The Yahweh Name

[Omniskeptical]

1. There's nothing unusual about a theology that agrees with the Bible.
2. There are MANY gospels in the Bible, not just two.

Blaspheme will get you nowhere. Jesus did NOT partake of any fallen nature.

Nope. MANY gospels not two or one.

A 4-fold gospel including Acts as 2nd Luke. It's in Jesus' Revelation to John being the creature with 4 faces.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Lon,

Er, no. That is derivative, deductive theology (and denomination). You will never, ever (period) find "Jesus, son of Adam."

Nice to hear from you again. I understand that both of these are speaking primarily about Jesus.
Psalm 8:4 (KJV): What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man (S#120 Adam), that thou visitest him?
Psalm 80:17 (KJV): Let thy hand be upon the man (S#376 ish) of thy right hand, upon the son of man (S#120 Adam) whom thou madest strong for thyself.

1 Corinthians 15:47 Sadly, you Christadelphians don't know your Bible, JUST what you want to believe.

Jesus is a man, even now 1 Timothy 2:5.

How many times have you read through your Bible, Trevor? Even once? It shows.

Actually most Christadelphians have a reading chart, reading the OT once a year, and the NT twice a year. I am a poor example as I take three years to cover the reading chart.

Philippians 2:4-11; 6 Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;

I prefer the KJV translation, and consider this passage is speaking about the humble disposition of Christ's mind before and during his ministry.

Problems with Christadelphians (a little primer on this oddity of the cult world):
1) There aren't even 100k of them :noway: There aren't even 70k of them!

I am not interested in numbers, but very interested in what is the true Gospel.

2) Jesus came back in 1866 and the RC was destroyed (yeah, didn't happen).

Yes, too much emphasis was put on this time period. The RCC did lose its temporal power shortly after this. I like the 2300 year time period, BC 334-333 to AD 1967, but this is off topic.

3) Like many cults, these deny a need for a Savior. The Lord Jesus Christ just 'set an example' as 'just a man.' From reading their Bible? Not a chance.

Jesus is our Saviour, and he is our example as well, but he is not 'just a man', he is the Son of God Matthew 1:20-21, Luke 1:34-35, John 1:14.

They don't believe, for instance, that Satan is a real being nor that he literally tempted Adam and Eve

We believe that the Serpent tempted Adam and Eve Genesis 3:1-5.

Summary: Small 'prediction' making oddball fringe with little in the way of actual scripture knowledge who even Australian Christians call 'nonChristian cultists' with poor theology.

I appreciate your assessment.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Right Divider]

A 4-fold gospel including Acts as 2nd Luke. It's in Jesus' Revelation to John being the creature with 4 faces.

 

[Right Divider]

Jesus is a man, even now 1 Timothy 2:5.

Jesus is God even now. Jesus was God from the beginning.

John 1:1 & 1:14
(1:1) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
(1:14) And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Jesus is God in the flesh.

Col 2:9
(2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

 

[Lon]

Greetings again Lon,

Nice to hear from you again. I understand that both of these are speaking primarily about Jesus.
Psalm 8:4 (KJV): What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man (S#120 Adam), that thou visitest him?
Psalm 80:17 (KJV): Let thy hand be upon the man (S#376 ish) of thy right hand, upon the son of man (S#120 Adam) whom thou madest strong for thyself.

To the incredibly small ignorance of scriptures already given.

Jesus is a man, even now 1 Timothy 2:5.

Your ignorance is showing: "Manfaced" Wish you weren't stuck in English arrogance and subpar translation.... :sigh: You literally have to follow whoever is the smarter guru, having no such education and background. It is a shame you picked the 64thousand Australian oddballs to follow, Trevor. I REALLY wish you'd not be slighted, but recognize your betters, in an 'intelligent AND smart' manner, Trevor.

Actually most Christadelphians have a reading chart, reading the OT once a year, and the NT twice a year. I am a poor example as I take three years to cover the reading chart.

