Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Bible tells antichristians are:are those who deny colossians 3:11 and 1 corinthians 2:16 anti-christ in all christians?
are those who deny colossians 3:11 and 1 corinthians 2:16 anti-christ in all Christians?
but it goes fartherBible tells antichristians are:
Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the Antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son.
1 John 2:22
the lack of at-one-ment to god in their beliefWhat reason do they have for denying them?
So, it's a matter of interpretation rather than a claim of the passages in question being spurious?the lack of at-one-ment to god in their belief
So, it's a matter of interpretation rather than a claim of the passages in question being spurious?
So, it's a matter of interpretation rather than a claim of the passages in question being spurious?
Sorry, I am not sure what do you mean with this, please explain.denying the son would exclude the known verse of john 1:3 too
Anti-Christ Christianity
Yes, Pauline-Christianity is the Anti-Christ/Dajjal as it teaches against the deeds and teachings of Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah, right, please?
Regards
One may, right?So, how can I believe in the Jesus and Paul of this 'Christianity'?
If you want, I can cite the example I mentioned...
After the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, the churches in Judea weakened, leading Hellenists living outside Judea to assume a prominent position in the interpretation of Christianity. This says it all..Anti-Christ Christianity
Yes, Pauline-Christianity is the Anti-Christ/Dajjal as it teaches against the deeds and teachings of Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah, right, please?
Like Yeshua-the truthful Israelite Messiah believed in One G-d but Pauline-Christianity propagates trinity, right, please/
Regards
This sounds uncommonly like the good old, "If they have a different interpretation than me, they are satanic, bound for hell, the antichrist, etc."are those who deny colossians 3:11 and 1 corinthians 2:16 anti-christ in all christians?
The first widespread Roman persecution of Christians is typically considered to have occurred under Emperor Nero in 64 AD. Following the Great Fire of Rome, which devastated much of the city, Nero sought to blame the Christians for the disaster. This led to severe punishments and executions of many Christians in Rome, marking the beginning of more systematic and brutal persecutions in the Roman Empire.There was no widespread persecution of Christians throughout the empire until the reign of Decius in the third century.
The accusation of high treason specifically was more a tool used by Roman authorities against both Christians and Jews rather than between them.This remembrance elevated Christianity morally in the eyes of the Roman Empire. In response, the Jews accused the churches in Judea of "high treason," a crime that presupposes an obligation of loyalty to the state.
Whatever persecution of the Christians was committed by the Pharisees and Sadducees, it all ended in 70 CE.As a result, the churches in Judea were systematically weakened internally,
Actually both views are true, depending on which book you are examining. On many instances, the Septuagint is quoted word for word -- the first century version of copy and paste. This is especially true in Matthew, Luke, and Hebrews. However, it is also true that in other places, such as some of Paul's epistles, that the author did indeed do their own translation from Hebrew into Greek.1) Words are polysemantic; many meanings have been lost and, when found, often disregarded for benign convenience within the religious system.
2) The fact is that the writers of the Christian Bible ("New Testament") used a Greek text different from our Septuagint:
2a) Were they performing their own translation from Hebrew?
2b) Or were they using a Septuagint, recalling and altering or "improving" it as they progressed?
3) Is Paul misinterpreted in translations? We have seen that in many cases, yes. Jesus, too, is always interpreted unipolarly in a manner convenient to "Christianity." I can provide a glaring example here of a misogynistic, antisemitic, and ignorant translation in the Christian Bible, a pattern followed by nearly all translations on this specific issue I am addressing. So, how can I believe in the Jesus and Paul of this 'Christianity'?
If you want, I can cite the example I mentioned...