/christian/ - Christianity

Religious discussions and spirituality

SAVE THIS FILE: Anon.cafe Fallback File v1.0 (updated 2021-01-10)

Want your event posted here? Requests accepted in this /meta/ thread.

Max message length: 5120

Drag files to upload or
click here to select them

Maximum 5 files / Maximum size: 20.00 MB

Board Rules

(used to delete files and postings)

QTDDTOT Anonymous 10/04/2021 (Mon) 01:18:38 No.1633
QTDDTOT - Questions that don't need their own thread. Post your questions here.
>>1729 >platonic relationship with an imaginary friend is idolatry You're so clueless its funny. You also make the mistake of thinking a waifu has anything to do with a tulpa. They are completely different things. If your going to comment on a topic it would certainly help if you knew something about it instead of just wanting to be the first one to make a judgement. >she will never be there for you Unlike real humans right :^)
>>1720 >but neither could God, by that logic If you want a more philosophical interpretation of Creation that's still compatible with Christianity (and was practiced as such for centuries until around the reformation), look into the Hermetic texts and Kabbalah. However, both of these things are highly difficult to comprehend. >downgraded overtime I've recently stumbled upon an interesting term for modern science, that came straight from the middle ages: The decayed sciences. How modern science works is to build theory upon theory, with each being likely, but not provable as such. The best example for this would be Newtonian physics, which were used for centuries and regarded as 100% truth... until they were discovered to be bogus. Meanwhile, the conception of a true science from the past would be one based upon Truth and extrapolating from there. An example of the divide would be Alchemy and Chemistry. Alchemy was based upon divine principles and could, through God, work true wonders. Chemistry meanwhile can mass-produce garbage and poison the planet. >How can a religion that is entirely subjective hold any truth? You're looking at modernity exclusively. What if modern conceptions take any given religion as subjective? You have centuries of literature that didn't. Look to older texts and keep the company of St. Thomas Aquinas. Ultimately, if you want to find God in the modern world, it's going to take quite a bit more work than it did for a medieval peasant. Simply the effects of dissolution as we drift further from God and the end times near. >issue of evolution and race is also troubling Not particularly. Your issue, once more, stems from modernism. You implicitly see Africans as fully human, while the older conception was that they were something lesser, something to be taught as children are taught, that will, in the fullness of time, mayhaps blossom into joining the human race, God willing. A challenge set by God, and a challenge we ultimately failed. If you get rid of the modern idea that we're all the same, despite clear evidence to the contrary, the issue is gone. Incidentally, the issues in Africa stem from the same mistake. It was a good deal more peaceful when it was colonized. Ultimately, for a society to work well, it must resemble Heaven. It cannot work if you set the lower equal to the higher, let alone the lower above the higher.
Open file (154.26 KB 1121x632 one eye symbolism.jpg)
>>1730 >You're so clueless its funny. That's your opinion. >>platonic relationship with an imaginary friend is idolatry It's very easy to worship something, just the act of engaging in politics is an act of worship. It is also easy to contact spirits or open doors as they say, as the youtube link will show. >You also make the mistake of thinking a waifu has anything to do with a tulpa. Many people who had waifus on 8chan tried to have it "become real" through tulpa-mancing, there was a whole tulpa board. just because they're different things don't mean that they can't lead to each other. >If your going to comment on a topic it would certainly help if you knew something about it instead of just wanting to be the first one to make a judgement. The irony, practice what you preach. I know plenty, having been an ex-weeb who used to have a waifu and tried to make it real with tulpas. The spiritual and lustful aspects of weebdom is dangerously neglected. >Unlike real humans right :^) That's so bitter, I don't blame you for being so pessimistic, but that's no reason to give up. You just have to find someone who does want/need you. Waifuism is just an artificial substitute that will never be there for you at all. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjaCzmsz-Z0
Open file (287.49 KB 1600x959 Wow.jpg)
