# "I have been anointed"



## ambush80 (Mar 14, 2019)

I just heard a former Baptist preacher turned Imam say that he has been "anointed to preach the word of God".  

I guess I hadn't heard that kind of language in some time but it struck me just as ever before as positively frightening.  This guy thinks that God has chosen him to tell people what's right and wrong and how to live because he believes that God has given _him_ the ability to interpret scripture.  And people will believe him.......

Positively frightening.


----------



## ambush80 (Mar 14, 2019)




----------



## 660griz (Mar 15, 2019)

It is also scary how often this happens. Folks being told by God to...
Some are in it for the money or power. Some are just bat &$*% crazy.


----------



## ky55 (Mar 15, 2019)

660griz said:


> It is also scary how often this happens. Folks being told by God to...
> Some are in it for the money or power. Some are just bat &$*% crazy.



If y’all remember it hasn’t been very long since a member on here made this comment during a discussion:

“Thanks for recognizing that I am called by God .”

He went on to define his personal church as “mainstream religion”, and even claimed power equal to the disciples.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 15, 2019)

If a man isn’t called, or at least feels that he’s called by God to preach, why dies he bother to burden himself with people and their problems??

Mega rich churches,,,,, yea I’d be skeptical about the money, but what about the broke ones that give up everything for a small congregation?? No money there!!


----------



## bullethead (Mar 16, 2019)

Spotlite said:


> If a man isn’t called, or at least feels that he’s called by God to preach, why dies he bother to burden himself with people and their problems??
> 
> Mega rich churches,,,,, yea I’d be skeptical about the money, but what about the broke ones that give up everything for a small congregation?? No money there!!


Similar reasons as to why people permanently transform themselves with implants with surgeries and tattoos from head to toe(think full body head to toe tats, piercings, silicone face implants and sharpen their teeth to look like a cat) and the people who dress up as their favorite characters or animals not just for conventions but every day.
They wholeheartedly believe in what they like. It gives them great pleasure  to see themselves and be seen and act in those ways. They are committed to whatever it is that they believe in. Religion/Cults are no different. It gives that person great pleasure to be a part of a group that all love the same thing.
Basically humans are complex, mostly weird and have many wants and needs that make them feel good.
And it ranges from mild to wild and we are all guilty of it in one form or another.
There are a handful of us in "here" every day. Why? Same reason some broke pastor stands in front of 3 dozen people every Sunday. It's one of his many "things" as it is theirs.


----------



## Israel (Mar 16, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Similar reasons as to why people permanently transform themselves with implants with surgeries and tattoos from head to toe(think full body head to toe tats, piercings, silicone face implants and sharpen their teeth to look like a cat) and the people who dress up as their favorite characters or animals not just for conventions but every day.
> They wholeheartedly believe in what they like. It gives them great pleasure  to see themselves and be seen and act in those ways. They are committed to whatever it is that they believe in. Religion/Cults are no different. It gives that person great pleasure to be a part of a group that all love the same thing.
> Basically humans are complex, mostly weird and have many wants and needs that make them feel good.
> And it ranges from mild to wild and we are all guilty of it in one form or another.
> There are a handful of us in "here" every day. Why? Same reason some broke pastor stands in front of 3 dozen people every Sunday. It's one of his many "things" as it is theirs.




Guilty?



> And it ranges from mild to wild and we are all guilty of it in one form or another.



Before what are we guilty?


----------



## bullethead (Mar 16, 2019)

Israel said:


> Guilty?
> 
> 
> 
> Before what are we guilty?


Guilty before the judgement of other human beings who are also guilty of accusations of being weirdos by someone else.
No ultimate judge Israel, its just us


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 16, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Similar reasons as to why people permanently transform themselves with implants with surgeries and tattoos from head to toe(think full body head to toe tats, piercings, silicone face implants and sharpen their teeth to look like a cat) and the people who dress up as their favorite characters or animals not just for conventions but every day.
> They wholeheartedly believe in what they like. It gives them great pleasure  to see themselves and be seen and act in those ways. They are committed to whatever it is that they believe in. Religion/Cults are no different. It gives that person great pleasure to be a part of a group that all love the same thing.
> Basically humans are complex, mostly weird and have many wants and needs that make them feel good.
> And it ranges from mild to wild and we are all guilty of it in one form or another.
> There are a handful of us in "here" every day. Why? Same reason some broke pastor stands in front of 3 dozen people every Sunday. It's one of his many "things" as it is theirs.


Can’t argue with this......but I know a couple that actually gave up successful  businesses to preach to broke congratulations........and have to work for other people to make ends meet.


----------



## Israel (Mar 16, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Guilty before the judgement of other human beings who are also guilty of accusations of being weirdos by someone else.
> No ultimate judge Israel, its just us


If men are exactly as you describe...weird, complex (or is it common, simple?)...and man (or better _the thing_) in that state..._is man,_ then man judges "man" as being guilty of being...man?


LOL! And some describe me _as afflicted _with self loathing!!!!



How much bandwidth do_ you _want me to use so that any accusation of "using it excessively" might stand finally...universal to agreement? I got an almost innumerable amount of ha ha's...found...is it better, above of all, _this man_ be restrained?

