Aberrant Theology At Large

[JohnD]

5 minutes ago, Still Alive said:

I used to listen to Martin a lot. 

Give him another listen.

You'll be amazed by the content you missed or weren't ready to receive until you had more life experience (which is the case with me).

He told it like it is.

 

[other one]

7 minutes ago, Still Alive said:

I formulated a basic theory a few years ago when I realized I agreed with a couple of teachings of Mormonism and Seventh day adventism, and disagreed with the "mainstream Christian church" on those issues. It goes something like this:

These religions glom onto something that really IS incorrect in the mainstream teaching, and when they expose this false teaching to some people, these people come into their congregation, which teaches a ton of nonsense that is given credibility by the one place they ARE more accurate than the mainstream churches. 

that is exactly what Herbert Armstrong did with the World Wide Church of God..

[JohnD]

See, the devils (demon spirits that possessed individuals) IN Jesus day often claimed the truth about Jesus:

We know who you are the Holy One of Israel..

But Jesus shut 'em up.

Why?

Because truth in the mouth of liars lends incidental credibility to the liars.

And the source of truth in those days (the Bible) was in a state of flux until the council of Jamnia and Nicea canonized both testaments.

The effort was to keep the source on God and his prophets at the time.

[Still Alive]

18 hours ago, JohnD said:

Give him another listen.

You'll be amazed by the content you missed or weren't ready to receive until you had more life experience (which is the case with me).

He told it like it is.

 

I still catch him from time to time. Right now I'm more focused on Dr. Michael Heiser, his podcasts (I'm up to 241 out of over 270) and his book, Unseen Realm. He's the guy that really got me turned on to reading all the stuff the writers of the NT had been reading and quoting in the NT from the Septuagint and beyond. Stuff like 1 Enoch.

[Daniel Marsh]

paint brushes are way too wide in this thread.

for one thing the canon of the new testament was defined around 400 AD

The same scholars were those who made copies of the new testament which is the Greek behind ours today.

If they can not be trusted, then there really is no reason to trust the many copies of our Greek, Latin or other translations made by them. 

In short, if we can not trust them to define Church Doctrine, there is no reason to trust our bibles today.

Our Bibles today are products of scholars.   Just as the many copies of the NT are copies of scholars.

Next post deals with the paint brushes. 

 

[Daniel Marsh]

Paint Brushes:   

Groups like Jehovah's Witnesses,  Latter Day Saints,  Christian Science, Scientology are outside the umbrella of Historical Christianity.   They teach false gospels, deny who Jesus is in one way or the other.   JW's denies that Jesus is God.   LDS teaches that There are three Gods, who were once a human that became a god.   Christian Science denies that Sin exists.   Scientology is just weird, made up by a used car salesman.

Catholics are Historical Christians who has some doctrines that are contrary to scripture.  Biggest problem is faith vs works.

Cults like United Pentecostal Church believes in Sabellianism.  That the members of the Trinity is just God wearing masks or are modes.

Most Denominations agrees on major Theology like, the Trinity, Who Jesus is, Salvation by Faith.   Their differences are based on minor Theology. 

All Churches have teachers.   In fact,  God gave us Teachers.   The texts about the Holy Spirit Teaching, bringing to memory, in the Gospels were in context written to the Apostles alone. 

Otherwise, if the Holy Spirit was teaching all of us Christians, then we would fully agree on the meaning of every text in Scripture at all times.  The fact that we are human and disagree proves that none of us can make a claim of being infallible. 

 

 

 

   

 

 

[Tigger56]

On 5/8/2019 at 11:25 AM, JohnD said:

Fuel for the cults and false religions etc. come from the cracks in our own theology.

Since the Roman Catholic bloo9dless (yet hostile) takeover of Christianity (beginning under Roman Emperor Constantine in the 300's CE),

it has become so commonplace to interpret the Word of God according to the traditions of man, it is seldom ever questioned.

A man finds another man about to jump off of a bridge one day, and he tries to talk him out of it.

"Hey, are you a Christian?"

"Yes," is the response.

"Me too. What denomination?"

"Baptist."

"Me too."

Now interested the would be jumper asks, "Norther or Southern Baptist?"

"Southern." 

"Me too."

"Southern Conservative Baptist  Conference, Council of 1879, or Southern Conservative Baptist Conference, Council of 1912?" the first man asked.

"The Conference of 1912," said the man who was about to commit suicide said now disinterested in taking his own life.

"DIE, HERETIC" said the man who came up and pushed him off the bridge.

Funny, but true....

Many accept their traditions within their beliefs without truly proving things for themselves. Once I have proven a truth, I'm not tossed to and fro with every wind of doctrine and I don't have to reinvent the wheel. But I do believe in proving things things and studying. Many believe simply because it was something they were taught by others or by their preacher. There are many people that believe things because the majority does. Whenever the concept of majority is used I always refer the person to Noah and advise the that Noah was right and most of the world was wrong! Thanks for the post and for the humor.