>>1720 >it basically started with reading through a Wikipedia page on the estimated timeline of the universe, how humanity will last for at most 100,000 years... So some modern world people managed to convince you their view was the best one. Perhaps convinced you, that you would be accepted in their world if you bought their narrative. But did they also mention that they believe a person mutilating their body to become something they are not is perfectly normal? I wouldn't take what these people say, or what the world at large says, or the fantasies they dream up, at face value. The people who write wikipedia articles are not the ones performing real accomplishments being written about. They characterize them how they like. The people who influence those writers, the "influencers" themselves, are not even real scholars either, they are just political hacks coming up with convenient belief systems to trap people into wrong ways of thinking through stuff like popular media. A lot of people today are heavily influenced by film and television media about how the world works, how it will be one day, and also history itself, when all of these ideas are false/dangerously misleading. In fact the people who have been used to bring knowledge of the Truth regarding this world have largely been sidelined, in the modern world's view. The things that have been discovered, have been warped, in the popular conception, to fit a way of thinking that tells you that you can do whatever you want, and what you say goes if you can act to convince enough people. They take facts and twist them and act like that's the conclusion you should draw. Hence why today we have such disorder taking the center stage, whereas in the age of discovery the people had a conception of what liberty was (a Biblical concept by the way), and they did publicly recognize the truth of our Lord. They recognized the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, and people certainly weren't afraid to the point of denying it. They were more afraid of what God thought of their denials than anything man thought. But I digress from this point. >and the universe as a whole will last for far longer than that, upwards of quintillions of quintillions of years (that may be exaggerating but you get the idea, a very long time) until it all collapses on itself This is simple extrapolation, and assumption that uncertainties are not what they are, and assumption moreover that what cosmologists think they currently observe will continue unchanged. This is merely a model. I wouldn't trust most people to eschew inserting their preconceived notions into it at some level, where said preconceived notion then unsurprisingly re-surfaces in their conclusions. >and forms another big bang, starting a new universe as the cycle continues. Now think to yourself, how could anyone possibly know that from scientific methods. They can't. It's all metaphysics, it's just someone's imagination about how all things operate. A statement like that cannot possibly be based on real measurements. And yet you see how confidently people will assert these kinds of views at you, regardless of that undeniable fact in this case. >Come 200 years in the future nobody will even know nor care There is nothing new under the sun. Solomon had those same thoughts in the old testament book of Ecclesiastes. See Ecclesiastes chapters 2 & 3. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ecclesiastes+2&version=KJV >And that's where Christianity should come in, that our time in this world doesn't matter, that heaven/eternal life is around the corner Because it is, eternal existence is, it's just a question of how you will spend it. >the universe couldn't have created itself <but neither could God According to what God must be by definition, He is a first cause. If not a first cause then such an entity would not qualify to meet the definition to begin with. So this doesn't carry over to the definition of God.
>>1720 (cont'd) >Thinking more about the Bible is also depressing, since it has been downgraded overtime from "infallible" to "reinterpreted" to "it's an allegory/expression". There have always been people making the "it's just an allegory" interpretation. Even in Genesis chapter 3 you have the serpent telling the woman that it was all just an allegory, and also asking if God had really said things exactly as they were said or whether errors had crept in. But can't you see, all of this doubts the existence of God, the perfect Being. >you lose many expressions that can only be understood in the original language. Except in the book of Acts you had the same words being spoken in multiple languages when the apostles starting speaking in tongues and everyone understood. It was because the Spirit of God allowed them to understand the word, according to standard biblical theology (1 Corinthians 2:13, 1 John 2:27, Luke 24:45, John 16:13, etc.). Without God being present to transmit the accurate understanding, we would also be sunk even if we all spoke the original Greek. No two people's understanding would be exactly the same even in that scenario without God having a guiding hand in it all. That is why Christ is master or teacher, for every believer has one Master, even Christ (Matthew 23:8).
I hear that reading books about magic can open doors to demons, is this still true with ebook readers and files of magick books? I have a lot of porn video games, is it okay to have as long as i don't play them or masturbate to them? Do you know any books that explain opening doors to demons from a christian perspective?
