Your Christian Identity

[YoursTrue]

That sort of practice didn't happen at the time of the Nicean council meeting. I think you may be confusing that time period of 325 AD, with that of the Spanish Inquisition in the 1500's AD?

But this is the problem when you have hierarchical power structures in religions. You have those trying to control the views of the masses through force. Take for instance the practice of shunning with the Jehovah's Witnesses. That's a form of violence and torture to non-conforming members too. Not too different than the sins of the RCC and the Spanish Inquisition.

For you actually to think that way is astounding. For instance anyway, a religious Jewish male will not talk to a non-Jewish female about religion. Do you personally adhere to a religion that is organized?

 

[YoursTrue]

As shown in Daniel 7:25, the "another" "king", Constantine, who was to "make alterations in time and in the law", such as changing the day of rest, to the day of the sun, in homage to his sun god Sol Invictus. He was also to "wear down the saints", the keepers of the Law, for "time, times, and half a time, in which times were with respect to the following kingdoms to come (Daniel 11:6 & 14 & 21 & 24 & 35 etc.), until the original kingdoms of Daniel 2:45 are all crushed, and the "kingdom" shall be set up which shall not be destroyed. Right now, the "kingdom" of the Roman Caesar/Czar/Putin is being crushed by a Jewish leader of a small country, and the defensive weapons being sent to Ukraine by the Jews of Israel. I expect Persia/Iran, the "breast of silver" (Daniel 2), will soon be crushed as well (Zechariah 14) after they have been lulled into attacking Jerusalem (Zechariah 14:1-2). The reign of the pope, who claims to hold the keys of David, is soon to "fall:" as well (Isaiah 22:15-25). Right after Constantine's vision of the cross at Milvian Bridge, in 312 B.C., he minted a coin to Sol Invictus, his sun god, in 313 A.D. The "day of the LORD", the day of judgment regarding Joel 2:31-32, when all the nations mentioned in Daniel 2 are "crushed", is fast approaching, and is with respect to the beginning of the 7th millennium, which is in line with the 7th day rest, not the eighth day, which is with respect to the white throne judgment. Those that keep the 8th day, Sunday, the day of the sun god, as their day of rest, well, they might just rest for eternity.

As I understand it, Constantine was baptized just before he died by an Arian (non-trinity-believing) priest.

 

[Windwalker]

Killing and torturing non-believers or dissidents is not in harmony with the scriptures. I think you have the disfellowshipping principle askew. There's a difference.

Does shunning (let's call it what it is), do harm to the person you are doing it to? Yes or no?

 

[Windwalker]

For you actually to think that way is astounding. For instance anyway, a religious Jewish male will not talk to a non-Jewish female about religion. Do you personally adhere to a religion that is organized?

Not talking to someone about religion, is very different from putting them on extinction, as if they didn't exist, shunning them, even family members. That is damaging, and it's a violent form of manipulation and coercion. There is no Love or Grace in such an act against another person. It is torture to them. It is psychologically damaging to them. It tortures them emotionally. Do you think that only physical violence is evil?

 

[Windwalker]

Do you personally adhere to a religion that is organized?

Why do you ask?

 

[Windwalker]

If a person needed help, family or non-family members, and they were disfellowshipped it is not wrong to help that person.

So, if you are the one inflicting damage upon them and the help they need is your love and compassion instead of shunning them in hopes of blackmailing them back into fellowship again, are you willing to help them, or let the suffer because "rules are rules"? Do you believing shunning your own family members is not really harmful to them? From what I read in scripture it says, "Love works no ill".

Isn't shunning someone working ill against them? How is that any better than the same spirit that motivated the Grand Inquisition? Torturing them into a confession of faith? That's the comparison. Coercion through psychological and emotional torture in order to extract a confession of faith. Basic question, does love use force to impose itself upon others? Kiss the cross, or die?

 

[2ndpillar]

As I understand it, Constantine was baptized just before he died by an Arian (non-trinity-believing) priest.

