(12-26-2018 10:57 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 09:58 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  The Bible can be interpreted a lot of different ways. When Satan chose to challenge Jesus by quoting scripture during the time he was tempted in the desert, he chose to use a scripture to do it. Jesus responded by quoting another scripture (Don't put God to the Test)

As Christians, we read the scriptures to interpret their meaning. You'll find if you spend time researching things that many of the major Christian denominations interpret small parts of the bible differently than others.

Does that make everyone who interprets a bible verse from 2000 years ago differently than you do Satan?

The highlighted statement is the word of Satan. The bible interprets itself and does so quite clearly on all vital doctrines, particularly salvation. As its says, God is not the author of confusion. Satan and the heart of man are the authors of confusion and lies. Even Christians battle against the flesh.

It was Satan himself who twisted the Word of God to Eve to deceiver her, and twisted the scripture to tempt Christ.

Jesus response each time was "ITS IS WRITTEN", "not it is interpreted".

Its Satan himself who tells man in their heart that the Word of God has many interpretations, its the Word of God and the men of God in the Bible, including Christ Himself who said just the opposite.

Disagreements over doctrine are based on the traditions of men in different denominations, not scripture itself. The Jews had the same problem in the OT and Christ rebuked them for it directly in the Gospels.

Wow. Which denomination are you a part of, out of curiosity?

(12-26-2018 11:40 PM)atsKnight Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 10:57 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 09:58 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  The Bible can be interpreted a lot of different ways. When Satan chose to challenge Jesus by quoting scripture during the time he was tempted in the desert, he chose to use a scripture to do it. Jesus responded by quoting another scripture (Don't put God to the Test)

As Christians, we read the scriptures to interpret their meaning. You'll find if you spend time researching things that many of the major Christian denominations interpret small parts of the bible differently than others.

Does that make everyone who interprets a bible verse from 2000 years ago differently than you do Satan?

The highlighted statement is the word of Satan. The bible interprets itself and does so quite clearly on all vital doctrines, particularly salvation. As its says, God is not the author of confusion. Satan and the heart of man are the authors of confusion and lies. Even Christians battle against the flesh.

It was Satan himself who twisted the Word of God to Eve to deceiver her, and twisted the scripture to tempt Christ.

Jesus response each time was "ITS IS WRITTEN", "not it is interpreted".

Its Satan himself who tells man in their heart that the Word of God has many interpretations, its the Word of God and the men of God in the Bible, including Christ Himself who said just the opposite.

Disagreements over doctrine are based on the traditions of men in different denominations, not scripture itself. The Jews had the same problem in the OT and Christ rebuked them for it directly in the Gospels.

Wow. Which denomination are you a part of, out of curiosity?

None.

I'm a bible believing Christian who fully rejects denominationalism.

Why is that a wow? The bible does not teach denominationalism, and most of the denominational divides in the church are not scriptural based, but based on the traditions of men.

The true church, the actual body of Christ, is scattered throughout many denominations, and many denomination also have sizable populations that are not even saved.

(12-26-2018 11:47 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Why is that a wow?

Message boards can ramp up reactions sometimes, but usually posters don't say other posters are speaking for Satan.

(12-26-2018 11:57 PM)atsKnight Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 11:47 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Why is that a wow?

Message boards can ramp up reactions sometimes, but usually posters don't say other posters are speaking for Satan.

You mistook what I said. He is one of a gazillion people today who make that statement, he hardly invented it. Its a very popular thing to say today because people want to devalue the Word of God so they don't have to study or follow it as much. Even saved Christians can fall into that deception.

Its comes from Satan Himself, who badly wants Christians to devalue the Word of God on some level.

(12-26-2018 11:47 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 11:40 PM)atsKnight Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 10:57 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 09:58 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  The Bible can be interpreted a lot of different ways. When Satan chose to challenge Jesus by quoting scripture during the time he was tempted in the desert, he chose to use a scripture to do it. Jesus responded by quoting another scripture (Don't put God to the Test)

As Christians, we read the scriptures to interpret their meaning. You'll find if you spend time researching things that many of the major Christian denominations interpret small parts of the bible differently than others.

Does that make everyone who interprets a bible verse from 2000 years ago differently than you do Satan?

The highlighted statement is the word of Satan. The bible interprets itself and does so quite clearly on all vital doctrines, particularly salvation. As its says, God is not the author of confusion. Satan and the heart of man are the authors of confusion and lies. Even Christians battle against the flesh.

It was Satan himself who twisted the Word of God to Eve to deceiver her, and twisted the scripture to tempt Christ.

Jesus response each time was "ITS IS WRITTEN", "not it is interpreted".

Its Satan himself who tells man in their heart that the Word of God has many interpretations, its the Word of God and the men of God in the Bible, including Christ Himself who said just the opposite.

Disagreements over doctrine are based on the traditions of men in different denominations, not scripture itself. The Jews had the same problem in the OT and Christ rebuked them for it directly in the Gospels.

Wow. Which denomination are you a part of, out of curiosity?

None.

I'm a bible believing Christian who fully rejects denominationalism.

Why is that a wow? The bible does not teach denominationalism, and most of the denominational divides in the church are not scriptural based, but based on the traditions of men.

