101G
Well-known member
ERROR, when did God, (the Father have blood?) Revelation 19:13 "And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God."
please answer this before we go on .... ok.
101G.
A super important teaching from Jesus
- Thread starter Keiw1
- Start date
please answer this before we go on .... ok.
101G.
Runningman
Well-known member
It's symbolic imagery, but that describes YHWH aka the Father.
Isaiah 62 (NIV)
3“I have trodden the winepress alone;
from the nations no one was with me.
I trampled them in my anger
and trod them down in my wrath;
their blood spattered my garments,
and I stained all my clothing.
Yes, pelase continue.
101G
Well-known member
no, it was his blood that was spilled on the cross that was on his garment. so let's get is right before we go on. now was it the Blood of Christ that was spattered his garments, yes or no?
please answer.
101G.
Runningman
Well-known member
No. God doesn’t have blood which means it’s symbolic imagery. God didn’t bleed on the cross, the Lamb did.
Revelation 5 (NIV)
9And they sang a new song, saying:
“You are worthy to take the scroll
and to open its seals,
because you were slain,
and with your blood you purchased for God
persons from every tribe and language and people and nation.
101G
Well-known member
and the one who is KING of kings, and LORD of lords is the Lamb the Word of God.... "JESUS", the almighty..
now also LISTEN, the HOLY SPIRIT he was the one who purchased with ... HIS BLOOD. Acts 20:28 "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood."
check ... mate again.
101G
Runningman
Well-known member
Your argument seems to be “this is what I say so therefore it’s true.” That’s not a valid argument. Where is Jesus ever called “King of kings and Lord of lords” in that word order in the Bible?
101G
Well-known member
read your bible, and if what 101G said line up with the bible then it's true, because the bible say so.
once again, 1 Timothy 6:13 "I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession;" 1 Timothy 6:14 "That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ:" 1 Timothy 6:15 "Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;"
check ...... mate.
101G
Runningman
Well-known member
The appearing of Jesus (the Son) is what God (the Father) will bring about in His own time. The one being called God is, therefore, not Jesus. God is being called the blessed and only Ruler and "King of kings and Lord of lords" while Jesus isn't. This is clear from the fact that in Matthew 24:36 that Jesus doesn't know when he returns and in 1 Thess. 4:14 Jesus is brought back by God. God is immortal, Jesus isn't. No one has seen God, many saw Jesus.
1 Timothy 6 (NIV)
14to keep this command without spot or blame until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15which God will bring about in his own time—God, the blessed and only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords,16who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen.
Revelation 19:16 also isn't Jesus. The rider on the white horse "has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself..." which would be the Father because Jesus isn't omniscient as Matthew 24:36 proves. Furthermore, In Revelation 6:2, Jesus isn't the rider on the white horse. So much more can be said.
I’m also claiming checkmate.
101G
Well-known member
IGNORANCE: Listen and Learn,
another word for "POTENTATE" is "DESPOT"
Despot: G1203 δεσπότης despotes (d̮es-po'-tees) n.
an absolute ruler (“despot”).
[perhaps from G1210 and posis (a husband)]
KJV: Lord, master
Root(s): G1210
John 13:13 "Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am."
Check .... Mate there, now this,
the Lord Jesus is KING and Governor, as well as Ruler, which a "POTENTATE" is.
Governor - Psalms 22:28 "For the kingdom is the LORD'S: and he is the governor among the nations."
Ruler - who is Governor, Micah 5:2 "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting."
Ruler: H4910 מָשַׁל mashal (maw-shal') v.
to rule.
[a primitive root]
KJV: (have, make to have) dominion, governor, X indeed, reign, (bear, cause to, have) rule(-ing, -r), have power.
there God is "Governor", now King....... who is King of kings..... (smile).
Fulfilment of Micah 5:2, this "RULER" who is "GOVERNOR" is also "King". Matthew 2:1 "Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem," Matthew 2:2 "Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him." Matthew 2:3 "When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him." Matthew 2:4 "And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born." Matthew 2:5 "And they said unto him, In Bethlehem of Judaea: for thus it is written by the prophet," Matthew 2:6 "And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda, art not the least among the princes of Juda: for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel."
that Governor, that Ruler, that King is the "Potentate, in 1 Timothy 6:15 , yes, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;"
this is just 2 easy........ Double CHECKMATE.
