Churches Hiding the Truth

a reply to: OperationBlackRose

Nope every law ever written down came from men.
It was easy to enforce these laws when telling gullible superstitious people these because they did not know better.
Sure these laws may be good but don't try and tell me that they came from God.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: OperationBlackRose
If you are addressing the God described in the Bible, then you are addressing the right God (from a Biblical viewpoint).
We can be sure that he is listening to us, because he knows what is in our minds, so he knows what we mean.
Are we not told that the Spirit speaks on our behalf?
Our God does not care whether we say Jesus with a hard "J" (in Anglo-Saxon countries), Jesus with a soft "J" (in Hispanic countries), or whether people who are not natural Aramaic speakers try to get their tongues round the Aramaic name.
If he knows our thoughts, he is not going to be put off by a variation in sounds.

If you are saying that 'your heart is all that matters', then what do you say about Jeremiah 17:9

"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?"

a reply to: OperationBlackRose

The secret of all secrets is baptism as ritual, but not revealed as actual rebirth. Ordinances have root meaning. The bread is the body made from seed / DNA and the cup is the mother's womb. I can tell yo and it won't matter. Blindness is not a function of the church hiding anything. It is a function of the Son hiding it from us. Delusion comes from the top down.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: OperationBlackRose

Nope every law ever written down came from men.
It was easy to enforce these laws when telling gullible superstitious people these because they did not know better.
Sure these laws may be good but don't try and tell me that they came from God.

Just wondering, are you a believer in the bible, or even God?

originally posted by: OperationBlackRose
Most of the Laws in the Torah was given by God. And in your comment about "Audience of their era", why then did God say 'this is a law ever binding' and 'this is a law throughout all generations', or 'a law until the end of time'?

Did God say those laws to you personaly or did you read them in a written book ?
Who wrote the book ? Who was in charge of the transmission and integrity of the book until now ?

originally posted by: OperationBlackRose
a reply to: Lazarus Short

What truth about Satan and Hell are you revering to?

The church uses Satan as a boogeyman - the truth is that a lot of Scripture has been mis-applied to Satan, and he really is not God's rival, just a part of the creation. God keeps him on a short leash.

Early in Genesis, we see that God made the Heavens and the Earth, but there is no mention of Him making Hell. If you look with an unbiased mind, you will see that the evidence for such a place is VERY scanty, not enough IMHO, to base a doctrine on. My researches indicate that Hell, as we "know" it, comes from pagan sources and fiction (Dante, Milton, Mary Baxter, etc).

a reply to: OperationBlackRose
The answer to Jeremiah's question is that only God can know it.
Therefore God's understanding of the fact that you are addressing him does not depend on getting the exact sounds right.
It is a mistake to get over-legalistic about these things.

a reply to: OperationBlackRose

Instead of being concerned with a name or the power of the correct pronunciation of a name…

how about the message?

The church is there to distract true seekers, people that come their for the first time are hoodwinked into believing in the church and turned away from the spirit. Jesus rebuked the church all the time…

link

originally posted by: OperationBlackRose
a reply to: kelbtalfenek

You are right, I am just afraid of scoffers turning this thread into n scoffing show

Understood. However an intelligent discussion CAN take place in these forums, I've seen it happen.

Already posted elsewhere on the forum recently :

Crucifixus est Dei Filius, non pudet, quia pudendum est;
et mortuus est Dei Filius, prorsus credibile est, quia ineptum est;
et sepultus resurrexit, certum est, quia impossibile.

The Son of God was crucified: there is no shame, because it is shameful.
And the Son of God died: it is wholly credible, because it is absurd.
And, buried, He resurrected: it is certain, because impossible."

— (De Carne Christi V, 4) Tertullian

Considering the author, it's an interesting perspective on Christianity.

a reply to: OperationBlackRose
OP. I don't know where you've been getting your teaching from, but you need to go back to the bible, and study it for yourself, "prayerfully". There are some very knowledgeable atheists on ATS, but you have at least one mature and grounded Christian in this thread you should be listening to. If you're correctable by your own brethren, that is.

a reply to: OperationBlackRose

Yes I believe in God.
But I will not have the audacity to say anything about her.
It should be a private thing your relationship with God and you should not believe anyone who says they know what God is, wants or anything.
God doesn't need a Religion so you should not either.
Iam an anti theist in the respect I know that all these Holy Books are nothing from God but men.
People are waking up to this.
You should also.

a reply to: OperationBlackRose

Oky, so no one that has any constructive contribution to the subject, only non believers, or people choosing what to believe?

a reply to: OperationBlackRose

You are not free to choose what to believe ?

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: OperationBlackRose


People are waking up to this.
You should also.

The first good idea....

a reply to: OperationBlackRose

i had to stop here.

The name 'Jesus' did not even exist 200 years ago. The true Name is Yehoshua, a Hebrew name for a Hebrew man. He is the Messiah, the Messiah that kept the Torah!

that told me you don't even have a clue in what your talking about. Jesus is the english translation for Yehoshua. the KJV was written in 1620 if memory serves, there were other english versions before that and if i recall they to use Jesus. that is well over 200 years.

ETA: John Wycliffe was the first to print a english version of the bible, and he used the latin for Jesus and it was printed as Iesus, the latin vulgate took most if not all of the new testament from the greek, they spelled it Ihsous

originally posted by: OperationBlackRose
Oky, so no one that has any constructive contribution to the subject, only non believers, or people choosing what to believe?

Hey, on what grounds are you classifying me as a non-believer?
Check my own threads. for heaven's sake.
On the topic of this thread, you need to pay more attention to the guidance of the Spirit, for "the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life" (2 Corinthians ch3 v6).

If the discussion is on individual churches I would say status quo and tradition are the driving factors behind their teachings more so than any deeper conspiracy. If you are speaking of “the church” as a body, this has been troubling me for some time. I maintain my Christianity, but I think what that means is very difficult to truly understand. The books of the Bible that have been left out is one such frustration, but also the failure to acknowledge the political motivations of the eras in which the book was being translated is also ignored. For example, while I have not researched it thoroughly, I have heard that the Hebrew version of the Bible never addresses homosexuality and rather all of the instances that in the English version speak to homosexuality were actually speaking to male prostitution. We fight over this today causing division between Christian’s and in reality we may not even be understanding the original message. The conspiracy to me seems to deny us of the absolute truth of our faith and the church (as a body) to me does not at all represent God’s intent. That’s my short, hurried take on it.

originally posted by: SunnyRunner360
If the discussion is on individual churches I would say status quo and tradition are the driving factors behind their teachings more so than any deeper conspiracy. If you are speaking of “the church” as a body, this has been troubling me for some time. I maintain my Christianity, but I think what that means is very difficult to truly understand. The books of the Bible that have been left out is one such frustration, but also the failure to acknowledge the political motivations of the eras in which the book was being translated is also ignored. For example, while I have not researched it thoroughly, I have heard that the Hebrew version of the Bible never addresses homosexuality and rather all of the instances that in the English version speak to homosexuality were actually speaking to male prostitution. We fight over this today causing division between Christian’s and in reality we may not even be understanding the original message. The conspiracy to me seems to deny us of the absolute truth of our faith and the church (as a body) to me does not at all represent God’s intent. That’s my short, hurried take on it.

This is the only constructive comment, and the kind of comments i was looking for.

Arguing about who wrote what and errors I made, through memory, is avoiding the issue. Maybe it is happening here to, but i have seen when people latch on to spelling, math, or other mistakes, they are loosing the conversation, but does not want to stop arguing.

Please keep the conversation on the issue, such as the Name (why it is not used), and the feasts (why we do not keep them)

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: OperationBlackRose
Oky, so no one that has any constructive contribution to the subject, only non believers, or people choosing what to believe?

Hey, on what grounds are you classifying me as a non-believer?
Check my own threads. for heaven's sake.
On the topic of this thread, you need to pay more attention to the guidance of the Spirit, for "the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life" (2 Corinthians ch3 v6).

Did I say that YOU are a non believer? Did I actually say that?