bbyrd009
Groper
- Nov 30, 2016
- 33,943
- 12,081
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States Minor Outlying Islands
one might actually pick up their cross and follow One Who is the Son of Man i guess
who can follow God
who can follow God
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Yes it does Helen. My salvation, my faith and thus my belief is based in knowing the real and true Jesus the Christ who died for my sins, not a God Jesus or a 100% god + 100% human creature that means having a 200% natured being I do not understand, of something with a dual nature. When I pray to God I know he is not Jesus his son, he is the creator of the universe. When I speak to Jesus I know it is Jesus and not his Father. When I speak to Jesus and the Father I know they are two separate beings I'm speaking with. I am in Christ as Christ is in the Father.
How can one pray sincerely and in truth to God, in all honestly, and believe this God is also Jesus as well. It is not possible. Who is this person really praying to? I do not desire to gamble on this grave matter. This has to be 100 % correct.
It matters a lot to me.
Bless you,
APAK
actually it does matter - because to pray to Jesus as a man and not God would be bordering on idolatry imho - twinc
Really? You tell me I'm flogging a dead horse then gloat because I chose to back off and not badger you on the subject any further?
I care very much because in the near future a small minority who choose, under the banner of religious liberty, to keep all the commandments of God, will find themselves enemies of the state, and yes, it is an important issue. But it isn't speculation. It's happened before. We can't ignore history, it will repeat, despite the best efforts of those aware of the issues.
Note that in Revelation there are two sides. Just two. Babylon the Great whose name is blasphemy, and"those who keep the commandments of God and have the faith of Jesus". There's none in between. None on the fence. Sheep and goats. That division is being formed now by the decisions we make today. Every day we are making decisions that will soon dictate which side we have chosen.
As I said, on one side are those who side with a blasphemous whore.
And, what is blasphemy according to the Bible? It is when a merely human power claims to be God on earth and when it thinks it can exercise the prerogatives and functions of God (see, John 10:30-33; Mark 2:7).
This thread is not so much about my understanding of Catholicism, but rather what the RCC thinks of itself. What drives men to do what they have done in the original pic on post one?
1) Roman Catholic church historians and theologians have made some audacious statements regarding the dignity and power of the Pope. Let’s notice a few of them:
In an oration offered to the Pope in the fourth session of the Fifth Lateran Council (1512) Christopher Marcellus stated: “For thou art the shepherd, thou art the physician, thou art the director, thou art the husbandman; finally, thou art another God on earth.” (Labbe and Cossart, History of
the Councils, Vol. XIV, col. 109). .
The Catechism of the Council of Trent states the following: “Bishops and priests, being, as they are, God’s interpreters and ambassadors, empowered in His name to teach mankind the divine law and the rules of conduct, and holding, as they do, His place on earth, it is evident that no nobler function than theirs can be imagined. Justly, therefore, are they called not only Angels, but even gods, because of the fact that they exercise in our midst the power and prerogatives of the immortal God.” (John A. McHugh and Charles J. Callan, Catechism of the Council of Trent for Parish Priests, p. 318).
Notice the following words of Cardinal Robert Bellarmine:
“All names which in the Scriptures are applied to Christ, by virtue of which it is established that he is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope.” (Robert Bellarmine, Disputationes de Controversiis, Tom. 2, “Controversia Prima”, Book 2 (“De Conciliorum Auctoritate” [On the Authority of Councils]), chap. 17 (1628 ed., Vol. 1, p. 266), translated
The New York Catechism states: “The pope takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth. By divine right the pope has supreme and full power in faith and morals over each and every pastor and his flock. He is the true Vicar of Christ, the head of the entire church, the father and teacher of all Christians. He is the infallible ruler, the founder of dogmas, the author of and the judge of councils; the universal ruler of truth, the arbiter of the world, the supreme judge of heaven and earth, the judge of all, being judged by no one, God himself on earth.” (Quoted in Lorraine Boettner, Roman Catholicism, p. 127)
Notice the following words in the journal, La Civilta Cattolica, “The pope is the supreme judge of the law of the land. . . . . He is the viceregent of Christ, who is not only a Priest forever, but also King of kings and Lord of lords.” (La Civilta Cattolica, March 18, 1871, quoted in Leonard Woolsey Bacon, An Inside View of the Vatican Council (American Tract Society ed.), p. 229
Pope Gregory IX adds his testimony: “For not man, but God separates those whom the Roman Pontiff (who exercises the functions, not of mere man, but of the true God), having weighed the necessity or benefit of the churches, dissolves, not by human but rather by divine authority.” (The Decretals of Gregory IX, Book l, title 7, chap. 3, in Corpus Juris Canonici (1555-56 ed.), Vol 2, col. 203, translated).
John XXIII at his inauguration address said: “Into this fold of Jesus Christ no one can enter if not under the guidance of the Sovereign Pontiff; and men can securely reach salvation only when they are united with him, since the Roman Pontiff is the Vicar of Christ and represents His person on this earth.” (Quoted in Lorraine Boettner, Roman Catholicism, p. 408).
Pope Leo XIII stated in an Encyclical Letter dated June 20, 1894: “We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty.” (The Great Encyclical Letters of
Leo XIII, p. 304).
The following words, in a recognized Roman Catholic encyclopedia, illustrate the blasphemous claims of the Papacy: “The Pope is of so great dignity and so exalted that he is not a mere man, but as it were God, and the vicar of God. The Pope is of such lofty and supreme dignity that, properly speaking, he has not been established in any rank of dignity, but rather has been placed upon the very summit of all ranks of dignities. The Pope is called most holy because he is rightfully presumed to be such. Nor can emperors and kings be called most holy; for although in civil laws the term ‘most sacred’ seems sometimes to have been usurped by emperors, yet never that of ‘most holy.’ The Pope alone is deservedly called by the name ‘most holy’, because he alone is the vicar of Christ, who is the fountain and source and fulness of all holiness. The Pope by reason of the excellence of his supreme dignity is called bishop of bishops. He is also called ordinary of ordinaries. He is likewise bishop of the universal church. He is likewise the divine monarch and supreme emperor, and king of kings. Hence the Pope is crowned with a triple crown, as king of heaven and of earth and of the lower regions. Moreover the superiority and the power of the Roman Pontiff by no means pertain only to the heavenly things, to the earthly things, and to the things under the earth, but are even over angels, than whom he is greater. So that if it were possible that the angels might err in the faith, or might think contrary to the faith, they could be judged and excommunicated by the Pope. For he is of so great dignity and power that he forms one and the same tribunal with Christ. So that whatever the Pope does, seems to proceed from the mouth of God, as according to most doctors, etc.
The Pope is as it were God on earth, sole sovereign of the faithful of Christ, chief king of kings, having plenitude of power, to whom has been intrusted by the omnipotent God direction not only of the earthly but also of the heavenly kingdom. The Pope is of so great authority and power that he can modify, explain, or interpret even divine laws. [In proof of this last proposition various quotations are made, among them these:] The Pope can modify divine law, since his power is not of man but of God, and he acts as viceregent of God upon earth with most ample power of binding and loosing his sheep. Whatever the Lord God himself, and the Redeemer, is said to do, that his vicar does, provided that he does nothing contrary to the faith.” (Lucius Ferraris, Prompta Bibliotheca Canonica, Juridica, Moralis, Theologica nec non Ascetica, Polemica, Rubricistica, Historica, article, “Papa”.) This encyclopedia is not some offshoot production. The Catholic Encyclopedia, volume VI, p. 48 in its article, “Ferraris” lauds the virtues of this encyclopedia with the following glowing words: It is “a veritable encyclopedia of religious knowledge” and “a precious mine of information.”
Once again, Pope Leo XIII stated: “But the supreme teacher in the Church is the Roman Pontiff. Union of minds, therefore, requires, together with a perfect accord in the one faith, complete submission and obedience of will to the Church and to the Roman Pontiff, as to God Himself.” (Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical Letter, ‘On the Chief Duties of Christians as Citizens”, dated January 10, 1890, trans. in The Great Encyclical Letters of
Pope Leo XIII, p. 193. Bold is mine.
Pope Nicholas I, who ruled from 858 to 867 A. D. pronounced the following awesome words: “It is evident that the popes can neither be bound nor unbound by any earthly power, nor even by that of the apostle [Peter], if he should return upon the earth; since Constantine the Great has recognized that the pontiffs held the place of God upon earth, divinity not being able to be judged by any living man. We are, then, infallible, and whatever may be our acts, we are not accountable for them but to ourselves.”
