|
|
Post by pioneer on Apr 28, 2009 0:05:59 GMT -5
I've been hesitating to jump into this topic with anything so much as a dissenting voice, since there seems to be so much agreement here , but thought I might add a simple question- in your minds, does "pagan culture" mean complete and thorough evil, or a mix of God's common grace and mankind's wickedness? In other words, can anything good (that is, ultimately from God) exist in pagan culture? Yes good can occur in some thing Pagan. That being said, if it has to do with the worship of their gods, NO! So if a Pagan holiday is incorporated into a service to our perfect and Holy God is is rendered unholy by assoication. It is in your part of the bible also. about clean and unclean, light with darkness ect. & ect. But your forgiven, what the hey? Enjoy your pagan holidays. I think I'll shema v' shemar, todah rabah |
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 28, 2009 14:03:29 GMT -5
good can occur from pagan cultures- there is good in almost EVERY pagan culture, josh. the fact is, they all
(a) derived from the true religion, but was perverted
(b) were a made up by a man OR
(c) were taught by fallen angels or nephilim
the fact is however, that there is still sin involved in those pagan holidadys- the most prevelent is worshipping other Gods.
shalom- JOHN
PIONNER: what do those things [shema v'shamar (and) todah rabah] mean?
|
|
|
|
Post by pioneer on Apr 28, 2009 14:43:51 GMT -5
good can occur from pagan cultures- there is good in almost EVERY pagan culture, josh. the fact is, they all (a) derived from the true religion, but was perverted (b) were a made up by a man OR (c) were taught by fallen angels or nephilim the fact is however, that there is still sin involved in those pagan holidadys- the most prevelent is worshipping other Gods. shalom- JOHN PIONNER: what do those things [shema v'shamar (and) todah rabah] mean? Hear and observe, thank you very much. |
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 28, 2009 16:17:10 GMT -5
thank you ... i am trying to highten my jewish vocabulary some more.
|
|
anochria
B'nai Elohim
Pastor of Aletheia Christian Fellowship
Posts: 194
|
Post by anochria on Apr 28, 2009 18:11:13 GMT -5
It's not surprising most of it would be easily translatable from Hebrew, because most of the authors of the New Testament were bilingual Hebrews and Koine Greek speakers.
This is not evidence that the original documents were written in Hebrew (which I guess you admitted), and definitely not evidence that we shouldn't trust the 10%.
Do you throw out 10% of the New Testament so easily?
Let me guess, it's the 10% of the New Testament that you have apriori disagreements with?
|
|
|
|
Post by pioneer on Apr 28, 2009 19:43:46 GMT -5
Like I said Acts 12:4 is a blatant act of garbage peddling.
Many other acts of furtering an agenda.
Tell me this. How do Hebrew idioms come out intact if they were Greek?
What I admitted is the Roman Dictators were very thorough in destroying all Hebrew documents of the first centuary. Check out Diocletion he was very driven to destroy every Hebrew document and there were several following him hell bent on wiping out every trace of Judaism.
If the Greek additions hadn't made things seem like God changed his mind , we would not be in this debate, we would be somewhat in agreement.
Clearly the bible even with the additions states that He has not replaced Israel. Has not replaced His Moedim, when the Temple is restored the Temple services will resume til the AD stops them, then after he is put away, even you, will go up and do the moedim or you will have no rain.
It is written.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 28, 2009 20:31:08 GMT -5
actually, one of the things i agreed with most in the new testement - the "he who is without sin cast the first stone" story- i reject as an original part of the gospel. in the earliest manuscripts, this story is not there. and i used this storyfor multiple examples before this. i was angry to learn that suh a great message was intertwined in a lie.
and for a statement of fact, most of the parts that SEEM to disagree with my theology ARE in the original text. so i pray and meditate on it until it comes into accordance with the rest of scripture. however, if i find multiple verses that resemble something against a doctrine i have, i will question the original doctrine of mine, not the meaning of the verses. but if there are 20 verses saying the same thing, but in different words, and another verse seems to contradict it, a red flag comes up that either i am misunderstanding the verse, or the verse wasnt in th original manuscript. so i go to the library and look it up, and google it for extra supporting info.
dont assume things like that- people can take it offensively and it just cause problems.
shalom- john
|
|
anochria
B'nai Elohim
Pastor of Aletheia Christian Fellowship
Posts: 194
|
Post by anochria on Apr 29, 2009 18:40:32 GMT -5
john wrote:
But we have good evidence that that passage in John wasn't in the originals. We have no such evidence for a passage like 12:4.
john wrote:
This is for the most part sound reasoning, except that I would never assume a passage wasn't in the original text for purely theological reasons. That's a very dangerous slope.
john wrote:
My apologies. It wasn't fair of me.
