Re: IM Advertisements
|August 18 2010, 4:19 PM |
I have had friends attend the RHCC, most have left. The idea that we follow Jesus Christ and his example does not seem to be what is the main purpose of RHCC. Jesus did not use any external forms of worship(IM)and how is using external forms of worship following Christ's example? Also, the selling of sermons presented by the ministers, is that not what Christ was cleansing the temple of, the extortion of those seeking God? Why does the church seem to be following a track of trying to make a buck from the knowledge of Jesus, like what Judas did?
Music Discords Lie to God and About God and Steal and Rob widows.
|August 18 2010, 7:12 PM |
False Teacher:Psalm 92
1 It is a good thing to give thanks unto the LORD and to sing praises unto Thy name, O most High:
2To shew forth thy lovingkindness in the morning, and thy faithfulness every night,
3Upon an instrument of ten strings, and upon the psaltery; upon the harp with a solemn sound.
Here find a case that what the Bible calls good, you teach is evil.
I did not say that what happened in Psalm 92 is evil: what you can do in your own dwelling would be fine but if you did it when Jesus promises to meet with us to be our Teacher it woudl be evil--beyond redemption. David was not a priest or a worship leader: in fact it is well recognized that the Psalms had a strong connection to making war and not making worship. The Levites were under the KING and COMMANDERS OF THE ARMY. The pattern of music introduced by the Catholic used the Levite Pattern. People who IMPOSE instruments deliberately sowing discord use the pattern of the Levites.
IT is a good thing to give thanks unto the Lord, and to sing praises unto thy name, O most High: Psalm 92:1
H3034 Yada yaw-daw' A primitive root; used only as denominative from H3027 ; literally to use (that is, hold out) the hand; physically to throw (a stone, an arrow) at or away; especially to revere or worship (with extended hands); intensively to bemoan (by wringing the hands):
To shew forth thy lovingkindness in the morning, and thy faithfulness every night, Psalm 92:2
Upon an instrument of ten strings, and upon the psaltery; upon the harp with a solemn [murmuring] sound. Psalm 92:3
Solemn is not modern "praise singing." What other than pride would cause people to come before God WITHOUT reverence and godly Fear.
H1902 higgâyôn hig-gaw-yone' Intensive from H1897 ; a murmuring sound, that is, a musical notation (probably similar to the moder affettuoso to indicate solemnity of movement); by implication a machination:device, Higgaion, meditation, solemn sound.
That's fine: you should hop to it: I have seen guys who could play that many instruments at a time! But, that doesn't give you authority to PERFORM for me what the psalmist reserved for himself.
You keep forgetting that church is EKKLESIA or SYNAGOGUE which was always defined as A SCHOOL OF THE WORD of God. Since you are commanded to REST on the Sabbath with travel limited to about 700 feet you might see how others used this MIZMOR:
Psa. 92:0 A Psalm (mizmor) or Song for the sabbath day.
No one held worship services on the REST day but pagans where SUN worship such as that of Apollo was always on the sevent day which was considered evil. The Civil-Military-Clergy system worshipped the SUN and stars just as did the Roman Civil system. To prevent people from getting involved on the REST DAY:
Lev. 23:29 For whatsoever soul it be that shall not be afflicted in that same day,
he shall be cut off from among his people.
Meaning destroyed or killed. If you grasp the nature of God you will repent and mourn for your weakness
and not "mount up" to force people watch you perform human talent.
Afflicted is Anah h6031 through the idea of looking down or browbeating); to depress literally or figuratively, abase self, afflict (-ion, self),
Lev. 23:30 And whatsoever soul
it be that doeth any work in that same day,
the same soul will I destroy from among his people.
Lev. 23:31 Ye shall do no manner of work:
it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations
in all your dwellings.
Where? in all your dwellings.
Work is 4399 melakah ministry, employment same as 4397
What you CANNOT do:
H4397 malâk mal-awk' From an unused root meaning to despatch as a deputy; a messenger; specifically of God, that is, an angel (also a prophet, priest or teacher):ambassador, angel, king, messenger.
They are lucky that they do NOT follow the Law fully or they would show up at services dead.
Be Back Soon....Hopefully
|August 19 2010, 11:37 PM |
Be talking with you soon Donnie. I hate to leave for a while, since I am the only one who is willing to talk with you guys.
