RISE OF THE CULTS: WHERE DID ALL THESE STRANGE AMERICAN RELIGIOUS SECTS COME FROM? 

A free written transcript of this message is available at media-cloud.sermonaudio.com/text/3917175372.pdf. Free written transcripts of this message are available in 20 languages at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=3917175372. See our playlist called "Dealing with "Church of Christ" at ru-vid.com/group/PLBD55090718DA6D3D with 90 videos. Books about Campbellism & its history go to www.pilgrimpublications.com. Have you ever wondered where many pseudo-Christian American cults such as Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Christadelphians, Seventh-day Adventists, Christian Scientists, the Unity School of Christianity and others have come from? Most people have never really stopped to ask that question. Larry Wessels, director of Christian Answers of Austin, Texas/ Christian Debater (RU-vid channel CANSWERSTV at ru-vid.com; see websites: www.BIBLEQUERY.ORG, www.HISTORYCART.COM & www.MUSLIMHOPE.COM) tackles this very seldom asked question & the answer he gives may surprise you. The Protestant Reformer Martin Luther once said, "My dear pope, I will kiss your feet and acknowledge you as supreme bishop if you will worship my Christ and grant that through His death and resurrection, not through keeping your traditions, we have forgiveness of sins & eternal life. If you will yield on this point, I shall not take away your crown & power; if not, I shall constantly cry out that you are the Antichrist, and I shall testify that your whole CULT & religion are not only a denial of God, but also the height of blasphemy against God and is idolatry. - ("What Luther Says", II:1069). It is obvious from Luther's definition of CULT he means a religious group that is "a denial of God," "a blasphemy," & is considered "idolatry." Cult expert & author Walter Martin defined "cult" as "a group of people gathered about a specific person or person's misinterpretation of the Bible." Authors John Ankerberg & John Weldon define "cult" as "a religious group having Biblically unorthodox and/or heretical teachings & which may fail to meet basic ethical standards of Christian doctrine & practice." Author Bob L. Ross (one of world's leading publishers of the works of Charles Haddon Spurgeon) defines "cult" as "a counterfeit of the true faith of the Bible." The shortest definition of the word cult is "organized heresy." It is interesting to note that the American "cults" began in the 1800s (Mormonism - 1830, Christadelphianism - 1848, Seventh-day Adventism - 1861, Jehovah's Witnesses - 1879, Christian Science - 1879, Unity School of Christianity - 1895) but why? What happened to cause all these sects to suddenly appear on the face of the earth? The answer is Campbellism which began in 1823. Campbellism (also know as Restorationism) is the theological "mother" spawning all these groups. The religious movement known as "Campbellism" (Restorationism) and adhered to by groups known as "Church of Christ," "Christian Church," and "Disciples of Christ," had its beginning primarily through the influence of two immigrants from Ireland. Thomas Campbell, the father, and Alexander Campbell (referred to by followers as the "Master Spirit"), the son, rebelled against Presbyterianism and ultimately created the Campbellite movement after coming to America in the early 1800s. To make a long story short, these two "Restorers of the Ancient Gospel" (as they were called by their followers) were joined by two other "Restorers" named Walter Scott and Barton W. Stone who discovered that the gospel message in the Bible had been lost & now they were going to restore it (Walter Scott actually claimed to have restored the gospel when he baptized a Baptist named William Amend on November 18, 1827). Utilizing a Campbellite interpretation of baptism verses found throughout the Bible (Acts 2:38, etc.) the "Restoration" of the lost gospel was water baptism "in order to the remission of sins;" i.e. water baptism (plus other obediences) was essential for salvation. Therefore, the Campbellite "Restorationist Plan of Salvation" meant an adherent had to do the following to be saved: hear + believe + repent + confess + be water baptized by immersion + local congregation + Lord's supper + giving on first day + non-instrumental singing + prayer + benevolence + bible study + no creed + bible name + second law of pardon + obedience to elders + good morals + no Christians in other denominations + scriptural marriage (if married) + no indwelling of the believer by the Holy Spirit, only in the Word + believe whatever the evangelists preach as the Word of God. From this Campbellite religion then came its influence on the birth of other American cults such as Mormonism (Sidney Rigdon, for instance, a close associate of the "Restorers" left the Campbellite organization & joined up with Joseph Smith, Jr. to help begin the Mormon religion). The links between Campbellism & the various cults go on & on.

Great video I came out of a cult 10 years ago that sprang up from the Revivalist era in America, best thing I ever did. Now I understand the whole plan of God, the revelation of His Son and His deity and the reality of satan. I have a wonderful relationship with my God and am waiting for Messiah with hope and love. I pray for all those who are astray from Bible teaching.