Pioneer wrote:
I go up to Jerusalem and participate in the Feasts every Sunday, and every time I gather with two or three others in Yeshua's name. If I don't, I do experience a drought.
This is true for followers of Yeshua the world over, right here, right now.
There is no need for a 3rd Temple built by human hands. Jesus is the only temple we need.
|
|
|
|
Post by pioneer on Apr 29, 2009 21:50:31 GMT -5
By who's order do you do this on Sunday? It aint biblical, the Sabbath was not revolked? What, then are you under the Pope? Every major Christian says that there is no change in the bible, and the only one who has a shred of credibility is the RCC and we all deny that! I am surely happy that you are forgiven, because if not, you are going to your everburning Hell!  31 ¶ Jesus then said to the Jews who had believed in him, "If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples, 32 and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free." Does any one believe he breathed the words this thread is named? By what authority does the Christian Church parade satan claus around the aisles of the church and repeat these words, "Yes. Virginia there is a Santa Claus."? A Man! 6 So, for the sake of your tradition, you have made void the word of God.
7 You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said:
8 ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me;If you love him keep the commandments. |
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 30, 2009 13:56:57 GMT -5
anochria: i wasnt saying that i assumed verses werent in scripture becaause of theological reasons- i was trying to get the total opposite point across. lol. but looking back i worded it wrong, my B.
shalom- john
|
|
anochria
B'nai Elohim
Pastor of Aletheia Christian Fellowship
Posts: 194
|
Post by anochria on May 1, 2009 13:09:45 GMT -5
Agreed on points a-c.
Now, here's my reasoning.
For the early church to take a pagan festival worshipping the "sun god" and create a rival festival worshipping the "son of God" to replace it is a brilliant tactic. And to translate over from the pagan holiday all the elements (and only those elements) of it that were excellent, praiseworthy, of good report, etc.. (Phil. 4:8) and put them back into the service of the true God- that is just exactly the sort of thing the Kingdom of God should be doing. Reclaiming the enemy's captured territory, removing the sin, and returning all good things into God's hands.
Likewise, Santa Claus is a blending of some wholesome remnants of pagan tradition (divorced of their idolatry) with some exemplary Christian traditions and turned into wonderful Christian allegory, if understood in that light.
Can even the Christian idea of "santa claus" be perverted? Yes.
But so can any good thing.
Santa Claus, in the proper light, is simply a mytho-historical story that speaks to us of how we are to walk in Christ's footsteps as giftgivers to the world. For the best portrayal of him in this light, read "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe" by C.S. Lewis.
|
|
anochria
B'nai Elohim
Pastor of Aletheia Christian Fellowship
Posts: 194
|
Post by anochria on May 1, 2009 13:17:43 GMT -5
Romans 14:4-8
4 Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.
5 One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone. 8If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord.
As to Saturday/ Sunday, I think it's pretty clear that the Christians began to gather on Sundays very early on because the early Jewish Christians still kept the Sabbath on Saturday/ went to synagogue with their Jewish countrymen. Sunday was their day to just hang out with other followers of Yeshua.
When the gospel spread to Gentiles, naturally, the Gentiles began meeting on Sundays, which was the distinctly Christian gathering. It was also a fitting day to meet, as it was the day when Jesus rose.
Paul wrote the above passage in reference to the fact that some quarrels were breaking out over this.
