Denominations

[Thorwald]

Well, well, well, I absolutely love the comments posted on this thread (above). You have brought up some interesting points, that God taught me directly, and are contained in my new book, 'Black Lights & Burnt Candles'.

The scriptures teach us, that we are 'known by our works'. This seems simple enough, but let us go a little deeper;

1) Even Al Capone provided free meals to the needy.
2) The BGEA comes up with 'ideas' galore, and then asks everyone to send them money in order to implement their ideas. They then tell everyone how great they are, and how many lives they have saved.
3) The Red Cross charged soldiers in the field during WWII for a coffee. The Salvation Army gave the soldiers FREE coffee.

There are many things that should be taken into consideration when evaluating charity;
1) How was the gift/money originally obtained, prior to being given to charity?
2) Was the 'gift' published, identifying the 'giver'?
3) Are the 'works' for God's glorification, or the contributor's or church's?
4) What selection process was used to disburse the gifts?
5) How much was spent on 'administration' costs? Most of the Salvation Army's contributions received are for admin.
6) ...and so on.

Many churches send their charitable collections all over the world, but fail to help needy Christians living next door to their church. Many of these tithes fall into the hands of the ungodly, and are used for purposes other than to glorify God. Should we not concentrate on helping Christ's sheep first? At what point, do we 'wipe our feet and walk away' from the ungodly? Evangelism sounds great, but many have heard the 'good news' before, and failed to believe, or continue to 'change their lives', and simply fall away again. Assuming that 'many were saved' during a revival meeting, means that the 'hearts' of the assumed saved, can be interpreted correctly by the 'teacher'.

 

[farout]

Thorwald: There is a christian web site dedicated to the information you suggested should be taken into consideration. We are not allowed to post web site's on TJ. Promoting your book does not seem the right thing to do unless you have asked the administrator of TJ.


I believe any group that trys to help humanity is always open for criticisms. However, I can speak for my experience with BGEA and they are impeccable in the handling of finances, and their witness for Jesus Christ is unmatched. Franklin Graham has a group (cant mention name) that ministers to the poorest of the poor world wide, and is there in the US or any other country that needs physical help. They help always in the name of Jesus Christ. Above all no ministry is perfect and mistakes are made. I have never heard any criticisms of the Salvation Army, I highly respect this ministry.

I think too often we use the words like "many". How many is "many"? Perhaps a percentage would be more understandable. If we brake down to cost of preaching the Gospel by the number of those who make a commitments to become a follower of Jesus Christ, what does that really mean? I am sure the cost to send a missionary to Japan is much more than say Mexico. If the cost per those "saved" reaches a certain point in dollars, what does than mean, should we say soul's in that place are not worth it?

Evangelism is the normal way we walk in our daily traffic pattern of life. I believe we keep telling and witnessing about Jesus Christ until He comes again. Perhaps no where in the world has the Gospel been preached and brought before most everyone numerous times, but in the United States and Canada. Yet we keep seeing on the TV Jesus Christ preached every hour of everyday! I don't think we can ever assume for sure how many come to really KNOW Jesus Christ. Only Jesus knows for sure the number who were saved. Perhaps those who have heard the Gospel so many times have become numb and hard of heart, and who knows what will open their heart, but we keep trying until he returns.


Who is our neighbor? If we compare our lives to most of the peoples in the world we are so rich! If we have a roof to sleep under, many people don't. We have food for breakfast, most don't. Do you have even one dollar? Most don't. Do you have a vehicle? Most people will never have one. Think about that many people don't name their children until they reach two years old, because so many die before the age of two. How can ppeople listen to the Gospel when they are hungry, without food, they are very ill, close to death. How can we wipe our feet and walk away? This gives us all something to thank God for. Blessings,


farout

 

[Boanerges]

I believe any group that trys to help humanity is always open for criticisms. However, I can speak for my experience with BGEA and they are impeccable in the handling of finances, and their witness for Jesus Christ is unmatched. Franklin Graham has a group (cant mention name) that ministers to the poorest of the poor world wide, and is there in the US or any other country that needs physical help. They help always in the name of Jesus Christ. Above all no ministry is perfect and mistakes are made. I have never heard any criticisms of the Salvation Army, I highly respect this ministry.