Satan's as well as the Campbellite "Church of Christ's" favorite Bible verse is Acts 2:38. "Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" (Acts 2:38). The previous verse of scripture is a favorite among many religious groups. The problem is that Acts 2:38 isn't the only verse in the Bible which deals with salvation. While many claim to "speak where the scriptures speak and remain silent where the scriptures are silent," they practically ignore most of the New Testament teaching on salvation. The only verses that such false teachers quote and reference are the ones they feel they can use to promote their "water gospel." The fact is that most of what the New Testament says about salvation doesn't include baptism at all! (John 5:24, John 11:25-26, John 14:6, Romans 4:5, Romans 10:9-13, Eph. 2:8-9, etc.), and the few places that do mention water baptism do not include it as part of one's salvation. Water baptism follows salvation as one of the first steps of obedience for the new believer. In spite of this obvious truth, the cultists remain steadfast in their heresy, insisting that Acts 2:38 sets forth water baptism as a requirement for salvation. Thus, this verse of scripture has become Satan's favorite Bible verse. In fact, many are trusting water baptism alone for the salvation of their souls! Indeed, Satan has deceived multitudes by his perversion of Acts 2:38. Rather than ignore Acts 2:38 by quoting "our favorite verses" instead, it is more appropriate to face this popular verse of scripture and see if the cultists are right in what they claim it teaches. The Truth about Acts 2:38 First, please notice that verse 38 isn't the only verse in Acts 2. In Peter's message, a great deal was said before verse 38 came out of his mouth. In fact, he even told his listeners how to be saved before verse 38! In Acts 2:21, Peter quotes from Joel 2 and says, "And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved." His words preceding verse 38 were so convicting that his listeners were "pricked in their heart" in verse 37. So, to use verse 38 out of its context causes a misrepresentation of God's word. The verse does not stand alone, and, in fact, a totally different meaning is conveyed when one makes it stand alone. Another error that many make with Acts 2:38 is the error of assumption. It is assumed that the word "for" must mean "in order to get." That is, being baptized "for" the remission of sins supposedly means to be baptized "in order to get" remission of sins. However, a closer look at the scriptures will reveal that this isn't the case at all. Notice Luke 5:12-14: "And it came to pass, when he was in a certain city, behold a man full of leprosy: who seeing Jesus fell on his face, and besought him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean. And he put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will: be thou clean. And immediately the leprosy departed from him. And he charged him to tell no man: but go, and shew thyself to the priest, and offer for thy cleansing, according as Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them." Jesus made this man clean in verse 13, yet in the next verse, verse 14, Jesus tells him to go offer a sacrifice "for thy cleansing" as a "testimony." Here the word "for" cannot mean "in order to get" because he had already gotten his cleansing in verse 13! It obviously meant "because of" his cleansing. If a man goes to jail "for stealing," then he goes there "because of" the stealing that he's already done, not "in order to get" a chance to steal again. Some like to argue that the Greek word "eis" means "in order to," but this isn't always the case. Jesus said in Matthew 12:41, "The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at (eis) the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here." The Greek word for "at" is "eis." Does this mean that the men of Nineveh repented "in order to get" the preaching of Jonah? No, they repented "because of" the preaching of Jonah. So, even "the Greek" doesn't demand the popular interpretation of Acts 2:38. The word "for" can be used different ways, not just one, so it is wrong to assume that it must mean "in order to get" in Acts 2:38. Another factor which is commonly ignored is the JEWISH factor. Every person in Acts 2 is a Mosaic law observing Old Testament Jew. In fact, they are all gathered together to observe a JEWISH FEAST called Pentecost (verse 1). A fair reading of the whole chapter (especially verses 4, 14, and 36) will clearly reveal that no Gentiles (non Jews) are present. Since this involves Jews, it involves a NATION (verse 36!!), not individuals. No one asked, "What must I do to be saved?" The question asked concerned the NATION of Israel: "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" (verse 37) Not, "What shall I do," but rather, "What shall WE do?" Acts 2 presents a NATION of people who come to realize that they have murdered their blessed Messiah and they're asking what THEY must do. It's a question concerning NATIONAL salvation. Isaiah 66:8 says, ". . . shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children." The "nation" is Israel! Romans 11:26 says, "And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob." Acts 2:38 is dealing with NATIONAL salvation. The Messianic Kingdom is still available to the Jews (until Acts 7:60 when they kill Stephen), so national salvation remains an issue until then. This is clear from what follows Acts 7. In Acts 8, an individual from Africa is saved (before baptism). In Acts 9, an individual from Asia is saved (before baptism). In Acts 10, an individual from Europe is saved (before baptism). Why didn't these individual conversions occur before Acts 7? Because the first seven chapter of Acts deal with Israel (1:6-8; 2:36; 3:12; 4:8-10; 5:31; 6:7-14; 7:1-60). The question of INDIVIDUAL salvation is asked and answered in Acts 16:30-31: ". . . Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house." Those who fail to make this distinction are guilty of violating II Timothy 2:15 where we are told to RIGHTLY DIVIDE the word of truth. The Bible says the gospel is to go to the Jew FIRST (Rom. 1:16), so they are the FIRST to receive the gospel in the book of Acts (chapter 2), but they are not the last to receive it. Acts doesn't end with chapter 2, so we should be cautious of anyone who develops their doctrine in Acts 2 while practically ignoring the next 26 chapters! If God didn't stop in Acts 2, then why does anyone else? Could it be that the later chapters in Acts contain information which the cultists want hidden from us? Could it be that there are other scriptures in Acts which do not agree with the wording of Acts 2:38? Could it be that Peter himself, the one preaching in Acts 2:38, says something different when speaking to individual Gentiles like you and me? One only has to read Acts chapter 10 to get the answer. Peter is preaching again in Acts 10, except only to individual Gentiles, and something very interesting occurs. In Acts 2:38, the Holy Ghost was promised to be given to the converts AFTER they were baptized, yet in Acts 10:44 the Holy Ghost falls upon the Gentiles BEFORE they are baptized! Now, Paul tells us in Romans 8:9, " . . .if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." Having God's Spirit is synonymous with belonging to God or being saved (John 3:6-8), so the Gentiles in Acts 10 were saved BEFORE they were baptized in water. Why don't the Acts 2:38 cultists ever point this out? Answer: It destroys their perverted doctrine that water baptism is essential for salvation. The fact is that Acts 2:38 is NOT the "model" plan of salvation, nor are any of the other "water verses" which the cultists use. Only by taking such verses out of their context can one teach such heresy. All of the Bible is true, not just the favorite "proof texts" of the cults. Baptism saves no one. It only serves as a testimonial picture of the death, the burial, and the resurrection of Jesus Christ AFTER one has believed on Christ (Acts 8:36-38). Paul said in I Corinthians 1:17 that ". . . Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect." This "gospel" is defined by Paul in I Corinthians 15:1-4, and it does NOT include water baptism. The dying thief was not baptized, yet Jesus saved him (Luke 23:42-43), and John wrote that we are washed in the BLOOD of Christ (Rev. 1:5), not in the water. In fact, the saints in Heaven claim to have gotten there by the blood of Jesus (Rev. 5:9), not by water. By faith in the blood of Jesus Christ one is saved (Rom. 3:25). Water baptism only follows this faith as an outward step of obedience. Friend, if you have fallen for the water gospel, why not repent of your sin and trust Jesus Christ alone? Acts 10:43 says, "To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins." Why not believe on Christ 100% right now and quit trusting something you DO for salvation? "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." (Rom. 5:1) Ephesians 2:8-9 says, "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." For more see our playlist "Dealing with "Saved by Works & Baptism", "Church of Christ"" with 76 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLBD55090718DA6D3D. Titus 1:9-16

I am so glad Christ is our rest from the law. Matthew 11:28-30.

@lumeriam Thanks for explaining yourself. From your position it's easy to understand what you're talking about as long as one has a limited understanding of the Bible. The problem is found on three fronts: 1) most people are generally ignorant of the Bible, 2) people distort & misuse the Bible, 3) hypocrisy is rampant in religious organizations & the uneducated public notices this even if they do not have an understanding of theology (see Jesus' comments in Matthew 23, is He "brow beating"?).

@ThreeX Thanks for the kind comment. Currently, since RU-vid, after all of these years, is finally letting us put our full length videos up (instead of 10 minute clips we were restricted to before) we have been actively uploading as many of our shows as possible. We have hundreds of hours of television & radio shows we've produced over the last 26 years on all types of subjects. An easy way to find these shows is to either type LARRY WESSELS in the RU-vid search box or CANSWERSTV. Blessings.

