Godplace/Mission238 forums

I enjoy a good Bible Study.  However it has came to my attention that there are certain ones here on God Place that are here to try and stir up confusion.  I have noticed no matter what the answer to a question is say will try to twist it around some how and make it confusing.  The Bible say:  Jude 4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

In light of this I have decided that from now on I will not answer a thread dealing with the Oneness of God.  I will however accept PM with a question.  I will pray over them and if God shows me to answer I will.  I will no longer be a tool that Satan and these people can use to promote their confusion.  I would encourage all Apostolics to refrain from getting into these discussions with these people.  Let us have good clean fellowship. 

There are many other things in the Bible we can discuss but when it leads to an attack on the truth, let us refrain from it.  This is only my feeling and my suggestion.  Of course I in no way can tell you what you must do.  I just wanted everyone to know where I stand. 

I have made many good friends on this post and I have gotten some Words from the Lord while on this post.  So I am glad we have it.  But just as with anything else if the Devil can find a way to mess it up he will surely try to.  The Bible tells us:  2 Cor 2:11 Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices.

So as we see satan working let us shut him down in the name of Jesus Christ.

God Bless you all and Thank God for a place like God Place where we can meet true Apostolics from other places.  As a matter of fact gotta go now and meet up with a couple from GP.

:copcar:


*shrug*


Yes I deleted a number of posts and I do not apologize for it.

I do not thing that Bro dad was making any accusations against anyone in particular, he didn't call anyone out by name nor did he point his fingers at anyone. He simply stated openly that  he was abstaining from certain types of threads. If nothing else he put himself on notice and now has to live up to his word. 

Lets face facts... Godplace and other Forums do get their share of folks with Axes to grind and dissension to spread.  In fact some of our posters have gone to forums for other denominations and did the exact same thing and bragged about it on Godplace. The key is to identify those and ignore them.

I think it best if we all just back down a bit and not assume that he is pointing a finger at you or you or you or you or even you.

i also feel as bro dad does, although i might post, it is my concern that apostolic oneness be carefull as to what they listen to and post.

just as scot said, we should learn who is not of like faith,or is subject to argument, and ignore them. since this is an apostolic site, if i see a post that strikes interest, or concern, or if i just have a question, i may post, or maybe not.

though i will not be subject to un-neaded debate anymore.(i admit to debateing too much before)

                                     
(it is un-like me to give up ground to un-like beleivers)

as i have stated before, i dont have the HG,but beleive firmly on oneness and am only just now growing in the knowledge of the word. i do not wish to be led astray.

which bring me to this:  thanks Brother Dad for the study material...yo

QuoteApostolic Truth Questions

I suppose this is the subject for this discussion thread.



The funny thing about "truth" (  referring to individual perspectives ) is that it all comes from the same place.   Regardless of the number of beliefs on any one subject, they are all scripturally sound to the individual presenting them.  Even within a single apostolic church you will find several explanations on even the most fundamental beliefs including the "oneness" of the godhead.

It is no wonder that there is an issue of confusion.

So is it possible for people to get together and search the scriptures for an explanation that makes sense to all?   

Christ was always willing to discuss and fully explain his truth.  Should we not also be so willing to search and discuss our beliefs in a productive manner that is not offensive.

So what is the truth?  Is it my truth  Or  a different truth of someone else?   How can anybody know for sure what the truth is when there is not a cohesive approach to discuss and search for the answer that does not present confusion.


 
Could it be that I will reread this in a day or so and realize that I make no sense?  I dunno, I am just in a rambling mood.


Anyway, concerning truths:

For some time now I have been pondering some ideas that most would find ridiculous.  Not because they are not supported by scripture, but because they do not necessarily agree with what most would consider to be "truth".  Eventually I would like to present them in full but I just do not have the time to dedicate to such discussions at this time.

A quick summary of a couple of them:


Satan and his "fallen angels" are fulfilling a role God created them for.  They still answer to God (Satan presented himself to God along with the other angels in Job)  but Satan was given a certain amount of authority here on earth.  It is their purpose to represent that which is against Gods will (since God could not do this himself).  Thus creating free will.


Bear with me on the following.

God is not omnipresent ( especially in the NT ) and is only active through the Holy Ghost within us.  The world is Satans playground but we are the vessels of the HG.  If God were omnipresent then there could be no sin or opposition to his will (thus no free will since there would not be another option).  Nor would there be a need for angels (messengers).

Absence of God from world explains why bad things happen to good people.



Wonders what I am doing.

:popcorn:

i said i would post if i had a concern. i am real concerned about that last post and i feel that that subject will only start another debate, confusion, and discontent. i can only say i disagree with everything you said. and i will leave it there.  *sighs and questions*  where are the apostolics???  -yo

Quotesaid i would post if i had a concern. i am real concerned about that last post and------

Glad I could be of service.  Yep, thats what I do from time to time...just post crazy stuff. :grin:

well since you think it was a service-it was. it was a dis-service to the word,a perversion of Christ's work on the cross and a distraction for who ever reads it.
  one day you will have to give an acount for all those idle words!

we can get along. we can even talk bible as long as we stay on the old path.
satan was created for glory of God and with free will. it was not Gods plan for him to fall, it was satans plan.
God is omnipresent. as far as the good people thing goes-all things happen for the glory of God. we dont know what God has in store for us or the next guy.
it rains on the just as well as the unjust.
and it is true demonds are still in Gods controll. he used them to torment king sol. they have to flee in the name of Jesus though.
in conclusion i will add this to the good people thingy. the prince of peace came not to bring peace but turned mother against daughter,father against son. figure that verse out then you might be on a road to where you and i can talk. oh one more thing, truth is not relative and does not change with the times or from person to person. the old path is always just that,the old path. it is the straight and narrow,and few be that find it. relative truth is a broad path paved with good intentions,many will be that travel this deceiving highway.-yo

Quotewhere are the apostolics

Here I am.   :waving:

If you knew me very well ( not just by my posts ) you would know that I am very much apostolic. 


I believe in the apostolic faith, however ( and I speak only for myself ) I am not threatened by exploring thoughts that have a potential to open up my understanding.

Each of the things I mentioned can actually be supported and all in all may very well explain issues of confusion that turn people away from God. 

There is much more to it than what I posted.   




God Bless.

Chris.

Definatley some rather interesting thoughts Q-tip.  not sure if I agree or disagree but there certainly interesting.

Quote from: yosemite on May 17, 2008, 04:33:58 AM
where are the apostolics??? 

I'm just simply a Christian trying to live according to what I see in the word of God

Let me back track a little bit to explain (briefly)  why I suggest that Satans fall was in Gods plan.


I hit a little on this before in the "sin" and "Esau" threads but did not elaborate on it. 

It can be deduced in scripture that God created angels sometime between the first and fourth day of creation.  Suggesting that he created them for a purpose in dealing with man. 

God placed the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the garden of eden with Adam and Eve.  He then allowed Satan to enter the garden and tempt Eve.

Between creation and the temptation of Eve Satan had already "fallen".



We should ask ourselves why God would create man so perfectly and then place the tree in the garden and allow satan to tempt Eve. He could have not placed the tree there and he also could have simply caused satan and his followers to simply not exist.  However he did not.  In stead he created the possibility to attain free will by allowing Satan to represent that which was against his will and tempt Eve to Sin.   Thus creating the sinful nature of man simply because we were then able to choose Gods will or that which was not Gods will.


How could God represent that which was against his own will?

He could not.

So he created Satan for that purpose and gave him dominion over the earth ( Satan is the prince of the world ). 

We all know that there is an evil spirit from God.  Right?

Notice the interaction between God and Satan in the book of Job.  It says Satan presented himself to the Lord with the other angels. 
Even after falling from heaven he was still presenting himself to God.  Also notice the interaction between them.  It was very professional ( so to speak ) and Satan sought certain permissions from God.  He did nothing without Gods permission. 

Do you think Satan attained the ability to "fall" on his own, or do you believe that God knew very well what he was doing when he created him.

Just the fact that God allowed Satan to exist without the urge to destroy him until after judgement is proof enough for me that God had a plan for Satan.  Is that so hard to accept?



If Satan did not represent that what is against Gods will, how could we have attained the temptation to do anything else.

yall can go for vanity if you want. lean on your own understanding. the more i think on it, brother dad your right. there are so many here relying on vain bableings and false doctrines, it is useless to post here. seems as though they follow like an uncurable plague of sorts.   *sighs*

Concerning Omnipresence.

I believe that God changed his interaction with man from the OT to the NT.  While in the OT he was more personally involved and often repented, in the NT we no longer see that direct involvement. 

Can sin exist in Gods presence?  Can man exist in the glory of Gods presence?

For free will to exist, God had to remove himself from the world.  Giving Satan power on earth to tempt us to stray from Gods will. 

Instead he dealt with us via angels (messengers) as well as Jesus ( yes he is god but no time to go there now) and now through the Holy Ghost.   Instead of being everywhere he is in us by means of the HG.  By dwelling in us we attain something that the world does not have in and of itself.

Are there any scriptures in the NT that really say otherwise?  Why is it said that he is omnipresent. 

I am not saying I have accepted this, only that I have been thinking on it.  It is worth considering.

Quote from: yosemite on May 17, 2008, 06:28:38 AM
yall can go for vanity if you want. lean on your own understanding. the more i think on it, brother dad your right. there are so many here relying on vain bableings and false doctrines, it is useless to post here. seems as though they follow like an uncurable plague of sorts.   *sighs*

your welcome to your opinion of the content of discussions on here but some of us on here would like to have open discussion with out having to hear terms like "vain babblings" and "false doctrine" thrown at us for simply discussing an idea.

simply put and will comply from now on with *ignores*


but i see you failed to comment on this:

oh one more thing, truth is not relative and does not change with the times or from person to person. the old path is always just that,the old path. it is the straight and narrow,and few be that find it. relative truth is a broad path paved with good intentions,many will be that travel this deceiving highway.-yo

Quoteyall can go for vanity if you want. lean on your own understanding. the more i think on it, brother dad your right. there are so many here relying on vain bableings and false doctrines, it is useless to post here. seems as though they follow like an uncurable plague of sorts.   *sighs*

I am just trying to stir up a conservation with those who so choose to endulge.  I don't think I have suggested anything that changes God or beliefs vital to salvation.  Just discussing Gods interaction with us.

Nothing I have said will cause one to question who God is or how to attain salvation.

Q-tip

The idea you present concerrning Satan and  his angels brings to mind some things the apostle Paul stated

Romans 9:14-24 (KJV)
14  What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
15  For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
16  So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
17  For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
18  Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
19  Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20  Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21  Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
22  What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
23  And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
24  Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

oh one more thing, truth is not relative and does not change with the times or from person to person. the old path is always just that,the old path. it is the straight and narrow,and few be that find it. relative truth is a broad path paved with good intentions,many will be that travel this deceiving highway.-yo



  good night.

Quote from: yosemite on May 17, 2008, 06:37:04 AM
simply put and will comply from now on with *ignores*


but i see you failed to comment on this:

oh one more thing, truth is not relative and does not change with the times or from person to person. the old path is always just that,the old path. it is the straight and narrow,and few be that find it. relative truth is a broad path paved with good intentions,many will be that travel this deceiving highway.-yo

I'll agree truth itself does not change.  our understanding of truth and ability to explain truth does change as we grow in the Lord.

Pauls truth wasn't necessarily Peters truth either.   They each had their own paths.

I was hoping to have a few days off before really getting into these but ..oh well. 

So truth is only relative and true only to the person who holds that particular view? ???

Yosemite and BSR is correct.....truth doesn't change, but our understanding of it does change over the course of our walk with God.

For example, the fact that God is one, doesn't change, but how we are able to comprehend it and explain it can and does change over time.

QuoteSo truth is only relative and true only to the person who holds that particular view? Huh

I dunno.   I suppose it depends on the subject matter of what truth applies to.  Paul was led to the gentiles but peter couldn't see it.

Hey Q-tip:

Some interesting thoughts.  I've got a few questions and comments.  The questions may be rhetorical at times, but I guess they're still questions.

Quote from: Q-tip on May 17, 2008, 06:22:08 AM
It can be deduced in scripture that God created angels sometime between the first and fourth day of creation.

It is my understanding that God created angels before the earth:

Job 38
4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

I don't know how that affects your theory, but just thought I'd throw that in there.   :grin:

QuoteBetween creation and the temptation of Eve Satan had already "fallen".

Did you ever wonder if God created man because of Satan's fall?   :-?

QuoteIn stead he created the possibility to attain free will by allowing Satan to represent that which was against his will and tempt Eve to Sin.   Thus creating the sinful nature of man simply because we were then able to choose Gods will or that which was not Gods will.

God creating Satan so that man could attain free will seems to be a theme in your post.  Is that an accurate thought I have?  If so, I can't agree with that.  I believe that when God chose to create ANYTHING that He brought about the reality of something "not God", and "not God", though created with a free will like the Creator, is fallible, because "not God" will likely choose to make decisions unlike God.  Clear as mud?   :lol:

QuoteEven after falling from heaven he was still presenting himself to God.  Also notice the interaction between them.  It was very professional ( so to speak ) and Satan sought certain permissions from God.  He did nothing without Gods permission. 

I agree with this and have always thought it to be this way between God and Satan.  I think God utterly despises Satan, but I don't think He treats him unfairly.  I surely don't think God and Satan stand toe-to-toe beating the snot out of each other, nor do I think that happens between Satan and his fallen crew and those who kept their place in heaven.  I believe Satan MUST ask permission before he touches one of God's children, and I believe those not in covenant relationship with God are fair game for Satan. 

QuoteDo you think Satan attained the ability to "fall" on his own, or do you believe that God knew very well what he was doing when he created him.

I think God knew "very well", even perfectly, and knows the same at all times.  This is where foreknowledge comes into the picture for me.  Existing in eternity (though it might be more accurate to say that God IS eternity) and seeing "the end from the beginning" really takes away (for me) the possibility that God created Lucifer so that man could attain free will....if that is what you are implying.

QuoteIf Satan did not represent that what is against Gods will, how could we have attained the temptation to do anything else.

I believe anything that God creates is created with the same freedom He has to choose right and wrong.  The difference is that God CANNOT choose wrong.  It's just not in His vocabulary.  But, it was and is in the angels' and ours.  "Not God" is fallible, but God chose to create "not God" anyway.  THAT act brought about free will, not Satan. 

Concerning Omnipresence.

Quote from: Q-tip on May 17, 2008, 06:33:27 AM
I believe that God changed his interaction with man from the OT to the NT.  While in the OT he was more personally involved and often repented, in the NT we no longer see that direct involvement.

How much more "personal" can God get than coming in flesh and then allowing us to be partakers of His divine nature?   ;)

QuoteCan sin exist in Gods presence?  Can man exist in the glory of Gods presence?

I'm not sure how this applies? 

QuoteFor free will to exist, God had to remove himself from the world.  Giving Satan power on earth to tempt us to stray from Gods will. 

I addressed this in my previous post.  I don't think man's free will has anything to do with Satan.  Free will apparently existed in the angels and in man when each was created.  I look at free will as God being "fair" to that which He creates.  If He creates anything without free will, then why create anything at all?

QuoteInstead he dealt with us via ... Jesus ( yes he is god but no time to go there now) and now through the Holy Ghost.

I think this is a fatal dagger in your thought.   :lol:  You cannot discount the fact that Jesus is God in flesh or that the Holy Ghost is this same One Spirit active in our lives and in the world. 

Again, how much more personal can God get than becoming like one of us?  How much more personal can He get than allowing us to partake of His divine nature?  If anything, over time, man's fall brought God into a more personal relationship with His creation than at any other time except maybe before the fall.  And, who knows ..... maybe we actually have a more personal relationship with Him than Adam did pre-fall?  I guess the other option is that it was no different.   :-?

QuoteInstead of being everywhere he is in us by means of the HG.  By dwelling in us we attain something that the world does not have in and of itself.

If God is not everywhere, how are sinners being saved everywhere?  Unless the Father, the Spirit, draw a sinner he/she cannot be saved.  God MUST be everywhere or neither you or I would be born again.

QuoteAre there any scriptures in the NT that really say otherwise?  Why is it said that he is omnipresent. 

The NT does not need to say that God is omnipresent.  His nature cannot change, for He is immutable.  The HG is God's "presence" active in the world today.  It (and I use that term to emphasize the role and not the person that is the HG) is not a "fill in" for God while He takes a sabbatical (pun intended  :lol:).

ogia, it is my recent discovery (maybe) that you and i may be on the same old path. in another post you made to a just beleive person, i saw a resemblence of the paths we take. at this time i can only say thanks for that comment and your latest post here and i agree. i'll be studying your posts more indepth from now on. there are some here that i am just going to disregard totally.
there are a lot of things the bible didnt explain.
i have only recently discovered that staying on the old path is better than publicly stating ideas or thoughts
where the bible does not go into detail. publicly, i prefer to stick to what the apostles preached word for word. this is and always will be the old path. it is not subject for debate and does not change from one person to the next nor does it change with time. the only thing that changes is us. we may grow in knowledge of the spirit but the truth never changes.

sorry if i seem a little quick to judge. i am knew to the word and am carefull as to what i listen to.(now)
  some times i am quick to disregard something and maybe i should take time to consider,but in no way is this a weakness only a defence mechenism.

                                                   -yo

Quote from: yosemite on May 17, 2008, 04:31:33 PM
sorry if i seem a little quick to judge. i am knew to the word and am carefull as to what i listen to.(now)
  some times i am quick to disregard something and maybe i should take time to consider,but in no way is this a weakness only a defence mechenism.

                                                   -yo

Really any Christian whether they're new to the word or not should use caution in what they accept and believe.  I do believe God gave us our mind and our Bible so that we can study and sort out the various things we hear and see from religious groups and science and disguard whats not true.  Even the apostle John told us this...

1 John 4:1(KJV)  Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

most of us that post in the Bible Discussion section (myself included) agree on these things...

1)  There is only one God
2)  Jesus is God manifest in flesh
3)  The gospel message of the early church is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ and our obedience to the gospel in repentance, water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ, and walking in newness of life (renewing of the Holy Spirit as Paul put it)

Also for your sake since your very new to all of this I'll not post the oddball stuff that I'm sometimes known to post.  I would encourage you to search and study the scripture for yourself and follow what it says. 

hey thanks!!!   now we can do that!!   glad to see mutual ground. :clap:   -yo

Have to be at work soon so I just quickly responded to some of your points OGIA.  All of the following responses were done in a friendly spirit.  If they come across otherwise it was not intentional.

QuoteIt is my understanding that God created angels before the earth:

Job 38
4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
5 Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
6 Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
7 When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

I don't know how that affects your theory, but just thought I'd throw that in there.   

I think it supports it. Here is what I presented in an earlier discussion.

John:
1.  In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2.  The same was in the beginning with God.
3.  All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Being that there was nothing but God in the beginning then it could possibly be concluded that the angels could not have existed because there was no place for them to exist.   

So in the beginning the heavens were created:
1.  In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

We know that God created the stars on the fourth day:

Genesis 1:16
And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

Citing Job 38:7, many believe that the angels were present on the day the stars were created.  If this is the case then it could possibly be concluded that the angels were created on either the 1st day or sometime before the 4th day.  Nonetheless, the angels were in existence prior to the temptation of Eve.  In this time period the angels were created and the fallen angels were ejected from heaven.

QuoteI'm not sure how this applies?

It has always been my understanding that man and sin could not survive in his actual presence.   I believe there is scripture that suggests such but don't have time to find it right now.    If God is omnipresent, then how could the world be so full of evil.  How could such things exist in his presence.

QuoteI think God knew "very well", even perfectly, and knows the same at all times.  This is where foreknowledge comes into the picture for me.  Existing in eternity (though it might be more accurate to say that God IS eternity) and seeing "the end from the beginning" really takes away (for me) the possibility that God created Lucifer so that man could attain free will....if that is what you are implying.

To  me it adds to the idea that God created him for said purpose.  Personally, I can not see how free will could have existed without God creating something for the purpose of opposing him.

I believe God created Satan "as is"  knowing very well the future events that would occur.  Which makes since that he would use Satan to represent all that opposes him since God could not do it himself.  God being all knowing could have simply not created Satan or he could have simply caused him to not exist.

If he did not have a purpose for Satan then why would  he allow him to exist?  Why would he give him dominion on the earth as the "prince of the world".  Why did he allow Satan to tempt Eve?

The very order of events in the Garden of Eden further suggests to me that it was Satans purpose oppose God thus presenting Free will.

The tree (an object of temptation) was placed in the garden.  Ever wonder why?
God gave the command not to eat of it........?
Satan was allowed to enter the garden. ......?
Satan's role was to convince Eve to eat from the tree which was against Gods will.

And it was then that the sinful nature of man entered the scene.

QuoteI believe anything that God creates is created with the same freedom He has to choose right and wrong.  The difference is that God CANNOT choose wrong.  It's just not in His vocabulary.  But, it was and is in the angels' and ours.  "Not God" is fallible, but God chose to create "not God" anyway.  THAT act brought about free will, not Satan.

This raises an interesting question.  If God can not choose wrong, then how could he have chosen to create free will (being all knowing)  in the fallen angels.   I don't think God directly created free will, but did create something to oppose his will to create free will.

QuoteDid you ever wonder if God created man because of Satan's fall

Yep.  But I like the other explanation because (for me) it makes more sense.

QuoteI think this is a fatal dagger in your thought.      You cannot discount the fact that Jesus is God in flesh or that the Holy Ghost is this same One Spirit active in our lives and in the world.

Absolutely. But not a dagger.

Jesus was God in the flesh just like the Holy Ghost is in us.  Key word here is "in".


If  omnipresent then he would be equally in everything at all times.  He would be in all people and not just the believer. 

For us to be filled we must take on something that was not previously there.  The Holy Ghost had to come from one place and fill another.

If God is truly omnipresent then why does one have to receive the HG?

QuoteIf God is not everywhere, how are sinners being saved everywhere?  Unless the Father, the Spirit, draw a sinner he/she cannot be saved.  God MUST be everywhere or neither you or I would be born again.

Who spreads his word?   Christians do of course.

It is what Believers are encouraged to do.   Gods works through the believer and reaches out to the unbeliever.

QuoteThe NT does not need to say that God is omnipresent.  His nature cannot change, for He is immutable.  The HG is God's "presence" active in the world today.  It (and I use that term to emphasize the role and not the person that is the HG) is not a "fill in" for God while He takes a sabbatical (pun intended   ).

If the Bible does not suggest that God is omnipresent then I believe that it is a nature of God worthy of  exploration.   Since the Bible is his word and how we obtain our understanding of him then we should be able to look there to find an answer.  If one explanation is supported but another is not then it has merit.



God Bless.

Chris.

Quote from: yosemite on May 17, 2008, 04:31:33 PM
ogia, it is my recent discovery (maybe) that you and i may be on the same old path. in another post you made to a just beleive person, i saw a resemblence of the paths we take. at this time i can only say thanks for that comment and your latest post here and i agree. i'll be studying your posts more indepth from now on. there are some here that i am just going to disregard totally.

Well, yo, I do see a whole lot of merit in the "old paths".  I see (through conversations with my mom and old timers) so much more consecration in the generations before me.  Now, I'm speaking exclusively about the USA, not across the world.  I don't really know about that other than what I hear. 

It does seem that the Apostolic Pentecostals of my generation forward to today are getting lazier and lazier and that there is more worldliness in the Church than ever before.  It seems there is less anointing, which makes sense.  And, unfortunately, I am just as guilty of the ones I am criticizing.  I pray for God's mercy everyday, that He doesn't smite this U.S. Church into the ground!  It just seems to be getting worse and worse.   :-(

Quotei have only recently discovered that staying on the old path is better than publicly stating ideas or thoughts where the bible does not go into detail. publicly, i prefer to stick to what the apostles preached word for word. this is and always will be the old path. it is not subject for debate and does not change from one person to the next nor does it change with time.

One of the problems I've noticed is that it seems that preachers are having to come up with more and more entertaining material each year.  They always have to have some "new" revelation it seems, or the crowd is not going to ask them to come back.  WE have created that monster!!  Plus, I fear many of the newer ministers (and even too many of the older ones) are trying to soft soap the Gospel too much in an effort to grow, using the justification that they don't want to run the sinner off.  Here in Louisiana is probably where most of this started.  People want entertainment.  They want to "know Him in the power of the resurrection" but not in the "fellowship of suffering".  Yep....I'm guilty of that, too!   :-\

Quotethe only thing that changes is us. we may grow in knowledge of the spirit but the truth never changes.

Exactly!!   :great:

Quotesorry if i seem a little quick to judge. i am knew to the word and am carefull as to what i listen to.(now)
  some times i am quick to disregard something and maybe i should take time to consider,but in no way is this a weakness only a defence mechenism.

It's taking (present tense) me a long time to get this forum stuff down.  I had to take a sabbatical from GP about 2 years ago, I guess.  I was very quick to lash out at others.  Has my theology changed?  Some of it, but it's only solidified what I knew.  I hope I've matured in my knowledge and not traded it in for something new. 

I think way too many are always looking for some "new thing", as the Epicurians on Mars Hill.  They are not content with the "old paths", as they are called.  I believe that sometimes canned answers are the only answer.  If someone doesn't like it, they will likely go looking for some "new thing" or new revelation, even if they have to get it from someone else.

I've decided that I will NOT change in the areas of Oneness and what constitutes the new birth [John 3:3-8; Acts 2:38].  My understanding will hopefully deepen about both topics, but I don't see any other doctrines more perfect and true than these.  If they are "old paths", then so be it.  It was good enough for the old timers, and it should be good enough for me.  I just pray that some in the various Oneness organizations in this country do a quick about face.   :smirk2:

one thing I want to toss my 2¢ in about.   :teeth:

Canned answers only have become a cliché because folks with little or no anointing throw them about as if to make a show of their authority.  This has and always will turn people off of them and the the phrases they use.  Plenty of people can quote the Bible folks!  That means nothing.  But to have understanding of what their quoting, and impart that understanding; while bearing the fruit of the Spirit, that is what makes what they say stick and get repeated.  So using a canned answer only has any value if ya have a clue to what you're talking about and can do it in the right spirit. 

:)

yeah!!!! thats it!! now that will preach!!! would love to converse more on this, but for now i'm headed to church. there will be a preacher there that can read the mail(if you know what i mean). man i hate to leave now, its gettin good. but ohhh well.  this goes to ogia havnt got time now to read others posts. sorry,gotta go!!
 ttfn-yo

Quote from: Q-tip on May 17, 2008, 08:27:39 PM
John:
1.  In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2.  The same was in the beginning with God.
3.  All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Being that there was nothing but God in the beginning then it could possibly be concluded that the angels could not have existed because there was no place for them to exist.  

So in the beginning the heavens were created:
1.  In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

We know that God created the stars on the fourth day:

Genesis 1:16
And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

Citing Job 38:7, many believe that the angels were present on the day the stars were created.  If this is the case then it could possibly be concluded that the angels were created on either the 1st day or sometime before the 4th day.  Nonetheless, the angels were in existence prior to the temptation of Eve.  In this time period the angels were created and the fallen angels were ejected from heaven.

I have just one comment I thought I'd throw in: it depends on what "beginning" you're talking about.  In the very beginning, before God created anything, then of course there was, by definition, nothing and no one but God.

But the "beginning" referred to in Genesis 1:1 isn't necessarily the very beginning.  I believe it refers to the beginning of planet Earth as we know it.  If that's the case, then there's nothing that says God couldn't have created the angels - or other worlds, or whole other universes - prior to the "beginning" of Genesis 1:1.

i used to dwell in these areas myself and have recently realized there are no scriptures for this and is mans foolishness to try and fill in these blanks.

God told us what we needed to know for salvation,the HG will lead into all truth. will HG tell us what God did before? dont know!!

:sing:  we will understand it better by and by!!       :laughhard:

QuoteBut the "beginning" referred to in Genesis 1:1 isn't necessarily the very beginning.  I believe it refers to the beginning of planet Earth as we know it.  If that's the case, then there's nothing that says God couldn't have created the angels - or other worlds, or whole other universes - prior to the "beginning" of Genesis 1:1.

When I think on controversial subjects (really all subjects)  I always keep in mind this scripture..

1 Corinthians 14:33-   For God is not the author of confusion......

With that in mind I search for what explanation  is  most supported by scripture and makes the most sense.



We are given no information that suggests that anything else existed before the creation in Genesis.  But based on what we are given...


God created light on the first day. 

We are not told that light existed elsewhere but we are told that he created it at this time.  It could not have existed since he created it.  So "the beginning"  is the beginning of all light.



God created the Stars (which would include other galaxies) on the 4 th day.  Which to me pretty much verifies that the beginning refers to the beginning of all other worlds and universes and not just the earth.

Quote1.  In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2.  The same was in the beginning with God.
3.  All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Since I assume that this tells us that there was absolutely nothing but God in the beginning, I conclude that the angels did not exist.  Otherwise it would most likely have said that "In the beginning was the word and the angels.  After all, the angels have played a vital role in Gods dealings with man.

 
God Bless.

Chris.

Quote from: Q-tip on May 19, 2008, 10:18:54 PM
We are given no information that suggests that anything else existed before the creation in Genesis.  But based on what we are given...


God created light on the first day. 

We are not told that light existed elsewhere but we are told that he created it at this time.  It could not have existed since he created it.  So "the beginning"  is the beginning of all light.

Ah, but He is the light.  So as long as He has existed, light has existed.

But maybe I'm just stirring the pot now?   :hypocrite:

Quote from: Q-tip on May 19, 2008, 10:18:54 PM
God created the Stars (which would include other galaxies) on the 4 th day.  Which to me pretty much verifies that the beginning refers to the beginning of all other worlds and universes and not just the earth.

That would be referring to the stars we now know.  What if there were others that came before?

OK, I got a question..when did the dinasaurs come into the picture? was it before Gen. 1:1 or somewhere before 1:2?

 :waving: Here!Here! I'm a Pentecostal and proud of it!!   Apostolic all the way

 :great:Hey, I'm a newbee and I can say that as long as its the truth and its scriptual...like I heard someone say before give me that ole time religion its good enough for me!!

Quote from: skeet5413 on May 19, 2008, 11:22:20 PM
OK, I got a question..when did the dinosaurs come into the picture? was it before Gen. 1:1 or somewhere before 1:2?

Since the Dinosaurs would class in the animal kingdom they would have been made on the 5th and 6th days of creation.  I personally believe the dinosaurs were around at least through the time of Job because of the description Job gives of the behemoth.  Moving his tail like a cedar would be a perfect description of something like what we call a brontosaurus.  The fosils we have today could have easily been the result of the great flood.

QuoteAh, but He is the light.  So as long as He has existed, light has existed.

The light of the world.

So since he created the light and he was the light, then he created himself before he existed.  Am I understanding this correctly?   :lol:

QuoteBut maybe I'm just stirring the pot now?

:popcorn:

QuoteThat would be referring to the stars we now know.  What if there were others that came before?

If there were such evidence provided then I would certainly be willing to consider it.  However there is none.  Not even a scripture that could  be misconstrued to suggest so.   Or is there?

Even if it were so we are still left with nothing but God in our beginning.  In our beginning there was God and no mention of angels.


*Hands the spoon back to Titushome*

:grin:

Quote from: Q-tip on May 17, 2008, 08:27:39 PM
If  omnipresent then he would be equally in everything at all times.  He would be in all people and not just the believer. 

I'm not sure why this needs to be true?  I do believe there is "something" of God in every person, be it that measure of faith or the soul or whatever.

QuoteFor us to be filled we must take on something that was not previously there.  The Holy Ghost had to come from one place and fill another.

The very definition of omnipresence precludes something having to come from somewhere else.  It is.....well, it just is.  In this case, "it" is God.  He does not have to move to go somewhere else.  He is already somewhere else.  He is in places outside of the universe He created.  He is there now and always has been.  He is everywhere present at all times. 

QuoteIf God is truly omnipresent then why does one have to receive the HG?

God being omnipresent and someone having to partake of His divine nature don't contradict in my mind.  It's clear that God even exists in hell, but that does not mean He resides there or has taken residence in demons. 

QuoteIf the Bible does not suggest that God is omnipresent then I believe that it is a nature of God worthy of  exploration.  Since the Bible is his word and how we obtain our understanding of him then we should be able to look there to find an answer.  If one explanation is supported but another is not then it has merit.

But, the Bible does speak to God's omnipresence.  If He said in the very first verse of the Bible and never again, He is still omnipresent.  God is not a man that He needs to convince us by repeating Himself.  I think He only does that out of sheer mercy. 

:grin:

wow!

                yo! 



                                                           ;)

QuoteI do believe there is "something" of God in every person, be it that measure of faith or the soul or whatever.

This, of course, is subject to debate. :)

QuoteGod being omnipresent and someone having to partake of His divine nature don't contradict in my mind

The idea of omnipresence suggests that he is fully everwhere and in everything at all times.  This does not necessarily coincide with many, many scriptures that suggest that things or people were sent to or from God.  There are so many "to's and fro's" that the idea of omnipresence may cause more confusion with the word than it would if he were not omnipresent.     

It is not suggested that God is in every person whether partially or fully.  It does say we receive him.  Suggesting to me that he was not necessarily already there.  Even Acts 2:38 is clear when it says that we "shall receive the Holy Ghost".  How do we really take on something if it is already there?  We receive him when we believe, repent and are baptized... right?

How can God and Gods nature be separated?

QuoteThe very definition of omnipresence precludes something having to come from somewhere else.  It is.....well, it just is.  In this case, "it" is God.  He does not have to move to go somewhere else.  He is already somewhere else.  He is in places outside of the universe He created.  He is there now and always has been.  He is everywhere present at all times.

Is he?  :grin:

So, if he is everywhere and in everything, why do I have to believe, repent and be baptized in order to receive him?  Scripture is clear that things either come from or go to him.  If he were already there then there would be no coming or going. 

Can we make "omnipresence" compatible with Gods word.  I feel that "not omnipresence" is much more compatible.

QuoteBut, the Bible does speak to God's omnipresence

The good thing about discussions on such topics ( when conducted in the proper manner ) is that we can test the validity of our ideas or beliefs through different perspectives and thoughts on certain scriptures.  Which is mostly why I brought this up.  I was unable to find where it suggests that he is and always has been omnipresent and by presenting this idea I knew that someone would point it out if it did say so. 


Where does it say that he is omnipresent?


*throws stirring spoon away and breaks out blender*



Good night and God Bless.

Chris.

i think god is everywhere, with everybody, saved and unsaved. walking right there beside them, waiting for them to reach out and receive him. if God was in everyone from birth it kills free will autamatically. to live for God is to die to self.

   i love the old poem foot prints in the sand.-yo

Quote from: Q-tip on May 20, 2008, 12:38:05 AM

QuoteAh, but He is the light.  So as long as He has existed, light has existed.

The light of the world.

He's more than the light of the world:

"This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. "  I John 1:5

Quote from: Q-tip on May 20, 2008, 12:38:05 AM
So since he created the light and he was the light, then he created himself before he existed.  Am I understanding this correctly?   :lol:

Yep.  (More or less.  ;))  He's the self-existant One.

Quote from: Q-tip on May 20, 2008, 12:38:05 AM

QuoteThat would be referring to the stars we now know.  What if there were others that came before?

If there were such evidence provided then I would certainly be willing to consider it.  However there is none.  Not even a scripture that could  be misconstrued to suggest so.   Or is there?

Neither is there any scriptural evidence that God did no other creating before the creating described in Genesis.  But as I mentioned before, this is all just speculation.  It's ultimately pointless, and could go on endlessly.  I'll let it go.  :D

Quote from: titushome on May 20, 2008, 07:12:31 PM


Neither is there any scriptural evidence that God did no other creating before the creating described in Genesis.  But as I mentioned before, this is all just speculation.  It's ultimately pointless, and could go on endlessly.  I'll let it go.  :D

no scripture =unfounded conversation and will lead in circles, so i agre with titushome.-yo

Quote from: Q-tip on May 20, 2008, 03:25:05 AMWhere does it say that he is omnipresent?

It's kinda pointless to continue supposing if this is a point of disagreement. 

There are many scriptures that describe God's omnipresence.  Psalm 139 is a good start.   :grin:

Quote"This is the message we have heard from Him and announce to you, that God is Light, and in Him there is no darkness at all. "  I John 1:5

Then if God is omnipresent there can be no darkness at all since all things would be in him.  

Scripture says that in the beginning there was only god.  No darkness and no light, nothing but God was in existence.

Any reference to God being the "light" in the Bible only relates to him being the light of the world.  If it were otherwise he would have said so.

QuoteYep.  (More or less.  )  He's the self-existant One.

But this is not supported by Genesis 1:3 which states -"And God said, Let there be light and there was light".

God could not have made more simple and clear....God existed before he created light.  

QuoteNeither is there any scriptural evidence that God did no other creating before the creating described in Genesis.  But as I mentioned before, this is all just speculation.  
 

So why speculate?  Lets just accept what scripture does say..."In the beginning.."  

Lets just take Gods word "as is".

QuoteIt's ultimately pointless, and could go on endlessly.

I love to explore how God deals with us.  My thoughts may not be acceptable to traditional Christian beliefs but they do agree with scripture ( well... to me anyway).  As such I don't agree that it is pointless.  

As far as it being endless well, that could apply to just about every conceivable topic up for discussion.  

QuoteI'll let it go.

I hope I am not stirring up any frustration within you.  It is not my intention.  I know I can be relentless but discussing ( and defending ) an idea is the only way to test its validity.  

God Bless.

Chris.

QuoteIt's kinda pointless to continue supposing if this is a point of disagreement.

Everything can be disagreed upon based on supposition.  It doesn't make any topic pointless though.

 

QuoteThere are many scriptures that describe God's omnipresence.  Psalm 139 is a good start.

This was a psalm of praise from David.  He was praising God for always tending to him. 

A person who loves God will always have God with them.  And David was never really in hell.

I will elaborate more if necessary but many times scripture refers to him being all knowing rather than omnipresent. 

God Bless.

Chris.

Quoteno scripture =unfounded conversation and will lead in circles,

But circles add so much to our lives.  I mean, look at all the emoticons that are configured around a circle.

:grin:

God Bless.

Chris.

im getting dizzy!!! :laughhard: :laughhard: :laughhard:

Quote from: Q-tip on May 21, 2008, 01:32:02 AM
Everything can be disagreed upon based on supposition.  It doesn't make any topic pointless though.

I didn't say the topic was pointless.  I said discussing it was if we can't agree on basic definitions.   :)

 

QuoteAnd David was never really in hell.

He didn't claim to be.  He said "IF I make my bed in hell...".

Quotemany times scripture refers to him being all knowing rather than omnipresent. 

How interesting that you brought this up, because I was thinking the same thing when I read Psalm 139.  It struck me -- God MUST BE omnipresent IF He is omniscient.  That psalm talks about Him knowing things that had not yet been, and we read in other places where He calls things that are not as though they were.  How does He know things that are not as though they are?  He must be there at that time and see it happening.  How did He know me before I was formed in the womb?  Because He not only was but He IS there at the womb before and after I am formed.   :grin:

QuoteHe must be there at that time and see it happening.  How did He know me before I was formed in the womb?  Because He not only was but He IS there at the womb before and after I am formed.

Having all nowledge doesn't equate to one being all present.  He knows everything because he created all things and nothing was made without him.
Omnipresent suggests a physical ( as it applies to God ) presence everywhere at every time.  All knowing suggests an intelligent comprehension of all things.  They were (as far as I can see) not united in scripture.

I hold that omnipresence does not compliment scripture as well as Not omnipresent.   

QuoteI didn't say the topic was pointless.  I said discussing it was if we can't agree on basic definitions.

I don't have a disagreement on basic definitions at all.  Discussion is based on the application of "omnipresence" to what the word of God has to say about it.

QuoteHe didn't claim to be.  He said "IF I make my bed in hell...".

Which shows the intent of his psalm.  In his praising of God he was illustrating how much so that he believed God always kept him.

Quote from: Q-tip on May 21, 2008, 12:01:03 PMI hold that omnipresence does not compliment scripture as well as Not omnipresent.   

Well, He either is or He isn't, right?   ;)

QuoteI don't have a disagreement on basic definitions at all.  Discussion is based on the application of "omnipresence" to what the word of God has to say about it.

A basic definition about God is that one of His attributes is omnipresence.  To me, to know all things -- past, present and especially future -- requires that He be there.  How else does He know what the end is going to look like? 

QuoteWell, He either is or He isn't, right?

No..No...No....It's-   He either isn't or he is.   :grin:

QuoteHow else does He know what the end is going to look like

Because he is all knowing.

:) :grin:

God Bless.

Chris.

some twisters look like this-all are devastating!  dtip for the day, dont take it personally!LOL

(http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll290/sam3996/ATT000031.jpg)

Quotedtip for the day, dont take it personally!LOL

:thumbsup2:

If you notice in the gospels,  Jesus told the truth then left it at that.  For example, he didn't rush after the rich man nor,   as in John 6:66 "From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him."  He didn't chase after them and say "wait,  you got it wrong."   No,  he told the truth. Period.

If someone asks you a question about what you believe,  tell the Truth, and leave it at that.  Let the Spirit do His work.

Quote from: Max_Kolbe on June 16, 2008, 05:04:31 AM
If you notice in the gospels,  Jesus told the truth then left it at that.  For example, he didn't rush after the rich man nor,   as in John 6:66 "From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him."  He didn't chase after them and say "wait,  you got it wrong."   No,  he told the truth. Period.

If someone asks you a question about what you believe,  tell the Truth, and leave it at that.  Let the Spirit do His work.

That's so true. He also did not make any attempt to be liked or accepted by people. He simply walked after the Spirit and went about His Father's business. Oh what an example to emulate.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on June 17, 2008, 02:03:47 PM

Quote from: Max_Kolbe on June 16, 2008, 05:04:31 AM
If you notice in the gospels,  Jesus told the truth then left it at that.  For example, he didn't rush after the rich man nor,   as in John 6:66 "From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him."  He didn't chase after them and say "wait,  you got it wrong."   No,  he told the truth. Period.

