I Believe In Evidence....

coffee · February 17, 2006

.

Mitrovitch stated:

I believe in evidence. (Post #4, Feb 13 2006, 05:44 PM, Faith Section, Rudometkin a Khlyst?.... thread)

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see the evidence demonstrating that MGR was Khlyst.

Are you just making a jump between what MGR wrote and the beliefs of the Khlysti? (Post # 2, Feb 13 2006, 02:10 PM, Faith Section, Rudometkin a Khlyst?.... thread)

I don't necessarily agree with your interpretation of evidence and that is my prerogative. However, if you have genuine evidence....it is something I would be interested in and which could possibly sway my beliefs.

As such, please provide what information you are referring to when you state that Maxim was Khlyst. Thank you kindly. (Post # 4, Feb 13 2006, 05:44 PM, Faith Section, Rudometkin a Khlyst?.... thread)

Mitrovitch's comment presupposes that Rudometkin was one of our Spiritual Christian Molokan forefathers. This theory has never been proven. Is it possible that now, after all these years, someone from among Rudometkin's loyal and faithful followers can provide the documentation for what has thus far proven to be the "missing link"?

To use Mitrovitch's words, maybe I am missing something, but I have yet to see any such alleged "evidence" demonstrating that Rudometkin was a Bible based Molokan Christian, or that he was even interested in becoming part of the religious sect that our founding Molokan forefathers had established in Russia.

Whenever anyone from today's crop of Rudometkinites is asked to explain how it is that they have come to the conclusion about Rudometkin ever being part of our Christian Molokan denomination, this elusive "evidence" continues to be non-existent .

The traditional stories handed down as family folklore have continued to become more inconsistent, exaggerated and embellished from generation to generation, but the "evidence" to substantiate this romanticized oral tradition is woefully missing.

With much Scripture twisting, Rudometkin's followers have taken what Rudometkin teaches in the Spirit and Life book, and have developed for themselves a belief system which they claim is somehow consistent with what is written in the Bible.

From that point, the Rudometkinites make a giant leap to where they apparently feel justified using the same denominational identity as that of our Spiritual Christian Molokan forefathers.

When asked to expound on the contradictions between what Rudometkin wrote in the Spirit and Life book, versus what is written in the Bible, and how it came to pass that Rudometkin's belief system is virtually identical to numerous foundational "spiritual teachings" and religious practices of the Khlysty, while at the same time contrary to specific Biblical beliefs that our historical Molokan Christian forefathers have long been known for, those who are the followers of Rudometkin consistently retreat back to silence, most of the time with empty excuses, instead of dialogue.

The historical evidence from those who have written about the history of religious sectarianism in Russia confirms what is evident in the Spirit and Life book, that Rudometkin formulated his own personal religious teachings by "blending" the mystical beliefs of the Khlysty with the religious practices of the Bible based Molokan Christians, and in the process Rudometkin developed his own version of the Khlysty heresy known by the name of "New Israel", a term that was commonly used among the Khlysty during the second half of the 19th century, into the beginning of the 20th century.

The current remnant of Rudometkinites are illiterate as it pertains to the reading and comprehension of anything that is written in the Russian language. For that matter, none of the parents of today's new crop of Rudometkinite zealots are fluent in the Russian language either. The term, "fluent" is used in this instance as the equivalent of being able to read a newspaper that is printed in Russian, or watch Russian television, and instantly translate verbatim, from Russian into English.

The point being, that in order for today's remnant of Rudometkin's faithful and loyal followers, such as Mitrovitch, to have any idea what Rudometkin wrote in the Spirit and Life book, they must rely on a person who is genuinely Russian-speaking in order to explain it to them, or they must trust that what is printed in one of the English translations is accurate and true to the context of what was originally written in Russian.

Of the three translations in existence, Danny *****************'s publication of the English Spirit and Life book seems to be the translation of choice for those who are more vocal among today's loyal and faithful Rudometkinite zealots.

This being said, today's American-born and English-speaking generation of Rudometkinites are a captive audience with regard to whatever Danny ***************** has published about Rudometkin. The question has been raised, and even presented directly to Danny himself, regarding the credibility and accuracy of what is printed in Danny's two English translations of the Spirit and Life book.

Question # 1 - Danny *****************, according to what you know, has everything that Rudometkin wrote to his followers, in his own original handwritten papers, been included in the 1928 edition of the Russian version of the Spirit and Life book that lies on the prestol in the Jumper churches?

Answer # 1 - So far, Danny's response has been silence.

Question # 2 - Danny *****************, according to what you know, has everything that Rudometkin wrote to his followers, in his own original handwritten papers, been included in your two English translations of the Spirit and Life book, either the one you published in 1983, or the revised version that you published in 2005?

Answer # 2 - So far, Danny's response has been silence.

Question # 3 - Danny *****************, did you, or did you not participate in an agreement with four other men to keep hidden from the general Molokan public, specific excerpts from Rudometkin's own original handwritten papers that were edited out and not included in the Russian version of the Spirit and Life book, which was published in 1928?

Answer # 3 - So far, Danny's response has been silence.

Question # 4 - Danny *****************, some of Rudometkin's drawings in the 1983 edition of your English translation of the Spirit and Life book have been changed, and these same drawings in your revised 2005 edition are noticeably and significantly different from how they appear in your 1983 publication. What were these changes and why were they made?

Answer # 4 - I am not aware of any changes. - Danny ***************** (Post # 67, Jan 25 2006, 03:33 PM, in Anonymous Section, What is a Molokan?.... thread)

"don't believe anything you hear unless you hear it from me personally" - Danny ***************** (Post # 50, Feb 3 2006, 11:25 AM, Anonymous Section, Missing Text From The Spirit and Life Book.... thread)

"If you don't hear it from me personally, do not believe it." - Danny ***************** (Post # 9, Jan 31 2006, 07:58 AM, Anonymous Section, Missing Text From The Spirit and Life Book.... thread)

Again, because Danny *****************'s translation of the Spirit and Life book seems to be the translation of choice for those who are more vocal among the loyal and faithful Rudometkinite zealots, today's American-born and English-speaking generation of Rudometkin's followers are a captive audience with regard to whatever Danny ***************** has published about Rudometkin as a person.

"I believe in evidence". - Mitrovitch

"I don't necessarily agree with your interpretation of evidence and that is my prerogative. However, if you have genuine evidence....it is something I would be interested in and which could possibly sway my beliefs." - Mitrovitch

Evidence Exhibit # 1 - On Page 249 in the 1983 version of Danny *****************'s English translation of the Spirit and Life book, there is a drawing that was originally done by Rudometkin, of a woman with her naked breasts exposed, displayed in shameful detail.

Evidence Exhibit # 2 - In the revised 2005 version of Danny *****************'s English translation of the Spirit and Life book, the drawing on Page 249 has been changed from how it appears in Danny's 1983 edition, so that the woman in the drawing has now been covered up, and her nakedness is no longer exposed.

Evidence Exhibit # 3 - On Page 253 in the 1983 version of Danny *****************'s English translation of the Spirit and Life book, there is a drawing that was originally done by Rudometkin, of a woman with her naked breasts exposed, displayed in shameful detail.

Evidence Exhibit # 4 - In the revised 2005 version of Danny *****************'s English translation of the Spirit and Life book, the drawing on Page 253 has been changed from how it appears in Danny's 1983 edition, so that the woman in the drawing has now been covered up, and her nakedness is no longer exposed.

Evidence Exhibit # 5 - On Page 762 in the 1983 version of Danny *****************'s English translation of the Spirit and Life book, there is a drawing that was originally done by Rudometkin, of a woman with her naked breasts exposed, displayed in shameful detail.

Evidence Exhibit # 6 - In the revised 2005 version of Danny *****************'s English translation of the Spirit and Life book, the drawing on Page 762 has been changed from how it appears in Danny's 1983 edition, so that the woman in the drawing has now been covered up, and her nakedness is no longer exposed.

Based on the evidence that has been presented about the changes from Danny *****************'s 1983 edition of his English translation of the Spirit and Life book, to his revised 2005 edition, and based on Danny's denial with regard to having any knowledge about these changes, what conclusion(s) are Mitrovitch and his fellow Rudometkinites going to make?

1) Is Danny ***************** an honorable person who is to be respected as a credible elder, as someone who is totally honest, who always tells the truth about Rudometkin and about what is written in the Spirit and Life book?

2) If Danny ***************** cannot tell the truth about one simple little question pertaining to a couple of obvious changes between his 1983 edition and his revised 2005 edition, how credible is Danny ***************** about the rest of what has been published in his English translations?

3) When it comes to the content of what is written in the Spirit and Life book, can Danny ***************** be trusted to be honest about the truth, as it pertains to Rudometkin?

4) Or is Danny ***************** simply a dishonest and deceitful liar, because of his agenda to keep certain incriminating truth, which Rudometkin revealed about himself in his own original handwritten papers, hidden away from the general Molokan public?

The implication from Danny's dishonesty affects the very credibility of Danny ***************** as a person, as well as the credibility of whatever he has published about Rudometkin, and about what is written in the Spirit and Life book.

As a general rule, Rudometkinite zealots like Mitrovitch are typically more than eager and willing to overlook Danny's dishonesty, since they all share an equal commitment with one another that Rudometkin's writings in the Spirit and Life book, first and foremost, before anything else, must be included as part of their belief system, no matter what is written in the Bible, no matter what kind of "evidence" exists, historical or otherwise.

This commitment to each other includes the prerequisite that first and foremost, above and beyond anything else, Rudometkin must be accepted as their "King of Spirits", as their "New Jewish Messiah", as their "Third Feature" who they believe to be the Holy Spirit incarnate, and as their special spiritual leader, their own personal "King of Israel", their "spiritual" Julius Caesar, "Yool'ia, Yool'iesar, King Yoores".

"I believe in evidence". - Mitrovitch

"I don't necessarily agree with your interpretation of evidence and that is my prerogative. However, if you have genuine evidence....it is something I would be interested in and which could possibly sway my beliefs." - Mitrovitch

Based on the genuine evidence that was presented at trial, it is quite obvious that a substantial amount of people still believe that O. J. Simpson murdered his wife. Based on that same genuine evidence, a jury of 12 people acquitted O. J. Simpson, and judged him to be not guilty.

We all need to be reminded that our Bible based Molokan Christian ancestors in Russia married their children, had child dedications for their children (k'stini), and buried their dead relatives perfectly fine without Rudometkin's writings in the Spirit and Life book, just as they and their parents before them had been doing for years, long before Rudometkin ever came along.

These are people who were elders of Molokan churches, both in Russia as well as here in America, who had firsthand knowledge about Rudometkin and his shameful practice of "spiritual wifery". Because these individuals and their parents who migrated here to America personally knew Rudometkin, and knew about his sexual immorality, many of us had grandparents and great grandparents who did not want to have anything to do with Rudometkin, or with his heretical teachings.

Today's generation needs to give credit to these older generations, who knew the truth about Rudometkin and who did not ignore his sinful immorality, but identified Rudometkin for what he was, a false prophet and sexual pervert.

There is not much mentioned in today's "Molokan" brotherhood about the segregation between the "Davidisti" and the "Makcimisti", but those ancestors who distanced themselves from Rudometkin's followers when they first migrated here to America, did so because of Rudometkin's un-Biblical and extra-Biblical self-proclamation that he was someone special in the eyes of God, above all others.

Just as this situation existed back then, so it exists today. There are many who are descendants of these same Molokan elders and ancestors, who are still active in today's Molokan community, who have never accepted Rudometkin as anything other than the deceived heretic that he was. These individuals have never accepted the Spirit and Life book as being equal to what is written in the Bible, and still do not, to this very day.

Today's new generation needs to be reminded of this, and take this to heart.

