Denominations Explained: What are Christian Denominations and where did denominations come from?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 4 พ.ย. 2024
- Denominations Explained: What are Christian denominations and where did denominations come from?
In this video, the guys at Remnant Radio explore Christian denominations. You're going to learn about the different beliefs and practices of each denomination, and you'll learn about similarities & differences between each one as well as their origins. It is our hope that this video will give you a better understanding of all the different Christian denominations and the beliefs that each of them holds.
__________________________________________________________________________________
Josh Lewis' Church Kings Fellowship Church
kingsfellowshi...
___________________________________________________________________________________
Michael Miller's Church Reclamation Church
reclamationden...
____________________________________________________________________________
![🔴 ฟุตบอลแชมป์กีฬา 7HD แชมเปียน คัพ 2024 [รอบรองชนะเลิศ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zPm8ClLVhoE/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks for all you are doing to bring about a more mature expression of love among the body of Christ.
My background is from not being raised in the faith to encountering a demonstation of the kingdom of God that included healing and deliverance from demons when I was in college in the mid-80s. I had the privilege of devouring the New Testament several times before hearing much teaching in church. I love the church. After hearing the heart of Jesus in His prayer captured by John in chapter 17, and reading Paul's letter to the Corinthians where he confronted the immaturity of Christians deriving an identity from their favorite servant of the Lord (rather than the Lord they serve), and reading about the unity and maturity in love that God desires for His people in Paul's letter to the Ephesians (chapter 4), I guess I have always been troubled with the idea of denominations. Like the moon, when it gets between the sun and the earth, eclipses the glory of the sun....disunity eclipses the glory of the Son and gets in the way of unbelievers being able to see who He is...that He was sent by the Father...out of love for them.
I went from an independent Charismatic church, then Asemblies of God, then Presbyterian (EPC) , then non-denominational, then Anglican, and now...after 38 years...longing to be simply Christian.
I had a good friend and brother tell me that no Christian can simply be a "Christian", but must be joined to a particular tradition. I disagree.
Jesus said, in response to Peter's confession that He is the Christ: "...I will build my church..." Peter said (in essence) in reaction to the transfiguration of Christ: "...if You want, let us build...."
I think there needs to be less reaction to Jesus that gives way to human initiatives that build His church for Him.
We need more revelation of who He is, so our hearts will be grieved with what grieves His heart.
We need more prayer....so He can bring His church to maturity through us as we respond to His leadership and initiatives.
Knowledge of the Scriptures and revelation are not one and the same....but the former will always lead to the latter.
Hans Kung (a brother from the Roman Catholic tradition) wrote in his book "On Being a Christian": (my paraphrase) "The bible is not a quarry where we find rocks to throw at one another."
In its mature expression, what Jesus is building will demonstrate a visible unity to the unbelieving world.
We need more demonstrations and less denominations!
Any works in the name of Christ that do not manifest in unity among the followers of Jesus are chaff, and will burn in the fire of His jealousy for His bride.
That fire is going to increase more and more as we grow closer to the end of this present evil age.
All of the Ephesians 4 ministries are needed to bring this kind of order and maturity to the body of Christ.
Father in heaven, raise them up and send them out in the power of Your Spirit for the sake of the world you love and the glory of Your Son Jesus,
who lives and reigns with You and the Holy Spirit, one God, now and forever. Amen.
Thanks for sharing this! Your comment is edifying! I grew up between a couple of Christian traditions which was helpful because I saw both as brethren, in spite of different approaches to God. I can't say I belong to any denomination now. I can see the danger of being in open water, but God's spirit hovers above waters, and God's man-son walks on them. Our ultimate refuge isn't the church, it's the name of the LORD.
Church 'splits' are utter grief. I see why they happen - I see why doctrine is important - but I wish we could aim to seek truth together, and have faith, more than we claim to authorise truth ourselves. I'm hesitant to question established doctrine but as I read the bible, I question God, and he does guide and comfort. I think we're to call no man Father, and I think we should tremble to call unholy what God has made holy, and to (if it were possible) restrict access to the cross, according to man's interpretations. The mention of people, whom many label as outside the faith, dying for faith IN JESUS, made me shudder in fear and sadness.
Your point about Peter 'let US build' vs. Jesus 'I will build' - beautiful and I hadn't thought of that before. Keep building, Lord.
Thanks for keeping us Copts in the family of Christians. The explanation of that split is complicated, but there is reason to argue that the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches confess the same things.
The term heresy is thrown around far too easily. Your brothers died for their faith. I love one of the hosts highlighted that. We're considered protestants, we understand all about complicated splits.
@@saintejeannedarc9460 I appreciate all three of these young men. They do a great job.
Ya'll need to write a book on this. Also maybe on other subjects. Very good
Everyone has their own flavor and tastes can change. Churches or denominations are not gangs. Unfortunately that is not only the perceived perception but has been the demonstrated case from most Pulpits who fly any type of denominational flag. The bigger travesty is inside non-denominational churches abandoning all liturgy and church history as if it never happened.
Father help us find balance and to lay aside all things that separate us from unity under your son 🙏🏻❤️
amen
Denominations are not even supposed to exist according to scripture. They exist because ppl refuse to accept what the Bible says, and they all want to elevate their personal beliefs and traditions above scripture. An objective comparison between their beliefs and the Bible shows that literally most of their beliefs and traditions were not practiced or taught.
Whoa! I hope the “Holiness Pentecostal” name being used for Oneness is corrected.
I was a part of the Independent Holiness Pentecostal movement for around 10 years (it included independent Pentecostals, Free Holiness Pentecostals, fellowshipping Conservative AG’s and COG’s, etc) and they were all Trinitarian, not oneness.
Although there are Oneness Pentecostals who call themselves Holiness, the Holiness Pentecostal or Pentecostal Holiness Movement is Trinitarian.
Pentecostal Assemblies of the World, United Pentecostal Church, Assemblies of the Lord Jesus Christ, Worldwide Pentecostal Fellowship are the main oneness organizations. However a lot of oneness Pentecostals are GIB (good independent brethren).
