What are we really dealing with here?

[APAK]

Good points. It comes down to this. If it is how you say, then the word has no clarity to me because, as I said, at the core of my faith is that God came in the flesh, was crucified and resurrected. If that is not the case and it is as you say, then, it is not the Spirit speaking to me or teaching or guiding but instead I talk to myself. If that is the case, then I follow a false God that I created in my mind. Because what He tells me is that this that you dispute is His will, His purpose, and His plan. For His great name's sake.

Who is the LORD in the Old Testament? Who speaks? I haven't read all of your other post so I don't know if you have already said.

1 Kings 18:31-32
[31] And Elijah took twelve stones, according to the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob, unto whom the word of the LORD came, saying, Israel shall be thy name: [32] And with the stones he built an altar in the name of the LORD : and he made a trench about the altar, as great as would contain two measures of seed.

VIJ: The spirit of God (at least Truth) is working inside your heart to perfect you as Christ was being perfected and was perfected after his death as our perfect sacrifice for the covering of our sins. Christ overcame as you have, by faith to belief and baptism in Jesus the Christ. Jesus was the first of the new creation. You are part of the new creation and part of the body of Christ.

Jesus the son of God who was born by his Father. The son died and was raised by his Father. Jesus played a vital role that his Father COULD NOT accomplish in the interests of true love, justice and mercy for mankind. The sacrifice HAD TO BE 100 % human, the shadow of this act was with Abraham and Isaac the son. Isaac was obedient to his father throughout and worked with him as one.

Jesus possessed (was BORN with) the spirit of God as he walked as one with his Father to the cross. Jesus even add help (power) of the 'fullness' of God after his baptism. This does not mean that Jesus was God, anymore than you are God because you have the same type (less power) of spirit and attempt to maintain your walk today in the spirit within you as one spirit.

Bless you,

APAK

 

[Naomi25]

Genesis 32:13 He spent the night there, and from what he had with him he selected a gift for his brother Esau: from there forward

Sorry, I still don't follow!! Sometimes people are on such different wave lengths, aren't they?? To me, the fact that Jacob quite rightly feared the brother he cheated (who also has a posse) still has nothing to do with God's electing promises. And it doesn't change the initial 'bad behaviour' of both men. Esau traditionally had to 'bow' before Jacob, but we know the limited blessing he got from his father saw him grow in power to throw off his brothers 'yoke'. Indeed, we see down through history that Esau's "seed" is numerous and quite powerful. But it still doesn't change the fact that the promise went to Jacob. Esau may have thrown off his brother, but if you read the OT, there are enough references to the 'judgement of Esau' to make you quite sure where God's grace lies. Look at Esau's offspring today...are they under God's blessing? I think not.
So no....I don't want to...in a million years...make myself Esau in the story.

kind of misses the point, seems to me. Imo it is more about perceptions v reality. Personally i'm ok with Catholics on the bench, even if they are a bit punishment-happy

Well, yes, doesn't it all miss the point though? My answer, while sarcastic in the extreme, was trying to highlight just how 'overboard and over the horizon' some of these ideas are.
Does every person 'identifying' (I hate that word!) as Catholic actually go to Mass...actually follow the faith? Because where I live, probably 70% see being "Catholic" as the same as being born 'Caucasian'...it's a state of being. They might sometimes go to services, they might say they 'believe all that stuff'...but does it affect their life? Nope. You couldn't call 'em Christians...even Catholic Christians...if you know what I mean. My point is simply....the chances of all those "high powered, influential" people being secret, evil, cabal members of a practicing Catholic Church plot to take over the world...is...stretching it...would you say???

oh, any Absolute Truth that Scripture has led you to would be fine; it's meant to be more like a thought exercise. You should be able to recall a contrasting v for any v in Scripture i guess. God is the only AT i can find, anyway; you might come away with a different impression

my apologies, i'll adjust my hearing there, not meaning to be vague

You sort of miss my point. All scripture is Absolute truth. It comes from God...Spirit inspired, God breathed. Perfect. If it comes from God, it must be absolute truth, yeah? He can not be less than absolutely truthful. But if you're after a specific example that particularly resonates with me just at the moment:

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. 17 And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. 19 For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.

21 And you, who once were alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, 22 he has now reconciled in his body of flesh by his death, in order to present you holy and blameless and above reproach before him, 23 if indeed you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the gospel that you heard, which has been proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, became a minister. - Col 1:15-23

 

[Reggie Belafonte]

not the point tho

Bible Search: book of the law
i guess some of them are at least

Romans 7:12
So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good

ah no, It's mentioned in Scripture. too.

