What is the narrow gate?

[michaelvpardo]

I normally would agree .... but in kjw47's case I admire his sincerity , he is forthright and clear speaking on what he believes etc.

I actually like the guy too .... and I understand how he got to believe what he does .... Mr Russel created a religion that is uncomplicated , easy to understand for the adherents , and very appealing to them , and probably spiritually peaceful in the sense that the devil just has to leave them alone and he has them where he wants.


For example if we bash them here on the forum or when they come to our door .... guess what .... they get bonus points for being persecuted.

It is a good system to keep them obedient to the Charles Russell Kingdom here on earth.

Venture too far to the truth and they will shun and ban you from the Kingdom .... the brainwash is complete.

Hey, it's your call, Arnie. Years ago, (not long after receiving the truth of the gospel and receiving Christ as Lord) I would invite the door to door JWs in to sit for a few minutes to talk about what they believed in and to try to point out their error to them (as well as to share the gospel with them.) Only the newer recruits would even admit that they didn't believe Jesus to be God and have equality with the Father. I'd give them solid arguments from the scripture and they would leave for a while to get coaching from someone more knowledgeable, then come back again with another argument, etc., etc., etc.
I gave this up when I came under conviction of the scripture that warns us not to welcome preachers of another gospel into our homes or offer them hospitality: Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds. 2 John 1:9-11
Clearly John wasn't simply speaking of unbelievers, but transgressors with respect to the gospel or we couldn't welcome anyone other than Christians into our home or be free to welcome anyone but those we recognize as brothers in the faith.
I have nothing personal against the author of the O.P. as I don't know him at all, and he probably believes that he is abiding in the doctrine of Christ (though he doesn't accept His testimony.)
We know better, and I find it a little unsettling that many in the church at large welcome those who deny the divinity of Christ as "brothers" in the faith.
This fellow might be a fine person by societal standards. I've known Mormons, Jehovah's witnesses, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Taoists, Krishna worshippers, even at least one follower of Alister Crowley, who by worldly standards were good men and women, most having lived less dissipative lives than I did prior to believing Christ, but that doesn't make them any less deceived in their self righteousness, nor one bit closer to God than the worst of sinners. All we can do for them is to offer the gospel to those willing to hear it, and pray to our Lord that they might find mercy and grace to believe Him.
The problem however remains that when we allow them their say in the household of God, they are sometimes able to draw away those who are young in the faith or carnal in their thinking through appeals to our old nature and to our vanity. One reason that I've spent the bulk of my time on message boards in forums dealing with eschatology is that those forums tend to be trolling grounds for cultists looking for the gullible, naïve, and biblically uninformed. When we confront them with the gospel and with sound biblical argument it helps strengthen those brethren whose discernment hasn't been trained with the scripture even if it has no effect upon the wolves themselves.
I don't pretend to be infallible in my assessments, but this is how the Spirit of Christ applied those verses from John's second epistle to my own situation. I've also witnessed members of that cult come to what appears to be a genuine faith in the Lord (I was led to Christ by a former JW who abandoned his family's religion and investigated a number of others prior to hearing and receiving the gospel,) but the work of the conviction of sin and convincing of truth isn't really ours, but God's. So, do what your conscience demands and be mindful of weaker brothers while engaged in public discourse. If you can minister to a cult member and remain abiding in Christ, more grace to you for the battle, but I'm just not that patient and there always remains a time when its appropriate to "shake the dust off of your feet."

 

[kjw47]