I hear an invitation. To be excessively...man. Who...doesn't?

I easily think it is better then, to be a sparrow.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 16, 2019)

Spotlite said:


> Can’t argue with this......but I know a couple that actually gave up successful  businesses to preach to broke congratulations........and have to work for other people to make ends meet.


I consider that abnormal, do you?


----------



## bullethead (Mar 16, 2019)

Israel said:


> If men are exactly as you describe...weird, complex (or is it common, simple?)...and man (or better _the thing_) in that state..._is man,_ then man judges "man" as being guilty of being...man?
> 
> 
> LOL! And some describe me _as afflicted _with self loathing!!!!
> ...


You are going to do what you do regardless.  That is what makes you, YOU and that is your normal but weird to me.

My normal is my normal and weird to you.

But at least in here, like everywhere else, it works.

 I know you are going say very little about and address the topics at hand directly and will make assertions and claims without anything in the next 10 paragraphs that back any of it up. There will be a daily point in your head that you will want to bring up and no matter what the topic at hand is you will conduct a question and answer session solely with yourself until you work it into the conversation you are having with yourself, and it seems suspiciously geared towards you making it sound like someone else asked you. Then you throw in some KJV verses end it with some Jesus praises and  bits of unworthy reasons why you should not be but are...

I get it. That is what you do. That is your part in this world.

I read the first few sentences and skip it. Then curiosity gets the best of me and I go back for a couple more and leave shaking my head, then I still come back a few more times until I read it all.  I know what to expect and you know what to expect in return because it is about the only time you address me on topic.

I am sure you feel similarly about my posts and my style of different approach.

We judge each other


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 16, 2019)

bullethead said:


> I consider that abnormal, do you?


Depends on what your benchmark is.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 16, 2019)

Spotlite said:


> Depends on what your benchmark is.


No,  I asked you if you if you think it is abnormal. It is a simple yes or no that is based off of your benchmark, not mine.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Mar 16, 2019)

I see the word "called" used very often.. It's interesting to me that God never calls preachers to low income, or a lower paying churchs?  Without fail, they find the position. Then they check out the salary, to see if God is calling or not


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 16, 2019)

bullethead said:


> No,  I asked you if you if you think it is abnormal. It is a simple yes or no that is based off of your benchmark, not mine.


Actually you said you consider it  abnormal, apparently there’s a benchmark for you. 

I don’t see anything abnormal with anyone feeling their calling in life is helping others. If anyone gives up their own to help others and it jeopardizes their family, I would find it hard to say that was normal. 

But for the direction of the OP, being anointed / called isn’t always about “look at me”.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 16, 2019)

Spotlite said:


> Actually you said you consider it  abnormal, apparently there’s a benchmark for you.
> 
> I don’t see anything abnormal with anyone feeling their calling in life is helping others. If anyone gives up their own to help others and it jeopardizes their family, I would find it hard to say that was normal.
> 
> But for the direction of the OP, being anointed / called isn’t always about “look at me”.





bullethead said:


> I consider that abnormal, do you?


You said that they gave up a successful business to preach to broke congregations and they have to work for others to make ends meet.
I would say that jeopardizes their family.  And why I said that I thought it  was abnormal and WHY i asked you if you thought it was abnormal.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 16, 2019)

bullethead said:


> You said that they gave up a successful business to preach to broke congregations and they have to work for others to make ends meet.
> I would say that jeopardizes their family.  And why I said that I thought it  was abnormal and WHY i asked you if you thought it was abnormal.


Working for others instead of themselves to make ends meet is not really jeopardizing anyone. They gave up what’s consuming their time of running a business to focus on people. Most of the time when work for others, you make less, but you get to go home when the clock dings and think nothing else of the place until it dings the next day.

Loosing homes, cars, healthcare is. They didn’t loose that. 

To me, that’s not “look at me I’m anointed” That’s humility.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 16, 2019)

Spotlite said:


> Working for others instead of themselves to make ends meet is not really jeopardizing anyone. They gave up what’s consuming their time of running a business to focus on people. Most of the time when work for others, you make less, but you get to go home when the clock dings and think nothing else of the place until it dings the next day.
> 
> Loosing homes, cars, healthcare is. They didn’t loose that.
> 
> To me, that’s not “look at me I’m anointed” That’s humility.


Your initial description was so vague that it made it sound like they went from riches to rags on purpose.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

There is a huge problem when men hang such titles on themselves.  We do not allow it to be done in any secular profession, even barbers must have oversight.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> There is a huge problem when men hang such titles on themselves.  We do not allow it to be done in any secular profession, even barbers must have oversight.


Such as "Worlds Best"? , yeah nobody in the secular world hangs such titles on themselves...
Who does not allow such self titling to be done? Can you give a few examples? And regarding a barber,  explain such an example of having such oversight .


----------



## Israel (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> You are going to do what you do regardless.  That is what makes you, YOU and that is your normal but weird to me.
> 
> My normal is my normal and weird to you.
> 
> ...