I've grown up in the Oneness movement (currently trying to figure out if i still believe that or not). Oneness Pentecostals tend to refer to themselves as Holiness or Apolstolic, as well as Pentecostal. There are also groups that call themselves Pentecostal that are Trinitarian.
While oneness are holiness, and the main oneness denominations came out of the holiness movement, the holiness movement preceded the oneness movement as we know today. I grew up oneness, and still ascribe to some of the docrine, and we always were called holiness or apostolic.
This episode was a good overall explanation of denominations. I really like the part at the end where Josh explained why there are additional differences among churches because of practices that make it hard for churches to worship and work together. I think denominations are necessary and not bad because there are some differences in practices among denominations and churches that can't be overlooked or overcome. It was also good to acknowledge that denominations and churches don't necessarily question the credibility of other churches or question their salvation. I look forward to the day when we will understand the correct Biblical interpretations perfectly and are perfectly united as one.
Denominations should not be,we should be Independent Christians,no pagan holidays at all,we should celebrate Holy Feast Days, draw people together etc etc.
Wow, the spelling errors in those charts... "Protistant", "Presbeterian", "Cumberlan", "Sweeden", "Aliance", "Pentecostalsim"...
😂
Seems like everyday fewer and fewer English speakers can spell!
Haha I noticed 'Oreintal'
Idk bro, I thot teh speling waz FINE!
Be great to see you get Terry Virgo on to talk about the UK restoration movement which led to what is now the NewFrontiers movement around the world.
I remember Terry speaking about the history of NewFrontiers (the family of churches that Andrew Wilson and Stuart Townend come from) years ago at Stoneleigh Bible week in the UK, it was electric.
He is such a humble man who has been used so much by The Lord. He has so often showed a heart similar to yours over the years to reach across the isle to learn from people from outside his own network.
Be sooooo good to see you guys chatting with him.
New Frontiers fits into a broader group identified as The British New Church Movement, which consists of several groupings of churches.
@@rob5462 definitely NewFrontiers, Pioneer, Salt and Light etc. Terry just came to mind as I’ve heard him specifically talk about the early days of the restoration movement and in particular NewFrontiers and it was electric. So encouraging.
Thank you for this episode, and for clarifying and rebutting the common myths about the Nacea Council allegedly inventing the Trinity, the Deity of Christ and coming up with the canon of the Bible. I'm often been bombarded these myths. It seems such discussions on church history, doctrines in depth and clarity, etc. in local evangelical churches in America are discouraged or downplayed. I often get weird looks from pastors and church leaders whenever I show interest in church history and ancient church councils, then mostly shut down. thanks again. God bless.
Why is that? Do they give you any reason for this?
A. B. Simpson was a Presbyterian minister but the C&MA doesn’t officially become a denomination until much later and their theology would probably fit better in the Wesleyan/holiness category rather than the Presbyterian tradition.
As a Romanian, it is so funny to hear you explain there aren't only Roman Catholics and Protestants 😂(according to the 2011 census, 89% of population in Romania is Eastern Orthodox). Also you made me smile when you explained how the Eastern Orthodox "look like Rome" and "don't have tv and lights in their churches" 😂
I think this is an American only viewpoint. So very sorry, we have limited knowledge of things outside of America.
Its super accurate to the ignorance of American Christians. I mean i genuinely didnt know Orthodox was even a type of Christianity until a yearish ago. And im in my 20s, been going to Protestant churches sporadically throughout my entire life. I only ever heard the word orthodox used as an adjective.
Great video guys, a lot of useful information, I would of liked to see you mention even for radical reformers like the restoration movement like SDA’s, Mormons, JW’s, etc.
K this video answered the question I’ve had my whole life (raised Christian). People would often ask me what denomination I am.. now I can answer and infirm in what other denoms are.. thanks guys so informative!!
I would recommend reading the lives of the saints. St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine.. Hundreds more... to know what it means to be a Christian.
My great-grandfather was the son of a Methodist minister and started a Oneness Pentecostal organization. He received the Holy Ghost during a brush arbor as a teenager and his family pretty much disowned him. He preached in the Holy Bible Mission Workers organization until they disbanded and he founded the Pentecostal Church of Zion in 1954. So that is one confirmation of the Methodist to Pentecostal movement.
The evangelical free church was started by scandinavian immigrants who came from a lutheran pietistic background.
Simply amazing video. Please do more history videos
Really appreciate this episode. You gave a concise history of the splits. I'm looking for the additional links in the "Description" though, and I don't see them. Do I need to look elsewhere or are those part of the Patreon content? The same question goes to the recent episode with Ken Fish - where are the additional links? Thanks for all you do!
Different topic but can you guys do an episode on why the church isn’t administered by council’s and why we have a pastor only and as head model in the modern evangelical church?
Very well done. Thanks for putting this together. In the graphic at 58:45, Foursquare is misspelled. It is one word, not two.
Thanks for the charts.very informative video I appreciate how you've brought out about the Catholic Church having divisions within.
This was actually my biggest issue with the video. I wouldn’t consider it as a division, simply a difference in preference of expressing and it is all under the same beliefs and practices. We all follow the same catechism and don’t subdivide in an tier system.
I feel they tried to show more uniformity in the Protestant denominations than anyone would agree to. For example, female and male pastors, accepting/ encouraging gay marriage, and any other liberal views.
I found this to be a fairly careful and accurate recounting of church history. Only pointing out that Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem did not emerge in the 6th C, they were there from the beginning except Constantine moving the Roman capitol to Constantinople in 330 (an it was renamed then obviously). Islam as a religion did not emerge until the 700s. The apostle Peter was bishop of Antioch prior to be bishop of Rome. Rome was first among equals and that was a defined term by Ignatius of Antioch, due to Rome being the capitol of the Roman Empire but that changed in the 4th c. Later the Western Roman Empire fell, but not the Eastern, which did not fall until the 1400s and was most definitely NOT Muslim-held territory. And the Eastern Orthodox did most definitely NOT say “we’re out,” but continued as today, as the faith handed down by the apostles, and has not undergone the rampant revisions of that faith as the West has done, but has kept to the same faith and to the 7 ecumenical councils. Anyway, this is the research I did as a protestant.
