Televangelists Speaking In Tongues

Again...the church is mainstream as long as it follows Christian principals. Charismatic churches, pentecostal churches, Southern Baptist, Baptist, Lutheran, catholic...all drastically different....but as long as they follow biblical principals ...yes they are mainstream.

 

I've never said that I'm for a theocracy. On the contrary. Unless Jesus Christ himself comes and establishes the world-wide government, then the Constitution of the United States is the Law of the Land. Just please let Democrats know this because they never follow it.
You are making the same mistake over and over expecting different results. You and I just agreed that religious and non-religious persons have a right to propose a law. Where do you think either gets their ideas for their proposed laws from? Either secular beliefs or religious beliefs. It seeps that only secular beliefs are allowed by you. Why are you allowed to force your secular beliefs on me but I can't propose a religious belief that the majority votes to comply with (responsibility)? Have I ever said it's okay to force laws by physical violence or threats? Who's doing that these days? Oh, Democrats like Joe TaliBiden forcing his stupid belief of vaccinations on everyone or lose your job! It's not the religious that are using Marxist and Fascist methods.

 

Some more different than others .. and some not dreastically .. the Pentecostal and evangelical fundamentalists are not the mainstream because the are literalists - Catholic - Orthodox - and most of protestantism is not .. nor do they practice the art of "speaking in tongues" for various reasons .. some of which - "in public" are a form of kind distancing .. the reality being far more heretical.

 

Bible believing....which I think you are meaning by "literalsts" are most definitely mainstream. And numerous. Perhaps our differences in opinion is based on where we live ?

 

You say you are not for theocracy ... then argue for theocracy .. putting it on the same level as secularism.

OK let us say we are voting in a referendum on whether or not to ban alcohol .. the question of the referendum is not "Do you like Alcohol" - the question of a referendum is "Do you have sufficient justification to force your beliefs on others through physical violence"

There are many valid justifications - what is not a valid justification is "I don't like it" - Would you like folks forcing stuff on you on such basis- though physical violence ? "I don't like XXXXXX" aside from the fact that this would be moronic hypocrisy .. as no sane person would accept want this. Tyranny upon Tyranny.

What is also not a valid justification is "God says so" . Prove what God says ? .. and who's God .. which text .. and who gets to decide .. some religious movement that takes hold . implementing dogma .. hmmm sounds familiar like over in the Middle East no ?

making law on the basis of a religious mob chanting God Says so - is Theocracy - doing what the Mullah's want.. dress it up how ever you like.

and this is exactly what his happening .. abortion a prime example .. Temperence movement being another .. war on drugs .. prohibition .porn ..and numerous other little wars ..

Belief in essential liberty is not belief in liberties you agree with - everyone believes in that .. belief in essential liberty is belief in liberty for things you disagree with.

 

Obviously that is not what I mean by literalist .. good grief .. Look .. ONLY the fundamentalists are literalits .. the other Churches recognize errors and flaws in the Bible.

If you go to a "Real" Seminary .. Missouri Synod for example .. where all the Lutheran pastors of that sect .. ELCC being the other .. are trained. 8 years .. learning Latin, Hebrew, Greek .. and you learn about the issues with the Bible .. These are learned men .. every Pastor .. and I know many many of them well .. having close relatives in the cloth.

In the Seminary you Learn that the "Christ Cried Tears of Blood" was a later interpolation = some overzealous scribe was wanting to present Jesus in a more human light - show his humanity .. So obviously that part was not "God Breathed" .. and there are "too many to count" other examples .. the long ending of Mark for example..

This is well established reality among acadamia of every denomination .. "except you know who" These Pastors and Priests can talk about these things openly .. don't have to make up ridiculous excuses for talking donkeys and so forth .. The Flood is easily explained through allegory - a non literalist does not have believe the Earth is only 6000 years old to believe in Jesus.

 

Why do you go off on this long nonsensical tirade when the answer is the vote of the people? It isn't whether you or I believe something that is better than the other. It's the melting pot of ideas that we end up voting on. We vote for politicians that seemingly have our best interests (when most are subject to the wind). They write laws. If we don't like them, we either take them to court or vote them out for someone else that will work in our best interest. The majority usually wins unless Democrats can manufacture false ballots and get them into the system like Michigan, Pennsylvania...That's our system. The tide changes through time. The swing is from right to left. From religious to secular beliefs. When the beliefs are more religious in nature, the secularists get their undies all up in a twist and attack viciously the religious or moral majority. When the beliefs are more secular, the religious stay more quiet patiently awaiting for collapse of the economy or something else. Something it seems secularists are unable to do. Instead, they riot in the streets sending out their militia BLM or Antifa. Much like a screaming child having a conniption fit jumping up and down...

