duration - until the end of the world, are the same. They have not changed.
Jesus never said he has abandoned that work.
The same zeal his disciples had, as described in the Acts of the Apostles, is the same zeal his followers would have today.

In fact, Jesus specifically said it would be the case.
"...this good news of the Kingdom ...will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness ...to all the nations, ...and then the end will come." (Matthew 24:14)

Matthew 28:19-20
19 Go, therefore, ...and make disciples of people of all the nations..., 20 teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you. ...And look! I am with you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things.

Can we not use Jesus' words as a marker - a measuring rod, to identify those who would bear the mark of his true followers today?

Couldn't any oddball cult out there claim that same argument?

Of course... because it's an oddball argument.

"We are the true church, because Jesus wouldn't let the church die, and since we're here, this is proof we are the church Jesus started!". Does this sound like a good argument to you?

It sounds like an argument with no basis.
I think giving a basis for an argument is important.
It is more reasonable to ask the question, 'Well, what are the identifying marks of true Christianity... if any?'

Jesus - the reason for Christianity (a Christian is a follower of Christ) - started a work on earth, which his followers were involved in, and which Jesus commanded them to finish.
Jesus left the earth, leaving specific instructions, to make disciples of people of all the nations - teaching them all he commanded.

Now, any reasonable person, who does not write Jesus and his apostles, and the Gospels off as the figment of some crazy men's imagination, would reason, 'Well look... if Jesus is really who he said he is - the son of God, and he really is alive in heaven, then what he said, and what he promised, is not just in somebody's head.'
Take note, I said, any reasonable person.

Now, a person who does not believe that Jesus even existed, or was whom he said he was, that person will not believe, but that has nothing to do with anything, nor anyone... Christians for that matter.
They didn't believe Paul... nor Jesus So what.
We'll see, right?

Not sure how we get from John to the modern JW sect in Brooklyn, NY. in such a clean unbroken line like that?

Understanding the scriptures, one would not see a clean unbroken line, like that.
Here is what the person who, not only studies the scriptures, but are taught by Jesus' true followers... remember Phillip. (Acts of the Apostles 8:29) ...and Peter. (Acts of the Apostles 10:5) ...and the list goes on. (Romans 10:13-15), will see.

Jesus' ministry (The Gospels)

-> The apostles' ministry (Acts of the apostles, to John's letters)

-> The great apostasy (immitation Christianity from the late first century - onward, as prophesied by the apostles - 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12; 1 Timothy 4:1; 2 Timothy 4:3; 2 Peter 2:1; 1 John 2:18-19

-> True Christianity (wheat - Matthew 13:24-30) identified (restoration)​

You missed the red mark.

Yep, this is what the Catholic Claim. At least they are older and closer to the time of the actual apostles.

Yup. The great apostasy.

Here again, the reasonable person looks for the marks. What are the marks?

We use the measuring line - Jesus words, and the apostles'.
I refered to quite a lot.
Then we look at the fruit, and compare.

Nope. The measuring line does not provide a match. Not even close.
Clergy Laity

Matthew 23:6-11)

6 They like the most prominent place at evening meals and the front seats in the synagogues 7 and the greetings in the marketplaces and to be called Rabbi by men. 8 But you, do not you be called Rabbi, for one is your Teacher, and all of you are brothers. 9 Moreover, do not call anyone your father on earth, for one is your Father, the heavenly One. 10 Neither be called leaders, for your Leader is one, the Christ. 11 But the greatest one among you must be your minister.​

History of Atrocities
Crusades

(Matthew 26:52)

Then Jesus said to him: “Return your sword to its place, for all those who take up the sword will perish by the sword.​

Inquisitions

The Inquisition was a powerful office set up within the Catholic Church to root out and punish heresy throughout Europe and the Americas. Beginning in the 12th century and continuing for hundreds of years, the Inquisition is infamous for the severity of its tortures and its persecution of Jews and Muslims. Its worst manifestation was in Spain, where the Spanish Inquisition was a dominant force for more than 200 years, resulting in some 32,000 executions.

etc. etc.