>>1741 your post is self explanatory. the items you mention have already caused you to be infested with demons through the very doors you speak of. otherwise you would see how absurd your questions are.
Open file (30.50 KB 640x605 1629968783721.jpg)
How can Mary be sinless (i get the catholic answer about her having the title of "full of grace" during her pregnancy with Jesus, but...) When she needed a savior? She also couldn't have been a perpetual virgin because she gave birth to Jesus's other family members? Aren't we all sinners because of original sin, and doesn't that include Christ and Mary? Sorry if this is morbid, but If a Baby dies does it die sinless because it's lack of intellect keeps it from intentionally sin, so wouldn't they be sinless if they die early enough? In the Bible it says "all have sinned and fall short of God" but does that also include original sin or just personal sin?
>>1742 I was recommended a book on addictions and have been trying to quit porn for many years since i was a young teen and i am now in my 30s. I have hurt many relationships because of my lust. If i get a deliverance would i be able to keep it and just not use it? Or would just resisting the temptation to use it be enough to get rid of the demons as long as i don't use any porn? Yes i realize how pathetic/dependent the sentiment/question is. Regarding the books on magic, i just want to know the meaning behind the esoteric interpretation in media and advertisements. I wouldn't practice it.
>>1741 If by opening doors you simply mean allowing, then any action could lead to spiritual problems if you sin against conscience. Almost any action can be a sin problem for someone in this way, so the general statement is you should not do things against your own conscience. I get this from 1 Corinthians 8. We should also not offend other people by doing things that cause them to stumble, either. That's going a step further. The classic example given in the New Testament is eating meat offered to idols. Paul, the apostle who wrote the letter, said in this passage that he would rather not eat any meat at all, if doing so offends his brother. But at the same time he also said that idols are nothing. Looking with lust at someone is compared with committing an adulterous act with them, and viewing porn is absolutely a sin according to Scripture. It also says in 1 John 3:15, "Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him." That's a similar concept there as well. If we are saved and we have Christ in us, then we should not be letting our flesh lead us anymore.
>>1741 >I have a lot of porn video games, is it okay to have as long as i don't play them or masturbate to them? Well, it would probably be a good idea to delete them anyway. Was there any particular reason you were keeping them?
>>1743 >How can Mary be sinless (i get the catholic answer about her having the title of "full of grace" during her pregnancy with Jesus, but...) When she needed a savior? Well, in Galatians 3:22 is says "But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe." Therefore, it is clear that all have sinned (like it says in Romans 3:23) and fallen short of the glory of God. The only way someone would try to tell you a person is sinless in a Biblical context would be if they were telling you someone is God. Obviously, according to the Bible everyone has sinned. This is a frequent theme. Jesus Christ, being God, is sinless. This is one way in which the Lord and Savior, Jesus, is different. As it says in Hebrews 7, He is "separate from sinners" among other attributes. He was born of a virgin, He alone is holy among all, and worthy and righteous, and His coming is a fulfillment of many ancient prophecies, such as Genesis 3:15 and many others—like it says in John 1:14, "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." It also says in 1 Timothy 3:16, "God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory." This last part refers to the fact that Jesus ascended into heaven after the Resurrection, after He died for all of our sins and transgressions on the cross and was in the grave until the third day when He rose again. Right now He continues to live due to the fact that He has resurrected and He won't die, as Jesus is quoted in Revelation as saying, "Fear not; I am the first and the last: I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death." All of these things are special to Christ Jesus. Later, some came up with their own theories in which other people such as Mary are sinless, however they simply did not understand the Gospel and how it tells us that all have sinned. It is pretty clear to see that this is a satanically inspired lie, because it openly contradicts clear Scripture. It also takes advantage of people being confused between the difference of being "blameless" and being sinless. It says in Luke 1:6 that the parents of John the Baptist were blameless, but that doesn't mean they were completely sinless before God. The same goes for a lot of people. The fact that we are ALL sinful is shown by a statement in the book of Isaiah, where it says "But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags;" In other words, what this means is from God's perspective, the best things we have done are still unholy and filthy. The things that we might consider righteous are still tainted with wickedness, as God sees all of our imperfections to an infallible accuracy. That's why we need Christ, the beloved and only begotten Son of God to intercede for us. He willingly came here in order to help us and provide a hope for our situation. What He asked is that we believe on Him. See John 5:24. "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life." In the epistle to the Colossians, another part of the New Testament, the apostle writes to the church: "You, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross." And our Savior did this because of how great of a person He is. So it's important to understand how no one can save themselves from the wrath to come. In 1 Thessalonians 1:10 it says, "Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come." The only way to be delivered is through the Lord; Like it says throughout the Bible, Salvation is of the Lord. This would be circumvented if someone (other than Christ the Lord) was able to save themselves from condemnation, or was already without sin. >Aren't we all sinners because of original sin, and doesn't that include Christ Christ is not included in that because He is the only begotten Son of God. As quoted earlier, he is "separate from sinners" (Hebrews 7:26).
