The main points of Christianity?

[IATIA]

Again, jesus said that those things would happen in the generation of the crowd he was addressing. Those things did not happen, god was wrong. Neh!

[CristW]

Let me address HUGGY74 assumptions on predestination.

God or Nature has a book.

The Book has details of human beings actions and mistakes. Therefore, the end of the story is known (free-will within predestination).

We are trying to find out if:

God/Jesus is the narrator(author)

or

Nature is the narrator(author)?

Which is more highly probable?

1. Let's assume that "Earth and Heaven passing away" in the Luke gospel passage is speaking about Jerusalem being destroyed by the Romans in 70 A.D. rather than a future event (Isaiah earlier uses the previous analogy to describe the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians).

2. Why would God/Jesus assign Paul for his mission if Paul already said Jesus will return during his era? (1st Corinthians 7:26-29, yes, the rest is through verse 40. I am aware of this but what about the earlier verses?)

3. Why would Paul and John (author of the Book of Revelation) disagree over foods sacrificed to idols?

(1st Corinthians 8:1-13 versus Revelation 2:14)

Paul and John are disputing a matter. You know what the key word is? "stumbling block" they both use it !!!

Paul uses it in 1st Corinthians 8:9 !!! They are fighting over doctrine!!!

This means that Paul wrote the book of Ephesians to defend himself against Jewish Christians like the writer of the Book of Revelation.

if anyone would read Ephesians and the Book of Revelation you would see the ideological battle taking hold between the two camps centered around , at first, with FOODS SACRIFICED TO IDOLS.

He attacks John (The writer of the Book of Revelation) at Ephesians 4:22!

It seems that Paul won a part of the battle concerning the inclusion of Gentile Christians into the fold of early Christianity(Romans 10:12,Romans 11:23-25) as this is apparent in the Book of Revelation (Chapters 7 and 14).

You then could read John's defense (and attack) against Paul's accusations because he includes Ephesus (Revelation 2:1-7).

4. Why would James be the early arbitrator between both camps (Acts 15:19-29, 21:18-25 and James 4:1-12)?

If the book of Revelation was the last book written then it followed the directions of the early church leadership concerning ...FOODS SACRIFCED TO IDOLS!

Now, everybody, are these conditions still active today ???

NO!

5. The Book of Revelation main error is the previous subject of FOODS SACRIFICED TO ROMAN IDOLS IN THE MARKETPLACE!

These conditions no longer exist. What is the evidence?

REVELATION 1:7 (The Romans pierced him - Jesus).
REVELATION 2:14 (Going to the Roman marketplace to purchase sacrificed foods is banned following James' earlier order).
REVELATION 9:4 (Those who obeyed the command will receive the mark of God)
REVELATION 14:9 (Those who disobeyed the command will receive the mark of the Beast and will be bound to hell-fire).
*Note: These marks are spiritual marks copying what Ezekiel had said in Ezekiel 9:4 !!!*

Therefore, REVELATION chapter 13 is describing Ceaser NERO who is "666"!

5. Therefore, there is no predestination because of the previous reasons described. Why would God/Jesus allow John to express the food sacrificed to idols situation? Why would Paul disobey an order? Why are they ...fighting or disagreeing over the issue?

What is wrong with the narrator(author)? It is not God/Jesus!

[robvalue]

How did Saul die?

I know the answer but I'm interested to hear opinions.

I know where you're going with this..

Saul killed himself, trust me, there is no contradiction.

OK, well I respect the fact that you answered the question without a dodge!

[Godscreated]

3. Why would Paul and John (author of the Book of Revelation) disagree over foods sacrificed to idols?

(1st Corinthians 8:1-13 versus Revelation 2:14)

They did not as I will explain, it had to do with certain things people thought were sinful.

Paul and John are disputing a matter. You know what the key word is? "stumbling block" they both use it !!!

Yes they did, and it was pointed at the Jewish believers not the Gentiles.

Paul uses it in 1st Corinthians 8:9 !!! They are fighting over doctrine!!!

