resident_evil
Senator
The Old Testament remains highly relevant. :0)Sure, it's a great reference, but be wary of those that cherry-pick from it to avoid facing a truth stated by Jesus.
The Old Testament remains highly relevant. :0)Sure, it's a great reference, but be wary of those that cherry-pick from it to avoid facing a truth stated by Jesus.
God repented after he sent the flood. However God doesn't change that's why he had a plan of salvation and no one has to be under the law of the old testament. Using the old Testament as an example is not being bound by it.The God of the Old Testament and the God of the New are as different as night and day. Obviously it wasn't God who changed since God is God. It's mankind's perception of God that changed with the birth and life of Christ.
What truth is that brother? He doesn't condemn wealth only the love of wealth.Sure, it's a great reference, but be wary of those that cherry-pick from it to avoid facing a truth stated by Jesus.
Actually the discussion was about whether or not the founders were Christians. I said look at our historical precedence of the Congressional Chaplain all were up until recently Christain.The discussion was those who use the Old Testament
The message of Christ is about everlasting life in spirit. Something the Old Testament doesn't address. Hence, while it was a great tragedy for Job to lose his sons in the Old Testament, it's a greater tragedy to lose one's soul in the New Testament.What truth is that brother? He doesn't condemn wealth only the love of wealth.
Look at the wealth of Salomon was he condemned?
yes the spirit is what Jesus was concerned about. It still doesn't change anything he never condemned people that had wealth. What he did condemn was the love of that wealth. He also condemned slouthness and not trying to provide for yourself.The message of Christ is about everlasting life in spirit. Something the Old Testament doesn't address. Hence, while it was a great tragedy for Job to lose his sons in the Old Testament, it's a greater tragedy to lose one's soul in the New Testament.
Mark 8:34-38
34 Then he called the crowd to him along with his disciples and said: “Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. 35 For whoever wants to save their life[a] will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me and for the gospel will save it. 36 What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? 37 Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul? 38 If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his Father’s glory with the holy angels.
Prior to this passage is Mark 8:33 where Jesus rebukes Peter and says "“You do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.”"
Clearly Christ is more concerned about spiritual afterlife, while the Old Testament concerns itself with mortal happiness as it describes how Job is eventually compensated with twice as many livestock and material wealth.
Jesus was big on condemning the sin, not the sinner.yes the spirit is what Jesus was concerned about. It still doesn't change anything he never condemned people that had wealth. What he did condemn was the love of that wealth. He also condemned slouthness and not trying to provide for yourself.
While a few other verses say that, Mark 10:20-31 does seem to show that there is a corruption of the soul in having wealth while others are poor.
https://www.bible.com/bible/111/mrk.10.20-31.niv
20“Teacher,” he declared, “all these I have kept since I was a boy.”
21Jesus looked at him and loved him. “One thing you lack,” he said. “Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”
22At this the man’s face fell. He went away sad, because he had great wealth.
23Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, “How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!”
24The disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said again,“Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God!
25It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”
26The disciples were even more amazed, and said to each other, “Who then can be saved?”
27Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but not with God; all things are possible with God.”
28Then Peter spoke up, “We have left everything to follow you!”
29“Truly I tell you,” Jesus replied, “no one who has left home or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields for me and the gospel
30will fail to receive a hundred times as much in this present age: homes, brothers, sisters, mothers, children and fields—along with persecutions—and in the age to come eternal life.
31But many who are first will be last, and the last first.”
I'll repeat what I have said to have wealth Jesus did not condemn but to love that wealth it was a sin.Jesus was big on condemning the sin, not the sinner.
So what do you think he was talking about in Mark 10:20-31?
Episcopalians are definitely Christians. Unitarians in John Adams's time definitely considered themselves Christians, and came from a Christian tradition, but many if not most Unitarians today are not processed Christians, and denying the Trinity is considered un-Christian by nearly all mainstream Christian traditions.Are Episcopalians Christians or not in your opinion? Unitarians?
Consider that leading Deists (e.g., Thomas Jefferson) were not members of Congress. Does Bush and Obama hosting Eid al-Fitr feasts prove that they are Muslims? Or is it, just possibly, merely a bit of political pandering of the sort the Founders were likewise not above?Funny thread questioning if the founders were Christians or something else and their views on Separation of Church and state.
If you really want the facts and historical precedence all you have to do is look at the Congressional Chaplain and who they appointed. All were Christians, If any were Deists don't you think they would have appointed something other than a Christain as the Congressional Chaplain?
Are you saying one can be a Christian without believing Jesus was God? Jefferson apparently felt the same, but I think that would astonish most Christian triumphalists today.I see what you did playing with words again? Can't win an argument move the goal post. THE DISCUSSION ISN'T ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT JEFFERSONS BELIEVED JESUS WAS GOD, BUT WHETHER THE FOUNDERS INCLUDING JEFFERSON WERE CHRISTIANS
Stop it.
Be like the birds of the air and the lilies of the field?If you give all your wealth away how would you provide for your own
"Woe to you who are rich."-Luke 6:24yes the spirit is what Jesus was concerned about. It still doesn't change anything he never condemned people that had wealth. What he did condemn was the love of that wealth. He also condemned slouthness and not trying to provide for yourself.
Many Christian denominations don't consider others "true" Christians. The only reason most accept the Trinity is because they killed off, declared as heretics or otherwise intimidated all opposing views.Episcopalians are definitely Christians. Unitarians in John Adams's time definitely considered themselves Christians, and came from a Christian tradition, but many if not most Unitarians today are not processed Christians, and denying the Trinity is considered un-Christian by nearly all mainstream Christian traditions.
Wealthy God fearing men mentioned in the Bible"Woe to you who are rich."-Luke 6:24
Jefferson attended Church many of them he also said he was a Christian.Consider that leading Deists (e.g., Thomas Jefferson) were not members of Congress. Does Bush and Obama hosting Eid al-Fitr feasts prove that they are Muslims? Or is it, just possibly, merely a bit of political pandering of the sort the Founders were likewise not above?
But who would take care of the poor if it wasn't for God blessing some people with wealth?Be like the birds of the air and the lilies of the field?
There is only one requirement to be a ChristianAre you saying one can be a Christian without believing Jesus was God? Jefferson apparently felt the same, but I think that would astonish most Christian triumphalists today.
He he. Autocorrected from or a typo for "professed Christians."Many Christian denominations don't consider others "true" Christians. The only reason most accept the Trinity is because they killed off, declared as heretics or otherwise intimidated all opposing views.
What are "processed Christians"? A communion wafer made by the Soylent corporation?
And by this criterion, Jefferson, who called himself a Christian because he admired Jesus's morals but denied his divinity, was not a Christian.There is only one requirement to be a Christian
Believe in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior.