Posted on 04/21/2009 4:05:25 PM PDT by ReformationFan
One of the most massive and widespread occurrences of identity theft has happened, and it is not even attracting the attention of local, state or national leaders. This particularly insidious method targets a minority group, stealing their most precious possession, and yet even more compelling is that the perpetrator assumes nearly permanent "residency" in the victim's identity.
The mastermind behind this worldwide ring has cells in every city and town in America – including operatives in many unsuspecting homes. The evidence of this outrage is right before our eyes, but we have simply chosen to ignore its existence, pretending that the consequences will be insignificant.
The "victim" is biblical Christianity, and the operatives of this fraud are millions of Americans, both clergy and laity, who are walking around using that identity with no right to do so. The consequences are a nation without the spiritual, moral, social and political anchor that held us firm through over 400 years of tempests and storms.
Maybe President Obama wasn't so far off when he gushed to Islamic leaders that, "…we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation. … we consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values. I think modern Turkey was founded with a similar set of principles."
His confusion in comparing American ideals – which have led us to fight, bleed and die to free others – with Turkey's – which have led them to slaughter, oppress and persecute non-Muslims – is understandable. Why do I make such an outrageous claim?
Many will insist that we all have the right to practice Christianity as our conscience dictates. Wrong.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
"Don't tell us how much someone "loves the Lord" (including the president) if he or she denies "all that I commanded you." Don't call yourself a Christian if you are going to deny essential doctrines."
Joining the CINOs?
Catholics in Name Only.
Now we can have CHRINOs too!
LOL!
Yes, that was a good quote. It still seems impossible that there can be any Christians on the left, as virtually everthing they believe is so contrary to Biblical teaching.
A good solution for everyone is Bible Study Fellowship-
http://www.bsfinternational.org/
I’ve been going for years and have learned so much of God’s Word from it. I also recommend every Christian read through the entire Bible from cover to cover. I finally did that last year and am so glad I did.
The word “Christianity” does not appear in the Bible.
The word “Christians” occurs only once, in Acts 11:26.
“... and the desciples were called Christians first in Antioch.”
The term was used by others about the desciples, they did not use it themselves.
The word Christian appears only twice:
Acts 26:28 “Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian”
...and
I Peter 4:16 “Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, ...”
It appears the name, “Christian,” was a derogatory one, and not one the apostles or early church fathers embraced.
I wish “Christians” would learn something about their religion. I love Christians but find them appallingly ignorant of the Bible they claim as their authority.
Hank
“Christian” is a label/symbol, as are all English nouns. It does not derive its meaning from the Bible. It derives its meaning from the dictionary.
Kinda like “rapture”.
Both words most definitely have a meaning. Several, actually.
>>I wish “Christians” would learn something about their religion. I love Christians but find them appallingly ignorant of the Bible they claim as their authority.<<
Oh, the irony of that paragrapy.
I have some problems with the criteria the author selected as being definitive of Christianity.
Perhaps the worst problem is defining Satan as a living being. In a manner of speaking, it could be said that categorizing Satan is “way above our pay grade.”
A good way of describing the problem is found in the Islamic concept of the “Abdala”. They are entities whose purpose is to maintain the continuity of existence. As such, they have a direct covenant with God, that is not any of the human covenants. Humans are not endowed with the ability to define or describe them, as we can most other things, and humans are advised to leave them alone.
In essence, what they do is not our business, and they have their own rules that we are not privy to. They have been, are, and will remain unknown to us.
Much the same problem exists with Satan. Living being or not, it is not up to us to say. Our job is not to define Satan, but to avoid Satan if at all possible. This part we know. But when people go around saying that Satan is “such and such” and “so and so”, they are treading on thin ice. Unlike the Abdala, at least we have been given some definition of what Satan is to work with. But that is not license to abstract.
And don’t *even* think you can describe the Holy Ghost. That is pushing “Taking God’s Name in Vain” to extremes.
Why don’t you identify what you believe the author used as the ‘criteria’, then we can discuss your problems with it.
He described them in criticizing the survey by Barna Research.
1) 60% believe “that Satan ‘is not a living being but is a symbol of evil.’”
2) Only 25 percent strongly disagree that God the Holy Spirit is “a symbol of God’s power or presence but is not a living entity.”
3) Less than one-half of Christians strongly disagreed that “Jesus Christ sinned when He lived on earth.” (Actually this one I believe is in conformity with Christian doctrines, i.e. Jesus was sinless. So half of Christians would be in error.)
What I was criticizing was mostly #1, because beyond what is written in the Bible about Satan, people not only don’t know, but we are not even capable of finding out on our own. It is not up to us to define angels, in heaven or fallen.
And #2 is even worse, because trying to come up with a human description of God the Holy Spirit actually violates a commandment.
Lots of cultures have a Satan-like character in their religious history. He goes by many names.
I don’t even use his name, I just use my personal favorite alternate name for him, ‘The Adversary,’ which is really a very fitting name.
“Lots of cultures have a Satan-like character in their religious history.”
That is not a good avenue to pursue, because lots of cultures also have a Savior-like character in their religious history as well. Similar to is not necessarily a valid comparison.
So define what it is to “BE” a Christian.
That’s a lot harder than what I did. People have had protracted wars over the definition of what it means to be a Christian. And those wars, I might add, in no way settled the issue.
But it is considerably easier to point out beliefs that are not Christian, or even Judeo-Christian. For example, Judeo-Christian religions, including Islam, are monotheistic. A unified God or a unified Trinity God, it still amounts to the same thing, a single God.
A problem arises with the concept of Satan, because it is an easy, wrong, extrapolation to imagine Satan as an “anti-God”, that is separate, opposite and equal to God. Theologians will slap this wrong idea down, and hard, but it leaves us with a dilemma.