Good to hear. Now listen to one who can read and understand the original language instead of listening to the scant 64 thousand who are fully stuck in English. Let me ask you a question: Do you find it incredibly odd, that almost every cult is started by English speakers with absolutely no understanding or education in Greek or Hebrew? I do. I find it audacious and incredibly ignorant, arrogant, and self-serving. I wholly believe if God communicates further with us, it won't be with English and it will be with Actual prophets (two witnessesses that will be killed and God will raise up for ALL to see, not just 64k cultists). Point? THINK, Trevor! Actually use your brain! God very God gave it to you!

I prefer the KJV translation,

And I, of course, prefer the original language KNOWING where English has shortcomings, literally something you cannot do at this present time. YOU are the one with deficiency in this conversation, Trevor. Why not actually humble yourself and actually learn something? Does 'face of a man' ring an important bell for you? Or do you just want to hang with Christadelphians, whom you love but have given rights over your brain to? When it literally becomes "Christ or men" which will TrevorL follow? YOUR choice.

and consider this passage is speaking about the humble disposition of Christ's mind before and during his ministry.

I know, literally, because you are ignorant. Literally. It literally says He was God and that He believed He was 'equal/was God.' LIterally. You cannot read 'literally,' Trevor.

I am not interested in numbers, but very interested in what is the true Gospel.

Sad, when YOUR man-made god can only reach 65 thousand. YOUR god is a complete failure and ignorant and arrogant to boot. Not so the Christian God. Not at all. He reaches billions and saves from among all who hear. Too bad you are not interested in HIS numbers, Trevor, just your little oddball 64thousand.

Yes, too much emphasis was put on this time period. The RCC did lose its temporal power shortly after this. I like the 2300 year time period, BC 334-333 to AD 1967, but this is off topic.

Er, not when you just said 'yes' meaning "true." It is spot on, because it means Christadelphians are untrustworthy in every conversation.

Jesus is our Saviour, and he is our example as well, but he is not 'just a man', he is the Son of God Matthew 1:20-21, Luke 1:34-35, John 1:14.

Because of the independent nature of Christadelphians, it may be that your particular is at odds with the full teaching of the whole. So...way less than even 64k your god is able to reach then?

We believe that the Serpent tempted Adam and Eve Genesis 3:1-5.

I appreciate your assessment.

Kind regards
Trevor

I hope so. There is a problem with following ignorance. We need to listen to our betters (mine too) and what they have to say lest we have a hope in complete ignorance. We are saved by faith, thus our ignorance is importantly covered, but it is not an excuse to persist in ignorance. I'm glad you are reading your Bible every 3 years. It'll help you become more astute. -Lon

 

[oatmeal]

No, He was not. Jesus is and was always God.

The Father was greater in position and not in being.

In your opinion, I am sure you believe so.

However, it is clear that Jesus is not God the Son, but the son of God, this is made very clear from scripture

The Father is greater than the son because the Father is God, Jesus is the son of God.

 

[oatmeal]

Problems with Christadelphians (a little primer on this oddity of the cult world):

1) There aren't even 100k of them :noway: There aren't even 70k of them!
2) Jesus came back in 1866 and the RC was destroyed (yeah, didn't happen).
3) Like many cults, these deny a need for a Savior. The Lord Jesus Christ just 'set an example' as 'just a man.' From reading their Bible? Not a chance. They clearly don't read and don't know the Bible and regard it as nice advice rather than something to adhere to. They don't believe, for instance, that Satan is a real being nor that he literally tempted Adam and Eve nor even Jesus. :Z
4) The majority of Christadelphians are easily duped Australians (most of the ones in England have died out). Above link is from orthodox Christians from Australia, giving directions for dealing with their own 'inhouse' problem with these cult members.

Summary: Small 'prediction' making oddball fringe with little in the way of actual scripture knowledge who even Australian Christians call 'nonChristian cultists' with poor theology.

If numbers are the measure of truth, then Jesus must have been an abject failure, for there were only about 120 disciples in Acts 1

 

[oatmeal]

Greetings again oatmeal,

I believe that the Son of Man, Jesus, was made a little lower than the Angels Hebrews 2:9, Psalm 8:4-5.

Kind regards
Trevor

Ok,

I believe that mankind, including Jesus Christ was made a little lower than God.

 

[Right Divider]

In your opinion, I am sure you believe so.

However, it is clear that Jesus is not God the Son, but the son of God, this is made very clear from scripture

The Father is greater than the son because the Father is God, Jesus is the son of God.

