Something wrong with Christianity?

[FrankSophia]

What is the lesser covenant in this context? I didn´t find it in the passage you referred to.

The Torah is called the lesser covenant in Hebrews 7...

2 Corinthians 3:1-18 calls it the covenant of death and condemnation...

This is what's wrong with Christianity, we don't even read our own texts and end up with the mentality of the Pharisee...

Right now this is threatening to destroy our species so it's a big deal.

 

[Cino]

The Torah is called the lesser covenant in Hebrews 7...

That chapter seems to be about priesthood, drawing an arc from Melchizedek via Aaron to Jesus. I found no reference to a "lesser covenant", only to the greater one offered by Jesus. But maybe what you are saying is implied in the text?

2 Corinthians 3:1-18 calls it the covenant of death and condemnation...

This is what's wrong with Christianity, we don't even read our own texts and end up with the mentality of the Pharisee...

Right now this is threatening to destroy our species so it's a big deal.

In what way is the "mentality of the Pharisee" an existential threat to our species?

Who, in your opinion, are the modern-day Pharisees?

 

[FrankSophia]

That chapter seems to be about priesthood, drawing an arc from Melchizedek via Aaron to Jesus. I found no reference to a "lesser covenant", only to the greater one offered by Jesus. But maybe what you are saying is implied in the text?



In what way is the "mentality of the Pharisee" an existential threat to our species?

Who, in your opinion, are the modern-day Pharisees?

Verse 22 specifically mentions that Jesus brings a better covenant, you have been mistaken in your interpretation because it's actually talking about Aarons priesthood being irrelevant because it's based on flawed men and sacrifices while ours is based on a promise. You seem to be arguing semantics though, if one is greater is not the one its compared to lesser?

Putin is using wrong Christian understandings to fuel his war, and Trump is doing the same in America... these two happen to have the largest nuclear arsenals on the planet and Putin especially seems to be willing to use them if tradition isn't upheld, if Christian values aren't applied to everyone... yet they aren't actually Christian values at all, they are Jewish and the reason Jesus was killed.

The Pharisee killed Jesus for violating the Sabbath (Mark 3:1-6) and is questioned about his claim to authority in the matter (Mark 2:24-28) at trial before execution, throughout Galatians we are told that Jesus has lifted the law through his sacrifice and that we're hypocrites who are rendering him irrelevant (Galatians 2:11-21 for instance) for continuing to live by it... yet we still try.

We are children of the resurrection because the law is no more upon us, of course the Muslims reject it to keep us under the law and Judaism just denies that he's the Messiah as such but even Christians have not understood the point of Jesus.

 

[FrankSophia]

So, the Pharisee are specifically those that still insist upon the law and use it to define sin...

The link between Hebrews 7 and 2 Corinthians 3 is important though, it's not just insistence upon the law but fixation on texts such that we never come to the Spirit at all...

Generally just this superficial comprehension of religion.

 

[restored&adopted]

Nothing about this admin is mature or polite.

Now this thread is about irrelevant bs instead of something interesting.

Guys lets all take a deep breath.
We are all souls searching hence us being here.

This is a light example of what is lying ahead. Scripture says that nation will rise against nation and even family members will turn against each other.

Even though Frank is unnecessarily aggressive in making sure his point is made he still has a valid point and if you discern you will notice that any discussions that may bring the lies into the open usually ends up the same. This is because the adversary (whose time is running out) uses emotions to distract and deflect.
And he uses both sides (if he has authority) to fuel this.

Casting the emotions aside I am standing on both sides reading the comments as there are truths on both sides. The important thing is that we are not called to serve in rightness against wrongness but in Truth.

What Frank originally mentioned is something he discerned is wrong and he is not wrong for noticing that. (You guys who know me probably thinking oh no here we go again

Frank, from my own experience the last 2 years I will try and help you understand what is happening. We are in the early light of the end. And people are waking up and searching again. As the enemy's kingdom is setup against itself most believers keeping the faith have started looking to the Truth themselves after lock-down and realises "the church" and Scripture does not say the same thing.

This may bring out anger and whatever wicked fruit the adversary has been able to put in place with religion.
In the end we only have ourselves to blame though as the Creator told us what will happen if we put our trust in an arm of flesh instead of coming to Him.