If someone asks you a question about what you believe,  tell the Truth, and leave it at that.  Let the Spirit do His work.

That's so true. He also did not make any attempt to be liked or accepted by people. He simply walked after the Spirit and went about His Father's business. Oh what an example to emulate.

i feel that is an untruth! if anything jesus taught understanding, love, and gentleness, not avoidence and selfrightiousness. Jesus called a woman a dog, but he knew the whole truth about her and waited to see if she would stay after a harsh treatment. it was not out of being unkind but affirming to others about compassion. did you notice at first he complied to majority thinking and then showed compassion against majority thinking and blesed the woman against the majority!! i feel he does strive to teach people that he knows will listen. i do not veiw Jesus as having a my way or no way attitude!! he gives all many chances and calls many times screamming out "hey, listen your wrong, come learn of me, be with me for i love you." i do beleive he does have a cut off point though, for it says he would turn some to a reprobate mind. Jesus knew the minds of people and knew who would listen and who would'nt. he showed many times in scripture his feelings and wants, but people were not listening. Jesus wept, remember that one?

no, i dont go for the my way or no way uncaring view of God!!!(though there is only one way"Acts 2:38) thats my truth and the only truth the one God promotes. (TIOLI)                         -yo

Yo,

I think you're kinda going overboard here.  It's not that Jesus was not a kind, compassionate, loving, gentle person - of course He was all of those things, and much, much more.  But He did not pander.  He didn't just say what people wanted to hear.  He told the truth, and He did it with love.  He walked in the Spirit, even when doing so went against what was popular and accepted.  He recognized that He was a servant of God, and not of men; thus in all He did, He pleased the Father, rather than trying to be a man-pleaser.

It seems to me that you and OOJ are in agreement - you just misread what he wrote.

Quote from: titushome on June 19, 2008, 07:08:00 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on June 17, 2008, 02:03:47 PM


That's so true.He also did not make any attempt to be liked or accepted by people.  He simply walked after the Spirit and went about His Father's business. Oh what an example to emulate.

It seems to me that you and OOJ are in agreement - you just misread what he wrote.

No, titushome, i didn't over do it, and i read what i read, and i don't believe it!!! it is my belief he made every possible attempt to be liked or rather to be loved and accepted by his people, the very scripture i quoted proves that!! in my opinion, that was his whole purpose, to win hearts and minds!! there is a old saying that i adhere to in cases like this.
it has two scenarios: you can lead a horse to water but you cant make him drink!!
  1. you can make him drink forcefully and drown him!!
  2. you can give him a salt lick and he will drink freely on his own!!

this is what i feel Jesus was doing scenario #2 when his disciples were leaving (i dont beleive this is the last they hear of Jesus and were later compelled to return). Jesus knew the minds of his people and was just waiting for them to get thirsty!! the other two post seem self righteous to me. sorry if i seem different or wrong to you but this is the way i feel. you need to re read the post yourself and see if you see what i see. after all (if you want to put the trinity in the mix) what was his fathers buisness??  winning hearts and minds freely without force!!
                                    -yo

Quote from: yosemite on June 19, 2008, 11:59:34 PM
it is my belief he made every possible attempt to be liked or rather to be loved and accepted by his people, the very scripture i quoted proves that!! in my opinion, that was his whole purpose, to win hearts and minds!!

Yes, Jesus was trying to win people's hearts and minds.  He knew the Truth, and He wanted to set His people free.

But His primary goal was not to be liked or accepted; His primary goal was to proclaim the Truth, to proclaim the Kingdom of God among us, to "set at liberty the captives."  Of course He wants every man and woman to accept Him, and to be accepted by Him; to enter into such a relationship with Him is nothing less than Life itself.  But He does not want to be "accepted" at the expense of Truth - such "acceptance" is only the acceptance of a lie, and not acceptance of the real Jesus Christ.

Quote from: yosemite on June 19, 2008, 11:59:34 PM
after all (if you want to put the trinity in the mix) what was his fathers buisness??

Speaking of Jesus' Father has nothing to do with the so-called trinity.  Jesus Himself spoke of His Father all the time.

Yo

I've re-read my post, trying to see where any mention or assertion was made regarding the points you listed. I don't see it. Scripture says Jesus grew in favor with God and Man. I can't recall the exact verse, but it also says He would not cry out in the streets, seeking to  make a name for Himself. He wasn't even exceptionally good looking. He was average.

Look at how many so-called "ministries" today go for the spot-light. They even name the ministries after themselves. Big names. Big shots. Big deal! Jesus went about His Father's business - every single day. His words and works spread w/o any self effort of His. He never sought the limelight. He never sought the approval of others. By approval, I mean watching the reactions of the crowd, or leadership and adjusting His words/actions accordingly. Look at politicians. Look at many ministers. Look at people!  Watch their actions and reactions. Jesus never did that.

If you've gotten a different slant than I... well, you got a different slant.

Peace.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on June 20, 2008, 04:43:14 PM

Look at how many so-called "ministries" today go for the spot-light.
Peace.

Shunks most of the time I just wish I could find my flashlight. lol

Quote from: titushome on June 20, 2008, 01:59:12 PM

Yes, Jesus was trying to win people's hearts and minds.  He knew the Truth, and He wanted to set His people free.

this i agree with.

Quote from: titushome on June 20, 2008, 01:59:12 PM
But His primary goal was not to be liked or accepted

this i do not because it just by-passes his whole purpose. if you are not liked and accepted, then no one is gonna listen. though i do beleive what he done was not for self gain....in a way, but in a way wasnt it for self gain since we are his creation and he would receive us?  not that man without Christ is worth anything.

titushome, i'm not an intelectual by any means, but these are some things i beleive and i may be wrong some times. let me know when! there are some things i dont understand too!

i can go along with the rest of the post. thanks titushome    -yo

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on June 20, 2008, 04:43:14 PM
Yo

I've re-read my post, trying to see where any mention or assertion was made regarding the points you listed. I don't see it. Scripture says Jesus grew in favor with God and Man. I can't recall the exact verse, but it also says He would not cry out in the streets, seeking to  make a name for Himself.  ( but he was making a name for his self. do you know of any one who has been as famous for as long for an act of such love? jesus has wept and made a name for hisself for there is no other name in which salvation is given)


He wasn't even exceptionally good looking. He was average. ( i never seen him in person, i dont know. besides i dont normally judge what other men look like!!)

Look at how many so-called "ministries" today go for the spot-light. They even name the ministries after themselves. Big names. Big shots. Big deal!
( this was mans ministry-and i agree it is wrong)

Jesus went about His Father's business - every single day. His words and works spread w/o any self effort of His. (that be-littles the work he done by way of neglecting the journey he made teaching not to mention being beaten and dying on the cross)

He never sought the limelight. He never sought the approval of others. By approval, I mean watching the reactions of the crowd, or leadership and adjusting His words/actions accordingly. Look at politicians. Look at many ministers. Look at people!  Watch their actions and reactions. Jesus never did that. ( so if everyone had fell down and worshiped him when he was here, you think he would have told them to stop-but i also do not think Jesus would change his words or actions to better suit man for it is glory to God and Gods plan only, not mans)

If you've gotten a different slant than I... well, you got a different slant. ( i may be an old slant six like dodge used to make)

Peace.

see added Quotes inside of quote insert!! let me know what you find is different and worthy of a slant.  -yo

Quote from: yosemite on June 21, 2008, 05:46:30 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on June 20, 2008, 04:43:14 PM
Yo

I've re-read my post, trying to see where any mention or assertion was made regarding the points you listed. I don't see it. Scripture says Jesus grew in favor with God and Man. I can't recall the exact verse, but it also says He would not cry out in the streets, seeking to  make a name for Himself.  ( but he was making a name for his self. do you know of any one who has been as famous for as long for an act of such love? jesus has wept and made a name for hisself for there is no other name in which salvation is given)


He wasn't even exceptionally good looking. He was average. ( i never seen him in person, i dont know. besides i dont normally judge what other men look like!!)

Look at how many so-called "ministries" today go for the spot-light. They even name the ministries after themselves. Big names. Big shots. Big deal!
( this was mans ministry-and i agree it is wrong)

Jesus went about His Father's business - every single day. His words and works spread w/o any self effort of His. (that be-littles the work he done by way of neglecting the journey he made teaching not to mention being beaten and dying on the cross)

He never sought the limelight. He never sought the approval of others. By approval, I mean watching the reactions of the crowd, or leadership and adjusting His words/actions accordingly. Look at politicians. Look at many ministers. Look at people!  Watch their actions and reactions. Jesus never did that. ( so if everyone had fell down and worshiped him when he was here, you think he would have told them to stop-but i also do not think Jesus would change his words or actions to better suit man for it is glory to God and Gods plan only, not mans)

If you've gotten a different slant than I... well, you got a different slant. ( i may be an old slant six like dodge used to make)

Peace.

see added Quotes inside of quote insert!! let me know what you find is different and worthy of a slant.  -yo

I think we're on two different wave-lengths here, but I'll try.  :teeth:



( but he was making a name for his self. do you know of any one who has been as famous for as long for an act of such love? jesus has wept and made a name for hisself for there is no other name in which salvation is given)

Scripture says:

GOD has highly exalted Him and {GOD has} given Him a name which is above every name. (Phillipians 2:9)

Jesus manifested & lifted up the Father's name, not His own. (John 5:43; 10:25; 12:28; 17:6; 17:11; 17:12; 17:26)

Everything Jesus did was to the glory of His Father and not for Himself. The glory Jesus received was a gift of God.



( i never seen him in person, i dont know. besides i dont normally judge what other men look like!!)[/b]

Just going by scripture. Isa 53:2... he hath no form or comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.

Jesus said unto them, "Whom seek ye?" They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. (John 18:4-5)

Now he that betrayed him gave them a sign, saying, Whomsoever I kiss, that same is he: and he came to Jesus and kissed him.  (Mt 26:48-49)
This insinuates Jesus was less than exceptual and blended in with humanity.



Jesus went about His Father's business - every single day. His words and works spread w/o any self effort of His.(that be-littles the work he done by way of neglecting the journey he made teaching not to mention being beaten and dying on the cross)


The journey He made, the teaching He did, the beating He took, and death on the cross - all this was the Father's business{plan}. For this cause was I born; to this end came I into the world.  (John 6:38; 8:42; 12:27; 18:37; Mk 10:45)


( so if everyone had fell down and worshiped him when he was here, you think he would have told them to stop-[/b]but i also do not think Jesus would change his words or actions to better suit man for it is glory to God and Gods plan only, not mans)[/b]

No, I do not think He would have told them to stop. Those that did fall down at His feet, -as well as those that worshipped Him-, were never admonished not to do so. The bulk of the populace did not recognize Him. Thus, the majority did not worship.

The key to Jesus was He sought only to glorify His Father and never to glorify Himself. He left that up to GOD. We are to seek only to glorify the Father thru/in Christ. We are to never glorify ourselves by seeking attention. We are not to do anything thru/in ourselves. Therein lies idolatry, claiming the glory that belongs to the LORD, for ourselves. Jesus was dead to Himself, willing Himself to do only what He saw the Father do; and say only what He heard the Father say. That is what we must emulate.

Better?

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on June 25, 2008, 06:12:27 AM


The key to Jesus was He sought only to glorify His Father and never to glorify Himself. He left that up to GOD. We are to seek only to glorify the Father thru/in Christ. We are to never glorify ourselves by seeking attention. We are not to do anything thru/in ourselves. Therein lies idolatry, claiming the glory that belongs to the LORD, for ourselves. Jesus was dead to Himself, willing Himself to do only what He saw the Father do; and say only what He heard the Father say. That is what we must emulate.

Better?

almost, except for the trinity bit. other than that, we on the same page!  -yo

Quote from: yosemite on June 27, 2008, 07:49:59 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on June 25, 2008, 06:12:27 AM


The key to Jesus was He sought only to glorify His Father and never to glorify Himself. He left that up to GOD. We are to seek only to glorify the Father thru/in Christ. We are to never glorify ourselves by seeking attention. We are not to do anything thru/in ourselves. Therein lies idolatry, claiming the glory that belongs to the LORD, for ourselves. Jesus was dead to Himself, willing Himself to do only what He saw the Father do; and say only what He heard the Father say. That is what we must emulate.

Better?

almost, except for the trinity bit. other than that, we on the same page!  -yo

ok.  :teeth:   

Quote from: yosemite on June 27, 2008, 07:49:59 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on June 25, 2008, 06:12:27 AM


The key to Jesus was He sought only to glorify His Father and never to glorify Himself. He left that up to GOD. We are to seek only to glorify the Father thru/in Christ. We are to never glorify ourselves by seeking attention. We are not to do anything thru/in ourselves. Therein lies idolatry, claiming the glory that belongs to the LORD, for ourselves. Jesus was dead to Himself, willing Himself to do only what He saw the Father do; and say only what He heard the Father say. That is what we must emulate.

Better?

almost, except for the trinity bit. other than that, we on the same page!  -yo

Where in there are you reading about a trinity?  There's nothing in any of OOJ's statements that you won't find more or less word-for-word in the Gospel books.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on June 28, 2008, 02:43:31 PM

Quote from: yosemite on June 27, 2008, 07:49:59 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on June 25, 2008, 06:12:27 AM


The key to Jesus was He sought only to glorify His Father and never to glorify Himself. He left that up to GOD. We are to seek only to glorify the Father thru/in Christ.  Jesus was dead to Himself, willing Himself to do only what He saw the Father do; and say only what He heard the Father say.

Better?

almost, except for the trinity bit. other than that, we on the same page!  -yo

ok.  :teeth:   

the quote that jesus never glorified hisself and being dead to his self is not in scripture and i beleive jesus is god. so how would he be dead to his self and not glorify his self?

Yo

It has nothing to do with Jesus being God. This deals with Jesus being Man. Scripture says: He took not the nature of angels, but {nature of} the seed of Abraham.

As Man, Jesus had a God-given will that had to be brought under subjection to the Will of God, His Father. Just as our self-wills do. That's what scripture means to be "dead to self". Did not Jesus repeatedly say – "Not my will but thine"?  Same thing.

Jesus didn't glorify Himself in the sense of seeking fame and recognition. He repeatedly told the healed to "Tell no one". He refused to blow trumpets or make a big fanfare at His arrival. He told the crowds it was God doing the work and not Himself. He did not seek the spotlight.

Both concepts are everywhere in the gospels and scripture. Just as Jesus referencing God as His Father. This isn't a religious addition centuries later. This is a direct identifier by Jesus Christ. In fact, the Pharisees were also offended at His words. The concept of God being relational as "Father" was beyond them. They too thought they were protecting their beliefs.

(A rule of thumb that has benefited me: Whenever the Pharisees, Sadducees, and I agree on anything; that's a good sign I need to re-examine my understanding. I just might be missing what the Bible really says.)

I understand how key words trigger the "Apostolic defense mechanism", but I still do not understand why.  ???     Jesus Christ - the Messiah, the Savior of the world – called God, His Father; and God – Yahweh, the Creator of all things – called Jesus, His Son. Can it get any plainer? Relationship, not Godship.


Rest assured, this has been an area of misunderstanding for centuries. Carrying over into the 21st is no big deal.  :biglaugh:

(A rule of thumb that has benefited me: Whenever the Pharisees, Sadducees, and I agree on anything; that's a good sign I need to re-examine my understanding. I just might be missing what the Bible really says.)


so your saying you agree on only some things that sadducees and pharisees agree on?
they also didnt think Jesus was God, or even on the same level!!

i think we would be better off if we didnt get into this. you know how i beleive  and i you!!      -yo

Good idea.  Round 4,875,321 about the godhead does not interest me in the least.  :teeth:

We'll bandy about some other topic.   :great:

ciao

ok...so what do u each believe...im confused...who believes 3 and who believes 1?

i beleive in the one and only and will venture no more.

hey...oj...did u usta go by another name?

Posted by: *mesipie*: ok...so what do u each believe...im confused...who believes 3 and who believes 1?


Posted by: yosemite: i beleive in the one and only and will venture no more.  


As do I, Yo. That's been made more than plain numerous times here. I'm just no longer hung up over terminology.   :grin:

BTW, I was being facetious with the number count. It seems like so many Apostolics are fixated on the godhead to the extent of tunnelvision. Any conversation that is different or challenges denominal teaching, is instantly sidelined to "oneness vs trinity". This happens over and over regardless of the topic.

My brother Yo is simply responding the way taught w/o having to deal with what the scriptures actually mean. That's just the way it is.   :(

I keep hoping that eventually, he - and others - will grow out of that.  :teeth:

Quote from: *mesipie* on July 02, 2008, 05:55:19 AM
hey...oj...did u usta go by another name?

Nope. Been the same from the beginning.  Comes from a puppet character I was going to use parodying 'Star Wars'.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 01, 2008, 10:27:17 PM
As Man, Jesus had a God-given will that had to be brought under subjection to the Will of God, His Father. Just as our self-wills do. That's what scripture means to be "dead to self". Did not Jesus repeatedly say – "Not my will but thine"?  Same thing.

Jesus didn't glorify Himself in the sense of seeking fame and recognition. He repeatedly told the healed to "Tell no one". He refused to blow trumpets or make a big fanfare at His arrival. He told the crowds it was God doing the work and not Himself. He did not seek the spotlight.

Both concepts are everywhere in the gospels and scripture. Just as Jesus referencing God as His Father. This isn't a religious addition centuries later. This is a direct identifier by Jesus Christ. In fact, the Pharisees were also offended at His words. The concept of God being relational as "Father" was beyond them. They too thought they were protecting their beliefs....

Jesus Christ - the Messiah, the Savior of the world – called God, His Father; and God – Yahweh, the Creator of all things – called Jesus, His Son. Can it get any plainer? Relationship, not Godship.

Exactly.

As far as not making "a big fanfare at His arrival," the only exception I know of is His entry into Jerusalem riding a donkey.  And He did that to identify Himself as the Messiah, which in turn pointed back to the God who sent Him.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 02, 2008, 12:36:20 PM
Posted by: *mesipie*: ok...so what do u each believe...im confused...who believes 3 and who believes 1?


Posted by: yosemite: i beleive in the one and only and will venture no more.  


As do I, Yo. That's been made more than plain numerous times here. I'm just no longer hung up over terminology.   :grin:

BTW, I was being facetious with the number count. It seems like so many Apostolics are fixated on the godhead to the extent of tunnelvision. Any conversation that is different or challenges denominal teaching, is instantly sidelined to "oneness vs trinity". This happens over and over regardless of the topic.

My brother Yo is simply responding the way taught w/o having to deal with what the scriptures actually mean. That's just the way it is.   :(

I keep hoping that eventually, he - and others - will grow out of that.  :teeth:

ooj and titushome, for one i do actually deal with what scripture means and follow it to the letter,secondly i hope i never grow out of the truth!! i could explain, but you already know all the answers i would give so it is pointless if yall will not listen. i'll quit casting my pearls!! ohh and thirdly, i like my tunnel vision. :clap: :great: :thumbsup2:    it keeps my eyes set on the goal, the target, the reason. so i'll just keep my eyes set on scripture and the glory land way!!  :sing:       (broad is the path, maybe the vision too!)

i already said i think we need to drop it!!

sorry...wasnt tryin to stir yall up...

Quote from: yosemite on July 02, 2008, 02:13:39 PM
ooj and titushome, for one i do actually deal with what scripture means and follow it to the letter,secondly i hope i never grow out of the truth!!

Yo, please note that those statements were not among the ones I quoted from OOJ as being ones I agree with.  While we may come to different conclusions about the meaning of some of the Scriptures, I do believe you're doing your sincere best to understand what they mean.  I encourage you to never stop growing and learning new things in the Lord - there's nothing more important than your personal relationship with Him.

Quote from: yosemite on July 02, 2008, 02:13:39 PM
i already said i think we need to drop it!!

Well, this is a discussion forum.  If you're tired of the discussion, no one is forcing you to participate.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 02, 2008, 12:36:20 PM
BTW, I was being facetious with the number count. It seems like so many Apostolics are fixated on the godhead to the extent of tunnelvision. Any conversation that is different or challenges denominal teaching, is instantly sidelined to "oneness vs trinity". This happens over and over regardless of the topic.

 
i'm not the apostolic scape goat for the trinitarians or the self enlightened ones or the just beleive group!! :laughhard:
     

Quote from: titushome on July 02, 2008, 07:14:47 PM
I encourage you to never stop growing and learning new things in the Lord - there's nothing more important than your personal relationship with Him.
Well, this is a discussion forum.  If you're tired of the discussion, no one is forcing you to participate.

i agree, no one is forcing me but who is asking the questions of me and talking of me?
so i restate this again as far as this issue is concerned it would be better left alone.
but if so desired i could give all scripture i have found on the one God head. we can get into baptism even. but what is the point? we will only go in circles again!!
( i'd be glad to give chp. and verse,gonna be a long post though.)
i got all the encouragement i need and i dont stop in the word, but i will not be sidetracked.  :clap:                 i understand quite a bit of the word, thanks. :biglaugh: :clap:            -yo :hi: :hi:

Hello Brother Yo, Hope all is well.  Remember what I told you, you can not show a blind man anything.  Those who chose to stand by and try to teach false doctrine of a trinity are lost and we know what the Bible says.  If this Gospel be hid it is hid to those who are lost.  Who the god of this world has blinded.  So I advise you to leave those you know will not receive the truth along.  What fellowship has light with darkness.  Truth divides, and  separates.  Some are nothing more than trouble makers and I don't care if they like me or not. Jesus said we would be hated for His name sake.  Not hated because of a trinity that was dream up by some half serving ungodly men after people started drifting away from truth.  The Bible say ever learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.  It is useless to try and discuss truth with those who refuse it.  Hang tight and just keep praying.  God will show the world who He really is when ever knee shall bow.  You know Benny Hinn says there is nine in the godhead.  He says they are distinct persons.  Each person has a body, soul, and spirit.  Three times three is nine.  He said this on TBN. Trash Broadcasting Network.  But I gues if we start with one and get three then why not nine or more.  If you going to be wrong might as well go way out there.  I encourage you to stop responding to these guys that want to stir the pot.  I writing this to you to let you know I am here for you man.

Quote from: *mesipie* on July 02, 2008, 03:28:34 PM
sorry...wasnt tryin to stir yall up...

You didn't stir anything up. This just proves the point. Happens all the time.  *** sigh***

Quote from: titushome on July 02, 2008, 01:45:30 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 01, 2008, 10:27:17 PM
As Man, Jesus had a God-given will that had to be brought under subjection to the Will of God, His Father. Just as our self-wills do. That's what scripture means to be "dead to self". Did not Jesus repeatedly say – "Not my will but thine"?  Same thing.

Jesus didn't glorify Himself in the sense of seeking fame and recognition. He repeatedly told the healed to "Tell no one". He refused to blow trumpets or make a big fanfare at His arrival. He told the crowds it was God doing the work and not Himself. He did not seek the spotlight.

Both concepts are everywhere in the gospels and scripture. Just as Jesus referencing God as His Father. This isn't a religious addition centuries later. This is a direct identifier by Jesus Christ. In fact, the Pharisees were also offended at His words. The concept of God being relational as "Father" was beyond them. They too thought they were protecting their beliefs....

Jesus Christ - the Messiah, the Savior of the world – called God, His Father; and God – Yahweh, the Creator of all things – called Jesus, His Son. Can it get any plainer? Relationship, not Godship.

Exactly.

As far as not making "a big fanfare at His arrival," the only exception I know of is His entry into Jerusalem riding a donkey.  And He did that to identify Himself as the Messiah, which in turn pointed back to the God who sent Him.

**forgot about that one. Good point. **

Quote from: titushome on July 02, 2008, 07:14:47 PM

Quote from: yosemite on July 02, 2008, 02:13:39 PM
ooj and titushome, for one i do actually deal with what scripture means and follow it to the letter,secondly i hope i never grow out of the truth!!

Yo, please note that those statements were not among the ones I quoted from OOJ as being ones I agree with.  While we may come to different conclusions about the meaning of some of the Scriptures, I do believe you're doing your sincere best to understand what they mean.  I encourage you to never stop growing and learning new things in the Lord - there's nothing more important than your personal relationship with Him.

* ditto *

** Yo, if I've offended you, I apologize. Like Titus said, this is a discussion forum. We each post our opinions/understandings/questions and await others to do the same. Nothing personal against anyone. Looking back from post 59, you and Titus were pretty much the only ones replying. Who else was I supposed to direct comments to? It's not like I plucked your name out of thin air and added it to the conversation.

With that in mind, my brother, I shall now reply. You're welcome to participate or not.

Quote from: yosemite on July 02, 2008, 07:24:46 PM
i got all the encouragement i need and i dont stop in the word, but i will not be sidetracked.  :clap:                 i understand quite a bit of the word, thanks. :biglaugh: :clap:            -yo :hi: :hi:

**No one is trying to discourage or sidetrack anyone. We all need to grow in our understanding of the word, too. The sidetrack spoken of here has nothing to do with leaving the truth. It has to do with the defensive reflexes to convert any topic into a "oneness vs trinity" issue. The sidetrack is seeing "trinity", and "self-enlightened ones" and "just believers" when it isn't even there. Has nothing to do with discrediting someone's personal walk with God, or trying to discourage them.

Quote from: yosemite on July 02, 2008, 07:24:46 PM
[i'm not the apostolic scape goat for the trinitarians or the self enlightened ones or the just beleive group!! :laughhard:

No one is trying to make you a scape goat. Why do you feel the need to divide the Body into groups? Is Christ divided?

I call you brother - even when we disagree.

Quote from: yosemite on July 02, 2008, 02:13:39 PM

ooj and titushome, for one i do actually deal with what scripture means and follow it to the letter,secondly i hope i never grow out of the truth!! i could explain, but you already know all the answers i would give so it is pointless if yall will not listen. i'll quit casting my pearls!! ohh and thirdly, i like my tunnel vision. :clap: :great: :thumbsup2:    it keeps my eyes set on the goal, the target, the reason. so i'll just keep my eyes set on scripture and the glory land way!!  :sing:       (broad is the path, maybe the vision too!)

i already said i think we need to drop it!!

I accidently erased my answer for this. Let me try again.

***************************
1... Then why does Jesus' {or anyone elses'} terminology of "Father" set off a "trinity defense mechanism"?  Could it be nothing more than an automomic reflex encoded by denominal teaching? Looking back at the posts, you said they were ok except for the trinity part. Titus asked where you got the trinity from. Who then, sidetracked to "oneness vs trinity"? And why? Autonomic reflex?

I know you walk daily with God and study His Word. That's how we learn. It is progressive and on-going. How we understood *here* should be deeper *there*. That's maturity. We are repeatedly told to conform to the image of Christ and to put on His mind. There has to be change in our understanding.

2...I hope you never grow out of the truth either. No one is trying to circumvent that. But everything not understood or even believed today is necessarily false. Do we seek out in the word the Spirit or the letter? We are told to try everything in the Spirit, for the Spirit brings life.

3... Tunnel vision for Heaven is a good thing. Setting our face like a flint to reach the other side. Tunnel vision for denominal teaching is a bad thing. Blinds us to what God may be doing outside of our connections. The Jewish priesthood had tunnel vision regarding the Messiah. They expected a conqueroring King, like David, to come down and free them from the Romans. And they were right about that. Instead, that led to them missing Jesus. Oh, a few did get past the autonomic reflexes, but most did not. Jesus chided them for missing the hour of their visitation.

The point here is that tunnel vision may just be a detriment to seeing the whole picture. We need to be able to see Jesus, even when He works outside of our box.

4... Just because one may understand differently or more than another on some matters - does not make them a swine.

Good posts, OOJ.

Concerning oneness vs. trinity in this thread, the fact of the matter is that no one here has been professing or defending trinitarian doctrine.  The references to the Father have alluded time and time again to the words that came from Jesus' own mouth.  We need to seek to understand what Jesus was talking about when He referred to Himself, His Father, and the relationship between them.

  :ignore:

Good idea. Let's talk about something different.   :thumbsup2:


The title of this thread is: Apostilic Truth Questions.  So...


Is Apostolic Truth different than Biblical Truth? 

i want to believe theres no difference. for one that is why it is called apostolic. we follow the apostles teachings and Jesus taught the apostles.

does your question go any deeper than that? care to elaborate? example?


                                           -yo

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 04, 2008, 02:54:04 AM
Good idea. Let's talk about something different.   :thumbsup2:


The title of this thread is: Apostilic Truth Questions.  So...


Is Apostolic Truth different than Biblical Truth? 

The Bible definition of Apostolic Truth Eph 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;  Beleive it or be lost. 

Acts 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.
Beleive or be lost

Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. Beleive or be lost

1 Cor 3:11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.  Beleive it or be lost.

Luke 24:45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.48 And ye are witnesses of these things.  Beleive or be lost

Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.  Beleive or be lost

Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.
Beleive it or be lost.

2 John 7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.8 Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward.
9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

Beleive it or your will be lost.

Apostolic Truth is Bible truth anything else is false doctrine.

Quote from: yosemite on July 04, 2008, 03:06:32 AM
i want to believe theres no difference. for one that is why it is called apostolic. we follow the apostles teachings and Jesus taught the apostles.

does your question go any deeper than that? care to elaborate? example?


                                           -yo

It can always go deeper. But, all my life I've heard Apostolics {and did it myself} speak of having "the truth". I believe that Israel in Egypt is a type of coming out of sin or the world; while Israel in Babylon is a type of coming out of religion or man inspired doctrine. I also believe that the last couple of years - this year especially- has shown the Lord calling more and more to come out of spiritual Babylon, and re-discover the unleavened bread of the Word.

Every denomination has its "truth",lived and passed down to congregations. Every family has done the same: added leaven to the Word. Since God is calling His people to back to Himself, -in preparation for His return-, it seems very important to know:

Is Apostolic truth different than Biblical truth?

Looks like a good start, Brother Dad. This being the 4th and all, I'm not able to give more than a quick note. More will come later, probably this week end. Then I promise to participate a lot fuller.


Apostolic Truth is Bible truth anything else is false doctrine.

Do not all other parts of the Body say the same thing? What's the difference?


Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.


The Apostles did not have a church building, nor limit services to Sunday/Wednesday. They did not have a paid pastor, paid staff, or parsonage. They did not pay tithes, nor take up offerings for themselves.

We do all those things, even though the Bible and Apostles teach differently. Are we in truth?


The Bible definition of Apostolic Truth Eph 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; 

Since Jesus is the chief cornerstone, and a cornerstone is a finished product for exact emulation - shouldn't Jesus' teachings/words/example be our mirror?

You've posted some great beginning scriptures. Where are the words of Jesus in there? I know we can't post the entire Bible, but it looks like a stronger leaning on the students, rather than the Master. More Apostolic than Bible.


Beleive it or be lost.

You used this phrase a lot. I take it to be applying to Apostolic truth. Our history is not one of great confidence in one another.

Therefore, is this statement personal, biblical, or universal among followers of Apostolic truth?



That's all the time I have right now. Thank you for participating. I look forward to continuing later.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 04, 2008, 12:46:20 PM

Apostolic Truth is Bible truth anything else is false doctrine.
Do not all other parts of the Body say the same thing? What's the difference? 

There are no other parts of the body.  Anything else is lost.


Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.


The Apostles did not have a church building, nor limit services to Sunday/Wednesday. They did not have a paid pastor, paid staff, or parsonage. They did not pay tithes, nor take up offerings for themselves.  Hey that is why we do home Bible studies in peoples homes.  And yes the according to Paul the ministry was to live by the Gospel.

We do all those things, even though the Bible and Apostles teach differently. Are we in truth?  If you are not One God Apostolic then no you are not Truth


The Bible definition of Apostolic Truth Eph 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; 

Since Jesus is the chief cornerstone, and a cornerstone is a finished product for exact emulation - shouldn't Jesus' teachings/words/example be our mirror?

You've posted some great beginning scriptures. Where are the words of Jesus in there? I know we can't post the entire Bible, but it looks like a stronger leaning on the students, rather than the Master. More Apostolic than Bible. I could post many of Jesus Words but the false teachers that are lost still will not beleive them for they are Bblinded by the God of this wordl.


Beleive it or be lost.

You used this phrase a lot. I take it to be applying to Apostolic truth. Our history is not one of great confidence in one another.

Therefore, is this statement personal, biblical, or universal among followers of Apostolic truth? This statment is based upon Bible and History and the leading of my Lord Jesus Christ.



That's all the time I have right now. Thank you for participating. I look forward to continuing later.

Post all you want I will stop posting along these lines Becasue if you can't see it then you are blinded my the God of this world.  If you do see it then we will meet in heaven.  Anyone beleiving the trinity is part of the mother harlot church and not God's Church. 

True Apostolics beleive the entire Bible and stand on it.  And we do not try to teach the false teaching that God is persons and not a Spirit.

i couldnt say it much better myself but as for scripture i cant say it any better. but i do have some more scripture that would fit to that quite nicely.  :clap: :clap: :clap: bro dad is on target for me!!

if they didnt take offerings and tieths, what was judas doing with the groups money bag. what was the money bag for? where did the money come from?
what was the money used for? the money bag must have been alright to start with because Jesus allowed it unlike the money changers in the temple.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 04, 2008, 02:15:03 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 04, 2008, 12:46:20 PM

Apostolic Truth is Bible truth anything else is false doctrine.
Do not all other parts of the Body say the same thing? What’s the difference? 

There are no other parts of the body.  Anything else is lost.


Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.


The Apostles did not have a church building, nor limit services to Sunday/Wednesday. They did not have a paid pastor, paid staff, or parsonage. They did not pay tithes, nor take up offerings for themselves.  Hey that is why we do home Bible studies in peoples homes.  And yes the according to Paul the ministry was to live by the Gospel.

We do all those things, even though the Bible and Apostles teach differently. Are we in truth?  If you are not One God Apostolic then no you are not Truth


The Bible definition of Apostolic Truth Eph 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; 

Since Jesus is the chief cornerstone, and a cornerstone is a finished product for exact emulation - shouldn’t Jesus’ teachings/words/example be our mirror?

You’ve posted some great beginning scriptures. Where are the words of Jesus in there? I know we can’t post the entire Bible, but it looks like a stronger leaning on the students, rather than the Master. More Apostolic than Bible. I could post many of Jesus Words but the false teachers that are lost still will not beleive them for they are Bblinded by the God of this wordl.


Beleive it or be lost.

You used this phrase a lot. I take it to be applying to Apostolic truth. Our history is not one of great confidence in one another.

Therefore, is this statement personal, biblical, or universal among followers of Apostolic truth? This statment is based upon Bible and History and the leading of my Lord Jesus Christ.



That’s all the time I have right now. Thank you for participating. I look forward to continuing later.

Post all you want I will stop posting along these lines Becasue if you can't see it then you are blinded my the God of this world.  If you do see it then we will meet in heaven.  Anyone beleiving the trinity is part of the mother harlot church and not God's Church. 

True Apostolics beleive the entire Bible and stand on it.  And we do not try to teach the false teaching that God is persons and not a Spirit.

the word God in this case is a lower case god not a respected God of higher case.
instead of my it is by in the MY that is bolded. thanks bro dad. LOL

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 04, 2008, 12:46:20 PM
Looks like a good start, Brother Dad. This being the 4th and all, I’m not able to give more than a quick note. More will come later, probably this week end. Then I promise to participate a lot fuller.


Apostolic Truth is Bible truth anything else is false doctrine.

Do not all other parts of the Body say the same thing? What’s the difference?
the body will not grow a third arm, leg, ear, eye. all other portions of the body that is not of the body is false.do you beleive that a man with a prosthetic leg
when he dies(if saved) his prosthetic leg will go to heaven? why not? did the false leg not do a good work? did it not look just like a true leg? is it because it didnt have the Holyspirit and was more worldly and materialistic? well thats just unfair isnt it!! or is it?

Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.


The Apostles did not have a church building, nor limit services to Sunday/Wednesday. They did not have a paid pastor, paid staff, or parsonage. They did not pay tithes, nor take up offerings for themselves.
well now, who were they writing the epistles to? the apostles were bishops to all the churches who followed their teachings of Christ. paul worked as a tent maker for his survival but the churches had offerings as do the missionaries of this day and time live and spread the word on.if the churches didnt give ties or offering what was all that with anninias when he got into trouble? where did all that money go? did they spread the word with it? did the apostles use a portion of it to travel with the word?did the bible say that the workman is worthy of his wage? do you beleive that a preacher is not worthy of his wage?i dont limit myself to social services either. i go in the word all the time, learning, praying and worshiping.(in my own way of course)
We do all those things, even though the Bible and Apostles teach differently. Are we in truth?
i dont see anything different other than modern tech.

The Bible definition of Apostolic Truth Eph 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; 

Since Jesus is the chief cornerstone, and a cornerstone is a finished product for exact emulation - shouldn’t Jesus’ teachings/words/example be our mirror?

You’ve posted some great beginning scriptures. Where are the words of Jesus in there? I know we can’t post the entire Bible, but it looks like a stronger leaning on the students, rather than the Master. More Apostolic than Bible.
are you suggesting that the apostles were antichrist? were the apostles not teaching the very word of Christ? as far as i can see and read what they teach  fits like a glove to what Jesus taught. we lean on no man but the scripture is used as a good proof.
Beleive it or be lost.          dido

You used this phrase a lot. I take it to be applying to Apostolic truth. Our history is not one of great confidence in one another.
well its best to not have confidence in those who prove themselves wrong.you know, the double minded man and all.
Therefore, is this statement personal, biblical, or universal among followers of Apostolic truth?
if they follow the bible it is universal!!


That’s all the time I have right now. Thank you for participating. I look forward to continuing later.
okiedokie!!   -yo             

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 03, 2008, 04:46:06 AM
Hello Brother Yo, Hope all is well.  Remember what I told you, you can not show a blind man anything.  Those who chose to stand by and try to teach false doctrine of a trinity are lost and we know what the Bible says.  If this Gospel be hid it is hid to those who are lost.  Who the god of this world has blinded.  So I advise you to leave those you know will not receive the truth along.  What fellowship has light with darkness.  Truth divides, and  separates.  Some are nothing more than trouble makers and I don't care if they like me or not. Jesus said we would be hated for His name sake.  Not hated because of a trinity that was dream up by some half serving ungodly men after people started drifting away from truth.  The Bible say ever learning but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.  It is useless to try and discuss truth with those who refuse it.  Hang tight and just keep praying.  God will show the world who He really is when ever knee shall bow.  You know Benny Hinn says there is nine in the godhead.  He says they are distinct persons.  Each person has a body, soul, and spirit.  Three times three is nine.  He said this on TBN. Trash Broadcasting Network.  But I gues if we start with one and get three then why not nine or more.  If you going to be wrong might as well go way out there.  I encourage you to stop responding to these guys that want to stir the pot.  I writing this to you to let you know I am here for you man.

hey bro didnt see the post till now, and i agree to the fact there are several veiw points of the blind,(enlightened ones, trinity and just beleive to name a few).
a better question to be pondered is who is wrong? is anybody wrong? i guess the normall mans answer is that all are going to heaven. not my opinion, as to what the word says. a rightious man scarcely makes it!! the path to destruction is broad and many be that travel it. who will travel the straight and narrow for few be that find it. i'll do my best to stay on the old path , the straight and narrow path. the tale of the broad path lets me know that not many are gonna make it and will be deceived. that is why i am so definsive on my faith and it is not something to be taken so lightly. as i said before, ya gotta stand for something or you'll fall for anything. just as my grandmother didnt want dice in the house, i dont want to get started in the new concept and an enlightened view. these are mans lilly livered, wobbled knee, spineless  doctrines.

That is kinda what they used to say about the pentecostal experience....

I am so glad I know for sure what is right.  My prayers go up for those who were once in the Apostolic Pentecostal Truth and has denied it and now are lost.  I just hope they have not gone too far.

Heb 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
People who have denied the truth are lost.  Does not matter who they are. 

You’ve posted some great beginning scriptures. Where are the words of Jesus in there? I know we can’t post the entire Bible, but it looks like a stronger leaning on the students, rather than the Master. More Apostolic than Bible.


Wow I was sure the Scripture I used from Luke 24 was the Lord Jesus Christ speaking.

Re: the Father vs. the Son terminology and the trinitarian accusations: I personally don't see any trinitarian reference from OOJ, and I have no problem using the terms these days.  I know the difference between the two and what each references.  Fact is, there are clearly two roles presented in the NT until all things are placed under His feet (1 Cor 15).  There is also a forever-more, physical manifestation of the One God, who, by the way, is called the Father only once in the OT, but many, many times in the NT.

We can't ignore the terminology, but I do pray that we always remember that these do not refer to the number of persons that God "is".  It is all about relationship of Spirit to Spirit manifested.  That One Spirit will always be the eternal One called "Father" (Spirit) and, since approx. 4BC known to the world as Jesus Christ, the Son of God (same Spirit manifested as human). 

Do I have it all figured out?  Nope.  I still get a bit confused by some of the terminology, but I have cemented in my belief that there is One God and His name IS Jesus Christ.  That is His identity, just as mine is John.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 04, 2008, 12:03:00 PM
Since God is calling His people to back to Himself, -in preparation for His return-, it seems very important to know:

Is Apostolic truth different than Biblical truth?

I say "no".  Does Apostolic truth encompass the whole of the Biblical truth?  Again, I say "no".  But, it does encompass the truths we, as the Gentile bride, are governed by.  There were no "Apostolic truths" before this new covenant era.  That, IMO, is why it is used.  Why would we use anything else to discuss the covenant we are under?  Is Tabernacle truth different than Biblical truth?  Is Mosaic truth, Davidic truth, Adamic truth, etc, etc?  There's nothing wrong with a thread asking for answers to "Apostolic truth questions", because it simply points us to the time that we live under and the commandments we are required to obey to be a part of His Kingdom.

