The Low-Information Evangelical, Part 2

Renew America ^ | August 29, 2014 | Marsha West

[Elsie]

I shudda read ahead...

[Elsie]

What is the definition of "truly a Christian" and then we can go from there.

Well...

When Jesus was asked a direct question; He replied with a direct answer:

 

John 6:28-29

Then they asked him, “What must we do to do the works God requires?”

Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.”

[Elsie]

We should all have the “right” knowledge then?

I have found, while leading bibles studies, that it's not too hard to get people to learn things that are in the book.

I have found it EXTREMELY difficult to get them to UNlearn things that are NOT found in the bible!

[GBA]

Seems straight forward enough to me, though I only speak for myself, of course.

[boatbums]

It is very upsetting to see the danger, but be looked at as some kind of “nit-picking, legalistic, spiritual kill-joy”.

I can sympathize. Too many people are sucked into the lies they are told through what they "experience" that they cannot stop and try to discern if what they are being told is the truth IS really the truth. When questioning a new evangelist that offered "holy laughter" in his revival services but a perverted Gospel, I was told sharply to, "Touch not God's anointed!". These people were so convinced by what they experienced that they couldn't see through the deception. We must always watch and pray. God's word is given to us to guide us into all truth. IT is our touchstone.

[dsc]

“Please do not think that I am a being mean spirited, but Low Information Catholic (LIC) is exactly the way the Catholic Church wants it congregation.

If you are really interested, read Pascendi Dominici Gregis.

The Catholic Church is a house divided. Evil has wormed its way in, and although it cannot win in the long run, it is causing a great deal of harm.

Just as there are all too many liberals in the Republican Party, so there are in the Church. Conservatives are present and oppose the libtards both in party and in the Church.

“The “dark ages” were so dark because the Catholic Church would not let its people read the Bible or translate the Bible into the native languages.”

Well, now, that just isn’t so. As a matter of fact, if you go to Mass every day for three years, you will hear the entire Bible read aloud.

The reason people didn’t read the Bible is because people couldn’t read.

It has now been demonstrated that discarding the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew was a ghastly mistake.

“The fact that the last popes have put their own revelation above God (e.g. Pope Francis new revelation concerning sodomites)”

1. Pope Francis announced no new revelation.
2. What Pope Francis announced was his own opinion, which any and every Catholic is free to contradict.
3. Pope Francis did not say what has been reported in the evilstream media.
4. I don’t think you can point to a similar action by Pope Benedict.

“and no-one is allowed to speak out against”

Catholics are quite free to criticize what Pope Francis said. Of course, it would only make sense to criticize what he actually said, and not what the depraved media slugs invented.

“this is a huge sign to, “...come out of her my people and be not a partaker of her plagues...” (Rev. 18:4)”

Historical perspective is our friend.

[Elsie]

It has now been demonstrated that discarding the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew was a ghastly mistake.

Why?

[daniel1212]

The Bible tells us that the enemy will indeed perform “miracles” and signs and wonders. The deception is and will be very deep in these last days.

While such so-called money-raising "faith teachers" and and false prophet must be exposed, the problem is with gong to the other extreme, that excluding miracles, as Christianity, and indeed Abrahamic faith is based upon miracles, testifying to God being the living God, not just one you read about.

. What set the God of Abraham above other deities was the miracle of Issac, while souls did not follow Moses because he was a great orator, nor were the Hebrews called to faith and obedience in the one true God on the strength of apologetical arguments.

Yet the first 3 miracles of Moses were duplicated by the magicians. (Exodus 7:10-11, 21-22; 8:6-7) Faced with this today, once camp will cite this as justification for excluding all miracles, while another will open the door so wide that modern-day magicians can be preachers.

Thru Moses the Law was given, and it, and Scripture as written, became the transcendent supreme standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims as the wholly Divinely inspired and assured, Word of God, as is abundantly evidenced .

(And which also testifies (Lk. 24:27,44, etc.) to writings of God being recognized and established as being so - essentially due to their unique and enduring heavenly qualities and attestation, and thus they provide for a canon of Scripture.

Yet nowhere in Scripture did God cease to do miracles, and these confirmed both men and writings of God as being so.

And which was part of the Scriptural substantiation upon which the Lord Jesus and early church established their Truth claims, following itinerant preachers in dissent from those who claimed to know the Law. (Mt. 22:23-45; Lk. 24:27,44; Jn. 5:36,39; Acts 2:14-35; 4:33; 5:12; 15:6-21;17:2,11; 18:28; 28:23; Rm. 15:19; 2Cor. 6:1-0; 12:12, etc.)

Paul is still working miracles in Acts 27, though the occasions for these had been reduced due to his captivity, Christ stated that "the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me," and likewise "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father."(John 14:12).

While not all are "workers of miracles," (1Cor. 12:29) which is a particular apostolic testimony (2Cor. 12:12) along with other things, the degree of which i do not see today, nor do i know of any verified forth-telling prophet, and see tongues as something easily fabricated or abused, if not dismissing them at all, yet i also see no real justification for cessationism, and the need for the Lord to confirm the Word with signs following, which is what Scripture testifies to and promises.

The word of God is as new to many souls, and skepticism just as high or higher, than in the 1st century, and while God owes grace to no one, miracles can be as much a help to seekers as then - and a warning to the lost and refutation of them. And with the rise of atheistic evolution and other modern challenges to faith then if anything, miraculous evidences testifying to a risen Christ are surely fitting. We do not serve a theoretical Deity, but a risen Savior.

Most cessationists do not doctrinally exclude all miracles (even if not expecting them it seems), but exclude the miraculous gifts of 1Cor. 12, seeing the canon of Scripture being closed as constituting the coming of that which is "perfect" in 1Cor. 13. But all the characteristics which accompany that which is perfect, which means knowing as also we are known, are not yet realized, not due to faulty transmission but reception, and only fully correspond to the face to face revelation of Christ in 1Jn. 3:2).

The revelatory gifts are esp. singled out for exclusion as being contrary to the supremacy and sufficiency of Scripture, However, Scripture is and has always been the supreme standard for testing Truth claims as the wholly inspired and assured word of God, to which all must conform to, while the sufficiency of Scripture is only formal in part. So that while one can read a text as Acts 10:36-43 and understand how to be saved, yet even the ability to reason in understanding that text, as well as teachers to help understanding others, is something Scripture only materially provides for, by why of sanction.

And which also materially provides for supplementary revelation, from the impressions of the Spirit as to God's specific will in applying what Scripture says - and which it may be safe to say every secessionist preacher believes in during the offering - to words of exhortation and edification, or a word of wisdom or knowledge in certain situations, even if by souls who deny such gifts. These do not add to the canon of Scripture, but like preaching, must be tested by Scripture, the assured word of God, the supreme standard which provides for such supplementary helps.

Excluding miracles is "safer" than allowing them, as thus we can reject fabrications and the demonic. However it is also sterile, and is not Christianity, which itself depends upon the miracle of being born of the Spirit, and preaches of a risen Savior who gives witness to His resurrection in not only the new birth but in other miracles, including working thru believers.

And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen. (Mark 16:20)

[Patton@Bastogne]

.


Primarily ... the PASTORS are to blame ...

Don't blame me ... I'm just the messenger.

Questions ?



Muster up the courage to do the free IRS download of "Pamplet P1828" which specifies the legal details of your tax-exempt church's sertitude to it's U.S. Government Masters.

Heck, I'll even do you the favor of providing the internet link:

IRS Legal Obligations of Tax-Exempt Christian Churches and Pastors" - (click)









.




IRS & Church Marriage vs. "Render Unto Caesar" ...

IRS & Church Marriage vs. "Render Unto Caesar" - (click)



America's Spiritual Revival and Healing - The Obstacle ...

.America's Spiritual Revival and Healing - The Obstacle ... - (click)




Pro-Life Victory vs. "Render Unto Caesar" ...

Pro-Life Victory vs. "Render Unto Caesar" - (click)




Tea Party Christians and "Render Unto Caesar" ...

Tea Party Christians and "Render Unto Caesar" - (click)





.

[dsc]

“Why?”

