originally posted by: 33Iam666
This is a debate forum. If you can't debate without getting angry then don't debate. No one is forcing any one to be here, if you don't like it,
don't come on here.
No this was a thread set up about Gallation's and a very good interpretation of it, I made the mistake of engaging you which I dearly wish I had not
and not because you think you have won for you patently have not but because you have essentially hijacked this thread to press your idiology over
that of the thread author and to attack a biblical text which has stood for over 1900 years and of course also you are using out of context
argument's and cross referencing out of context also.
Though this will rattle a lot of my fellow christians on this point I must say and point out that a lot of the text's and of course VERBAL teaching's
which were likely far more extensive than the written work's we have today in the modern bible were simply not included except in the non writen
catachism's and tradition's of all of the orthodox church's (Catholic litterally mean's Orthodox in Latin which of course is analogus to METHODIST
with the exception methodist belief is based on the litteral word but of course they have therefore discounted the original verbal and catachism
traditions which were mostly shared by all of the original church's including those that were non Nicene such as the Syriac (though they later adopted
the Nicene creed as it was based on common christian belief anyway) and the Ethiopian Orthodoxy, sadly the Arabian Church's (there were entire
kingdoms of both Jewish and Christian belief on the Arabian Peninsular) were eradicated by the Islamic army's from the 7th century onward and of
course Islam mistranslated such passages as Misra into Misram from the arameic as well as denying both the Imaculate
Conception/Crucifixion/Resurrecton and the divinity of Christ claiming he was a miner profet superceded by Muhammed and also claiming that Christ once
killed a child for disturbing him while he was writing with his finger in the sand?.
There have been many such TWISTING's of the biblical passages over the ages, indeed the very unification of the church on earth under a secular
empire was an act of Usurpation of the throne of Christ as instead of faith it demanded order and conformity, this was harmful to the church as most
pagen priest whom had been important members of the suddenly defunct religions simply upped stix and moved into the new Clergy of the church bringing
many of there practices and of course there privaleged status with them so forever changing the nature of the church from a social organisation and
grass root's movement into an imposed belief and control system.
The truth is that Paul was not a false profet, he was a servant in Christ and our elder brother in him also, you can continue to deny so long as you
do not deny christ and take into account the harm your opinion may when you force it onto others actually harm there faith in general, christianity
has to heal but it is at it's most true when practiced freely by those whom have chosen just as the lord Said "My own shall come unto me" and those
regardless of denomination or opinion are one family and one true church in christ no matter were they are but of course True teching is necessary, if
paul had been false then John of Patmos and other later important christian figures would have noted it as well as there having been another version
of the Bible as a result.
While it is true there were many sects which arose after the the third century as well as even first century deviation in the meaning of the
teaching's of christ which is why the apostles often admonish those Church's and the Alpha and Omega warn's them they will lose there candle (be
destroyed) so that there wrong teaching will not infect his body these were well recognised even early in the church history, love and forgiveness of
sin for instance was not a licence to live in a sinful way, forgiveness is still dependant upon repentance and confession is a tool of this especially
because we know when we have done wrong in ourselve's most of the time and confessing is painful forcing us to both tell other's and face up to our
action in ourselves.
But later sect's such as the Gnostic Movement's were not truly christian at all and there teaching often were deliberately altered to incorporate
alternate interpretations and even to encode pagan theology and philosophy into them with many Gnostic texts especially in Egypt being almost totally
different and including story's which were not from the original.
That is not to say that the egyptian church is in the wrong, they do keep there pagan deity's as saint's since it mentions how the idol's of egypt
bowed down before the child jesus and they have story's which may be true such as the child jesus taking mud form the bank's of the nile and making it
into two doves which he then breathed life into and let fly away.
So not even any given church has it all, the Syriac Orthodoc church is the oldest though it underwent a split with the smaller half remaining
independant and now probably wiped out by the ISIL terrorists when in fact it could have lain claim to being the true original church having been
founded by the OTHER apostles.
The split led half to join the Catholic church as they found most of there teaching's and catachysm were in agreement with some differences and as
well because of a prolonged dispute with the Greek/Eastern Orthodoxy which is why they chose the Catholic/Western orthodox church, but of course
within there archives written in Aremaic rather than Latin or Greek were many early christian text's and of course though he was not there apostle
they had no problem with the word's of Paul and indeed agreed with him so at the end of this how are you over 1900 years later suddenly more knowing
than all of those various unrelated christian scholar's and teachers from various INDEPENDANT christian traditions and why do you think you are
correct to the exclusion of common sense.
Of couse some saint's seemed vaguely strage to our mind's such as the eastern ascetic tradition such as Simeon Stylites, he MORTIFIED his flesh by
staying on a pillar till the day he died to emulate his beloved Jesus whom died on a cross, he was in his way rejecting this world and devoting
himself utterly to the spriritual indulgance in christ, it does seem strange though to us with our modern and unchristian materialistic view of the
world and the universe but of course miracles happened around this Syriac saint as they did around many other ascetic's, notice how almost all of
these people whom god so loved for trying to emulate his son lived in poverty or rejected there wealth, so much for praying to god for money as some
TV evangelists seem to think is correct, pray for your neighbour first and yourself last for your father know's what you need and your true home is
not here on earth anyway but with him.