Abandon Ship!

[Elijah674]

See these verses & ask yourself who these many of this 'Ship' were persecuting? + what Jer. was doing? (alone we even see, it appeared?) Then see what God COMMANDS of him + the word of 'take the precious FROM the Vile! And Abandon Ship?? Who stayed put & who left whom at God's Command? Also read the repeat of Matt. 10:5-6 + Rev. 18:4'a fatal decision if not done so! :seehearspeakis the status/quo
--Elijah

JER. 15
[15] O LORD, thou knowest: remember me, and visit me, and revenge me of my persecutors; take me not away in thy longsuffering: know that for thy sake I have suffered rebuke.
[16] Thy words were found, and I did eat them; and thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of mine heart: for I am called by thy name, O LORD God of hosts.
[17] I sat not in the assembly of the mockers, nor rejoiced; I sat alone because of thy hand: for thou hast filled me with indignation.
[18] Why is my pain perpetual, and my wound incurable, which refuseth to be healed? wilt thou be altogether unto me as a liar, and as waters that fail?
[19] Therefore thus saith the LORD, If thou return, then will I bring thee again, and thou shalt stand before me: and if thou take forth the precious from the vile, thou shalt be as my mouth: let them return unto thee; but return not thou unto them.
[20] And I will make thee unto this people a fenced brasen wall: and they shall fight against thee, but they shall not prevail against thee: for I am with thee to save thee and to deliver thee, saith the LORD.

 

[Former Christian]

Cyberjosh

So, as to where you are clearly coming from:.....

I don’t think Agrippa was trying to be facetious. He sounds genuinely impressed. And Paul’s answer gives that impression.

In the Greek, Agrippa is saying something like, “In a short time you are persuading me, to make me a Christianâ€. There’s no reason to think it a question. As I said, it sounds to me like Agrippa was genuinely impressed. And who knows what happened later, as it isn’t recorded. What is recorded is that Agrippa agreed that Paul should be set free because there was no need for him to have come before him in the first place. But apparently it was preordained that he go to Rome, and circumstances dictated that he end up in Rome.

I think Agrippa’s use of the term was dictated by what was common usage among other unbelieving Gentiles. Paul no where in his prior argument uses the term, so he didn’t get the term from him.

I don’t think the use of the word in Acts 11:26 is neutral at all. It’s a clear statement interpreted by Christians as if the reference is to themselves. Luke doesn’t ever refer to himself as a Christian. So whether or not he thought of himself as one would be speculation. I think Luke saw himself as an unbiased historian of the facts. Even though he was a believer. That does seem to be how he presents things in parts one and two of what he presents. And in 11:26, Luke was just recording the fact that the first use of the word Christian was in Antioch, and that it was used with reference to those known to be disciples of the Christ.

I don’t know when scholars think Luke’s writings were written. But it seems self-evident to me that they were written right before Paul was executed in Rome. And Luke wished to get the history he learned from Paul down before he forgot it. He does stop the narrative when Paul was in Rome awaiting his trial before, whoever was Emperor at the time. Nero I think. And if Nero, Paul probably died because of Nero’s bias against the Jews, not necessarily because of bias against believers in Jesus Christ. I wouldn’t be surprised to find that in Nero’s mind there was no difference. Unlike many, I’m not up on extra-biblical history. That is, I remember little of what I have learned in the past.

Regarding Peter’s reference to the term, I continue to maintain his use was a matter of contrast, just as you point out. Suffering as a murderer or suffering as a Christian. Again, Peter nowhere refers to himself as a Christian. And I don’t think he’s doing so here. But I agree that it is this portion that is generally interpretively emphasized to carry the meaning that the term was used as a self-denotation.

There is nothing to say that to suffer under that term, being as others knew to whom it referred to, wouldn’t in fact be to the glory of God. Today, if you were to suffer as a Christian, there might be a little confusion as to whether you were suffering for a religion that bares the term or for the person to whom the term is related. That is unless you pointed out which yourself, or others pointed it out for you.