Hey, it's your call, Arnie. Years ago, (not long after receiving the truth of the gospel and receiving Christ as Lord) I would invite the door to door JWs in to sit for a few minutes to talk about what they believed in and to try to point out their error to them (as well as to share the gospel with them.) Only the newer recruits would even admit that they didn't believe Jesus to be God and have equality with the Father. I'd give them solid arguments from the scripture and they would leave for a while to get coaching from someone more knowledgeable, then come back again with another argument, etc., etc., etc.
I gave this up when I came under conviction of the scripture that warns us not to welcome preachers of another gospel into our homes or offer them hospitality: Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds. 2 John 1:9-11
Clearly John wasn't simply speaking of unbelievers, but transgressors with respect to the gospel or we couldn't welcome anyone other than Christians into our home or be free to welcome anyone but those we recognize as brothers in the faith.
I have nothing personal against the author of the O.P. as I don't know him at all, and he probably believes that he is abiding in the doctrine of Christ (though he doesn't accept His testimony.)
We know better, and I find it a little unsettling that many in the church at large welcome those who deny the divinity of Christ as "brothers" in the faith.
This fellow might be a fine person by societal standards. I've known Mormons, Jehovah's witnesses, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Taoists, Krishna worshippers, even at least one follower of Alister Crowley, who by worldly standards were good men and women, most having lived less dissipative lives than I did prior to believing Christ, but that doesn't make them any less deceived in their self righteousness, nor one bit closer to God than the worst of sinners. All we can do for them is to offer the gospel to those willing to hear it, and pray to our Lord that they might find mercy and grace to believe Him.
The problem however remains that when we allow them their say in the household of God, they are sometimes able to draw away those who are young in the faith or carnal in their thinking through appeals to our old nature and to our vanity. One reason that I've spent the bulk of my time on message boards in forums dealing with eschatology is that those forums tend to be trolling grounds for cultists looking for the gullible, naïve, and biblically uninformed. When we confront them with the gospel and with sound biblical argument it helps strengthen those brethren whose discernment hasn't been trained with the scripture even if it has no effect upon the wolves themselves.
I don't pretend to be infallible in my assessments, but this is how the Spirit of Christ applied those verses from John's second epistle to my own situation. I've also witnessed members of that cult come to what appears to be a genuine faith in the Lord (I was led to Christ by a former JW who abandoned his family's religion and investigated a number of others prior to hearing and receiving the gospel,) but the work of the conviction of sin and convincing of truth isn't really ours, but God's. So, do what your conscience demands and be mindful of weaker brothers while engaged in public discourse. If you can minister to a cult member and remain abiding in Christ, more grace to you for the battle, but I'm just not that patient and there always remains a time when its appropriate to "shake the dust off of your feet."

The doctrine of Christ =

Therefore, keep on seeking first the kingdom and his ( YHWH(Jehovah) righteousness and all these other things will be added( sustenance, covering, spirituality)

Blessed are the meek for they will inherit the earth--( not heaven or hell as ones end)

Jesus teaches he has a God like we do--John 20:17, rev 3:12--- etc,etc

all teachings being contradicted by trinity teachers.

 

[michaelvpardo]

The doctrine of Christ =

Therefore, keep on seeking first the kingdom and his ( YHWH(Jehovah) righteousness and all these other things will be added( sustenance, covering, spirituality)

Blessed are the meek for they will inherit the earth--( not heaven or hell as ones end)

Jesus teaches he has a God like we do--John 20:17, rev 3:12--- etc,etc

all teachings being contradicted by trinity teachers.

I don't think that you've ever attended a real church service, but if you think that you can express the doctrine of Jesus Christ in 3 verses taken out of context, you're just simple minded. If you believe that biblical doctrine teaches something else other than the equality of The Father, Son and Holy Spirit, that just makes you another lost soul on the broad way. At least you have plenty of company.

 

[nothead]

Jesus taught----- Enter through the narrow gate, because cramped is the road that leads to life( eternal) FEW will find it. Have you seen the narrow gate? Are you one of the FEW?

Finding the narrow way requires independent investigations into Grace vs Works, the Sovereignty of God, and the divinity of Christ.

And the mainliners have it wrong on all three counts, Selah. They go directly AGAINST the Canon of scripture which cannot be broken.

Who is Jesus Christ? And what is my relationship with Him?

But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear: Having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ. (1 Peter 3:15-16)

Go ahead and scrutinize my doctrine; no problem there. I have nothing to hide in that aspect.

What I am trying to explain in this thread is that I have been changed by Jesus Christ. I can't confirm for you that the process is complete; I am more a work in progress, if you will. The experience I mentioned earlier is not the only evidence I have that God has come into my life. Since you talked about healing, I will match your example with one of my own.

One day on the farm I was feeding the cows in the morning. I was in the pen dumping grain into their trough. These playful creatures like to push you around with their heads when they are young. They put their heads down and just plow into you. I was turned to the side and the calf slammed into my knee, dislocating it from the socket. I collapsed to the floor, screaming in agony. I cried out to God and he guided my hands to snap my knee back into place. The pain was incredible, as anyone with a similar experience can surely vouch for. I couldn't walk.

Someone had to come help me off the ground and hold me up as I hobbled back to the administration building. A person I was with asked if he could lay hands on my injury and pray for me. At first I was a little taken aback - it was my first encounter with this kind of medical treatment. As he lay hands on my knee, an electric shock passed between my leg and his hand. The pain receded, but was still present. Perhaps I wasn't quite willing to believe that God really heals us.

That night I went to sleep in agonizing pain, and had a dream about a man. A man who came and healed me; we walked together. When I awoke in the morning I no longer felt any pain, the swelling was completely gone and I could walk up and down the stairs with no assistance. I had never previously experienced such an amazing occurrence.

