- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote (thethinker @ Oct. 17 2009,16:03) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Oct. 18 2009,09:31) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 18 2009,09:25) Quote (david @ Oct. 17 2009,13:59) Quote This world and everything in it it and all days are God's just as WJ said. –thinker.
But there are some bad things in this world. And God hates those bad things. If you love the things God hates, are you a friend of God?
Why don't you go give Satan a hug. Satan is “God's” right?
Dress Satan up how you want, he is still Satan.
The Bible says that friends of the world are enemies of God.
Thinker, I know you've heard this scripture. You've maybe even read it:
(James 4:4-8) Adulteresses, do YOU not know that the friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever, therefore, wants to be a friend of the world is constituting himself an enemy of God. 5 Or does it seem to YOU that the scripture says to no purpose: “It is with a tendency to envy that the spirit which has taken up residence within us keeps longing”? 6 However, the undeserved kindness which he gives is greater. Hence it says: “God opposes the haughty ones, but he gives undeserved kindness to the humble ones.” 7 Subject yourselves, therefore, to God; but oppose the Devil, and he will flee from YOU. 8 Draw close to God, and he will draw close to YOU. Cleanse YOUR hands, YOU sinners, and purify YOUR hearts, YOU indecisive ones.
David, I am under the impression to them Satan and sin is dead. Therfore they can do anything they wish. They believe God abolished/Destroyed every single law in the Old Testament, and they do not even recognize that every single Law proffessed in the New Testament comes from the Old Testament. Sadder yet if you quote a New Testament Law they state they are not even beholding to it. I truly believe they believe they are spotless and with no blemish because all laws have been destroyed.
Not destroyed, but fulfilled. I can't speak for what WJ and TT believe. But if you ever get a chance to pick up a Catholic Catechism you will find it organized along the lines of the ten commandments and the creed. If you get a chance to go to a Catholic or Orthodox church you will see the fulfillment of Synagogue (Liturgy of the Word) and fulfillment of Temple (Liturgy of the Eucharist).Protestants forsook the latter and tried to extend the former.
Why did they forsake the priesthood in the order of Melchisedek?
CA,
You are a cross between a legalist and a Christian. Fulfilled means “abolished.” The Levitical order IN ITS ENTIRETY was fulfilled in Christ. So it has been abolished. Eventually the Christians caught on and stopped eating a passover lamb when they took communion. But if Con had his way we would still be eating lambs in worship if Con even worships.thinker
So “FULFILLED” means “ABOLISHED”?For God hath put in their hearts to “ABOLISH”? his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be “ABOLISHED”. Revelation 17:17
And the scripture was “ABOLISHED” which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. James 2:23
That the righteousness of the law might be “ABOLISHED” in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. Romans 8:4
God hath “ABOLISHED” the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. Act 13:33
And when they had “ABOLISHED” all that was written of him, they took [him] down from the tree, and laid [him] in a sepulchre. Act 13:29
But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so “ABOLISHED”. Act 3:18
For these things were done, that the scripture should be “ABOLISHED”, A bone of him shall not be broken. John 19:36
After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be “ABOLISHED”, saith, I thirst. John 19:28
That the saying might be “ABOLISHED”, which he spake, Of them which thou gavest me have I lost none. John 18:9
And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy “ABOLISHED” in themselves. John 17:39
He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice: this my joy therefore is “ABOLISHED”. John 3:29
And he said unto them, These [are] the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be “ABOLISHED”, which were written in the law of Moses, and [in] the prophets, and [in] the psalms, concerning me. Luke 24:44
And the scripture was “ABOLISHED”, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors. Mark 15:28
I was daily with you in the temple teaching, and ye took me not: but the scriptures must be “ABOLISHED”. Mark 14:49
But thou hast “ABOLISHED” the judgment of the wicked: judgment and justice take hold [on thee]. Job 36:17
Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 17 2009,17:32) Quote (thethinker @ Oct. 17 2009,16:03) Quote (CatholicApologist @ Oct. 18 2009,09:31) Quote (Constitutionalist @ Oct. 18 2009,09:25) Quote (david @ Oct. 17 2009,13:59) Quote This world and everything in it it and all days are God's just as WJ said. –thinker.
But there are some bad things in this world. And God hates those bad things. If you love the things God hates, are you a friend of God?
Why don't you go give Satan a hug. Satan is “God's” right?
Dress Satan up how you want, he is still Satan.
The Bible says that friends of the world are enemies of God.
Thinker, I know you've heard this scripture. You've maybe even read it:
(James 4:4-8) Adulteresses, do YOU not know that the friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever, therefore, wants to be a friend of the world is constituting himself an enemy of God. 5 Or does it seem to YOU that the scripture says to no purpose: “It is with a tendency to envy that the spirit which has taken up residence within us keeps longing”? 6 However, the undeserved kindness which he gives is greater. Hence it says: “God opposes the haughty ones, but he gives undeserved kindness to the humble ones.” 7 Subject yourselves, therefore, to God; but oppose the Devil, and he will flee from YOU. 8 Draw close to God, and he will draw close to YOU. Cleanse YOUR hands, YOU sinners, and purify YOUR hearts, YOU indecisive ones.
David, I am under the impression to them Satan and sin is dead. Therfore they can do anything they wish. They believe God abolished/Destroyed every single law in the Old Testament, and they do not even recognize that every single Law proffessed in the New Testament comes from the Old Testament. Sadder yet if you quote a New Testament Law they state they are not even beholding to it. I truly believe they believe they are spotless and with no blemish because all laws have been destroyed.
Not destroyed, but fulfilled. I can't speak for what WJ and TT believe. But if you ever get a chance to pick up a Catholic Catechism you will find it organized along the lines of the ten commandments and the creed. If you get a chance to go to a Catholic or Orthodox church you will see the fulfillment of Synagogue (Liturgy of the Word) and fulfillment of Temple (Liturgy of the Eucharist).Protestants forsook the latter and tried to extend the former.
Why did they forsake the priesthood in the order of Melchisedek?
CA,
You are a cross between a legalist and a Christian. Fulfilled means “abolished.” The Levitical order IN ITS ENTIRETY was fulfilled in Christ. So it has been abolished. Eventually the Christians caught on and stopped eating a passover lamb when they took communion. But if Con had his way we would still be eating lambs in worship if Con even worships.thinker
So “FULFILLED” means “ABOLISHED”?For God hath put in their hearts to “ABOLISH”? his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be “ABOLISHED”. Revelation 17:17
And the scripture was “ABOLISHED” which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. James 2:23
That the righteousness of the law might be “ABOLISHED” in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. Romans 8:4
God hath “ABOLISHED” the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. Act 13:33
And when they had “ABOLISHED” all that was written of him, they took [him] down from the tree, and laid [him] in a sepulchre. Act 13:29
But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so “ABOLISHED”. Act 3:18
For these things were done, that the scripture should be “ABOLISHED”, A bone of him shall not be broken. John 19:36
After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be “ABOLISHED”, saith, I thirst. John 19:28
That the saying might be “ABOLISHED”, which he spake, Of them which thou gavest me have I lost none. John 18:9
And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy “ABOLISHED” in themselves. John 17:39
He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice: this my joy therefore is “ABOLISHED”. John 3:29
And he said unto them, These [are] the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be “ABOLISHED”, which were written in the law of Moses, and [in] the prophets, and [in] the psalms, concerning me. Luke 24:44
And the scripture was “ABOLISHED”, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors. Mark 15:28
I was daily with you in the temple teaching, and ye took me not: but the scriptures must be “ABOLISHED”. Mark 14:49
But thou hast “ABOLISHED” the judgment of the wicked: judgment and justice take hold [on thee]. Job 36:17
Hebrew: male'1) to fill, be full
a) (Qal)
1) to be full
a) fulness, abundance (participle)
b) to be full, be accomplished, be ended
2) to consecrate, fill the hand
b) (Niphal)
1) to be filled, be armed, be satisfied
2) to be accomplished, be ended
c) (Piel)
1) to fill
2) to satisfy
3) to fulfil, accomplish, complete
4) to confirm
d) (Pual) to be filled
e) (Hithpael) to mass themselves against
Greek plēroō:
1) to make full, to fill up, i.e. to fill to the full
a) to cause to abound, to furnish or supply liberally
1) I abound, I am liberally supplied
2) to render full, i.e. to complete
a) to fill to the top: so that nothing shall be wanting to full measure, fill to the brim
b) to consummate: a number
1) to make complete in every particular, to render perfect
2) to carry through to the end, to accomplish, carry out, (some undertaking)
c) to carry into effect, bring to realisation, realise
1) of matters of duty: to perform, execute
2) of sayings, promises, prophecies, to bring to pass, ratify, accomplish
3) to fulfil, i.e. to cause God'
s will (as made known in the law) to be obeyed as it should be, and God's promises (given through the prophets) to receive fulfilmentIt's a shame this is such a divisive issue. Clearly there are two camps here and no middle ground. The more developed the discussion has become the greater the acrimony and the more entrenched the positions. It's unfortunate. I can see validity in some of the elements of both arguments, but I remain uncomfortable with halloween and I won't be involving myself in any aspect of it.