>>1743 >In the Bible it says "all have sinned and fall short of God" but does that also include original sin or just personal sin? In the Bible, in Ephesians 2, Paul says to the church that we "were by nature the children of wrath," even as others still are. By nature simply means because we inherited the sin nature from our predecessor, Adam. This is explained in more detail in 1 Corinthians chapter 15, which is part of another epistle of the apostle Paul, starting around verse 20. So basically, it's about the fact that we sin by nature, and we are each accountable for our own offenses and sins against God. The Bible here also says, "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." - 1 Corinthians 15:22. In other words, those who are born again will be in Christ and therefore be made alive: just as every person inherited their earthly nature from Adam, whoever believes on Christ can also be born again and be saved. >Sorry if this is morbid, but If a Baby dies does it die sinless because it's lack of intellect keeps it from intentionally sin, so wouldn't they be sinless if they die early enough? From a biblical point of view, this is not a hard question to answer. David said, in 2 Samuel 12:23, that he would be going to meet his child who died. Also Job, in the book of Job 3:11-19 basically says the same thing. And yes, the Roman Catholic teaching also goes against this, and that is just because their teaching is unbiblical. I should also add for this point, we should be able to trust in God to handle every person with true justice, even if we do not understand how everything is handled. We should believe that God is able to uphold His word in all things, including being His righteousness. For instance, we are assured of the following elsewhere in the book of Job: "Therefore hearken unto me, ye men of understanding: Far be it from God, that he should do wickedness; and from the Almighty, that he should commit iniquity. For the work of a man shall he render unto him, and cause every man to find according to his ways. Yea, surely God will not do wickedly, neither will the Almighty pervert judgment."
>>1744 if you havent raped then you are not addicted. but everyone is usually very forceful on everything, your thoughts, allegiance, and even your life. technically rape is the way of life so count your sins, and theirs.
think about this : in the desert end of the world, a woman has to cover themselves, or else they are to be raped and killed and that's just. and it's a religion. if that's not way out of control kind of lust, i dont know what else.
>>1741 This image board is filled with demons.
>>1745 >then we should not be letting our flesh lead us anymore. But we still do. And you offer little real advice as to how to avoid it.
>>1732 Youtube is a santanic website so I shan't be clicking.
>>1746 Downloading them takes a long time and i'm something of a digital hoarder so i don't really want to delete them, a lot of my free time is spend downloading games. Pretty lame reason, i know.
>>1753 https://yewtu.be/watch?v=MW-2ti4DOD8 Here is a better version of his testimony, on a non-youtube site.
>>1747 >>1748 Okay, thank you for answering my questions.
>>1753 Can you prove it's connected to satanism?
>>1758 Ill be making a testimony of how my waifu changed my life around and led me to God.
