baptized with water and the holy spirit

[Truthcomber]

Sue D

You: i'M CONTINUING BUT -- i WAS ALSO GOOGLING INTERLINEAR BIBLES. AMONG OTHER ARTICLES WAS "WHY TO AVOID USING INTERLINEAR BIBLES" -- FOR ONE THING THEY GIVE A PERSON A FALSE SENSE OF KNOWING hEBREW / gREEK. AND THEY DO GIVE A LINE BY LINE INTERPRETATION OF A PASSAGE. bUT i CAN DO THE SAME THING WITH MY sTRONG'S CONCORDANCE. aND TO mE -- IT ALSO SUGGESTS THAT A PERSON nEEDS TO GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL TO GET THE REALLY TRUE TRANSLATION.

Me: What in the world are you talking about? I have been using Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance to get my interlinear passages. All the Greek and Hebrew words used in the interlinear passages are all in the Strong’s ExHAUSTIVE Concordance.

 

[Truthcomber]

Sue D,



You: AND AN INTERLINEAR bIBLE IS SIMPLY SOMEONE ELSE COMPILING A BIBLE. -- SO -- i USE A sTRONG'S CONCORDANCE -- MY HUSBAND GOT ONE IN bIBLE COLLEGE. i RARELY USE IT BECAUSE i HAPPEN TO TRUST THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION. aND THE PRESENT -DAY kjv IS AN UP-DATED FROM THE 1ST ONE.

Me: When you use the NEW STRONG CONCORDANCE for interlinear verses, you can pick what version of the bible you want, and Strong will give you the Hebrew and Greek words in English—even the frivolous ones. If you just consider just the Greek text, you will have a translation by Strong word for word. Granted he may have picked the wrong English word, but the reader has a choice. Just click on the number above the English translated word and see.

Example:

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible

put cursor on 2316 above “God” and click. You could have clicked on parallel to see the various different versions of this translation, i.e. NKJV, NASB etc.

https://biblehub.com/greek/2316.htm’’

It gives you the various English definitions of Theos. Strong selected "God" as the meaning of Theos for this verse

 

[Truthcomber]

continued...

try this again

Hebrews 1:1 Interlinear: In many parts, and many ways, God of old having spoken to the fathers in the prophets,

Strong's Greek: 2316. θεός (theos) -- God, god

 

[Truthcomber]

Sue D

You: a RETIRED PASTOR SAID THAT LOTS OF TIMES WHEN A PERSON GOES BACK TO THE ORIGINAL -- IT'S TO 'PROVE' THAT THE ENGLISH ISN'T REALLY CORRECT. BUT THEY FIND THAT THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE TRANSLATION HAS DONE A VERY GOOD JOB. tHEY JUST DON'T LIKE WHAT THEY'RE READING.

Me: I speak English like most people in this country do. One has to have the right English definitions to make the verse connect to each other. Something you have not done. Most of the time they can be considered correct. But it just takes a little here and there to perverse the meaning in context, not just with the paragraph but with the whole bible.

 

[Truthcomber]

Sue D,


One reason I do not subscribe to any one Church doctrine is because of their traditions. If they have discovered new light and have been teaching error, they continue to so because of their pride, especially if they have been doing so for a long time. It would make them look bad if they changed their teachings. Another, is that pastors have a vested financial interest in continuing on with the traditional teachings.

Isa 28:9 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts. 10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

Me: This is how you understand scripture, and of course with the guidance of the holy spirit (1 Corinthians 2:13-14). You grow in spirit and truth. I do not care how smart or dumb you are, you cannot understand God’s word with human understanding.


1 Cor 2:11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. 14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.


Me: likewise, you cannot understand scripture by this method if God doesn’t now want you to…



Isa 28: 13 But the word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken.


Me: even if you studied the bible in a school of ministry for a 100 years.


2 Timothy 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Romans 11:32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.