The true church, the actual body of Christ, is scattered throughout many denominations, and many denomination also have sizable populations that are not even saved.

Right! But those denominations all have "versions" of the Bible written to support their vain doctrine. Hence my comments in my previous post about the transliterations versus the translations and the need for going back to the oldest translations that we have and fragments of old scrolls and getting thoroughly searched usages of words set in the context of understanding in which they were written as much as we possibly can.

So Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and the surrounding languages of their ancient neighbors are all helpful tools. The last modern translation that was somewhat more reliable was the 1948 Revised Standard Version which didn't have anywhere near the number of political and denominational alterations of word meanings as the current versions. The King James Version had alterations to appease the monarchy. So even it is not fool proof.

(12-27-2018 12:04 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Right! But those denominations all have "versions" of the Bible written to support their vain doctrine. Hence my comments in my previous post about the transliterations versus the translations and the need for going back to the oldest translations that we have and fragments of old scrolls and getting thoroughly searched usages of words set in the context of understanding in which they were written as much as we possibly can.

So Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and the surrounding languages of their ancient neighbors are all helpful tools. The last modern translation that was somewhat more reliable was the 1948 Revised Standard Version which didn't have anywhere near the number of political and denominational alterations of word meanings as the current versions. The King James Version had alterations to appease the monarchy. So even it is not fool proof.

Yep. Virtually none of them are 100% full proof. But the Lord God of course anticipated this and thus made His word very repetitive concerning the key doctrines, repeating them over and over again in multiple books so we would not fall prey to massive errors over a specific version or translation concerning a single verse or passage.

He designed His Word to help us get around the language barriers, and kept some very old copies available in modern times to cross check things.

I think most denominations have verse they based their traditions on, or have an strange "interpretation" based on a single verse, but when you weigh that against the rest of the NT you run into massive problems with that tradition. Such as the idea of a Pope. They use the famous verse of Christ telling Peter on this rock I will build my church, but when you examine everything about the papacy you see it is a massive contradiction to the entire NT and there is no basis for the papacy at all. Did Peter found the church on the day of Pentecost with his sermon? Sure, but he never had authority over the other Apostles and would have rejected everything about the Papacy. Instead the NT clearly tells us PAUL is the Apostle to the gentiles, not Peter. Its Paul who wrote most of the NT to the Gentile churches, and the majority of church doctrines are in those epistles. A lot of denominations today almost completely ignore them.

Indeed even calling another man "Holy Father" is a blasphemy against the Father in Heaven. Christ said specifically to NEVER call another man a Holy Father. We have ONE holy Father, and He is in heaven.

(12-27-2018 12:13 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 12:04 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Right! But those denominations all have "versions" of the Bible written to support their vain doctrine. Hence my comments in my previous post about the transliterations versus the translations and the need for going back to the oldest translations that we have and fragments of old scrolls and getting thoroughly searched usages of words set in the context of understanding in which they were written as much as we possibly can.

So Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and the surrounding languages of their ancient neighbors are all helpful tools. The last modern translation that was somewhat more reliable was the 1948 Revised Standard Version which didn't have anywhere near the number of political and denominational alterations of word meanings as the current versions. The King James Version had alterations to appease the monarchy. So even it is not fool proof.

Yep. Virtually none of them are 100% full proof. But the Lord God of course anticipated this and thus made His word very repetitive concerning the key doctrines, repeating them over and over again in multiple books so we would not fall prey to massive errors over a specific version or translation concerning a single verse or passage.

He designed His Word to help us get around the language barriers, and kept some very old copies available in modern times to cross check things.

I think most denominations have verse they based their traditions on, or have an strange "interpretation" based on a single verse, but when you weigh that against the rest of the NT you run into massive problems with that tradition. Such as the idea of a Pope. They use the famous verse of Christ telling Peter on this rock I will build my church, but when you examine everything about the papacy you see it is a massive contradiction to the entire NT and there is no basis for the papacy at all. Did Peter found the church on the day of Pentecost with his sermon? Sure, but he never had authority over the other Apostles and would have rejected everything about the Papacy. Instead the NT clearly tells us PAUL is the Apostles to the gentiles, not Peter.

Athanasius was one of the early representatives of the Emperor Constantine who attended the council at Nicaea. The Emperor mandated public meeting places so he could spy on the activities of Christians. He established rank to be designated by stoles in the manner of the Roman senators. He used Roman Senatorial precedent to order the worship including the reading of 3 separate scriptures. He introduced the procession of the light of Rome into the sanctuary and out of it into the world patterned after the Senate, and the presentation of the gifts to the altar like the presentation of the gifts to the Emperor's throne. He appropriated the tithes for his military campaigns. Practically everything that is practiced in denominational worship today came from Rome, or is an alteration of Roman rite.

None of it has a thing to do with early church worship which was mostly in homes.

The creeds were written by those paid by Rome to be in attendance at the councils, although they were based loosely in efforts to fight ancient heresies. There is some sound doctrine to be found in them, but they are hardly canonical.

Most folks in churches today are there for "fellowship" which really amounts to social life. They enjoy the message but couldn't tell you if it was Biblically based or not. And if it was a great Sermon they might remember it the next day. A good sermon is forgotten after lunch on Sunday. And a lousy sermon is a good opportunity for a nap. They expect the clergy to do the actual work of the church which violates the Great Commission. They drop their dues in the plate to keep the church open and the clergy paid and few are concerned about mission, let alone the widows, orphans, poor, sick, and the sojourner within their gates.