Just remember....be careful for what you ask.....and in your case....you got it.
No one posts here.....no one cares for this site......except for the X-men (J. Waddey, Donnie Cruz, William Crump, Ken Sublett). You even scared Jimmy Wren away.
Re: Be Back Soon....Hopefully
|August 20 2010, 12:39 AM |
Good observation, Dave.
Here's mine: It's not a conspiracy of many against one. You see, Dave, of the thousands of congregations in the brotherhood, only a few have become "instrumental music" advocates. These have affiliated with the Christian Church or the Willow Creek Association of Community Churches. Notice the following:
Farmers Branch Church of Christ, TX
Woodmont Hills Family, Nashville, TN
Quail Springs Church of Christ, TX
Northwest Church of Christ, Shoreline, WA
Relatively, you are in the minority as an instrumental music lover among members of the church which doesn't indulge in mechanical music in the assembly.
|Dr. Bill Crump|
Re: Be Back Soon....Hopefully
|August 20 2010, 9:25 AM |
Dave wrote: "No one posts here.....no one cares for this site..." That's obviously Dave's wishful thinking. The fact of the matter is that this site worries Dave. The stats have shown that far more people visit this site but who choose not to post anything. If no one cares for this site, if this site doesn't influence anyone, then why does Dave waste so much of his time trying to debunk it? Apparently Dave envisions himself as an army of one who will ultimately stamp out the CM site. Oh yes, this site worries Dave very much.
The Trinity is not based on scripture
|August 22 2010, 2:50 AM |
Source: "The Reluctant Messenger"
History of the Trinity
Trinity Definition: Within the nature of the One True God, there simultaneously exists three eternal Persons, namely, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. All three Persons are co-equals in all the attributes of the Divine Nature.
This definition defines God, not as a family, but as a committee. But how did this doctrine come to exist in modern Christianity? In the preface to Edward Gibbon's History of Christianity, it reads:
If Paganism was conquered by Christianity, it is equally true that Christianity was corrupted by Paganism. The pure Deism of the first Christians was changed, by the Church of Rome, into the incomprehensible dogma of the Trinity. Many of the pagan tenets, invented by the Egyptians and idealized by Plato, were retained as being worthy of belief.
Most theologians know that the Trinity doctrine is not scriptural.
Because the Trinity is such an important part of later Christian doctrine, it is striking that the term does not appear in the New Testament. Likewise, the developed concept of three coequal partners in the Godhead found in later creedal formulations cannot be clearly detected within the confines of the canon.
But nowhere do we find any Trinitarian doctrine of three distinct subjects of divine life and activity in the same Godhead.
All Pagan religions from the time of Babylon have adopted in one form or another a Trinity doctrine or a triad or trinity of gods. In Babylon it was Nimrod, Semiramas, and Tammuz. In Egypt it was Osiris, Isis, and Horus. Within Israel paganism it was Kether, Hokhmah, and Binah. In Plato's philosophy it was the Unknown Father, Nous/Logos, and the world soul. In the book, A Statement of Reasons, Andrews Norton says of the Trinity:
We can trace the history of this doctrine, and discover its source, not in the Christian revelation, but in the Platonic philosophy The Trinity is not a doctrine of Christ and his Apostles, but a fiction of the school of the later Platonists.
Historians also know that the Trinity doctrine is not authorized in the New Testament.
There is no evidence the Apostles of Jesus ever heard of a Trinity.
The Bible does not teach the doctrine of the Trinity. Neither the word Trinity itself, nor such language as one in three, three in one, one essence or substance or three persons, is biblical language. The language of the doctrine is the language of the ancient Church, taken not from the Bible but from classical Greek philosophy.
