InSeasonOut

Acts 4:31 And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness.

Right, but i found it interesting that the eating blood is forbidden before the law - Genesis 9:4 ; and under the law - Levi. 17:10 ; and even now after the law = .... Acts 15:20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. Also 15:29 and 21:25 forbid eating blood. After i learned this, i keep a close eye on who is cooking!

Authority of Scripture. Reformed theology teaches that the Bible is the inspired and authoritative Word of God, sufficient in all matters of faith and practice. You don't believe that. ^ You are not is a position to judge or represent what I believe. For the record, I absolutely believe that, in fact, I am betting my eternity on that premise. In what way do you think I do not believe that? Below is part of what you said during our chat in the private messaging. You said quote : "There is only one word of God, and we do not posess it in the form of ink on paper, all we have is imperfect, incomplete simulations of it, that we call manuscripts, and Bible translations. Versions are not all equal, but none is uniquely the word of God and without error. People are free to use the KJV, it has served a great purpose for 400 years, but it was not the first, nor is it the last, good version of the Bible. The best Bible version, is the one you will actually read and take to heart." End quote Then i asked you - how can someone take the Bible to heart if it's not the word of God?

Authority of Scripture. Reformed theology teaches that the Bible is the inspired and authoritative Word of God, sufficient in all matters of faith and practice. You don't believe that. ^

Calvinism is heresy. His private interpretations are heresy. He believed in replacement theology - which is a heresy.

InSeasonOut I had a read. The writer of that article is full of errors in my opinion. It wasn't the fruit that was evil, because every fruit got made was good. It was disobeying God that was evil. If God had told us what fruit it was, then men would of for sure created a religion banning this fruit! Genesis 1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. Wow, thats okay you disagreed.. but WHERE does it say the fruit was evil? - It's not in there! Your article is filled with errors! lol

Here is a solid topical study by Peter Ruckman http://www.kjv1611.org.uk/Forbidden fruit.htm

Properly? According to who? What is your authority? reading in English and reading in Greek... authority is my own common sense. Which Greek manuscript(s) ? And I don't believe you can be your own authority - Authority needs to be outside yourself unless your a dictator... We need our authority to be the word of God - by definition - the word of God is perfect, inerrant etc. And in english it is the KJB. Bible Believers change their view to fit the Bible, not change the Bible to fit a fallible "common sense"; which anyone can make up as they go... Which "proper" translation are you comparing the improper translation to? Any improper translation is only in your mind. Or a "bible scholar" ; man is your authority. No one can fully and absolutely understand 100% of the word of God. Your better saying "I don't know" then saying God failed to give us his word in our language in one volume. Lost sinners are going to be judged by the Book; they have no excuse of saying they didn't learn Greek or saying the Bible is filled with errors.

Properly? According to who? What is your authority?

I think you need to read the second part of this post about 4 times.... Ok now what? Well if he quotes several verses that perfect shows the Trinity, don't you think that he is making that point..... or are you questioning him being s total idiot..... LoL Oh ok, I was just saying that the Branhamites will use those same verses to Disprove the trinity, and have some cultic interpretation. They somehow don't see it... Then they will try again and i say no that describes the trinity... then they give an analogy to disprove the trinity and then i say wow you perfectly described the trinity!

Joe, don't misunderstand... as the video said = the new versions are only for money! Zondervan is owned by Rupert murdoch, who owns harper collins and publishes the satanic bible. Other publishers don't even believe in a inerrant inspired bible. It's just a translation - not even James White believes their is an error free Bible. Thats the main reason for the footnotes, no one knows what is should say. If anyone thinks the NIV or NASB is error free, then they should know not one Bible scholar agrees. FACT. I'm not condemning anyone, just exposing their lies and hypocrisy. They are not Bible believers they are bible doubters and corrupt God's word. It all started with the Gnostics in Alexandria Egypt in the 1st century and Satan is still corrupting the Bible and using false brethren to do it. ALL new versions come from the corrupt Westcott and Hort text. They weren't even Christians. The NU - or Nestle aland greek text was made under supervision of the Vatican. The modern versions are very "inter-denominational". Inside the cover of the Nestles text you see the name Carlo M. Martini. Not only that but the new versions are "gender inclusive" - look in any new bible. You will most likely see in the intro pages a gender policy. Meaning there is no manuscript support for it. They are ashamed of the word of God and change words "he, his him" etc to include females. The KJV is not excluding them in those passages referring in a general sense to humanity or mankind; as woman was taken from man (Genesis 2:22) there are over 200 english translations all produced for money. Christianity is mocked because of this and is a stumbling block to a lot of Muslims etc.. Try witnessing to one and they will most likely themselves bring up the fact Catholics gave us the Bible and that God is not the author of confusion, and we have contradicting bibles. It all comes down to final authority. Is man your authority? yourself? or the word of God? is it inerrant / infallible ? and Where/what is it? Proverbs 30:5 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him Psalm 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. 7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. Psalm 138:2 I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.