Thethinker – I have looked into the content and context of the verse you have cited (1 Cor 8) and while I agree Paul has made a pragmatic concession for a particular circumstance, I don't see this as opening the door for christians to a carte blanche involvement into paganistic or occultic practices. In Revelation 16:2 we read about a severe consequence for those misdirecting their worship. I'm not making a direct comparison between halloween and what happens in Revelation 13:15-16. But because this is yet future in context it does show that the prohibitions for satanic idolatry must still be in effect now, they have not been done away with. I suppose you could argue that these are unbelievers but it makes no sense to me that christians would be exempt from something unbelievers are prohibited to do.
If we make an exception for for something ostensibly at the more-harmless end of the occultic practices continuum, where do you draw the line? As David has already said – how about ouija boards?…seances?…Catholic Mass?? (that'll get a bite from Catholicapologist). In terms of your understanding of the outworking of Paul's dispensation in 1 Cor. 8 how far is too far? Evidently receiving the mark of the beast and worshiping his image is over the line so where exactly is the line drawn?
WJ – I can see some merit in the way you deal with this, trying to turn something bad into something good (reminded me of that passage in Genesis 50 where Joseph said to his brother “you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good….”).
Handing out Bible tracts to door knockers and the like is a good use of a witnessing opportunity IMO, and is much preferable to scowling at them. But you're still adopting at least one of the integral elements of Halloween, the candy. In that sense you haven't really set up something as a counterpoint to the festival, which I think is something you wanted to achieve? To be in the world but not of the world. Am I right? The problem I have with this approach is because it has a semblance to standard practice for Halloween celebration it has the effect of indirectly condoning the festival to the nonchristians who are observing you. Do you see my point?
Blessings
PaulNick,
WJ's last post indeed was a “glorious victory.” Love is the fulfillment of the law and not obedience to regulations. Constitutionalist has been on this earth for a good deal of time now and he still hasn''t figured this out.Con referred to his wife of 30 years. My wife and I will be celebrating our 30th this October 20. Yet Con still operates under the old covenant laws which were for children. Paul said that the law is for children. “When we were children we were under bondage of the elements of the world.” The “elements of the world” were the external codes and regulations. Grace is for the mature adult.
How is it that Con and I can be the same age and married for the same length of time and yet I know what true Christianity is and Con does not know?
Anyway, I am with Mandy. This has gotten so boring. I am done with this subject. Let Con and David have their non-relevant religion.
WJ has won our case.
thinker
Paul said:
Quote Thethinker – I have looked into the content and context of the verse you have cited (1 Cor 8) and while I agree Paul has made a pragmatic concession for a particular circumstance, I don't see this as opening the door for christians to a carte blanche involvement into paganistic or occultic practices. Paul,
I am done with this subject. But you haven't checked in for a while so I will say one more thing. WJ and I have never defended a “carte blanche involvement into paganistic or occultic practices.” I have never seen such a thing at a Church in America. Paul simply said that he could eat meat in a pagan temple because he has the knowledge that no other gods exist. But David is a polytheist and believes that other gods exist so this would be a problem for him.So called “occult practices” are benign in my opinion. Con and David have a brand of “christianity” that's like a child being afraid of the dark. But we are the light of the world and as such we are supposed to lighten up the dark places. God forbid that Con and David should enter a dark place and give it light.
thinker
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 18 2009,20:48) It's a shame this is such a divisive issue. Clearly there are two camps here and no middle ground. The more developed the discussion has become the greater the acrimony and the more entrenched the positions. It's unfortunate. I can see validity in some of the elements of both arguments, but I remain uncomfortable with halloween and I won't be involving myself in any aspect of it. Thethinker – I have looked into the content and context of the verse you have cited (1 Cor 8) and while I agree Paul has made a pragmatic concession for a particular circumstance, I don't see this as opening the door for christians to a carte blanche involvement into paganistic or occultic practices. In Revelation 16:2 we read about a severe consequence for those misdirecting their worship. I'm not making a direct comparison between halloween and what happens in Revelation 13:15-16. But because this is yet future in context it does show that the prohibitions for satanic idolatry must still be in effect now, they have not been done away with. I suppose you could argue that these are unbelievers but it makes no sense to me that christians would be exempt from something unbelievers are prohibited to do.
If we make an exception for for something ostensibly at the more-harmless end of the occultic practices continuum, where do you draw the line? As David has already said – how about ouija boards?…seances?…Catholic Mass?? (that'll get a bite from Catholicapologist). In terms of your understanding of the outworking of Paul's dispensation in 1 Cor. 8 how far is too far? Evidently receiving the mark of the beast and worshiping his image is over the line so where exactly is the line drawn?
WJ – I can see some merit in the way you deal with this, trying to turn something bad into something good (reminded me of that passage in Genesis 50 where Joseph said to his brother “you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good….”).
Handing out Bible tracts to door knockers and the like is a good use of a witnessing opportunity IMO, and is much preferable to scowling at them. But you're still adopting at least one of the integral elements of Halloween, the candy. In that sense you haven't really set up something as a counterpoint to the festival, which I think is something you wanted to achieve? To be in the world but not of the world. Am I right? The problem I have with this approach is because it has a semblance to standard practice for Halloween celebration it has the effect of indirectly condoning the festival to the nonchristians who are observing you. Do you see my point?
Blessings
Paul
Paul,
I read your post again and I have a question for you. David said that WJ is keeping a “bad association” because he gives out candy on halloween. You seem to agree with David.However, I pointed out that David took Paul's statement about bad associations out of context. David has since admitted that he took the statement out of context though he still defends his use of the statement.
Paul was referring to those who deny the resurrection when he was referring to “bad associations.” So here is my question: Who is the real threat? Is it WJ who gives out candy? Or is David the real threat to our faith because he denies the resurrection?
I wonder why you chastised WJ and I but said nothing to David. Please reply.
thinker
Quote (thethinker @ Oct. 18 2009,06:01) Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 18 2009,20:48) It's a shame this is such a divisive issue. Clearly there are two camps here and no middle ground. The more developed the discussion has become the greater the acrimony and the more entrenched the positions. It's unfortunate. I can see validity in some of the elements of both arguments, but I remain uncomfortable with halloween and I won't be involving myself in any aspect of it. Thethinker – I have looked into the content and context of the verse you have cited (1 Cor 8) and while I agree Paul has made a pragmatic concession for a particular circumstance, I don't see this as opening the door for christians to a carte blanche involvement into paganistic or occultic practices. In Revelation 16:2 we read about a severe consequence for those misdirecting their worship. I'm not making a direct comparison between halloween and what happens in Revelation 13:15-16. But because this is yet future in context it does show that the prohibitions for satanic idolatry must still be in effect now, they have not been done away with. I suppose you could argue that these are unbelievers but it makes no sense to me that christians would be exempt from something unbelievers are prohibited to do.