To give an even clearer representation - I will put it onto context for you. I had a similar injury several years previous.... before I had encountered God in a personal way. It was the same type of dislocation. That same injury drove me to painkillers, physical therapy and two weeks before I could walk again.

And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues; They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. (Mark 16:17-18)

I was on the receiving end of healing in this particular instance, but it is not my only example. It is only the one I care to share here.

I understand your reference about Satan, but I assure you - there is no relevance here. I find your comment about hallucinogenic drugs a little misguided. At the time of my LIGHT experience I hadn't touched a drink or drug for nearly eight months. So anything that may have been in my system previously was surely flushed out and no longer present. No one 'dosed' me.

I don't prescribe to any new age philosophy, although I have read some literature. I like to know what my opposition claims to be true, so that I can find the flaws in their logic and argue it while making some sort of sense. I hope to appeal to their reasoning, if nothing else. I am not an uneducated man, spouting my opinion as fact, with no basis in reality.

I try to align my personal experiences with what God says in his word.

Although I was exposed to Christianity as a child, I refused the concept and studied Philosophy in university and went down all sorts of paths. I've read the Qur'an, Confucius, The Celestine Prophecy, Immanuel Kant, Rene Descartes, Karl Marx, Plato, St. Francis, George Berkeley, John Locke, David Hume, Thomas Hobbes, Bertrand Russell, etc. Blah, blah, blah. Countless hours of countless pages. Then I branched into English and studied many other works - too many to list. Of course, in my spare time I poured science fiction, fantasy and classical literature into my mind.

Carrying on the path of philosophy, I studied computer science (programming) because I found a relationship between philosophical concepts and source code.

All of this reading, all of this searching, led me to ONE truth - our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Nothing compares to the living God who is not hidden in the pages of a book, but rather present and interactive. A God who speaks and WALKS with his people.

One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all. (Ephesians 4:5-6)

But don't take my word for it. Just ask Him yourself.

Funny the verse you quote says God is the Father only. And you just got done saying Jesus is God and the One Lord. One God who is the Father of us all. Jesus is not God almighty.

Jesus is elohim but subordinate to YHWH Elohim.

According to R.P.C. Hanson, "with the exception of Athanasius, virtually every theologian, East and West, accepted some form of subordianationism at least up to the year 355; subordinationism might indeed, until the denouement of the controversy, have been described as accepted orthodoxy."

subordinationism, wiki.

 

[kjw47]

Finding the narrow way requires independent investigations into Grace vs Works, the Sovereignty of God, and the divinity of Christ.

And the mainliners have it wrong on all three counts, Selah. They go directly AGAINST the Canon of scripture which cannot be broken.

Funny the verse you quote says God is the Father only. And you just got done saying Jesus is God and the One Lord. One God who is the Father of us all. Jesus is not God almighty.

Jesus is elohim but subordinate to YHWH Elohim.

According to R.P.C. Hanson, "with the exception of Athanasius, virtually every theologian, East and West, accepted some form of subordianationism at least up to the year 355; subordinationism might indeed, until the denouement of the controversy, have been described as accepted orthodoxy."

subordinationism, wiki.

Finding the narrow gate requires learning Jesus' truths and applying them--then one can see the narrow gate clearly. The narrow gate leads to the door(Jesus( to get to ones final destination--The Father.

 

[nothead]

I don't think that you've ever attended a real church service, but if you think that you can express the doctrine of Jesus Christ in 3 verses taken out of context, you're just simple minded. If you believe that biblical doctrine teaches something else other than the equality of The Father, Son and Holy Spirit, that just makes you another lost soul on the broad way. At least you have plenty of company.

How about the Greatest Verse in all of Bible, said to be so by Jesus himself:

Mark 12

[SIZE=.75em]29 [/SIZE]And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; YHWH Elohim, YHWH one:

