Christmas is not pagan

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Wow! If you have a problem understanding a clear verse how can you teach in a church? GS, Luke in Acts 21:21 is referring to false accusers, and how they misunderstood Paul's words. Peter explains this in 2 Peter 3:16 "As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction."

Good grief

So you suggest Paul taught circumcision?

Paul’s teaching isn’t hard to understand. He preached justification by faith and not works. That does not give us the freedom to live after the flesh, but instead it is freedom from from the works of the flesh to walk after the Spirit. I didn't invent the calendar and cannot help all the pagan influences on the days of the year. I don't mind traditions that involve teaching children about the birth of Christ.

I guess you have had turnaround from your love for bacon.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968

You have obviously have more knowledge on the subject, so I take that into account for the following;

The LDS believers have a massive movement in the federal government, many lawmakers are believers in the LDS faith. If 2012 would've went differently, we would've had one as the President. It's no secret that the LDS church controls the state of Utah as far as the political realm is concerned. With that said, I just don't think, the LDS are merely foot-soldiers in the gram skein of things.

The so-called "White Horse Prophecy" plays a large part in this. But the people at the top of the food chain who make the actual decisions (what people call "the Deep State", the unelected upper management officials and department heads) tend to be either Knights of Malta, or graduating from Jesuit universities.

We have to remember that the Counter-Reformation never actually ended, and that it was LITERALLY cloak and dagger stuff. The creation of various religious movements throughout Protestantism (often by Freemasons, like the SDA, the JW/Watchtower, the LDS, various other "doomsday cults", spiritualist movements, etc etc) was part and parcel of the Jesuit run Counter-Reformation, to destabilise Protestant societies and keep them chasing their tails and rabbit trails, to weaken them and reduce any threat they might pose to Vatican power and influence.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968

Completely off topic.
The LDS church over took the Catholic Church as the wealthiest church in the world, by three times as much. Pope may not have as much power as we think.

I've noticed the LDS has hijacked the old classic/sacred hymns, knowing that this might be a draw for Protestants who are tired of a rock concert every service or a guy on a keyboard singing songs that nobody knows. Additionally, they openly refer to themselves as Trinitarian. Since most self-professed Trinitarians today have drifted into blatant tritheism, they might feel right at home in the LDS. I'm just waiting for the LDS to start emphasizing "being saved by grace" as the next ploy.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

So you suggest Paul taught circumcision?

Acts 21:21 points out that Paul was being falsely accused, if you read, you can see what he is being accused of. Teaching law keeping Judeans to reject the law of Moses. He never did that, as long as the temple stood, with a working priesthood, they who were of the elect practiced as they always had. The Gentiles were the ones Paul refused to teach law keeping. The Judaizers believed that they needed to convert the Gentiles into physical Judeans first, joining them into the lineage of Abraham, therefore partakers in that covenant. This was to be done before they could repent and accept Christ, through baptism. This was discussed in Acts 15. In Acts 16:1-3 Paul circumcises Timothy whose grandmother Lois (Greek name) and mother Eunice (Greek name), were law keeping Diaspora Judean Christians. Paul didn't want to have any issues because of the Christian Judean law keepers. Timothy was taught the books of Moses from his youth by his Diaspora Judean Christian law keeping grandmother, and mother, His father a Non-Judean Greek was most likely the influence why his son went uncircumcised. In Galatians 2:1-3 Paul doesn't circumcise Titus because he was never a Judean, or part of the law keeping diaspora. Titus was a Gentile.

Originally Posted by good samaritan

Paul’s teaching isn’t hard to understand. He preached justification by faith and not works. That does not give us the freedom to live after the flesh, but instead it is freedom from from the works of the flesh to walk after the Spirit.

It looks like it is hard for you. Where did Jesus teach against circumcision? Do you have at least one verse?

Originally Posted by good samaritan

I didn't invent the calendar and cannot help all the pagan influences on the days of the year. I don't mind traditions that involve teaching children about the birth of Christ.

You didn't invent them, those traditions are from the man in the pointy hat whose throne is in Rome. Its the Roman Mass plain and simple.

You want to teach children about Christ's birth? Try using a Bible, instead of once a year powdering them in Romanism. What I find funny, is that people like you, who baptize the Roman Mass in Jesus name. Are the same guys who would try to get Sister FooFoofnick to take the Roman rosary off her rearview mirror, and her Virgin Mary (which glows in the dark) off her dashboard. Then turn around and take the whole church family to see the Xmas card display downtown. Complete with life-size Nativity scene.

Originally Posted by good samaritan

I guess you have had turnaround from your love for bacon.

Just like Titus not being compelled to be circumcised. He would of still been eating the diet of the Roman Gentiles. Which first on the menu was Boar.

[seguidordejesus]

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968

gram skein of things.

Can you elaborate on this?

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Acts 21:21 points out that Paul was being falsely accused, if you read, you can see what he is being accused of. Teaching law keeping Judeans to reject the law of Moses.

I understood that this was an accusation. How did he fare teaching this where Jews may have been present?

Romans 2:28
For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
Romans 2:29
But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

He never did that, as long as the temple stood, with a working priesthood, they who were of the elect practiced as they always had. The Gentiles were the ones Paul refused to teach law keeping.

Then obviously he wasnt a proponent for a law keeping requirement for the NT church.

1 Corinthians 7:18-19
18......Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.
19......Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.

Paul taught Christian liberty on these issues. This is not what others are teaching here on AFF.

The Judaizers believed that they needed to convert the Gentiles into physical Judeans first, joining them into the lineage of Abraham, therefore partakers in that covenant. This was to be done before they could repent and accept Christ, through baptism. This was discussed in Acts 15. In Acts 16:1-3 Paul circumcises Timothy whose grandmother Lois (Greek name) and mother Eunice (Greek name), were law keeping Diaspora Judean Christians. Paul didn't want to have any issues because of the Christian Judean law keepers. Timothy was taught the books of Moses from his youth by his Diaspora Judean Christian law keeping grandmother, and mother, His father a Non-Judean Greek was most likely the influence why his son went uncircumcised. In Galatians 2:1-3 Paul doesn't circumcise Titus because he was never a Judean, or part of the law keeping diaspora. Titus was a Gentile.

Acts 16:3
Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek.

Paul’s motivation for Timothy being circumcised was a P.R. statement. This was not a salvation issue, but this was simply about expediency.

It looks like it is hard for you. Where did Jesus teach against circumcision? Do you have at least one verse?

What?!?! Where did I say Jesus taught against circumcision? If I did it was a typo. I said Paul taught against the necessity of circumcision of the flesh.

You didn't invent them, those traditions are from the man in the pointy hat whose throne is in Rome. Its the Roman Mass plain and simple.

Never was important to me to research. I never have taught Santa clause and all the folklore that many practice around Christmas. I simply thank Jesus for being born. While many think there insights make them spiritual superior, I think it doesn't matter and if I can use it as avenue to reach the lost in our field of harvest I will. Christmas programs all over have brought people to apostolic churches where they have received the gospel. To me that is a win. What the enemy has meant for bad, God has turned to good.

You want to teach children about Christ's birth? Try using a Bible, instead of once a year powdering them in Romanism.

I assure you I teach my kids from the Bible daily. I have homeschooled them from kindergarten and our family has spent our whole lives serving in the local church.

what I find funny, is that people like you, who baptize the Roman Mass in Jesus name. Are the same guys who would try to get Sister FooFoofnick to take the Roman rosary off her rearview mirror, and her Virgin Mary (which glows in the dark) off her dashboard. Then turn around and take the whole church family to see the Xmas card display downtown. Complete with life-size Nativity scene.

People like me? Hahaha. You probably don't know too many people like me. We are pretty backwoods redneck. Lol. We have very few Catholics around our neck of the woods. But I guess you are saying that having nativity scenes are an abomination.

Just like Titus not being compelled to be circumcised. He would of still been eating the diet of the Roman Gentiles. Which first on the menu was Boar.

I enjoyed a good amount of hog jawl, black eyed peas and cabbage this weekend. I don't care what you eat. If the U.S. continues it's course we may not be eating at all.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

1 Corinthians 7:18-19
18......Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.
19......Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God.

Paul taught Christian liberty on these issues. This is not what others are teaching here on AFF.

Paul did not teach what you think he was teaching, and neither do "others here on AFF" teach what you think they are teaching.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by seguidordejesus

Can you elaborate on this?

I believe he meant "grand scheme".

[good samaritan]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Paul did not teach what you think he was teaching, and neither do "others here on AFF" teach what you think they are teaching.

I quoted what Paul was teaching and I can't understand what you are teaching.

[seguidordejesus]

Originally Posted by Esaias

I believe he meant "grand scheme".

Man, I hoped he was on to something new.