I think posts 6 and the above are among the finer I've read. Also more fundamental to real issues at hand than we have yet discussed, especially regarding this predilection men have for judging one another. And since I know I am not the only one (far from it) that has ever written the word "truth" in these exchanges I would hope we can have a good faith dialog about that, especially in light of what you write. I agree with so much in these posts, but I also know my endorsement means nothing.

Unless you are willing to say only you and I (which I believe would be a little late at this point if I read you correctly) are the only pair of men that have ever engaged in some judgment of one another, or discerning, or testing (in whatever form), then we alone would have that peculiar issue. But that is not what I believe I hear from you, I believe you are speaking in a much broader sense of what takes place between men (perhaps all? any?) than just you and I. And I agree, wholeheartedly.

No one need agree that "chickens come home to roost", but since I did not create that aphorism or platitude, I believe I am not at odds with whoever did, nor any other who has found it useful to describe what I trust is my understanding of it. Stuff given out returns. Bread cast on the waters, etc.

We both know Jesus is quoted in the Bible as saying many things about judgment. He hits that particular drum pretty hard, and often. And far from implying it in itself is a bad or evil thing, he is nevertheless careful to caution what he knows is inclined toward its casual handling. There is a right judging, there is something else. We needn't discuss all the particulars, nor my understanding of any of them as though I am expert.

But I would ask you this as simply as I can. The matter so often raised as to Jesus' lacking in that peculiar form of universality that is raised by some as a disqualifying, (He's far too parochial in appeal! to speak for the "All God"! He's just so..._Hebrew_.) of what more universal thing among men could Jesus speak as to both their nature in judgment...while He is also careful to include God's nature and opinion in such? See, I believe you when you say "we judge each other" as being far more than just Israel and Bullet do it. Do I misunderstand?

If it is indeed as universal as I infer from your writing, then at the very least, Jesus is addressing something "common to man"...and perhaps to the extreme _of every man. _Right judging (if such a thing be) would also then be _in application_ of some universality of import to all men. At least as Jesus says. Anyone can disagree, of course, and many do. Any man is free to approve all of his own judging and judgments, even taking some form of shelter in "well, everyone does it" and Jesus is just speaking of something that is "no big deal" due to its ubiquity. But, Jesus doesn't speak so, if I understand at all.

So the matter of chickens coming home to roost. And here I agree with the necessity of the universality of_ truth_...to be Truth. If it is truth, it is whether men approve, believe, agree or disagree with it. No doubt (as I believe I rightly infer from your writing) men have an inclination to desire to see themselves "in a certain light" of being whatever sort of particular person they approve. No less or more "religious" people than any other. And do things to that end. And I have yet to meet any (have you?) that would say "I prefer to believe all lies, lies are my foundational principle in all"

But merely saying we "want the truth" or believe _in_ the truth, _desire the truth_ of matters is perhaps no less universal a response than judging. It's so easily assumed to ourselves. "Of course every man _has his own truth" _which ultimately equates to what...if in all it is only "their own"? As many_ truths _as souls that inhabit at any time.

Chickens and roosting. "For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again." Is Jesus speaking only here of "among men"? In one place he surely does speak of a measuring out and of how men shall give into your bosom...but in so many others, no. He speaks of a judge...who Himself judges judging, and ministers out accordingly. A man's judging will return upon his own head in the same measure (quantity) and quality of which he ministers it. If this is not universally so, and true for all, then it is not truth. Mattering not, again, whether men believe it, approve it, agree, or not.

I will not say I am more skilled in judging, nor even more cautious about it, than you. I cannot know, or therefore say "my palate is more discerning" or I know a better caution that I can then therefore instruct you. But, I cannot lie, I have heard a "caution" in Jesus Christ...and that to me the truth of it has been driven home when it is exposed I have been casual about it, assuming it is _my right _especially endorsed by some notion that_ "everyone does it". _I don't disagree with your appraisal (if it is your appraisal) that _all men_ do it with one another.

I am simply convinced I have tasted the results of my_ own giving out_ in casualness that I have found unbearable to myself when returned upon me. And such unbearableness when measured so rightly with a just measure that I cannot deny such _drives me_ to search out a thing called grace. Yes, I may be the chief of "bad judgers" and therefore need the strictest of discipline and chastening applied. But, I have only found such grace in one. One who knows men are more damaging of their own souls in faulty judging...than they know.

If I want less grace for you, than I need and desire for myself (do you believe or doubt there have been times I have been precisely there?) the return of such mistaken appeal by being laughed at so heartily, causes me to reconsider. I need being laughed at when so wrong. It is life to me now. Even if it need be derisively.


----------



## Spotlite (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Your initial description was so vague that it made it sound like they went from riches to rags on purpose.


After re-reading it, I can see that. Not how I intended it to sound. Thanks for clarifying that.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Israel said:


> I think posts 6 and the above are among the finer I've read. Also more fundamental to real issues at hand than we have yet discussed, especially regarding this predilection men have for judging one another. And since I know I am not the only one (far from it) that has ever written the word "truth" in these exchanges I would hope we can have a good faith dialog about that, especially in light of what you write. I agree with so much in these posts, but I also know my endorsement means nothing.
> 
> Unless you are willing to say only you and I (which I believe would be a little late at this point if I read you correctly) are the only pair of men that have ever engaged in some judgment of one another, or discerning, or testing (in whatever form), then we alone would have that peculiar issue. But that is not what I believe I hear from you, I believe you are speaking in a much broader sense of what takes place between men (perhaps all? any?) than just you and I. And I agree, wholeheartedly.
> 
> ...