I think too often we use the words like "many". How many is "many"? Perhaps a percentage would be more understandable. If we brake down to cost of preaching the Gospel by the number of those who make a commitments to become a follower of Jesus Christ, what does that really mean? I am sure the cost to send a missionary to Japan is much more than say Mexico. If the cost per those "saved" reaches a certain point in dollars, what does than mean, should we say soul's in that place are not worth it?

Evangelism is the normal way we walk in our daily traffic pattern of life. I believe we keep telling and witnessing about Jesus Christ until He comes again. Perhaps no where in the world has the Gospel been preached and brought before most everyone numerous times, but in the United States and Canada. Yet we keep seeing on the TV Jesus Christ preached every hour of everyday! I don't think we can ever assume for sure how many come to really KNOW Jesus Christ. Only Jesus knows for sure the number who were saved.

Well put my brother!

 

[james1523]

Hi James, farout here. As I read your post I thought of some questions and a few things I wanted to say. You have some pretty deep thoughts, and bring issues to the front I have never experienced. I am thinking my experience in nothing but Baptist Chrurches has me at a disadvantage in addressing other denominations and their governing is concerned. I can say in the last 60 years that I can remember for sure, that no one told the pastor what to preach, or told him what church he would pastor next, or when this would take place. Indeed the congregation makes those decisions to vote a pastor into the office or vote him out. The congregation, which the pastor is a member, is a democratic organization. No one person makes all the decision's. There are committee's that are in charge of certain assigned areas. Business meetings are held however often the congregation states in their constitution says. Usually the Elder or Deacon Board, with the Pastor as chairman, are Board that all other boards report to. There are Trustees that maintain the building and financial affairs. If a denomination is involved the Church determines how much they will sent to the state office and the national office. The church can determine if they want to send or not send anything to either or niether of the denominational offices. I have been a pastor of a church that only supported the state office.

At no time has anyone told me what to preach or how to preach. These structures are typical of Baptist churches, be they non-denominational or denominational. In the United States in order for a church to have a 501 3C tax exexpt status, a church has to hace some stated form of government. Frankly, I do not think a churches should be tax exempt, and that giving should be taken off individual taxes. The Bible says we are not to let the left hand know what the right hand gives. I never knew who gave what. I agree that too often those who record what is given by whom, can spread private information, that can cause favoritism in elections for offices, and other church related business.

I believe it may come to a time and point in our country that private home churches, like they have in China may become necessary. Already in some states Ministers are required to be licensed by the church and give proof to the state. In some Europeian countries I have heard the country tells them what they can not preach. I think Canada is one country that speaking against homosexuality can cause serious problems for the preacher. If anyone knows exactly what happens please let us know.

I agree a church body should be the least structured as possible. We are in a world that is in major change, and the devil is doing all that he can to bring christians under persecution. For lazy unconcerned so called christians they soon may have to make the choice who it is they are going to serve and if they are genuinely followers of Jesus Christ. I have said all i know for now. Blessings.

Hi farout thanks for your input about how the Baptist churches operate. I guess many of my comments re: structure do not apply to your denomination. The denominations in which the structure is worst is the episcopal denominations.. Anglican, Lutheran, etc...and of course Catholic. Essentially the Protestant ones are miniature copies of the papal-style Roman Catholic system. For example in Anglicanism there is no Pope but there is an Archbishop of Canterbury who is a kind of figure head.. and formerly the Monarch of England was the declared Head of the Church.

