Are you a “True Worshipper”?

[Cnkw3]

But your own list dates at least 4 books of the New Testament LATER than the Shepherd was written!

Per your source:

• 1 John: AD 90-95
• 2 John: AD 90-95
• 3 John: AD 90-95
• Revelation: AD 94-96

By your logic, your New Testament should not contain these books.


Land the plane.

---> How do you know Hebrews is inspired and the Shepherd is not???

You still are not reading. The shepherds range is from 100-160. With a more approximate date of 140. I got that from early christian writings.com You don’t like the source then tough. I don’t like yours. This proves the fruitlessness of discussing these other books that nobody today accepts in their Bible. They have had years and years to study this stuff and there is still no reputable Bible sold today that includes them.
So, Pauls directive stands. When you have “the written word”. (Which you say we do) It trumps what man says.
1 Cor4:6.

 

[Cnkw3]

Yes, of course. And as the written word of God says, the word of God is not confined to paper.

Does it say that? Where? This is an honest question. I need some book chapter and verse on that

 

[Cnkw3]

Yes, of course. And as the written word of God says, the word of God is not confined to paper.

Let look at the final book in the Bible…revelation. How does it end?
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book,(where are the words coming from? The book) If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Revelation 22:18-19
It’s all about the book. The written word. Sounds pretty confined to me.

 

[Natha]

In John 4 we find Jesus saying this….
But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
John 4:23-24

By Jesus using the phrase “true worshipper” implies that there are those that may worship but it is not true worship. I believe we can see an example of that in MT 15 when Jesus confronted the Pharisees and told them that they honored him with their lips but their heart was far from him and he explained why…..they taught for doctrine the commandments of men. I think we see this kind of worship in many “ churches” today.

In order to be a “true worshipper” one MUST (this is an imperative, you have no other choice) worship in SPIRIT and in TRUTH.

SPIRIT - This is having the right attitude, reverence for God, and awe to be able to praise the God of heaven. This deals with the emotion and feeling of worship.

TRUTH - This is doing things according to the truth of Gods word. The ONLY place we find “truth” is in Gods word he has given us in our Bibles. It does not come from the “church”, Pope, catechism, statements of faith, creed books, or anyones opinion. It comes through book, chapter, and verse. Period. If you cant find what you are doing and teaching in your ”Christian” life in the Bible (Gods word) then it is not being done in “truth”.

So, are you a “TRUE WORSHIPPER”?

Amen.... as per my understanding,,, more than 85% people are not thinking on true worship,, i appreciate your posting.. blessings

 

[Walpole]

You don’t know exactly what they were looking at. Im sure it contained Isaiah. Maybe thats all Paul needed to use. Thats all Philip needed. Show me in the text where it tells which OT scriptures he was referring to. The point is….he used the written word to support what he was teaching. That is a fact!

We know they were looking at the Greek Scriptures (LXX) because they were Greek Jews.

St. Luke is specific about what St. Paul teaching (Acts 17:3), which was the same message he was preaching in Thessalonica. Isaiah does not explicitly identify its subject as the Messiah, the Son of God, in the manner Wisdom 2:12-20 does. Wisdom is in the LXX and Wisdom 2:12-20 is what the Jewish rulers quote to Jesus when He is hanging on the cross. (cf. Luke 23:35)

 

[Walpole]

You still are not reading. The shepherds range is from 100-160. With a more approximate date of 140. I got that from early christian writings.com You don’t like the source then tough. I don’t like yours. This proves the fruitlessness of discussing these other books that nobody today accepts in their Bible. They have had years and years to study this stuff and there is still no reputable Bible sold today that includes them.
So, Pauls directive stands. When you have “the written word”. (Which you say we do) It trumps what man says.
1 Cor4:6.

In a previous post where you were refuted about your assertion about acceptance of Hebrews in the first century, you were shown the EARLIEST listed canon dated to the second century and it EXCLUDED the book of Hebrews, but INCLUDED the Shepherd.

You have yet to answer how know Hebrews is inspired but the Shepherd is not. If you now want to claim it's because of the date composed, slap down a date from the Scriptures which states the cutoff date for a book to be inspired. In other words, what does the Scripture say is the date God stops inspiring authorship?

 

[Walpole]

Let look at the final book in the Bible…revelation. How does it end?
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book,(where are the words coming from? The book) If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Revelation 22:18-19
It’s all about the book. The written word. Sounds pretty confined to me.