 

[Truthcomber]

Sue D



You: fOR SOME REASON -- YOU WANT TO BELIEVE THAT jESUS cHRIST ONLY CAME INTO EXISTENCE WHEN HE WAS BORN IN THE nEW tESTAMENT. tHAT HE ATTAINED 'DEITY' WHEN HE DIED ON THE CROSS FOR OUR SINS. bUT THAT HE DIDN'T EXIST IN THE OLD tESTAMENT.

wHEN IT'S POINTED OUT TO YOU THAT HE dID -- YOU TRY TO FIND REASONS TO SAY THAT VERSES ARE A BAD TRANSLATION IN SOME WAY.

BUT, BACK TO hEBREWS 1:10 -- THE ENTIRE CHAPTER. jESUS cHRIST DID EXIST IN THE OLD tESTAMENT AND IN gENESIS 1:26 "LET 'US' MAKE MAN IN OUR IMAGE. tHE ENTIRE GODHEAD DID EXIST BACK THEN. jUST LIKE HEBREWS SAYS. AND JOHN 1:1 -3 SAME THING.


Me: You are totally wrong.


Page 4 Oct 27 @64 of this thread.



“Let us” in Genesis 1:26 is NOT the Trinity


Quote: "Elohim is known in Hebrew grammar as A PLURAL OF MAJESTY. It is derived from the Hebrew verb “el” meaning, “strength,” and thus elohim amplifies the meaning of strength (el). In Hebrew, the literal rendering of elohim would read, “The strongest strength” or even, “the strongest of the strong.

” To introduce the polytheistic concept of the Trinity into the monotheistic Hebrew scripture by twisting the meaning of elohim is ignorance, dishonesty or outright deception...


Genesis 1:27 So God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them. (KJV) Notice the personal pronouns in Genesis 1:27 (“his” and “he”) are all SINGULAR, whereas the personal pronouns in Genesis 1:26 (“Us” and “Our”) are all plural. In Genesis 1:27 only one individual is actually doing the creating…God!

Isa 44:24 Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

Me: The Word was in the beginning with God, not Jesus. Christ became fully the Word of God at his resurrection and glorification. He is now the complete expression of his Father.

Revelation 19:13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.

John 16:15 All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.




Me: Notice in Genesis 1:27 we have the pronouns “he” and his” not ‘they” and “theirs”. God is one enitiy.

 

[Truthcomber]

Sue D,


Me: The Word or expression of God existed in John 1:1-3. God was expressed in theopanies and christophanies in the OT. Even the ground the ground where he expressed himself at was holy (Exodus 3:5, Acts 7:33). He expressed himself fully in the Messiah fully in the NT (John 1:14, Hebrews 1:1-2).


Colossians 2:9 (NIV) For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,


Me: God has a temple. Christ is that living temple (John 2:19, John 14:2). The church is the living stones of that temple (1 Peter 2:5), the Messiah being the chief corner stone. The book of Hebrews prove you wrong. There is not one place in the OT where you will find the son of God or God the son or God the holy spirit. It was after Christ was resurrected and glorified into heaven that he became fully the son of God.

Heb 1:4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they. 5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son? 6 And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten (firstborn: Col 1:18) into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.

 

[Sue D.]

@Truthcomber -- I will take a moment to be thankful to God that my caps lock feature of my keyboard is working correctly.

Actually , in Scripture -- or in any environment -- context is the key. But especially God's Word.

take for instance "two, to and too" -- the context of the sentence determines which of those three is being used correctly. And all three of them sound the same.

And, when translating from one language to another -- each language has it's own alphabet -- as a result -- some words do Not translate from one to another.

We all have an English language dictionary -- use it to find out what various words mean that we're not familiar with.

In response to what you just posted. You said that you don't identify with any specific church's doctrines -- because if they discover new truths', etc. -- our Bible is complete. No new truths are part of God's Word. Now, granted some people have said that they have been given 'new truths' in addition To God's Word -- but that is how cults get started. Well -- one of the ways.