Long before the founding of Christianity the idea of a triune god or a god-in-three persons was a common belief in ancient religions. Although many of these religions had many minor deities, they distinctly acknowledged that there was one supreme God who consisted of three persons or essences. The Babylonians used an equilateral triangle to represent this three-in-one god, now the symbol of the modern three-in-one believers. The Greek triad was composed of Zeus, Athena and Apollo. These three were said by the pagans to 'agree in one.' One of the largest pagan temples built by the Romans was constructed at Ballbek (situated in present day Lebanon) to their Trinity of Jupiter, Mercury and Venus. In Babylon the planet Venus was revered as special and was worshipped as a Trinity consisting of Venus, the moon and the sun. This triad became the Babylonian holy Trinity in the fourteenth century before Christ. Although other religions for thousands of years before Christ was born worshipped a triune god, the Trinity was not a part of Christian dogma and formal documents of the first three centuries after Christ. That there was no formal, established doctrine of the Trinity until the fourth century is a fully documented historical fact. Clearly, historians of church dogma and systematic theologians agree that the idea of a Christian Trinity was not a part of the first century church. The twelve apostles never subscribed to it or received revelation about it. So how then did a trinitarian doctrine come about? It gradually evolved and gained momentum in late first, second and third centuries as pagans, who had converted to Christianity, brought to Christianity some of their pagan beliefs and practices.
When we turn to the problem of the doctrine of the Trinity, we are confronted by a peculiarly contradictory situation. On the one hand, the history of Christian theology and of dogma teaches us to regard the dogma of the Trinity as the distinctive element in the Christian idea of God, that which distinguishes it from the idea of God in Judaism and in Islam, and indeed, in all forms of rational Theism. Judaism, Islam, and rational Theism are Unitarian. On the other hand, we must honestly admit that the doctrine of the Trinity did not form part of the early Christian-New Testament-message. Certainly, it cannot be denied that not only the word "Trinity", but even the EXPLICIT IDEA of the Trinity is absent from the apostolic witness of the faith.. The doctrine of the Trinity itself, however, is not a Biblical Doctrine.
Since the doctrine is unscriptural, it took an emperor to make Christianity start embracing the concept.
It was at this stage that Constantine made his momentous suggestion. Might not the relationship of Son to Father be expressed by the term homoousios ("of the same substance"). Its use, however, by the Sabellian bishops of Libya had been condemned by Dionysius of Alexandria in the 260s, and, in a different sense, its use by Paul of Samosata had been condemned by the Council of Antioch in 268. It was thus a "loaded" word as well as being unscriptural. Why Constantine put it forward we do not know. The possibility is that once again he was prompted by Hosius, and he may have been using it as a "translation" of the traditional view held in the West, that the Trinity was composed of "Three Persons in one substance," without inquiring further into the meaning of these terms. The Emperor had spoken, and no one dared touch the creed during his lifetime. The great majority of the Eastern bishops found themselves in a false position.
There is only one passage in the Authorized Version of the Bible used by Trinitarians to support their view.
I John 5:7-8, For there are three that bear record [in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in Earth], the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. AV
Editors added the bracketed words in the early fourth century to the Latin Vulgate translation. They are not in the older Greek manuscripts. For this reason, modern translations omit them. Bible commentaries explain that these words were never in the apostle John's manuscript or any existing early copies of it.
How does the Trinity Doctrine apply to mankind?
God's PURPOSE in having created humanity is to reproduce GOD.
God is not merely one Person, nor even limited to a "Trinity," but God is FAMILY. The doctrine of the Trinity is not a family.
This former Lucifer, who became Satan, has so cleverly DECEIVED all humanity that almost no one today knows that God is, actually, a Divine FAMILY. One Family, God IS a Family. That Family is one GOD. Satan has deceived people into almost every other belief. Perhaps the largest number have been deceived into believing God is a "Trinity."
In order to understand how mankind becomes part of the divine family, one must understand the Plan of God.
NOTE: There are countless sources that explain the history of the Roman Catholic Church-invented, Protestant-propagated Trinity Doctrine. I find this particular article concise while it is consistent with other sources.
I have already pointed out that in the various hymnbooks [Great Songs of the Church, Majestic Hymnal, Christian Hymns, Praise for the Lord, etc.] used in churches of Christ, in the very popular hymn:
"Holy, Holy, Holy!"
"God in three Persons, blessed Trinity!" [as originally written]
------------- is not found in the verses. Instead, we have -----------
"God over all, and blest eternally."
I think that this reflects a rejection of the Trinity Doctrine in the Restoration Movement as well as by the publishers and compilers of hymns used in the churches.
Bold are FEMALES
|August 22 2010, 9:40 PM |
In Babylon it was Nimrod, Semiramas, and Tammuz
In Egypt it was Osiris, Isis, and Horus
Israel paganism it was Kether, Hokhmah, and Binah.