>>1743 the short answer is that since Jesus is simultaneously fully God and fully man, His Godhood cancels out the original sin that is present in his humanity. there are much deeper explanation but that's the quickest one.
I hail from an orthodox christian culture and I've long since become disenchanted with our church, practically since I've grown up. I've lost faith, but I regret it. I've recently learned that in catholic tradition people often ask God in their prayers for courage, patience and other virtues rather than concrete results. It sounds extremely based and looks like it can work from my perspective as an atheist. So what kind of ritual may replace it? To whom might an atheist pray for courage? I don't think I can ever buy into christian mythology.
>>1759 Absolutely.
>>1767 absolute garbage post. >To whom might an atheist pray for courage? lmao
>>1769 It sounds like bait to make Christians reply in a bad faith manner. >>1767 Just in case it's not bait, pray to the Christian God while you look at the evidence for Christ from a Christian perspective before automatically assuming the atheist position is the correct one. Read the book "A Case for Christ" where an atheist reviews the evidence for Jesus, and ends up becoming a Christian.
I know that Jesus wasn't a copy of pagan deities, but what about this... >It's just a blending and evolution of things that came before it. It grew out of Canaanite and Babylonian polytheism before becoming monolatrous and finally denying the existence of other deities altogether (or accusing them of being demons masquerading as gods). The god of the Hebrews was the result of combining the Elohist and Yahwist traditions. Then after the Persian influence during the Exile, it ended up getting infused with Zoroastrian traits. Apocalypticism is one of them. The Christian beliefs in heaven and hell were influenced by the Greek pagan ideas of the Elysian Fields and Tartarus. The ancient Hebrews just had Sheol prior to the Second Temple period (at which point competing ideas were floating around, including the Sadducees' lack of belief in an afterlife and the Pharisees' supposed idea of a future resurrection of the dead), and even that is thought by many to just refer to the grave. Later on, people like St. Augustine ended up taking a good dose of Neoplatonist philosophy and incorporating it into Christianity. >It all looks exactly like the development of a man-made belief system that evolved over many centuries and not divine truth handed down from on high. I don't really know too much about this and was wondering if any of you knew more or had any articles or reading debunking the idea that Christianity blended/evolved from ancient paganism this?
If someone gets closer to God, like if someone goes to church three times a day and sings worship to God, will this bring spiritual opposition from demons and Satan? Because i did that and then took on a job where i had an strange outburst of anger at someone at my work. I offend a co-worker's race which offended the owner (of the same race), who later became unbelievably angry at me for that tiny outburst and eventually kicked me out of the job for a bunch of other stuff that they were mad about.
>>1777 >zeitgeist movie is for angsty teenagers if you actually researched any of it for yourself you'd see that stuff you wrote is nonsense. try talking to the God of the Bible for a week, then try praying to Ra, then try talking to God again. see how it feels.
>>1779 The quote you're talking about is not something i believe in, it's something some anon told me, i'm a Christian and i referred him to debunking videos about the false claim that genesis was taken from pagan myths, to show that Christianity is not a copy from ancient paganism. I wanted more info on this since i haven't encountered this topic too much beyond the debunked claim that Jesus was a copy of pagan deities.
>>1780 sorry, i misread your post. i would have to look myself to find some material. personally it was the Holy Spirit that led me to debunk those claims through my own experience. the more i read the Bible, the more i realized the "it's all based on the same stories, bro" theory was nonsense.
https://www.gotquestions.org/unpardonable-sin.html >The only unpardonable sin today is that of continued unbelief. There is no pardon for a person who dies in his rejection of Christ. The Holy Spirit is at work in the world, convicting the unsaved of sin, righteousness, and judgment (John 16:8). If a person resists that conviction and remains unrepentant, then he is choosing hell over heaven. “Without faith it is impossible to please God” (Hebrews 11:6), and the object of faith is Jesus (Acts 16:31). There is no forgiveness for someone who dies without faith in Christ. Why is rejection of Jesus related to blasphemy of the Holy Spirit in reference to the unforgivable sin, wasn't it blasphemy of the Holy Spirit and not the Son? Continued unbelief sounds really subjective, how do we know if we have committed the unforgivable sin?