There is not a denominational church that gives more than 5 cents out of every dollar given to actual ministry to the people listed above. The denomination and clergy and building fund claims the rest. Mission money goes to pay the salary, insurance, and provide housing for the missionaries.

Sine Die.

(12-27-2018 12:35 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 12:13 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 12:04 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Right! But those denominations all have "versions" of the Bible written to support their vain doctrine. Hence my comments in my previous post about the transliterations versus the translations and the need for going back to the oldest translations that we have and fragments of old scrolls and getting thoroughly searched usages of words set in the context of understanding in which they were written as much as we possibly can.

So Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, and the surrounding languages of their ancient neighbors are all helpful tools. The last modern translation that was somewhat more reliable was the 1948 Revised Standard Version which didn't have anywhere near the number of political and denominational alterations of word meanings as the current versions. The King James Version had alterations to appease the monarchy. So even it is not fool proof.

Yep. Virtually none of them are 100% full proof. But the Lord God of course anticipated this and thus made His word very repetitive concerning the key doctrines, repeating them over and over again in multiple books so we would not fall prey to massive errors over a specific version or translation concerning a single verse or passage.

He designed His Word to help us get around the language barriers, and kept some very old copies available in modern times to cross check things.

I think most denominations have verse they based their traditions on, or have an strange "interpretation" based on a single verse, but when you weigh that against the rest of the NT you run into massive problems with that tradition. Such as the idea of a Pope. They use the famous verse of Christ telling Peter on this rock I will build my church, but when you examine everything about the papacy you see it is a massive contradiction to the entire NT and there is no basis for the papacy at all. Did Peter found the church on the day of Pentecost with his sermon? Sure, but he never had authority over the other Apostles and would have rejected everything about the Papacy. Instead the NT clearly tells us PAUL is the Apostles to the gentiles, not Peter.

Athanasius was one of the early representatives of the Emperor Constantine who attended the council at Nicaea. The Emperor mandated public meeting places so he could spy on the activities of Christians. He established rank to be designated by stoles in the manner of the Roman senators. He used Roman Senatorial precedent to order the worship including the reading of 3 separate scriptures. He introduced the procession of the light of Rome into the sanctuary and out of it into the world patterned after the Senate, and the presentation of the gifts to the altar like the presentation of the gifts to the Emperor's throne. He appropriated the tithes for his military campaigns. Practically everything that is practiced in denominational worship today came from Rome, or is an alteration of Roman rite.

None of it has a thing to do with early church worship which was mostly in homes.

The creeds were written by those paid by Rome to be in attendance at the councils, although they were based loosely in efforts to fight ancient heresies. There is some sound doctrine to be found in them, but they are hardly canonical.

Most folks in churches today are there for "fellowship" which really amounts to social life. They enjoy the message but couldn't tell you if it was Biblically based or not. And if it was a great Sermon they might remember it the next day. A good sermon is forgotten after lunch on Sunday. And a lousy sermon is a good opportunity for a nap. They expect the clergy to do the actual work of the church which violates the Great Commission. They drop their dues in the plate to keep the church open and the clergy paid and few are concerned about mission, let alone the widows, orphans, poor, sick, and the sojourner within their gates.

There is not a denominational church that gives more than 5 cents out of every dollar given to actual ministry to the people listed above. The denomination and clergy and building fund claims the rest. Mission money goes to pay the salary, insurance, and provide housing for the missionaries.

Sine Die.

So true and so frustrating for those who are bible based believers as Christ, the Apostles and the early church were. What most Christians in America today think of as "church" did not even exists in the early church.

I am absolutely blown away at how little of the Word many Christians today know. I was guilty of the same thing for many years though, because I was not really saved and thought I could not understand the bible beyond some sections of the 4 Gospels. Its the Holy Spirit who opens up our understanding, but He only does that when we TRULY humbly ourselves to Him, ask Him with a pure heart for understanding, and then apply ourselves with serious Bible study and teaching.

(12-26-2018 10:57 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 09:58 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  The Bible can be interpreted a lot of different ways. When Satan chose to challenge Jesus by quoting scripture during the time he was tempted in the desert, he chose to use a scripture to do it. Jesus responded by quoting another scripture (Don't put God to the Test)

As Christians, we read the scriptures to interpret their meaning. You'll find if you spend time researching things that many of the major Christian denominations interpret small parts of the bible differently than others.

Does that make everyone who interprets a bible verse from 2000 years ago differently than you do Satan?

The highlighted statement is the word of Satan. The bible interprets itself and does so quite clearly on all vital doctrines, particularly salvation. As its says, God is not the author of confusion. Satan and the heart of man are the authors of confusion and lies. Even Christians battle against the flesh.

It was Satan himself who twisted the Word of God to Eve to deceiver her, and twisted the scripture to tempt Christ.

Jesus response each time was "ITS IS WRITTEN", "not it is interpreted".

Its Satan himself who tells man in their heart that the Word of God has many interpretations, its the Word of God and the men of God in the Bible, including Christ Himself who said just the opposite.