Greek triad was composed of Zeus, Athena and Apollo.
Romans was constructed at Ballbek (situated in present day Lebanon) to their Trinity of Jupiter, Mercury and Venus.
That's why in this age which REJECTS KNOWLEDGE and trusts the Holy Spirit in "spiritual formation" it comes as no surprise since a trinitarian SPIRIT must absolutely be FEMALE that church is EFFEMINATE.
Donnie's source is wrong (and that surprises us?)
|September 1 2010, 7:46 AM |
While the word "trinity" is not found in the scriptures, it has been proven that the theology is in the scriptures. Donnie denies what the scriptures teach, but his denials do not make him correct.
Many Church Fathers prior to Nicea affirmed belief in a triune theology, something Donnie's source ignores.
Is it so surprising that a website that is so void of the influence of the Spirit of God is pwned by a following that denies the Spirit?
But Donnow and his mentor and his disciples deny so much of what is plainly written in God's word that one more teaching against God's Word should not surprise us.
"I and my Father are one"
|August 26 2010, 5:00 PM |
QUESTION: What would you like to say about the topic regarding the "Spirit OF the Lord"? WHAT is it? Or, WHO is it [to others who believe that the "holy Spirit OF Christ" is the third PERSON]?
CHANGE AGENT'S RESPONSE: "... No one this side of heaven will be able to fully understand all aspects of the Spirit. Let me ask a question, was Jesus a separate person from God? Well of course the answer is yes. But he and God were also ONE, from Jesus own mouth. I would place the Spirit in the same place, not the same but the are all three one. The three would never contradict each other, never direct one to violate God's word so i would conclude they are ONE, but different, yet all from the ONE God. I can't understand all aspects of that but I trust God, the Holy Spirit and Jesus. I do know from the very beginning generally speaking when God moved and worked in the physical world which He created, it was His Spirit. Gen. 1:2. The appearance of Jesus in the physical world, (God in the flesh) was something that never happened before or since. When He left and ascended to heaven to return to God, he promised another to comfort, direct and be a real presence for believers. ... change Agent"
COMMENTS: That no one completely understands God's nature and His attributes is understandable. But the assertion that the Council-of-Nicea-decreed Trinity Doctrine ("God in Three PERSONS") -- based on its history, the pagan-and-government influences in the church of Rome in the early centuries, and the mishandling of the scriptures concerning God's nature -- is not to be questioned is akin to accepting another papal doctrine that in the familial concept of "father-mother-child," that "the Virgin Mary is the 'Mother of God.'"
I agree with what you said concerning the oneness or unity of the entities -- three of them -- in the Godhead. But that (unity) is not really in question here. We see examples of unity or oneness in Scripture. "I and my Father are one" in John 10:30 is an example of oneness; "the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one" (I John 5:8) is another. "So we, being many, are one body in Christ" (Rom. 12:5) is yet another example of oneness.
From that perspective alone, we cannot prove that being "one" justifies the notion that "the Spirit OF the Lord" is ANOTHER BEING apart from the Lord, who is a BEING HIMSELF.
One colossal question should be: How does the Christian envision "the Spirit OF the living God" as he [even] attempts to "worship" God's Spirit? [You know, we have another thread concerning "worship of the Holy Spirit."]
--- Does one picture the Spirit OF Jesus Christ as a PERSON "descending like a dove" (Matt. 3:16)?
--- Does one picture the Spirit OF the Living God as a PERSON as "a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind" (Acts 2:2)?
--- Does one picture the Spirit OF the Lord as a PERSON being "in my nostrils" (Job 27:3)?