The significance of Peter using the term is that it was being used with reference to the disciples. And he wished to make it clear that if they wish to use that term to refer to the disciples, that there is no reason to be ashamed to suffer under it.

It should be noted that the term Christian isn’t a name. The name would be Jesus of Nazareth. The term merely is a reference to following a person who the disciples referred to as the Anointed one or the Messiah. And though this term could have referred to any number of Christs that were around at the time, it was known to primarily refer to the disciples of Jesus of Nazareth. And under the circumstances, it would no more be a source of shame then, as it would be today. Providing it was clear that the suffering ones were indeed suffering in relation to Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ or Messiah. And Peter was clear through personal revelation, that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ, the Son of the living God.

P.S. As a preview in response to the rest of your post, I did find a few Church Father quotes from the second century - one circa 125 AD by Justin Martyr - which do in fact apply the title 'Christian' to believers. I also will consult 1 Clement when I have time just to see if it uses the title, as I know 1 Clement was another early Christian (couldn't avoid using the unqualified term this time, although I think I've established my understanding of its meaning by now ) writing by 'Pope' Clement of Rome.

That early eh? Well, I guess I shouldn’t be surprised. Apparently a lot of the ideas of modern Christianity had an early start. Which is reasonable if Christianity is a religion that is connected to human history. In the view I present as a former Christian, Christianity existed in the first century as did Judaism. And the principles of both influencing the ekklesia, is what the NT writers was trying to counter. I at one time thought that Christianity was an expression like Corinth. But Christianity has gone way beyond that. Rather than divisions within a single ekklesia, Christianity is composed of denominations each with their own hierarchy and doctrines. And it seems that I remember that the Clergy/laity system began back in the second century also according to Christian historians. I don’t think most Protestant Christians realize how close to Catholicism they really are.

I must say that some of the things said by the early extra-biblical writers, that I have had the time to read, are indeed fascinating. But to me, extra-biblical writers are only that and really have no bearing on whether a teaching or practice of Christianity is true or false.

I probably shouldn’t have said anything about the ekklesia, since my view is apparently unique. In Christianity, the English word Church is the correct translation of the Greek word ekklesia, period end of discussion. Nevertheless, the view I present concerning the difference between the ekklesia and the Church does affect how the matter of the abandonment of Christianity would be considered under that view. I would be quite different from the norm, as you probably have noticed.

I think the only thing I’ll say on the matter of the ekklesia for the moment is that I encourage you take a couple of things into consideration. One is the plural use of ekklesia when used in relation to an area larger than a city. Two, that when those verses that appear to be references of universality, and considered to be such in Christianity, such as the Matt references and Eph 5, note the context in which they are used. Which can just as easily be construed as local.

The Matt references speak of Peter in the way the Catholics think. I have no doubt of that. Though naturally Eastern Orthodox and Protestants have to disagree. For no other reason than these Churches, along with the Catholic Church see the Church as being universal as well as local. So to anyone other than a Catholic, Matt is proof of the Catholic Church if Peter is the Rock. But consider if in the Matt references, Jesus is referring to a local ekklesia, the ekklesia in Jerusalem. In Eph 5, consider that the context is a local ekklesia, the ekklesia in Ephesus.

Christianity has its own ideas of which I am no longer a part, because I’m a former Christian. And looking at things from the outside does tend to give one a different perspective. And if that is true of me, a former Christian, consider how it must be for the non-Christian, who is standing further away than I. The next time you’re given opportunity to witness to someone, keep that in mind. They’re in a foreign country when they’re around you as far as they’re concerned. If you really want to show them around, you’ll have to be very patience so that they can take in the sights and see what they need to see.

PS: there is a discussion going in "The Law" thread concerning what Paul says in Rom 3:31 and what he says in Eph 2:15. I'd appreciate any ideas you might have to offer.

FC

 

[Bob Carabbio]

Re: When it's time to go.