No. He recognizes his people quite easily by the fruits of the spirit, not by their peculiar doctrinal ideas they use to claim they are the one true church in order to set themselves apart from other Christian sects. "By their fruits you shall know them", not by their claims to be the one true church.

According to the scriptures, Jesus gives holy spirit to his followers, who in turn displays the fruitage of the spirit.

So, in order to bear good fruit, one must prove to be a disciple of Christ.
(John 15:8) My Father is glorified in this, that you keep bearing much fruit and prove yourselves my disciples. . .

We see the fruit - the results, because they are his disciples.
In other words, if they were not his disciples, whom he recognized, they could not bear fruit for us to see.
(John 13:34, 35)
34 I am giving you a new commandment, that you love one another; just as I have loved you, you also love one another. 35 By this all will know that you are my disciples - if you have love among yourselves.”

It's actually a command Jesus' followers obey.
Hence people can identify that they are his true followers.
Similar with all the other commandments

...but that's good. We are showing a little reasonableness here.
So, not the so called fruit that people think gets them a ticket to heaven, but the actual commands of Jesus... all of them. ...including remaining in his teaching.
(John 8:31) . . .“If you remain in my word, you are really my disciples. . .
Yes. Teachings.

So, when we go to war, and fight for our country, killing our fellow brother and sister from another country, or we don't remain neutral in the worlds political affairs, but take sides, how is that showing love for our brothers?
How is it showing love for God and Christ, when we are part of the world, and are too faithless to zealously engage in preaching the good news to our neighbors?
How does that even show we love our neighbor?

Fruits yes. These identify us. They are part of our Christian identity... along with not cussing... and the whole nine yards of discipleship.

 

[nPeace]

Does shunning (let's call it what it is), do harm to the person you are doing it to? Yes or no?

Does speaking the truth cause harm to the person you speak the truth to?
Does preaching a message cause harm to the listener?
Does disciplining a child cause harm to the child?

You realize what you just asked, I hope.

 

[nPeace]

So, if you are the one inflicting damage upon them and the help they need is your love and compassion instead of shunning them in hopes of blackmailing them back into fellowship again, are you willing to help them, or let the suffer because "rules are rules"? Do you believing shunning your own family members is not really harmful to them? From what I read in scripture it says, "Love works no ill".

Isn't shunning someone working ill against them? How is that any better than the same spirit that motivated the Grand Inquisition? Torturing them into a confession of faith? That's the comparison. Coercion through psychological and emotional torture in order to extract a confession of faith. Basic question, does love use force to impose itself upon others? Kiss the cross, or die?

Am I to understand from what you are saying, that you disagree with this?
(2 John 10-11) 10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your homes or say a greeting to him. 11 For the one who says a greeting to him is a sharer in his wicked works.

Would it make a difference whom that person is? In other words, would partiality be acceptable based on if that individual is a fleshly relative?

Would you be willing to ignore and disobey an instruction, simply because of emotional attachment to family?

How does that show one believes anything they claim to believe?
The same Bible that says Love you enemy, says this...
(1 Corinthians 5:11) 11 But now I am writing you to stop keeping company with anyone called a brother who is sexually immoral or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man.

Do we pick and choose what we want to believe, as I asked @Eddi?

 

[nPeace]

First of all, that's not true. Each person decides how he will handle a situation regarding someone who has left the faith. I agree it may not be pleasant for a person to be disfellowshipped. But it is a biblical principle. Each person makes up his own mind as to how he will handle the situation. However the scriptural principle is clear for those who obey the scriptures.

It's actually a scriptural command. 1 Corinthians 5:11; 2 John 1:10, which was communicated, by letter, to the Christian congregations.

 

[nPeace]

So the stories I have heard how parents and siblings won't talk to their own family members, that they disown them, etc, are not really that prevalent? Shunning may be just a matter of "not discussing religion at the dinner table", sort of topic avoidance like any other hot button issue in any other typical family?

Explain how you see shunning (let's call it what it is here, rather than softening it with a euphemism), as not being nearly so psychological and emotionally and spiritually damaging as I've heard the stories of in this practice. I'd be interested in hearing how it's not all as bad as that.


Again, this seems to be softening it, "not be pleasant", as if it were a stern corrective measure, like giving a child timeout or something. Shunning is outright damaging. It is tantamount to torture.

