God's word in english is true

[littlelight]

Matt 16:5-6 yeast is something that just a little of can by its subtle way of working creep in and become something very large that completely distorts the truth. Take for instance Acts 8:1-24. If I'm right and Simon M. is a saved person then verse 22 means that Simon M. can be forgiven but its only because he has accepted Jesus. God would be giving him time to repent and change his ways and become a fruitful christian.







But if we Christians insist that SimonM is unsaved then it means that we have introduced some yeast into the gospel message. That yeast has now become a full blown untruth that could send countless thousands or millions of unbelievers into hell. Because I can see how that yeast has become a lie I hear all the time from unbelievers. That is: “God is love. If you are a good person (repentant) He forgives you no matter what.â€




Read through verse 22 and ask yourself: Would Peter tell a person that had just rejected the only way to be forgiven to ask God to forgive him without reinforcing the fact that Jesus is the only forgiveness available? Peter told him to repent but he would not neglect the most important part of the message. Repentance without Jesus ain't good enough.

 

[littlelight]

I believe the truth can come through different versions of the Bible. I believe that (yeast) can come through different versions of the Bible. This is why we pray for Wisdom & Understanding. The Holy Spirit will give understanding if you pray for it.

The only thing is that every one of my * versions say essentially the same thing. Peter tells Simon M. to repent of his wickedness. Pray to the Lord and maybe God will forgive him.




Every Christian that has a moderate knowledge of the new testament knows that ( Heb 9:22) blood has to be shed to be forgiven. Even though God asked for animal sacrifice in the O.T. it cannot remove sins ( Heb 10 : 4). There is no other way than Jesus ( Acts 4 : 12).




If Simon M. had just rejected Jesus then Peter wasn't a very good preacher, teacher and evangelist because he implied that God might forgive Simon M. without letting him know that he had rejected the only means to be forgiven. I'll guarantee you that Peter would not have done that. Even if Peter could have made such a big foopaw the Holy Spirit would not have recorded it.




But because our doctrine don't allow for salvation without complete and total repentance Simon M. could not be saved. I guess we have to ignore, change words or add to God's word to save our “traditions of the elders.â€







* I have 33 versions. 3 in the NIV series which should be counted as one. Several updates such as KJV and NKJV which should be counted as one. So I have 28 versions that had different translators. Plus I have an interlinear with strongs number and definations.

 

[littlelight]

Matt 16:15-19 So what do gates do? Some gates are built to keep things out. Such as gates around a castle were built to defend the people against those trying to invade them. Some gates were built to keep things in. All our prisons have gates to keep the people we put there inside. The gates of hell do both. Satan tries to keep the gospel out. He is also trying to keep those inside the gates locked in. Gates are not something that is used to attack something. So Jesus is not saying that the church will never be overcome by the gates of hell. Jesus is saying that the gates of hell cannot prevail over the rock of Peters confession.




When Peter confessed that Jesus was the Son of God it meant more than that. It meant that Peter believed Jesus to be the promised Messiah. Peter believed that Jesus was sent to save him and all of Israel. He had no idea of the full extent of that saving, but Jesus said that rock (his confession) prevailed over the gates of hell.




Hell is anywhere Satan's kingdom is. Satan is the prince of this world (Jn 16: 11 ). Everyone that is not God's has their residence in the kingdom of the prince of this world (Jn 8 :23). Everyone that belongs to God is not of this world ( Jn17:14 - 20 ). When the church assails the gate with the gospel it will be heard thru the gates of hell. When those inside the gates hear the gospel and confess Jesus as Lord and Christ the gates are opened. That person has passed from death to life.

 

[littlelight]

More on osas

Ro8: 26-30 There are those called that receive Jesus and don't make it because they do not love God.




Ro 8: 28 lets us know who the people in verse 29-30 is referring to. In Jn 14:23 those love Jesus keep his words and Jesus and the Father make their abode within that person. Jn 15:6 those that keep his word abide in Him (Jesus). If they do not continue to abide in Him they are cast into the fire. Therefore verse 30 does not apply to those that receive Jesus and do not love. They prove that they do not love him by not remaining in Him as He has commanded. They have lost their salvation.

 

[Vanguard]

[FONT=Calibri, sans-serif]Most Churches that I have been associated with believe the english Bible has translation errors.

They would be correct.

At this point we need to step outside of the box and dive into ancient history.

There is a difference between 'God's word" and a human being's account of a story. That is what the Bible is, a collection of stories, told by various authors, many of which are unknown. Those that authored a book within the Bible, or those that translated the Bible into a particular language later on, often claimed divine inspiration and that God spoke to them. However, if you look at their accounts of divine inspiration, they were alone. No one was around to witness the event. They can/could say that God told them [whatever] and no one can refute it.

Fast forward...

The Protestant Reformation is in swing, led by King Henry VIII of England. He wanted a divorce from Anne and the Pope said no. Henry told the Pope that England was separating from the Roman Catholic Church, and up starts the Church of England. As a matter of fact to be a Protestant means you are in "protest" of the Roman Catholic Church. During the early 17th century CE, the KJV Bible was penned and finalized in 1611 for King James I. It was translated into English for the Church of England. It's source texts were the Masoretic Text with Septuagint influence for the OT, the Textus Receptus with some Vulgate influence for the NT, and the Apocrypha was taken from the Septuagint and Vulgate. All 47 scholars were members of the Church of England, working for the king (that should throw up a red flag right there). At the time the Rosetta Stone, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and other archaeological discoveries had not been found. They actually had very few textual resources to cross reference by.

Fast forward...

In the 1950s, the Dead Sea Scrolls were found and biblical scholars scrambled to translate them. Only a small percentage have actually been translated to this day, because both Israel, the Vatican and others own/possess those fragments and are not letting them into the hands of the non-Jewish, non-Catholic scholars. You have to ask yourself "why". What are they trying to hide or protect.