To understand what is happening one need to understand the prophecies, but understanding comes through Him and if we do not realise His Ruach (Spirit) is two-edged we will struggle a lot to receive understanding and if one has faith but still trusting in humans to give you the Truth who will jump around in the Menorah trying to find Truth instead of focusing on the light in the middle AND obeying His commandments only.
As we will not be judge by opinions but by His law.

Thank you for listening to my "Sermon"

Now to get back to your question. What is wrong with Christianity is that it is a religion created by annexing Faith.
But I realise one need to be careful to just only point that Christianity is the only religion where humans distorted the truth as we are limited to our own experiences.
Teaching people that you have to be a born-again Christian where the Word says you have to be born-again which applies to any soul regardless of their religion.
The teaching of having to be a member instead of a branch.

 

[Cino]

I stand by my earlier point that our Code of Conduct is worth reading and abiding by, for all participants of the Interfaith Dialogue Forums.

Do take this to heart.

 

[Cino]

yet they aren't actually Christian values at all, they are Jewish and the reason Jesus was killed.

Isn't it a very core Chrisyian value that Jesus' death was fortunate for his followers, as it constituted some kind of redemption by sacrifice?

I never understood this part of Christian belief. Either blame the Jews (why not the Romans? They were the executioners aftet all?), or rejoice in the sacrifice, but having it both ways is, frankly, self-contradictory.

Also, enough antisemitic rhetoric. Last warning.

 

[FrankSophia]

Even though Frank is unnecessarily aggressive in making sure his point is made he still has a valid point and if you discern you will notice that any discussions that may bring the lies into the open usually ends up the same. This is because the adversary (whose time is running out) uses emotions to distract and deflect.
And he uses both sides (if he has authority) to fuel this.

I have not been aggressive or rude, you speak in a moment about emotions not controlling us but I have had no emotional response to this dialog. In my experience people really dislike their fundamental beliefs being questioned or threatened in any way, but if your foundation is truth itself then no engagement is ever a threat... it's just a matter of understanding each other better.

Casting the emotions aside I am standing on both sides reading the comments as there are truths on both sides. The important thing is that we are not called to serve in rightness against wrongness but in Truth.

Hmm, I probably should have adjusted the quote but now it wouldn't make sense.

Frank, from my own experience the last 2 years I will try and help you understand what is happening. We are in the early light of the end. And people are waking up and searching again. As the enemy's kingdom is setup against itself most believers keeping the faith have started looking to the Truth themselves after lock-down and realises "the church" and Scripture does not say the same thing.

This may bring out anger and whatever wicked fruit the adversary has been able to put in place with religion.
In the end we only have ourselves to blame though as the Creator told us what will happen if we put our trust in an arm of flesh instead of coming to Him.

I am the one wearing a crown in Revelation 3:7-13 so I'm quite familiar with prophecy.

To understand what is happening one need to understand the prophecies, but understanding comes through Him and if we do not realise His Ruach (Spirit) is two-edged we will struggle a lot to receive understanding and if one has faith but still trusting in humans to give you the Truth who will jump around in the Menorah trying to find Truth instead of focusing on the light in the middle AND obeying His commandments only.
As we will not be judge by opinions but by His law.

This is what has gone wrong, due to the law compassion is killed.

Now to get back to your question. What is wrong with Christianity is that it is a religion created by annexing Faith.
But I realise one need to be careful to just only point that Christianity is the only religion where humans distorted the truth as we are limited to our own experiences.
Teaching people that you have to be a born-again Christian where the Word says you have to be born-again which applies to any soul regardless of their religion.
The teaching of having to be a member instead of a branch.

This somewhat relates to Ephesians 2:11-22 as we like to differentiate each other but you are rightly suggesting a removal of barriers... while it may not look like it so far I'm familiar with various traditions and see nothing different at the peaks.

Truth is not dependent on the words used to convey it.

 

[FrankSophia]

Isn't it a very core Chrisyian value that Jesus' death was fortunate for his followers, as it constituted some kind of redemption by sacrifice?

I never understood this part of Christian belief. Either blame the Jews (why not the Romans? They were the executioners aftet all?), or rejoice in the sacrifice, but having it both ways is, frankly, self-contradictory.

I would suggest if they'd have just accepted him he needn't have died at all, I do not uphold that it was necessary for salvation because he is already not living by the law and this is why he was killed... he is already living by love, and healed when breaking the sabbath. We could have just accepted this then, but 2000 years later we still haven't.