This means that Paul wrote the book of Ephesians to defend himself against Jewish Christians like the writer of the Book of Revelation.

You say the above, then you say the quote below.

If the book of Revelation was the last book written then it followed the directions of the early church leadership concerning ...FOODS SACRIFCED
TO IDOLS!

How could there have been such a battle between the two, you yourself say the book of Revelations was written last, actually it was written after Paul's death.

Paul couldn't of defended himself after he was dead. If you will read the whole of the NT, you will see that Paul says it's fine to eat meat sacrificed to idols, but do not do it at the expense of causing a Jewish/or any believer to sin or fall. What you are referring to in Revelations is the law the Jewish Christians upheld even though they in reality did not have to. Paul explains that if one believes it's a sin to eat such meat it's a sin and one will be judged that way. Remember this one, "judge not least ye be judged." Meaning judge someone by a certain thing and God will judge you according to what you would condemn others of. Paul gave many things that were sinful, he gave them as absolutes, then he said that things like the food laws were not binding unless one wanted it to be that way. Paul through the love of Christ was trying to help both sides of such issues, he never tried to raise controversy, he did his best to help keep these situations from getting in the way of Christianity and the love it promotes.

if anyone would read Ephesians and the Book of Revelation you would see the ideological battle taking hold between the two camps centered around , at first, with FOODS SACRIFICED TO IDOLS.

He attacks John (The writer of the Book of Revelation) at Ephesians 4:22!

Again Paul was dead before the book of Revelations was written.

4. Why would James be the early arbitrator between both camps (Acts 15:19-29, 21:18-25 and James 4:1-12)?

He wasn't until Peter spoke and reassured the Council that Jesus came also for the Gentiles, that what was once considered filth was acceptable to God. Peter also asked them why they would put the burden of the Law on the Gentiles, when the Jewish people could not bear the weight of it. James conceded circumcision and most all the law because of what Peter testified to, James threw in the law of sacrificed meats to idols and sexual immorality to appease himself and the other Jewish leaders. Sexual immorality was a given through Christ's teachings, the meat thing was Jame's way of trying to force something on the Gentiles, something they did a lot of, he thought they should have to give up something. Paul didn't argue the point at the time, he had just won a victory and would deal with the food law later. We see this in later letters as you yourself have pointed out.

GC

[Homeless Nutter]

I know where you're going with this..

Saul killed himself, trust me, there is no contradiction.

OK, well I respect the fact that you answered the question without a dodge!

Hmmm... To be honest - I'd rather see him try and "dodge" this one.

I mean - simple denial may work for a believer, as it usually does, but mental acrobatics they perform around certain problems are something to behold.

As for your question - it is my opinion that Saul fell down some stairs. Terrible shame, really. Silent killer, those stairs... (You should trust me, because I haven't bothered with providing even as feeble a "proof", as a passage from a bronze-age fantasy compilation)

[robvalue]

Thats true, yes. But he got killed by someone else, an enemy threw a spear at him from a great distance, and it ruptured an artery. He bled out.

[CristW]

3. Why would Paul and John (author of the Book of Revelation) disagree over foods sacrificed to idols?

(1st Corinthians 8:1-13 versus Revelation 2:14)

They did not as I will explain, it had to do with certain things people thought were sinful.

Paul and John are disputing a matter. You know what the key word is? "stumbling block" they both use it !!!

Yes they did, and it was pointed at the Jewish believers not the Gentiles.

Paul uses it in 1st Corinthians 8:9 !!! They are fighting over doctrine!!!

This means that Paul wrote the book of Ephesians to defend himself against Jewish Christians like the writer of the Book of Revelation.

You say the above, then you say the quote below.

If the book of Revelation was the last book written then it followed the directions of the early church leadership concerning ...FOODS SACRIFCED
TO IDOLS!

How could there have been such a battle between the two, you yourself say the book of Revelations was written last, actually it was written after Paul's death.