What scholars have found are discrepancies within the KJV and have revised various translations over the years to make them as accurate as possible. They are bypassing the Latin Vulgate and other sources and going to the oldest known texts available (as they should). There are 3 types of translation methods: literal, dynamic and paraphrased. A literal translation tries to maintain accuracy in a "word for word" format, but they also have to arrange things for sentence structure for the given language. A dynamic translation goes for a "thought for thought" process but they are not as accurate as a literal translation. The paraphrased versions are basically taking the source texts and "putting it into the translators own words." This method is the weakest and least accurate. Unfortunately, a lot of religions use the latter method in an effort to support their views.

In short, the KJV does contain errors and modern scholars work and revise various renditions to try and correct those errors, misrepresentations, and bad translations. If the Bible were 100% accurate, there would be no revisions. That's not the case.

Getting back to your main point...

I tend to view "God's word" as "God's message" and go from there. The words change translation to translation, but the message does not. It proves to be far more accurate and just when viewed that way. Besides, Christians are not beholden to the OT anyway.

 

[littlelight]

They would be correct.

At this point we need to step outside of the box and dive into ancient history.

There is a difference between 'God's word" and a human being's account of a story. That is what the Bible is, a collection of stories, told by various authors, many of which are unknown. Those that authored a book within the Bible, or those that translated the Bible into a particular language later on, often claimed divine inspiration and that God spoke to them. However, if you look at their accounts of divine inspiration, they were alone. No one was around to witness the event. They can/could say that God told them [whatever] and no one can refute it.

Fast forward...

The Protestant Reformation is in swing, led by King Henry VIII of England. He wanted a divorce from Anne and the Pope said no. Henry told the Pope that England was separating from the Roman Catholic Church, and up starts the Church of England. As a matter of fact to be a Protestant means you are in "protest" of the Roman Catholic Church. During the early 17th century CE, the KJV Bible was penned and finalized in 1611 for King James I. It was translated into English for the Church of England. It's source texts were the Masoretic Text with Septuagint influence for the OT, the Textus Receptus with some Vulgate influence for the NT, and the Apocrypha was taken from the Septuagint and Vulgate. All 47 scholars were members of the Church of England, working for the king (that should throw up a red flag right there). At the time the Rosetta Stone, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and other archaeological discoveries had not been found. They actually had very few textual resources to cross reference by.

Fast forward...

In the 1950s, the Dead Sea Scrolls were found and biblical scholars scrambled to translate them. Only a small percentage have actually been translated to this day, because both Israel, the Vatican and others own/possess those fragments and are not letting them into the hands of the non-Jewish, non-Catholic scholars. You have to ask yourself "why". What are they trying to hide or protect.

What scholars have found are discrepancies within the KJV and have revised various translations over the years to make them as accurate as possible. They are bypassing the Latin Vulgate and other sources and going to the oldest known texts available (as they should). There are 3 types of translation methods: literal, dynamic and paraphrased. A literal translation tries to maintain accuracy in a "word for word" format, but they also have to arrange things for sentence structure for the given language. A dynamic translation goes for a "thought for thought" process but they are not as accurate as a literal translation. The paraphrased versions are basically taking the source texts and "putting it into the translators own words." This method is the weakest and least accurate. Unfortunately, a lot of religions use the latter method in an effort to support their views.

In short, the KJV does contain errors and modern scholars work and revise various renditions to try and correct those errors, misrepresentations, and bad translations. If the Bible were 100% accurate, there would be no revisions. That's not the case.

Getting back to your main point...

I tend to view "God's word" as "God's message" and go from there. The words change translation to translation, but the message does not. It proves to be far more accurate and just when viewed that way. Besides, Christians are not beholden to the OT anyway.

I am not too worried about the old testament. The new is where most of what we need is at for us. But as a sideline this post is about the old testament.


The book of Ruth , in my opinion, should be called the book of Naomi. It starts out by letting us know that Naomi was a dutiful wife and followed her husband as she should have by God's law. Ruth 1: 9 She was well loved by her both daughters-in-law. So she was in no means a bitter woman at heart. Ruth 1: 15 – 16 by her efforts and love for God Ruth was saved. Ruth knew Naomi well enough that she had to accept Naomi's God to continue with her. The entire middle is devoted to how Naomi mentored Ruth in the ways of God and His people. Ruth4:14 – 22 and it ends by letting us know that God blessed Naomi for being an obedient daughter of His.




I just get tired of hearing how bitter Naomi was in the face of evidence to the contrary. I would be a lot worse than her if I was in her shoes. Naomi is quite a lady. God is not the God of the dead but the living. I'm sure that she is in heaven.

 

[littlelight]

As I have said before one mistake is assuming that everything Jesus said to the disciples in the Gospels applies to us. We have to check the epistles to see if it applies to us and to observe what the Apostles did.




Matt 28: 19 Jesus instructed His Apostles to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and of the Holy Spirit. Lets see how this was done in Acts. Acts 2 :38, Acts 8 : 16 ,Acts 10 : 48, and in Acts 19 : 5. Notice a theme there. Every place baptism mentioned is in the name of Jesus. The water immersion seems to have been done in the name of Jesus.




Some claim that in Acts 8: 4-17 Philip did not baptize right and that was why Peter and John was sent to them. Acts 6: 5 Philip was listed 2nd behind Stephen. Acts 21: 8 Philip was given the gift of evangelism. God scattered them in Acts 8 because they were ready and He was ready to take the salvation to the gentiles. Peter and John were sent to confirm that God had given the Samaritans salvation. The manifest gifts displayed were proof that those in Jerusalem could not argue against. God did the same in Acts 10 for Cornelius and his household.