I feel like piracy is not stealing, it would be like making a copy of a chair instead of stealing one from a store.
>>1782 Well, it says in 1 John 5:9-10 (right after talking about the Trinity) the following: "9 If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son. 10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son." When John says that he that believes the Son of God has the witness in himself, he is referring to the Holy Spirit. Going back a couple verses, in 1 John 5:6, it says "And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth." Jesus also said in the Gospel of John, chapter 14, "16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. [...] 26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." Later in Chapter 16, the Lord Jesus says, "13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. 14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you." Paul says in 1 Corinthians 2: "12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. 13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual." So it is clear from this that John is referring to the "the witness" as the Holy Spirit back in the original passage. And if someone does not believe Him, he is "making God a liar." It also says in Hebrews 6 this key fact, "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." Notice what it says there. It talks about those who have "tasted" the good word of God, but that doesn't mean they have accepted it. One can taste something without accepting it. It says that there are some people who have actually tasted the word of God; maybe they have even cast out devils in Christ's name - see Matthew 7:21-23 - but they rejected the word. There are people who have truly received good things and realized the light of the truth, but they chose to reject it knowing what it was. I would say that if you knew the word of truth, were "enlightened," but you still chose to trample that for some ungodly reason, then you have "made God a liar" like John said. I would even say they have sinned against the Holy Ghost—On the other hand, compare the reaction of the crowd in Acts 2: "41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls." And Acts 13: "46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. 47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth. 48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed."
>>1777 >It all looks exactly like the development of a man-made belief system that evolved over many centuries and not divine truth handed down from on high. A careful reading of the Old Testament shows this for the cheap device of falsehood that it really is. It relies on people's lack of familiarity with the Scripture in order to dissuade them from simply reading it for themselves. People might be one step away from discovering the word of truth but be turned away by an obviously false declaration like that. And it's so obviously false, which is why it's so despicable.
>>1792 Just to add on to my post since the website decided it wanted to post without my hitting the post button. Read the early chapters of Genesis. Read the book of Genesis alone. There you see references to God saying "let us make man in our image." This is clearly the same as what Paul taught referring to Christ. The only begotten Son is God, in whose image we were made. "Our image" - from this verse of Genesis - is the image of God. We get prophecies in Genesis 3:15 of the seed who will be born who will crush the serpent with his feet. That is the Gospel of Christ, and it is echoed throughout all of the Old Testament. Every saint has believed the word of God regarding this salvation, whether looking forward to the coming Savior or looking to the cross after He died for us and rose again and believing the word as it was revealed by God in His infinite wisdom to us. When God says "let us make man in our image," that refers to the Holy Trinity, and specifically to the image of the Person described here: "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth." There are so many prophecies regarding Christ that are fulfilled and could only have been fulfilled one way through Jesus. Micah 5:2 says where He was born, and that His "goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." Isaiah 7:14 says He is born of a virgin (sorry modern versions). In Genesis 22:17, we get a similar prophecy to that of Genesis 3:15, where in Genesis 22:17 it says Christ (the seed) shall possess the gate of "his" [singular] enemies. Again, the modern versions get this verse wrong, but stick with the KJV with its accurate grammar. Isaiah predicts the fact, by revelation of prophecy: "But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all." - Isaiah 53:5-6 Genesis 49:10 we see that the Savior will come from Judah, and from 2 Samuel 7:12, we see that he is a royal descendant of David. Everyone knows Jesus' genealogy from David given in the Gospel and there has never been a dispute about that. In Psalm 22, it describes the scene of His death, stating "For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet." To get even more specific, Daniel's prophecy about the 483 years from the commandment to rebuild the temple is fulfilled, because 454 BC *(reign of Artaxerxes) was exactly that number of years before the year of Jesus' ministry/crucifixion in the early 1st century. I could go on about all the prophecies mentioned especially by Matthew. Jesus even makes the astute point in John 5:46, "For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me."