Hey, it's your call, Arnie. Years ago, (not long after receiving the truth of the gospel and receiving Christ as Lord) I would invite the door to door JWs in to sit for a few minutes to talk about what they believed in and to try to point out their error to them (as well as to share the gospel with them.) Only the newer recruits would even admit that they didn't believe Jesus to be God and have equality with the Father. I'd give them solid arguments from the scripture and they would leave for a while to get coaching from someone more knowledgeable, then come back again with another argument, etc., etc., etc.
I gave this up when I came under conviction of the scripture that warns us not to welcome preachers of another gospel into our homes or offer them hospitality: Whoever transgresses and does not abide in the doctrine of Christ does not have God. He who abides in the doctrine of Christ has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds. 2 John 1:9-11
Clearly John wasn't simply speaking of unbelievers, but transgressors with respect to the gospel or we couldn't welcome anyone other than Christians into our home or be free to welcome anyone but those we recognize as brothers in the faith.
I have nothing personal against the author of the O.P. as I don't know him at all, and he probably believes that he is abiding in the doctrine of Christ (though he doesn't accept His testimony.)
We know better, and I find it a little unsettling that many in the church at large welcome those who deny the divinity of Christ as "brothers" in the faith.
This fellow might be a fine person by societal standards. I've known Mormons, Jehovah's witnesses, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Taoists, Krishna worshippers, even at least one follower of Alister Crowley, who by worldly standards were good men and women, most having lived less dissipative lives than I did prior to believing Christ, but that doesn't make them any less deceived in their self righteousness, nor one bit closer to God than the worst of sinners. All we can do for them is to offer the gospel to those willing to hear it, and pray to our Lord that they might find mercy and grace to believe Him.
The problem however remains that when we allow them their say in the household of God, they are sometimes able to draw away those who are young in the faith or carnal in their thinking through appeals to our old nature and to our vanity. One reason that I've spent the bulk of my time on message boards in forums dealing with eschatology is that those forums tend to be trolling grounds for cultists looking for the gullible, naïve, and biblically uninformed. When we confront them with the gospel and with sound biblical argument it helps strengthen those brethren whose discernment hasn't been trained with the scripture even if it has no effect upon the wolves themselves.
I don't pretend to be infallible in my assessments, but this is how the Spirit of Christ applied those verses from John's second epistle to my own situation. I've also witnessed members of that cult come to what appears to be a genuine faith in the Lord (I was led to Christ by a former JW who abandoned his family's religion and investigated a number of others prior to hearing and receiving the gospel,) but the work of the conviction of sin and convincing of truth isn't really ours, but God's. So, do what your conscience demands and be mindful of weaker brothers while engaged in public discourse. If you can minister to a cult member and remain abiding in Christ, more grace to you for the battle, but I'm just not that patient and there always remains a time when its appropriate to "shake the dust off of your feet."

How about this woof say to that woof, "you a woof, woof."

In other words, your perspective on what is 'cult' is somewhat cultish. Like Walter Martin and his "Kingdom of the Cults."

Or the pot calling the kettle green after they both been in the moss for awhile.

We know better, and I find it a little unsettling that many in the church at large welcome those who deny the divinity of Christ as "brothers" in the faith.

If the statement I made above is true, then ALL of your ECFS and their sheep were also not brothers in the faith, brother.

According to R.P.C. Hanson, "with the exception of Athanasius, virtually every theologian, East and West, accepted some form of subordianationism at least up to the year 355; subordinationism might indeed, until the denouement of the controversy, have been described as accepted orthodoxy."

This was a well respected TRIN SCHOLAR a generation before you, or two depending upon how ancient you are.

 

[kjw47]

I don't think that you've ever attended a real church service, but if you think that you can express the doctrine of Jesus Christ in 3 verses taken out of context, you're just simple minded. If you believe that biblical doctrine teaches something else other than the equality of The Father, Son and Holy Spirit, that just makes you another lost soul on the broad way. At least you have plenty of company.

1 Corinthians 15:24-28----- Upon Jesus handing back the kingdom to his God and Father, he becomes in subjection---I don't see equality.

2 important teachings--John 17:1-6--1 cor 8:6--- if there was equality--why isn't the HS mentioned in these two ?
Why is the Father the only one called God in these two?

 

[michaelvpardo]

1 Corinthians 15:24-28----- Upon Jesus handing back the kingdom to his God and Father, he becomes in subjection---I don't see equality.

2 important teachings--John 17:1-6--1 cor 8:6--- if there was equality--why isn't the HS mentioned in these two ?
Why is the Father the only one called God in these two?

Husband's and wives are declared equal in scripture, yet God has called women to subordinate themselves to their husbands (e.g. the husband is head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church). God is a god of order and He has defined order in all the universe. If He didn't exempt Himself from His own law, why would He exempt Himself from the Order that He established in creation? We don't know what the Lord's order was prior to creation, but we do know that we have an immortal, eternal, invisible God, who has entered into His own creation in the person of His Son and through the manifestation of His Spirit.
The verse you quote from first Corinthians says (rightfully so) that Jesus will hand back the kingdom to the Father, yet Jesus remains a king eternally (as the inheritor of the Father's kingdom). You'll find these things in scripture if you'll look, but you seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the concept of "the trinity" to begin with. No "Trinitarian" theologian with a sound understanding of doctrine makes the claim that there is more than one God, but rather that He exists as a plurality of three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

How about the Greatest Verse in all of Bible, said to be so by Jesus himself:

Mark 12

29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; YHWH Elohim, YHWH one:


How about this woof say to that woof, "you a woof, woof."

