Final Version Christianity blog

submitted by Cornfed from self.Christianity

I started a Christian oriented blog last week to give my views on Christian issues.

https://finalversionchristianity.blog/

The main idea is that while the world is ready for a Christian revival, most mainstream churches aren't up to the task, so this would be a good time to sort out sensible doctrine as well as getting together via home churches or whatever.

https://finalversionchristianity.blog/2021/11/24/final-version-christianity-intro/

If no-one objects I might post specific threads here from time to time.

all 26 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Vulptex 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (21 children)

It is quite simple. If one supports female priests and female leadership, one is not a Christian.

Huh, TIL Jesus and Paul weren't Christians.

[–]Cornfed[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

What are you talking about?

[–]Vulptex 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

If one supports female priests and female leadership, one is not a Christian; Jesus had just as many female disciples as male disciples, and Paul supported a woman as an apostle and another as a deacon, therefore they are not Christians.

[–]Cornfed[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Those female supporters were not leaders or priests. Paul was explicit about not having female priests.

[–]Vulptex 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

What are apostles and deacons, if not some kind of leader or teacher?

Also, Paul didn't say anything about not having female priests, unless you count what are almost certainly 2nd-century forgeries by the Catholic Church. Nor is Paul the decision-maker regardless of what he might have thought.

[–]Cornfed[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The females you are referring to were, if not some kind of leader or priest, not some kind of leader or priest.

[–]Vulptex 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

So are you saying even apostles don't teach others? That's kinda their job.

There wasn't any such thing as a "priest" in New Testament times either.

[–]Cornfed[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

There is a difference between helping out in various ways and being leaders and priests. Paul was clear on this. See for example 1 Corinthians 14:33-35 and 1 Timothy 2.

[–]Vulptex 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I think Paul meant what he said, regardless of pseudo-Paul not liking it and inserting the verses you're referring to into his epistles.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

they weren't, they were jews, at that time there was no such thing as christianity, just a jewish sect

[–]Cornfed[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

No, at the time referred to they were a separate sect consisting of mostly ethnic Jews who were intent on expanding into the non-Jewish world, which was most of Paul's life goal.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

thats what i said

[–]Cornfed[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

You said there was no such thing as Christianity. Clearly there was - it just happened to consist mostly of ethnic Jews.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

christianity didn't exist till a few hundred years later when the romans codified it

like I said it was just a jewish sect then, of which there were many

[–]Cornfed[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Their religion clearly differed from Judaism, hence Paul's previous persecution of them. Most Jews didn't think of them as just other Jews in terms of their religion. There is no reason to require some kind of arbitrary codification to acknowledge the existence of a separate religion.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

the story with paul is yeah he persecuted them but then changed his ways and converted to judaism.

They controlled the temple, jesus Brother James was the high priest. That meant the top jew. They didn't use the term christian to call themself that, they were jews.

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

They would be considered Christians now. And Christianity is still a Jewish sect.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

interesting idea, agree and disagree, it is a jewish sect still but most christians would disagree with that

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I wouldn't say most, probably just anti-semites for the most part. And I doubt most of them are believers anyway, they just suck up to Christianity because they like how it's the "tradition".

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

definitely wrong most would not just the antisemites, saying it's not a jewish sect anymore doesn't mean they're an antisemite it's just they'd think it's their own religion

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Most Christians I've talked to recognize that it began with Judaism. Even some anti-semites accept this and get around it by saying that Jews are not "real Jews" (who according to them are white Europeans).

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

that's not the same as saying it is the same religion still

Yeah hitler and the nazis made up positive christianity which downplayed the jewishness of jesus. Can't just try to deny reality like that tho. They had planned to just do that as a segue into their nordic religion, which the thule society believed in. And mainly just using religion to brainwash people. Most would disagree just because they don't really know the history of christianity.

[–]fschmidt 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Videos here

[–]Node 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It is probably not possible to know the actual date of the birth of Jesus at this time. If you believe the Book of Luke it probably occurred sometime in March. However, there was an eastern tradition that Jesus was conceived and died on the same calendar day, and if you work that out it puts the date around Christmas time. In any case, given we are not sure of the date, why not just pick a convenient date and celebrate it then, as we do with other holidays?

What would be the primary argument in favor of celebrating when the earth is in a specific position in its orbit around our sun?

[–]Cornfed[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

None that I know of. There are certain times of the year that holidays can be convenient thought, such as when the weather is very hot or very cold.

[–]Node 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I just find it a peculiar behavior that seems to indicate some quirky levels of functionality.

Aside from that, nice work on the blog and videos.