Ebionite
Well-Known Member
Whatever, *Staff Edit*
Last edited by a moderator:
-
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:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How can you be a True Christian™ if you don't take the Eden story literally?
- Thread starter ppp
- Start date
-
- Tags
- fall naked bodz! soteriology
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Just because you are wrong is no excuse to call someone a liar. The post where I told you that you had to be polite is still there. It has not been edited. If I had edited it the site notes it. You only have a few minutes before the site notes that a post was edited.
Also it is a clear violation of the rules here to call someone a liar. You have made quite a few false claims about me, but I have not called you a liar. As someone that a claims to be a Christian you should know better.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
I'm not wrong, *Staff Edit* and I've never claimed to be a Christian.
Last edited by a moderator:
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Your user name is Ebionite. They were Jews that followed Jesus but did not believe in magical Jesus. They are still nominally called "Christians". And you cannot name on lie of mine. Do you even know what a lie is? Meanwhile I can point out that you have broken the Ninth Commandment multiple times. That is not the same as lying.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
More deflection. You said that I claimed to be a Christian, which is not true.
I've documented one of your previous *Staff Edit* here:
Historical Case for the Resurrection of Jesus
Like you lied about the proof, you mean? You made the false claim about Ron Wyatt, not me. https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/how-can-you-be-a-true-christian%E2%84%A2-if-you-dont-take-the-eden-story-literally.270747/post-8232486 No. I offered to provide sources if you asked politely...
www.religiousforums.com
Last edited by a moderator:
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
You do not seem to know what "deflection" is either. Is or is your user name not "Ebionite"? Ebionite's are nominally Christians. You may not like that term and you could request that others not use it for you, but until you openly do as an Ebionite you would also be a Christian. That is not a "lie" it is just what Ebionites are called. It was neither a slur or a compliment to point that fact out. It was clearly not a lie.
And no, now you are just admitting that you are wrong by continually referring back to arguments that you lost.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
Deflection is when you change the topic because you have been caught in a lie.
The Ebionites were never Christians because they rejected Paul.
Ebionism
Dates First through fifth centuries. Founder Possibly Ebion of Pella. Principal errors Insistence that all Christians or at least all Jewish Christians must be...
Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek Saul:
And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.
Acts 11:25-26
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
No, rejecting Paul does not mean that they were not Christians:
Ebionite | Jewish Christianity, Early Christianity, Sect
Ebionite, member of an early ascetic sect of Jewish Christians. The Ebionites were one of several such sects that originated in and around Palestine in the first centuries ad and included the Nazarenes and Elkasites. The name of the sect is from the Hebrew ebyonim, or ebionim (“the poor”); it was
"Ebionite, member of an early ascetic sect of Jewish Christians. "
Ebionites - Wikipedia
"Ebionites (Greek: Ἐβιωναῖοι, translit. Ebiōnaîoi, derived from Hebrew אֶבְיוֹנִים (or אֶבְיוֹנִם),[1] ʾEḇyōnīm, meaning 'the poor' or 'poor ones') as a term refers to a Jewish Christian sect, which viewed poverty as a blessing, that existed during the early centuries of the Common Era.[2][3] T"
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Ebionites
Two varieties: the earlier group called Ebionites denied the divinity of Christ; the later Ebionites were a Gnostic sect who believed that matter was eternal and was God's body
"By this name were designated one or more early Christian sects infected with Judaistic errors."
Those are the first three sources that I came across on Ebionites. Where was my lie?
Holy crap!! Even your source points out that they were Jewish Christians:Ebionism
Dates First through fifth centuries. Founder Possibly Ebion of Pella. Principal errors Insistence that all Christians or at least all Jewish Christians must be...www.catholic.com
Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek Saul:
And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.
Acts 11:25-26
"
There were three groups of Jewish heretics in the early Church: A strict party, the Judaizers, claimed that all Christians must accept circumcision and keep the Mosaic Law in order to be saved. A milder party, sometimes called the Nazarenes, claimed that all Jewish Christians must be circumcised and keep the Mosaic Law, even though Gentile Christians need not. A Gnostic Jewish group, sometimes called the Elkasaites, insisted on keeping the Mosaic Law and added pagan cosmic speculation and the worship of angels.
Development of the Heresy
Ebionism started as a broad movement rather than with a single leader. Even if Ebion of Pella was a real person, many beliefs of Ebionitism were common in early Jewish Christianity, especially the insistence on observing the Law of Moses."
Stay away from handguns if you value your toes. You have a tendency to shoot yourself in the foot. This is the second time tonight that your quotes or links refuted your claims.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
I'm using the primary source. You've got nothing but Christian sources, who are not going to acknowledge that they marginalised a distinct group that had no association with them.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Your source was a Catholic one and it still claimed that they were Christians. The website for your source is "www.catholic.com". One does not get much more Christian than that. And no, only my last source was Christian. The other two were secular.
Now there may be a Ebionite source out there somewhere, but you clearly did not use one of those.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
Well, duh. Maybe you should read my post again.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
You do not seem to understand what a "primary source" would mean in this context. Your source was no more "primary" than mine were. If anything your source was weaker than my secular sources.
Tinkerpeach
Active Member
Taking anything in the Bible literally is not really the smartest thing to do. The things God wants us to know are clearly spelled out, the rest is there for context. Genesis, like Revelations are there to provide a beginning and an end to God's story. Was there really a serpent in the Garden, did the Garden actually even exist, it doesn't really matter since that is not what God wants people to focus on, He wants them to focus on salvation through our lord Jesus Christ.
How the fall of man actually happened is irrelevant, what is relevant is what we can do about it.
Ebionite
Well-Known Member
Belief of salvation is a marketable commodity. Due diligence requires that people check that what they've been sold will actually perform as described.
ppp
Well-Known Member
For those of you who don't take the story of the Fall literally. Adam, Eve, Tree, Serpent, etc, how do you envision the Fall of Man happening?
Your answer seems to be it doesn't matter if there was a fall or what it was.
And if it didn't happen, what use is Jesus?
Your answer seems to be that Jesus provides salvation from.... something????
Tinkerpeach
Active Member
No way for us to know since there is no documentation of it.
Something obviously happened with Adam and Eve but the Bible is filled with metaphors.
God doesn't explain every single detail to us. What's important to know is that God said man fell and sin was introduced, the exact details are irrelevant.
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
They aren't error-free though so .... ?
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
I got this:
"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
The Bible contains myriads of what theologian's call "variations". For just one example, how many angels were at Jesus' tomb and what did he/they say?
No two gospels agree. There's many more like this.
BTW, the churches through centuries up until the 1800's, the emergence of the "fundamentalist movement", did teach the Bible is not inerrant for good reasons, because it clearly isn't. Even when the Christian canon was chosen in the 4th century, it was common knowledge that there often were "variations" on the same narrative.
Thus, to claim the Bible is perfect simply is just a form of idolatry. The Bible is not God and God is not the Bible-- the Bible is about God.
Last edited:
SkepticThinker
Veteran Member
The claims about him are true. Ron Wyatt is a hack with zero credibility. These creationists agree with me about him. They've got his claims listed under their "Arguments we Think Creationists Should NOT Use."
Arguments we think creationists should NOT use
Arguments we think creationists should NOT use
So it's not just atheists that think he's full of it.