Apparently we're on here at the same time.

I've been doing some researching about the "Us" in Genesis 1:26 -- there are several interpretations as to who the "Us" is referring to. One of those views is what you hold to -- another view is what I've always heard preached. That in the broad sense -- it's the 1st reference of the existence of the trinity. And, to Me -- that fits in with the rest of Scripture.

Getting back to one of your 1st comments -- there are no 'new' truths to be adding To Scripture -- or being 'discovered' in God's Word. There are some who believe that if other people simply 'dig deeper' into Scripture, that 'they' will Also ' see the same light that 'they' do.

Maybe what 'we' need to do is get back to the basics of salvation. That Jesus Christ is the Son of God -- that He died on the cross - shed His blood -- for our sins. And that He rose again bodily from the dead on the 3rd day. That there is no other name given under heaven whereby we are saved.

And we can go back to John 1:1 -- In the beginning was the Word and the Word was With God and the Word was God.// John 10:30 "I and My Father are One". God is eternal and so is the Son, Jesus Christ.

We are going round and round with this subject. so -- rather than getting dizzy on this merry-go-round -- I'm getting off.

 

[Brother-Paul]

Taken from the Tynedale Commentary for Matthew 28:19

Baptizing and ‘teaching’ (v. 20) are participles dependent on the main verb, make disciples; they further specify what is involved in discipleship.

Baptizing has been mentioned in this Gospel only as the activity of John, though the Gospel of John makes it clear that it was a characteristic also of Jesus’ ministry at least in the early days while John was still active (John 3:22-26; 4:1-3). It was against the background of John’s practice that it would be understood, as an act of repentance and of identification with the purified and prepared people of God (see on 3:6, 9, 13). But while John’s baptism was only a preparatory one (3:11),

Jesus now institutes one with a fuller meaning. It is a commitment to (in the name is literally ‘into the name’, implying entrance into an allegiance) the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit (all three of whom, interestingly, were involved in the event of Jesus’ own baptism, 3:16-17). Jesus thus takes his place along with his Father and the Spirit as the object of worship and of the disciple’s commitment. The experience of God in these three Persons is the essential basis of discipleship. At the same time the singular noun name (not ‘names’) underlines the unity of the three Persons.

Baptism was in fact performed in New Testament times, as far as our records go, in the name of Jesus, which is surprising if Jesus had laid down an explicit trinitarian formula before his ascension. An explanation for this may be found in the argument that these words, which later came to be used as a liturgical formula, were not originally so intended and used. They were rather ‘a description of what baptism accomplished’ (AB, pp. 362-363). Or it may be that Matthew is summarizing, in the more explicit and formal language of the church in which he wrote, the gist of what Jesus had taught about the God his disciples were to worship, teaching which had clearly associated himself and the Spirit with the Father, even if not in a set formula. It has been argued that these words were not part of the original text of Matthew, since Eusebius regularly in his pre-Nicene works quotes Matthew 28:19 in the shorter form ‘Go and make disciples of all nations in my name’, but the fact that no extant manuscript of Matthew has this reading suggests that this was rather Eusebius’ own abbreviation than a text he found in existing manuscripts.

Tyndale Commentaries - Matthew.

The Nicene Creed. This creed is usually called just the “Nicene Creed.” It is also called the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed, after its origin in the first two Church ecumenical Councils in 325 and 381. [Roman Catholic]

 

[Truthcomber]

There is no new truths in God's word. There is discovering what the truth is. This can be new if the old "truths" or interpretation of God's word is wrong.


Proverbs 25:2 (NIV) It is the glory of God to conceal a matter; to search out a matter is the glory of kings.


The PAGAN TRINITY EXPOSED - Indisputable FACTS the Trinity IS False!