Jesus is God.... always has been, always will be.

John 1:1 & 1:14
Col 2:9
John 17: 5

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Lon,

To the incredibly small ignorance of scriptures already given.

Another one of your colourful posts, but I do not detect much substance. As well as Psalm 8:4 and Psalm 80:17 which to me clearly answered your false claim, and which you did not discuss, please also consider John 8:28:
Psalm 8:4 (KJV): What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man (S#120 Adam), that thou visitest him?
Psalm 80:17 (KJV): Let thy hand be upon the man (S#376 ish) of thy right hand, upon the son of man (S#120 Adam) whom thou madest strong for thyself.
John 8:28 (KJV): Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
Please use your great language skills to explain how you understand the word "man" and "Son of Man" here in these three Scriptures in the OT and NT. I understand especially that Psalm 8 is telling us that Jesus is the specific descendant of Adam that will fulfill God's purpose in the Creation.

Your ignorance is showing: "Manfaced"

Again plenty of colour, but you have not discussed or answered 1 Timothy 2:5. Perhaps I should also add the following:
Acts 17:30–31 (KJV): 30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: 31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

Let me ask you a question: Do you find it incredibly odd, that almost every cult is started by English speakers with absolutely no understanding or education in Greek or Hebrew?

John Thomas was a thorough Biblical scholar and was very proficient at Hebrew and Greek. I have a copy of his translation of 2 Samuel 23:1-7, the last words of David, and some of the Psalms. In any of his expositions, he often discusses the meaning of the original Hebrew or Greek words, phrases and language in their context. Robert Roberts who mainly followed after as an expositor and editor of a major magazine may have had less Hebrew, but he certainly knew how to discuss the meaning of the Hebrew and Greek words when necessary. Again, plenty of colour, but no substance.

And I, of course, prefer the original language KNOWING where English has shortcomings, literally something you cannot do at this present time. ..... It literally says He was God and that He believed He was 'equal/was God.'

I was specifically speaking about the KJV "the form of God" compared with your possibly NIV "Who, being in very nature God". The error of this translation is evident because the same word is used for "the form of a servant", not the very nature of a servant. I believe the aspect of grasping equality (RV) speaks of the comparison of the humility and submission of Jesus by comparison to Adam and Eve who grasped the fruit and equality.

Sad, when YOUR man-made god can only reach 65 thousand. YOUR god is a complete failure and ignorant and arrogant to boot. Not so the Christian God. Not at all. He reaches billions and saves from among all who hear. Too bad you are not interested in HIS numbers, Trevor, just your little oddball 64thousand.

I would be interested in the so-called many that are saved as to how they would understand "the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ", and whether they have been baptised after they believed these "things".
Acts 8:5–6,12 (KJV): 5 Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them. 6 And the people with one accord gave heed unto those things which Philip spake, hearing and seeing the miracles which he did. 12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.

Er, not when you just said 'yes' meaning "true." It is spot on, because it means Christadelphians are untrustworthy in every conversation.

I notice that you did not indicate some interest in some of the time periods given in the Bible. Christadelphians were not disappointed with the events of 1870, and I believe that the fulfillment or part fulfillment of the 2300 evening-mornings in 1967 is very significant, and appears to be part of the reason for the present disturbances in Jerusalem. Again, how many of your so-called saved have any interest in these dates and time periods, or understand what events are prophesied to happen in order to establish the Kingdom of God upon the earth. Most of them only know heaven going at death.

Because of the independent nature of Christadelphians, it may be that your particular is at odds with the full teaching of the whole. So...way less than even 64k your god is able to reach then?

Obscure. All the Christadelphians that I have heard of believe the same Gospel and that Jesus is our Saviour. Matthew 1:20-21 clearly state this.

I hope so.

I doubt that you believe the same, that the Serpent was one of the creatures that God created on the sixth day and that this creature was subtle or crafty, and that it had the ability to speak.

We need to listen to our betters (mine too) and what they have to say lest we have a hope in complete ignorance.

Perhaps you are claiming superiority, especially in your language skills. I have not seen much substance in what you have stated.

We are saved by faith, thus our ignorance is importantly covered, but it is not an excuse to persist in ignorance.