There is God, and there is man. But the existence of Satan implies that there is something in between the two, in terms of power. And unlike a monotheistic God, there is no limit to how many entities can exist that are more powerful than man.
But if they are more powerful than us, what sense does it make for us to try and define what they are?
The Catholics tried, creating a very complicated idea of the heavenly host of many orders of angels and other beings. But they likewise fell into the trap of elevating Satan and his minions, who in Hell tried to recreate the appearance of heaven in Hell, as in castles, banquets, and hierarchies.
But this ends up looking silly. Because it is not up to humans to define what it means to be angels or demons. They are beyond us.
I liked that one, too. I dread the direction many churches and denominations are taking. I love a good evangelical sermon that makes one squirm in his or her seat and convicts them of sin. We barely get them anymore.
I call him the enemy (of our souls).
I believe it is precisely this reason some are moving away from the term. It has become a label and not a definition of who someone is. When our church went on a mission trip to the Portland area to help one of our partner churches, we discovered that they do not use the term "Christian" when asking someone about their faith...or when describing their own faith. Instead...they refer to themselves as "Followers of Christ," which is much more clear on where you stand.
Many people in this country call themselves Christians...but embrace doctrines that are not orthodox and deny doctrines that are (Jesus as "The Way" for instance).
>>Many people in this country call themselves Christians...but embrace doctrines that are not orthodox and deny doctrines that are (Jesus as “The Way” for instance).<<
And that is an old issue. I remember an old interview with a woman (at least 20 years ago) where she was asked if she was a Christian. She said, “Of course I am. I’m an american, aren’t I?
Romans 16:17-20Paul's instruction on how to turn away from false teaching: Be wise in what is good and innocent in what is evil.
Now I urge you, brethren, keep your eye on those who cause dissensions and hindrances contrary to the teaching which you learned, and turn away from them. For such men are slaves, not of our Lord Christ but of their own appetites; and by their smooth and flattering speech they deceive the hearts of the unsuspecting. For the report of your obedience has reached to all; therefore I am rejoicing over you, but I want you to be wise in what is good and innocent in what is evil. The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus be with you.
The Athanasian CreedThese are the truth of Scripture laid out to aid in identifying true Christian faith, helping identify false teaching.
(1) Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith; (2) Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. (3) And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; (4) Neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the substance. (5) For there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son and another of the Holy Spirit. (6) But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one, the glory equal, the majesty co-eternal. (7) Such as the Father is, such is the Son and such is the Holy Spirit. (8) The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Spirit uncreate. (9) The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible. (10) The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Spirit eternal. (11) And yet they are not three eternals, but one eternal. (12) As also there are not three uncreated nor three incomprehensibles, but one uncreated and one incomprehensible. (13) So likewise the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, and the Holy Spirit almighty; (14) And yet they are not three almighties, but one almighty. (15) So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God; (16) And yet they are not three Gods, but one God. (17) So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Spirit Lord; (18) And yet they are not three Lords, but one Lord. (19) For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every person by himself to be God and Lord; (20) so are we forbidden by the catholic religion to say: There are three Gods or three Lords. (21) The Father is made of none, neither created nor begotten. (22) The Son is of the Father alone; not made nor created, but begotten. (23) The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding. (24) So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits. (25) And in this Trinity none is afore, nor after another; none is greater, or less than another. (26) But the whole three persons are co-eternal, and co-equal. (27) So that in all things, as aforesaid, the Unity in Trinity and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped. (28) He therefore that will be saved must thus think of the Trinity.
(29) Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. (30) For the right faith is that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and man. (31) God of the substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and made of the substance of His mother, born in the world. (32) Perfect God and perfect man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting. (33) Equal to the Father as touching His Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching His manhood. (34) Who, although He is God and man, yet He is not two, but one Christ. (35) One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of the manhood into God. (36) One altogether, not by the confusion of substance, but by unity of person. (37) For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one Christ; (38) Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead; (39) He ascended into heaven, He sitteth on the right hand of the Father, God Almighty; (40) From thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead. (41) At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies; (42) And shall give account of their own works. (43) And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting, and they that have done evil into everlasting fire. (44) This is the catholic faith, which except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved.
The Nicene Creed
I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made.
Who, for us men and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.
And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.
And I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.
The Apostles' Creed
1. I believe in God the Father, Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth.
2. And in Jesus Christ, His only begotten Son, our Lord;
3. Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the virgin Mary;
4. Suffered under Pontius Pilate; was crucified, dead, and buried; He descended into hell;
5. The third day He rose again from the dead;
6. He ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty;
7. From thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead.
8. I believe in the Holy Spirit.
9. I believe a holy catholic Church, the communion of saints;
10. The forgiveness of sins;
11. The resurrection of the body;
12. And the life everlasting. AMEN.
“...the way to discern what isn’t truth is to know what is.”
When things are different, distinguishing *between* them is easy—however, *defining* them may not be easy at all. That is, you are correct that you can know which is God and which is Satan, but it is not up to us to define what God or being Satan are, except relative to us.
Mankind does not define God, nor is it able to. God is a singularity, so there is nothing in the universe to compare to God. This is why God has no name, because names are used to distinguish something that is known from something else that is known.
But this does not mean that mankind cannot “know” God, just that we cannot define God.
But God is the ultimate extreme of what we cannot define. This does not mean that “things”, other than God, cannot also exist that are either unknown or unknowable to mankind. For example, we know “of” angels, but we cannot on our own say what they are—we are reliant on other’s definitions of what angels are. Again, we can “know” angels, but we cannot define angels—they are beyond our definition.
That is, one angel is an angel, another is an archangel. What is the difference? From our point of view they are both angels, but unless somebody shares with us why they are different, we have no clue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.