 

[Truthcomber]

 

[Brother-Paul]

I am aware of these, below is the Jewish New Testament Commentary

I include this also as it includes the important statement highlighted below. (Not my words)

19 This "Great Commission" of Yeshua is stated with varying emphases at Mk 16:15-20, Lk 24:46-49, Yn 20:21-23 and Ac 1:8.

Make people from all nations into talmidim. This must have shocked his hearers, who surely thought that the Messiah was only, or at least primarily, for Jews. Today the situation is reversed, for many Christians think it wrong to evangelize Jews. But their position is inconsistent; for if they really respect Yeshua they should obey his command to make people from all nations, including the Jewish nation, into talmidim.

Immersing them (see 3:1N) into the reality of the Father, the Son and the Ruach HaKodesh. KJV has "baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." Christianity has tended to regard this phrase as a "baptismal formula" to be pronounced when someone is baptized. This understanding leads to such questions as: What is this "name" of the Father, Son and Spirit? Is it Jehovah? Jesus (compare Ac 2:38, 8:16)? or something else? Must all three "persons of the Godhead" be mentioned for a baptism to be valid?

So far as I am concerned, these questions miss the point. First of all, Greek eis generally means "into" rather than "in." Secondly, although "name" is the literal meaning of Greek onoma, "immersing into a name" describes no possible literal act. My rendering expresses what I believe to be the intended meaning, since in the Bible "name" stands for the reality behind the name. While "in the name of" can mean "on the authority of," that seems weak here; more is meant than identifying who authorizes immersion. It is possible that the Greek for "into the name" renders Hebrew lashem, "for, for the sake of, with reference to"; if so, the JNT renders the sense well.

The Father, the Son and the Ruach HaKodesh. This is the closest the New Testament comes to stating the proposition that YHVH, Adonai, the one God of Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaʿakov, consists of Father, Son and Holy Spirit (compare 2C 13:14). The word "trinity" appears nowhere in the New Testament; it was developed later by theologians trying to express profundities which God has revealed about himself. The New Testament does not teach tritheism, which is belief in three gods. It does not teach Unitarianism, which denies the divinity of Yeshua the Son and of the Holy Spirit. It does not teach modalism, which says that God appears sometimes as the Father, sometimes as the Son and sometimes as the Holy Spirit, like an actor changing masks. It is easy to wander astray into error or nonsense in thinking about God, since his ways are not our ways and his thoughts are not our thoughts (Isaiah 55:8). Some Messianic Jews use the term "triunity" in conscious avoidance of the word "trinity," which has such a non-Jewish, traditionally Christian ring to it, and in order to emphasize the unity of God as proclaimed in the Shʾma without neglecting what this verse highlights. But the bottom line is that it is more important to believe God's word and to trust him than to argue over particular doctrinal or verbal formulas used in attempting to describe the nature of God.

There is also a textual issue. Although nearly all ancient manuscripts have the trinitarian formula, Eusebius, the Church historian, who may have been a non-trinitarian, in his writings preceding the Council of Nicea in 325 C.E., quotes the verse without it. Most scholars believe the formula is original, but papers by Hans Kosmala ("The Conclusion of Matthew," Annual of the Swedish Theological Institute, 4 (1965), pp. 132-147) and David Flusser ("The Conclusion of Matthew in a New Jewish Christian Source," ibid., 5 (1966-7), pp. 110-119) take the opposite view.

Jewish New Testament Commentary.

 

[Brother-Paul]

There is no new truths in God's word. There is discovering what the truth is. This can be new if the old "truths" or interpretation of God's word is wrong.

I agree it is right to make clear the errors discovered and agree there are no new truths in God's Word, there cannot be.

I have said it many times and feel it right to add it here, We as saved believers should look back to the early church and see the differences between then and now, the trouble is all churches think they are right, every denomination thinks they are right, yet they do heed the warnings to the seven churches, our Lord's critism to each church should make us all think and review our situation today.