The assumption was Eusebius, Constantine's cleric and court historian, and an original leader of the Arian group, baptized Constantine. But as Eusebius wrote, he often lied for the good of the "Christian" community. Whether Constantine was baptized or not, is an open question, but with little consequence. Although the Eastern church declared him a saint, but then again, the western church burned declared "saints" alive (Joan of Arc).

 

[2ndpillar]

Yes. Burning books, killing unbelievers, shunning your church and immediate family members who don't conform to church dogma. All of it is from the same evil source.

The source of Constantine's (beast with two horns like a lamb) "evil", was from the "dragon"/devil (Revelation 13:4 & 11). This was warned of before the fact per Revelation 13:14, yet the "world", the "many" (Matthew 7:13), were all deceived by the beast, who held the title of Pontifex Maximus, and his heirs, such as the present-day Pontiffs.

 

[YoursTrue]

Not talking to someone about religion, is very different from putting them on extinction, as if they didn't exist, shunning them, even family members. That is damaging, and it's a violent form of manipulation and coercion. There is no Love or Grace in such an act against another person. It is torture to them. It is psychologically damaging to them. It tortures them emotionally. Do you think that only physical violence is evil?

First of all, that's not true. Each person decides how he will handle a situation regarding someone who has left the faith. I agree it may not be pleasant for a person to be disfellowshipped. But it is a biblical principle. Each person makes up his own mind as to how he will handle the situation. However the scriptural principle is clear for those who obey the scriptures.

 

[YoursTrue]

The assumption was Eusebius, Constantine's cleric and court historian, and an original leader of the Arian group, baptized Constantine. But as Eusebius wrote, he often lied for the good of the "Christian" community. Whether Constantine was baptized or not, is an open question, but with little consequence. Although the Eastern church declared him a saint, but then again, the western church burned declared "saints" alive (Joan of Arc).

Thanks for that. The history is interesting, and I do remember reading that Constantine was baptized at (his) last minute as he was dying, by an Arian believer. Yes, I agree it's an open question re Constantine. I didn't know that about Eusebius. Interesting.

 

[Windwalker]

The source of Constantine's (beast with two horns like a lamb) "evil", was from the "dragon"/devil (Revelation 13:4 & 11).

Yes, that is what I was alluding to. The same source of evil that drove the power of institutional religion to do harm to others who did not conform to their edicts, is the same source of evil of those in religions who do the same to their own family members and church members who don't conform to the edicts of their leadership.

Violence is violence, whether it's physical, psychology, emotional, or spiritual violence, and it comes from the same corrupted source.

This was warned of before the fact per Revelation 13:14, yet the "world", the "many" (Matthew 7:13), were all deceived by the beast, who held the title of Pontifex Maximus, and his heirs, such as the present-day Pontiffs.

Well, this is a much later creative reading of the book of Revelation. In reality, it was written to refer to contemporary Rome in the day in which John of Patmos wrote it in coded language, long before there were any popes. The "beast", the 666 code, was in reference to Nero. There was a popular view at that time than Nero would rise from the dead and bring about destruction of the Roman Empire.

Nero Redivivus legend - Wikipedia

 

[Windwalker]

First of all, that's not true. Each person decides how he will handle a situation regarding someone who has left the faith.

So the stories I have heard how parents and siblings won't talk to their own family members, that they disown them, etc, are not really that prevalent? Shunning may be just a matter of "not discussing religion at the dinner table", sort of topic avoidance like any other hot button issue in any other typical family?

Explain how you see shunning (let's call it what it is here, rather than softening it with a euphemism), as not being nearly so psychological and emotionally and spiritually damaging as I've heard the stories of in this practice. I'd be interested in hearing how it's not all as bad as that.

I agree it may not be pleasant for a person to be disfellowshipped.

Again, this seems to be softening it, "not be pleasant", as if it were a stern corrective measure, like giving a child timeout or something. Shunning is outright damaging. It is tantamount to torture.