"Never once has it been stated by any here about these church folds being Rev. 17:1-5 CHRISTLESS. (Isa. 5:3) or had they even cared as noted by some, about these FALSE DOCTRINES being taught for truth!"

The Lord's never led me into a "Christless Church" yet over the last 50 years. I don't expect him to begin now.

 

[Elijah674]

Re: When it's time to go.

"Never once has it been stated by any here about these church folds being Rev. 17:1-5 CHRISTLESS. (Isa. 5:3) or had they even cared as noted by some, about these FALSE DOCTRINES being taught for truth!"

The Lord's never led me into a "Christless Church" yet over the last 50 years. I don't expect him to begin now.

Well, who does one believe, the Word of God or a church denomination that has documented open sin in it being the case for well past the Striving of the Holy Spirit as was the case in Gen. 6:3's preflood ones, and with all kinds of false doctrines being taught for truth. And just one as seen in Gen. 3:4 of an immortal soul.

And a Christ that never changes! (of Heb. 13:8! if that is even believed?) And HIS WORD?? Josh 7 is [THE TRUTH!]
[12] Therefore the children of Israel could not stand before their enemies, but turned their backs before their enemies, because they were accursed: [[[neither will I be with you any more, except ye destroy the accursed from among you.]]]

And again, the Rev. 17:1-5 verse has the 'ABOMINATION OF THE EARTH' by the compiliars, as capped.

Rev. 17
[4] And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:
[5] And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH.

And when one see's that Christ is not there, who is?? Had you ever wondered why in John 10:16 that these ones had to leave their folds if Christ had of been in them?? And the Rev. 18:4 verse sure sounds fatal as well!

John 10
[16] And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also [[I must bring,]] and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.

And Rev. 18
[2] And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.
[3] For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.
[4] And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, [[Come out of her, my people]], that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.

--Elijah

 

[Former Christian]

Bob Carabbio

I'm sure the strong adherent of any one of the denominations of Christianity, including some you no doubt consider non-Christian simply because they fail to measure up to your own view of what constitutes a Christian Church, providing they have reached the same advanced age as you, can and will make the same exact claim as you. And they would no more consider abandoning their ship than you would yours.

FC

 

[Former Christian]

Elijah674

Revelation 18:4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. (KJV)

Wouldn’t you agree, that if we are to apply this to believers today, given my understanding of the nature and character of Christianity (man-made and denominational respectively), that I should come out of Christianity all together? And if so, where would I go since to me there is no Christian denomination that doesn’t fit the description in that verse?

FC

 

[Elijah674]

Elijah674

Revelation 18:4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. (KJV)

Wouldn’t you agree, that if we are to apply this to believers today, given my understanding of the nature and character of Christianity (man-made and denominational respectively), that I should come out of Christianity all together? And if so, where would I go since to me there is no Christian denomination that doesn’t fit the description in that verse?

FC

Good question! But NO, it takes BOTH, Christ's ONE FOLD (PURE DOCTRINS) that He ONLY WILL BE IN AS THE CENTERPIECE! (Isa. 5:3)
Here is a post that I just placed on another site. It is shortened with the earlier stuff gone, so as to not be way tooo long here! See if it explains your question some/what?

ME:
Yes, this is exactly your problem according to the Word of God in Jer 17:5. But you say it falsely.. for it is you who believe as they do.. at least as you pick & choose! (for they all believe differently & had not UNITY of belief) And it is you & not they that live in Hosea 4:6 time + Dan. 12:4, which you call God as 'nitpick'ing.

And your words are FATAL in the fact that your set of false beliefs have not changed in one degree! Gen. 3:4 still has your LIEING Doctrine for just one of many! --Elijah

PS: If any could be awake after well past 120 of the Holy Spirits Striving?? (as these birds talk of!) for these Rev. 17:1-5 ones? Check Lev. 17:12-19's 'SEVEN TIMES' on Christ's FINAL DAY of ATONEMENT! And it is TRUTH that the Holy Spirit is being poured out, (Again Eccl. 3:15 + Acts 2:17 + Acts *3:19!) and we are seeing 'mankind' making their LAST FINAL DECISIONS one way or the other.