Being baptized into the name of Jesus simply means that you are saved if one made a true confession. Being baptized into the name of the Father means that you have taken the first step in obedience by being baptized. So when one believes and is immersed in the name of Jesus one is baptized without saying in the name of the Father but the act itself (obedience ) implies the Father. Jn 14: 23 If one is obedient it proves that they love Jesus and the Spirit of the Father indwells them. The baptizer simply states “ I baptize you in the name of Jesus.â€




If God so desires then you might get the manifestation of gifts by baptizing you into the Holy Spirit. It does not have to happen at the same time as the immersion as proven by Acts 8 and 10. It does not have to be by the laying on of Apostles hands as proven by Acts 10. God had given them the ability to baptize in the Holy Spirit in Matt 28: 19.




I am not trying to say if the wrong formula was used that people are not saved. God knows the heart and that is what salvation is based on.







I keep seeing hearing on Christian radio , TV and on signboards “ If my people who are called by myname will repent I will heal their landâ€. 1 Jn 5:10 People that do not believe the testimony God gave about his son are calling Him aliar. Jn 1: 1 Jesus is the word of God. The testimony that God gave about His Son is in the written word we have. If we do not believe the written word of God are we calling Him a liar? How many sins that we commit are bigger than calling Him a liar?

 

[felix]

littlelight,

The problem can be solved easily in a few steps. Anyone who truly want to know the truth will also know the truth. This is not actually about translations. But the truth itself.

1. Authority: Words of Christ

• Father - Deut 18:19 And it shall be [that] whoever will not hear My words, which He speaks in My name, I will require [it] of him.
• Son - John 12:48-49 He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him—the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day. For I have not spoken on My own [authority;] but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak.
• Holy Spirit - John 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.

The Father, Son and the Holy Spirit clearly declares the authority of the words spoken by Christ -which is the ultimate authority.

2. Witness: Scripture
The authority of Scripture is not because it is a holy book but only because it gives witness about Christ.

• John 5:39-40 You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me. But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.

The other important question is what is Scripture?
Luke 24:44-45 Then He said to them, "These [are] the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and [the] Prophets and [the] Psalms concerning Me." And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.
Christ specifically mentions what He declares as Scripture: Law of Moses, Psalms and the Prophets - no additional books. If this is the case, how is that we are adding many books and call it as Scripture?
If we follow Christ, we will also view only the above as Scripture.

3. Doctrine: Christ's Gospel
This is the important part. Many doctrines like "eternal security", "faith only" - all are based purely on Paul's letters. Paul's letters are not scripture but letters to his planted church, just like a missionary sending a letter to his planted church today. Hence, it is important that we lay down the foundation as Christ. If we don't have Christ as foundation, then we error. Many put Paul's foundation (which they twist themselves) and try to fit Christ's doctrine latter. But if we put Christ's doctrine as foundation, no other doctrine can error us. E.g, Christ no where taught the doctrine of eternal security. But today, denominations like baptists don't have Christ's doctrine and knowing refusing to believe Christ's simple words because they are happy with Paul's doctrine. e.g, Every denomination who believe in eternal security will give a twisted interpretation for Christ's simple words of John 15:2. This doesn't mean Paul have erred but rather, they twist it to be convenient for them as mentioned by Peter regarding Paul's letters in 2Pet 3:14-16.

Anyone who willingly reject Christ's teaching will error. If we follow Christ we will never get lost and we will never error for we follow Truth.

Translations only come second. If all are in agreement with the above 3 simple truths, there will not be any issues anywhere in translations.

 

[littlelight]

littlelight,

The problem can be solved easily in a few steps. Anyone who truly want to know the truth will also know the truth. This is not actually about translations. But the truth itself.





1. Authority: Words of Christ

• Father - Deut 18:19 And it shall be [that] whoever will not hear My words, which He speaks in My name, I will require [it] of him.
• Son - John 12:48-49 He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him—the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day. For I have not spoken on My own [authority;] but the Father who sent Me gave Me a command, what I should say and what I should speak.
• Holy Spirit - John 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.

The Father, Son and the Holy Spirit clearly declares the authority of the words spoken by Christ -which is the ultimate authority.

2. Witness: Scripture




The authority of Scripture is not because it is a holy book but only because it gives witness about Christ.

• John 5:39-40 You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me. But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.

The other important question is what is Scripture?
Luke 24:44-45 Then He said to them, "These [are] the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and [the] Prophets and [the] Psalms concerning Me." And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.
Christ specifically mentions what He declares as Scripture: Law of Moses, Psalms and the Prophets - no additional books. If this is the case, how is that we are adding many books and call it as Scripture?
If we follow Christ, we will also view only the above as Scripture.

3. Doctrine: Christ's Gospel
This is the important part. Many doctrines like "eternal security", "faith only" - all are based purely on Paul's letters. Paul's letters are not scripture but letters to his planted church, just like a missionary sending a letter to his planted church today. Hence, it is important that we lay down the foundation as Christ. If we don't have Christ as foundation, then we error. Many put Paul's foundation (which they twist themselves) and try to fit Christ's doctrine latter. But if we put Christ's doctrine as foundation, no other doctrine can error us. E.g, Christ no where taught the doctrine of eternal security. But today, denominations like baptists don't have Christ's doctrine and knowing refusing to believe Christ's simple words because they are happy with Paul's doctrine. e.g, Every denomination who believe in eternal security will give a twisted interpretation for Christ's simple words of John 15:2. This doesn't mean Paul have erred but rather, they twist it to be convenient for them as mentioned by Peter regarding Paul's letters in 2Pet 3:14-16.

Anyone who willingly reject Christ's teaching will error. If we follow Christ we will never get lost and we will never error for we follow Truth.

Translations only come second. If all are in agreement with the above 3 simple truths, there will not be any issues anywhere in translations.

Why do you believe that there is no scripture besides the law of Moses, psalms and the prophets? You found that information in Luke. He was not one of those that Jesus was talking to in John 14:26. You do not count the gospels as scripture so how can the gospels ( Matthew, Mark and John) be relied on for truth?