A simple Google search on this instantly brings up information like this:

The effect of shunning can be very dramatic or even devastating on the shunned, as it can damage or destroy the shunned member's closest familial, spousal, social, emotional, and economic bonds.[citation needed]

Shunning contains aspects of what is known as relational aggression in psychological literature. When used by church members and member-spouse parents against excommunicant parents it contains elements of what psychologists call parental alienation. Extreme shunning may cause traumas to the shunned (and to their dependents) similar to what is studied in the psychology of torture.

Shunning - Wikipedia.​

What I seem to hear is a downplaying of this practice, as "it's not all that bad, really". But as a practice is it Biblically sanctioned?? Let's talk about that.

But it is a biblical principle.

Aside from a couple OT passages which talk about cutting someone off from the assembly, which we can pretty much disregard because what Jesus taught supersedes what Moses taught (think 'eye for an eye' of Moses, being superseded by 'turn the other cheek 'of Jesus), there are only two references to it in the NT as an instruction to Christians. Mt. 8:17, and 2 Thes. 3:14

Let's take the first one.

"If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.​

Question. How did Jesus treat pagans, harlots, and tax collectors? Did he shun them, "away from me you impure ones, for I am holy and you are not!"? Was Jesus teaching his followers to do the opposite of how he treated them with love and compassion and understanding instead?

Maybe you should consider this to mean, show them more compassion as I have shown by example, and not revile them and expel them like the Pharisees did, whom Jesus rebuked for doing so.

I don't think I really need to say anything more than that, do I?

Now the 2nd reference, 2 Thes. 3:14.

Something to note about 2 Thessalonians is that that epistle is not considered an authentic Pauline epistle by most modern NT scholarship. You can read about why that is the case here: 2 Thessalonians

But aside from the high likelihood this is a much later text posing itself to be a letter of Paul, even reading the passage itself does not support the mistreatment of the church member by shunning them as is practiced in the Jehovah's Witnesses' sect.

Take special note of anyone who does not obey our instruction in this letter. Do not associate with them, in order that they may feel ashamed. 15 Yet do not regard them as an enemy, but warn them as you would a fellow believer.​

Shunning them is treating them as an enemy. It is a practice that goes directly against the teachings of love and compassion that Jesus taught. It treats them as unworthy of love.

Even if you want to view them as enemies, how did Jesus say you should treat your enemies? Do I need to quote that verse?

Each person makes up his own mind as to how he will handle the situation.

Yet it is a sanctioned practice, rather than condemned as it should be. So "leaving it up to the individual", how badly they treat their family member, is hardly what can be considered good Christian leadership. Abuse should never be condoned from the pulpit.

However the scriptural principle is clear for those who obey the scriptures.

Is it? If you think it sanctions it, apparently it's not that clear to you.

 

[2ndpillar]

Yes, that is what I was alluding to. The same source of evil that drove the power of institutional religion to do harm to others who did not conform to their edicts, is the same source of evil of those in religions who do the same to their own family members and church members who don't conform to the edicts of their leadership.

Violence is violence, whether it's physical, psychology, emotional, or spiritual violence, and it comes from the same corrupted source.


Well, this is a much later creative reading of the book of Revelation. In reality, it was written to refer to contemporary Rome in the day in which John of Patmos wrote it in coded language, long before there were any popes. The "beast", the 666 code, was in reference to Nero. There was a popular view at that time than Nero would rise from the dead and bring about destruction of the Roman Empire.