Someone asked, "I looked on page 71 of "Desire of the Ages and there is no mention of Jesus having older brothers. I have been an sda for 9 years and have never heard that before." When reading Desire of Ages, on page 62 or 87 depending which version one has, in the 10th paragraph of chapter 9 "Days of Conflict", Ellen G White states, "All this displeased His brothers. Being older than Jesus, they felt that He should be under their dictation." The Desire of Ages Bible Additions & Contradictions - 1. EGW: Jesus had older brothers “All this displeased his brothers. Being older than Jesus, they felt that He should be under their dictation. They charged Him for setting Himself above their teachers and the priests and rulers of the people. Often they threatened and tried to intimidate Him; but He passed on, making the Scriptures His guide.” DA, p. 87. Not biblical: The Bible does not tell us Jesus had "older brothers" nor any of the other statements attributed to them as claimed by Ellen G. White. Matt 12:46-47 (NIV): While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.” How do Protestant Christians view Jesus' brothers? "Nevertheless, some writings in the early centuries raised questions about the brothers to protect their developing doctrine of Mary’s perpetual virginity. One of them, often called the Gospel of James, tells the life story of Mary, using much fanciful material. It claims that Jesus’ brothers were the sons of Joseph by an earlier marriage. This is the view of the Greek Orthodox Church. Later a famous scholar, Jerome, argued that Jesus’ brothers were really his cousins because their mother was Mary of Cleophas and the sister of Mary the mother of Jesus (see John 19:25). This is the view of the Roman Catholic Church, but Protestant scholars prefer the traditional view of the Gospels. Jesus was born of the virgin Mary. Mary and Joseph then had four sons in the way all humans normally do." Holman Bible Dictionary, by W. J. Fallis. 2. EGW: Jesus’ brothers sided with the Rabbis "His brothers, as the sons of Joseph were called, sided with the rabbis. They insisted that the traditions must be heeded, as if they were the requirements of God. They even regarded the precepts of men more highly than the word of God, and they were greatly annoyed at the clear penetration of Jesus in distinguishing between the false and the true. His strict obedience to the law of God they condemned as stubbornness." DA, p. 86. Not biblical: There is not one word in Holy Scriptures that tells us anything about the brothers of Jesus siding with the rabbis, nor do we ever find the brothers condemning Jesus about anything as charged by Ellen G. White. 3. EGW: Jesus, an irritation to his brothers "The example of Jesus was to them a continual irritation." DA, p. 88. Not biblical: Where in the Bible do we find that Jesus was a continual irritation to his brothers? 4. EGW: Jesus charged with cowardice "Often He was accused of cowardice for refusing to unite with them (his brothers) in some forbidden act;" DA, p. 89. Not biblical: Did Jesus' brothers really try to get Jesus to commit a forbidden act? Please give the Bible text. 5. EGW: Jesus brothers were spiteful towards Jesus "Again and again He was asked, why do you submit to such despiteful usage, even from your brothers?" DA, p. 89. Not biblical: Where does the Bible tell us Jesus' brothers were ever spiteful towards Him? 6. EGW: Priests and teachers wanted Mary to control Jesus "When the priests and teachers required Mary's aid in controlling Jesus, she was greatly troubled; At times she wavered between Jesus and His brothers," DA, p. 90. "They decided that He must be persuaded or constrained to cease their manner of labor, and they induced Mary to unite with them, thinking that through His love for her they might prevail upon Him to be more prudent." DA, p. 321. Not biblical: Would someone supply the Bible text where the priests and teachers wanted Mary to control Jesus, where Mary wavered between Jesus and His brothers and uniting with the brothers? 7. EGW: Judas chose himself "While Jesus was preparing the disciples for their ordination, one who had not been summoned urged his presence among them. It was Judas Iscariot, a man who professed to be a follower of Christ. He now came forward soliciting a place in this inner circle of disciples. ... He hoped to experience this through connecting himself with Jesus" DA, pp. 293, 717. Not biblical: The Bible truth is that JESUS CHOSE JUDAS. "When morning came, he called his disciples to him and chose twelve of them ... Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor. ... Then Jesus replied, 'Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? ... You did not chose me, but I chose you" Luke 6:13-16; John 6:70; 15:16 (NIV). 8. EGW: Judas had a conviction to confess his sin "When the Saviour’s hands were bathing those soiled feet, and wiping them with the towel, the heart of Judas thrilled through and through with the impulse then and there to confess his sin." DA, p. 645. Not biblical: There is no Bible record of Judas having an impulse to confess his sin at the foot-washing. 9. EGW: Judas did not have a conviction to confess "As Christ celebrated this ordinance with His disciples, conviction came to the hearts of all save Judas." Evangelism p. 275. Note: Did Judas have a conviction to confess his sin, or did he not have this conviction? Which EGW statement came from God? Ellen's inspired writings are very difficult to keep up with as she often contradicts herself as well as God. 10. EGW: Dogs eat Judas' body His weight had broken the cord by which he had hanged himself to the tree. In falling, his body had been horribly mangled, and dogs were now devouring it. His remains were immediately buried out of sight;" DA, p. 722. Not biblical:There is no Bible record of dogs eating Judas. Acts 1:18 (NIV) With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. 11. EGW: Jesus' bones broken during His crucifixion "The mother of Jesus was agonized, almost beyond endurance, and as they stretched Jesus upon the cross, and were about to fasten his hands with the cruel nails to the wooden arms, the disciples bore the mother of Jesus from the scene, that she might not hear the crashing of the nails as they were driven through the bone and muscle of his tender hands and feet" Spiritual Gifts, vol. 1, p. 58. Not biblical: The Bible tells us, John 19:25, 36 (NIV) These things happened so that the scriptures would be fulfilled: 'Not one of his bones will be broken' 12. EGW: Omits broken bones mistake 40 years later "His hands stretched upon the cross; the hammer and the nails were brought, and as the spikes were driven through the tender flesh, ..." DA, p. 744. Note: EGW compiled the Desire of Ages, 40 years after she first wrote that as the nails were driven through his "bone and muscle," she changed her account to read: the nails were driven through the tender flesh. 13. EGW: Jesus could not see through the portals of the tomb "The Saviour could not see through the portals of the tomb. Hope did not present to Him His coming forth from the grave a conqueror, or tell Him of the Father’s acceptance of the sacrifice" DA, p. 753. Not biblical: Jesus told his followers what would happen after his death; He would rise up after three days. Jesus also told Caiaphas, "In the future" he would return. Who is telling the truth, Jesus or EGW? The Bible tells us that Jesus could see through the portals of the tomb from the following texts: Luke 24:7 (NIV) 7‘The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.’ John 2:19 (NIV) 19Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.” John 10:17 - 18 (NIV) 17The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life-only to take it up again. 18No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.” Matt 26:64 (NIV) 64“Yes, it is as you say,” Jesus replied. “But I say to all of you: In the future you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” 14. EGW: The sister of Martha and Lazarus, was Mary Magdalen-she was led into sin by Simon The Feast At Simons’ House. "Simon had led into sin the woman he now despised. "It was Mary who poured upon His head the precious anointing oil, and bathed His feet with her tears. Mary was first at the tomb after the resurrection." DA, p. 566,568. Not biblical: The Bible never identifies Mary, LAZARUS' sister as Mary Magdalene, nor is it ever suggested from the Bible that Simon led Mary into sin and despised her. EGW in the DA does not say this Mary was Mary Magdalene, but does identify Mary as "was first at the tomb". The Bible tells us it was Mary Magdalene who was first at the tomb: Mark 16:9 (NIV) When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons. 15. EGW: Man healed on the Sabbath, forgot it was Sabbath "In his joy the man had forgotten that it was the Sabbath; yet he felt no condemnation for obeying the command of One who had such power from God." DA, p.203. Not biblical: There is no mention in John 5 that the man forgot that it was the Sabbath or that he felt no condemnation for obeying Christ. 16. EGW: The disciples fled from men possessed by demons "Their eyes glared out from their long and matted hair, the very likeness of humanity seemed to have been blotted out by the demons that possessed them, and they looked more like wild beasts than like men. The disciples and their companions fled in terror;" DA, p. 337. Not biblical: There is no Bible record of the disciples fleeing from these men before Jesus healed them. 17. EGW: Lazarus, leads the donkey at the triumphal entry into Jerusalem. The healed dumb shouted the loudest, healed blind led the way and the healed cripples broke the most branches. "The blind whom He had restored to sight were leading the way. The dumb whose tongues He had loosed shouted the loudest hosannas. The cripples whom He had healed bounded with joy, and were the most active in breaking the palm branches…Lazarus, whose body had seen corruption in the grave, but who now rejoiced in the strength of glorious manhood, led the beast on which the Savior rode." DA, p. 572. Not biblical: There is no Bible record of the Lazarus or anyone else leading the donkey that Christ rode, or the blind, dumb and cripples that Jesus healed participating in the manner as described by EGW. There is no Bible record of Lazarus even being present when Christ was riding the donkey. 