From what you have said I understand you believe that:

1. Matt 5 : 17 we must work the law of Moses.
2. Matt 32: 2 We must do as the Pharisees say.

From what you say I do not think we believe enough of the same books to discuss any topic. I believe all the new testament as true. If one can only rely on the words of Jesus I cite the above.

 

[felix]

Why do you believe that there is no scripture besides the law of Moses, psalms and the prophets? You found that information in Luke. He was not one of those that Jesus was talking to in John 14:26. You do not count the gospels as scripture so how can the gospels ( Matthew, Mark and John) be relied on for truth?

From what you have said I understand you believe that:

1. Matt 5 : 17 we must work the law of Moses.
2. Matt 32: 2 We must do as the Pharisees say.

From what you say I do not think we believe enough of the same books to discuss any topic. I believe all the new testament as true. If one can only rely on the words of Jesus I cite the above.

No. You misunderstood it all. I never said they are not true. I said, they are not Scripture. It is often taught in churches that Scripture is the authority. While I don't deny that, Scripture by itself is NOT the authority. The Words of Christ and Christ Himself is the authority. The authority of Scripture is only because it gives witness to Christ.

When Christ is referring to Scripture (before any of the NT books were written), how can we even consider adding ourselves other books as Scripture when Christ NEVER included them?
NT is certainly required and must be used for understanding Scripture. But NT by itself is NOT Scripture.

Matt 5:17 has nothing to do with law of Moses.

(Matt 5:17-19) "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches [them,] he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Let us see what is meant by these commandments referring on the law:

1. (Matt 5:20) For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds [the] [righteousness] of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.
2. (Matt 5:22) But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, 'Raca!' shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, 'You fool!' shall be in danger of hell fire.
3. (Matt 5:28) But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
4. (Matt 5:32) But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.
5. (Matt 5:34) But I say to you, do not swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is God's throne;
6. (Matt 5:39) But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.
7. (Matt 5:44) But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you,

Can you confirm that the commandments spoken by Christ is actually "law of Moses"? I certainly know and you would also agree that the above has absolutely nothing to do with law of Moses.

(there is no Matt 32: 2, so I can't address it).

All the doctrines spoken by Paul and other apostles are actually from what Christ revealed them in some way or other. Hence, we must always put the foundation of Christ and then build using Paul's and apostles teachings. This way, we will never error because, the foundation is Christ and His Words are the ultimate authority. If anyone tries to build a wrong doctrine over the foundation of Christ, it simply doesn't stand because, it doesn't fit and falls apart. Hence, if we have the foundation strong using Christ's words, there will not be any error in the true doctrine of Christ.

 

[littlelight]

No. You misunderstood it all. I never said they are not true. I said, they are not Scripture. It is often taught in churches that Scripture is the authority. While I don't deny that, Scripture by itself is NOT the authority. The Words of Christ and Christ Himself is the authority. The authority of Scripture is only because it gives witness to Christ.

When Christ is referring to Scripture (before any of the NT books were written), how can we even consider adding ourselves other books as Scripture when Christ NEVER included them?
NT is certainly required and must be used for understanding Scripture. But NT by itself is NOT Scripture.

Matt 5:17 has nothing to do with law of Moses.

(Matt 5:17-19) "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches [them,] he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.








Let us see what is meant by these commandments referring on the law:

1. (Matt 5:20) For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds [the] [righteousness] of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.
2. (Matt 5:22) But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, 'Raca!' shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, 'You fool!' shall be in danger of hell fire.
3. (Matt 5:28) But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
4. (Matt 5:32) But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.
5. (Matt 5:34) But I say to you, do not swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is God's throne;
6. (Matt 5:39) But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.
7. (Matt 5:44) But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you,

Can you confirm that the commandments spoken by Christ is actually "law of Moses"? I certainly know and you would also agree that the above has absolutely nothing to do with law of Moses.

(there is no Matt 32: 2, so I can't address it).

All the doctrines spoken by Paul and other apostles are actually from what Christ revealed them in some way or other. Hence, we must always put the foundation of Christ and then build using Paul's and apostles teachings. This way, we will never error because, the foundation is Christ and His Words are the ultimate authority. If anyone tries to build a wrong doctrine over the foundation of Christ, it simply doesn't stand because, it doesn't fit and falls apart. Hence, if we have the foundation strong using Christ's words, there will not be any error in the true doctrine of Christ.

I am glad that you clarified. The verse that I transposed is Matt 23: 2-3. As far as I know you will not see any law concerning Moses' seat. Moses sat as judge when the nation of Israel came out of Egypt. Ex 18: 17 – 25 It was too much for one man so Moses appointed elders from the 12 tribes to act as Judges.The Pharisees claimed their authority was passed down to them after the exile from Persia. Jesus apparently agreed.




Matt 5: 31- 32 mentions divorce. Deut 24:1-4 is a law of Moses concerning divorce. There is nothing in the 10 commandments about divorce.





Therefore; Jesus is referring to the commands in the Law of Moses and telling them how God interprets those commands. That is why no one can be justified by the law. Ro 3:27 – 28 we are not justified by observing the law but by faith.




Matt 5: 19-20 if our righteousness has to exceed the Pharisees. The least in the kingdom of heaven by verse 5:19 break and teach others to break the commandments. By Matt 11:11 the greatest man ever born was John the Baptist. Yet he was lower than the least in the kingdom of heaven. Therefore; those that break and teach others to break the commandments are greater than John the Baptist. We do not have to observe the commandments in Matt 5: 21 –48.







Now that I know that you accept the epistles then Jn 15: 2 cannot mean that a believer loses salvation. If that was the meaning then Jesus is saying that salvation is by works. God cuts off every branch that does not produce fruit. Ro 11:6 If one has to work ( produce fruit) to keep salvation then its not by grace.







Jn 15: 6 is concerning a believer losing salvation. To remain in Jesus the person had to be in Him at one time. Notice it does not say that the person is cut off. God did not cut the person off. If one doesn't remain in Jesus they do not need to be cut off as they have cut themselves off.