A simple Google search on this instantly brings up information like this:

The effect of shunning can be very dramatic or even devastating on the shunned, as it can damage or destroy the shunned member's closest familial, spousal, social, emotional, and economic bonds.[citation needed]

Shunning contains aspects of what is known as relational aggression in psychological literature. When used by church members and member-spouse parents against excommunicant parents it contains elements of what psychologists call parental alienation. Extreme shunning may cause traumas to the shunned (and to their dependents) similar to what is studied in the psychology of torture.

Shunning - Wikipedia.​

What I seem to hear is a downplaying of this practice, as "it's not all that bad, really". But as a practice is it Biblically sanctioned?? Let's talk about that.


Aside from a couple OT passages which talk about cutting someone off from the assembly, which we can pretty much disregard because what Jesus taught supersedes what Moses taught (think 'eye for an eye' of Moses, being superseded by 'turn the other cheek 'of Jesus), there are only two references to it in the NT as an instruction to Christians. Mt. 8:17, and 2 Thes. 3:14

Let's take the first one.

"If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.​

Question. How did Jesus treat pagans, harlots, and tax collectors? Did he shun them, "away from me you impure ones, for I am holy and you are not!"? Was Jesus teaching his followers to do the opposite of how he treated them with love and compassion and understanding instead?

Maybe you should consider this to mean, show them more compassion as I have shown by example, and not revile them and expel them like the Pharisees did, whom Jesus rebuked for doing so.

I don't think I really need to say anything more than that, do I?

Now the 2nd reference, 2 Thes. 3:14.

Something to note about 2 Thessalonians is that that epistle is not considered an authentic Pauline epistle by most modern NT scholarship. You can read about why that is the case here: 2 Thessalonians

But aside from the high likelihood this is a much later text posing itself to be a letter of Paul, even reading the passage itself does not support the mistreatment of the church member by shunning them as is practiced in the Jehovah's Witnesses' sect.

Take special note of anyone who does not obey our instruction in this letter. Do not associate with them, in order that they may feel ashamed. 15 Yet do not regard them as an enemy, but warn them as you would a fellow believer.​

Shunning them is treating them as an enemy. It is a practice that goes directly against the teachings of love and compassion that Jesus taught. It treats them as unworthy of love.

Even if you want to view them as enemies, how did Jesus say you should treat your enemies? Do I need to quote that verse?


Yet it is a sanctioned practice, rather than condemned as it should be. So "leaving it up to the individual", how badly they treat their family member, is hardly what can be considered good Christian leadership. Abuse should never be condoned from the pulpit.


Is it? If you think it sanctions it, apparently it's not that clear to you.

(Hebrews 12:9-11) 9 Furthermore, our human fathers used to discipline us, and we gave them respect. Should we not more readily submit ourselves to the Father of our spiritual life and live? 10 For they disciplined us for a short time according to what seemed good to them, but he does so for our benefit so that we may partake of his holiness. 11 True, no discipline seems for the present to be joyous, but it is painful; yet afterward, it yields the peaceable fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it.

Contrary to what some parents may mistakenly believe, children who are not regularly disciplined are not happy. In fact, failure to discipline children often results in kids who are unhappy, angry, and even resentful. To those around them, a child who is not disciplined will be unpleasant company, and a child without discipline may find it difficult to make friends.

Contrary to what people claim, shunning actually is a form of discipline that helps not only the one being disciplined, buy all in the congregation.
It protects them from a wrong course, or being influence by those who pursue a wrong course.
(1 Corinthians 15:33-34) 33 Do not be misled. Bad associations spoil useful habits. 34 Come to your senses in a righteous way and do not practice sin, for some have no knowledge of God. I am speaking to move you to shame.

It also helps save the one being disciplined. That's good, for sure.

 

[nPeace]

I believe I try to refrain from it but these days hearing t so much makes it stick in the head. What I consider worse is making a curse such as: May you burn in Hell. I would rathe give a person a blessing: May you live long and prosper.