You say:
I know. I have read Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian and was quite pleased to find that these early Christians believed he same things I believe. And while some might want to nitpick and major on the minors, we need to remember that the letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life. (End quote}

FREE CHOICE!...' known by the Godhead, but is not fulfilled by any man until either DEATH or MATURED one way or the other. Heb. 11;13 Has this Inspired Prophecy that these ALL [[DIED IN THE F-A-I-T-H]].
James 2:26 FINDS.. OBEDIENT WORKING LOVING FAITH!!

They were prejudged by God alone from Eccl. 12:13-14 as saved by their OBEDIENT [[WORKING]] RECORDS. And that will be the ONLY QUESTION ASKED at ones death or when He (Christ) returns, have they been OBEDIENT to Their Ten Commandments! Then ALL OTHERS are ALL past/tensed & will be EXECUTIVELY JUDGED to come forward at the close of the 1000 years to have their resurrection to die the (THEIR ETERNAL) Second DEATH. Obad. 1:16

And some say that these [[ALL]] have NO PART IN MAKING PROPHECY??? That is pure non/sense! 1 Cor. 6:2-3 There is none of God's creation of [ANYTHING] that has not a part in Their Creation that does not make Prophecy! Yet take close note that these ones of Prov. 6 have NO THINKING BRAINS as the ones who were created in the Image of God have! But some here do not know that they are brain dead ‘robots’.
Prov. 6
[6] Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise:
[7] Which having no guide, overseer, or ruler,
[8] Provideth her meat in the summer, and gathereth her food in the harvest.
[9] How long wilt thou sleep, O sluggard?when wilt thou arise out of thy sleep? And even that is an Prophesied fact not yet fully finished!

And Israel as an 'EX/HOUSE NATION of God' is just that, His DESOLATE EX/HOUSE! Matt. 23:38. Sure, satan will use his PROPHESIED 'PRE/KNOWN' work from there, as well as elsewhere.

And these Virgin ones were never even included with the ABOMINATION OF THE EARTH ones of Rev. 17:1-5 who have been pre.recorded as well past/tence!

--Elijah

PS: But Christ does have Eph. 4:5's [ONE FAITH!] not faith, but one FAITH as in Candlestick, House, Fold, Church, Sanctuary! Pure/doctrines of His, with Christ INSIDE of it!)

 

[Former Christian]

Elijah674

You know, Drew isn’t the only one who has a hard time understanding you. Most of the time I really don’t understand what you’re trying to say either. I’m sorry I brought it up, because now I have to admit my imperfection.

You bring up all these verses that as near as I can tell have nothing whatever to do with the verse in question. Except perhaps in your own mind. But that’s generally the way of interpretation, isn’t it? The only thing I can tell now is that your “no†means you disagree. But I haven’t a clue as to why.

Revelation 18:4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. (KJV)

This is the context,

Revelation 18:
1 And after these things I saw another angel come down from heaven, having great power; and the earth was lightened with his glory.
2 And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying, Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.
3 For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.
4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.
5 For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.
6 Reward her even as she rewarded you, and double unto her double according to her works: in the cup which she hath filled fill to her double.
7 How much she hath glorified herself, and lived deliciously, so much torment and sorrow give her: for she saith in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow.
8 Therefore shall her plagues come in one day, death, and mourning, and famine; and she shall be utterly burned with fire: for strong is the Lord God who judgeth her.
(KJV)

Unless you think that Babylon is a reference to Christianity, which is different from the view of Christianity that I present, then it certainly doesn’t have any bearing on my being a former Christian, nor on whether or not I should come out of Christianity in the way implied in vs. 4.

And that is what I hoped, in all it’s simplicity, your answer would be.