Unfortunately this kind of structure is also copied in some of the Pentecostal denominations. For example I was meeting in a small church of about 50 people, but the "pastor's pastor", for lack of better term, shut us down because we weren't growing fast enough (in terms of numbers)..we weren't meeting our "growth targets".. so it was seen as unprofitable and we were shut down. So we had to assimilate into a larger church which was less convenient as it was further away. In this structure there is President, Senior Pastor, Pastor etc.. roles like this.. is this much different from Pope, Archbishop, Bishop etc.. ? Now things might not be as bad if the leaders were Spirit-filled men of God.. but in far too many cases the leaders are theological professors or similar, and hold views contrary to the bible (e.g. pro-homosexual marriage, or believe that all religions worship the same God). Essentially this kind of structure enables satan to get a hold over the whole denomination by getting a hold of the man at the top. Without the structure.. this is not possible. The way for satan to get a hold over a denomination is to gain control over the few who are in leadership at the top, and this flows down and so on. I could go on about priests who are also clairvoyants and spirit mediums , support gay marriage, also attend Buddhist seminaries .. call God "mother" not Father. There was one I attended in which we were sitting down on fluffy cushions with candles and chanting like monks lol. I have only seen this thing in the denominations which have the most structure. Now can the church congregation stand up and speak against the pastor or priest if they believe or do these things? Well they can try, but they will soon be shut down. Those in control owns the building and the finances.. there is no way to change the leaders or replace them.. the congregation has little say and little power. Most in the congregation just attend as a weekly religious custom, and do not truly know what goes on or what the priest or pastor truly believes...and even if they do, they do not try to change anything. Who will be your priest or pastor is not determined from amongst your fellowship, but an outsider who comes from a different city or town is chosen by the central leadership. The only thing we can do is leave them.

 

[james1523]

Well, well, well, I absolutely love the comments posted on this thread (above). You have brought up some interesting points, that God taught me directly, and are contained in my new book, 'Black Lights & Burnt Candles'.

The scriptures teach us, that we are 'known by our works'. This seems simple enough, but let us go a little deeper;

1) Even Al Capone provided free meals to the needy.
2) The BGEA comes up with 'ideas' galore, and then asks everyone to send them money in order to implement their ideas. They then tell everyone how great they are, and how many lives they have saved.
3) The Red Cross charged soldiers in the field during WWII for a coffee. The Salvation Army gave the soldiers FREE coffee.

There are many things that should be taken into consideration when evaluating charity;
1) How was the gift/money originally obtained, prior to being given to charity?
2) Was the 'gift' published, identifying the 'giver'?
3) Are the 'works' for God's glorification, or the contributor's or church's?
4) What selection process was used to disburse the gifts?
5) How much was spent on 'administration' costs? Most of the Salvation Army's contributions received are for admin.
6) ...and so on.

Many churches send their charitable collections all over the world, but fail to help needy Christians living next door to their church. Many of these tithes fall into the hands of the ungodly, and are used for purposes other than to glorify God. Should we not concentrate on helping Christ's sheep first? At what point, do we 'wipe our feet and walk away' from the ungodly? Evangelism sounds great, but many have heard the 'good news' before, and failed to believe, or continue to 'change their lives', and simply fall away again. Assuming that 'many were saved' during a revival meeting, means that the 'hearts' of the assumed saved, can be interpreted correctly by the 'teacher'.

I believe any group that trys to help humanity is always open for criticisms. However, I can speak for my experience with BGEA and they are impeccable in the handling of finances, and their witness for Jesus Christ is unmatched. Franklin Graham has a group (cant mention name) that ministers to the poorest of the poor world wide, and is there in the US or any other country that needs physical help. They help always in the name of Jesus Christ. Above all no ministry is perfect and mistakes are made. I have never heard any criticisms of the Salvation Army, I highly respect this ministry.

Social work and charity is good.. no one can deny that. But I dare say in today's humanist society (that is, a society which puts the needs of man first, before God's) I do not think that the good works of genuine Christians can outdo the combined works of Roman Catholics, Buddhists, Muslims and Atheists, and the Government combined...enough to convince the world of Jesus.