Disagreements over doctrine are based on the traditions of men in different denominations, not scripture itself. The Jews had the same problem in the OT and Christ rebuked them for it directly in the Gospels.

Ahh yes, Satan. Reminds me of college days when my church group all decided we were on the "Bus to hell" and decided who had which role on the bus. I was supposed to be tied to the back. But driver seemed like a pretty cool role as well

Since we're on the subject of Satan, you realize you just proved my point for me...right? Every denomination has biblical verses that it bases its foundation for beliefs on. Their belief is what they INTERPRET that scripture to mean.

I have literally seen two churches take the same scripture and make it out to mean two different things. Obviously, as you have insisted, both of those churches are obviously following the word of satan… Should I go warn them on their eternal damnation, or should they just find out when they get there? Surprise!

Hell, when James was king of England, he had such a wide set of beliefs that he literally created a version of the bible that's tailored to what he thought. In fact, basically every single version of the bible today has been written out in the best attempt to understand what it says. Obviously it was not written in English.

(12-26-2018 11:57 PM)atsKnight Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 11:47 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Why is that a wow?

Message boards can ramp up reactions sometimes, but usually posters don't say other posters are speaking for Satan.

Nah. It's fun. It's not the first time. I've been told I'm going to hell so many times in my life its not even funny.

We Christians are a funny group. We place value on a set of beliefs that we have based on what the bible says. We then preach a message based on those beliefs, and then get frustrated when we find someone who doesn't believe the same thing we do, and fail miserably at the concept of practicing what we preach.

Sorry, I'm ranting. It feels like this happens to me every Christmas. Too much time around family.

(12-27-2018 01:51 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 10:57 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 09:58 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  The Bible can be interpreted a lot of different ways. When Satan chose to challenge Jesus by quoting scripture during the time he was tempted in the desert, he chose to use a scripture to do it. Jesus responded by quoting another scripture (Don't put God to the Test)

As Christians, we read the scriptures to interpret their meaning. You'll find if you spend time researching things that many of the major Christian denominations interpret small parts of the bible differently than others.

Does that make everyone who interprets a bible verse from 2000 years ago differently than you do Satan?

The highlighted statement is the word of Satan. The bible interprets itself and does so quite clearly on all vital doctrines, particularly salvation. As its says, God is not the author of confusion. Satan and the heart of man are the authors of confusion and lies. Even Christians battle against the flesh.

It was Satan himself who twisted the Word of God to Eve to deceiver her, and twisted the scripture to tempt Christ.

Jesus response each time was "ITS IS WRITTEN", "not it is interpreted".

Its Satan himself who tells man in their heart that the Word of God has many interpretations, its the Word of God and the men of God in the Bible, including Christ Himself who said just the opposite.

Disagreements over doctrine are based on the traditions of men in different denominations, not scripture itself. The Jews had the same problem in the OT and Christ rebuked them for it directly in the Gospels.

Ahh yes, Satan. Reminds me of college days when my church group all decided we were on the "Bus to hell" and decided who had which role on the bus. I was supposed to be tied to the back. But driver seemed like a pretty cool role as well

Since we're on the subject of Satan, you realize you just proved my point for me...right? Every denomination has biblical verses that it bases its foundation for beliefs on. Their belief is what they INTERPRET that scripture to mean.

I have literally seen two churches take the same scripture and make it out to mean two different things. Obviously, as you have insisted, both of those churches are obviously following the word of satan… Should I go warn them on their eternal damnation, or should they just find out when they get there? Surprise!

Hell, when James was king of England, he had such a wide set of beliefs that he literally created a version of the bible that's tailored to what he thought. In fact, basically every single version of the bible today has been written out in the best attempt to understand what it says. Obviously it was not written in English.

If you have any sincerity of belief you should search these things out for yourself. They are available in the stacks and sometimes in the archives of theological libraries. Lexicons in Hebrew and Greek can help those who don't read the languages. Then to place it all into context you should refresh you historical knowledge of the time frames involved. A brief study of Roman Senatorial rites and the Emperors role in public ceremony might be revealing as well. A study of Constantine is recommended as well.

Then to compare early church practices which were a lot more informal and familial with contemporary worship in light of what you learned from the Roman rites of court would be a lot easier to do. Then the gulf between the two and when worship changed would be evident, as well as why it changed and how it devolved or evolved from there depending upon your perspective.

Finally I would recommend getting a budgetary layout from each modern denomination and where charity is provided ask for an individual breakdown of those aspects of the budget and subtract building, utilities, salaries, insurance, and denominational materials from that budget and see how much actually makes it to the needy.

Then perhaps you wouldn't be so condescending to Eric while believing firmly in whatever misconception you may have about the hypocrisy of, or practice of, the modern church and its denominations. What he is trying to speak about are actual discrepancies between what early texts of the Bible said, versus what has been redacted into modern transliterations, and what, through the doctrinal positions of denominations, has altered the instruction of the early texts.

I think you might find such an undertaking to be quite revelatory as to why indeed both churches could take opposite positions and both be errant in doing so, and I believe you might find that a simpler, but truthful understanding, can be both gracious and transformative and make a lot more sense than what passes for religion today.