18. EGW: Little Children fell asleep on Jesus' breast "The children were foremost in the rejoicing. Jesus had healed their maladies; He had clasped them in His arms, received their kisses of grateful affection, and some of them had fallen asleep upon His breast as He was teaching the people." DA, p. 592. Not biblical: There is no Bible record of children kissing Jesus or sleeping on Jesus' breast. This is just a sampling of the false Bible teachings of Ellen G. White in The Desire of Ages, no doubt there are many more. Seventh-day Adventists, who accept these Bible contradictions and additions as being from God, have been misled and deceived by their prophet. It is time to make the Bible alone your source of faith and not the writings of a false prophet. Will God be asking you, "did you accept Ellen White as gospel with her false teachings, or did you accept my Word as truth?" The Desire of Ages Library of Congress Myth It was often said by Adventist pastors, "that the Library of Congress recommended The Desire of Ages written by Ellen G. White, over other books written on the life of Christ." The conferences had drives for local churches to contact the managers of the major motels in the their city to try to get The Desire of Ages in every motel room. We were to use the Library of Congress statement to promote the book to the motel managers. It was after leaving Adventism that I found that it was not the Library of Congress that promoted The Desire of Ages, but a former SDA Pastor who went to work for the Library of Congress. His name is, Wells E. Bement, born February 7, 1891 and died December 26, 1977. He was a 1922 graduate of Washington Missionary College and served briefly in India, was dean and Bible teacher at Atlantic Union College and later worked in educational and MV work as director. Bement's letter was a personal letter in answer Mr. Nicolas Chaij's questions. The letter was not written on the Library of Congress stationary and was not the opinion of the Library of Congress: December 11, 1946 Mr. Nicolas Chaij Apartado 50, General Peraze Havana, Cuba Dear Mr. Chaij: I regret that absence and illness have kept me from answering your letter sooner. Now I shall do so briefly. To select five of six books on the on the life of Christ from the more than 10,000 written in English in the last 300 years, to say nothing of those in other languages, and say that they are unqualifiedly the best is no small task. Happily you have eased the task by asking me to make my personal selection. My preference or choice would be guided by what I wished to get from the book or books to be read. Let me put it this way: I would put Desire of Ages by Ellen G. White first for spiritual discernment and practical application. Second, I would name Dr. Alfred Edersheim's 2 volumes on the Life of Jesus the Messiah for connection with type and ceremonial rites, and contemporary Hebrew literature. Third would come Samuel J. Andrews' Life of Our Lord Upon the Earth Considered in Its Historical, Chronological and Geographical Relations for chronological sequence, geographical settings and authoritative references. Fourth, I would take Dean Farrar's Life of Christ for scholarship and elegance of expression. We might list as fifth, the 4-volumes treatise of John Feter Lange, The Life and Times of the Lord Jesus Christ, for the electorate and exhaustive treatment. Beyond this point there come rushing to my mind so many authors commanding attention that I would be presumptuous to try to put them in sequence. One will receive something from every one, and the subject is exhaustive. In answer to another of your inquires, I will say that the Desire of Ages is well thought of in the Library of Congress. Please pardon this late reply to your good letter. Apologetically, It was dishonest for the Seventh-day Adventist Church leaders to mislead its members to believe that the The Desire of Ages was held in such high regard as "one of the best books on the life of Christ" or words to that effect in the Library of Congress and not tell them this glowing report was by a former Adventist pastor and that it was his personal opinion. Mr. Bement was no doubt prejudiced in his selection of The Desire of Ages over other books in the library, being a loyal diehard Ellen G. White fan. Most Adventists would also pick The Desire of Ages as their favorite book. The Seventh-day Adventist Church should have written to the Library of Congress to get their official opinion. This would have been the honest thing to do and then report their findings to the church members instead of misleading them. Desire of Ages Plagiarism Before Walter Rae wrote The White Lie and The Desire of Ages Project that was headed by Fred Veltman, chairman of the Religion Department of Pacific Union College, the majority of Seventh-day Adventist knew very little or nothing of Ellen White filling her books with material from uninspired authors. Most Adventists believed God was the source of Ellen's book and little Ellen was just a messenger to write it all out from her visions when she always used the terms, "I saw" or "I was shown". Little did the church members realize that what she saw was in copyrighted books of other authors. Now that Ellen's hands were caught in the books of other authors, the church has do defend this practice. Just how are they doing this? It is by comparing Ellen with the Bible writers as they often quoted other Bible writers or non-inspired writers without giving them credit. Is this a valid way of defending Ellen's copying? If Ellen had given credit to the people she was copying from, there would have not been an issue. Ellen went far beyond what any Bible writer has claimed. EGW: "Although I am as dependent upon the Spirit of the Lord in writing my views as I am in receiving them, yet the words I employ in describing what I have seen are my own, unless they be those spoken to me by an angel, which I always enclose in marks of quotation" (Review and Herald, Oct. 8, 1867, quoted in Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 37). Note: Ellen is telling us the words she employs describing what she has seen (visions) are her own. Yet she deceives us by coping her words from other authors and telling us these are her words or God's words. EGW: "When writing these precious books, if I hesitated, the very word I wanted to express the idea was given to me" (Selected Messages, vol. 3, p. 51, 52). Note: Ellen is telling us when she hesitated "the very word" she wanted was given to her. If this was true, she would not have been copying from other authors. This is positive proof Ellen White, the Adventist prophet was a liar and a thief. What books did Ellen White use in writing The Desire of Ages? From Adventism's Ministry Magazine, Dr. Fred Veltman, The Desire of Ages Project: the data What major works were used by Ellen White in writing the DA text? "We found 10 books from which Ellen White drew 10 or more literary parallels per Desire of Ages chapter. The Life of Christ, by William Hanna, heads the list with 321 source parallels. Night Scenes of the Bible and Walks and Homes of Jesus, both by Daniel March, come in second with 129 parallel sentences." The Desire of Ages Project: the data, Part 1, Ministry October 1990, p. 6. "The other major sources are: John Harris, The Great Teacher; Fredrick Farrar, The Life of Christ; George Jones, Life-Science From the Four Gospels; Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah; J. H. Ingraham, The Prince in the House of David; Francis Wayland, Salvation by Christ; and John Cumming, Sabbath Evening Reading on the New Testament; St. John." The Desire of Ages Project: the data, Part 1, Ministry, October 1990, p. 7. What additional sources contributed to the DA text? "In addition to the major sources, we found that 21 works written by 20 authors had a minor impact on the 15 chapters. Two authors had works in both the major influence and minor influence categories." The Desire of Ages Project: the data, Part 1, Ministry, October 1990, p. 6. Note: Ellen and her Secretary helpers used 33 books to make up The Desire of Ages. Ellen had a 1200 plus library to copy from. All Adventists ought to be indebted to these authors in helping their prophet to succeed in her role as having the "Spirit of Prophecy." Seeing these other authors had the information first that Ellen used, shouldn't they get equal billing with EGW as having the Spirit of Prophecy also? See Dr. Fred Veltman's Desire of Ages Project: the data This is a two part series. Marian Davis Writes Part of The Desire of Ages A letter by H C Lacey to L E Froom indicates that Marian Davis not only used Ellen White’s writings she had a free hand in making use of other sources also. The letter reads, In this connection, of course you know that Sr. Marian Davis was entrusted with the preparation of The Desire of Ages and that she gathered her material from every available source-from Sr. White’s books already in print, from unpublished manuscripts, from private letters, stenographical reports of her talks etc.-but perhaps you may not know that she (Sr. Davis) was greatly worried about finding material for the first chapter (and other chapters too for that matter) and I did what I could to help her; I have good reason to believe that she also appealed to Professor Prescott for similar aid, and got it too in far richer and more abundant measure than I could render. (H C Lacey letter to L E Froom Aug. 30, 1945) The Desire of Ages Rewritten Many Times "In Australia I saw The Desire of Ages being made up, and I saw the rewriting of chapters, some of them written over and over and over again. I saw that, and when I talked with Sister Davis about it, I tell you I had to square up to this thing and begin to settle things about the spirit of prophecy. If these false positions had never been taken, the thing would be much plainer than it is today. What was charged as plagiarism would all have been simplified, and I believe men would have been saved to the cause if from the start we had understood this thing as it should have been. With those false views held, we face difficulties in straightening up. We will not meet those difficulties by resorting to a false claim." E. G. Daniells, 1919 Bible Conference, Spectrum, May 1979, p. 51. Note: Adventist apologists like to compare Ellen with the Bible prophets. Compare this: How many Bible prophets had to rewrite their visions and admonitions many times? Ellen just could not get it right the first time and The Desire of Ages was re-written over and over and over again. How many Bible prophets sold their visions and admonitions and made a living off of them and then leave them to their offspring to make a living? How many Bible prophets copyrighted their visions? How many prophets that had visions, went to the library in order to find words to describe their vision and then had to re-write them over and over and over again? Veltman brings out the fact that in his research of "fifteen chapters" from the DA he found Ellen to be 31% dependent on other authors. I would like to see the SDA church come up with one Bible prophet that was 31% dependent on other authors. For more on this see www.truthorfables.com/Desire_of_Ages.htm. See our playlist "Dealing with Seventh-day Adventism & Their "Prophetess"" with 21 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL5316CC6F66F24283. Matthew 7:15

