the true 'christians'
-
you still have not shown me where in the bible does it say (since you are also both RC and have been a protestant) that easter and christmas are to be celebrated as christian festivals as you claim they are? I have stated based on the bible that these are pagan and as such do not warrant our attention. God did not adopt them, nor did Yeshua adopt them as Christian festivals, also neither did the apostles and neither did Yeshua's disciples adopt them, but the RC church adopted them because they wanted to put a christian slant on things. So i can only conclude that they are man made religious festivals adopted by man, not of God, not ordained by God. How can you say then that this is God's work when it is so clearly of man's doing????Originally posted by Honeybunz:So those who think Christmas and Easter are only for pagans are the only true Christians?
this is the third time you are skirting the issue.
-
how about it was divine revelation made to the true representative on earth; after the bible was canonised?Originally posted by breytonhartge:you still have not shown me where in the bible does it say (since you are also both RC and have been a protestant) that easter and christmas are to be celebrated as christian festivals as you claim they are? I have stated based on the bible that these are pagan and as such do not warrant our attention. God did not adopt them, nor did Yeshua adopt them as Christian festivals, also neither did the apostles and neither did Yeshua's disciples adopt them, but the RC church adopted them because they wanted to put a christian slant on things. So i can only conclude that they are man made religious festivals adopted by man, not of God, not ordained by God. How can you say then that this is God's work when it is so clearly of man's doing????
this is the third time you are skirting the issue. -
Ok I wanna be lazy....Originally posted by breytonhartge:you still have not shown me where in the bible does it say (since you are also both RC and have been a protestant) that easter and christmas are to be celebrated as christian festivals as you claim they are? I have stated based on the bible that these are pagan and as such do not warrant our attention. God did not adopt them, nor did Yeshua adopt them as Christian festivals, also neither did the apostles and neither did Yeshua's disciples adopt them, but the RC church adopted them because they wanted to put a christian slant on things. So i can only conclude that they are man made religious festivals adopted by man, not of God, not ordained by God. How can you say then that this is God's work when it is so clearly of man's doing????
this is the third time you are skirting the issue. 
I fully, totally agree with sillyme.Originally posted by sillyme:I think it boils down to what you associate a date to right?
One can use a special date such as Christmas and celebrate with no religious meaning to it. Just because the date has pagan roots doesn't mean that all who observed it is a pagan.
To most (if not all) Christians, Easter is a day to celebrate Jesus' resurrection. We don't mix paganistic practices into it. Our intentions are clear, to rejoice that our bondage to death is broken. Hallelujah!
What about you? -
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by sillyme:
I think it boils down to what you associate a date to right?
One can use a special date such as Christmas and celebrate with no religious meaning to it. Just because the date has pagan roots doesn't mean that all who observed it is a pagan.
To most (if not all) Christians, Easter is a day to celebrate Jesus' resurrection. We don't mix paganistic practices into it. Our intentions are clear, to rejoice that our bondage to death is broken. Hallelujah!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I fully, totally agree with sillyme.
What about you?
No i unfortunately do not. The ressurection occured during passover and the feast of unleavened bread, so get that part right.
If you want to celebrate Jesus's birth, like i have said so many times before, do it on the correct day?
Please do not mix up the significant days of our Lords life with things that have no association to Yeshua whatsoever.
Easter is still that easter. A pagan religion and christmas is still yule. If you want to celebrate christmas, then why do churches still put up christmas trees, which advertise their pagan roots? Why do churches have early morning service for easter which is the exact time that the goddess asthar is remembered? Do they then not bring in paganism into the church by doing these things? The spiritual side of things is very important and the church has been slack in being on guard about this. -
Honeybunz,
You still have not answered my question. -
The Holy Scripture states as such:Originally posted by breytonhartge:you are then still only putting your money on people who can err. I think it is better if you put your money on the WORD of God.
BTW, what makes the bishops, the pope etc have better authority than the pastors etc? Are they not human as well? Who ordained them? Did God physically come down and say I ordain you to be my representative, did the Spirit of God fall on them like a dove like when Yeshua got baptised and before He began His ministry? Did any voice from heaven say these are my ordained bishops, deacons, this is my ordained pope? 