.

Disciple · February 17, 2006

coffee,

Could you please PM me scans of the three forementioned pages of the 2005 edition of the Spirit and Life? Thanks.

seeking_truth_1 · February 17, 2006

Why not post them for all to see?

anakainosis · February 17, 2006

This is page 253 in the 2005 English version.

Page 253 in the 1947 Russian version.

Page 249 in the 2005 English version.

Page 249 in the 1947 Russian version.

:11:

1) Is Danny ***************** an honorable person who is to be respected as a credible elder, as someone who is totally honest, who always tells the truth about Rudometkin and about what is written in the Spirit and Life book?

2) If Danny ***************** cannot tell the truth about one simple little question pertaining to a couple of obvious changes between his 1983 edition and his revised 2005 edition, how credible is Danny ***************** about the rest of what has been published in his English translations?

3) When it comes to the content of what is written in the Spirit and Life book, can Danny ***************** be trusted to be honest about the truth, as it pertains to Rudometkin?

4) Or is Danny ***************** simply a dishonest and deceitful liar, because of his agenda to keep certain incriminating truth, which Rudometkin revealed about himself in his own original handwritten papers, hidden away from the general Molokan public?- Coffee

coffee · February 17, 2006

.

Disciple,

Regarding:

coffee,

Could you please PM me scans of the three forementioned pages of the 2005 edition of the Spirit and Life?

Thanks.

I am guessing that you have the 1983 version of Danny's translation, which contains the same drawings that are in the Russian version that is on the prestol, which you more than likely have a copy of as well.

Thank you Anakainosis for posting the covered up versions that are in Danny's 2005 publication. The drawing on Page 762 in Danny's English translation is not in either the 1928 or the 1947 publications of the Russian version.

Danny's 1983 edition shows the woman on Page 762 with naked breasts exposed, while in his revised 2005 version, Danny has altered Rudometkin's drawing to cover up the woman's nakedness.

If you still would like to see a scan of Page 762, maybe Anakainosis can post that page from Danny's 2005 edition as well?

.

anakainosis · February 17, 2006

Mr. or Mrs. Admin, can you pin this topic and also the ‘Russian Nonconformity’ thread to the top of the Faith forum? These two threads contain ‘evidence’ that a few miss to see amongst the many here on this forum regarding these commonly discussed issues.

Thank you.

seeking_truth_1 · February 27, 2007

It's all about the contradictions and yet those who advocate the S&L is "god inspired" cannot explain those same contradictions

I forgot about this thread

coffee did a great job pointing out the edits to remove and/or altered content in the S&L done so with intent to change the original meaning

coffee · July 14, 2009

.

....Because people tend to forget. Bringing it to the top. This one also needs to be read from the top.

The heresies in the Spirit and Life book are evil in the sight of the Lord and need to be purged from the lives of those "Molokans" who desire to have a true, spiritual and intimate relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ of the Holy Scriptures.

.

steadfast · July 15, 2009

If Danny ***************** were to appear before every church prestol and admit falsifying the S&L writings too, do you think many churches would remove it as their second Holy book and do you think some churches would stop blessing with it? Is TOTAL purging of Rudometkin's Khlyst beliefs from the Molokan church really necessary for it's members to have a relationship with Christ?............SF

Disciple · July 15, 2009

Does anyone have the microfilm, of the writings that were excluded from the published versions?

coffee · July 16, 2009

.

Does anyone have the microfilm, of the writings that were excluded from the published versions?

I was told that the writings were preserved on microfiche, not microfilm. I am not certain of the technological differences, but they are not the same.

This I was told by 3 of the 5 men who each claimed to share in the project, that the copies they have were taken from the microfiche. One of the men claimed to me that there is at least one, possibly two, additional books in the possession of individual families who did not allow the contents of their originals to be part of the project.

The infatuation with the mystery should not be an interest about what is written in the unpublished portions of Rudometkin's writings, but why the writings that WERE published, which are permeated throughout with heresy against the written Word of God in the Bible, were placed on the altars in the first place, to eventually become integrated into our "Molokan" worship of God, to the point that we have the spiritual mess that exists in our "Molokan" churches.

.

coffee · July 16, 2009

.

If Danny ***************** were to appear before every church prestol and admit falsifying the S&L writings too, do you think many churches would remove it as their second Holy book and do you think some churches would stop blessing with it? Is TOTAL purging of Rudometkin's Khlyst beliefs from the Molokan church really necessary for it's members to have a relationship with Christ?............SF

From personal experience, what goes on in the churches depends on the political leadership. So much depends on who the dominant elders and church leaders are, with regard to the kind of "control" they have in what is and is not allowed in their particular churches, as it pertains to the belief system that is practiced. Due to the emotional bond that exists because of our common ethnicity, and the desire to maintain some sort of semblance of "peace" and brotherhood-type of "unity", with the sense of accompanying "togetherness", it is doubtful that the heresy will ever be purged from today's traditional Jumper "Molokan" churches in existence.

However, as we all know, those same dominant political elders and church leaders do not have control of the radio stations that our modern "Molokan" people listen to in our homes, or the Christian book stores that we visit, and quite obviously, many of today's "Molokans", the women and young mothers in particular, are listening to God's evangelists who broadcast on radio, and are reading books that have been written by a variety of these faithful messengers from the Lord, and are being exposed to the truth of the Scriptures, which is sadly limited in the typical "Molokan" church services because of the "religion" that is practiced instead.

Also, as we all can see, the political church leadership has no control over those from within their own church members who attend non-Molokan, God fearing, Holy Spirit filled, Bible based Christian churches elsewhere, where they find fellowship with other Jesus followers and can worship God in their own native, American-born, English language, without having to endure being bullied around by the Rudometkinites, without being exposed to the evil spiritual filth that is written in the Spirit and Life book.

I believe that the purging of the heresy is happening in the homes, in private, out of the public eye, where one's relationship is truly personal, between the individual alone, and the Lord Jesus Christ Himself.

.

steadfast · July 16, 2009

Testing a spirit, during a family meal turn on the radio to a Christian sermon, and quietly watch the reactions of your adult loved ones.

Born a Molokan, born to loose or born to choose?...........SF

March 3, 2010

Coffee,

You are not even a Molokan and don't want to be one. Why do you even come onto this site? You find fault with pictures because ***** ***************** is a bit prudish and wants to cover the nipples in the drawings. Is there something about the nipples that you find important? Is that evidence? Please!

All that you did was poke fun at Mitrovitch because he was asking about evidence. Do you get the giggles from poking fun? What are you trying to accomplish by saying inflamatory statements like "being exposed to the evil spiritual filth that is written in the Spirit and Life book." You don't go to a Molokan Church yet you slam on Molokans who real the Spirit and Life book. I have found that my pentacostal friends are very intrigued with the Spirit and Life book. Does that make the Pentacostals worshiping another god?

We got the idea. You don't like the physical manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Let Molokans be. Do you think that you will convert all of us or is it just the thought that if you can save one soul out of our dastardly faith that you will be redeemed by the actions you have taken in your life. I think you know what I mean.

I am just,

Sickened.

NAD923 · March 5, 2010

Coffee,
You are not even a Molokan and don't want to be one. Why do you even come onto this site? You find fault with pictures because ***** ***************** is a bit prudish and wants to cover the nipples in the drawings. Is there something about the nipples that you find important? Is that evidence? Please!

All that you did was poke fun at Mitrovitch because he was asking about evidence. Do you get the giggles from poking fun? What are you trying to accomplish by saying inflamatory statements like "being exposed to the evil spiritual filth that is written in the Spirit and Life book." You don't go to a Molokan Church yet you slam on Molokans who real the Spirit and Life book. I have found that my pentacostal friends are very intrigued with the Spirit and Life book. Does that make the Pentacostals worshiping another god?

We got the idea. You don't like the physical manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Let Molokans be. Do you think that you will convert all of us or is it just the thought that if you can save one soul out of our dastardly faith that you will be redeemed by the actions you have taken in your life. I think you know what I mean.

I am just,

Sickened.

I'm sick with you!

seeking_truth_1 · March 5, 2010

You are not even a Molokan and don't want to be one.

Not a molokan? What is a molokan?

Can you define what a molokan is Biblically?

Pentacostals (to a greater degree) worship the True and Living God as found in Scripture

That's not a case with molokanism

The physical manifestation of the Holy Spirit is not the issue nor problem (though I cannot find a case for jumping in the Spirit in the Bible but speaking in tongues etc I can)

The problem with molokanism is they do not worship in Spirit and In Truth because the s&l is wholly contrary to the Bible

Anyone who looks to the s&l as "scripture" or adheres to it's teachings cannot know the God of the Bible

Whatever "spirit" is manifested by those who do not know Jesus is not of God but of Satan

As to the drawing that obviously been edited...My question is why?

If they were created under the inspiration of the "spirit of god", why would anyone change them?

Did the "spirit of god" make an error in judgment and it was necessary for man to correct it?

Can you explain that one to me?

Coffee,
You are not even a Molokan and don't want to be one. Why do you even come onto this site? You find fault with pictures because ***** ***************** is a bit prudish and wants to cover the nipples in the drawings. Is there something about the nipples that you find important? Is that evidence? Please!

All that you did was poke fun at Mitrovitch because he was asking about evidence. Do you get the giggles from poking fun? What are you trying to accomplish by saying inflamatory statements like "being exposed to the evil spiritual filth that is written in the Spirit and Life book." You don't go to a Molokan Church yet you slam on Molokans who real the Spirit and Life book. I have found that my pentacostal friends are very intrigued with the Spirit and Life book. Does that make the Pentacostals worshiping another god?

We got the idea. You don't like the physical manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Let Molokans be. Do you think that you will convert all of us or is it just the thought that if you can save one soul out of our dastardly faith that you will be redeemed by the actions you have taken in your life. I think you know what I mean.

I am just,

Sickened.

Nick Shubin · March 5, 2010

I've got some pepto bismol, care for some?

Ok, you showed your displeasure with Coffees post, but what do you come back with? You come back with the same thing that most do, anger. Do you have any biblical support to back up what you believe in?

Our true molokan forefathers, those that didn't fall for mgr, and his new israel sect, could back up what they believed! They also preached the message of the gospel! If we define ne-nash as a non believer, then they preached to ne-nashi! Phillip M. ***************** took spevka groups to other churches, while in this country...gulp! Why was it ok then, but not now? How dare the man who led us to this country mingle with ne-nash!

GoodDay · March 6, 2010

Sickened

Why are you sharing the "Almighty holy book" with a unaccepted Ne-nash? Do others know about this?

Did you show the parts where Macxim says he is the only way, meaning that Pentecostals are going to hell too?

Did you say you are special and part of THE chosen people and that Pentecostals are going to hell?

Why would you want to show it to him? He can't follow it because he is not Molokan and is going to hell.

Why do you talk with a Christian who would allow who-ever into his church? What if he invited you and you said you can't because your Molokan and that book says, he is going to hell?

Do you get the point?

I am sickened too now!! But you can keep the name, ill be better once I finish reading this stuff.

Thank God for Coffee s obediance to bring the garbage to the top of the trash-can for others to read. That was a analogy-Meaning cr-ap that has been forced upon us to a place where we can clearly see it's falsness.

Paul

Coffee,
You are not even a Molokan and don't want to be one. Why do you even come onto this site? You find fault with pictures because ***** ***************** is a bit prudish and wants to cover the nipples in the drawings. Is there something about the nipples that you find important? Is that evidence? Please!

All that you did was poke fun at Mitrovitch because he was asking about evidence. Do you get the giggles from poking fun? What are you trying to accomplish by saying inflamatory statements like "being exposed to the evil spiritual filth that is written in the Spirit and Life book." You don't go to a Molokan Church yet you slam on Molokans who real the Spirit and Life book. I have found that my pentacostal friends are very intrigued with the Spirit and Life book. Does that make the Pentacostals worshiping another god?

We got the idea. You don't like the physical manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Let Molokans be. Do you think that you will convert all of us or is it just the thought that if you can save one soul out of our dastardly faith that you will be redeemed by the actions you have taken in your life. I think you know what I mean.

I am just,

Sickened.

stevepiv · March 6, 2010

Sickened

Why are you sharing the "Almighty holy book" with a unaccepted Ne-nash? Do others know about this?

Did you show the parts where Macxim says he is the only way, meaning that Pentecostals are going to hell too?

Did you say you are special and part of THE chosen people and that Pentecostals are going to hell?

Why would you want to show it to him? He can't follow it because he is not Molokan and is going to hell.

Why do you talk with a Christian who would allow who-ever into his church? What if he invited you and you said you can't because your Molokan and that book says, he is going to hell?

Do you get the point?

I am sickened too now!! But you can keep the name, ill be better once I finish reading this stuff.

Thank God for Coffee s obediance to bring the garbage to the top of the trash-can for others to read. That was a analogy-Meaning cr-ap that has been forced upon us to a place where we can clearly see it's falsness.

Paul

Coffee,
You are not even a Molokan and don't want to be one. Why do you even come onto this site? You find fault with pictures because ***** ***************** is a bit prudish and wants to cover the nipples in the drawings. Is there something about the nipples that you find important? Is that evidence? Please!

All that you did was poke fun at Mitrovitch because he was asking about evidence. Do you get the giggles from poking fun? What are you trying to accomplish by saying inflamatory statements like "being exposed to the evil spiritual filth that is written in the Spirit and Life book." You don't go to a Molokan Church yet you slam on Molokans who real the Spirit and Life book. I have found that my pentacostal friends are very intrigued with the Spirit and Life book. Does that make the Pentacostals worshiping another god?

We got the idea. You don't like the physical manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Let Molokans be. Do you think that you will convert all of us or is it just the thought that if you can save one soul out of our dastardly faith that you will be redeemed by the actions you have taken in your life. I think you know what I mean.

I am just,

Sickened.

Amen Brother!

March 6, 2010

Amen to what I'd like to ask. Goodday, ***************** and Piv all are against the very foundation of Molokanism and yet here they are condemning another for not wanting to be a Molokan..yadda yadda. They themselves by their own admission condemn Molokans and the religion in general and are (the 3 of them) looking outside of the Molokan church at other religious services. This is the whole problem. I say go...good riddance and quit trying to bring down the rest of the Molokans. They need moral support and not your false christian havno.

March 6, 2010

Sickened,

If those drawings were God inspired, then no one on this earth should edit them, if God saw fit to inspire drawings with the nipples then no one should should tzmper with them. If the editor believed that these drawings were of God do you think he would dare render them as anything but accurate to how God had them drawn. I think the editor knew full well that those drawings have nothing to do with God, that is why he felt he had the authority to change them, otherwise he is guilty of subverting God's will. Of course that does mean he is guilty of leading others astray, but I think we already know that.

Nick Shubin · March 6, 2010

They need moral support and not your false christian havno.

What better moral support is there, than Gods word, found in the Bible?

March 6, 2010

Amen to what I'd like to ask. Goodday, ***************** and Piv all are against the very foundation of Molokanism and yet here they are condemning another for not wanting to be a Molokan..yadda yadda. They themselves by their own admission condemn Molokans and the religion in general and are (the 3 of them) looking outside of the Molokan church at other religious services. This is the whole problem. I say go...good riddance and quit trying to bring down the rest of the Molokans. They need moral support and not your false christian havno.

The "false Christian havenot" they are talking about comes straight out of the Bible, if you have an issue you really should take it up with the author, He's ready to listen.

March 7, 2010

It is a good thing that Ezekiel and Nahum did not make pictorials of Israel and her paramour as they discriptively stated.

Eze 23:20 her paramours whose members were as large as those of horses

Eze 16:37 I will uncover your nakedness to them that they may see all your nakedness

Nahum 3:5 And i will lift up your skirts over your face and I will net nations look on your nakedness.

Having a set of nipples showing through a kavtan (Russian traditional blouse) is nothing compared pictorially to what Ezekiel and Nahum and other OT Bible prophets described. But if pictorials were made, I am sure the Rabbinic scholars would have been prudent in the same manner.

The same is applied to pictures of Jesus on the cross. The victums were crucified stark naked. Since the soldiers were gambling for Jesus clothes, what was he wearing? But all the artists are prudish about showing the son of God exactly in the manner he was crucified.

But that is the Bible and not the S&L.

Coffee,
You are not even a Molokan and don't want to be one. Why do you even come onto this site? You find fault with pictures because ***** ***************** is a bit prudish and wants to cover the nipples in the drawings. Is there something about the nipples that you find important? Is that evidence? Please!

Sickened.

March 7, 2010

It is a good thing that Ezekiel and Nahum did not make pictorials of Israel and her paramour as they discriptively stated.

Eze 23:20 her paramours whose members were as large as those of horses

Eze 16:37 I will uncover your nakedness to them that they may see all your nakedness

Nahum 3:5 And i will lift up your skirts over your face and I will net nations look on your nakedness.

Having a set of nipples showing through a kavtan (Russian traditional blouse) is nothing compared pictorially to what Ezekiel and Nahum and other OT Bible prophets described. But if pictorials were made, I am sure the Rabbinic scholars would have been prudent in the same manner.

The same is applied to pictures of Jesus on the cross. The victums were crucified stark naked. Since the soldiers were gambling for Jesus clothes, what was he wearing? But all the artists are prudish about showing the son of God exactly in the manner he was crucified.

But that is the Bible and not the S&L.

Coffee,
You are not even a Molokan and don't want to be one. Why do you even come onto this site? You find fault with pictures because ***** ***************** is a bit prudish and wants to cover the nipples in the drawings. Is there something about the nipples that you find important? Is that evidence? Please!

Sickened.

Coffee,
You are not even a Molokan and don't want to be one. Why do you even come onto this site? You find fault with pictures because ***** ***************** is a bit prudish and wants to cover the nipples in the drawings. Is there something about the nipples that you find important? Is that evidence? Please!

I am just,

Sickened.

March 7, 2010

It is a good thing that Ezekiel and Nahum did not make pictorials of Israel and her paramour as they discriptively stated.

Eze 23:20 her paramours whose members were as large as those of horses

Eze 16:37 I will uncover your nakedness to them that they may see all your nakedness

Nahum 3:5 And i will lift up your skirts over your face and I will net nations look on your nakedness.

Having a set of nipples showing through a kavtan (Russian traditional blouse) is nothing compared pictorially to what Ezekiel and Nahum and other OT Bible prophets described. But if pictorials were made, I am sure the Rabbinic scholars would have been prudent in the same manner.

The same is applied to pictures of Jesus on the cross. The victums were crucified stark naked. Since the soldiers were gambling for Jesus clothes, what was he wearing? But all the artists are prudish about showing the son of God exactly in the manner he was crucified.

But that is the Bible and not the S&L.

Coffee,
You are not even a Molokan and don't want to be one. Why do you even come onto this site? You find fault with pictures because ***** ***************** is a bit prudish and wants to cover the nipples in the drawings. Is there something about the nipples that you find important? Is that evidence? Please!

Sickened.

March 7, 2010

It is a good thing that Ezekiel and Nahum did not make pictorials of Israel and her paramour as they discriptively stated.

Eze 23:20 her paramours whose members were as large as those of horses

Eze 16:37 I will uncover your nakedness to them that they may see all your nakedness

Nahum 3:5 And i will lift up your skirts over your face and I will net nations look on your nakedness.

Having a set of nipples showing through a kavtan (Russian traditional blouse) is nothing compared pictorially to what Ezekiel and Nahum and other OT Bible prophets described. But if pictorials were made, I am sure the Rabbinic scholars would have been prudent in the same manner.

The same is applied to pictures of Jesus on the cross. The victums were crucified stark naked. Since the soldiers were gambling for Jesus clothes, what was he wearing? But all the artists are prudish about showing the son of God exactly in the manner he was crucified.

But that is the Bible and not the S&L.

Coffee,
You are not even a Molokan and don't want to be one. Why do you even come onto this site? You find fault with pictures because ***** ***************** is a bit prudish and wants to cover the nipples in the drawings. Is there something about the nipples that you find important? Is that evidence? Please!

Sickened.

Coffee,
You are not even a Molokan and don't want to be one. Why do you even come onto this site? You find fault with pictures because ***** ***************** is a bit prudish and wants to cover the nipples in the drawings. Is there something about the nipples that you find important? Is that evidence? Please!

I am just,

Sickened.

GoodDay · March 7, 2010

Jesus Christ is the only foundation;

1 Corinthians 3:11-13

For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; every man's work shall be made manifest; for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.

Steve, myself and "*************" are in no way against what The Bible says about the only foundation there is that will not fall apart-That being Jesus Christ Himself. I have come to learn that our True Forefathers believed this very Truth because they were a Bible based bunch of believers.

You are saying "They" the Molokans of today need support? What sort of support? If their foundation was Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ only, the churches would be filled every time those doors where open. You think we and others that see the errors in todays Molokanism and the spirit and life are the ones behind these problems? How can that be when them that don't come around because of that are the problem? The problem is that which makes people want to stay away.

I lost you on the part about "condemning another for not wanting to be a Molokan"?

I lost you on the part about us condemning Molokans?

If you read back through the piles of posts we have been talking about "Religion" in general-Personally I hate religion because it destroy people's freedom to worship and have a personal relationship with Jesus. Our forefathers broke away from "Religion." Now it's showing what happens when Religion gets in the way again. It's turned into what our forefathers broke away from.

Again, I can speak for all of us as we know each other, NONE of us are looking for any "Religion" anywhere. Why do you think that?

We are not trying to bring down anybody. We are all posting posts that if condensed would say;

Read the Bible and study it with NO influence from anywhere. This is not a Molokan thing. That Bible holds ALL that one needs to live. The spirit and life justs sits there and most people will not read it. We are all just saying to read that too. Again, with NO outside influence. One can know right from wrong when they read it. It doesn't take the Holy Spirit to guide. Then if someone is concerned about where they or their loved ones are gonna end up, compare the two. They do NOT go together in any way. There are so many posts on here that point out everything one needs to see or know. Many will see and will study for themselves as some have in the past. God will guide them to the Truth if they are open to Him. Many will just get angry, but they will NEVER read either book. Why is that?

The Bible can hold it's own and has it's Authority from God. If anyone is angry at any of us for posting, don't take what we say; Read the Bible. There have been endless questions asked on here about why so many things are not done in the churches according to the Bible and no one answers.

Why is that?

I ask you one simple question and I hope you can answer honestly.

What are you referring to, when you say "False Christian Havno"?

Are you calling the Word of God that is in The Bible Havno?

If it says "All are one in Christ." It means just that.

When it says "God shows no favourtism," it means just that.

Every word and meaning in the Bible is True and applies to all peoples equally.

If the spirit and life is true and is Scripture, then it would not be for a little select group because the Holy Bible say God is no respecter of man and God shows no favourtism and no partiallity.

Paul

Amen to what I'd like to ask. Goodday, ***************** and Piv all are against the very foundation of Molokanism and yet here they are condemning another for not wanting to be a Molokan..yadda yadda. They themselves by their own admission condemn Molokans and the religion in general and are (the 3 of them) looking outside of the Molokan church at other religious services. This is the whole problem. I say go...good riddance and quit trying to bring down the rest of the Molokans. They need moral support and not your false christian havno.

coffee · March 8, 2010

.

Regarding:

Coffee,

You are not even a Molokan and don't want to be one. Why do you even come onto this site? You find fault with pictures because ***** ***************** is a bit prudish and wants to cover the nipples in the drawings. Is there something about the nipples that you find important? Is that evidence? Please!

All that you did was poke fun at Mitrovitch because he was asking about evidence. Do you get the giggles from poking fun? What are you trying to accomplish by saying inflammatory statements like "being exposed to the evil spiritual filth that is written in the Spirit and Life book." You don't go to a Molokan Church yet you slam on Molokans who real the Spirit and Life book. I have found that my pentacostal friends are very intrigued with the Spirit and Life book. Does that make the Pentecostals worshiping another god?

We got the idea. You don't like the physical manifestation of the Holy Spirit. Let Molokans be. Do you think that you will convert all of us or is it just the thought that if you can save one soul out of our dastardly faith that you will be redeemed by the actions you have taken in your life. I think you know what I mean.

I am just,

Sickened.

I am glad to see that the administrators/moderators of this site continue to allow and encourage the Rudometkinites to come and post their religious views, for all to read and compare. It continues to show that the "spirit" which inspired Rudometkin and Klubnikin to write and draw what they did in the Spirit and Life book is NOT the same as the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth which the Lord has given to indwell all of those who are Bible based followers of Him.

When comparing the inspiration of that which is written in the Holy Scriptures, the Bible, with the inspiration of that which is written in the Spirit and Life book, it is easy to see that there are two opposing spirits at work. Both cannot be “holy”, especially when that which is written in the Spirit and Life book contradicts that which is written in the Bible. One is a false "spirit".

The point has been made, and has been repeated in a number of previous posts, that if Danny S h u b i n believed that what Rudometkin has written and drawn in the Spirit and Life book was truly inspired by the God of the Holy Scriptures, why would he dare tamper with them, or change them in any way? After all, is it not EGK on this forum, as well as the Rudometkinites, who constantly bring up accusations of purported "scribal alterations" to support their assumption that the Bible has been tampered with by man and is therefore unreliable?

From El Scorcho Grande, Post #21 above:

If those drawings were God inspired, then no one on this earth should edit them, if God saw fit to inspire drawings with the nipples then no one should should tzmper with them. If the editor believed that these drawings were of God do you think he would dare render them as anything but accurate to how God had them drawn. I think the editor knew full well that those drawings have nothing to do with God, that is why he felt he had the authority to change them, otherwise he is guilty of subverting God's will. Of course that does mean he is guilty of leading others astray, but I think we already know that.

Regarding the claim that the reason Danny changed the illustrations is because he is prudish, this is about as silly of an excuse as one can give. Those who know Danny's personal history will agree that Danny is most certainly no prude, and his motive for changing Rudometkin's "inspired" illustration is to protect the reputation of his heretical leader. The fact that Danny is dishonest about it, by denying that he knows anything about it, is shameful albeit consistent with his decision to hide the reality about the true context of what Rudometkin personally wrote in his original letters.

In response to Danny's dishonesty, I am thankful that God made it possible to reprint the booklet that was written in English by my Uncle Paul, entitled A Labor of Love, as well as translating it into the Russian language and distributing it to Molokans in Russia, which has made a huge impact upon our current generation of young Molokans today, both here in America as well as in Russia. The booklet is the personal testimony of how my Uncle Paul was so lost in the deception of Rudometkin's heresies which are printed in the Spirit and Life book, and how the TRUE Jesus Christ personally intervened in his life and brought him out of that darkness, to repent and receive Him in Spirit and in Truth.

Regarding the claim about Mitrovitch, or Otkroveniya 22, whichever screen name he chooses to use, that he was being "poked fun" of, all I can say is that he is a big boy, who has been married and divorced, and who works as an attorney in Downey, California. When he came onto this forum, he took the position that he was going to "argue" from the position of defending Rudometkin and what the man wrote in his original letters, as well as that which is published in the Spirit and Life book.

An attorney does not have to be "right", or even represent the truth, in order to win his or her case. Rather, the "argument" that is presented by an attorney just has to be more persuasive than the opposing attorney, so that the judge or the jury will rule in favor of the winning "argument". Unfortunately, the truth is disregarded so many times in favor of the attorney who "argues" most persuasively.

In this case, the historical "evidence" has been presented many times, most notably from the writings of Conybeare, Mel'nikov and Dingl'shtedt, but Mitrovitch has chosen to reject it, with a number of weak excuses, yet has failed to provide sound evidence, other than the sensationalized oral tradition and family folklore that the Rudometkinites have continued to exaggerate, for his desire to believe that Rudometkin was allegedly part of our original Christian Molokan sect.

Other than fourvetta and his relatives in the Clark Street church, the Rudometkinites like Mitrovitch remain silent about their spiritual leader's claim in the Spirit and Life book, that just as S. M. Uklein is historically considered to have been the founding originator of the Christian Molokan denomination in Russia, Rudometkin himself boasted in his writings that he was the originating forefather of his "new israel" sect, a sect which the most reliable historians also document as being distinctly different from that of the Christian Molokans. The fact that while in Russia, the majority of Rudometkin's loyal followers had come over from the Christian Molokan sect to become part of Rudometkin's Khlystical "new israel" sect, has never been in dispute.

And it never ceases to amaze me how the Rudometkinites continue to offer the sorry explanation that those who remain steadfast in this ministry to expose all of the evil spiritual filth that is written in the Spirit and Life book, supposedly do so only because they either "hate" our Molokan people, or that they "don't like the physical manifestation of the Holy Spirit", or that they want to somehow "slam" the Molokan community, or that they just want to be like the rest of the world so that they can go out and eat pork and shrimp without a guilty conscience, etc., etc., etc., or any number of other similar, silly accusations.

In truth, those who minister against the evil that was written by Rudometkin and Klubnikin in the Spirit and Life book do so out of Godly love, together with a nostalgic attachment to our Molokan ethnicity, by inspiration and motivation of the Holy Spirit. In my case, I can remember a number of occasions when my response to the Lord was much like Jonah in the Bible, who did not want to go and minister to the Ninevites because of the evil that they represented. Jonah did not have compassion for the Ninevites, yet was compelled to extend the mercy of the Lord to them, because of God's love for the people, which existed not only for Jonah and the nation of Israel alone, but for all of mankind.

At various times throughout this ministry, I have not wanted to extend myself to the Rudometkinites, because in my experience with them, they are rude, arrogant, smart aleck and a bunch of bullies in how they exercise their domination over the political leadership of the Molokan churches, which then extends to others within the current social community. Yet, just as our gracious Lord had pity on the Ninevites, being merciful upon them, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love, God has persisted in His revelation to me that His pity and mercy also extends to the Rudometkinites, who are no less permeated with evil in their religious heresies than were the Biblical Ninevites, in the days of Jonah.

Regarding the interest of Pentecostal friends, my wife and I have several friends who are members of different charismatic Russian and American Christian Pentecostal denominations, with whom we have shared information about Rudometkin's “new israel” followers and the extra-Biblical heresies in the Spirit and Life book. These friends, who are Bible based followers of the Lord Jesus Christ, and are fellow brothers and sisters in the Lord, are not only appalled by the fact that Satan has deceived the Rudometkinites, but they are praying with us that God will open the spiritual eyes of the Rudometkinites to come away from the heresies which they so willingly continue to immerse themselves in.

I like the way it is stated in the “What is Fourvetta Doing Wrong?” thread:

From Post #11, by Guest_Huh?

All one can do is give the message of the TRUE Gospel, the message of God's wrath towards the unfaithful, the message of Gods mercy towards those that worship Him. The message that we can not save ouselves, not by heritage, tradition, works, or anything else. The message that God has done for us, what we can not do for ourselves! After that, it's up to God to work in each individual as He sees fit.

There is no point in arguing, or belittling, or enciting others to anger! As a believer, we are representatives of Gods mercy, that if He was able to cleanse us of our filth, he is able to do the same for others! We are to deliver His good news with love, and compassion, not with malice, or strife in our hearts. For if we do so in that manner, we make a mockery of the Gospel!

Yet, we continue to see that the Rudometkinites would rather cling to the heresies of their spiritual “christ” leader than to admit the errors of their forefathers. As we can see, they would rather wallow in Rudometkin's heresies that are in the Spirit and Life book than repent of their false doctrines and strange teachings, so that they can receive the TRUE Jesus Christ of the Holy Scriptures and worship God in Spirit and in Truth.

From Post #41 in the What is Fourvetta Doing Wrong? thread, by NAD923:

If you don't like it po and find your own hole!

I like the one I'm in.

From Post #22 in the Things That Might Help The Molokan Churches Continue On thread, by NAD923:

As I said before I don't go under any NAME!

Christian, Maximist or any other names were given as NICKNAMES!

I beleive in ALL the BOOKS! (Meaning that this Rudometkinite believes what is written in the Spirit and Life book)

IF that is sending me to HELL so be it!

I can remember not too long ago, when other individuals who participate on this forum, most notably Nick S h u b i n, Disciple and Steve Piv, as well as others, probably shared the same sentiment, in that they considered those who ministered against Rudometkin's heresies in the Spirit and Life book as their enemies, as enemies against their religious beliefs.

However, as we can all witness, by intervention of the Holy Spirit, they each have come away from the spiritual darkness which they had formerly so willingly participated in, and have met the real Jesus Christ, and after investigating the claims that are written about Him in the Bible, these men now consider those who they had previously considered as enemies, to now be their brothers and fellow laborers in the fields of the Lord, as followers of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Their example is being replicated throughout the present day Molokan community, as others are seeking the Lord Jesus Christ, by reading and studying what is written in the Word of God that is recorded in the Bible, and in response, Jesus is only too glad to introduce Himself to them, that they might repent of their sins and receive His free gift of grace, and be saved to inherit eternal life together with Him.

Following the example of Jonah and his ministry to the Ninevites then, may those who faithfully labor in the fields of our ethnic Molokan community be encouraged to continue, to press on, for the seeds of truth that are being planted by some, are being watered by others, and all the while, the Lord God is providing the growth which is resulting in the fruit of saved souls.

pje

.

coffee · March 8, 2010

.

Thank you GoodDay. I agree and have changed the text. In the future, you can PM me or send me a personal e-mail. Now, since we are concerned about not mentioning prior embarrassments, you might consider deleting any offending text from your post?

Thank you,

Phil

GoodDay · March 8, 2010

.

Thank you GoodDay. I agree and have changed the text. In the future, you can PM me or send me a personal e-mail. Now, since we are concerned about not mentioning prior embarrassments, you might consider deleting any offending text from your post?

Thank you,

Phil

I apolgize for not Pm you directly about that Coffee. I thought the Admin would have to take it out.

I signed out for a while and now I cannot edit that post of mine.

Admin-Can you please delete my post above about removing those words?

Thank you

GoodDay · March 9, 2010

Dan S,

Please do not send me another eMail as the one you just did.

Coffee is a solid Christian man with a deep love for Jesus Christ and you are against anyone that loves the Lord in the pure way He desires us to. You are getting a bit out of hand by eMails to people who do not worship your god mgr. You spent your live digging so far into that book and visiting the prisons that you left Jesus Christ out of your beleifs. Your tradition or Russian Language and beard etc.. means nothing to God as you don't love him.

I still thought it was not somthing that should have been posted regardless if true or not. It the process of asking it to be removed I copy and pasted it so the Admin can see which part to delete. Coffee on a Christian manner corrected me and said to Pm or eMail him before to so he can remove it, which I should have. Once I signed out and back in, I was not able to edit or delete so again I asked the administrator to remove it. It was not malicious.

As to your eMail, you say that all was not the truth and I believe you.

BUT, you need to stop sending eMails to the ones you know that you are and keep your focus off of others and into your own life. If you call Jesus Christ your Saviour then please keep your focus on Him.

The reason many feel about you the way they do is because of your behavior and your constant forcing your feelings onto others in a malicious way. Your beliefs are a different issue. Its more about the way you behave.

You are not helping nothing but are making things worse.

By the way, Me, StevePiv are pascifists and against war as he has posted and as I have. Molokans are not the only ones that are. Actually many of them are not. Just peacefully share your beliefs at least in a way that doesn't have others think you are up to some sneaky things. Pascifism has nothing to do with what "denomitation" one is. Start by keeping your actions toward others peacfull and then allow other peace to follow.

Please do not eMail me anymore,

Paul

EGK · March 10, 2010

PJE,

It is easy to make an accusation towards another of wrong doing. "accusations of purported "scribal alteration" to support their assumption that the Bible has been tampered with by man and is therefore unreliable." I have never purported that the Bible is unreliable. I have only reported scripture verses that are not in agreement with the most extant (oldest copies) copies of the Bible verse in question. This information I gather from the research of academians in the field of Religous Studies and Antiquities. If you can prove me wrong on any, do so! I will greatly appreciate it.

Also, do not include me in your list of Rudometkinites, I have never believed in his writings as they do not agree in context with biblical scripture. I do not include you with the Pope and Rome so I expect the same courtesy in return.

It is good to hear that you are doing better physically. I hope and pray that God continues to bless you with strength and good health.

EGK

seeking_truth_1 · March 11, 2010

You are really not being wholly honest EGK

You deny the Deity of Jesus and are intimating that Scripture is unreliable

Please....

Two excellent and easy to understand books to read, one is about early christian church history written by a Jewish author. The author is a Rhodes scholar from Harvard Law school and is a professor at George Mason University.
The book is, "When Jesus Became God" by Richard E Rubenstein.

The second book is the story of how the New Testament bible wording was put together and how the early christian scribes and later professional scribes translated and inserted and misquoted original texts. The author is the Chairman of religious studies at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.

The book is, "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart D Ehrman

PJE,

It is easy to make an accusation towards another of wrong doing. "accusations of purported "scribal alteration" to support their assumption that the Bible has been tampered with by man and is therefore unreliable." I have never purported that the Bible is unreliable. I have only reported scripture verses that are not in agreement with the most extant (oldest copies) copies of the Bible verse in question. This information I gather from the research of academians in the field of Religous Studies and Antiquities. If you can prove me wrong on any, do so! I will greatly appreciate it.

Also, do not include me in your list of Rudometkinites, I have never believed in his writings as they do not agree in context with biblical scripture. I do not include you with the Pope and Rome so I expect the same courtesy in return.

It is good to hear that you are doing better physically. I hope and pray that God continues to bless you with strength and good health.

EGK

EGK · March 12, 2010

You are really not being wholly honest EGK

You deny the Deity of Jesus and are intimating that Scripture is unreliable

Please....

Wooo there Crusader..........

If I am being dishonest show me where and prove me wrong. Give me a scholar or historian that proves me wrong, where it is written and the details of it as I have always given in what I write. Don't make accusations unless you have the stuff to back it up. It makes you look unlearned.

As to the deity of Jesus, I give you the choice to believe as you see fit. What I write about is what the bible and history says. I do not make them up as I go as you do. If in the bible they call him a man who am I to disagree.

I am not intimating that scripture is unreliable, it is just that the earlier manuscripts do not always agree in content to the later ones. The closer the manuscript is to the original writer the more reliable it is to the original content. Do some serious study and free yourself from the traditions of man which you follow.

EGK

seeking_truth_1 · March 12, 2010

As in ALL cults the Deity of Jesus is called into question

I said

You deny the Deity of Jesus

You said

If in the bible they call him (Jesus) a man who am I to disagree

I said you

are intimating that Scripture is unreliable

You said

The closer the manuscript is to the original writer the more reliable it is to the original content

I'll reiterate my statement...You're not being wholly honest

You are really not being wholly honest EGK

You deny the Deity of Jesus and are intimating that Scripture is unreliable

Please....

Wooo there Crusader..........

If I am being dishonest show me where and prove me wrong. Give me a scholar or historian that proves me wrong, where it is written and the details of it as I have always given in what I write. Don't make accusations unless you have the stuff to back it up. It makes you look unlearned.

As to the deity of Jesus, I give you the choice to believe as you see fit. What I write about is what the bible and history says. I do not make them up as I go as you do. If in the bible they call him a man who am I to disagree.

I am not intimating that scripture is unreliable, it is just that the earlier manuscripts do not always agree in content to the later ones. The closer the manuscript is to the original writer the more reliable it is to the original content. Do some serious study and free yourself from the traditions of man which you follow.

EGK

lastinline · March 13, 2010

'EGK' date='Mar 11 2010, 11:12 PM' post='51724'.

If in the bible they call him a man who am I to disagree.

In the Bible, Thomas declared Him, his Lord and God and the Pharisees attempted to stone Him, simply because he declared Himself, GOD!

lastinline (where simple is and simpleton sees simply)

coffee · March 13, 2010

PJE,

It is easy to make an accusation towards another of wrong doing. "accusations of purported "scribal alteration" to support their assumption that the Bible has been tampered with by man and is therefore unreliable.

I have never purported that the Bible is unreliable. I have only reported scripture verses that are not in agreement with the most extant (oldest copies) copies of the Bible verse in question

This information I gather from the research of academians in the field of Religous Studies and Antiquities. If you can prove me wrong on any, do so! I will greatly appreciate it.

Also, do not include me in your list of Rudometkinites, I have never believed in his writings as they do not agree in context with biblical scripture. I do not include you with the Pope and Rome so I expect the same courtesy in return.

It is good to hear that you are doing better physically. I hope and pray that God continues to bless you with strength and good health.

EGK

First of all, I do NOT include you as one of the Rudometkinites, nor have I ever done so. If this is the conclusion that you have made, then I am afraid you have made a very terrible grammatical error in your misunderstanding and misinterpretation of what I have written.

If you will again read anything in which I have ever mentioned you by name personally, I NEVER refer to you as a Rudometkinite. It should be quite obvious to the readers that according to several comments which you have made, you have distanced yourself from the Rudometkinites, and that you do not consider yourself to be a spiritual "brother" to them, and I acknowledge this. Added to that are your comments about how you do not regard the heresies in the Spirit and Life book as being equal to the Bible, nor are they even compatible with the writings of the Holy Scriptures, and I also acknowledge this.

However, with regard to your "technique" of denying certain specific Scriptural absolutes, I cannot help but make reference to the fact that your denial of these Biblical truths is extremely similar to, if not exactly like, that of the typical zealous Rudometkinites, and in that way, in the context of your excuses why you do not accept a number of selected passages from the written Word of God, I include you in the same breath as I do those who are followers of Rudometkin and the writings in the Spirit and Life book. In other words, the methodology of how you arrive at your perception of "truth" is the same as that of the Rudometkinites, even though you are not a follower of Rudometkin.

As Seeking Truth has pointed out only all to well, it is equally obvious that you are skeptical of those writings in the Holy Scriptures which do no align with your already preconceived theories about the person of God, about His triune nature, about the very deity of the Lord Jesus Christ, and about the reliability of the Bible. It is dishonest of you to deny your contention that the Scriptures have been tampered with by man, and are therefore unreliable.

From Post #38, Trinity Question thread:

As a hint to help you, look at 1 John 5:7-8, But oh by the way, this was not in the original text but was added by a scribe at a later date ( it is not found in any Greek manuscript until the 11th century).

Well how about another trinitarian mainstay, Matthew 28:19, Oh I forgot another scribal addition.

But you would not have known this unless the Pope sent you an encylical to set you straight on what is the correct doctrine to believe.

Sorry, I tried to help!

EGK

It is very apparent to the readers that you have already made up your mind about your version of God, that you only want to believe in a God Who is the Father ONLY, and that you seek out the writings of other skeptics who share your similar religious views, to bolster your preconceived conclusion about God. In this way, you leave the readers with the impression that you fancy yourself as some kind of authority OVER the written Word of God, as you continue to present arguments that you seem to believe are the epitome of "one-ups-man-ship", in your attempt to disregard those Biblical passages which proclaim that Jesus is God. Yet, when you are unable to explain other important passages from the Scriptures, you simply remain silent about them.

Instead of humbly admitting that you do not comprehend the Biblical reality that God is defined and described in the Holy Scriptures as being triune in existence, that according to the Bible, He is God the Father, that He is also God the Son, and that He is God the Holy Spirit, you continue in your futile attempts to "explain" God according to your own human reasoning, which the Lord tells us in His written Word that this is not possible (Isaiah 55:8-9 and Isaiah 40:28), since He is God the Creator, and we are mankind, His creation.

When asked the question whether or not one of the participants here on the forum accepted and believed the Scriptural truth that Jesus is God in human flesh, the following answer that was given is about as honest and transparent, in fact totally truthful, as anyone can ever be:

From Post #27, Guest_Huh? in the New Church thread:

(question) - Is He Deity as God in flesh?

(answer) - As far as i can wrap my mind around it, yes

In other words, the person is saying that although he/she believes this as the declaration of the Holy Scriptures, it does not make total sense to normal human reasoning.

Instead of being honest about your lack of understanding, that you will never be able to "understand" or "explain" the existence of God, you proceed to mock and taunt those who believe what is recorded in the Scriptures about the Biblical Triune God, as if you have won some kind of competition, as if you have prevailed in some kind of debate, yet you fail to explain those passages in the Bible which declare the truth of what you refer to in derision as "trinitarian".

There has already been more than ample historical documentation given here on the forum that the early Christian Church taught and believed in the triune existence of God, with references to the Trinity, with bold statements about the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ, centuries before the idea of the historical Ecumenical Councils was ever conceived.

Again, it is silly of you to pretend that your participation here on the forum is simply an "innocent" search for the truth, as if you want the readers to believe that you have not already made up your mind yet, but that your desire to dialogue with others is simply some kind of "innocent" and unpremeditated exploration of what is recorded in the Holy Scriptures.

From Post #51, A Different Jesus thread:

I challenge you again, give the verses where Jesus Christ is openly called God in the New Testament and I will give you the ones where he is openly called a man.

Are you up to it or full of hot air?

EGK

Another reason that your name is used in the same breath as the Rudometkinites is because you continue to ask the same questions that the Rudometkinites ask:

From Post #38, Trinity Question thread:

2. Where in scripture is Jesus Christ called, "God the son?"

EGK

The answer has been given so many times that it has even gotten to be so silly having to revisit the same subject over and over again. The answer is found in the Bible, in Hebrews 1:8, where God the Father refers to the Son, in context, as God. And still, both you and the Rudometkinites reject this Scriptural truth, that Jesus, as the Son of God, is also God the Son, and that according to what is recorded in the Scriptures, His throne exists forever and ever, without beginning and without end.

The same Apostle Peter who made the declaration in Matthew 16:16 about the Lord Jesus Christ, this same Jesus who the disciples WORSHIPPED as the Son of God in Matthew 14:33, that He is the Christ, the Son of the living God, is the same Apostle Peter who identifies Jesus Christ, in specific context, as our God and Savior in 2 Peter 1:1.

The same Apostle Paul who made the declaration in 1 Timothy 2:5 that there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, is the same Apostle Paul who identifies Jesus Christ, in specific context, as our great God and Savior in Titus 2:13.

These men, both historical figures and fellow disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ, were not contradicting themselves. What they each were inspired by God to write down for others to read, is the truth, that Jesus Christ was God, Who became a man for the sake of sinful mankind, to cleanse us of all sin, and when He became flesh, He did not cease to be God.

You have taken the position that Jesus is either God, or He is just a man, and you have chosen to believe that He was just a man. You have taken the position that it is "either - or". Those who are students of the Bible, those who are Bible based followers of the Lord Jesus Christ, understand that the declaration of the Scriptures, which is God's revelation to mankind, is that Jesus Christ is "both - and". According to what is recorded in the written Word of God, Jesus is both God and man.

This is what it means when it is written in John 1:1 that Jesus, in His preincarnate existence was God in Spirit form, as the Word of God. This is what it means when it is written in John 1:14 that Spirit became human flesh, when the Word became flesh and dwelt among mankind on earth, when God became the human being person of Jesus of Nazareth.

This territory has been covered before, pretty thoroughly in fact. You might want to review Post #40 in the Who is Jesus II thread.

Of course Jesus was a man. This is the testimony of the Scriptures. There is no denial of this Biblical truth. However, you and the Rudometkinites, and those writers with whom you share the same beliefs, deny the very Scriptures that testify about the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ, by simply choosing to ignore them, or attempting to twist them out of context.

The context of the Scripture in John 8:58 is that in response to Christ's statement that He, being a mere man, is God I AM in the flesh, the Jewish leaders had picked up stones and were going to kill Him for making such a statement. There was no grammatical error to be concerned about when the statement was made. The Jews, who certainly knew the grammar of the language better than any of us, understood perfectly what Jesus was saying, and their reaction was to stone Him to death for making such a claim.

Christ did not falter or stutter, in order to stop and tell them that this was all simply a minor grammatical misunderstanding on their part, that He was not REALLY saying that He is God I AM. For Jesus to deny Who He Is would be the sin of dishonesty and deception, and the Scripture declares that Christ was without sin.

The same is also true for the passage in John 10:27-33, when Jesus told the Jewish leaders that He and God the Father are one. Again, the Jews knew exactly what Jesus was saying, and their reaction was to stone Him to death for making that claim. According to the Jews, they understood what is written in that Scriptural passage, that Jesus, being a mere man, had made the statement that He was equal to God, and therefore God.

Those Biblical passages are the testimony of the Apostle John, who also recorded the words as they were inspired by the Holy Spirit in Revelation 22:12-20, that:

1) This person identifies Himself in Verse 16 as Jesus.

2) Who states in Verse 12 that He is coming soon.

3) Who repeats Himself in Verse 20 that He is coming soon.

4) Who identifies Himself in Verse 13 as the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.

The text is clear that this passage from the Scriptures is in specific reference to the Lord Jesus Christ, and not that of God the Father, yet you reject the truth of this Biblical passage, and even deny that Jesus is identified in the Bible as the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.

From Post #49, Trinity Question thread:

Thanks, I learned and even changed my view on the Alpha and Omega, I used to think it meant Jesus, with the Alpha and Omega showing a definite beginning and end, but I learned that was wrong. It is God the Father, the Lord God Almighty. It is Jesus who is speaking in Revelation 1:18, because verse 13 says it is the"Son of man". God is not the Son of man, God cannot be a Son, only a Father.

EGK

There are many Scriptural passages found in the writings of the Apostle Paul, which confirm the truth that Jesus Christ was a man, a literal human being, and not just some visible "spirit form". These were all written by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, in words that were breathed out by God Himself. This is the same Apostle Paul who also was inspired to write in Romans 9:5, that the Lord Jesus Christ is God over all.

This is the same Apostle Paul who also was inspired to write in Colossians 1:15-19 that Jesus is the Creator God. In 1 Corinthians 8:6, this same Apostle Paul was inspired by God to write that all things that have ever been created exist through the Lord Jesus Christ. This declaration of truth is very specific testimony that He, this man called Jesus, was active together with God the Father from the very beginning of creation.

These are not some alleged "scribal alterations", for these same passages from the Scriptures have been preserved as we have them today in the earliest manuscripts of the New Testament writings known to exist. For those who desire to authenticate what is written in our Biblical text, one can take a trip to Dublin, Ireland, where one can visit the Chester Beatty Museum.

The centerpiece of this museum is the Chester Beatty Papyri. The Beatty Papyri is a collection of ancient manuscripts containing various books of the Bible. Included in this historical collection are books of the New Testament, written in the original Greek language, dating back to 180-200 AD.

These manuscripts predate, by 150 years, the emperor Constantine and the early Ecumenical councils, who you and the Rudometkinites claim were supposedly responsible for purportedly deceiving the Christian Church into believing that the Lord Jesus Christ is God in the flesh, and for allegedly manufacturing the very "concept" of the term, The Trinity.

Included in the Beatty Papyri is the letter of the Apostle Paul to the Romans. It is generally accepted among Bible Scholars and Biblical historians that the Apostle Paul originally penned these words sometime during the period of 57-60 AD.

The text that exists on the Beatty Papyri, which includes the Biblical passage in Romans 9:1-5, is virtually identical to the translation that we have today from the original Greek into English, which testifies that the Lord Jesus Christ is indeed God in the flesh, in context, as God over all.

In March of 2004, The Moore Theological College Library, in Australia, received the Bodmer Papyri, donated from the personal library of Martin Bodmer, which eventually became known as Fondation Martin Bodmer.

Martin Bodmer was a Swiss industrialist who acquired the papyri in the early 1950s. These historical manuscripts are dated 175-225 AD, predating by over a century any so-called "manipulation" by Constantine and the men who participated in the first of the historical Ecumenical Councils.

In other words, Constantine and the men who participated in the decisions of the early Ecumenical Councils were not even born when these papyri were written, and those men would not even begin to take their place in history for at least another century afterwards.

Included in these Bodmer Papyri are portions of the New Testament Biblical text, written in the original Greek language, of the Gospel according to John. According to the Bible, John was the Disciple and Apostle of the historical Jesus of Nazareth.

This man, John, was a personal witness of the life and death, resurrection and ascension, of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is generally accepted among Bible scholars and Biblical historians that John originally penned these words in the period around 85 AD.

In the Bodmer Papyri, the text of John 1:1-18 is virtually identical to what we read today as the translation of the original Greek into English, that the Lord Jesus Christ is God, Who has existed without beginning as our Creator God, and Who became flesh to dwell on earth.

Also included in the Beatty Papyri is the letter from the Apostle Paul to the followers of the Lord Jesus Christ in Corinth. It is generally accepted among Bible scholars and Biblical historians that the Apostle Paul originally penned this letter in the period 51-55 AD.

Anyone who desires to confirm for themselves, can indeed go to Ireland, where they will find that the text written in this historical manuscript, in 1 Corinthians 8:5-6, is virtually identical to what has been translated from the original Greek into our English language, which declares that all things are and exist by and through the Lord Jesus Christ.

For now, I will conclude with reference to the Scriptural passage of the account where Satan tempts Jesus in the wilderness, which was first posted by someone else here on the forum. This is found in Matthew 4:1-11, in Mark 1:12-13, and in Luke 4:1-13, and is something which neither you nor any of the Rudometkinites have ever given answer to.

The text is clear that it is Jesus, the man, Who is being tempted, not God the Father. It is also clear that the one who is doing the tempting is the devil, who is identified by name as Satan.

From the text, Satan refers to Jesus by name as the Son of God. In other words, it is clear from what is written in the Bible about this event, that it is Jesus, the man, the Son of the living God, Who is the One being tempted, not God the Father.

However, when Jesus answers the devil, He tells him that he, Satan, is not to put the Lord your God to the test. The devil was tempting Christ, not God the Father. God the Father was not even in the picture. According to the Scriptural text, Jesus is once again referring to Himself as the Lord your God.

This is already pretty lengthy, so to all of the readers, I end by saying that it would be doubtful at best to expect either EGK or any of the zealous Rudometkinites to change how they have already chosen to believe, specifically their rejection of the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. In my experience, unless and until such individuals begin to revere the Bible with ultimate authority, it is extremely rare that they will actually humble themselves to receive the Biblical truth about the historical person of Jesus Christ.

I am not a scholar. I am only a student of the Bible, and I have not found in the Scriptures that God requires mankind to understand Him, or to understand how Jesus Christ is both God and man. I have not found that this is a requirement to being born again, in order to be saved from one's sins, in order to inherit eternal life together with Christ.

That being said, I believe the Scriptures ARE very specific that we must believe in the One, True, Biblical Lord, the Jesus Christ of the Holy Scriptures, Who is God in the flesh. To deny Him, to deny that He Is God, or to believe that He is anything else, is to believe in "another Jesus". The warning is given in the Bible to those who do so, that they will end up being the ones who are rejected by Jesus, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth (Luke 13:22-30).

.

GoodDay · March 13, 2010

If Jesus was not God, He would have rebuked Thomas big time!! But,Jesus being God, that he did not do.

'EGK' date='Mar 11 2010, 11:12 PM' post='51724'.

If in the bible they call him a man who am I to disagree.

In the Bible, Thomas declared Him, his Lord and God and the Pharisees attempted to stone Him, simply because he declared Himself, GOD!

lastinline (where simple is and simpleton sees simply)

seeking_truth_1 · March 13, 2010

Good Morning Coffee:

As always your blessed insights are a wonderful way to start the day

First: It "sounds" like you are doing better and praise God for bringing you to this point

Second: You are always much better at articulating things that are swirling around in my head and have the ability to convey them more effectively

I indentified EGK as a wolf for the very same reasons you cited

His smarmy way of bringing forth "facts" in an attempt to discuss "truth" are alarming and frankly unpalatable

Equally alarming are the young Chrsitians on this forum engaging EGK in dialog as "brother" which cannot be further from the truth, hence EGK's tag "wolf"

A wolf slinking about trying to convince the others "It's all right, I'm your friend"....

"Grandmother, what big eyes you have!"

"All the better to see with, my child"

"Grandmother, what big teeth you have got!"

"All the better to eat you up with."

Unfortunately, as the story goes, granny "bought the farm" when she opened the door to the deceiver

15 ¶ "Beware of false prophets who come disguised as harmless sheep but are really vicious wolves.

16 You can identify them by their fruit, that is, by the way they act. Can you pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?

17 A good tree produces good fruit, and a bad tree produces bad fruit.

18 A good tree can't produce bad fruit, and a bad tree can't produce good fruit.

19 So every tree that does not produce good fruit is chopped down and thrown into the fire.

20 Yes, just as you can identify a tree by its fruit, so you can identify people by their actions. (Matthew 7:15-20)

Sheep by their very nature are skittish

It requires the Shepard to provide a safe place so the sheep will calm and rest

1 ¶ «A Psalm of David.» The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want.

2 He maketh me to lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters.

3 He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name's sake. (Psalm 23:1-3)

The task of the wolf is to disturb the sheep enough to cause them to leave the protection of the sheepfold and the shepherds care

That is when the wolf shows themself for what they really are by partaking in a "lamb lunch"

He (wolfie) and I engaged in dialog where he would not overtly state his opinions but hide under the guise of being a "friend" or a "brother"

After much dialog the real "truth" of EGK's belief system began to emerge

It's painfully obvious EGK denies the Deity of Jesus AND the veracity of Scripture regardless of how he attempts to spin it

Being a sheep myself, I'm very unsettled with EGK and his ilk looking to gain a "toe hold" ("claw hold in this case) in an attempt to lead people away from the safety of the Shepherd

I guess that's why I have nominal patience for others who seek to do the same

coffee · March 13, 2010

.

Regarding:

It is good to hear that you are doing better physically. I hope and pray that God continues to bless you with strength and good health.

EGK

First: It "sounds" like you are doing better and praise God for bringing you to this point

seeking_truth_1

Although this has nothing to do with the topic of the thread, I want to thank you for your concern, for your prayers and for your kind words towards me.

To be honest, most of the time I feel like "poop". I get fatigued if I do not stop and rest, or take at least one nap a day. The surgery to remove the cancer was successful, and I am cancer free. The tumor was the only location in my body where there was any cancer, although a good portion of the lymph nodes that were removed during surgery, which were surrounding the area, were also cancerous.

The interior anatomy of my body has been altered in that I no longer have an esophagus, and my stomach is no longer the enclosed organ that it used to be. Approximately one-third of my stomach was removed and part of the remaining stomach was fashioned into a receiving tube which then was sewn onto the back of my throat, where the esophagus used to connect. I now eat so that the food goes from my mouth to my throat directly into what used to be my stomach. I can only eat small portions, and I have to eat regularly multiple times during the day and night. My last meal of the day is when I wake up to eat at 1:00 in the morning.

However, I am getting stronger little by little, day by day.

Thank you.

.

GoodDay · March 13, 2010

Your have strong faith in Jesus and are a very evident Christian man coffee, and your post's give so much truth and insight to God's True Word and about biblical Christianity and we are all thankfully for that!.

Praise God that you are improving-even if it is slowly- the awesome thing is it's obvious that have fully given it over to God!

Still in my prayers~

Paul

.

Regarding:

It is good to hear that you are doing better physically. I hope and pray that God continues to bless you with strength and good health.

EGK

First: It "sounds" like you are doing better and praise God for bringing you to this point

seeking_truth_1

Although this has nothing to do with the topic of the thread, I want to thank you for your concern, for your prayers and for your kind words towards me.

To be honest, most of the time I feel like "poop". I get fatigued if I do not stop and rest, or take at least one nap a day. The surgery to remove the cancer was successful, and I am cancer free. The tumor was the only location in my body where there was any cancer, although a good portion of the lymph nodes that were removed during surgery, which were surrounding the area, were also cancerous.

The interior anatomy of my body has been altered in that I no longer have an esophagus, and my stomach is no longer the enclosed organ that it used to be. Approximately one-third of my stomach was removed and part of the remaining stomach was fashioned into a receiving tube which then was sewn onto the back of my throat, where the esophagus used to connect. I now eat so that the food goes from my mouth to my throat directly into what used to be my stomach. I can only eat small portions, and I have to eat regularly multiple times during the day and night. My last meal of the day is when I wake up to eat at 1:00 in the morning.

However, I am getting stronger little by little, day by day.

Thank you.

.

stevepiv · March 13, 2010

Yes, Ds. Coffee,

Stay strong in the Lord. He is Good and Faithful and Mighty to Save. You and Ts. Coffee and your entire family are in my prayers.

.

Regarding:

It is good to hear that you are doing better physically. I hope and pray that God continues to bless you with strength and good health.

EGK

First: It "sounds" like you are doing better and praise God for bringing you to this point

seeking_truth_1

Although this has nothing to do with the topic of the thread, I want to thank you for your concern, for your prayers and for your kind words towards me.

To be honest, most of the time I feel like "poop". I get fatigued if I do not stop and rest, or take at least one nap a day. The surgery to remove the cancer was successful, and I am cancer free. The tumor was the only location in my body where there was any cancer, although a good portion of the lymph nodes that were removed during surgery, which were surrounding the area, were also cancerous.

The interior anatomy of my body has been altered in that I no longer have an esophagus, and my stomach is no longer the enclosed organ that it used to be. Approximately one-third of my stomach was removed and part of the remaining stomach was fashioned into a receiving tube which then was sewn onto the back of my throat, where the esophagus used to connect. I now eat so that the food goes from my mouth to my throat directly into what used to be my stomach. I can only eat small portions, and I have to eat regularly multiple times during the day and night. My last meal of the day is when I wake up to eat at 1:00 in the morning.

However, I am getting stronger little by little, day by day.

Thank you.

.

lastinline · March 15, 2010

If Jesus was not God, He would have rebuked Thomas big time!! But,Jesus being God, that he did not do.

'EGK' date='Mar 11 2010, 11:12 PM' post='51724'.

If in the bible they call him a man who am I to disagree.

In the Bible, Thomas declared Him, his Lord and God and the Pharisees attempted to stone Him, simply because he declared Himself, GOD!

lastinline (where simple is and a simpleton sees simply)

I would to like to point out that Thomas who was one of Christ's original twelve Disciples and knew Jesus intimately during His earthly ministry. It could be said that Thomas probably witnessed most if not all His miracles. During an intimate conversation in preparing His disciples for His departure from them by the Crucifixion, we can read in John 14 how Thomas questioned Jesus about not understanding where He was going to prepare a place for him. Jesus explained to Thomas and the others with him in verse 7, “If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; and from now on you know Him and have seen Him.”

Thomas just as the other Disciples were devastated by either witnessing or being given the details Christ's gruesome Crucifixion on the cross could not believe his fellow Disciples when told him that they had indeed seen the Lord, alive.

After Christ later revealed Himself to Thomas, up-close and personal, Christ with devine authority tells Thomas, "Do not be unbelieving, but believing.” Thomasa's immediate response to declare Jesus Christ as, “My Lord and my God!”

Jesus then immediately responds back with “Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

I believe that we can ascertain that Jesus was not only declaring that to be Blessed, one must not only believe that He was/is Alive, one must also declare Him Lord and God, just is Thomas clearly declared.

lastinline (yes and again, where simple is and a simpleton sees simply)

lastinline · March 18, 2010

Yes, I to am continuing to be Blessed, for even though I have not seen, I believe. Jesus Christ of Nazareth is in all His Glory, My Lord and My God!

lastinline (yes and again, where simple is and a simpleton sees simply)

'lastinline' date='Mar 14 2010, 08:35 PM' post='52026'Jesus then immediately responds back with “Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

I believe that we can ascertain that Jesus was not only declaring that to be Blessed, one must not only believe that He was/is Alive, one must also declare Him Lord and God, just is Thomas clearly declared.

lastinline (yes and again, where simple is and a simpleton sees simply)

mud · March 19, 2010

If Jesus was not God, He would have rebuked Thomas big time!! But,Jesus being God, that he did not do.

After Christ later revealed Himself to Thomas, up-close and personal, Christ with devine authority tells Thomas, "Do not be unbelieving, but believing.” Thomasa's immediate response to declare Jesus Christ as, “My Lord and my God!”

Jesus then immediately responds back with “Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

I believe that we can ascertain that Jesus was not only declaring that to be Blessed, one must not only believe that He was/is Alive, one must also declare Him Lord and God, just is Thomas clearly declared.

lastinline (yes and again, where simple is and a simpleton sees simply)

So I thought I'd share my 2 cents on Thomas' words. I truly believe the details of the Bible are there for a purpose (the order in which it's written, the words used, etc...). God makes it quite clear who Jesus is and what we must believe for salvation both BEFORE Thomas' verse and AFTER. God must have figured that man would blow Thomas' words out of proportion, just like many are doing today, so He made sure clarity was given both BEFORE and AFTER in the same chapter (or section of writtings).

BEFORE - we read that Jesus has a God.

John 20:17

Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

AFTER - we read that what we MUST believe for salvation has nothing to do with Jesus 'being' God, but ONLY that Jesus is God's Son.

John 20:31

But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

Now before rebuttal happens, I want to say that I'm not taking away any deity that Jesus has; He is God's Son, so therefor is included in the deity of the Godhead body. I'm only pointing to God's own clarification both BEFORE and AFTER this verse of Thomas'. So before anyone starts claiming that in order to be saved, we need to accept Jesus as God, I suggest another read through of scripture to see the truth.

Nothing is more clear than:

1 Corinthians 8:6

But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

coffee · March 20, 2010

.

So I thought I'd share my 2 cents on Thomas' words. I truly believe the details of the Bible are there for a purpose (the order in which it's written, the words used, etc...).

God makes it quite clear who Jesus is and what we must believe for salvation both BEFORE Thomas' verse and AFTER.

God must have figured that man would blow Thomas' words out of proportion, just like many are doing today, so He made sure clarity was given both BEFORE and AFTER in the same chapter (or section of writtings).

In my experience, the Rudometkinites do not revere what is written in the Bible as the ultimate authority, as THE truth above all truths. As a result, they "play" with the Scriptures by ignoring and minimizing, and in effect they attempt to neutralize and deny some passages which they neither understand nor want to believe, while emphasizing other passages that are more to their personal liking, without recognizing and taking into context the entire counsel of what is recorded in the written word of God, both BEFORE and AFTER the passages that they like, and wish to emphasize.

Instead of taking and receiving the revelation of Thomas in the Bible as verification of the foundational truth of Scripture, that Jesus is Lord and God in the flesh, the stereotypical Rudometkinite gives the excuse that those who are the Bible based Jesus followers purportedly "blow out of proportion" that which is written in the Holy Scriptures about Christ being God in the flesh.

In other words, the Rudometkinites attempt to minimize and ignore what is written about the declaration in the Scriptures that Jesus is God in the flesh, in order to emphasize the Biblical truth that Jesus was a man. In this way, the Rudometkinites want to stop and say that Jesus was a man only, the Son of God only, and not God in the flesh, not part of the One triune God.

From the perspective of those who are followers of Jesus, God must have known that there would be those who would reject the truth about the very deity of Christ, and they would deny that in the beginning, Jesus was with God, and that He was God in Spirit form Who became flesh, and in their denial and rejection of this Scriptural absolute, they would contend that Christ is a created being, a creature of God who is somehow less than God the Father.

Therefore, so that mankind would not stop and focus on the humanity of Christ only, in between the testimony in the Scriptures that the Lord Jesus Christ was truly a man, the Son of God, with genuine flesh and bones and blood, having the entire anatomy of a true, normal human being, God made sure to also include the declaration of truth in His written Word, that when He became flesh, Jesus was still the same God Who was in Spirit form in the beginning, and that He is without beginning and without end, One of the three persons of the eternal triune God.

No, the revelation of the Apostle Thomas that Jesus Christ is Lord and God in the flesh, is not "blown out of proportion". It is a Biblical truth which is repeated many times throughout the Holy Scriptures, and one cannot ignore or minimize this Scriptural absolute just because they do not understand it, or that they have made the personal choice that they simply do not want to believe it.

Again, this illustrates all too well the human reasoning of the Rudometkinites, of an "either - or" mentality, in contrast to the testimony of a "both - and" declaration in the written Word of God about the deity and humanity of the Lord Jesus Christ, that He is both God and man.

The Rudometkinites do not even understand the context of the Biblical passage which they quote:

Nothing is more clear than:

1 Corinthians 8:6

But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

The context of this passage is that all things exist OF God the Father, and BY the Lord Jesus Christ, in conjunction one with the other, in unity one with the other. This is a testimony that Jesus is the Creator God, by Whom all things exist. When read in context with other Scriptural absolutes about the deity of Christ, this is a confirmation that Jesus was with God the Father in the beginning, and that He and the Father are both the same ONE God.

Once again, God does not require mankind to be able to understand or explain His existence, but the Scriptures are clear that one must believe in the One, True, Biblical Jesus Christ as Savior. This Savior, the same One Who is described as the Son of God, the man, is the same Savior Who is also described in the Scriptures as "my Lord and my God" (John 20:24-31), as "God over all" (Romans 9:1-5, and as God the Son (Hebrews 1:5-13).

.

mud · March 21, 2010

Coffee - I'm sorry to have posted my point of view on a forum that I knew full well felt differently. I was expecting rebuttal, as stated in my post, but wasn't expecting a philosophical debate about 'rudometkinites'. Thank you for sharing your vast knowledge of the rudometkinites, but I'm really not interested.

I thought I could share something that was based purely on the Word of God with true scripture supporting the understanding that God revealed to me without having someone bring it back to a rudometkinite debate. But alas, I was wrong. Maybe we should all try to spend more time in the Word of God, and less time boasting of our own understanding of a group of people.

I've requested my post to be withdrawn.

seeking_truth_1 · March 21, 2010

Perhaps you do not subscribe to the writings of rudometkin and would not be considered a "rudometkinite"

Regardless, the cult of molokanism, like all cults will attempt to reduce Jesus and His word to something different than what Scripture teaches

You'll rely upon what was "revealed" to you but if Scripture contradicts that "revelation" you have to dismiss Scripture as the inerrant Word of God and "make it up" as you go

There is a way the seems right to a man but it's end is death (Proverbs 14:12)

Just because it "seems" right does not make it right if it cannot be supported in Scripture

Is that reasonable?

Anyone who subscribes the writings of rudometkin are "god inspired" would be a "follower" of mgr and therefore a rudometkinite

Anyone who regulalry attends and participates in the cult of molokanism DOES give a "nod of approval" to those writings

Coffee - I'm sorry to have posted my point of view on a forum that I knew full well felt differently. I was expecting rebuttal, as stated in my post, but wasn't expecting a philosophical debate about 'rudometkinites'. Thank you for sharing your vast knowledge of the rudometkinites, but I'm really not interested.

I thought I could share something that was based purely on the Word of God with true scripture supporting the understanding that God revealed to me without having someone bring it back to a rudometkinite debate. But alas, I was wrong. Maybe we should all try to spend more time in the Word of God, and less time boasting of our own understanding of a group of people.

I've requested my post to be withdrawn.

coffee · March 21, 2010

.

Coffee - I'm sorry to have posted my point of view on a forum that I knew full well felt differently. I was expecting rebuttal, as stated in my post, but wasn't expecting a philosophical debate about 'rudometkinites'. Thank you for sharing your vast knowledge of the rudometkinites, but I'm really not interested.

I thought I could share something that was based purely on the Word of God with true scripture supporting the understanding that God revealed to me without having someone bring it back to a rudometkinite debate. But alas, I was wrong. Maybe we should all try to spend more time in the Word of God, and less time boasting of our own understanding of a group of people.

I've requested my post to be withdrawn.

First of all, how silly of you to respond with such childish sarcasm. It appears that your issue has more to do with your objection to the use of the term "Rudometkinite" than anything else.

If you are not numbered with the Rudometkinites, then my comments certainly do not apply to you, and you should not even be slightly offended. If you are not numbered with the Rudometkinites, then I would think you might agree that their political domination over the religious beliefs and practices within today's "Molokan" churches has been arguably the primary reason for the sad and slow disintegration of our once thriving social community.

If you truly believe what you wrote, then why withdraw it? Let it remain as your testimony of what you believe.

However, I am guessing that you have the Spirit and Life book on your table in your home, as a display of what you accept and follow as your personal belief system. I am also guessing that Rudometkin's heresies in the Spirit and Life book are prominently displayed on the altar in the church that you attend, with the demand that what is written in that extra-Biblical book be required and included as part of your worship of God.

I have shared what has been my experience with the Rudometkinites. If you are indeed a fellow, Bible based follower of the Lord Jesus Christ, and your experiences with the Rudometkinites differ, then I am sure the readers would enjoy hearing your version.

What I wanted to illustrate in your presentation of what you imply as revelation to you from God, is that you, like the Rudometkinites, ignore, minimize and reject key passages from the Bible, specifically those which declare and testify about the very deity of the Lord Jesus Christ.

To anyone who is a student of the Scriptures, what is recorded in the written Word of God is THE authoritative revelation from the Lord, which is His truth to mankind. For those who are Bible based followers of Jesus, to accept and receive what is written in the Bible, which includes the testimony that Jesus is God in the flesh, is to be faithful to God's revelation, which is in glaring contrast to the position you presented that to accept and believe what is written in the Holy Scriptures is purportedly some kind of so-called "blowing out of proportion" of God's written Word.

Regarding:

Maybe we should all try to spend more time in the Word of God,

I pray that you become a student of the Bible and that you learn about all of the claims that are written in the Scriptures about the Lord Jesus Christ, without any influence from Rudometkin's heresies in the Spirit and Life book, so that you come to know Him as Who He truly IS. I assure you that when you do so, the True, Jesus Christ Who is revealed in the Bible is only more than happy to introduce Himself to you.

I wish you well.

.

coffee · March 22, 2010

.

Just in case there is not enough clarity in what has been posted, it is good to illustrate the human reasoning of the Rudometkinites and those who attempt to manipulate what is written in the Bible, in order to demonstrate how they justify their denial of certain specific passages in the Scriptures.

So I thought I'd share my 2 cents on Thomas' words. I truly believe the details of the Bible are there for a purpose (the order in which it's written, the words used, etc...). God makes it quite clear who Jesus is and what we must believe for salvation both BEFORE Thomas' verse and AFTER. God must have figured that man would blow Thomas' words out of proportion, just like many are doing today, so He made sure clarity was given both BEFORE and AFTER in the same chapter (or section of writtings).

BEFORE - we read that Jesus has a God.

John 20:17

Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

AFTER - we read that what we MUST believe for salvation has nothing to do with Jesus 'being' God, but ONLY that Jesus is God's Son.

John 20:31

But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

By emphasizing the passages in the Scriptures which testify about the humanity of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Rudometkinites present their case as if the BEFORE and AFTER passages which they quote, in some way supposedly neutralize and nullify, or offset and invalidate somehow, those passages in the Bible which declare the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Although they do not actually come out and say it, they apparently believe it is by inspiration of the Holy Spirit that God wants them to ignore, minimize and reject those key passages from the Holy Scriptures which testify that Jesus Christ is God in the flesh, in order for them to justify their denial of this Biblical absolute.

I thought I could share something that was based purely on the Word of God with true scripture supporting the understanding that God revealed to me....

In other words, by quoting the passages from the Bible in John 20:17 and John 20:31, the Rudometkinites contend that these Scriptures supposedly nullify and invalidate the revelation from Christ's disciple, Thomas, in the passage from John 20:28, as something that Bible based followers of Jesus allegedly blow "out of proportion".

This illustrates only too well the excuse of the Rudometkinites that to accept and believe in the context of the testimony of the written Word of God which is recorded in the Holy Scriptures, is to "blow out of proportion" God's revelation to mankind. It is another vivid demonstration of the chasm which separates those "Molokan" people who are Bible based followers of the Lord Jesus Christ, from those "Molokans" who adhere to a belief system which includes Rudometkin's extra-Biblical heresies that are written in the Spirit and Life book.

This is a prime example of how the Rudometkinites do not revere what is written in the Bible as THE ultimate authority with regard to God's revelation to mankind.

If Jesus was not God, He would have rebuked Thomas big time!! But, Jesus being God, that he did not do.

After Christ later revealed Himself to Thomas, up-close and personal, Christ with devine authority tells Thomas, "Do not be unbelieving, but believing.” Thomasa's immediate response to declare Jesus Christ as, “My Lord and my God!”

Jesus then immediately responds back with “Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

I believe that we can ascertain that Jesus was not only declaring that to be Blessed, one must not only believe that He was/is Alive, one must also declare Him Lord and God, just is Thomas clearly declared.

lastinline (yes and again, where simple is and a simpleton sees simply)

.

lastinline · March 22, 2010

'mud' date='Mar 20 2010, 09:39 PM' post='52714'

I thought I could share something that was based purely on the Word of God with true scripture supporting the understanding that God revealed to me without having someone bring it back to a rudometkinite debate. But alas, I was wrong. Maybe we should all try to spend more time in the Word of God, and less time boasting of our own understanding of a group of people.

If it looks like a duck and quacks like duck, then it must be a duck, seems pretty simple to me. But, then hopefully my perception is completely wrong and I certainly hope so.

Yes, you have found a great Truth that is clearly believed by ALL that have a true reverence for the Holy Scriptures that Jesus Christ has a Father God. But, this not in anyway comparable to our earthly father and son relationship.

Please remember the statement by Jesus, of Truth in John 14: 10 "Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me?" Please do not diminish or dismiss this statement as anything less than PURE TRUTH, for to do so, would be making Christ a purveyor of a lie. Both parts of His declaration are completely True. Also, that Truth was revealed just after Christ revealed to His Disciples that, "He who has seen Me has seen the Father." This was and is true today, just as it was two thousand plus years ago. As Coffee has so eloquently said, we are not commanded to understand these Pure Truths, merely to Believe them! Why, because He said it and He is not as a man who can lie and deceive.

In reference to the duck perception, I just found that by at least in some way by not distancing yourself from a rudometkinite belief system you gave, at least to me, a sense that your sympathies are with rudometkinites or do you actually have a reverence for his "new israel" proclamations in the s&l?

lastinline (where seeing Him as Lord God is commanded & complied with)

lastinline · March 28, 2010

'mud' date='Mar 19 2010, 04:49 PM' post='52602'
God must have figured that man would blow Thomas' words out of proportion, just like many are doing today, so He made sure clarity was given both BEFORE and AFTER in the same chapter (or section of writtings).

That is quite a declaration, "God must have figured."

The Holy Scriptures warned us not to speak for God and make a decision that can have eternal consequences to oneself and others who may be swayed by such a unreliable proclamation.

2 Peter 1: 19 And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts; 20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, 21 for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. NKJV

2-e Петра 1: 19 И притом мы имеем вернейшее пророческое слово; и вы хорошо делаете, что обращаетесь к нему, как к светильнику, сияющему в темном месте, доколе не начнет рассветать день и не взойдет утренняя звезда в сердцах ваших, 20 зная прежде всего то, что никакого пророчества в Писании нельзя разрешить самому собою. 21 Ибо никогда пророчество не было произносимо по воле человеческой, но изрекали его святые Божии человеки, будучи движимы Духом Святым.

'mud' date='Mar 20 2010, 09:39 PM' post='52714'
Maybe we should all try to spend more time in the Word of God, and less time boasting of our own understanding of a group of people.

I've requested my post to be withdrawn.

When challenged to defend beliefs in a belief system "new israel" that is not defensible. What is the response? At least with this gentleman it is silence. Why? We can at least take some joy that mud has not resorted to the typical chest thumping insanity of the rudometkinites, so clearly seen when The Truth is presented to them.

I would like to remind him thou, that silence can be construed as defiance/ignoring of the Truth presented in the Holy Scriptures. To that, I present a friendly reminder from the Holy Scriptures.

Mark 8: 38 Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels. NKJV

2 Timothy 4: 1 I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom: 2 Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. NKJV

Who exactly do you fear?

1Peter 3: 13 And who is he who will harm you if you become followers of what is good? 14 But even if you should suffer for righteousness’ sake, you are blessed. “And do not be afraid of their threats, nor be troubled.” 15 But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear; 16 having a good conscience, that when they defame you as evildoers, those who revile your good conduct in Christ may be ashamed. 17 For it is better, if it is the will of God, to suffer for doing good than for doing evil. NKJV

lastinline (where Christ reigns)

lastinline · April 4, 2010

'mud' date='Mar 20 2010, 09:39 PM' post='52714'

I've requested my post to be withdrawn.

Some serious manning-up is recommended from someone with a whole lot of experience in matters of having to do with intestinal fortitude!

lastinline (& afraid of what? Nothing!)

I Believe In Evidence....

Recommended Posts

coffee 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Disciple 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

seeking_truth_1 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

anakainosis 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

coffee 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

anakainosis 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

seeking_truth_1 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

coffee 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

steadfast 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Disciple 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

coffee 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

coffee 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

steadfast 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest Sickened

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

NAD923 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

seeking_truth_1 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Nick Shubin 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

GoodDay 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

stevepiv 0

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest anonymouse

Share this post