Quote
The Apostles did not have a church building, nor limit services to Sunday/Wednesday. They did not have a paid pastor, paid staff, or parsonage. They did not pay tithes, nor take up offerings for themselves.  We do all those things, even though the Bible and Apostles teach differently. Are we in truth?

Where did the Apostles gather?  What day(s) of the week?  Who was James of Jerusalem?  Who were the "elders" Paul appointed to the Gentile congregations?  How did they make a living?  Did they work until they dropped dead and another elder replaced them?  Where did Paul stay when he journeyed?  What about the other evangelists?

It seems that there is much left out of the specifics of the Church that maybe God left to man to figure out how to accomplish according to the time His people would live in.  Are there any specific commandments regarding the above?  If not, are they really "apostolic truths" or just apostolic lifestyles/preferences? 

Quoteshouldn’t Jesus’ teachings/words/example be our mirror?

Where are the words of Jesus in there? I know we can’t post the entire Bible, but it looks like a stronger leaning on the students, rather than the Master. More Apostolic than Bible.

Do those who are born again and living a life pleasing to the Lord need to quote the "words in red" when supporting a belief with another who claims to be a brother?  Isn't the understanding that the Lord is the very One who inspired the whole Book and that just because we find some of His words "in red" they are no more important in this regard than those in black in Leviticus or Philemon? 

Apostolic truths (defined above), IMO, don't have to have words in red to support them when discussing topics with brethren of like precious faith.  I know what Brother Dad posted would have been just as valid as the words of God in flesh (aka the words in red) even if he hadn't included the Luke passage.  He does not have to give equal or even more weight to the words of Jesus Christ to establish a belief for me.  I know his belief about the God who spoke "Let there be light" and Who also cried in a manger.  That is enough for me for him to post something from Genesis to Revelation and not have to balance it out with the words of Jesus to substantiate his thought.

Quote from: OGIA on July 05, 2008, 07:55:00 PM
Re: the Father vs. the Son terminology and the trinitarian accusations: I personally don't see any trinitarian reference from OOJ, and I have no problem using the terms these days.   I know the difference between the two and what each references.  Fact is, there are clearly two roles presented in the NT until all things are placed under His feet (1 Cor 15).  There is also a forever-more, physical manifestation of the One God, who, by the way, is called the Father only once in the OT, but many, many times in the NT.

We can't ignore the terminology, but I do pray that we always remember that these do not refer to the number of persons that God "is".  It is all about relationship of Spirit to Spirit manifested.  That One Spirit will always be the eternal One called "Father" (Spirit) and, since approx. 4BC known to the world as Jesus Christ, the Son of God (same Spirit manifested as human). 

Do I have it all figured out?  Nope.  I still get a bit confused by some of the terminology, but I have cemented in my belief that there is One God and His name IS Jesus Christ.  That is His identity, just as mine is John.

i dont have a problem with using the termenology either. i just feel that when it is all you use it is considered to be pushing a trinity issue and subtlely trying to change someones veiw from oneness to trinity. thats why i guess i get aggressive in this issue, i phsyco anallize too deep!!??  LOL sence i feel that oneness has been revealed to me i no longer have to use these terms and i take liberty in not doing so.
when it used to be father son and holyghost i can now say God or Jesus, wichever my brain comes up with first. to me it is one in the same!!

dido on not having it all figured out!! just the facts, mamm!! (dragnet)LOL  -yo

Quote from: OGIA on July 05, 2008, 07:55:00 PM
Re: the Father vs. the Son terminology and the trinitarian accusations: I personally don't see any trinitarian reference from OOJ, and I have no problem using the terms these days.  I know the difference between the two and what each references.  Fact is, there are clearly two roles presented in the NT until all things are placed under His feet (1 Cor 15).  There is also a forever-more, physical manifestation of the One God, who, by the way, is called the Father only once in the OT, but many, many times in the NT.

We can't ignore the terminology, but I do pray that we always remember that these do not refer to the number of persons that God "is".  It is all about relationship of Spirit to Spirit manifested.  That One Spirit will always be the eternal One called "Father" (Spirit) and, since approx. 4BC known to the world as Jesus Christ, the Son of God (same Spirit manifested as human). 

Terminology is no problem for a true Apostolic Believer.  For we know He is Fahter in creation, Son In redemption, Holy Ghost in the Church.  He is my Heavenly Father, Bright and morning Star, Lilly of my valley, ect.

Terminology is no problem for a true Apostolic Believer.  For we know He is Fahter in creation, Son In redemption, Holy Ghost in the Church.  He is my Heavenly Father, Bright and morning Star, Lilly of my valley, ect.
i dont have a problem with using the termenology either. i just feel that when it is all you use it is considered to be pushing a trinity issue and subtlely trying to change someones veiw from oneness to trinity. or maybe i just have a thorn in my side, or a bur under my saddle!! LOL  -yo

Dittos yo and Bro. Dad. 

And I understand what both of you are saying.  While I don't have a problem with the terms, I do still have a problem when people use the term "Father" and oppose it to the name "Jesus".  No problem with using "Father" in opposition to "Son", because there is a difference there.  But, I don't oppose the terms Father and Jesus because they are one and the same person.  One term identifies role, one confirms identity.

 :thumbsup2: since i know bro. dad and trust his judgement i kinda stay close to what he says also. beginning to like what you say also ogia. i feel that when i study and come out on the same page as you two i must not be far off. although i know my thoughts might need a fine tuning now and again. thanks!!   -yo

I agree with your post OGIA Thank you for your input.

Quote from: yosemite on July 06, 2008, 08:14:20 PM
i dont have a problem with using the termenology either. i just feel that when it is all you use it is considered to be pushing a trinity issue and subtlely trying to change someones veiw from oneness to trinity....  LOL sence i feel that oneness has been revealed to me i no longer have to use these terms and i take liberty in not doing so.

I don't understand why you would say "I no longer have to use these terms."  These are the terms used by Jesus Himself, as well as by Jesus' apostles - Paul, Peter, James, John, Matthew, et al - in their writings!  Why the aversion to using the very terminology employed by Jesus and His apostles?  Should we not rather seek to properly understand what they are saying, and correct those whose understanding is incorrect?

I repeat, NO ONE here is setting forth trinitarian doctrine as truth.  Those of us here who use Father/Son terminology in reference to God do so with the same meaning, as best as we are able to understand, used by Jesus and His apostles.  None of us by doing so are trying to change anyone's view from oneness to trinity.

 :ignore:

Quote from: titushome on July 07, 2008, 02:47:46 PM

Quote from: yosemite on July 06, 2008, 08:14:20 PM
i dont have a problem with using the termenology either. i just feel that when it is all you use it is considered to be pushing a trinity issue and subtlely trying to change someones veiw from oneness to trinity....  LOL sence i feel that oneness has been revealed to me i no longer have to use these terms and i take liberty in not doing so.

I don't understand why you would say "I no longer have to use these terms."  These are the terms used by Jesus Himself, as well as by Jesus' apostles - Paul, Peter, James, John, Matthew, et al - in their writings!  Why the aversion to using the very terminology employed by Jesus and His apostles?  Should we not rather seek to properly understand what they are saying, and correct those whose understanding is incorrect?

I repeat, NO ONE here is setting forth trinitarian doctrine as truth.  Those of us here who use Father/Son terminology in reference to God do so with the same meaning, as best as we are able to understand, used by Jesus and His apostles.  None of us by doing so are trying to change anyone's view from oneness to trinity.

I agree I feel there is no way around using such terms.  I learned along time ago to that by avoiding these terms I often fueled the trinitarins fire.  It is better to understand them.  I will add in some cases when talking to trinitarains you are just wasteing your breath.  Learn to judge the spirit.  I come across many that are just wanting to cause a fuss.  Be strong in the Bible Truth about the only true and livng God.  Let us not give place to the devil by arguing with folks that refuse to see truth.  However always be ready to teach a good Bible study.

bro dad:     I agree I feel there is no way around using such terms.  I learned along time ago to that by avoiding these terms I often fueled the trinitarins fire.  It is better to understand them.  I will add in some cases when talking to trinitarains you are just wasteing your breath.  Learn to judge the spirit.  I come across many that are just wanting to cause a fuss.  Be strong in the Bible Truth about the only true and livng God.  Let us not give place to the devil by arguing with folks that refuse to see truth.  However always be ready to teach a good Bible study.
******************************************************************************************************************************

so your saying to be instant in and out of season. decerning the time you should or shouldnt put your foot in your mouth. LOL i generally keep putting my foot in my mouth.  sorry!!     LOL

Sorting out from the holiday weekend. Getting back in the groove. Will catch up later in the evening/night.  :thumbsup2:

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 04, 2008, 02:15:03 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 04, 2008, 12:46:20 PM

Apostolic Truth is Bible truth anything else is false doctrine.
Do not all other parts of the Body say the same thing? What's the difference? 

There are no other parts of the body.  Anything else is lost.


Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.


The Apostles did not have a church building, nor limit services to Sunday/Wednesday. They did not have a paid pastor, paid staff, or parsonage. They did not pay tithes, nor take up offerings for themselves.  Hey that is why we do home Bible studies in peoples homes.  And yes the according to Paul the ministry was to live by the Gospel.

We do all those things, even though the Bible and Apostles teach differently. Are we in truth?  If you are not One God Apostolic then no you are not Truth


The Bible definition of Apostolic Truth Eph 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; 

Since Jesus is the chief cornerstone, and a cornerstone is a finished product for exact emulation - shouldn't Jesus' teachings/words/example be our mirror?

You've posted some great beginning scriptures. Where are the words of Jesus in there? I know we can't post the entire Bible, but it looks like a stronger leaning on the students, rather than the Master. More Apostolic than Bible. I could post many of Jesus Words but the false teachers that are lost still will not beleive them for they are Bblinded by the God of this wordl.


Beleive it or be lost.

You used this phrase a lot. I take it to be applying to Apostolic truth. Our history is not one of great confidence in one another.

Therefore, is this statement personal, biblical, or universal among followers of Apostolic truth? This statment is based upon Bible and History and the leading of my Lord Jesus Christ.



That's all the time I have right now. Thank you for participating. I look forward to continuing later.

Post all you want I will stop posting along these lines Becasue if you can't see it then you are blinded my the God of this world.  If you do see it then we will meet in heaven.  Anyone beleiving the trinity is part of the mother harlot church and not God's Church. 

True Apostolics beleive the entire Bible and stand on it.  And we do not try to teach the false teaching that God is persons and not a Spirit.

I won't waste your time, or mine Bro Dad. As stated earlier: we have a history of no confidence in one another. However, for the sake of discussion - and those who may read this - I will reply. Well, to a degree anyway.

Overall, I take it you believe anyone who does not accept Apostolic truth {doctrine} - with all its peculiarities - is lost w/o the truth. I think you believe Apostolic truth = biblical truth, as long as biblical truth does not disagree with Apostolic truth. {I think that's right}.

I recall Jesus saying: I am the way, the truth, and the life. He that believes in me shall have everlasting life. I don't recall Him saying Apostolic truth was the way, the truth, and the life. Nor do I recall Him saying belief on Apostolic truth granted everlasting life. I do remember him praying for those who would believe on Him, based upon His disciples' witness. The key being ON HIM though. That's what I meant by leaning on the Students more than the Master. Tendency to misunderstand what was said. 


The Apostles did not have a church building, nor limit services to Sunday/Wednesday. They did not have a paid pastor, paid staff, or parsonage. They did not pay tithes, nor take up offerings for themselves.
Hey that is why we do home Bible studies in peoples homes. And yes the according to Paul the ministry was to live by the Gospel.

We do all those things, even though the Bible and Apostles teach differently. Are we in truth?  If you are not One God Apostolic then no you are not Truth

You didn't answer the question. IF Apostolic truth is the same as Biblical Truth, why do we all continue to demand/accept tithes, support financially draining church buildings/programs, and take up offerings in payment of preaching? The Apostles did not do that, as there is -zero- NT scripture and -zero- historical evidence until about the 4th century. Biblical truth proves tithing was an ordinance of the Law of Moses, annulled at Calvary. There is nothing inherently wrong with buildings or paying someone. There is though when it is presented as "Thus saith the Lord, pay or be cursed."

Biblical truth records Jesus telling His disciples to take no money with them, for freely you have received, freely give. Biblical truth records Jesus not demanding money from anyone, nor setting up a "new priesthood" modeled after the old. Each believer is a priest and each believer is equal. Where do we get the idea that some are more equal than others and demanding of our support? Is it biblical or Apostolic?

So, if the Apostles didn't preach or do it, and the Bible confirms that, - when we do it, are we in truth?


Note that the Baptists, Assembly of God, Assembly of the Lord Jesus Christ, Methodists, etc, also teach the same thing on this subject. All teach the necessity of tithes and offerings to avoid the curse. Every one of them. Even though it is not Biblical Truth.

Biblical truth teaches giving as the Spirit leads. Giving to those who are in need, especially to the brethren.

Again, whose truth do we believe?

It is repeatedly inferred that I believe in the trinity. No I do not. Once again, I remind all the fine brothers and sisters of Godplace that I too see and understand DT 6:4; and have experienced Acts 2:38. That was in 1975. I've never changed that. Never disbelieved it. So back off the accusations when you run out of things to say. It doesn't anger me in the least. It does make you look bad.

Quote from: yosemite on July 04, 2008, 11:19:17 PM
i couldnt say it much better myself but as for scripture i cant say it any better. but i do have some more scripture that would fit to that quite nicely.  :clap: :clap: :clap: bro dad is on target for me!!

if they didnt take offerings and tieths, what was judas doing with the groups money bag. what was the money bag for? where did the money come from?
what was the money used for? the money bag must have been alright to start with because Jesus allowed it unlike the money changers in the temple.

Nothing wrong with the money bag. The money came from the free-will giving of people, not from a mandated requirement. In the OT, no one but farmers & ranchers paid tithes. The regular people did not. Tithes were to feed the Levitical priesthood who had no other way to feed themselves. This was how God provided for the Levites who alone ministered unto the Lord God. Jesus was showing the disciples that God was more than capable of meeting their needs, w/o dependence upon anyone else. He was teaching them to take no thought but depend upon God who knows your needs. That's why the Spirit of God moved upon some to share their God-blessed abundance. Just like the church did at its birth. We are supposed to do the same; when your brother is in need, meet that need from your abundance. We struggle to do so because our money first goes to the re-established priesthood, leaving little if any available for anyone else. How many in our congregations pay their way into poverty in order to support a pastor and building? How many have tithed their entire Christian lives and still have virtually nothing, while the "minister" lives high on the hog? 

Nothing personal toward any "minister". Just reference to the system as a whole.

Quote from: yosemite on July 05, 2008, 12:05:02 AM

Apostolic Truth is Bible truth anything else is false doctrine.

Do not all other parts of the Body say the same thing? What's the difference?

the body will not grow a third arm, leg, ear, eye. all other portions of the body that is not of the body is false.do you beleive that a man with a prosthetic leg
when he dies(if saved) his prosthetic leg will go to heaven? why not? did the false leg not do a good work? did it not look just like a true leg? is it because it didnt have the Holyspirit and was more worldly and materialistic? well thats just unfair isnt it!! or is it?


I don't understand this. I think you mean anything not Apostolic is false, like a prosthetic limb. My intended question is:

Do not other denominations say anything they don't believe is false doctrine too? Why is Apostolic truth any different than Baptist or Assembly of God truth? It seems Biblical truth is circumvented by all.


Acts 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.


The Apostles did not have a church building, nor limit services to Sunday/Wednesday. They did not have a paid pastor, paid staff, or parsonage. They did not pay tithes, nor take up offerings for themselves.

well now, who were they writing the epistles to? the apostles were bishops to all the churches who followed their teachings of Christ. paul worked as a tent maker for his survival but the churches had offerings as do the missionaries of this day and time live and spread the word on.if the churches didnt give ties or offering what was all that with anninias when he got into trouble? where did all that money go? did they spread the word with it? did the apostles use a portion of it to travel with the word?did the bible say that the workman is worthy of his wage? do you beleive that a preacher is not worthy of his wage?i dont limit myself to social services either. i go in the word all the time, learning, praying and worshiping.(in my own way of course)


No where in the epistles is there any commandment to tithe. No where in the espistles is there any re-establishment of the congregation supported priesthood. Sure saints supported Paul's journeys with money and food. Nothing wrong with that. They were not commanded to support or be cursed, though.

History shows there was no record of tithes or church buildings until the 4th century. Such practices fell into vogue after the council of nicea, and we know what happened there. Annanias got into trouble because he chose to sell his land and give ALL the proceeds to the church, to meet the needs of everybody. He died because he changed his mind and wanted to keep SOME of it. He lied about the selling price and God killed him. Had nothing to do with tithes or mandated offerings for the ministry. All NT giving is freewill, including domestic and foreign. If a congregation chooses to support someone with a salary, that's fine because it's freewill. Otherwise, the ministry should support itself like Paul; working in a profession and not placing the saints back under the curse.  Biblical truth teaches this.


We do all those things, even though the Bible and Apostles teach differently. Are we in truth?

i dont see anything different other than modern tech.


Ever seriously looked into the subject? There is a difference.


The Bible definition of Apostolic Truth Eph 2:20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone; 

Since Jesus is the chief cornerstone, and a cornerstone is a finished product for exact emulation - shouldn't Jesus' teachings/words/example be our mirror?

You've posted some great beginning scriptures. Where are the words of Jesus in there? I know we can't post the entire Bible, but it looks like a stronger leaning on the students, rather than the Master. More Apostolic than Bible.

are you suggesting that the apostles were antichrist? were the apostles not teaching the very word of Christ? as far as i can see and read what they teach  fits like a glove to what Jesus taught. we lean on no man but the scripture is used as a good proof.


No I'm not suggesting anything like that. The question is our teaching, not theirs. IF Apostolic truth follows exactly what the Apostles taught, why do we teach things they did not? Why do we get defensive over Jesus' terminology regarding Himself and His Father? Why is Acts 2:38 "the plan of salvation" and not the cross? Why is Apostolic doctrine superior to any other denominal doctrine?

My contention is nothing less than Apostolic truth is not really different than any other denominations truth. All reject anyone who doesn't follow "their truth", even though all first come thru the cross. We must all forget about "our truth" and focus on biblical truth. Otherwise, we remain with 3000+ denominations formed from the same Bible and believing on the same Jesus. Somehow the religion has got to stop and we allow the HG to make us one in Him.


Beleive it or be lost.          dido

You used this phrase a lot. I take it to be applying to Apostolic truth. Our history is not one of great confidence in one another.

well its best to not have confidence in those who prove themselves wrong.you know, the double minded man and all.


Again, I'm wrong for apparently not seeing things your way. How self-righteous is that?


Therefore, is this statement personal, biblical, or universal among followers of Apostolic truth?

if they follow the bible it is universal!!


So acknowledged Apostolics can also be "wrong and double-minded" unless believing exactly alike? Sounds personal to me.


That's all the time I have right now. Thank you for participating. I look forward to continuing later.
okiedokie!!   -yo       

Looking forward to it.        :teeth:

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 05, 2008, 04:28:22 PM
I am so glad I know for sure what is right.  My prayers go up for those who were once in the Apostolic Pentecostal Truth and has denied it and now are lost.  I just hope they have not gone too far.

Heb 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
People who have denied the truth are lost.  Does not matter who they are. 

*** That verse has absolutely nothing to do with Apostolic Pentecostal Truth. It's talking about saints who have turned back to self-will and the world being unable to come to repentance like the first time. Sin before salvation was done in ignorance; sin afterward is on purpose. If they come back to God, it will be with many consequences of their sin. Just like us when we sin - purposely choosing to ignore the HG and word - there are always consequences. Those consequences may be nothing more than dealing with self-condemnation or it could be total destruction of our credibility. You don't have to be Apostolic to disobey God.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 05, 2008, 04:34:15 PM
You've posted some great beginning scriptures. Where are the words of Jesus in there? I know we can't post the entire Bible, but it looks like a stronger leaning on the students, rather than the Master. More Apostolic than Bible.


Wow I was sure the Scripture I used from Luke 24 was the Lord Jesus Christ speaking.

Cute. I like sarcasm too. It helps to side-track things very neatly. Was the statement too difficult to understand? Does it need re-wording? Maybe I missed the red-letters.

Quote from: OGIA on July 05, 2008, 07:55:00 PM

Re: the Father vs. the Son terminology and the trinitarian accusations: I personally don't see any trinitarian reference from OOJ, and I have no problem using the terms these days.  I know the difference between the two and what each references.  Fact is, there are clearly two roles presented in the NT until all things are placed under His feet (1 Cor 15).  There is also a forever-more, physical manifestation of the One God, who, by the way, is called the Father only once in the OT, but many, many times in the NT.

We can't ignore the terminology, but I do pray that we always remember that these do not refer to the number of persons that God "is".  It is all about relationship of Spirit to Spirit manifested.  That One Spirit will always be the eternal One called "Father" (Spirit) and, since approx. 4BC known to the world as Jesus Christ, the Son of God (same Spirit manifested as human). 

Do I have it all figured out?  Nope.  I still get a bit confused by some of the terminology, but I have cemented in my belief that there is One God and His name IS Jesus Christ.  That is His identity, just as mine is John.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 04, 2008, 07:03:00 AM
Since God is calling His people to back to Himself, -in preparation for His return-, it seems very important to know:

Is Apostolic truth different than Biblical truth?

I say "no".  Does Apostolic truth encompass the whole of the Biblical truth?  Again, I say "no".  But, it does encompass the truths we, as the Gentile bride, are governed by.  There were no "Apostolic truths" before this new covenant era.  That, IMO, is why it is used.  Why would we use anything else to discuss the covenant we are under?  Is Tabernacle truth different than Biblical truth?  Is Mosaic truth, Davidic truth, Adamic truth, etc, etc?  There's nothing wrong with a thread asking for answers to "Apostolic truth questions", because it simply points us to the time that we live under and the commandments we are required to obey to be a part of His Kingdom.

****Thanks John for joining. I always appreciate your insight.

I see what you're saying. I agree. We are wise to study the Apostles biblically and historically. I meant the question in the context of superiority. I don't think the thread title is inherently right or wrong. I think our boxing up of truth can be.
Quote

The Apostles did not have a church building, nor limit services to Sunday/Wednesday. They did not have a paid pastor, paid staff, or parsonage. They did not pay tithes, nor take up offerings for themselves.  We do all those things, even though the Bible and Apostles teach differently. Are we in truth?

Where did the Apostles gather?  What day(s) of the week?  Who was James of Jerusalem?  Who were the "elders" Paul appointed to the Gentile congregations?  How did they make a living?  Did they work until they dropped dead and another elder replaced them?  Where did Paul stay when he journeyed?  What about the other evangelists?

It seems that there is much left out of the specifics of the Church that maybe God left to man to figure out how to accomplish according to the time His people would live in.  Are there any specific commandments regarding the above?  If not, are they really "apostolic truths" or just apostolic lifestyles/preferences? 

***Very good. Thought provoking.


Quote
shouldn't Jesus' teachings/words/example be our mirror?

Where are the words of Jesus in there? I know we can't post the entire Bible, but it looks like a stronger leaning on the students, rather than the Master. More Apostolic than Bible.

Do those who are born again and living a life pleasing to the Lord need to quote the "words in red" when supporting a belief with another who claims to be a brother?  Isn't the understanding that the Lord is the very One who inspired the whole Book and that just because we find some of His words "in red" they are no more important in this regard than those in black in Leviticus or Philemon? 

Apostolic truths (defined above), IMO, don't have to have words in red to support them when discussing topics with brethren of like precious faith.  I know what Brother Dad posted would have been just as valid as the words of God in flesh (aka the words in red) even if he hadn't included the Luke passage.  He does not have to give equal or even more weight to the words of Jesus Christ to establish a belief for me.  I know his belief about the God who spoke "Let there be light" and Who also cried in a manger.  That is enough for me for him to post something from Genesis to Revelation and not have to balance it out with the words of Jesus to substantiate his thought.


***Aren't the words in red supposed to be our foundation and cornerstone? We can't really know Apostolic truth w/o them. Some very good scriptures were used; taken from the Apostles instructions to other saints. Remember, we're using Apostolic truth because we're Apostolic in experience. The concept holds to Baptist, or Methodist, or Charismatic; the point being is does _________ truth = Biblical truth? Jesus told us He was the Truth, so _______ truth has to measure up to Jesus. If I take my measurements more from the Epistles than from the Gospels, something can get out of alignment. That's what I meant.

Bro Dad doesn't believe I'm a brother. Which is fine. I know he is. 

Quote from: yosemite on July 06, 2008, 08:14:20 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 05, 2008, 07:55:00 PM
Re: the Father vs. the Son terminology and the trinitarian accusations: I personally don't see any trinitarian reference from OOJ, and I have no problem using the terms these days.   I know the difference between the two and what each references.  Fact is, there are clearly two roles presented in the NT until all things are placed under His feet (1 Cor 15).  There is also a forever-more, physical manifestation of the One God, who, by the way, is called the Father only once in the OT, but many, many times in the NT.

We can't ignore the terminology, but I do pray that we always remember that these do not refer to the number of persons that God "is".  It is all about relationship of Spirit to Spirit manifested.  That One Spirit will always be the eternal One called "Father" (Spirit) and, since approx. 4BC known to the world as Jesus Christ, the Son of God (same Spirit manifested as human). 

Do I have it all figured out?  Nope.  I still get a bit confused by some of the terminology, but I have cemented in my belief that there is One God and His name IS Jesus Christ.  That is His identity, just as mine is John.

i dont have a problem with using the termenology either. i just feel that when it is all you use it is considered to be pushing a trinity issue and subtlely trying to change someones veiw from oneness to trinity. thats why i guess i get aggressive in this issue, i phsyco anallize too deep!!??  LOL sence i feel that oneness has been revealed to me i no longer have to use these terms and i take liberty in not doing so.
when it used to be father son and holyghost i can now say God or Jesus, wichever my brain comes up with first. to me it is one in the same!!

dido on not having it all figured out!! just the facts, mamm!! (dragnet)LOL  -yo

***Neither myself, nor anyone else is pushing a trinity issue. That's a defense mechanism. I am trying to put some concepts and perspectives perhaps not seen or considered. That's what discussions are for. The Body assembling itself.

i dont know about where you are from but around here the pastors dont live high on the hog. there are churches around here going out because there is no one to fill the pastor position. no one around here cares for the starvation bit. around here the tiethes are offerings to keep the word moving, not to make wealthy preachers!!
so i ask again, is the preacher not worthy of his wage? i beleive it to be a ballencing act to go from high on the hog to no church at all!! to be seeing the preachers living high on the hog your either jealous or you dont know what you are saying or maybe the wrong church. and another thing our church and the sherman church are dedicated out of the tiethes and the building fund to be shure that members and family and the community and our mission ministries are taken care of before our church bills are taken care of. to the point if Gods money is involved be sure men of God are involved!!    -yo

as for the rest that has already been said and done to the point of traveling in circles  :ignore:

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 08, 2008, 01:08:01 AM

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 05, 2008, 04:28:22 PM
I am so glad I know for sure what is right.  My prayers go up for those who were once in the Apostolic Pentecostal Truth and has denied it and now are lost.  I just hope they have not gone too far.

Heb 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
People who have denied the truth are lost.  Does not matter who they are. 

*** That verse has absolutely nothing to do with Apostolic Pentecostal Truth. It’s talking about saints who have turned back to self-will and the world being unable to come to repentance like the first time. Sin before salvation was done in ignorance; sin afterward is on purpose. If they come back to God, it will be with many consequences of their sin. Just like us when we sin - purposely choosing to ignore the HG and word - there are always consequences. Those consequences may be nothing more than dealing with self-condemnation or it could be total destruction of our credibility. You don’t have to be Apostolic to disobey God.

This my friend is all anout Apostolic truth.  Apostolic truth is all they had in the Church at that time.  That was all you could leave.  I fully understand it is talking about going back in sin.  That is what it is when someone denies the Truth for trinity falsehood.  Will continue to pray for those who have put Christ back on the cross with their lies from hell of a trinity. 

Also every verse in the Bible is Apostolic Truth.  For we are a whole Bible Church.  Anything outside of One God Jesus Name teaching is false.  I pray for people to wake up before it is too late. 

whew!! dont stop him when he's preaching good!! the only plan i beleive in is one God, one Word, one Way= keys to the kingdom, in which were given to peter!!
and peter used them in acts 2:38 (the new covenant)

i agree to the whole bible being an apostolic truth!! the old testiment was a forshadowing of things to come and is still the word and as bro dad said we are a whole truth whole bible beleiving church, leaving nothing out.

oops i was suposed to- :ignore: *sits back awhile* :popcorn:     -yo

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 08, 2008, 01:32:01 AM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 08, 2008, 01:08:01 AM

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 05, 2008, 04:28:22 PM
I am so glad I know for sure what is right.  My prayers go up for those who were once in the Apostolic Pentecostal Truth and has denied it and now are lost.  I just hope they have not gone too far.

Heb 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
People who have denied the truth are lost.  Does not matter who they are. 

*** That verse has absolutely nothing to do with Apostolic Pentecostal Truth. It's talking about saints who have turned back to self-will and the world being unable to come to repentance like the first time. Sin before salvation was done in ignorance; sin afterward is on purpose. If they come back to God, it will be with many consequences of their sin. Just like us when we sin - purposely choosing to ignore the HG and word - there are always consequences. Those consequences may be nothing more than dealing with self-condemnation or it could be total destruction of our credibility. You don't have to be Apostolic to disobey God.

This my friend is all anout Apostolic truth.  Apostolic truth is all they had in the Church at that time.  That was all you could leave.  I fully understand it is talking about going back in sin.  That is what it is when someone denies the Truth for trinity falsehood.  Will continue to pray for those who have put Christ back on the cross with their lies from hell of a trinity. 

Also every verse in the Bible is Apostolic Truth.  For we are a whole Bible Church.  Anything outside of One God Jesus Name teaching is false.  I pray for people to wake up before it is too late. 

Once again the "oneness vs trinity" diverts the discussion. That was never implied or mentioned at all. And what does "Anything outside of One God Jesus Name teaching is false" have to do with anything? That's never been in question!


***sigh***

Thank you though for your comments.

Does anyone else out there wish to discuss this? Perhaps if I give a different "for instance"? This is just one example, ok?

IF {as Bro Dad stated} Apostolic truth believes and teaches the whole Bible - just like _______ truth proclaims to - then why does biblical truth not support mandated tithing as Apostolic truth {+ every other denomination} teaches ? Why does Apostolic truth believe what the Apostles did not?

See, that's the question. That's the discrepancies we all have to straighten out. What is TRUTH and what is ERROR.

The doctrine of the trinity is no worse than the doctrine of the tithe. Both are unbiblical products of Man's misunderstanding scripture.


What do we do about it? Like the Bereans, we search the scriptures to see if this be so. If it is biblical, we alter our ______ truth toward correction. Line upon line and precept upon precept. Learning to truly allow the Holy Ghost to guide us.

If it's not biblical, then perhaps we are in a position to enlighten a brother, or sister about the Word. Just as Apollos' understanding was undertaken by Aquila and Priscilla.

Is the Church willing to do so?

Quote from: yosemite on July 08, 2008, 01:17:57 AM
i dont know about where you are from but around here the pastors dont live high on the hog. there are churches around here going out because there is no one to fill the pastor position. no one around here cares for the starvation bit. around here the tiethes are offerings to keep the word moving, not to make wealthy preachers!!

so i ask again, is the preacher not worthy of his wage? i beleive it to be a ballencing act to go from high on the hog to no church at all!! to be seeing the preachers living high on the hog your either jealous or you dont know what you are saying or maybe the wrong church. and another thing our church and the sherman church are dedicated out of the tiethes and the building fund to be shure that members and family and the community and our mission ministries are taken care of before our church bills are taken care of. to the point if Gods money is involved be sure men of God are involved!!    -yo

Please note what I said: Nothing personal toward any "minister". Just reference to the system as a whole.


I seriously doubt you do not know of any minister who lives better than his congregation. I also seriously doubt you do not know any saint who has tithed faithfully for years and years, yet is still waiting on "the windows of heaven to pour out that financial breakthru" as promised by the pulpit.

The comparison is: Apostolic truth, along with ______ truth, faithfully subscribe to non-biblical commands & methods. What passes for the 21st Century Church is not as biblical, nor Apostolic as it thinks it is. But it will be as it repents of its leaven and sheds the old wineskins. What God has declared He will do in us here at the end, He cannot do until we all come out of religious doctrines, and fully into Christ; the pure, unleavened word of God. That's what is meant by come out and be separate. That's comparable to returning from spiritual Babylon.

Whether Apostolics believe it or not, there are members of the Body scattered within the other denominations. Members bought and paid for by the same blood of the Lamb. In a spiritual sense, we all come out of the (denomi) nations into Christ. This is the remnant of the end. This is the true Church. The Jesus truth saints. The biblical truth.  :teeth:

Shouldn't we all want to be a part of that?

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 08, 2008, 05:59:26 AM
IF {as Bro Dad stated} Apostolic truth believes and teaches the whole Bible - just like _______ truth proclaims to - then why does biblical truth not support mandated tithing as Apostolic truth {+ every other denomination} teaches ? Why does Apostolic truth believe what the Apostles did not?

See, that's the question. That's the discrepancies we all have to straighten out. What is TRUTH and what is ERROR.

The doctrine of the trinity is no worse than the doctrine of the tithe. Both are unbiblical products of Man's misunderstanding scripture.

Well once again you have missed it my friend.  Tithes are just as much of the Bible today as it was in the Old Testement. 

1 Cor 9:7 Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock?
8 Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also?
9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?
10 Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.
11 If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?
12 If others be partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? Nevertheless we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ.
13 Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar?14 Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.
KJV
Notice Paul is not writing in the past tense.  Why people have such a hard time just doing what the Word says is beyond me.  So if I was one rebeling against God's Word and withholding the tithes I beleive I would correct it.  How be it some just want to try to dim the light.  Apostolic Truth is still the only way.

Now I do hope you are a true Apostolic believer and you are just trying to get us to put the truth out there so everyone will see.  I have known of people asking things like this just so someone else can see the truth.  I do really hope this is your case and you are not just rebelling against God's Word.

QuoteWhether Apostolics believe it or not, there are members of the Body scattered within the other denominations. Members bought and paid for by the same blood of the Lamb. In a spiritual sense, we all come out of the (denomi) nations into Christ. This is the remnant of the end. This is the true Church. The Jesus truth saints. The biblical truth.  :teeth:

Shouldn't we all want to be a part of that?

Sure there are people in other churches as long as they have fulfulled the Word.  Repented, gone down in the water in the name of Jesus Christ, and are filled with His Spirit.  The name on the door does not matter.  The Doctrine of Jesus Christ is what counts.  Anything outside of One God, Jesus Name is wrong.  And if they find the truth while in a false church doctrine church then the Bible teaches they should come out from her.I do not believe it has to say Apostolic on the door, but must be Apostolic Truth Doctrine that is being taught.  Once again
Gal 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

2 John 9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

There is no other Doctrine.

And for thos who think Jesus has to say then
Matt 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
KJV
Notice he said they ought to have done what they did.  He did not say they should not pay tithes but that they should have, but there were other things also.   And these are RED LETTER WORDS.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 08, 2008, 12:12:51 PM

QuoteWhether Apostolics believe it or not, there are members of the Body scattered within the other denominations. Members bought and paid for by the same blood of the Lamb. In a spiritual sense, we all come out of the (denomi) nations into Christ. This is the remnant of the end. This is the true Church. The Jesus truth saints. The biblical truth.  :teeth:

Shouldn't we all want to be a part of that?

Sure there are people in other churches as long as they have fulfulled the Word.  Repented, gone down in the water in the name of Jesus Christ, and are filled with His Spirit.  The name on the door does not matter.  The Doctrine of Jesus Christ is what counts.  Anything outside of One God, Jesus Name is wrong.  And if they find the truth while in a false church doctrine church then the Bible teaches they should come out from her.I do not believe it has to say Apostolic on the door, but must be Apostolic Truth Doctrine that is being taught.  Once again
Gal 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

2 John 9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

There is no other Doctrine.

first up, wow bro dad i would have used a different scripture but yours hit the nail a little more squarely!!

secondly, OOJ, this is where the apostolic vrs. trinity come in. see bolden phrase.

thirdly, you said this-
I seriously doubt you do not know of any minister who lives better than his congregation. I also seriously doubt you do not know any saint who has tithed faithfully for years and years, yet is still waiting on "the windows of heaven to pour out that financial breakthru" as promised by the pulpit.

ohhh really?well there is one preacher who is a mail carrier and makes pretty good money, one preacher who is currently un-employed that we ask prayer for at this time,and then my preacher who is 75yrs old and retired from the automotive industry up north who is just barely getting by. the churches i attend dont preach earthly treasures, but only the heavenly treasures that count. they also preach anninias and his wife!! if your gonna take up an offering or a tithe you better do as God wants with it. i challenge you to come and stay with us for a bit!! God never promised a finacial break through. maybe he is mercyfull to let us draw another breath!! maybe the outpouring is there and you cant see it for the worldly lusts. open your eyes to a more spiritual level. there was a lady in the bible that gave a mite and it was of her whole living, what did she get? i think it was mercy not riches!! she had a pure heart and didnt lust or favor the riches of the world. if the congregation is waiting on the windows to pour out finacial blessing only, then are they pure of heart or do they lust for the riches of this world?

oops! did it again!! :ignore: :popcorn:   -yo

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 08, 2008, 12:01:27 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 08, 2008, 05:59:26 AM
IF {as Bro Dad stated} Apostolic truth believes and teaches the whole Bible - just like _______ truth proclaims to - then why does biblical truth not support mandated tithing as Apostolic truth {+ every other denomination} teaches ? Why does Apostolic truth believe what the Apostles did not?

See, that's the question. That's the discrepancies we all have to straighten out. What is TRUTH and what is ERROR.

The doctrine of the trinity is no worse than the doctrine of the tithe. Both are unbiblical products of Man's misunderstanding scripture.

Well once again you have missed it my friend.  Tithes are just as much of the Bible today as it was in the Old Testement. 

1 Cor 9:7 Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock?
8 Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also?
9 For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen?
10 Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope.
11 If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?
12 If others be partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? Nevertheless we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ.
13 Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar?14 Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.
KJV
Notice Paul is not writing in the past tense.  Why people have such a hard time just doing what the Word says is beyond me.  So if I was one rebeling against God's Word and withholding the tithes I beleive I would correct it.  How be it some just want to try to dim the light.  Apostolic Truth is still the only way.

Now I do hope you are a true Apostolic believer and you are just trying to get us to put the truth out there so everyone will see.  I have known of people asking things like this just so someone else can see the truth.  I do really hope this is your case and you are not just rebelling against God's Word.

No, they are not.

Historically, tithing did not begin as a mandated doctrine in the Church until the 4th Century. It was the answer to financing the "converted" pagan system of priesthood over the people. Temples and cathedrals were erected and had to be paid for; leadership had to be supported.

Not going to go into a full rendition here, but if a topographical study of tithes is made; it becomes obvious the mandate was under OT Law. The Bible says all ordinances of Moses were nailed to the cross, according to Col 2:14. Eph 2:15 says they were abolished, so any modern day command or practice is adding to scripture and under the curse. Even the Jerusalem Council did not command the Gentile Believers to tithe. Nor is tithing mentioned by Paul in any of his letters.

Here are some scriptures: 


2 Chronicles 33:8, "... so that they will take heed to do all that I have commanded them, according to the whole law and the statutes and the ordinances by the hand of Moses."


Ephesians 2:15, "Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, [even] the law of commandments [contained] in ordinances."

Deuteronomy 12:11, "Then there shall be a place which the LORD your God shall choose to cause his name to dwell there; thither shall ye bring all that I command you; your burnt offerings, and your sacrifices, your tithes, and the heave offering of your hand, and all your choice vows which ye vow unto the LORD."

Nehemiah 13:5, "And he had prepared for him a great chamber, where aforetime they laid the meat offerings, the frankincense, and the vessels, and the tithes of the corn, the new wine, and the oil, which was commanded [to be given] to the Levites, and the singers, and porters; and the offerings of the priests."

Hebrews 7:5. "And verily they that are of the sons of Levi, who receive the office of the priesthood, have a commandment to take tithes of their brethren according to the law."

Acts 21:25- As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written [and] concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from [things] offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication."


2 Thessalonians 3:7-9, "...we were not idle when we were with you, we did not eat anyone's bread without paying, but with toil and labor we worked night and day, that we might not burden any of you. It was not because we have not that right, but to give you in that conduct an example to imitate."

1 Corinthians 9:18, "When I preach the gospel, I make the gospel of Christ without charge."



These are just some verses. Serious study will show we've been erroneously bringing a curse upon God's people. Tithes is just one such thing that God is bringing into the light.

I say this not simply to play "devil's advocate", but in all sincerity of heart. We must repent of our itching ears and Nicolatian attitudes toward God and His Word. The beginning of sorrows is here. The greatest manifestation of God's power and authority is upon us. The greatest falling away into apostasy looms. All of His Body must let go of our _______ truth and return 100% to Biblical Truth. Otherwise, we may not make it; and definitely will not achieve His purpose for our lives.

I don't know about you or anyone else, but fulfilling my destiny in Christ is worth leaving all religious truth. That's not rebellion against God; it's rebellion against error. Apostolic truth cannot trump Biblical truth. To do so is idolatry.

Once again... I'm against Apostolic truth (per se) just as much as Baptist, Methodist, Pentecostal, etc truth. I'm against all truth that doesn't line up to Biblical truth. Biblical truth is the only truth. Biblical truth is Jesus The Truth. That's the plumb line. That's the chief cornerstone.