"THIS BOOK" = the book John is referencing that he is composing = the book of Revelation

 

[Walpole]

Does it say that? Where? This is an honest question. I need some book chapter and verse on that

The New Testament is replete with verses testifying to this. I posted a couple in a previous thread here, but here are an additional few versus from the KJV...

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."

Acts 13:46 "It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles."

Romans 10:17 "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."

1 Thess 2:13 "For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe."

2 Tim 2:9 "...but the word of God is not bound."

Heb 13:7 "Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation."



The written word of God testifies that the word of God is NOT confined to pages in a book. The word of God was first spoken, heard, taught and spread orally before the first words of Scripture were ever put to papyrus.

 

[jaybo]

Amen.... as per my understanding,,, more than 85% people are not thinking on true worship,, i appreciate your posting.. blessings

Where did you get this statistic? Has someone actually conducted a poll?

 

[Natha]

Where did you get this statistic? Has someone actually conducted a poll?

I have travelled all over india .. i visited thousands of churches in 35 years ministry.. I met thousands of preachers and i preached in more than 150 conferences where 150 to 200 gathered in each time.. i saw with my eyes, i hear with my ears on their personal faith and doctrines.. very sad to say this.. but it is fact.. Thank you for asking .. i am 61 year old and working in south india (8 states)

 

[Walpole]

In a previous post where you were refuted about your assertion about acceptance of Hebrews in the first century, you were shown the EARLIEST listed canon dated to the second century and it EXCLUDED the book of Hebrews, but INCLUDED the Shepherd.

You have yet to answer how know Hebrews is inspired but the Shepherd is not. If you now want to claim it's because of the date composed, slap down a date from the Scriptures which states the cutoff date for a book to be inspired. In other words, what does the Scripture say is the date God stops inspiring authorship?

You still are not reading. The shepherds range is from 100-160. With a more approximate date of 140. I got that from early christian writings.com You don’t like the source then tough. I don’t like yours. This proves the fruitlessness of discussing these other books that nobody today accepts in their Bible. They have had years and years to study this stuff and there is still no reputable Bible sold today that includes them.
So, Pauls directive stands. When you have “the written word”. (Which you say we do) It trumps what man says.
1 Cor4:6.

Cnkw3 I'm still waiting for you to slap down a date from Scripture.

Give me the date which Scripture states is the cutoff date for when God ceases inspiring authors to write. Remember not to go beyond what is written!

 

[Cnkw3]

We know they were looking at the Greek Scriptures (LXX) because they were Greek Jews.

St. Luke is specific about what St. Paul teaching (Acts 17:3), which was the same message he was preaching in Thessalonica. Isaiah does not explicitly identify its subject as the Messiah, the Son of God, in the manner Wisdom 2:12-20 does. Wisdom is in the LXX and Wisdom 2:12-20 is what the Jewish rulers quote to Jesus when He is hanging on the cross. (cf. Luke 23:35)

Who cares if it was the Greek scriptures. I already said that Jesus even quoted from that. The point is…Paul used Old Testament writing to preach Christ. These same OT writings that the Bereans could use to verify. The text says nothing about “the wisdom”. You added that to the discussion.

 

[Cnkw3]

In a previous post where you were refuted about your assertion about acceptance of Hebrews in the first century, you were shown the EARLIEST listed canon dated to the second century and it EXCLUDED the book of Hebrews, but INCLUDED the Shepherd.

You have yet to answer how know Hebrews is inspired but the Shepherd is not. If you now want to claim it's because of the date composed, slap down a date from the Scriptures which states the cutoff date for a book to be inspired. In other words, what does the Scripture say is the date God stops inspiring authorship?

What early listed canon. You’ve been arguing that the “canon” didnt happen until the 4th century.
were the apostles still alive? No,. Then its too late. That has been part of the acceptance criteria for years.

 

[Cnkw3]

"THIS BOOK" = the book John is referencing that he is composing = the book of Revelation

You are right. What’s good for rev is good for all. If not why not?
What this proves is that…The written word, when you have it, trumps the oral every time. This principle of not adding to or taking away is consistent throughout the Bible. Dt 4, Prov 30, and we see in Rev
You said…the word is not confined to the written word and the Bible proves you wrong. Oh yea, but you have to go OUT OF THE BIBLE to find any of your doctrine that you have added.

 

[Walpole]

What early listed canon. You’ve been arguing that the “canon” didnt happen until the 4th century.
were the apostles still alive? No,. Then its too late. That has been part of the acceptance criteria for years.

Stop dodging.

