I received a letter from someone in the UK which, twice, used this expression and I wonder what it was meant to convey, especially the word 'alone'. Is this a saying of a particular group of self-identifying Christians ? If so, what are they communicating by the 'alone' ? Are they implying that no other matters can be included as a ground of gathering ? And why is the title 'Christ' not mentioned, or 'Son of God' ?

So I'm curious if there exist any Christian sects which deny the physical birth of Jesus, i.e. that Jesus was born from Mary. Perhaps such a sect would say that Jesus simply appeared from the Heavens and didn't need anyone to bring him into the world.

[Christian atheism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_atheism) is the practice of following the teaching of the Christian bible, or Jesus, without believing in the existance of God or that Jesus is the son of God. Do Christian atheists have denominations, and if so, what are those denominations? I will accept *either* actual denominations of Christian atheists, or denominations of Christians who believe in God but who nevertheless have members who identify as Christian atheists, however, I am primarily interested in the former.

Are there any Christian denominations that believe certain scientific knowledge is leading humanity away from the truth of God? Especially where that piece of technology has been used for evil exploitation?

I've been thinking recently, there are a number of famous theologians and apologists who, despite belonging to some particular denomination or another, are recognized widely by Christians of other denominations as good thinkers or teachers. For instance, Tim Keller (Presbyterian), Karl Barth (Swiss Reformed), C.S. Lewis (Anglican), Blaise Pascal (Catholic), and many others. **I am wondering if there are any Seventh Day Adventist thinkers who have a positive reputation as theologians or apologists outside of their own denomination.** I would not be surprised if the answer were "no" given that Seventh Day Adventist Church is relatively new and usually regarded as on the fringes of orthodoxy by other Christian churches. However, if there are any examples, I would love to learn about them for the sake of improving my relationships with friends in the SDA.

What are the receptions and reputations of Olivet Assembly in these countries? - US - South Korea - China (Is it also called Young Disciples of Jesus (耶稣青年会)?) From limited search results, it looks like it was founded in South Korea. There are also some articles about it on American and Chinese websites, with different attitudes. Is it legal and well accepted by the governments or societies in the three countries? Thanks.

Many denominations may believe they are right. Likewise multiple religions sincerely believe they are right. But does God require one to join a denomination? Or does he emphasize the importance of Christlike living and the study of his word?

There are a multiplicity of contemporary claims regarding Jesus made by folks who refer to themselves as Christian. 1) Jesus was and is both God and man. 2) Jesus was and is only man 3) Jesus was an angel, became a man, and is an angel again. (Or was and is both.) 4) Jesus was a man and now is God. These are, perhaps, not all of the options and certainly not all of the nuances. What I have not come across is a contemporary claim that Jesus was God only and not really man at all. Docetism is one form of the sort of thing I am referring to but I am unaware if Docetism is still alive under the umbrella of claimed Christianity: > In the history of Christianity, docetism (from the Koinē Greek: δοκεῖν/δόκησις dokeĩn "to seem", dókēsis "apparition, phantom"1 ) was the doctrine that the phenomenon of Jesus, his historical and bodily existence, and above all the human form of Jesus, was mere semblance without any true reality.[3] Broadly it is taken as the belief that Jesus only seemed to be human, and that his human form was an illusion. - Wikipedia I have seen articles describing "docetic christianity " wherein the importance of being led of the Spirit becomes so magnified that human responsibility to any sort of biblical hermeneutic disappears: > On this view, it becomes unimportant whether Jesus lived or died according to the Gospel records. What matters is the ethical and existential message of the stories about him; how the story affects my understanding of myself. This begins to sound like what I have seen described as Christian Atheism in practice, but theologically cannot be since Christian Atheism denies the existence of God: Are there any contemporary denominations who claim to be Christian and whose theology holds that Jesus was God only and not really human?

From my reading of the Bible, I have come to understand that unity among Christians is a good thing. 1 Corinthians 1:10-13 > Now I exhort you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all agree and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be made complete in the same mind and in the same judgment. For I have been informed concerning you, my brethren, by Chloe’s people, that there are quarrels among you. Now I mean this, that each one of you is saying, “I am of Paul,” and “I of Apollos,” and “I of Cephas,” and “I of Christ.” Has Christ been divided? Paul was not crucified for you, was he? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? Psalm 133:1 > Behold, how good and how pleasant it is
For brothers to dwell together in unity! These, and other passages of scripture, seem to emphasize the importance of Christian unity and love while de-emphasizing the importance of distinctions. In light of these passages, how do Christians justify separating themselves into so many different denominations? Are there any Biblical justifications given for why having such division is preferred over unity?