The Salvation Army.. the social welfare and assistance provided by the Catholics or Anglicans alone outdoes the Salvation Army by many times. It is just they are less noticeable because they do not go around in army uniforms calling themselves "colonels" or "majors" or things like this. Sometimes the Salvation Army turns away the men and only renders help to the women. I'm not sure if this is a local policy decision or a general rule. As a standalone "church", the Salvation Army does not baptize people nor do they hold communion, but both baptism and remembrance of Him regularly are commands of the Lord to His church. If we attend Salvation Army we must go somewhere else for that. I'm not saying this to belittle the good work they do, just to highlight that they are chiefly a charity organization rather than a Biblical church.

There is nothing wrong with social work... but for the church.. the most important things should come first.. preaching the Gospel and building the Church. Social work is secondary to that, or is in support of that. This comes down to a matter of our heart motives. Are we doing it for God to satisfy God's heart or are we doing it because we see a need and wish to satisfy this human need? There is a "social gospel" which is not the genuine New Testament gospel. The New Testament gospel is centered on Christ's redemption and God's desire to have a church of His own, a Bride of Christ. The social gospel is focused on human need.. and salvation from sins is one of the needs that are met.. in addition to shelter, clothing, food etc. The effects of this social gospel is already seen. There are many places in the world where the gospel is claimed to have been preached.. but in reality what has happened is the Catholics went there many centuries ago.. they established Catholic churches, schools, hospitals.. the true gospel was not preached..bibles in the local languages were not produced and distributed.. just the social gospel attending to human needs. The local peoples just include Jesus as another idol on their mantlepiece next to Buddha or their dead ancestors. For this reason evangelical organizations must go to these areas and evangelize them properly with the genuine gospel.

 

[farout]

James1523: "Nobody cares how much you know; until they know how much you care." If someone is hungry it's best to feed then in the name of Jesus then give then the gospel. The need for the hunger for the Good News of Jesus Christ is really out thereespecially in South America. There is never a doubt that what ever we do must be dome in the Name of Jesus Christ.

James, I honestly believe that is a person is in a denomination or a non-denomination church it is usually best to do social efforst like giving out food or whatever, to be done from the church. If the work is like helping those whom house's were destroyed (such as happened in Joplin Missouri) that at times money ar food and other items needed to be sent to a group you feel you can trust. That is something we choose for our selves. The Red Cross is a standard group most give too, I personally won't, because the Southern baptist already have disaster groups set up in all the states and they are always ready to go into action. I am sure there are other christian groups equally prepared to do the same.

I am not saying anything different than you, I think we are just saying it differently. Blessings.


farout

 

[Thorwald]

Social work and charity is good.. no one can deny that. But I dare say in today's humanist society (that is, a society which puts the needs of man first, before God's) I do not think that the good works of genuine Christians can outdo the combined works of Roman Catholics, Buddhists, Muslims and Atheists, and the Government combined...enough to convince the world of Jesus.

The Salvation Army.. the social welfare and assistance provided by the Catholics or Anglicans alone outdoes the Salvation Army by many times. It is just they are less noticeable because they do not go around in army uniforms calling themselves "colonels" or "majors" or things like this. Sometimes the Salvation Army turns away the men and only renders help to the women. I'm not sure if this is a local policy decision or a general rule. As a standalone "church", the Salvation Army does not baptize people nor do they hold communion, but both baptism and remembrance of Him regularly are commands of the Lord to His church. If we attend Salvation Army we must go somewhere else for that. I'm not saying this to belittle the good work they do, just to highlight that they are chiefly a charity organization rather than a Biblical church.

There is nothing wrong with social work... but for the church.. the most important things should come first.. preaching the Gospel and building the Church. Social work is secondary to that, or is in support of that. This comes down to a matter of our heart motives. Are we doing it for God to satisfy God's heart or are we doing it because we see a need and wish to satisfy this human need? There is a "social gospel" which is not the genuine New Testament gospel. The New Testament gospel is centered on Christ's redemption and God's desire to have a church of His own, a Bride of Christ. The social gospel is focused on human need.. and salvation from sins is one of the needs that are met.. in addition to shelter, clothing, food etc. The effects of this social gospel is already seen. There are many places in the world where the gospel is claimed to have been preached.. but in reality what has happened is the Catholics went there many centuries ago.. they established Catholic churches, schools, hospitals.. the true gospel was not preached..bibles in the local languages were not produced and distributed.. just the social gospel attending to human needs. The local peoples just include Jesus as another idol on their mantlepiece next to Buddha or their dead ancestors. For this reason evangelical organizations must go to these areas and evangelize them properly with the genuine gospel.