4th paragraph is where is starts to go sour.
"We both know....."
Neither of us know.
In fact it is more likely that nobody that wrote anything in the NT ever met Jesus let alone even actually saw Jesus let alone was even close enough to him to hear anything he said let alone quote him.

Can you see how your statements are made in order to guide the reader to your point? The point cannot be taken as legit when it is constantly based off of conjecture and assertion.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Israel said:


> I think posts 6 and the above are among the finer I've read. Also more fundamental to real issues at hand than we have yet discussed, especially regarding this predilection men have for judging one another. And since I know I am not the only one (far from it) that has ever written the word "truth" in these exchanges I would hope we can have a good faith dialog about that, especially in light of what you write. I agree with so much in these posts, but I also know my endorsement means nothing.
> 
> Unless you are willing to say only you and I (which I believe would be a little late at this point if I read you correctly) are the only pair of men that have ever engaged in some judgment of one another, or discerning, or testing (in whatever form), then we alone would have that peculiar issue. But that is not what I believe I hear from you, I believe you are speaking in a much broader sense of what takes place between men (perhaps all? any?) than just you and I. And I agree, wholeheartedly.
> 
> ...


Yes, I am speaking about all men, not just you and I. We make great examples of what I am talking about.

Nobody needed Jesus to possibly say these things you are giving him credit for.
He did not start those thoughts and the world has since followed. It has been pondered and addressed long before the notion of Jesus was ever penned.


----------



## Israel (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> 4th paragraph is where is starts to go sour.
> "We both know....."
> Neither of us know.
> In fact it is more likely that nobody that wrote anything in the NT ever met Jesus let alone even actually saw Jesus let alone was even close enough to him to hear anything he said let alone quote him.




I think if you reread you may find there was a care to say "Jesus is quoted" making no other claim or reference to accurately so, or otherwise.

What I believe about it I was careful to not impose...

Is there such a thing...as straining at gnats?


----------



## Israel (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Yes, I am speaking about all men, not just you and I. We make great examples of what I am talking about.
> 
> Nobody needed Jesus to possibly say these things you are giving him credit for.
> He did not start those thoughts and the world has since followed. It has been pondered and addressed long before the notion of Jesus was ever penned.




Then might the question be if Jesus is useless to such matters, having been in consideration and "started" elsewhere, is there any immutability to such? Jesus unequivocally says there are absolute laws governing exchanges between men.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Israel said:


> I think if you reread you may find there was a care to say "Jesus is quoted" making no other claim or reference to accurately so, or otherwise.
> 
> What I believe about it I was careful to not impose...
> 
> Is there such a thing...as straining at gnats?


I try to read everything carefully and that is why I replied as I did.  Someone would need to actually hear it to quote it.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Israel said:


> Then might the question be if Jesus is useless to such matters, having been in consideration and "started" elsewhere, is there any immutability to such? Jesus unequivocally says there are absolute laws governing exchanges between men.


Jesus says?
Captn Kirk says also.

They each had good writers


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Such as "Worlds Best"? , yeah nobody in the secular world hangs such titles on themselves...
> Who does not allow such self titling to be done? Can you give a few examples? And regarding a barber,  explain such an example of having such oversight .


Barbers must be licensed by the state, after an expensive education or apprenticeship.

As for priest, decons, and bishops, there is much education, on the job training, teaching, etc., etc., etc., before a bishop will ordain a priest or deacon or before 3 bishops will consecrate a new bishop.

At.least that is the way it is in the church.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> Barbers must be licensed by the state, after an expensive education or apprenticeship.
> 
> As for priest, decons, and bishops, there is much education, on the job training, teaching, etc., etc., etc., before a bishop will ordain a priest or deacon or before 3 bishops will consecrate a new bishop.
> 
> At.least that is the way it is in the church.


Barbers...hmm, I'll have to think on that one.  I may have to agree with you since I am on my 23rd year of being a Licensed Barber . Good example Madman

Here in Pennsylvania Tattoo Artists need ZERO licensing or Apprenticeship or inspection by the State. Just for example.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Barbers...hmm, I'll have to think on that one.  I may have to agree with you since I am on my 23rd year of being a Licensed Barber . Good example Madman
> 
> Here in Pennsylvania Tattoo Artists need ZERO licensing or Apprenticeship or inspection by the State. Just for example.


I could careless about licensing but there may need to some "oversight" for sanitation.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Mar 17, 2019)

I wonder if the anointing wears off? Because after about 5 years, without fail, the church who once loved their preacher, turns against him. Churches made up of people whom have been there all their lives are the one's who do this. If, he outlast them, and they move on, or they leave before the remainder runs him off, they go to the nearest mega church where they are no longer a problem, feeling like it's not their church, that if they don't like it, it's them that is supposed to leave, not the preacher. And all is well, from then on. This is the dividing line of how mega churches continue to grow and smaller churches continue to die out. It actually has little to do with the preacher and more to do with the disgruntle "been here all my life", pew warmer, giving up trying to control. I don't mean this entirely in a bad light. It's just the way it is, human nature.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> I could careless about licensing but there may need to some "oversight" for sanitation.