101G.
Jesus is Gods image--Gods command to mortals= Man does not live by bread alone but by EVERY utterance from God--is impossible unless one study's Gods word always, it never stops. And one must be taught by these( Matt 24:45) in order to understand some of it.Oh good grief.
Ummmmmmmm
Jesus never told his followers to study scripture. Never. Not once.
Jesus lived on this earth after the books of the Old Testament were written, and before the books of the New Testament were written. So, obviously, Jesus didn’t say anything about the New Testament. None of the books of the New Testament existed when Jesus was teaching.
He did, however quote a lot from the Old Testament.
Jesus never commanded, or encouraged, his followers to study scripture
But surly you are smart enough to figure out what Jesus meant when he said in Matt 16:18
NASB 1995
"I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.
Truth is that either by anointing of Jesus, self appointment or congregational vote Peter became the first POPE.
Jesus picked "HIM".
I am not a RCC supporter. In fact I am so anti- Pope Francis... ( subject for another thread) ... but you cannot dismiss how any of or the churchianity stuff started.
But it was not all smooth going.... But eventually an off shoot of the Orthodox church came into being.... They hold similar views but also opposite in that their priests ( at least in the Greek Orthodox) marry.
The do share a tie in with the Protestants
From the book https://www.cambridge.org/core/book...introduction/6F557828A479C3426C06889465E64D4F
There were lots and lots and lots of differing opinions among those Catholic/Orthodox people..... NOT AT ALL UNLIKE US HERE.
But someone had to write a first bible... then a second... and so forth.....
Originally where their knowledge came was from the Old Testament scriptures, of which no one would have had any much to argue about as no one was alive so their old testament, and ours, and those of the Jewish books all pretty much read the same.
As to KJV ... Read about what happen and why.............
So enter the Reformation and all bets were off.... Different branch's all claiming to be the one true Christian Church ....and scores upon scores of bible translations all claiming to be the best.
Now, as I said I am not pro Pope Frankie.... He has said and done things that could well lead one to believe he is the anti-Christ.
(After all... he did say having a personal relationship with Jesus was dangerous... then walked it back insisting one needs no be so into the church.)
And now he is pushing a one world religious idea, and says they all lead to God....
This is not as Jesus expected when appointing Peter.... So don't throw the baby out with the bath water...
Peter was never a Pope. He served the God of Israel always= the Abrahamic God=YHVH(Jehovah) a single being God, as all true followers do--John 4:22-24
Only the little flock are bought from the earth=Rev 14:3= 144,000-- The darkness tells all they will go to heaven and they are born again.
MTMattie
Active member
If you want the rest of the Popes... Ill provide them.
Popes of the 1st century
| Pontiff number | Pontificate | Name: English · Latin | Date and Place of birth | Age at start/ end | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 30 – c. 64 (approx. 34 years) | St Peter PETRVS | Bethsaida, Judaea, Roman Empire[birth 1] | Born as Shimon, son of Yonah, a Jew from Judaea. A peregrinus, free provincial subject of the Roman Empire who was not a Roman citizen. Apostle of Jesus. According to Catholic tradition he received the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven (Matthew 16:18–19). Feast day (Feast of Saints Peter and Paul) 29 June. The Catholic Church recognizes him as the first Bishop of Rome appointed by Christ, and therefore the first pope. Also revered as saint in Eastern Christianity, with a feast day of 29 June.[6] St. Peter's Basilica in Vatican City is named after him. | |
| 2 | c. 64 – c. 76 (?) (11–12 years) | St Linus LINVS | Volterrae, Italia, Roman Empire[birth 2] | First Roman pope, being a Roman citizen born in Italia, the homeland of the ancient Romans.[birth 3][7] Feast day 23 September. Also revered as a saint in Eastern Christianity, with a feast day of 7 June. Possibly mentioned in the New Testament (Second Epistle to Timothy 4:21).[8] | |
| 3 | c. 76 – c. 88 (?) (12 years) | St Anacletus ANACLETVS | Athenae, Achaea, Roman Empire[birth 4] | First Greek pope. A peregrinus, free provincial subject of the Roman Empire who was not a Roman citizen. Feast day 26 April. Once erroneously split into Cletus and Anacletus.[9] | |
| 4 | c. 88 – c. 97 (?) (9 years) | St Clement I CLEMENS | Roma, Italia, Roman Empire[birth 5] | Roman citizen, born in the capital of the Roman Empire. Feast day 23 November. The earliest Apostolic Father, issued 1 Clement which is said to be the basis of apostolic authority for the clergy. Also revered as a saint in Eastern Christianity, with a feast day of 25 November. Possibly mentioned in the New Testament (Epistle to the Philippians 4:3).[10] He was martyred by being tied to an anchor and being thrown in the sea. | |
| 5 | c. 97 – c. 105 (?) (7–8 years) | St Evaristus EVARISTVS | Bethlehem, Iudaea, Roman Empire[birth 6] | Hellenized Jew. A peregrinus, free provincial subject of the Roman Empire who was not a Roman citizen. Said to have divided Rome into parishes, assigning a priest to each. Feast day of 26 October. |
Runningman
Well-known member
I'm going to have to call check mate based on the grounds of 1 Timothy 6:14-16 teaching that Jesus isn't the only Only Ruler and King of kings and Lord of lords.