FC

 

[Elijah674]

Bob Carabbio

I'm sure the strong adherent of any one of the denominations of Christianity, including some you no doubt consider non-Christian simply because they fail to measure up to your own view of what constitutes a Christian Church, providing they have reached the same advanced age as you, can and will make the same exact claim as you. And they would no more consider abandoning their ship than you would yours.

FC

Hi, Christ's WORD speaks to [[[ME]]] (Rom. 8:14) If I will listen! It is HIS WORD of James 2:10 He identified in verse 11 His Ten Commandment Eternal Covenant, which will be our (MY) standard to be Judged by. (ibid 12)

James 2
[10] For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
[11] For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law.
[12] So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.

OK: This is God's WORD, not mine! And if 'i' was 'yoked in membership' with any church that was violating this law knowingly?? I did & would move on!! Is it like puling teeth perhaps? Yet, Christ WORD DEMANDS that I Love for Him first place in my life. (But that was & is the case from this end!)

Again, Isa. 5
[3] And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem, and men of Judah, judge, I pray you, betwixt me and my vineyard. (verse 7 call's His Vineyard HIS HOUSE! ex/house ibid 3's free choice)

John 12
[42] Nevertheless among the chief rulers also [[many believed on him]]; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, [[lest they should be put out of the synagogue:]]
[43] [[For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.]]

And?? John 10
[16] And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them [[also I must bring]], and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be [[one fold, and one shepherd]].

+ Rev. 18
[3] For all nations (world/wide) have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.
[4] And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, [[Come out of her, my people]], that ye be not [[partakers of her sins]], and that ye receive not of her plagues.

OK: Enough for now!?
Now for who the ones are as seen from the Lords WORD as the 'SAVED REMNANT' with this last message of truth.

Rev. 12
[17] And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

It is these few 144000 ones who will give the Last (666 mark of the beast message) Three Angels message to the world! Rev. 14:6-12. (through persecution & world court. satalite witnessed no doubt!)

--Elijah

 

[Former Christian]

Elijah674

Hi, Christ's WORD speaks to [[[ME]]] (Rom. 8:14) If I will listen! It is HIS WORD of James 2:10 He identified in verse 11 His Ten Commandment Eternal Covenant, which will be our (MY) standard to be Judged by. (ibid 12)

[[[ME]]]??? (MY)???

(Edited by staff)

Romans was written to the Romans,

Romans 1:7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.
(KJV)

Romans isn’t an epistle for individuals per se. It’s a community epistle written to a community. If it is to have any meaning for anyone in the 21st century, it must be realized that it continues to be written to a community, and is not a private epistle to a specific individual to be taken unto himself as a private word from God to himself. And to anyone who thinks that Romans was written to a first century ekklesia alone, only to understood in the 21st century as pertaining to anyone in the 21st century through the common practice of biblical interpretation, it has no meaning at all except how the individual interpreter sees fit. And that is very subjective, very subjective indeed. What Paul says in Romans either has the same meaning for all or it has no meaning at all.

Romans 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. (KJV)

This verse is for all who are in Christ, not just your private verse.

As is,

Romans 8:
1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.
13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live. (KJV)

And this,

Romans 8:
15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.
16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:
17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint–heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.
18 For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. (KJV)

As far as James 2 is concerned, I’m surprised a Protestant would bother with any of it, considering what Martin Luther thought of the epistle of James, an epistle of straw, because it teaches against justification by faith alone. On its own merits, that is. Apart from what it might be interpreted to mean.

But he who wrote,

James 2:10 For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. (KJV)

Also wrote,

James 2:11 For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law. (KJV)

The problem is that some think this isn’t a reference to the Law given to Israel. If they think it refers to any of that Law, it only refers to the moral laws, as if there is to be a separation of some sort within that Law for the sake of those under the second covenant, like a separation between Church and State. As if the moral law, that contains the law to keep the Sabbath means nothing to the one under the second covenant unless the Sabbath is redefined as on the first day of the week, instead of on the last day of the week as is taught clearly in the OT.