I am specifically blaming Levitical law because Exodus 31:15 insists upon it.

The Jewish people weren't allowed to execute people so they made a deal with the Romans to get it done, but the Romans didn't really want to and tried to avoid it...

Also, enough antisemitic rhetoric. Last warning.

Nothing I've said is antisemitic as this is an ethnic group and I'm speaking against ideas...

You can't really put Jesus in the correct perspective without speaking against what he brought to an end.

 

[FrankSophia]

I love all people, but some ideas are harmful.

You misunderstand me if you think I'm validating violence against anyone.

I'm not posting this to a general section of the site though.

I enjoy the mystical aspects of every tradition provided it doesn't get too far from the realization of oneness... this section is specifically for Christian discussion though, and here there are specific issues to talk about. I was born into a Christian society, it is what effects me most directly so it has a greater importance in many ways. I want those around me to stop needlessly causing suffering due to foolish notions of obedience...

This is obviously not a topic for elsewhere in the forum, but why is it wrong here?

 

[Faithfulservant]

The Pharisee didn't technically kill Jesus.. the Romans did and nothing was done to Jesus that He did not allow. Jesus asked the Father to forgive them for they know not what they were doing why should we not do the same?. It wasn't about the Sabbath they believed He was a false prophet and teacher and that He didn't fulfill all the criteria of the Messiah. They still believe that. They didn't understand that He would be coming twice as we believe. I've spoken to a few Jewish people that were thankfully not too defensive to give me an honest answer. It's attitudes like you are presenting that causes such a rift between us as God's people. We can learn a lot from them as the Old Testament are their scripture and they have the understanding that we do not have and they study them faithfully their whole lives. My love for them is that God chose them and through them we are called. Just as the Lord promised Abraham that through his seed all nations would be blessed.

 

[FrankSophia]

The Pharisee didn't technically kill Jesus.. the Romans did and nothing was done to Jesus that He did not allow. Jesus asked the Father to forgive them for they know not what they were doing why should we not do the same?. It wasn't about the Sabbath they believed He was a false prophet and teacher and that He didn't fulfill all the criteria of the Messiah. They still believe that. They didn't understand that He would be coming twice as we believe. I've spoken to a few Jewish people that were thankfully not too defensive to give me an honest answer. It's attitudes like you are presenting that causes such a rift between us as God's people. We can learn a lot from them as the Old Testament are their scripture and they have the understanding that we do not have and they study them faithfully their whole lives. My love for them is that God chose them and through them we are called. Just as the Lord promised Abraham that through his seed all nations would be blessed.

The Romans tried to let him go and crucify a murderer instead but the Pharisee insisted on putting Jesus to death, overlooking this part of the story misses the point entirely. He has claimed authority over the sabbath in Mark 2:24-28 so I understand your confusion but Mark 3:1-6 violates Exodus 31:15 and the stated punishment is death. He understands he isn't going to get through to these people, but that isn't the same thing... they don't know that they are killing God and freedom so that they can cling to death and condemnation. For me a lot of the things they expected of Jesus were fulfilled in Muhammad, he is one like unto Moses and a nation for Ismael but even he says Jesus will be judge and due to his illiteracy he did not read Galatians 1:8 even going to a Jewish community for the law because it wasn't given to him. For me what causes a rift between us is that we are ignoring the Spirit for superficial arguments, we see in Ephesians 3:16-19 a love that surpasses knowledge and reveals the fullness of God but we focus on correcting the flesh. We think we are Gods people but we are slaves to worldly forces...

 

[FrankSophia]

Abraham is the father of racism and Moses the father of nationalism... the two greatest poisons throughout history.

Take a look at Galatians 4:19-31 and we learn that we participate in the same promise Abraham did, yet in the context of Hebrews 7 we are an order older than Abraham.

I would go so far as to suggest Jesus is another rainbow apologizing for the callous apathy that resulted from this.

It is why love is the law now, that compassion and empathy might flourish.

Instead we're still slaughtering each other for not complying with our expectations.

 

[FrankSophia]

Uhh, I was thinking of Galatians 3:28-29 specifically...

Still that section is relevant too.

 

[Thomas]

Why is all of this ignored today?

I don't think it is.

Why is Christianity not about perfecting love, but rather continues to cling to condemnation?

There are those who do, and those who shout about it ... my advice, don't listen to all the noise ...

Where is any of this in modern Christianity?