 

[felix]

I am glad that you clarified. The verse that I transposed is Matt 23: 2-3. As far as I know you will not see any law concerning Moses' seat. Moses sat as judge when the nation of Israel came out of Egypt. Ex 18: 17 – 25 It was too much for one man so Moses appointed elders from the 12 tribes to act as Judges. The Pharisees claimed their authority was passed down to them after the exile from Persia. Jesus apparently agreed.

The context is simple: Hear them and obey what they teach from the law but don't follow their actions. This is because Christ has not yet took the role of High Priest to mediate between us and God and the New Covenant was not yet given. When the New Covenant was not yet given, how can you expect Christ to say not to follow the Old Covenant?

Matt 5: 31- 32 mentions divorce. Deut 24:1-4 is a law of Moses concerning divorce. There is nothing in the 10 commandments about divorce.

Matt 5:32 is not about divorce alone but how it is related to adultery based on the reason it is used, which the law spoke nothing of.

Therefore; Jesus is referring to the commands in the Law of Moses and telling them how God interprets those commands. That is why no one can be justified by the law. Ro 3:27 – 28 we are not justified by observing the law but by faith.

It is not how God interprets those laws given to Moses but it is what God always wanted us to follow which is His law. God's Law is different from Moses law.
(Gen 26:5) .. Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws."
Abraham obeyed and kept God's Laws 400 years before the law of Moses was even given.

Matt 5: 19-20 if our righteousness has to exceed the Pharisees. The least in the kingdom of heaven by verse 5:19 break and teach others to break the commandments. By Matt 11:11 the greatest man ever born was John the Baptist. Yet he was lower than the least in the kingdom of heaven. Therefore; those that break and teach others to break the commandments are greater than John the Baptist. We do not have to observe the commandments in Matt 5: 21 –48.

It is not so the way you interpreted. For example, Matt 18:1-3 clearly states whoever becomes like a child and humbles himself is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

(Rom 14:17) for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.

In short, kingdom of heaven is not materialistic and not based on things of this world. Great in kingdom of heaven doesn't mean a high post. Neither is least in kingdom of heaven is a low post. It means, in terms of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. The reason why He said John would be least is because, John was just sent to prepare the way and he died before receiving the righteousness of Christ, the peace from above which He left before leaving, and the joy of Salvation in Christ through the Holy Spirit.

Now that I know that you accept the epistles then Jn 15: 2 cannot mean that a believer loses salvation. If that was the meaning then Jesus is saying that salvation is by works. God cuts off every branch that does not produce fruit. Ro 11:6 If one has to work ( produce fruit) to keep salvation then its not by grace.

Which is exactly why I said, you need to laydown the foundation of Christ and then build using the apostles and Paul's teachings. If you don't you will tend to twist Christ's words to fit a false doctrine which are not based on Christ's.

Actually, it is not that I don't accept epistles. They are required teachings but not Scripture. What makes you think that I don't accept epistles?

You can read my blogs Faith and Works in Salvation and Eternal Security – a false doctrine! where I explained in great detail. There are a lot of false teachings based on the mis-interpreted verses/letters of Paul.

To give you an idea here...

Context of “faith” by Paul & James (using Gen 15:6)

• (Rom 4:2-5) For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath [whereof] to glory; but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
• (Jas 2:21-24) Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

How is it possible where James says work is required and Paul say work is not required using the same example? It is not that they contradict but we misunderstood it.
The book of Romans (actually, Paul in all his letters e.g, Rom chapters 2, 3; Gal 2:16; Phil 3:9) refers to “works” as “works of the law”. You can find it repeatedly in the same chapter or the adjacent chapters regarding it. The faith mentioned by Paul is same as the ”living faith” mentioned by James using the above Abraham example mentioned by both authors.
(I had mentioned in great depth of all the verses used by Faith only group. I certainly assure you it will be a blessing to you and to know the truth)

Who told grace means "no works"? Is being humble not a work according to you?

• (Jas 4:6) But He gives more grace. Therefore He says: [" God resists the proud,] [But gives grace to the humble."]
• (Heb 12:15) looking carefully lest anyone fall short of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up cause trouble, and by this many become defiled;

God is not going to give you grace if you are not humble. Neither you will have grace if there is any root of bitterness in you. Which means, you need to earn your grace by being humble and holy.

Jn 15: 6 is concerning a believer losing salvation. To remain in Jesus the person had to be in Him at one time. Notice it does not say that the person is cut off. God did not cut the person off. If one doesn't remain in Jesus they do not need to be cut off as they have cut themselves off.

Neither John 15:2 nor verse 6 say that.

• (John 15:2) Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He takes away; and every [branch] that bears fruit He prunes, that it may bear more fruit.
• (John 15:6) If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw [them] into the fire, and they are burned.

He takes away or he is cast out in both verses are extremely clear that it is God who is doing it.

 

[littlelight]

The context is simple: Hear them and obey what they teach from the law but don't follow their actions. This is because Christ has not yet took the role of High Priest to mediate between us and God and the New Covenant was not yet given. When the New Covenant was not yet given, how can you expect Christ to say not to follow the Old Covenant?



Matt 5:32 is not about divorce alone but how it is related to adultery based on the reason it is used, which the law spoke nothing of.



It is not how God interprets those laws given to Moses but it is what God always wanted us to follow which is His law. God's Law is different from Moses law.
(Gen 26:5) .. Abraham obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws."
Abraham obeyed and kept God's Laws 400 years before the law of Moses was even given.



It is not so the way you interpreted. For example, Matt 18:1-3 clearly states whoever becomes like a child and humbles himself is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

(Rom 14:17) for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.