(Cormenin, History of the Popes, p. 243, as cited in R. W. Thompson, The Papacy and the Civil Power, p. 248).
Many other quotations could be added to prove that the Papacy claims to have the powers and prerogatives of God.
Further to the above....
The Papacy claims to possess the power to forgive sins. According to the Bible, only God can forgive sins (see Mark 2:7). If only God can forgive sins and the Pope claims to have power to forgive them, then the Pope must claim to be God! Not only does the Papacy claim that the Pope can forgive sins, but it also claims that its priesthood can forgive them. St. Alphonsus de Liguori wrote a book titled, Dignity and Duties of the Priest or Selva. Liguori lived in the mid 1700’s. What makes his book especially significant is that it is a compendium of the Roman Catholic “wisdom” of the previous 1500 years. Thus it presents with clarity, the official position of the Roman Catholic Church on the subject of the power and duties of the priesthood.
Before we look at several blasphemous statements from this book, it is important to understand the Roman Catholic view of the Mass.
In their view,
l) the priest has the power to change the bread into the real flesh of Jesus and the wine into His real blood,
2) Christ is contained in his totality (known as “ubiquity”) in each host distributed by the priest,
3) because Christ is totally present in each host, the host is worshiped by the priest and the faithful. Obviously, for these concepts to be true, the priest would have to exercise the powers of Almighty God. And this is just what the Roman Catholic Church believes.
Let’s listen to the words of St. Alphonsus de Liguori: “With regard to the power of the priests over the real body of Jesus Christ, it is of faith that when they pronounce the words of consecration the Incarnate Word has obliged himself to obey and to come into their hands under the sacramental species. We are struck with wonder when we hear that God obeyed the voice of Josue–The Lord obeying the voice of man–and made the sun stand when he said move not, O sun, towards Gabaon. , . . . and the sun stood still. But our wonder should be far greater when we find that in obedience to the words of his priests–HOC EST CORPUS MEUM–God himself descends on the altar, that he comes wherever they call him, and as often as they call him, and places himself in their hands, even though they should be his enemies. And after having come, he remains, entirely at their disposal; they move him as they please, from one place to another; they may, if they wish, shut him up in the tabernacle, or expose him on the altar, or carry him outside the church; they may, if they choose, eat his flesh, and give him for the food of others.” St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Dignity and Duties of the Priest or Selva, pp. 26-27.
“With regard to the mystic body of Christ, that is, all the faithful, the priest has the power of the keys, or the power of delivering sinners from hell, of making them worthy of paradise, and of changing them from the slaves of Satan into the children of God. And God himself is obliged to abide by the judgment of his priests, and either not to pardon or to pardon, according as they refuse or give absolution provided the penitent is capable of it. ‘Such is,’ says St. Maximus of Turin, ‘this judiciary power ascribed to Peter that its decision carries with it the decision of God.’ The sentence of the priest precedes, and God subscribes to it,’ writes St. Peter Damian.”St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Dignity and Duties of the Priest or Selva, pp. 27-28.
“Were the Redeemer to descend into a church, and sit in a confessional to administer the sacrament of penance, and a priest to sit in another confessional, Jesus would say over each penitent, ‘Ego te absolvo,’ the priest would likewise say over each of his penitents, ‘Ego te absolvo,’ and the penitents of each would be equally absolved.” St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Dignity and Duties of the Priest or Selva, p. 28.
The Roman Catholic Papacy claims to have changed the law of God. (Dan.7:25 ) Not even God can change the law He wrote with His own finger (see Exodus 31:18). It is as eternal as He is. This means that the Papacy not only claims power equal to God’s but actually claims a power greater than God’s. Obviously this is blasphemy in its most odious form. Notice the following words from the Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. XII, art. “Pope,” p. 265: “Peter and his successors have power to impose laws both preceptive and prohibitive, power likewise to grant dispensation from these laws, and, when, needful, to annul them. It is theirs to judge offenses against the laws, to impose and to remit penalties. This judicial authority will even include the power to forgive sin. For sin is a breach of the laws of the supernatural kingdom, and falls under the cognizance of its constituted judges.”