However if all you read are the social guru pseudo intellectual feel good books of pop psychology passing themselves off as "Christian" then you won't get very far. It's the dusty old books in the archive and microfiche that contain the least politicized, least altered, and most informative study information. It neither teaches hate, nor does it acquiesce to the political whims and socially popular lies of the modern era.

(12-27-2018 02:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 01:51 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 10:57 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 09:58 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  The Bible can be interpreted a lot of different ways. When Satan chose to challenge Jesus by quoting scripture during the time he was tempted in the desert, he chose to use a scripture to do it. Jesus responded by quoting another scripture (Don't put God to the Test)

As Christians, we read the scriptures to interpret their meaning. You'll find if you spend time researching things that many of the major Christian denominations interpret small parts of the bible differently than others.

Does that make everyone who interprets a bible verse from 2000 years ago differently than you do Satan?

The highlighted statement is the word of Satan. The bible interprets itself and does so quite clearly on all vital doctrines, particularly salvation. As its says, God is not the author of confusion. Satan and the heart of man are the authors of confusion and lies. Even Christians battle against the flesh.

It was Satan himself who twisted the Word of God to Eve to deceiver her, and twisted the scripture to tempt Christ.

Jesus response each time was "ITS IS WRITTEN", "not it is interpreted".

Its Satan himself who tells man in their heart that the Word of God has many interpretations, its the Word of God and the men of God in the Bible, including Christ Himself who said just the opposite.

Disagreements over doctrine are based on the traditions of men in different denominations, not scripture itself. The Jews had the same problem in the OT and Christ rebuked them for it directly in the Gospels.

Ahh yes, Satan. Reminds me of college days when my church group all decided we were on the "Bus to hell" and decided who had which role on the bus. I was supposed to be tied to the back. But driver seemed like a pretty cool role as well

Since we're on the subject of Satan, you realize you just proved my point for me...right? Every denomination has biblical verses that it bases its foundation for beliefs on. Their belief is what they INTERPRET that scripture to mean.

I have literally seen two churches take the same scripture and make it out to mean two different things. Obviously, as you have insisted, both of those churches are obviously following the word of satan… Should I go warn them on their eternal damnation, or should they just find out when they get there? Surprise!

Hell, when James was king of England, he had such a wide set of beliefs that he literally created a version of the bible that's tailored to what he thought. In fact, basically every single version of the bible today has been written out in the best attempt to understand what it says. Obviously it was not written in English.

If you have any sincerity of belief you should search these things out for yourself. They are available in the stacks and sometimes in the archives of theological libraries. Lexicons in Hebrew and Greek can help those who don't read the languages. Then to place it all into context you should refresh you historical knowledge of the time frames involved. A brief study of Roman Senatorial rites and the Emperors role in public ceremony might be revealing as well. A study of Constantine is recommended as well.

Then to compare early church practices which were a lot more informal and familial with contemporary worship in light of what you learned from the Roman rites of court would be a lot easier to do. Then the gulf between the two and when worship changed would be evident, as well as why it changed and how it devolved or evolved from there depending upon your perspective.

Finally I would recommend getting a budgetary layout from each modern denomination and where charity is provided ask for an individual breakdown of those aspects of the budget and subtract building, utilities, salaries, insurance, and denominational materials from that budget and see how much actually makes it to the needy.

Then perhaps you wouldn't be so condescending to Eric while believing firmly in whatever misconception you may have about the hypocrisy of, or practice of, the modern church and its denominations. What he is trying to speak about are actual discrepancies between what early texts of the Bible said, versus what has been redacted into modern transliterations, and what, through the doctrinal positions of denominations, has altered the instruction of the early texts.

I think you might find such an undertaking to be quite revelatory as to why indeed both churches could take opposite positions and both be errant in doing so, and I believe you might find that a simpler, but truthful understanding, can be both gracious and transformative and make a lot more sense than what passes for religion today.

However if all you read are the social guru pseudo intellectual feel good books of pop psychology passing themselves off as "Christian" then you won't get very far. It's the dusty old books in the archive and microfiche that contain the least politicized, least altered, and most informative study information. It neither teaches hate, nor does it acquiesce to the political whims and socially popular lies of the modern era.

I'm not condescending. I'm being me. Simply put, we believe entirely different things. I come from a family of ministers. My belief system is shaped through that.

I don't spend time obsessing over the bible, nor do I take every word it says literally. The bible is a series of texts written over 2000 years ago. The goal is to let Christ in to your life and let him guide you where he wants you to go. I don't honestly believe that God cares if we all believe slightly different things, or if we don't follow every word the bible says as law. Be a tough life to live if we did.

(12-27-2018 02:01 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 11:57 PM)atsKnight Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 11:47 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Why is that a wow?

Message boards can ramp up reactions sometimes, but usually posters don't say other posters are speaking for Satan.

Nah. It's fun. It's not the first time. I've been told I'm going to hell so many times in my life its not even funny.

We Christians are a funny group. We place value on a set of beliefs that we have based on what the bible says. We then preach a message based on those beliefs, and then get frustrated when we find someone who doesn't believe the same thing we do, and fail miserably at the concept of practicing what we preach.

Sorry, I'm ranting. It feels like this happens to me every Christmas. Too much time around family.

