What clicked and made you have a different mindset? How long did it take to start changing and how long was the transformation? Did it last or is it an ongoing back and forth between your old self? I want to know your transformation and success.

Any kind of change, big or small. Anything from weight loss, world view, personality shift, major life change, single change like stopped smoking or drinking soda to starting exercising or going back to school. I want to hear how people’s life were a bit or a lot better through reading and your progress.

TIA 🙏

  • @afraid_of_zombies
    0•1 year ago

    Agh all of this is wrong. Have you ever read your book?

    It was already a perfect sacrifice.

    According to whom? Paul. Paul was the one who said that.

    There were already services on Sunday because that’s when Jesus did his services.

    Nope. Paul again because the Easter miracle happened on Sunday.

    The Moses commandments were lifted by nobody,

    Again No. It was in Paul’s letters. You can even trace the line of Pharisee thought (as documented in the Talmud) that led to his conclusion. There is a reason why Christians can eat pork.

    but Jesus himself provided commentary on how priority for them would play out.

    Show that to me.

    Baptism did not start with Paul or even Jesus, but Jesus popularized it when asking John the Baptist (whose name is literally The Baptist) to baptize him

    Again. His letters predate the Gospels and I never said Paul invented it, I said he popularized it. Baptism was a sorta off-shot of a related Jewish tradition at that time. If very well could have vanished as a fad.

    The trinity was an interpretational teaching and optional (Eastern Orthodox people don’t even have it and never did).

    Yes, I know. I said that. We see hints of the Celestial Jesus in the letters of Paul that evolved eventually into the Trinity.

    The position of women was always culturally influenced.

    Nope. If the timeline of events were true the ministry had women on near equal footing which Paul reduced steadily as he lived.

    Jesus made the eucharist a thing, he literally said “the bread is my body and the wine is my blood”.

    He didn’t exist but had he existed he wouldn’t have said that. Again Paul. The exact wording is off.

    And Jesus first spoke about salvation and faith versus works (I can cite quite a few verses on this).

    Actually the Gospels came out after Paul and his debate with James :)

    You could say a thing or two about the organization of the church, but then again, there was Catholics versus Eastern Orthodox.

    Really? Show me Jesus talking about Bishops please.

    As for the gospel writers, perhaps you forget how many there were.

    4 cannon, and 11 non-cannon. Oh did you mean writers? Thousands. Nothing you saw in your KJV Bible even resembles what the original writings were like.

    As for the sparing the rod…

    Not one of those supports your claim

    • Call me Lenny/LeniEnglish
      1•1 year ago

      See Luke 22:19-20, Mark 14:22-24, John 6:35, John 6:51-58, John 15:5, John 19:29-32, Matthew 22:34-40, and Matthew 12, a chapter literally called “Jesus works on the Sabbath”. The events in the gospels came before Paul because Paul’s conversion was after the last supper. To say his events came before the events in the gospels is very odd in an argument. You can’t say “well the gospels were written after”, that’s like saying Canaanites came after the Hebrews because the Hebrews were written about before the Canaanites were written about. Things exist independently from writing about them.

      Not really sure why you included the trinity as a thing anyways if it’s not impactful as to whether it’s true or not, it would be like saying Paul invented robes. Yeah, and? All three parts of the trinity exist, but seeing it “as a trinity” is not necessary.

      When I said the position of women was always culturally influenced, I wasn’t saying that in the sense that Paul didn’t demote us in favor of men but that that was culturally a non-issue/moot. Paul said at one time we should wear coverings on our head, but that is extremely setting-exclusive, if depictions are anything to go by.

      Paul was completely unnecessary with baptism popularization. Traditions don’t just vanish like you describe. Or else we wouldn’t have a John the Baptist to speak of.

      The last verse I gave about children in my previous comment literally and explicitly denounces using any method such as the rod. If that doesn’t support what I’m saying, then you’ve escalated this argument into a matter of understanding as well now, and I cannot explain something to someone who figuratively doesn’t speak my language.

      I’m surprised I actually agreed with someone on what good manners and good form are before witnessing the argument continue out of the idea I’m not “supposed to” agree with you according to your assumption of what I am. I ethically agree with you, take it or leave it.

      • @afraid_of_zombies
        -2•1 year ago

        See Luke 22:19-20, Mark 14:22-24, John 6:35, John 6:51-58, John 15:5, John 19:29-32, Matthew 22:34-40, and Matthew 12, a chapter literally called “Jesus works on the Sabbath”.

        All of them argue over what is work not about the rule itself.

        The events in the gospels came before Paul because Paul’s conversion was after the last supper. To say his events came before the events in the gospels is very odd in an argument. You can’t say “well the gospels were written after”, that’s like saying Canaanites came after the Hebrews because the Hebrews were written about before the Canaanites were written about.

        Incorrect. The letters predate the Gospels by decades. Which we know because they reference later events and try to patch up holes that didnt exist in Paul’s time. Especially John which was written ~100 yesrs aftet the events and shows a fully developed theology.

        Things exist independently from writing about them.

        Give me one. Show me any secular reference to Jesus that predates Paul.

        Not really sure why you included the trinity as a thing anyways if it’s not impactful as to whether it’s true or not, it would be like saying Paul invented robes. Yeah, and? All three parts of the trinity exist, but seeing it “as a trinity” is not necessary.

        Because the Trinity doesn’t exist. He started the fiction and it carried on.

        Paul said at one time we should wear coverings on our head, but that is extremely setting-exclusive, if depictions are anything to go by.

        Now we are cherry picking.

        The last verse I gave about children in my previous comment literally and explicitly denounces using any method such as the rod. If that doesn’t support what I’m saying, then you’ve escalated this argument into a matter of understanding as well now, and I cannot explain something to someone who figuratively doesn’t speak my language.

        quote it, NIV