By looking back at the early church and following it threw the early years, we see so many differences in the way people fellowship today, once we see those differences it becomes important to find out how things changed, when they changed and by whom. The majority show the majority of changes were made by the Roman Catholic Church starting around the time of Constantine, and from then onwards to the present day.

The same applies to our Bible translations, it is up to each person to make sure they are right, it is up to us to make sure we are right with God, search the scriptures, compare the scriptures, learn from the scriptures, understand the errors, Be Right with God. Don't rely on everything a pastor, deacon, vicar, minister, bishop says. God gives His Word to the world, to every soul in the world, it is up to us to Receive the Truth He gives us and follow His Commandments and The Word.

But don't do so in a way that takes our eyes off Jesus, do it in love in Jesus Name.

Bless you

 

[Truthcomber]

Amien brother,

I believe you have it right.

 

[Sue D.]

I agree it is right to make clear the errors discovered and agree there are no new truths in God's Word, there cannot be.

I have said it many times and feel it right to add it here, We as saved believers should look back to the early church and see the differences between then and now, the trouble is all churches think they are right, every denomination thinks they are right, yet they do heed the warnings to the seven churches, our Lord's critism to each church should make us all think and review our situation today.

By looking back at the early church and following it threw the early years, we see so many differences in the way people fellowship today, once we see those differences it becomes important to find out how things changed, when they changed and by whom. The majority show the majority of changes were made by the Roman Catholic Church starting around the time of Constantine, and from then onwards to the present day.

The same applies to our Bible translations, it is up to each person to make sure they are right, it is up to us to make sure we are right with God, search the scriptures, compare the scriptures, learn from the scriptures, understand the errors, Be Right with God. Don't rely on everything a pastor, deacon, vicar, minister, bishop says. God gives His Word to the world, to every soul in the world, it is up to us to Receive the Truth He gives us and follow His Commandments and The Word.

But don't do so in a way that takes our eyes off Jesus, do it in love in Jesus Name.

Bless you

Re: RCC -- that particular group -- huge as it is -- has added the teachings of their church fathers To God's Word. There are the Apocraphal books between the Old and New Testaments that were found to mix 'stories' with Truth. They were taken out of the recognized Canon of Scripture. A Lot of false teaching has been integrated into the RCC church which is why the Protestant Reformation came to be. The Protestant churches emerged // Methodist, Lutherans', Presbyterians and the Baptist church came to be a lot later.

The 'church' we know Today Is different than the early church. It's bound to be -- and yes, in Revelation the book -- there is the example of the 7 churches in Asia -- their positives and negatives. God's reactions to each.
The cultures are different today. The languages are obviously different. We dress differently . But is 'different' Wrong or simply 'different'.

As far as errors being taught. We need to make sure that the 'errors' are really Errors. There Are those who look and look for a group of people who believe the same misconceptions of Scripture that 'we' have. And even when 'they' are shown a more accurate concept of Scripture -- they dig their heals in and refuse to hear what is being explained to them. I've known a couple of people who, over the years, haven't been going to Any church. They believe that Their interpretation of Scripture is The Right one and very few people believe that same way. Ya try to share Scripture that shows Another way and they won't hear it.

Jesus Christ is/ was / God in the flesh -- God is eternal and so is Jesus Christ. He did not simply come into existence at His birth in the New Testament. He did Not 'earn' His way into the Godhead / trinity/ by willingly dying on the cross for all of us. He, Jesus Christ, was part of God's plan for our salvation from the beginning of time. Well -- from Before the beginning of time. Because 'in the beginning God created' in order to do that -- He had to have already been 'there'.

The greatest commandment is found in the New Testament -- we are to love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul and mind and then to love our neighbor as we love ourselves. When we do the 1st -- obedience will come naturally.

He was given a seat of honor next to God the Father once He had ascended back up to heaven.