Well I clearly did not say you were going to hell, and even clarified that I was not calling you Satan, simple repeating a lie Satan has deceived many of us with, even us Christians.

Christians can absolutely speak or believe a lie from Satan, its a very easy thing to do.

(12-27-2018 02:30 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 02:01 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 11:57 PM)atsKnight Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 11:47 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Why is that a wow?

Message boards can ramp up reactions sometimes, but usually posters don't say other posters are speaking for Satan.

Nah. It's fun. It's not the first time. I've been told I'm going to hell so many times in my life its not even funny.

We Christians are a funny group. We place value on a set of beliefs that we have based on what the bible says. We then preach a message based on those beliefs, and then get frustrated when we find someone who doesn't believe the same thing we do, and fail miserably at the concept of practicing what we preach.

Sorry, I'm ranting. It feels like this happens to me every Christmas. Too much time around family.

Well I clearly did not say you were going to hell, and even clarified that I was not calling you Satan, simple repeating a lie Satan has deceived many of us with, even us Christians.

Christians can absolutely speak or believe a lie from Satan, its a very easy thing to do.

But that's the thing Eric. I don't use Satan regularly in conversations. I believe in the existence of a devil figure but you'll almost never hear me ever reference the devil unless it comes from one of the few scriptures in which one is mentioned.

You'll never hear me use the phrase "listening to the devil" or "following Satan's lies" because I don't follow that teaching at all.

(12-27-2018 02:24 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 02:15 AM)JRsec Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 01:51 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 10:57 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(12-26-2018 09:58 PM)chiefsfan Wrote:  The Bible can be interpreted a lot of different ways. When Satan chose to challenge Jesus by quoting scripture during the time he was tempted in the desert, he chose to use a scripture to do it. Jesus responded by quoting another scripture (Don't put God to the Test)

As Christians, we read the scriptures to interpret their meaning. You'll find if you spend time researching things that many of the major Christian denominations interpret small parts of the bible differently than others.

Does that make everyone who interprets a bible verse from 2000 years ago differently than you do Satan?

The highlighted statement is the word of Satan. The bible interprets itself and does so quite clearly on all vital doctrines, particularly salvation. As its says, God is not the author of confusion. Satan and the heart of man are the authors of confusion and lies. Even Christians battle against the flesh.

It was Satan himself who twisted the Word of God to Eve to deceiver her, and twisted the scripture to tempt Christ.

Jesus response each time was "ITS IS WRITTEN", "not it is interpreted".

Its Satan himself who tells man in their heart that the Word of God has many interpretations, its the Word of God and the men of God in the Bible, including Christ Himself who said just the opposite.

Disagreements over doctrine are based on the traditions of men in different denominations, not scripture itself. The Jews had the same problem in the OT and Christ rebuked them for it directly in the Gospels.

Ahh yes, Satan. Reminds me of college days when my church group all decided we were on the "Bus to hell" and decided who had which role on the bus. I was supposed to be tied to the back. But driver seemed like a pretty cool role as well

Since we're on the subject of Satan, you realize you just proved my point for me...right? Every denomination has biblical verses that it bases its foundation for beliefs on. Their belief is what they INTERPRET that scripture to mean.

I have literally seen two churches take the same scripture and make it out to mean two different things. Obviously, as you have insisted, both of those churches are obviously following the word of satan… Should I go warn them on their eternal damnation, or should they just find out when they get there? Surprise!

Hell, when James was king of England, he had such a wide set of beliefs that he literally created a version of the bible that's tailored to what he thought. In fact, basically every single version of the bible today has been written out in the best attempt to understand what it says. Obviously it was not written in English.

If you have any sincerity of belief you should search these things out for yourself. They are available in the stacks and sometimes in the archives of theological libraries. Lexicons in Hebrew and Greek can help those who don't read the languages. Then to place it all into context you should refresh you historical knowledge of the time frames involved. A brief study of Roman Senatorial rites and the Emperors role in public ceremony might be revealing as well. A study of Constantine is recommended as well.

Then to compare early church practices which were a lot more informal and familial with contemporary worship in light of what you learned from the Roman rites of court would be a lot easier to do. Then the gulf between the two and when worship changed would be evident, as well as why it changed and how it devolved or evolved from there depending upon your perspective.

Finally I would recommend getting a budgetary layout from each modern denomination and where charity is provided ask for an individual breakdown of those aspects of the budget and subtract building, utilities, salaries, insurance, and denominational materials from that budget and see how much actually makes it to the needy.

Then perhaps you wouldn't be so condescending to Eric while believing firmly in whatever misconception you may have about the hypocrisy of, or practice of, the modern church and its denominations. What he is trying to speak about are actual discrepancies between what early texts of the Bible said, versus what has been redacted into modern transliterations, and what, through the doctrinal positions of denominations, has altered the instruction of the early texts.

I think you might find such an undertaking to be quite revelatory as to why indeed both churches could take opposite positions and both be errant in doing so, and I believe you might find that a simpler, but truthful understanding, can be both gracious and transformative and make a lot more sense than what passes for religion today.

However if all you read are the social guru pseudo intellectual feel good books of pop psychology passing themselves off as "Christian" then you won't get very far. It's the dusty old books in the archive and microfiche that contain the least politicized, least altered, and most informative study information. It neither teaches hate, nor does it acquiesce to the political whims and socially popular lies of the modern era.