The Papacy claims to possess the power to forgive sins. According to the Bible, only God can forgive sins (see Mark 2:7). If only God can forgive sins and the Pope claims to have power to forgive them, then the Pope must claim to be God! Not only does the Papacy claim that the Pope can forgive sins, but it also claims that its priesthood can forgive them. St. Alphonsus de Liguori wrote a book titled, Dignity and Duties of the Priest or Selva. Liguori lived in the mid 1700’s. What makes his book especially significant is that it is a compendium of the Roman Catholic “wisdom” of the previous 1500 years. Thus it presents with clarity, the official position of the Roman Catholic Church on the subject of the power and duties of the priesthood.
Before we look at several blasphemous statements from this book, it is important to understand the Roman Catholic view of the Mass.
In their view,
l) the priest has the power to change the bread into the real flesh of Jesus and the wine into His real blood,
2) Christ is contained in his totality (known as “ubiquity”) in each host distributed by the priest,
3) because Christ is totally present in each host, the host is worshiped by the priest and the faithful. Obviously, for these concepts to be true, the priest would have to exercise the powers of Almighty God. And this is just what the Roman Catholic Church believes.
Let’s listen to the words of St. Alphonsus de Liguori: “With regard to the power of the priests over the real body of Jesus Christ, it is of faith that when they pronounce the words of consecration the Incarnate Word has obliged himself to obey and to come into their hands under the sacramental species. We are struck with wonder when we hear that God obeyed the voice of Josue–The Lord obeying the voice of man–and made the sun stand when he said move not, O sun, towards Gabaon. , . . . and the sun stood still. But our wonder should be far greater when we find that in obedience to the words of his priests–HOC EST CORPUS MEUM–God himself descends on the altar, that he comes wherever they call him, and as often as they call him, and places himself in their hands, even though they should be his enemies. And after having come, he remains, entirely at their disposal; they move him as they please, from one place to another; they may, if they wish, shut him up in the tabernacle, or expose him on the altar, or carry him outside the church; they may, if they choose, eat his flesh, and give him for the food of others.” St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Dignity and Duties of the Priest or Selva, pp. 26-27.
“With regard to the mystic body of Christ, that is, all the faithful, the priest has the power of the keys, or the power of delivering sinners from hell, of making them worthy of paradise, and of changing them from the slaves of Satan into the children of God. And God himself is obliged to abide by the judgment of his priests, and either not to pardon or to pardon, according as they refuse or give absolution provided the penitent is capable of it. ‘Such is,’ says St. Maximus of Turin, ‘this judiciary power ascribed to Peter that its decision carries with it the decision of God.’ The sentence of the priest precedes, and God subscribes to it,’ writes St. Peter Damian.”St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Dignity and Duties of the Priest or Selva, pp. 27-28.
“Were the Redeemer to descend into a church, and sit in a confessional to administer the sacrament of penance, and a priest to sit in another confessional, Jesus would say over each penitent, ‘Ego te absolvo,’ the priest would likewise say over each of his penitents, ‘Ego te absolvo,’ and the penitents of each would be equally absolved.” St. Alphonsus de Liguori, Dignity and Duties of the Priest or Selva, p. 28.
The Roman Catholic Papacy claims to have changed the law of God. (Dan.7:25 ) Not even God can change the law He wrote with His own finger (see Exodus 31:18). It is as eternal as He is. This means that the Papacy not only claims power equal to God’s but actually claims a power greater than God’s. Obviously this is blasphemy in its most odious form. Notice the following words from the Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. XII, art. “Pope,” p. 265: “Peter and his successors have power to impose laws both preceptive and prohibitive, power likewise to grant dispensation from these laws, and, when, needful, to annul them. It is theirs to judge offenses against the laws, to impose and to remit penalties. This judicial authority will even include the power to forgive sin. For sin is a breach of the laws of the supernatural kingdom, and falls under the cognizance of its constituted judges.”
Helen
Well-Known Member
- Oct 22, 2011
- 15,476
- 21,157
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- Canada
Okay, I hear you.
We will differ on this...I am one who believes that God will not be one whit interested wether our doctrine was perfect or not...
I believe that when we are "weighed in the scale.."
He will be taking the measure of our heart..not the measure of our doctrine.
A person could have perfect doctrine..T's crossed and i's dotted..yet have a closed , selfish, judgemental heart. The Day will reveal it.
So, we differ here...but that okay
Offended someone I see. I expected it in those that are not bold and confident in the love of God.