Anglican, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Old Catholic, and some Lutherans all define apostolic succession the same. Some would not be recognized by others and some Anglicans and Lutherans who lean more Protestant wouldn’t care about succession but they understand the doctrine the same. It simply means that all valid bishops have a succession from prior valid bishop back to the apostles and the Roman Pope is simply a special Bishop in RC theology. The Roman Catholic Communion recognizes Eastern and Oriental Bishops as well as some Old Catholic Bishops as having valid succession, but they emphasize the necessity of communion with the Roman Pope for fullness of the faith and visible church. Other valid bishops would be considered in schism, and for the orthodox a similar principle would apply for the pentarchy
Anglicans, Lutherans, and Old Catholics tend to hold a branch theory which says the full visible church is split amongst the valid communions with apostolic succession. As for the Oriental Orthodox they have tended to be ecumenical but also very undefined in line with apophatic theology and not historically having much communication with other Christian’s. I hope this helps clarify the concept of Apostolic Succession
You also have the Charismatic Catholics, which pre-date Pentecostalism by a decade or 2. They are worth a look if you ever do anymore church history videos.
I also would love a charismatic Catholic deep dive. As I have studied church history and Pentecostalism particularly, I have noted that the origins loosely trace to similar moves around the world. I wonder where they all connect?
This would be difficult to track as the early church - Catholic, Orthodox etc have always had men and women of such great faith and they had pursued God in different ways and clearly seen signs wonders deliverance etc it’s always had a place under the umbrella term - mystics, dessert fathers, church saints etc - many martyrs etc seemed to be quite charismatic. From memory it was 1967 the renewal began to breakout and result in charismatic movement mainstreaming. I mean yeah, there is more charismatic Catholics in the word then all the Pentecostals combined. But my understanding was their modern most recent move of the Holy Spirit was after Azuzu st .. Catholic charismatic move was 1967? I think the new move was there abouts
@@BrianLassekall roads lead to Rome. The beauty of the Catholic tradition is the ability to practice in many ways (as noted in the next comment) and not need to create other denominations. As The Lord Prayed, “May they all by one as I am one with You”
@@georgefuentes4112 I would say that the divisiveness of Catholic dogmas create greater division then "denominations". If Catholics would recognize the office of pope as a human institution I think all roads could lead to Rome. But from my understanding the divine appointment dogmas have always been more important to Rome then the unity of the body. I can always come together in unity with a brother (or sister) but I will only bow to the one Father of us all.
@@BrianLassekitscorrupt thru and thru
I just became christan , after a young life of sin and evil . My search for closeness to Jesus christ brought me to his church , and during the Easter vigil I was baptised into the catholic church . The church christ himself founded. It's great. To be so close to the source ❤
Lutheranism in America is a little more complicated. For most of the 20th century, Lutherans in America were in a process of merging its various ethnic representations (German, Swedish, Finnish, Norwegian, Icelandic, Danish, Slavic, etc.). By the 1970's and 80's, the resulting major groups began discussing further merger. The American Lutheran Church (which had been in altar and pulpit fellowship with the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod), the Lutheran Church in America, and the Association of Evangelical Lutheran Churches (which had split off from the LCMS), decided to merge into one Church, the ELCA. The LCMS declined to merge. So, those three Churches (ALC, LCA, and AELC) merged into the ELCA in 1988. With the eventual theological drift of the ELCA, though, large groups of more moderate and conservative Lutherans have departed the ELCA since its founding. Most of those now form the North American Lutheran Church and the Lutheran Churches in Mission for Christ. There are other smaller groups that were never part of the the ELCA merger, though, for example the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod and the American Association of Lutheran Churches (former members of the ALC that did not merge into the ELCA). So, yeah, complicated.
Forgive me if this has been asked, but is there a copy of the list and charts that you used to breakdown the different denominations and from where they came from or began?
Presbyterians are not Anglican. The Westminster Assembly was driving by the Puritans during the 1st English Civil War. When the monarchy was restored, the Church Of England repudiated the Westminster Documents and returned to Episcopal rule. If you try to group them with Anglicans, then you have to group Baptists and Congregationalist with Anglicans. All English Christians were at one time Anglican.
A Baptist went to Heaven and was greeted by St. Peter. The Baptist looked around excitedly then asked, "Hey Peter. Who's that group over there all by themselves?" Peter said, "Oh, those are the Catholics. They think they are the only ones here."
When I heard that joke it was the Baptists who thought they were the only ones there. (I was a Baptist at the time and it was told self-deprecatingly by a baptist pastor)
@@olliesue14Same. Makes more sense theologically that way.
@@olliesue14 yeah me too. it's an old joke
@@PatrickSteil lol STOP
@@dumbcat Not sure if you know this, but Catholics teach that the Church is the "Body of Christ" on earth in physical form - if there was no Church, probably you and I would not have a Bible and would not have known about Jesus at all - the "movement" would have died after the first generation of Christians.
Further, the Catholic Church teaches that there is some truth and Jesus in all Protestant churches and that they are separated brethren, but brothers and sisters in Christ nonetheless.
But there are some/many? Baptists (and other protestants) who will say that the Catholic Church is evil, corrupt and that none who believe in her teachings are "saved".
So wild because again, without the Catholic Church, we would have no Bible, no firm stance on the Trinity, no real presence of Jesus in the Eucharist (which was unanimously held by all Christians up through the reformation including by Luther and others), Baptismal regeneration (again, held up through the reformation) and so many other things. The teachings of the Church from the earliest Christians is the same Faith as it is taught today in the Catholic Church.
Hey guys, not to be offensive at all but I’m not sure you understand the filioque debate that caused the great schism. You guys said the book of Acts shows the Spirit proceed from Jesus… but that’s not even what the debate is about…
The debate was about the ontological Trinity. But you guys are talking in terms of the economic Trinity
If you go back and read, the debate was about the Holy Spirit proceeding 'from the Father' versus the Holy Spirit proceeding 'from the Father and the Son.'