The Second Commandment warns against making “graven images” or likenesses of anything in heaven, on earth, or in the waters below. Some Christians apply this very strictly to artwork, icons, and statues. With modern technology, it’s now possible to create humanoid robots, androids, or AI-powered machines that imitate human appearance or behavior. **Do any Christian denominations or traditions teach that creating such human-like robots violates the commandment not to make graven images?** If so, what is their reasoning or theological basis? If not, how do theologians distinguish robots from prohibited “images” in Exodus 20:4?

Some Christian interpretations connect human knowledge with moral decline, often drawing from passages such as Genesis 3 (the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil), Ecclesiastes 1:18 (“For with much wisdom comes much sorrow”), or 1 Corinthians 8:1 (“knowledge puffs up, but love builds up”). Are there any recognized Christian denominations or theological traditions that explicitly teach—or have historically taught—that an increase in human knowledge (scientific, philosophical, or technological) directly leads to an increase in immorality or moral corruption?

Was Pentecost 50 days after the feast of unleavened bread? Christ was crucified on the beginning of the feast of unleavened bread, and I was told that it was 50 days either after his resurrection or after his crucifixion.

Here is an example of a context with **"outpouring of the Holy Spirit"** (phrase in bold): > #### Bill McLeod > > Wilbert “Bill” Laing McLeod (1919 - 2012). Canadian Baptist pastor and revivalist born in Winnipeg, Manitoba. Converted at 22 in 1941, he left a sales career to enter ministry, studying at Manitoba Baptist Bible Institute. Ordained in 1946, he pastored in Rosthern, Saskatchewan, and served as a circuit preacher in Strathclair, Shoal Lake, and Birtle. From 1962 to 1981, he led Ebenezer Baptist Church in Saskatoon, growing it from 175 to over 1,000 members. Central to the 1971 Canadian Revival, sparked by the Sutera Twins’ crusade, his emphasis on prayer and repentance drew thousands across denominations, lasting seven weeks. McLeod authored When Revival Came to Canada and recorded numerous sermons, praised by figures like Paul Washer. Married to Barbara Robinson for over 70 years, they had five children: Judith, Lois, Joanna, Timothy, and Naomi. His ministry, focused on scriptural fidelity and revival, impacted Canada and beyond through radio and conferences. > > #### Sermon Summary > > In this sermon, the speaker shares a powerful testimony of a meeting where the glory of God was experienced. It started with one person praying and soon others joined, resulting in a powerful **outpouring of the Holy Spirit**. The meeting lasted for over four hours, with people confessing their sins and seeking God's presence. The speaker emphasizes the need for the glory of God to return to our churches and lives, and encourages repentance, prayer, faith, and identification with Christ as the simple yet costly price to pay for experiencing God's glory. > > https://www.sermonindex.net/sermons/XuEeri0s1gBZfmHq Here is an example of a context with **"filling of the Holy Spirit"** (phrase in bold): >#### God's Word Enhances the Work of the Spirit > >A beam of light doesn't have to shine down on my house for the Spirit to fill me. I don't have to jump three times and turn in circles or say the right thing or have the name John to know the power of the Holy Spirit. I simply need to pray, seek to align my heart with God’s, and fill my mind with His Word. > >It isn't complicated, but that doesn’t mean it’s effortless: a daily **filling of the Holy Spirit** requires a daily filling of the Word of God. In contrast, I firmly believe a lack of Spirit-filled living is due to a lack of enthusiasm for the Bible, along with mediocre attempts to fight sin. But if God's Word is filling us, then the Spirit of God will too. > > https://www.reviveourhearts.com/blog/what-does-it-mean-to-be-filled-with-the-spirit/ From the first context, **"outpouring of the Holy Spirit"** appears to convey the idea of a dramatic, identifiable event, one that might even be highlighted on a calendar. From the second context, **"filling of the Holy Spirit"** seems to describe a more ordinary, ongoing condition that Christians are encouraged to pursue daily. Is this distinction commonly understood among Christians? What is an overview of how major Christian theologies generally understand the concepts of the **"outpouring of the Holy Spirit"** and the **"filling of the Holy Spirit"**?

In the Acts of the Apostles we find that the early believers were every day visiting the temple and afterwards meeting in each others homes. >Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved. (Acts 2:46-47, NIV) If the Old ceremonial ways of the Old Testament were finished at the death of Christ (or as other conjecture after Pentecost) why did the church still attend temple gatherings? Was it because they were not fully aware of the full implication of the New Covenant and may have even offered sacrifices? Was it because they just wanted to get together and evangelize their brethren? Was it some mishmash of both reasons plus possibly more? What was going on in their heads?