If we make an exception for for something ostensibly at the more-harmless end of the occultic practices continuum, where do you draw the line? As David has already said – how about ouija boards?…seances?…Catholic Mass?? (that'll get a bite from Catholicapologist). In terms of your understanding of the outworking of Paul's dispensation in 1 Cor. 8 how far is too far? Evidently receiving the mark of the beast and worshiping his image is over the line so where exactly is the line drawn?
WJ – I can see some merit in the way you deal with this, trying to turn something bad into something good (reminded me of that passage in Genesis 50 where Joseph said to his brother “you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good….”).
Handing out Bible tracts to door knockers and the like is a good use of a witnessing opportunity IMO, and is much preferable to scowling at them. But you're still adopting at least one of the integral elements of Halloween, the candy. In that sense you haven't really set up something as a counterpoint to the festival, which I think is something you wanted to achieve? To be in the world but not of the world. Am I right? The problem I have with this approach is because it has a semblance to standard practice for Halloween celebration it has the effect of indirectly condoning the festival to the nonchristians who are observing you. Do you see my point?
Blessings
Paul
Paul,
I read your post again and I have a question for you. David said that WJ is keeping a “bad association” because he gives out candy on halloween. You seem to agree with David.However, I pointed out that David took Paul's statement about bad associations out of context. David has admitted since that he took the statement out of context though he still defends his use of the statement.
Paul was referring to those who deny the resurrection when he was referring to “bad associations.” So here is my question: Who is the real threat? Is it WJ who gives out candy? Or is it David who denies the resurrection the real threat to our faith?
I wonder why you chastised WJ and I but said nothing to David. Please reply.
thinker
David does not deny the resurrection.WJ does give out candy.
Is 1:8 chastised no one. He merely gave a view point.
I operate under the whole bible, you see only left or right.
And it is not amazing both of us viewing things differant with both of 30 years of marriage, differant paths same goals.
You say it was abolished, I say it was fulfilled.
You see it as a case to be won or loss. I see it as something that needs to be tried and tested.
Quote “I feel your scorn and I accept it.” – Jon Stewert Quote “If you set your heart upon philosophy, you must straightway prepare yourself to be laughed at and mocked by many who will say Behold a philosopher arisen among us! or How came you by that brow of scorn? But do you cherish no scorn, but hold to those things which seem to you the best, as one set by God in that place. Remember too, that if you abide in those ways, those who first mocked you, the same shall afterwards reverence you; but if you yield to them, you will be laughed at twice as much as before.” – Epictetus thinker……..Then as lights of the world why involve yourself with there customs, I agree with Isa 1:18, where is the line at thinker, to what extent do you engage in these satanic rituals. Do we justify any behavior we chose to, by saying we are (FREE) to do What every we Decide we want to do, Where is the line at thinker. Halloween is totally a Evil Satanic Practice no matter how you color it thinker. As i said before you put any mask on a pig , but it's still a pig. IMO
gene
to all
so i will always remind you of these things (the call for righteousness),even though you know them and are firmly established in the thruth you now have.we did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our lord Jesus-Christ.2Peter 1-12&16Is. 1:18 said:
Quote In Revelation 16:2 we read about a severe consequence for those misdirecting their worship. I'm not making a direct comparison between halloween and what happens in Revelation 13:15-16. But because this is yet future in context it does show that the prohibitions for satanic idolatry must still be in effect now, they have not been done away with. I suppose you could argue that these are unbelievers but it makes no sense to me that christians would be exempt from something unbelievers are prohibited to do. Paul,
I sent you a pm challenging you to a debate on your understanding of satan and the Revelation. Revelation 16:2 has absolutely nothing at all to do with halloween or ouija boards. If you accept I would like for the exchange to be between you and me alone.thinker
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Oct. 19 2009,07:56) Hi TT,
Those who are not in Christ follow the god of the world.
