|
|
Post by jimmie on Oct 15, 2015 10:24:44 GMT -8
Acts 17:18 Then certain philosophers of the Epicureans, and of the Stoicks, encountered him. And some said, What will this babbler say? other some, He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods: because he preached unto them Jesus, and the resurrection.
There are many references to other groups or religions in the Bible. The purpose of this thread is to identify who they were and who are their modern counterparts.
Epicureans:
Epicurus, an ancient Greek philosopher founded the Epicureans around 307 BC. Epicurus was an atomic materialist, whose materialism led him to a general attack on superstition and divine intervention. Since Jesus was a divine intervention by God, the Epicureans would naturally think Paul was setting forth a strange god because their gods did not meddle in the affairs of man. The Epicureans modern counterpart would be Deism which allows for a god to exist but they reject all divine interventions such as miracles. Buddhism also adheres to this philosophy.
Stoicks:
Stoicism is a school of Hellenistic philosophy founded in Athens by Zeno of Citium in the early 3rd century BC. A distinctive feature of Stoicism is its cosmopolitanism: All people are manifestations of the one universal spirit and should, according to the Stoics, live in brotherly love and readily help one another. In Acts 17: 26, Paul draws the Stoicks in with, “And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth”. Thus Stoicks taught Pantheism derived from the Greek pan "all" and theos "God". The modern counter parts would be Hinduism, Taoism and nature worship.
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on Oct 15, 2015 19:38:18 GMT -8
... Stoicism is a school of Hellenistic philosophy founded in Athens by Zeno of Citium in the early 3rd century BC. A distinctive feature of Stoicism is its cosmopolitanism: All people are manifestations of the one universal spirit and should, according to the Stoics, live in brotherly love and readily help one another. In Acts 17: 26, Paul draws the Stoicks in with, “And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth”. Thus Stoicks taught Pantheism derived from the Greek pan "all" and theos "God". The modern counter parts would be Hinduism, Taoism and nature worship.
It was the early catholic (universal) church which combined Judaism and paganism to start their own religion. It was very stoic in its early years, embracing every pagan practice and drawing men in. Later as the Catholic religions we know today they were much less accommodating, though they kept all the pagan beliefs they had incorporated. The later so called Protestants divested themselves of some of the practices in Catholicism which they found too burdensome or onerous. But they kept whatever was pleasing to their tastes. Still not obedient to  , these new upstarts even threw out obedience to their church.
There is some debate as to whether the term "Christian" was actually used in the Bible.
Acts 11:26 (KJV) And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.
Acts 11:26 (ESV) and when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. For a whole year they met with the church and taught a great many people. And in Antioch the disciples were first called Christians.
Acts 11:26 (CJB) and when he found him, he brought him to Antioch. They met with the congregation there for a whole year and taught a sizeable crowd. Also it was in Antioch that the talmidim for the first time were called “Messianic.”
Gevurot 11:26 (OJB) And, having found him, he brought him to Antioch. And it came about that for an entire year, they met with Moshiach’s Kehillah there, and taught a large multitude. And it was in Antioch that the talmidim were first called Ma’aminim HaMeshichiyim (Messianic Believers).
The key term is "Christianos" G5546 Χριστιανός a Christian, that is, follower of Christ.
So technically the word is used, as is reflected in most translations. The CJB and OJB extrapolate what the original Hebrew probably said and translate that way. However the Peshita also says "Christians." So we'll have to go with the evidence, noting the exceptions, and say it is used. And thus "Christians" becomes the prime example of what you are talking about here. And they have incorporated almost every known heresy at some point. Early heresy: Christian church. Modern counterpart: contemporary Christian churches, Catholic and Protestant.
Dan C |
|
|
|
Post by alon on Oct 16, 2015 6:32:31 GMT -8
Nicolas is a derivative of the verb νικαω (nikao) meaning to be victorious, prevail or overcome. So we can see right off this doctrine was meant to overcome the Word of God.
Acts 6:5 (ESV) And what they said pleased the whole gathering, and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolaus, a proselyte of Antioch.
So Nicolas was "a proselyte of Antioch." A new believer, not yet strong in his faith. This tell us he’d converted from paganism probably to Messianic Judaism. Then he again converted, this time to Christianity. From this, we know these facts about Nicolas of Antioch:
He had deep pagan roots, unlike the other six deacons who came from pure Hebrew lineages. Nicolas' pagan background meant he’d previously been immersed in the occult. He didn’t mind taking an opposing position; he did after all change religions at least twice. Conversion to Judaism would have estranged him from pagan family and friends. He was not impressed or concerned about the opinions of other people. He was very open to new ideas and concepts. To shift from paganism to Judaism shows us a very liberal thinker, as pagans were generally offended by Judaism.