Slap down a date to back up your assertion. Give me a DATE FROM SCRIPTURE which states the cutoff date for God to inspire an author. Remember to use your criteria and DO NOT GO BEYOND WHAT IS WRITTEN.

 

[Walpole]

You are right. What’s good for rev is good for all. If not why not?
What this proves is that…The written word, when you have it, trumps the oral every time. This principle of not adding to or taking away is consistent throughout the Bible. Dt 4, Prov 30, and we see in Rev
You said…the word is not confined to the written word and the Bible proves you wrong. Oh yea, but you have to go OUT OF THE BIBLE to find any of your doctrine that you have added.

Guess what? CLAIMING THE WORD OF GOD IS CONFINED TO THE WRITTEN IS GOING OUT OF THE BIBLE! You have been shown, from the written word of God, that the word of God is NOT confined to the written!

 

[Walpole]

What early listed canon. You’ve been arguing that the “canon” didnt happen until the 4th century.
were the apostles still alive? No,. Then its too late. That has been part of the acceptance criteria for years.

Try to keep up with your own arguments. You originally claimed the church knew IN THE FIRST CENTURY that Hebrews was inspired. But you have been shown that is erroneous and the earliest extant canonical list dates from the SECOND CENTURY and EXCLUDES Hebrews (but included the Shepherd of Hermas)!

 

[Cnkw3]

The New Testament is replete with verses testifying to this. I posted a couple in a previous thread here, but here are an additional few versus from the KJV...

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."

Where does this even hint at the written word not being enough. It only says..they spake the word of God. Also…did. These people have the miraculous to back up their word?
What does this saying mean to you?
And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.
Mark 16:20
So when the Catholic Church comes up with new teaching do they “confirm the word with signs following? Why not. These people you are appealing to here did.

Acts 13:46 "It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles."

Did Paul use the OT to support his teaching yes or no? Was it written down? Could Paul use signs and miracles to support his message? Can the pope? NO!

Romans 10:17 "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."

Amen. Amen. That NOWHERE says that you can just make up whatever you want and call it “the word of God”. Which means you cant just grab some old book you like from a “church father” and call it the “word of God“.

1 Thess 2:13 "For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe."

Here we are right back to acts 17 where Paul reasoned with them “from the scriptures”. This supports the written word. It doesn’t teach against it.

2 Tim 2:9 "...but the word of God is not bound."

The context has to do with Paul in chains. He is saying that you cant chain up the word of God. It will not be imprisoned so that it can’t spread to all. This has proven to be true. There have been plenty through the years that have tried to stop the spread of the gospel. To lock it down so to speak. But they have failed. It doesnt mean….confined to the written word. Again, You added something that was not in the text.

Heb 13:7 "Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation."

You cant hear the word without it being “spoken”. This doesn’t mean you can “speak” what ever you want.
Paul said…
I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. BUT though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
Galatians 1:6-9
This sounds pretty confined to me. The “pope” cannot be found in any of Paul’s letters or actions in the book of Acts so therefore i have to reject it and it seems the Catholics will be accursed because it is obviously a different gospel.

The written word of God testifies that the word of God is NOT confined to pages in a book. The word of God was first spoken, heard, taught and spread orally before the first words of Scripture were ever put to papyrus.

Did these people have the miraculous to back it up? Yes or no?

 

[Cnkw3]

Guess what? CLAIMING THE WORD OF GOD IS CONFINED TO THE WRITTEN IS GOING OUT OF THE BIBLE! You have been shown, from the written word of God, that the word of God is NOT confined to the written!

You just made that up. Now show me a passage that contradicts…
And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.
1 Corinthians 4:6
Whose more puffed up then the pope? People kiss him all day long.
What did Paul say to the Ephesians..
How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;
Ephesians 3:3-5
If this isnt the pattern I don’t know what is.
First……The HS through apostles and prophets provided the info.
Second…These select individuals (not the shepherd of Hermes)then wrote it down. Now when we read we can understand. At least Paul says we can. I‘ll trust Paul over you or the Catholic Church.

 

[Cnkw3]

Try to keep up with your own arguments. You originally claimed the church knew IN THE FIRST CENTURY that Hebrews was inspired. But you have been shown that is erroneous and the earliest extant canonical list dates from the SECOND CENTURY and EXCLUDES Hebrews (but included the Shepherd of Hermas)!

So the people that received the letter of Hebrews in the 60”s DIDNT think it was inspired? I don’t agree with you. Now prove me wrong.