Quote from: yosemite on July 08, 2008, 05:00:02 PM

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 08, 2008, 12:12:51 PM

QuoteWhether Apostolics believe it or not, there are members of the Body scattered within the other denominations. Members bought and paid for by the same blood of the Lamb. In a spiritual sense, we all come out of the (denomi) nations into Christ. This is the remnant of the end. This is the true Church. The Jesus truth saints. The biblical truth.  :teeth:

Shouldn't we all want to be a part of that?

Sure there are people in other churches as long as they have fulfulled the Word.  Repented, gone down in the water in the name of Jesus Christ, and are filled with His Spirit.  The name on the door does not matter.  The Doctrine of Jesus Christ is what counts.  Anything outside of One God, Jesus Name is wrong.  And if they find the truth while in a false church doctrine church then the Bible teaches they should come out from her.I do not believe it has to say Apostolic on the door, but must be Apostolic Truth Doctrine that is being taught.  Once again
Gal 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

2 John 9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

There is no other Doctrine.

first up, wow bro dad i would have used a different scripture but yours hit the nail a little more squarely!!

secondly, OOJ, this is where the apostolic vrs. trinity come in. see bolden phrase.

thirdly, you said this-
I seriously doubt you do not know of any minister who lives better than his congregation. I also seriously doubt you do not know any saint who has tithed faithfully for years and years, yet is still waiting on "the windows of heaven to pour out that financial breakthru" as promised by the pulpit.

ohhh really?well there is one preacher who is a mail carrier and makes pretty good money, one preacher who is currently un-employed that we ask prayer for at this time,and then my preacher who is 75yrs old and retired from the automotive industry up north who is just barely getting by. the churches i attend dont preach earthly treasures, but only the heavenly treasures that count. they also preach anninias and his wife!! if your gonna take up an offering or a tithe you better do as God wants with it. i challenge you to come and stay with us for a bit!! God never promised a finacial break through. maybe he is mercyfull to let us draw another breath!! maybe the outpouring is there and you cant see it for the worldly lusts. open your eyes to a more spiritual level. there was a lady in the bible that gave a mite and it was of her whole living, what did she get? i think it was mercy not riches!! she had a pure heart and didnt lust or favor the riches of the world. if the congregation is waiting on the windows to pour out finacial blessing only, then are they pure of heart or do they lust for the riches of this world?

oops! did it again!! :ignore: :popcorn:   -yo

Then let me shake your hand! You're the first Christian I've met who has no inkling of ministerial financial abuse in the entire Body of Christ. The first who is unaware of any minister faring sumptuously upon the labor of the Body.

What a momentous day this is for me!   :clap:   :clap2:

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 08, 2008, 07:13:47 PM
Then let me shake your hand! You're the first Christian I've met who has no inkling of ministerial financial abuse in the entire Body of Christ. The first who is unaware of any minister faring sumptuously upon the labor of the Body.

What a momentous day this is for me!   :clap:   :clap2:

NO, i just go to a church with apostolic full truth elders who take care of what is Gods. we are all human and subject to err. ohh i have an inkling, or an idea!! its just nonexisting in the churches i attend. but if we cross the threshhold of faith i can show you some baptist and etc. etc. that are rich beyond measure in the congregations money.(these are what i call professional preachers and dont hold a public job, but i only know of them from hearsay) there are some preacher in the apostolic faith who dont hold a public job but also know how to handle Gods money. these are normally the preachers that struggle to make ends meat! not the ones flaunting cadilacs and new expensive suits. you dont have to take my word. see for yourself!! come stay with us a bit. the giving of money is all through the new testiment and isnt against Gods will or plan, no matter what name you give it, tieths or whatever. preachers in our area do more than preach and is where i think a salary is earned!! funerals weddins going to visit the sick and elderly and the shut ins. do i beleive that we are all asigned that job? yes. do we do it? no!! i still think a preacher is worthy of his wage!! though the preachers at the churches i attend take no salary or at least the sherman and evergreen church doesnt, dont know of the new albany church where the mail man preaches. sherman and evergreen do good to keep the missions and light and water and insurance payed, much less pay a salary to the preacher.

That's good news, Yo. I'm glad you know people like that. So do I. Wonderful saints of God.

Again... don't misunderstand what we're talking about here. We're talking about the system and not individuals.

We're looking at doctrinal {in this case} Apostolic truth compared to Biblical truth.

IF we're really Apostolic, then our doctrine {leaven} has to match up exactly to theirs; as outlined in the Bible.

IF Apostolic truth = Biblical truth - in every way, shape, or form - there should be no major discrepancies.


Just the fact that Apostolic truth { and Christianity at large} mandates tithing in their doctrine - against Biblical truth - proves an inequality. An inequality in this area. Tithing is just one example, easily found with limited study.

Do we all have some inequalities? Yeah! I think it's in the Feast of Tabernacles that only unleavened bread could be eaten. Jesus said leaven was the teaching/doctrine of the Pharisees, meaning added to. We know Jesus is the Bread from Heaven; totally unleavened. He is whole and complete, needing nothing. The time has come for His Body to purge out the leaven of _________ truth and eat only the pure, unleavened, Word of God.

That's what I'm talking about. We all have to examine our "bread" and be willing to make any change necessary. It is in the examination that we discover IF Apostolic truth = Biblical truth. 

Regarding tithing....



NT Apostles were all about GIVING:

Give w/o reservation. Give to those in need. Give out of a determined heart. Give cheerfully, not grudgingly or of necessity. Give as led by the Spirit. Give and it shall be given to you. Freely you have received, freely give. Give wisely. Give willingly.



OT Priests were all about PAYING:

Pay required sacrifices. Pay required offerings. Pay required tithes. Pay required fast. Pay required Laws. Pay required Ordinances. Pay or be cursed.


Ever notice how we **give** in the offering; but we **pay** tithes? Ever notice how - right before tithes -  Malachi 3 is quoted about robbing God and being cursed unless you **pay**? Sounds more like the Godfather, than God the Father.

Ever notice how nothing is mentioned about Jesus bearing the curse on Calvary? If Jesus bore the curse, how can we be cursed?   

Just some thoughts from a Berean.

Regarding pastors living "high on the hog," as OOJ put it, I have to mostly concur with Yosemite: most pastors I know do not.

Of course, we all probably can think of pastors we know, or know of, who live very well at the expense of God's people, or who at least live better than the average Joe in their congregations.  But most pastors I know pastor small churches that usually struggle financially, and the pastor's salary is typically pretty low.  Even the pastors I know who pastor larger churches usually choose to receive only a portion of the tithe - enough to live modestly - and direct the rest into the general church fund, or to missions, or whatever.

That said, I think the discussion of whether the NT teaches us that tithes are mandatory for Christians is one worth having.  I see nothing in the NT that tells me tithes are required of the Church.  If you know of any writings that tell us so, please share them; I'd like to know.

Instead, the NT writings stress giving, as OOJ wrote:

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 09, 2008, 01:22:24 PM
Give w/o reservation. Give to those in need. Give out of a determined heart. Give cheerfully, not grudgingly or of necessity. Give as led by the Spirit. Give and it shall be given to you. Freely you have received, freely give. Give wisely. Give willingly.

This is more in keeping with the spirit of the NT; much more than a mandatory tithe.

Also worth discussing is whether Christian congregations ought to pay their pastors - potentially a separate issue from that of the tithe.  I see a stronger case in the NT for pastors' salaries than for tithes, but I think the issue is far from being clearly decided.  I'd like to know the thoughts of anyone who cares to share.

First and foremost let me plainly state that the last post by OOJ is so close to blasphemy that it really concerns me.  Not only does he put the Apostolic Church down for tithes but then compares God to the Godfather.  How rude and disrespectful can anyone person be.  Not only does OOJ not like tithes now but the way he words it even the Levities were wrong.  Just goes to show you that there are those who would pervert the gospel.  It is one thing to disput or disagree with me or any other person that wishes to post.  But when you start poking fun at God watch out.  I was hoping OOJ was just trying to get someone to post some valid scriptures, however with that post it is plain to see that he is just plain confused.
2 Thess 2:8- And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
KJV
OOj has shown New or Old he does not like paying of tithes.  He has criticized the Pastors of our age as well as the Levities of the Old.  Makes me wonder what else he does not like about the Bible.  We already know he does not like the Fact that there is but One Spirit not three person in the Godhead.  he does not like the plan of salvation, nor does he like paying tithes.  Why he even wants to be on an Apostolic thread is beyond me because he sure don't believe in anything except himself.  I can only say we should all bind together and pray for OOJ that God would deliver him out of his blindness.  No one has to agree with me on everything but come on OOJ just crossed the line and showed he just don't like the Word of God.  Please pray for OOJ.

Quote from: titushome on July 09, 2008, 02:01:51 PM
Regarding pastors living "high on the hog," as OOJ put it, I have to mostly concur with Yosemite: most pastors I know do not.

Of course, we all probably can think of pastors we know, or know of, who live very well at the expense of God's people, or who at least live better than the average Joe in their congregations.  But most pastors I know pastor small churches that usually struggle financially, and the pastor's salary is typically pretty low.  Even the pastors I know who pastor larger churches usually choose to receive only a portion of the tithe - enough to live modestly - and direct the rest into the general church fund, or to missions, or whatever.

That said, I think the discussion of whether the NT teaches us that tithes are mandatory for Christians is one worth having.  I see nothing in the NT that tells me tithes are required of the Church.  If you know of any writings that tell us so, please share them; I'd like to know.

Instead, the NT writings stress giving, as OOJ wrote:

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 09, 2008, 01:22:24 PM
Give w/o reservation. Give to those in need. Give out of a determined heart. Give cheerfully, not grudgingly or of necessity. Give as led by the Spirit. Give and it shall be given to you. Freely you have received, freely give. Give wisely. Give willingly.

This is more in keeping with the spirit of the NT; much more than a mandatory tithe.

Also worth discussing is whether Christian congregations ought to pay their pastors - potentially a separate issue from that of the tithe.  I see a stronger case in the NT for pastors' salaries than for tithes, but I think the issue is far from being clearly decided.  I'd like to know the thoughts of anyone who cares to share.

Thank you for you gentleman way of approaching this discussion.  I did offer two scriptures yesterday on this post from the New Testament concerning both tithes and paying of the Ministers.  However I think it would not be a bad idea if we started a thread where different ones can post their feelings in a proper way.  I feel sometimes there are those who don't understand the how the Minister is supported.  I know that God does take care of me.  so if you start the thread be sure and send me a pm and I will check it out and maybe join in.

Oh Brother Dad.

All I will say is this:  If clarity is needed... ask.   No need to accuse.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 09, 2008, 02:36:12 PM
However I think it would not be a bad idea if we started a thread where different ones can post their feelings in a proper way.  I feel sometimes there are those who don't understand the how the Minister is supported.  I know that God does take care of me.  so if you start the thread be sure and send me a pm and I will check it out and maybe join in.

I will probably start two threads: one about tithes, and one about financial support of preachers.  Hopefully I'll have time to do so either today or tomorrow.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 09, 2008, 02:30:23 PM
OOj has shown New or Old he does not like paying of tithes.

I'm not sure where you get that he disagrees with the OT practice of paying tithes, but as far as the NT goes he has offered plenty of Scriptures in support of his position.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 09, 2008, 02:30:23 PM
He has criticized the Pastors of our age as well as the Levities of the Old.

Is it wrong to criticize pastors when they do wrongly - for example, when they use the tithes given them to live lavish lifestyles?  I know not all preachers are guilty of this, but we all know there are preachers who are guilty - and I took OOJ's criticisms to be directed toward them.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 09, 2008, 02:30:23 PM
We already know he does not like the Fact that there is but One Spirit not three person in the Godhead.

OOJ has repeatedly asserted that he does not agree with the concept of the trinity, and that he believes in only one God.  Nothing he's written has even suggested that he is a trinitarian.  Whence come the repeated contentions that he is?

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 09, 2008, 02:30:23 PM
he does not like the plan of salvation....

???  I don't even know where this comment came from.

OK for the record I attest to the the fact I am a one God Apostolic and glad that I am.  I ask if anyone else will atest to the fact they are a one God Apostolic believer. 

I attest that I am a one-God-Apostolic-Believer.

i also afirm the fact i am a oness apostolic beleiver.

Now we know, no two One Apostolics will see ever point the same.  But we must have the foundation right.  I offer my apology to OOJ for assuming that he was a trinitarian. 

In all sincerety Bro Dad....

After taking time to relax and process things brought up in this Apostolic Truth Questions Thread, I do hope you - and others - will invest serious study into the Word and see if there is any merit to my position.

The first time I was confronted with this type of information... I pretty much had the same reaction. But I studied it for a long time, searching the scriptures to see if this was so. Honest research will reveal much.

I have no beef with any One-God Apostolic saint. We're part of the Body of Christ. I have no beef with Apostolic truth. I strive to discover and live by it myself. I do have a beef with the leavened bread that has crept in over the last 1700 years. I do have a beef with any Christian truth that contradicts, circumvents, adds to, subtracts from, or ignores unleavened Biblical truth.


Isn't that what we all really want? The pure Word of God? Isn't the discovery of such worth discussing? Even when it threatens to rip established belief systems apart?

Take the discovery of Jesus' name baptism, established a few years after Azuza. Do we not think that was a hard truth to accept? Was it not defended against by ________ truth?

All hidden error is difficult to believe and change. If we refuse to discuss it, how will we discern truth from error? How do we prevent the leaven from becoming part of future bread? We've had a mixed loaf since the 4th Century. I think our LORD is trying to separate it.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 09, 2008, 09:45:03 PM
Now we know, no two One Apostolics will see ever point the same.  But we must have the foundation right.  I offer my apology to OOJ for assuming that he was a trinitarian. 

Apology accepted.

And forgive me for offending you. That is never my intention.

now lets all take hands and gather at the fire and sing a round of kumbaya!!LOL
sorry! i just thought that would be funny here. not meant for sarcasim.LOL

Quote from: yosemite on July 09, 2008, 10:43:27 PM
now lets all take hands and gather at the fire and sing a round of kumbaya!!LOL
sorry! i just thought that would be funny here. not meant for sarcasim.LOL

It was funny.  (I laughed anyway.)   :biglaugh:



Oh, yeah - and I'm a One-God-Apostolic believer too.  :D

Regarding the tithe:

First of all, consider that Abraham paid tithes, and his tithing predated the law by over 400 years.  He was a wealthy man with a hot wife.  Sounds like someone I want to emulate.  Oh, and his wealth - a lot of it came to him miraculously by Gods hand.  Think his tithing had something to do with that?  Huh?  (Most likely so...when you consider God's later admonition and promises in Malachi - see below).

Secondly, God, the creator of the universe, speaking through his prophet Malachi explains what tithing is for:

Malachi 3:8-12

8  Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.
9  Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation.
10  Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.
11 And I will rebuke the devourer for your sakes, and he shall not destroy the fruits of your ground; neither shall your vine cast her fruit before the time in the field, saith the LORD of hosts.
12 And all nations shall call you blessed: for ye shall be a delightsome land, saith the LORD of hosts

First and foremost, tithes and offerings are to support the ministry.  The byproduct of supporting the ministry is that God will bless those who participate, and in addition, will rebuke the devourer.

What is wrong with the modern day "Church" utilizing God's plan to support the ministry - both on a local and worldwide level?

As for me and my house, I will continue to honor God with the tithe, and as such, will continue to reap his bountiful blessings on my life.  If you choose to do otherwise, good luck holding off that pesky devourer...

Shalom

Quote from: yosemite on July 09, 2008, 10:43:27 PM
now lets all take hands and gather at the fire and sing a round of kumbaya!!LOL
sorry! i just thought that would be funny here. not meant for sarcasim.LOL

:sing:  :sing:  :sing:  :sing:

Quote from: doogie on July 10, 2008, 12:00:48 AM
Regarding the tithe:

First of all, consider that Abraham paid tithes, and his tithing predated the law by over 400 years.  He was a wealthy man with a hot wife.  Sounds like someone I want to emulate.  Oh, and his wealth - a lot of it came to him miraculously by Gods hand.  Think his tithing had something to do with that?  Huh?  (Most likely so...when you consider God's later admonition and promises in Malachi - see below).

Secondly, God, the creator of the universe, speaking through his prophet Malachi explains what tithing is for:

Malachi 3:8-12

8  Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.
9  Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation.
10  Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.
11 And I will rebuke the devourer for your sakes, and he shall not destroy the fruits of your ground; neither shall your vine cast her fruit before the time in the field, saith the LORD of hosts.
12 And all nations shall call you blessed: for ye shall be a delightsome land, saith the LORD of hosts

First and foremost, tithes and offerings are to support the ministry.  The byproduct of supporting the ministry is that God will bless those who participate, and in addition, will rebuke the devourer.

What is wrong with the modern day "Church" utilizing God's plan to support the ministry - both on a local and worldwide level?

As for me and my house, I will continue to honor God with the tithe, and as such, will continue to reap his bountiful blessings on my life.  If you choose to do otherwise, good luck holding off that pesky devourer...

Shalom

Hey Doogie!  Way to jump right in.  :teeth:

As previously noted, tithing to utilize God's plan to support the ministry, doesn't apply to NT "church". In the OT, the storehouse was the Temple in Jerusalem wherein **food** was distributed to the priests and then to the poor.  Also, the ones who robbed God were the priests and not the people. The priests did not properly distribute the tithe as intended. It was them God was angry with.

There is no storehouse {temple} after Calvary. Scripture says: You all are the temple and you all are priests. Jesus is the High Priest, the only mediator between God and Man. There is no one to tithe to, for all are equal - saints, pastors, teachers, evangelists, apostles, and teachers. No one is "more equal or above" the other. Jesus abolished the elevated priesthood at Calvary.

Thus, to tithe in the NT is going back under the curse of the Law. {and we know what that means} Hebrews 7:5 says: they took tithes according to the Law. What did Jesus do with the Law and its ordinances?

The NT is all about giving. If a congregation chooses to support their ministry; nothing wrong with that at all. According to the Bible though, such support cannot be mandated and manipulated by threats of curses. If so, we move out of the will of God and into error. Look again at I Samuel 8, where Israel wanted a King.

Meanwhile, I suggest do the study {biblically and historically} and see whatcha think then. And don't forget.... this is just one example of how error becomes truth.

Here again I see where we will disagree on the tithes.  I will not try to convince you that you are wrong as I am sure you can not convince me I am wrong.  I was brought being taught tithes were not part of the NT Church.  I now believe that is very much a part of Gods plan.  But I also feel as with standards this is an area many will disagree and may be best to slow down on my input.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 10, 2008, 04:32:35 AM
Here again I see where we will disagree on the tithes.  I will not try to convince you that you are wrong as I am sure you can not convince me I am wrong.  I was brought being taught tithes were not part of the NT Church.  I now believe that is very much a part of Gods plan.  But I also feel as with standards this is an area many will disagree and may be best to slow down on my input.

I know we disagree. I'm not trying to convince anyone with logic alone. As always, shouldn't we seriously look at what the Bible says and base our decisions on that?

Your input is welcome. Biblical truth can be better seen when brought into public light. Iron sharpening iron. Saints assemblying themselves together.

I don't see where this is in the same category as standards. Standards have a tendency to be influenced by, but not directly addressed in scripture. It's not a contest to prove individuals "right or wrong". It's the method of alignment to the plumb line. We're still talking about Apostolic truth here.

IF this example of tithing remains a part of God's plan for NT saints - a plan to finance the Kingdom - then it must be plainly laid out in the scriptures. There must be a foundation laid by Jesus in the Gospels; which is  explicitly built upon by the Apostles in the rest of the Book. Otherwise, it is leaven added over the last 1900 yrs since the Apostles died.

At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter what My truth, Your truth, Apostolic truth, or Christian truth all say. Biblical truth is the one we'll be accountable for. Biblical truth is what we seek to understand.

And if we still disagree..... we disagree. It doesn't make us any less brothers, nor remove us from the Body. There's a whole lot more still to understand. We might even discover it together.  :idea:

If I might add....

What I expect from everyone who is interested in this topic, is this:

1... Put away pre-determined conclusions.

2... Seriously research the scriptures. Read every verse that talks about tithes (ing) in the OT & NT.

3... Consider the context of every verse.

4... Don't call anyone else and ask them. Do it yourself.

5... Research the web or library for historical information.

6... Spend more than 10 min on the project.

7... Of course, pray that the LORD will reveal to you what the Word really says.

8... Accept or reject the conclusions.



I studied this for over a month. Hours at a time. Then I battled the ingrained habit and resisted the dissenting voices. IF you see it, it will be a revelation. Always there but never looked for. That's how strongly I believe.

As far as tithes go it seems that OOJ and I were brought up totally different.  I was raise that being taught not to pay tithes.  It was by pray and studing God's word that became convince tithes should be paid.  I recently spoke up in a church service where the Pastor was teaching on tithes.  He said tithes should go in an envelope with your name on it.  I spoke up and said I don't think that it has to be in an envelope as long as you give it to God.  I don't care if you just throw it in the offering plate.

I think for sue that OOJ and myself can agree on this.  It does not matter what you call it as long as you are giving from your heart.  Nothing we ever do for God should be done out of fear of what God might do to us if we don't do it.  Everything we do for God must come from our heart.  Whether it be prayer, study of God's Word, fasting, standards, or giving it must all be from the heart.

Many Apostolics try to stay away from this verse but it is so true.
Rom 10:9That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

If it is not in the heart then it is not unto salvation.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 10, 2008, 02:08:01 PM
I think for sue that OOJ and myself can agree on this.  It does not matter what you call it as long as you are giving from your heart.  Nothing we ever do for God should be done out of fear of what God might do to us if we don't do it.  Everything we do for God must come from our heart.  Whether it be prayer, study of God's Word, fasting, standards, or giving it must all be from the heart.

Amen!

A wise elder told me this about tithing a few years back.....

Abraham paid tithes to Melchisedec, a priest and, I believe, a theophany of the Lord God.  This pattern continued through the tabernacle.  Was the high priest position annulled or was it continued under Him who was after the order of the first OT high priest?  It was continued when God Himself, not a theophany, came to earth as man and fulfilled the duties of the High Priest to perfection with the perfect sacrifice.

Question: where does the NT ever annul the payment of tithes to the High Priest?  Is not the Head of the Church the One in whom we should invest our monies, the firstfruits of what HE has blessed us with?  Doesn't "freely you have been given, freely give" apply to money, too?  Doesn't it seem that the practice of tithing never was done away with, as the high priest role never was, either?

Ever since then I have seen the necessity of tithing.  No, not to pay my way into heaven, but to return to God's Kingdom what He has blessed me with...to support the ministry, to feed the poor, to build new churches, to cloth the naked, to help a brother and/or sister in need, etc, etc. 

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 10, 2008, 01:27:12 AM

Hey Doogie!  Way to jump right in.  :teeth:

Response:  I cant resist - especially on THIS topic! :great:

As previously noted, tithing to utilize God's plan to support the ministry, doesn't apply to NT "church". In the OT, the storehouse was the Temple in Jerusalem wherein **food** was distributed to the priests and then to the poor.  Also, the ones who robbed God were the priests and not the people. The priests did not properly distribute the tithe as intended. It was them God was angry with.

Response:  Tithing is a principle shown in scripture to pre-date the law.  Abraham paid tithes, Jacob promised to pay tithes - it is very clear in scripture that those who participated in it were blessed.  You can argue that it is no longer applicable, but you cannot provide one iota of scripture to back up your argument.  Certainly Malachi was written to the wayward priesthood, but, when God spoke through Malachi, he revealed HIS view on tithing, and made promises for those who would participate in the program.  If tithing was only mentioned as a tenet of the Law, you might have a point.  But since it predates the law as a principle, and since the NT does not say tithing is no longer necessary or provide a different plan to fund the ministry, I believe it to still be relevant.

There is no storehouse {temple} after Calvary. Scripture says: You all are the temple and you all are priests. Jesus is the High Priest, the only mediator between God and Man. There is no one to tithe to, for all are equal - saints, pastors, teachers, evangelists, apostles, and teachers. No one is "more equal or above" the other. Jesus abolished the elevated priesthood at Calvary.

Response:  You are wrong.  Read 1 Cor 12:28, where Paul gives a definite hierarchy in the "Church."  That having been said, you fail to acknowledge that tithing makes provision for the local church to subsist - this includes facilities, staff, etc.  Then again, you may be one of those who think it is wrong to have church in a comfortable, air-conditioned building.  

Thus, to tithe in the NT is going back under the curse of the Law. {and we know what that means} Hebrews 7:5 says: they took tithes according to the Law. What did Jesus do with the Law and its ordinances?

Response:  Again, tithing is a principle that pre-dates the law.  How can you possibly imply that tithing is going back under the law?  That is NOT what Paul is focusing on in Hebrews 7.  Rather, he is writing of the "priesthood" of Jesus Christ.  You are doing the very "out-of-context cherrypicking" that you admonish the readers of this forum to obstain from.

The NT is all about giving. If a congregation chooses to support their ministry; nothing wrong with that at all. According to the Bible though, such support cannot be mandated and manipulated by threats of curses. If so, we move out of the will of God and into error. Look again at I Samuel 8, where Israel wanted a King.

Response:  I am not sure who is making threats of curses?  However, God, speaking through Malachi, did promise to bless those who do tithe, and to rebuke the devourer.  I know of some "believers" who do not practice tithing.  In EVERY case, they lack blessing in their lives, and in some cases, are poverty stricken.  I find it interesting that some who advocate abstinence from tithing like to talk about "giving."  It would be interesting to see if their "giving" is more or less than if they were returning the tithe to God.  Again, as for me, I choose to follow this God ordained principle, and will continue to reap bountiful blessings as a result.  One more thing...not for a second do I condone wanton creation of new commandments, or other "abuses" by the ministry, but I would like for you to  please show me where the Bible states that "...such support cannot be mandated and manipulated by threats of curses..."      

Meanwhile, I suggest do the study {biblically and historically} and see whatcha think then. And don't forget.... this is just one example of how error becomes truth.

Response:  To be frank, I dont need to study anything.  The Bible is more a book to be believed than understood.  I can read Malachi, apply it to my life, and reap the benefits of allowing the living Word to perpetuate in my life.  The blessings associated with the tithe are not exclusive to the Jewish race as some covenants are.  I choose to reap the benefits of obedience to God's word.

You know, Paul warns us about people who profess to love God, but deny his actual power to move in individual lives:

2 Tim 3:5-7
5  Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
6  For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
7  Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

You and those who believe tithing is wrong or unnecessary are free to not give the tithe back to God.  On the other hand, with gas prices at record levels, inflation ever rising, unemployment increasing and such, you might do well to have a little blessing headed your way.  I'm having my most prosperous year ever, and it's only going to get better!

Shalom.

   

Thank you for responding.

At this time I choose not to reply nor offer counter scripture, for I'm afraid it wouldn't matter. If I reply at a later date, it will be more directed at others who might have the same conclusions.

See, this confession bothers me alot.

Posted by: doogie... To be frank, I dont need to study anything.  The Bible is more a book to be believed than understood.


I choose not to waste our time.

Thanks anyway. 

Quote from: OGIA on July 11, 2008, 03:12:48 AM
Question: where does the NT ever annul the payment of tithes to the High Priest?  Is not the Head of the Church the One in whom we should invest our monies, the firstfruits of what HE has blessed us with?  Doesn't "freely you have been given, freely give" apply to money, too?  Doesn't it seem that the practice of tithing never was done away with, as the high priest role never was, either?

This is a very good point.

So, accepting this for now for the sake of the discussion, the next logical question is this: how and to whom do we pay our tithe?  It's easy to say that we ought to pay a tithe to Jesus Christ our High Priest, but how do we actually put this into practice?  Jesus certainly has no use for our money - the Earth and all that is in it already belong to Him - and even if He did it's not like we could deliver it to His doorstep or place it directly in His hand.

So do we dedicate at least ten percent of our income to doing the work of the Lord: buying necessities to give to the poor and needy; paying for gas to visit the sick, the elderly, the imprisoned; etc.?  Or do we do what is usually done with the tithe, and give ten percent of our income to our pastor and/or local church group?  Or do we give ten percent to the Christian ministry(ies) of our choice?  Or is some combination of the above acceptable?

I ask in all sincerity, wondering what is your (anyone's) personal approach to this issue.  OGIA?  OOJ?  Doogie?  Bro Dad?

Quote from: doogie on July 11, 2008, 03:51:44 AMResponse:  To be frank, I dont need to study anything.  The Bible is more a book to be believed than understood.  I can read Malachi, apply it to my life, and reap the benefits of allowing the living Word to perpetuate in my life.  The blessings associated with the tithe are not exclusive to the Jewish race as some covenants are.  I choose to reap the benefits of obedience to God's word.

I wanted to add the full remarks of Doogie here.  I agree that we do not have to understand all Bible.  There are many things we do without having an understanding as to why.  But whether we understand or not we must obey. 

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 11, 2008, 04:26:34 AM
Thank you for responding.

At this time I choose not to reply nor offer counter scripture, for I'm afraid it wouldn't matter. If I reply at a later date, it will be more directed at others who might have the same conclusions.

See, this confession bothers me alot.

Posted by: doogie... To be frank, I dont need to study anything.  The Bible is more a book to be believed than understood.


I choose not to waste our time.

Thanks anyway. 

To OOJ: for my sake, would you respond anyway?  Thanks.

Quote from: doogie on July 11, 2008, 03:51:44 AM
The Bible is more a book to be believed than understood.

To Doogie: this is a whole 'nother discussion, but I also don't get where you're coming from with this statement.  I'm going to start another thread so as to not sidetrack this one further.  Click here (http://godplace.com/forum/index.php?topic=28796.0).

Thank you Titushome for the way you appoarched your last post.  I did not use it as a qoute as if I did and everyone else did I felt we would have a rather large post.  First and foremost we all would agree God never changes.
Mal 3:6 For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.
7 Even from the days of your fathers ye are gone away from mine ordinances, and have not kept them. Return unto me, and I will return unto you, saith the Lord of hosts. But ye said, Wherein shall we return?
8 Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.
9 Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation.
10 Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the Lord of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.

Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

One of the things I noticed in the first verses God says My ordinances, He did not say Moses law or the law but He said mine.  I would as that for a better understanding if you have not please read Brother Titus post on "The Law".  It will make it more clearly the difference between the Law of Moses and the Law of God.  God's Law can anot or never will change.  The order that God set the example before Moses of paying tithes to the preist is still a law of God today.  God never changes.  

I will add many of the ministers in the modren day Church certainly without doubt misused the tithes to live a lifestlye unbecoming a man of God.  This in no way relieves us from having to bring them in.  Once you have payed your tithes it is no longer in your hand.  If your Pastor misuses them God will judge Him.  The Pastor should be took care of but they are not just for the Pastor but all the Ministry.  There all kinds of examples in the Bible that teach us the Preacher should be taken care of.  One in the NT is, 1 Cor 9:14 Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.

It is plain and simple, God set up an ordinance no where in the Bible did He denounce the ordinance.  It was before the law of Moses, it is God's law.  God does not want His Ministers to have to be worried with the worldly jobs but rather be concerned about the things of the House of God.

I may or may not post more later on this subject, as I am not your Pastor do I wish to cause confusion between anyone and their Pastor.






KJV

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 11, 2008, 03:06:47 PM
God does not want His Ministers to have to be worried with the worldly jobs but rather be concerned about the things of the House of God.

Regarding this perspective, I am reminded of what was stated by the apostles in Acts 6:2-4:

Quote2 So the twelve summoned the congregation of the disciples and said, "It is not desirable for us to neglect the word of God in order to serve tables. 3 "Therefore, brethren, select from among you seven men of good reputation, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may put in charge of this task. 4 "But we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word."

I believe these statements give us biblical precedent for those called to ministry - pastors/teachers, apostles, prophets and evangelists - to answer that call full-time, devoting themselves to the study and ministry of the Word, and to prayer.

Certainly there is also a case to be made for ministers also being employed in other professions, as Paul was.  But it seems to be part of God's plan that there are those for whom the ministry of the Word takes the place of a regular full-time job; and in such instances who is provide for their needs, and the needs of their families, if not the saints of God to whom they minister?

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 11, 2008, 04:26:34 AM
Thank you for responding.

At this time I choose not to reply nor offer counter scripture, for I'm afraid it wouldn't matter. If I reply at a later date, it will be more directed at others who might have the same conclusions.

See, this confession bothers me alot.

Posted by: doogie... To be frank, I dont need to study anything.  The Bible is more a book to be believed than understood.


I choose not to waste our time.

Thanks anyway. 

You posted a response to my earlier posting that was very forceful in it's assertion that tithing in the context of the NT Church is in fact "false doctrine."  Yet, you do not provide adequate theological proof to make such assertions.  I would challenge you to back up your beliefs with scripture and post your findings here.

Regarding my comment about not needing to study anything, I was attempting to make a simple point.  First of all, I have in fact studied this subject extensively, including a complete Bible search of the words tithe, tithing, tenth, etc.  After searching the scripture, I am satisfied that paying tithes to my local church does in fact satisfy the Biblical principle of returning to God a tenth of all my increase, just as Abraham and others in the Bible did - even though they were not under the Law of Moses at the time they did it.  They did it simply to please God.  I want to do the same - simply to please God.  As a by-product, I have received much blessing in return.  That all having been said, I have observed some in this modern age who question every doctrine of the Bible - not from a perspective of wanting to deepen their relationship with God, but from a perspective of contention.  Every sacred doctrine is fodder for their re-interpretation, rather than simply accepted at face value.  By all means we should study scripture, rightly dividing the Word of God.  But, some, and it is just some, insist on finding alternative explanations that dissect and diffract the intended "simple truth" of scripture.  Specifically in regard to this topic, I feel that since I have studied this subject, concluded its applicability to my life, and believe that you are wrong, I do not see the need to search this out any further.  Had you provided a modicum of theolgical proof for your viewpoint, maybe I would feel differently.  Prove me wrong, and I will trumpet your viewpoint to the ends of the earth.  I am waiting...

Regarding your comment:  "I choose not to waste our time", who is the "our" that you refer to?  Am I to be concerned that a group of people are secretly sitting back chuckling over the folly of my comments?  Is this form not intended for topics such as this to be debated, reviewed and considered?  Man up and prove your doctrine, but dont hide behind silly groupspeak.

Quote from: titushome on July 11, 2008, 01:53:57 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 11, 2008, 03:12:48 AM
Question: where does the NT ever annul the payment of tithes to the High Priest?  Is not the Head of the Church the One in whom we should invest our monies, the firstfruits of what HE has blessed us with?  Doesn't "freely you have been given, freely give" apply to money, too?  Doesn't it seem that the practice of tithing never was done away with, as the high priest role never was, either?

This is a very good point.

So, accepting this for now for the sake of the discussion, the next logical question is this: how and to whom do we pay our tithe?  It's easy to say that we ought to pay a tithe to Jesus Christ our High Priest, but how do we actually put this into practice?  Jesus certainly has no use for our money - the Earth and all that is in it already belong to Him - and even if He did it's not like we could deliver it to His doorstep or place it directly in His hand.

So do we dedicate at least ten percent of our income to doing the work of the Lord: buying necessities to give to the poor and needy; paying for gas to visit the sick, the elderly, the imprisoned; etc.?  Or do we do what is usually done with the tithe, and give ten percent of our income to our pastor and/or local church group?  Or do we give ten percent to the Christian ministry(ies) of our choice?  Or is some combination of the above acceptable?

I ask in all sincerity, wondering what is your (anyone's) personal approach to this issue.  OGIA?  OOJ?  Doogie?  Bro Dad?

My first response would be that if you have questions about tithing, you would do well to discuss them with your pastor, as he will be required to give account to God for your soul, and will most likey respond in a manner that is scripturally based, and is in your best interest.

That having been said, here is a good, safe pattern that seems to work well:

1.  Pay tithes to your local church - anything less than a tenth of your increase is not a tithe, and, if you are going to tithe, it should be the "firstfruits", not what's left over
2.  Pay offerings to your local church - there is a distinction between tithes and offerings (the tithes belong to God, the offering is above and beyond)
3.  Give additional offerings to personal projects that you feel are worthy of your funding - be it to the homeless person on the street, or the local food bank
4.  Give additional offerings to other "Godly" causes that propogate the Apostles Doctrine around the world (would not want to be responsible for funding groups that spread false doctrines, as we may be required to give account for what we have done with what we had to work with)

You asked, that's my two cents.

Shalom.

Titus, I'll work on it. I would rather not just scribble off any ole answer.


Doogie, "Regarding your comment:  "I choose not to waste our time", who is the "our" that you refer to?  Am I to be concerned that a group of people are secretly sitting back chuckling over the folly of my comments?  Is this form not intended for topics such as this to be debated, reviewed and considered?  Man up and prove your doctrine, but dont hide behind silly groupspeak

This is paranoia. The 'our' referred to is you and me. There is no "silly groupspeak" anywhere. I'm way beyond 14 yrs of age, and do not play those types of juvenile games. No one should be chuckling over any comment or belief.

Yes, this forum is a place to discuss and consider topics. I try not to debate. That changes discussion and consideration into winning and losing. Sorry, that never has worked. I will continue to post my position and current understanding and viewpoint. I have always been willing to adjust my level of perception. Isnt that what it's about.... line upon line & glory to glory?

I won't ignore you, but you're going to have to do better than flinging out accusations and throwing down gauntlets. At least as far as I'm concerned.

Quote from: titushome on July 11, 2008, 01:53:57 PM
So, accepting this for now for the sake of the discussion, the next logical question is this: how and to whom do we pay our tithe?  It's easy to say that we ought to pay a tithe to Jesus Christ our High Priest, but how do we actually put this into practice?  Jesus certainly has no use for our money - the Earth and all that is in it already belong to Him - and even if He did it's not like we could deliver it to His doorstep or place it directly in His hand.

I'll start off with a question: does the Lord NEED our mouths, hands, feet and brains?  No, but for some unearthly reason He chose to utilize them in the propogation of truth.  He chose to get the ones He redeemed involved in the redemption of others.  I view money just like that.  He does not need my money.  But, blessings in my life....e.g., the knowledge of truth....He EXPECTS......maybe even DEMANDS.....that I pay a part, the first part, of that blessing back to Him.  That payment can be money, time, energy, prayer, knocking doors, witnessing in Wal Mart or so many other things.  I believe "tithing" includes all of those examples for some, but only some for all.  Why?  Because we are not all blessed with the same blessings from God.  Some have excess (relatively speaking, of course!!) money, some have incredible wisdom, some have great physical strength, some have organization skills.  You get the picture.   :grin:

Basic thought (and one Bro. Wayne Huntley preached so wonderfully about Thursday night of La. camp) is that the Lord blesses US for US to be a blessing to Him by using the blessing to help others.  Personally?  I think His blessings are as much a test of stewardship as they are to, say, answer a prayer.  When I give Him the firstfruits I do believe He is more apt to bless again.

So, no, God does not need my money.  He doesn't even really need me.  He's just chosen it to be that way.  :grin:

QuoteSo do we dedicate at least ten percent of our income to doing the work of the Lord: buying necessities to give to the poor and needy; paying for gas to visit the sick, the elderly, the imprisoned; etc.?  Or do we do what is usually done with the tithe, and give ten percent of our income to our pastor and/or local church group?  Or do we give ten percent to the Christian ministry(ies) of our choice?  Or is some combination of the above acceptable?

I'm not 100% sure on how to divvy it all out, but in my personal life I give 10% on income of any sort.  I also give an offering beyond that.  That offering includes monies the pastor knows about and those he does not.  It also includes time, energy, etc.  However, I have to be careful about those things not of monetary contribution.  I, personally, don't want my voluntary submission to God's Kingdom to be viewed as a "tithe".  I don't want to think He's content with 10% of my day or 10% of my time, etc.  I believe it's clear that He asks for way more than 10% in some areas.   ;)

As someone else has posted, I pay to a man of God I trust and who's life has beared the fruit of righteousness and incredible stewardship.  What he does with it after that is between him and God.  I do know that every penny, as far as I know, is accounted for once a year before the church and many times during the year before the elders.

Hope that makes sense, titus.   :)

Quote from: doogie on July 11, 2008, 03:51:44 AM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 10, 2008, 01:27:12 AM



As previously noted, tithing to utilize God's plan to support the ministry, doesn't apply to NT "church". In the OT, the storehouse was the Temple in Jerusalem wherein **food** was distributed to the priests and then to the poor.  Also, the ones who robbed God were the priests and not the people. The priests did not properly distribute the tithe as intended. It was them God was angry with.

Response:  Tithing is a principle shown in scripture to pre-date the law.  Abraham paid tithes, Jacob promised to pay tithes - it is very clear in scripture that those who participated in it were blessed.  You can argue that it is no longer applicable, but you cannot provide one iota of scripture to back up your argument.  Certainly Malachi was written to the wayward priesthood, but, when God spoke through Malachi, he revealed HIS view on tithing, and made promises for those who would participate in the program.  If tithing was only mentioned as a tenet of the Law, you might have a point.  But since it predates the law as a principle, and since the NT does not say tithing is no longer necessary or provide a different plan to fund the ministry, I believe it to still be relevant.
[/i]  [/color]

**It may sound like a cliché, but: Abraham's offering of animal sacrifices pre-dated the Law too. There are more scriptural recordings of that, than there are tithes. Why do we not carry sacrifices over? Why haven't they been incorporated into the church?

"Tithe, tithed, or tithing" is mentioned 1 time in scripture before the books of the law, referring of course, to Abraham and Melchizedek in Genesis 14. It is mentioned by Jacob in Genesis 28. According to scripture, no one paid tithes during the 2000 yrs from Adam to Abraham. NO ONE. Scripture does not say God commanded Abraham to tithe to Melchizedek. It simply says Abraham gave a tenth. A tenth of what; all that he had? He was already wealthy and blessed w/o tithing.

                  Genesis 13:2: And Abram was very rich in cattle, in silver
                                      And in gold.