I take it then you don’t believe Jesus was the first born God spirit-filled, real breathing human being on earth and now has immortality given to him by his Father.
So, you must be a 3-personality idol worshipper. You pray to the Jesus Christ, the God Almighty, the Spirit, all fused as one being? I would say that is definitely idolatry. It must be agony figuring out who you pray to…..
John 3:16 says that God birthed a son, his only son, a human being with his spirit, not a god-man.
Jesus was the first and only born believer in God. He was the first and only born human being with the spirit of his Father dwelling within him. We as true Christians are not naturally born that way. We have to be reborn. Can you dig that concept?
There no Trinity mystery work at hand here.
APAK
The Law never saved anyone and the books are not Law at all.
There is no such thing as Holy Law.
There is the Holy Spirit and that it, end of story.
The books are or come to life with the Holy Spirit, so the Bible is Holy.
The Law can be replaced ? so be carful what you are calling the Bible as it could be replaced by law, the Bible will never be replaced because it is a Holy Bible, what next first testament 2ed testament and the 3rd testament ?
The book of truth, oh boy ! and by who, the worldly ?
Okay, I hear you.
We will differ on this...I am one who believes that God will not be one whit interested wether our doctrine was perfect or not...
I believe that when we are "weighed in the scale.."
He will be taking the measure of our heart..not the measure of our doctrine.
A person could have perfect doctrine..T's crossed and i's dotted..yet have a closed , selfish, judgemental heart. The Day will reveal it.
So, we differ here...but that okay
Peace and love out to you Helen....
APAK
tabletalk
Well-Known Member
- Feb 6, 2017
- 847
- 384
- 63
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Peace and love out to you Helen....
APAK
You sound like a pleasant guy, but you don't know peace and you don't know love; because you don't know Jesus.
Jesus was Emmanuel God with us ? that is who he is first and foremost, people have to remember but he is our Salvation, that's his workings as he only does the will of the Father, because he is the Holy Spirit incarnate.
Jesus represents 3 things the Holy Spirit firstly and foremost then the Salvation of Man and he is God with us, that is who he is and represents.
Worshiping God is worthless on it's own to man as this brought about nothing of true worth to man and without Jesus we are dead to God the Father, so there is no point in worshiping God because no one can come to the father but through his Son who is Salvation it's self. it's Biblical !
Jesus says that some will never believe he came as a man but he says he was not worried about such but said about that if a man rejects the Holy Spirit to look out, Jesus is the Holy Spirit any way, incarnate so such does not bother him, because his work is all about leading you to the Holy Spirit and God the Father is the Holy Spirit.
What we call the Father made everything, it's this who sent the prophets and then his Son to deal with Mans works, that only reject God and turns men into slaves, Holy Moses came to correct that by bringing the people out of Slavery, to the correct position of under God, not man who only enslaves men under his works.
That's why nowadays people love to worship Political Correctness, because it will enslave them under this mans works doctrine.
The thing is such people don't have the Holy Spirit, so they are blinded to follow in mans works that only leads them down the garden path to their slavery under Satan rule.
Harvest 1874
Well-Known Member
Sorry for the delay, work has kept me busy of late.
We should now like to address your reply to our statement that nowhere in scriptures is it stated that angels are immortal, nor that mankind restored will be immortal."
You state: I beg to differ...read your Bible. For starters here are these verses... Matt 22:29, 30 and Luke 20:35, 36
In reply, we might say the same thing in regards to yourself about reading the bible, as it’s obvious that you have not yet fully examined all the perinient text upon this subject nor do the scriptures you present support your conclusions, you have made an error here which one would only ascribe to a novice student of the word in that you have felled to rightly divided the Word of God into its proper times and seasons, more particularly as to whom was being addressed (both presently and in the future), and “when” these things would apply.
The account you supplied was in regards to a discussion our Lord was having with the Sadducees (who didn’t believe in the resurrection), hopes for a future everlasting life were held out only vaguely in the Old Testament; but immortality was not so much mentioned even once. It was not until our Lord “abolished death [broke its hold on man] and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.” (2 Tim 1:10) What this implies is that prior to this time the Jews knew nothing in regards to any future spiritual life, most assuredly one which included immortality. They had an inkling of a possible resurrection to life following death, but nothing in the Old Testament implied that this would be everlasting life and certainly not immortality.