Paul couldn't of defended himself after he was dead. If you will read the whole of the NT, you will see that Paul says it's fine to eat meat sacrificed to idols, but do not do it at the expense of causing a Jewish/or any believer to sin or fall. What you are referring to in Revelations is the law the Jewish Christians upheld even though they in reality did not have to. Paul explains that if one believes it's a sin to eat such meat it's a sin and one will be judged that way. Remember this one, "judge not least ye be judged." Meaning judge someone by a certain thing and God will judge you according to what you would condemn others of. Paul gave many things that were sinful, he gave them as absolutes, then he said that things like the food laws were not binding unless one wanted it to be that way. Paul through the love of Christ was trying to help both sides of such issues, he never tried to raise controversy, he did his best to help keep these situations from getting in the way of Christianity and the love it promotes.

if anyone would read Ephesians and the Book of Revelation you would see the ideological battle taking hold between the two camps centered around , at first, with FOODS SACRIFICED TO IDOLS.

He attacks John (The writer of the Book of Revelation) at Ephesians 4:22!

Again Paul was dead before the book of Revelations was written.

4. Why would James be the early arbitrator between both camps (Acts 15:19-29, 21:18-25 and James 4:1-12)?

He wasn't until Peter spoke and reassured the Council that Jesus came also for the Gentiles, that what was once considered filth was acceptable to God. Peter also asked them why they would put the burden of the Law on the Gentiles, when the Jewish people could not bear the weight of it. James conceded circumcision and most all the law because of what Peter testified to, James threw in the law of sacrificed meats to idols and sexual immorality to appease himself and the other Jewish leaders. Sexual immorality was a given through Christ's teachings, the meat thing was Jame's way of trying to force something on the Gentiles, something they did a lot of, he thought they should have to give up something. Paul didn't argue the point at the time, he had just won a victory and would deal with the food law later. We see this in later letters as you yourself have pointed out.

GC

1. What is the point of describing the FOODS SACRIFICED TO ROMAN IDOLS? The Book of Revelation is therefore meant for the early Christian audience not for a future audience! (Otherwords, you have been excluded.)

2. There are no ROMAN FOOD marketplace and especially there are no ROMAN PAGAN STATUES at the food marketplace. If there were today would you still go?

3. The main issue for the early Christians then was FOODS SACRIFICED UNDER ROMAN PAGAN STATUES. This was the repeating theme for John in the Book of Revelation. Of course, it was the last book I made this clear in my earlier post but probably I failed to make this very clear to you.

4. Therefore, the Book of Revelation is a false prophecy concerning Jesus physical return. Christianity only has the moral lessons and that's it. These moral lessons are the main points: NO WARMONGERING and NO HOARDING OF WEALTH!

[Godscreated]

They did not as I will explain, it had to do with certain things people thought were sinful.


Yes they did, and it was pointed at the Jewish believers not the Gentiles.


You say the above, then you say the quote below.


How could there have been such a battle between the two, you yourself say the book of Revelations was written last, actually it was written after Paul's death.

Paul couldn't of defended himself after he was dead. If you will read the whole of the NT, you will see that Paul says it's fine to eat meat sacrificed to idols, but do not do it at the expense of causing a Jewish/or any believer to sin or fall. What you are referring to in Revelations is the law the Jewish Christians upheld even though they in reality did not have to. Paul explains that if one believes it's a sin to eat such meat it's a sin and one will be judged that way. Remember this one, "judge not least ye be judged." Meaning judge someone by a certain thing and God will judge you according to what you would condemn others of. Paul gave many things that were sinful, he gave them as absolutes, then he said that things like the food laws were not binding unless one wanted it to be that way. Paul through the love of Christ was trying to help both sides of such issues, he never tried to raise controversy, he did his best to help keep these situations from getting in the way of Christianity and the love it promotes.


Again Paul was dead before the book of Revelations was written.