@@IndianaJoe0321 exactly. In terms of the ontological Trinity. Not the economic Trinity.
The debate wasn’t (for example) over if Jesus sent the Spirit to Earth on the day of Pentecost along with the Father (economic Trinity)
Instead, the debate was over if the Spirit spirated out of both the the Father and Son, or just out of the Father, before time began (ontological Trinity)
So do you regard the Assyrian/Ancient Church of the East as non christians? More akin to Mormons than to the Oriental Orthodox? I didn't get that feeling in the Nestorianism video but do here so am curious.
I've never researched it, but Michael Heiser stated that early Arians were called "brothers" by those that they were contending with. Anyone have any affirmation or dispute if this?
Well done. Praise His Name.
I really liked the end explanation of we choose à denomination on how they perform liturgy. I was deeply influence by both catholic and Protestant teachers and choose to be Protestant in my 20s charismatic but left a few years ago because I got uncomfortable with prophetic teachings. Ironically the only charismatic church I would still listen to was ihopkc until now but for the last year I have been drawn to the catholic faith and have spent alot of time reading pope benedict works. The one thing I love about the catholic church is their devotion to the eucharistic. It always grieved me that alot of protestant churches really don't make room for communion. I love that catholics make it the center. I dont know if I will fully convert but that is a major heart matter for me is making communion central. But Stacey Campbell whose a charismatic protestant prophet actually prophesied over pope Francis in 2007 at an ecumenical meeting that he would become pope. I think when he was a cardinal. There's a video of it on TH-cam she is telling Ken fish the story. Im not sure how I feel about pope Francis but it's interesting. I have been reading pope benedicts works and I really like him.
42:47 Spoken like a true Calvinist!
So many comments claiming y'all made various mistakes here and there. For shame! So what if this is one of the trickiest, most confusing, most disagreed upon subjects in church history- besides, omniscience is a communicable attribute...right?
The way we use the term "denominations" comes from the proliferation of thousands of Protestant secs in the United States in the past 200 years. This actually comes from the author of the U S Constitution founding father James Madison's federalist paper essay #10 and #51 where he said the greatest danger to democracy was groups that were too united, so that the US leadership had a duty to break up the four main branches of Protestants into hundreds of individual denominations so that they wouldn't and couldn't unite to vote in Christian teachings that would be imposed on the rest of society.
Church of the East accepted Chalcedon FYI. To label them Nestorian is a misnomer. They accepted him after his expulsion, but his influence on the Church of the East was limited.
Nestorius himself praised Chalcedon's theology as well, even thought it still named him a heretic, due to the slander of Cyril of Jerusalem (BTW, Roundtree misspoke when he described even Cyril's theology).
Great discussion!
Good episode but it is missing some important context.
One is that to make it sound like mostly these splits are due to disagreements over tertiary issues that were not Christian defining issues I believe is completely false.
People aren’t going to do something as radical as split over something they don’t see as important to what their tradition teaches.
The second is the fundamental issue as to whether or not we as Christians need an authority in the Church to help govern what is it be a Christian.
It seems to me that the Protestant movement which said absolutely no to this has failed. It has cause more division than ever and in fact didn’t get away from the need for church authority, just dumbed it down to whatever someone who wanted to start a church believed.
Bro, have you even been to church before? People would split over what color carpet you have in the foyer lol
@@ravikeller9626 Yes I spent 20 years in the Methodist Church. I do agree with you that that is a real thing lol - but I would say that is a RESULT of protestantism which has declared it a "sacred tradition" that if you don't agree with the Pastor or anything your local church is doing you can just leave and go somewhere else. This is not a good thing for Christians or society. It upholds the view that "there is no objective truth".
It also shows me that most who would do this don't really understand why they are there on Sunday mornings - to worship our Lord. That should be the reason they come there and they return each Sunday. NOT the music or the Pastor or the color carpet :)
@@ravikeller9626I heard of a church splitting or nearly splitting because 1 group didn't like that there was a drawing of Jesus with children on the door to the sunday school. One half was like whatever the other half wanted it gone and nearly split over it. It was a protestant denomination. It was on frank tureks channel
Thank you!!
You guys should have some anabaptists on like David Bercot or Dean Taylor they have some really good stuff that I have found really interesting!
How do we get back to one Church? Paul spoke against divisions (denominations) below. There are no denominations found in the church letters which Paul wrote in the NT.
1Co 1:10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
What the modern Church needs is a New Covenant Revival (Heb. 9:10) in which members of various denominations are willing to re-examine everything they believe and see if it agrees with the Bible, instead of the traditions of men. We need to be like the Bereans. It will be a battle between our flesh and the Holy Spirit. It will not be easy. If you get mad and upset when someone challenges your man-made Bible doctrines, that is your flesh resisting the truth found in God's Word.
Nobody can completely understand the Bible unless they understand the relationship between the Old Covenant given to Moses at Mount Sinai and the New Covenant fulfilled in blood at Calvary.
What brings all local churches together into one Body under the blood of Christ? The answer is found below.
New Covenant Whole Gospel:
Let us now share the Old Testament Gospel found below with the whole world. On the road to Emmaus He said the Old Testament is about Him.
He is the very Word of God in John 1:1, 14. Awaken Church to this truth.
Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Jer 31:32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by husband unto them, saith the LORD:
Jer 31:33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
Is the most important genealogy in the Bible found in Matthew 1:1 (Gal. 3:16)? Is God's Son the ultimate fulfillment of Israel (John 1:49)? Why has the modern Church done a pitiful job of sharing the Gospel with modern Orthodox Jews? Why would someone tell them they are God's chosen people and then fail to share the Gospel with them? Who is the seed of the woman promised in Genesis 3:15? What did Paul say about Genesis 12:3 in Galatians 3:8? Who is the "son" in Psalm 2? Who is the "suffering servant" of Isaiah 53? Who would fulfill the New Covenant promised in Jeremiah 31:31-34? Who would fulfill the timeline of Daniel chapter 9 before the second temple was destroyed? Why have we not heard this simple Old Testament Gospel preached on Christian television in the United States on a regular basis?
Once a person comes to understand the New Covenant promised to Israel and Judah in Jeremiah 31:31-34, which is found fulfilled by Christ during the first century in Hebrews 8:6-13, and Hebrews 10:16-18, and specifically applied to the Church in 2 Corinthians 3:6-8, and Hebrews 12:22-24, man-made Bible doctrines fall apart.
Let us now learn to preach the whole Gospel until He comes back. The King of Israel is risen from the dead! (John 1:49, Acts 2:36)
We are not come to Mount Sinai in Hebrews 12:18. We are come instead to the New Covenant church of Mount Zion and the blood in Hebrews 12:22-24.
1Jn 3:22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.
1Jn 3:23 And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.
1Jn 3:24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.
The following verses prove the Holy Spirit is the master teacher for those now in the New Covenant.
Jer 31:34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.
Mar 1:8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.
Joh 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
Act 11:16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.
1Co 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.
1Jn 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
Watch the TH-cam videos “The New Covenant” by David Wilkerson, or Bob George, and David H.J. Gay.
Thank you. Lots of food for thought.
@@lisachambers3683 Old Covenant Baptism vs. New Covenant Baptism (water vs. Spirit)
Water baptism was a part of the Old Covenant system of ritual washing. The Old Covenant priests had to wash before beginning their service in the temple. (Ex. 30:17-30) When Christ was water baptized by His cousin John in the Jordan River, He was under the Old Covenant system. He also only ate certain foods, and wore certain clothes, as prescribed by the 613 Old Covenant laws. Christ was water baptized by John and then received the Holy Spirit from heaven. The order is reversed in the New Covenant. A person receives the Holy Spirit upon conversion, and then believers often declare their conversion to their friends and family through a water baptism ceremony. Which baptism makes you a member of Christ’s Church?
The New Covenant conversion process is described below. (Born-again)
Eph 1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
(A person must “hear” the Gospel, and “believe” the Gospel, and will then be “sealed” with the Holy Spirit.)
Joh 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
(See Jer. 31:34 for the New Covenant promise, and 1 John 2:27 for the fulfillment)
============
Which baptism is a part of the salvation process, based on what the Bible says?
What did Peter say below?
Acts 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.
Acts 11:16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.
Based on Luke 3:16, and John 1:33, and Acts 11:15-16, the most important thing about the word "baptize" in the New Testament has nothing to do with water. The Holy Spirit is the master teacher promised to New Covenant believers in Jeremiah 31:34, and John 14:26, and is found fulfilled in Ephesians 1:13, and 1 John 2:27. Unfortunately, many modern Christians see water when they read the word "baptize" in the text.
Based on the above, what is the one baptism of our faith found in the passage below? How many times is the word "Spirit" found in the passage, and how many times is the word "water" found in the passage?
Eph 4:1 I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called,
Eph 4:2 With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love;
Eph 4:3 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
Eph 4:4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, (See 1 Cor. 12:13)
“baptize” KJV
Mat_3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
Mar_1:8 I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.
Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. (Water or Holy Spirit?, See Eph. 1-13.)
Luk_3:16 John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire:
Joh_1:26 John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not;
Joh_1:33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.
1Co_1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
1Co 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. (See Eph. 4:1-5)
Heb 9:10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. (Old Covenant ----> New Covenant)
How many people have been saved by the Old Covenant water baptism of John the Baptist?
Who did John the Baptist say is the greatest Baptist that ever lived in Luke 3:16? What kind of New Covenant baptism comes from Christ?
Hebrews 9:10 Old Covenant vs. New Covenant
(CSB) They are physical regulations and only deal with food, drink, and various washings imposed until the time of the new order.
(ESV) but deal only with food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation.
(ESV+) but deal only with R5food and drink and R6various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation.
(Geneva) Which only stood in meates and drinkes, and diuers washings, and carnal rites, which were inioyned, vntill the time of reformation.
(GW) These gifts and sacrifices were meant to be food, drink, and items used in various purification ceremonies. These ceremonies were required for the body until God would establish a new way of doing things.
(KJV) Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.
(KJV+) Which stood onlyG3440 inG1909 meatsG1033 andG2532 drinks,G4188 andG2532 diversG1313 washings,G909 andG2532 carnalG4561 ordinances,G1345 imposedG1945 on them untilG3360 the timeG2540 of reformation.G1357
(NKJV) concerned only with foods and drinks, various washings, and fleshly ordinances imposed until the time of reformation.
(NLT) For that old system deals only with food and drink and various cleansing ceremonies-physical regulations that were in effect only until a better system could be established.
(YLT) only in victuals, and drinks, and different baptisms, and fleshly ordinances-till the time of reformation imposed upon them .
@@lisachambers3683
Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Joh 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Anabaptist translates to re-baptizer, it was considered sinful to do this more than once. Also one of the earliest anabaptist movements was violently anarchist, leading Luther and authorities to be very critical of all. Other anabaptists then promoted pacifism
You guys should invite Trent Horn, Pints with Aquinas or Jimmy Akin on your show and find a good topic to discuss.
That would be great.
Soooo do you all have a video on full preterism. Makes much sense and should be studied to see if correct
You should see if John Stumbo (president of the CMA) will come on the show to talk about the history of the CMA and their current pursuits as a denomination. They're doing some pretty cool stuff! We are prayerfully considering becoming licensed ministers through them. I think it'd be a cool show!
Counsil of Chalcedon wasn't directly against miaphysitism but against monophysitism that denies Jesus had a fully human nature. Miaphysites separated because they were uneasy with the language defined by the council, as they thought it too nestorian.
Holiness Pentecostals/Pentecostal Holiness ain't the same as Onenesss Pentecostals, even thought here are a number of Oneness groups that would describe themselves as Holiness. Holiness variation of Pentecostalism (of whicht he Church of God is and example) are the original Pentecostals, the AG came along with a Presbyterian and Baptist background and rejected the Wesleyan aspect, teaching instead Finished Work theology.
Nestorius was greatly concerned with giving the title Mother of God to Mary and actually said "Do not make the virgin a god".