No. Abraham gave a tenth of the spoils of war captured from the five kings. Spoils of war. And he only did this once. There is no other scriptural record, period. One time does not set up a principle. Two or three witnesses, remember. 

Then there's Jacob, who "promised to pay tithes"; Jacob, the supplanter and thief who cheated his brother and then fled in fear. Jacob, blessed by Isaac to receive the promises given to Abraham; attempts to manipulate God. Look at what Jacob said:

Gen 29:20-22 - And Jacob vowed a vow, saying, IF God will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat, and raiment to put on, So that I come again to my father's house in peace; THEN shall the Lord be my God: And this stone, which I have set for a pillar, shall be God's house: and of all that thou shalt give me I will surely give the tenth unto thee.


Jacob's entire "principle" is based on IF GOD - THEN I. Jacob made a carnal vow based upon his desires. There is no scriptural record he ever paid tithes as promised. NONE. Can't use him as an example, even though we tend to share the same mindset.

Scripture is very clear that those who base their relationship on faith alone, received the blessings w/o ever tithing. The first time we see Abram, he is obeying the voice of God. God said: I will make you great and a blessing to the earth. God said that years before the once recorded meeting with Melchizedek. Tithing had absolutely nothing to do with Abrahams blessings. This is backed up by scripture after scripture after scripture.

What do we have pre-law? A one-time offering on spoils of war, and the unconfirmed fulfillment of a desperate man. Neither incident is a direct commandment of God. How can that be an eternal principle?

Sure Malachi revealed God's POV. He was talking to the priests, not the people.

[i]Malachi 1:1 - The burden of the word of the Lord to Israel by Malachi. 

Malachi 2:1 - And now, O ye priests, this commandment is for you.  [/i]   

The warning was to the thieving, disobedient priests who were endangering the nation. Remember, the Levites did not have a land inheritance. They depended upon the bounty of the entire nation. God's threat to 'cut off the crops' would effect them just like the people. No crops - no tithes. No tithes - no food. Everybody would suffer. God said they had robbed the entire nation by their disobedient actions. That's why HE said: for your {the priests] sakes, I will open the windows of heaven. For your {the priests} sakes I will rebuke the devourer. He was talking to the priests of Levi and no one else.

The first mention of the tithe - outside of Genesis - is Lev 27:30-34: All the tithe of the land and all the tithe of the herd. Land and herd. Food and clothing for Levi whose inheritance was to minister unto the Lord. It ends with this:

These are the commandments, which the Lord commanded Moses for the children of Israel in Mt Sinai. 

The Mt. Sinai covenant is the LAW. The LAW held force until Christ died, establishing a new covenant in His blood. We may personally find "tithing" relevant, but it is patently not scriptural for NT Saints. Big difference between choice and mandate. Anyone want to give 10% - go for it. Teaching 10% as a mandated requirement - that's a no-no. Truth is: we, the church, teach tithing as necessary even though NT scripture does not.


I really do not want to write out every scripture, so here's a list according to Strong's.

TITHE: Lev 27:30,32; Num 18:26; Deut 12:17, 14:22-23 & 28; 2 Chr 31:5-6; Neh 10:38, 13:12; Matt 23:23; Lk 14:42

TITHES: Gen 14:20; Lev 27:31; Num 18:24, 26, 28; Deut 12:6, 11, 26:12; 2 Chr 31:12; Neh 10:37-38, 12:44, 13:5; Amos 4:4; Mal 3:8, 10; Lk 18:12; Heb 7:5, 6, 8, 9

TITHING: Deut 26:12


Again: a topographical study will show exactly who, how, what, when, and to whom tithing was commanded. Remember that the Matthew & Luke references were by Jesus while still under the Law. Hebrews is a point of reference to Jews and is not a commandment or affirmation under NT.

To be continued....

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 12, 2008, 05:07:08 PMTruth is: we, the church, teach tithing as necessary even though NT scripture does not.

More like "my opinion is".   ;)

Matt 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

Luke 11:42 But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.


OOJ of course Jesus taught that tithes should be paid. According to Matthew and to Luke.  I chose to obey and be blessed.  Others may do how they wish. 

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 12, 2008, 05:07:08 PM
Sure Malachi revealed God’s POV. He was talking to the priests, not the people.

[i]Malachi 1:1 - The burden of the word of the Lord to Israel by Malachi. 

Malachi 2:1 - And now, O ye priests, this commandment is for you.  [/i]   

The warning was to the thieving, disobedient priests who were endangering the nation. Remember, the Levites did not have a land inheritance. They depended upon the bounty of the entire nation. God’s threat to ‘cut off the crops’ would effect them just like the people. No crops - no tithes. No tithes - no food. Everybody would suffer. God said they had robbed the entire nation by their disobedient actions. That’s why HE said: for your {the priests] sakes, I will open the windows of heaven. For your {the priests} sakes I will rebuke the devourer. He was talking to the priests of Levi and no one else.

Good try but sorry in Malachi 3 he makes it plan he is talking to all the Sons of Jacob.
Mal 3:6 For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob  are not consumed.
7 Even from the days of your fathers  ye are gone away from mine ordinances, and have not kept them. Return unto me, and I will return unto you, saith the Lord of hosts. But ye said, Wherein shall we return?
8 Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.
KJV

Also again notice it is the Law of God not the Law of Moses here.

Quote from: doogie on July 11, 2008, 03:51:44 AM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 10, 2008, 01:27:12 AM


There is no storehouse {temple} after Calvary. Scripture says: You all are the temple and you all are priests. Jesus is the High Priest, the only mediator between God and Man. There is no one to tithe to, for all are equal - saints, pastors, teachers, evangelists, apostles, and teachers. No one is "more equal or above" the other. Jesus abolished the elevated priesthood at Calvary.

Response:  You are wrong.  Read 1 Cor 12:28, where Paul gives a definite hierarchy in the "Church."  That having been said, you fail to acknowledge that tithing makes provision for the local church to subsist - this includes facilities, staff, etc.  Then again, you may be one of those who think it is wrong to have church in a comfortable, air-conditioned building.  [/i]  [/color]

Let's first look at Jesus, the cornerstone of the temple. Paul's definitions must be based upon His.

Mt 20:25-26 - But Jesus called them {the disciples} unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes {rulers/authority} of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you:

Lk 22:25-26 - And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. But ye shall not be so;

I Cor 11:3 - For I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ:

Eph 4:4, 15-16: There is one body, ... But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.

Eph 5:23, 30 - Christ is the head of the church: For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.


Since Christ is the head and we are the members {particular members} making up an organism and not an institution; what part of the remaining body - from the neck down - has control? A hand? A foot? Colon? Spleen? Large intestine? Small intestine? Third rib? Fourth rib?  Who's in charge of this headless body?

Christ is the head. That's why we all put on His mind, so we all can know what to do. I Cor you mentioned - that's not an hierarchy of church authority. That's a list of gifts given to the Body in order to function properly. They are likened to the 5 senses - taste, touch, hearing, smelling, seeing. Neither of the senses rule, but all work in harmony together for the perfection {maturing} of the Body. Only the head is in control.

Ever think about what kind of system was in place when Jesus came to earth? You had a High-Priest, and priests and subordinates under him. Only the priests could hear from God and direct the people. Common people couldn't. Till Jesus came along. That is one of the things we were set free from - dependency upon another for the direction of God. Now He is the High-Priest. He is the only mediator between God and Man. He is the Head of the Body. He is - Jesus of Nazareth, King and Priest of Jerusalem. The Son of God. The priesthood was abolished at Calvary.

But we soon fell back to the order of the flesh; appointing authority and lords over our lives. After the Council of Nicea, the priesthood was formally re-established and the Nicolaitan doctrine took control. The Nicolaitans believed ministers are of higher importance and saints are lesser. We know it as differentiating between priests and laity. The pulpit and the pew. Nicolaitan doctrine was hated by Jesus, according to Revelation. 

The pastor as the "head" of the congregational church is another product of Nicea. We exhalt the ministry, boasting of these titles; even though Jesus said:

But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.    


I can't recall the persons name or scriptural location, but Paul made mention of a brother who thought more of himself and was demanding acknowledgement of his "ministry". Maybe someone can find that. Paul was against such foolery. We are equals in this together. The "ministry" is a guidance, but not to be exalted. Not to lord over the people of God.

Did it every cross your mind that the way we "do church" may not be the correct or scriptural model? I do not see any mention of church buildings being erected to facilitate worship, even though Jerusalem Church added daily to the initial 3000. Paul never writes about how to build a building and set up necessary facilities. He simply met in someone's house, or a large enough area to hold the crowd. The Bible mentions the Temple and synagogs, but not Christian church buildings. Therefore, the biblical model had no need of support staff or such. Any money needed went to the needy and the poor. Acts records all members needs were met by the Body so no one had too much or lacked. Members came with a song, psalm, testimony, word of knowledge, etc. controlled by the Holy Ghost. There was no single "pastor" who ran the entire show. No single "message from God" that everyone quietly listened to. Everyone participated as directed by the Spirit of God. Elders were there to wisely oversee the less mature saints and keep them from getting out of order.

I don't think it is necessarily wrong to have a central place of gathering. I like a comfortable, air-conditioned environment. It's generally stays hot here in Texas. But it needs to be debt-free so the saints are not put in bondage over it. I think the Lord is more than capable of moving upon His people to supply monetary needs for utilities and such. If you look back in scripture, God moved upon the Israelites to give and Moses had to tell them to stop. He was getting too much. The NT is all about giving, not taking. When you mandate and necessitate funds - you'll come up short every time. That's why tithing fails as a financial generator. God's preferred way has always been to give out of the abundance of the heart.

Tithing is not the NT provision for the local church. I've listed all the OT, biblical truth scriptures on tithes and tithing, and how it operated under the Law of Moses. I've made note of the blaringly lack of evidence in the NT. All you've made is assumptions based upon the traditions of doctrine found in Apostolic and Christian truth. I'm not sure you seek biblical truth thru discussion; but want me to "acknowledge that tithing makes provision for the local church to subsist". I can't do that. There's no scripture for it. History itself shows tithing did not begin until the 4th Century. You're going to have to come up with Bible, not corporate agreements. 

Quote from: doogie on July 11, 2008, 03:51:44 AM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 10, 2008, 01:27:12 AM


Thus, to tithe in the NT is going back under the curse of the Law. {and we know what that means} Hebrews 7:5 says: they took tithes according to the Law. What did Jesus do with the Law and its ordinances?

Response:  Again, tithing is a principle that pre-dates the law.  How can you possibly imply that tithing is going back under the law?  That is NOT what Paul is focusing on in Hebrews 7.  Rather, he is writing of the "priesthood" of Jesus Christ.  You are doing the very "out-of-context cherrypicking" that you admonish the readers of this forum to obstain from. [/i]  [/color]

There is no scriptural record of tithing as a pre-law principle. What does scripture show? A one time tithe on spoils of war and unconfirmed fulfillment of a desperate mans promise.

Yes, Paul is writing of the priesthood of Jesus Christ. I mentioned this section because it is the only record concerning tithes after Calvary. Paul is not telling us to continue tithing; he said it was according to the law (vs 5). He is contrasting the temporary Levitical order to the eternal order of Melchizedek.

Hebrews 7 says it's of the Law. Malachi 3 says it's an ordinance.  Eph 2:15 says the law of commandments contained in ordinances was abolished by Jesus. Col 2:14 says ordinances were blotted out and nailed to the cross. Col 2:20, 22 says if you are dead in Christ, why are you subject to ordinances after the commandments and doctrines of men?

We're discussing if Apostolic truth = biblical truth, then Apostolic truth must agree with biblical truth. What doesn't is the leavened bread of men. Tithes are an example we're using. So far, I've listed what the Bible says about the issue, giving scripture after scripture affirming it as an OT commandment and ordinance. I've given NT scripture concerning the abolishment of commandments and ordinances at Calvary. You've made assumptions, assertions, and caustic remarks. It does not appear I am the one providing "out-of-context cherry picking".

It is evident that no amount of scripture will convince OOJ how wrong his point of view is.  The uselessness of continuing such a task is wasteful.  I am convince of obeying the Word and do not wish to see the scrimming that i saw when growing up from those bent on withholding what is God's.  Every Scripture can be twisted to fit what ever we wish to make it fit.  I am not trying to offend OOJ but do believe that I have a God call obligation to tell him he is wrong.  Yes I am narrow minded but refuse to back down from truth.  I heard all the same ole arguments before, used to even use some of them.  But I thakn God He has shown me the Truth not just on tithes, but orht things as well.  I will say this OOJ if you don't want to give back to God the tenth and do as the early Church did then sell all you have and take it to the Church.
Acts 2:45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.

Can't have it and give it all away.  I could fully explain that scripture but know how futile it would be to try.  Just give it all up now, hey not a bad idea.  Seeing most of the time when I preach I do not even get an offering.  Oh I forgot us preachers are in for the money.  Well I am not and most I know aren't, we are in for the winning of souls.  Such fighting over a dime is beyond me.  God has and will take care of me but that in no way frees others from doing what is right.

Don't call it tithes give until God say you have out gave him.  I have a neice and her husband who give about 18% right now to church.  they started with 10% and felt lead to start adding 1% per year that they are married.  It is 8 or 9 years now and they are very blessed.  Neither one of then has a collge education.  They both had just normal paying jobs.  After starting to give back to God, God open the windows of heaven and begin blessing them.  They still do not have any degrees nor are they going to school to get one.  But they both make over $100,000.00 a year now.  Why because they choose to give back to God.  I could go on and on and on of the blessing in my life.  For instance I have had two Cadilacs given to me.  Received large sums of money in the mail, people just handing me money.  So all I can really say is go ahead if you want to withhold don't bother me I kinda like the plan God laid out and I will continue to follow it.  Because it works, I tried the other way and it did not work.  So I will trust God.

Quote from: doogie on July 11, 2008, 03:51:44 AM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 10, 2008, 01:27:12 AM



The NT is all about giving. If a congregation chooses to support their ministry; nothing wrong with that at all. According to the Bible though, such support cannot be mandated and manipulated by threats of curses. If so, we move out of the will of God and into error. Look again at I Samuel 8, where Israel wanted a King.

Response:  I am not sure who is making threats of curses?  However, God, speaking through Malachi, did promise to bless those who do tithe, and to rebuke the devourer.  I know of some "believers" who do not practice tithing.  In EVERY case, they lack blessing in their lives, and in some cases, are poverty stricken.  I find it interesting that some who advocate abstinence from tithing like to talk about "giving."  It would be interesting to see if their "giving" is more or less than if they were returning the tithe to God.  Again, as for me, I choose to follow this God ordained principle, and will continue to reap bountiful blessings as a result.  One more thing...not for a second do I condone wanton creation of new commandments, or other "abuses" by the ministry, but I would like for you to  please show me where the Bible states that "...such support cannot be mandated and manipulated by threats of curses..."      [/i]  [/color]

Every sermon or teaching I've ever heard about tithes mentions finances being cursed unless the believer tithes. You, yourself mirror that in comments made. Look again at Malachi. God was not talking to the people {who had obeyed the law and tithed}, but to the disobedient priests. Take a random sampling of ministers, ask if tithing is mandatory and cursable. I pretty well guarantee you the majority will answer yes. That's manipulation by threats of curses which scripture does not teach for NT saints.

Are you saying poverty is the result of non-tithing? Really? Is that what's wrong in Africa? Or Appalachia? Mississippi? How about Mexico? Haiti? Believers in every place, but poverty nonetheless. Tithing has nothing to do with poverty. Besides, Jesus said the one who gave it all, gave more. He demands 100% and not 10%. Remember the Pharisee and the Publican? The Pharisee boasted that he gave tithes, unlike the Publican. The Publican was honest enough to admit he might be wrong and needed mercy. Jesus said the Publican was justified and not the Pharisee. It might be interesting to compare, but scripture says not to compare ourselves to one another.

2 Cor 10:12,15 - but they measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise. Not boasting of things without our measure, that is, of other men's labours:

Speaking of poverty stricken - Jacob mirrors that example. Isaac had already blessed him with the inheritance. The blessing couldn't be taken back. Jacob was on the run, responding to the surprised presence of God in his life. What was his reaction? O God, IF YOU DO THUS AND SO; THEN I WILL GIVE YOU A TENTH.  He did not realize who he was in relationship with God. He was blessed no matter what he did. Our blessing is spiritual and not material. We may exhibit material gains, but that is not the measurement of blessing. There's a scripture that talks about us thinking our works measure our spirituality. We're already blessed in Christ. We are complete in Him. Poor or rich does not affect us.

But let's look at Abraham again. Let's ignore the fact that Abraham was not poverty stricken in Genesis 14, he was in fact very wealthy. Scripture records only the one time of tithing by him. If Abraham's actions here are truly the principle established - then I need tithe only once to achieve the same blessing. And you know what, I've done that. Many times over in fact. So according to that principle, I'm just as blessed as Abraham. I'm more blessed than Jacob, {whom we can't prove ever did honor his vow} Isaac, David, Solomon, Job, Peter, Paul, James, John, and even Jesus. See, there is no scriptural record any of the above men paid tithes. But I have once - just like Abraham. That makes me blessed.

So goes the theory.

No, if anyone is in Christ, he is blessed. He is an heir unto the blessings of Abraham. Nothing else qualifies us for blessing. Jesus said to seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things will be added unto you. Did it ever dawn on anyone that God just may be looking at hearts that desire to give; and "tithing" is simply the terminology used? Could He not simply be honoring the giving heart and not the percentage? I think that is possibly it.

Quote from: doogie on July 11, 2008, 03:51:44 AM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 10, 2008, 01:27:12 AM

Meanwhile, I suggest do the study {biblically and historically} and see whatcha think then. And don't forget.... this is just one example of how error becomes truth.

Response:  To be frank, I dont need to study anything.  The Bible is more a book to be believed than understood.  I can read Malachi, apply it to my life, and reap the benefits of allowing the living Word to perpetuate in my life.  The blessings associated with the tithe are not exclusive to the Jewish race as some covenants are.  I choose to reap the benefits of obedience to God's word.

You know, Paul warns us about people who profess to love God, but deny his actual power to move in individual lives:

2 Tim 3:5-7
5  Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
6  For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
7  Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

You and those who believe tithing is wrong or unnecessary are free to not give the tithe back to God.  On the other hand, with gas prices at record levels, inflation ever rising, unemployment increasing and such, you might do well to have a little blessing headed your way.  I'm having my most prosperous year ever, and it's only going to get better!

Shalom.    

Sure, and we can read Genesis, apply it to our life, and offer up our child on a sacrificial altar, hoping God will stop us from killing him/her. Or offer a couple of turtle doves for sin. Maybe kill a lamb at Passover. After all, I read these things in the Bible too; no need to study and understand.

We all want to obey God's word. We all want to please Him. Even we who supposedly only: "profess to love God, but deny his actual power to move in individual lives". BTW, I never once have denied God's power to move in individual lives. NEVER.  I believe I have stressed that repeatedly. I thought the preaching of the cross was the power of God?

Let me stress again... tithing as mandatory giving is wrong in the NT. Giving is a necessary function of the Body. God so loved the world He gave. Jesus said, freely you have received, freely give. Give and it shall be given unto you. Give out of the abundance of the heart. Give cheerfully. NT is GIVING. Not one place does the Bible advocate NT tithing in order to be given to. Remember the 3 types of giving: grudgingly, of necessity, and cheerfully. At it's very best; tithing is given as a necessity. All saints should give. That has never been in question. I'm just relating what the Bible says. You don't have to agree with it. You don't have to understand it. You don't have to do it. That's up to you. I stopped and made the necessary adjustments after deeper study - just like I have with other corrections of God.

Prosperity is not a sign of approval from God. Jeremiah 22:21 - I spake unto thee in thy prosperity; but thou saidst, I will not hear. This has been thy manner from thy youth, that thou obeyest not my voice.

Paul said, I've been rich and I've been poor. I've been full and I've been hungry. But I've always been content knowing if God be for us who can be against us. Can we say the same? If prosperity abandoned us, would we turn away from God? Will we be like the crowd who left when Jesus told them all miracles had ceased? The gravy train had left the station? Will we attempt to "give" ourselves back into His graces?

Some might. I choose not to.



To not tithe does not mean not give. It simply frees us from the curse of the law. Frees us to give as much as the Holy Spirit leads, and where the HS directs. No one is freed from giving.

I know this is controversible. That's why it has to be studied out and allow the HG to determine. That's what discovering biblical truth is all about.

I also know some things are too much for some people, and they never understand. That's ok. This isn't salvational issue. 

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 13, 2008, 08:42:40 PM
I know this is controversible. That's why it has to be studied out and allow the HG to determine. That's what discovering biblical truth is all about.

So, the guy down the street says he has studied it out and that the HG revealed to him that tithing is a NT principal. 

Who's HG is right....yours or his?

Mine has told me to tithe; not as a mandate under the Law, but as a NT principle and as an offering to the High Priest.

Who's HG is right? 

:-?

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 13, 2008, 02:37:23 AM
Matt 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

Luke 11:42 But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judgment and the love of God: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.


OOJ of course Jesus taught that tithes should be paid. According to Matthew and to Luke.  I chose to obey and be blessed.  Others may do how they wish. 

Jesus was talking to Pharisees still under the Law. Note that he mentioned they tithed food, which was their portion to be given upward to the High Priest. Has nothing to do with after Calvary.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 13, 2008, 02:43:54 AM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 12, 2008, 05:07:08 PM
Sure Malachi revealed God's POV. He was talking to the priests, not the people.

[i]Malachi 1:1 - The burden of the word of the Lord to Israel by Malachi. 

Malachi 2:1 - And now, O ye priests, this commandment is for you.  [/i]   

The warning was to the thieving, disobedient priests who were endangering the nation. Remember, the Levites did not have a land inheritance. They depended upon the bounty of the entire nation. God's threat to 'cut off the crops' would effect them just like the people. No crops - no tithes. No tithes - no food. Everybody would suffer. God said they had robbed the entire nation by their disobedient actions. That's why HE said: for your {the priests] sakes, I will open the windows of heaven. For your {the priests} sakes I will rebuke the devourer. He was talking to the priests of Levi and no one else.

Good try but sorry in Malachi 3 he makes it plan he is talking to all the Sons of Jacob.
Mal 3:6 For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob  are not consumed.
7 Even from the days of your fathers  ye are gone away from mine ordinances, and have not kept them. Return unto me, and I will return unto you, saith the Lord of hosts. But ye said, Wherein shall we return?
8 Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.
KJV

Also again notice it is the Law of God not the Law of Moses here.

Nice try back atcha.  :teeth:  Look again. There is no change of persons mentioned as happened in Chapter 1, then Chapter 2. Aren't priests also sons of Jacob? Seems like the Lord was reminding them who they were emulating. We see the same thing in the Gospels/Acts when Peter steps into the flesh and is referred to as Simon. Both were given a new name {Israel/Peter}. Both sometimes went back - action wise - to the old one.

All laws are God's laws. They still changed.

Oh, btw... I am God and change not....refers to his nature/character and not His actions. There are plenty of scriptural references where God repented {changed His mind}. One major change is the priesthood. God changed from the order of Levi to the order of Melchizedek.  But the nature of God never changes. God is love. Everything He does is in love of His creation. Even when He chastises.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 13, 2008, 06:53:48 PM
It is evident that no amount of scripture will convince OOJ how wrong his point of view is.  The uselessness of continuing such a task is wasteful.  I am convince of obeying the Word and do not wish to see the scrimming that i saw when growing up from those bent on withholding what is God's.  Every Scripture can be twisted to fit what ever we wish to make it fit.  I am not trying to offend OOJ but do believe that I have a God call obligation to tell him he is wrong.  Yes I am narrow minded but refuse to back down from truth.  I heard all the same ole arguments before, used to even use some of them.  But I thakn God He has shown me the Truth not just on tithes, but orht things as well.  I will say this OOJ if you don't want to give back to God the tenth and do as the early Church did then sell all you have and take it to the Church.
Acts 2:45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.

Can't have it and give it all away.  I could fully explain that scripture but know how futile it would be to try.  Just give it all up now, hey not a bad idea.  Seeing most of the time when I preach I do not even get an offering.  Oh I forgot us preachers are in for the money.  Well I am not and most I know aren't, we are in for the winning of souls.  Such fighting over a dime is beyond me.  God has and will take care of me but that in no way frees others from doing what is right.

Don't call it tithes give until God say you have out gave him.  I have a neice and her husband who give about 18% right now to church.  they started with 10% and felt lead to start adding 1% per year that they are married.  It is 8 or 9 years now and they are very blessed.  Neither one of then has a collge education.  They both had just normal paying jobs.  After starting to give back to God, God open the windows of heaven and begin blessing them.  They still do not have any degrees nor are they going to school to get one.  But they both make over $100,000.00 a year now.  Why because they choose to give back to God.  I could go on and on and on of the blessing in my life.  For instance I have had two Cadilacs given to me.  Received large sums of money in the mail, people just handing me money.  So all I can really say is go ahead if you want to withhold don't bother me I kinda like the plan God laid out and I will continue to follow it.  Because it works, I tried the other way and it did not work.  So I will trust God.

See Bro Dad, this is the real problem: contention over who's right and who's wrong; who's viewpoint "wins out". It's not a matter of winning and losing. Its not a salvational issue anyway. All I've done is quote the scriptures to show there is no direct scriptural NT example or commandment to tithe.  Scripture supports it in the OT. Most comments were then simply refuting the traditional justification for the mandate.

Most responses have been primarily caustic remarks, character attacks, and traditional mantra. Few have been legitimate, thought out, replies. Most are ramblings about "being blessed because I tithe", and "I used to believe that but now I don't". If I'm so wrong - and you're so right, then show us.

Forget Malachi.

Where is the response to Abraham and Jacob?

Where is the response to the listing of tithes as food for the Levites?

Where is the response to no mention by Jesus in the Gospels?

Where is the response to no mention to the Gentiles in Acts 15?

Where is the response to no mention in any of the Apostles letters to the Church?


It was these discoveries in scripture, that caused a new look. I have no problem with anyone who tithes; just as I have no problem with anyone who does not understand the rapture. It is religion and tradition that has the problem. And we are discussing whether Apostolic truth = Biblical truth, aren't we?

******************

I have a neice and her husband who give about 18% right now to church.  they started with 10% and felt lead to start adding 1% per year that they are married.  It is 8 or 9 years now and they are very blessed.

Well of course they are. THEY FELT LED is obeying the will of God in this matter. What else should we expect?

Quote from: OGIA on July 12, 2008, 08:26:07 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 12, 2008, 05:07:08 PMTruth is: we, the church, teach tithing as necessary even though NT scripture does not.

More like "my opinion is".   ;)

Truth is: we, the church, teach baptism according to Mt 28:19 as necessary even though NT scripture does not.

Same response?  ;)

Quote from: OGIA on July 14, 2008, 01:55:02 AM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 13, 2008, 08:42:40 PM
I know this is controversible. That's why it has to be studied out and allow the HG to determine. That's what discovering biblical truth is all about.

So, the guy down the street says he has studied it out and that the HG revealed to him that tithing is a NT principal. 

Who's HG is right....yours or his?

Mine has told me to tithe; not as a mandate under the Law, but as a NT principle and as an offering to the High Priest.

Who's HG is right? 

:-?

The HG only teaches truth. But he teaches only what we are currently willing and able to accept. Many times, the HG uses terminology and concepts we are familiar with in order to avoid confusion. Being familiar with tithes allows the Spirit to guide your giving from the heart. The first barrier was recognizing "no mandate", simply given freely in love.

The answer to the question is: "Your" HG is always right because he is leading and guiding you into all truth. There will be some truth that each person never grasps or applies here on earth, but other saints might. Each of us are responsible for ourselves. Each of us are responsible to share what "our" HG reveals to us. That is how unleavened biblical truth is spread throughout the Body.

At this point I will not even waste my time reading your post on tithes.  I know what works and what don't work.  You yourself should know better than to try and tie Africa and in with the people of God.  I will sim[ly put it this way, I know what works.  I have been on both sides of the issue.  But after you throwing in the the remark of Africa I knew for sure there was no need to continue reading your posts.  End of discussion.

Now for next topic.
The Bible says:Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death
KJV
Now we know what we will earn if we sin.  The question is what is the cost of sin?

Quote from: titushome on July 11, 2008, 01:53:57 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 11, 2008, 03:12:48 AM
Question: where does the NT ever annul the payment of tithes to the High Priest?  Is not the Head of the Church the One in whom we should invest our monies, the firstfruits of what HE has blessed us with?  Doesn't "freely you have been given, freely give" apply to money, too?  Doesn't it seem that the practice of tithing never was done away with, as the high priest role never was, either?

This is a very good point.

So, accepting this for now for the sake of the discussion, the next logical question is this: how and to whom do we pay our tithe?  It's easy to say that we ought to pay a tithe to Jesus Christ our High Priest, but how do we actually put this into practice?  Jesus certainly has no use for our money - the Earth and all that is in it already belong to Him - and even if He did it's not like we could deliver it to His doorstep or place it directly in His hand.

So do we dedicate at least ten percent of our income to doing the work of the Lord: buying necessities to give to the poor and needy; paying for gas to visit the sick, the elderly, the imprisoned; etc.?  Or do we do what is usually done with the tithe, and give ten percent of our income to our pastor and/or local church group?  Or do we give ten percent to the Christian ministry(ies) of our choice?  Or is some combination of the above acceptable?

I ask in all sincerity, wondering what is your (anyone's) personal approach to this issue.  OGIA?  OOJ?  Doogie?  Bro Dad?

I personally do not pre-set any percentage. It would be a combinaton of the above.  :teeth: Sometimes it goes in the plate, sometimes straight to the needy hand. Sometimes it is nothing at all. It depends upon my response to the HG and not my response to the habit of non-chalantly throwing in some bucks. I desire to give exactly where the HG wants it to go. That's not always easy for me.

I would like to ask a question, Why is we think of God and His Word more in the negative instead of the positive?  For instance, Obey Act 2:38 or be lost.  Not, Obey and be saved.  Pay tithes or be cursed, not, pay tithes and be blessed.  Attend Church or be punished, not, attend Church and be Blessed

I believe that in the NT God has shown forth Mercy to those who will let Him.  To teach obey or be cursed is not the way we should teach anything.  We are blessed by obeying God's Word.  Punishment will come at the end of the way.  Truly living for God is a Blessed life.  We serve God because we love Him.  We are not following Him out of fear, nor are we doing it because we are seeking a blessing.  Jesus:
John 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

I love God and choose to do my best to please Him.  I love my wife and my desire is to please her.  I do not seek to please her because I am afraid she will leave me, or not cook my supper but because I love her.  So much more with Jesus Christ.
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

We were already lost that is why He came, we were already cursed that is why He came.  Obeying God delivers us from being lost, obeying God sets us free from the curse. 

Jesus also said,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.

The only true way to have life is with Jesus Christ. 
John 10:10 I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.

The only truly fulfulled life is in Jesus Christ.  When I obey His Words in these things He will bless me.  I was born into this world cursed.  But thanks be to God, He has delivered me.  So I will do my best to obey Him at all times.  I wish to say with Paul.
2 Tim 4:7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith:

Amen to Bro. Dad's post.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 14, 2008, 02:28:56 PM
I would like to ask a question, Why is we think of God and His Word more in the negative instead of the positive? 

This reflects on how many apostolic churches teach.  Its fear based teaching  and most often uses threats of loosing salvation or missing the rapture to scare members and seekers into complying.  Can you expect someone to have a positive view of God and of the Scripture if God is presented to them as waiting on them to mess up so he can punish them?

Quote from: titushome on July 14, 2008, 02:58:36 PM
Amen to Bro. Dad's post.

I second that.  :thumbsup2:

Quote from: bsr on July 14, 2008, 04:45:36 PM

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 14, 2008, 02:28:56 PM
I would like to ask a question, Why is we think of God and His Word more in the negative instead of the positive? 

This reflects on how many apostolic churches teach.  Its fear based teaching  and most often uses threats of loosing salvation or missing the rapture to scare members and seekers into complying.  Can you expect someone to have a positive view of God and of the Scripture if God is presented to them as waiting on them to mess up so he can punish them?

Exactly. We all were carried away into religion, not too long after conversion. It takes time to grow in the Lord and recognize the call to come out. That path is narrow, compared to the broad way of religious thought. The captivity in Babylon typifies this.

I don't purposely think of the Word as negative. I've simply learned that the negative has to be overcome for the positive to work properly. I think it was after Passover that leaven was to be added to the unleavened bread. This signified the pure Word being in an unpure vessel. It takes a lifetime of the pure cleansing the unpure and will only be fully accomplished in the end.

Personally, it is in contrasting religious traditions with the Bible that the negative comes out. Otherwise, my witness is overwhelmingly positive.

I'm sorry Bro Dad that Africa upset you. If you choose to re-read the post, you will find it is simply an exagerated response to the apparent cause of poverty being non-tithing.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 14, 2008, 06:14:06 PM
I'm sorry Bro Dad that Africa upset you. If you choose to re-read the post, you will find it is simply an exagerated response to the apparent cause of poverty being non-tithing.

I accept and appreciate your apology. 

I remember one time a woman and her husband had stopped going to church.  About six months later they had a bad automobile accident.  The woman's back was broke.  Someone said see what God done to them for quitting Church.  I thought then and this was the late 70s my God wouldn't do that.  As I began to Pastor I told and retold this story.  There are things we will face just because we a human.  There are however things we are protected from because we are under the protecting hand of God.  Sometimes things happen because we have gotten out in the wilderness away from God.  Not because God makes them happen but because we got out there where it could happen.  I like to compare it to standing under an umbrella.  As long as we stay under it the rain is not falling on us, but if we get out from under it then we will have to deal with rain and elements that we were protected from.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 14, 2008, 06:05:12 PM

Quote from: bsr on July 14, 2008, 04:45:36 PM

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 14, 2008, 02:28:56 PM
I would like to ask a question, Why is we think of God and His Word more in the negative instead of the positive? 

This reflects on how many apostolic churches teach.  Its fear based teaching  and most often uses threats of loosing salvation or missing the rapture to scare members and seekers into complying.  Can you expect someone to have a positive view of God and of the Scripture if God is presented to them as waiting on them to mess up so he can punish them?

Exactly. We all were carried away into religion, not too long after conversion. It takes time to grow in the Lord and recognize the call to come out. That path is narrow, compared to the broad way of religious thought. The captivity in Babylon typifies this.

I don't purposely think of the Word as negative. I've simply learned that the negative has to be overcome for the positive to work properly. I think it was after Passover that leaven was to be added to the unleavened bread. This signified the pure Word being in an unpure vessel. It takes a lifetime of the pure cleansing the unpure and will only be fully accomplished in the end.

Personally, it is in contrasting religious traditions with the Bible that the negative comes out. Otherwise, my witness is overwhelmingly positive.

I think many beliefs use fear to hold people. I have a mother who is in a nursing home and I have been told many a times by her that I am going to hell because I no longer believe as she does. I went to visit her one day and had an elder from where she attended  walk out as I walked in and look at me and just said I am so sorry you are choosing to go to hell. They think because I no longer believe as they do and have embraced this truth I am hell bound and are constantly letting me know it. But I am assured in what I believe now and it doesnt bother me. I think if we become more assured in our beliefs through bible study and prayer it will help us to stand
The fear tatic my mom used used to bother me until I became grounded in what I believe. Once I became grounded  it has helped me greatly to stand firm

Quote from: Bobbiesue on July 14, 2008, 09:28:09 PM
I think many beliefs use fear to hold people. I have a mother who is in a nursing home and I have been told many a times by her that I am going to hell because I no longer believe as she does. I went to visit her one day and had an elder from where she attended  walk out as I walked in and look at me and just said I am so sorry you are choosing to go to hell. They think because I no longer believe as they do and have embraced this truth I am hell bound and are constantly letting me know it. But I am assured in what I believe now and it doesnt bother me. I think if we become more assured in our beliefs through bible study and prayer it will help us to stand
The fear tatic my mom used used to bother me until I became grounded in what I believe. Once I became grounded  it has helped me greatly to stand firm

That's really sad.  I'm glad you're still making the effort to spend time with your mother, in spite of her attitude toward you.

I think many beliefs use fear to hold people. I have a mother who is in a nursing home and I have been told many a times by her that I am going to hell because I no longer believe as she does. I went to visit her one day and had an elder from where she attended  walk out as I walked in and look at me and just said I am so sorry you are choosing to go to hell. They think because I no longer believe as they do and have embraced this truth I am hell bound and are constantly letting me know it. But I am assured in what I believe now and it doesnt bother me. I think if we become more assured in our beliefs through bible study and prayer it will help us to stand
The fear tatic my mom used used to bother me until I became grounded in what I believe. Once I became grounded  it has helped me greatly to stand firm

The above was to be a qoute from bobbiesue, some how I didn't do the do something right

I agree with titushome, it is great you are still spending time with your Mother.  I would also like to add that true Holiness is more attitude, stndards are only a producr of our Holiness.  If our attitude stinks I don't care what kind of standards we have.  I am teaching standard here but I think we all would agree the proper attitude is the first step do living for God.  I like how Paul put it after naming several sins.

1 Cor 6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

We should never forget where and what God delivered us from.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 14, 2008, 01:34:24 PM

Now for next topic.
The Bible says:Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death
KJV
Now we know what we will earn if we sin.  The question is what is the cost of sin?

The cost of sin is: Life and everything that defines it.

Sin costs each individual their destiny and purpose, joy and peace, soundness of mind and heart - just to name a few.

Sin costs eternity spent in the presence of God.

Sin costs eternity spent alone, in torment.

Sin costs it all.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 14, 2008, 01:17:49 PM

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 13, 2008, 06:53:48 PM
It is evident that no amount of scripture will convince OOJ how wrong his point of view is.  The uselessness of continuing such a task is wasteful.  I am convince of obeying the Word and do not wish to see the scrimming that i saw when growing up from those bent on withholding what is God's.  Every Scripture can be twisted to fit what ever we wish to make it fit.  I am not trying to offend OOJ but do believe that I have a God call obligation to tell him he is wrong.  Yes I am narrow minded but refuse to back down from truth.  I heard all the same ole arguments before, used to even use some of them.  But I thakn God He has shown me the Truth not just on tithes, but orht things as well.  I will say this OOJ if you don't want to give back to God the tenth and do as the early Church did then sell all you have and take it to the Church.
Acts 2:45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.

Can't have it and give it all away.  I could fully explain that scripture but know how futile it would be to try.  Just give it all up now, hey not a bad idea.  Seeing most of the time when I preach I do not even get an offering.  Oh I forgot us preachers are in for the money.  Well I am not and most I know aren't, we are in for the winning of souls.  Such fighting over a dime is beyond me.  God has and will take care of me but that in no way frees others from doing what is right.

Don't call it tithes give until God say you have out gave him.  I have a neice and her husband who give about 18% right now to church.  they started with 10% and felt lead to start adding 1% per year that they are married.  It is 8 or 9 years now and they are very blessed.  Neither one of then has a collge education.  They both had just normal paying jobs.  After starting to give back to God, God open the windows of heaven and begin blessing them.  They still do not have any degrees nor are they going to school to get one.  But they both make over $100,000.00 a year now.  Why because they choose to give back to God.  I could go on and on and on of the blessing in my life.  For instance I have had two Cadilacs given to me.  Received large sums of money in the mail, people just handing me money.  So all I can really say is go ahead if you want to withhold don't bother me I kinda like the plan God laid out and I will continue to follow it.  Because it works, I tried the other way and it did not work.  So I will trust God.

See Bro Dad, this is the real problem: contention over who's right and who's wrong; who's viewpoint "wins out". It's not a matter of winning and losing. Its not a salvational issue anyway. All I've done is quote the scriptures to show there is no direct scriptural NT example or commandment to tithe.  Scripture supports it in the OT. Most comments were then simply refuting the traditional justification for the mandate.

Most responses have been primarily caustic remarks, character attacks, and traditional mantra. Few have been legitimate, thought out, replies. Most are ramblings about "being blessed because I tithe", and "I used to believe that but now I don't". If I'm so wrong - and you're so right, then show us.

Forget Malachi.

Where is the response to Abraham and Jacob?

Where is the response to the listing of tithes as food for the Levites?

Where is the response to no mention by Jesus in the Gospels?

Where is the response to no mention to the Gentiles in Acts 15?

Where is the response to no mention in any of the Apostles letters to the Church?


It was these discoveries in scripture, that caused a new look. I have no problem with anyone who tithes; just as I have no problem with anyone who does not understand the rapture. It is religion and tradition that has the problem. And we are discussing whether Apostolic truth = Biblical truth, aren't we?

******************

I have a neice and her husband who give about 18% right now to church.  they started with 10% and felt lead to start adding 1% per year that they are married.  It is 8 or 9 years now and they are very blessed.

Well of course they are. THEY FELT LED is obeying the will of God in this matter. What else should we expect?

Fyi:  I wll be responding, but have been traveling for work over the past week and have not had the opportunity to do so yet.

Quote from: doogie on July 18, 2008, 04:28:10 AM

Fyi:  I wll be responding, but have been traveling for work over the past week and have not had the opportunity to do so yet.

Great. Looking forward to it.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 14, 2008, 01:20:34 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 12, 2008, 08:26:07 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 12, 2008, 05:07:08 PMTruth is: we, the church, teach tithing as necessary even though NT scripture does not.

More like "my opinion is".   ;)

Truth is: we, the church, teach baptism according to Mt 28:19 as necessary even though NT scripture does not.

Same response?  ;)

Depends on how you interpret "according to Mt 28:19".  Define and I'll answer.   :)

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 14, 2008, 01:31:59 PM
The HG only teaches truth. But he teaches only what we are currently willing and able to accept. Many times, the HG uses terminology and concepts we are familiar with in order to avoid confusion. Being familiar with tithes allows the Spirit to guide your giving from the heart. The first barrier was recognizing "no mandate", simply given freely in love.