I'm not condescending. I'm being me. Simply put, we believe entirely different things. I come from a family of ministers. My belief system is shaped through that.

I don't spend time obsessing over the bible, nor do I take every word it says literally. The bible is a series of texts written over 2000 years ago. The goal is to let Christ in to your life and let him guide you where he wants you to go. I don't honestly believe that God cares if we all believe slightly different things, or if we don't follow every word the bible says as law. Be a tough life to live if we did.

That's your prerogative. I wasn't asking you to abandon your beliefs, just to test them critically with a variety of disciplines before you so quickly dismiss the beliefs of others.

I agree that the call of each is different. I once heard the body of believers described as a tool box for the Holy Spirit and was told that most Christians restrict themselves to being just two of those tools, a wrench or a screwdriver. The wrench puts their arm around someone and gently turns them in the right direction until they've tightened up a bit. The screwdriver bears down on people. It was said that this works only so far because most people are either nuts, or their screw is loose. If you bear down on someone who is a nut it dulls your blade and scars their head. If you apply a wrench to someone who has a screw loose you accomplish little.

The reality is that everyone has a different issue and it takes the right tool to help. Our job is to listen well enough to find out who (which tool) to recommend.

So I agree that as many approaches are needed as there are individuals and their issues.

But I also know that there are many many stumbling blocks erected by the various churches when it comes to reaching people and that many of those trace their roots back to the corruption of the early church.

After all, we aren't saved by ritual, we aren't saved by denominations, and we aren't saved by our works and we aren't saved by pedigree. And anything that gets in the way of actually adhering to the teachings of Christ misses the mark. We are saved only by the grace of Jesus. That doesn't make us perfect but it puts us on the path to conforming to Christ.

What I was inviting was a testing of what you hold dear. It is enlightening for everyone, self included, to do so.

(12-27-2018 01:51 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Ahh yes, Satan. Reminds me of college days when my church group all decided we were on the "Bus to hell" and decided who had which role on the bus. I was supposed to be tied to the back. But driver seemed like a pretty cool role as well

Since we're on the subject of Satan, you realize you just proved my point for me...right? Every denomination has biblical verses that it bases its foundation for beliefs on. Their belief is what they INTERPRET that scripture to mean.

I have literally seen two churches take the same scripture and make it out to mean two different things. Obviously, as you have insisted, both of those churches are obviously following the word of satan… Should I go warn them on their eternal damnation, or should they just find out when they get there? Surprise!

Hell, when James was king of England, he had such a wide set of beliefs that he literally created a version of the bible that's tailored to what he thought. In fact, basically every single version of the bible today has been written out in the best attempt to understand what it says. Obviously it was not written in English.

I understand exactly the point you were trying to make, I said the same thing for many years before I finally took it upon myself to read the scripture firsthand and see what they said for myself.

Its a trap we fall into that allows us to say "whats the point?" when it comes to bible based doctrine. Since denominations can be all over the place, how can I know what to believe anyway. What you are not seeing is that is exactly what the enemy (Satan) wants us to think. That is why he has tried so hard to divide up the church into so many denominations and flood them with the traditions of men over actual scripture.

Just because someone points to a verse and says "it means this" does not mean you should believe it. In fact the Bible itself tells us as individuals to search the scriptures out to see of those things be true.

If you ever decide to get serious about studying the Scripture and finding out what they say for yourself, you are going to find that it is much easier to see the error of denominational teaching verses what the bibel actually teaches. Its like the example I gave about the papacy earlier, they have a verse they point to and base it on, but when you read the entire NT its because so obvious they are in error and no such thing is taught in the Bible.

I think most people who decide to step out of denominational chains and seek what the bible actually says for themselves are almost always blown away at how clear the key doctrines are, and how easy it is to see the man made traditions over what is actually written in scripture.

But its much easier just to throw your hands up in the air, accept defeat and just tell yourself its not worth it because of so many divisions in the churches. Reading the Word of God firsthand really convicts us and exposes our own sin, and that is a difficult things for EVERYONE to face, and Satan knows this and does not want you reading it and wants you to "give up" concerning reading and understanding the bible. HE badly wants you to be ignorant of what the Word of God says, and wants you to be a slave to man made tradition and denominationalism over the actual Word of God.

I fell into the same trap for many, many years. But I am here to tell you its a lie strait from the father of lies, and you absolutely can read and understand the scripture for yourself, and it can change your life eternally in way you do not even yet perceive. And you don't necessarily have to leave your current church to do that. In fact by becoming a serious bible student, you can have a very positive impact on the people in your current church.

(12-27-2018 02:39 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  But that's the thing Eric. I don't use Satan regularly in conversations. I believe in the existence of a devil figure but you'll almost never hear me ever reference the devil unless it comes from one of the few scriptures in which one is mentioned.

You'll never hear me use the phrase "listening to the devil" or "following Satan's lies" because I don't follow that teaching at all.

Well I don't know why you would run from such a thing. Was Jesus scared to speak of Satan in that context? Was Paul? Was Peter? Were any of the church fathers? They spoke quite often and quite openly about it throughout the NT.