Excellent point Joe, - all those versions you quoted change John 3:16- only the KJV contains the word "begotten" Romans 8:15 - For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father. - 8:29 - For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. 1 John 3:2 - Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. Jesus was not created, he was begotten. (Colossions 1:12-18) - I was created but i was not born as a son of God. I was born again as a son of God. So the new versions are in error.

Before, you read this I must be clear im not an "Arminianist" or part of any denomination. Arminianism has many problems as well but Calvinism is a heresy that often needs correcting. And I'll be referring to 5 point Calvinism or TULIP - but i reject all forms of it. If you follow Christ you are a Christian and should identify yourself as such. When i hear someone identify themselves as a Calvinist, Arminian etc then i tend to think that person follows a man 1 Corinth. 3:4 For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal? So here is what I've come to learn about Calvinism. They don't really believe in "Total depravity" - they believe in "Total inability" The Lord Jesus Christ said And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. John 12:32 (Calvinists change scripture to "..all the elect...") Long story short - there is power is the gospel, in the name of Jesus Christ. There is evidence for the "existence of God" and many great apologists. But the problem with that is if a man can convince you with great intellect then another man can come along and unconvince you with his intellect. (evidence is great for humble seekers) As Christians we are suppose to preach the gospel - using the law - 10 commandments to prick their conscience.- Intellectual arguments go nowhere with prideful people. 1 Peter 5:5 "...God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble." (Preach the Law to the proud - and grace to the humble) So the gospel cuts through the intellect to reach the conscience. Using the law, acknowledging sin, judgement and hell, - the proud will often admit they are not good people and deserve hell when judged by the 10 commandments. "Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness..." And whether they believe it or not they are without excuse (Romans 1:20). Thats another subject...the point is when their conscience bears witnesses and they hear the gospel God will draw all men unto Christ. Forget intellect - God has made foolish the wisdom of this world. When God draws you near to him, and one truly becomes born again, there is no unconvincing. Back to the Calvinist's belief in Total depravity - or Total inability - They say i could preach the gospel to a crowd of a million people - all of which are the "non-elect" - Not one of them can get saved. Calvinists believe in a powerless gospel - and a heartless "god" - that will not draw sinners to repentance when Christ is preached. They just burn in hell. = Heresy Total Depravity - Calvinists believe the unsaved man is dead in trespasses and sins to the extent that it affects his will; so that, he cannot will to be saved (Ephesians 2:1-4). ! Man’s nature is depraved (Ps. 39:5-6; Jer. 17:9; Luke 11:13; Rom. 7:24; Gal. 1:4), but he is still held responsible for his actions (Isa. 45:19; Matt. 12:36-37; Luke 17:1). Israel is held accountable for the crucifixion (Acts 2:22-23; 4:10; 7:52) and Gentiles are held accountable (Rom. 2:6-11). ! Man was created with a freewill to accept or reject God’s will (Exo. 35:5, 21, 29; Ezra 7:13-16; Rev. 22:17). ! God commands a man to receive Christ (1 John 3:23). ! The new birth is conditioned upon receiving Jesus Christ by faith (John 1:12-13). Unconditional Election - Calvinists believe a person is chosen by God in eternity past and was put into Christ unconditionally based upon God’s sovereign grace (Ephesians 1:4-5). ! Election is conditioned upon the foreknowledge of God (1 Peter 1:2). ! The emphasis in the choosing of Ephesians 1:4-5 is Christ, not man. Man was not here before the foundation of the world. Christ should receive the preeminent place, not man. God chose before the foundation of the world that salvation was to be in Christ Jesus (2 Timothy 1:9-10). ! Election is not directed at salvation, but service. One is elected to serve a purpose (Isaiah 42:1; 45:4; 65:9; 1 Peter 2:6; 2 Peter 1:10). A citizen by birth can be elected to public service by the vote of the people. ! Election is always in a precise or temporary setting; in that, a person is put into Christ at the moment of receiving Christ (John 1:12-13; 1 Cor. 12:13). Once in Christ then the benefits of eternity are given to a finite being who had a beginning, but will have no end. ! According to Calvinism, some are elected to hell. If this is so, a man is obeying God’s will by rejecting a command of accepting Christ (Acts 17:30-31; 1 John 3:23). ! According to Calvinism, some innocent babies are elected to hell, which is directly contrary to the teaching of Romans 9:11 that every innocent child is elected in regards to the grace of God (Deut. 1:39; Rom. 2:6-16; 4:15; 5:13). When a child reaches the knowledge of good and evil (Gen. 3:5-6), he or she is held accountable. ! If a man is elected to salvation IN Christ before the foundation of the world, that man fell out when Adam sinned (before salvation a man is IN Adam -- Romans 5:14-21; 1 Cor. 15:21-22); therefore, on this point an Arminian and a Calvinist agrees. If Calvinism is right, at salvation a man is put back into Christ. What could cause him to fall out of Christ again? See any Arminian and he’ll expound all he knows within thirty seconds with time to spare. ! Before salvation, a man is not recognized by God (Matt. 7:21-23) because he is under God’s wrath (John 3:36 Eph. 2:11-14). A man is born - he must be born again, of the Spirit. You can not be given the second man if you are not in the first (1Cor, 15:47-49) Limited Atonement - Calvinists believe Jesus Christ died only for the elect because they are the only ones who can repent (John 10:11) ! Unlimited atonement is Scriptural (John 3:16-21, 36; 1 Tim. 2:3-6; Heb. 10:10, 29; 2 Peter 2:1; 3:9). Limited atonement is a myth. ! Tyre and Sidon would have repented if given the chance (Matt. 11:20-24). Irresistible Grace - Calvinists believes the Holy Ghost draws a man to Christ and overshadows the elect to the extent that he cannot resist God’s sovereign grace to salvation (Acts 13:48). ! The Spirit of God draws a man to Christ, but the man’s part is acceptance of the Gospel through his freewill (Rom. 10:13-14; 1 Cor. 4:15; 9:22; 1 Tim. 1:15). ! The ones ordained to eternal life are Gentiles who follow their conscience in doing right, such as Cornelius. These Gentiles receive the opportunity to hear the gospel of Jesus Christ (Acts 10:1-11:18; Romans 2:1-16; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4). ! Eleazor, a type of the Holy Ghost, asked Rebekkah, a type a Christian (Gen. 24:58). ! God’s grace can be resisted as there are sins against the Holy Ghost (Acts 5:3; 7:51; Eph. 4:30; 1 Thess. 5:19). Perseverance of the Saints - Calvinists waffle between preservation and perseverance on this petal of the flower. Calvinists say that the saints will persevere in the faith; and if they do not persevere, they are not of the elect. ! Perseverance and eternal security (once saved, always saved) are not the same. Eternal security is a truth for the NT saint in the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 1:8-9; Ephesians 1:12-14; 4:30). ! Predestination is one’s destination beforehand. A NT saint is predestinated to be conformed to the image of Jesus Christ (Rom. 8:29-20; Eph. 1:4-5, 11). ! Perseverance of the saint is another similarity with the Arminians. Summary : Since a man can do nothing to be saved or obtain salvation because he is totally depraved (incapable), God through irresistible grace will unconditionally elect the chosen ones because of limited atonement. Hyper-Calvinists do not win souls because God will save those He chooses no matter what. Calvinists usually are self-conceited because God specially chose them and not the heathen Arminians INSANITY - Teaching Calvinism to enlighten a non-Calvinist is absurd because his or her freewill to choose is not valid. A Calvinist is born a Calvinist against his will. I'm not a Calvinist because God predestinated me before the foundation of the world to not be a Calvinist. I can’t help it! I'm not an Arminian because I reject it of my own freewill. I can't help that! 2 Thessalonians 3:1-5 (KJV)

I think you need to read the second part of this post about 4 times.... Ok now what?

Right, the Branhamites are dangerous... The guy leads people to William branham and not Jesus Christ. (who they think was created), Every time he tried to describe that God is one, I'd say say yeah thats the trinity/ Godhead. Same with this topic, I'm not sure if the 1st post is advocating the trinity or denying it... He just quotes the first few verses of John and Genesis, which perfectly show the Godhead or a "trinity" - the "tri-unity" of God.

I found out recently that the Branhamites or the "message" cult (of william branham) is in my town. I talked to a guy about all Branhams heretical doctrines including his denying the Godhead (trinity). It is odd how we met. I was out preaching the gospel. He was out preaching the message.

I've heard a lot about accountability, but not much in the Bible. Sins and faults aren't the same. If you've wronged a brother of course you should confess that to him, but if you sinned against God, confess that sin to God - not man - not even a brother... I'm accountable to God - not man. There is one mediator.... For example... a Christian should not shame himself by confessing to a brother that he looked at something sinful on the internet. Theres a heretical ministry i know of that helps Christians stay accountable to each other but tracking internet history... I don't agree with that.

Actually, it doesn't. (See the 2nd section of post #6 above) No. You said you believe the Spirit of God indwells nonbelievers. But yet a believer can lose the Holy spirit? No wonder you are messed up doctrinally

First i agree on not being part of a "denomination" - they are unscriptural. Why i asked is because, many heresies arise IN denominations Like the Charismatic / pentecostal especially.... The baptism of the Holy Spirit is salvation. - It's not get saved then seek Holy Spirit baptism... Acts 10 - Gentiles - recieved the Spirit by faith. and indwells every born again believer - Romans 8:9 Again, this is what i mean by rightly dividing, understand - Acts 2 Jews - - Acts 8 Samaritans - Acts 10 Gentiles The Gospel went to the Jew first, Acts is a transition book, be careful getting doctrine for todays Christians from it. BTW you wouldn't catch me dead in a pentecostal babble building. Those places are filled with devils. Bible2 says Quote : "Everyone, both believers and unbelievers, has some minimal measure of God's Spirit by which they are able to exist" End quote This is so wrong... so heretical and blasphemous i don't know what to say... is that what the pentecostals told you? Repent... Thats disgusting

The Bible clearly teaches eternal security. It's called faith and sound doctrine, not "false hope" There are so many scriptures proving this by a simple reading of scripture. Eph 1:12-14 Romans 8:33-39 John 10:28 etc etc etc.. Since you deny eternal security, you are saying you can lose salvation and have to do works to keep it? And if its lost you can be born again again and again and again? Chapter and verse? What sin determines the loss of salvation? Do you have to be sinlessly perfect? I already know the answers, but what really bothers me is you really did say the Holy Spirit is not given at salvation.... Acts 2:38 vs. 8:14-17 vs. 10:44-48 The Apostle Peter was directly observant of the reception of the Holy Ghost by three separate groups of people. Three thousand repentant Jews received the Holy Ghost after they were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ in Acts 2:38. The Samaritans followed the same pattern, but Peter needed to pray and lay hands on them before they received the Holy Ghost in Acts 8:14-17. After Peter preached the gospel to Cornelius and other Gentiles the Spirit of God fell upon them before they were baptized in Acts 10:44-48. These variations confused the Apostles and in a special meeting Peter concluded salvation by grace through faith (Acts 15:7-11). If a Gentile does not understand the doctrinal variations, the safe choice is Acts 10. The Holy Ghost is received by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ in this age (Galatians 3:14; Ephesians 1:12-14). This is why rightly dividing the word of truth is important.. Be careful getting doctrine out of Acts. It's a transition book. We recieve the Holy Ghost by faith, at salvation.

The Holy Spirit is given AT salvation. When a person comes to God as a sinner, repents and puts their faith in Jesus Christ, his blood washes away all sin and they get the Holy Spirit. Not part of it...All. There is a major heresy out there that teaches you get saved, then later you seek the Holy Spirit... major heresy. IDK if thats what you were saying, but thats important to understand. Salvation is a free gift, by grace thru faith in Christ alone. And amillenialism can also be defined as all the prophetc events dealing with revelation are fulfilled in the 1st century with the fall of Jerusalem and John was just writing poetically... and some say were in the "millenial kingdom" right now..and its not a literal thousand years.... Totally unscriptural,.. the other 2 views are pre-millenialism and post-millenialism. I believe the Bible clearly teaches a pre-millenial coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. At His second coming there is war, then the literal 1000 yr kingdom (post-mill teaches that Christians build the kingdom without Christ present, and they have a 1000 yrs of peace, then Christ comes back at the end... that one might be worse then amillenial.... idk its close...) These are all "eschatology" views... Complex terms, yes.. When studying in depth I've learned the terms along the way. Seem to be in common use.. I do not debate. Especially with other Christians. I believe debate is a sin, Romans 1:29,KJV - its listed in the things that come from a reprobate mind. And debate goes back to the ancient pagan rome era... I understand many Christian apologists debate today and they aren't "reprobate" but they should not debate...especially if they use or support the new bible versions....whole different subject there BTW what denomination do you hold?

InseasonOut Thank you for the apology and I forgive you. If we are going to come on here and have dialogue with one an other we have to be pretty thick skinned! We should not take anything personal for we are only discussing doctrines. I only speak about things I am confident about and can always back up what I say. Now this is not a personal attack on you or anyone, because I love everyone here, But we should always defend with scriptures and with reasoning. but I do testify that the 70th week doctrine, and it is a NEW DOCTRINE, that placing it in the end times, holds no water. I see everybody speaking about it and I always shake my head. There is a "falling away" happening right now, and the truth is being distorted. Everyone is going along with this doctrine not even studying carefully what Daniel is speaking about. That prophecy in Daniel was concerning the building of the second temple to it's destruction (70AD) - That's it. The 70 weeks is over. The prophecy was for that period of 490 yrs or so. The missing week is from when the angel gave the commandment to rebuild the temple, to the actual starting date of rebuilding. One week passed here, and it's not pointed out plainly but we can work it out, that this is that missing week. Since the destruction of the temple, desolations are determined until the consummation (the coming). 70AD was the cut off point for Israel. If they were not going to believe all the witness accounts of Christ by then, when it was still fresh, which they did not as a nation, then they will be included in the curse. This curse is a spiritual desolation, being blinded until Christ returns, then he will open their eyes. Not only will Israel be desolate, but the whole world, including the christian world where the falling away takes place. okay, i read your response....... well thanks for explaining your reasoning with scripture, if thats your doctrinal conviction, ..great. I'm not gonna respond to "debunk" that idea.. ill let this one go. I hope it's helping to bear fruit in your life in some way....

The 70th week is done, finished, over. It finished when the temple was destroyed in 70AD. What?!?!... Wow okay no wonder you are confused.... How long have you been studying the Bible? Do you study? or parrot what you've been told? If you are saying you're amillenial then that is the most shameful belief any professing Christian can make. Don't bother responding, im not gonna read it. Get the basics of eschatology straightened out. InSeasonOut, Brother that was unnecessary. I can understand you are probably very frustrated at all the resistance you are getting but try to keep it in the Spirit of Christ .. there is nothing wrong with being blunt but Christ does not like us mocking each other or anyone for that matter. Just walk away for a bit when you get revved up .. make a coffee & take a deep breath .. but keep it in the Spirit of Christ please because it doesn't look good. Regards I agree... After i walked away, i realized that was a fleshy response. As you can tell i was very frustrated. I shouldn't have let that get under my skin. Sorry Sister.

The 70th week is done, finished, over. It finished when the temple was destroyed in 70AD. What?!?!... Wow okay no wonder you are confused.... How long have you been studying the Bible? Do you study? or parrot what you've been told? If you are saying you're amillenial then that is the most shameful belief any professing Christian can make. Don't bother responding, im not gonna read it. Get the basics of eschatology straightened out.