In other words, your perspective on what is 'cult' is somewhat cultish. Like Walter Martin and his "Kingdom of the Cults."

Or the pot calling the kettle green after they both been in the moss for awhile.


If the statement I made above is true, then ALL of your ECFS and their sheep were also not brothers in the faith, brother.

According to R.P.C. Hanson, "with the exception of Athanasius, virtually every theologian, East and West, accepted some form of subordianationism at least up to the year 355; subordinationism might indeed, until the denouement of the controversy, have been described as accepted orthodoxy."

This was a well respected TRIN SCHOLAR a generation before you, or two depending upon how ancient you are.

First of all, Jesus would have recited the great sh'mah, and not used the covenant name of God, in other words "Sh'mah Israel, Adonai alluhenu, Adonai Echad," (pardon my spelling, but I'm not Jewish.)
In Jesus' time as in our time the covenant name of God was not spoken aloud by Jews, even when reading scripture.
Secondly, subordination as in a rule of order (or as in order of rule) doesn't imply inequality (see my response to the other JW.)
BTW, just because someone was noted as a "Trinitarian" scholar, that by no means indicates that they had a firm grip on the truth or even knew Jesus Christ. There have been such men in free and accepted Masonry for hundreds of years and its doubtful that any were ever truly born again or had ever seen God. Case in point; Mr. Russel before he invented his own wack-a-doodle religion.

 

[nothead]

First of all, Jesus would have recited the great sh'mah, and not used the covenant name of God, in other words "Sh'mah Israel, Adonai alluhenu, Adonai Echad," (pardon my spelling, but I'm not Jewish.)
In Jesus' time as in our time the covenant name of God was not spoken aloud by Jews, even when reading scripture.

....but all would know he was reciting the Hebrew Text, which was as I depicted. I'm not sure why you brought it up, since the TEXT is what Jesus was reciting, abeit minus the pronounced Name of God.

I would add however, that IF he said the name of his Father out loud, he was perfectly authorized to do so, as HIGH PRIEST along the order of Melchizedek.
Even being OVER the present High Priest who was allowed to say this name once a year. Why, why since he was Messiah.

Secondly, subordination as in a rule of order (or as in order of rule) doesn't imply inequality (see my response to the other JW.)
BTW, just because someone was noted as a "Trinitarian" scholar, that by no means indicates that they had a firm grip on the truth or even knew Jesus Christ. There have been such men in free and accepted Masonry for hundreds of years and its doubtful that any were ever truly born again or had ever seen God. Case in point; Mr. Russel before he invented his own wack-a-doodle religion.

Absolute subordinationism means most or all of the early ECF's believed Jesus was divine only in a SUBORDINATE ABSOLUTE SENSE, not as 'office' or 'role' as you and yours like to tout now. Even a "Ray of the Sun" or a 'drop' from the bucket or the like in analogy is likened to this same subordinate idea.

The true paradigm was and is that Jesus was an elohim not of like kind, but of subordinate kind. Jews did not SPEAK of the ontology of God, mainly since this is something quite in the category of unknowing to them. Bible: Jesus is over the angels in heaven. Elohim, but of course by default, not YHWH Elohim.

As it should be to you sir. Once you think you know something that you cannot possibly know, you are quite in danger to yourself and others.

 

[kjw47]

Husband's and wives are declared equal in scripture, yet God has called women to subordinate themselves to their husbands (e.g. the husband is head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church). God is a god of order and He has defined order in all the universe. If He didn't exempt Himself from His own law, why would He exempt Himself from the Order that He established in creation? We don't know what the Lord's order was prior to creation, but we do know that we have an immortal, eternal, invisible God, who has entered into His own creation in the person of His Son and through the manifestation of His Spirit.
The verse you quote from first Corinthians says (rightfully so) that Jesus will hand back the kingdom to the Father, yet Jesus remains a king eternally (as the inheritor of the Father's kingdom). You'll find these things in scripture if you'll look, but you seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of the concept of "the trinity" to begin with. No "Trinitarian" theologian with a sound understanding of doctrine makes the claim that there is more than one God, but rather that He exists as a plurality of three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