Then, the question of "the Comforter" or "the Spirit of truth" in John chapters 14-16. Save this one for another day.
|August 27 2010, 10:32 AM |
I don't check here often, because i have never really found anything of significant importance, Donnie asked so here is my take on the subject. No one this side of heaven will be able to fully understand all aspects of the Spirit. Let me ask a question, was Jesus a separate person from God? Well of course the answer is yes. But he and God were also ONE, from Jesus own mouth. I would place the Spirit in the same place, not the same but the are all three one. The three would never contradict each other, never direct one to violate God's word so i would conclude they are ONE, but different, yet all from the ONE God. I can't understand all aspects of that but I trust God, the Holy Spirit and Jesus. I do know from the very beginning generally speaking when God moved and worked in the physical world which He created, it was His Spirit. Gen. 1:2. The appearance of Jesus in the physical world, (God in the flesh) was something that never happened before or since. When He left and ascended to heaven to return to God, he promised another to comfort, direct and be a real presence for believers. So much of this site simply argues over things we will never understand this side of heaven. I am ok with not understanding things God has kept me and others from understanding. I will continue to look at the poor reflection, but most of the few posters here are not. They seem to say they have it all figured out and if you disagree with them, well you cant be a brother or even worse you are, some kind of sexual pervert. (direct reference to Sublett) That Donnie is my take on it, i probably wont check back for a while, of course unless the Spirit moves me to. LOL peace
Father and Son are one
|August 27 2010, 11:07 AM |
Let me ask a question, was Jesus a separate person from God? Well of course the answer is yes. But he and God were also ONE, from Jesus own mouth. I would place the Spirit in the same place, not the same but the are all three one. The three would never contradict each other, never direct one to violate God's word so i would conclude they are ONE, but different, yet all from the ONE God. I can't understand all aspects of that but I trust God, the Holy Spirit and Jesus
There are TWO ACTORS: God the Father in heaven the ONE Jehovah who is never a trinity in the Old Testament
And Jesus of Nazareth whom "God made TO BE both Lord and Christ."
In the economic sense all authority has been given to Jesus Christ: that is why the NAME of father, son and spirit is Jesus: that was understood when Peter baptized in the NAME Jesus Christ.
John 10:25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not:
......the works that I do in my Fathers name, they bear witness of me.
John 10:26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
John 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
John 10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
John 10:29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all
......and no man is able to pluck them out of my Fathers hand.
John 10:30 I and my Father are one
So the ONE Deity in heaven and Jesus of Nazareth which was made to be both Lord and Christ.
Heb. 10:3 But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.
Heb. 10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
Heb. 10:5 Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith,
......Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
Heb. 10:6 In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
Heb. 10:7 Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.
When God anointed Jesus of Nazareth he BECAME Jesus the CHRIST OF GOD.
Phil 2:5 Your attitude [mind] should be the kind that was shown us by Jesus Christ,
Phil 2:6 who, though he was God, did not demand and cling to his rights as God,
Phil 2:7 but laid aside his mighty power and glory,
......taking the disguise of a slave and becoming like men.
Phil 2:8 And he humbled himself even further,
...... going so far as actually to die a criminal's death on a cross.
If you deny that the FULL GODHEAD dwelled in Jesus of Nazareth bodily, John says you are an antichrist.
John 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me?
......the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself:
......but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.
John 14:11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me:
......or else believe me for the very works sake.
|This message has been edited by Ken.Sublett from IP address 18.104.22.168 on Aug 28, 2010 10:31 AM|
Re: "I and my Father are one"
|August 28 2010, 12:48 AM |
To Change Agent:
1. You had posted "Spirit" on August 26 2010 (10:53 AM).
2. I then responded to your post with "I and my Father are one" on August 26 2010 (5:00 PM). Herein I tried to address the issue you brought when you said that the Spirit is a[nother] PERSON just as Jesus and God are PERSONS. And your main reasoning was that all three PERSONS are one -- your implication being that because of oneness or unity, God is in THREE PERSONS or BEINGS. I also asked how one would envision the Spirit as the THIRD PERSON in the "Trinity" Doctrine invented by the Nicean Council of Roman Catholicism.
3. Now I'm wondering why [in response to my post "I and my Father are one"], you elected to re-post on August 27 2010 (10:32 AM) exactly the same message as that one from "Spirit."
I would ask you to read my post "I and my Father are one." Then, please feel free to point out to me or refute anything that you disagree with. I feel that there are questions that Trinitarians need to answer. For example, if one believes that the Spirit, as another PERSON in the Godhead, is to be worshiped, how does he do it (worship the Spirit of Jesus Christ)?
Seriously, how does one worship the Spirit of Jesus Christ? Do you begin with: "O, Spirit of Christ [instead of 'Our Father'], who art in heaven..."; and end with: "I pray in the name of Christ"?