Everywhere, if you care to look.

 

[FrankSophia]

I don't think it is.

There are those who do, and those who shout about it ... my advice, don't listen to all the noise ...

Everywhere, if you care to look.

I have been looking for decades and have only encountered a handful of genuine Christians so I don't understand how you're drawing these conclusions?

Again let me bring up Luke 14:26 and Galatians 5:4 so that there is no debate about this being gatekeeping or similar.

Most are trying to benefit themselves by obeying laws, precisely what we're told isn't Christian.

Ultimately it is more about feeling the Spirit in each other, but most seem dead inside.

 

[Thomas]

I have been looking for decades and have only encountered a handful of genuine Christians so I don't understand how you're drawing these conclusions?

All I can say is my experience is different.

Most are trying to benefit themselves by obeying laws, precisely what we're told isn't Christian.

By whom. I'm thinking of Matthew 5:17–20?

Ultimately it is more about feeling the Spirit in each other, but most seem dead inside.

Love for one another ... yes. That does not abrogate the Word of God, rather, it illuminates it.

 

[FrankSophia]

By whom. I'm thinking of Matthew 5:17–20?

These are popular verses among those who are against Christ but you fail to notice that the Resurrection hasn't happened yet, and he's killed under the law so yes it's still upheld fully until God reverses it... then Christ appeared to Paul and explained the ramifications of that but we've ignored him.

We don't seem to understand that Paul is closer to the events than the gospels, and the earliest of his letters tells us this is the gospel we've received and should not accept the contrary of... warning us that hypocrites are already ignoring the message for what they've always known failing to create the new people of Ephesians 2:11-22

Love for one another ... yes. That does not abrogate the Word of God, rather, it illuminates it.

The light of God is a direct experience upon union, which is the experience of divine love.

Logos is a Stoic concept, relating it to words in a book is a mistake.

It is the common knower of the psyche/soul, nous/spirit, and monad/oneness which is an important aspect of hesychasm.

 

[Thomas]

These are popular verses among those who are against Christ but you fail to notice that the Resurrection hasn't happened yet, and he's killed under the law so yes it's still upheld fully until God reverses it... then Christ appeared to Paul and explained the ramifications of that but we've ignored him.

I disagree with your interpretation.

Any word given by God, any 'message' from the divine is timeless and eternal ... therefore there is no 'use by' date.

We don't seem to understand that Paul is closer to the events than the gospels ...

Do we? Paul is preaching, and aware of the Gospel, other than his own gospel (cf 1 Corinthians 15) – so while his letters are the first, his was not the only gospel being preached at the time, and it's evident that Paul draws from these gospels – 1 Corinthians 15:5-7 is a somewhat credal statement which Paul is aware of in the Church.

The light of God is a direct experience upon union, which is the experience of divine love.

Nevertheless...

Logos is a Stoic concept, relating it to words in a book is a mistake.

No, that's just unknowing of its more profound meaning, or rather its unique meaning in John – to miss that is the mistake, yes.

It is the common knower of the psyche/soul, nous/spirit, and monad/oneness which is an important aspect of hesychasm.

OK ... I only pause because hesychasm is a broad term ... a bit like Logos!

 

[FrankSophia]

Any word given by God, any 'message' from the divine is timeless and eternal ... therefore there is no 'use by' date.

Hebrews 7:1-28 and 2 Corinthians 3:1-18 strongly disagree with you.

Do we? Paul is preaching, and aware of the Gospel, other than his own gospel (cf 1 Corinthians 15) – so while his letters are the first, his was not the only gospel being preached at the time, and it's evident that Paul draws from these gospels – 1 Corinthians 15:5-7 is a somewhat credal statement which Paul is aware of in the Church.

You are misunderstanding Corinthians, it is written several years after Galatians but there is no other gospel he can reference.

Further, why is it in the cannon as it is if the early Church accepted a gospel contrary to it?

No, that's just unknowing of its more profound meaning, or rather its unique meaning in John – to miss that is the mistake, yes.

John 1 is basically just applying the Stoic concept to Jesus and anyone back then would have recognized this considering it was the most popular philosophy of the day...

OK ... I only pause because hesychasm is a broad term ... a bit like Logos!

It really isn't...

Hesychasm means silence, stillness...

There are various means of getting there, but these aid only in self control...

No activities are hesychasm...

Here God comes for a visit.