The myth of grace-only & easy-believism shattered forever

[Truther]

This is Oneness Pentecostal doctrine. It comes out of the "Jesus Only" movement inspired by William Branham, an evangelist of the mid 20th Century. The first adherents were called "Branhamites".

No sir.

Few teach this.

This is not oneness, nor is it trinity.

Oneness and trinity are "hypostatic union" cousins and they are related to their mother, the RCC.

The 1st century church taught Jesus was made God after resurrecting, first noticed by Thomas.

The RCC taught Jesus was God made a microscopic sperm cell that mated with Mary's egg to develop a God/man.

God was inside Jesus, not God was Jesus.

If you don't believe me, then believe Jesus himself.....


24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.


...etc.

 

[Truther]

If in regards to the Three Witnesses in Heaven as opposed to man as led by the Holy Spirit that testify to His death on the cross, hence your 2 witnesses, then that is why God's witness from Heaven is greater than man's witness by the Holy Ghost on earth because there are 3 Witnesses in Heaven that testify to the Son's ascension in Heaven.



That is only testifying to which Person of the Godhead is the only Mediator. Some believers err, thinking they can pray to the Holy Spirit as if there is Another Mediator between God the Father & man when Jesus is the only God at that throne of grace because it is His job to give all prayers to the Father by Him, including the Spirit's silent intercessions to the Father.

So Who can hear and answer prayers? God. Then read Who is answering prayers.

John 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.... 13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

Who is the Savior when scripture both testify to God being the Savior and Jesus is the Savior too?

Acts 13:23Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus:

1 Timothy 1:1Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ, which is our hope;

Go ahead and do a word search at Bible Gateway for God Saviour and then Jesus Saviour and see what you find.

BibleGateway - Keyword Search: God Saviour

5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;


The mediator person of the Godhead is a man?

God is a self mediator?


I trow not.

 

[Enow]

5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

The mediator person of the Godhead is a man?

God is a self mediator?

I trow not.

And yet we were created in God's image.

 

[Truther]

And yet we were created in God's image.

Correct.

Adam was created in the likeness of him that was to come(Rom 5:14).

The last Adam was the creation pattern for the first Adam(body, soul and spirit).

 

[michaelvpardo]

Sorry, but quoting a Scripture out-of-context doesn't answer my question. Who - as in, which Church or individual - has the infallible interpretation of Scripture? Do you? If not you, then who?
Non-Catholic churches and individuals come up with endless and differing interpretations of Scripture - which version is the infallible truth? Please tell me.

The Holy Spirit of course. Duh.

 

[michaelvpardo]

It certainly is God’s job, but for the sake of unity, clarity and salvation, he does it through his one, true Church (ie, the Catholic Church):.

So if we can just figure out who is the one true Catholic Church, we'll be sitting pretty. It's somewhere in asia minor, right? Come on you must have better dogma than that!
Suppose we resurrect the one true church, will it have the mind of Christ? Do you?

 

[RogerDC]

A believer repents before he is saved

I should think so - salvation is a process and we are not saved until after we die are judged and granted salvation by Christ. Until then, we only have the hope of being saved.

 

[RogerDC]

2 Tim 3: 16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

The first problem with your argument is that “all Scripture” referred to in 2Tim 3:16 is the Old Testament (see v.15). Pray tell, how can the OT alone make a Christian “complete”?

1. reproof, or correct us when we have false thinking

No, it doesn’t say anything at all about correcting “false thinking” - it simply says “for correction”. Furthermore, how can the OT alone correct the “false thinking” of a Christian?

2. Doctrine, all truth is given in scripture

No, that is not what it says all at - it simply says “profitable for doctrine”. The word “profitable” doesn’t mean “all truth is given in scripture” - that is pure invention on your part.

Furthermore, how can the OT provide “all truth” to a Christian?

4 instruction in righteousness. Self explanatory I hope

The word “righteousness” refers to obeying the commandments; as does “that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work”. Nothing there about testing every doctrine by Scripture or Scripture containing everything the apostles taught and practised.

now that Catholic Church wants us to think this is not true. That only certain men are authorized or gifted to properly interpret scripture and we should listen to them, even when what they say comes outside the rhelm of scripture, as if they to are inspired. Well this passage shows us that is not only not needed, but not true. The Bible le is capable of doing all God wants us to do.

Eph 4:4-14 contradicts you. It describes the gifts Christ provides for the following:

“for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Until we all meet into the unity of faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the age of the fulness of Christ; That henceforth we be no more children tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the wickedness of men, by cunning craftiness, by which they lie in wait to deceive”.