I agree with your logic, but BGEA sending some 60+ 'preachers' to visit those affected by Katrina, did little to 'feed and clothe and perhaps transport out' those in need. Faith without works,...is dead. Those who 'give to' charitable organizations, are following God's Word. What is done with the 'gifts', can be questionable at times. God destroyed most of mankind in the flood [Noah's time], and also destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. Are the charitable organizations sometimes seeking out people who God has already turned over to a reprobate mind? This is a valid question.

 

[ushalk]

the bottom line about denominations is that when we go before christ in the judgement, he is not going to stop and ask if we were a member of a church made of brick and mortar with a name tied to it show a whole lot of nothing. it isnt even a proof of faith. that isw the true bottom line. thank you.

 

[Thorwald]

the bottom line about denominations is that when we go before christ in the judgement, he is not going to stop and ask if we were a member of a church made of brick and mortar with a name tied to it show a whole lot of nothing. it isnt even a proof of faith. that isw the true bottom line. thank you.

Every single real Christian knows this. You have offered no wisdom. Real wisdom, is realizing, that the Christian ministry has thrown God out of the Trinity & The Godhead. The Father, Son and Holy Ghost, does NOT include Jesus Christ. 'The Son' is the Lord God Almighty (He who is sitting on His throne in Revelation chapter 4...The first figure referred to in Isaiah 44:6). Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of the Lord God Almighty. The Father of the Lord God Almighty has NEVER been seen by man, nor has any man heard His voice at any time. The NT scriptures contain errors in regards to this topic. If you doubt me, ask God, as I did, before receiving two visions followed by a dream in riddles. This is the truth, as shown to me by God Himself.

 

[Strypes]

Every single real Christian knows this. You have offered no wisdom. Real wisdom, is realizing, that the Christian ministry has thrown God out of the Trinity & The Godhead. The Father, Son and Holy Ghost, does NOT include Jesus Christ. 'The Son' is the Lord God Almighty (He who is sitting on His throne in Revelation chapter 4...The first figure referred to in Isaiah 44:6). Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of the Lord God Almighty. The Father of the Lord God Almighty has NEVER been seen by man, nor has any man heard His voice at any time. The NT scriptures contain errors in regards to this topic. If you doubt me, ask God, as I did, before receiving two visions followed by a dream in riddles. This is the truth, as shown to me by God Himself.

Is that a typo?

 

[james1523]

Every single real Christian knows this. You have offered no wisdom. Real wisdom, is realizing, that the Christian ministry has thrown God out of the Trinity & The Godhead. The Father, Son and Holy Ghost, does NOT include Jesus Christ. 'The Son' is the Lord God Almighty (He who is sitting on His throne in Revelation chapter 4...The first figure referred to in Isaiah 44:6). Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of the Lord God Almighty. The Father of the Lord God Almighty has NEVER been seen by man, nor has any man heard His voice at any time. The NT scriptures contain errors in regards to this topic. If you doubt me, ask God, as I did, before receiving two visions followed by a dream in riddles. This is the truth, as shown to me by God Himself.

You claim that no one has heard the Father's voice.

But here is an example where people heard the Father's voice:
Matt 3:17 And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."

 

[Thorwald]

You claim that no one has heard the Father's voice.

But here is an example where people heard the Father's voice:
Matt 3:17 And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."

The NT scriptures tell us in several scriptures, that The Father dwells in the light which no man can come unto, and no man has ever seen The Father or heard His voice at ANY time. This would mean, that Stephen (Acts 7:55-56) saw THE SON (The Lord God Almighty) and Jesus Christ. This would also mean, that John saw these same two figures (Revelation chapters 4 & 5). Isaiah 44:6 must also refer to these same two figures. Genesis 1:26 must refer to these same two figures ('us').