Dare to be an Anti-Christ
|August 30 2010, 11:40 PM |
Justin Martyr (c.100-165 AD)
Chapter LXI-Wisdom is Begotten of the Father, as Fire from Fire.
[font color=blue]"I shall give you another testimony, my friends," said I,
"from the Scriptures, that God begat
before all creatures a Beginning,
[who was] a certain rational
power [proceeding] from Himself,
who is called by the Holy Spirit, now the Glory of the Lord,
now the Son, again Wisdom, again an Angel, then God,
and then Lord and Logos; and on another occasion
He calls Himself Captain, when He appeared in human form to Joshua the son of Nave (Nun).
For He can be called by all those names, since He ministers to the Father's will,
and since He was begotten of the Father by an act of will;
just as we see happening among ourselves:
for when we give out some word, we beget the word;
yet not by abscission, so as to lessen the word [which remains] in us,
when we give it out:
and just as we see also happening in the case of a fire,
which is not lessened when it has kindled [another], but remains the same;
and that which has been kindled by it likewise appears to exist by itself,
not diminishing that from which it was kindled
The Word of Wisdom
, who is Himself this God begotten of the Father of all things, and Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and the Glory of the Begetter, will bear evidence to me, when He speaks by Solomon the following: Proverbs 8
If you miss this, you have missed it all.
"Let Your Spirit Come" by John Chisum, Worship Leader
|August 31 2010, 1:31 AM |
John Chisum composed this "contemporary Christian music" piece in 1989. [I came across this on the web -- that "this title is not available in China." Wonder why?]
Accordingly, John Chisum is "a well known worship leader, conference speaker, recording artist and the founder of Worship4Life and Firm Foundation Ministries, ... music publisher, producer, arranger, seasoned songwriter, clinician, and the new Pastor of Celebration Arts at Fair Haven...."
Who is more popular: John Chisum or Keith Lancaster, former "worship leader" at Madison?
Brent Whitworth, Keith Lancaster's replacement, led a couple of "Holy Spirit" invitation songs after Tom Haddon's sermon on "Uncharted Territory" this past Sunday -- only during the "contemporary" assembly.
(1) "Holy Spirit, Breathe On Me"
Holy Spirit, breathe on me.
Holy Spirit, let me see
all the things You are,
all the things You want me to be.
Holy Spirit, breathe on me.
All the things You are,
all the things You want me to be.
Holy Spirit, breathe on me.
(2) Let Your Spirit Come
Let Your Spirit come, fall upon me now.
Let Your Spirit come, fall upon me now.
And let the rain fall down, pour upon my soul;
Come and wash me now, come and make me whole
... Let Your Spirit come.
So, notice any contradictions? Misconceptions?
O.K., "Your Spirit" signifies that something (the spirit) belongs to or is a part of someone (the Father or His Son Jesus Christ); thus, the Spirit OF God or the Spirit of Jesus Christ. Good -- "Your Spirit" is accurately stated. But WHOSE Spirit is it?
Question: Can that spirit WHICH is HOLY and WHICH BELONGS TO the Lord (God the Father or His Son Jesus Christ) really be a separate BEING?
Question: And suddenly the "Christian" addresses the Spirit or mind of Christ as "all the things You are" or "all the things You want me to be"?
Question: What about asking "the Spirit of Christ" that indwells the Christian to "fall upon me now"? Really? Just what is expected to occur or be "experienced"?
Question: "Come and wash me now"? Really? The Spirit of Christ cleansing one from sins? I was thinking that the blood of Christ washes sins away!!!
|This message has been edited by Donnie.Cruz from IP address 22.214.171.124 on Aug 31, 2010 11:33 AM|
Re: "Let Your Spirit Come" by John Chisum, Worship Leader
|August 31 2010, 2:00 PM |
I apologize for the re-posting of the message, i hit the wrong key on my computer. I am sure this will be my last post, Donnie I am saddened how you can be so particular in the things you and the members of this site will discuss. I truly do not understand many of the things you are willing to argue about. Of course the Spirit belongs to God, just as Jesus belongs to God. Many times i have stated, yep that's my son and he belongs to me. Simple to understand that while he may belong to me, he is separate. No one would argue, about the blood of Christ washing our sins away. There is a relationship in what Jesus' blood accomplishes and the Holy Spirit. At least that is what Paul writes to Titus.
