Feb 16 2008
About
I have left this page up merely to display the comments.
The Church of Jesus Christ
fides quaerens intellectum
-
Click to Help
- Help Support This Blog
AI-Religion- yesyoucanministry.orgBorn to be free! - Religion […]
- RSS Feeds DirectoryAdd RSS feeds to your reader or site from any category […]
- Add A SiteRead and share blogs in real-time. […]
- Bookmark This PageClick the link above to bookmark this site […]
- yesyoucanministry.org
- Connect with me:
May 6th, 2008 1:38 am
Oneness Pentecostalism has no real history, no Creedal support, and is not a real Christology. Sadly, this is true speech.
May 6th, 2008 11:15 am
I simply cannot understand your ignorance of the issue. First, I am not oneness pentecostal. Second, who cares about creeds? The only creed that I know is that Jesus Christ is Lord (Joel 2:32). But, I don’t want to go beyond what is written. As far as history is concerned, the Trinity doctrine was conceived in opposition to what many call Modalism, meaning that we came first.
May 30th, 2009 10:52 pm
joel 2:32 doesn't say jesus christ is lord.
May 9th, 2008 7:46 am
Great site! Very scholarly and accurate presentation of pure doctrine. I just started a blog about a month ago and it just happens to be designed like this one. I guess true Monotheist minds think alike.
My blog is evduanewilliams.wordpress.com
I pray that God continues to bless your ministry.
June 14th, 2008 2:32 pm
“As far as history is concerned, the Trinity doctrine was conceived in opposition to what many call Modalism, meaning that we came first.”
It doesn’t mean that at all. It merely means that the Trinitarian doctrine was codified, that is, clearly defined, when the heretical ideas of modalism arose.
June 16th, 2008 8:32 am
Not sure what page you pulled the quote from…
LJ, I appreciate your comment, but you need to read your history of the development of the Trinity. It is a doctrine clearly seen as one developed and foreign to the Apostles and the Bible that they produced. It was developed through schism and politics of the Church.
Modalism was the true and historic doctrine of the Church. Even Rome knows that.
June 16th, 2008 9:50 am
Polycarp,
Not to get you and I go’in again, but for the sake of history, one must read JND Kellys classic book: Early Christian Doctrines. His book is in it 5th edition I believe. He is with the Lord now. (RIP) This book puts to silence your bad history and theology. READ IT!
June 16th, 2008 12:47 pm
Irishanglican,
I was a’ wandering when you might stop by again. For the sake of doctrine, you must read the Bible and notice that the doctrine of the Trinity was not in it. And then you must start to read actual history books, say some by the Catholic Church which state that the doctrine of the Trinity has been developed.
June 16th, 2008 1:25 pm
Polycarp,
I read and love the Holy Scriptures! And I would be in agreement that the “dogma” of the Trinity has developed, but from the nature and truth of the “Apostles doctrine/teaching” (Acts 2:42). Again, JND Kelly’s book is a classic, you would have to dimnish yourself mentally to deny its validation!
Also, you cannot make the R. Catholic Church the boogie-man! The Eastern Orthodox Church has similarity, but it is also its own tradition (good word and way). As my own Church, Anglican. Like all hard-line “fundamentalists” you are really a reductionist, at best. I think I have stated the worst as you may know.
Father Robert
June 16th, 2008 1:40 pm
*diminish..ya know I can’t type right..lol
June 16th, 2008 1:50 pm
I never attempted to make Rome the boogie man. Rome, however, is the hold of the history of the development of the Trinity doctrine.
Taking calling name is no way to address the issues.
Can you provide a scriptural basis Church councils that establish and develop doctrine? Or Scriptural basis for Tradition over Scripture? The three denominations that you mentioned all support doctrinal development and tradition over scripture.
Robert, it seems to me that you main goal in life is to argue, but you do so with no valid points and with no evidence.
Please provide some.
June 16th, 2008 2:01 pm
Polycarp,
READ JND Kelly’s book…PLEASE! Then maybe we can at least debate. And I have learned with you, you simply cannot “exegete” scripture! Just writing down Greek words, means little if you cannot give some interpretive measure from them. And historical theology does matter also!
Fr. Robert
June 16th, 2008 2:33 pm
Historical development of theology does not matter.
I exegete just fine, just not like you want it to come out. Perhaps your method is wanting in the Truth department?
June 16th, 2008 3:02 pm
Polycarp,
Now you have finally admitted one of your biggest weakness – “Historical development of theology does not matter?” Was there any development in any NT doctrine (to your mind)? Do you believe in theology at all? And do you believe in the hypostatic-union of Christ? And that Christ has two natures (God & Man) in one person?
Fr. Robert
June 16th, 2008 8:15 pm
What I believe is that you have a very free grasp on the things that you say. I also believe that you know full well that the Trinity doctrine developed over time, but you deem it necessary to use other words so as to hide the dishonesty of those that seek to supplant the truth. I also believe that Church Councils were made up of men doing the Emperor’s bidding, and was in themselves something akin to 19th century political parties.
I also believe that you lurk waiting for arguments, knowing, fully, that those things that you espouse could not fill a blog, and that although cyberspace is filled with inconsequential items any way, those things would put it over the top therefore you seek only to put pithy comments to hide the fact that with all of your education you lack the one thing that you need, the Revelation of Jesus Christ.
June 16th, 2008 8:53 pm
Polycarp,
You have once again evaded my questions theological. And your assessment historically lacks just that, the historical proof. I have not seen one piece of historical theology from you, but that’s right there isn’t any (for you, as you stated). And you forget (though I know you don’t like the fact, that I was a seminary professor). I can write and speak in few words, at least I try to. This was Calvin’s ability. But I know you are Arminian, most Pentecostal people are.
And it is the fact I think of being so heterodox, i.e. unorthodox in the established faith. That causes you real problems. You just have opinions, and almost no theology proper. Sorry, but this is my conviction based on my theology and views of history. And mine are real, historical and can be given some historical sense. Though I am feeble I admit, even with my so-called education (which again seems to bother you?) It is not really personal, but you have made it so in your mind. It is called ad hominem, when you cannot attack the issue, you attack the man or person.
Fr. Robert
June 16th, 2008 9:48 pm
My goodness, someone else that likes to bloviate!
Honestly, now you are going to attack my Arminianism? Is that another tactic to deflect from you lack of doctrinal support for the Trinity? You say that you have theology proper, yet your theology is found only in history books and philosophical defenses of what is supposedly the Christian faith. Proper theology begins and ends with the Scriptures themselves.
You have yet to show one shred of evidence and yet you seem to think that you have? I have posted my theological reasoning, and yet all you have done is to shout into cyberspace, ‘You are wrong and I will show you’ then, nothing. Seems to me that your lack of evidence speaks volumes of your doctrine.
All you do is to attack, and yet no more than a few weeks ago, you swore this blog off. Seems to me that your words are as honest as your doctrine, Robert.
June 3rd, 2009 1:01 pm
Sweet, you're Arminian? Lets talk about the fact that predestination is throughout the entire Bible!
June 16th, 2008 10:11 pm
Your right Poly, I should not proceed with your ad hom. So I will leave, but say hi to Duane for me.
Fr. Robert
June 17th, 2008 7:43 am
Leave? Again, after the attacks on me? Well, I guess we will see how long it lasts this time.
June 17th, 2008 5:15 pm
Poly, we will call it even. You are not gonna change me, and I am not gonna change you. If any change takes place? It will be the work of God in “metanoia” – a transformation of the mind!
One thing we can agree on, this Todd B. is a fool and impostor! Hopefully most of the souls will just pass along through his deception. We have such in Great Britain, but they are more “spiritist” like.
Fr. Robert
June 18th, 2008 8:05 am
Fr. Robert, on this I agree. I will also agree that I believe that you can be an invaluable resource on the Orthodox and early Church Councils.
Todd B. is the latest in a long line of such people, always seeking to pervert the gospel.
I don’t understand how people can so willingly give themselves over to such a fraud.
July 9th, 2008 2:08 pm
Simon Magus was a true soldier. He traveled with a female spiritual companion and could fly. SM was a Sethian and rejected the false salvationist doctrine that was being promoted in the name of the fictional historic Jesus. SM came from a long lineage of Pagan Gnostics dating back to Plato and Pythagoras. The literalists perverted the Godman myth and obliterated all reference to Sophia (though early Christians worshipped her).
July 9th, 2008 2:12 pm
Oh, wow, a Gnostic. I though Rome obliterated you fellows a while back?
July 9th, 2008 5:49 pm
Gnosticism, the heretical movement of the early Christian centuries that emphasized that salvation was through a secret gnosis or knowledge. Originating as a perversion of both Jewish and Christian truths, it developed into an independent phenomenon. The principal patristic sources of information about Gnosticism come from the Church Fathers, such as Justin the martyr, Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Origen, Tertullian, and Epiphanius. We also should note that “gnosis” is an immediate knowledge of spiritual truth without the mediation of churches or other institutions or rituals. Besides the full-blown aspect, as we see in the above quote (Johnnypeepers). Is there not some gnostic nature to many independent type Christians today? Yes, this is a question.
Fr. Robert
PS Poly I am hardly on “holiday”. Long story…
Johnnypeepers – There are both Jewish..Hasidic’s that love the wisdom or sophia of God. And of course the Wisdom Lit. and books, etc. Plus the E. Orthodox have a place for doctrine of sophia. But the early orthodox Christian’s did not “worship” sophia.
Fr. R.
July 9th, 2008 6:19 pm
Well, if no holiday, then I hope that all is well.
(Sidebar here, but have you picked up the Orthodox Study Bible?)
I believe that many so-called independents have a form of gnosticism within themselves, but a very limited form, but then again, some ‘associated’ members do as well. If we are not careful, we begin to worship the gnosis more than the reality or action. Knowing about God is not the same as knowing God, if I am making myself plain here.
July 9th, 2008 8:18 pm
Polycarp,
Yes I have the Orthodox Study Bible. It uses the Septuagint for the OT text. Interesting, but not my blank choice for sure on the Text of the OT. Though this is the text the Jews used in Jesus time, and no doubt the early first century church to some degree. But, often St. Paul quotes the Hebrew, and very freely too (in his NT Letters).
Agree as to “knowledge”…as St. Paul says: “knowledge (alone) puffs up”. We are simply nothing without the Spirit of God!
I am here visting my elderly “mum”! God Bless her!
Fr. R.
July 10th, 2008 7:46 am
I like the use of the Septuagint in NT Studies, and really enjoy having the OSB on hand, however, the NETS is the preferred choice, but since it does not have a NT attached to it, it is cumbersome in Church.
July 11th, 2008 8:45 pm
Praise the Lord! This is great! Where are you saints located. I am also The Church of Jesus Christ.
July 11th, 2008 8:51 pm
That is great to here. My particular congregation is located south of Charleston, West Virginia. Where are you?
July 19th, 2008 10:40 am
I am glad to hear that you think it important to call attention to false doctrine. I was wondering what you think of Hank Hanegraaff’s commmentary on the Church of Christ, which I will copy and paste for you here. It is on CRI’s website, http://www.equip.org.
Churches of Christ – Perspecitve
Perspective CP0604
IS THE CHURCH OF CHRIST A CHRISTIAN CHURCH?
Some Christians believe that the Church of Christ promotes non-biblical teachings and practices. Is the Church of Christ a Christian church?
The Church of Christ movement originally arose in the hopes of promoting unity among all Christians, but it eventually ended up separating itself from other Christian groups. Although the Church of Christ movement is basically Christian, it’s difficult not to categorize certain factions as aberrant because of some of their more extreme doctrines and practices.
Of all its beliefs, the Church of Christ movement is perhaps best known for its view that water baptism is absolutely essential for salvation. This is no doubt a “sub-biblical” view of baptism. Acts 10:44-48, for example, records that Gentiles were filled with the Holy Spirit (and therefore saved) before they were baptized. Water baptism is certainly a normal part of becoming a Christian and a member of the church; nevertheless, it’s still possible to be saved without having been baptized — especially when circumstances make baptism very difficult if not impossible (cf. Luke 23:39-43). Now, some of the more extreme factions within the Church of Christ movement go even further, and argue that anyone who views baptism differently from them is not a Christian and is, therefore, lost — even if that person has been baptized!
There are also reports that heavy-handed tactics are employed by a number of more extremist groups within the Church of Christ. The Boston Movement, for example, which evolved from a similar movement at the Crossroads Church of Christ, is probably the most well-known of these authoritarian groups. Both movements were rejected by the mainline Churches of Christ. This particular group goes so far as to say that other segments of the Church of Christ movement are non-Christian and will face eternal damnation.
And so, while the Church of Christ movement is orthodox in many of the essentials of the faith, it is plagued with a very loud segment whose views are so extreme that developing any type of Christian fellowship with them becomes almost an impossible task. But remember, don’t throw the baby out with the bath water; there are many within the Church of Christ movement who are committed Christians.
On the Church of Christ, that’s the Bible Answer Man Perspective. I’m Hank Hanegraaff.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
For more information on this topic, please consult our Web site at http://www.equip.org; write to us at P. O. Box 8500, Charlotte, NC 28271-8500; or contact us using the other information listed above.
We also recommend the statement “The Churches of Christ, the Christian Churches, the Disciples of Christ” (DC600), which addresses various beliefs within the Church of Christ, and the article “At What Price Success? The Boston (Church of Christ) Movement,” by James Bjornstad (DC615).
July 19th, 2008 10:45 am
Andrea, I have dealt with the CoC and find a good many of them to be extremist, indeed. Not all of then, but more then a few here in Appalachia. I would have to disagree with Hank’s take on the beginning of the CoC – they were formed by the Stone-Campbellite movement in the 1830’s as part of the restorationist movement, seeking to restore the New Testament Church.
Their view on Baptism is the historical view on baptism, although many Protestants don’t believe it to be so.
July 21st, 2008 3:00 pm
Check out my blog at djmmusings.blogspot.com
July 26th, 2008 9:17 am
Are you LDS? You sound a lot alike in some areas.
July 26th, 2008 9:54 am
JL, have you actually read this blog? Any at all? Or did you just read ‘The Church of Jesus Christ’ and automatically assume Mormon? Honestly, reading comprehension is a good skill to master.
August 13th, 2008 3:26 pm
All of the above arguing is good if you have Jesus Christ in your heart, mind, and soul.
Otherwise it is empty semantics.
August 13th, 2008 3:31 pm
Suppose, I believe that if you examine some of the other pages and comments, you will see where our discussion has carried us. We have to first start with Christ and then grow in grace.
Besides, it is not so much arguing between some of us, but strenuous fellowship.
August 17th, 2008 10:54 pm
BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU ARE SAYING
August 17th, 2008 11:17 pm
WHY?
September 4th, 2008 9:54 pm
What about Easter?
There are book references, and I remember seeing these and other references when my step-father was a Christian minister back in the 1970s. Nearly all of the Christian festivals were originally pagan festivals that were adopted and Christianized by the early Church Fathers into “nicer” things so that the Christian converts could keep on doing their original festivals while looking like they were Christians. The early Church Fathers hated Jews so much that they purposely made these festivals to be as “counterpoints” to the Biblical feasts that the Jews celebrated and as proof that the Church was so much “better” than the Jews and the synagogues. It was also during this time that the Church began to kill Jews and other “non-believers”, which lasted for many centuries.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“Easter is a word of Saxon origin, and imports a goddess of the Saxons, or rather, of the East, Estera, in honor of whom sacrifices being annually offered about the Passover time of the year (spring), the name became attached by association of ideas to the Christian festival of the resurrection, which happened at the time of the Passover …. So the present German word for Easter, Ostern, is referring to the same goddess, Estera or Ostera.”
– Excerpted from Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“Originally the spring festival in honor of the Teutonic goddess of light and spring known in Anglo-Saxon as Eastre. As early as the 8th century the name was transferred by the Anglo-Saxons to the Christian festival designed to celebrate the resurrection of Messiah. In A.V. (authorized Version) it occurs once (Acts 12:4), but is a mistranslation.”
– Excerpted from The Westminster Dictionary of Bible
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
” The word Easter is of Anglo origin, and is supposed to be derived from
Eostra, the goddess of love, or the Venus of the North in honor of whom a festival was celebrated by our pagan ancestors in the month of April.”
– Excerpted from Barnes’ Notes
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“Although Easter is a Christian festival, it embodies traditions of an ancient time antedating the rise of Christianity. The origin of its name as lost in the dim past; some scholars believe it is probably derived from Eastre, Anglo-Saxon name of a Teutonic goddess of spring and fertility, to whom was dedicated Eastre month, corresponding to April. Her festival was celebrated on the day of the vernal equinox, and traditions of the festival survive in the familiar Easter bunny, symbol of the fertile rabbit, and in the equally familiar colored Easter eggs originally painted with gay hues to represent the sunlight of spring.
Such festivals, and the myths and legends which explain their origin, abounded in ancient religions. The Greek myth of the return of the earth-goddess Demeter from the underworld to the light of day, symbolizing the resurrection of life in the spring after the long hibernation of winter, had its counterpart, among many others, in the Latin legend of Ceres and Persephone…. The universality of such festivals and myths among ancient peoples has led some scholars to interpret the resurrection of Christ as a mystical and exalted variant of fertility myths.”
– Excerpted from Funk and Wagnalls Standard Reference Encyclopedia, vol. 8, 1970
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
PASCHA (Greek letters), mistranslated “Easter” in Acts 12:4, A.V., denotes the Passover (R.V.). The phrase “after the Passover” signifies after the whole festival was at an end. The term Easter is not of Christian origin. It is another form of Astarte, one of the titles of the Chaldean goddess, the queen of heaven. The festival of Pasch held by Christians in post-apostolic times was a continuation of the Jewish feast, but was not instituted by Christ, nor was it connected with Lent.
From this Pasch the Pagan festival of Easter was quite distinct and was introduced into the apostate Western religion, as part of the attempt to adapt Pagan festivals to Christianity. See PASSOVER.
– An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, W.E. Vine, 1966, pp.14-15
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
See the image of the rabbit in the moon (a commonality to many cultures of a sacred animal to the moon deity, such as in the ancient Mediterranean and Near East)
http://www.calendersign.com/en/am_hare_hedgehog.php
P. S. It should also be noted that the early Church Fathers also brought in the Mediterranean festivals of the fertility goddesses, such as Ishtar and Asthoreth, to coincide with the new Christian festival of Easter.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
September 4th, 2008 9:57 pm
Catherine, what is this about? What is your point?
September 4th, 2008 10:00 pm
Catherine, please keep the comments short and pithy.
September 20th, 2008 1:24 pm
I scanned all the comments and the article. The Truth is sorely lacking in all of these. God the Father, God the Son and God, the Holy Spirit are all one…hence, the Trinity. That is our God and Creator, whether we can understand the concept or not.
It isn’t “my” church or “your church”. Christ intended only one and it is revealed in Scripture well enough that a 4th grader could understand it. Christ is the head of it and it was established in Acts 2. It is not a man-made organization. Christ died for it and purchased it with His own blood. It would be wise to study the Scriptures…instead of world history or commentaries.
September 20th, 2008 9:06 pm
What are you talking about? Lots of words, little sense.
October 11th, 2008 3:38 pm
How is the average person out here supposed to have any hope of knowing all this? Is this the sort of knowledge you think people need? I just finished reading a fantastic story about a missionary. The Lord used her to bring hundreds of idol worshippers to Jesus. She wouldn’t meet your expectations in her knowledge of theology or history. She was too busy spreading the gospel.
October 11th, 2008 4:25 pm
Farrah,
My Sister In Christ, this is also a theological blog, and theology is the study of God. And sound biblical study of God is demanded of us…”Study to show yourself approved unto God, a workman..etc.” (2 Tim.2:15) This also really should be the desire of the whole Church of God, to learn more and more the doctrine of God… to worship Him!
“But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To HIM be glory both now and forever. Amen.” (2 Pet.3:18)
There are all levels and gifts of God. Keep enjoying those God opens and gives to you! Maybe sometime in the future you might see and enjoy more of those theological gifts and blessings that God has deeply stored in Himself!
Father Robert (irishanglican)
October 11th, 2008 5:11 pm
Well said, Fr. Robert. Better than I could have.
October 12th, 2008 12:41 am
It did occur to me earlier today that maybe the Lord has a job for your knowledge that I’m unaware of, maybe if you are really His children you are there to help people I would never interact with. If that makes sense? At any rate, I think I understand what you’re saying.
November 18th, 2008 2:54 pm
Polycarp – I just had to comment that you are cracking me up over here with some of your dialogue. “Strenuous fellowship” LOL! That’s great!
Also, it sounds like we might agree on false Trinity doctrine as well. Isn’t is amazing how that is the biggest heresy to many (to not believe in the Trinity as 3 actual persons)?!? You’d think we were the antichrist the way some talk.
November 18th, 2008 2:57 pm
Wait? We are not the antichrist?
November 21st, 2008 9:57 am
Dear Borhters and Sisters in Christ,
Greetings from Dubai…
I am in trouble; I need a job somewhere or I need some money to pull on; so I need your prayer and
further help.
God bless.
Sincerely,
Mannil Mathai ABRAHAM
January 7th, 2009 10:59 pm
I just found your blog, and I must say, it’s nice. Insightful, direct and Godly – all qualities I look for in a blog to not only read, but to link.
Check out “The Writing on the Wall” and you will find some like-mindedness. Let me know if you are interested in linking? Thanks.
Peace,
HiScrivener
January 30th, 2009 8:37 pm
Just a quick question. You state that you are not a Oneness Pentecostal linking to the UPCI, but the Church of Jesus Christ organization does adhere to the oneness doctrine. Stated here:
http://www.jesuschristisgod.org/are_the_things_your_saying_found.htm
So, I’m assuming that you are simply not part of the UPCI, but have similar doctrine.
Your blog has a wealth of information. I came from a Trinitarian viewpoint until maybe five years ago when I came to a fuller revelation of who Jesus Christ was from the Scriptures.
Congratulations on your blog being featured on the Anchorage Daily Newspaper also!
February 11th, 2009 12:31 am
Bro Joel, Not sure if you remember me. We met several years ago in Dyersburg. I have really enjoyed your blog. Lots of great information. Congrats to on the new baby.
In Jesus Christ,
Bro John Blankenship
February 15th, 2009 1:10 am
The God of Israel is the Holy One of Israel. There are no three persons, for the Father is an invisible Spirit, dwelling in the glorified form many call Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Yahshua,Yah-Is-Savior). The Holy Spirit is that portion of Himself that He shares out of Himself,into the members of His body, the church or “called out ones.” These have placed their old selves on the cross and died to self with Christ (Romans 6: 1-6), and through faith in the operation of God that raised up the man Christ from the dead, we by that same belief receive His Spirit, and thus receive a new heart and life. Praise God.
There is no trinity; it is a heinous heresy heaved upon the masses by the enemy. I appreciate very much you standing firm, Polycarp, in the face of so many who need eyesalve to see this truth. God bless you richly… Wayneman
April 26th, 2009 5:27 pm
test
May 4th, 2009 8:59 pm
Just a quick question. Why do you remain unknown, while you attempt to destroy people openly? Why not just attack vaguely, just as you remain with your identity? You’re doing nothing new, just the typical unbelieving Baptist C*** that’s been around way too long.
June 3rd, 2009 1:08 pm
Why would Christians be baptized in the Holy Spirit if the Holy Spirit was not God?
AC 1:5 For John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized in the HOLY SPIRIT not many days hence.
AC 1:8 But ye shall receive power, when the HOLY SPIRIT is come upon you: and ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.
Why wouldn't Christians be Baptized just in Jesus or the Father if the Holy Spirit wasn't God?
July 21st, 2009 11:24 pm
I can’t find it now, but I swear I read somewhere on your blog that you lived in south Louisiana at some point? Where, exactly?
July 22nd, 2009 12:14 am
Don’t worry–I’ll not say a word!
I grew up in Natchitoches, moved to New Orleans for seminary, now live in Forest Hill. Did any Louisiana stick to you when you vacated?
July 22nd, 2009 12:25 am
Yes, our cuisine is quite wonderful! Is it hard to get crawfish in WV?
July 22nd, 2009 1:04 am
Chinese crawfish–GAG! It’s funny you mentioned Zapp’s–I just finished off a bag earlier today. If there is a bright side, at least you can season your food! It’s the little things that count!
January 7th, 2009 11:02 pm
Done!
January 30th, 2009 9:11 pm
Thanks, Matt. Actually, on the oneness pentecostal thing, I have met many of them who has a doctrine that ranges from near Trinitarian to a denial of the Father and/or Son. I appreciate the kind words and I hope you continue to visit.
February 11th, 2009 8:30 am
Bro. John, I do remember you. Thank you for the kind words. If you ever wish to contribute, please, let me know.
February 15th, 2009 6:36 am
Thanks, Wayneman. Have you read this series yet?
March 16th, 2009 5:27 pm
Where, anywhere in the Bible, does it say that the Bible alone contains the word of God? What did they do before there was a canon of the Bible? What was the Apostle’s authority? For that matter, where in the Bible does it state the word Bible? So where did that come from?
The truth is that the Trinity is defined in the Bible (both in the new and old testaments), the word wasn’t used, but the doctrine stands “Go forth to all nations baptising in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” This is the Trinity, it defines the trinity.
When you start to read actual history books, you will find that almost all of them that explain the Church for the first 1500 years were…Catholic. Face it, whatever Church you belong to, it stemmed from the Church Christ created when he declared Peter the first Pope, and told him that the gates of hell would not prevail against it.
One church, not many. But, in fact, my brother, you are a part of the Catholic Church, whether you want to believe it or not. Not in full communion with us, but at least partially with us. Because Christ created one Church, and if you believe in Him, you are part of His Church.
March 16th, 2009 5:31 pm
Not tradition over scripture. Tradition equal to scripture, both equal to Magesterium.
Scriptural basis for Church Council = Acts 15 where Peter calls the apostles together to discuss inclusion of the Gentiles into the faith. The Apostles together decided, with Peter as their head, that circumcision was no longer necessary, that baptism took it’s place. That the dietary laws were not needed, except for the exclusion of eating animal blood.
But, where do you get the idea that it has to be in the Bible for it to be absolutely proven? The Bible in no way states that it is complete.
March 16th, 2009 5:37 pm
Emperors had nothing to do with the Council of Jerusalem, and the last 5 or 6 councils, at least since the break-off of govenmental Europe and the Church. Beyond that, the legitimizing and finally legalization and cessation of persecution, which engendered embracement of the faith by secular government, was the only way the faith could grow. In some cases, secular decisions were made at Church Councils, but you have to understand the complete and total integration of the Church and the governments of Europe.
March 16th, 2009 6:49 pm
David, first, I can tell that unlike others who have take up the charge you are uneducated when it comes to church history. The canon might not have been fully formed for some time after the Apostles, but the books existed from that time. I prefer not to use the term ‘bible’ in formal conversation, because it was always called Scriptures.
The Trinity was not defined anywhere until long after the Apostles. Most Catholic scholars will tell you this, and point to the addition of Matthew 28.19 as a latter interpolation to the text. The original baptismal formula, even again, according to Catholic scholars, was Acts 2.38, in the name of Jesus Christ. Using your logic as applied to Matthew 28.19, then the first understanding of the Godhead was a monad. As a matter of fact, the monad existed until Eusebius of Caesarea and Marcellus.
I believe that the Orthodox Communions would disagree with you concerning the ‘Catholic’ root of all churches, and further, so would I concerning mine. Rome did not gain power until after Nicaea. As a matter of fact, it was to the Bishop of Alexandria – by the way, who was first called Pope – that it was given to date Easter. Peter was not declared ‘Pope’, as that title did not existed until the 3rd century, and used, again, in Alexandria. Cyprian, who I think you should read, fought hard against what he saw as Rome’s ascendancy against the Tradition of the Church.
The Apostle Paul said that Scripture was given for doctrine, nothing else. The Magesterium was created by Rome long after Paul.
The Council in Jerusalem had James as the head, as he was the first Bishop of that city. It was not the inclusion of the Gentiles that concerned the Council, but to what part they had to obey the Law. You should Tertullian on this.
I would suggest that before you argue your own history, you know it. Please continue this discussion on my discussion page.
May 4th, 2009 9:26 pm
Well, Harold, or is it Gem? Harold, I am not attempting to destroy anyone, just tell the Truth. My identity is my own. It is easily know, if you follow long enough. And I am not Baptist, Gem. It is obvious that you have not followed this blog long.
May 31st, 2009 1:23 am
Indeed, Dr. West, but doesn't Paul's use of it, not to mention Peter, indicate that they primitive New Testament Church understood that particular prophecy to be applied to the recently ascended Messiah? The use of the phrase 'name of the Lord,' especially in light of Peter's application of the events of Pentecost to that prophecy, is a running them in Acts.
June 3rd, 2009 9:43 am
Great – but I see predestination as a corporate issue, not an individual issue.
June 3rd, 2009 9:45 am
David, I am not saying that God is not Spirit.
July 21st, 2009 11:27 pm
Indeed, I did, Jason. I was born in Baton Rouge, grew-up between Port Vincent, Denham Springs, and Central. Even spent some time in Baker – but don’t tell anyone.
July 22nd, 2009 12:18 am
Only the love of the food. Coming to West Virginia was like coming to a different world – another culture. I don’t mean like moving to Mississippi, but a truly different culture. Had too much of Louisiana stuck, well, it’s tough enough now to fit it…
I have some relatives still down there, and I will be there in November, but I really don’t even visit much. I just feel at home here – always have.
July 22nd, 2009 12:30 am
No – I mean, if you like Chinese crawfish. I miss Community Coffee most of all. We can get Cafe Du Monde, but not Community. I did get a local store to carry Zapp’s, so I am pretty happy about that. We even have Tony’s and Zatarans, but no, the cuisine here is generally lacking, what’s that word? Oh, yes, flavor. The staple here is pinto beans and cornbread.
Oh, and they have cod and talipa for seafood.
And don’t get me started on what passes for Cajun around here.
July 22nd, 2009 7:30 am
No, it’s not the little things! I want my crawfish boils, my long rows of corn and potatoes, not some miniature Chinese crawfish, already peeled an cooked! I need my gumbos, my creoles, dare I even say it? I need my ettouffee. Give me your bisque, your crawfish pie, and your king cake.
Of course, I have clear, blue water, mountain scenery (I live on the mountain) and four seasons.