Who Is Your "brother"?

[EGK 0]

Thank you very much for not reading the thread especially the thread title as started by me

 

"Do Molokans Observe Independence Day?, If So, Why..."

 

Yes it was directed to molokans to inquire of those who may adopt a pacifist stance

 

Essentially I was asking those who would maintain a pacifist stance do you observe Independence Day and why

 

As to your credibility, you have denied the Deity of Jesus and the veracity of Scripture therefore calling into your question the ability rightly divide the Word of God

 

I want to make sure everyone else know your views on these core Christian tenets so as to avoid any attempts on your part to deceive them

 

Now it is possible your views have recently changed to affirm the Deity of Jesus and the veracity of Scripture to which I would welcome hearing about that

 

Again seems pretty straight forward

 

 

Seeking;

 

I appreciate your reply, it was very candid and to the point. You seem to be hung up on two points.

 

1. The deity of Jesus

 

2. The veracity of scripture as I see it.

 

Here is my position as of now, it may change. I count on the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ to guide me.

 

1, As to the deity of Jesus, I do not know. Scripture does not unequivocally state it, Jesus never

stated it, and the general church took over 300 years to finally come to a consensus, one way

or the other to state it. A good argument can be given for both perspectives.

 

2. I do not deny veracity, I deny inerrancy.

 

Accept this or reject this, I can not answer any further as of now due to time restraints on me.

 

Egk

[GoodDay 0]

What do you mean by "observing' it?

 

EGK is right on.

 

It is not a Molokan Holiday so the question does not flow.

 

I am sure some do and I am sure some don't. Just as some are for war and some are not.

 

One can pretty much take any group of people and find some that do, and some that don't, for most things.

 

Do christians in general observe it? I would say all of them recognize it. But do they all send that day praising people and land? I would say no.

[seeking_truth_1 0]

You say

EGK is right on.

 

He says

As to the deity of Jesus, I do not know

AND

He says regarding Scripture

I do not deny veracity, I deny inerrancy.

 

He also states that I am

...hung up on two points

 

These two "hang ups" (Who Jesus Is and the Inerrancy of Scripture) are the core tenets of Biblical Christianity

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/veracity

 

Main Entry: ve·rac·i·ty

Pronunciation: \və-ˈra-sə-tē\Function: noun Inflected Form(s): plural ve·rac·i·tiesDate: circa 1623 1 : devotion to the truth : truthfulness

2 : power of conveying or perceiving truth

3 : conformity with truth or fact : accuracy

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/inerrant

 

Main Entry: in·er·rant

Pronunciation: \-ənt\Function: adjective Etymology: Latin inerrant-, inerrans, from in- + errant-, errans, present participle of errare to errDate: 1837 : free from error

 

 

 

Scripture says "Every word of God is pure; He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him." (Proverbs 30:5)

 

"The entirety of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous judgments endures forever." (Psalm 119:160 NKJV)

 

"Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth." (John 17:17 NKJV)

 

 

 

Is EGK your "brother" in Christ?

 

Is he still "right on"?

 

He might be a nice man or an engaging individual, but does he view Jesus and The Bible as you do?

 

Based upon his own words, he is not my Brother in Christ

 

As to the original thread topic your statement "It is not a Molokan Holiday so the question does not flow" is an opinion not a fact

 

It's not an Amish or Mennonite holiday yet I could ask the same question of any group that dogmatically advocates pacifism and/or makes it a tenet of faith

 

It points to the hypocrisy of convenience

 

You go on about being a pacifist yet I would imagine you still pay taxes, use public services, drive on roads and expect assistance if you dial 911 all provided by the government via your tax dollars

 

What do you mean by "observing' it?

 

EGK is right on.

 

It is not a Molokan Holiday so the question does not flow.

 

I am sure some do and I am sure some don't. Just as some are for war and some are not.

 

One can pretty much take any group of people and find some that do, and some that don't, for most things.

 

Do christians in general observe it? I would say all of them recognize it. But do they all send that day praising people and land? I would say no.

 

Seeking;

 

I appreciate your reply, it was very candid and to the point. You seem to be hung up on two points.

 

1. The deity of Jesus

 

2. The veracity of scripture as I see it.

 

Here is my position as of now, it may change. I count on the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ to guide me.

 

1, As to the deity of Jesus, I do not know. Scripture does not unequivocally state it, Jesus never

stated it, and the general church took over 300 years to finally come to a consensus, one way

or the other to state it. A good argument can be given for both perspectives.

 

2. I do not deny veracity, I deny inerrancy.

 

Accept this or reject this, I can not answer any further as of now due to time restraints on me.

 

Egk

[GoodDay 0]

Actually Seeking,

 

I drive a vehicle made of of recycled paper that runs off air. It hovers about 4 inches off the ground so I dont have to use public roads. I never heard of 911 until you just mentioned it but I have heard of 411 if thats the same thing?

 

According to your un-Scriptural logic and my driving on the street and taxes being with held makes me a murdering Un-Christian soldier then you finnaly have a point!

 

Thank God that Jesus Christ died on the Cross and The Holy Spirit dwells in Gods Children to equip us with His Word to do His Work. With out the convictions of The Holy Spirit you will allways see war from a Non-Spiritual veiw point. Thats why Americas church is allmost all physical. You are all fighting physical Battles and not Spirtual Battles. How can that be? Many churches say the Outward manifestation of The Holy Spirit is a time that is gone and past. They are right in a sense because that are not of The Holy Spirit.

 

Does The Holy Spirit support war? Is not The Holy Spirit God?

 

You still serving Only one and a half sides of a triangle x 10% Apostle Paul.

 

Them that support war are equal to them that are in war. It's not even so much the act, but rather the intent and mental thoughts that God will forgive if you and them repent. I can even go as so far as to say you are more of a murderer than a person who joins in pure ingnorance and brainwashed and with the support of his church member and pastors. You should know better and they can come to know better.

 

You use a lot of login Seeking. By you saying, my Brother EGK is wrong about Scripture, because of your on- going never ending points you brought up would mean that since you are saying he is not your Brother means that anyone in the world that knows war is wrong is My Brother and EGK's Brother?

 

I will gladly accept that

[seeking_truth_1 0]

GoodDay

 

Is EGK your "brother" in the Lord though he denies the accuracy/veracity of Scripture AND the Deity of Jesus?

 

 

Actually Seeking,

 

I drive a vehicle made of of recycled paper that runs off air. It hovers about 4 inches off the ground so I dont have to use public roads. I never heard of 911 until you just mentioned it but I have heard of 411 if thats the same thing?

 

According to your un-Scriptural logic and my driving on the street and taxes being with held makes me a murdering Un-Christian soldier then you finnaly have a point!

 

Thank God that Jesus Christ died on the Cross and The Holy Spirit dwells in Gods Children to equip us with His Word to do His Work. With out the convictions of The Holy Spirit you will allways see war from a Non-Spiritual veiw point. Thats why Americas church is allmost all physical. You are all fighting physical Battles and not Spirtual Battles. How can that be? Many churches say the Outward manifestation of The Holy Spirit is a time that is gone and past. They are right in a sense because that are not of The Holy Spirit.

 

Does The Holy Spirit support war? Is not The Holy Spirit God?

 

You still serving Only one and a half sides of a triangle x 10% Apostle Paul.

 

Them that support war are equal to them that are in war. It's not even so much the act, but rather the intent and mental thoughts that God will forgive if you and them repent. I can even go as so far as to say you are more of a murderer than a person who joins in pure ingnorance and brainwashed and with the support of his church member and pastors. You should know better and they can come to know better.

 

You use a lot of login Seeking. By you saying, my Brother EGK is wrong about Scripture, because of your on- going never ending points you brought up would mean that since you are saying he is not your Brother means that anyone in the world that knows war is wrong is My Brother and EGK's Brother?

 

I will gladly accept that

[coffee 0]

.

 

Regarding:

 

Seeking;

 

I appreciate your reply, it was very candid and to the point. You seem to be hung up on two points.

 

1. The deity of Jesus

 

2. The veracity of scripture as I see it.

 

Here is my position as of now, it may change. I count on the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ to guide me.

 

1, As to the deity of Jesus, I do not know. Scripture does not unequivocally state it, Jesus never

stated it, and the general church took over 300 years to finally come to a consensus, one way

or the other to state it. A good argument can be given for both perspectives.

 

2. I do not deny veracity, I deny inerrancy.

 

Accept this or reject this, I can not answer any further as of now due to time restraints on me.

 

Egk

 

 

For anyone who has followed any of the previous discussions pertaining to the subject, the above response is an excellent example of one's selective choice to deny existing Biblical and historical truth.

 

1. Scripture DOES unequivocally testify that the Lord Jesus Christ is God Who came down to earth from heaven, to inhabit human flesh in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. True, it is not stated in the precise terminology, using the specific words in the exact chronology which is demanded by the skeptic, but the written Word of God is definite and conclusive that Jesus is God.

 

2. Jesus DID state that He is God, on a number of separate occasions, which are each recorded in the Bible. Just because this is not confirmed in the Scriptures using the precise terminology, in the exact predetermined chronological order that is demanded by the skeptic, does not erase the fact that Christ's personal testimony about His own Deity is written in the Bible, with undeniable certainty.

 

3. The general church DID NOT take 300 years to finally come to a consensus. The existing historical documentation proves that the followers of Jesus, from as early as the first century AD, taught that Jesus is God, as one of the three persons of the Godhead, Who exists in Trinity, as the Triune God. Documents which predate by 200 years the historical Ecumenical Council in Nicea prove that the Deity of Jesus Christ was one of the foundational truths which was taught by the early Christian Church, until Arias, 300 years later, began to introduce his heretical theory that Jesus was not co-eternal with God the Father. The action that was taken by the Christian Church leaders 300 years after Jesus was crucified, was to put a stop to the heresy that was being taught by Arias and his followers. The existing documentation proves that the consensus of the early Christian Church was that Jesus is indeed God, and this truth has been taught by the followers of Christ from the time when Jesus walked the earth, to the present.

 

4. By denying the veracity and inerrancy of the Holy Scriptures, the skeptic then becomes his own "god", since he or she, using their own personal reasoning, by establishing their own parameters, ultimately makes the decision which portions that are written in the Bible are true, and which portions are not, and in so doing, they create their own personal benchmark regarding that which they will accept, and that which they will not. The next skeptic, who then establishes his own parameters, thereby creating for himself his own personal benchmark, can differ from the first skeptic in his acceptance of specific portions of the Scriptures, and each skeptic then becomes their own personal "god" by establishing for themselves their own guidelines for that which is to be considered "truth", thereby determining for themselves what they consider to be "holy" from what is written in the Scriptures, and that which they do not.

 

.

[GoodDay 0]

.

 

Regarding:

 

Seeking;

 

I appreciate your reply, it was very candid and to the point. You seem to be hung up on two points.

 

1. The deity of Jesus

 

2. The veracity of scripture as I see it.

 

Here is my position as of now, it may change. I count on the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ to guide me.

 

1, As to the deity of Jesus, I do not know. Scripture does not unequivocally state it, Jesus never

stated it, and the general church took over 300 years to finally come to a consensus, one way

or the other to state it. A good argument can be given for both perspectives.

 

2. I do not deny veracity, I deny inerrancy.

 

Accept this or reject this, I can not answer any further as of now due to time restraints on me.

 

Egk

 

 

For anyone who has followed any of the previous discussions pertaining to the subject, the above response is an excellent example of one's selective choice to deny existing Biblical and historical truth.

 

1. Scripture DOES unequivocally testify that the Lord Jesus Christ is God Who came down to earth from heaven, to inhabit human flesh in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. True, it is not stated in the precise terminology, using the specific words in the exact chronology which is demanded by the skeptic, but the written Word of God is definite and conclusive that Jesus is God.

 

2. Jesus DID state that He is God, on a number of separate occasions, which are each recorded in the Bible. Just because this is not confirmed in the Scriptures using the precise terminology, in the exact predetermined chronological order that is demanded by the skeptic, does not erase the fact that Christ's personal testimony about His own Deity is written in the Bible, with undeniable certainty.

 

3. The general church DID NOT take 300 years to finally come to a consensus. The existing historical documentation proves that the followers of Jesus, from as early as the first century AD, taught that Jesus is God, as one of the three persons of the Godhead, Who exists in Trinity, as the Triune God. Documents which predate by 200 years the historical Ecumenical Council in Nicea prove that the Deity of Jesus Christ was one of the foundational truths which was taught by the early Christian Church, until Arias, 300 years later, began to introduce his heretical theory that Jesus was not co-eternal with God the Father. The action that was taken by the Christian Church leaders 300 years after Jesus was crucified, was to put a stop to the heresy that was being taught by Arias and his followers. The existing documentation proves that the consensus of the early Christian Church was that Jesus is indeed God, and this truth has been taught by the followers of Christ from the time when Jesus walked the earth, to the present.

 

4. By denying the veracity and inerrancy of the Holy Scriptures, the skeptic then becomes his own "god", since he or she, using their own personal reasoning, by establishing their own parameters, ultimately makes the decision which portions that are written in the Bible are true, and which portions are not, and in so doing, they create their own personal benchmark regarding that which they will accept, and that which they will not. The next skeptic, who then establishes his own parameters, thereby creating for himself his own personal benchmark, can differ from the first skeptic in his acceptance of specific portions of the Scriptures, and each skeptic then becomes their own personal "god" by establishing for themselves their own guidelines for that which is to be considered "truth", thereby determining for themselves what they consider to be "holy" from what is written in the Scriptures, and that which they do not.

 

.

 

 

Brother EGK openly talks of his faith in God and how he sees Jesus Christ as he seeks and searches the Scriptures.

 

"As to the diety of Jesus Christ, I do not know"

 

"Here is my position as of now, it may change,"

 

I will boldly and openly and proudly call a man my Brother who admits his beleifs and that he is still searching and it can change.

 

The think that really stood out is the comment that EGK posted saying "it took the General Church 300 years to come to a concenses."

 

What was the ruling during those 300 years??

 

Edited July 12, 2010 by GoodDay

[GoodDay 0]

EGK is my Brother Seeking,

 

Are American soldiers that will fully took oaths and gave thier lives to leaders and pledged their lives and thier faith and thier obediance too? No they are not.

 

Anyone, who willfully gives their life to a leader who does not follow The Ways of God is thier property and not Gods.

 

 

GoodDay

 

Is EGK your "brother" in the Lord though he denies the accuracy/veracity of Scripture AND the Deity of Jesus?

 

 

Actually Seeking,

 

I drive a vehicle made of of recycled paper that runs off air. It hovers about 4 inches off the ground so I dont have to use public roads. I never heard of 911 until you just mentioned it but I have heard of 411 if thats the same thing?

 

According to your un-Scriptural logic and my driving on the street and taxes being with held makes me a murdering Un-Christian soldier then you finnaly have a point!

 

Thank God that Jesus Christ died on the Cross and The Holy Spirit dwells in Gods Children to equip us with His Word to do His Work. With out the convictions of The Holy Spirit you will allways see war from a Non-Spiritual veiw point. Thats why Americas church is allmost all physical. You are all fighting physical Battles and not Spirtual Battles. How can that be? Many churches say the Outward manifestation of The Holy Spirit is a time that is gone and past. They are right in a sense because that are not of The Holy Spirit.

 

Does The Holy Spirit support war? Is not The Holy Spirit God?

 

You still serving Only one and a half sides of a triangle x 10% Apostle Paul.

 

Them that support war are equal to them that are in war. It's not even so much the act, but rather the intent and mental thoughts that God will forgive if you and them repent. I can even go as so far as to say you are more of a murderer than a person who joins in pure ingnorance and brainwashed and with the support of his church member and pastors. You should know better and they can come to know better.

 

You use a lot of login Seeking. By you saying, my Brother EGK is wrong about Scripture, because of your on- going never ending points you brought up would mean that since you are saying he is not your Brother means that anyone in the world that knows war is wrong is My Brother and EGK's Brother?

 

I will gladly accept that

[seeking_truth_1 0]

If you agree with EGK, you are not my brother in the Lord and I made a serious error in judgment

 

My apologies for having been fooled

[GoodDay 0]

If you agree with EGK, you are not my brother in the Lord and I made a serious error in judgment

 

My apologies for having been fooled

 

 

Even Satan knows and believes that Jesus is God.

 

" Based on that statment alone," Seeking you are saying the you are brothers with Satan.

[GoodDay 0]

Seeking , "Based on this statement alone," you are the brother of Satan;

 

Satan knows and believes that Jesus is God.

[seeking_truth_1 0]

Lets get back to the thread

 

EGK denies the Deity of Jesus and the veracity/accuracy of Scripture though he seems to be reserving the right perhaps change his mind at a later date

 

For now it would appear that change has not occurred

 

Those are 2 core tenets of Christianity and without them you have nothing

 

You say EGK is your "brother in the lord" yet he denies the very tenets of Christianity

 

To be a "brother in the lord" you need to be in agreement in at the very least the Christian essentials

 

Who Jesus is

How Salvation is Secured

The veracity/accuracy of Scripture

 

I do not think you are you in agreement with his stance on the Deity of Jesus and the veracity/accuracy of Scripture but I am wondering what is going on

 

As to your ridiculous statement "Based on this statement alone, you are the brother of Satan" if we use your "logic" that would make EVERY Christian a "brother of Satan"

 

You also say "Satan knows and believes that Jesus is God"

 

I'm inclined to agree but he does not acknowledge Him as Lord or Satan would be a Christian too

 

Seeking , "Based on this statement alone," you are the brother of Satan;

 

Satan knows and believes that Jesus is God.

[EGK 0]

.

 

Regarding:

 

Seeking;

 

I appreciate your reply, it was very candid and to the point. You seem to be hung up on two points.

 

1. The deity of Jesus

 

2. The veracity of scripture as I see it.

 

Here is my position as of now, it may change. I count on the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ to guide me.

 

1, As to the deity of Jesus, I do not know. Scripture does not unequivocally state it, Jesus never

stated it, and the general church took over 300 years to finally come to a consensus, one way

or the other to state it. A good argument can be given for both perspectives.

 

2. I do not deny veracity, I deny inerrancy.

 

Accept this or reject this, I can not answer any further as of now due to time restraints on me.

 

Egk

 

 

For anyone who has followed any of the previous discussions pertaining to the subject, the above response is an excellent example of one's selective choice to deny existing Biblical and historical truth.

 

1. Scripture DOES unequivocally testify that the Lord Jesus Christ is God Who came down to earth from heaven, to inhabit human flesh in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. True, it is not stated in the precise terminology, using the specific words in the exact chronology which is demanded by the skeptic, but the written Word of God is definite and conclusive that Jesus is God.

 

2. Jesus DID state that He is God, on a number of separate occasions, which are each recorded in the Bible. Just because this is not confirmed in the Scriptures using the precise terminology, in the exact predetermined chronological order that is demanded by the skeptic, does not erase the fact that Christ's personal testimony about His own Deity is written in the Bible, with undeniable certainty.

 

3. The general church DID NOT take 300 years to finally come to a consensus. The existing historical documentation proves that the followers of Jesus, from as early as the first century AD, taught that Jesus is God, as one of the three persons of the Godhead, Who exists in Trinity, as the Triune God. Documents which predate by 200 years the historical Ecumenical Council in Nicea prove that the Deity of Jesus Christ was one of the foundational truths which was taught by the early Christian Church, until Arias, 300 years later, began to introduce his heretical theory that Jesus was not co-eternal with God the Father. The action that was taken by the Christian Church leaders 300 years after Jesus was crucified, was to put a stop to the heresy that was being taught by Arias and his followers. The existing documentation proves that the consensus of the early Christian Church was that Jesus is indeed God, and this truth has been taught by the followers of Christ from the time when Jesus walked the earth, to the present.

 

4. By denying the veracity and inerrancy of the Holy Scriptures, the skeptic then becomes his own "god", since he or she, using their own personal reasoning, by establishing their own parameters, ultimately makes the decision which portions that are written in the Bible are true, and which portions are not, and in so doing, they create their own personal benchmark regarding that which they will accept, and that which they will not. The next skeptic, who then establishes his own parameters, thereby creating for himself his own personal benchmark, can differ from the first skeptic in his acceptance of specific portions of the Scriptures, and each skeptic then becomes their own personal "god" by establishing for themselves their own guidelines for that which is to be considered "truth", thereby determining for themselves what they consider to be "holy" from what is written in the Scriptures, and that which they do not.

 

.

 

 

 

Welcome Coffee;

 

It is always very pleasant to read such a well written sermon but as always you pick and choose what you want to verify your thesis but leave even more out.

 

You had previously written about the "Chester Beatty Papyri" and their effect upon the authenticity and dates of the Gospels. These are, I totally agree, very conclusive in dating of the Gospels and to their authenticity, which never was a contention of mine. But where are the originals? I am afraid they are not available. So to prove inerrancy you cannot, unless you have the originals to compare later translations against, inerrancy is unprovable.

 

Let me quote from Sir Fredric Kenyon" The Bible and Modern Scholarship, (1948)

 

Significance of the Finds:

 

"The net result of this discovery--by far the most important since the discovery of the Siniaticus--is, in fact, to reduce the gap between the earlier manuscripts and the traditional dates of the New Testament books so far that it becomes negligible in any discussion of their authenticity. No other ancient book has anything like such early and plentiful testimony to its text, and no unbiased scholar would deny that the text that has come down to us is substantially sound, on the other hand, IT IS EVIDENT THAT BY THE END OF THE SECOND CENTURY VARIANTS IN THE MINOR DETAILS OF THE TEXT WERE PLENTIFUL AND WIDELY DIFFUSED. IT IS CLEAR THAT IN THE SECOND CENTURY THERE WAS NO GENERAL CONTROL OF THE TEXT OF THE BOOKS, WHICH WERE GRADUALLY COMING TO BE RECOGNIZED AS CANONICAL. MANUSCRIPTS WERE COPIED IN ALL PARTS OF THE WORLD WITHOUT COMPARISON WITH ONE ANOTHER, AND OFTEN NO DOUBT UNTRAINED SCRIGBES. HENCE MISTAKES AND SMALL VARIANTS EASILY AROSE AND WERE REPEATED, AND IT WAS ONLY GRADUALLY THAT THEY WERE SUBMITTED TO CONTROL AND REVISION. WE MUST THEREFORE ACCEPT MINOR UNCERTAINTIES AS TO THE DETAILS OF THE TEXT, WITHOUT PINNING OUR FAITH WHOLLY TO ANY ONE OF THE RECOGNIZED FAMILIES;but we have every right to be satisfied of its general integrity and faithfulness as the record of the earliest Christian writings."

 

I know you know more than Sir Fredric Kenyon, who was a scholar of ancient languages and who had made a life-long study of the Bible, especially the New Testament as an historical text. Britis paleographer, biblical and classical scholar, Director of the British Museum, President of the British Academy from 1917 to 1921, Professor of English Law at Oxford, etc. The lisyt is too long to fully quote.

 

Some of the undisputed facts are these;

 

We do not have the original manuscripts of any of the books of the New Testament, but only copies--over 5,000 copies, just in the Greek language in which the books were originally written.

 

Most copies are centuries removed from the originals.

 

All of the copies contain mistakes both great and small, as scribes either inadvertently or intentionally altered text.

 

The vast majority of these changes are insignificant, immaterial, and of no importance for the meaning of the passages in which they are found, but still an error.

 

Others, however are quite significant. Sometimes the meaning of a verse, a passage, or an entire book depends on which textual variants the scholar decides are "original".

 

To this day there are many passages of the New Testament where scholars continue to debate the original wording. And there are some in which they may never know what the authors originally wrote. If it is inerrant why still the debate?

 

Let me give you a few Bible passages:

1 John 5:7, John 8:7, John 8:11, Luke 22:44, Luke 22:20, Mark 16:17-18, John 5:4, Luke 24:12, Luke 24:51.

 

In my Life Application Study Bible, it states about 1 John 5: 7-8;

" Late manuscripts of the Vulgate testify in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. And there are three that testify on earth: (not found in any Greek manuscript before the sixteenth century)"

 

In the Codex Vaticanus, which the King James version of the bible is based upon, a page states in the margin;

 

"Fool and knave, leave the old reading, don't change it! This notation and note are listed in the Codex Vaticanus in a margin note (between columns one and two) in which some medieval scribe maligns a predecessor for altering the text.

 

As you can now see this is why I deny "inerrancy" and not veracity. Any child can verify by the old parlor game of passing a message from one child to another that the ending message is usually quite different from the one originally given. This depending upon the interpretation of the message from one to another until it reaches its end. It must also be remembered that the New Testament writings of Jesus Christ were not written by Jesus but by others, who interpreted his message and then repeated it as an oral history until it was finally written down, centuries later. The original Disciples were uneducated men and it took sometimes many decades to write down their messages which became the Gospels to make Christianity a religion of the Book as the Jews and to attach themselves to the historocity of the Jews.

 

Sir Fredric Kenyon also stated that the New Testament ("GRADUALLY BECAME CANNONICAL"), but you know better than him.

 

I ask you one question, if Jesus claimed he was divine, then why does Matthew, Mark and Luke all fail to say anything about it? Did they just forget to mention that part?

 

Try comparing the Gospels horizontally. Compare the different stories especially of the Passion of Christ. Why do they differ?

 

EGK (substantially sound but not inerrant)

[EGK 0]

 

 

Those are 2 core tenets of Christianity and without them you have nothing

 

You say EGK is your "brother in the lord" yet he denies the very tenets of Christianity

 

To be a "brother in the lord" you need to be in agreement in at the very least the Christian essentials

 

Who Jesus is

How Salvation is Secured

The veracity/accuracy of Scripture

 

 

 

Seeking;

 

You talk of "core tenets". Where are these ("core tenets") listed in scripture, where does Jesus state "who he is", "how salvation is secured","the veracity/accuracy of scripture? Where does it state we have to be in agreement of these "christian essentials".

 

You blow alot of smoke, but I have not seen the fire yet!

Prove your points with scripture or scholarship, personal opinion is good but not enough unless you can back it up.

 

This is a tenet of Jesus Christ below, this is what I want to see!

 

"When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say the Son of Man is?

They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets."

But what about you? he asked. "Who do you say I am?"

Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revelaed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.

I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven" Then he warned his disciples not to tell anyone that HE WAS THE CHRIST."

Matthew 16:13-20

 

 

EGK

[Guest Guest]

Where in scripture does it imply that satan believes that Jesus is God, he always refered to Him as the Son of God.

 

 

Satan knows and believes that Jesus is God.

 

[seeking_truth_1 0]

"You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me.” (John 5:39 NKJV)

 

"But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me.” (John 15:26 NKJV)

 

What about Jesus do the Scriptures testify?

What does the Holy Spirit testify about Jesus?

 

 

 

 

 

 

[KevinPolyaNazaroff 0]

Seeking;

 

You talk of "core tenets". Where are these ("core tenets") listed in scripture, where does Jesus state "who he is", "how salvation is secured","the veracity/accuracy of scripture? Where does it state we have to be in agreement of these "christian essentials".

 

You blow alot of smoke, but I have not seen the fire yet!

Prove your points with scripture or scholarship, personal opinion is good but not enough unless you can back it up.

EGK,

Until you submit to the core tenets of Biblical Christianity, you will continue to be misinformed about the character and nature of God.

 

You say, "where does Jesus state "who he is"".

 

This has been stated and proven with Biblical passages so many times on this forum, that I can't believe you are seriously asking again.

 

Are you going to keep on asking until you get the answer YOU are looking for?

 

I don't know you, and you may be a nice guy, but by your own admission, you reject Biblical Christianity.

 

You can be considered a friend by all of us, but not a brother in Christ.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is a tenet of Jesus Christ below, this is what I want to see!

 

"When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say the Son of Man is?

They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets."

But what about you? he asked. "Who do you say I am?"

Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revelaed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.

I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven" Then he warned his disciples not to tell anyone that HE WAS THE CHRIST."

Matthew 16:13-20

 

 

EGK

You do realize that this is another scripture that proves the deity of Jesus, don't you?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kevin Nazaroff

[EGK 0]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is a tenet of Jesus Christ below, this is what I want to see!

 

"When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say the Son of Man is?

They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets."

But what about you? he asked. "Who do you say I am?"

Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revelaed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.

I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven" Then he warned his disciples not to tell anyone that HE WAS THE CHRIST."

Matthew 16:13-20

 

 

EGK

You do realize that this is another scripture that proves the deity of Jesus, don't you?

 

Kevin;

 

In Matthew 16, it states and Jesus affirms to the fact that he is the "Son of the Living God". Do you see this? And also through out Matthew Jesus is said to be the "Son of Man" and calls himself that. In Mark Jesus is also called the "Son of David" (Mark 12:23) and also the "Son of the Blessed One" Mark (Mark 14:61) "And Jesus replied: "I am, said Jesus "And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven." This is what Jesus affirmed to at his trial before the High Priest.

 

What I ask of you now is to go through your Concordance of the bible and now give to me the listing and scripture which Jesus the Christ, The Son of the Living God says he is "God the Son. Or where someone else says this and with Jesus's own words he affirms it. Do this as if you are on trial for your life. Just you and the bible, do not listen to others, even me and give me your answer. What does the preponderance of evidence show you and not what others tell you it says.

 

EGK (Needed, One Bible, One concordance, One Holy Spirit = One God)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[seeking_truth_1 0]

EGK

 

 

What about Jesus do the Scriptures testify?

What does the Holy Spirit testify about Jesus?

 

"You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me." (John 5:39 NKJV)

 

"But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me." (John 15:26 NKJV)

 

What about Jesus do the Scriptures testify?

What does the Holy Spirit testify about Jesus?

[EGK 0]

EGK

 

 

What about Jesus do the Scriptures testify?

What does the Holy Spirit testify about Jesus?

 

"You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me." (John 5:39 NKJV)

 

"But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me." (John 15:26 NKJV)

 

What about Jesus do the Scriptures testify?

What does the Holy Spirit testify about Jesus?

 

 

 

Seeking;

 

 

I am surprised you ask these questions of me. What could you learn from one you do can not call a "Brother". You who are secure and all knowledgeable about your "Core Tenets" would already know these answers. I cannot answer this to one who already has his mind made up and will not think about, discuss or accept what others may have to say. That would be a waste of my time and yours!

 

I am waiting on Kevin to answer and will give him all the time he needs.

 

EGK

[seeking_truth_1 0]

With all due respect, I cited passage from the Bible

 

I was not adding commentary nor personal bias

 

I asked a couple FAIR questions

 

What about Jesus do the Scriptures testify?

What does the Holy Spirit testify about Jesus?

 

According to the passages that I cited, please answer the FAIR questions

 

Please tell us what those passages mean

 

Thank you

[Guest Guest]

I cannot answer this to one who already has his mind made up and will not think about, discuss or accept what others may have to say. That would be a waste of my time and yours!

EGK

EGK is quitting again and so soon this time!

 

 

EGK doesn't know.

1. The deity of Jesus, As to the deity of Jesus, I do not know.

EGK does know.

His Word is the greatest of His works; and His words, therefore, are to be sought out by all who, through grace, have been made to value them more than necessary food. Our business must be to read, mark, and study what He has written for our learning. No Lexicons, or other works or words of man can avail us here. It is only from God's own Word that we can learn His truths.

EGK seems confused.

 

[EGK 0]

 

 

 

 

Is EGK your "brother" in Christ?

 

Is he still "right on"?

 

He might be a nice man or an engaging individual, but does he view Jesus and The Bible as you do?

 

Based upon his own words, he is not my Brother in Christ

 

 

 

Seeking;

 

Do you not remember these words your wrote, "he is not my brother in Christ". You who have called me so many different unflattering names now want to dialog with me on scripture. Would you accept the opinions of a Molokan? I do not think so.

 

EGK

[seeking_truth_1 0]

Absolutely... You are not my "brother in Christ"

 

I also identified you as a deceiver and a wolf both of which are not flattering yet accurate

 

You can feign hurt feelings but I can see right through it

 

You are attempting to put forth false doctrine and I'll not idly sit by and allow your garbage to go unchallenged

 

As to accepting the "opinions of a Molokan", no one could define what that is as it relates to Christianity so that remark is spurious at best

 

That still does not address the questions

]

What about Jesus do the Scriptures testify?

What does the Holy Spirit testify about Jesus?

 

[EGK 0]

Absolutely... You are not my "brother in Christ"

 

I also identified you as a deceiver and a wolf both of which are not flattering yet accurate

 

You can feign hurt feelings but I can see right through it

 

You are attempting to put forth false doctrine and I'll not idly sit by and allow your garbage to go unchallenged

 

As to accepting the "opinions of a Molokan", no one could define what that is as it relates to Christianity so that remark is spurious at best

 

That still does not address the questions

]

What about Jesus do the Scriptures testify?

What does the Holy Spirit testify about Jesus?

 

 

Seeking;

 

 

Thanks for the laugh but I will wait for Kevin to answer!

 

EGK

[seeking_truth_1 0]

Good Grief

 

What does Kevin have to do with the the questions I asked?

 

Kevin clearly stated

 

"I don't know you, and you may be a nice guy, but by your own admission, you reject Biblical Christianity.

You can be considered a friend by all of us, but not a brother in Christ."

 

"You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me." (John 5:39 NKJV)

 

"But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me." (John 15:26 NKJV)

 

What about Jesus do the Scriptures testify?

What does the Holy Spirit testify about Jesus?

 

For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. (Isaiah 9:6)

 

10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's Day, and I heard behind me a loud voice, as of a trumpet,

11 saying, "I am the Alpha and the Omega the First and the Last" and, "What you see, write in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia: to Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamos, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea."

12 Then I turned to see the voice that spoke with me. And having turned I saw seven golden lampstands,

13 and in the midst of the seven lampstands One like the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to the feet and girded about the chest with a golden band.

(Revelation 1:10-13)

 

17 And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead. But He laid His right hand on me, saying to me, "Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last.

18 "I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death. (Revelation 1:17-18)

 

 

1 ¶ So He got into a boat, crossed over, and came to His own city.

2 Then behold, they brought to Him a paralytic lying on a bed. When Jesus saw their faith, He said to the paralytic, "Son, be of good cheer; your sins are forgiven you."

3 And at once some of the scribes said within themselves, "This Man blasphemes!"

4 But Jesus, knowing their thoughts, said, "Why do you think evil in your hearts?

5 "For which is easier, to say, 'Your sins are forgiven you,' or to say, 'Arise and walk'?

6 "But that you may know that the Son of Man has power on earth to forgive sins" —then He said to the paralytic, "Arise, take up your bed, and go to your house."

7 And he arose and departed to his house.

8 Now when the multitudes saw it, they marveled and glorified God, who had given such power to men. (Matthew 9:1-8)

 

 

16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness,

17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work. (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

 

 

 

What about Jesus do the Scriptures testify?

What does the Holy Spirit testify about Jesus?

[KevinPolyaNazaroff 0]

...but I will wait for Kevin to answer!

 

EGK

I will post the scriptures here shortly.

 

In the meantime, I found this quote I would like to share with you.

K.

 

 

 

Sir Isaac Newton, when asked this question, “Sir Isaac, I do not understand. You seem to be able to believe the Bible like a little child. I have tried but I cannot. So many of its statements mean nothing to me. I cannot believe; I cannot understand,”

He replied:

“Sometimes I come into my study and in my absentmindedness I attempt to light my candle when the extinguisher is over it, and I fumble about trying to light and cannot; but when I remove the extinguisher then I am able to light the candle. I am afraid the extinguisher in your case is the love of your sins; it is deliberate unbelief that is in you. Turn to God in repentance; be prepared to let the Spirit of God reveal His truth to you, and it will be His joy to show the glory of the grace of God shining in the face of Jesus Christ.”

 

[coffee 0]

.

 

Regarding:

 

Welcome Coffee;

 

It is always very pleasant to read such a well written sermon but as always you pick and choose what you want to verify your thesis but leave even more out.

 

You had previously written about the "Chester Beatty Papyri" and their effect upon the authenticity and dates of the Gospels. These are, I totally agree, very conclusive in dating of the Gospels and to their authenticity, which never was a contention of mine. But where are the originals? I am afraid they are not available. So to prove inerrancy you cannot, unless you have the originals to compare later translations against, inerrancy is unprovable.

 

Let me quote from Sir Fredric Kenyon" The Bible and Modern Scholarship, (1948)

 

Significance of the Finds:

 

"The net result of this discovery--by far the most important since the discovery of the Siniaticus--is, in fact, to reduce the gap between the earlier manuscripts and the traditional dates of the New Testament books so far that it becomes negligible in any discussion of their authenticity. No other ancient book has anything like such early and plentiful testimony to its text, and no unbiased scholar would deny that the text that has come down to us is substantially sound, on the other hand, IT IS EVIDENT THAT BY THE END OF THE SECOND CENTURY VARIANTS IN THE MINOR DETAILS OF THE TEXT WERE PLENTIFUL AND WIDELY DIFFUSED. IT IS CLEAR THAT IN THE SECOND CENTURY THERE WAS NO GENERAL CONTROL OF THE TEXT OF THE BOOKS, WHICH WERE GRADUALLY COMING TO BE RECOGNIZED AS CANONICAL. MANUSCRIPTS WERE COPIED IN ALL PARTS OF THE WORLD WITHOUT COMPARISON WITH ONE ANOTHER, AND OFTEN NO DOUBT UNTRAINED SCRIGBES. HENCE MISTAKES AND SMALL VARIANTS EASILY AROSE AND WERE REPEATED, AND IT WAS ONLY GRADUALLY THAT THEY WERE SUBMITTED TO CONTROL AND REVISION. WE MUST THEREFORE ACCEPT MINOR UNCERTAINTIES AS TO THE DETAILS OF THE TEXT, WITHOUT PINNING OUR FAITH WHOLLY TO ANY ONE OF THE RECOGNIZED FAMILIES;but we have every right to be satisfied of its general integrity and faithfulness as the record of the earliest Christian writings."

 

I know you know more than Sir Fredric Kenyon, who was a scholar of ancient languages and who had made a life-long study of the Bible, especially the New Testament as an historical text. Britis paleographer, biblical and classical scholar, Director of the British Museum, President of the British Academy from 1917 to 1921, Professor of English Law at Oxford, etc. The lisyt is too long to fully quote.

 

As you can now see this is why I deny "inerrancy" and not veracity. Any child can verify by the old parlor game of passing a message from one child to another that the ending message is usually quite different from the one originally given. This depending upon the interpretation of the message from one to another until it reaches its end. It must also be remembered that the New Testament writings of Jesus Christ were not written by Jesus but by others, who interpreted his message and then repeated it as an oral history until it was finally written down, centuries later. The original Disciples were uneducated men and it took sometimes many decades to write down their messages which became the Gospels to make Christianity a religion of the Book as the Jews and to attach themselves to the historocity of the Jews.

 

Sir Fredric Kenyon also stated that the New Testament ("GRADUALLY BECAME CANNONICAL"), but you know better than him.

 

EGK (substantially sound but not inerrant)

 

 

Sir Fredric Kenyon is the former Director of the British Museum, and a respected scholar who is universally regarded as an authority for his research about the history of the Bible. So that there is no confusion, the comments made by EGK that I "know more than" Kenyon, or that I "know better than" Kenyon, is NOT to be mistaken for something which I personally might have ever stated or even implied, but is a reflex reaction of immature sarcasm on the part of EGK.

 

I seriously doubt that any reputable scholar or historian who has ever studied the content of the available Biblical manuscripts, particularly those which have been preserved in the original languages of Hebrew and Greek, would ever be able to deny that which EGK stated:

 

We do not have the original manuscripts of any of the books of the New Testament, but only copies--over 5,000 copies, just in the Greek language in which the books were originally written.

 

Most copies are centuries removed from the originals.

 

And there are some in which they may never know what the authors originally wrote.

 

Let me give you a few Bible passages:

 

1 John 5:7, John 8:7, John 8:11, Luke 22:44, Luke 22:20, Mark 16:17-18, John 5:4, Luke 24:12, Luke 24:51.

 

In my Life Application Study Bible, it states about 1 John 5: 7-8;

 

"Late manuscripts of the Vulgate testify in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. And there are three that testify on earth: (not found in any Greek manuscript before the sixteenth century)"

 

In the Codex Vaticanus, which the King James version of the bible is based upon, a page states in the margin;

 

"Fool and knave, leave the old reading, don't change it!"

 

This notation and note are listed in the Codex Vaticanus in a margin note (between columns one and two) in which some medieval scribe maligns a predecessor for altering the text.

 

 

Taking all of this into consideration, after the many years that he spent with his own personal investigation and research pertaining to the authenticity and veracity of the Scriptural text as we have it today, here is the conclusion that Sir Fredric Kenyon came to:

 

It may be disturbing to some to part with the conception of a Bible handed down through the ages without alteration and in unchallenged authority; but it is a higher ideal to face the facts, to apply the best powers with which God has endowed us to the solution of the problems which they present to us; and it is reassuring at the end to find that the general result of all these discoveries and all this study is to strengthen the proof of the authenticity of the Scriptures, and our conviction that we have in our hands, in substantial integrity, the veritable Word of God. (THE STORY OF THE BIBLE - Account Of How It Came To Us - by Sir FREDERIC KENYON I.B.E., K.C.B., F.B.A., F.S.A.)

 

 

In other words, in response to the so-called "proof" that has supposedly been submitted by EGK, one is prompted to ask where is the alleged "smoking gun"?

 

What EGK has stated with regard to the authenticity of the existing available manuscripts, that "inerrancy is unprovable", cannot be denied. However, the same is true in reverse.

 

EGK cannot prove, with absolute inerrancy, that the earliest available manuscripts containing Scriptural text which he and the Rudometkinites refuse to accept as truth, specifically those writings which testify and proclaim that Jesus is God, have supposedly been altered.

 

Like the evolutionists, who cannot provide any proof to support their theory about the origin of all species, but who insist on believing that the species of mankind evolved to its present form from prior lower species of different life forms over "millions of billions of years", EGK and the Rudometkinites, and the skeptics who they refer to as "authorities", cannot prove that the specific Biblical text which they object to has ever been altered, specifically those Scriptures which testify of the Deity of Jesus Christ, that He is God in the flesh.

 

In fact, all known collected evidence proves that what has been recorded in the Bible about the Deity of Jesus, and preserved in the earliest manuscripts known to exist, originally was written exactly as we have the Holy Scriptures in their printed form today.

 

EGK and the Rudometkinites, and the other skeptics, cannot provide samples of marginal notes that were written by scribes throughout history, in order to prove their hypothesis that the early Christian Church, prior to the 4th century AD, believed differently about the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ than it does today.

 

On the contrary, according to all of the existing Biblical manuscripts known to predate any of the historical Ecumenical Councils, the historical documentation concerning the subject of Jesus as God in the flesh testifies that what is recorded as the written Word of God, in the context and form which we have today, is in fact exactly as it was initially dictated by the Lord Himself.

 

For instance, what EGK has stated about the Biblical text in 1 John 5:7-8 is true, but EGK and the Rudometkinites, and their fellow skeptics, have never been able to provide any such evidence that there has ever been any such alleged "tampering" with the Scriptural text which testifies that Jesus is "God over all" (Romans 9:5).

 

Nor is there any such evidence with regard to the text that is written in the earliest known manuscripts which describes the Lord as our "great God and Savior Jesus Christ" (Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1;1).

 

The same can be said about the Biblical text in which Jesus describes Himself as God, when He identifies Himself as "the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end" (Revelation 22:13).

 

There is no evidence of any such alleged "tampering" with the Scriptural passage in which God the Father identifies Jesus as God the Son, where the Father addresses the Son as "God" and as "Lord" (Hebrews 1:8-12).

 

The same is true of the Biblical text in which Jesus declares Himself YAHWEH, the "I AM" God (John 8:58 and John 10:30).

 

EGK and the Rudometkinites, and their fellow skeptics, have yet to present any evidence of purported scribal liberties that have ever been taken in order to alter or add to and change what is recorded about Jesus being the preincarnate Word of God, Who existed as God in Spirit form "in the beginning", Who became flesh and walked the earth as a human being (John 1:1-14).

 

This is most obvious with the Scriptural passages in which Jesus is identified as our Creator God "through Whom" all things exist, which were created "by Him" and "through Him and for Him" (Colossians 1:15-17 and 1 Corinthians 8:6).

 

To date, there has been no evidence presented by EGK and the Rudometkinites, or their fellow skeptics, to cast any doubt about the authenticity of the words which Jesus spoke to Satan when the devil was tempting the Lord, and Christ referred to Himself with absolute certainty, when He told Satan that "it is written", that one is not to put "the Lord your God" to the test.

 

Because EGK and the Rudometkinites, together with their fellow skeptics, have already predetermined that they will not believe or accept the single specific Biblical truth, as it is recorded in the Holy Scriptures, that the Lord Jesus Christ is both God and man, the tactic they employ is to present historical documentation about certain existing flaws in other unrelated excerpts from the historical Biblical record, in order to highlight certain obvious human errors.

 

Their intended purpose is to cast doubt and suspicion on the integrity and the veracity of the Biblical text, with so-called "proof" that the written Word of God as we know it, purportedly with malicious premeditation, has supposedly been "tampered with" by human hands.

 

Since evidence exists that various historical errors can be found elsewhere in the Scriptures, EGK and the Rudometkinites attempt to justify and defend their skepticism with the assumption that all other Scripture is also "suspect", specifically when it concerns what the Bible based followers of Jesus Christ believe about His Deity.

 

Regarding:

 

I ask you one question, if Jesus claimed he was divine, then why does Matthew, Mark and Luke all fail to say anything about it? Did they just forget to mention that part?

 

Try comparing the Gospels horizontally. Compare the different stories especially of the Passion of Christ. Why do they differ?

 

 

According to what is written in the Bible, the identity of Jesus Christ as the promised "God with us" Immanuel, the child about Whom it is prophesied in the book of Isaiah, that His name would be called "Mighty God", is found in Matthew 1:18-25.

 

The fact that neither Mark, nor Luke, nor John, mentions this excerpt, which is found only in the account written by Matthew, does not make it unreliable or untrustworthy, nor is it conclusive proof that God did not inspire Matthew to write what he did.

 

The fact that one account is not exactly the same as another, or that each account, as they are written by four different men, is not a carbon copy, "cookie cutter" duplication of the other, does not substantiate EGK's claim that they supposedly "differ" somehow one from the other.

 

As a student of the Bible, and as a follower of the Lord Jesus Christ, I consider all of Scripture to be the written Word of God (2 Timothy 3:14-17), but to EGK and the Rudometkinites, and to their fellow skeptics, parameters have obviously been established with regard to what is acceptable and what is not, especially when it comes to which Biblical text the skeptic considers to be authentic and authoritative, as being truly inspired by the Lord.

 

These parameters always conveniently adhere to the guidelines which the skeptics have established with regard to their own predetermined choices and decisions that they have made, particularly as it applies to what and which Scriptures they will and will not accept as "authority".

 

In other words, they set themselves up as their own "god", and ultimately decide for themselves, using their own predetermined established guidelines, which portions of the Biblical text they will accept, and which passages from the Bible that they will reject.

 

In this instance, EGK keeps repeating himself that he will not accept any of the other Scriptures which testify of the Deity of Jesus, but will only accept those Scriptures where Jesus Himself is found to have uttered the applicable words, apparently using the following words only, in specific order:

 

There is only One God, Who is Triune in nature, Who exists in Trinity, and I, Jesus, existed previously in Spirit form in heaven as God the Word, Who, together with God the Father and God the Holy Spirit, created all of creation, and then I, God the Word, became a human being in the person of Jesus of Nazareth, exactly as it is written in the Holy Scriptures, and I dwelled on earth for a time as God in human flesh until I was crucified, according to what is also written in the Scriptures.

 

Apparently, unless EGK and the Rudometkinites, and their fellow skeptics, can find these precise words, uttered in this precise order, they will not accept any of the other passages from the Bible which comprise the complete counsel of the Scriptures, and which declares and testifies that the Lord Jesus Christ is our loving, Creator God, Who came to earth as the only acceptable sacrifice to die for sinful mankind, in order to provide salvation and eternal life to all who will accept Him as Who He IS, and believe in Him according to all of the claims that are written about Him in the Bible.

 

.

[EGK 0]

 

 

Thank You Coffee;

 

Another fine sermon about a multitude of biblical questions. But in regards to the original statement, I stated:

 

"I do not deny veracity, I deny inerrancy"

 

Since there are no original texts available for proof, inerrancy cannot be proved. Proof of scribal errors was so rampant in antiquity that the author of the Book of Revelation threatened damnation to anyone who "adds to or "takes away words from the text. (Rev 22: 18-19) To believe otherwise is naievity of the highest form. If one will only read the Revised Standard version of the Bible in the books of 1 and 2 Samuel, alone you will find where translators are not even sure what the original text was in the footnotes.

 

I find it also strange how one will accept the belief of the first century fathers, as it pertains to the trinity doctrine, but vehemently deny other first through third century doctrines such as, Prayer for the Dead, Purgatory, Veneration of Mary, by the same men.

 

EGK

 

 

[Guest Guest]

"I do not deny veracity, I deny inerrancy" Since there are no original texts available for proof, inerrancy cannot be proved. EGK

You state their are no "original" Scriptures to prove accuracy, do you use the eannie meannie miney moe molokan church system to determine what is true and what is not?

 

[lastinline 0]

"I do not deny veracity, I deny inerrancy"

Since there are no original texts available for proof, inerrancy cannot be proved. Proof of scribal errors was so rampant in antiquity that the author of the Book of Revelation threatened damnation to anyone who "adds to or "takes away words from the text. (Rev 22: 18-19) To believe otherwise is naiveté of the highest form.

You now belong to a growing list of "messiahs" that my Lord God warned me about.

 

lastinline (& appearing in a timely manner & rejoicingly with HIS naiveté)

[coffee 0]

.

 

 

Regarding:

 

Thank You Coffee;

 

Another fine sermon about a multitude of biblical questions. But in regards to the original statement, I stated:

 

"I do not deny veracity, I deny inerrancy"

 

Since there are no original texts available for proof, inerrancy cannot be proved. Proof of scribal errors was so rampant in antiquity that the author of the Book of Revelation threatened damnation to anyone who "adds to or "takes away words from the text. (Rev 22: 18-19) To believe otherwise is naievity of the highest form. If one will only read the Revised Standard version of the Bible in the books of 1 and 2 Samuel, alone you will find where translators are not even sure what the original text was in the footnotes.

 

I find it also strange how one will accept the belief of the first century fathers, as it pertains to the trinity doctrine, but vehemently deny other first through third century doctrines such as, Prayer for the Dead, Purgatory, Veneration of Mary, by the same men.

 

EGK

 

 

First of all, it is the testimony of the Holy Scriptures that our Creator God, the God of the Bible, is ONE God Who exists and Who has made Himself known to mankind in 3 distinct persons.

 

The fact that today's Bible based followers of the Lord Jesus Christ believe this Scriptural truth, is NOT based on the fact that the first century forefathers of the early Christian Church also specifically believed this, but rather it is because this truth is recorded in the written Word of God.

 

Likewise with the rejection of such practices as "prayer for the dead" and the teachings about "purgatory", which are an integral part of the religious policies of the Russian Greek Orthodox Church, and the Roman Catholic Church, as well as that which is propagated among the Rudometkinites in the writings of the Spirit and Life book, these strange teachings and false doctrines are NOT founded on Biblical truth.

 

The rejection of these teachings and practices are NOT based on anything that has ever been written by any of the early Church forefathers.

 

I am not aware of any single early Church father of the "first through third century" who ever supported the Scriptural testimony of the Deity of Jesus Christ, who also defended "prayer for the dead" and the mythical and extra-Biblical teaching about "purgatory", or who also participated in the "veneration of Mary".

 

I find it curious and strange that EGK and the Rudometkinites, and even the so-called "experts" they refer to, can be openly and admittedly skeptical about the authority of the Bible, due to their denial of inerrancy, yet still claim that they do not deny the veracity of the Holy Scriptures.

 

To me, this is a contradiction.

 

.

 

[seeking_truth_1 0]

Seems to me they mean the same thing

 

free from error and conformity with truth are the same thing

 

How can you have one with the other

 

How can anything conform to Truth and not be accurate?

 

Main Entry: ve·rac·i·ty

Pronunciation: \və-ˈra-sə-tē\Function: noun Inflected Form(s): plural ve·rac·i·ties

Date: circa 1623

1 : devotion to the truth : truthfulness

2 : power of conveying or perceiving truth

3 : conformity with truth or fact : accuracy

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/inerrant

 

Main Entry: in·er·rant

Pronunciation: \-ənt\Function: adjective Etymology: Latin inerrant-, inerrans, from in- + errant-, errans, present participle of errare to err

Date: 1837

1: free from error

 

 

Thank You Coffee;

 

Another fine sermon about a multitude of biblical questions. But in regards to the original statement, I stated:

 

"I do not deny veracity, I deny inerrancy"

 

Since there are no original texts available for proof, inerrancy cannot be proved. Proof of scribal errors was so rampant in antiquity that the author of the Book of Revelation threatened damnation to anyone who "adds to or "takes away words from the text. (Rev 22: 18-19) To believe otherwise is naievity of the highest form. If one will only read the Revised Standard version of the Bible in the books of 1 and 2 Samuel, alone you will find where translators are not even sure what the original text was in the footnotes.

 

I find it also strange how one will accept the belief of the first century fathers, as it pertains to the trinity doctrine, but vehemently deny other first through third century doctrines such as, Prayer for the Dead, Purgatory, Veneration of Mary, by the same men.

 

EGK

[Guest Merriam_Webster]

"I do not deny veracity, I deny inerrancy"

Seems to me they mean the same thing

 

free from error and conformity with truth are the same thing

 

How can you have one with the other

 

How can anything conform to Truth and not be accurate?

 

Main Entry: ve·rac·i·ty

Pronunciation: \və-ˈra-sə-tē\Function: noun Inflected Form(s): plural ve·rac·i·ties

Date: circa 1623

1 : devotion to the truth : truthfulness

2 : power of conveying or perceiving truth

3 : conformity with truth or fact : accuracy

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/inerrant

 

Main Entry: in·er·rant

Pronunciation: \-ənt\Function: adjective Etymology: Latin inerrant-, inerrans, from in- + errant-, errans, present participle of errare to err

Date: 1837

1: free from error

EGK you didn't answer

 

 

 

 

[Guest Merriam_Webster]

EGK is confused about the veracity of the Scriptures, he praises them as being inerrant Word of God

His Word is the greatest of His works; and His words, therefore, are to be sought out by all who, through grace, have been made to value them more than necessary food. Our business must be to read, mark, and study what He has written for our learning. It is only from God's own Word that we can learn His truths.

Give your research and back up what you have to say with Book, Chapter and verse.

then in denial he does a 180 and piece meals his own Holy Bible….

"I do not deny veracity, I deny inerrancy" Since there are no original texts available for proof, inerrancy cannot be proved.

EGK has no authority outside of his own mind, he is elder taught and makes a conscious choice to remain Biblically ignorant and wants you to join him.

 

 

EGK reveres commentaries over Scripture.

I play no game, I give my opinion and I backed it up with scholars commentaries…..

EGK does not believe Jesus is God

As to the deity of Jesus, I do not know. Scripture does not unequivocally state it, Jesus never stated it,….

EGK denies the early Christian Church tenets yet accepts the Los Angeles Novi Roman Church tenets of Rudometkin, Prayer for the Dead, Purgatory, Veneration of Mary

I find it also strange how one will accept the belief of the first century fathers, as it pertains to the trinity doctrine, but vehemently deny other first through third century doctrines such as, Prayer for the Dead, Purgatory, Veneration of Mary, by the same men.

 

 

The EGK's molokan church does not bring it's people to the Biblical Jesus but a different jesus, as is perceived by the mind of Rudometkin, and EGK wants you to be a part of it.

 

 

[seeking_truth_1 0]

Here's EGK last foray into heresy until he went poof

 

Then he resurfaced only to make himself out to be a fool yet again

 

Why not just allow Scripture to speak for itself?

[Guest Mudpattie]

EGK acknowledges the accuracy of the Bible.

His Word is the greatest of His works; and His words, therefore, are to be sought out by all who, through grace, have been made to value them more than necessary food. Our business must be to read, mark, and study what He has written for our learning.

EGK doubts the accuracy of the Bible.

I ask you one question, if Jesus claimed he was divine, then why does Matthew, Mark and Luke all fail to say anything about it? Did they just forget to mention that part?

 

As of one week ago EGK denies the Deity of Jesus.

Using a red letter edition of the new testament marked with the words of Jesus, show me who Jesus says he is? (His words only)

EGK believes the Bible but not this red letter verse. The Father is Revealed 7 "If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; and from now on you know Him and have seen Him." John 14:7 NKJV

 

Bible only EGK says, no need for the words or works of other men.

His Word is the greatest of His works; and His words, therefore, are to be sought out by all who, through grace, have been made to value them more than necessary food. Our business must be to read, mark, and study what He has written for our learning. No Lexicons, or other works or words of man can avail us here. It is only from God's own Word that we can learn His truths.

EGK plays no games, he backs up his opinions with the commentaries of Chuck Smith and other scholars.

I play no game, I give my opinion and I backed it up with scholars commentaries and also gave a quote from a very highly respected Pastor of today, Chuck Smith.

EGK in the SAME post, runs the other way again saying he uses Book, Chapter and verse only.

Give your research and back up what you have to say with Book, Chapter and verse.

 

Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; 1 John 4:1 NKJV