In short, kingdom of heaven is not materialistic and not based on things of this world. Great in kingdom of heaven doesn't mean a high post. Neither is least in kingdom of heaven is a low post. It means, in terms of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. The reason why He said John would be least is because, John was just sent to prepare the way and he died before receiving the righteousness of Christ, the peace from above which He left before leaving, and the joy of Salvation in Christ through the Holy Spirit.



Which is exactly why I said, you need to laydown the foundation of Christ and then build using the apostles and Paul's teachings. If you don't you will tend to twist Christ's words to fit a false doctrine which are not based on Christ's.

Actually, it is not that I don't accept epistles. They are required teachings but not Scripture. What makes you think that I don't accept epistles?

You can read my blogs Faith and Works in Salvation and Eternal Security – a false doctrine! where I explained in great detail. There are a lot of false teachings based on the mis-interpreted verses/letters of Paul.

To give you an idea here...





Context of “faith†by Paul & James (using Gen 15:6)

• (Rom 4:2-5) For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath [whereof] to glory; but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
• (Jas 2:21-24) Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

How is it possible where James says work is required and Paul say work is not required using the same example? It is not that they contradict but we misunderstood it.
The book of Romans (actually, Paul in all his letters e.g, Rom chapters 2, 3; Gal 2:16; Phil 3:9) refers to “works†as “works of the lawâ€. You can find it repeatedly in the same chapter or the adjacent chapters regarding it. The faith mentioned by Paul is same as the â€living faith†mentioned by James using the above Abraham example mentioned by both authors.
(I had mentioned in great depth of all the verses used by Faith only group. I certainly assure you it will be a blessing to you and to know the truth)





Who told grace means "no works"? Is being humble not a work according to you?

• (Jas 4:6) But He gives more grace. Therefore He says: [" God resists the proud,] [But gives grace to the humble."]
• (Heb 12:15) looking carefully lest anyone fall short of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up cause trouble, and by this many become defiled;

God is not going to give you grace if you are not humble. Neither you will have grace if there is any root of bitterness in you. Which means, you need to earn your grace by being humble and holy.







Neither John 15:2 nor verse 6 say that.

• (John 15:2) Every branch in Me that does not bear fruit He takes away; and every [branch] that bears fruit He prunes, that it may bear more fruit.
• (John 15:6) If anyone does not abide in Me, he is cast out as a branch and is withered; and they gather them and throw [them] into the fire, and they are burned.

He takes away or he is cast out in both verses are extremely clear that it is God who is doing it.

Acts 15: 1-21 Peter and the council of Jerusalem interpreted Gods laws that the gentiles should observe. Verses 9 thru 11 confirm that we are justified by faith. The Apostles and elders agreed that the church abstain from the 4 things in verse 19. None of the 4 match the commandments that you say we have to abide by. They have to be recommendations because of verses 9-11 and the council cannot change God's law. Paul also confirms that they are recommendations 1 Cor 8: 7-8.




The basic question the council had to answer was how were the gentiles saved? That was answered in verses 9-11. However, you say people cannot be saved unless they work the commandments from the sermon on the mount. If that were true then some mention of them would have been included in the councils reply.The people in Antioch had not heard the sermon nor read the gospel(s) as none were written at that time.




A lot of the men on the council had been with Jesus from the beginning. Most of them had heard Jesus' sermon on the mount. Acts 1:2- 3 they had been trained by the Holy Spirit and he had given them instructions for 40 days concerning the Kingdom of God. Yet they do not give the church any commandments.

 

[felix]

Acts 15: 1-21 Peter and the council of Jerusalem interpreted Gods laws that the gentiles should observe. Verses 9 thru 11 confirm that we are justified by faith. The Apostles and elders agreed that the church abstain from the 4 things in verse 19. None of the 4 match the commandments that you say we have to abide by. They have to be recommendations because of verses 9-11 and the council cannot change God's law. Paul also confirms that they are recommendations 1 Cor 8: 7-8.




The basic question the council had to answer was how were the gentiles saved? That was answered in verses 9-11. However, you say people cannot be saved unless they work the commandments from the sermon on the mount. If that were true then some mention of them would have been included in the councils reply.The people in Antioch had not heard the sermon nor read the gospel(s) as none were written at that time.

A lot of the men on the council had been with Jesus from the beginning. Most of them had heard Jesus' sermon on the mount. Acts 1:2- 3 they had been trained by the Holy Spirit and he had given them instructions for 40 days concerning the Kingdom of God. Yet they do not give the church any commandments.

Are you referring Peter's doctrine or James's doctrine or Paul's doctrine? Peter had to be embarrassed from Paul before all to condemn his doctrine in favor of Paul's as in Gal 2.

I stand by the doctrine of Christ who gave one new commandment.

The doctrine of Christ is simple and straight forward:

• John 14:15 "If you love Me, keep My commandments.
• John 14:24 He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine but the Father's who sent Me.
• John 15:12 This is My commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you.
• John 13:34 A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another.

Are you keeping Christ's Words ?

What makes you think Paul's or Peter's words are the authority over Christ's Words ?

• (Deut 18:18-19) I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require [it] of him.
• (John 12:48) He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
• (John 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.

It is God the Father, who will require of us if we didn’t listen to Christ. It is Christ’s spoken words which will judge us in the last day. It is the words of Christ which the Holy Spirit will bring into remembrance. It will be your mistake to exalt any man's letter to his planted church (e.g., Paul’s letters) or man's book over Christ’s Words and equates it to be authoritative and be equal with His words. It is Christ's Words which are the ultimate authority above heaven and below earth and on everything.

I don't see where this authority over Christ's Words is even coming from when you are quoting from Acts to reject Christ's Sermon on the Mount.

Which is why, any doctrine that does not have foundation as Christ is a false doctrine.

 

[littlelight]

Are you referring Peter's doctrine or James's doctrine or Paul's doctrine? Peter had to be embarrassed from Paul before all to condemn his doctrine in favor of Paul's as in Gal 2.

I stand by the doctrine of Christ who gave one new commandment.