While Jesus is a Lord, he isn't the Lord God, the Lord of heaven and earth (Matthew 11:25, Acts 17:24,254), nor equal with God (John 14:28.)
In Acts 4:24-27, the Sovereign Lord is the one they prayed to while referring to Jesus as his servant. Jesus taught that he is the one the only true God sent in John 17:3, while he also taught in John 13:16 that the one sent is not greater than the one who sent him.
God is called the head of Jesus (1 Cor. 11:3) and Jesus is himself the property of God (1 Cor. 3:23) so the early thought on Jesus and who he is in relation to God is not that Jesus is himself God, nor equal to God, but is a subordinate, created, being who didn't inherently have Christhood and Lordship. This is evident from the fact that in Acts 2:36, Peter stated “Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah.”
Therefore, after Jesus was made Lord he was appointed Lord over the church (Ephesians 1:22,23, Colossians 1:15-20) etc.
So what we have an image of here, based on Scripture, is a hierarchy. This also exists in the family unit so we can understand clearly how this works with God and Jesus. Paul said the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. Obviously there is a hierarchy and a separation of powers and authority while each individual does not become the same person.
Since some proof has been provided, the point about God being the only Ruler stands in 1 Timothy 6:14-16 while that isn't Jesus. It refers to God being the Lord Moist High, the Sovereign Lord, King of kings and Lord of lords. Just a few titles that Jesus doesn't share with God.
Double check mate.
Peterlag
Well-known member
There is not one verse that says Jesus is God the Son. Nor has there ever been a teaching on it anywhere in the Bible. The Jews never saw it anywhere in the entire Old Testament nor anyone in the New Testament ever taught it. The Catholics who invented this nonsense have used only about 8 verses that they have to piece together from statements that are scattered all over the New Testament. One should think if such nonsense was true and important that it would have been taught by someone. And it is not. If the Jews had no trinity, and the Christians had no trinity until it was officially declared by the Catholic Church in the 4th century. Then don’t you have to wonder where it came from? If it was formulated by the same Church that brought you Mary Mother of God, immortality of the soul, purgatory and hellfire... then don't you wonder just a little bit?
Peterlag
Well-known member
There is not one verse that says Jesus is God the Son. Nor has there ever been a teaching on it anywhere in the Bible. The Jews never saw it anywhere in the entire Old Testament nor anyone in the New Testament ever taught it. The Catholics who invented this nonsense have used only about 8 verses that they have to piece together from statements that are scattered all over the New Testament. One should think if such nonsense was true and important that it would have been taught by someone. And it is not.
Peterlag
Well-known member
There is not one verse that says Jesus is God the Son. Nor has there ever been a teaching on it anywhere in the Bible. The Jews never saw it anywhere in the entire Old Testament nor anyone in the New Testament ever taught it. The Catholics who invented this nonsense have used only about 8 verses that they have to piece together from statements that are scattered all over the New Testament. One should think if such nonsense was true and important that it would have been taught by someone. And it is not.