First of all, Jesus would have recited the great sh'mah, and not used the covenant name of God, in other words "Sh'mah Israel, Adonai alluhenu, Adonai Echad," (pardon my spelling, but I'm not Jewish.)
In Jesus' time as in our time the covenant name of God was not spoken aloud by Jews, even when reading scripture.
Secondly, subordination as in a rule of order (or as in order of rule) doesn't imply inequality (see my response to the other JW.)
BTW, just because someone was noted as a "Trinitarian" scholar, that by no means indicates that they had a firm grip on the truth or even knew Jesus Christ. There have been such men in free and accepted Masonry for hundreds of years and its doubtful that any were ever truly born again or had ever seen God. Case in point; Mr. Russel before he invented his own wack-a-doodle religion.

Husbands and wives are not declared as equal---- Gods word teaches the two become one flesh--but also teaches--God is the head of Jesus--Jesus is the head of man--Man is the head of woman.

Husbands and wives are not declared as equal---- Gods word teaches the two become one flesh--but also teaches--God is the head of Jesus--Jesus is the head of man--Man is the head of woman.

I know exactly what the trinity teaching is---The exact opposite of what Jesus and Paul taught--also every Israelite who ever served the true God--not one of these served a trinity. That includes--Noah,Abraham,Job,David,Daniel,Isaiah,Elijah--- I will serve the God these men serve.( d)

 

[Arnie Manitoba]

I know exactly what the trinity teaching is---The exact opposite of what Jesus and Paul taught--also every Israelite who ever served the true God--not one of these served a trinity. That includes--Noah,Abraham,Job,David,Daniel,Isaiah,Elijah--- I will serve the God these men serve.( d)

kjw47 .... you need to read your Old testament again ..... many times God is plural ..... and he sometimes appeared as three men when walking and talking with the patriarchs.

You should not force Jehovah to conform to your preconceived notions about what he is.

If Jesus Christ is not God come in the flesh , I am in deep trouble

If Jesus Christ is God come in the flesh , you are in deep trouble.

So is Russell and Rutherford and all their minions

And you know it.

 

[kjw47]

kjw47 .... you need to read your Old testament again ..... many times God is plural ..... and he sometimes appeared as three men when walking and talking with the patriarchs.

You should not force Jehovah to conform to your preconceived notions about what he is.

If Jesus Christ is not God come in the flesh , I am in deep trouble

If Jesus Christ is God come in the flesh , you are in deep trouble.

So is Russell and Rutherford and all their minions

And you know it.

I agree one side is in big trouble--Jesus taught---Few will find the road--- trinity Christians= 2 billion---JW,s = 8 million---who has few?

 

[williemac]

I agree one side is in big trouble--Jesus taught---Few will find the road--- trinity Christians= 2 billion---JW,s = 8 million---who has few?

What Jesus said was true at the time He said it. As well, He also said that with men it is impossible. That is what "few" meant in context. Does this mean that this was always going to be?
Remember, God had promised Abraham that his seed would be numbered as the sand of the sea. In fact, John saw a multitude around the throne that no man could number. The promise was not "few", but 'many'. So many that we cannot even count it.

The few is in relation to man's ability. Abraham had originally made this mistake when he tried to help God fulfill the promise by having a son through the slave woman. The two sons in question were types, symbolic of the two covenants, as Paul taught the Galatians in 4:22-26.

The few represents the old covenant. The many is the fulfillment of the promise. I prefer to believe that God determined to keep His promise. You can believe whatever you want. Keep trying to earn eternal life. Knock yourself out. And remain with the few...of which with men, it is impossible.

Paul confirmed that life is a free gift (Rom.5:15-19, for starters) made possible and available by the works, obedience, and righteousness of one man, Jesus. He said .."I am the way, the truth and the life". We can see in Rom. 5 how He was to fulfill that claim.

After all, how could God make a promise to Abraham that depended upon men for it's fulfillment? This is His work, not ours, "....lest anyone should have cause for boasting". (NWT)

Making this about the accurate identity of Jesus is a diversion to what it is really about. It is about responding to God, who was in Christ, reconciling the world to Himself, and is pleading for a response to be reconciled (2Cor.5:19,20). It is about having a relationship with Him and His Son (John 17:3) through the sacrifice of His Son. ( also, Rev.3:20,21), and by faith in what he has done on our behalf rather than in what we are doing on our own behalf. (lest anyone should boast).

 

[kjw47]

What Jesus said was true at the time He said it. As well, He also said that with men it is impossible. That is what "few" meant in context. Does this mean that this was always going to be?
Remember, God had promised Abraham that his seed would be numbered as the sand of the sea. In fact, John saw a multitude around the throne that no man could number. The promise was not "few", but 'many'. So many that we cannot even count it.