The Church of the East (That received Nestorious) denies that they divide the one person of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church now recognizes that the dispute was to a degree confusion over the churches using different languages. "The Church of The East" (Existing largely in India) dividing from the Catholic Church in 451 should not be confused with the Orthodox Church (Often mistakenly called the Eastern Orthodox Church that split from Rome in 1054.
The council that excommunicated Nestorious proceeded in the absence of the bishops from the East that supported Nestorius and there was a political element to this dispute.
Serious question concerning Denominations that teach the Trinity doctrine.
In John 16:13 it says, "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for HE SHALL NOT SPEAK OF HIMSELF; but whatsoever he shall HEAR, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come."
Who is this Spirit 'hearing' from? Is not the Holy Spirit co-equal and consubstantial with both the Father and the Son within the fullness of the Godhead according to the doctrine of the Trinity? Who is telling this Spirit of Truth what to say? The Father? The Son? Both? Are they not both Spirits? And if he cannot speak of himself, but only what he 'hears' . . . . and then told what words to speak, would he not be subordinate to whomever is telling him what to say?
John 4:24 says "God is a Spirit': and they that worship him must worship him in 'spirit and in truth' . . . . PERIOD!
If the 'Spirit of truth' as stated above in John 16:13 is actually the very same 'Spirit' who is also the Spirit of God whom we worship in spirit and truth . . . so then why can God not simply speak of Himself when speaking to man . . . without channeling his words apparently thru a different Spirit and telling it what to say?
Do the denominations that follow the Trinity doctrine believe and teach that God himself tells a separate Spirit of, or from Himself, what to say when speaking to mankind, or otherwise showing men 'things to come'? Why? And how does that work?
It seems very confusing to me. Please explain if you can.
In the graphic at 24:29, Oriental is misspelled. The graphic reads OREINTAL.
Christian missionary alliance in local church, you have elders, and the chair of the elders board (which usually is the lead or sr pastor but can pass it on to another elder number). Then there is districts, and you vote in a district superintendent. These are representatives from churches from the churches based on since and any licensed workers can vote. And then there in a national office. With a president. Again voted on by representatives and licensed workers. (Some nuances in there). There is a committee that brings a candidate(S) to be voted. Then there is dexcom which is basically an elders board for the national organization. (This is the Canadian set up) there is committees for candidates for the districts too. My favourite part of AB Simpson is him being kicked out of his denomination for the sake of missions. And then starting another one. But he wasn’t trying to start a denomination. He just wanted to encourage a deeper life and send out missionaries with an ad in a newspaper. And Canadian. ☺️ and yes. He got ghosty. 😂
I still think you should interview Dr Bernie Van De Walle. He is the district superintendent in the Canadian Midwest (CMD) and taught for years the Alliance history and Thought. And is very well versed in AB Simpson. And wrote books. Which he says are boring. 🤣 (I am not)
Acts 2:36 King James Version (KJV)
"Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ."
... which is NOT a proof text for Jesus being a created entity.
To be fair, the Anabaptist tradition is probably so small because the reformed and Catholic were killing them off too! Also, I think there is a stronger argument that the General Baptists come out of the Anabaptist denomination through John Smyth. No doubt Thomas Helwy's was clearly Arminian and therefore from the reformed tradition, but Smyth has a different background and so the Baptist's are a mix of reformed and non-reformed background.
First among equals should go with the beatitudes. The last shall be first and the first shall be last. 🤔 I’m listen to a textbook on the church history. Super fascinating. And I’ll be listening to it too.
I have a friend who is Catholic and says certain Catholic groups aren’t true Catholics. Because they didn’t reform after the reformation. Because the Catholic Church also reformed too. Also other issues going on there in that area. And she says they are the ones who give them the “Mary worship” name. And I’d agree. And the fun part is they aren’t even worshiping Mary the virgin there. It’s a totally different person and they know that too.
Diarmaid MacCulloch argues that we have so many denominations because of the separation of Church and state.
Prior to the USA, church splits were prevented because of its political and even economic impact. Kings would step in because they needed their state religion as a national institution to be stable. i.e. You can argue on different doctrines but you are forced to agree to disagree.
But with the american concept of separation of church and state, church became an institution of personal values and thus differing values led to splits.
Is Onenesss Pentecostal considered as a Christian denomination? Are they considered Christians?
Love you guys
But you vastly misrepresented nestrorius and the church of the east
It’s almost offensive
This was GOODDDDD
what are some books you guys recommend for studying church history?
The series by Pelikan is great
@@lisachambers3683 so do you believe that as a believer we shouldn’t read anything but the Bible?
@@lisachambers3683 I see what you’re saying and we should be cautious, But I respectfully disagree. I think it can get dangerous when we can start putting our trust in men and idolizing “church fathers” but when I read those things what goes through my mind is what is the truth? And how does is compare to God’s word.
@@lisachambers3683 I hear you. We shall both keep praying and seeking the Lord first and test everything by His word. But others might not have the same convictions about just reading about church history.
Four witnesses by Rod Bennet - It is the earliest you can get with early Church History.
In the June 2002 issue of the Church History journal, Pier Beatrice reports that Eusebius testified that the word homoousios (consubstantial) "was inserted in the Nicene Creed solely by the personal order of Constantine."
The main thesis of this paper is that homoousios came straight from Constantine's Hermetic background. As can be clearly seen in the Poimandres, and even more clearly in an inscription mentioned exclusively in the Theosophia, in the theological language of Egyptian paganism the word homoousios meant that the Nous-Father and the Logos-Son, who are two distinct beings, share the same perfection of the divine nature.
- Pier Franco Beatrice, "The Word 'Homoousios' from Hellenism to Christianity", Church History, Volume 71, № 2, June 2002, p. 243
Obviously, the Trinitarians of the Nicaean Council would deny any collusion with Constantine, and remove all documentation and reference to his mandate prior to their gathering.
Link to Jordan Peterson vid?
I thought this was supposed to be about denominations? It's more about who's a Heritic.
How nice. So which church do you believe in today?
Josh how did you get your kids to learn the nicene creed?
I believe the original church preceded the Roman church. They met in homes. I still like the house church model. Or small independent bible churches.
Hey Josh, if you believe in Scriptual Regeneration- AKA via the Word. Why not Baptismal Regeneration which is washing with water by the Word?
... because baptism doesn't regenerate anyone. A person who believes that false teaching believes in a different gospel.
@@IndianaJoe0321 "And baptism, which this [the salvation of Noah through water] prefigured, now saves you-not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers made subject to him." - 1 Peter 3:21-22
Please do an episode on the theological debate concerning "eternal submission of the Son"
Assemblies of God has also roots in the Christian Missionary Alliance.
The nature of Jesus must have been important because one of these debates was going on when a volcano sent us into famine, plagues and the dark ages. After repeating the creed that said Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit and knowing that Father God was also present, ive never had any doubt that Jesus was fully the Son of God in a mortal body.
The oriental church should also include the Malankara Orthodox Church from India.
Yea I would also had that the actual teachings of WJ Seymour wasn’t articulated here
I am a big fan of the show! You have laid out church history very well! I just want to comment about your comment about Roman Catholic different religious orders are divided in what they believe. These different ordes are present beacuse they have different charism of mission. Like the Jesuits their mission is to preach the good news thru education, and the diocesan mission is the local church.. That is why there are different orders.. Thats the only thing i think is a misconception from you..
Completely agree and am grateful you pointed this out. I feel they falsely hammered this down and could imagine many non-Catholics excited about some supposed disunity. As a Catholic we are all apart of one Church just like Jesus prayed for. Different passions and ways of contributing to the one body but all believing the same doctrines/ catechism.
@@georgefuentes4112how do you explain the jesuit order doing mind control programming and satanic ritual abuse on children? or the pope and the those at the Vatican sacrificing children underneath the vatican? or the homosexuality and pedophilia within catholicism? is this really the church of Jesus or have they introduced a new jesus? We are to pray to the Father in the name of the Son…. not to Mary this is idolatry…. there is much wrong here…
There is no statement in the book of Acts that supports the view that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son.
When did the church stop being the people of the way? My Methodist church talked about sanctification and justification, but it never made sense.
Most Methodists in the U.S. don't believe in the resurrection. Does your church?
Why the old intro on a new video?
What are the proper/correct names to use for the Creator and the Saviour?
Yahweh and Jesus
God works. Creator is good. Lord Jesus is good. The Spirit of Jesus is my personal go to.
Okay you lost me when you said two nominations going to be a fun and interesting subject. That's the funniest thing I've heard all day
🎉🎉🎉
One more point about the east-west split was also that church growth at that time was mostly in the east.
Rome was at its peak decline while remembering that they once were the centre of the world. The once mighty city was now reduced to abandoned ruins and urban centres were now farmlands. Due to wars in the west and peace in the east, most of the church growth prior to the split was in the east. (Thus why there are so many different Eastern orthodox grps).The one thing Rome still had going was the Pope being there.
So the eastern church not giving in to them was like taking away their one thing they could still hold on to. While the hot theological debate was understandable, the outcome was overblown by the socio-economic environment.
I raise this point because more and more Christians outside europe and US question why their denomination HQ are in US or Europe while the bulk of their denomination growth are in Asia and Africa. More and more Asian and African churches are rejecting western church practices that are growingly liberal and also overly westernised.
Biggest growth of Christianity will be in Sub-Saharan African due to birth rate and in China from atheists (by communist revolution) converting to Christianity. These countries will be the head of Christianity in some years, it will be like Christianity going back to his foundations Asia and Africa
Coptic Christians are far from heretics. Thank you for clarifying
Oh well as long as you confirm them...
Denominations?
They can’t even humble themselves enough to be One Church to follow all God Jesus Christ has commanded us.
I find this very sad and troubling.
This episode entirely overlooks the bloody church wars. Check into this shameful history and you will be thankful for the Peace of denominational separation.
@@NakedProphet division? I know about that history.
They should practice what they preach
It is theologically and grammatically incorrect to claim that the Holy Spirit proceeds from two sources. The Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father through the Son is orthodox but the filioque is not orthodox.
16 "And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 17 Even the Spirit of truth;" John 14
are you guys in agreement with Walter Veith and Stephen Borh? just the name Remnant Radio.... its said that the true remnant church of Christ will have 2 identifying features 1. it would hold to the testimony of Jesus Christ (AKA the Spirit pf Prophecy or the old and new testament) and 2. be keepers of the commandments (Sabbath included as it points to our Creator and was given to all mankind along with marriage the only, 2 institutes that came before sin came) this to me after looking into the 2300 day/year prophecy the 70 week prophecy and the 1260 year prophecy of littlehorn power ruling from 538 to 1798 and its revival after its deadly wound with the gasparro treaty in 1929 the church of SDA teaches these things and keeps the Precepts out of gratitude for being saved by grace
Yeah...we are all divided and weak...
And the devil is literally destroying us....
Different Intrerpretations of
Scripture created divisions in
Early church which carried on
Into present
Baptist is solely based on immersion
Pentecostal on day of pentecost
Methodist on Wesley's teachings
Congregational on church gatherings
Others undoubtedly on religous practices
Using 1611 kjv as our guide
Elect is the true church
A body of chosen ones
Scattered thruout the world!
LEZ goooooo
32:50 You are incorrect. Acts does NOT say that Jesus pours out the Holy Spirit. Read it again. It says that Jesus sends the Spirit FROM the Father. The Spirit does not proceed from Christ and Christ never claimed it did.
Acts 1:4-5:
And while staying with them he ordered them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, “you heard from me; 5 for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.”
Christ calls the Spirit the promise of the Father. Not a promise from himself.
Acts 1:7-8:
He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.”
Christ emphasizes the Father's authority and says they will receive THE Spirit. He does not claim the authority for himself nor does he say that he will send them the spirit or that he has any authority or control over the Spirit himself. It is clearly phrased as being separate from him. He doesn't say "I will send you the spirit and make you my witnesses". He says they will receive the spirit and then will be his witnesses. It's all in a passive voice.
And if that isn't enough then the book of John will remove doubt.