Because misguided and downright malicious people have used the occasion of “translation” to introduce errors into the translated Bibles.

[daniel1212]

As a matter of fact, if you go to Mass every day for three years, you will hear the entire Bible read aloud

As a matter of fact, i think (as a former RC lector) this is another parroted dubious claim. There is no official statement, but based on one priest's count, going to daily mass would result in hearing 13.5 % of the OT (w/o Psalms) and and 71.5 % of the NT being read during the Sundays & Weekdays cycle. Alex calculates this to be only 12.7% of the entire Bible (excluding Psalms) being heard by a weekly-Mass-attending Catholic.

In response to your common "Mass every day for three years, you will hear the entire Bible" assertion, a Catholic at Catholic Answers (http://forums.catholic.com/showpost.php?p=1063633&postcount=9) finds,

The readings for Sunday Mass are repeated every three years. The reading for Weekday Mass are repeated every two years. The following table, based on my own calculations (and therefore likely not entirely error-free), will give you an idea of about what percentage of the Bible, Testament, or each individual book of the Bible, you might hear read at Mass over the course of any three-year period, based on the number of verses read. (Note: All optional Mass readings were included. Also, a verse was counted even if only part of verse is used.)

Book(s) (verses) . . . . . . Sundays only . . Sundays & Weekdays



Entire Bible (35478). . . . . . 14% (5035) . . . 30% (10722)
Old Testament (27524) . . . 6% (1663) . . . . 18% (4830)

Book(s) (verses) . . . . . . . . . Sundays only . . Sundays & Weekdays

New Testament (7954) . . . . . . 42% (3372) . . . . 74% (5892)

And it is hard to hear the entire bible when it seems even in the weekly Sundays & Weekdays cycle Obadiah doesn't get a single reading, and only 1% of 1 Chronicles and 3% of 2 Chronicles, 5% of Leviticus and Lamentations, and 6% of Numbers and Proverbs, and 7% of Joshua and 8% of Ezra and Job (just in the under 10% category) are read.

Moreover, some readings are partial verses, while much of the amount of Scripture RCs are said to hear in mass is redundancy, with some even including "Amen" or like brief statements in their calculations.

In addition, while never universally banning personal Bible reading by the laity, or never printing some in the vernacular, Rome certainly hindered it during much of her history, while in modern times teaching liberal revisionism via her sanctioned Bible helps for decades.

[Cvengr]

Especially in Latin!

[dsc]

“As a matter of fact, i think (as a former RC lector) this is another parroted dubious claim.”

The Internet is a wonderful resource. It also provides fallacious information for the malicious to use in spreading error.

[daniel1212]

The Internet is a wonderful resource. It also provides fallacious information for the malicious to use in spreading error.

So why did you engage in it? Or do you defend your fallacious assertion?

[metmom]

And I don’t need to go to mass every day for three years to read the entire Bible.

I can read it all the way through, all by myself, in far less time.

[daniel1212]

But you miss the redundant practiced play and the perfunctory professions it promotes.

[metmom]

And thank the Lord for that.

[Alex Murphy]

The Internet is a wonderful resource. It also provides fallacious information for the malicious to use in spreading error.

Anyone who believes that the entire Bible is read during the three-year Catholic lectionary reading cycle must be unfamiliar with the contents of the Bible, meaning they have never read or studied it for themselves. If they had read it cover-to-cover, and especially if they made it a habit of studying it daily, they would begin to recognize the huge chunks that are missing from the lectionary readings.

There's an easy way to prove or disprove our assertions. The first way is to obtain a copy of the lectionary reading list, and re-order the readings into book/chapter/verse order rather than reading order. Look and see how many breaks exist in the numbering.

Another method would be to simply bring a Bible into Mass and, using a highlighter, color each verse as it's read during the next three years. At the end of the three-year reading cycle, dsc can then flip through the pages and then witness how many passages aren't highlighted.

[metmom]

That’s too simple.

[metmom]

When questioning a new evangelist that offered "holy laughter" in his revival services but a perverted Gospel, I was told sharply to, "Touch not God's anointed!".

Funny how that seems to be the stock answer when confronted.

That's a red flag for sure.