I base my argument on the word of God, the bible. Not on what people say.
"You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church." Matthew 16:18
And to him and the apostles,
"Whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven" Matthew 18
We make an effort to claim that Christ gave the bishops authority. How about you? Where did your pastor get his authority from? Did Jesus Christ found your Church? Jesus Christ is the head of Church, and He founded on Peter the rock, the very first Pope. And we thank God for giving us a Pope to unite us, if not there will be unlimited chaos, evidently shown by the hundreds of denominations out there. -
Actually I am confused here. Do you or do you not agree with sillyme? By reading the rest of your text, you do not agree with sillyme. Seems to me that sillyme is saying that Easter is a day to celebrate Jesus's resurrection but there is no need to mix paganistic practices into it. So the celebration of Easter is given.Originally posted by breytonhartge:quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by sillyme:
I think it boils down to what you associate a date to right?
One can use a special date such as Christmas and celebrate with no religious meaning to it. Just because the date has pagan roots doesn't mean that all who observed it is a pagan.
To most (if not all) Christians, Easter is a day to celebrate Jesus' resurrection. We don't mix paganistic practices into it. Our intentions are clear, to rejoice that our bondage to death is broken. Hallelujah!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I fully, totally agree with sillyme.
What about you?
No i unfortunately do not. The ressurection occured during passover and the feast of unleavened bread, so get that part right. -
I do not agree with sillyme. Easter is easter, if you want to celebrate the ressurection of the Lord, use the correct festival and terminology. Passover and the feast of unleavened bread.Originally posted by Chin Eng:Actually I am confused here. Do you or do you not agree with sillyme? By reading the rest of your text, you do not agree with sillyme. Seems to me that sillyme is saying that Easter is a day to celebrate Jesus's resurrection but there is no need to mix paganistic practices into it. So the celebration of Easter is given. -
Even we in the West call Easter, 'Easter', the Church in the East use the Greek term Pascha, a transliteration of the Hebrew word Pesach, or Passover. Pascha is also the name of this feast in Latin, the official language of the Roman Rite. The Romance languages reflect this usage; the Italian word Pasqua, the French Paques and the Spanish Pascua each derive from Pascha, and ultimately from Pesach.
Thus the Feast of Christ's Resurrection has two names among Christians: Pascha, or Passover, and Easter, which may connote "sunrise" or "white". Either way, the feast is truly Christian, not pagan. -
Easter is a day that is honered by nearly all of contemporary Christianity and is used to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ.Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:Even we in the West call Easter, 'Easter', the Church in the East use the Greek term Pascha, a transliteration of the Hebrew word Pesach, or Passover. Pascha is also the name of this feast in Latin, the official language of the Roman Rite. The Romance languages reflect this usage; the Italian word Pasqua, the French Paques and the Spanish Pascua each derive from Pascha, and ultimately from Pesach.
Thus the Feast of Christ's Resurrection has two names among Christians: Pascha, or Passover, and Easter, which may connote "sunrise" or "white". Either way, the feast is truly Christian, not pagan.
The holiday often involves a church service at sunrise, a feast which includes an "Easter Ham", decorated eggs and stories about rabbits.
Those who love truth learn to ask questions, and many questions must be asked regarding the holiday of Easter.
Is it truly the day when Jesus arose from the dead? Where did all of the strange customs come from, which have nothing to do with the resurrection of our Saviour?
The purpose of this tract is to help answer those questions, and to help those who seek truth to draw their own conclusions.
The first thing we must understand is that professing Christians were not the only ones who celebrated a festival called "Easter."
"Ishtar", which is pronounced "Easter" was a day that commemorated the resurrection of one of their gods that they called "Tammuz", who was believed to be the only begotten son of the moon-goddess and the sun-god.
In those ancient times, there was a man named Nimrod, who was the grandson of one of Noah's son named Ham.
Ham had a son named Cush who married a woman named Semiramis.Cush and Semiramis then had a son named him "Nimrod."
After the death of his father, Nimrod married his own mother and became a powerful King.
The Bible tells of of this man, Nimrod, in Genesis 10:8-10 as follows: "And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth. He was a mighty hunter before the Lord: wherefore it is said, even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the Lord. And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad,and Calneh, in the land of Shinar."