 

I was talking about a vote of the people - must have got off on the wrong track you did ... into some nonsense land that does not exist in my post.

 

You call it literalist. I call it Bible Believing. We are talking about the same thing. And this type of faith is mainstream.

I don't consider this seminary you describe as a "real" seminary. It is a seminary that does not consider the Bible as truth. So....I'm sure you are drawn to it, however America is filled to the brim with churches and Biblical scholars that view the Bible as the word of God and God Breathed. Mainstream.

 

Literalism is not main stream - and for good reason .. only the fundamentalists believe this way from a doctrinal perspective. We are talking doctrine here mate .. sorry .. perhaps a person or two in the pew of an average church believes the Flood Story - earth 6000 years old .. the vast majority do not .. and none of the clergy - because every seminary teaches from a non literalist perspective but evangelical and don't think Pente's have a formal seminary of note .. online be a minister training will do.

You need to get out more - go to a "normal" church once in awhile - talk to people who are not literalists about their beliefs - why no one but the fundamentalists believe in the flood story ...

You say "Bible Beleiving" but don't even know what you mean when you say that .... Believe what parts of the Bible ? if you say "All" every word is God Breathed .. OK .. which Bible as not all are the same -some with significant differences - some with different books .. passages saying completely different things from one to the next.

Tell me mate .. which Bible should I use - Mitt would not answer this question in his "Answers to tough questions OP" guess that one was a bit too tough .. so please tell me . which Bible is 100% God breathed.

 

Personally I like the King James version for its beautiful old language. The NIV is easier to understand. It's all 100% breathed, protected, and controlled by God.

The normal churches do believe in the Bible as God's word. Of course not ALL churches. But more do then don't in my area. Perhaps you live somewhere particularly progressive?

 

Thanks for giving a version of the Bible - and normal churches do not take the entire bible as the literal word of God .. some of the Bible ..such as proverbs and ecclesiastes ...is not intended to be God Breathed .. it is wisdom writings.

In any case the KJV and NIV are modern bibles the KJV being a notibly horrible translation as far as modern texts go .. but that is here nor there as both are relatively modern - copied from the MT - Masoretic Text ~700-900 AD.

There are significant differences from the MT and Older Bibles -- dating 300-100 BC. Talking about the OT here ... Septuagint ... the Bible Jews at the time of Christ would have been using.

These Bibles tell a much different story than today's Bible - Without getting into details - that will come later - why would God change the story over time ? Did he not get it right the first time ?

 

The oldest Biblical scriptures were from dead sea scrolls. And those have been found to be amazingly consistant with modern versions. The story hasn't changed and the message has stayed the same for thousands of years.
I like the kjv as it has stood the test of time.

 

The Oldest Bibles are the Dead Sea Scrolls but also the Septuagint (LXX) but same time period .. we will look at both . and while these two are similar .. this is not the case with the MT in some very important places.

For example - Starting with Deut 32:8 Elyon (EL) divides the nations among his sons - the Sons of God - the portion given to YHWH is Israel.

This not the only time "EL" is depicted as "the Most high" .. we also find this in Psalm 82 - and other places.

Later on in Deut 32 we come to verse 43.

"O heavens, rejoice with Him
Bow to Him, all sons of the divine

O nations, rejoice with His people
and let all angels of the divine strengthen themselves in Him.

For He’ll avenge the blood of His sons,
be vengeful, and wreak vengeance and recompense justice on his foes

And the Lord will Cleanse His people’s land"

So above we have a scene with the Sons of God Rejoicing with the most high .. but they are subordinate to the Father. Sons of the Divine.

The people are also rejoicing on earth - a tier below - and the angels on a lower tier yet. This passage makes it clear the distinction between angels and the sons of God .. and let no one tell you that the other references to the "Sons of God" in the Bible are angels .. as is a lie .. we know they are not angels .. the Bible tells us so in numerous places .. Job being another.

This passage however is so explicit in the distinction .. and we can't have that .. The LXX is above - QDuet - qumran text reads similarly.

Fast forward 1000 years to the MT .. and all references to angels and divinities have been wiped clean from the text.

"O nations, rejoice His people
For He’ll avenge the blood of His servants and wreak vengeance on His foes
And will cleanse His people’s land"

As you can see this is quite the hack job. The MT makes no mention of any "sons of the divine" bowing to the supreme God no celebration in heaven - no angels. Go to a Modern Bible and the hack job continues.