His conversion to Christianity, was at least the second time he had converted to another religion. This ability to easily change religions implies a chameleon like personality, going a totally different direction with ease.
Nicolas taught a doctrine of compromise, saying total separation between Christianity and occult paganism was not needed. Early Church records seems to indicate that Nicolas of Antioch was so immersed in occultism, Judaism, and Christianity that he had a lot of each in his belief system. He had no problem mingling these belief systems, and saw no reason why those still in the Roman black magic and its countless mystery cults couldn't continue to fellowship with Christians.
It was difficult for believers to live separately from all the pagan activities because pagan religions were at the center of life in these cities. A converted Gentile would have had difficulties staying away from the pagan influences. Changing back and forth to paganism would have been easy for weak believers since most of their families and friends were still pagans. Nicolas' deep roots in paganism may have given him a tolerance for occultism and paganism. Growing up in this perverse spiritual environment may have convinced him these belief systems were not dangerous; a wrong perception resulting in a very liberal viewpoint encouraging people to stay connected to the world.
It is significant that the "deeds" and "doctrines" of the Nicolaitans are only mentioned in connection with the churches in the occultic cities of Ephesus and Pergamon. It seems that the "doctrine" of the Nicolaitans was that it was alright to have one foot in both camps and that we needn't be so strict about separation from the world in order to be a Christian. This, in fact, was the "doctrine" of the Nicolaitans that Jesus "hated." It led to a weakend Christianity without power or without conviction - a defeated, worldly Christianity. This teaching inevitably results in defeat of its followers. When sin and compromise enter in, it drains away the power in the work of the Cross and the power of the Spirit. The evil fruit of Nicolas' "doctrines" encouraged worldly participation, indulgence in sin and a lowered godly standard.
We need to make sure we understand the doctrine the Nicolaitans taught. His actions are given alongside those of Balaam, a sorcerer in Revelation B But I have a few things against you: you have some there who hold the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the sons of Israel, so that they might eat food sacrificed to idols and practice sexual immorality. So also you have some who hold the teaching of the Nicolaitans.
Balaam, in order to seduce the people of God with unbridled, sensual living dangled the prostitutes of Moab before the men of Israel.
Numbers 25:1-3 (ESV) While Israel lived in Shittim, the people began to sleeper with the daughters of Moab. These invited the people to the sacrifices of their gods, and the people ate and bowed down to their gods. So Israel yoked himself to Baal of Peor. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel.
Just as the men of Israel compromised themselves with the lusts of the world and false religions/worshiping idols, now the "doctrine" of the Nicolaitans was again encouraging compromise. Compromise with the world always results in a weakened and powerless form of belief. This was the reason Yeshua "hated" the "doctrine" and the "deeds" of the Nicolaitans.
Again the Church is the new Nicolaitans. They are in large part responsible for Christianity's acceptance of Christmas and Easter, even Halloween, and other unbiblical practices- such as the Pope recently kissing a Quran in St. Peters square. Nicolaitanism, broadly applied, organized the systematic removal of as a central pillar of Christian life. These things happened because of attitudes on truth found in the heresies of the Nicolaitans.
Dan C
Sources: Joseph Meyers, MA; Prof. G.W. Milliken, Dr. of Hx; my father.
Note: We all need to scourge these tendencies from our own lives. The had it bad, but that don't mean we don' got it some ourselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Oct 16, 2015 7:00:25 GMT -8
A sheep in wolf's clothing. I mean a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Nicolaitans: Nike the god of victory and laity or common people. The elite ruling over the common people. As in catholic priest over their Laymen.
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on Oct 16, 2015 7:33:05 GMT -8
Yes, a sound church hierarchy was needed in the Nicolatains system to keep the common man in line. If a commoner were to question these doctrines once they were entrenched, they'd immediately get an argument from authority (which is a logical phallacy, btw) where a Priest of Bishop would get them back in line. Still happens in churches everywhere today.
Dan C
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on Oct 16, 2015 10:27:16 GMT -8
Rev 3:9 9 Behold, I will make those of the synagogue of Satan who say that they are Jews and are not, but lie—behold, I will make them come and bow down before your feet, and they will learn that I have loved you.