It's not that I don't believe in Sabbath, it's just that I don't think there's a particular day that must be called Sabbath.
gotta go....
|
|
|
|
Post by John on May 1, 2009 13:53:17 GMT -5
this sabbatical belief has stemmed from you belieeing the law has been abolished. 'we uphold the law' and 'i have not come to ablish the law' --- those verses dont matter to christians (on the verse side, many scriptures are ignored by meessianics as well- whic i condemn).
the sabbath is officially saturday- but followers of Yeshua should make that one step further and make veveryday a sabbath (not a day of bondage, but a day of freedom. mosheh ordered a man to be killed for picking up sticks because man controlls the laws of sabbath... shalom-
john
|
|
anochria
B'nai Elohim
Pastor of Aletheia Christian Fellowship
Posts: 194
|
Post by anochria on May 1, 2009 14:09:56 GMT -5
First off, just to be clear, I don't believe the law has been "abolished" but "fulfilled".
Furthermore, I think that Paul is telling us that the actual historical day of Sabbath isn't important in Christ. The author of Hebrews seems to say, in line with what you're saying, that in Christ, every day is now Sabbath.
|
|
|
|
Post by itiswritten on May 1, 2009 14:17:01 GMT -5
Romans 14:4-8 4 Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.
5 One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God. 7For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone. 8If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. The above quote relates to two issues: Eating and days. First the discussion is speaking of vegitarianism vrs non-vegitarianism. It is not discussing clean vrs unclean meats. The next section is dealing with fast days. It was the custom at the time to fast twice a week. It was not a commandment, just a custom. Some thought that it should be treated as a commandment. We see an example of this in Luke where the Pharisee is described as making the statement below. Luke 18:12
I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.Romans 14 is in no way saying that it is fine to eat unclean meats or not to. Neither is Paul saying that it is fine to keep the Sabbath if you want to or not to if you don't. It is a misapplication of that passage of scripture to use it as a proof text that it doesn't matter if Sabbath or Feast days are kept especially since there are so many clear texts testifying to the opposite. As to Saturday/ Sunday, I think it's pretty clear that the Christians began to gather on Sundays very early on because the early Jewish Christians still kept the Sabbath on Saturday/ went to synagogue with their Jewish countrymen. I agree with you that the early believers kept Sabbath on Saturday and attended synagogue. It is important to realize that the day begins in the evening after sundown and ends in the evening. It has long been a custom to congregate at the opening of the Shabbath (Sabbath) and at its close which would be Saturday evening by its modern name. The first day of the week (Sunday) begins on what most people think of as Saturday evening. That is when the first day of the week begins. In all likelyhood in most cases the disciples and followers of Y'shua were closing the Sabbath on Saturday evening (First day of the week.) In light of the biblical and historical precident, it is logical that the meeting described below was a gathering at the end of the Sabbath (Saturday evening) that went until after midnight because of Paul' (Shual's) speech. Acts 20:7
And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight.Sunday was their day to just hang out with other followers of Yeshua. I am not aware of any biblical or historic evidence that confirms the above quote. When the gospel spread to Gentiles, naturally, the Gentiles began meeting on Sundays, which was the distinctly Christian gathering. It was also a fitting day to meet, as it was the day when Jesus rose. It actually was natural that the Gentiles continued to go to synagogue on Shabbat. Again, there is nothing in scripture that indicates anything fitting about switching the Sabbath to Sunday for any reason. Notice that much of the initial commandments given to the Gentiles had to do with kosher. It is also clear that it was expected that Gentiles would be keeping the Sabbath and hearing the Torah portions read in the synagogues. Acts 15:19-21 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: 20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. 21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day. Paul wrote the above passage in reference to the fact that some quarrels were breaking out over this. I have already dealt with the passage and it is clear that is not what he is discussing. Shaul (Paul) told us to be followers of him even as he followed the Messiah. Both kept the Sabbath and the Feasts. We see several places where we see how important it was to Shaul to do both. It's not that I don't believe in Sabbath, it's just that I don't think there's a particular day that must be called Sabbath. gotta go.... What we think doesn't matter. What does matter is what YHVH has said. He said that the seventh day is the Sabbath. This is mentioned repeatedly so that there is absolutely no confusion on the matter. It is even reiterated by the writer of Hebrews. Hebrews 4:1-11 1 Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it. 2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.
3 For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.
4 For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works.
5 And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest.
6 Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief:
7 Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts.