Titus 3:4-5 But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit,
and to the churches,
II Th 2:13
13 But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord, because from the beginning God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth.
I do find it revealing you would question the Holy Spirit falling on us. How about focusing on the fruits being displayed in our lives, love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness and faithfulness. I truly wish Gods blessings on all,and a presence of the Holy Spirit.
"Something" that belongs to "someone"; not "someone" that belongs to &
|August 31 2010, 4:13 PM |
Feel free to do so if you change your mind and decide to post again. I really think it is a good idea to continue searching the truth and discussing doctrinal issues. And in doing so, we should be careful as to what scriptural teachings to adhere to and false teachings to reject.
I'm afraid that I am being accused of being "so particular" in scriptural matters that I want to believe in and teach and even discuss. But that's OK.
In the specific study of the HOLY spirit OF Jesus Christ, I just want, if nothing else, to leave this with you -- that I am concerned about (and it is important to me) what I envision the Spirit OF the Lord to be.
If someone tells me that we ought to "worship" the Holy Spirit OF God, I will first question the veracity of that assertion, especially since the entire Bible talks about "worship" [of the living God or the Father] but says NOTHING whatsoever about worship of God's [HIS] spirit. We don't even find in the entire Bible ANY reference to "God the Holy Spirit."
We have already reviewed the history of the man-made Trinity Doctrine. Just because the Nicean Council decreed such an invented doctrine or that the Roman Catholic Church approved it, that doesn't make it right and acceptable.
I don't know how much more do I need to stress the point that the adjective "HOLY" describes the nature or is an attribute of His spirit. God's Spirit is not a proper noun. God's Spirit is NOT a BEING nor is it God's NAME. The holy spirit of God is not a proper name.
Let's put it simply with this example: "The mind of Einstein" [following the pattern of "the spirit of Jesus Christ"].
Would you consider the "mind" of Einstein as a separate "being" or "person" from Einstein the being or person himself? I think NOT!!!
Let's modify Einstein's "mind" as being "bright." [Oh, the bright mind of Einstein!!!]. Would you consider the "bright mind" of Einstein as a SEPARATE BEING from Einstein himself? Again, I think NOT!!!
In the same manner, would you consider the "spirit" of Christ as a separate "being" or "person" from Christ Himself? I think NOT!!!
Let's modify Jesus Christ's "spirit" -- scripturally speaking -- as being "holy." [Oh, the holy spirit of Jesus Christ!!!]. Would you consider the "holy spirit" of Jesus Christ as a SEPARATE BEING from Christ Himself? Again, I think NOT!!!
The adjective "HOLY" makes a lot of difference in identifying the Spirit of the living God.
So much for the adjective.
Let's briefly deal with the preposition "OF" in discussing the spirit which is holy and which belongs to God.
Beforehand, let's clarify one thing -- that we're not dealing here with [as in your example] a person [your son] in the family who "belongs to" you as a parent. That example clearly illustrates two SEPARATE PERSONS and the relationship.
But dealing with what constitutes the being or the person as Einstein is a different matter. We'd be dealing with his mind, his eyes, his nose, his heart, his spirit, his soul, etc. The nose or mind OF Eistein would not be a different person from Einstein. Would it? I think NOT!!!
Same for the holy Spirit of Jesus Christ.
So, let's be careful about making claims that the Holy Scripture does not support.
Do we worship, praise or pray to the spirit or mind of Jesus Christ? I would if there were evidence in Scripture. But there just isn't.
Spirit falling: an ANGRY BLAST OF THRESHING.
|August 31 2010, 4:41 PM |
Spirit NEVER speaks of a PERSON but the mental disposition of that person. Spirit primarily means a WIND or a violent, angry blast. When the Spirit was manifest in the upper room it was a rushing WIND and FIRE. God had to pour out this BLAST to intimidate the doubting Jews to quit refusing baptism to the Gentiles. Here is something to think about conserning SPIRIT and FALLING on which to the viper race would be a baptism of WIND and FIRE to blast the chaff away so it could be burned up.
People who CALL on the SPIRIT and FIRE to fall on them are INVITING God to VIPERIZE them.