John 14:16-17:
And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever- the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you.
Jesus says he will ask the Father to give them the Spirit. It is clearly not coming from Jesus.
Thank you,Gents.🌹🌹🌹🌹
@38:47 the cope begins
Wikipedia:
"A Christian denomination is a distinct religious body within Christianity that comprises all church congregations of the same kind, identifiable by traits such as a name, particular history, organization, leadership, theological doctrine, worship style and, sometimes, a founder.
Theology is the systematic study of the nature of the divine, or more broadly of religious belief. It occupies itself with the unique content of analyzing the supernatural, but also deals with religious epistemology, asks and seeks to answer the question of revelation. Revelation pertains to the acceptance of God, gods, or deities, as not only transcendent or above the natural world, but also willing and able to interact with the natural world and to reveal themselves to humankind."
My comment:
Theology is the study of the Hebrew God Yahweh and His other self called "Jesus" believed in by Christians. Both are able to reveal themselves to mankind but they never do - instead believers invent and copy stories that are drummed into the minds of little children at indoctrination centers.
Ever heard of mysticism? Quite narrow minded to think God never reveals himself to the believer. He does but on his own terms and sometimes it's just a glimpse but it can totally transform us.
5:37
Shalom, It is interesting that many, if not all, have built their foundation off of what some other human, whether current or historical, believes rather than taking a personal journey with Christ Himself to build their theological foundation. Without His "personal" enlightenment, one will never come to know the truth as well as who The Father is (Matthew 11:27).
For those who would disagree, look at how divided the body of believers are and tell me they are all following Christ..
Shalom..
@@lisachambers3683 Shalom, I have been an adopted son of The Most High and sibling of Christ for several years and by The Father's intervention and guidance, I see myself going backwards and referring to the original Hebrew and Greek as most all worldly translations are at great fault for the confusion throughout the world. Many have even created their own Bibles based on their own theologies, which too are at fault and responsible for the worlds confusion.
The goal of life is to look to the original scriptures and allow enlightenment by YHWH to understand the whole puzzle as one matures
If a person is not referencing the original languages, I don't see them ever finding the truth.
Our goal is to leave the kingdom of darkness (ignorance) and bind with The Begotten Son and allow Him to lead us into the Kingdom of Light (knowledge).
I suspect, by your comment above, that you might believe that Jesus is Michael The Archangel and if this is the case, I would respectfully disagree as I personally know The Son and The Father.
Shalom.
@@lisachambers3683
Shalom, I've not heard back so I hope all is well.
Shalom
@@lisachambers3683 Shalom Lisa, I sent it again, did you receive it?
Shalom
@@lisachambers3683 Shalom Lisa, it doe's not contain any links.
Let me rephrase it differently:
I believe it is importance to refer back to the original Hebrew and Greek because there has been much confusion due to translations.
Throughout my adopted life, as I grow deeper in my relationship, I find it critically important to access the Hebrew and Greek languages to obtain specific components of the inspired authors message which is the key to unlocking and understanding the scriptures which leads to the ultimate truth being tevealed, and I encourage all others in that same aspect.
When I mention scriptures, I don't mean just the Protestant bible. Many are not aware there are four bibles throughout the world, each containing more books than the other. There is the Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox, and Ethiopian.
The Ethiopian has at least 15 more books within and they highlight more of the spiritual warfare and demonic presence in the world.
I again, in my conversations encourage believers to place their trust in The Spirit of Truth to guide them as to what is truth and what is not.
I'm confident that, as an example, the Ethiopian's see their Bible as being as much inspired as the Protestant.
I refer to ignorance (lack of knowledge) as being The Kingdom of darkness, which the enemy would love to keep us there.
It is by yoking together with Christ that we are led into the kingdom of light (knowledge and truth).
Spiritual warfare abounds to keep truth from being propagated, yet those who are found guilty of doing so will one day, whether in this life, or the next, will receive their reward for doing so.
As for the three pieces of criteria you
mentioned, would be curious why you look to those only.
To me the critical questions would be:
A) Who created "the heavens, earth, and all within them, whether visible or invisible?
B) When was Christ "begotten"?
Shalom
@@lisachambers3683 Shalom Lisa.
I want to state it is a privilege to meet someone who thinks out of the box and willing to converse and "reason together" in search of truth.
I've seen pdf versions on the web. As for the book of Enoch, there are three.
Have you ever used "Bible Hub Text Analysis" as a research tool?
If I may ask, what have you learned regarding Christ pre-existence?
Shalom
I am biblical Christian Only Restored. I am not Protestant, Reformed or Charismatic. James 2:24 Acts 2:38 1 Peter 3:21 Mark 16:15,16
I think: We are made in the image of God. Heart, soul, mind and all my strength are directly related to son, father, holy spirit and God almighty, AKA, the most high God. That's why Moses had the way of life passing through the 3 courts to the mercy seat with the cherubim wings. And why there is heaven, heavens, heaven of heavens and most high heaven. And other examples.
Presbyterian, from Greek Presbyteros
I think early Christianity in Acts and Paul's letters, was actually more like Messianic Judaism. They did not CHANGE LAWS (God's Laws) and TIMES (Appointed TIMES/Feasts), the antichrist did that. The antichrist, or Mother of Harlots riding a beast, is a false religion riding in with a PAGAN Nation. A false religion is referred to as a HARLOT, like in Proverbs, and beasts are always used in prophecy to describe different NATIONS, like in Daniel. Roman Catholicism came in right after the prior world rulers, there is no 2000 year delay in the statue in Daniel. If Catholicism is the mother of Harlots, she has produced MANY harlots in all the denominations of Christianity. Worshipping Him in an IMAGE they created APART from the true Perfectly obedient Christ Who came KEEPING ALL the Laws of God. Jesus didn't change any Food Laws, Ordained Feasts, Sabbaths, or worship. Jesus is STILL OBEDIENT today, worshipping a Jesus who is leading a REBELLION AGAINST GOD and His Laws is the Great Deception!
Who was made the first pope? In 300 something
No, it was Peter when Christ commanded him to feed His sheep