>>1777 >>1793 The Bible even talks about His divinity in the Old Testament. For instance in Psalm 8 it says, "For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour. Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet:" That's talking about the fact that God was manifest in the flesh (see New Testament). It says in Isaiah 9:6, "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace." It says in Psalm 2, "Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him." Thirty-seven other Psalms tell us about those who are blessed for trusting in the Lord/God, here it says the same thing about the Son. He also has many appearances in the Bible by this point, for instance at the time when Daniel's three friends were thrown into the furnace, Daniel chapter 3 says, "Did not we cast three men bound into the midst of the fire? They answered and said unto the king, True, O king. He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God." As it says in Psalm 33:6, "By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth." This is mirrored in the NT, which says "Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear." - Hebrews 11:6. And also John 1:1, which says "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." The Old Testament also testifies to the divinity of the Holy Spirit, for instance as early as Job 33:4, which says "The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life." And the Spirit of God is also referred to, as early as Genesis 1:2. I could go further, the Old Testament talks about the creation of the church. We note the following passage from Psalm 102: "16 When the LORD shall build up Zion, he shall appear in his glory. 17 He will regard the prayer of the destitute, and not despise their prayer. 18 This shall be written for the generation to come: and the people which shall be created shall praise the LORD. 19 For he hath looked down from the height of his sanctuary; from heaven did the LORD behold the earth; 20 To hear the groaning of the prisoner; to loose those that are appointed to death; 21 To declare the name of the LORD in Zion, and his praise in Jerusalem;" And in Hosea 2:23, "And I will sow her unto me in the earth; and I will have mercy upon her that had not obtained mercy; and I will say to them which were not my people, Thou art my people; and they shall say, Thou art my God." (see 1 Peter 2:9-10) This is in brief the reason why Paul could write, in Galatians 3:16, "Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ." That's because the promise is and was always to Christ, who is one Person, not many. He is that one seed who will inherit those things. It was anticipated from the beginning. It says this as early as Genesis 3:15, as it says, "And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." Notice the use of "his" [singular second person]. It's no accident. There are so many parallels and re-affirmations of things said earlier on that the theory of development is simply a figment of people's imaginations who have not studied the Bible very well, which they might have just learned from someone else and was passed along to them, as well as those who might be deliberately lying for some ulterior motive.
>>1736 so why do we still have so many congregations/denominations/sects arguing over how things should be interpreted? if there was a single true meaning would God have revealed it to us and made it obvious that "that interpretation" is the right one?
>>1795 There is at least three reasons for this. Firstly, there are outright false prophets and people who don't believe who come to all kinds of bizarre conclusions that don't add up. The majority of the world is lost, that is not saved (see Jesus in Luke 13:23 when asked if there are many that be saved), so they fall in this category. Paul speaks about these in 1 Corinthians 2:14, "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." So, that explains a big part of the confusion going on right there. Another part is that there are people who just do not want to learn despite being saved. Even the best Christian ever is still imperfect has problems with this sometimes. We are not perfect. In Hebrews 5:11, the inspired writer talks about this. "11 Of whom we have many things to say, and hard to be uttered, seeing ye are dull of hearing. 12 For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. 13 For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe." Also in Galatians 1, Paul writes: "6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: 7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ." And later in Galatians 4 he tells this church: "8 Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods. 9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? 10 Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years. 11 I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain." Obviously, if someone is not even reading or studying the word of God in the first place, then they can't learn about it. This applies to using modern versions as well, unfortunately. Since so many aren't really studying the Bible, they easily get confused about doctrine as they have never really learned/read/studied what Scripture says. Moreover, the modern inaccurate versions they may use (such as the NIV, ESV and so on) throw them off with bad translations and corrupted sources that do not accurately represent what the original word of God says. This can be remedied by using the KJV Bible or another textus receptus-accurate translation in whatever language they speak. Third, there are people who argue over things that are just not relevant at all. There's a lot of that as well. People who have problems simply with being contentious over details that are not explicitly stated in the Bible. This would be those who do not heed the warning given in Titus 3:9, "But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain." Paul again probably had to deal with this a lot in for instance the church of Corinth, as it says in 1 Corinthians 1: "10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. 