I suggest that we are saved by faith of the true gospel, and therefore ignorance of some aspects or more is not salvation by faith, but faith in a non-entity.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again oatmeal,

Ok, I believe that mankind, including Jesus Christ was made a little lower than God.

Hebrews 2:5–9 (KJV): 5 For unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come, whereof we speak. 6 But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him? 7 Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands: 8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him. 9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.
Luke 20:34–36 (KJV): 34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage: 35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: 36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.
We will become equal unto the angels after the resurrection, not before.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Lon]

Greetings again Lon,

Another one of your colourful posts, but I do not detect much substance. As well as Psalm 8:4 and Psalm 80:17 which to me clearly answered your false claim, and which you did not discuss, please also consider John 8:28:

Trevor, Trevor, Trevor. Posturing without listening gets you nothing. You can go your happily, chosen, ignorant way. The rest of the millions and millions (hundreds of them) KNOW what you don't. You really think God came to an oddball little group and told only you something different, like every other cult out there? Seriously? Does that even sound rational in your own mind? No. No it does not.

Psalm 8:4 (KJV): What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man (S#120 Adam), that thou visitest him?
Psalm 80:17 (KJV): Let thy hand be upon the man (S#376 ish) of thy right hand, upon the son of man (S#120 Adam) whom thou madest strong for thyself.
John 8:28 (KJV): Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
Please use your great language skills to explain how you understand the word "man" and "Son of Man" here in these three Scriptures in the OT and NT. I understand especially that Psalm 8 is telling us that Jesus is the specific descendant of Adam that will fulfill God's purpose in the Creation.

Great language skills is not as important. You are simply doing 'confirmation bias' in comparing scriptures. YOU are. You were brought up that way. I rather gave you a verse. Not one to immediately run away to another oddball 'proof text' (means confirmation bias) when you haven't even discussed the first. You know something Trevor??? EVERY cult member I have ever talked to, does this. Every last one of them! Again, Trevor, CAN you think??? Are you even capable any more? One of the traits of the greatest command, is to love God with your WHOLE mind. Trevor, we have to be smart. We aren't supposed to be just happy with obscure little teaching. I realize you grew up in this. I did too (much bigger cult than yours, the United Methodist Church that lost its way and teaches heresy). I read my bible and realized where they were going off clear orthodox teaching from scripture. STUDY, Trevor!

Again plenty of colour, but you have not discussed or answered 1 Timothy 2:5. Perhaps I should also add the following:
Acts 17:30–31 (KJV): 30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: 31 Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

See? A cult ploy. You can't even stay in one text. It is called confirmation (trying desperately to prove something you believe WHETHER IT IS TRUE OR NOT). It is done by every cult. Every last one of them, Trevor. ALL of them. Do you even understand that?

John Thomas was a thorough Biblical scholar and was very proficient at Hebrew and Greek.

No he wasn't. I've had the classes and know he doesn't.

I have a copy of his translation of 2 Samuel 23:1-7, the last words of David, and some of the Psalms. In any of his expositions, he often discusses the meaning of the original Hebrew or Greek words, phrases and language in their context. Robert Roberts who mainly followed after as an expositor and editor of a major magazine may have had less Hebrew, but he certainly knew how to discuss the meaning of the Hebrew and Greek words when necessary. Again, plenty of colour, but no substance.

No, it isn't even color, Trevor, it is sludge. You are compensating and you know it. It is a lack.

I was specifically speaking about the KJV "the form of God" compared with your possibly NIV "Who, being in very nature God". The error of this translation is evident because the same word is used for "the form of a servant", not the very nature of a servant. I believe the aspect of grasping equality (RV) speaks of the comparison of the humility and submission of Jesus by comparison to Adam and Eve who grasped the fruit and equality.

It doesn't matter. Stuck in translation isn't 'knowing.' It is fodder for confirmation bias. It isn't 'reasonable' Trevor.

I would be interested in the so-called many that are saved as to how they would understand "the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ", and whether they have been baptised after they believed these "things".
Acts 8:5–6,12 (KJV): 5 Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them. 6 And the people with one accord gave heed unto those things which Philip spake, hearing and seeing the miracles which he did. 12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.