Honor system here in Pa for tattoo shops!!!! I agree, it should have oversight but it is the first example th of a profession that thought of without.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Honor system here in Pa for tattoo shops!!!! I agree, it should have oversight but it is the first example th of a profession that thought of without.


Historically almost all professions were apprenticeship,  with school;  professional engineers are still that way.  You must pass the F.E. (final exam) it was the engineer in training exam in my day, (e.i.t) and then work under a P.E. for three years before you could take the P.E. exam.
As for bishops, they have one main responsibility,  " to pass on the teaching EXACTLY as it had been passed down to them, hence the need for 3 bishops to consecrate one.  

I believe anyone who bestows a title upon themself is disqualified immediately. 

I know a man who was given an award for humility,  it was then taken away because he accepted it.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Mar 17, 2019)

Licenses are always a good thing. It separates those serious about running a good business and those fly by night. Also, the license board holds them accountable to particular standards, and they can have their license revoked  if they don't maintain proper insurance. LOL, we are discussing church stuff


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> Historically almost all professions were apprenticeship,  with school;  professional engineers are still that way.  You must pass the F.E. (final exam) it was the engineer in training exam in my day, (e.i.t) and then work under a P.E. for three years before you could take the P.E. exam.
> As for bishops, they have one main responsibility,  " to pass on the teaching EXACTLY as it had been passed down to them, hence the need for 3 bishops to consecrate one.
> 
> I believe anyone who bestows a title upon themself is disqualified immediately.
> ...


Makes me think that the first Bishop(or three) had to give the title to himself/themselves and then all of the bishops that came after those are based off of immediate disqualifications.
That puts a damper on the whole profession.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Makes me think that the first Bishop(or three) had to give the title to himself/themselves and then all of the bishops that came after those are based off of immediate disqualifications.
> That puts a damper on the whole profession.


In Christianity, Christ appointed the first "leader" aka Peter,  the Biblical word used is Greek επίσκοπος, epískopos, which means leader.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Makes me think that the first Bishop(or three) had to give the title to himself/themselves and then all of the bishops that came after those are based off of immediate disqualifications.
> That puts a damper on the whole profession.


Kind of like first "barber".  The key is I doubt you appointed yourself barber.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> In Christianity, Christ appointed the first "leader" aka Peter,  the Biblical word used is Greek επίσκοπος, epískopos, which means leader.


I get that but at some point the regulations changed from then to the  EXACT pass down 3 Bishop consecration now.

Lots of people cut hair until somebody decided there needed to be rules. All the barbers now are not connected to or a result of the first person to trim some bangs with a sharp rock. Peter (or at some point somebody) must have decided on the Hierarchy  and created Bishops, Cardinals, Priests etc.. but am I to believe the Bishops today have been instructed and taught EXACTLY as Peter(or whoever) taught the next high ranking member below him? I would guess those teachings were passed along for hundreds of years until somebody made the process official. At some point somebody called themself Bishop and the chain of rank started.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

1gr8bldr said:


> Licenses are always a good thing. It separates those serious about running a good business and those fly by night. Also, the license board holds them accountable to particular standards, and they can have their license revoked  if they don't maintain proper insurance. LOL, we are discussing church stuff


Hence the Reformation, someone got mad and left, started his own thing.  Now all bets are off, teach what you want.  The Church still maintains the standards.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> I get that but at some point the regulations changed from then to the  EXACT pass down 3 Bishop consecration now.
> 
> Lots of people cut hair until somebody decided there needed to be rules. All the barbers now are not connected to or a result of the first person to trim some bangs with a sharp rock. Peter (or at some point somebody) must have decided on the Hierarchy  and created Bishops, Cardinals, Priests etc.. but am I to believe the Bishops today have been instructed and taught EXACTLY as Peter(or whoever) taught the next high ranking member below him? I would guess those teachings were passed along for hundreds of years until somebody made the process official. At some point somebody called themself Bishop and the chain of rank started.


I agree there is some question on some topics, and on some there is no teaching or tradition. 12 disciples heard the teaching from Christ, therefore they knew what was needed to be a future leader, Paul instructs Timothy in his letters to him.  We still have writings from the early church to help us understand what was taught.  Read the Didactic a.k.a. the teaching of the 12.

The ecumenical councils give us insight as to what was happening and how some priest and teachers strayed from doctrine.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> I agree there is some question on some topics, and on some there is no teaching or tradition. 12 disciples heard the teaching from Christ, therefore they knew what was needed to be a future leader, Paul instructs Timothy in his letters to him.  We still have writings from the early church to help us understand what was taught.  Read the Didactic a.k.a. the teaching of the 12.
> 
> The ecumenical councils give us insight as to what was happening and how some priest and teachers strayed from doctrine.


So is there a denomination of Christianity that is still of the ways the 12 and Peter taught?