11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. 12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. 13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?" Again, we are all suceptible to falling into this bad pattern, this sin, at times. All the more reason not to place trust in anyone but God to be our instructor and rely on Him to interpret Scripture for us if we are saved. Like it says in Ephesians 2:18, "For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father." >if there was a single true meaning would God have revealed it to us and made it obvious that "that interpretation" is the right one? It also says in Scripture, "God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble." We see throughout history that the majority of people are lost, and are acting according to their own nature rather than having their actions and understanding being guided by what the word of God says. And yet, we also see that the church has still continued to exist even to the present day through those who have, and they are still around even today. This is thanks to God, of course. You can find them if you know what you are looking for. As Christ promised, He is with us "unto the end of the world." Meaning the gates of hell shall not truly prevail against His church (see Matthew 16:18), even if there are persecutions or tough times. But that doesn't mean the truth will always be in the majority, or the loudest or most prominent voice in the world (if there is such a thing).
>>1795 (cont'd) In modern times, there has been a profound drop in Biblical literacy due to forces of corruptive influences. You have no doubt seen this for yourself. People are actively trying to suppress the Gospel. But it is just as the Lord said would happen in the New Testament. He said "If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." The apostles give us prophecies about "scoffers" arising in the later days and so forth (see 2 Peter 3:3-7, 1 Timothy 4:1-4, 2 Timothy 3:1-9, etc.). So this would just be a fulfillment of that. Hopefully that makes sense.
>>1792 >>1793 >>1794 These are amazing answers to my question thank you very much.
>>1809 I'm glad you were able to see them my friend. I am just gonna be perfectly honest, the reliance of "the other side of this argument" on those that listen to them simply trusting what they say and looking no further, is really unbelievable. There is a whole bunch of people today who were told these blatantly inaccurate things, supposed "facts," by modern supposed "scholars" of Biblical literature, and none of them ever actually looked in the Bible to see these things for themselves; they just kept repeating these claims to each other - despite it being untrue - without ever verifying it. The problem is very few people are actually willing to dig into Scripture to directly confirm things for themselves. People are taught you need to be some kind of academic institute "expert" to read it or figure it out, and those guys in turn blatantly lie to people. They pretend like the Bible doesn't say all these things that it actually does say. Having read the Bible for myself, modern mainstream "biblical scholarship" is absolutely ridiculous and it is a huge scam, maybe the biggest and most bold and brazen scam I have ever encountered in my life. But they prop themselves up today as "the experts" and of course they get university funding (not from a church of course, but from very theologically questionable sources) to put out these "academic scholarship" articles, and they posture themselves as the authoritative experts when they don't know the first thing about even the very basics of the Bible. These days, so many just repeat what their leaders tell them to and tow the line of the "respected" people in the academic field, and modern "scholars" are afraid to ever question the supposed "top scholars," which based on what I have read are perhaps the most wicked of all. The "top scholars" who everyone is afraid to question in academia are just complete cons and verifiable frauds; Basically everything I wrote here they pretend doesn't exist. And this is to the great detriment of the average reader, whose trust they abuse and continue to abuse viciously. They work to turn people away from the truth and lead them down an erroneous dead end path. I personally was misled by them for a long time as well. It took God to turn my life around - after having been misled by people who really are not qualified to be called "scholars." That's just my personal take on where things are today, but I'm glad I was able to answer your question.
>>1826 lol I say this
>>1829 Christianity and Islam do not discriminate on the basis of race, so a christian/muslim woman can lust after BBC so long as it is within the confines of marriage.
don't feed the trolls/spam.
>>1830 Cute, it is sad that so many christians here are racist.

Report/Delete/Moderation Forms

no cookies?