The Letter of the Law is only just that. it's not truly Holy, Jesus came and it was in this that he brought it all to life and truly holy as he finished it all off, so the two he gave put all the other 12 that now come under Grace.
The OT law did not cut it truly until Jesus came.
The OT is a blueprint for Christianity.

The Old Testament was it Holy, could it be called the Holy Book, books. yes I think so, Holy of Holies ? well it was not finished for such.

I think it depends how one looks at such, looking back we can see that it did not cut it, to be what it was truly to become, so it's not truly Holy in that light any more but it was at the time the work of God and Holy.

People who reject the Holy Trinity are not truly Born Again of the Holy Spirit, because such is a rejection of Jesus Christ to who he truly is and the Holy Spirit has not informed them this is a fact, that all 3 are one in the same and this is why fools start looking for a mythical race of ratbags to help them out, the same type wanted to let a murder off the Cross but not our lord and Saviour, they wanted him out of the way, so they could follow their Golden Calf and Idols of mans works.

No one comes to God the Father but through his Son and that's a Biblical fact, so that takes out Islam and Jewish and all denominations who reject the Trinity because the fact is they reject Jesus Christ in fact, so how can they come to know God the Father at all.
They have rejected the corner stone, they are building rubbish to their own idols and self, Jesus said he was going to knock down that rubbish in 3 days.

This rubbish about we hear adding the phrase "Judah Christianity" all the time nowadays, is nonsense as if the Jews are some how supportive of Christianity, well that's a direct lie. it's such people who are attacking Christ Jesus and working to undermine and destroy true Christianity.

As soon as I hear rejection of the Trinity I know who I am dealing with, it's one who is trying to undermine Jesus Christ and claim they can know God, well how can they if they don't go through Jesus his Son. it makes a mockery of Jesus Christ to make such a claim.

We have a stupid Pope Frances making claims that the Jew and Islam worship the same God, oh do they now ? they don't know God, they reject his Son, if they knew they would of came to Christ Jesus. but the fact is they don't.
You shall know them by there works.

 

[VictoryinJesus]

This does not mean that Jesus was God,

Thank you for being patient with me but I can't agree. I am not saying I am right. I am saying this is foundational for where I am at. If I am in error, then please pray that He reveals it so I can see it and acknowledge it.

 

[APAK]

I was wondering the same thing. Trying to work out what denomination is inspiring his thinking. Here says not JWs, yet he quoted Russell. Shades of Christadelphian, except he holds to a pre-existent Christ. Shades of Adventism t he holds to an earthly millennium and a created Christ, not begotten. Curiouser and curiouser. Can agree with much of what"they"are saying, particularly the immortality issue, but not everything, certainly i would not agree with a created Christ. Never.

brakelite: It is JW teachings...expressions like "little flock" is a give-away. Not saying I cannot learn from him or anyone else like him. I don't like branding folks as I don't like them branding me. I guess you know that about me already. He has views that seem logical and scripture -based although maybe some of his conclusions are a stretch. For example, an angel sinning does not make that being an automatic mortal...they do see God's face. Their sin that causes separation from God is on a different plane that sinning in a corrupt human soul. Scripture does not spell this area out that well....

Gooday Brother I like you Taupo pics

APAK

 

[APAK]

Thank you for being patient with me but I can't agree. I am not saying I am right. I am saying this is foundational for where I am at. If I am in error, then please pray that He reveals it so I can see it and acknowledge it.

I consider you a deep-thinker on this site and a diligent searcher of the truth and God, our Father. Please promise yourself and me you will NEVER give up your quest and be as Paul was and said...I have fought the good fight and ran the race....KEEP the FAITH!

Bless you,

APAK

 

[brakelite]

brakelite: It is JW teachings...expressions like "little flock" is a give-away. Not saying I cannot learn from him or anyone else like him. I don't like branding folks as I don't like them branding me. I guess you know that about me already. He has views that seem logical and scripture -based although maybe some of his conclusions are a stretch. For example, an angel sinning does not make that being an automatic mortal...they do see God's face. Their sin that causes separation from God is on a different plane that sinning in a corrupt human soul. Scripture does not spell this area out that well....

Gooday Brother I like you Taupo pics

APAK

Yes, that's what I figured, and asked him if he was JW but denied it. Oh well. I do find myself in agreement with him on the state of the dead and the absence of any natural or innate immortality to men or angels. Men must seek such as a gift, and it is clear that Satan is to be utterly destroyed in the end...and good job too.

 

[bbyrd009]

So no....I don't want to...in a million years...make myself Esau in the story.

of course not--the story was written that way on purpose. You don't want to ID with Adam either, right

My point is simply....the chances of all those "high powered, influential" people being secret, evil, cabal members of a practicing Catholic Church plot to take over the world...is...stretching it...would you say?

well, we're down to, what, one country w/o a central bank, and .1% have 90% of the wealth? I'd say that "secret" is the only part that is stretching it myself

 

[bbyrd009]

You sort of miss my point. All scripture is Absolute truth. It comes from God...Spirit inspired, God breathed. Perfect. If it comes from God, it must be absolute truth, yeah? He can not be less than absolutely truthful. But if you're after a specific example that particularly resonates with me just at the moment:

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. 17 And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. 19 For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.

21 And you, who once were alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds, 22 he has now reconciled in his body of flesh by his death, in order to present you holy and blameless and above reproach before him, 23 if indeed you continue in the faith, stable and steadfast, not shifting from the hope of the gospel that you heard, which has been proclaimed in all creation under heaven, and of which I, Paul, became a minister. - Col 1:15-23

ok, you say "specific example" but then you give a passage with many examples? That actually contains an "if?" So i'd ask you to restate your Absolute Truth a bit more succinctly if you would first

 

[bbyrd009]

As soon as I hear rejection of the Trinity I know who I am dealing with

ha never mind that pesky fruit stuff huh

personally as soon as i hear rejection of Scripture i feel the same way

 

[Harvest 1874]

Yes, that's what I figured, and asked him if he was JW but denied it. Oh well. I do find myself in agreement with him on the state of the dead and the absence of any natural or innate immortality to men or angels. Men must seek such as a gift, and it is clear that Satan is to be utterly destroyed in the end...and good job too.

And I still deny it, sorry if this hurts anyone's feelings, but just because one group shares some similar beliefs of that of another does not make them one in the same. Baptist believe some of the same things as Methodist, Anglicans share similar beliefs as Catholics, are we to say they are all the same? (By the way the term "little flock" is found in the scriptures, therefore a scriptural term, which any student of God's word can use.)

There are distinctive differences between Bible Students and JW's both in our beliefs and in the way we practice our faith. JW's are more structurally organized with the Governing Body dictating doctrine and practice, while Bible Students believe that all students of God's word are free to believe as they chose, as they believe the Holy Spirit has led them.

“Bible Students are nationwide, even international, however, we do not constitute a formal denomination of any kind, and there is no central headquarters. The various classes, or ecclesia’s as they are often referred, are independent, though allied one to another through a common faith. Our leaders, elders and deacons, are elected from the congregation. (They serve willingly, without any monetary compensation.) All are welcome to attend and study with us.”

The term Bible Students was widely recognized at the turn of the century. It is thought by some that after the death of Pastor Charles T. Russell in 1916, the Bible Students became Jehovah’s Witnesses. THIS IS INCORRECT.

Bible Students are still the same today, and they are NOT Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Pastor Russell was not the founder of the sect called Jehovah’s Witnesses. He was never known as one, and he never used the name. The Jehovah’s Witnesses did not even come into existence until the early 1930’s, years after Pastor Russell died (in 1916).

The Bible Student movement started in the 1800’s, emerging when the age of enlightenment challenged Christianity. At that time, many intelligent individuals set out to prove that the Bible was unintelligent and untrustworthy. Many Christians reacted by clinging blindly to their creeds. Bible study classes formed spontaneously to challenge intelligent unbelief and unintelligent belief. Charles Russell became the pastor of one of these Bible study classes, and was soon recognized as a leading Bible expositor. His sermons appeared in over 3,000 newspapers weekly, here and overseas. Pastor Russell advocated the sound method of harmonizing all the Bible texts on a given subject before accepting any teaching as scriptural. He never claimed to originate new truths, but to have discovered Bible truths that were lost, or changed from the beliefs of the early church.

In 1879, Pastor Russell formed the Zion’s Watch Tower, later known as the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society. This Society was merely an organ of evangelism and a stimulus to Bible Study. It was never the central authority of the Bible Students, whose organization was, and is to this day, congregational in character.

J. F. Rutherford gained control of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society shortly after Pastor Russell’s death in 1916. He moved rapidly to centralize authority over all Bible Student congregations. Vital changes were made in basic doctrines, incompatible with the studied conclusions of most Bible Students. In 1917, the Bible Students began separating from this authoritarian arrangement, and soon there were many independent and autonomous congregations cooperating together in a world- wide fellowship. Understand there is no connection between these Bible Students and the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the two are incompatible one with another regardless of whether or not they share some basic fundamental teachings (as do the majority of the professing churches).

To us what the Jehovah’s Witnesses teach is nothing more than “another Gospel,” (Gal 1:6) not the faith once delivered to the saints, the only true and acceptable faith.”

 

[Phoneman777]

Thank you for being patient with me but I can't agree. I am not saying I am right. I am saying this is foundational for where I am at. If I am in error, then please pray that He reveals it so I can see it and acknowledge it.

APAK, Thomas said unto Jesus, "My Lord and my God". At that moment Thomas wasn't looking up into heaven when he said it. Thomas wasn't swearing - he had better religion than that. Thomas said "unto Him" (Gr: "aipen autos").

"And Thomas answered and said unto Him - UNTO JESUS - my Lord and my God."

 

[Phoneman777]

Well...it gets a bit muddy. They say, as Protestant denominations....'daughter' religions under Rome, we are actually part of the Beast...the Antichrist. And if you read Revelation, there is no "coming out" of that. Pretty much, we're doomed.
But Babylon seems to refer to the 'great city that has dominion over the kings of the earth'. Now...does that mean (in their scenario) Vatican City? And people living there/working there but who are, perhaps, not really Catholic, have a chance to 'get out'? I don't know.
All I do know is that if we follow the logic of those I've been talking to...we are part of the beast...not just being deceived, an actual, willing, part. And according to Revelation, there's no coming back from that. Rosey, huh?

It's of a truth that "all God's biddings are enablings" and if He says "come out", we can come out. Yes, Apostate Protestantism are the daughters of the whore of Babylon and their latest movements within Ecumenism are more than enough to prove just that. Protestantism is no longer protesting. But, God has revealed that which He is calling out of Babylon to enter: His end time, world wide church, which is characterized as that "which keep the commandments of God and have the faith of Jesus and His testimony. So, of how many church denominations can it be truly said that:

• have a global presence in almost every single country of the world (hint: there's only two and they're depicted in Revelation - the Whore of Babylon and the Pure Woman)
• teach obedience to all of God's Ten Commandments
• teach that by faith in Jesus we can overcome sin like Jesus did, as well as be obedient unto death if necessary

It's that church that God is calling us into, the church preaching the Three Angels' Messages of Revelation 14 that are to go into all the world just before Jesus comes back.

 

[Naomi25]

It's of a truth that "all God's biddings are enablings" and if He says "come out", we can come out. Yes, Apostate Protestantism are the daughters of the whore of Babylon and their latest movements within Ecumenism are more than enough to prove just that. Protestantism is no longer protesting. But, God has revealed that which He is calling out of Babylon to enter: His end time, world wide church, which is characterized as that "which keep the commandments of God and have the faith of Jesus and His testimony. So, of how many church denominations can it be truly said that:

• have a global presence in almost every single country of the world (hint: there's only two and they're depicted in Revelation - the Whore of Babylon and the Pure Woman)
• teach obedience to all of God's Ten Commandments
• teach that by faith in Jesus we can overcome sin like Jesus did, as well as be obedient unto death if necessary

Alright. But this all still assumes that: first, the Catholic Church is the harlot, and that second: Protestant denominations are more closely linked to the RCC than it would appear.
Both are just supposition, really, as there are others that fit into the category of AC as well...especially if we are talking about a future entity. As for Protestantism being linked with the RCC? Well...you might, as you say, find a few who come under our banner for lack of a better one (not really any other for them to be under, is there?) who reach out to the RCC for the sake of Ecumenism, but these people already have a loose understanding of theology and don't place any great importance on doctrine. The majority of us? While not hostile to the RCC...we recognize we have vast differences. Maybe not on the 'surface', but they're there, and when you get down deep, to where theology and doctrine do matter, it become untenable to 'hold hands' in ecumenical cooperation. Sure we dialogue and comport ourselves (or we should) in a Christian manner...as you point out...we should believe that we can win some of these people, should we not, and hostility never does.

teach obedience to all of God's Ten Commandments

I found this statement interesting. Interesting in that...in the NT, Jesus affirms every one of the 10 commandments...except the Sabbath. What does he say about the Sabbath? That the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. Then Paul tells us that no man should judge us about a day or Sabbath...that such things were but shadow of things to come...that Jesus IS the substance. Jesus is the true Sabbath. He is our rest, or our joy, our rejuvenation. When we are in him, we can worship any day, find peace any day, find true rest any day.

It's that church that God is calling us into, the church preaching the Three Angels' Messages of Revelation 14 that are to go into all the world just before Jesus comes back.

Yeah, see...this makes me a little squirrel-y. "The Angel's Message". Capital letters. Very important angels. Then you go to Rev 14 and see what they say, and it's good and all, certainly necessary...but. It doesn't actually mention what the gospel is. If you are making it such a big deal, such a focus point of your 'church', then don't you think it should actually mention the gospel? Or Jesus? Or the cross? Or him dying for our salvation? Or him rising again? Or our need to repent? Or of how we need to run this race...our sanctification? Or that Jesus is the Lamb of God? Or that he is God? Or just, you know, all of the essential bits in all the books in front of Revelation?
It just seems to me that your 'church' has picked an odd passage to be your "mission statement", as it were. It's focusing on Angels, commandments, wrath, and fearing God. None of those are wrong, but if you don't put them in the right context...the context of the cross and of Jesus Christ and the Fathers grace, then you are sending and receiving quite a different message from the one the bible has just spent a whole lot of words making plain.

 

[Naomi25]

of course not--the story was written that way on purpose. You don't want to ID with Adam either, right

Well, then what on earth, was your point at all? It seems we have run full circle and are back....nowhere.

well, we're down to, what, one country w/o a central bank, and .1% have 90% of the wealth? I'd say that "secret" is the only part that is stretching it myself

Okay, you're right. Only America means anything. She is clearly the wealthiest, most powerful, most important nation to have ever existed, and no other County matters at all, has any wealth, political influence. We're all dead in the water.
Too bad America can't be found in the Bible at all. Maybe God didn't get the memo...? Or wait...Satan? Maybe Satan didn't get it, since he's supposed to be steering the ship...?

ok, you say "specific example" but then you give a passage with many examples? That actually contains an "if?" So i'd ask you to restate your Absolute Truth a bit more succinctly if you would first

See, now your just reaching. Look, it's quite simple. God gave us scripture. Yes? If it comes from God, it must, logically, be true...yes? To say 'no', implies God is being less than absolutely truthful. So...that's a no-brainer.

As for my 'specific' example. Feel free to mock my choice of words, but when confronted by an entire bible full of passages...yes, I chose to give you a 'specific' passage...as in...the passage covers an idea. I could have just given you 1 verse out if it, if you wanted "specific" specific, but that would have given 1/10 of an 'absolute truth', which would have been stupid, don't you think?

And then, you really think because the word "if" appears once in the passage, that suddenly it's not absolute truth anymore? Pu-lease! If you read it...carefully...you will notice that the "if" appears when it references us. When speaking of God, of Christ and of his nature, there is no "if". The only 'uncertainty' you could possibly find there is all down to human nature. "if" people stay in God. I'd say that was fairly accurate though, wouldn't you? Truthful, in fact? People are saved, "if" they stay in Christ. You, friend, have no leg to stand on...hence...you are reaching.

 

[brakelite]

And I still deny it, sorry if this hurts anyone's feelings, but just because one group shares some similar beliefs of that of another does not make them one in the same. Baptist believe some of the same things as Methodist, Anglicans share similar beliefs as Catholics, are we to say they are all the same? (By the way the term "little flock" is found in the scriptures, therefore a scriptural term, which any student of God's word can use.)

There are distinctive differences between Bible Students and JW's both in our beliefs and in the way we practice our faith. JW's are more structurally organized with the Governing Body dictating doctrine and practice, while Bible Students believe that all students of God's word are free to believe as they chose, as they believe the Holy Spirit has led them.

“Bible Students are nationwide, even international, however, we do not constitute a formal denomination of any kind, and there is no central headquarters. The various classes, or ecclesia’s as they are often referred, are independent, though allied one to another through a common faith. Our leaders, elders and deacons, are elected from the congregation. (They serve willingly, without any monetary compensation.) All are welcome to attend and study with us.”

The term Bible Students was widely recognized at the turn of the century. It is thought by some that after the death of Pastor Charles T. Russell in 1916, the Bible Students became Jehovah’s Witnesses. THIS IS INCORRECT.

Bible Students are still the same today, and they are NOT Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Pastor Russell was not the founder of the sect called Jehovah’s Witnesses. He was never known as one, and he never used the name. The Jehovah’s Witnesses did not even come into existence until the early 1930’s, years after Pastor Russell died (in 1916).

The Bible Student movement started in the 1800’s, emerging when the age of enlightenment challenged Christianity. At that time, many intelligent individuals set out to prove that the Bible was unintelligent and untrustworthy. Many Christians reacted by clinging blindly to their creeds. Bible study classes formed spontaneously to challenge intelligent unbelief and unintelligent belief. Charles Russell became the pastor of one of these Bible study classes, and was soon recognized as a leading Bible expositor. His sermons appeared in over 3,000 newspapers weekly, here and overseas. Pastor Russell advocated the sound method of harmonizing all the Bible texts on a given subject before accepting any teaching as scriptural. He never claimed to originate new truths, but to have discovered Bible truths that were lost, or changed from the beliefs of the early church.

In 1879, Pastor Russell formed the Zion’s Watch Tower, later known as the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society. This Society was merely an organ of evangelism and a stimulus to Bible Study. It was never the central authority of the Bible Students, whose organization was, and is to this day, congregational in character.

J. F. Rutherford gained control of the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society shortly after Pastor Russell’s death in 1916. He moved rapidly to centralize authority over all Bible Student congregations. Vital changes were made in basic doctrines, incompatible with the studied conclusions of most Bible Students. In 1917, the Bible Students began separating from this authoritarian arrangement, and soon there were many independent and autonomous congregations cooperating together in a world- wide fellowship. Understand there is no connection between these Bible Students and the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the two are incompatible one with another regardless of whether or not they share some basic fundamental teachings (as do the majority of the professing churches).

To us what the Jehovah’s Witnesses teach is nothing more than “another Gospel,” (Gal 1:6) not the faith once delivered to the saints, the only true and acceptable faith.”

Okay, fair enough. Had never heard of your group. Good to be informed, thanks. What it means that you are not JW is that one more false teaching I object to can be scratched from the list... The JW assertion that only JWs will be among the elite saved. However still disagree with you on the divinity of Christ. While ii agree there is no trinity, because the Son predated creation and was the means through whom the Father worked, then as a begotten Son he inherited the attributes of the Father... Divine attributes. Just as my son is human, then God's Son must be divine. Simple really. But the fact that He is a Son, is a denial of the trinity. No co equal or co eternal con substantial beings can be Father and son. Not are the Father and son simply roles they are playing for the sake of salvation. The trinity would suggest that because all 3 members are precisely equal in every respect, indivisible, and inherently God in their own right, then any one of them could have taken upon himself the role of Father, Son, or Spirit. Buy if one believes in the literal sonship of Jesus, then one cannot accept the trinity as taught by the creeds. They are incompatible.

 

[Phoneman777]

Alright. But this all still assumes that: first, the Catholic Church is the harlot, and that second: Protestant denominations are more closely linked to the RCC than it would appear.
Both are just supposition, really, as there are others that fit into the category of AC as well...especially if we are talking about a future entity. As for Protestantism being linked with the RCC? Well...you might, as you say, find a few who come under our banner for lack of a better one (not really any other for them to be under, is there?) who reach out to the RCC for the sake of Ecumenism, but these people already have a loose understanding of theology and don't place any great importance on doctrine. The majority of us? While not hostile to the RCC...we recognize we have vast differences. Maybe not on the 'surface', but they're there, and when you get down deep, to where theology and doctrine do matter, it become untenable to 'hold hands' in ecumenical cooperation. Sure we dialogue and comport ourselves (or we should) in a Christian manner...as you point out...we should believe that we can win some of these people, should we not, and hostility never does.



I found this statement interesting. Interesting in that...in the NT, Jesus affirms every one of the 10 commandments...except the Sabbath. What does he say about the Sabbath? That the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. Then Paul tells us that no man should judge us about a day or Sabbath...that such things were but shadow of things to come...that Jesus IS the substance. Jesus is the true Sabbath. He is our rest, or our joy, our rejuvenation. When we are in him, we can worship any day, find peace any day, find true rest any day.




Yeah, see...this makes me a little squirrel-y. "The Angel's Message". Capital letters. Very important angels. Then you go to Rev 14 and see what they say, and it's good and all, certainly necessary...but. It doesn't actually mention what the gospel is. If you are making it such a big deal, such a focus point of your 'church', then don't you think it should actually mention the gospel? Or Jesus? Or the cross? Or him dying for our salvation? Or him rising again? Or our need to repent? Or of how we need to run this race...our sanctification? Or that Jesus is the Lamb of God? Or that he is God? Or just, you know, all of the essential bits in all the books in front of Revelation?
It just seems to me that your 'church' has picked an odd passage to be your "mission statement", as it were. It's focusing on Angels, commandments, wrath, and fearing God. None of those are wrong, but if you don't put them in the right context...the context of the cross and of Jesus Christ and the Fathers grace, then you are sending and receiving quite a different message from the one the bible has just spent a whole lot of words making plain.

The prophetic timeline pinpoints the Papacy as the AC to the exclusion of all other candidates.

The Papacy recognizes only one true Protestant denomination, and claims authority over all other "protestants" - and rightly so - by virtue of their observance of Sunday, which the Catholic church claims is the "the Mark of our authority. The church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact."

Jesus' remarks about the Sabbath was not to diminish the commandment to rest on that day, but to diminish the unbelievably burdensome Sabbath rules that religious leaders had of their own authority imposed. The word "man" (Gr. "anthropos") literally means "mankind", which refutes the idea that it is "the Sabbath of the Jews" for J-E-W is a strange way to spell M-A-N.

The context of Colossians 2 is the "ceremonial law" of meat offerings, drink offerings, observance of new moons, etc. which were all tied to the Mosaic Law and called "your sabbaths...BESIDES the (weekly) Sabbath of the Lord thy God." Paul no more meant to teach to ignore the 4th commandment than teach to ignore the 1st or any of the rest of the 10. Paul says the nailed commandments of the handwriting of Moses "were against us", and Deuteronomy 31:24-26 says the writings of MOSES were "against us" and were placed outside the ark, while the Ten Commandments written by the finger of God are for us. Hebrews 4:9 Lamsa version says "It is therefore the duty of the people of God to keep the Sabbath" and the reason given in the next verse says if you are resting in the finished work of Jesus, then you will evidence that inward rest by resting outwardly from daily work "as God did from His" when He rested at the end of Creation week from working.

Bound up right there in the Three Angels' Messages is "the everlasting GOSPEL to preach unto them that dwell in the earth, to every nation, kindred, tongue, and people." The Gospel is preached along with the call to return to the worship of the Creator "for the hour of His Judgment is come", the exposure of Babylon as spiritually bankrupt, and the warning not to accept the Mark of the Beast and perish, the last warning message to go into all the world just before Jesus comes. I'd say that's a pretty bold mission statement for a pretty bold mission, and no other church preaches it or can preach it bc ALL of them are breaking the 4th commandment every week, mostly in ignorance, but those who recognize that Jesus meant well what He said - "If ye love Me, keep My commandments" - will indeed come out of Babylon.

 

[mjrhealth]

will indeed come out of Babylon.

God people have being coming out of "babylon" , mens religions for years, thats why it says

Rev_18:4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.

There would be few in any left in there. The great Harlot mens religion trying to replace our Lords beautiful bride, as if it ever cou7ld,

 

[Naomi25]

The prophetic timeline pinpoints the Papacy as the AC to the exclusion of all other candidates.

Who's Prophetic timeline? Because as far as I can see, there are several different interpretations when it comes to the Daniel passage that speaks of the "abomination of desolation". Yous is but one, and it definitely does not exclude all others. Your theory is supposition, nothing more. To claim it to be more, is claiming an authority you do not have.

The Papacy recognizes only one true Protestant denomination, and claims authority over all other "protestants" - and rightly so - by virtue of their observance of Sunday, which the Catholic church claims is the "the Mark of our authority. The church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact."

I feel like I've done this dance before. The RCC has no 'claim' right or otherwise on Protestants who worship on Sunday. Yeesh. Get over it guys. We read the bible, we see it in the bible, we follow what we see in the bible.
The idea that it matters what the RCC "thinks" on this issue is nonsensical in the first place. You disagree with the RCC, we disagree with the RCC....so why on earth are we saying it matters what they are saying about this? We say they are wrong on a heap of things...guess what? They're wrong on this too!