8 For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day.
9 There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God.
10 For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his.
11 Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief. |
|
|
|
Post by John on May 1, 2009 14:25:03 GMT -5
vary vary good post itiswritten. however... what does shaul mean by 'nothing is unclean in itself'...?
|
|
|
|
Post by itiswritten on May 1, 2009 14:55:19 GMT -5
vary vary good post itiswritten. however... what does shaul mean by 'nothing is unclean in itself'...? Thanks John. I will have to do a deeper study on this. The word translated as "unclean" in the passage is translated mostly as "common." NT:2839
koinos (koy-nos'); probably from NT:4862; common, i.e. (literally) shared by all or several, or (cer.) profane:
KJV - common, defiled, unclean, unholy.It could be that Shaul is discussing purchasing meat in the markets or "shambles." If at the market or at someone's home, you should not ask if it has been sacrificed to idols. However, if they tell you that it has, then you are not to eat it. Again, this would be discussing kosher meat sold at the market or at a feast at someone's home. For example: If someone invited you over to dinner and offerered you chicken to eat, you should not ask if it was sacrificed to an idol. However, if they were to invite you over for "Easter" dinner, they have just told you to what god that the meal was sacrificed unto. The passage below is related to the issue. In other words, something being sacrificed to an idol does not make it unclean in itself, but eating of it after knowing that it is makes it unclean. 1 Cor 10:25 Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake: 26 For the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof. 27 If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake. 28 But if any man say unto you, this is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that shewed it, and for conscience sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof: Again: 1 Corinthians 8:1-13
1Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth. 2 And if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know. 3 But if any man love God, the same is known of him. 4 As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one. 5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) 6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him. 7 Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled. 8 But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse. 9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak. 10 For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols; 11 And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? 12 But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ. 13 Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend. |
|
anochria
B'nai Elohim
Pastor of Aletheia Christian Fellowship
Posts: 194
|
Post by anochria on May 1, 2009 15:38:31 GMT -5
I only have a moment, but I want to respond to your last point:
The author of Hebrews isn't talking about a day of the week but an age, the age of the Messiah, in which we have now entered his rest.
|
|
anochria
B'nai Elohim
Pastor of Aletheia Christian Fellowship
Posts: 194
|
Post by anochria on May 1, 2009 16:01:58 GMT -5
Pioneer:
Regarding Easter, you seem to think that celebrating "Easter" makes it automatically a celebration of the goddess Eastre. In my understanding, the Easter celebration was simply named that because it was the name of the month by that time in the common language.
This is similar to most of our days of the week.
Do you refrain from saying words like "Wednesday" or "Thursday" because of their distant associations with pagan deities? (perhaps you do)
|
|
|
|
Post by John on May 1, 2009 17:28:55 GMT -5
i brought up the same point anochria--- lol. no, but i do have a problem with the pagan traditions haveing to do with worshipping idols. since santa claus is based off of a pagan god, i will have nothing to do with him. since the christmas tree is based off of Odin hanging himself on a tree for wisdom, i will have nothing to do with it. the bible may not have anything to say about it after it has gone through christianity's "conversion" process. but i will have nothing to do with it because i myself have understood it as worshipping another god, and i know how harshly YHVH deals with idolotry. i am limiting myself so that i will not sin. i personally DO think that it is wrong to use pagan ideas of gods. but i dont have any problem with the irish idea of a 'wake' in which people unleash their feelings after a person has passed. this has nothing to do with spirits or gods, so i have no problem with it. it has nothing to do with religion at all actually.
taoism and buddhism i have no problem with, as long as it is observed under judaism... i think that taoism and buddhism were revelations to certain people for certain times. but i think that some of the beliefs got perverted.
the mayans have a description of a god that is described exactly as yeshua is. the god said that he would come back, so they built their temples awaiting their god to come back. then the civilization disappeared. i have a problem with the mayans perverted system, but i think that finding all these descriptions prove that Yeshua tried to show everyone about him.
native americans have been worshipping an angel called Yehowah for 100 years. in certain parts of this place, this angel is the only god.
etc., etc., etc., etc., etc!!!
so their are definately revelations of Yeshua to pagan cultures. but shaul said they went into apostasy and worshipped the creation over the creator. they made idols of god and worshipped them, and then the religion was perverted to something it wasnt origianllly. so yes, their is ood to pagan cultures. but i wont have anything to do with idolotry.
shabbat shalom- john
|
|