Nero Redivivus legend - Wikipedia

Actually, the oldest version of Revelation 13:18 was 616, the number of Constantine's name. The 666 version was subsequent. version. Nero was a conflicted soul who actually accomplished little of subsequence during his rule other than supposedly killing Peter and Paul for political reasons. The "beast", referred to in Revelation 13:3-4, was Julius Caesar, who purloined the position of Pontifex Maximus from the pagan priesthood leadership, and who ruled Rome as a dictator for "forty-two months" and was "slain" by the senate, and was "healed"/revived by the Senate when they declared him a god, and he was followed by the Augustus Caesars. Constantine convened the Nicene Council on the basis of him being the Pontifex Maximus, keeper of the gods and calendar, a position inherited from Julius Caesar. The position of Pontifex Maximus, Pontif, was not transferred to the Gentile church for long time. According to Revelation 17:10, the "beast" that "is", during the writing of the Revelation, was the sixth head of the 7 headed beast of Revelation 17:3, which would be the era of the initial 10 Augustus Caesars (10 horns) (Daniel 7:24), ending with the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., the focus location of Daniel and Revelation. Constantine would be the 7th head, the one to "come" (Rev 17:10). We are now in the era of the 8th head (Revelation 17:11) who has 10 horns and shall war against the "lamb". The "harlot" they "hate" is Judah, the Jews, and they shall burn "her up with fire" (Revelation 17:16) as was done by Hitler's (Kaiser/Caesar/3rd Reich) regime, one of the 10 horns which shall reign for an "hour" (short time) with the 8th head. Right now, a Jew in Ukraine, is battling a heir of the Roman Caesar/Czar/dictator, in the form of Putin. Nero was simply a lowly horn of the 6th head of the beast and accomplished little other than p-ssing off the future Roman Catholic church which was built on the foundation of Peter and Paul, the two horns like a lamb of Revelation 13:11.

 

[Windwalker]

Actually, the oldest version of Revelation 13:18 was 616, the number of Constantine's name.

There has always been some controversy about why there is a textual variant like this, from a slip of the pen, to a simply different way to say the same thing. In both cases 666 and 616 are the name Nero, depending if you are using the Hebrew spelling of Nero or the Latinized version the Hebrew for Nero. Here's a good explanation on that subject I found on this one site, as well as a gif I found to illustrate this difference: 666: The Number of the Beast (or is it 616?) — The Beggars Blog




So you can see Nero is also 616. But playing games with Gematria to make people you don't like to be the antichrist is not limited to you making Constantine the antichrist, it's been applied to anyone. From Hitler to Henry Kissinger, to Ronald Regard, to Marilyn Monroe.

When John of Patmos, an unknown apocalyptic Jew (not the apostle John), wrote Revelation, his entire text is talking about present day Rome. Hence, why he coded the language. If he meant some future Rome, that would have been considered a work of future fiction, not an attack against Rome herself of that day.

The 666 version was subsequent. version. Nero was a conflicted soul who actually accomplished little of subsequence during his rule other than supposedly killing Peter and Paul for political reasons.

I already provided you with the relevant link to the prevalent belief that Nero would come back from the dead to bring about the ruin of Rome. Nero was already dead when John wrote Revelation. It was his fabled return that this is addressing.

Again, with any sort of heavily coded and symbolized book like this, anyone can make it say anything about anyone they want to attack in history. That's pretty much the only reason why it was included in the canon of scripture, despite being hotly contested as to its inclusion. That book really is an oddball book, yet it seems some churches consider it the cornerstone of their faith! I personally find the gospels more inspiring.

 

[2ndpillar]

There has always been some controversy about why there is a textual variant like this, from a slip of the pen, to a simply different way to say the same thing. In both cases 666 and 616 are the name Nero, depending if you are using the Hebrew spelling of Nero or the Latinized version the Hebrew for Nero. Here's a good explanation on that subject I found on this one site, as well as a gif I found to illustrate this difference: 666: The Number of the Beast (or is it 616?) — The Beggars Blog


View attachment 70332

So you can see Nero is also 616. But playing games with Gematria to make people you don't like to be the antichrist is not limited to you making Constantine the antichrist, it's been applied to anyone. From Hitler to Henry Kissinger, to Ronald Regard, to Marilyn Monroe.

When John of Patmos, an unknown apocalyptic Jew (not the apostle John), wrote Revelation, his entire text is talking about present day Rome. Hence, why he coded the language. If he meant some future Rome, that would have been considered a work of future fiction, not an attack against Rome herself of that day.