 

[Brother-Paul]

Re: RCC -- that particular group -- huge as it is -- has added the teachings of their church fathers To God's Word. There are the Apocraphal books between the Old and New Testaments that were found to mix 'stories' with Truth. They were taken out of the recognized Canon of Scripture. A Lot of false teaching has been integrated into the RCC church which is why the Protestant Reformation came to be. The Protestant churches emerged // Methodist, Lutherans', Presbyterians and the Baptist church came to be a lot later.

The 'church' we know Today Is different than the early church. It's bound to be -- and yes, in Revelation the book -- there is the example of the 7 churches in Asia -- their positives and negatives. God's reactions to each.
The cultures are different today. The languages are obviously different. We dress differently . But is 'different' Wrong or simply 'different'.

As far as errors being taught. We need to make sure that the 'errors' are really Errors. There Are those who look and look for a group of people who believe the same misconceptions of Scripture that 'we' have. And even when 'they' are shown a more accurate concept of Scripture -- they dig their heals in and refuse to hear what is being explained to them. I've known a couple of people who, over the years, haven't been going to Any church. They believe that Their interpretation of Scripture is The Right one and very few people believe that same way. Ya try to share Scripture that shows Another way and they won't hear it.

Jesus Christ is/ was / God in the flesh -- God is eternal and so is Jesus Christ. He did not simply come into existence at His birth in the New Testament. He did Not 'earn' His way into the Godhead / trinity/ by willingly dying on the cross for all of us. He, Jesus Christ, was part of God's plan for our salvation from the beginning of time. Well -- from Before the beginning of time. Because 'in the beginning God created' in order to do that -- He had to have already been 'there'.

The greatest commandment is found in the New Testament -- we are to love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul and mind and then to love our neighbor as we love ourselves. When we do the 1st -- obedience will come naturally.

He was given a seat of honor next to God the Father once He had ascended back up to heaven.

Greetings Sue

I have been out most of the day, so I will not reply to this tonight, I will reply tomorrow.

 

[Brother-Paul]

Re: RCC -- that particular group -- huge as it is -- has added the teachings of their church fathers To God's Word. There are the Apocraphal books between the Old and New Testaments that were found to mix 'stories' with Truth. They were taken out of the recognized Canon of Scripture. A Lot of false teaching has been integrated into the RCC church which is why the Protestant Reformation came to be. The Protestant churches emerged // Methodist, Lutherans', Presbyterians and the Baptist church came to be a lot later.

We know this Sue, there would not have been a reformation had the RCC got things right. They have fed in errors for the last 1700 years.

The 'church' we know Today Is different than the early church. It's bound to be -- and yes, in Revelation the book -- there is the example of the 7 churches in Asia -- their positives and negatives. God's reactions to each.
The cultures are different today. The languages are obviously different. We dress differently . But is 'different' Wrong or simply 'different'.

You are looking at worldly differences Sue, yes there are many, I am not talking about cultures, dress, etc.

1 - Take the church, people call the church building the church, it is not the church, it is misleading. As stated previously this was introduced by, yes you got it, the RCC. The called the church, the kuriakon, a word we will NOT find in scripture. The true Church as we know is the ekklesia, these are the saved souls, the Bride of Christ, the Body of Christ.

2 - Take the church, the true church. It is saved souls, not saved and lost souls, yet ministers do not make this clear to the flock.

3 - Take the church, it is when two or three, or more, come together in Jesus Name, anywhere, it doesn't have to be a building. The church is meeting here right now.

4 - Take the church, people talk of my church, they do not have one, many would cry their eyes out, if the building called a church, was burned down, they would be crying for the wrong reasons, the church, is the ekklesia, the saved souls, we are all spiritual stones in the Lord's Church He calls His bride.

5 - Take the church, so many do not accept the True Church, in which Jesus Christ is Head of, is actually, saved souls across the world, regardless of age, sex, ability, disability, language, colour, etc. Together saved souls worldwide are the ekklesia. We are the ones our Lord will Return in Glory for. O Come Lord Jesus.