Taking into account the above, Revelation 1:6 KJV Bible, could also be referring to God (The Lord God Almighty) having a 'Father'. This would mean that the understanding of the disciples & apostles in regards to this topic, was not correct. When Isaiah saw the figure on the throne, he feared for his life. He then assumed that the figure on the throne was the Lord of Hosts. I believe that Isaiah saw the Lord God Almighty on His throne. This also tells me, that the misunderstandings concerning this topic, go back to the OT.

 

[james1523]

The NT scriptures tell us in several scriptures, that The Father dwells in the light which no man can come unto, and no man has ever seen The Father or heard His voice at ANY time. This would mean, that Stephen (Acts 7:55-56) saw THE SON (The Lord God Almighty) and Jesus Christ. This would also mean, that John saw these same two figures (Revelation chapters 4 & 5). Isaiah 44:6 must also refer to these same two figures. Genesis 1:26 must refer to these same two figures ('us').

Taking into account the above, Revelation 1:6 KJV Bible, could also be referring to God (The Lord God Almighty) having a 'Father'. This would mean that the understanding of the disciples & apostles in regards to this topic, was not correct. When Isaiah saw the figure on the throne, he feared for his life. He then assumed that the figure on the throne was the Lord of Hosts. I believe that Isaiah saw the Lord God Almighty on His throne. This also tells me, that the misunderstandings concerning this topic, go back to the OT.

I don't believe there was any misunderstanding on the part of the apostles. The Son and Jesus Christ are the one same Person in two different aspects.

 

[Thorwald]

I don't believe there was any misunderstanding on the part of the apostles. The Son and Jesus Christ are the one same Person in two different aspects.

I KNOW WHAT YOU BELIEVE. However, you are ignoring some NT scripture, in order to achieve this belief. You haven't dealt with the 'invisible to man' FATHER. In order to come to your belief, you have to make the INVISIBLE Father, VISIBLE. In other words, you have to ignore/break scripture. In my second vision, there were 'four' persons present. Two who I was not allowed to see, and two who I was allowed to see. The error, therefore, is in the actual scriptural manuscripts given to us by the authors.

We often hear that the scriptures are 'inerrant'. They are not so. If you match the list of generations found in Genesis, to the lists of generations found in Matthew and Luke, you will find that there is an additional generation listed in the NT. The book of Revelation is accurate, only because John was told what to write down, and what not to write down. If you want to understand the Trinity & Godhead properly, you must make certain that you do not deviate from Revelation.

You have to deal with Revelation 1:6, and not change it (interpret it) to 'fit your belief'. Only use the KJV Bible, in doing so.

 

[farout]

How many churches are needed to start a denomination? Blessings.

farout

 

[farout]

I agree with your logic, but BGEA sending some 60+ 'preachers' to visit those affected by Katrina, did little to 'feed and clothe and perhaps transport out' those in need. Faith without works,...is dead. Those who 'give to' charitable organizations, are following God's Word. What is done with the 'gifts', can be questionable at times. God destroyed most of mankind in the flood [Noah's time], and also destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. Are the charitable organizations sometimes seeking out people who God has already turned over to a reprobate mind? This is a valid question.

Thorwald: I have no idea how many "preacher's" BGEA sent to Katrina. I do know Franklin Graham's organization "Samaritian's Purse" was there helping in just about every way that was possible, to those dear ones who lost everything they had, and some lost loved one's as well. For sure with he hundred of thousand's who endured such suffering those who wer to offer prayer and help direct those to get the help they needed. Am I to assume you were there to help with the Katrina disaster and saw these thing's for your self?

I know Jesus delt with the "Good Samaitian" to show us how the help those in need. There is no way to determine who was a person with a "reprobate mind". Would it have been better to let those destitute people just fend for thenselves? As it was there were bodies floating in the water and in the streets, many were standing in their roof top's signaling to be rescued. I have no idea if Canada sent any help or not, I feel that surely some Canadian's sent money to the Red Cross or other organization's. I know hat the United States gives more aid than any other country in the world. It is seldon that other's that have received help from the USA ever returns the favor. However, in reality the problem was our's to take care of.