Nimrod became a god-man to the people and Semiramis, his wife and mother, became the powerful Queen of ancient Babylon.
Nimrod was eventually killed by an enemy, and his body was cut in pieces and sent to various parts of his kingdom.
Semiramis had all of the parts gathered, except for one part that could not be found.
That missing part was his reproductive organ. Semiramis claimed that Nimrod could not come back to life without it and told the people of Babylon that Nimrod had ascended to the sun and was now to be called "Baal", the sun god.
Queen Semiramis also proclaimed that Baal would be present on earth in the form of a flame, whether candle or lamp, when used in worship.
Semiramis was creating a mystery religion, and with the help of Satan, she set herself up as a goddess.
Semiramis claimed that she was immaculately conceived.
She taught that the moon was a goddess that went through a 28 day cycle and ovulated when full.
She further claimed that she came down from the moon in a giant moon egg that fell into the Euphrates River.
This was to have happened at the time of the first full moon after the spring equinox.
Semiramis became known as "Ishtar" which is pronounced "Easter", and her moon egg became known as "Ishtar's" egg."
Ishtar soon became pregnant and claimed that it was the rays of the sun-god Baal that caused her to conceive.
The son that she brought forth was named Tammuz.
Tammuz was noted to be especially fond of rabbits, and they became sacred in the ancient religion, because Tammuz was believed to be the son of the sun-god, Baal. Tammuz, like his supposed father, became a hunter.
The day came when Tammuz was killed by a wild pig.
Queen Ishtar told the people that Tammuz was now ascended to his father, Baal, and that the two of them would be with the worshippers in the sacred candle or lamp flame as Father, Son and Spirit.
Ishtar, who was now worshipped as the "Mother of God and Queen of Heaven", continued to build her mystery religion.
The queen told the worshippers that when Tammuz was killed by the wild pig, some of his blood fell on the stump of an evergreen tree, and the stump grew into a full new tree overnight. This made the evergreen tree sacred by the blood of Tammuz.
She also proclaimed a forty day period of time of sorrow each year prior to the anniversary of the death of Tammuz.
During this time, no meat was to be eaten.
Worshippers were to meditate upon the sacred mysteries of Baal and Tammuz, and to make the sign of the "T" in front of their hearts as they worshipped.
They also ate sacred cakes with the marking of a "T" or cross on the top.
Every year, on the first Sunday after the first full moon after the spring equinox, a celebration was made.
It was Ishtar's Sunday and was celebrated with rabbits and eggs.
Ishtar also proclaimed that because Tammuz was killed by a pig, that a pig must be eaten on that Sunday.
By now, the readers of this tract should have made the connection that paganism has infiltrated the contemporary "Christian" churches, and further study indicates that this paganism came in by way of the Roman Catholic System.
The truth is that Easter has nothing whatsoever to do with the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.
We also know that Easter can be as much as three weeks away from the Passover, because the pagan holiday is always set as the first Sunday after the first full moon after the spring equinox.
Some have wondered why the word "Easter" is in the the King James Bible.
It is because Acts, chapter 12, tells us that it was the evil King Herod, who was planning to celebrate Easter, and not the Christians.
The true Passover and pagan Easter sometimes coincide, but in some years, they are a great distance apart. -
For all discussions related to Passover, let's go over to http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=188203
-
brey.... quote source lah! http://www.lasttrumpetministries.org/tracts/tract1.html just a courtesy thing, always need to quote source!
so difficult to read. the link above has line spacing, which makes reading easier. -
Pesach is correct, it seems that the Eastern churches have kept more true to the word and celebration of the feasts of the Lord than the west. How do you relate the two words pesach and easter? they have totally different meanings so how can you say one is like the other? If pesach is the name of this feast in latin, the official language of teh roman rite, why then do we have the word easter to celebrate the ressurection of Christ?????Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:Even we in the West call Easter, 'Easter', the Church in the East use the Greek term Pascha, a transliteration of the Hebrew word Pesach, or Passover. Pascha is also the name of this feast in Latin, the official language of the Roman Rite. The Romance languages reflect this usage; the Italian word Pasqua, the French Paques and the Spanish Pascua each derive from Pascha, and ultimately from Pesach.