6 - Take the church, every denominational church (building with a group of saved and not saved souls), consider themselves to be 'The Church', every denomination considers what they do is right with God. Really, I am always considering what I am doing wrong and repenting and I am just one spiritual stone.

7- Take the Church, the early Christians met in houses, they didn't have buildings to come together to worship in. The RCC created the buildings as places of worship, nothing wrong in that at all, it makes sense to have a place to come together to have prayer, fellowship and worship God giving thanks to Jesus. But these tiny stone built structures got bigger and cathedrals came to be, each having more towers or larger towers, man trying to reach God.

But there is another element here, let me just take the Church of England, but what I am adding here is common of all denominations...

How much money does the Church of England have and where did all the money come from?
The Church’s property portfolio and investments are immense. It is sitting on a combination of ancient endowments and investments worth £8.3bn, which 'last year alone' increase by £400m.

The Church of England has hit the headlines after it offered to buy off the £400m loan book of collapsing pay-day loan firm Wonga. However, just the week before, it announced it would not be severing ties with Amazon and has been found to offer zero-hours contracts in some of its establishments, leading people to question the church's choices as an investor and employer.

As i has previously reported, these earnings are enough to make the CofE by far the UK’s biggest charity, with an income more than three times that of Oxfam.

There is a lot more, the above are the tip of the iceberg, but I emphasise they are not alone, all denominations have massive assets and investment. The RCC was reported that it was investing in porn in South America because the returns were massive.

8 - Take the so called church denomination, what ever happened to selling everything and giving to the poor, what ever happened to providing for the needy?

9 - Take the church, Clergy that are not born-again, RCC clergy called father, where did vicar come from (vicar meaning temporary) it was created by the Anglican Church, it is not scriptural. Scripture clearly quotes these positions as deacons, pastors, teachers, bishops. Not Arch Bishops or any other name. Now we may say these are small items, depending where we come from etc, the main consideration is, they are not scriptural.

10 - Take the church,
Note here 'All who believed, all who were saved (the ekklesia)
Note the difference between the early church and now
Then take note as we compare these differences, how blessed they were, great power, great grace, none lacked anything.

Acts 2:44-45 (NKJV)
44 Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common,
45 and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need.

Acts 4:32-37 (NKJV)
32 Now the multitude of those who believed were of one heart and one soul; neither did anyone say that any of the things he possessed was his own, but they had all things in common.
33 And with great power the apostles gave witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And great grace was upon them all.
34 Nor was there anyone among them who lacked; for all who were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the proceeds of the things that were sold,
35 and laid them at the apostles' feet; and they distributed to each as anyone had need.
36 And Joses, who was also named Barnabas by the apostles (which is translated Son of Encouragement), a Levite of the country of Cyprus,
37 having land, sold it, and brought the money and laid it at the apostles' feet.

These are some of the differences between the early church and todays church.
Are we right with God?
Are we right with God's Word?
Can we see any differences?

We cannot change the world or the church as it is today, first we make sure we are right with God, we can let church ministers of the errors, it is doubtful they will listen, they are employees. The situation is much higher up, in the denomination running of what has become a business. But we can, taking to heart our situation, as a spiritual stone, in the One True Church, we can pray about this as the spirit guides us.

I am not talking about cultures, dress, etc. I am talking about differences between the early church and now.

As stated yesterday, the message to the seven churches showed many errors, yet none of them thought they were in error, is that not a clear message for today, starting with each one of us. I think so.

What good is all that wealth, if Christ Returns tonight, how much is being missed for helping the poor and the homeless, etc.
That said those who are left behind will no doubt need some of it.

Is there a difference between the early church and the church today? Let all readers decide.