The answer to the question is: "Your" HG is always right because he is leading and guiding you into all truth. There will be some truth that each person never grasps or applies here on earth, but other saints might. Each of us are responsible for ourselves. Each of us are responsible to share what "our" HG reveals to us. That is how unleavened biblical truth is spread throughout the Body.

Well, I mostly agree, but still see "your HG" as telling you that the NT does not teach tithing.  I know a whooooooooole lot of HG-filled men who are preaching a lie then...... :-(

Quote from: OGIA on July 18, 2008, 10:29:45 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 14, 2008, 01:20:34 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 12, 2008, 08:26:07 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 12, 2008, 05:07:08 PMTruth is: we, the church, teach tithing as necessary even though NT scripture does not.

More like "my opinion is".   ;)

Truth is: we, the church, teach baptism according to Mt 28:19 as necessary even though NT scripture does not.

Same response?  ;)

Depends on how you interpret "according to Mt 28:19".  Define and I'll answer.   :)

Just like it says. Just like the bulk of the Church carries thru.  :P

Quote from: OGIA on July 18, 2008, 10:29:45 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 14, 2008, 01:31:59 PM
The HG only teaches truth. But he teaches only what we are currently willing and able to accept. Many times, the HG uses terminology and concepts we are familiar with in order to avoid confusion. Being familiar with tithes allows the Spirit to guide your giving from the heart. The first barrier was recognizing "no mandate", simply given freely in love.

The answer to the question is: "Your" HG is always right because he is leading and guiding you into all truth. There will be some truth that each person never grasps or applies here on earth, but other saints might. Each of us are responsible for ourselves. Each of us are responsible to share what "our" HG reveals to us. That is how unleavened biblical truth is spread throughout the Body.

Well, I mostly agree, but still see "your HG" as telling you that the NT does not teach tithing.  I know a whooooooooole lot of HG-filled men who are preaching a lie then...... :-( 

As do I.  :cry2:   

That's why biblical truth trumps _______ truth every time. We just have to have the scales fall from our eyes.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 18, 2008, 11:37:17 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 18, 2008, 10:29:45 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 14, 2008, 01:20:34 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 12, 2008, 08:26:07 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 12, 2008, 05:07:08 PMTruth is: we, the church, teach tithing as necessary even though NT scripture does not.

More like "my opinion is".   ;)

Truth is: we, the church, teach baptism according to Mt 28:19 as necessary even though NT scripture does not.

Same response?  ;)

Depends on how you interpret "according to Mt 28:19".  Define and I'll answer.   :)

Just like it says. Just like the bulk of the Church carries thru.  :P

Like I said, I'll answer when you define.   :-?

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 18, 2008, 11:39:43 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 18, 2008, 10:29:45 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 14, 2008, 01:31:59 PM
The HG only teaches truth. But he teaches only what we are currently willing and able to accept. Many times, the HG uses terminology and concepts we are familiar with in order to avoid confusion. Being familiar with tithes allows the Spirit to guide your giving from the heart. The first barrier was recognizing "no mandate", simply given freely in love.

The answer to the question is: "Your" HG is always right because he is leading and guiding you into all truth. There will be some truth that each person never grasps or applies here on earth, but other saints might. Each of us are responsible for ourselves. Each of us are responsible to share what "our" HG reveals to us. That is how unleavened biblical truth is spread throughout the Body.

Well, I mostly agree, but still see "your HG" as telling you that the NT does not teach tithing.  I know a whooooooooole lot of HG-filled men who are preaching a lie then...... :-( 

As do I.  :cry2:   

That's why biblical truth trumps _______ truth every time. We just have to have the scales fall from our eyes.

Like I said, your HG seems to be telling you the truth while not revealing "it" to others.   :-?

Quote from: OGIA on July 19, 2008, 02:38:49 AM

Like I said, I'll answer when you define.   :-?

Sorry John, I thought it was obvious.


Truth is: we, the church, teach baptism according to Mt 28:19 as necessary even though NT scripture does not.

Same response? 


Depends on how you interpret "according to Mt 28:19".  Define and I'll answer.   

The bulk of the the Christian Church takes Matthew 28:19 - baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost - to be a literal commandment using the titles Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. The bulk of the Church infers this to be Jesus. This is a historical and present fact.

Being good Bereans who search the scriptures to see if these things be so; we find every recorded biblical enactment of this command uses the name of the Lord Jesus. There is not one scriptural record of baptism in the titles Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Nor is there an historical record until the 4th Century, after the Nicean Council.

Thus, the bulk of the Church is biblically in error regarding baptism, and doesn't even realize it.

So... take the statement: Truth is: we, the church, teach tithing as necessary even though NT scripture does not.,

switch "tithing" for "baptism according to Mt 28:19", and you get the equally biblical error:

Truth is: we, the church, teach baptism according to Mt 28:19 as necessary even though NT scripture does not.


Is baptism in Jesus' name personal opinion or biblical truth?  :teeth:

Quote from: OGIA on July 19, 2008, 02:38:49 AM

Like I said, your HG seems to be telling you the truth while not revealing "it" to others.   :-?

Just like the HG does regarding:

baptism in Jesus' name.... infilling of the Holy Ghost.... laying on of hands for healing.... speaking in tongues.... gift of the apostle.... gift of the prophet.... word of knowledge.... modesty and moderation.... spiritual discernment.... Christ is the head.... Jesus is the only door to God.... the timing of the resurrection/rapture.... and on and on and on.

John, surely there is somethng the HG revealed to you that you shared with others who did not know? Something so clear but somehow they did not see? We all learn different things at different times. All of us. Just because someone doesn't yet see it, doesn't mean it's not there.

I know some very godly brethren who have the HG, but baptize according to Mt 28:19. I know some very godly brethren who have the HG, baptize according to Acts 2:38, but do not see modesty and moderation. Acts 2:38 doesn't automatically grant us everything. We have to be willing to see biblical truth and act on it.

Like you said: Well, I mostly agree, but still see "your HG" as telling you that the NT does not teach tithing.  I know a whooooooooole lot of HG-filled men who are preaching a lie then...... . 

Not on purpose. Not with malice. Just not yet seeing what the Book really says. And that's not my fault. Jesus said if you want wisdom/understanding, then ask for it. I simply did what He said.  :teeth:

The bulk of the Church does not teach baptism wrong.  There is no Baptism outside of the name of Jesus Christ.  To use titles is not baptizing, just getting wet.  There is only one Church and that is the Church that is called by the name of Jesus Christ.  There is only one door.  There is only one name.  People who have not been baptized in the name of Jesus Christ are not in the church but in a Church. 

Acts 4:10 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.
11 This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner.
12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.
13 Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus.

Unless we get bold and tell the truth to people that they are not saved outside of the name of Jesus Christ, then we are letting people die lost.  We must know beyond a shadow of a doubt that this is right.  Otherwise we will be guilty of misleading people.

This is not an attempt to slam anyone or put them down, but Biblical Truth is just that and there can only be one truth.  We simply accept it or deny it.  Either we are right or we are wrong it can not be both ways.  It is time to get the boldness we need to have true Revival.  It is time we stand for the truth of God's Word.  No one without exception is saved outside of Repentance, Water Baptism and the in filling of the Holy Ghost.  We have established that most of us here believe this, but do we really.   Because if we really do then we know nothing else will do.  There is no plan B.

You either believe it or you don't.  As for me I do and I will stand up for anyday, anytime, anywhere.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 19, 2008, 09:25:36 AM
The bulk of the Church does not teach baptism wrong.  There is no Baptism outside of the name of Jesus Christ.  To use titles is not baptizing, just getting wet.  There is only one Church and that is the Church that is called by the name of Jesus Christ.  There is only one door.  There is only one name.  People who have not been baptized in the name of Jesus Christ are not in the church but in a Church. 

Acts 4:10 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.
11 This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner.
12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.
13 Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus.

Unless we get bold and tell the truth to people that they are not saved outside of the name of Jesus Christ, then we are letting people die lost.  We must know beyond a shadow of a doubt that this is right.  Otherwise we will be guilty of misleading people.

This is not an attempt to slam anyone or put them down, but Biblical Truth is just that and there can only be one truth.  We simply accept it or deny it.  Either we are right or we are wrong it can not be both ways.  It is time to get the boldness we need to have true Revival.  It is time we stand for the truth of God's Word.  No one without exception is saved outside of Repentance, Water Baptism and the in filling of the Holy Ghost.  We have established that most of us here believe this, but do we really.   Because if we really do then we know nothing else will do.  There is no plan B.

You either believe it or you don't.  As for me I do and I will stand up for anyday, anytime, anywhere.

Well, Brother that's a whole nother subject. One we've been over alot. Let someone else belabor the point.

***************************************************************************


Posted by Brother Dad: This is not an attempt to slam anyone or put them down, but Biblical Truth is just that and there can only be one truth.  We simply accept it or deny it.  Either we are right or we are wrong it can not be both ways. [/i]

That's right. Biblical Truth is the only one. Accept it or deny it. You either believe it or you don't. Biblical Truth!

So, I've proven that the Bible does not teach tithing to be necessary for NT saints. Apostolic truth teaches it is, just like the so-called "false church".

Will you now stand up for this Biblical Truth "anyday, anytime, or anywhere"?

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 19, 2008, 06:16:00 AM
Thus, the bulk of the Church is biblically in error regarding baptism, and doesn't even realize it.


Is baptism in Jesus' name personal opinion or biblical truth?  :teeth:

I can't answer your question, because I seem to also disagree with you on what the "Christian Church" is and who is in it.  I don't consider anything or anyone being the "church" that and who does not practice water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.

So, my response to your premise would be that the two don't compare because only those who are absolutely correct about water baptism are "the Church".

 
PS: I read Bro. Dad's post after I posted mine, but I would have most likely just quoted his and given that as my answer since they are very similar.  Jerry, you can't compare water baptism in Jesus' name with tithing and say the "bulk of the church" practices it wrong when I don't agree with you who is IN said Church.  I happen to believe tithing is not only a NT principle, but a godly principle that has endured for millenia.  I don't believe it is an issue of salvation, in and of itself; but I do question someone who doesn't give at least 10% of their firstfruits as to where their heart is.  And I believe it is "heart matters" that are salvational.  The acts we commit or don't commit for God are merely products of the heart.

Quote from: OGIA on July 19, 2008, 05:07:46 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 19, 2008, 06:16:00 AM
Thus, the bulk of the Church is biblically in error regarding baptism, and doesn't even realize it.


Is baptism in Jesus' name personal opinion or biblical truth?  :teeth:

I can't answer your question, because I seem to also disagree with you on what the "Christian Church" is and who is in it.  I don't consider anything or anyone being the "church" that and who does not practice water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.

So, my response to your premise would be that the two don't compare because only those who are absolutely correct about water baptism are "the Church".

 
PS: I read Bro. Dad's post after I posted mine, but I would have most likely just quoted his and given that as my answer since they are very similar.  Jerry, you can't compare water baptism in Jesus' name with tithing and say the "bulk of the church" practices it wrong when I don't agree with you who is IN said Church.  I happen to believe tithing is not only a NT principle, but a godly principle that has endured for millenia.  I don't believe it is an issue of salvation, in and of itself; but I do question someone who doesn't give at least 10% of their firstfruits as to where their heart is.  And I believe it is "heart matters" that are salvational.  The acts we commit or don't commit for God are merely products of the heart.

Ok. Thanks anyway.   :teeth:

No OOJ you have not proven tihes wrong just that you refuse to pay them.  I believe the NT teaches it and you don"t.  I would agree with OGIA I would have a real concern about someone I was pastoring who refused to give God at least 10 percent.  After all what has He done for us.

You know what? I've just about had it with all of these holier-than-thou accusations. Who are you or anyone else, to imply I am a thief and refuse to give anything to our Lord?

I have been nothing but respectful as a brother-in-Christ during this entire topic. But you and men of your ilk continually call names and label false accusations.

I would be concerned to be pastored by such a viperous tongue!

White-washed secpulchre!  I wash my hands of you!

I am sorry you took that so hard.  No one said they were holier than anyone.  Nor did I call people names.  I simply answered your question concerning a topic that I try to close several post behind us.  All I can say is we must make sure we are ready to go when the Lord calls us home.

Everyone:

Please try to keep the discussion about the TOPIC and not about INDIVIDUALS who are posting.

Thanks,

The Management

:smirk2:

The way i look at tithing and giving is this, God expects me to give, and I give.   But what I give is between me and God, not between me and the pastor.  If i feel that they  should know the percentage I give ---then I will tell them at that time.

Quote from: OGIA on July 19, 2008, 05:07:46 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 19, 2008, 06:16:00 AM
Thus, the bulk of the Church is biblically in error regarding baptism, and doesn't even realize it.


Is baptism in Jesus' name personal opinion or biblical truth?  :teeth:

I can't answer your question, because I seem to also disagree with you on what the "Christian Church" is and who is in it.  I don't consider anything or anyone being the "church" that and who does not practice water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.

So, my response to your premise would be that the two don't compare because only those who are absolutely correct about water baptism are "the Church".

 
PS: I read Bro. Dad's post after I posted mine, but I would have most likely just quoted his and given that as my answer since they are very similar.  you can't compare water baptism in Jesus' name with tithing and say the "bulk of the church" practices it wrong when I don't agree with you who is IN said Church.  I happen to believe tithing is not only a NT principle, but a godly principle that has endured for millenia.  I don't believe it is an issue of salvation, in and of itself; but I do question someone who doesn't give at least 10% of their firstfruits as to where their heart is.  And I believe it is "heart matters" that are salvational.  The acts we commit or don't commit for God are merely products of the heart.

:thumbsup2: :thumbsup2:

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 19, 2008, 09:18:33 PM
No OOJ you have not proven tihes wrong just that you refuse to pay them.

OOJ has never said that he does not give 10% (or more) to God, so to say that he "refuses{s} to pay them" is wrong.

The argument he's making is that he doesn't believe God requires 10% from NT Christians; rather, he believes we should give whatever and whenever we feel the Lord directs us to give - whether it's 10%, 50%, 90% or 0%*.  Because the truth is, 100% of what we own belongs to Him anyway, and we are to use it or give it away as He directs us.

*And yes, there is a time when it would be appropriate to give nothing: if someone, say a missionary or an evangelist, is urging me to give money to their work - one that is ostensibly of and for the Lord - but I feel the Lord telling me not to give, because their work is not of Him; then I should give nothing.

To try and push something that is a personal view even if you think you are right and then get bad because someone else sees it totally different and start name calling is wrong.  I attempted to go back to the post where OOJ told how he gave to the Church but was unable at this time to find it.  It is no skin off my back, or money in my pocket if people do not wish to pay tithes.  The point is we must be saved.

No one can build a house without first having the foundation.  No one can be in the Church of the Living God without Repentance, Water Baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.  Then God will at some point fill them with the Holy Ghost evidenced by speaking in tongues.  Then after you are in the Church you do the following.

Phil 2:12Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.
13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.
14 Do all things without murmurings and disputings:

It was not I that brought up the need to pay tithes, it was not I that called paying or not paying teaching false doctrine.  I teach the Whole Bible from cover to cover, however I tell everyone to first get the foundation right.  I am not near as concerned about them understanding tithes, tribulation, standards, or the coming of the Lord.  All these things they can grow and work out with God in fear and trembling to get them right.  But if they die and I have not shown them the foundation I am wrong.  To let a trinitarian think he is saved is wrong on my part.  To let them feel like they are part of the body is to deceive them.  I am not saying be ugly but we must somehow let them know the right way.  So what I would like to do now is ask for some suggestions of how you would approach a person in a trinitarian church with the plan of salvation.  How about those who have repented and have received the HG, how will you teach them Jesus name baptism.  Please do not call out Church names or peoples name just how would you handle these situations we face every day.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 14, 2008, 01:43:41 PM

I personally do not pre-set any percentage. It would be a combinaton of the above.  :teeth: Sometimes it goes in the plate, sometimes straight to the needy hand. Sometimes it is nothing at all. It depends upon my response to the HG and not my response to the habit of non-chalantly throwing in some bucks. I desire to give exactly where the HG wants it to go. That's not always easy for me.

Here is the post I was looking for earlier for Brother Titushome where OOJ does not beleive in 10%.  But I stress I do not wish to see this issue brought back up as it seems to stir up bad feelings and results in name calling.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 21, 2008, 02:57:42 PM
To let a trinitarian think he is saved is wrong on my part.  To let them feel like they are part of the body is to deceive them.  I am not saying be ugly but we must somehow let them know the right way.

Sorry, but I have to ask: what in the Bible tells you that someone who believes in the erroneous doctrine of trinitarianism is not saved, or not part of the Body?

I know a man who was baptized in Jesus' name, and is full of the Holy Spirit, and is doing his best to live a Godly life and grow in God - but he believes in the so-called trinity.  How would this one error result in him not being saved?

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 21, 2008, 02:57:42 PM
So what I would like to do now is ask for some suggestions of how you would approach a person in a trinitarian church with the plan of salvation.  How about those who have repented and have received the HG, how will you teach them Jesus name baptism.

How?  I just talk with them about it.  I share with them what I've learned from my own studies of the Scriptures.  Seeing how they've by their own admission dedicated their lives to Jesus, they're usually pretty open to talking about what the Bible says.

In the case of my friend, he's already obeyed what Apostolics call "the plan of salvation" - so there's no need to explain it to him, or urge him to follow it.  Regarding his trinitarian belief, we've talked about it, and I'm sure we'll talk about it again.  He's studied the Scriptures for himself, and for now, that's the conclusion that he's reached.  He knows I see it differently.

Quote from: titushome on July 21, 2008, 07:38:40 PM
Sorry, but I have to ask: what in the Bible tells you that someone who believes in the erroneous doctrine of trinitarianism is not saved, or not part of the Body?

I believe the Bible is clear that idolatry will send someone to hell.  The true doctrine of the trinity is about worshipping more than one person who is God.  How is that not idolatry?  Is the trinity any different than worshipping one of the Hindu gods?  If so, how?  Just because someone claims to worship the "Christian God", do they really?  If they worship another Person besides Jesus Christ as God, are they worshipping in truth --- one of the requirements by the Father for true worship?  If it's not "true" worship, will He accept it?

I do believe there are variants of beliefs in the trinity (just as there are in Oneness), but I've IMO false doctrine is that which does not exalt Jesus Christ...and HIM ALONE.....as the One God of eternity.  Even if someone says they believe that but then turns around and says "but then there's also the Father, yet they are one", I still don't think they are worshipping one God.

QuoteI know a man who was baptized in Jesus' name, and is full of the Holy Spirit, and is doing his best to live a Godly life and grow in God - but he believes in the so-called trinity.  How would this one error result in him not being saved?

Is idolatry alone enough to send someone to hell?  I think it is.   :(

Quote from: OGIA on July 21, 2008, 09:26:58 PM
I believe the Bible is clear that idolatry will send someone to hell.

Absolutely true.

Quote from: OGIA on July 21, 2008, 09:26:58 PM
I do believe there are variants of beliefs in the trinity (just as there are in Oneness), but I've IMO false doctrine is that which does not exalt Jesus Christ...and HIM ALONE.....as the One God of eternity.  Even if someone says they believe that but then turns around and says "but then there's also the Father, yet they are one", I still don't think they are worshipping one God.

Here's another way of looking at it: trinitarians, as far as I know, worship the God who has revealed Himself to us in and through the person of Jesus Christ.  How then are they failing to exalt Him as "the One God of eternity"?

The nature of God far exceeds the capacity of the human mind to understand.  Oneness beliefs and trinitarianism are two modern attempts to explain Him; and in my opinion, oneness is much closer to the truth of understanding who and what God is, and how He is who He is through Jesus Christ.  But the error of trinitarianism is not a fatal one, because it still acknowledges God in Christ, and Christ as God.

Trying to understand how God could be both Father in Heaven and Son on earth is no small undertaking.  Take note of the all the times Jesus addresses the Father, or makes reference to the Father.  Is Jesus talking to Himself, or referring to Himself in the third person?  To whom did Jesus pray?  Is Jesus schizo, or what?  These are difficult questions to answer, and it's no small wonder that so many in trying to understand have fallen into such errors as trinitarianism.

Quote from: OGIA on July 21, 2008, 09:26:58 PM
The true doctrine of the trinity is about worshipping more than one person who is God.  How is that not idolatry?  Is the trinity any different than worshipping one of the Hindu gods?  If so, how?

The error of belief in the "Christian" trinity is different from the error of believing in a false religion, because it still exalts Jesus alone as Lord and Christ.

Quote from: OGIA on July 21, 2008, 09:26:58 PMJust because someone claims to worship the "Christian God", do they really?

Definitely not.  But of much greater significance than professing belief in the trinity is this: claiming to worship the "Christian God," but not walking in His ways.  Because by not walking in His ways, I am not with my life acknowledging Him as Lord and God.  This is true idolatry; this is truly what it means to follow after or serve a false god.

Tinity doctrine is false doctrine.  God did not receive a knowledge of the triune God from God.  The Bible is full of One God scriptures.  If we do not help them to see the truth then they will be lost because of our failure.  Maybe the biggest problem is not that people can not figure out how God could be in heaven and also walking on earth in the form of Jesus Christ, but the problem comes in because people fail to realize that God is a Spirit and not a person or person.  Furthermore where is the heaven that God dwells there.  There can only be one truth either we have it or we don't.  The problem with the people staying in the trinity is they are staying with the mother harlot.  Anyone who truly repents and follows after Jesus Christ will see that there is but one not a trinity.  One God does not gives several different options on how we should believe.  The Bible is plan in the fact.  2 Peter 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

Seeing once again our conversations are going in a downward spiral I feel I should maybe change the way I put the question on  here.  The thing I would like to see discussed is how do different once approach someone in order to get a Bible Study started with them. 

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 21, 2008, 10:34:14 PM
Tinity doctrine is false doctrine....  If we do not help them to see the truth then they will be lost because of our failure....  There can only be one truth either we have it or we don't.  The problem with the people staying in the trinity is they are staying with the mother harlot.  Anyone who truly repents and follows after Jesus Christ will see that there is but one not a trinity.

You still haven't really answered my question: what in the Bible tells you that someone who believes in the erroneous doctrine of trinitarianism is not saved, or not part of the Body?

Yes, there is only one Truth; yes, trinitarianism is false doctrine.  But will this false doctrine prevent someone from entering into life with God?  Answer with Scripture, please.  There are many false doctrines out there: preterism, snake handling, tithing/not-tithing¹, the necessity of "attending church" on Sunday², etc.  I don't believe error in any of these areas will keep a person from living in God; though they will hamper that life, keeping that person from living fully the life God intends for them.

1 Since this issue has been a subject of heated debate in this very thread, I'll refrain for now from taking a position on it.
2 Just to clarify: we don't "attend church;" we ARE the Church.  And there's nothing in the Bible that says we have to assemble ourselves together at the same time every Sunday morning.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 21, 2008, 10:34:14 PM
One God does not gives several different options on how we should believe.

Absolutely true.  But that still doesn't necessarily mean that someone who hasn't yet received the Truth concerning a particular issue is "lost."  Isn't each of us still at least partially in the dark concerning something?  Won't there always be something we don't perfectly understand?

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 21, 2008, 11:24:11 PM
Seeing once again our conversations are going in a downward spiral I feel I should maybe change the way I put the question on  here. 

By "downward spiral" are you referring to the fact that I don't completely agree with you?

I do not think everyone has to agree with me.  A true Apostolic knows the scriptures are true and everything else is false.
Gal 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.
11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

2 John 9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

Space nor time would permit me to post all the one God scriptures here.  But there can only be one truth. 

But I have another question I would like to ask.  Why is that some love to get on the Bible threads and try to debate an issue, but you never saw them on the Giving God Some Glory or they never start a thread about how good God is to them?  Just curious!!!!

Wonder what someone who needs to find the truth thinks when they see those who say they have it, but want to debate the very truth they claim to have.

James 1:5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
6 But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.
7 For let not that man think that he shall receive any thing of the Lord.
8 A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.

Oneness either right or it is wrong.  There can not be two ways. 

Of course I could go on and on and on with scripture, but what would be the point.  All that it will do is cause the trinitarian to see that we Apostolics can not even agree and get along.  So I encourage those on here to stop trying to show how smart they may think they are and start using our time to bring some Glory to God.  For if at the end of the road I have proved my point at the cost of someone really seeing the Love of God in my life and them being lost, then I have really lost. 

I would add that if a person does not know how to properly teach a trinitarian the oneness of God leave it alone.  I can not begin to count the people that I have taught Bible Studies to who had someone before try to teach the them the Apostolic Doctrine.  I am not referring this to anyone person, just saying it is better not try and teach it if you don't fully know it.

2 Tim 3:14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
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 perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Are we in this for the betterment of the Kingdom or for the debating of a point.

Hello.  This will be my first post on these forums, and will probably not be my last.  I was baptised on the 6th and received the Holy Ghost on the 13th, so I am fairly new to the word of God.  I believe in the One Godhead.  So that being said:

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 22, 2008, 02:58:26 PM
I do not think everyone has to agree with me.  A true Apostolic knows the scriptures are true and everything else is false.
Gal 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.
11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

2 John 9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

The way I read these scriptures, says perfectly clear.  If you do not believe what is taught by the apostles and find it not to be "Truth" that you will not be accepted.  So I believe that those who believe in the "Trinity" do not believe in the "Truth", therefor will not be accepted.  I agree with Bro. Dad.  There is far too much debate on this "Trinity" and not enough praising God.

If we look historically back into the Book of Acts, chapter 15; we find exactly what Paul was dealing with in Galatians. It wasn't any deviation from oneness or support of any so-called trinity. It was adding to the grace of God to attain salvation. Paul was dealing with religious commands from the OT, being necessitated in the NT. This particular one happened to be circumcision.


Acts 15:1 - And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. (5) But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them to keep the law of Moses. 

Some said you had to or be lost. Others said you need to just in case you won't be lost.

Apostolic Truth was at odds with Biblical Truth even then.  :biglaugh:

Once again why all the debates, where is the Praises of God?  Is it so hard to lift up Jesus Christ whom we all love so much?  Is it hard to Praise the one who died for us.  I am so thankful for all that God has done for me.  I am thankful for the way He provises our every need.  I have told people I believe I am the most blessed man alive.  God is so Good to me.

I refuse to even lower myself to get back into a debate that does not help anyone, but I will continue to lift up Jesus Christ.  So let us learn to love each other and assemble together.  For without debate the Bible plainly says we sin when we don't assemble together.
Heb 10:24 And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:
25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.
26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,

Cut it slice or dice it this in the proper context.  So let us find a place to assemble with our Brothers and Sister so we may encourage and lift up each other.

I love going to Church.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 22, 2008, 04:28:59 PM
If we look historically back into the Book of Acts, chapter 15; we find exactly what Paul was dealing with in Galatians. It wasn't any deviation from oneness or support of any so-called trinity. It was adding to the grace of God to attain salvation. Paul was dealing with religious commands from the OT, being necessitated in the NT. This particular one happened to be circumcision.


Acts 15:1 - And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved. (5) But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them to keep the law of Moses. 

Some said you had to or be lost. Others said you need to just in case you won't be lost.

Apostolic Truth was at odds with Biblical Truth even then.  :biglaugh:

Have I ever posted how that God has given me two Cadillacs, or told how that God has sent me money in the mail time and time again.  Or have I told of all the many times that God has given me meals to eat when I had no money.  Or when I need to pay the power bill God always sends the money just in time.  I am so glad I serve the true and living God.  God is so awesome.  Anybody else got a testimony.

I was in the Navy for 8 years.  When I joined the Navy I was a Southern Baptist.  When I was on my first submarine I sat in the Crews Mess (Mess Hall) and pondered why I believed in God.  I pondered this for a few hours.  Then I realized I believed because my family believed and it was kinda forced on my growing up.  Then I decided that I wouldn't believe anymore.  I didn't believe in God for 5 years.  Then I was stationed on the USS Texas.  A shipmate of mine talked to me on several occasions about the word of God and taught me things I never knew before.  This brought me back, to believing in god.  Though I believed, I wasn't living the life of a Christan.  I cussed like a sailor, didn't go to church, pretty much did what I wanted to.  I left the Navy and took my family to Kentucky, where my wifes family is.  After a few months of living here, me and my wife have separated and I'm taking it hard.

Well on the 6th I was sitting outside my house and God sent me someone to show me the way.  We talked for a bit and he asked me if I wanted to get baptised, and I told him yes.  So I was baptised at 0114 (1:14AM for you non military folk) in the morning that night, and I haven't felt better in all my life.  Then on the 13th, almost a week later I received the Holy Ghost.  I thank God everyday for finding me and turning my life around.  I praise him and always will.  I love and adore him.  He is my savior and I will never forget.  I will never again disbelieve in him.

This is my testimony.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 22, 2008, 02:58:26 PM
I do not think everyone has to agree with me.  A true Apostolic knows the scriptures are true and everything else is false.

I agree that the Scriptures are true.  But the question is not about truth - in this case, truth regarding oneness/trinity - as we are all in agreement concerning that.  The question is whether someone who does not yet see this truth will not be "saved."

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 22, 2008, 02:58:26 PM
But I have another question I would like to ask.  Why is that some love to get on the Bible threads and try to debate an issue, but you never saw them on the Giving God Some Glory or they never start a thread about how good God is to them?  Just curious!!!!

I have started threads about how good God is to me, though it's been a while.  If you check, you might find some that haven't been cleared from the boards yet.  And it is true that I would do well to start such threads more often; one can never declare enough the goodness of God!

But this thread is not a praise and testimony thread; the topic of conversation is "Apostolic Truth Questions."  And you still have not answered my question: what in the Bible tells you that someone who believes in the erroneous doctrine of trinitarianism is not saved, or not part of the Body?  There is no question or debate here about the error of trinitarianism; the question is whether belief in this particular falsehood will cause a man to be lost to God.  Answer with Scripture, please.

If you do not wish to discuss this topic any longer, then feel free to start a praise and testimony thread in which you can discuss what you wish.  That way you will not detract from the focus of this thread.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 22, 2008, 02:58:26 PM
Are we in this for the betterment of the Kingdom or for the debating of a point.

That's a fair question - one I must ask myself regularly.  I don't want to be guilty of participating in pointless debates.

I'm in it for the King and the Kingdom, brother.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 22, 2008, 05:19:26 PM
Once again why all the debates, where is the Praises of God?  Is it so hard to lift up Jesus Christ whom we all love so much?  Is it hard to Praise the one who died for us.

Brother Dad, let me ask you a question: why is it that when you disagree with something I write, and say so, you are "standing up for truth" and "defending the faith;" yet when I disagree with something you write, and say so, I am merely "debating," or being contentious, or causing the conversation to take a "downward spiral," or whatever?

It is my hope that we as brothers will sharpen one another as iron sharpens iron - but for that to happen, the pieces of iron must strike one another; they must clash.  If we limit ourselves to discussing things on which we already agree, then no one will ever be sharpened, so to speak.

QuoteBrother Dad, let me ask you a question: why is it that when you disagree with something I write, and say so, you are "standing up for truth" and "defending the faith;" yet when I disagree with something you write, and say so, I am merely "debating," or being contentious, or causing the conversation to take a "downward spiral," or whatever?

Welcome to the world of Apostolic internet discussion boards...where everybody is defending the truth.   ;)

Quote from: bishopnl on July 22, 2008, 07:42:34 PM
Welcome to the world of Apostolic internet discussion boards...where everybody is defending the truth.   ;)

Why don't you jump in?  :D

Quote from: titushome on July 22, 2008, 07:47:49 PM

Quote from: bishopnl on July 22, 2008, 07:42:34 PM
Welcome to the world of Apostolic internet discussion boards...where everybody is defending the truth.   ;)

Why don't you jump in?  :D

That's kind of a loaded question....;)

I read from time to time....I've even gotten engaged in debate.  And I've had some of my beliefs solidified, and I had to reevaluate my position on others.  I agree with you that iron sharpens iron...and this is an internet discussion forum.  The point of discussions at all is to challenge, evaluate, and grow. 

Fact is, Truth is never afraid to be challenged...because if it is the Truth, it's got nothing to lose.  That's my two cents, anyway.

Quote from: titushome on July 21, 2008, 10:09:01 PM
Here's another way of looking at it: trinitarians, as far as I know, worship the God who has revealed Himself to us in and through the person of Jesus Christ.  How then are they failing to exalt Him as "the One God of eternity"?

But, do they worship the One God AS the Person Jesus Christ or as the 2nd person of the trinity?  If they chose "b", then they are not worshipping God in His fullest revelation.  They are worshipping another "part" of God, not God in fullness.

QuoteThe nature of God far exceeds the capacity of the human mind to understand.  Oneness beliefs and trinitarianism are two modern attempts to explain Him; and in my opinion, oneness is much closer to the truth of understanding who and what God is, and how He is who He is through Jesus Christ.  But the error of trinitarianism is not a fatal one, because it still acknowledges God in Christ, and Christ as God.

Trying to understand how God could be both Father in Heaven and Son on earth is no small undertaking.  Take note of the all the times Jesus addresses the Father, or makes reference to the Father.  Is Jesus talking to Himself, or referring to Himself in the third person?  To whom did Jesus pray?  Is Jesus schizo, or what?  These are difficult questions to answer, and it's no small wonder that so many in trying to understand have fallen into such errors as trinitarianism.

Definitely not.  But of much greater significance than professing belief in the trinity is this: claiming to worship the "Christian God," but not walking in His ways.  Because by not walking in His ways, I am not with my life acknowledging Him as Lord and God.  This is true idolatry; this is truly what it means to follow after or serve a false god.

You didn't ask me about disobedience or how to explain the Father/Son relationship.  The points above are pertinent and dangerous, too; but that's not what you asked.  You asked, if I'm not mistaken, why trinitarians would be lost, right?  I pointed out that the true trinitarian doctrine is equal to idolatry, because it does not allow worship of Jesus Christ and Him alone as the One God. 

So, I stand by my beliefs: the trinitarian doctrine is idolatry.  Whoever is holding to it in the end will not be accepted by the Lord as His children.  He will no more accept them as He will the Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, narcissist or atheist.

So if I ask a repentant, baptized, Spirit-filled Trinitarian, do you believe Jesus Christ is the one true God, and beside him there is no other...and they answer yes, are they still going to hell?

Doesn't sound like a trinitarian to me.   :grin:

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 22, 2008, 05:19:26 PM
Once again why all the debates, where is the Praises of God?  Is it so hard to lift up Jesus Christ whom we all love so much?  Is it hard to Praise the one who died for us.  I am so thankful for all that God has done for me.  I am thankful for the way He provises our every need.  I have told people I believe I am the most blessed man alive.  God is so Good to me.

I refuse to even lower myself to get back into a debate that does not help anyone, but I will continue to lift up Jesus Christ.  So let us learn to love each other and assemble together.  For without debate the Bible plainly says we sin when we don't assemble together.
Heb 10:24 And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works:
25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.
26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,

Cut it slice or dice it this in the proper context.  So let us find a place to assemble with our Brothers and Sister so we may encourage and lift up each other.

I love going to Church.

I just had a flashback image of 60's hippies putting daisies in the gun barrels of the National Guard.  :laughhard:

Brother, we are assembled together. We do not have to have a physical building to meet in. We are the Church.

Discussion - not debate - lifts up. As mentioned, it is the iron sharpening itself that strengthens us.

If all that's ever eaten is milk, when will meat be palatable?

If all that's ever discussed is already understood, how will we learn?

I've noticed the topic has shifted {predictibly} to the comfortable milk of the godhead. Don't we already know this?

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 21, 2008, 02:57:42 PM


Phil 2:12Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.
13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.
14 Do all things without murmurings and disputings:

applies here too!!                             :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Quote from: OGIA on July 21, 2008, 09:26:58 PM

Quote from: titushome on July 21, 2008, 07:38:40 PM
Sorry, but I have to ask: what in the Bible tells you that someone who believes in the erroneous doctrine of trinitarianism is not saved, or not part of the Body?

I believe the Bible is clear that idolatry will send someone to hell.  The true doctrine of the trinity is about worshipping more than one person who is God.  How is that not idolatry?  Is the trinity any different than worshipping one of the Hindu gods?  If so, how?  Just because someone claims to worship the "Christian God", do they really?  If they worship another Person besides Jesus Christ as God, are they worshipping in truth --- one of the requirements by the Father for true worship?  If it's not "true" worship, will He accept it?

I do believe there are variants of beliefs in the trinity (just as there are in Oneness), but I've IMO false doctrine is that which does not exalt Jesus Christ...and HIM ALONE.....as the One God of eternity.  Even if someone says they believe that but then turns around and says "but then there's also the Father, yet they are one", I still don't think they are worshipping one God.

QuoteI know a man who was baptized in Jesus' name, and is full of the Holy Spirit, and is doing his best to live a Godly life and grow in God - but he believes in the so-called trinity.  How would this one error result in him not being saved?

Is idolatry alone enough to send someone to hell?  I think it is.   :(

:thumbsup2:

Quote from: yosemite on July 22, 2008, 10:56:57 PM

Quote from: titushome on July 22, 2008, 07:22:01 PM

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 22, 2008, 02:58:26 PM
I do not think everyone has to agree with me.  A true Apostolic knows the scriptures are true and everything else is false.

I agree that the Scriptures are true.  But the question is not about truth - in this case, truth regarding oneness/trinity - as we are all in agreement concerning that.  The question is whether someone who does not yet see this truth will not be "saved."


I have started threads about how good God is to me, though it's been a while.  If you check, you might find some that haven't been cleared from the boards yet.  And it is true that I would do well to start such threads more often; one can never declare enough the goodness of God!

But this thread is not a praise and testimony thread; the topic of conversation is "Apostolic Truth Questions."  And you still have not answered my question: what in the Bible tells you that someone who believes in the erroneous doctrine of trinitarianism is not saved, or not part of the Body?  There is no question or debate here about the error of trinitarianism; the question is whether belief in this particular falsehood will cause a man to be lost to God.  Answer with Scripture, please.


It is my hope that we as brothers will sharpen one another as iron sharpens iron - but for that to happen, the pieces of iron must strike one another; they must clash.  If we limit ourselves to discussing things on which we already agree, then no one will ever be sharpened, so to speak.

Quote from: yosemite on July 22, 2008, 10:56:57 PM

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 21, 2008, 02:57:42 PM


Phil 2:12Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.
13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.
14 Do all things without murmurings and disputings:

applies here too!!                             :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

Quote from: OGIA on July 22, 2008, 08:31:41 PM

Quote from: titushome on July 21, 2008, 10:09:01 PM
Here's another way of looking at it: trinitarians, as far as I know, worship the God who has revealed Himself to us in and through the person of Jesus Christ.  How then are they failing to exalt Him as "the One God of eternity"?

But, do they worship the One God AS the Person Jesus Christ or as the 2nd person of the trinity?  If they chose "b", then they are not worshipping God in His fullest revelation.  They are worshipping another "part" of God, not God in fullness.

QuoteThe nature of God far exceeds the capacity of the human mind to understand.  Oneness beliefs and trinitarianism are two modern attempts to explain Him; and in my opinion, oneness is much closer to the truth of understanding who and what God is, and how He is who He is through Jesus Christ.  But the error of trinitarianism is not a fatal one, because it still acknowledges God in Christ, and Christ as God.

Trying to understand how God could be both Father in Heaven and Son on earth is no small undertaking.  Take note of the all the times Jesus addresses the Father, or makes reference to the Father.  Is Jesus talking to Himself, or referring to Himself in the third person?  To whom did Jesus pray?  Is Jesus schizo, or what?  These are difficult questions to answer, and it's no small wonder that so many in trying to understand have fallen into such errors as trinitarianism.

Definitely not.  But of much greater significance than professing belief in the trinity is this: claiming to worship the "Christian God," but not walking in His ways.  Because by not walking in His ways, I am not with my life acknowledging Him as Lord and God.  This is true idolatry; this is truly what it means to follow after or serve a false god.

You didn't ask me about disobedience or how to explain the Father/Son relationship.  The points above are pertinent and dangerous, too; but that's not what you asked.  You asked, if I'm not mistaken, why trinitarians would be lost, right?  I pointed out that the true trinitarian doctrine is equal to idolatry, because it does not allow worship of Jesus Christ and Him alone as the One God. 

So, I stand by my beliefs: the trinitarian doctrine is idolatry.  Whoever is holding to it in the end will not be accepted by the Lord as His children.  He will no more accept them as He will the Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, narcissist or atheist.

ogia & bro dad =     :thumbsup2:

Quote from: OGIA on July 22, 2008, 08:31:41 PM
You asked, if I'm not mistaken, why trinitarians would be lost, right?  I pointed out that the true trinitarian doctrine is equal to idolatry, because it does not allow worship of Jesus Christ and Him alone as the One God. 

I guess we're at something of an impasse then; I must contend that for most trinitarians, their trinitarianism is not idolatry, but only an incorrect way of looking at or understanding God's nature or being.

I've read the writings of some trinitarians who, yes, essentially believe in three gods.  Some have even gone so far as to advocate devoting equal amounts of prayer time to each "person" in the "trinity."  But most trinitarians, from my point of view, believe in only one God, to whom they wrongly apply this incorrect traditional doctrine known as trinitarianism.

To prove the singular is the intent of one-God in Genesis 1:1 the verb is singular which identifies the subject as being singular. Although trinitarians do not like it and say the Jews are telling lies, the ancient Godly Israelites always understood God to be one person, a numerical ONE and not three. They understood the plural Elohim to speak of the majesty of intensity and his attributes of power. And for any trinitarian to say the plural means *GODS*, then let them translate it that way and see what a mess they make of the Scriptures.  Even staunch trinitarians know this would be a pollution and sacrilege.  The great schema: Hear O Israel the LORD our God is one LORD, settles the argument. But within Mystery Babylon the skilled scribes of the occult would not be so easily exposed and rebuked by Jewish doctrine. No, they would live by the reinterpretations of Nimrod and his gnosticism and impregnate the world with his doctrines. And thus we have Ministers and people today who believe in the trinitarian doctrine of Mystery Babylon and don't know it is a philosophy of man and not a true doctrine of God.