Nick,
Paul said the “god of THIS AGE.” The expression “this age” was the old covenant dispensation. When the old covenant dispensation came to its full end in ad70 satan was destroyed. Satan is not the god of the new covenant age. All those who believe that satan is operating today in the new covenant age are superstitious.I am hoping that Paul will debate with me one on one about this. If Paul declines then I will accept a reply to my invitation from anyone. But it must be a one on one exchange.
thinker
Thinker………..If Satan is dead why keep his day then?, in honor of devils and demons. Does this make sense to you? AS i said before when i was a Child I never saw (ONE) parent Dressed up for Halloween , it was something only Children did, But those Childern grow up and began to celebrate it more then the kids do, until now its as large a holiday as Christmas maybe even bigger in some parts of the country. What happened to cause that to Happen Thinker? This all happened in over about a fifty year span. From hardly nothing to look now and you feel we should all go a further its expansion. Wrong Thinker.
gene
Still asking, under this new covenant, are you permitted to eat or drink blood? the question has gone unanswered, and only the new age can answer it, so what say you?
can you remove your neighbors boundries, steal, lie, kill, not honor your mother and father, not have teach your children the ways of Yahweh?
and then proclaim, the blood of Christ covers me of these things? How does it? to me there is no justice.
to this day, i do not understand, why people pertain Yah's ways as law's, scripture clearly reveals that the way of his people did not change when Christ assended, sabbath was still kept, same foods were still ate, dress did not change.
Sacrifice, priesthood, mercy seat, altar that is done and vanished away with.
To love Yahweh with all your heart is a law, love your neighbor is a law, go and preach the gospel is a law; the law it is written on our hearts, so how is the law is done away with?
Christ love for his father, kept the commands, should our love not be as his, to be pleasing to him also, so he looks down upon us and says, yes, they are my set apart ones.
how can one be set apart when they are so conform to the world and it's practices.
who would want to set Christ back upon the stake? (excluding CA he doesn't count, he worships it) but some must confer with others, to offend another, it seems to be the case, this would be expected from what they present, not willing to stand boldly before the throne on their own accord, some just try to get in the kingdom another way, like theives and robbers.
Here is endurance of the saints: here are those keeping the commands of God, and the faith of Christ
rev 14.12Gene
Quote (Gene @ Oct. 18 2009,20:27) Thinker………..If Satan is dead why keep his day then?
Can you show scripture where satan owns any days?WJ
Quote (WorshippingJesus @ Oct. 19 2009,15:07) Gene Quote (Gene @ Oct. 18 2009,20:27) Thinker………..If Satan is dead why keep his day then?
Can you show scripture where satan owns any days?WJ
W.J. It is History shows this!!
About 2,000 years ago in the area of the world that is now Ireland, the United Kingdom, and northern France, lived a group of people called the Celts. The Celts' lives revolved around growing their food, and considered the end of the year to be the end of the harvest season. So, they celebrated new year's eve each year on October 31st with a festival called “Samhain,” named after their Lord of the Dead (also known as the Lord of Darkness). Samhain (pronounced 'sow-in') was presided over by Celtic priests called Druids.Back then, winter was the time of year associated with human death. The Celts believed that on the night that marked the end of summer and the beginning of winter, the boundary between the worlds of the living and the dead blurred allowing ghosts of the dead to return to earth. Celts thought that the presence of the ghosts made it easier for the Druids, their priests, to predict the future. These predictions were an important source of comfort and direction for the Celts during their long, dark, frightening winters.
To celebrate Samhain, the Druids built huge sacred bonfires around which the Celts gathered to burn crops and animals as sacrifices to their ancient gods. During the celebration, the Celts dressed up in costumes consisting of animal heads and skins and tried to tell each other's fortunes.
The Celts eventually were conquered by the Romans, and by about the year 43 AD two Roman festivals were combined with the Celtic Samhain festival. The first Roman festival was Feralia, a day in late October when the Romans traditionally commemorated the passing of the dead. The second was a day to honor Pomona, the Roman goddess of fruit and trees. The symbol of Pomona is the apple and the incorporation of this celebration into Samhain probably explains the tradition of “bobbing” for apples practiced today on Halloween.
By 800 AD, the influence of Christianity spread into Celtic lands. In the seventh century, replace the Celtic festival of the dead with a related, but church-sanctioned holiday, Pope Boniface IV designated November 1st as All Saints' Day, a time to honor saints and martyrs. The combined and updated celebration was also called All-hallows or All-hallowmas (from Middle English Alholowmesse meaning All Saints' Day) and the night before it, the night of Samhain, began to be called All-hallows Eve and, eventually, Halloween.