 

[Brother-Paul]

As far as errors being taught. We need to make sure that the 'errors' are really Errors. There Are those who look and look for a group of people who believe the same misconceptions of Scripture that 'we' have. And even when 'they' are shown a more accurate concept of Scripture -- they dig their heals in and refuse to hear what is being explained to them. I've known a couple of people who, over the years, haven't been going to Any church. They believe that Their interpretation of Scripture is The Right one and very few people believe that same way. Ya try to share Scripture that shows Another way and they won't hear it.

We cannot condemn those who believe and do not attend a place of worship, called a church.

I know a person who attended services at, Church of England, RCC, Methodist, URC and had fellowship with some Baptists, the person has not been part of any denomination for the last twenty of the last thirty years. That person believes no less today than the hour he/she first believed, and has continued to grow in faith. So this tells me, although it is good and important to go to a local church building for prayer, felloeship and worship, it doesn't mean the person is lost or misguided.

Jesus Christ is/ was / God in the flesh -- God is eternal and so is Jesus Christ. He did not simply come into existence at His birth in the New Testament. He did Not 'earn' His way into the Godhead / trinity/ by willingly dying on the cross for all of us. He, Jesus Christ, was part of God's plan for our salvation from the beginning of time. Well -- from Before the beginning of time. Because 'in the beginning God created' in order to do that -- He had to have already been 'there'.

The greatest commandment is found in the New Testament -- we are to love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul and mind and then to love our neighbor as we love ourselves. When we do the 1st -- obedience will come naturally.

He was given a seat of honor next to God the Father once He had ascended back up to heaven.

Amen sister, I am sure all saved souls agree.

Obedience comes through Faith and abiding in Him, allowing Him to abide in us.

We are made righteous, we are to practice righteousness -- obedience comes naturally.

 

[Sue D.]

A person WHO goes from church to church like that IS BOUND TO GET A variety OF DIFFERENT DOCTRINAL BELIEFS and could END UP FAIRLY CONFUSED IN WHAT THEY BELIEVE AND WHY. aND YES i HIT A WRONG KEY AND GOT ALL MESSED UP AGAIN. wILL TRY various things.

 

[Mart]

Matthew 28 : 19 "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit......" And THAT is the trinity. And that is how Jesus Christ was instructing his disciples as they went unto all the world. Because it's through the trinity that we Have salvation. The Holy Spirit comes to indwell each believer at the instant Of their inner heart's belief and confession of such.

Matt 28:19 is the ONLY verse that says this and yet the apostles only baptized in Yeshua's name. Were they disobedient? Also, v.19 does not say these 3 names are one person. It just lists the names.

As for "the holy spirit" this too is misleading. No where in the original languages of scripture does reference to Yahweh's Spirit mean a separate being. The trinitarian translators took a gender neutral term and changed it to support their heretical view of 3 gods in one.
If anyone can show where scripture says in the original that the Father and the Son are one and the same then you are right. But, it doesn't exist. John 1:1 is used by trinitarians as proof but the original has been intentionally mistranslated. The "Word" doesn't refer to Messiah or Yahweh.
The "Word" in Greek is logos;
Greek: λόγος
Transliteration: logos
Pronunciation: log'-os
Definition: From G3004; Strong's
something said (including the thought); by implication a topic (subject of discourse) also reasoning (the mental faculty) or motive; by extension a computation;

To make more sense use the word plan or plans. The Father had planned for a man to redeem the world. That man is Yeshua!

The entire Old Testament speaks of the Father as ONE! The Father speaks of Himself as ONE! The first Commandment is violated by the trinity. The Jews know The Father as ONE being. When asked by Yeshua "who do you say I am?" Peter answered "Yahweh's Messiah." Peter didn't say Yeshua was God. Every time this question came up would have been a fantastic time to educate the world that the Father and Son are one and the same yet that never happens. No where in scripture is this ever said.

Like in politics there are liberals in Christianity. Why would anyone believe a liberal? There is too much at stake.

As for knowing the truth, I'll take the words of Messiah when he said "no one comes to the Father but through Me." Notice he doesn't say "no one comes to me but through me."