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> I get that but at some point the regulations changed from then to the  EXACT pass down 3 Bishop consecration now.
> 
> Lots of people cut hair until somebody decided there needed to be rules. All the barbers now are not connected to or a result of the first person to trim some bangs with a sharp rock. Peter (or at some point somebody) must have decided on the Hierarchy  and created Bishops, Cardinals, Priests etc.. but am I to believe the Bishops today have been instructed and taught EXACTLY as Peter(or whoever) taught the next high ranking member below him? I would guess those teachings were passed along for hundreds of years until somebody made the process official. At some point somebody called themself Bishop and the chain of rank started.


I should have read this more closely, I apologize.  The answer is yes, Christ chose the hierarchy,  he gave the keys to Peter, an old testament symbol of authority.  Christ then grants power to the 12, "whoever's sins you you forgive are forgiven, whoever's sins you retain are retained".  Christ set up a body, he called it the church and set the "overseers" in charge of it. The first council we see is in the book of Acts, regarding the teaching on the need for circumcision. As the church spread we see what came to be believed as false teachings, councils were convened to decide whether they were false or not.  Decisions have been made by large bodies.of men on these matters.  Ultimately in about 1054 there was a split between the church in the east and the church in the west over what are arguably some minor points, but important none the less.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> So is there a denomination of Christianity that is still of the ways the 12 and Peter taught?


We believe there to be, the Catholic Church, a.k.a. the church in the west, the Eastern Church, a.k.a. the Orthodox Church, the Coptic Church, the Christian Church in Egypt, and some strains of the Anglican Chrurch.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> We believe there to be, the Catholic Church, a.k.a. the church in the west, the Eastern Church, a.k.a. the Orthodox Church, the Coptic Church, the Christian Church in Egypt, and some strains of the Anglican Chrurch.


I wholeheartedly am under the impression(based on their actions not words) that once religion became organized the downfall immediately started. The Catholic teachings(just to pick one) are far different than the actions of their teachers and don't really differ from the top to bottom of rank.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> So is there a denomination of Christianity that is still of the ways the 12 and Peter taught?


This why some of us believe the Biblical premise of apostolic succession is so important.  The man ambush references in the OP is no more a Christian than my beagles are.  He professes nothing of the church.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> I wholeheartedly am under the impression(based on their actions not words) that once religion became organized the downfall immediately started. The Catholic teachings(just to pick one) are far different than the actions of their teachers and don't really differ from the top to bottom of rank.


How are they different from th original?


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> How are they different from th original?


Corruption within. Fondness for little boys. Marriage counseling from someone who has never been married. Wealth etc etc etc etc etc


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> How are they different from th original?


Honest question, if the Pope is decided by decision from God or the Holy Spirit Inspiring or working through the Cardinals,  why isn't it unanimous the first time, every time?


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Honest question, if the Pope is decided by decision from God or the Holy Spirit Inspiring or working through the Cardinals,  why isn't it unanimous the first time, every time?


I don't believe it is decided by God or the Holy Spirit.  Judas' replacement was chosen by lots.  But you still have not told me how it has changed from the early church.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> I don't believe it is decided by God or the Holy Spirit.  Judas' replacement was chosen by lots.  But you still have not told me how it has changed from the early church.


I did tell you, I said it has changed in actions, not words.

The Cardinals pray to the Holy Spirit for guidance. Is the excuse that the HS only needs to guide a 2/3 majority?


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Corruption within. Fondness for little boys. Marriage counseling from someone who has never been married. Wealth etc etc etc etc etc


 I am no defender of the Roman Catholic church,  but have you noticed how the media has dropped the story?  Mainly because when the facts came out it was homosexuality and not pedophilia.   I'll not defend what was done.  The point being there are bad people in any organization,  boy scouts, girl scouts, church, barbershop quartets, etc.  The corruption in the church was in the process of being corrected before the reformation.  Orthodox priests are married, Coptic priests are married, Anglican priests are married.  By the marriage of priests was part of the great schism.  The Roman's just felt it was better if their priests were married to the church.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> I don't believe it is decided by God or the Holy Spirit.  Judas' replacement was chosen by lots.  But you still have not told me how it has changed from the early church.


Lets be honest, the Church has always been against homosexuality. Yet, its clergy is full of homosexuals saying they are against homosexuality the whole time they are going through the acts.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> I am no defender of the Roman Catholic church,  but have you noticed how the media has dropped the story?  Mainly because when the facts came out it was homosexuality and not pedophilia.   I'll not defend what was done.  The point being there are bad people in any organization,  boy scouts, girl scouts, church, barbershop quartets, etc.  The corruption in the church was in the process of being corrected before the reformation.  Orthodox priests are married, Coptic priests are married, Anglican priests are married.  By the marriage of priests was part of the great schism.  The Roman's just felt it was better if their priests were married to the church.


How many other organizations are supposed to be influenced by and connected to and get guidance from God? Wouldn't the ultimate HR representative know what these people will do beforehand?


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> I did tell you, I said it has changed in actions, not words.
> 
> The Cardinals pray to the Holy Spirit for guidance. Is the excuse that the HS only needs to guide a 2/3 majority?