I already provided you with the relevant link to the prevalent belief that Nero would come back from the dead to bring about the ruin of Rome. Nero was already dead when John wrote Revelation. It was his fabled return that this is addressing.

Again, with any sort of heavily coded and symbolized book like this, anyone can make it say anything about anyone they want to attack in history. That's pretty much the only reason why it was included in the canon of scripture, despite being hotly contested as to its inclusion. That book really is an oddball book, yet it seems some churches consider it the cornerstone of their faith! I personally find the gospels more inspiring.

You would have to define what gospels you consider "inspiring", and in what way they inspire you. As for Revelation being the cornerstone of "some" churches, you would have to be more specific. Luther, a founder of the Protestant church, tried to remove it from the canon. As for the message of the "son of man", it was the "kingdom" in which he presented in parables so that only those with eyes and ears to hear could understand (Matthew 13:13). If you understand the "kingdom", feel free to present your case and the parable you are describing. If you are describing the message of the "enemy", the tare seed, mixed with the wheat seed, the message of the "son of man", well that message leads to the "furnace of fire" (Matthew 13:30) per the "son of man's" parable concerning the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 13:24). Nero fit none of the descriptions around the "beast with two horns like a lamb", whereas Constantine set up two Christ like leaders, such as horns like a lamb, as the foundation of his Roman church, which sat on the beast (Roman power) (Revelation 17:3), which received its power from the "dragon", by building basilicas for both Peter and Paul. Nero did not create a dynastic Roman church, which was to last time, times, and half a time (Daniel 7:25) other than apparently killing two of its subsequent leaders. No, you will have to do more than quote items written by Christian apologist, and the "wise and educated", in which Yeshua said he was pleased that they understood nothing (Matthew 11:25).

 

[Muffled]

If you identify as Christian, what is your belief, or view on cussing - profanity - using abusive speech or words.
I'm referring to those words which most news media and TV channels censor.

@Kenny @InChrist and others, I would really like to hear your side on this.
Could you also identify what faith you identify with (by faith, I mean "denomination").

I believe I try to refrain from it but these days hearing t so much makes it stick in the head. What I consider worse is making a curse such as: May you burn in Hell. I would rathe give a person a blessing: May you live long and prosper.

 

[Muffled]

I think there is a time and a place for foul language

I see nothing intrinsically wrong with using offensive words indeed I see nothing offensive about offensive words

I'd never use the Lord's name as a swear word though, so I'd never say "oh my God!" or "Jesus Christ!" as an exclamation

Jesus H Roosevelt Christ - Outlander.

Perhaps some thought of Roosevelt as a savior.

 

[Muffled]

Oh yeah, this 100%.

I'm also really hesitant to make any vows (which I suppose is another type of swearing, but clearly not the type the OP was referring to). (Edit: I made promises when I was baptised in 2021, and vows when I got married in 2022. I think these are OK.)

I believe Jesus took exception to those who used vows as a way to deceive.

 

[Windwalker]

You would have to define what gospels you consider "inspiring", and in what way they inspire you.

Inspire towards love. I don't see the book of Revelation doing that. It seems to be mostly about destroying the enemy. I'm not sure how that inspires you towards a better quality of life, unless you have a thirst for blood and vengeance?

As for Revelation being the cornerstone of "some" churches, you would have to be more specific.

Every time I've spoken with a Jehovah's Witness, it's all about the coming kingdom for them, and the book of Revelation seems to be their primary obsession, end times, the destruction of the world, themselves as the chosen ones, etc. I don't find that to be really what the Gospel is about, do you? You and your salvation and home in a new earth? Is that what it's all about? Yourself?

Luther, a founder of the Protestant church, tried to remove it from the canon.