Thus the Feast of Christ's Resurrection has two names among Christians: Pascha, or Passover, and Easter, which may connote "sunrise" or "white". Either way, the feast is truly Christian, not pagan.
How does pesach which means passover be made equal to easter, which means sunrise? Now who is confused.
It is noted that soccrates attributes the celebration of easter due to a perpetuation of local custom and not something that Jesus or his disciples enjoined in keeping.
We need to realise also that there is no equivalent word for "Easter" in the Greek language, for one simple but important reason, the word is an Anglo-Saxon word for a pagan festival. The word in its original use is entirely pagan. According to the English Church historian Bede, it derives from a pagan spring festival in honour of Eastra or Ostara a Teutonic goddess. It has no associations whatsoever with Christ, His death and Resurrection, or indeed anything Christian. Is it not, therefore, unsuitable to be used to describe the greatest day in the life of the Church? The French, Italians and Spanish do not make the same mistake. Their words come from the proper source - Passover, which in Greek is the word "Pascha".
Bede's Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum ("Ecclesiastic History of the English People") contains a letter from Pope Gregory I to Saint Mellitus, who was then on his way to England to conduct missionary work among the heathen Anglo-Saxons. The Pope suggests that converting heathens is easier if they are allowed to retain the outward forms of their traditional pagan practices and traditions, while recasting those traditions spiritually towards Christianity instead of to their indigenous gods (whom the Pope refers to as "devils"), "to the end that, whilst some gratifications are outwardly permitted them, they may the more easily consent to the inward consolations of the grace of God". The Pope sanctioned such conversion tactics as biblically acceptable, pointing out that God did much the same thing with the ancient Israelites and their pagan sacrifices. This practice might explain the incorporation of Eostre traditions into the Christian holiday.
So who is responsible for defiling the passover? The RC church!!! -
sorry lah too hasty in posting... thanks for the tip!Originally posted by Chin Eng:brey.... quote source lah! http://www.lasttrumpetministries.org/tracts/tract1.html just a courtesy thing, always need to quote source!
so difficult to read. the link above has line spacing, which makes reading easier.
-
I support u Brey. Preach it man!
But i hope my "scandalous" reputation wont affect what u are saying.
-
God the Father loves you all, bickering children! He loves you no matter what doctrine u are trying to defend. But know this, He wants you to grow up & study the bible more often & not just depend on other people. He wants you to open your eyes & ears to see & hear. Don't let traditions hinder you.
There are good things abt every church but we are to edify the church not divide the church with our endless bickerings. Let us become like Jesus not become like catholics, protestants, charismatics etc. These are all church structures. One day it will all be dismantled when Christ comes back for us. We now see dimly but then we will see clearly.
God bless! -
Let's go back to the topic again...Originally posted by despondent:hello!!! well, juz tot tat i will pose a thread on belief groups who claim to be 'christians'. no i am nt coming against catholicism or any denomination. i am toking abt the groups like mormons and Jehovah Witness...anyone who interested in cult topics...share them here... God Bless!!!
I was once approached by a mormon who shared with me abt Joseph Smith his prophet and the new revelation he believed in.
I am also interested in cult topics, but what do u want to discuss? -
SgMacross,Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:The Holy Scripture states as such:
"You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church." Matthew 16:18
And to him and the apostles,
"Whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven" Matthew 18
We make an effort to claim that Christ gave the bishops authority. How about you? Where did your pastor get his authority from? Did Jesus Christ found your Church? Jesus Christ is the head of Church, and He founded on Peter the rock, the very first Pope. And we thank God for giving us a Pope to unite us, if not there will be unlimited chaos, evidently shown by the hundreds of denominations out there.
sorry ah... Matt 16:18, there is still some debate on this among the scholars...
Camp 1, the 'rock' refers to here is Peter, which also means rock.
Camp 2, the 'rock' refers to here is actually the confession of Peter, meaning on the confession that "Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God" will the church be build upon.
God bless. -
I assume you are from Camp 2 then..Originally posted by vince69:SgMacross,
sorry ah... Matt 16:18, there is still some debate on this among the scholars...