God still uses men.  A group of, hopefully, godly men choosing a godly leader.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Lets be honest, the Church has always been against homosexuality. Yet, its clergy is full of homosexuals saying they are against homosexuality the whole time they are going through the acts.


The church still teaches homosexuality is a sin and no homosexual can be a priest, but some lie about their orientation and are ordained.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> I am no defender of the Roman Catholic church,  but have you noticed how the media has dropped the story?  Mainly because when the facts came out it was homosexuality and not pedophilia.   I'll not defend what was done.  The point being there are bad people in any organization,  boy scouts, girl scouts, church, barbershop quartets, etc.  The corruption in the church was in the process of being corrected before the reformation.  Orthodox priests are married, Coptic priests are married, Anglican priests are married.  By the marriage of priests was part of the great schism.  The Roman's just felt it was better if their priests were married to the church.


And, among adults it is homosexuality.  When kids are involved it IS pedophilia. What facts could change that?


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> How many other organizations are supposed to be influenced by and connected to and get guidance from God? Wouldn't the ultimate HR representative know what these people will do beforehand?


  I sure he does know, but we have free will.
Still has bad men in it.  The church has never taught men are infallible.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> The church still teaches homosexuality is a sin and no homosexual can be a priest, but some lie about their orientation and are ordained.


Again, my employee can lie to me, you and every other human on the planet.  
If there was a force above humans who is said to interact with humans every single day and decide outcomes  and that force allows these people to represent the organization..."HIS" organization....well....it all seems like it ends at the human level.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> And, among adults it is homosexuality.  When kids are involved it IS pedophilia. What facts could change that?


How many cases of pedophilia were reported?  I'll not defend either.  Even Jesus had Judas. 
Let's talk about the orthodox.  What problem do you have with them?  What about the Anglicans? Or the Cops?  Just humans trying to worship their God.  
I'll not let Judas keep me from Jesus.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> I sure he does know, but we have free will.
> Still has bad men in it.  The church has never taught men are infallible.


Again, if a god steps in to help in car crashes and a thousand other things.......


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Again, my employee can lie to me, you and every other human on the planet.
> If there was a force above humans who is said to interact with humans every single day and decide outcomes  and that force allows these people to represent the organization..."HIS" organization....well....it all seems like it ends at the human level.


We believe that one day He will return to judge the earth.  So it ends with him.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Again, if a god steps in to help in car crashes and a thousand other things.......


Why should he step in?


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

I believe we have erred from the op.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Again, if a god steps in to help in car crashes and a thousand other things.......


. May step in, I dont know.  I believe we have all seen some amazing things in our lives.  Miracle or explainable? We may never know.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> How many cases of pedophilia were reported?  I'll not defend either.  Even Jesus had Judas.
> Let's talk about the orthodox.  What problem do you have with them?  What about the Anglicans? Or the Cops?  Just humans trying to worship their God.
> I'll not let Judas keep me from Jesus.


And you don't have to.
I just do not believe that there is any higher power beyond humans. If there is I certainly do not know it. And I do not believe that one religion, sect, denomination or single person knows more or is any closer to a higher power than anyone else. I am also convinced that the writings of all the various religions are nothing more than man made.

Regarding the orthodox, anglicans etc... they are byproducts of the same man made rules and are only as accurate and infallible as their worst member. Weakest link in the chain. If the writings they follow are inaccurate and fallible,  how can what they stand for and do...even if 100% accurate and unchanged to those writings...be any better?


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> We believe that one day He will return to judge the earth.  So it ends with him.


I understand what is taught in order to comfort.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> Why should he step I?


Agreed, but I am going with what people give credit to in order to explain the often unexplainable.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> I believe we have erred from the op.


Its all connected. No subject is that direct that it is not made up of many other things that tie into it.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> . May step in, I dont know.  I believe we have all seen some amazing things in our lives.  Miracle or explainable? We may never know.


Same as my answer earlier. 
It is easy to fill in gaps with what we want instead of being content not knowing.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> And you don't have to.
> I just do not believe that there is any higher power beyond humans. If there is I certainly do not know it. And I do not believe that one religion, sect, denomination or single person knows more or is any closer to a higher power than anyone else. I am also convinced that the writings of all the various religions are nothing more than man made.
> 
> Regarding the orthodox, anglicans etc... they are byproducts of the same man made rules and are only as accurate and infallible as their worst member. Weakest link in the chain. If the writings they follow are inaccurate and fallible,  how can what they stand for and do...even if 100% accurate and unchanged to those writings...be any better?


 I understand that is what you believe, I believe all we see had to have a cause, basic logic. My theology has evolved from that.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> I understand what is taught in order to comfort.


No comfort to me.  I am still charged with confronting evil, caring for the sick, feeding the poor, etc.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Same as my answer earlier.
> It is easy to fill in gaps with what we want instead of being content not knowing.


As I said, I dont know.  I have an event that happened to me the I have no idea how it happened short of a miracle.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> I understand that is what you believe, I believe all we see had to have a cause, basic logic. My theology has evolved from that.