The few is in relation to man's ability. Abraham had originally made this mistake when he tried to help God fulfill the promise by having a son through the slave woman. The two sons in question were types, symbolic of the two covenants, as Paul taught the Galatians in 4:22-26.

The few represents the old covenant. The many is the fulfillment of the promise. I prefer to believe that God determined to keep His promise. You can believe whatever you want. Keep trying to earn eternal life. Knock yourself out. And remain with the few...of which with men, it is impossible.

Paul confirmed that life is a free gift (Rom.5:15-19, for starters) made possible and available by the works, obedience, and righteousness of one man, Jesus. He said .."I am the way, the truth and the life". We can see in Rom. 5 how He was to fulfill that claim.

After all, how could God make a promise to Abraham that depended upon men for it's fulfillment? This is His work, not ours, "....lest anyone should have cause for boasting". (NWT)

Making this about the accurate identity of Jesus is a diversion to what it is really about. It is about responding to God, who was in Christ, reconciling the world to Himself, and is pleading for a response to be reconciled (2Cor.5:19,20). It is about having a relationship with Him and His Son (John 17:3) through the sacrifice of His Son. ( also, Rev.3:20,21), and by faith in what he has done on our behalf rather than in what we are doing on our own behalf. (lest anyone should boast).

When one reads Gods word from front to back a few times--a pattern develops--99% mislead--99% false religionsssssssssssssss--
Reality---One religion, one truth, one faith, one God.

 

[michaelvpardo]

Husbands and wives are not declared as equal---- Gods word teaches the two become one flesh--but also teaches--God is the head of Jesus--Jesus is the head of man--Man is the head of woman.



I know exactly what the trinity teaching is---The exact opposite of what Jesus and Paul taught--also every Israelite who ever served the true God--not one of these served a trinity. That includes--Noah,Abraham,Job,David,Daniel,Isaiah,Elijah--- I will serve the God these men serve.( d)

You obviously neither understand scripture or know Christ.
Let's start with the concept of subordination. I'll use myself as a simple example; Prior to enlisting in the USAF I had spoken with a recruiter about joining the USAF under a commission and as an officer. After taking the aptitude test, I elected not to receive a commission as I didn't have an interest in working for the missile command (which became the Space command during the term of my enlistment.) As an Airman 1st class and later as a senior airman, I was subordinated to both non commissioned officers and commissioned officers, yet if I had accepted a commission, I would have had men like myself in subordination to me. This was no reflection upon their equality with me or mine with theirs, but simply a matter of rule of order.
This isn't a complex idea, but rather simple. God created order in the universe, not chaos, and He went so far as to place Himself under a rule of order, even entering a tabernacle of flesh in the person of His Son, and submitting to Himself in the person of the Father, so that He might accomplish the victory over death and the redemption of creation. It was necessary that He fulfill His own covenant with the shedding of His own blood, and the eternal Father, being the invisible and eternal God is not a creature of flesh and blood, so He revealed Himself in the person of His Son.
This is all simple stuff, Christianity 101 so to speak, but as simple as it is, men are unable to receive it in the natural condition of their birth, because they are at enmity with God, dead in sin and transgression, separated from God and without any ability or desire to seek Him out. So, like your Mr. Russel, they invent a god of their own imagination and try to warp the scripture and the image of God to something that they can imitate in their lost and fallen state, and in their own minds justify themselves, their evil behavior, and their rejection of God in the person of His Son. This is death times two and unless you're delivered from such foolishness there will be no place found for you at the return of Christ. Gehenna was a garbage dump for those things for which there was no use or place in the city of Jerusalem, a place of continual burning of all that is unclean and discarded. This is what Jesus compared to God's garbage dump, Hell.
You have a right to choose Hell by rejecting Christ in the sense that God has given us all the ability to make choices, but believing the gospel is most definitely a commandment given to all men.
Now, husbands and wives have most certainly been declared equal by God and through scripture, but as I said before, the Lord created an order for creation which placed men before women and made women subordinate within the marriage relationship. If you'll take the time to read the entire Bible, not just excerpts taken out of context to support false doctrines, you'll find that the Lord has called husbands and wives to a mutual submission to each other, while retaining a relationship of subordination in the household and consequently within the church for the purposes of maintaining the order of creation (something disturbed by the fall of man.)
I haven't taken the time to support my statements with scriptural references, but this is only because you've already demonstrated a complete disregard for scripture that disagrees with your narrow and carnal mindset.
Once more I will call you to repentance, to the abandonment of vain imagination, and to faith in the living God who has revealed Himself in His Son, even our Lord, Jesus Christ, the express image of God, the messenger of the covenant, the inheritor of all creation, King of kings, and Lord of lords. I honestly don't believe that you'll be permitted much more time unless you repent, so I urge you to choose eternal life and to flee destruction for it draws near.