The more they say that, the more clear it becomes that if Jesus of Nazareth is the source of that change in the understanding of the Sabbath, the more obvious it becomes that the so-called faith related to the second covenant is the teaching of a sect that has nothing whatever to do with the first covenant, nor with the writings called the Old Testament.

But as per usual, I haven’t a clue what this means to you. For James continued,

James 2:
12 So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.
13 For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment. (KJV)

Zechariah 7:9 Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, Execute true judgment, and shew mercy and compassions every man to his brother
(KJV)

The Law only talks about the mercy of God. In the prophets, which were often claimed to be the basis of belief just as much as the Law by Jesus, shows that the mercy of God is to be an example to those who follow him.

The Psalms only talks about the mercy (translated as loving kindness in the KJV) of God except in Psalm 109 where curses are called down upon one because they didn’t show mercy. Again showing that the one who follows God is to be like God in mercy.

And as per usual, as far as the rest of that post, I continue to remain clueless. Stringing a bunch of verses together that are contextually ambiguous due to their singularity does that to me.

Yours truly,

Former Christian

 

[Jethro Bodine]

As far as James 2 is concerned, I’m surprised a Protestant would bother with any of it, considering what Martin Luther thought of the epistle of James, an epistle of straw, because it teaches against justification by faith alone.

No it doesn't. Paul teaches that a man is made righteous by faith, not by works of the law. James teaches that a man is shown to be righteous by works of the law. The same word 'justified' means 1) to be made (declared) righteous, and 2) to be shown to be righteous. Look it up if you don't believe me. Context shows us what definition of 'justification' James is talking about, just as context shows us what definition of 'justification' Paul is talking about.

James is just echoing what Paul himself says, that faith upholds the law. An upholding of the law which James says shows you to have the faith that saves. James says in his letter that if your faith does not find expression in the "royal law found in scripture, 'Love your neighbor as yourself'" (James 2:8 NIV1984) you have a 'faith' that cannot save you ("Can such faith save him?" 2:14). Paul echoes the same thing:

"5 But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope. 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value (toward justification). The only thing that counts (toward justification) is faith expressing itself through love." (Galatians 5:5-6 NIV1984 parenthesis mine)

The thing that counts is that your faith fulfill the law of love. All three, Paul, James, and John, say this in their letters. Faith that finds expression in love for others is what justifies a person. The faith makes him righteous. The love shows him to be righteous.

 

[Former Christian]

Jethro Bodine

I attempted to send you a PM on this matter, but it wouldn't go through with a message giving a reason that I didn't understand. So here I'll only say that my reference to James 2 was a slip of the mind and leave it at that.

FC

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Re: When it's time to go.

"When I settle into a church, I know four things:"

1) There are going to be what I CONSIDER to be errors in theology preached. I may "Come around to agreement", or THEY may come around, or maybe not.

I want to hear from anybody in this entire forum who has seen the leadership of a church they were attending 'come around' to their point of view. I am now of the firm conviction that this never happens, or happens so infrequently that for all intents and purposes it is something that can not be reasonably expected to happen in a church where you are enduring their doctrines and beliefs hoping it will change to the way you see things. Unless there is some other compelling reason to stay you probably should start thinking about moving on.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Jethro Bodine

I attempted to send you a PM on this matter, but it wouldn't go through with a message giving a reason that I didn't understand. So here I'll only say that my reference to James 2 was a slip of the mind and leave it at that.

FC

I'm sorry that happened with the PM thingy. I like this topic very much and would have enjoyed continuing the discussion if there was anything to discuss.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Re: When it's time to go.

...and as Rick Warren says - It's NOT about me - it's about being obedient to the calling.

I honestly don't believe God calls us to a fellowship where Christ is not somehow feeding you and binding up your wounds, encouraging you and building you up to go back into the world to be a faithful witness for Him, and giving you opportunities to help others get that, too.