I sincerely know that christian's in our country have shown our faith is backed up and proven that our deeds are motivated by our faith. The United States has endured several very serious natural disaster's in the last six years, the loss of life has been high, and Christian organizations have been there every single time.

To be sure Sodom and Gomorrah's evil is still alive in the world today. There is no country in the world that serves as an example of goodness. Today there are no perfect christian organization's, but there are examples of christians being the "Good Samaritian's". I can tell you that the Souther Baptist denomination was there and the first to start feeding people, and stayed for months. While FEMA was an unbelievable example to show everyone, that anything that could go wrong did go wrong. FEMA did much to show the government was ill prepared for such a catastrophe. But there were other groups that came even before being asked. Blessings.


farout

 

[Strypes]

Every single real Christian knows this. You have offered no wisdom. Real wisdom, is realizing, that the Christian ministry has thrown God out of the Trinity & The Godhead. The Father, Son and Holy Ghost, does NOT include Jesus Christ. 'The Son' is the Lord God Almighty (He who is sitting on His throne in Revelation chapter 4...The first figure referred to in Isaiah 44:6). Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of the Lord God Almighty. The Father of the Lord God Almighty has NEVER been seen by man, nor has any man heard His voice at any time. The NT scriptures contain errors in regards to this topic. If you doubt me, ask God, as I did, before receiving two visions followed by a dream in riddles. This is the truth, as shown to me by God Himself.

Is that a typo?

As I never got a response, I have bumped this back up.. Are you actually saying Jesus Christ is not God?

 

[ushalk]

Every single real Christian knows this. You have offered no wisdom. Real wisdom, is realizing, that the Christian ministry has thrown God out of the Trinity & The Godhead. The Father, Son and Holy Ghost, does NOT include Jesus Christ. 'The Son' is the Lord God Almighty (He who is sitting on His throne in Revelation chapter 4...The first figure referred to in Isaiah 44:6). Jesus Christ is the only begotten Son of the Lord God Almighty. The Father of the Lord God Almighty has NEVER been seen by man, nor has any man heard His voice at any time. The NT scriptures contain errors in regards to this topic. If you doubt me, ask God, as I did, before receiving two visions followed by a dream in riddles. This is the truth, as shown to me by God Himself.

real wisdom would let you know that denominations is actually a false religion of their own. and just about everything we are taught about church these days is false aswell as many of the teachings concerning salvation, spiritual gifts, ministries.....etc. i mean come on we are taught social country clubs and truly no more than that. it is all false and a fake illusion of the truth.

 

[Thorwald]

Is that a typo?

Hi Strypes.

Let us look at Revelation 1:6 KJV Bible: [speaking of Christ] "And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father, to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen."

First of all, John was instructed what to write down and what not to write down, in Revelation. We can assume, that everything in Revelation, is the truth. Secondly, it is 'GOD' who is our Father in heaven, and it is GOD who is to be glorified, and creation is His dominion. Thirdly, we know that GOD is the Father of Jesus Christ, as well as the rest of mankind. Fourthly, we know that it is GOD sitting on His throne in Revelation chapter 4 and it is He who The Lord's Prayer refers to.

We now have to deal with the rest of the NT scriptures;

The Father of 'GOD' dwells in the light which no man can come unto. No man has ever heard His voice, nor seen His shape at any time. Isaiah 44:6 refers to the GODHEAD...GOD and His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ (Lord of Hosts and Lamb of God). Stephen saw THE GODHEAD in Acts 7:55. I also saw these two figures, in my second vision. It is 'GOD's voice' speaking from heaven, "This is my Son in whom I am well pleased." Isaiah saw 'GOD' sitting on His throne, and Isaiah feared for his life. He first believed that he had seen the 'invisible to man' FATHER. He then decided that he in fact saw the Lord of Hosts, instead.