Question: "How is Jesus our Sabbath Rest?" Answer: The key to understanding how Jesus is our Sabbath rest is the Hebrew word sabat, which means "to rest or stop or cease from work." The origin of the Sabbath goes back to Creation. After creating the heavens and the earth in six days, God "rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had made" (Genesis 2:2). This doesn’t mean that God was tired and needed a rest. We know that God is omnipotent, literally "all-powerful." He has all the power in the universe, He never tires, and His most arduous expenditure of energy does not diminish His power one bit. So, what does it mean that God rested on the seventh day? Simply that He stopped what He was doing. He ceased from His labors. This is important in understanding the establishment of the Sabbath day and the role of Christ as our Sabbath rest. God used the example of His resting on the seventh day of Creation to establish the principle of the Sabbath day rest for His people. In Exodus 20:8-11 and Deuteronomy 5:12-15, God gave the Israelites the fourth of His Ten Commandments. They were to "remember" the Sabbath day and "keep it holy." One day out of every seven, they were to rest from their labors and give the same day of rest to their servants and animals. This was not just a physical rest, but a cessation of laboring. Whatever work they were engaged in was to stop for a full day each week. (Please read our other articles on the Sabbath day, Saturday vs. Sunday and Sabbath keeping to explore this issue further.) The Sabbath day was established so the people would rest from their labors, only to begin again after a one-day rest. The various elements of the Sabbath symbolized the coming of the Messiah, who would provide a permanent rest for His people. Once again the example of resting from our labors comes into play. With the establishment of the Old Testament Law, the Jews were constantly "laboring" to make themselves acceptable to God. Their labors included trying to obey a myriad of do’s and don’ts of the ceremonial law, the Temple law, the civil law, etc. Of course they couldn’t possibly keep all those laws, so God provided an array of sin offerings and sacrifices so they could come to Him for forgiveness and restore fellowship with Him, but only temporarily. Just as they began their physical labors after a one-day rest, so, too, did they have to continue to offer sacrifices. Hebrews 10:1 tells us that the law "can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship." But these sacrifices were offered in anticipation of the ultimate sacrifice of Christ on the cross, who "after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right of God" (Hebrews 10:12). Just as He rested after performing the ultimate sacrifice, He sat down and rested-ceased from His labor of atonement because there was nothing more to be done, ever. Because of what He did, we no longer have to "labor" in law-keeping in order to be justified in the sight of God. Jesus was sent so that we might rest in God and in what He has provided. Another element of the Sabbath day rest which God instituted as a foreshadowing of our complete rest in Christ is that He blessed it, sanctified it, and made it holy. Here again we see the symbol of Christ as our Sabbath rest-the holy, perfect Son of God who sanctifies and makes holy all who believe in Him. God sanctified Christ, just as He sanctified the Sabbath day, and sent Him into the world (John 10:36) to be our sacrifice for sin. In Him we find complete rest from the labors of our self-effort, because He alone is holy and righteous. "God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God" (2 Corinthians 5:21). We can now cease from our spiritual labors and rest in Him, not just one day a week, but always. Jesus can be our Sabbath rest in part because He is "Lord of the Sabbath" (Matthew 12:8). As God incarnate, He decides the true meaning of the Sabbath because He created it, and He is our Sabbath rest in the flesh. When the Pharisees criticized Him for healing on the Sabbath, Jesus reminded them that even they, sinful as they were, would not hesitate to pull a sheep out of a pit on the Sabbath. Because He came to seek and save His sheep who would hear His voice (John 10:3,27) and enter into the Sabbath rest He provided by paying for their sins, He could break the Sabbath rules. He told the Pharisees that people are more important than sheep and the salvation He provided was more important than rules. By saying, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath" (Mark 2:27), Jesus was restating the principle that the Sabbath rest was instituted to relieve man of his labors, just as He came to relieve us of our attempting to achieve salvation by our works. We no longer rest for only one day, but forever cease our laboring to attain God’s favor. Jesus is our rest from works now, just as He is the door to heaven, where we will rest in Him forever. Hebrews 4 is the definitive passage regarding Jesus as our Sabbath rest. The writer to the Hebrews exhorts his readers to "enter in" to the Sabbath rest provided by Christ. After three chapters of telling them that Jesus is superior to the angels and that He is our Apostle and High Priest, he pleads with them to not harden their hearts against Him, as their fathers hardened their hearts against Jehovah in the wilderness. Because of their unbelief, God denied that generation access to the holy land, saying, "They shall not enter into My rest" (Hebrews 3:11). In the same way, the writer to the Hebrews begs them-and us-not to make the same mistake by rejecting God’s Sabbath rest in Jesus Christ. "There remains, then, a Sabbath-rest for the people of God; for anyone who enters God's rest also rests from his own work, just as God did from his. Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will fall by following their example of disobedience" (Hebrews 4:9-11). There is no other Sabbath rest besides Jesus. He alone satisfies the requirements of the Law, and He alone provides the sacrifice that atones for sin. He is God’s plan for us to cease from the labor of our own works. We dare not reject this one-and-only Way of salvation (John 14:6). God’s reaction to those who choose to reject His plan is seen in Numbers 15. A man was found gathering sticks on the Sabbath day, in spite of God’s plain commandment to cease from all labor on the Sabbath. This transgression was a known and willful sin, done with unblushing boldness in broad daylight, in open defiance of the divine authority. "And Jehovah said to Moses, ‘The man shall surely be put to death’" (v. 35). So it will be to all who reject God’s provision for our Sabbath rest in Christ. "How shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation?" (Hebrews 2:3). "What does it mean that Jesus is the Lord of the Sabbath? - www.gotquestions.org/Lord-of-the-Sabbath.html "What is a sabbatical year?" - www.gotquestions.org/sabbatical-year.html "What does shabbat mean?" - www.gotquestions.org/shabbat.html "What day is the Sabbath, Saturday or Sunday?" - www.gotquestions.org/Saturday-Sunday.html "Does God require Sabbath-keeping of Christians?" - www.gotquestions.org/Sabbath-keeping.html Finally, Sabbath Keeping in Alaska is a Problem. This shows that the Sabbath was a regional, temporary command for Israel and not for the world. Interesting problem in Alaska. According to the officious SDA sunset calculator, on Friday eve, May 30th, in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, the sun set below the horizon, bringing with it the Jewish Shabbat, at 11:38 PM, almost midnight. Note: AK is so far west, it is on Hawaiian time. Here is the quote: Calculations for: Longitude: -148.34000 Latitude: 70.27000 Prudhoe Bay, Alaska Time Zone: Hawaiian Standard Time, HSTDate: 5/30/03 Friday Sunrise: 0:07am HST (sunrise Friday morning)Sunset: 11:38pm HST (sunset, Friday night, becoming sabbath) Next, we find sunrise on Sabbath, May 31st, actually starts before midnight Friday night and el sol invictus stays up all day Sabbath, and into Sabbath night, and into Sunday morning, and into Sunday night, for the next two months! Date: 5/31/03 Sunrise: Sun above horizon HST Sunset: Sun above horizon HST (meaning the sun never sets). Meaning: if you live and work in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, extracting dino remains buried and liquified by Noah's flood less than 4500 years ago, you have a problem! (no!! dummy! not the recent age of the earth!)... you have to quit working! Because on Friday night, May 30th, when the sun went down at 1l:38, bringing in the holy Lord's day, you had to stop working, thou, and thy manservant, and thy maidservant, and all the strangers within thy igloo. But the sun came up again on Sabbath just a few minutes later, but never went down after that!!! As I scribble this nonsense it is still Sabbath in Prudhoe Bay...cause the sun never went down....no Saturday sunset. So if you believe literally that you must keep sabbath from sunset on Friday night to Sabbath sunset.....the next day, Sabbath, did NOT have a sunset this summer! Won't be a sunset for another two months! So you are faced with keeping Sabbath for two months straight, and giving up your job with Exxon! Unless of course, you are the camp padre, trying to spread the word that black gold comes from dead dinos who missed the ark, or in the medical profession raking in piles of dough and salving your conscience by paying plenty of tithe to keep the hired-archy gainfully employed.... -sent by reader Seventh Day Adventists follow their false prophetess Ellen G. White (a woman authority over her religious followers which violates 1 Timothy 2:12, "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.") & her idol of Sabbath keeping for salvation requirement (violating Galatians 1:6-9) rather than what the Bible plainly teaches about Sabbath keeping for New Testament believers. For more see our playlist "Dealing with Seventh-day Adventism & Their "Prophetess"" with 23 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL5316CC6F66F24283. See the websites: www.TruthorFables.com, www.ExAdventist.com, www.LifeAssuranceMinistries.org & www.GreatControversyExposed.com. Titus 1:9-16

Please do a video on the Iglasia Ni Cristo cult.

Thanks for your videos !

The word cult in current popular usage usually refers to a new religious movement or other group whose beliefs or practices are considered abnormal or bizarre by the larger society

@lumeriam Explain to the readers what you mean by "Christian guilt-shame propaganda is the scariest of them all." Apparently you don't like Christian doctrine or theology, is that what you mean? Do you hate what the Bible teaches, is that what you mean? You have a Quaker talking on your RU-vid channel page & you mention you like "I Am" metaphysics. See our RU-vid video, "New Age "I AM" Church Universal & Triumphant Debate: Larry Wessels vs. Verner Zotter." Do you like Elizabeth Clare Prophet?

love these videos!!!

What you have said is so true but most don't have a clue what you're talking about since they have never had the supernatural conviction by the Holy Spirit (John 3:3-8, Titus 3:5, 1 Cor 6:19-20, Romans 8:1-17, etc). Our video "SUPERNATURAL BIBLE PROPHECY CONCERNING JESUS THE JEWISH MESSIAH (PART #1)" gets into what you're referring to in a little more detail. 1 Corinthians 2:10-16

For a free transcript of our original 1 Hour & 40 minute message called "RISE OF THE CULTS: WHERE DID ALL THESE STRANGE AMERICAN RELIGIOUS SECTS COME FROM?" go to www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?m=t&s=3917175372. Once there scroll down the page to "View Transcript" & click on that. You also have the options of "Download PDF" or "Send to Kindle" or "Google Translation" available in 27 languages from Arabic to Vietnamese. Nothing to buy & everything is free. 2 Tim. 2:15

The modern day "Church of Christ" movement was began back in the early 1800s by Thomas & Alexander Campbell, Barton W. Stone & Walter Scott. See our video at RISE OF THE CULTS: WHERE DID ALL THESE STRANGE AMERICAN RELIGIOUS SECTS COME FROM?. Walter Scott "arranges" the "ancient gospel" & makes "experiments" with it; baptizes William Amend on November 18, 1827 & claims to have "restored the gospel" (see "Life of Elder Walter Scott" by Baxter, Chapter VI; "Memoirs of Alexander Campbell, Vol. 2, pp. 208-220) thus the name "The Restoration Movement." Water baptism becomes the savior & gospel of this group. However, did Christianity really need these four men to "restore the ancient gospel" in 1827? Was there no Christianity before 1827? Is water baptism then essential & necessary in order to be saved from hell & go to heaven instead? Why Water Baptism Is Not Essential to Salvation By Steve Morrison www.BibleQuery.org Points We Should Agree On Salvation was purchased neither by water nor by faith. Our salvation is by grace through the shed blood of Jesus on the cross. The issue is whether we choose to receive that salvation through a) faith (most Bible-believing Christians, including some Church of Christ) b) Faith plus one work: baptism (some Church of Christ) c) Faith plus works in general (Catholic, Orthodox, some Church of Christ) d) Being a nice guy (Jesus’ blood was unnecessary) (many liberal Protestants and Catholics) Why This is Important A person can believe the wrong one of the first two and still be saved. But to me this is still important and unscriptural: 1. Says God sometimes breaks His promise 2. Salvation: God plus our response plus a 3rd party 3. Is there a corner in Hell for some obedient believers? On the other hand, many Church of Christ people say that if a person was martyred for their faith, and even if they were first baptized by immersion, if it was not specifically for remission of sins, there was no point for them to die for their faith, because they are in Hell. What if a Church of Christ person believed, but was killed in a car wreck on the way to being baptized? Thesis Nowhere does the Bible say the words "Cannot be saved without water baptism" Granted that some Bible truths are implied, not directly stated. But allegedly implied truths that contradict Biblically stated truths are untruths. Outline: Five Points Through Faith (Jn 3:16,18,36; Jn 5:24; 6:29,35,40 Rom 10:9-13, 1 Cor 1:14,17a etc.) Response of a Believer (Mk 16:16; Jn 3:3-6; Acts 2:38; 22:16, 1 Pet 3:20-21 etc.) Understanding Salvation (Eph 2:8-10) Thief on the Cross (Luke 23:40-43) Holy Spirit & Cornelius (Acts 10:43-48) Through Faith We Are Saved Some verses teach belief/faith for salvation, no mention of baptism. Others explicitly give the Promise of All who believe / have faith … are saved (John 3:16,18, etc.) We should all believe God’s promises. But what is genuine belief / saving faith? Genuine Belief / Saving Faith Saving Faith is not belief about but believing on Even the devils believe - and shudder (Jms 2:19) "Cheap grace", mere belief about facts, but not leading to a transformed life, is dead (Jms 2:20-24) True belief means trusting our lives to God OT: Ps 4:5; 9:10; 13:5; 20:7; 22:4,9; 25:2; Pr 3:5; Isa 8:17 NT: Rom 4:5; 9:33; 10:11; 1 Pet 2:6 Heb 2:13 (quotes 2 Sam 22:3) Blondin & tightrope over Niagara Falls illustration Old Testament believers, with the knowledge they had, were saved trusting forward to the same Savior we have, while we with the knowledge we have trust backwards at the finished work of Christ. When Blondin was about to walk over Niagara Falls on a tightrope pushing a wheelbarrow, a man told him that he believed that he could do it. Blondin asked if he really believed. When the man said yes, Blondin told him to get in the wheelbarrow. Genuine faith is not standing on the side saying "I believe", but saving faith in Christ is being willing to get in the wheelbarrow. Genuine Belief in Jesus as Lord Genuine belief in Jesus as Lord implies a repentance, calling on God, and commitment to obedience, including I might add, practicing the Lord’s supper and baptism. But let’s say a person was unable to fulfill baptism or another act of obedience, God understands out intentions. Role of Works in Salvation Both Ephesians 2:8-9 and James 2 show that works have an important role in our salvation: they are an output, not an input. Works are like a beating heart. You can make a dead person’s heart beat with electrodes, but that does not mean they are alive. But if you say a person is alive but their heart is not beating, then I have my doubts. Baptism is a work of a saved believer, not a lost person. But if someone says works have a role in us getting saved, then they deny Ephesians 2:8. Twice as many verses emphasize belief without baptism Verses showing water baptism Jn 3:16,18,36 (whosoever) Jn 1:11-12 (received him) Mk 16:16 (believe and is baptized) Jn 5:24 Jn 2:11b, 23b (belief only) Jn 3:4-6 (born of water & spirit) Acts 10:43-48 Jn 6:29,35,40,47 Acts 2:37-38 (for remission of sins) Rom 4:1-6; 5:1 Jn 7:38,39; Acts 22:16 (wash away thy sins) Rom 9:33 (belief only) Jn 8:30-32 Rom 6:3-5 (bapt.