Thus we understand that when they spoke of the resurrection of the dead they were not referring to “The First Resurrection”, applicable only to the Church, which they knew nothing of, but of the “common salvation” (Jude 3) the “resurrection of judgement” (Greek: krisis a tribunal or testing period).
The question our Lord was asked was: A woman who was childless lost her husband. A brother married her to raise children in his dead brother’s name, but he too died and she was still childless. This happened seven times. Finally the woman herself died. Whose wife will she be in the resurrection?
VERSE 34 “Jesus answered and said to them, “The sons of THIS AGE (this “present evil world” 2 Pet 3:7) marry and are given in marriage.”
In other words, marriage is normal or customary at the present time.
VERSE 35 “But those who are counted worthy to attain THAT AGE (the “world to come” 2 Pet 3:13), and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage.”
“They which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world [the age beyond the Millennium or Kingdom], and the resurrection [Greek anastasis] from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage.” Not until the end of the Millennium and the Little Season (Rev 20:23) is past (the krisis period completed) will there be the full raising up of the obedient of mankind in a collective sense. The raising up of mankind back to all that was lost in Adam, i.e. human perfection, will be a gradual process encompassing the entire millennial age.
Death ends the marriage contract: “till death do us part.” Husbands and wives resurrected in the next age are no longer bound by their wedding vows. Nevertheless there will still be some who are still married, for example those married couples who manage to survive through the Great Time of Trouble, such will still be married in the next age. However by the end of the millennium marriage as an institution will have ended as implied by our Lords words that in that age they (mankind) will “neither marry nor are given in marriage”.
The fact that Lord did not give that answer is surprising, for it would have closed the door right away to the Sadducees’ reasoning. Instead he had a lesson to teach, so he raised the answer to a higher level by intentionally avoiding the Kingdom Age (the millennial age and focused on the age beyond that). Only those who prove worthy as “sheep” will live beyond the Millennial Age, for the “goats” will go into destruction by the end of the Millennium (Matt. 25:31–46). Referring to after the Kingdom Age, Matt 25:34 says, “Then shall the King [Jesus] say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.” That will be God’s Kingdom. After the goats are destroyed in the Little Season, God will be 100% in 100% of the people: “all in all” (1 Cor. 15:28).
Continued with next post due to 10000 character limit.
Harvest 1874
Well-Known Member
Continued from previous post addressed to APAK
VERSE 36 “Nor can they die anymore, for they are equal to the angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.”
Here is where your difficulty comes in you erroneously assume that when the Lord said they would be equal to the angels that this implied equal in substance or quality of life, your assumption being that they are immortal and thus this will likewise be the same for those counted worthy to attain that age. But this is not what was meant at all.
Not only will mankind not marry in the age beyond the Millennium (the “world to come”), but they will not die anymore. Reason: The proved human race will be “equal unto [or like] the [holy] angels” who did not sin (and thus withstood a severe test at the time of the Flood). These are the worthy, proven (tested) angels. Great credit goes to the angels who passed that test. Mankind will be tested likewise in the Little Season. Those who pass this test will no longer die because they will not sin anymore. Millions unfortunately will deflect in the Little Season when the test is on each individual, and the unworthy will be weeded out as the “goats” from the “sheep”.
Tried and proven humanity will be “the children of God.” Rev 21:7 is a proof text: “He that overcomes shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be MY SON.” The Greek word anastasis signifies not just perfect human beings but perfect loyal and tried human beings. These are “children of the resurrection [anastasis].” Second Death will always operate as a principle, but those who are tried and prove loyal will not disobey. There will be no more sin on the earth after the Little Season.” (Extracts were taken from The Book of Luke, by Brother Frank Shallieu)
We likewise mention: "Despite what is commonly taught not all believers are going to receive immortality, only those who make their calling and election sure, who are proven faith even unto death will receive the crown of life. (Rev 2:10)."
This statement was made so as make clear that not all believers are going to receive the “crown of life” (immortality) despite what they have erroneously been taught by the “blind guides”, such reward is reserved only to those believers who have heeded the Apostles injunction in Rom 12:1, viz. “I beseech you therefore, brethren (fellow believers), by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.”