I like Rick Warren but he missed it big time on this one. Big time! Too many people use this little phrase as a way to suppress dissatisfaction and dissension in the church. Not all dissension is wrong. And dissatisfaction really can be legitimate sometimes. Let's not forget, cults thrive on the suppression of any and all dissension and dissatisfaction as a rule and turn that discontent back on the person as their problem. Shut up and drink the kool-aid!

SO until there's a "Release" - I'm there to stay.

Too often the 'release' we think God is giving us is actually where our patience and understanding end and we get in a tussel with someone over some matter of doctrine, or procedure, or belief. It's better for all involved to consider leaving a church that is not meeting your need to be fed and feed others before the situation gets to that point.

 

[Elijah674]

No it doesn't. Paul teaches that a man is made righteous by faith, not by works of the law. James teaches that a man is shown to be righteous by works of the law. The same word 'justified' means 1) to be made (declared) righteous, and 2) to be shown to be righteous. Look it up if you don't believe me. Context shows us what definition of 'justification' James is talking about, just as context shows us what definition of 'justification' Paul is talking about.

James is just echoing what Paul himself says, that faith upholds the law. An upholding of the law which James says shows you to have the faith that saves. James says in his letter that if your faith does not find expression in the "royal law found in scripture, 'Love your neighbor as yourself'" (James 2:8 NIV1984) you have a 'faith' that cannot save you ("Can such faith save him?" 2:14). Paul echoes the same thing:

"5 But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope. 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value (toward justification). The only thing that counts (toward justification) is faith expressing itself through love." (Galatians 5:5-6 NIV1984 parenthesis mine)

The thing that counts is that your faith fulfill the law of love. All three, Paul, James, and John, say this in their letters. Faith that finds expression in love for others is what justifies a person. The faith makes him righteous. The love shows him to be righteous.

Can you say... LOVING OBEDIENCE??
And as you say per Re: Abandon Ship, let just suppose that this a a large church denomination??
OK: of the two in 'one' membership, which ones ABONDON the Ship, the most who stay on board, or the Loving Obedient ones? (Matt. 25:6 comes into mind)

--Elijah

 

[cyberjosh]

Hi FC,

I'm really sorry that I haven't had the time to dedicate to continuing our conversation. Life is very busy for me right now and I am in the process of trying to buy a house. It is consuming all my time and energy (and finances) right now...

Anyway, I just saw this video on a friend's facebook status and wondered if it might not resonate with you a little bit. Enjoy:

[video=youtube;1IAhDGYlpqY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IAhDGYlpqY&feature=share[/video]

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IAhDGYlpqY&feature=share

God Bless,
~Josh

 

[cyberjosh]

Something I posted in response on facebook to that video:

"Wow, this dude is the real deal! I just watched an interview he did (here: http://youtu.be/cmp4GoDLbMs) on Fox, and for a 22-year old - man! I wish I could speak with such candidness as him!

I love what he said at 16:15-16:23 in that interview video: "Nothing can critique me and show me how much I need and deserve death more than the cross, but on the flip side nothing can show me how much I'm worth and how much God loves me than the cross""

Gasp. I think this kid just discovered a Christ-centered theology! It's quite inspiring.

 

[Elijah674]

[FONT=Verdana,arial]Done on another site: and was wondering what ship these might be on, if any???

By: ----
If people are taught this corrupt carnal doctrine that they have no control over what they think and do. It takes the responsibility for their sins away, and they will be lost. In their mind their sins are God's fault. Also it makes God the "instrument of evil." Which is a lie.



Hi, be honest with this question OK? (and by that remark I don't mean that you will not be, but just want an answer) OK: Here in Heb. 6:4-6 we 'see'..

[4] For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
[5] And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
[6] If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

OK: Is it not also truth for the lost such as all of these others, that have never been made Partakers of the Holy Ghost in the first place to be as these ones here are in verse 6???

Matt. 12:31-32 surely must include the ones that cannot or at least do not try to keep (Phil. 4:13) their self from sinning, such as these ones that are singled out by you above!

So how are they any different than these claiming'only believe' withNO WORKING EFFORT??? James 2:26.

