| Author | Message | ||
     called Senior Member Username: called Post Number: 1714 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 222.127.245.209 |
These are the basic beliefs and practices of the The Straight and Narrow Gate Apostolic Ministries "Founder Pastor Johnny J Christen" The RCC 1. First and above all We Believe that the Roman Catholic Church is the Great Whore of Babylon that sits upon 7 hills {Roam}. And that all Protestant churches on the face of the earth and splinter groups of them are her daughters or synagogues of Satan, and that Christendom at large is the false worldly religious system that the soon come False Prophet will rule over. The Trinity 2. We openly and publicly deny the Roman Catholic doctrine of the so called Holy Trinity and hold Extremely Steadfast and firm to the belief that for us there is but one God the Father, and one Lord Christ Joshua -Yahushua the Messiah which is the only begotten son of the one true God. And that the Holy Spirit which proceeds from both the Father and the Son is the breath of life, the power, the life force, the wisdom, the mind and personality of God Almighty which is an extension of himself in all his glory which dwells in each and every true believer. The Scriptures 3. We believe That All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. In its original OT Hebrew and NT Greek text. Sectarianisn is of Satan 4. We believe that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation, their fore sectarianism and denominationalism can not possibly be of God, and since each and every individual sect or denomination on the face of the earth has its own private interpretations and claims to hold the ultimate truth they must come from Satan himself, because this worldly religious system completely divides the body of Christ and their can be no divisions whatsoever in true Christianity according to the scriptures. Repentance and Baptism 5. We believe in Repentance and water baptism by full immersion in the name of the Master Christ Joshua or Yahushua the Messiah for the forgiveness of sins and receiving the free gift of the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands by a true Minister of the most high God. | ||
| called Senior Member Username: called Post Number: 1715 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 222.127.245.209 |
Salvation 6. We believe that Salvation is a free gift only to those who are qualified to receive it and that only mature, repented, baptized, holy spirited filled, faithful, obedient, followers of Christ will even have a chance of entering the Kingdom of God. Church leaders 7. We believe and hold steadfastly & unshakable to the biblical fact that only men are qualified to become ordained church leaders such as Pastors, Evangelist, Elder’s and Deacons according to the 5 fold ministry given in scripture and the teachings of the Apostle Paul concerning the woman’s role in the church and in the home. We further believe that women are strictly forbidden to hold any church office that would place them in direct authority over men. The Woman’s hair 8. We believe if a man has long hair it is a shame onto him, but if a woman has long hair it is her glory, for her long hair has been given to her to serve as a covering {NT Vail}, and if she cuts the glory off her head which God himself gave her to serve as a her covering she dishonors her head which is her husband, and if anyone wants to argue about it all we have to is we have no other custom neither does the true churches of GodGod’s Purpose of Grace 9. Election is the gracious purpose of God, according to which He regenerates, sanctifies, and glorifies sinners. …All true believers endure to the end. Those whom God has accepted in Christ, and sanctified by His Spirit will never fall away from the state of grace, but shall persevere to the end. 10. The Church 10. the New Testament church of the Master Christ Joshua - Yahushua the Messiah is not a building sect or denomination, it is a local body of repented baptized holy spirit filled believers who are associated by covenant in the faith and fellowship of the gospel as it is written without compromise…and seeking to extend the gospel to the ends of the earth. …This church is one unified body that can not be divided in anyway shape or form. …The New Testament speaks also of the church as the body of Christ, which includes all of the redeemed of all the ages. | ||
| called Senior Member Username: called Post Number: 1716 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 222.127.245.209 |
Evangelism & Missions 11. It is the duty and privilege of every follower of Christ and every church of the Master Christ Joshua to endeavor to make disciples of all nations … to seek constantly to win the lost to Christ by personal effort. Religious Liberty 12. Church and state should be separate. The state owes to every church protection and full freedom in the pursuit of its spiritual ends. …A free church in a free state is the Christian ideal. Family 13.God has ordained the family as the foundational institution of human society. …Marriage is the unity of one man and one woman in covenant commitment for a lifetime, There is no such thing as same sex unions or marriages point blank, this is abomination in the sight of God. The husband and wife are of equal worth before God, But they are in no way shape or form equal when it comes to their roles in the church or in the home,. The husband is to be the provider head of the household and spiritual leader and the wife must submite herself unto her own husband as unto the Master himself in everything, The marriage relationship models the