How it say all that achieved? By Scripture? No, Scripture is not even mentioned - it is by Christ’s provision of “some apostles, and some prophets, and other some evangelists, and other some pastors and teachers”. These Christ-appointed people are the CHURCH, which is “the pillar and foundation” of the truth” (1Tim 3:15).

 

[RogerDC]

That's what the Vatican insiders are actually saying and they are pushing for reform. Why do you think Pope John Paul I was murdered? I didn't say that - I am repeating what faithful Roman Catholic Vatican insiders are also saying!

You can’t believe everything you read. I take such stories with a large grain of salt - I wish I had a dollar for every sensational rumour from “Vatican insiders” and for every conspiracy theory written about the Vatican! There is no doubt there are some corrupt Catholic clergy, but who knows what is really going on in the Vatican?

 

[RogerDC]

There is no reference to him consulting the church. In Acts 15, he did not go to get approval from the Apostles. He went to stop the false Judaist apostles from corrupting the Gentile churches with their false gospel. He said that he did not get his gospel through flesh and blood, but by direct revelation from Jesus Christ Himself. So there was no need for him to get approval from a group of men. He went there to present his true gospel as he presented it to the Gentiles, and they acknowledged and recognised him as the Apostle to the Gentiles. It was for the reason of unity, and not approval that he went to Jerusalem.

Good grief - what are you talking about? Can you read English? Acts 15:2 clearly describes how Paul and Barnabas had a disagreement about circumcision, so they went sent (“appointed to go”) to the Churches leaders in Jerusalem “about this question”. After their meeting with the Church leaders, Paul and Barnabas “were sent on their way BY the CHURCH” to deliver the Church’s decision to the Gentiles (v.3).

In other words, Paul - the very same Paul who wrote most of the NT epistles - consulted the CHURCH for the settling of doctrine.

That's what he also said in Galatians 2:2. He went to proclaim his gospel to the Apostles so that he would know that the Apostles were not supporting the false Judaist apostles with the false gospel they were impressing on the Galatian churches. He was not expecting or asking for approval from the Apostles concerning the gospel he was preaching.

You obviously struggle with reading clear and plain words of Scripture, so you really need to find someone who can do it for you.

Gal 2:1-2 clearly describes how Paul was sent (“by revelation”) to the Church leaders, where he “laid before them” what he was preaching to the Gentiles. He sought their approval, as he says, “lest I should be running or had run in vain.” The Church leaders approved of Paul’s teaching - Paul says they “added nothing” to his gospel (v.6) - and then approved that he should preach to the Gentiles (v.9).

Do you understand what’s going on in this passage? Paul - the very same Paul who wrote most of the NT epistles - went to the leaders of the Church in order to have what he was preaching approved.

It is important not to read stuff into the text that isn't there to twist what is said to support one particular opinion.

You have an excellent sense of humour!

 

[RogerDC]

No, your Pope debunks what used to be the Bible to the Catholic.
His word is God speaking to the Catholic.

That is correct when the Pope is teaching Church doctrine.

You think he speaks infallible words of God always.

Your comment demonstrates that you don’t understand the Catholic doctrine of Papal Infallibility. This is what I find curious about ex-Catholics who attack the Church - they don’t understand Catholicism!

He is your God on earth

Sort of, but not quite - the Pope is God’s representative on earth and is appointed and empowered to shepherd Christ’s flock on earth.

 

[RogerDC]

You're scraping the bottom of the barrel there. Every good Bible commentator knows that the team who compiled the JW New World Translation did not have one Hebrew or Greek scholar among them. Nothing new here. Looks like a desperate random shot in the hope it hits something.

The Protestant hero, Martin Luther, in his dishonest translation of the NT, added the word “alone” to Romans 3:28, so that it read “a man is justified by faith alone”. He lied in this way in order to deceive anyone stupid enough to listen to him and his false “faith alone” doctrine.

Luther also wanted to remove the books of James and Revelation from the Bible altogether. (This patron saint of fools is on record as saying he could commit any number of serious sins and still be saved!)

 

[Paul Christensen]

You can’t believe everything you read. I take such stories with a large grain of salt - I wish I had a dollar for every sensational rumour from “Vatican insiders” and for every conspiracy theory written about the Vatican! There is no doubt there are some corrupt Catholic clergy, but who knows what is really going on in the Vatican?

The documentary consisted in videotaped interviews of the actual Vatican insiders themselves who expressed their concerning about the corruptions, including gay orgies and the using of prostitutes by many priests and Vatican officials. There was the definite suggestion that Pope Benedict was given an offer he couldn't refuse because he was planning to bring reforms to the Vatican - resign or face the same face as Pope John Paul I. Even the gay priests themselves were very willing to be interviewed and say that there were gay orgies and they were fully involved!