Think you know a lot about Halloween history and traditions? Try BlackDog's Halloween Quiz.
For more details and information on the origins and history of Halloween as well as modern Halloween traditions, visit the History Channel's website.
BlackDog's Halloween Party——————————————————————————–
Quote (Is 1:18 @ Oct. 18 2009,04:48) WJ – I can see some merit in the way you deal with this, trying to turn something bad into something good (reminded me of that passage in Genesis 50 where Joseph said to his brother “you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good….”). Handing out Bible tracts to door knockers and the like is a good use of a witnessing opportunity IMO, and is much preferable to scowling at them. But you're still adopting at least one of the integral elements of Halloween, the candy. In that sense you haven't really set up something as a counterpoint to the festival, which I think is something you wanted to achieve? To be in the world but not of the world. Am I right? The problem I have with this approach is because it has a semblance to standard practice for Halloween celebration it has the effect of indirectly condoning the festival to the nonchristians who are observing you. Do you see my point?
Hi brother Paul!I appreciate your words and respect your opinions for I know your Spirit as one of integrity and always being fair in any discussion!
All I can say is I am at liberty in Christ to use my time on Oct 31st as a time for family, friends and a Church gathering to do what I believe is right.
I find no fault in kids dressing in Bible Characters, or playing games and giving candy and prizes to them.
If I answer my door and innocent little children are standing there with their parents asking for candy, I give it to them with a tract!
Sorry, I don’t buy the fact that I am participating in their sins, no more than I am participating in the sins of Pornography by using the internet or the TV.
IMO “religious” men have to often turned the world off by their snobby, holier than thou attitudes.
Jesus provided wine at a wedding feast where he knew men were more than likely getting plastered! Was Jesus partaking of their sin? Of course he wasn’t. It was customary to serve wine at a wedding, so nothing was wrong with Jesus creating the wine. What men did with it afterward was their own responsibility.
Jesus sat down and ate with publicans, sinners, and tax collectors. Why?
Because…
They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
Mark 2:13-17
13 And he went forth again by the sea side; and all the multitude resorted unto him, and he taught them. 14 And as he passed by, he saw Levi the son of Alphaeus sitting at the receipt of custom, and said unto him, Follow me. And he arose and followed him.
15 And it came to pass, that, as Jesus sat at meat in his house, many publicans and sinners sat also together with Jesus and his disciples: for there were many, and they followed him. 16 And when the scribes and Pharisees saw him eat with publicans and sinners, they said unto his disciples, How is it that he eateth and drinketh with publicans and sinners? 17 When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.I think we have more liberty in Christ than men realize. I believe under the direction of the Holy Spirit I can walk into a bar and sit down with drunken men and have a glass of water and tell them about Jesus!
I believe I can give some candy and a Bible tract to that little child that knows nothing about the so-called dark roots of Halloween, (They can’t even get the origin right, look at CAs post) and most of the parents cannot even tell you why they do it.
IMO, this kind of attitude is the same kind of attitude that says it is of the devil to play a certain style of music, even if that music is created to bring the word of God to the lost.
For instance, Rock and Roll was created by worldly men and used for evil purposes.
It brought into our country all kinds of drugs and promiscuous sex and even the worship of demons is found in some of their songs.
But I know many Godly musicians who have taken Christian Rock and Roll to many young people and seen many of them repenting and turning to Jesus.
The style was the worlds, but the words and the substance was from the Spirit.
I am quote sure I will be judged for my liberty in Christ. So be it. I will stand and not be ashamed.
I appreciate you Paul, and I will endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace and agree to disagree!
Blessings Keith
Quote (georg @ Oct. 18 2009,23:25)
W.J. It is History shows this!!
About 2,000 years ago in the area of the world that is now Ireland, the United Kingdom, and northern France, lived a group of people called the Celts.
IreneDoes the devil own the days? Or are the days the Lords?
Since when does satan own Oct 31st?
Who causes the sun to rise and set on that day?
Who created Oct 31st?
I think you have missed my point!
WJ
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