Pneuma A. blast, wind, first in Anaximen. (but pno is commoner in Poets; Hom. uses pnoi
2. metaph., thalerter p. with more genial breeze or influence, A.Th.708(lyr.
en andrasin philois bebken the wind is constantly changing even among friends, S.OC612;
II. breathed air, breath, salpigx broteiou pneumatos plroumen A.Eu.568; auln, ltou p., E.Ba.128(lyr.), Ph.787 (lyr., pl.); p. aperrxen biou the breath of life, A.Pers.507; p. aplesen Id.Th.984 (lyr.); p. athroison collect breath, E.Ph.851;
3. flatulence, in pl., Eub.107.9, Arist.Pr. 948b25, Dsc.2.112, D.L.6.94.
5. that which is breathed forth or exhaled, odour, theion odms p. E.Hipp.1391; p. baru aphieisa, of a tree, Plu.2.647b.
Long before it speaks of III. divine inspiration, agria . . pneumata theuphoris
Or the spirit OF God or the spirit OF man
A. fall upon or over, epepipton alllois Th.7.84; epi ti X.Oec.18.7, cf. Thphr.CP5.4.5: metaph., epepese moira Pi.Pae.2.64; epi ti Isoc.5.89; dialogismoi epipiptousi tini Plu.Oth.9.
2. . of money, accrue, to meros ho heuriskomes epipipton epi to khreos to opheilomenon SIG953.66 (Cnidus, ii B.C.).
II. . fall upon in hostile sense, attack, assail, tini Hdt.4.105, Th.3.112; aphulakt aut e. Hdt.9.116; apharkt t stratoped Th.1.117; aparaskeuois tois enantiois X.Cyr.7.4.3; also es tous Hellnas, v.l. for es-, Hdt.7.210; of storms, toisi barbaroisi ho bors epepese ib.189; kheimn epipesn Pl.Prt. 344d; of winds meeting one another, Arist.Mete.364b3; of diseases, Hp.Aër.3; h nosos e. tois Athnaiois Th.3.87; so of grief, misfortunes, etc., oukhi soi mona epepeson lupai E.Andr.1043 (lyr.), etc.; epepese polla kai khalepa kata stasin tais polesi Th.3.82, etc.
2. . come on after, e. rhigos puret Hp.Aph.4.46.
3. . accumulate, plth sitou epipeptkenai PPetr.2p.62 (iii B.C.).
|This message has been edited by Ken.Sublett from IP address 126.96.36.199 on Sep 13, 2010 5:52 PM|
|September 1 2010, 3:51 PM |
1 Corinthians 13:14, KJV "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen."
The wording of this benediction implies equality between the sources of grace, love and fellowship (Greek koinnia, which can also be
rendered communality, commonness, communion)that is, between the Father (God), the Son (the Lord Yeshua the Messiah) and the Holy Spirit (the Ruach HaKodesh). But this equality remains an implication and is not stated as a proposition. As pointed out elsewhere, Adonai is never called a Trinity in the New Testament. However, the three terms which appear here, along with equivalent terms, are used in various ways in both the New Testament and the Tanakh when speaking of God. (2 Corinthians 13:14 from Jewish New Testament Commentary)
|September 1 2010, 3:58 PM |
1 Cor 12:4-6, KJV Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all."
In this passage, gifts, services, workings are but different words for pneumata, the inspirations or spiritual gifts which build up the body of Christ. And Spirit, Lord, God are...the one source of all the gifts. (Paul Hinnebusch, Community In The Lord, Notre Dame, Indiana: Ave Maria Press, 1975, p. 169)
|September 1 2010, 1:30 PM |
Please give us a reference to the use of TRIAS before
Denying the Spirit is to deny that the NAME of father, son and spirit is Jesus Christ.
1John 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
1John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
1John 2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
When Peter and everyone else baptized in the NAME of the Father, Son and Spirit they baptized in the NAME Jesus Christ.
It seems to have been a man named Theophilus of Antioch who first applied the term "trias" to this Biblical concept as early as 181 A.D. But it was the Anathasian Creed, completed some time in the fifth century, which stated it most clearly: "We worship one God in trinity, and trinity in unity, neither confounding the persons, nor separating the substance."
I am pretty sure that no one was so undereducated that they didn't know about prepositional phrases.
|This message has been edited by Ken.Sublett from IP address 188.8.131.52 on Sep 13, 2010 5:55 PM|