The enemy is quite real, and we are in a spiritual battle, and we don't do ourselves or others a favor by running former or pretending he does not exist or he is not working directly against us and the church.

You said you come from a line of preacher/ministers and your beliefs come from that, and I appreciate that and understand. But the bible clearly tells us our beliefs should come from the Word of God, not the word of men.

That's not a knock on anyone in your family or their understanding of the bible, its just a basic understanding the bible gives us, that the Word of God should be the basis of our understanding and beliefs. Other men can help guide us, but they final authority and say should be measured and tested against scripture, not tradition or family.

(12-27-2018 02:50 AM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(12-27-2018 01:51 AM)chiefsfan Wrote:  Ahh yes, Satan. Reminds me of college days when my church group all decided we were on the "Bus to hell" and decided who had which role on the bus. I was supposed to be tied to the back. But driver seemed like a pretty cool role as well

Since we're on the subject of Satan, you realize you just proved my point for me...right? Every denomination has biblical verses that it bases its foundation for beliefs on. Their belief is what they INTERPRET that scripture to mean.

I have literally seen two churches take the same scripture and make it out to mean two different things. Obviously, as you have insisted, both of those churches are obviously following the word of satan… Should I go warn them on their eternal damnation, or should they just find out when they get there? Surprise!

Hell, when James was king of England, he had such a wide set of beliefs that he literally created a version of the bible that's tailored to what he thought. In fact, basically every single version of the bible today has been written out in the best attempt to understand what it says. Obviously it was not written in English.

I understand exactly the point you were trying to make, I said the same thing for many years before I finally took it upon myself to read the scripture firsthand and see what they said for myself.

Its a trap we fall into that allows us to say "whats the point?" when it comes to bible based doctrine. Since denominations can be all over the place, how can I know what to believe anyway. What you are not seeing is that is exactly what the enemy (Satan) wants us to think. That is why he has tried so hard to divide up the church into so many denominations and flood them with the traditions of men over actual scripture.

Just because someone points to a verse and says "it means this" does not mean you should believe it. In fact the Bible itself tells us as individuals to search the scriptures out to see of those things be true.

If you ever decide to get serious about studying the Scripture and finding out what they say for yourself, you are going to find that it is much easier to see the error of denominational teaching verses what the bibel actually teaches. Its like the example I gave about the papacy earlier, they have a verse they point to and base it one, but when you read the entire NT its because so obvious they are in error and no such thing is taught in the Bible.

I think most people who decide to step out of denominational chains and seek what the bible actually says for themselves are almost always blown away at how clear the key doctrines are, and how easy it is to see the man made traditions over what is actually written in scripture.

But its much easier just to throw your hands up in the air, accept defeat and just tell yourself its not with it because of so many divisions in the churches. Reading the Word of God firsthand really convicts us and exposes our own sin, and that is a difficult things for EVERYONE to face, and Satan knows this and does not want you reading it and wants you to "give up" concerning reading and understanding the bible. HE badly wants you to be ignorant of what the Word of God says, and wants you to be a slave to man made transition and denominationalism over the actual Word of God.

I fell into the same trap for many, many years. But I am here to tell you its a lie strait from the father of lies, and you absolutely can read and understand the scripture for yourself, and it can change your life eternally in way you do not even yet perceive. And you don't necessarily have to leave your current church to do that. In fact by becoming a serious bible student, you can have a very positive impact on the people in your current church.

Eric the best scriptural reference to this is the Tower of Babel. Humanity lost its common language due to individual pride. The same may be said of denominations. Each insisting they know how and why God does what God does and in their own pride of assumed knowledge they confuse the world until nobody can understand what's being said. Satan has been described as the author of confusion. I see it in religions. I see it in denominations. I see it in our culture. And I confront it every day in my life. Language, the meaning of individual words, and the intentions of others are all confused to the point of making the average person just want to withdraw from the constant conflict. But unfortunately the only way out of confusion is by listening and never tiring of explaining, and by continuing to learn.

Proverbs 2:1-6
1 My son, if you receive my words, And treasure my commands within you,
2 So that you incline your ear to wisdom,
And apply your heart to understanding;
3 Yes, if you cry out for discernment,
And lift up your voice for understanding,
4 If you seek her as silver,
And search for her as for hidden treasures;
5 Then you will understand the fear of the Lord,
And find the knowledge of God.
6 For the Lord gives wisdom;
From His mouth come knowledge and understanding;


James 1:5-8
5 If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him. 6 But let him ask in faith, with no doubting, for he who doubts is like a wave of the sea driven and tossed by the wind. 7 For let not that man suppose that he will receive anything from the Lord; 8 he is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways.

(12-27-2018 03:00 AM)JRsec Wrote:  Eric the best scriptural reference to this is the Tower of Babel. Humanity lost its common language due to individual pride. The same may be said of denominations. Each insisting they know how and why God does what God does and in their own pride of assumed knowledge they confuse the world until nobody can understand what's being said. Satan has been described as the author of confusion. I see it in religions. I see it in denominations. I see it in our culture. And I confront it every day in my life. Language, the meaning of individual words, and the intentions of others are all confused to the point of making the average person just want to withdraw from the constant conflict. But unfortunately the only way out of confusion is by listening and never tiring of explaining, and by continuing to learn.

AMEN!