Lizbeth
Well-Known Member
I have only ever heard one person talk about that.......and the narrow path is the way of the cross and "dying" to our old fleshly nature and enduring the chastisements which bring about that death, learning obedience by things which we suffer, so maybe that wouldn't be too surprising in that sense. I have wondered if something like that is what it means about the ten virgins ALL falling asleep.Indeed it has a beginning and an end in this life which in the rebellion church denies. But you have contradicted yourself by saying IF we remain on the narrow path, or works thereof, when the fully sanctified have the testimony that they had a magnificent fall prior to the full work.
Regardless of their past or origins in the dust and sands of time, which I don't know much about, I have been talking about the present day EO church.....it's not a place to be recommended to anyone, but needs to be exposed and warned about.Sister you are arguing a subject that you have not studied. They believe in water baptism saving because in the early years, which they have stumbled on, a water baptised person would have hands lain on him and the Holy Spirit would fall on them (not infants as today).
It is Jesus who sends the Holy Spirit to baptise, not the will of man. This is the point of being born again and previous to this, one still sinned. A new creature is one so unlike the old that it is significant, not because of what they believe but how they are - holy as He is holy, and I have gone to great lengths to deny that I am undermining the start of the process.
I thought you were implying that one does not have salvation and eternal life unless they are entirely sanctified....sorry if I misunderstood.
We can know in our heart by the Spirit exactly what Jesus meant when He said that. And He wouldn't have us trying to justify or excuse disobeying it. Paul did not give himself titles, his use of the term father applied to himself was merely descriptive. And same with our earthly fathers, none of us go around calling our earthly Dads by the title, "Father So and So".Jesus was often critical of the underlying effect and motivation of an act rather than the act itself. He is warning people against inaccurately attributing fatherhood of a particular kind or degree of fatherhood to those who do not have it, and not to the literal meaning otherwise we could not call our earthly seed donators, fathers.
He is said not to call any man teacher.
In acts 7:2 Stephen refers to our father Abraham.
In Romans 9:10 Paul speaks of our father Isaac.
Paul regularly referred to Timothy as His child 1 Cor 4:17, 1Tim 1:2, 2Tim 1:2. And he often referred to himself as a father.
Whatever their past might have been, I can't say, but I wouldn't trust a group that trusts in outward things to be holding the truth in spirit. They may have some bits of truth but that doesn't mean we should go looking to them for it.....that is always the bait that leads to false things. It ws the "good" part of the Tree of Knowledge of Good&Evil that deceived Eve. Only because of extremity did God feed Elijah a morsel of bread with a raven...an unclean bird...but he wasn't meant to swallow the raven, only the morsel of bread. And neither should we go looking to get our food from ravens, but from God.They were so fallen, the EO that is, that they preached the necessity of full surrender to Christ to be baptised and become holy (?) whereas the rest of Christendom only did it now and again. The early writings were rich in it.
The EO church produced a place of beauty, once they could have buildings so that the presence of God could be experienced which would bring man to repentance. Maybe they overdid it once that apostacy came in I don't know, but there were plenty of holy men about known as saints. They did not all fall into flesh.
Really sis you are giving your opinions which are not factual history.