way God relates to His people. …Children, from the moment of conception, are a blessing and heritage from the most high. The Lord's Day 14. Is the 7th day Sabbath, The Son of man is Lord/Master even of the Sabbath, that makes him Lord/Master over the 7th day since nowhere in scripture can we find the first day of the week being called the a holyday or the Sabbath, Yahshua refers to the Sabbath as a specific day; it is the Sabbath, not a Sabbath. The Sabbath was not made for its own sake as were the other six days, but as a service to mankind. An alternate translation would be that it "was made on account of man." yahushua presents it as the Creator's specific and thoughtful gift to man. It was not made just for the Jews, but for mankind. When God created the Sabbath, He intended it from the beginning as a UNIVERSAL blessing to benefit mankind. He made it to help ensure man's physical and spiritual well-being. Clean and unclean meats 15. Has nothing whatsoever to do with NT scripture, After the great flood God blessed Noah and his family and specifically told them that Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat. Gen 9:3-4, NT Scriptires backs this up in 1Tim 3:1-6 1Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; 3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. 4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving: 5 For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer. 6 If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of yahushua the Messiah, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereunto thou hast attained. | ||
| called Senior Member Username: called Post Number: 1717 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 222.127.245.209 |
Sacred names 16. The Sacred names of Elohim and Messiah We believe that the Fathers name has been given to us in four Hebrew letters YHWH or YHVH or YAHU known as the Tetragrammaton” and the closest rendering of these four Hebrew letters we can come up with is {Yahweh} Yahu UL or ULhim but no one is sure of this. Christ said I come in my father’s name and from this we come up with Yahushua or Yeshua which literally means {Yahweh} Yahu UL or ULhim saves and {Salvation}. Acts 4:12 tells us, Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. The name JESUS is nothing more than a fourth handed down translation of the true, from Aramaic to Hebrew from Hebrew to Greek from Greek to Latin and from Latin to the English name we have and use today which has no meaning whatsoever in the English language, further more it should noted that the letter J is only about 500 years old, their fore Mary the mother of our Messiah could not have possibly named that Hebrew child {JESUS}An English name that didn’t even come into existence until 15 or 16 centuries after the death of her precious Son.. Openly active Gay and Lesbian church membership 17. There is no such thing as openly active Gay – Homosexual or Lesbian ordination or full church membership in this Ministry point blank. The apostle Paul calls such a practice Vile affections and clearly states for all to see in their bibles that they that practice such things are worthy of death. Rom 1:32, this type of cancer as well as any type of immorality must be cut out from the very start or it will spread like wildfire in a dry forest, we will not tolerate any form of immoral life style whatsoever weather it be homosexual or Header sexual, all must come to Christ- Messiah with a repented heart and a true willingness to change with the help of the holy spirit before they can become a member of the true body of Christ- Messiah, he who the son sets free is free indeed. We are Messianic believers in Messiah 18. We believe in the Messianic roots of Christianity for we know that salvation comes from the Jews, we gentiles are mealy branches of the wild olive tree that has been grafted in among them {the Israelites} and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the true olive tree {Israel} and those of us that have been baptized onto Yahushua Ha Messiah have become the seed of Abraham and their fore have become spiritual Jews by the circumcision of the heart, we must never boast or become high minded of these things, for if Elohim speared not the natural branches, we full well know that he will not spear us either. Speaking in tongues 19. We believe that the gift of speaking in tongues is very much for today and should be practiced in every assembly of the most high, but if any man speak in an unknown tongue {human language} let it be by two or at the most three and that being one at a time, and let in interrupt , but if their be no interrupter let him keep silence in the assembly, let him speak to himself and to Elohim, For Elohim is not the author of confusion but of peace as in all the assemblies of the most high, all things must be done decently and in order | ||
| called Senior Member Username: called Post Number: 1718 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 222.127.245.209 |
20. We as law abiding citizens and true messianic believers in Yahushua ha Messiah fully and completely stand on each and every word of the bible as it is written without compromise and the United States constitution which contains freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of the press!!!{ In G-D we trust } Please see constitution or the bill of rights http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html 2. Timothy 2:15 study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. Peace in Messiah P Johnny Brother {Liftin or Grant} if your still out their please get intouch with me i need to talk to you!!! websites1959@yahoo.com | ||
| called Senior Member Username: called Post Number: 1720 Registered: 4-2006 Posted From: 222.126.42.130 |
I knew you guys couldn't handle this!!! | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3516 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
called, I can handle it -- just don't know where to begin to deprogram you. However, there is some truth in that which you have posted. Let's start with your general claim in No. 1. You make the general statement that the RCC and all Protestant denominations are "synagogues of Satan". What is a denomination? According to the American Heritage Dictionary, a denomination [reliously defined] is - An organized group of religous congregations. Please note the plural context of the definition by the use of the word 'group' and 'congregations'. You prefaced your points by identifying yourself as - These are the basic beliefs and practices of the The Straight and Narrow Gate Apostolic Ministries "Founder Pastor Johnny J Christen" Since your church consists of more then one congregation, your organization, by definition, is a DENOMINATION. Accordingly, as you noted in point No. 1, you would also have to believe that your church is a 'synagogue of Satan'. Now that I have shown you the foolishness of making such stupid statements as your belief and practice No. 1, let's look deeper into why you are wrong. Undoubtedly, you are trying to separate your church from the other [alleged] 5 christian church types by identifying it with either the church of Philadelphia or Smyrna as described in Rev. 2 and 3. Christ judges these two church types favorably. In general, I agree that every Christian [ones that actually read the Bible] should take note of Rev. 2 and 3. I know that in the past, these 7 churches have been taught to mean church periods of time by some. To me, it is clear that the 7 churches described in Rev. 2 and 3 are not periods of time but are symbolic of the types of Christian churches to be judged by Christ. Yes, Christ knew there would be divisions [denominations] in the Christian world at the end time. The number 7 in Biblical numerics is symbolic of spiritual completion. Also, the ancient cities identified in Rev. 2 and 3 almost formulate a circle. So, these churches represent the full realm of Christian beliefs and practices. As the Christian can gather from reading Rev. 2 and 3, Christ has something against 5 out of the 7 types of churches. So, it seems logical to only belong to the church type Philadelphia or Smyrna. The issue here is understanding what separates Philadelphia and Smyrna from the other 5 church types. What your belief and practice No. 1 does is simply label all else as 'synagogues of Satan' due to their denominational organizations. As set forth above, your church is one and the same. The term 'synagogue of Satan' is used in Rev. 2:9 and 3:9. You failed to properly interpret its meaning. Rev 2:9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan. Rev 3:9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee. As one can see, the term 'synogogue of Satan' has nothing to do with the other 5 church types. Christ identifies whom comprise the synagogue of Satan. It is those that claim to be Jews but are not. Surely, the Christian churches of today are comprised of all races of people. Your practice and beleif No. 1 that the 'synagogue of Satan' is the other denominations is simply untrue. Christ tells us directly whom they are. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3517 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
called, Regarding belief and practice No. 2 - The word 'Trinity' is not in the Bible. It is a tradition of man to refer to God the Father, Jesus the only begotten Son of God, and the Holy Spirit the 'Trinity'. Attempts to define the so-called Trinity are a waste of time in that it tries to box God in a package that we can handle. Moses was rebuked for such efforts. God places the 'breath of life' into all flesh beings -- irrespective of whether they are believers or not. To that extent, I take issue with your belief and practice. >>>>> Regarding No. 3 - I fully agree. >>>>> Regarding No. 4 - Be definition, your church is a 'sect'. Therefore, by your definition, your church is of Satan. I agree that Satan has infiltrated the church and we are to refrain from all teachings not of Christ. The mere fact that Christ found no fault with the Churches of Smyrna and Philadelphia should tell us that some sects do follow the true Biblical teachings of Christ. >>>>> Regarding No. 5 - You are confusing 'laying on of hands' with 'baptism'. You should look at Heb. 6:2 more closely. Heb 6:2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. The word 'and' clearly distinguishes the 4 mutually exclusive principles in this scripture. One has to go back to verse 1 to obtain the subject - Heb 6:1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, These scriptures speak of 'leaving', which means going beyon the basics. The listing in verse 1 and 2 is describing the foundation principles of Christianity -- all separate. The 'laying on of hands' has nothing to do with baptisms. There is nothing in scripture that requires a "true minister of the most high God" to baptize another. That is simply your tradition of man -- not the Word of God. >>>>> Regarding No. 6 - Salvation in not a "free" gift. It was paid for at a high price in blood by our Lord Jesus Christ -- the perfect lamb of God. For your Church to teach that it was "free" is antithetical to Christianity. Salvation has nothing to do with "qualifications", which is an equivalent teaching to obtaining salvation by works. John 3:16 makes no mention of "mature, repented, baptized, holy spirited filled, faithful, obedient, followers of Christ will even have a chance of entering the Kingdom of God". I just covered Heb. 6:1-2. Therein, it declares our works to be 'dead', which means they are of no value in obtaining salvation. The only thing works are good for is covering a multitude of sin -- but, never for obtaining salvation. We also are judged for our works. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3518 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
called, Regarding No. 7 - When ancient Israel was a theocracy, there was a woman Judge in authority -- Deborah. Jdg 4:4 And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time. Clearly, women are more then allowed to head a church and have authority over men. To claim otherwise, as you have done, is wholly unbiblical. It is a tradition of man -- not the Word of God. >>>>> Regarding No. 8 - More lunacy and bastardization of scripture on a part of your church. You clearly misinterpret 1 Cor. 11. The outline of these scriptures is: Verse 3, A Principle is revealed Verses 4-6, Results Verses 7-12, Reasons provided Verses 13-15, Nature's teachings So, we learn of the heirarchy in Verse 3 - Co 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. The terms 'man' and 'woman' refer to husband and wife. As Christ is the head of all man, so shall the husband be over the wife. What does this mean? Well, some errantly think that the husband has authority to boss the wife around at will. That certainly is not the example of Christ. Christ was the servant of man [washed disciples' feet, healed the sick, etc] and actually was crucified for man. Likewise, the husband is responsible for serving the wife -- protecting the wife and dying, if necessary, for the wife. Your church uses this scripture to make a wife a servant to the husband. Certainly, you have bastardized the Biblical intent. In verses 4-6, we are introduced to terms 'praying', 'prophesying', and 'covered'. What do these terms mean? 'Praying' simply means 'praying to God'. 'Prophesying' simply means speaking for God. I will explain 'covered' a bit later. So, in placing the terms 'praying' and 'prophesying' in context with Verse 3, we rightly divide the Word by understanding the heirarchy. Christ taught man how to pray. Christ also revealed the will of God through scriptures to man. Likewise, a husband is responsible for the proper spiritual edification of his wife. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3519 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
cont'd To understand what is meant by 'covered', one has to look at it in Greek - G2596 kat-ah' A primary particle; (preposition) down (in place or time), in varied relations (according to the case [genitive, dative or accusative] with which it is joined): - about, according as (to), after, against, (when they were) X alone, among, and, X apart, (even, like) as (concerning, pertaining to, touching), X aside, at, before, beyond, by, to the charge of, [charita-] bly, concerning, + covered, [dai-] ly, down, every, (+ far more) exceeding, X more excellent, for, from . . . to, godly, in (-asmuch, divers, every, -to, respect of), . . . by, after the manner of, + by any means, beyond (out of) measure, X mightily, more, X natural, of (up-) on (X part), out (of every), over against, (+ your) X own, + particularly, so, through (-oughout, -oughout every), thus, (un-) to (-gether, -ward), X uttermost, where (-by), with. In composition it retains many of these applications, and frequently denotes opposition, distribution or intensity. Verse 4 states that a husband [whom has Christ as his authority] shall not block [cover] his own mind from receiving the Word of God. The husband that does block that which comes from Christ dishonors the authority Christ gave the husband in Verse 3. On the other hand, if the wife does not block [uncovered] those teaching which comes from outside influences instead of from her husband, she dishonors her husband and the heirarchy established by God. Does this mean that the wife is bound by the teachings of the husband? If the husband has blocked his mind from the Word of God and fails in his responsibility to teach it properly to his wife, the wife has no obligation to follow him. However, if she does follow her husband's false teachings, she will not be held accountable by God. In obeying the heirarchy, it is the husband that will be held accountable. If the wife discards the husband's true teachings and does not respect God's heirarchy, then she will be held accountable. That is where the symbolism of hair length is provided in Verses 5 and 6. We are reminded in verses 7 - 9 that man is the image of God and that woman was made for man. Therein nature is consistent with the heirarchy established in verse 3. In verse 10, we learn that because the woman was created for man, she needs 'power' on her head [covering to block] because of 'the angels'. One has to go to the Greek to understand 'power' - G1849 ex-oo-see'-ah From G1832 (in the sense of ability); privilege, that is, (subjectively) force, capacity, competency, freedom, or (objectively) mastery (concretely magistrate, superhuman, potentate, token of control), delegated influence: - authority, jurisdiction, liberty, power, right, strength. The covering spoken of in Verse 10 is knowledge of scripture. The woman needs to have mastery of the knowledge of the scriptures. Why? We are informed in that same scripture -- 'because of the angels'? What angels are being referenced in verse 10? Well, they are the fallen angels -- those reference in Gen. 6:2, 2 Pet. 2:4, Jude 1:6. So, the long hair on a woman [verse 15] is symbolic of much biblical knowledge. This knowledge will protect her from the fallen angels, when they return in the end times. In summary, rightly dividing the Word in 1 Cor. 11 will let us know that these scriptures have absolutely nothing to do with head wear or length of hair. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3520 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
called, Regarding No. 9 - Your point is nonsensical. The term 'election' refers to those before the foundation of the world -- the predestined. Since certain people are already 'elect'/'predestined', there would be no purpose for God to create this second age. God could have simply gone from the first age, to judgment and the elimination of Satan [and the third that followed him], and onto the third age. So, clearly there is no purpose here for the 'elect'. The scriptures are quite clear as to the purpose of this age of grace - 2Pe 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 2Pe 3:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: 2Pe 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. The purpose of grace is for the ungodly men [those that are not 'elect'/'predestined']. They all have a chance in this second age to prove themselves. >>>>> Regarding No. 10 - You falsely box in the Church with your definition of your church ["it is a local body of repented baptized holy spirit filled believers who are associated by covenant in the faith and fellowship of the gospel as it is written without compromise" A church is nothing more that two or more gathered in Christ's name - Mat 18:20 For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. >>>>> Regarding No. 11 - I agree in concept with that practice and belief. It is important that one recognizes that bringing forth false christian doctrine is worse then bringing forth no christian doctrine. Any preacher that does this will have to answer not only for his/her own sins, but, for the souls lost as a result of the false preachers false teachings. So, the concept that I agree with is evangelizing and bringing for the True Word of God. >>>>> Regarding No. 12 - The example from ancient Israel was that a theocracy is better then a kingship or democracy. If God appoints/annoits the judge [ruler] we would be far better off. However, absent God-appointed/annointed Judges to be over us, it is best to have relious freedom. >>>>> Regarding No. 13 - I already covered the proper placement of a woman within the church and in a family. She has every right and authorization from God to head churches and to have authority over man. Within the family, she is to allow her husband to provide proper spiritual edification. >>>>> Regarding No. 14 - You have no idea whether today's week aligns with the week as established back then for the Sabbath. The current calendar that we currently used ended up adding/deleting many days therefrom the old calendar. So, it is bordering pshchotic to preach a certain day of the week to worship God and dismiss the other days. Besides, Christ is now our Sabbath [which means rest]. | ||
| xman3 Advanced Member Username: xman3 Post Number: 745 Registered: 12-2006 Posted From: 75.14.38.32 |
I'm with you watchman, in that I agree with some of what he said and disagree with some. That aside, 3 cheers to you for that answer. Mister called's holier than thou "I knew you guys couldn't handle this" looks kind of foolish now. I don't really care what called says, but since this was at the top and I read it, I had to commend you on that lengthy and thorough response to that long list of stuff. Guess he didn't expect one like that. I find it humorous that a statement of "faith" is the stuff about the Catholics though. Faith statement against other groups make me a bit leery, but then again I'm not "called" to join him. To each his own though. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3521 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
xman3, Thank you. I, too, took offense at his "I knew you guys couldn't handle this" comment. I see no reason to speak against other denominations at all -- let alone placing it in a Statement of Faith. Christ is the judge of the churches -- not man. So, it seems to me that the focus should be on the Word of God -- allowing the Word to determine which beliefs and practices of every church align itself with God's Word. Though I am not Catholic and I know that many preachers also believe that the RCC is the 'great whore of Babylon', I find it silly to put that teaching in a Statement of Faith, while failing to address all of the many other major doctrinal issues that divide the christian world. I realize that it is not possible to cover everything in a Statement of Faith; however, the specifics that are covered are indicative of what kind of ministry it is. However, I do agree that religious freedom entitles Called, and those of like mind, to have their own beliefs. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3522 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
called, Before you keep calling the RCC the "Great Whore of Babylon" I suggest that you do some real Bible research on the subject. Since you already are familiar with Christ's judgment of the churches, you are familiar with Rev. 2 and 3. Christ finds no fault with the Church types of Philadelphia and Smyrna. The common link is that these church types correctly identify the 'synagogue of Satan'. Your church does not meet that criteria. However, more notably with respect to the RCC, it, too, fails to correctly identify the 'synagogue of Satan'. So, it is fair to conclude that the RCC would fall under one of the other 5 church types, which Christ finds fault in for, in deed, the RCC is an alleged christian church. So, when I read about the other 5 church types, I see: 1. Ephesus - It has labored and is patient. It hates evil. It has tried false apostles and found them liars. It hast borne, and has patience. For Christ's sake, hast labored and hast not fainted. It hast lost its first love. It hates the deeds of the Nicolatians. 2. Pergamos It holds fast Christ's name. It has not denied the faith. It has among them that have the doctrin of Balaam. It has among them that have the doctrine of the Nicolatians. 3. Thyatira - It has works of charity, faith, service, and patience. It has housed the teachings of the false prophetess Jezebel and has repented not. 4. Sardis - It fails to be a good watchman. 5. Laodecia - It is neither hot nor cold toward Christ. It is fat and content in their riches. >>>>> As one reads these descriptions, we know of only one church that has tried false apostles. That is the RCC. I know of only one church that can claim the mantle of being 'borne' and has existed from the beginning [has not fainted] -- that is the church founded by Peter -- the RCC. So, IMO, the description of the church of Ephesus is speaking of the RCC. If not, then Christ's description of all of the 5 church types with fault mention nothing relative to 'the Great Whore Babylon'. So, it is fair to conclude that the 'Great Whore Babylon' is not a church at all. It takes little research to determine what exactly the 'Great Whore Babylon' is. It is detailed in Rev. 17. Therein, it clearly states that the 'Great Whore Babylon' is a city. Rev 17:18 And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth. Now, some [any your church] have postulated that this great City is Rome -- headquarters of the Vatican. Well, this is easily proven to be false. The Vatican does not reign over any nation -- let alone the kings of the earth. Evidence suggests that the RCC has less influence in the world today -- not more. As further evidence that it is not Rome, one can determine the exact city spoke of. As mentioned in verse 18, it is the city that reigns over the 'kings of the earth'. One can easily determine whom the 'kings of the earth' are by reading the scriptures. Rev 17:12 And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, which have received no kingdom as yet; but receive power as kings one hour with the beast. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3523 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
Lo and behold, these kings of the earth are future and reign one hour with the beast. Rev 17:13 These have one mind, and shall give their power and strength unto the beast. They are the beast's lieutenants. The 'beast' is plainly identified. Rev 17:8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is. Gee -- that sounds alot like antichrist [which is Satan] himself. Rev 13:18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six. Yep, the antichrist is the one that will rule over the earth by way of his 10 like-minded servants. So, the question remains as to what City is the seat of the antichrist's authority. We get a clue in Rev. 17. Rev 17:16 And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. The kings of the earth shall hate this city. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that there is no biblical rationale for concluding that these future lieutenants of the antichrist would have anything against Rome. However, we are given much scriptural documentation as to what city it would be. We are given a clue as to why these Kings of the Earth [like-minded] with the antichrist have rage. As indicated above in verse 12, they have only one hour [figuratively] to rule. It is a short time. The answer as to what will end their rule is given in Rev. 17. Rev 17:14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful. They know that the Lamb [Christ] will return and defeat them. Well, then they must also know where Christ returns. The scriptures are clear as to where this will take place -- the same place Christ departed. So, the Kings of the Earth hate the city where the Lamb of God shall return. It is not Rome. Christ describes the endtime events to His disciples. In Matt. 24, we learn where the antichrist sets up his world wide control center. Mat 24:15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, [whoso readeth, let him understand:] Dan 12:11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. The holy place is the temple site in Jerusalem. That is why Christ informs those in Judea to flee at this time. Mat 24:16 Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains: Jerusalem is in Judea. Christ explains why. Mat 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. So, in connecting the dots to this riddle, the battle between the Kings of the Earth, as mentioned in Rev. 17:14, and the Lamb and spoken by Christ himself is in Jerusalem [Armageddon]. Jerusalem is the city that the Kings of the Earth hate -- not Rome. Jerusalem is the Great Whore Babylon. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 735 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 71.229.6.252 |
M(r)(s). Watchman_2: Any kin to Gerald, the watchman? He was a JW I knew in the early days of the internet (Graphix Boards). P. Johnny (called) has along history on this board. I am surprised he has not been banded. I would like to ask you to explain the statement that Peter founded the Roman Church. Any proof? | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3535 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
TATM, Sorry...don't know Gerald. Yes, I have communicated with Called in the past. We will see if he is a student of the Word or just another religious hack. I know that he is a preacher -- so, I expect more of him with regard to Biblical knowledge then a non-pro. As for the RCC, it was the eventual inheritor of the church founded by Peter. Mat 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. There is many writings that indicate that Peter was the founder of the church in Rome that is now the RCC. Here is one site for your review. http://www.stpeterchurch.com/site/pi9.htm Of course, I am not saying that there were not other Christian groups not affiliated with the church in Rome. Most of them were driven under ground out of persecution by the church in Rome. | ||
| nabashalam Senior Member Username: nabashalam Post Number: 1786 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 24.241.231.105 |
Why wont God heal amputees? http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/your-delusion.htm | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 736 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 71.229.6.252 |
M(r)(s). Watchman_2: Quoting: "Mat 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." End quote. Actually, Peter founded the first church in Jerusalem, not Rome.(Just the facts, Ma'am! I quote the Bible, not a religion.) Any chance you know what happened to that church in 70 AD? You probably know that I am not fan of the Roman church. The Book of Acts tells us Paul was sent to Rome to testify, not Peter. The Bible tells us the church at Rome was jewish, not gentile. Any way, I am interested in your thoughts on the first church. What happened to Peter's church in Jerusalem? | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3536 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
TATM, I am not a fan of the Catholic Church either. So, you will need to take up your debate as to whether Peter was the founder of what is now the RCC with Catholics that believe Peter was. I have not thoroughly studied the topic. Peter's church, whether Rome or Jerusalem, is not of major importance today since Rev. 2 and 3 are dispositive as to what Church one should belong to. So, one's claim to be the successor to the 'original' church of Peter is not Christ's concern -- what the church teaches is what is important. Yes, Paul was sent to the Romans. Rom 1:7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ. It says nothing of the Jews. The Catholics will claim that Peter was martyred in Rome -- the exact location was within the Vatican. BTW, Paul was not a Jew -- he was a Benjamite. Rom 11:1 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin. In regard to your point, if Peter founded the church in Jerusalem, then you would have to be able to offer proof of where that church migrated through time in order to claim the promise of Mark 16:18 is not the RCC. The church in Jerusalem did not survive there. | ||
| the_apostolic_truth_ministries Advanced Member Username: the_apostolic_truth_ministries Post Number: 742 Registered: 10-2005 Posted From: 71.229.6.252 |
M(r)(s). Watchman Mr. Bear and I got into a discussion on the subject recently. I was hoping you might turn over another leave. I would disagree with your assessment of Revelation. It makes a hugh difference which church you are in. Several churches claim to be the first church or the church founded on Pentecost (Roman Church, The Church of Christ, the Church of God, pentecostalism, etc.). All of them can not be right. You tried to fool me old eyes, didn't you? But, I saw through it. Not exactly, I had to look in the Bible to reassure myself. The verse quoted is in Matthew, not Mark. I hope you see the humor in that switch. As to Romans, we could debate indefinitely. The Roman church, for example, claims the Book of Mark was written in Latin. Many churches demand that various verses be removed from the Bible, in order to defend their doctrine. The book of Romans is an argument or debate comparing legalism to grace. One of my favorite misquoted verses from Romans gives us a clear look at who the letter was written to. ". . . the gifts and callings of God are without repentence." The passage is a reminder to the Jew that he will always have a special place in the heart of God. Unfortunately, the law has been replaced with grace. Jew . . . the word means "man(kind) of Judah". In colloquialism, the word Jew refers to anyone from or associated with Israel. Paul said of himself that he was a Hebrew of Hebrews. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3537 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
called, Regarding your Statement of Faith No. 15: I agree that clean or unclean meat has nothing to do with NT scripture. However, the conclusion [everything is suitable for consumption] you reach from OT scripture is in complete error. Even Noah was aware that there were certain meats that were clean and certain meats that were unclean. Gen 7:2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female. Obviously, Noah took more of clean beasts so that they had food to eat after the flood. It proves conclusively that food laws were in place. So, when we read - Gen 9:3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. we have an apparent inconsistency by God. He instructed Noah to place more of the clean animals in the ark for consumption thereafter the flood; yet, He seems to be telling Noah after the flood that Noah can eat the unclean meat as well. So, for your interpretation to be correct, we would have to conclude that either 1) God is inconsitent or 2) God performed divine act, which was not detailed in scripture, to make formerly unclean animals to be suitable for consumption. With a little Bible study, we can resolve this inconsistency and/or demonstrate that it is not relevant today. In the very next verse after the one you are relying upon for your [false] doctrine, we see an important clue. Gen 9:4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat. Here, we see God giving an exception to what He stated in verse 3. It is clear that God is informing Noah and family that the flesh is to be properly bled prior to consumption. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3538 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
cont'd God is speaking of food preparation. He is directing them to not eat animals that are not properly bled. So, it appears that God is still concerned about health issues instead of making all animals clean. [He could just as easily made all animals in the blood clean as well.] The issue is easily resolved in a check of the original language of verse 3. A check of the word 'every' in Hebrew - H3605 kole, kole From H3634; properly the whole; hence all, any or every (in the singular only, but often in a plural sense): - (in) all (manner, [ye]), altogether, any (manner), enough, every (one, place, thing), howsoever, as many as, [no-] thing, ought, whatsoever, (the) whole, whoso (-ever). As can plainly be seen, the Hebrew word rendered 'every' in the KJV does not necessarily mean ALL as you have concluded. In fact, it is best rendered 'AS MANY AS'. In fact, if you check out the meanings of the other word isn Gen. 9:3, you will see a wide range of meanings. In fact, a rendering that is not inconsistent with the clean and unclean animals that went into the ark can be achieved. Hence, Gen. 9:3 is best interpreted as - Gen 9:3 As many as of the moving thing that liveth that exists as meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. God is not stating that Noah can consume the unclean thing; but, He is informing him that he can consume all of the clean animals that exist after the flood. Then, in verse 4, God is telling them to properly bleed the animal and to not eat the clean animal that dies of natural causes -- bloated and not bled. There is no new marching orders for God did not make the unclean clean. Irrespective of whether you agree with me that Gen. 9:3 is a poor English rendering, you, as a preacher, should have trepidation at making a religion from one scripture, which is contradictory to God's previous instructions. And, if you have done your homework on the subject, you would have noted that God gave the food laws to us in Lev. 11. So, if you believe that God can contradict Himself with Gen. 9:3, then, he certainly countered His Gen. 9:3 mandate by Lev. 11. The fact is that the food laws are applicable today. There are clean and unclean meats. Your belief and practice No. 15 is unbiblical. | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3539 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
called, Regarding No. 16: I believe the sacred name is YHVH [Yahveh] -- there is no letter 'w' in Hebrew. The savior IMO is Yeshua. >>>>> Regarding No. 17: It is true that homosexuality is an abomination onto God. So, is eating pork. Neither are unforgiveable sins. If everyone had to qualify themselves by personal conduct to preach, there would be very few preachers. Our good deeds are nothing but filthy rags compared to our Father. Nonethelesse, I certainly do not support open homosexuality in any church. >>>>> Regarding No. 18: I don't know how one can claim to be a Christian without being Messianic. You contradict yourself in claiming to be Messianic, yet claiming that salvation comes from the Jews. As for Christ's earthly lineage, he is half Levite and half Jew. You need to clarify your terminology so when referring to the 'Gentile' the viewer understands what you mean. Many that think they are Gentiles are not -- they are the true seed of Abraham. The Abrahamic covenant passed with the offspring of Joseph, Mannaseh and Ephraim, -- not the Jews. Since the Jews did not receive the Messiah, the Word has been spread around the World by the non-Jew. Primarily this has been done by the other tribes of Israel. Obviously, you refer to Rom 11:17 with your interpretation of the true olive tree. Rom 11:17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; The true olive tree spoken of is the natural seed of Abraham -- not the nation of Israel today. The wild olive tree are those people not of the offspring of Abraham. >>>>> | ||
| watchman_2 Senior Member Username: watchman_2 Post Number: 3540 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 66.92.33.240 |
called, Regarding No. 19: The question of 'tongues' is of much debate here on Factnet. The Bible basically defines two types of tongues. There is the Pentecostal tongue spoken by Christ, which was spoken once by Christ, yet received in the specific language and specific dialect of all that heard Christ. All other usage of the word 'tongues' refers to language. So, if your church practices the teaching of the Word of God in the native languages of other peoples, then I support that practice. However, I sense that you refer to 'tongues' as the regular utterances of church members in gibberish that no one comprehends, to simulate that one has the Holy Spirit within them. Such practice is wholly unbiblical. The purpose of language is to convey thought. The speaking in tongues is to properly relay the Word of God in the language of the recipient. No man has the gift of the Pentecostal tongue. >>>>> Regarding no. 20: I fully agree. |