I lead a church small group that has (for over a decade now) switched off between studies of secondary literature and studies of the Bible. We are just now finishing an Advent devotional full of secondary literature and are heading into a period of reading the Bible, in this case the Gospel of Luke. In the past, we have engaged in informal versions of close reading or inductive Bible study, with leadership shifting from person to person with each new session. The composition of the group had changed, however, so that I've become the de facto leader. One member of our group has expressed interest in learning how to read the Bible closely, not having learned inductive Bible study before (or close reading of literature either). The problem is that I have a PhD in rhetoric, literature, and linguistics and am acutely aware of the fallacy of "inductive" anything. I still do "inductive Bible study," but I don't swallow whole what we identify as "the original intended meaning" of a text. I'm tempted to hand out a guide to "inductive Bible study" (e.g., from Intervarsity Christian Fellowship) but complicate it with some insights about how biblical texts are historically situated, culturally interested, and linguistically bounded--even as they are divinely inspired. I think a straight-up inductive Bible study guide such as Mike McKinlely's *Luke for You* series would be very readable and probably welcome, but I don't want to put ourselves in the position of arguing with theology that I can see from an online summary informs McKinley's "induction." Likewise, although I would like everyone to have access to Ched Myers's *Healing Affluenza and Resisting Plutocracy* (a commentary on Luke), I want us to question Myers's assumptions as well (more consistent with mine and those of the rest of the group). So I think what I need is a counterpart to the simple handout about how to do inductive Bible study, i.e., a short guide to bringing an informed mind to the shortcomings of so-called "induction."

Below are several excerpts from Christian websites that discuss the idea of "paying the price" in a spiritual context: > In this sermon, the speaker shares a powerful testimony of a meeting where the glory of God was experienced. It started with one person praying and soon others joined, resulting in a powerful outpouring of the Holy Spirit. The meeting lasted for over four hours, with people confessing their sins and seeking God's presence. The speaker emphasizes the need for the glory of God to return to our churches and lives, and encourages repentance, prayer, faith, and identification with Christ **as the simple yet costly price to pay for experiencing God's glory**. > > https://www.sermonindex.net/sermons/XuEeri0s1gBZfmHq > God is a God of process. The major problem with this generation is that men are not ready to **pay the price** to have spiritual power and experiences. But the truth is, if it is genuine, there will be **a price attached to it**. Jesus told the disciples in Luke 24:49 to tarry in Jerusalem until they were endued with power from on high. So, where did you get the version of your divine power without divine process? **Anything valuable always has a price tag**. If you see anything that is valuable, that is cheap, it is either somebody paid for it, or it is stolen. **Authentic power has a price tag**. > > There is a **price you will have to pay** to walk in the authentic power of God. If you see a man that works in supposed power and you don’t see a price in his life, it’s false power he’s working with. The man that God will work with must **pay the price** for spiritual experiences. Specific callings and specific anointing call for specific **prices that we must constantly be paying**. May the Lord find you dependable to carry His power these last days. > > https://spiritmeat.net/2024/06/22/22-june-2024-the-price-for-spiritual-power-and-spiritual-experiences-pay-it-mark-314/ > Every day we need to be watchful by **paying the price to buy the Spirit as the golden oil** so that we may supply the churches with the Spirit for the testimony of Jesus and be rewarded by the Lord to participate in the marriage dinner of the Lamb. > > Our urgent need today is to gain more of the Spirit; we need to live a life of **buying** an extra portion of the Spirit to saturate our entire being. > > Day by day we need to live such a life, a life of **paying the price** to gain the Spirit not only in our spirit but also in our soul, being saturated with the Spirit in our vessel. If we have a day when we don’t **pay the price** to gain the saturating Spirit, that is a wasted day; we do not want to have any wasted days! > > For us to gain more of the Spirit in our soul we need to **pay a price**; we need to **pay the price** of giving up the world, dealing with the self, loving the Lord above all things, and counting all things loss for Christ. > > Day by day we need to **pay the price** of losing our soul life and denying the things that we want to do so that we may pray more, even persevere in prayer and watch unto prayer, so that we may gain more of the Spirit. > > If we don’t **pay the price to buy the oil today**, we will have to pay it after we are resurrected; sooner or later, we will have to **pay the price** – so why not today, why not in this age? > > https://agodman.com/paying-price-buy-spirit-oil-vessel-word-prayer/ > The wise virgins told the foolish virgins to go buy their own oil. When the Bible speaks of the oil, it refers to the Holy Spirit. You may ask, “But, how is it possible to buy the Holy Spirit?” > > Jesus is referring to a person having to **pay the price**, which means denying their will, obeying the Word of God, being faithful, sacrificing and keeping constant watch. > > All those who truly want the presence of God should be aware that **there is a price to pay**. The wise virgins, certainly, **paid the price** (sacrificed) with the time they waited for the bridegroom. Surely, they prepared themselves by investing in their spiritual lives through prayer, fasts, consecration and surrender, not allowing the light of the Spirit to burn out. > > On the other hand, there are those who aren’t willing to **pay that price**. They live according to their fleshly desires, refuse to stop living in sin, are in the church but far from God, have the lamp, which is faith, but don’t have the oil, which is the Holy Spirit. > > https://www.universal.org/en/bispo-macedo/pay-the-price/ Is the idea of "paying the price" for greater spiritual power, anointing, or a deeper experience of God a common teaching across all Christian denominations, or is it emphasized primarily within certain groups? For example, is it widely taught that Christians must *pay a price* to receive more of the Spirit, more anointing, or greater spiritual authority? What is the biblical basis for this teaching?

To whom or what is Jesus referring in this passage when he speaks of “something greater than Solomon”? > The queen of the South will rise up at the judgment with this > generation and condemn it, for she came from the ends of the earth to > hear the wisdom of Solomon, and behold, something greater than Solomon > is here. (Matthew 12:42, ESV) I have always assumed it was Jesus, but much of Matthew 12 is about the Holy Spirit. Solomon was a wise counselor and the Holy Spirit is the Counselor that Jesus would send. Do any theologians hold that Jesus is speaking of the Holy Spirit and not himself?

I'm aware that Cessationists do not believe in spiritual gifts. However, how do they view the process of being filled with the Holy Spirit? Tozer's How to be filled with the holy spirit defines the process as a very dramatic, sudden process. Do Cessationists also take this view, or do they view it as a more gradual process? ____ #### Appendix - List of verses on "being filled with the Holy Spirit". - And Jesus, **full of the Holy Spirit**, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit in the wilderness [Luke 4:1, ESV] - 8 But as for me, **I am filled with power, with the Spirit of the Lord**, and with justice and might, to declare to Jacob his transgression and to Israel his sin. [Micah 3:8, ESV] - 18 And do not get drunk with wine, for that is debauchery, **but be filled with the Spirit**, [Ephesians 5:18, ESV] - When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place. 2 And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. 3 And divided tongues as of fire appeared to them and rested on each one of them. 4 **And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit** and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. [Acts 2:1-4, ESV] - 8 Then Peter, **filled with the Holy Spirit**, said to them, “Rulers of the people and elders, [Acts 4:8, ESV] - 31 And when they had prayed, the place in which they were gathered together was shaken, **and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit** and continued to speak the word of God with boldness. [Acts 4:31, ESV] - 3 Therefore, brothers, pick out from among you seven men of good repute, **full of the Spirit** and of wisdom, whom we will appoint to this duty. 4 But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.” 5 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. [Acts 6:3-5, ESV] - 54 Now when they heard these things they were enraged, and they ground their teeth at him. 55 But he, **full of the Holy Spirit**, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. [Acts 7:54, ESV] - 17 So Ananias departed and entered the house. And laying his hands on him he said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus who appeared to you on the road by which you came has sent me so that you may regain your sight **and be filled with the Holy Spirit**.” [Acts 9:17, ESV] - 24 for he was a good man, **full of the Holy Spirit** and of faith. And a great many people were added to the Lord. [Acts 11:24, ESV] - 9 But Saul, who was also called Paul, **filled with the Holy Spirit**, looked intently at him [Acts 13:9, ESV] - 52 And the disciples were **filled with joy and with the Holy Spirit**. [Acts 13:52, ESV] - 15 for he will be great before the Lord. And he must not drink wine or strong drink, **and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit**, even from his mother's womb. [Luke 1:15, ESV] - 67 And his father Zechariah was **filled with the Holy Spirit** and prophesied, saying [Luke 1:67, ESV]

Inspired by [*Can the Church institute a marital age disparity limit impediment?*](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/111248/can-the-church-institute-a-marital-age-disparity-limit-impediment) , a more general question is "*Can the Church …?*". That is, is there any law that the Church is *not* allowed to make. Many countries have constitutions based strictly on what the government is *not* allowed to do; the American Constitution perhaps being the best example. But is there anything limiting what laws the Roman Church can enact for its members?

---------- God sent Jonah to prophesy to the Babylonian city of Nineveh, which he did with the greatest of reluctance, thereby effecting the largest mass conversion of a city up to that time. It's possible that Nineveh was a "random" city, but that's probably not the case, given its size and strategic importance. Instead, what made Nineveh significant enough to be chosen in God's eyes? Was Nineveh the "second" city of Babylon, after the capital, in the manner of New York City versus Washington D.C.? Did Nineveh have a "Sodom and Gomorrah" reputation, making it the worst city of Babylon? Was Nineveh unusually open and "cosmopolitan," thereby making it the easiest city to convert? Or was there some other reason that I have overlooked?