Camp 1, the 'rock' refers to here is Peter, which also means rock.
Camp 2, the 'rock' refers to here is actually the confession of Peter, meaning on the confession that "Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God" will the church be build upon.
God bless. -
Yes,Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:I assume you are from Camp 2 then..
I believe that the foundation of the church is build on the confession that,
"Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God" and not on the person Peter, the other is that when we make our decision to submit ourself to Christ, we also confess that we believe that Jesus is Christ, the Son of the living God.
Having said this, pls note that Jesus did reinstate the Apostle Peter after His resurrection, and send him (Peter) to feed His sheeps, so this interpretation has in no way diminished the role Peter play in the early church.
My problem with the former interpretation is that, the church should in no way be build on a falliable person (yes, even Apostle Peter is not perfect), the other is that our salvation is based on the person Jesus Christ and not of Apostle Peter.
God Bless. -
Do you think Apostle Paul is a forgery?Originally posted by vince69:Having said this, pls note that Jesus did reinstate the Apostle Peter after His resurrection, and send him (Peter) to feed His sheeps, so this interpretation has in no way diminished the role Peter play in the early church.
My problem with the former interpretation is that, the church should in no way be build on a falliable person (yes, even Apostle Peter is not perfect), the other is that our salvation is based on the person Jesus Christ and not of Apostle Peter.
'cos Jesus never intro Paul. Jesus intro Peter and the Holy Spirit. But not Paul!
Furthermore, God appeared to Paul, but did God appear to the rest of the apostles and tell them "this is my greatest apostle"? -
Icemoon,Originally posted by Icemoon:Do you think Apostle Paul is a forgery?
'cos Jesus never intro Paul. Jesus intro Peter and the Holy Spirit. But not Paul!
Furthermore, God appeared to Paul, but did God appear to the rest of the apostles and tell them "this is my greatest apostle"?
#1 : God did not say Paul is the greatest apostle
#2 : Jesus is the one that appear to Paul (Acts 9:5)
#3 : Anani'as was told by Jesus, to pray over Paul, the Lord also reveal His plan for Paul to Anani'as
"for he is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel" Acts 9:15
#4 : interestingly you are not the only one saying this, here is Paul's defense on his calling as Apostle (1 Corinthians 9) at that time when this came out.
God Bless. -
St Peter is not the Saviour of the world, but he is the first Pope.Originally posted by vince69:My problem with the former interpretation is that, the church should in no way be build on a falliable person (yes, even Apostle Peter is not perfect), the other is that our salvation is based on the person Jesus Christ and not of Apostle Peter.
God Bless.
What do you mean by 'failiable'? -
Cause all men are falliable, there is no one that do not make mistake, if there is ever one person that is perfect and infalliable, its our Lord Jesus Christ.Originally posted by SingaporeMacross:St Peter is not the Saviour of the world, but he is the first Pope.
What do you mean by 'failiable'?
To say a person is not falliable, is to say this person cannot make, will not and does not make mistake, meaning perfect.
yes, the Apostle Peter is an apostle appointed by our Lord Jesus Christ, but definitely not infalliable and far from being perfect.
I had always been curious about, and since now that you mentioned it, perhaps you can help me with these; when was Peter make the first Pope of the Catholic Church? Is he also the first Bishop of the church in Rome? When did Peter first go to Rome to build the church there? ...etc mainly on the beginings of the Catholic Church.
If you can direct me to where I can find these info, that will be very helpful.
Many Thanks .
Oh... before I forget, the only source of Info on the early churches I have at this moment is
1) Sketches from church history by S.M.Houghton
2) The works of Josephus translated by William Whiston. -
Let's go back to the topic again...
well, we can tok abt how these cults preach 'lies' tat r so close to the truth...i do noe of certain 'truths' they preach tat seem to have biblical references...in the last days, i feel its impt we uncover n discern truth from lie...anyone has anything to share in tis area? i wil post some of the info i noe the next time...
I was once approached by a mormon who shared with me abt Joseph Smith his prophet and the new revelation he believed in.
I am also interested in cult topics, but what do u want to discuss?