These may be several categories of people. Obviously one who would lie about being Jewish; but also the one who was raised in either Judaism or Messianic Judaism, knows all the rituals and knows how to talk so we’d think him saved, but he is not. This is a bad problem in churches, but not so bad in MJ. Yet. Speaking of churches, how about their replacement theology? Aren’t they saying they are Jews and worse, that the Jews are no longer Jews? Or how about when others want answers to something and come to you saying “I know you know all about this jewish stuff; …” If you set yourself up as an expert when all you are is a proselyte, could you not be joining the synagogue of hasatan?
This is one reason I always say I am a proselyte to Messianic Judaism. I’ll be learning this until the day I die, so that suits me just fine. It’s also why I won’t let anyone call me Rabbi here. I am WAY short of earning that status! I just enforce the rules around here … which I am sure has made a couple of folk think I am of the synagogue of hasatan myself.
That leads into my last category. We’ve had people on here try to tell us they were Messianic, when really they were Ebionites, cultists, people who just couldn’t leave mainC or HR, Light folk, Sacred names and Two House, and a couple who went and started their own thing … many of these people were well intentioned, however they are all of the synagogue of hasatan.
Anyone who in any way says they are Jewish when they are not either biologically Jewish, converted to Judaism, or is observant Meshiachim who has been with it long enough to understand and they are not; or anyone trying to influence these people to violate or leave their faith is of the synagogue of hasatan. If they convert but stay with an MJ congregation to pull people away, they are of the synagogue od hasatan. If they are in an MJ congregation and start spreading false doctrine they are in the synagogue of hasatan. This is a very broad category, and the same kinds of people now as then are trying to do the same things.
So be strong in your faith, hold on and don’t jump at every idea that sounds good. The enemy has the same silver tongue he had when he first deceived Chava in the Garden.
Dan C
|
|
|
|
Post by alon on Oct 16, 2015 11:05:56 GMT -8
Followers of Balaam, a Mesopotamian soothsayer
Rev 2:14 But I have a few things against you: you have some there who hold the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the sons of Israel, so that they might eat food sacrificed to idols and practice sexual immorality.
Balaam, son of Beor is apparently a Syrian who lived near the Euphrates just south of Carchemish (Numbers 22:5). He tried to prophesy against Israel for money and honor for the king of Moab, Balak son of Zippor (verses 2-7). Unlike any other prophet, he leads the Israelites into sin, which brings a curse upon them and gets 24,000 of them killed.
Characteristics he is noted for:
* an enemy of God and Israel
* an evil and avaricious character.
* a hired mercenary (Deuteronomy 23:4-5)
* an evil man whom God defeated (Nehemiah 13:2; Micah 6:5).
* the personification of greed in using religion for personal gain (II Peter 2:15; Jude 11).
* inducing others to sin, specifically idolatry and sexual immorality. (Revelation 2:14)
We have seen this type in every congregation. The schemer. The "prophet." The Rabbi with no credentials, but a good line of bull. The Pentecostal who has a word from God every Sunday. The person who worms their way into a position, then leverages the office to get their way. Those who spread lashon hara. The ones in it for what they can get out of it. The one who doesn't do anything themselves, but likes to tell everyone else how to do their job. The fault finder. The thief. The disrupter. The one who needs the spotlight. The woman who dresses sexy and flaunts herself, often on "stage" as part of the "worship team." The one who has to have Christmas trees and wreaths all over the church for over a month.
We could go on and on; and these people are everywhere. Rav S tends to show these people the door pretty quickly. Soetimes he'll counsel with them and get them to correct; and if they are making progress we work with them. If not, please don't slam the door as you leave.
Dan C
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmie on Oct 16, 2015 14:28:39 GMT -8
"Then certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over them which had evil spirits the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth. And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew, and chief of the priests, which did so. And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but who are ye? And the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them, and overcame them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded. And this was known to all the Jews and Greeks also dwelling at Ephesus; and fear fell on them all, and the name of the Lord Jesus was magnified." (Acts 19:8-17 KJV)
Professional exorcist were another group of Jews that were not Jews, like Simon in Samaria and Elymas in Cyprus (8:9; 13:6)." Other references to exorcism as practised by the Jews are found in Matt. 12:27; Mark 9:38; Luke 9:49, 50. It would seem that it was an opinion among these vagabond Jews that miracles might be wrought by invoking the divine name. Thus also these "vagabond Jews" pretended that they could expel daemons. The power of casting out devils was conferred by Christ on his apostles (Matt. 10:8), and on the seventy (Luke 10:17-19), and was exercised by believers after his ascension (Mark 16:17; Acts 16:18); but this power was never spoken of as exorcism.
|
|
- there are 70 faces to 