Peterlag
Well-known member
There is not one verse that says Jesus is God the Son. Nor has there ever been a teaching on it anywhere in the Bible. The Jews never saw it anywhere in the entire Old Testament nor anyone in the New Testament ever taught it. The Catholics who invented this nonsense have used only about 8 verses that they have to piece together from statements that are scattered all over the New Testament. One should think if such nonsense was true and important that it would have been taught by someone. And it is not.
Peterlag
Well-known member
Jesus Christ is not a lexical definition of logos. The verse does not say "In the beginning was Jesus." The "Word" is not synonymous with Jesus, or even the "Messiah." The word logos in John 1:1 refers to God's creative self-expression... His reason, purpose and plans, especially as they are brought into action. It refers to God's self-expression or communication of Himself. This has come to pass through His creation and especially the heavens. It has come through the spoken word of the prophets and through Scripture. Most notably it has come into being through His Son. The logos is the expression of God and is His communication of Himself just as a "word" is an outward expression of a person's thoughts. This outward expression of God has now occurred through His Son and thus it's perfectly understandable why Jesus is called the "Word." Jesus is an outward expression of God's reason, wisdom, purpose and plan. For the same reason we call revelation "a word from God" and the Bible "the Word of God."
If we understand that the logos is God's expression... His plan, purpose, reason and wisdom. Then it is clear they were with Him "in the beginning." Scripture says God's wisdom was "from the beginning" and it was common in Hebrew writing to personify a concept such as wisdom. The fact that the logos "became" flesh shows it did not exist that way before. There is no pre-existence for Jesus in this verse other than his figurative "existence" as the plan, purpose or wisdom of God for the salvation of man. The same is true with the "word" in writing. It had no literal pre-existence as a "spirit-book" somehow in eternity past, but came into being as God gave the revelation to people and they wrote it down.
Catholicism is pure darkness--started by satan=2Thess 2:3= foretold to rise. They may have some truths but not enough. They allowed a pagan false god worshipping king to preside over some councils or at least the one in 381 ce where for the first time ever the holy spirit was added to a godhead.=recorded history fact. Catholicism's own encyclopedia says its true. They were there. That encyclopedia as well says--the apostolic Fathers knew nothing of God being a trinity.
Catholicism brought in statues, icons and graven images--Started both easter and Christmas with added pagan false god worship things to both. In fact The Chaldean rites of spring festival=bunny rabbits and the dyed eggs of Pasch were prevalent in that false god worship celebration. The false goddess=Beltis the queen of the heavens, in another language=Astarte(first t silent) and on the Assyrian monuments=Ishtar, pronounced eastar--They named the holiday after a false goddess.= straight off the table of demons( 1 Cor 10:21)= God assures if one partakes off of that table they cannot partake off his.
Last edited:
MTMattie
Active member
I will not disagree about the darkness but would be more apt to call it secretivness.
You cannot get away from the fact that Jesus is the one who said “I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it."
And the name Peter .... Jesus named Peter "The Rock"? Matthew 10:2, Mark 3:16, and Luke 6:14 all record that Jesus changed Simon's name to Peter. The literal meaning of the name Peter () is stone, boulder, or rock. In Matthew 16,
Now we cannot discount that after Jesus was gone Satan would have had a field day in trying to insinuate himself into everything... especially a new church that was just getting off the ground. He had gotten to Judas. I believe he had gotten to Thomas... for mortal men will often flounder when their leader is not leading....
Plus you have the fact that mortal Peter was undoubted puffed up with self importance. It has been so with every Pope.
And that RCC system, as well as the Orthodox... has been ripe with so much political stuff within that it would make your head spin.
And the Vatican archives beneath the Vatican and I understand kept under lock and key must hold a lot that would bring that church down if one could get to it.
I well remember how the church tried to stop Dan Browns "The DaVinci Code." I mean if there was no truth why worry?
If you ever watched any portion of the Series back in the 1980s, if you are old enough... call the Thornbirds.... It WAS NOT just a love story but a truthful expose of the politics in the church.
You tend to look at things with tunnel vision where it would be beneficial to widen your scope of things.
I agree that the Cult of Mary is bad. Not the parishioners who know nothing but the clergy.
It is not the only one though and you truly need to findout for yourself these things