I believe that it has a cause also. We differ on the cause, and I am pretty sure you believe the cause has no cause.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Regarding the orthodox, anglicans etc... they are byproducts of the same man made rules and are only as accurate and infallible as their worst member. Weakest link in the chain. If the writings they follow are inaccurate and fallible,  how can what they stand for and do...even if 100% accurate and unchanged to those writings...be any better?


How can you be sure the rules are man made?  If the writings are infallible what should that tell you?


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> I believe that it has a cause also. We differ on the cause, and I am pretty sure you believe the cause has no cause.


 A  cause needs no cause, only an effect needs a cause.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> As I said, I dont know.  I have an event that happened to me the I have no idea how it happened short of a miracle.


I totally understand that. I have also. I used to think the God of the Bible was the only explanation.  Then I found out different but similar enough things happen to people all over the planet and they give credit to their gods for very specific reasons that are eerily similar to the specific reasons of a lot of other religions. I have to consider that their gods are equally responsible and real or none are.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> I totally understand that. I have also. I used to think the God of the Bible was the only explanation.  Then I found out different but similar enough things happen to people all over the planet and they give credit to their gods for very specific reasons that are eerily similar to the specific reasons of a lot of other religions. I have to consider that their gods are equally responsible and real or none are.


what if the God of the Bible was the explanation?
We can agree to a point.  Maybe the God of the Bible does it all.  I just believe, when it comes to "God stories" the Judeo/ Christian God  checks the boxes.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> We can agree to a point.  Maybe the God of the Bible does it all.  I just believe, when it comes to "God stories" the Judeo/ Christian God  checks the boxes.


That is just as easily argued by another believer in another god.


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> I believe that it has a cause also. We differ on the cause, and I am pretty sure you believe the cause has no cause.


What is that cause?


----------



## Madman (Mar 17, 2019)

bullethead said:


> That is just as easily argued by another believer in another god.


Maybe, some of them begin to breakdown rapidly.  Who do you think has a believable "God story"?


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> What is that cause?


I just do not know


----------



## bullethead (Mar 17, 2019)

Madman said:


> Maybe, some of them begin to breakdown rapidly.  Who do you think has a believable "God story"?


None that I have heard.


----------



## Madman (Mar 18, 2019)

bullethead said:


> I just do not know


Do you believe the cause to be a "what" or a "who"?


----------



## bullethead (Mar 18, 2019)

Madman said:


> Do you believe the cause to be a "what" or a "who"?


Most likely a what, but again I have no way to be sure. I do not think that there are forces above, beyond or outside of the Universe that govern or create. I am convinced that we are a result of the available chemistry set and exist because current conditions allow. Only what can happen does happen. When the chemistry and conditions were different we did not exist. When those conditions change again we will not exist.


----------



## Madman (Mar 18, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Most likely a what, but again I have no way to be sure. I do not think that there are forces above, beyond or outside of the Universe that govern or create. I am convinced that we are a result of the available chemistry set and exist because current conditions allow. Only what can happen does happen. When the chemistry and conditions were different we did not exist. When those conditions change again we will not exist.


Maybe we will meet one day and have the opportunity to flesh that out over our favorite drink and food.  Until then............


----------



## bullethead (Mar 18, 2019)

Like the universe, humans did not poof into existence. The matter and energy was there and when conditions were right for what happened to happen, it happened!


----------



## ambush80 (Mar 18, 2019)

Madman said:


> Maybe we will meet one day and have the opportunity to flesh that out over our favorite drink and food.  Until then............



I wanna come, too!


----------



## Madman (Mar 18, 2019)

ambush80 said:


> I wanna come, too!


I'd like that! 
Peace ambush


----------



## Israel (Mar 19, 2019)

I suppose I am not understanding you.



> Basically humans are complex, mostly weird and have many wants and needs that make them feel good.
> And it ranges from mild to wild and we are all guilty of it in one form or another.







bullethead said:


> Guilty before the judgement of other human beings who are also guilty of accusations of being weirdos by someone else.
> No ultimate judge Israel, its just us



Are we guilty of succumbing to the 



> many wants and needs that make them feel good



or guilty of judging one another in the perception of the forms those take?


----------



## bullethead (Mar 19, 2019)

Israel said:


> I suppose I am not understanding you.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


One, the other, both.


----------



## Israel (Mar 19, 2019)

bullethead said:


> One, the other, both.


Then are you saying in this that the judgment of one imputing a guilt to another that that other is to assume? Wear? Find rightly fitted to him? But also no less making the accuser guilty?

And if so, and such practice is as normal to man as you seem to be saying, manguilt is as ubiquitous as the practice.

Wouldn't that make man...guilty of just being?
And_ apparently_...inescapable?


----------



## bullethead (Mar 19, 2019)

Israel said:


> Then are you saying in this that the judgment of one imputing a guilt to another that that other is to assume? Wear? Find rightly fitted to him? But also no less making the accuser guilty?
> 
> And if so, and such practice is as normal to man as you seem to be saying, manguilt is as ubiquitous as the practice.
> 
> ...


Word it however you see fit, but it involves, begins and ends with humans.


----------



## atlashunter (May 13, 2019)

You’re not much of a cult leader if you don’t at least make the claim to be working at the behest of a deity. How many genuinely believe the claim is hard to say.


----------