The doctrine of Christ is simple and straight forward:

• John 14:15 "If you love Me, keep My commandments.
• John 14:24 He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine but the Father's who sent Me.
• John 15:12 This is My commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you.
• John 13:34 A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another.

Are you keeping Christ's Words ?

What makes you think Paul's or Peter's words are the authority over Christ's Words ?

• (Deut 18:18-19) I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, [that] whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require [it] of him.
• (John 12:48) He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
• (John 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.

It is God the Father, who will require of us if we didn’t listen to Christ. It is Christ’s spoken words which will judge us in the last day. It is the words of Christ which the Holy Spirit will bring into remembrance. It will be your mistake to exalt any man's letter to his planted church (e.g., Paul’s letters) or man's book over Christ’s Words and equates it to be authoritative and be equal with His words. It is Christ's Words which are the ultimate authority above heaven and below earth and on everything.

I don't see where this authority over Christ's Words is even coming from when you are quoting from Acts to reject Christ's Sermon on the Mount.

Which is why, any doctrine that does not have foundation as Christ is a false doctrine.

You cite my post and ask who's doctrine I was referring to. Then you cite Gal 2: 11 when Paul confronted Peter in Antioch.




I never mentioned Galatians 2. The council in Jerusalem had nothing to do with Peter's actions in Antioch. Peter was not teaching that gentiles had to be circumcised.




Then you say the doctrine of Jesus is simple and cite 4 verses in the gospel of John ( Jn 14: 15 , Jn 14:24 , Jn 15: 12 , and Jn 13: 34) . I will presume that you think that Paul or maybe Peter or maybe both violated the command of Jesus to love our brothers. If that is what you are asking then I would say Peter did not show love in separating himself from the gentiles. Paul might have been more diplomatic and called Peter aside.




And in answer to your question: Are you( me) keeping Jesus' words. Again I will presume that you are referring to loving christian brothers. The answer is yes.




Now to Deut 18: 18, Jn 12: 48 and Jn 14: 26. You use them to support your doctrine that we have to do all that Jesus said.




Jn 6: 26 -29 Jesus states they should work for food that endures to eternal life. Since Jesus had told them to work for food that leads to eternal life; they were asking what works must they do to get eternal life. Jesus answered that there was only work that anyone can do to get eternal life. That one work is believing in the one that God has sent (Jesus). This is a word from Jesus.




I did not quote Acts to cite the apostles authority over Gods word. I was trying to prove that after the Holy Spirit was sent all the believers at the Jerusalem council believed in salvation by grace.




Acts 1 : 2-3 I believe that the Holy Spirit and Jesus had recalled all that Jesus had said and done. But, at least to the Apostles, the Holy Spirit and Jesus had also clearly defined what one needed to do to receive salvation. I say this because they were the ones Jesus was sending out to start His church. You cannot start a church and hold a false doctrine.




How could Peter state that both believing Jews and gentiles were saved by grace if it was not by grace but by works?




Peter confirms in Acts 10 : 43 that “all the prophets testified that everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness thru His name.†Acts 10 : 44 Peter was still saying the above words the Holy Spirit came upon all who heard the message. Acts 11: 17 Peter confirms that they not only heard but believed his message.
He never mentioned commandments to be kept.

 

[felix]

How could Peter state that both believing Jews and gentiles were saved by grace if it was not by grace but by works?

The same way Peter said circumcision is necessary to Paul only to be rebuked by him (although it is true, just joking).

What makes you think grace is not by works?
Jas 4:6 But He gives more grace. Therefore He says: [" God resists the proud,] [But gives grace to the humble."]

Is being humble not a work?

Also,
Heb 12:14 Pursue peace with all [people,] and holiness, without which no one will see the Lord:
Heb 12:15 looking carefully lest anyone fall short of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up cause trouble, and by this many become defiled;

What makes you think "not falling short of grace of God" is not work?

You are freely justified by grace as in Rom 3:24, but grace it self is NOT FREE. You had to earn it by your works esp., by being humble.

 

[littlelight]

The same way Peter said circumcision is necessary to Paul only to be rebuked by him (although it is true, just joking).

What makes you think grace is not by works?
Jas 4:6 But He gives more grace. Therefore He says: [" God resists the proud,] [But gives grace to the humble."]

Is being humble not a work?

Also,
Heb 12:14 Pursue peace with all [people,] and holiness, without which no one will see the Lord:
Heb 12:15 looking carefully lest anyone fall short of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up cause trouble, and by this many become defiled;

What makes you think "not falling short of grace of God" is not work?

You are freely justified by grace as in Rom 3:24, but grace it self is NOT FREE. You had to earn it by your works esp., by being humble.[/QUO

 

[littlelight]

The same way Peter said circumcision is necessary to Paul only to be rebuked by him (although it is true, just joking).

What makes you think grace is not by works?
Jas 4:6 But He gives more grace. Therefore He says: [" God resists the proud,] [But gives grace to the humble."]

Is being humble not a work?

Also,
Heb 12:14 Pursue peace with all [people,] and holiness, without which no one will see the Lord:
Heb 12:15 looking carefully lest anyone fall short of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up cause trouble, and by this many become defiled;

What makes you think "not falling short of grace of God" is not work?

You are freely justified by grace as in Rom 3:24, but grace it self is NOT FREE. You had to earn it by your works esp., by being humble.