Light To The Nations

The Trinity Doctrine Is Pagan

By Pastor G. Reckart, Pastor

Quote from: OGIA on July 22, 2008, 08:31:41 PM


So, I stand by my beliefs: the trinitarian doctrine is idolatry.  Whoever is holding to it in the end will not be accepted by the Lord as His children.  He will no more accept them as He will the Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, narcissist or atheist.

But there's part of that equation I'm not sure being considered: Many have received the baptism of the Holy Ghost and spoken in tongues.

Besides, as far as I can tell from scripture, Mankind will be judged for eternal destinination by acceptance or rejection of Jesus; and not understanding the godhead. It's all about Jesus; not anyone's doctrine. Look at just this one sample found in John 3:14-21:


And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved {discovered}. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.  


1... no one comes to God unless seeking truth & drawn by God

2... the HG is not given to sinners

3... anyone coming thru 1 & 2 is a child of God, scripturally proven accepted by Him

4... the HG is poured into a leavened vessel, clean but spotted. It takes TIME for the leaven of religion to be purged. That includes the Apostolic, oneness portion too. All of us are undergoing the purging of religious leaven and the expansion of the pure unleavened Word of God.

Remember the Lord's admonition to Peter: Do not call what I've cleansed, unclean!

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 23, 2008, 02:46:49 PM


And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.  For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved {discovered}. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

didnt Jesus say if you beleive in me follow my commandments?!! i'm not a JUST beleive person.
i feel you also have to follow the commands given by Jesus. when you follow the commands given, you change the should not to would not, or at least you can take it in the literal sence that OOJ has posted it.

Quote from: yosemite on July 23, 2008, 03:15:00 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 23, 2008, 02:46:49 PM


And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.  For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved {discovered}. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

didnt Jesus say if you beleive in me follow my commandments?!! i'm not a JUST beleive person.
i feel you also have to follow the commands given by Jesus. when you follow the commands given, you change the should not to would not, or at least you can take it in the literal sence that OOJ has posted it.

Well, scripture - as well as Jesus the Word - repeatedly and emphatically stresses belief. Belief in what? Jesus is the Lamb of God; the Savior of the world; the Messiah; the Son of God; the mediator between God and Man. And that can only come by the HG that draws anyone seeking the light of truth. {no one calls Jesus Lord except by (revealed) the Holy Ghost} It is only after that other commandments can be obeyed.

If we look at "Believing in Jesus as Messiah" as commandment #1, and everything else numerically following as #2, #3, #4, etc.; then adherence or understanding or believing those becomes a moot point if #1 is not obeyed. It is entirely possible to believe in one God, Creator of Heaven and Earth; baptism for remission of sin; the gift of the Holy Ghost; living a good, biblically moral life; and still be lost. Why? Because Jesus is not believed in as Savior, thereby not accepted individually.

That's why Jesus says "should" and not "would". Mankind "should believe this", but most will not. If I don't believe in Him, I will not obey His commandments. If I don't believe in Him, it doesn't matter what the Bible says about anything. Especially the godhead. Who cares! Unbeleivers dont! Only believers in Christ even remotely wrestle with such matters. But they're following the Lord. As best they know how. Just like us.

Simple as that. Thus the danger we face when condemining to hell those who may or may not understand exactly as I.

Jesus said if you beleive in me also do my commands. this is at the same time not one after the other. but as you say one without the other is useless and shows a non-conformity.

Quote from: titushome on July 23, 2008, 01:47:08 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 22, 2008, 08:31:41 PM
You asked, if I'm not mistaken, why trinitarians would be lost, right?  I pointed out that the true trinitarian doctrine is equal to idolatry, because it does not allow worship of Jesus Christ and Him alone as the One God. 

I guess we're at something of an impasse then; I must contend that for most trinitarians, their trinitarianism is not idolatry, but only an incorrect way of looking at or understanding God's nature or being.

Well, then, we're not really at an impasse.  ;)  As bishopnl asked about a "trinitarian who.....", so goes the ones you speak about above.  IF  (BIG if!)  they worship Jesus Christ as the Only God of eternity, then they are NOT trinitarians.  Just like someone won't be saved just because they call themselves "Christian",  neither will someone be lost just because they call themselves "trinitarian".  It's the fruit of the belief, not the name, that will lead someone to be lost, IMO.

Quote from: OGIA on July 23, 2008, 07:53:29 PM
Just like someone won't be saved just because they call themselves "Christian",  neither will someone be lost just because they call themselves "trinitarian".  It's the fruit of the belief, not the name, that will lead someone to be lost, IMO.

I absolutely, 100% agree.  With the part I made blue, especially.  :great:

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 23, 2008, 02:46:49 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 22, 2008, 08:31:41 PM
So, I stand by my beliefs: the trinitarian doctrine is idolatry.  Whoever is holding to it in the end will not be accepted by the Lord as His children.  He will no more accept them as He will the Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, narcissist or atheist.

But there's part of that equation I'm not sure being considered: Many have received the baptism of the Holy Ghost and spoken in tongues.

Jerry,

I have no doubt trinitarians are born again.  Why not them, but atheists or Muslims, etc?  But, that's not what I'm talking about.  I'm talking about being "saved"......ie: making it to eternity with the Lord.  If you'll look at my wording, I said "whoever is holding to it (trinitarian belief) in the end....".  I absolutely believe He will give the born again trinitarian every opportunity (and more) to see the error of that doctrine, as He will the Muslim to see that He is not Allah (even though the Muslims are strict oneness adherents ;) ).

QuoteBesides, as far as I can tell from scripture, Mankind will be judged for eternal destinination by acceptance or rejection of Jesus; and not understanding the godhead. It's all about Jesus; not anyone's doctrine.

I'm going to take your comments above and insert some comments of my own and show you why I feel the doctrine of (what we call) "oneness" is the most important doctrine of scripture.  Yes, even above the doctrine of the new birth......

Besides, as far as I can tell from scripture, Mankind will be judged for eternal destinnation by acceptance or rejection of Jesus as the only God of eternity become the Savior of mankind; and not understanding the godhead, even though since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse; It's all about Jesus (who is the only God of eternity and who must be recognized as such); not anyone's doctrine but His, which defines Him as the one and only God of eternity and requires that He be recognized as such or it becomes idolatry.

Trinitarionism isn't just for those who believe in the three godheads.  As I have stated in my thread "Someone Please Explain to me"

Quote from: Somnic on July 23, 2008, 03:59:05 AM
I have heard many variations of the "Trinity".  I have heard the one where people believe that they will see three divine beings when they get to heaven.  I have heard one where people believe that there are three gods in one supreme being.  I have heard that there are three persons.  And most recently I have heard of the Trinity as in one God but with three roles, and those three roles labled as the Trinity. 

The last one is more along the lines that we believe.  One God with three caracteristics, being the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.  But just saying believing in the "Trinity" is wrong may not be wrong, if its the last one stated.  If you hear someone believing in the "Trinity", ask them first what it is they believe.  It may be that they believe in the same one God with three roles as we do.  Just saying that someone believes in the "Trinity" doesn't automatically mean they believe in more than one Godhead.

Just my $0.2

We label people trinitarians and automatically assume that they are believing in the three godheads.  This isn't the case always.  From what I have heard and read, there are allot of "trinitarians" who believe in the "Trinity as being the three roles that God plays:  The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.  If someone says that they believe in the "Trinity", wouldn't it be better to ask them what it is that they believe, than to jump to conclusions and assume that they are talking about the three godheads? 

Its NOT our place to judge.  Only God can do that: DEUT 1:17 Ye shall not respect persons in judgement; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is Gods: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it.  God specifically says LEV 19:18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy self: I am the Lord.  Love thy neighbour  Only God can judge

Quote from: OGIA on July 23, 2008, 08:08:59 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 23, 2008, 02:46:49 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 22, 2008, 08:31:41 PM
So, I stand by my beliefs: the trinitarian doctrine is idolatry.  Whoever is holding to it in the end will not be accepted by the Lord as His children.  He will no more accept them as He will the Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, narcissist or atheist.

But there's part of that equation I'm not sure being considered: Many have received the baptism of the Holy Ghost and spoken in tongues.

Jerry,

I have no doubt trinitarians are born again.  Why not them, but atheists or Muslims, etc?  But, that's not what I'm talking about.  I'm talking about being "saved"......ie: making it to eternity with the Lord.  If you'll look at my wording, I said "whoever is holding to it (trinitarian belief) in the end....".  I absolutely believe He will give the born again trinitarian every opportunity (and more) to see the error of that doctrine, as He will the Muslim to see that He is not Allah (even though the Muslims are strict oneness adherents ;) ).

QuoteBesides, as far as I can tell from scripture, Mankind will be judged for eternal destinination by acceptance or rejection of Jesus; and not understanding the godhead. It's all about Jesus; not anyone's doctrine.

I'm going to take your comments above and insert some comments of my own and show you why I feel the doctrine of (what we call) "oneness" is the most important doctrine of scripture.  Yes, even above the doctrine of the new birth......

Besides, as far as I can tell from scripture, Mankind will be judged for eternal destinnation by acceptance or rejection of Jesus as the only God of eternity become the Savior of mankind; and not understanding the godhead, even though since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse; It's all about Jesus (who is the only God of eternity and who must be recognized as such); not anyone's doctrine but His, which defines Him as the one and only God of eternity and requires that He be recognized as such or it becomes idolatry.

I have no doubt trinitarians are born again.  Why not them, but atheists or Muslims, etc?  But, that's not what I'm talking about.  I'm talking about being "saved"......ie: making it to eternity with the Lord.  If you'll look at my wording, I said "whoever is holding to it (trinitarian belief) in the end....".  I absolutely believe He will give the born again trinitarian every opportunity (and more) to see the error of that doctrine, as He will the Muslim to see that He is not Allah (even though the Muslims are strict oneness adherents ;) ).


I see what you're saying. Thanks for clarifying. 

I see a contradiction though.... in previous posts, "trinitarians" were determined by you not to be in the church {born again}; yet here there is no doubt some are. Since that is the case, what is the difference between "trinitarians" coming to see the error of that doctrine; and "oneness" coming to see the error of theirs? Surely there are errors {leaven} in the entire Body that needs correcting w/o damning us all?

Big difference between Muslims and "trinitarians". As Titushome said: Trinitarians see the godhead under different terminology/expression of the one God. They still believe in and hold Jesus as Messiah at the focal point. Muslims do not believe in Jesus as Messiah. All Christians to them are infidels. No comparison there. 


As far as the other, I still don't quite agree 100%. I see what you're saying but do not see the godhead as the foundation; important as it is.

Romans 1:20
"For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse."

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 24, 2008, 05:40:30 AM
I see a contradiction though.... in previous posts, "trinitarians" were determined by you not to be in the church {born again}; yet here there is no doubt some are. Since that is the case, what is the difference between "trinitarians" coming to see the error of that doctrine; and "oneness" coming to see the error of theirs? Surely there are errors {leaven} in the entire Body that needs correcting w/o damning us all?

I don't recall saying trinitarians weren't born again and in the Church?   ???  And, I'm not sure what errors you are talking about "oneness" coming to see.  I've never said "oneness" is the end all of being saved, but I do believe it is necessary to be.  No, not an exact, perfect understanding, but one that results in the worship of ONE Person who is God: Jesus Christ.

QuoteBig difference between Muslims and "trinitarians". As Titushome said: Trinitarians see the godhead under different terminology/expression of the one God. They still believe in and hold Jesus as Messiah at the focal point. Muslims do not believe in Jesus as Messiah. All Christians to them are infidels. No comparison there. 

Holding Jesus as the Messiah does not = salvation to me.  Yes, that is part, but it does not grant entrance into or keep someone in the Body.  And, remember, I'm talking about being saved at death or rapture; not being in a "saved" state.  Many will be in a saved state and be lost in the end, IMO.    So, if someone is worshipping God as any person other than the Lord Jesus Christ -- be it the two "other" persons of the godhead or Allah -- then they will be rejected in the end.

QuoteI see what you're saying but do not see the godhead as the foundation; important as it is.

Jesus Christ is foundational, not the godhead.  Understanding that the fullness of the godhead dwells in that Man bodily is essential, not optional.  I believe the godhead to be a term that describes God in His existence in transcendence, ie: as the Father.  THAT godhead dwells in a human being, and the knowledge of that......which leads to true worship and obedience to the Gospel......is essential to salvation, IMO.  That's why He is the chief cornerstone.  God in man is the chief cornerstone, and the knowledge that it is God and 100% God in that role is why there is salvation in no other; not no other name (although true), but (more precisely) in no other Man than the One God became.

I was born into the Apostolic Faith both naturally and Spiritually.  I was raised in an independent Apostolic Church.  At the age of 21 I prayed and told God I needed to know the truth for myself.  He then open my understanding of the Scriptures and bean to show me verse upon verse.  However I found out that many thing I had been taught were not how it was in the Bible.  Oh it did not change the plan of salvation, just some of the points they did or did not believe in.  I am now 48 almost 49 years old.  During my lifetime I have saw the fly by nights come and go.  The half wits and the dim wits that no matter what you showed them in the Word they were going to go their way.  I have heard just about ever foolish teaching and question a person can come up with.  Even heard someone ask where did Noah get the glass for the window in the ark.  I have seen them try to act like the were smart by saying the NT Church never went to a Church building, but are they meeting regularly in the saints house for their worship.  And for a side note check the 3rd chapter of the Book of Acts where were they going.  I have seen the never dying people.  The cloud doctrine people.   The list can go one.  They fit in the same group. 
2 Thess 2:7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

I have seen compromising so called preachers and saints of God who refuse to stand for truth.  Either because of other men or just plan ignorance.  John 7:13 Howbeit no man spake openly of him for fear of the Jews.

1 Cor 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

So with that said I will say I will not longer play around with posting to people who refuse to obey the Scriptures or who chose to question Apostolic Truth. 

This post is titled Apostolic Truth questions because it was addressing this foolishness that was happening on other post.  So with that said I hope and pray we all come to the place where we say enough is enough.  Leave them along and the will go away.  Don't exchange post with them and they will stop.  As O said before there is a pm button if anyone needs to aks me a for real question.  Elsewise I am finished with this type of posting.

Quote from: OGIA on July 19, 2008, 05:07:46 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 19, 2008, 06:16:00 AM
Thus, the bulk of the Church is biblically in error regarding baptism, and doesn't even realize it.


Is baptism in Jesus' name personal opinion or biblical truth?  :teeth:

I can't answer your question, because I seem to also disagree with you on what the "Christian Church" is and who is in it.  I don't consider anything or anyone being the "church" that and who does not practice water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.

So, my response to your premise would be that the two don't compare because only those who are absolutely correct about water baptism are "the Church".  
 
PS: I read Bro. Dad's post after I posted mine, but I would have most likely just quoted his and given that as my answer since they are very similar.  Jerry, you can't compare water baptism in Jesus' name with tithing and say the "bulk of the church" practices it wrong when I don't agree with you who is IN said Church.  I happen to believe tithing is not only a NT principle, but a godly principle that has endured for millenia.  I don't believe it is an issue of salvation, in and of itself; but I do question someone who doesn't give at least 10% of their firstfruits as to where their heart is.  And I believe it is "heart matters" that are salvational.  The acts we commit or don't commit for God are merely products of the heart.

Posted by: OGIA 

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on Yesterday at 12:40:30 AM
I see a contradiction though.... in previous posts, "trinitarians" were determined by you not to be in the church {born again}; yet here there is no doubt some are. Since that is the case, what is the difference between "trinitarians" coming to see the error of that doctrine; and "oneness" coming to see the error of theirs? Surely there are errors {leaven} in the entire Body that needs correcting w/o damning us all?


I don't recall saying trinitarians weren't born again and in the Church?     And, I'm not sure what errors you are talking about "oneness" coming to see.  I've never said "oneness" is the end all of being saved, but I do believe it is necessary to be.   No, not an exact, perfect understanding, but one that results in the worship of ONE Person who is God: Jesus Christ.


Note the bold parts.

Generally, mostly "oneness" Christians are baptized in Jesus' name. The above statements imply no one else can be saved - either progressively or atthe end - otherwise. Since only the church makes up the Body of Christ, and judging by above statements only "oneness" believers incorporate that; ergo "trinitarians" are not saved, born-again, nor in the Church.

Just wondering.

Oh, errors in "oneness" are errors in understanding truth in the Word. Just like "trinitarian" errors are errors in understanding truth in the Word. Most such things are minimal and not necessarily salvational. For both camps.

Quote from: OGIA on July 24, 2008, 09:38:08 PM

QuoteBig difference between Muslims and "trinitarians". As Titushome said: Trinitarians see the godhead under different terminology/expression of the one God. They still believe in and hold Jesus as Messiah at the focal point. Muslims do not believe in Jesus as Messiah. All Christians to them are infidels. No comparison there. 

Holding Jesus as the Messiah does not = salvation to me.  Yes, that is part, but it does not grant entrance into or keep someone in the Body.  And, remember, I'm talking about being saved at death or rapture; not being in a "saved" state.  Many will be in a saved state and be lost in the end, IMO.    So, if someone is worshipping God as any person other than the Lord Jesus Christ -- be it the two "other" persons of the godhead or Allah -- then they will be rejected in the end.

How can anyone equate Allah = Father? Any "christian" who does simply reveals the falseness of knowing God. Such a one is immediately proved to be a liar and the truth {Jesus} not in him.

I've never in my life met a "trinitarian" christian who worshiped anyone other than the Lord Jesus Christ. Christ is always the focal point in their life. Like them, we all worship the God Jesus worshipped. We are priviledged to do so in or thru the Body of Christ. HIS God is now our God. HIS Father is now our Father. Ain't no two's or three's anywhere in there. Never has been nor never will be.

The CHURCH worships God in Christ. The CHURCH bought with the incorruptible blood of the Lamb. The CHURCH brought out of darkness into light. The CHURCH saved by the gift of grace and not works. The CHURCH growing up into a mature son of God. The CHURCH walking in the good, acceptable, and perfect will of God. The CHURCH bone of HIS bone and flesh of HIS flesh. The CHURCH, the Lamb's wife.

THE CHURCH!


Sorry. Rejectors of Christ cannot be compared to Receivers of Christ. That's taking religion a little too far.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 24, 2008, 11:16:59 PM

So with that said I will say I will not longer play around with posting to people who refuse to obey the Scriptures or who chose to question Apostolic Truth. 

This post is titled Apostolic Truth questions because it was addressing this foolishness that was happening on other post.  So with that said I hope and pray we all come to the place where we say enough is enough.  Leave them along and the will go away.  Don't exchange post with them and they will stop.  As O said before there is a pm button if anyone needs to aks me a for real question.  Elsewise I am finished with this type of posting.

Once again the false accusation goes out about "refusing to obey the Scriptures". That sounds good. Sounds real patriotic. Zealous even. Defending the faith once delivered to the saints; even though no one has questioned biblical faith at all. The questions have all been about our religious faith and Apostolic Truth compared to Biblical Truth.

My brother hit the nail on the head. At last, the real problem is revealed: who chose to question Apostolic Truth.   That is the worm in the bottom of the barrel. I don't claim to be Apostolic, (though I am); nothing wrong with that. I claim to be a Believer in the Body of Christ. {That's what bothers so many of my brethren}.

Where else to question Apostolic Truth, than on an Apostolic Truth topic? Where else to see if there is any leaven in our bread? As stated before, we all have religious leaven in our doctrine. We all have errors in which to correct. All of us. So why are we afraid? Why do we even broach secret answers to "real questions"? Haven't real questions been asked? Haven't real questions been evaded and sidetracked back to the familiar? Where in the Bible are we commanded not to question? Didn't the Bereans search the scriptures after hearing Paul?

There are things in the Spirit and things in the natural, that God is preparing. The time of the end is nigh. There are some in the Body that truly desire to understand what is biblical and what is not. It doesn't matter how long our "church" has or has not done this. Some of us want to grow beyond the confines of traditional knowledge and see - perhaps for the first time - Thus sayeth the Lord.

I have news for seekers. The answers sought will not be found in the pulpits of Apostolic Truth, Baptist Truth, Charismatic Truth, or any other Organizational Truth. They will only be found privately, individually, and personally searching the Word of God and allowing the Holy Ghost to lead the way.

Religion cannot answer Truth. And until Apostolic Truth = Biblical Truth, we dare not be so proud of ourselves.
*************************************************

Doogie, if you read this.... I eagerly await your reply. Hopefully work has calmed down a bit.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 25, 2008, 06:57:35 AM
Where else to question Apostolic Truth, than on an Apostolic Truth topic? Where else to see if there is any leaven in our bread? As stated before, we all have religious leaven in our doctrine. We all have errors in which to correct. All of us. So why are we afraid? Why do we even broach secret answers to "real questions"? Haven't real questions been asked? Haven't real questions been evaded and sidetracked back to the familiar? Where in the Bible are we commanded not to question? Didn't the Bereans search the scriptures after hearing Paul?

We should be asking questions and making sure there isn't any false doctrine creaping into what we're teaching and practicing.  Sadly though many are too afraid to ask questions because questioning is not welcomed among many churches.  The Bereans were called noble because they went to the scriture and searched to make sure what the apostle Paul himself preached was according to scripture.  Can we not do the same with what we hear from a preacher or teacher with out having the preacher or teacher get mad because we're going back to scripture to make sure what they taught is true?

Quote from: bsr on July 25, 2008, 05:49:04 PM

We should be asking questions and making sure there isn't any false doctrine creaping into what we're teaching and practicing.  Sadly though many are too afraid to ask questions because questioning is not welcomed among many churches.  The Bereans were called noble because they went to the scriture and searched to make sure what the apostle Paul himself preached was according to scripture.  Can we not do the same with what we hear from a preacher or teacher with out having the preacher or teacher get mad because we're going back to scripture to make sure what they taught is true?

I agree with you BSR people should be able to ask the Pastor questions.  I always encouraged people to come to me and ask questions.  My problem with the way it is done here can cause people to become confused.  I would always go to my Pastor and go in private with my question least I fuel someone who is rebellious to find something else to fuss about.  I have offered people if they really have a question about what I believe to pm me.  I think it is wrong when we get into debates where everyone can see them.  As I was growing up I saw people who had questions who would just openly question the Pastor.  As a child I thought that was the Church was to be.  After I grew up I found the need for respecting the ministry.  I never had a problem going to my pastor nor did anyone that came to me and discussed matters.  But I always refused to debate with them.  I have seen however preachers who say "who are you to question the ministry".  We learn by questions ask in the proper matter.  But I never had time for people who just wanted to try and show how smart they thought they were.  But, by all means I would encourage everyone to go to your Pastor with a legitmate concern, ask for clarity in what they preach or teach.  All question are handle much better in this manner.

Yo - Don't use Reckart as a source....while he may have a few ideas that are good, he's crazy as a fruitbat and has scorned people all over the Internet for years...LOL..... 

Word to the wise...lol

Quote from: yosemite on July 23, 2008, 02:27:22 PM
To prove the singular is the intent of one-God in Genesis 1:1 the verb is singular which identifies the subject as being singular. Although trinitarians do not like it and say the Jews are telling lies, the ancient Godly Israelites always understood God to be one person, a numerical ONE and not three. They understood the plural Elohim to speak of the majesty of intensity and his attributes of power. And for any trinitarian to say the plural means *GODS*, then let them translate it that way and see what a mess they make of the Scriptures.  Even staunch trinitarians know this would be a pollution and sacrilege.  The great schema: Hear O Israel the LORD our God is one LORD, settles the argument. But within Mystery Babylon the skilled scribes of the occult would not be so easily exposed and rebuked by Jewish doctrine. No, they would live by the reinterpretations of Nimrod and his gnosticism and impregnate the world with his doctrines. And thus we have Ministers and people today who believe in the trinitarian doctrine of Mystery Babylon and don't know it is a philosophy of man and not a true doctrine of God.

Light To The Nations

The Trinity Doctrine Is Pagan

By Pastor G. Reckart, Pastor

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 25, 2008, 06:57:16 PM
My problem with the way it is done here can cause people to become confused.  I would always go to my Pastor and go in private with my question least I fuel someone who is rebellious to find something else to fuss about.

Well, someone who's rebellious will always find something to fuss about - their rebelliousness is their problem, and we shouldn't allow it to stifle our discussion.

Our real concern ought to be for those who are young in their faith - and even then, the concern isn't that they might hear more mature saints asking questions and/or disagreeing with one another; it's that some unscrupulous person might try to use the situation to deceive those who don't know any better.  Our concern should be for guarding those who are spiritually immature from such wolves in sheep's clothing.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 25, 2008, 06:57:16 PM
I think it is wrong when we get into debates where everyone can see them.  As I was growing up I saw people who had questions who would just openly question the Pastor.  As a child I thought that was the Church was to be.  After I grew up I found the need for respecting the ministry.  I never had a problem going to my pastor nor did anyone that came to me and discussed matters.  But I always refused to debate with them.... We learn by questions ask in the proper matter.  But I never had time for people who just wanted to try and show how smart they thought they were.  But, by all means I would encourage everyone to go to your Pastor with a legitmate concern, ask for clarity in what they preach or teach.  All question are handle much better in this manner.

I see a problem with the approach that says questions should always be taken to privately to one's pastor, and never discussed/debated openly: it denies the ministry of ALL the saints, and sets up the pastor as the final arbiter (for the congregation he pastors) of what is and isn't true.

There certainly is a proper manner in which questions should be asked, but it has less to do with protocol followed than with the spirit or attitude with which they are asked.  Is the person asking questions doing so meekly?  With respect for others, with willingness to listen to what they have to say?  With an openness to learning?  To put it another way, are we operating in the Spirit?

Because it's when we start asking - or answering, for that matter - questions when "in the flesh," so to speak, that we get into trouble: pride, arrogance, antagonism, hostility, trying to lord ourselves over each other, etc.  These sorts of things will very quickly come to dominate the conversation when we're not in the Spirit.



Edit: given that this is an internet discussion forum, that adds a whole 'nother element to what I've described above.  It can be much more difficult to discern the spirit in which questions are asked or comments made, when all we have to go on are people's words (and sometimes a few emoticons ;)).  In normal conversation, we have tone of voice, body language, etc.; online we have none of those things.  We should all be very careful in wording our posts, as well as careful  and patient in trying to understand what someone else is trying to say before responding.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 25, 2008, 06:13:26 AM
Sorry. Rejectors of Christ cannot be compared to Receivers of Christ. That's taking religion a little too far.

Problem is, we disagree on the definition of "receivers of Christ".  As far as I'm concerned, someone who has not obeyed Acts 2:38 is no more "saved" than a Muslim. 

Also, there will be many who have "received Christ" who will be rejected in front of Him.  They will contend they were His children, but He will reject them.  Is that rejection anymore final than the rejection the Muslim, Buddhist or idolator will receive?

Lost is lost, Jerry.  We just disagree where God draws that line.

QuoteI've never in my life met a "trinitarian" christian who worshiped anyone other than the Lord Jesus Christ

I've met more than I care to count. 

If there is the recognition of ANOTHER PERSON who is God besides Jesus Christ, then I believe that is idolatry.  The trinity doctrine does not allow for the worship of Jesus Christ as the ONE AND ONLY GOD.  There is ALWAYS at least one "other person" until they remember the HG and then there's that "3rd" guy, too.   :roll:  If the proclaimed trinitarian worships Jesus Christ as the One and only God of heaven, with NO multiplicity of persons (HE, Jesus Christ, being the Father incarnate), then that person is NOT a trinitarian.  And, again, it is not the title that saves or damns; it is the belief and practice that does.

Quote from: titushome on July 25, 2008, 07:49:00 PM

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 25, 2008, 06:57:16 PM
My problem with the way it is done here can cause people to become confused.  I would always go to my Pastor and go in private with my question least I fuel someone who is rebellious to find something else to fuss about.

Well, someone who's rebellious will always find something to fuss about - their rebelliousness is their problem, and we shouldn't allow it to stifle our discussion.

Our real concern ought to be for those who are young in their faith - and even then, the concern isn't that they might hear more mature saints asking questions and/or disagreeing with one another; it's that some unscrupulous person might try to use the situation to deceive those who don't know any better.  Our concern should be for guarding those who are spiritually immature from such wolves in sheep's clothing.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 25, 2008, 06:57:16 PM
I think it is wrong when we get into debates where everyone can see them.  As I was growing up I saw people who had questions who would just openly question the Pastor.  As a child I thought that was the Church was to be.  After I grew up I found the need for respecting the ministry.  I never had a problem going to my pastor nor did anyone that came to me and discussed matters.  But I always refused to debate with them.... We learn by questions ask in the proper matter.  But I never had time for people who just wanted to try and show how smart they thought they were.  But, by all means I would encourage everyone to go to your Pastor with a legitmate concern, ask for clarity in what they preach or teach.  All question are handle much better in this manner.

I see a problem with the approach that says questions should always be taken to privately to one's pastor, and never discussed/debated openly: it denies the ministry of ALL the saints, and sets up the pastor as the final arbiter (for the congregation he pastors) of what is and isn't true.

There certainly is a proper manner in which questions should be asked, but it has less to do with protocol followed than with the spirit or attitude with which they are asked.  Is the person asking questions doing so meekly?  With respect for others, with willingness to listen to what they have to say?  With an openness to learning?  To put it another way, are we operating in the Spirit?

Because it's when we start asking - or answering, for that matter - questions when "in the flesh," so to speak, that we get into trouble: pride, arrogance, antagonism, hostility, trying to lord ourselves over each other, etc.  These sorts of things will very quickly come to dominate the conversation when we're not in the Spirit.



Edit: given that this is an internet discussion forum, that adds a whole 'nother element to what I've described above.  It can be much more difficult to discern the spirit in which questions are asked or comments made, when all we have to go on are people's words (and sometimes a few emoticons ;)).  In normal conversation, we have tone of voice, body language, etc.; online we have none of those things.  We should all be very careful in wording our posts, as well as careful  and patient in trying to understand what someone else is trying to say before responding.

some good points Brother Titushome.  I know how important facial expressions are.  I have a deaf son.  Deaf people will teach us how important it is to see the person in order to get a better understanding of the person and their attitude.  I will add that if it is an open Bible Study I feel it is ok to ask open question.  What I saw growing up was people standing up right in Church and disrupting.

Quote from: OGIA on July 25, 2008, 08:14:39 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 25, 2008, 06:13:26 AM
Sorry. Rejectors of Christ cannot be compared to Receivers of Christ. That's taking religion a little too far.

Problem is, we disagree on the definition of "receivers of Christ".  As far as I'm concerned, someone who has not obeyed Acts 2:38 is no more "saved" than a Muslim. 

Also, there will be many who have "received Christ" who will be rejected in front of Him.  They will contend they were His children, but He will reject them.  Is that rejection anymore final than the rejection the Muslim, Buddhist or idolator will receive?

Lost is lost, Jerry.  We just disagree where God draws that line.

QuoteI've never in my life met a "trinitarian" christian who worshiped anyone other than the Lord Jesus Christ

I've met more than I care to count. 

If there is the recognition of ANOTHER PERSON who is God besides Jesus Christ, then I believe that is idolatry.  The trinity doctrine does not allow for the worship of Jesus Christ as the ONE AND ONLY GOD.  There is ALWAYS at least one "other person" until they remember the HG and then there's that "3rd" guy, too.   :roll:  If the proclaimed trinitarian worships Jesus Christ as the One and only God of heaven, with NO multiplicity of persons (HE, Jesus Christ, being the Father incarnate), then that person is NOT a trinitarian.  And, again, it is not the title that saves or damns; it is the belief and practice that does.

Also, there will be many who have "received Christ" who will be rejected in front of Him.  They will contend they were His children, but He will reject them.  Is that rejection anymore final than the rejection the Muslim, Buddhist or idolator will receive?

But why were they rejected? Jesus plainly tells them - and us - yet I do not see "Because you didn't believe I was God" in there.

Also, only Believers{receivers of Jesus the Messiah} stand before the Judgment Seat of Christ. Non-Believers{rejectors of Jesus the Messiah} stand before the White Throne Judgment of God.

So,  If the proclaimed trinitarian worships Jesus Christ as the One and only God of heaven, with NO multiplicity of persons (HE, Jesus Christ, being the Father incarnate), then that person is NOT a trinitarian... receives the Holy Ghost and lives a godly life.... are they saved and in the Church?

Quote from: OGIA on July 25, 2008, 08:14:39 PM
Problem is, we disagree on the definition of "receivers of Christ".  As far as I'm concerned, someone who has not obeyed Acts 2:38 is no more "saved" than a Muslim. 

Here's where I would have issues with the traditional Oneness Pentecostal view point.  Obedience to Acts 2:38 is simply repenting and being baptized.  Those are the only commands given in that verse. the last part "ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" is a promise to those who do obey.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 26, 2008, 02:00:01 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 25, 2008, 08:14:39 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 25, 2008, 06:13:26 AM
Sorry. Rejectors of Christ cannot be compared to Receivers of Christ. That's taking religion a little too far.

Problem is, we disagree on the definition of "receivers of Christ".  As far as I'm concerned, someone who has not obeyed Acts 2:38 is no more "saved" than a Muslim. 

Also, there will be many who have "received Christ" who will be rejected in front of Him.  They will contend they were His children, but He will reject them.  Is that rejection anymore final than the rejection the Muslim, Buddhist or idolator will receive?

Lost is lost, Jerry.  We just disagree where God draws that line.

QuoteI've never in my life met a "trinitarian" christian who worshiped anyone other than the Lord Jesus Christ

I've met more than I care to count. 

If there is the recognition of ANOTHER PERSON who is God besides Jesus Christ, then I believe that is idolatry.  The trinity doctrine does not allow for the worship of Jesus Christ as the ONE AND ONLY GOD.  There is ALWAYS at least one "other person" until they remember the HG and then there's that "3rd" guy, too.   :roll:  If the proclaimed trinitarian worships Jesus Christ as the One and only God of heaven, with NO multiplicity of persons (HE, Jesus Christ, being the Father incarnate), then that person is NOT a trinitarian.  And, again, it is not the title that saves or damns; it is the belief and practice that does.

Also, there will be many who have "received Christ" who will be rejected in front of Him.  They will contend they were His children, but He will reject them.  Is that rejection anymore final than the rejection the Muslim, Buddhist or idolator will receive?

But why were they rejected? Jesus plainly tells them - and us - yet I do not see "Because you didn't believe I was God" in there.

"Why" they were rejected was not the point.  The point is that there will be "receivers of Christ" rejected as totally as the Muslim and idolator -- rejectors of Christ -- because they did not worship the Father in spirit and in truth. And, bottom line is we disagree on what defines someone who has received Christ.  There is no way to come to any common ground on this.

Also, "because you didn't believe I was God" is not what I'm talking about.  I've not met one trinitarian who didn't believe Jesus Christ was God.  They'd be foolish to admit such.  But, to worship another "person" OTHER THAN HIM is idolatry -- IMO a sure ticket to hell.

QuoteSo,  If the proclaimed trinitarian worships Jesus Christ as the One and only God of heaven, with NO multiplicity of persons (HE, Jesus Christ, being the Father incarnate), then that person is NOT a trinitarian... receives the Holy Ghost and lives a godly life.... are they saved and in the Church?

Yes, I believe they are.

Quote from: bsr on July 26, 2008, 03:56:56 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 25, 2008, 08:14:39 PM
Problem is, we disagree on the definition of "receivers of Christ".  As far as I'm concerned, someone who has not obeyed Acts 2:38 is no more "saved" than a Muslim. 

Here's where I would have issues with the traditional Oneness Pentecostal view point.  Obedience to Acts 2:38 is simply repenting and being baptized.  Those are the only commands given in that verse. the last part "ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" is a promise to those who do obey.

But, how is Acts 2:38 fulfilled in the examples we have in the book of Acts after the day of Pentecost?  There is always water baptism in the name of the Lord and the infilling of the HG evidenced by tongues.  That's why I say that this is obedience to Acts 2:38.

Quote from: OGIA on July 19, 2008, 05:07:46 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 19, 2008, 06:16:00 AM
Thus, the bulk of the Church is biblically in error regarding baptism, and doesn't even realize it.


Is baptism in Jesus' name personal opinion or biblical truth?  :teeth:

I can't answer your question, because I seem to also disagree with you on what the "Christian Church" is and who is in it.  I don't consider anything or anyone being the "church" that and who does not practice water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.

So, my response to your premise would be that the two don't compare because only those who are absolutely correct about water baptism are "the Church".


So,  If the proclaimed trinitarian worships Jesus Christ as the One and only God of heaven, with NO multiplicity of persons (HE, Jesus Christ, being the Father incarnate), then that person is NOT a trinitarian... receives the Holy Ghost and lives a godly life.... are they saved and in the Church?

Yes, I believe they are.   

Then I guess we can change my original statement to:

Thus, the bulk of the Church is biblically in error regarding baptism and the godhead, but doesn't even realize it.

The reason I make such a "deal" out of this, is because we cannot be so blindly arrogant to fool ourselves into believing only "us" are saved. Only "us" have the truth and God. That's the mistake the Jews made before and after Christ. Now, that mindset has been infected into the Body of Christ. Thousands of denominations testify eloquently.

When Paul came upon the men in Acts 19, he recognized them as Believers. He asked them "Have you received the Holy Ghost since you believed?"

The key factor here is: since you believed. Paul was talking to recognized Believers in the Messiah. Not random spiritual folks who believed in "GOD". Believers in the Messiah. They just didn't know His name.

Same holds today. Rather than thinking "every other denomination is lost unbelievers", we should be thinking "have you received ________ since you believed?

Have you received:

the Holy Ghost... revelation of the Mighty God in Christ... baptism in Jesus' name... gift of healing... gift of tongues.... gift of prophecy.... gift of prophets... gift of helps.... increased faith in the Word.... etc.

The true lost need the cross. The true lost need the Savior. The true lost need the blood. The true lost need faith to believe.

The Body needs each other. The Body needs unity. The Body needs revival. The Body needs "since you believed." The Body needs the unleavened Word of God.

The Body doesn't need any more division. The time is soon upon us where denomination will not matter. All who stand in the testimony of Jesus will be in danger. All will be required to be willing to give their life. Literally.

So it's important to recognize the Body as Christ does. Not segregate ourselves in religious denominations.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 27, 2008, 01:50:23 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 19, 2008, 05:07:46 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 19, 2008, 06:16:00 AM
Thus, the bulk of the Church is biblically in error regarding baptism, and doesn't even realize it.


Is baptism in Jesus' name personal opinion or biblical truth?  :teeth:

I can't answer your question, because I seem to also disagree with you on what the "Christian Church" is and who is in it.  I don't consider anything or anyone being the "church" that and who does not practice water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.

So, my response to your premise would be that the two don't compare because only those who are absolutely correct about water baptism are "the Church".


So,  If the proclaimed trinitarian worships Jesus Christ as the One and only God of heaven, with NO multiplicity of persons (HE, Jesus Christ, being the Father incarnate), then that person is NOT a trinitarian... receives the Holy Ghost and lives a godly life.... are they saved and in the Church?

Yes, I believe they are.   

Then I guess we can change my original statement to:

Thus, the bulk of the Church is biblically in error regarding baptism and the godhead, but doesn't even realize it.

You define the "church" differently than I and the word of God do, Jerry.  The Church of Jesus Christ not only has been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ but also baptizes in that manner.  A person is not in the Church (aka the body of Christ) until they are baptized this way.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 28, 2008, 02:52:55 AM
So it's important to recognize the Body as Christ does. 

I agree.  And until his Name has been called over someone they are not a part of His Body.

Quote from: OGIA on July 30, 2008, 12:33:14 PM

I agree.  And until his Name has been called over someone they are not a part of His Body.

Your are right and I refuse to compromise the Word of the Lord so that I can make some one fell good here on earth and them be lost in Glory.  Also in Acts 19 Paul ask if the had received the HG since they believed.  Not since they were saved.  And these the Bible tells us were followers of John not followers of Jesus Christ.

Quote from: OGIA on July 30, 2008, 12:33:14 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 27, 2008, 01:50:23 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 19, 2008, 05:07:46 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 19, 2008, 06:16:00 AM
Thus, the bulk of the Church is biblically in error regarding baptism, and doesn't even realize it.


Is baptism in Jesus' name personal opinion or biblical truth?  :teeth:

I can't answer your question, because I seem to also disagree with you on what the "Christian Church" is and who is in it.  I don't consider anything or anyone being the "church" that and who does not practice water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.

So, my response to your premise would be that the two don't compare because only those who are absolutely correct about water baptism are "the Church".


So,  If the proclaimed trinitarian worships Jesus Christ as the One and only God of heaven, with NO multiplicity of persons (HE, Jesus Christ, being the Father incarnate), then that person is NOT a trinitarian... receives the Holy Ghost and lives a godly life.... are they saved and in the Church?

Yes, I believe they are.   

Then I guess we can change my original statement to:

Thus, the bulk of the Church is biblically in error regarding baptism and the godhead, but doesn't even realize it.

You define the "church" differently than I and the word of God do, Jerry.  The Church of Jesus Christ not only has been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ but also baptizes in that manner.  A person is not in the Church (aka the body of Christ) until they are baptized this way.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 28, 2008, 02:52:55 AM
So it's important to recognize the Body as Christ does. 

I agree.  And until his Name has been called over someone they are not a part of His Body.

I understand what you're saying. But, John, quit evading your statements. Look at what you said:


1... I can't answer your question, because I seem to also disagree with you on what the "Christian Church" is and who is in it.  I don't consider anything or anyone being the "church" that and who does not practice water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.