Do you really think that as Protestant Churches we are locked into traditional ways of doing things and can never look back. You might want to say that the Protestant churches only worship on Sunday because that's what the RCC did, and was familiar to us. Whatever! Not only did we have the Reformation, but we have lots...and lots of people who read, and re-read scripture over and over. Who write theology books and examine topics just like this one. We don't just skate along on "mothers" coat tails.

And to be honest, if feels like you're basing all this on something that you cannot prove...that RCC = AC! And that the RCC thinks the church is above the bible, which I'm fairly sure they actually don't...that church tradition helps translate the bible, maybe, but above it? Nope, not sure about that one.

Jesus' remarks about the Sabbath was not to diminish the commandment to rest on that day, but to diminish the unbelievably burdensome Sabbath rules that religious leaders had of their own authority imposed. The word "man" (Gr. "anthropos") literally means "mankind", which refutes the idea that it is "the Sabbath of the Jews" for J-E-W is a strange way to spell M-A-N.

Mmmm...stretching, I think. You are missing, completely the point of "the Sabbath is made for man, not man for the Sabbath." If Jesus was saying what you are implying, he would have said: "The Sabbath is for all mankind, not just for the Jews."
Instead, he made a point of saying that the day is FOR us. We are not beholden to it. That is the natural understanding of the text, even if you make it "mankind" instead of "man". Especially if we look at the other passages as well.

Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. 17 These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. - Col 2:16-17

One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. - Rom 14:5-6a

At the very least, the evidence would suggest that in this issue, conscience is to be employed. That means being dogmatic about which day to worship on, and judging people based on your righteousness (worshiping on Sabbath), puts you back in those Pharisee shoes, with made up rules that are again, pushing more than the bible permits.

The context of Colossians 2 is the "ceremonial law" of meat offerings, drink offerings, observance of new moons, etc. which were all tied to the Mosaic Law and called "your sabbaths...BESIDES the (weekly) Sabbath of the Lord thy God." Paul no more meant to teach to ignore the 4th commandment than teach to ignore the 1st or any of the rest of the 10. Paul says the nailed commandments of the handwriting of Moses "were against us", and Deuteronomy 31:24-26 says the writings of MOSES were "against us" and were placed outside the ark, while the Ten Commandments written by the finger of God are for us. Hebrews 4:9 Lamsa version says "It is therefore the duty of the people of God to keep the Sabbath" and the reason given in the next verse says if you are resting in the finished work of Jesus, then you will evidence that inward rest by resting outwardly from daily work "as God did from His" when He rested at the end of Creation week from working.

Oh, no! There is no way you can just dismiss the meaning of these verses like that! Well...I mean...obviously you can. But if you are going to so outrageously cheat and dismiss such clear, obvious passages, then I'm afraid I can't take much else you say seriously.
Really. You guys are giving me such an education. "How to explain away the obvious in 10 easy steps!"

Allow me to demonstrate what you've just done to Colossians 2.
See how it's talking about Jesus being the shadow? (which is is, that is true) That means this passage is about Jesus being Gods shadow! So that means he's not really God, being a shadow is just proof that he is less than God!

See what I did there? I picked something the passage was talking about...sure. But then I went all the way to Mars....your flavor Mars, but I thought that might make the point a little better.

Bound up right there in the Three Angels' Messages is "the everlasting GOSPEL to preach unto them that dwell in the earth, to every nation, kindred, tongue, and people." The Gospel is preached along with the call to return to the worship of the Creator "for the hour of His Judgment is come", the exposure of Babylon as spiritually bankrupt, and the warning not to accept the Mark of the Beast and perish, the last warning message to go into all the world just before Jesus comes. I'd say that's a pretty bold mission statement for a pretty bold mission, and no other church preaches it or can preach it bc ALL of them are breaking the 4th commandment every week, mostly in ignorance, but those who recognize that Jesus meant well what He said - "If ye love Me, keep My commandments" - will indeed come out of Babylon.

Mmmm. But apparently, the "everlasting GOSPEL" allows for some wriggling when not outright stated from biblical passages. Some of the things you guys come out with. Not. In. The. Bible. So I'd say that perhaps my feelings on regards to trying to 'bag and tag' it all from the "Three Angels" message, might have been spot on.

 

[bbyrd009]

Too bad America can't be found in the Bible at all.

ah, you don't think? imo this is likely bc America is run by a shadow kingdom, which is found in the Bible, but whether you buy that or not, the US is pretty obviously at least the head that is shown to the world of this kingdom imo.