Only those who have taken this (second step) of a full consecration to the Lord, who have entered into covenant relationship with the Father, a “covenant by sacrifice” (Psa 50:5) are considered prospective members of the body of Christ, the true church or ecclesia (meaning: "the called out assembly”), but even here though many are called (to this special calling, the “high calling which is in Christ Jesus”) few are chosen (Matt 22:14), few make their calling and election sure, few are proven faithful even unto death.
You state: Are you a hit-and-run poster? I can do without your replies if that is your intention. Your types of replies usually are not conducive to edifying discussions because all that you have written are one-way cryptic messages.
Did you really attempt to respond to my statements with a discussion in mind, or just show me what you know about the subject and as superfluous information? I learned nothing from your reply.
In Reply, first of all this was not, as you say a “hit and run” post, I was scanning through the various posts when I came upon yours, it was late and I wished simply to make a short reply, one which I suspected would bring a response and lead to further discussion (which it did). I do find it rather amusing on this forum that if you make a long post, more in-depth and explanatory you’re accuse of being to verbose, but now it seems if you make to short a comment you’re accused of not being attentive and respectful of someone elses thoughts or opinions. So which would you prefer?
You state: And what’s your definition of mortal/immortal all about?
I will attempt to address this in a subsequent post.
VERSE 36 “Nor can they die anymore, for they are equal to the angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection.”
Here is where your difficulty comes in you erroneously assume that when the Lord said they would be equal to the angels that this implied equal in substance or quality of life, your assumption being that they are immortal and thus this will likewise be the same for those counted worthy to attain that age. But this is not what was meant at all.
Not only will mankind not marry in the age beyond the Millennium (the “world to come”), but they will not die anymore. Reason: The proved human race will be “equal unto [or like] the [holy] angels” who did not sin (and thus withstood a severe test at the time of the Flood). These are the worthy, proven (tested) angels. Great credit goes to the angels who passed that test. Mankind will be tested likewise in the Little Season. Those who pass this test will no longer die because they will not sin anymore. Millions unfortunately will deflect in the Little Season when the test is on each individual, and the unworthy will be weeded out as the “goats” from the “sheep”.
Tried and proven humanity will be “the children of God.” Rev 21:7 is a proof text: “He that overcomes shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be MY SON.” The Greek word anastasis signifies not just perfect human beings but perfect loyal and tried human beings. These are “children of the resurrection [anastasis].” Second Death will always operate as a principle, but those who are tried and prove loyal will not disobey. There will be no more sin on the earth after the Little Season.” (Extracts were taken from The Book of Luke, by Brother Frank Shallieu)
We likewise mention: "Despite what is commonly taught not all believers are going to receive immortality, only those who make their calling and election sure, who are proven faith even unto death will receive the crown of life. (Rev 2:10)."
This statement was made so as make clear that not all believers are going to receive the “crown of life” (immortality) despite what they have erroneously been taught by the “blind guides”, such reward is reserved only to those believers who have heeded the Apostles injunction in Rom 12:1, viz. “I beseech you therefore, brethren (fellow believers), by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.”
Only those who have taken this (second step) of a full consecration to the Lord, who have entered into covenant relationship with the Father, a “covenant by sacrifice” (Psa 50:5) are considered prospective members of the body of Christ, the true church or ecclesia (meaning: "the called out assembly”), but even here though many are called (to this special calling, the “high calling which is in Christ Jesus”) few are chosen (Matt 22:14), few make their calling and election sure, few are proven faithful even unto death.
You state: Are you a hit-and-run poster? I can do without your replies if that is your intention. Your types of replies usually are not conducive to edifying discussions because all that you have written are one-way cryptic messages.
Did you really attempt to respond to my statements with a discussion in mind, or just show me what you know about the subject and as superfluous information? I learned nothing from your reply.
In Reply, first of all this was not, as you say a “hit and run” post, I was scanning through the various posts when I came upon yours, it was late and I wished simply to make a short reply, one which I suspected would bring a response and lead to further discussion (which it did). I do find it rather amusing on this forum that if you make a long post, more in-depth and explanatory you’re accuse of being to verbose, but now it seems if you make to short a comment you’re accused of not being attentive and respectful of someone elses thoughts or opinions. So which would you prefer?
You state: And what’s your definition of mortal/immortal all about?
I will attempt to address this in a subsequent post.