So, my response to your premise would be that the two don't compare because only those who are absolutely correct about water baptism are "the Church".

2... So,  If the proclaimed trinitarian worships Jesus Christ as the One and only God of heaven, with NO multiplicity of persons (HE, Jesus Christ, being the Father incarnate), then that person is NOT a trinitarian... receives the Holy Ghost and lives a godly life.... are they saved and in the Church?

Yes, I believe they are.   


Statement 1 says "no". Statement 2 says "yes".   Which is it?   That's the question I have for you.

Anyone that denies that water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ is the only Bible formula for baptism is denying Biblical truth and are leading people To be lost and their blood will be on their hands.  It is time to stand up for what is right and let the people know exactly what it will take to get to heaven.  Wishy washy so called People of the Name who will continue to try and find some way around it need to really get down and pray and fast.  God is a Spirit and not a person or persons.  I know many will not like it but there is only One Truth.  I know for a fact that if a person in a trinitarian church sees the truth  they will have to come out from among the false teaching of God being persons and leave that church or they will not be able to stand.  There will come a time that they will either have to take a stand for what is right or compromise the truth and say well as long as you do like the devils and beleive then you are saved. 

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 30, 2008, 01:50:31 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 30, 2008, 12:33:14 PM

I agree.  And until his Name has been called over someone they are not a part of His Body.

Your are right and I refuse to compromise the Word of the Lord so that I can make some one fell good here on earth and them be lost in Glory.  Also in Acts 19 Paul ask if the had received the HG since they believed.  Not since they were saved.  And these the Bible tells us were followers of John not followers of Jesus Christ.

There's no one here trying to "compromise and make someone feel good".  I don't know where that came from.

Yes, Acts 19 is talking to John's followers. Yes, Acts 19 does say Paul asked about the Holy Ghost. Read the post again. Get past the obvious first level and look deeper in meaning.

I repeat:

The key factor here is: since you believed.  Since... after....following...   Talking about progression here. Line upon line.   Here a little - there a little.  

Every one of us have  "since you believed" revelations. Why is that so difficult to understand? Everything I have gained in Christ over my entire life, has been "since I believed". Nothing came instantaneously and fully. It took years of growth in Him.

But apparently, some were infused miraculously at their beginning and have nothing left to receive.  How sad. A lifetime of walking with the LORD and gaining nothing. No wonder others having a slower go at it remains inconceivable. It's beyond their scope of experience.

Yes we disagree on who's in the "Church". That's ok. I can live with that. Like so much here in life - we'll find out over there; if not over here.

Meanwhile, we still are family and need one another. Especially in the days approaching. I need all the Body I can find.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 30, 2008, 03:39:28 PM
Anyone that denies that water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ is the only Bible formula for baptism is denying Biblical truth and are leading people To be lost and their blood will be on their hands.  It is time to stand up for what is right and let the people know exactly what it will take to get to heaven.  Wishy washy so called People of the Name who will continue to try and find some way around it need to really get down and pray and fast.  God is a Spirit and not a person or persons.  I know many will not like it but there is only One Truth.  I know for a fact that if a person in a trinitarian church sees the truth  they will have to come out from among the false teaching of God being persons and leave that church or they will not be able to stand.  There will come a time that they will either have to take a stand for what is right or compromise the truth and say well as long as you do like the devils and beleive then you are saved. 

Brother, I honestly believe you do not understand a single thing I say. I can't talk to you, and I'm not going to argue with you. Let's just leave each other alone.

shalom

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 30, 2008, 03:42:04 PM

 

Every one of us have  "since you believed" revelations. Why is that so difficult to understand? Everything I have gained in Christ over my entire life, has been "since I believed". Nothing came instantaneously and fully. It took years of growth in Him.

But apparently, some were infused miraculously at their beginning and have nothing left to receive.  How sad. A lifetime of walking with the LORD and gaining nothing. No wonder others having a slower go at it remains inconceivable. It's beyond their scope of experience.

Yes we disagree on who's in the "Church". That's ok. I can live with that. Like so much here in life - we'll find out over there; if not over here.

Meanwhile, we still are family and need one another. Especially in the days approaching. I need all the Body I can find.

Yes i agree with you will all learn things after birth.  But anything only half born is dead.  There must be a complete birth in order to have life.  After being born there must be growing in the Grace and Knowledge of our  Lord Jesus Christ.  That is one of the greatest things about teaching home Bible Studies, as I teach them I am ever learning things myself.  anyone that does not grow is stagnated and will begin to stink in time.  

I also agree we need each other in the body of Christ.  No member can function on it's own.  I have many brothers and sisters in the Church that does not see everything the way I do, but we are all built on the same foundation.  

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 30, 2008, 03:46:24 PM

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 30, 2008, 03:39:28 PM
Anyone that denies that water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ is the only Bible formula for baptism is denying Biblical truth and are leading people To be lost and their blood will be on their hands.  It is time to stand up for what is right and let the people know exactly what it will take to get to heaven.  Wishy washy so called People of the Name who will continue to try and find some way around it need to really get down and pray and fast.  God is a Spirit and not a person or persons.  I know many will not like it but there is only One Truth.  I know for a fact that if a person in a trinitarian church sees the truth  they will have to come out from among the false teaching of God being persons and leave that church or they will not be able to stand.  There will come a time that they will either have to take a stand for what is right or compromise the truth and say well as long as you do like the devils and beleive then you are saved. 

Brother, I honestly believe you do not understand a single thing I say. I can't talk to you, and I'm not going to argue with you. Let's just leave each other alone.

shalom

I will continue to stand up for the Oneness of God and the truth as the Bible teaches it.  There is but one way to get to heaven.  I have no problem leaving you yourself along but I will stand up for truth.

Quote from: OGIA on July 27, 2008, 03:15:16 AM
But, how is Acts 2:38 fulfilled in the examples we have in the book of Acts after the day of Pentecost?  There is always water baptism in the name of the Lord and the infilling of the HG evidenced by tongues.  That's why I say that this is obedience to Acts 2:38.

Here are some conversion accounts that only show belief/repentance and baptism in the account in Acts
The ethopian eunuch (acts 8:29-39)
Lydia (Acts 16:14-15)
The Jailer (Acts 16:27-34)
Crispus and many in Corinth (Acts 18:8 )



Here are some cases in Acts that its refered to that they received the Spirit or would receive the Spirit but you don't find recorded that they spoke in tongues

The crowd Peter preached to on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:41)
Samaria (Acts 8:17)
Saul of Tarsus (Acts 9:17)

Quote from: bsr on July 30, 2008, 06:53:51 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 27, 2008, 03:15:16 AM
But, how is Acts 2:38 fulfilled in the examples we have in the book of Acts after the day of Pentecost?  There is always water baptism in the name of the Lord and the infilling of the HG evidenced by tongues.  That's why I say that this is obedience to Acts 2:38.

Here are some conversion accounts that only show belief/repentance and baptism in the account in Acts
The ethopian eunuch (acts 8:29-39)
Lydia (Acts 16:14-15)
The Jailer (Acts 16:27-34)
Crispus and many in Corinth (Acts 18:8 )



Here are some cases in Acts that its refered to that they received the Spirit or would receive the Spirit but you don't find recorded that they spoke in tongues

The crowd Peter preached to on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:41)
Samaria (Acts 8:17)
Saul of Tarsus (Acts 9:17)

We know first of all the the Apostles all taught one message for everyone.  Whether we see a full account of it each time or not.  We understand every detail is not spelled out on every instance that is shown, just as Acts 2:41 does not say how they were baptized.  However we know how the Apostles would have done it.   As far as Saul in Acts 9 whose name was changed to Paul we know he said He spoke in tongues.  And for Samaria in Chapter 18 we know that Simon saw something happened when the people received the Holy Ghost for he wanted to pay them for the power to be able to lay hands on people and get the same results.

Truly receiving the Holy Ghost is a gift from God.  How could we say we love Him and then refuse His gift.  I do believe people try to make it hard for people to get the Holy Ghost.  But if a person truly repents and get baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, they will receive the Holy Ghost.  It may be right away or it may be ten years down the road but God will not let them die without the Holy Ghost.  Once they have truly repented and been baptised then they have done all they have to do.  God gives the Holy Ghost.  I am saying they just need to worship God and let God fill them in His time.  And when they receive the Holy Ghost they will speak in tongues but I may never hear them.  But God's plan is the same for everyone.  He is a fair and just God.  I think sometimes we discourage people from getting the Holy Ghost because we make them feel like it is something they have to do.  No one can fill themselves with the Holy Ghost it comes from God.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 31, 2008, 05:03:35 AM
We know first of all the the Apostles all taught one message for everyone. 

I'll agree the Apostles taught the same message to everyone.  That message according to what I've seen in scripture consisted of these things...

The death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ
repentance
remission of sins

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 30, 2008, 03:14:59 PM
I understand what you're saying. But, John, quit evading your statements. Look at what you said:


1... I can't answer your question, because I seem to also disagree with you on what the "Christian Church" is and who is in it.  I don't consider anything or anyone being the "church" that and who does not practice water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.

So, my response to your premise would be that the two don't compare because only those who are absolutely correct about water baptism are "the Church".

2... So,  If the proclaimed trinitarian worships Jesus Christ as the One and only God of heaven, with NO multiplicity of persons (HE, Jesus Christ, being the Father incarnate), then that person is NOT a trinitarian... receives the Holy Ghost and lives a godly life.... are they saved and in the Church?

Yes, I believe they are.   


Statement 1 says "no". Statement 2 says "yes".   Which is it?   That's the question I have for you.

Jerry,

I really don't appreciate you telling me that I am evading your question.  Like I'm, in some way, scared of your accusations?  Nah.  I can't find where it is even close to being an evasion of your question.

Listen up once more: a person who worships Jesus Christ as the one God of eternity is NOT a trinitarian by definition.  If he/she has believed and obeyed the Gospel and lives a life pleasing to God, he/she is not lost!

Any questions?  :grin:

Quote from: bsr on July 31, 2008, 12:51:07 PM

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 31, 2008, 05:03:35 AM
We know first of all the the Apostles all taught one message for everyone. 

I'll agree the Apostles taught the same message to everyone.  That message according to what I've seen in scripture consisted of these things...

The death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ
repentance
remission of sins

I see what you're saying and agree. Jesus' command was that repentance and remission of sin be preached, beginning at Jerusalem. That is the 'too good to be true news' of the gospel. The Holy Ghost becomes the gift believing adherents should {John 8:38-39} and shall {Acts 2:38-39} receive. Some receive immediately, while others take longer. Either way, the "receiver" has already become part of the Body of Christ and is saved from their sins.

It is my opinion, that just as much of the professing and believing Church will fall away into apostasy; so too will much of the believing and professing Church be filled with the Spirit. Many who are considered "lost" today, will be suddenly endued with power from on high. Sometimes we forget that what is called the Charismatic Movement, was nothing more than the Holy Ghost -so cherished among Pentecostals - sweeping thru traditionally non-Spirit filled christendom. Now it is nothing to see Baptists, Catholics, etc lifting hands, clapping hands, and speaking in tongues. This was virtually unheard of until the 1970's -1980's.

The HG is a gift for the Church - and the Church only. We need to preach it and be like Paul in Acts 19: Have you received since you believed?

I too trust the Lord to be more than willing and able to fill HIS people with the Spirit or whatever else HE deems necessary. It is only up to us to provide the knowledge. We can't demand acceptance nor denial in the Body based on that.

Quote from: bsr on July 31, 2008, 12:51:07 PM
I'll agree the Apostles taught the same message to everyone.  That message according to what I've seen in scripture consisted of these things...

The death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ
repentance
remission of sins

We also know that Jesus commanded His apostles to teach people all the things He had taught them.  So it can be inferred that since He commanded them to baptize those who believe, they baptized them; and we have Scriptural examples of this being fulfilled.  We can also infer that since He promised the gift of the Holy Spirit to anyone who asks for it, His followers proclaimed this promise as well; and we have Scriptural examples of this being fulfilled.  And since Jesus spent most of His teaching on life in the kingdom of God, and on describing the kind of people who are citizens of God's kingdom, then we can infer that Jesus' disciples taught these things to others also.

It's all one message, one Truth.  There are no "minimum requirements" to fulfill; no checklists; no Option A, Option B, Option C.  Just the good news that Jesus brought us.

Quote from: OGIA on July 31, 2008, 01:40:18 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 30, 2008, 03:14:59 PM
I understand what you're saying. But, John, quit evading your statements. Look at what you said:


1... I can't answer your question, because I seem to also disagree with you on what the "Christian Church" is and who is in it.  I don't consider anything or anyone being the "church" that and who does not practice water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.

So, my response to your premise would be that the two don't compare because only those who are absolutely correct about water baptism are "the Church".

2... So,  If the proclaimed trinitarian worships Jesus Christ as the One and only God of heaven, with NO multiplicity of persons (HE, Jesus Christ, being the Father incarnate), then that person is NOT a trinitarian... receives the Holy Ghost and lives a godly life.... are they saved and in the Church?

Yes, I believe they are.   


Statement 1 says "no". Statement 2 says "yes".   Which is it?   That's the question I have for you.

Jerry,

I really don't appreciate you telling me that I am evading your question.  Like I'm, in some way, scared of your accusations?  Nah.  I can't find where it is even close to being an evasion of your question.

Listen up once more: a person who worships Jesus Christ as the one God of eternity is NOT a trinitarian by definition.  If he/she has believed and obeyed the Gospel and lives a life pleasing to God, he/she is not lost!

Any questions?  :grin:

Sorry John. It did seem like evasion. My error.   :pound:

I do still have a question:

Since most "trinitarians" are baptized according to Mt 28:19, is the above person still lost?   :teeth:

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 31, 2008, 01:47:09 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 31, 2008, 01:40:18 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 30, 2008, 03:14:59 PM
I understand what you're saying. But, John, quit evading your statements. Look at what you said:


1... I can't answer your question, because I seem to also disagree with you on what the "Christian Church" is and who is in it.  I don't consider anything or anyone being the "church" that and who does not practice water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.

So, my response to your premise would be that the two don't compare because only those who are absolutely correct about water baptism are "the Church".

2... So,  If the proclaimed trinitarian worships Jesus Christ as the One and only God of heaven, with NO multiplicity of persons (HE, Jesus Christ, being the Father incarnate), then that person is NOT a trinitarian... receives the Holy Ghost and lives a godly life.... are they saved and in the Church?

Yes, I believe they are.   


Statement 1 says "no". Statement 2 says "yes".   Which is it?   That's the question I have for you.

Jerry,

I really don't appreciate you telling me that I am evading your question.  Like I'm, in some way, scared of your accusations?  Nah.  I can't find where it is even close to being an evasion of your question.

Listen up once more: a person who worships Jesus Christ as the one God of eternity is NOT a trinitarian by definition.  If he/she has believed and obeyed the Gospel and lives a life pleasing to God, he/she is not lost!

Any questions?  :grin:

Sorry John. It did seem like evasion. My error.   :pound:

I do still have a question:

Since most "trinitarians" are baptized according to Mt 28:19, is the above person still lost?   :teeth:

The person who has the revelation of Jesus Christ as the ONLY GOD will NOT accept baptism in titles.  Period.  That help?

Not really. I know many christians who accept the godhood of Jesus but have not baptized according to Acts.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 31, 2008, 03:24:35 PM
Not really. I know many christians who accept the godhood of Jesus but have not baptized according to Acts.

No there is no such thing of a christtian who has not taken on tne name in water baptism.  Truth is truth anything else is comprise.  I do know many good people in the trinity church who are deceived, they live good clean moral lifes but they must obey the True Word of God in order to be saved.  If we tell them other wise their blood will be on our hands.

Quote from: bsr on July 31, 2008, 12:51:07 PM

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 31, 2008, 05:03:35 AM
We know first of all the the Apostles all taught one message for everyone. 

I'll agree the Apostles taught the same message to everyone.  That message according to what I've seen in scripture consisted of these things...

The death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ
repentance
remission of sins

Rom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
KJV

Quote from: OGIA on July 31, 2008, 03:05:00 PM

The person who has the revelation of Jesus Christ as the ONLY GOD will NOT accept baptism in titles.  Period.  That help?

The problem is some people only think thye know he truth.  anyone or anybody that will refuse to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ is rejecting Him.  I know some will comprise and try to say everyone is saved but even in Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

We will not just believe but believing will bring forth action.

Jesus said: John 7:38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

Notice Jesus said believe as the scriptures hath said not as we may choose.  Any thing else is false teaching.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 31, 2008, 03:24:35 PM
Not really. I know many christians who accept the godhood of Jesus but have not baptized according to Acts.

I didn't ask you if you agreed.  I asked you if that statement cleared up how I view the person you keep manufacturing.   ;)

By the way, define "godhood". 

I didn't ask you if you agreed.  I asked you if that statement cleared up how I view the person you keep manufacturing.    


Not manufacturing anybody. Talking about real people, in the real world, who've come thru the cross and are being obedient to the commandment of Jesus: repent and be baptized - & God filled them with the Holy Ghost. They understand and accept that Jesus is God in the flesh and there are no other God(s). They were simply baptized according to Mt 28:19.

You've said such a person is saved because they are not "trinitarian".

You've also said such a person is lost because they have not been baptized according to Acts.


Are they in the Body of Christ needing to grow into clearer understanding?

Or, are they not in the Body of Christ, totally rejected by God no matter how much HG or understanding given?


That's my question: Which one is it?   ???

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 31, 2008, 04:16:58 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 31, 2008, 03:05:00 PM

The person who has the revelation of Jesus Christ as the ONLY GOD will NOT accept baptism in titles.  Period.  That help?

The problem is some people only think thye know he truth.  anyone or anybody that will refuse to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ is rejecting Him.  I know some will comprise and try to say everyone is saved but even in Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

We will not just believe but believing will bring forth action.

Jesus said: John 7:38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

Notice Jesus said believe as the scriptures hath said not as we may choose.  Any thing else is false teaching.

No one said anything about refusal. Nor "just believe" w/o action.

Talking about countless millions whom GOD has filled with the Holy Ghost and deemed acceptable to HIM. Talking about those who have not yet received/understood Jesus' name baptism.

Has nothing to do with refusing anything. Just as millions of Jesus' name baptized christians have not understood/received biblical grace or forgiveness. Those are in just as much false doctrine/error as any "trinitarian" regarding baptism.

And many Jesus' name baptized christians do refuse to forgive and extend grace. Many "trinitarians" do refuse baptism in Jesus' name.  Guilty parties everywhere.

That's why the Church - the entire Body of Christ - needs to come together in unity of the faith {Christ and HIM crucified} until we can come together in unity of spirit. But it will not happen as long as the left hand refuses to acknowledge the existence of the right.

"Godhood" was a typo. I meant godhead.

Fingers too slow for my thoughts.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 31, 2008, 06:02:31 PM
Talking about real people, in the real world, who've come thru the cross and are being obedient to the commandment of Jesus: repent and be baptized - & God filled them with the Holy Ghost. They understand and accept that Jesus is God in the flesh and there are no other God(s). They were simply baptized according to Mt 28:19....

Are they in the Body of Christ needing to grow into clearer understanding?

Or, are they not in the Body of Christ, totally rejected by God no matter how much HG or understanding given?

I too know and have known many who have not been baptized "in Jesus' name" yet to whom God has given the gift of the Holy Spirit.  That the Spirit in them is genuine is evidenced by the presence in their lives, and growth over time, of the fruit of the Spirit.

I feel this is an extremely important question.  Should we consider such people to be our brothers and sisters in the Lord: part of His family, His body, His Church, His bride?

I believe the answer is yes.  Like Peter on the rooftop, how can I reject that which God has apparently cleansed and accepted?

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 31, 2008, 06:02:31 PM
I didn't ask you if you agreed.  I asked you if that statement cleared up how I view the person you keep manufacturing.    

Not manufacturing anybody. Talking about real people, in the real world, who've come thru the cross and are being obedient to the commandment of Jesus: repent and be baptized - & God filled them with the Holy Ghost. They understand and accept that Jesus is God in the flesh and there are no other God(s). They were simply baptized according to Mt 28:19.

You've said such a person is saved because they are not "trinitarian".

You've also said such a person is lost because they have not been baptized according to Acts.


Are they in the Body of Christ needing to grow into clearer understanding?

Or, are they not in the Body of Christ, totally rejected by God no matter how much HG or understanding given?


That's my question: Which one is it?   ???

Souls are not saved because they are "not trinitarian".  I don't know where you got that from?
 

Quote from: OGIA on July 31, 2008, 07:58:08 PM

Souls are not saved because they are "not trinitarian".  I don't know where you got that from?

If there is the recognition of ANOTHER PERSON who is God besides Jesus Christ, then I believe that is idolatry.  The trinity doctrine does not allow for the worship of Jesus Christ as the ONE AND ONLY GOD.


And, again, it is not the title that saves or damns; it is the belief and practice that does.


Listen up once more: a person who worships Jesus Christ as the one God of eternity is NOT a trinitarian by definition.  If he/she has believed and obeyed the Gospel and lives a life pleasing to God, he/she is not lost!


If the proclaimed trinitarian worships Jesus Christ as the One and only God of heaven, with NO multiplicity of persons (HE, Jesus Christ, being the Father incarnate), then that person is NOT a trinitarian.


Problem is, we disagree on the definition of "receivers of Christ".  As far as I'm concerned, someone who has not obeyed Acts 2:38 is no more "saved" than a Muslim.

You define the "church" differently than I and the word of God do, Jerry.  The Church of Jesus Christ not only has been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ but also baptizes in that manner.  A person is not in the Church (aka the body of Christ) until they are baptized this way.


And until his Name has been called over someone they are not a part of His Body.

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 31, 2008, 04:08:38 PM

Quote from: bsr on July 31, 2008, 12:51:07 PM

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 31, 2008, 05:03:35 AM
We know first of all the the Apostles all taught one message for everyone. 

I'll agree the Apostles taught the same message to everyone.  That message according to what I've seen in scripture consisted of these things...

The death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ
repentance
remission of sins

Rom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
KJV

The passage you reference was written to a church so can't be used for showing what the apostles preached to potential converts.

Receiving the Spirit is something that is promised to all who obey the gospel by repentance and water baptism.  The apostles did sometimes make mention of that promise when preaching to potential converts.  Peter made mention of it in his message in Acts 2 and his message in Acts 3.

Quote from: titushome on July 15, 2008, 01:45:46 PM

Quote from: Bobbiesue on July 14, 2008, 09:28:09 PM
I think many beliefs use fear to hold people. I have a mother who is in a nursing home and I have been told many a times by her that I am going to hell because I no longer believe as she does. I went to visit her one day and had an elder from where she attended  walk out as I walked in and look at me and just said I am so sorry you are choosing to go to hell. They think because I no longer believe as they do and have embraced this truth I am hell bound and are constantly letting me know it. But I am assured in what I believe now and it doesnt bother me. I think if we become more assured in our beliefs through bible study and prayer it will help us to stand
The fear tatic my mom used used to bother me until I became grounded in what I believe. Once I became grounded  it has helped me greatly to stand firm

That's really sad.  I'm glad you're still making the effort to spend time with your mother, in spite of her attitude toward you.

I love my mom and Know she means well but shes been that way with all things in her life. I believe and pray God can open things up to her

Quote from: bsr on August 01, 2008, 01:37:01 AM

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 31, 2008, 04:08:38 PM

Quote from: bsr on July 31, 2008, 12:51:07 PM

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 31, 2008, 05:03:35 AM
We know first of all the the Apostles all taught one message for everyone.

I'll agree the Apostles taught the same message to everyone.  That message according to what I've seen in scripture consisted of these things...

The death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ
repentance
remission of sins

Rom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
KJV

The passage you reference was written to a church so can't be used for showing what the apostles preached to potential converts.

Receiving the Spirit is something that is promised to all who obey the gospel by repentance and water baptism.  The apostles did sometimes make mention of that promise when preaching to potential converts.  Peter made mention of it in his message in Acts 2 and his message in Acts 3.

True it was writen to the churches. But one thing it brings out to me is this and this is somthing that was really dealing with me was this


1 Corinthians 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

Is not the body the Church?    So would it not be that we were baptized into the church by the spirit as it says

Romans 8:9 (KJV) But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.       

even though this is to the church, it was reminding them that if they didn't have the spirit they wern't his, So to be in the church we have to have his Spirit



I also want  to show a scripture that still sort has bothered me that goes along that lines that God really opened up my eyes to recently



Many will use this verse to say that water Baptism is the last step in salvation



Acts 2:41 (KJV) Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

This may sound a bit off to some  but look at this

and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls

I always took this to be at the point of baptism  but with the way its worded they were baptized and the same day were added Got me to seeing that being baptized and being added were two seperate events. not one as I had always believed

I know some may not agree with this but just thought I would point out somthing I seen

Many peopl will receive the Holy Ghost and never be saved because they do not follow the Spirit.  I realize there will alwaysbe those who comprise and lie to folks.  There is one plan of salvation people can obey and be baptized in Jesus Name or they will be lost.  Just as welll as if they did not obey and repent.  I will continue to point out any other teaching is not of God.  I will not even bid the false teachers Godspeed.  Just because some will not except truth does not change it.  And I mean anyone, I am no refering to just one person .  Anyone teaching anything else is teaching false doctrine .  I knew from the beginning just as Timothy says some wil not hear sound doctrine,  but man pleaseing doctrines from hell are always ready to be excepted.   To tell anyone they ar saved withogettin baptized in Jesus name is to lie to them and maybe cause them never to do what is right and be lost forever.  Contend for the Faith.

Quote from: titushome on July 31, 2008, 07:50:00 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 31, 2008, 06:02:31 PM
Talking about real people, in the real world, who've come thru the cross and are being obedient to the commandment of Jesus: repent and be baptized - & God filled them with the Holy Ghost. They understand and accept that Jesus is God in the flesh and there are no other God(s). They were simply baptized according to Mt 28:19....

Are they in the Body of Christ needing to grow into clearer understanding?

Or, are they not in the Body of Christ, totally rejected by God no matter how much HG or understanding given?

I too know and have known many who have not been baptized "in Jesus' name" yet to whom God has given the gift of the Holy Spirit.  That the Spirit in them is genuine is evidenced by the presence in their lives, and growth over time, of the fruit of the Spirit.

I feel this is an extremely important question.  Should we consider such people to be our brothers and sisters in the Lord: part of His family, His body, His Church, His bride?

I believe the answer is yes.  Like Peter on the rooftop, how can I reject that which God has apparently cleansed and accepted?

That's right. God will not fill - and cannot fill - an unbelieving, non-repentant, sin-filled person with the Holy Ghost. He even said the HG was the spirit of truth which the world {lost} cannot receive. Only seekers of truth find it. Only those drawn to the Father, find HIM. The HG is HIS gift to HIS children.  And we see that all over the place. The HG doing miraculous things in the lives of so many people.

We {apostolics} are just part of the Body, not the entire thing. Are there doctrinal errors in other denoms?  YES.  Are there doctrinal errors in Apostolics?  YES.  Have we all come thru the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ?   YES.   Are we all striving forward in relationship with HIM?   YES.

Has anyone here reached total perfection?  NO.   Does anyone here have nothing left to be clarified and understood?  NO.  Is anyone here willing to add requirements to the price paid on the cross, willing to say: Jesus paid it all, but...?   I HOPE NOT.

Therefore, what God has cleansed had best not be called unclean. Let the Lord take care of 1700 years of miscellaneous errors. All Christians have them. Have faith in our Father to bring us all together. We have more than enough enemies. No need to hunt up new ones.

I guarantee that the day is coming when Apostolics won't care what denomination a person may be. All that will matter is: Jesus is our Lord & Savior. The tares and apostates will be taken care of without our help. The Body will be battlling the Beast/Harlot and paying the ultimate price.

Quote from: bsr on August 01, 2008, 01:37:01 AM

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 31, 2008, 04:08:38 PM

Quote from: bsr on July 31, 2008, 12:51:07 PM

Quote from: Brother Dad on July 31, 2008, 05:03:35 AM
We know first of all the the Apostles all taught one message for everyone. 

I'll agree the Apostles taught the same message to everyone.  That message according to what I've seen in scripture consisted of these things...

The death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ
repentance
remission of sins

Rom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
KJV

The passage you reference was written to a church so can't be used for showing what the apostles preached to potential converts.

Receiving the Spirit is something that is promised to all who obey the gospel by repentance and water baptism.  The apostles did sometimes make mention of that promise when preaching to potential converts.  Peter made mention of it in his message in Acts 2 and his message in Acts 3.

Spirit means "breath of God". Man is composed of body, soul, and spirit. It is the spirit that is eternal and separated from God. It is the spirit that is dead in sin. Thus, it is the spirit that is redeemed or born again; grafted into Christ. We are born with a sinful spirit. Jesus was born with a sin-less spirit. When the blood is applied - spiritually - to our spirit, it is raised up in Christ and we take within ourselves His sin-less spirit. We are joined with Him, His spirit becoming our spirit.

So, to have the Spirit of Christ is to have a redeemed, sinless nature. It is to be cleansed by the blood of the Lamb; a believer in the crucified Messiah. A Christian - like Christ. We are of the world and none of His w/o the blood applied; still in darkness & sin. It is only to those with His spirit that the Holy Ghost can come and fill.

The passage here has a deeper meaning than just "receiving the gift of the HG" in order to be saved.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 31, 2008, 10:07:19 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 31, 2008, 07:58:08 PM

Souls are not saved because they are "not trinitarian".  I don't know where you got that from?

If there is the recognition of ANOTHER PERSON who is God besides Jesus Christ, then I believe that is idolatry.  The trinity doctrine does not allow for the worship of Jesus Christ as the ONE AND ONLY GOD.


And, again, it is not the title that saves or damns; it is the belief and practice that does.


Listen up once more: a person who worships Jesus Christ as the one God of eternity is NOT a trinitarian by definition.  If he/she has believed and obeyed the Gospel and lives a life pleasing to God, he/she is not lost!


If the proclaimed trinitarian worships Jesus Christ as the One and only God of heaven, with NO multiplicity of persons (HE, Jesus Christ, being the Father incarnate), then that person is NOT a trinitarian.


Problem is, we disagree on the definition of "receivers of Christ".  As far as I'm concerned, someone who has not obeyed Acts 2:38 is no more "saved" than a Muslim.

You define the "church" differently than I and the word of God do, Jerry.  The Church of Jesus Christ not only has been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ but also baptizes in that manner.  A person is not in the Church (aka the body of Christ) until they are baptized this way.


And until his Name has been called over someone they are not a part of His Body.

I'm still trying to find where I said that the title "trinitarian" damns someone to hell?

Quote from: OGIA on August 01, 2008, 12:39:32 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 31, 2008, 10:07:19 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 31, 2008, 07:58:08 PM

Souls are not saved because they are "not trinitarian".  I don't know where you got that from?

If there is the recognition of ANOTHER PERSON who is God besides Jesus Christ, then I believe that is idolatry.  The trinity doctrine does not allow for the worship of Jesus Christ as the ONE AND ONLY GOD.


And, again, it is not the title that saves or damns; it is the belief and practice that does.


Listen up once more: a person who worships Jesus Christ as the one God of eternity is NOT a trinitarian by definition.  If he/she has believed and obeyed the Gospel and lives a life pleasing to God, he/she is not lost!


If the proclaimed trinitarian worships Jesus Christ as the One and only God of heaven, with NO multiplicity of persons (HE, Jesus Christ, being the Father incarnate), then that person is NOT a trinitarian.


Problem is, we disagree on the definition of "receivers of Christ".  As far as I'm concerned, someone who has not obeyed Acts 2:38 is no more "saved" than a Muslim.

You define the "church" differently than I and the word of God do, Jerry.  The Church of Jesus Christ not only has been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ but also baptizes in that manner.  A person is not in the Church (aka the body of Christ) until they are baptized this way.


And until his Name has been called over someone they are not a part of His Body.

I'm still trying to find where I said that the title "trinitarian" damns someone to hell?

If there is the recognition of ANOTHER PERSON who is God besides Jesus Christ, then I believe that is idolatry.  The trinity doctrine does not allow for the worship of Jesus Christ as the ONE AND ONLY GOD.


And, again, it is not the title that saves or damns; it is the belief and practice that does.


Revelation 22:8... idolaters and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

I know some of this is disturbing to our comfort zones. But we need to all learn discernment via the Spirit and not the flesh. We all tend to look thru the eyes of our denomination's understandings, often w/o knowing what the Word actually says. I have been and sometimes am guilty of that.

Acts 2:38 is the perfect {mature} will of God. No denying it. Yet the Church has been buried in the earth for the last 1700 years. A lot of things were lost, forgotten, and mistorted. Why do we think there are over 3000+ denominations that proclaim Jesus Christ? Each has found a part that is awaiting the whole.


Romans 12:2 says: Be not conformed to this world { don't evaluate everything thru the flesh} but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, {soul, emotions, intellect; put on mind of Christ} that ye may prove {discern} what is that good, acceptable, and perfect will of God.


Mt 13:33 & Lk 13:21 reference another Jesus' story defining the Kingdom of Heaven. He says it is like leaven a woman took and hid in three measures of meal until the whole was leavened. Notice 3 measures. Just like the blueprint of the Tabernacle; outer court, inner court, and holy of holies. 3 rooms = 3 measures. This is the progression of faith to faith and glory to glory. This is the fruit of harvest - 30, 60, 100.

Look at Romans again. How many measures of the will of God do we see?  Three.

Therefore, the Body of Christ - awakening upon this 3rd day - cannot help but manifest a portion of the kingdom. Some 30, some 60, and some 100 fold. Much of what we term "trinitarian" are simply parts of the Body which found 2 measures of the leaven hidden in the meal.

Every revelation we gain from God comes from digging out the pure, hidden leaven of manna. There cannot be any man-made stuff in there. That's why the children need each other to assemble the discovered leaven. It is only in the 3rd measure that perfection/maturity is attained. If I continue to hoard my measure and bury it within the earth of my denomination, well the Master finds no profit in that.

I believe the best method of sharing the leaven is to recognize who/what is of God, and let the HG reveal which measure we both need. I can't join back to the band wagon and ignore them.

What God has cleaned I will not call unclean.

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on August 01, 2008, 02:02:43 PM

Quote from: OGIA on August 01, 2008, 12:39:32 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on July 31, 2008, 10:07:19 PM

Quote from: OGIA on July 31, 2008, 07:58:08 PM

Souls are not saved because they are "not trinitarian".  I don't know where you got that from?

If there is the recognition of ANOTHER PERSON who is God besides Jesus Christ, then I believe that is idolatry.  The trinity doctrine does not allow for the worship of Jesus Christ as the ONE AND ONLY GOD.


And, again, it is not the title that saves or damns; it is the belief and practice that does.


Listen up once more: a person who worships Jesus Christ as the one God of eternity is NOT a trinitarian by definition.  If he/she has believed and obeyed the Gospel and lives a life pleasing to God, he/she is not lost!


If the proclaimed trinitarian worships Jesus Christ as the One and only God of heaven, with NO multiplicity of persons (HE, Jesus Christ, being the Father incarnate), then that person is NOT a trinitarian.


Problem is, we disagree on the definition of "receivers of Christ".  As far as I'm concerned, someone who has not obeyed Acts 2:38 is no more "saved" than a Muslim.

You define the "church" differently than I and the word of God do, Jerry.  The Church of Jesus Christ not only has been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ but also baptizes in that manner.  A person is not in the Church (aka the body of Christ) until they are baptized this way.


And until his Name has been called over someone they are not a part of His Body.

I'm still trying to find where I said that the title "trinitarian" damns someone to hell?

If there is the recognition of ANOTHER PERSON who is God besides Jesus Christ, then I believe that is idolatry.  The trinity doctrine does not allow for the worship of Jesus Christ as the ONE AND ONLY GOD.


And, again, it is not the title that saves or damns; it is the belief and practice that does.


Revelation 22:8... idolaters and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

Last chance...............

where did I say a title damns anyone?  You keep asking me to answer a question based on what you think I believe.  I think they call that a strawman argument.  I've have NEVER said that a title damns anyone.  It is the belief and the practice that belief produces that causes people to be lost.  If a person who worships Jesus Christ as God and God alone, then they are NOT trinitarian.  But, "not being a trinitiarian" will not save them.  Worshipping the Lord will.

Any other response from you that deviates from that in the form of an accusation will not get a response from me.  Not being mean, just tired of you not addressing my beliefs as I've stated them.  However, I will be happy to clear up any confusion you have.  :grin:

Quote from: OGIA on August 01, 2008, 03:12:35 PM

Last chance...............

where did I say a title damns anyone?  You keep asking me to answer a question based on what you think I believe.  I think they call that a strawman argument.  I've have NEVER said that a title damns anyone.  It is the belief and the practice that belief produces that causes people to be lost.  If a person who worships Jesus Christ as God and God alone, then they are NOT trinitarian.  But, "not being a trinitiarian" will not save them.  Worshipping the Lord will.

Any other response from you that deviates from that in the form of an accusation will not get a response from me.  Not being mean, just tired of you not addressing my beliefs as I've stated them.  However, I will be happy to clear up any confusion you have.  :grin:

Not trying to accuse you of anything. All I've been trying to do is get clarification on what you truly do believe.

How to make this clearer....


From my understanding of previous posts, you have said non-Acts 2:38 adherents were lost. Then you said they were not lost.

My definition of non-Acts 2:38 adherents are those who have or have not received the Holy Ghost, but are all baptized according to Mt 28:19. Most people who adhere to Mt 28:19 are called "Trinitarians" by "us".  Of course, I do stand to be corrected on this observation.


So my question remains:   


Are they in the Body of Christ needing to grow into clearer understanding?

Or, are they not in the Body of Christ, totally rejected by God no matter how much HG or understanding given?

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on August 01, 2008, 10:03:30 PM
Not trying to accuse you of anything. All I've been trying to do is get clarification on what you truly do believe.

I'm not sure how you've missed it?   ???

QuoteFrom my understanding of previous posts, you have said non-Acts 2:38 adherents were lost. Then you said they were not lost.

I've never said those who have not obeyed Acts 2:38 are not lost.

QuoteMy definition of non-Acts 2:38 adherents are those who have or have not received the Holy Ghost, but are all baptized according to Mt 28:19.

Well, that's not mine.  They must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ to have obeyed Acts 2:38.

QuoteMost people who adhere to Mt 28:19 are called "Trinitarians" by "us".  Of course, I do stand to be corrected on this observation.

But, that's not how I define a trinitarian.

QuoteSo my question remains:   

Are they in the Body of Christ needing to grow into clearer understanding?

Or, are they not in the Body of Christ, totally rejected by God no matter how much HG or understanding given?

Your question "remains" because you can't seem to grasp or accept what I believe.  I don't care what title you put on someone.  If they have not come to accept Jesus Christ as the only God, the only Diety, with no multiplicity of persons in the godhead, and that Jesus Christ is the One God (One PERSON of God) manifest in flesh...AND....if they have not obeyed Acts 2:38, then they are not born again and, thus, not saved.

Not sure what else to say, Jerry.  If you can't comprehend that, then we'll just have to move on.  I will not put anyone in the Body that has not been put there by scripture, and the definition you use of "believer" is not mine or the word of God's, IMO.

Hmm...When I read the famous verse that all apostolics like to use to when pinned down to answer the question of how to be born again, acts 2:38, i see nothing about a requirement that one must believe in the oneness. 

Ok John. Calm down.

I got your belief.

Acts 2:38 & Dt 6:4 or Hell.

Got it!  Writing it down for the future, so I do not wonder again.

Thanks.

Can anyone else out there answer this question:

IF it truly is Acts 2:38 & Dt 6:4 or Hell -

How then do others receive the gift of the Holy Ghost and manifest the fruit of the Spirit?


???  ???  ???  ???

Quote from: [{(nwlife)}] on August 02, 2008, 01:07:43 PM
Hmm...When I read the famous verse that all apostolics like to use to when pinned down to answer the question of how to be born again, acts 2:38, i see nothing about a requirement that one must believe in the oneness. 

nwlife: what do you think prompted the question "...what must we do"?

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on August 02, 2008, 01:56:53 PM
Ok John. Calm down.

I got your belief.

Acts 2:38 & Dt 6:4 or Hell.

Got it!  Writing it down for the future, so I do not wonder again.

Thanks.

Actually, you've got the verses in the wrong order.  :-?

However, if that's what you got from my postings, then you're only seeing what you choose to see.  :smirk2:

Quote from: OGIA on August 02, 2008, 03:41:27 PM

Quote from: onli-one-jehovi on August 02, 2008, 01:56:53 PM
Ok John. Calm down.

I got your belief.

Acts 2:38 & Dt 6:4 or Hell.

Got it!  Writing it down for the future, so I do not wonder again.

Thanks.

Actually, you've got the verses in the wrong order.  :-?

However, if that's what you got from my postings, then you're only seeing what you choose to see.  :smirk2:

Correction.....


Dt 6:4 & Acts 2:38 or Hell.

*siiiiigh*


If it was anyone but you two I'd probably issue a warning.  But you guys are old hands at this "serious arguing" stuff, .... and since it's just the two of you, .............


Carry On!


;)

I realize that no amount of scripture will change those who choose to not see.  To receive the Holy Ghost does not mean a person if saved, they follow the Spirit of god into all truth.

Rom 8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

God will reveal Himself to anyone who will allow Him to do so. 

2 Cor 4:3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:
4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
5 For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake.
 

Can a person the has the Holy Ghost be lost?

Quote from: Brother Dad on August 03, 2008, 02:17:02 AM
Can a person the has the Holy Ghost be lost?

Yes.

Quote from: jdcord on August 02, 2008, 11:50:35 PM

*siiiiigh*


If it was anyone but you two I'd probably issue a warning.  But you guys are old hands at this "serious arguing" stuff, .... and since it's just the two of you, .............


Carry On!


;)

Not too big a sigh JD. At least it's interesting.  :teeth: