stevepiv

Prijun is a heretic, on his way to hell. He/she has been warned, corrected, told the Truth. They continue to deny and embrace a belief system that has no power to save. Sad sad sad....

Lastinline, Taking your logic to other cults your recommendation for a Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, JW, Mormon, Molokan would be to stay there so you can be more effective... That's not Sola Scriptura.

You can go for it Anonymous. I was just chiming in. Thanks!

Lastinline, If you are ever in So Cal area on The Lord's Day please let me know and you are invited to come Church with my family and I. Steve

I want to inject a timely quote here from Spurgeon: "Oh, my brethren! Bold-hearted men are always called mean-spirited by cowards."- C.H. Spurgeon Instead of Lastinline challenging Seeking_Truth_1's sincerity, maybe Lastinline and EGK can prove from THE BIBLE how they can participate and be members of a cult that denies the essential doctrines of Christianity. I am not questioning your personal beliefs, but asking you to prove why you attend a place that would exclude people as being "Ne-Nash" based on race. Or, deny The Trinity. The Inerrancy of Scripture. Have extra Biblical writings. Sing songs glorifying Maxim aka "King of spirits". Prayer for the dead. No real Biblical church membership aka "you are born into the religion". And, the list goes on. I know Seeking_Truth_1 doesn't need my backing or me to even post this. I am asking Lastinline and EGK to look past the messenger and answer directly and concisely. Thank you.

Thank you for your post. I need to ask, what do you guys really think is going to happen when your church ALLOWS that book to be present and where you get your "worship service order" from? Seriously, is it okay that the book be there but no one blesses with it? Then you can stay? Or, as long as we had 3 speeches from the Bible and 2 from the devil book then it's ok? Then, the assistant minister is blatantly NOT a Christian and NOT saved by any means by being loyal to the heresy in that book. Isn't that enough for your friend to stop attending there and placing himself under those heretics? Molokans have a lot to learn, even the ones that are Christian and yet remain there. You are NOT in a good place for Christian growth to minister to others. What I have learned and observed since 6 years ago since my Wife and I left is that you need to separate yourself from the darkness of the Molokan church and join a Bible based Church. What is keeping you there? What is keeping any Christian there? I won't question your salvation Mr. Lastinline as you have confessed and testified that Salvation is Faith Alone in Christ Alone by God's Grace Alone to the Glory of God Alone. I have much more to write, but will start with this for now.

I agree with what the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith states and this confession is what our Church holds to in explaining what we believe the Holy Scriptures teach: CHAPTER 30; OF THE LORDS SUPPER Paragraph 1. The supper of the Lord Jesus was instituted by him the same night wherein he was betrayed, to be observed in his churches, unto the end of the world, for the perpetual remembrance, and showing to all the world the sacrifice of himself in his death,1 confirmation of the faith of believers in all the benefits thereof, their spiritual nourishment, and growth in him, their further engagement in, and to all duties which they owe to him; and to be a bond and pledge of their communion with him, and with each other.2 1 1 Cor. 11:23-26 2 1 Cor. 10:16,17,21 Paragraph 2. In this ordinance Christ is not offered up to his Father, nor any real sacrifice made at all for remission of sin of the quick or dead, but only a memorial of that one offering up of himself by himself upon the cross, once for all;3 and a spiritual oblation of all possible praise unto God for the same.4 So that the popish sacrifice of the mass, as they call it, is most abominable, injurious to Christ's own sacrifice the alone propitiation for all the sins of the elect. 3 Heb. 9:25,26,28 4 1 Cor. 11:24; Matt. 26:26,27 Paragraph 3. The Lord Jesus hath, in this ordinance, appointed his ministers to pray, and bless the elements of bread and wine, and thereby to set them apart from a common to a holy use, and to take and break the bread; to take the cup, and, they communicating also themselves, to give both to the communicants.5 5 1 Cor. 11:23-26, etc. Paragraph 4. The denial of the cup to the people, worshipping the elements, the lifting them up, or carrying them about for adoration, and reserving them for any pretended religious use, are all contrary to the nature of this ordinance, and to the institution of Christ.6 6 Matt. 26:26-28, 15:9, Exod. 20:4,5 Paragraph 5. The outward elements in this ordinance, duly set apart to the use ordained by Christ, have such relation to him crucified, as that truly, although in terms used figuratively, they are sometimes called by the names of the things they represent, in other words, the body and blood of Christ,7 albeit, in substance and nature, they still remain truly and only bread and wine, as they were before.8 7 1 Cor. 11:27 8 1 Cor. 11:26-28 Paragraph 6. That doctrine which maintains a change of the substance of bread and wine, into the substance of Christ's body and blood, commonly called transubstantiation, by consecration of a priest, or by any other way, is repugnant not to Scripture alone,9 but even to common sense and reason, overthrows the nature of the ordinance, and has been, and is, the cause of manifold superstitions, yea, of gross idolatries.10 9 Acts 3:21; Luke 14:6,39 10 1 Cor. 11:24,25 Paragraph 7. Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible elements in this ordinance, do then also inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally, but spiritually receive, and feed upon Christ crucified, and all the benefits of his death; the body and blood of Christ being then not corporally or carnally, but spiritually present to the faith of believers in that ordinance, as the elements themselves are to their outward senses.11 11 1 Cor. 10:16, 11:23-26 Paragraph 8. All ignorant and ungodly persons, as they are unfit to enjoy communion with Christ, so are they unworthy of the Lord's table, and cannot, without great sin against him, while they remain such, partake of these holy mysteries, or be admitted thereunto;12 yea, whosoever shall receive unworthily, are guilty of the body and blood of the Lord, eating and drinking judgment to themselves.13 12 2 Cor. 6:14,15 13 1 Cor. 11:29; Matt. 7:6

The True Word of God is pure without any contradictions. It is you that has contradictions. Not The Bible.

Very good article to address Prijun: Difference or Contradiction? by R.C. Sproul We live in a day when consistency of thought is demeaned by many people, and individuals maintain that contradiction is the hallmark of truth, particularly in religious matters. Yet, in practice, human beings seek consistency. Consider liberal Protestantism. Decades ago, most of the mainline denominations abandoned the infallibility and inerrancy of Scripture. Originally, these denominations thought they could continue affirming the other core tenets of Christianity. As the years passed, however, it became clear that the rejection of the infallibility and inerrancy of the Scriptures leads to the denial of Christian orthodoxy on other matters. Most churches that abandoned biblical inerrancy and infallibility eventually rejected the atonement, biblical sexual ethics, and other teachings. Those denominations had to do that for consistencys sake. To deny that Gods Word is without error is to deny that we have a trustworthy revelation from Him. Thus, it doesnt ultimately matter what the Bible says about anything. When it comes to studying the actual consistency of Scripture, its not long before we have to deal with allegations that the Bible is full of contradictions. This can be devastating to the Christian faith, because we know that if the Bible has real contradictions, its not a consistent account, and if its not a consistent account, it cant be divinely inspired. The main thing I want to say about this issue is that most alleged contradictions turn out not to be contradictions at all. When I was a seminary student, my professors frequently taught the theories of higher critics who refused to affirm the infallibility of Scripture. One of my fellow seminarians, a brilliant fellow, struggled with these theories. He had come to seminary believing in Scriptures consistency, but by the time he was a senior, he was one of the casualties of the exposure to this relentless skepticism about the Bible. I remember one discussion in the hallway of the seminary where he said: R.C., how can you still believe in the inerrancy of Scripture after all weve gone through here? Dont you see that the Bible is full of contradictions? At the time, he couldnt list even ten examples of contradictions in the Bible. So I suggested he go home and come up with thirty contradictions that we could look at together. When we met the next day, he brought a list of about twenty. He gave me the first contradiction, and we looked at the apparently contradictory passages together, and we found that there was variation between the two accounts. But variation and contradiction arent the same thing. Were familiar with how two eyewitnesses might see the same crime but report it differently. They remember different things about the event because of their different perspectives, but the details of the two accounts dont conflict. In fact, the authorities like to have many witnesses to a crime because comparing the stories gives a fuller view of what happened. The same thing happens when historians research an event and read eyewitness accounts of it. As my friend and I looked at the first alleged biblical problem, we found it was possible for the two accounts to agree. Then, we looked at the rest of the contradictions. Some examples were more challenging than others, but what happened was this: in every example, we concluded together that there was no real contradiction. Read the Bible carefully, and youll find variations of perspective. Consider the Gospels presentation of the resurrection. For example, Matthew 28:110 and Mark 16:18 say there was one angel at the empty tomb, while Luke 24:112 mentions the presence of two angels at Jesus grave. That was one of the contradictions my friend brought to me. So I said we should assume for the sake of argument that two angels were present. If so, would it not be possible for one eyewitness to be more concerned about who wasnt thereJesusthan he was about the number of angels present, especially if one of them did not speak? The disciple could have said, I went there, and I saw an angel, who said x, y, and z, without mentioning the second angel because the presence of two angels wasnt that significant to the disciple who was writing. I asked my friend, What word is conspicuously absent from this disciples report that must be there to have a true contradiction? The answer was clear: the word only. If there were two angels, we know there had to be at least one; thus, since Mark and Matthew dont say there was only one angel there, theres no contradiction between them and Luke. Instead, theres variation in perspectives because theyre relying on different eyewitness reports of the same event. Such variation is exactly what we should expect from independent accounts. It took many centuries and many different writers to give us the Bible. It didnt drop from heaven on a parachute. The doctrine of inspiration doesnt mean we wont find difficult-to-reconcile texts in Scripture. The Bible is a divine bookbut its also a very human book, not in that it is filled with human errors but in that it reflects how human beings tell stories. No two people write in exactly the same way, and no two human beings report their perspectives on the same event identically. Two people can accurately represent the same event without covering all the same details. Thats the kind of thing we find in Scripture. Difference does not mean contradiction.

The questions you have and alleged "discrepancies" have been dealt with already. You aren't the first heretic blasphemer that has attempted to discredit the Word of God.

The 2 verses that I posted and the verse that Seeking Truth posted show that we have sinned and fall short of God's Glory. But NOT Jesus Christ. He is the spotless, sinless Lamb of God and the Only Way to receive forgiveness of our sins is by believing in Him by Faith Alone. Prijun I really feel bad for you and pray for you.

23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, Romans 3:23 | ESV

21 For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps. 22 He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth. 23 When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly. 24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed. 25 For you were straying like sheep, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls. 1 Peter 2:21-25 | ESV

It should be up an running tomorrow. The Sunday School is at 9:30, then Morning services at 10:45 AM all Pacific Standard Time. Hope you can watch tomorrow.

All for not believing the Catholic doctrine of original sin. Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God. The face of God is continually with us. So do you claim to be without original sin?