Again. Is it even 'reasonable?' Is it even rational to think this way, Trevor? You are literally thinking like a cult member. Its sad. My whole time here is not to be shaken, I know orthodoxy. My whole presence is in concern for you. You have been brainwashed.

I notice that you did not indicate some interest in some of the time periods given in the Bible. Christadelphians were not disappointed with the events of 1870, and I believe that the fulfillment or part fulfillment of the 2300 evening-mornings in 1967 is very significant, and appears to be part of the reason for the present disturbances in Jerusalem. Again, how many of your so-called saved have any interest in these dates and time periods, or understand what events are prophesied to happen in order to establish the Kingdom of God upon the earth. Most of them only know heaven going at death.

Of course, it is always this way with every cult member I've ever met. Always.

Obscure. All the Christadelphians that I have heard of believe the same Gospel and that Jesus is our Saviour. Matthew 1:20-21 clearly state this.

So you are challenging the data. How about this one? Google 'exChristadelphians.' Sadly most become atheists. I really wish I could get a hold of a few of them. Christianity is true. They are becoming atheists because of what Christadelphians did to them. It means, when they find they have been abused, brainwashed, and lied to, they are chucking the whole thing. That is an unforgivable damage, Trevor.

I doubt that you believe the same, that the Serpent was one of the creatures that God created on the sixth day and that this creature was subtle or crafty, and that it had the ability to speak.

Perhaps you are claiming superiority, especially in your language skills. I have not seen much substance in what you have stated.

Oddly, I've all kinds of positive marks on my posts. Do you even pay attention? Is it arrogance? No, mostly just education, Trevor. I'm educated, you are not. Simple, no?

I suggest that we are saved by faith of the true gospel, and therefore ignorance of some aspects or more is not salvation by faith, but faith in a non-entity.

Kind regards
Trevor

Well, another 'suggestion' from the Christadelphian handbook. My suggestion: Quit being a Christadelphian commercial. Become a 'Christ-honor' commercial.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Lon,

The rest of the millions and millions (hundreds of them) KNOW what you don't.

Nothing of substance in your latest post. You reject some aspects of the United Methodist Church. Do you support the millions of Roman Catholics? Out of the many millions that you endorse, how would they define "the kingdom of God" Acts 8:12?

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Lon]

Greetings again Lon,

Nothing of substance in your latest post.

Doesn't matter. You've rejected ANY discussion with men and women smarter than your mere 60k. In the end, it is literally that odd little Australian, wholly audacious number that is entirely of 'no substance whatsover.' Go ahead and keep posturing, Trevor. I personally see it as wickedness. Your's? In as much as you embrace uncritically, warped Christianity.

You reject some aspects of the United Methodist Church. Do you support the millions of Roman Catholics?

Unlike you, yeah. I support most of what they teach. Unlike you, yes also to the Methodists. It is more their policy than their 'theology.' They still have right from wrong on their books. So, then, let's revisit "Christadelphians:" Yep, I reject not so much policy as actually teaching unorthodox oddities. Big difference, no? THINK, Trevor!

Out of the many millions that you endorse, how would they define "the kingdom of God" Acts 8:12?

Kind regards
Trevor

YOU should look up what they actually believe. At BEST you'd be a wild-olive branch, grafted in. Hardly the first-choice let alone only 60 thousand Australians, for truth. THINK, Trevor! THINK! Use your brain!

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Lon,

Unlike you, yeah. I support most of what they teach.

One of my brethren speaks about how, when his mother was widowed at an early age and she was destitute, that the only contact that she had from the RCC was when her priest came around to demand money to help get her husband out of purgatory.

YOU should look up what they actually believe.

I personally would start with Daniel 2:44 and discuss the four world empires and then the return of Jesus to replace these kingdoms with the Kingdom of God upon the earth. I am not sure that you and your many millions including the Catholics would agree with this assessment of the anticipated near return of Jesus (partly because you do not agree with my pet understanding of the 2300 years and other prophecies about the return of the Jews to the Holy Land) and what he will accomplish.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Lon]

Greetings again Lon,

One of my brethren speaks about how, when his mother was widowed at an early age and she was destitute, that the only contact that she had from the RCC was when her priest came around to demand money to help get her husband out of purgatory.

