a reply to: LABTECH767
You misunderstand brother... I didn't say the bible is "so different"... in fact what was compiled in the early years of Christianity is almost the
same as what we have today minus a few additions by Trinitarian scribes... and of course revelation which was originally rejected by the church until
400 some odd years later
I said, Christianity read into what was written and made their own doctrine out of it according to what they wanted to believe...I shall cover a few
points so as to show what I saying.
I wouldn't expect any Christian to reject Paul, admittedly what he said about love is beyond compare and I do admire his words on that subject...
Those words fully reject the so called god of the OT in every aspect... Though Paul twisted the words of Christ to suit his own agenda... Paul's
version of Christianity is "faith alone"... Jesus did not teach faith alone ever... He did say "believe and you will have eternal life"... except
belief requires action not just words... Thus Paul makes HIS words null and void... HE said "why Call me lord and not do what I say"... Everything he
taught required action not just faith.
So to deny paul no matter your personal opinion is to deny the will of he whom sent him.
Paul sent himself... wanted a following, and used the name of Jesus to get what he wanted... He created what is Christianity today... Not
the Gnostic sect's who brought pagan ideas into christianity along with remnant's of the non christian faith did do damage in the earlyer
period but that was countered by the fact they whom had known the Jesus on earth were the first teachers and the very strict and warning letter's to
sect's that arose that had LEFT there first love.
Which included warnings about Paul in Johns letters... the gnostics didn't bring pagan ideas to Christianity... That was Constantine... the pagan
ruler of rome who adopted many Pagan ideas such as Easter which is a tribute to Ishtar, Christmas which is just another version of Sol invictus... and
many other ideas as well.
Also unlike most people actually believe, there weren't any gnostic sects... the gnostic writers were basically writers that didn't get wide
acceptance or a large following... Marcion wasn't a gnostic writer, he was a Christian Heretic, so was Valentinian but many of their ideas were taken
by those who consider themselves "Gnostic" today, but back then there wasn't a "gnostic religion"... there were many versions of Christianity... all
with their own belief sets.
Dan's books were fiction... which he openly admits... many people who read his books assumed he was writing about history but he wasn't and he
admitted to that fact
The trinity isn't a biblical concept what so ever... There are two passages in the NT that show a trinity clearly... both are additions to the
text... 1 John 5:7 and Matthew 29:19... Everything else that even remotely describes a triune God is nothing more then Christians reading into
something that isn't there... there was NO trinity when Jesus walked the earth Period. Proof of which is found within the NT...
In Matthew 28:19 Jesus said baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and holy spirit... except IF you read through the rest of the NT not a single
person is baptized in that fashion... Every single one is baptised in the name of Jesus Christ... Further more a man named Eusebius who was a bishop
in the early church quotes that very passage over 8 times in his writing and every single time the "Trinitarian formula" is absent...
Something as important as "the very nature of God" would not be hidden... it would have been shown clearly... and it was! God isn't a trinity
according to the bible... Period
Would you like more?
Look at the greeting's in Pauls letters...
Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ
No holy spirit? I wonder why Paul left out One of the most important figures in Trinitarian doctrine? One of the very parts of God so to speak...
I'll tell you why... because Paul knew nothing of a triune God... Neither did any of the apostles... There was no triune God taught in the OT or
the NT anywhere... Its found by reading into what was written just as I said previously... And Christianity has had almost 2000 years to find all the
so called "Trinitarian proof texts" in the bible that they have become adept at attempting to prove something that wasn't ever taught by the man they
So again... its not that the bible is much different then the original compilation. Aside from a few alterations and additions to the texts its
pretty much the same... the issue lies with the early church who read into what was writing to show what they wanted to teach... then they started
pushing creeds from men that didn't know any of the apostles or Jesus for that matter... which just got the church farther away from the original
teachings found in the gospels.
the church today is a mess... Christianity as a whole is a complete train wreck... all one has to do is look at the fruit it produces to see that...
There are very few Christians who actually act like Christians...
they adopt the label to gain this elite status of being "saved" and look down their noses at anyone who isn't in their little club...
And the only reason I refuse to claim that label is because I will not be associated with such people... Not all of course, but most make me sick
edit on 10-4-2015 by Akragon because: (no reason given)