Harvest 1874
Well-Known Member
This is true, but the Holy Spirit speaks to us through the written word, the scriptures, not as some poor deluded souls are fond of believing in our heads. If you’re hearing voices in your head I would advise seeking medical attention. Of course if you’re dabbling in séances, witch-craft and the like, those things forbidden by the Lord, then it’s possible you might be hearing voices, but don’t be fooled these are not the dead speaking, these are fallen spirits attempting to take advantage of one’s gullibility. Witchcraft was instituted by Satan to prove his lie that the dead are not dead.
“Abstain from every form of evil.” 1 Thess 5:22
The knowledge of the will of God does not come to us in a supernatural way, but through the study of his Word.
Harvest 1874
Well-Known Member
I’m pretty sure that when the scriptures said that we are to grow in the “knowledge” of our Lord Jesus this implied more than just a personal growth or relationship with the Lord, it includes the study of his word.
“Whosoever will do the will of My Father which is in heaven shall know of my doctrine.” (John 7:17)
The word doctrine signifies teaching. The doctrines of Christ, therefore, are the teachings of Christ.
If knowledge were not of importance why then did the Apostle Peter include it in those things necessary that we might make our calling and election sure?
“For this very reason, giving all diligence, add to your faith (your belief, your relationship with Christ) virtue, to virtue KNOWLEDGE, to knowledge self-control, to self-control perseverance, to perseverance godliness, to godliness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness love. For if these things are yours and abound (that is if they grow), you will be neither barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. For he who lacks these things is shortsighted, even to blindness, and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins.” 2 Pet 1:5-9
“Giving all diligence” is an important phrase, and it applies to all of the steps. Give all diligence to add to your faith virtue. Give all diligence to add to your virtue knowledge. Give all diligence to add to your knowledge temperance, and so forth.
Faith is the substratum of an entire Christian’s life. The just shall live by faith (Rom. 1:17). Faith in Jesus is the bottom line—faith that he is the Redeemer. We are to add to that faith, in successive order, the seven steps that Peter enumerates.
“We all start our Christian walk as babes with faith in Jesus. In his first epistle, Peter said that “as newborn babes, [we should] desire the sincere milk of the word ... [so that we] may grow thereby” (1 Pet. 2:2). The milk of the word as the Apostle Paul states are the first principle doctrines (the basics), the elementary teachings about Christ, and after having learn these we are to move on (grow in the graces and knowledge) that we might be taken forward to maturity.
As the babe feeds on milk (studies the doctrine and applies it to his life), his bones grow and he gets a little stronger so that, spiritually speaking, he can withstand opposition and persecution. This would be adding virtue (fortitude, strength of character) to our faith. To add knowledge, the babe needs milk for growth. “Milk” includes the knowledge and understanding of God’s Word, for how can we instruct others if we have not been instructed ourselves?
No my friend we don’t see study and learning as a waste of time, we are admonished to do so in the scriptures.
“Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth (rightly divides the Word of truth).” 2 Tim 2:15 NIV
Harvest 1874
Well-Known Member
Sorry it was late and I neglected to add the source for the quote, it was taken from “Studies in the Scriptures” by C.T. Russell, Vol 2 Page 273, 274
I will post a link as soon as I locate it.
Harvest 1874
Well-Known Member
I haven't forgotten you, I will get to you in time, I've been busy with work lately and haven't had time to catch up on all the post, I can see I'm way behind in the discussion, however this thread has already been "hijacked" so if you want to discuss the Trinity I would suggest starting another thread. You can start by re-posting your comments addressed to me with respects to the Trinity to the new thread if you like.
Naomi25
Well-Known Member
- Aug 10, 2016
- 3,199
- 1,801
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- Australia
I don't follow...what do we read later? I see the bible saying this:
“I have loved you,” says the Lord. But you say, “How have you loved us?” “Is not Esau Jacob's brother?” declares the Lord. “Yet I have loved Jacob 3 but Esau I have hated. I have laid waste his hill country and left his heritage to jackals of the desert.” - Mal 1:2-3
12 she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13 As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” 14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! 15 For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. - Rom 9:12-16
In Hebrews we read this: By faith Isaac invoked future blessings on Jacob and Esau. - Heb 11:20
But the only 'blessing' that his father was able to give him was that 'in the future, you will tire of serving your brother and throw off his yoke.' So...sort of a limited 'blessing', and hardly impinging upon our conversation...not that I can see, anyway. You might need to explain a bit more...?
Similar threads