 

[williemac]

Headship has nothing to do with inequality. The head is simply the life source of the body. The church gets her life from Jesus. Jesus gets His life from the Father. The woman was created from man, getting her life from him.

The head serves the body, protects the body, cares for the body, saves the body, nurtures the body. Husbands love your wives as Christ loved the church and gave Himself for her. This is the role of the head. It has become obscured in traditions of men, who suppose that they are the rulers of their wives (wishful and lustful thinking) and supposing the wives are their servants, when in fact they are partners, the two becoming one flesh.

This is simply the fallen human nature exposing its pride of life. Don't fall for it, my brothers. Your wife is your ministry. The body gets its life and strength from the head. Without the body, the head has no ability or reason to function. Head does not mean Lord. Lordship is an authoritative term. Headship is a relationship term. The two are not the same.

Women are God's gift to men to teach us how to serve, how to be unselfish, how to love, how to put someone else first. Practice makes perfect.

 

[Arnie Manitoba]

.

God can come down here as Jesus Christ if he wants

God can come down here as a burning bush if he wants

....

A burning bush on Mount Herob said ....

“I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.”

Moses hid his face, because he was afraid to look at God.

....


When Moses asked for some identification the burning bush replied .... "I AM"

When the Jews asked for some identification Jesus answered .... “before Abraham was born " I AM ”

 

[Floyd]

Arnie Manitoba, on 06 Apr 2014 - 04:39 AM, said:

kjw47 .... you need to read your Old testament again ..... many times God is plural ..... and he sometimes appeared as three men when walking and talking with the patriarchs.

You should not force Jehovah to conform to your preconceived notions about what he is.

If Jesus Christ is not God come in the flesh , I am in deep trouble

If Jesus Christ is God come in the flesh , you are in deep trouble.

So is Russell and Rutherford and all their minions

And you know it.

I agree one side is in big trouble--Jesus taught---Few will find the road--- trinity Christians= 2 billion---JW,s = 8 million---who has few? (Arni Manitoba).



Any person who does not accept that Christ Jesus is God Incarnate, is in big trouble. That makes very many in the world!
It is incumbent on us to walk as best we can in this life as Christians, for our witness to the world.
If we were able to be as some of the Posters on this thread and Board say we must be; there would have been no need for God's intervention in Jesus the Christ!
I never fail to be surprised how many people (spirits?) get angry at the assertion of Christ's Deity.
One has to wonder who they really are?
Floyd.

 

[kjw47]

Arnie Manitoba, on 06 Apr 2014 - 04:39 AM, said:
I agree one side is in big trouble--Jesus taught---Few will find the road--- trinity Christians= 2 billion---JW,s = 8 million---who has few? (Arni Manitoba).



Any person who does not accept that Christ Jesus is God Incarnate, is in big trouble. That makes very many in the world!
It is incumbent on us to walk as best we can in this life as Christians, for our witness to the world.
If we were able to be as some of the Posters on this thread and Board say we must be; there would have been no need for God's intervention in Jesus the Christ!
I never fail to be surprised how many people (spirits?) get angry at the assertion of Christ's Deity.
One has to wonder who they really are?
Floyd.

Jesus teaches he has a God--- while on earth-John 20:17) and while sitting at the right hand of power( God-Father) rev 3:12
If Jesus were God, the kingdom would have always been his, but it had to be given to him( Daniel 7:13-15) and he must give it back and be in subjection( after his 1000 year reign as Gods appointed king) to his God and Father-1 Corinthians 15:24-28)
Jesus didn't come to start 32,999 religionssssssss--there is only need for one, just like in the ot.

 

[Floyd]

Jesus teaches he has a God--- while on earth-John 20:17) and while sitting at the right hand of power( God-Father) rev 3:12
If Jesus were God, the kingdom would have always been his, but it had to be given to him( Daniel 7:13-15) and he must give it back and be in subjection( after his 1000 year reign as Gods appointed king) to his God and Father-1 Corinthians 15:24-28)
Jesus didn't come to start 32,999 religionssssssss--there is only need for one, just like in the ot.(kjw47)


This is naïve non-sense; You and many others do not understand the Power of the Godhead!


Floyd.