The first step in humility is to admit that there is a God and you are not Him. That is Satan's mistake. Adam wanted to be God and it led to his downfall. When one believes Jn 3: 16 they have taken the first step toward humility. Ro 5 : 9 when one is in Christ they are justified. Only because they have the righteousness of Christ. Matt 11: 29 Christ was humble. If He was not then we do not meet the level of humility need to be righteous. Heb10 : 14 we do not need, for our eternal salvation, forgiveness for sins committed in Jesus. By one sacrifice He has, as far as the Father is concerned, sanctified us completely even while we are being sanctified. 1Jn 1: 8 we know that we sin but that is not counted as long as we are in Jesus. 1 Jn 1: 9 we have to confess those sins only for temporal reasons. 1Jn 1: 10 if we claim ( after being inHim) that we are sin free ( therefore we don't need Jesus) His word (Jn 1: 1) is not in us and we have lost salvation. Ro 8: 9 if we don't have the Spirit of Jesus in us we are not His. As long as we have His spirit we are His. Ro 10 : 13 everyone that calls on Jesus to save them are saved. 2 Tim 2 :13 as long as we are calling on Jesus to save us He cannot deny us and we are saved.




Now back to Jn 15 : 2.
1 Tim 6 : 4 –5 and 2 Tim 2 : 14 I do not argue words as that is how people justify false doctrines. As far as I know this is the only warning concerning the way people justify false doctrines outside of denying Jesus. We have plenty of warning about people teaching false doctrines. But we are specifically warned about arguing words 2 times. Please read the verses that I cited as to why I do not argue words. I do not claim that you match the person described. I am simply saying I think your doctrine is wrong and this is one of my points to prove my claim. Doctrines are wrong if they cannot be proven without changing words.




Look it up to see if I am right about this. The same word take away can also mean bear up, carry or lift up. But in verse Jn 15 :6 he is cast out. The same word there can mean throw down. The things I believe I justify with the Bibles God has given me and not by changing the meanings of words in those bibles. I also do not go withone bible that states what I want to hear but go with the majority.




Acts 10 : 22 Cornelius was a man who feared God. That means he believed in the God of the Jews but had not taken the steps to become a Jew. He was uncircumcised. Acts 10 : 47 he baptized them without insisting that they be circumcised. Peter never said gentiles had to be circumcised or obey the law to besaved.

 

[littlelight]

Listening to Christian radio the other day and they talked about the judgment of Matt 25: 31-33. The teaching was that these verses described a judgment after the tribulation to reward those non believers who helped Christians during the tribulation.




Matt 24 : 1 – 3 Jesus was answering His disciples questions they asked in verse 3. He answered them in the order that they were asked. The first question was concerning the temple being torn down. The second question concerned His return. The last question was concerning the end of the world.




Rev 20 : 7 – 14 the white throne judgment is at the end of this world immediately after the millennium. This is the final judgment of all non believers. Some of those judged during this white throne judgment are people from the tribulation. Some of them may have indeed aided Christians of the tribulation. But people of the tribulation do not enter into the millennium based upon how they treated Christians.




The people that enter into the millennium are those who are not of legal age. Num 14:29-31 and Dt1:37- 39 seem to indicate that people under the age of 20 are not held responsible for sins they commit. They will be around after the tribulation. Maybe all people that were not in the armies of the world plus those too young will enter into the millennium. Either way those who have helped the Christians or Jews will not face judgment until after the millennium.

 

[felix]

The first step in humility is to admit that there is a God and you are not Him. That is Satan's mistake. Adam wanted to be God and it led to his downfall. When one believes Jn 3: 16 they have taken the first step toward humility. Ro 5 : 9 when one is in Christ they are justified. Only because they have the righteousness of Christ. Matt 11: 29 Christ was humble. If He was not then we do not meet the level of humility need to be righteous. Heb10 : 14 we do not need, for our eternal salvation, forgiveness for sins committed in Jesus. By one sacrifice He has, as far as the Father is concerned, sanctified us completely even while we are being sanctified. 1Jn 1: 8 we know that we sin but that is not counted as long as we are in Jesus. 1 Jn 1: 9 we have to confess those sins only for temporal reasons. 1Jn 1: 10 if we claim ( after being inHim) that we are sin free ( therefore we don't need Jesus) His word (Jn 1: 1) is not in us and we have lost salvation. Ro 8: 9 if we don't have the Spirit of Jesus in us we are not His. As long as we have His spirit we are His. Ro 10 : 13 everyone that calls on Jesus to save them are saved. 2 Tim 2 :13 as long as we are calling on Jesus to save us He cannot deny us and we are saved.




Now back to Jn 15 : 2.
1 Tim 6 : 4 –5 and 2 Tim 2 : 14 I do not argue words as that is how people justify false doctrines. As far as I know this is the only warning concerning the way people justify false doctrines outside of denying Jesus. We have plenty of warning about people teaching false doctrines. But we are specifically warned about arguing words 2 times. Please read the verses that I cited as to why I do not argue words. I do not claim that you match the person described. I am simply saying I think your doctrine is wrong and this is one of my points to prove my claim. Doctrines are wrong if they cannot be proven without changing words.




Look it up to see if I am right about this. The same word take away can also mean bear up, carry or lift up. But in verse Jn 15 :6 he is cast out. The same word there can mean throw down. The things I believe I justify with the Bibles God has given me and not by changing the meanings of words in those bibles. I also do not go withone bible that states what I want to hear but go with the majority.




Acts 10 : 22 Cornelius was a man who feared God. That means he believed in the God of the Jews but had not taken the steps to become a Jew. He was uncircumcised. Acts 10 : 47 he baptized them without insisting that they be circumcised. Peter never said gentiles had to be circumcised or obey the law to besaved.

You should learn to back your statements from Scripture or gospels or teachings of apostles / disciples.

You said: "The first step in humility is to admit that there is a God and you are not Him. That is Satan's mistake. Adam wanted to be God and it led to his downfall."

(James 2:19) You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble!

Neither Satan nor Eve (that's not Adam) wanted to be God but to be "like God".

Just because demons believe in one God and they are not God, if this is humility, then what is the difference between your's and a demon's faith?

Don't have the guts to admit your falsehood even after the simple words spoken by Christ in John 15:2 ? Looks like you haven't even addressed it and replied an utterly unrelated nonsense.
Have foundation in Christ and then build over it using other's teachings, then you will not error.