 

[RogerDC]

The documentary consisted in videotaped interviews of the actual Vatican insiders themselves who expressed their concerning about the corruptions, including gay orgies and the using of prostitutes by many priests and Vatican officials. There was the definite suggestion that Pope Benedict was given an offer he couldn't refuse because he was planning to bring reforms to the Vatican - resign or face the same face as Pope John Paul I. Even the gay priests themselves were very willing to be interviewed and say that there were gay orgies and they were fully involved!

Even if those things were true, what is your point?

 

[Paul Christensen]

Good grief - what are you talking about? Can you read English? Acts 15:2 clearly describes how Paul and Barnabas had a disagreement about circumcision, so they went sent (“appointed to go”) to the Churches leaders in Jerusalem “about this question”. After their meeting with the Church leaders, Paul and Barnabas “were sent on their way BY the CHURCH” to deliver the Church’s decision to the Gentiles (v.3).

In other words, Paul - the very same Paul who wrote most of the NT epistles - consulted the CHURCH for the settling of doctrine.You obviously struggle with reading clear and plain words of Scripture, so you really need to find someone who can do it for you.

Gal 2:1-2 clearly describes how Paul was sent (“by revelation”) to the Church leaders, where he “laid before them” what he was preaching to the Gentiles. He sought their approval, as he says, “lest I should be running or had run in vain.” The Church leaders approved of Paul’s teaching - Paul says they “added nothing” to his gospel (v.6) - and then approved that he should preach to the Gentiles (v.9).

Do you understand what’s going on in this passage? Paul - the very same Paul who wrote most of the NT epistles - went to the leaders of the Church in order to have what he was preaching approved. You have an excellent sense of humour!

Show me where either Luke or Paul used the actual word "approval" in their accounts of the meeting with the Apostles in Jerusalem. The motion that Paul needed approval from the Apostles is another example of the deceptive twisting of Scripture to fit RCC doctrine.

 

[RogerDC]

The documentary consisted in videotaped interviews of the actual Vatican insiders themselves who expressed their concerning about the corruptions, including gay orgies and the using of prostitutes by many priests and Vatican officials. There was the definite suggestion that Pope Benedict was given an offer he couldn't refuse because he was planning to bring reforms to the Vatican - resign or face the same face as Pope John Paul I. Even the gay priests themselves were very willing to be interviewed and say that there were gay orgies and they were fully involved!

It's possible the Church is experiencing the Great Apostasy mentioned in 2Thess 2.

 

[RogerDC]

Show me where either Luke or Paul used the actual word "approval" in their accounts of the meeting with the Apostles in Jerusalem.

The word "approval" is not literally there, it is implied - as would be obvious to any intelligent adult who is not afraid to read the text honestly.

 

[RogerDC]

If I may, the Trinity doctrine is also incorrect.....

Did the Holy Spirit tell you that?

 

[RogerDC]

Again the Greek word for Peter's name is not the same as the rock Jesus was talking about.

HTML Bible Index - King James Version - Strongs Concordance - Frames Version

Go to this site, in the left column scroll down to Matthew in blue and click on the #16 in blue to pull up that chapter. Then scroll down on the right to those verses where the Greek words in blue are mirroring the verses in English.

Then click on PetroV for the name of Peter and then click on petra for the rock Jesus is talking about in verse 18.

PetroV is "apparently a primary word; a (piece of) rock (larger than 3037); as a name, Petrus, an apostle:--Peter, rock. Compare KhfaV - Kephas 2786.

Kephas or Cephas is stone; piece of rock.

Petra is "feminine of the same as PetroV - Petros 4074; a (mass of) rock (literally or figuratively):--rock.

So not the same Greek word nor the exact same meaning for why Peter's name is regarded as Cephas or stone. If it was exactly the same meaning, then "petra" would be unnecessary, but it was necessary because the difference is size.



Same keys given to His disciples and so you are forgetting that there were other disciples in that room when you applied Jesus's words only to Peter himself.

Matthew 16:19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 20 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.

These keys to binding and loosing is given to every believer abiding in Him in correcting others, even those considered the little ones that go astray.

Matthew 18:14 Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.17 And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. 18 Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 19 Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.

So Peter is not so exclusive as you had been led to believe.



As important as that line of succession is per the CC, we do not see that as being taught as such in the N.T. That was just a con line to keep the authority of ruling over the churches from Rome.

You didn't answer my question: Why did Jesus change Simon's name to "rock" the very first time they met (John 1:42)?

 

[RogerDC]

Correct brother, the new world mistranslation is an abomination.
Charles Russel could not read the greek alphabet, much less translate greek texts,lol.

Judging by some of his doctrines, Charles Russel couldn't even read English properly!