Yes he did. Here's how he criticized it saying it was,

"neither apostolic nor prophetic... I can in no way detect that the Holy Spirit produced it... Again they are supposed to be blessed who keep what is written in this book; and yet no one knows what that is, to say nothing of keeping it... Christ is neither taught nor known in it."​

I like that summary of it. It's really only in the Bible because it's so easy to find your enemy in it as the antichrist, and so easy to play with the number 666 (or 616) to make it fit those you want to be the antichrist. I've heard countless people as the "prophesied" antichrist and his number, and you seem to have just been really attracted to making it fit Constantine. What make you different than anyone else who do that with their chosen target?

Even the church father Irenaeus recognized how easy it was to abuse it to make whoever you want to fit into it. He states, "making surmises, and casting about for any names that may present themselves, inasmuch as many names can be found possessing the number mentioned; and the same question will, after all, remain unsolved" (Against Heresies, V.30.3).

No, the most reasonable understanding of Revelation and the number of the beast is that it referred to someone contemporary to the readers, which would have been Nero who had recently died/disappeared but was expected to return and destroy the world. I would recommend reading this whole article on the subject. It's quite informative and well written::Nero as the Antichrist

 

[2ndpillar]

Inspire towards love. I don't see the book of Revelation doing that. It seems to be mostly about destroying the enemy. I'm not sure how that inspires you towards a better quality of life, unless you have a thirst for blood and vengeance?


Every time I've spoken with a Jehovah's Witness, it's all about the coming kingdom for them, and the book of Revelation seems to be their primary obsession, end times, the destruction of the world, themselves as the chosen ones, etc. I don't find that to be really what the Gospel is about, do you? You and your salvation and home in a new earth? Is that what it's all about? Yourself?


Yes he did. Here's how he criticized it saying it was,

"neither apostolic nor prophetic... I can in no way detect that the Holy Spirit produced it... Again they are supposed to be blessed who keep what is written in this book; and yet no one knows what that is, to say nothing of keeping it... Christ is neither taught nor known in it."​

I like that summary of it. It's really only in the Bible because it's so easy to find your enemy in it as the antichrist, and so easy to play with the number 666 (or 616) to make it fit those you want to be the antichrist. I've heard countless people as the "prophesied" antichrist and his number, and you seem to have just been really attracted to making it fit Constantine. What make you different than anyone else who do that with their chosen target?

Even the church father Irenaeus recognized how easy it was to abuse it to make whoever you want to fit into it. He states, "making surmises, and casting about for any names that may present themselves, inasmuch as many names can be found possessing the number mentioned; and the same question will, after all, remain unsolved" (Against Heresies, V.30.3).

No, the most reasonable understanding of Revelation and the number of the beast is that it referred to someone contemporary to the readers, which would have been Nero who had recently died/disappeared but was expected to return and destroy the world. I would recommend reading this whole article on the subject. It's quite informative and well written::Nero as the Antichrist

I don't know, but Nero lived in the 60s B.C., prior to the destruction of Jerusalem, which was central to Revelations, and Revelations was supposedly written late in the 1st century. And Revelation 17 refers to 2 heads of the beast to follow the time of the writing of Revelations 17:10-11. And the parables of the kingdom of heaven, espoused by Yeshua, such as the several of Matthew 13, all refer to the "end of the age", when the "wicked" would be "gathered" "first" and thrown into the "furnace of fire". As for the term "Antichrist", only used by John, it referred so one that was, is, and is to be in the future, as in a spiritual imperative rather than a person. The Gentile church ascribes the antichrist to Daniel 7:25, which refers to the one who will "wear down the saints", the followers of the LAW, such as the Roman church has done, and one who has intended to make alterations in the Law, as the Roman church has done under the direction of the Roman emperor Constantine (Daniel 7:25) by way of his 321 A.D. decree. As for how one is to "love" according to Yeshua, well he said one was to "keep the commandments". (John 14:21) and (1 John 1:6) As for what this adulterous generation believes is love, apparently that is to fornicate with their neighbor's wife, or in today's world of demons, thy neighbor's male partner. (Matthew 16:4)