You are yet confusing people with doctrine. We were talking about doctrine.

I personally would start with Daniel 2:44 and discuss the four world empires and then the return of Jesus to replace these kingdoms with the Kingdom of God upon the earth. I am not sure that you and your many millions including the Catholics would agree with this assessment of the anticipated near return of Jesus (partly because you do not agree with my pet understanding of the 2300 years and other prophecies about the return of the Jews to the Holy Land) and what he will accomplish.

Kind regards
Trevor

It is all reading into it. Feeling-centered guesses.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Lon,

You are yet confusing people with doctrine. We were talking about doctrine.

I was also speaking about doctrine. Christadelphians reject heaven going at death, immortal souls and purgatory. One of my Italian brothers stated that the RCC required that the relatives pay for one or more Masses to help get his relative who died recently out of purgatory. You seem to tolerate purgatory.

It is all reading into it. Feeling-centered guesses.

Christadelphians strongly accept this view of Daniel 2:44. Soon after John Thomas' introduction to the Campbellites, Alexander Campbell imposed on John Thomas to preach for the first time, and he spoke on the prophecy of Daniel 2. Christadelphians are also very strongly advocate the promise concerning Eve and her descendant, and the promises to Abraham and David. We consider these as essential parts of the Gospel. Our latest Sunday night lecture was on the promises to David.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Lon]

Greetings again Lon,

I was also speaking about doctrine.

Nope.

Christadelphians reject heaven going at death, immortal souls and purgatory. One of my Italian brothers stated that the RCC required that the relatives pay for one or more Masses to help get his relative who died recently out of purgatory. You seem to tolerate purgatory.

No. That is 'policy' not to be confused with 'theology.' Do I disagree with Catholics? Yes, but I don't confuse the two.

Christadelphians strongly accept this view of Daniel 2:44. Soon after John Thomas' introduction to the Campbellites, Alexander Campbell imposed on John Thomas to preach for the first time, and he spoke on the prophecy of Daniel 2.

I realize that. I'm not charismatic either. Sensationalism isn't rational. David danced in his underwear, but it shouldn't become a doctrine that everyone 'filled' should be dancing in their underwear. One is a story, the other a confusion over THE WHOLE POINT of the story. Anybody dancing in their underwear 'because David did' doesn't understand scripture at all.

Christadelphians are also very strongly advocate the promise concerning Eve and her descendant, and the promises to Abraham and David.

You aren't a Jew. You are a wild olive grafted in. Listen a second: EVERY cult I know of confuses themselves with Israel instead of recognizing that we gentiles are wild olive branches. We are NOT the avenue for new revelation and we are oddly arrogant to think so. We are the 'gentile dogs' Jesus talked about and it wasn't right that we should get but table scraps. It is true 'there is neither Jew nor Greek' at present, but Paul gives sound warning that we are the 'wild' ones.

We consider these as essential parts of the Gospel. Our latest Sunday night lecture was on the promises to David.

Kind regards
Trevor

Which is Judaism, not a gospel message. Every (every, Trevor) cult confuses the two. Every last one, Trevor. I don't want you to end up an atheist. I want you to end up making a commitment (like I did) to follow Jesus alone and forget any doctrine that doesn't leave you in His hands.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Lon,

Which is Judaism, not a gospel message.

I am very convinced of our view of Daniel 2:44 and also the sure mercies of David.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[Lon]

Greetings again Lon,

I am very convinced of our view of Daniel 2:44 and also the sure mercies of David.

Kind regards
Trevor

It isn't that God's promises are void to Jews, that wasn't my point. My point is that you, a wild olive branch, have to be careful not to read the cultured, loved, olive trees' mail. You and I are grafted into something different and our promises are found largely in Paul's writings --the Apostle TO the gentiles, which unavoidably, you and I are. It is impossible, literally, to escape that. On this Mid Acts Theology is correct: we HAD to have an apostle dedicated just to us or it wouldn't have happened. We'd just be "Jews" like almost every cult thinks. It isn't possible. It doesn't make sense that we'd need our own Apostle unless there was a difference. Mid Acts, btw, do not think that there is a different gospel today. They believe, like I and most of Christianity, that there is only one gospel. Knowing that has helped bridge the gap.