He wasn't until Peter spoke and reassured the Council that Jesus came also for the Gentiles, that what was once considered filth was acceptable to God. Peter also asked them why they would put the burden of the Law on the Gentiles, when the Jewish people could not bear the weight of it. James conceded circumcision and most all the law because of what Peter testified to, James threw in the law of sacrificed meats to idols and sexual immorality to appease himself and the other Jewish leaders. Sexual immorality was a given through Christ's teachings, the meat thing was Jame's way of trying to force something on the Gentiles, something they did a lot of, he thought they should have to give up something. Paul didn't argue the point at the time, he had just won a victory and would deal with the food law later. We see this in later letters as you yourself have pointed out.

GC

1. What is the point of describing the FOODS SACRIFICED TO ROMAN IDOLS? The Book of Revelation is therefore meant for the early Christian audience not for a future audience! (Otherwords, you have been excluded.)

The Churches of revelations were used for examples of future churches, The Jewish Christians believe it was sinful to eat meat sacrificed to false gods. In that belief God tells them you will be judge as you judge, a warning to the future churches, live by the scriptures, for I will judge you by what you want to make doctrine.

2. There are no ROMAN FOOD marketplace and especially there are no ROMAN PAGAN STATUES at the food marketplace. If there were today would you still go?

No foods are off limits to me, the only reason I might not eat some foods at certain times, is to keep a fellow brother/sister from stumbling if they believe it's wrong to eat that food. I deal with this all the time I have a good friend who is an Adventist.

3. The main issue for the early Christians then was FOODS SACRIFICED UNDER ROMAN PAGAN STATUES. This was the repeating theme for John in the Book of Revelation. Of course, it was the last book I made this clear in my earlier post but probably I failed to make this very clear to you.

I know what you were trying to do, I'm not gullible enough to take your word for it. I've dealt with this for years and know what the whole of the NT says. Your failure is in trying to confuse the scriptures, it might work on those who haven't spent the time studying the scriptures to find the true meanings within them. It will work on those who do not believe, they're gullible enough to accept things untrue because they believe it hurts Christianity. As I said earlier it was meant for those churches and the ones to come. The book of Revelation was written after Paul's death, so there could be nor doctrine battle going on between Paul and John. You also have missed something very important, John is told to write down what he sees, not what he thinks is correct.

4. Therefore, the Book of Revelation is a false prophecy concerning Jesus physical return. Christianity only has the moral lessons and that's it. These moral lessons are the main points: NO WARMONGERING and NO HOARDING OF WEALTH!

Christians are not to war monger nor should they hoard wealth, but those were not the points you were making, you were saying Christians were not to even defend themselves against evil people or have enough money to make them comfortable, the scriptures do not teach such nonsense.
Please explain the entire book, give us Christians how all the prophesies have been fulfilled. Here's a question when does Jesus move to the sanctuary.

GC

[CristW]

1. What is the point of describing the FOODS SACRIFICED TO ROMAN IDOLS? The Book of Revelation is therefore meant for the early Christian audience not for a future audience! (Otherwords, you have been excluded.)

The Churches of revelations were used for examples of future churches, The Jewish Christians believe it was sinful to eat meat sacrificed to false gods. In that belief God tells them you will be judge as you judge, a warning to the future churches, live by the scriptures, for I will judge you by what you want to make doctrine.

1. No, the time (of condition) has been established by the early verse - Revelation 1:7 - The error within the verse is "THEY also which pierced him..." despite other parts of the verse, this particular part hints of false prophecy. The other verse in reference - Revelation 2:14(Revelation 2:20) - is telling the church about the "sin" of participating in the Roman marketplace. Pergamos congregation was being tested greatly! (Just compare the situation with the other six congregations). The problem with the congregations(Churches) in these locations was that they were being assimilated into Roman society through the Roman marketplace where pagan idols stood while food was being prepared. It seems that this "sin", the social struggle in Pergamos, was a distinguishing factor compared with the other six. The "sin" is described as "fornication" = eating foods sacrificed to idols. Your response has nothing to do with the ACTUAL words said.

2. There are no ROMAN FOOD marketplace and especially there are no ROMAN PAGAN STATUES at the food marketplace. If there were today would you still go?

No foods are off limits to me, the only reason I might not eat some foods at certain times, is to keep a fellow brother/sister from stumbling if they believe it's wrong to eat that food. I deal with this all the time I have a good friend who is an Adventist.

2. The last order (the book of Revelation which followed James' last order) concerned keeping away from those particular foods mentioned. You would then have to admit that the Book of Revelation did not recognize Paul's version. You would also have to admit that Paul was against James' order. Then you would be in violation of the Book of Revelation's last command (supposedly Jesus' own words).

3. The main issue for the early Christians then was FOODS SACRIFICED UNDER ROMAN PAGAN STATUES. This was the repeating theme for John in the Book of Revelation. Of course, it was the last book I made this clear in my earlier post but probably I failed to make this very clear to you.

I know what you were trying to do, I'm not gullible enough to take your word for it. I've dealt with this for years and know what the whole of the NT says. Your failure is in trying to confuse the scriptures, it might work on those who haven't spent the time studying the scriptures to find the true meanings within them. It will work on those who do not believe, they're gullible enough to accept things untrue because they believe it hurts Christianity. As I said earlier it was meant for those churches and the ones to come. The book of Revelation was written after Paul's death, so there could be nor doctrine battle going on between Paul and John. You also have missed something very important, John is told to write down what he sees, not what he thinks is correct.

3. Wow! you said: ..."and the ones to come". This means that all Churches are in violation of the last command even the Adventists (I am sure they still follow Paul's order (anti-order/command) concerning food violation). John writes it down then it is a "command" and this is my point. Jesus' last command is in agreement with James' order therefore Paul's command is corrected ...or abrogated by the last command (Book of Revelation). This would mean that some books written by Paul are incorrect but then again he did admit he may have been wrong (2nd Timothy 3:16). Or we could then assume that may be all Churches today are wrong in doctrine. But let us go to the Adventists in which a command they themselves may not all be following (Matthew 24:20 / Sabbath regulation concerning traveling has to be followed. How many Adventists, you know do not use autos or modern transportation to get to church especially during the Sabbath? Or even any church who says that Sabbath is now Sunday?)

4. Therefore, the Book of Revelation is a false prophecy concerning Jesus physical return. Christianity only has the moral lessons and that's it. These moral lessons are the main points: NO WARMONGERING and NO HOARDING OF WEALTH!

Christians are not to war monger nor should they hoard wealth, but those were not the points you were making, you were saying Christians were not to even defend themselves against evil people or have enough money to make them comfortable, the scriptures do not teach such nonsense.
Please explain the entire book, give us Christians how all the prophesies have been fulfilled. Here's a question when does Jesus move to the sanctuary.

4. Yes, the verses against Self-Defense: Matthew 5:21 (Ok, let us say that "kill' meant murder), Matthew 5:38-45 (These verses are VERY CLEAR), Matthew 26:52 (This is more within context knowing the situation), John 15:13.
Against wealth: Matthew 6:19-24, Matthew 19:24, and Acts 4:32-35. (*Note: This is against (Hoarding of) wealth but the verses are PRO-distribution of wealth. Even though, we could also observe the command of earning - 2nd Thessalonians 3:8-11, the problem with the previous verses, from Thessalonians, is that in a recession or depression it may be impossible to find jobs. Furthermore, in that particular social environment, it may have been the case that many Christians were not offered jobs or many kept their faith hidden. Therefore, creating the situation were many ignored commands concerning the "Food" order which is highlighted later in the Book of Revelation).

Therefore, making it highly improbable to be Christian in this modern world. More importantly, it means that they expected Jesus' to return early around 140 A.D.! Knowing all the other conditionals.

Therefore, the Islamic message is also false because one of the doctrines within Islam is the return of Jesus.

Judaism has also been exposed as false because of the issue surrounding the Temple (within the NT and the groups competing against the early Christian movement).

GC