Yes. That's a good point.
These words stick in our heads, and if we don't really make an effort - try, like you said, they become imbedded in our heart. Then when we speak...
(Matthew 15:18-20) 18 However, whatever comes out of the mouth comes from the heart, and those things defile a man. 19 For example, out of the heart come wicked reasonings: murders, adulteries, sexual immorality, thefts, false testimonies, blasphemies. 20 These are the things that defile a man; but to take a meal with unwashed hands does not defile a man.”
(Luke 6:45) . . .for out of the heart’s abundance his mouth speaks.

Whom of us wants to be defiled... especially in God's sight? @Eddi?

 

[nPeace]

I'm Catholic and I cuss like a sailor. My mom taught me well.

"Cuss words" are just words and have many usages and meanings, depending on context. Sometimes they're inappropriate, sometimes they're cruel when used certain ways against others, sometimes they're fun and sometimes they're the only words that truly capture the moment.

Is that your decision based on what you think, or based on scripture?

I find it interesting that people who are not even Christian don't find those words decent, not appropriate. Yet professed Christians do.

Why do you think that is? Why do many people find those words disgusting... and where do you draw the line?

 

[nPeace]

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to take lessons on being an authentic Christian from a person who believes Jesus is not God but is in fact the Archangel Michael and whose spiritual authority is a group of eight guys in New York

I don't have to take such holier-than-thou nonsense and I won't

I believe in God, I believe that Jesus is God, I believe Jesus created the universe, I believe he died for my sins, I believe he rose from the dead and ascended into Heaven and will at some point return and I try my best to live accordingly, because he is my Lord and Master

I am therefore an authentic Christian.....

You don't have to do anything Eddi... but you made that clear from the beginning, didn't you.

 

[Messianic Israelite]

If you identify as Christian, what is your belief, or view on cussing - profanity - using abusive speech or words.
I'm referring to those words which most news media and TV channels censor.

@Kenny @InChrist and others, I would really like to hear your side on this.
Could you also identify what faith you identify with (by faith, I mean "denomination").

Hi nPeace. In my faith, we don't cuss. Cussing shows a defect in the heart. Ever hit your thumb with a hammer? What came out of your mouth at that time indicates what is in the heart. Just like hard situations will bring out of hearts things that lie buried there. I know of people who, when hitting their thumb with a hammer, the hammer flew, but the words didn't. I don't think I have ever cussed. But I can imagine it's not easy to change old habits. Ephesians 4:29 says "Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear" and Ephesians 5:4 "Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving." but the scripture that always come to mind for me is Jacob / James 1:26 "If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person's religion is worthless."

 

[nPeace]

Hi nPeace. In my faith, we don't cuss. Cussing shows a defect in the heart. Ever hit your thumb with a hammer? What came out of your mouth at that time indicates what is in the heart. Just like hard situations will bring out of hearts things that lie buried there. I know of people who, when hitting their thumb with a hammer, the hammer flew, but the words didn't. I don't think I have ever cussed. But I can imagine it's not easy to change old habits. Ephesians 4:29 says "Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear" and Ephesians 5:4 "Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving." but the scripture that always come to mind for me is Jacob / James 1:26 "If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person's religion is worthless."

Thank you.
I just liked a post of yours in another thread.
I can see you give a lot of thought to scripture.
You seemed to have been given a good upbringing.
Were you always connected to religious assemblies?

 

[Messianic Israelite]

Thank you.
I just liked a post of yours in another thread.
I can see you give a lot of thought to scripture.
You seemed to have been given a good upbringing.
Were you always connected to religious assemblies?

Hi nPeace. Good afternoon. Thank you. My upbringing was good, but I give Yahweh all the glory for that. I actually grew up in a broken home, however, with the commandments, especially to honour my parents, I was able to come to appreciate them and I was happy. I grew up in my faith and have always been part of the Assemblies of Yahweh, and have always tried to observe the Laws of Yahweh. Although my focus was mostly upon Yahweh in my youth, as a Father that I could rely on, confide in and come to, I came to greatly appreciate Yahshua the Messiah after my baptism, for forgiving my sins, bestowing the Holy Spirit, and giving me the knowledge and understanding I need to please the Father more perfectly. But yes, I have always been connected to my faith. How about you?