So is there not ‘some factual admittance’ to this truth with some of these devils postings, even knowing that he is a done/deal? Obad. 1:16, Rev. 20:10

In other words, we do not know when this takes place, yet when it does it says that there is no way back after that point, right? And are we not to see this by these ones telling us that they cannot or will not make the correct DECISION, at least on this point??

--Elijah
[/FONT]

 

[Former Christian]

Cyberjosh

Anyway, I just saw this video on a friend's facebook status and wondered if it might not resonate with you a little bit.

Thanks for mentioning those two videos. And thinking of me in the process.

Yes, both videos resonate with me very much. I was just like him many years ago. Of course I’ve grown some since then. But I’m still just as enthusiastic as he is, when the opportunity arises. Can’t be that enthusiastic with everyone one meets, or with most Christians, of course. They just misunderstand. When I was his age, Spiritually speaking, I had to learn that the hard way.

I’m glad you put up the second video. He explains what he meant by the first video. And as popular as the first video was, not many really understood initially where he was coming from. They totally misunderstood what he meant by religion. As is seen by all the Catholics who responded. They thought that he was expressing this really complex idea, when in actuality he was just expressing the simplicity of the faith. And that resonates with me a great deal. On this forum, not many understand where I’m coming from either. That I’m actually expressing the simplicity of the faith as it’s presented in the bible. That those caught up in the web of biblical interpretation and denominationalism think should be as complex as their own ideas of things.

It’s in that sense that I see Christianity as a man-made religion. Just like anything else created by man, much more complex than it really needs to be. The original biblical pattern is very simple. If Christianity was as simple as this young man portrays it, it wouldn’t be man-made. Rather it would be an expression of the one new man on earth expressing Jesus Christ and ultimately, God.

And I’ve personally experienced such an expression for a short time. A community that expressed the simplicity in Christ, before a man laid his hands on it and changed it into another denomination of Christianity. The sad part is how so many, after following Jesus (and I believe that Jesus was leading, not Satan as some outside of this community thought), decided to follow a man instead of Jesus. Thus ruining what they had. There is no doubt a moral to that sad story. But I’ve never been completely sure what it was, so many things have come to mind. I’ve never seen it happen again, and don’t expect it to happen again in my lifetime. Christians are too comfortable in their own denominational expression of Christianity.

In the Old Testament, God gave his Law to Moses. And through Moses to a group of people chosen to be examples of that Law to the world. But by the time of Christ, they had turned it into a religion for the Jews alone. By the first century, the simple pattern of the Tabernacle had become a huge edifice that turned the tabernacle ritual as originally given into something very complex. They turned a way of living into what was in Jesus’ own words a Tradition of men. That Tradition continues in modern Judaism today. It has added to that Tradition since the first century, adding even more to its complexity, and is even more an expression of the nature of man. Sorry to say, Christianity, having in my personal opinion, developed from the original Judaizers (seen more clearly today in Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, than Protestantism), is now seen in a double line wherein one has historically developed along the lines of Judaism with its own Tradition, and the other has developed into such diversity of Traditions, that it is presently the ultimate expression of the denominational character of Christianity.

I, like you, enjoy listening to believers who retain their passion for what they believe. Especially if what they believe conforms more to the simplicity that is in Christ. There is a pastor of a Church, that if his Church was in my neighborhood, I would surely attend. For two reasons. First, I agree with a lot of what he has to say, even though he is an Evangelical Protestant. Second, he is a passionate teacher of the bible as he understands it. And due to his passion, he can say a lot in a short amount of time. That kind of passion can only be infectious to the right sort of person. And I guess I’m that sort of person. I would never know about him if it weren’t for someone putting videos of his sermons onto YouTube. On all sorts of subjects. His name is Billy Crone. If you like the enthusiasm of this young man, I think you’ll like the passion of Billy Crone. And I think that you may even come to agree, as I do, with a lot of what he says. Check him out when you get a chance.

FC