The scriptures contain errors of understanding on the part of the 'authors'. These errors have been passed on and on. There are actually 'four' persons, not 'three'. If this was corrected, there would be no contradictions in the scriptures, concerning The Trinity & The Godhead. In my second vision, there were 'four' figures. I was not allowed to see THE FATHER or HIS HOLY SPIRIT. They controlled the vision. It was later in the vision, that The Godhead appeared. Both of these figures were identical in appearance. I recognized Christ immediately. He stood on the right of the second identical figure.

 

[farout]

Hi Strypes.

Let us look at Revelation 1:6 KJV Bible: [speaking of Christ] "And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father, to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen."

First of all, John was instructed what to write down and what not to write down, in Revelation. We can assume, that everything in Revelation, is the truth. Secondly, it is 'GOD' who is our Father in heaven, and it is GOD who is to be glorified, and creation is His dominion. Thirdly, we know that GOD is the Father of Jesus Christ, as well as the rest of mankind. Fourthly, we know that it is GOD sitting on His throne in Revelation chapter 6 and it is He who The Lord's Prayer refers to.

We now have to deal with the rest of the NT scriptures;

The Father of 'GOD' dwells in the light which no man can come unto. No man has ever heard His voice, nor seen His shape at any time. Isaiah 44:6 refers to the GODHEAD...GOD and His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ (Lord of Hosts and Lamb of God). Stephen saw THE GODHEAD in Acts 7:55. I also saw these two figures, in my second vision. It is 'GOD's voice' speaking from heaven, "This is my Son in whom I am well pleased." Isaiah saw 'GOD' sitting on His throne, and Isaiah feared for his life. He first believed that he had seen the 'invisible to man' FATHER. He then decided that he in fact saw the Lord of Hosts, instead.

The scriptures contain errors of understanding on the part of the 'authors'. These errors have been passed on and on. There are actually 'four' persons, not 'three'. If this was corrected, there would be no contradictions in the scriptures, concerning The Trinity & The Godhead. In my second vision, there were 'four' figures. I was not allowed to see THE FATHER or HIS HOLY SPIRIT. They controlled the vision. It was later in the vision, that The Godhead appeared. Both of these figures were identical in appearance. I recognized Christ immediately. He stood on the right of the second identical figure.

Thorwald: As I said before the topic on different versions of the Bible has been completely dialogued from one end to the other, top and bottom and just aboout every where inbetween. So what I am about to say is not being rude or wanting to offend anyone, ok?

I went to seminary and two of my professors were very involved with two of the Bibles you do not approve of. The NASB and the NIV. I need not gointo al lot of saying how wonderful these christian men were. These men were very educated in languages, Hebrew and one in Greek. If you lived to be "old as dirt" (My grandson's say that about me) you will never know these languages. I am fully aware of the KING JAMES ONLY position. I will not debate this again. It takes hours upon hours to give answers and researce questions, I just don't have the heart to become an object of anyone's anger about the Bible. I will say the NIV Study Bible and it's notes are also the same notes in the KJV study Bible, the NKJV Study Bible and I believe a couple of others. Please do consider when we talk trash about a christian and His work it's a judgement call for the Lord not me that's for sure. I do not support the TNIV or the recent NIV as these are gender nutral, which I am opposed to 100%. The first NIV and the NIV of 1984 are very reliable dynamc equalivent versions. The NASB is very reliable and goes to the very end to be as literal from the Hebrew and Greek, and at times reads seems a little like Greek. The English Standard Bible is also a literal translation, but I prefer the NASB as much of my study is from the NASB.

I will ask you the same question I have asked others, what you are posting if it is not yours orignally then please state your source. Most anyone with a computer can google KJV only and have the very same information in seconds. I can respect "new" information that you personally have found yourself. I have no problem if you love the KJV it has been a wonderful translation for hundred's of years. But there are better translations today in my personal opinion. And after all if we all could spend as much time living what the Bible says and not debating which version is the Holy one, more would come to Christ from our witness. That's all about I want to say, please. Blessings.


farout