Rejoice, you nations, with his people,
for he will avenge the blood of his servants; he will take vengeance on his enemies
and make atonement for his land and people.

Note the last line .. God is no longer Cleansing the land - and we all know what that means .. God is now Atoning for something .. has God done something wrong ? and it is no longer the poeples land ... it is Gods land.

The passage has been rendered unrecognizable ... Why would God do this ?

 

Those people give religion a bad name.

 

Nice try in saving face. All have the right to input their thoughts, opinions and beliefs when it comes to writing laws...

 

Not trying to save anything - you are shilling for theocracy .. and don't understand the difference between essential liberty and freedom to do what one wants .. nor what sound justification for law is .. you think Law should be based on religious belief - want to force your religious beliefs on others through physical violence.

I disagree with forcing religious belief on others through physical violence "With Respect to Essential Liberty" - quotes around the part you keep forgetting and/or are not understanding.

Further - you seem to think that Jesus would condone this nasty path ... an equally dubious belief.

 

Please show where I've said anything about forcing religious beliefs on others? In our Constitutional Republic, we vote on the laws we want. Mostly by majority wins. We elect our representatives in our republic based on majority wins. The elected officials make our laws. Judges rule on the constitutionality of the laws. Well, they are supposed to but many don't. That's another subject matter. What I was clear in stating is that all people have a right to have their opinions and beliefs made into law. That includes both secular atheists and religious persons. It's part of our free right to express our religious or non-religious views. Then, we vote on them. If secular evil beliefs are made into the law, I have to abide by them. I may not like it, but that's what I've agreed to by being a citizen of the United States of America. Same holds true with you. If religious righteous beliefs are made into law, like thou shalt not steal, then you have to abide by them by the same reasoning I have to. This is how we obtain justice for all.
I also believe that forcing religious beliefs on others through physical violence is wrong. Where have I ever said otherwise?

 

I've heard atonement used along with the concept of cleansing. I got this from Google:

"The Hebrew word for "atonement" (kippur) literally means "a covering" but in the context of the Levitical priesthood and sacrifices it has to do with ritual cleansing. The root word, kopher, means "a ransom". The "kippur"/atonement offerings are literally the ransom or price of ritual cleansing... and that ransom involves blood.
In Leviticus 14:52 the blood of a bird is used to cleanse a house with "leprosy":

I think you are in the weeds and missing the point. Obviously you don't trust the Bible and are motivated to spend a lot of energy to find something different between versions many years apart. I see things differently. I find the accuracy of the Bible thru thousands of years of storytelling, to the written word and hand written copies as incredible. God's message remains the same through the span of time. The message and principles are timeless.

 

It's amazing how much faith people have in these mail-order ministers.

 

This is a very well-thought out excellent post. Sometimes people try to put too much into their studies without a thought of prayer and meditation. Thank you for your message.

 

I don't know what you are trying to accomplish here. But, I noticed that you do pick out the name or a portion of the name of the Most High God or our Father in Heaven. You have "El" which is part of the name Elohim in which our Church knows the Father's name as. Jehovah (Yahweh) is the Son, who came down off his thrown as Jesus Christ.

 

50+1 or Simple Majority Mandate is a violation of the Constitutional Republic = Tyranny of the Majority. Overwhelming majority - at least 67% is required to mess with essential liberty.

"Law" is physical violence - when you make law based on religious belief .... this is forcing religious belief on others through physical violence - of which you have voiced support numerous times.

 

Obviously you are in deep denial - desperate to avoid the fact that older Bibles Deut 32:43 in the LXX and 4DeutQ says something copletely different .from the modern Text - has a much different message.

Your claim "God's message remains the same through the span of time" is a complete falsehood.

In one place God says Children should not be killed for the sins of their parents - in another God orders the killing of Children, Babies and Fetuses "Because of the sins of their parents"

You are the one in the weeds mate - desperate to deny scripture that does ot agree with your perspective - desperate to intentionally avoid the point .. so don't blame your issues on me.

You finish with "I find the accuracy Incredible" .. Well of course you do since you ignore or deny all the inaccurate passages.

The word "Cleanse" in Deut 32:43 is not talking about ritual sacrifice... it is talking about killing people. Why are you so desperate to insert made up nonsense into the Bible Text ?

 

You have no idea what you are talking about .. "Elohim" and the proper name El are two differnent things.

The name of the God of Abraham is not YHWH .. get it .. got it .. good.