…into His death) Rom 10:9-13 Jn 11:25-26 (believes) 1 Cor 6:11 (washed... by the spirit) Joel 2:32a+Acts 2:21+Rom 10:13 Jn 12:46 (believe) Gal 3:26-27 (baptized…clothed) 1 Cor 1:14,17 Jn 16:9 (not believe) Eph 5:26,Tt 3:5 (washing) Eph 2:8-10 Jn 17:20 (believe only) Col 2:11-13; Heb 10:22 Gal 3:22b (belief only) Rom 10:9-10 (if a man…) 1 Pet 3:20b-21 Heb 4:2 (faith only) 1 Jn 5:1,10-13 1 Cor 1:12-13 (Paul and divisions) Other verses mentioning belief but not baptism: Jn 4:39a,41; 9:35; 10:42; 11:25,45,48; 12:11, 31,42,44; 14:1,12; 20:31 Acts 14:23; 20:21; Rom 15:13; Php 1:29; Tt 3:8 Other verses mentioning baptism: Mt 28:19; Acts 1:22; 2:41; 8:13,16, 37-39; 1 Cor 10:2 John 3:16,18 Jn 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. (KJV) Note it is not that this verse simply mentions belief without baptism. It says that whosoever believes is saved, without baptism. John 3:18 Jn 3:18 He that believeth in Him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." (KJV) When you believed in Christ, were you condemned or not condemned at that exact in time? John 3:36 "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life; and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him." (KJV) John 5:24 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life." (KJV) Acts 10:43 (KJV) "To Him give all the prophets witness, that through His name, whosoever believeth in Him shall receive remission of sins." This was said to Cornelius prior to baptism. Rom 10:9-13 (also Joel 2:32a; Acts 2:21) (KJV) "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. (10) For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. (11) For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. (12) For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. (13) For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." 1 Cor 1:14; 17a (KJV) 1 Cor 1:14 "I [Paul] thank God that I baptized none of you but Cris’pus and Ga’i-us" 1 Cor 1:17a "For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel:" Jn 6:28-29,35,40 (KJV) Jn 6:28-29 "Then said they unto him, What shall we do that we might work the works of God? (29) Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent." Jn 6:35 "And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst." Jn 6:40 "And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day." Twice as many verses emphasize belief without baptism Verses showing water baptism Jn 3:16,18,36 (whosoever) Jn 1:11-12 (received him) Mk 16:16 (believe and is baptized) Jn 5:24 Jn 2:11b, 23b (belief only) Jn 3:4-6 (born of water & spirit) Acts 10:43-48 Jn 6:29,35,40,47 Acts 2:37-38 (for remission of sins) Rom 4:1-6; 5:1 Jn 7:38,39; Acts 22:16 (wash away thy sins) Rom 9:33 (belief only) Jn 8:30-32 Rom 6:3-5 (bapt.…into His death) Rom 10:9-13 Jn 11:25-26 (believes) 1 Cor 6:11 (washed... by the spirit) Joel 2:32a+Acts 2:21+Rom 10:13 Jn 12:46 (believe) Gal 3:26-27 (baptized…clothed) 1 Cor 1:14,17 Jn 16:9 (not believe) Eph 5:26,Tt 3:5 (washing) Eph 2:8-10 Jn 17:20 (believe only) Col 2:11-13; Heb 10:22 Gal 3:22b (belief only) Rom 10:9-10 (if a man…) 1 Pet 3:20b-21 Heb 4:2 (faith only) 1 Jn 5:1,10-13 1 Cor 1:12-13 (Paul and divisions) Other verses mentioning belief but not baptism: Jn 4:39a,41; 9:35; 10:42; 11:25,45,48; 12:11, 31,42,44; 14:1,12; 20:31 Acts 14:23; 20:21; Rom 15:13; Php 1:29; Tt 3:8 Other verses mentioning baptism: Mt 28:19; Acts 1:22; 2:41; 8:13,16, 37-39; 1 Cor 10:2 Summary of the First Section While some verses simply mention belief without baptism, many other verses say that all who believe, regardless of baptism will be saved. We will call these the "whosoever" verses. Saving faith is a living faith, that is willing to repent, confess God, and obey. Of course getting baptized with water is part of obeying. But if a person dies before they are able to be baptized, God looks at our heart. Response of a Believer Water baptism verses Summary of Response Mk 16:16 yet Jn 3:36 Faith leads to baptism, only unbelief condemned Jn 3:4-6 yet Jn 3:16,18 Spoken to Nicodemus before the resurrection Acts 2:37-38 yet 10:43 Eis can mean result of or in, as in Acts 10:43 Acts 22:16 yet 22:13 Never said "Brother" Saul was not saved first Rom 6:3-5 yet 10:9-11 No mention of the pious unbaptized like the thief 1 Cor 6:11 yet Rom 8:11; Eph 1:13-14a Washed by the Spirit here, not water. If the Spirit is in a NT believer, Spirit’s seal guarantees. Gal 3:26-27 yet 2 Cor 5:4-5 A soldier’s uniform is an emblem of his identity. All with the Spirit guaranteed future clothing. Eph 5:26,Tt 3:5 Baptism of the Holy Spirit as in Acts 1:5 + 2:4 Col 2:11-13 yet Rom 2:29; Acts 15:1-21 Symbol of buried with Christ. Bible never said cannot be saved without water baptism Heb 10:22 yet 1 Pet 3:21 The washed body is a visible emblem, but 1 Pet 3:21a says does not save. 1 Pet 3:20b-21 yet 2:6b Noah and Abraham obedient saints beforehand. 1 Cor 1:12-13 yet 1:14-17 Baptism not vital since Paul NOT sent to baptize. Others: Mt 28:19; Acts 1:22; 2:41; 8:13,16, 37-39 - not say for salvation Response of a Believer Belief in the Lord Jesus implies a pledge of obedience. But this does NOT imply God sends an obedient believer, who in unable to do something, to Hell! While no other way except Christ (Jn 14:6b, Acts 4:12) the Bible never says condemned without baptism. While these show baptism is an important response of believers, no verse reneges on God’s promise to all who believe! Mk 16:16 "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned." Yet John 3:36 "He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." (NKJV) Mark 16:16 does not specifically say all who believe but are unbaptized go to Hell. It if did, it would contradict John 3:36 and the other whosoever verses. Here is a "Change for a dollar and a water bottle illustration". If my daughter in the kitchen asks me for change for a dollar, and I tell her, give me a dollar and a water bottle and I will give you change. If my daughter gives me both I give her the change. If my daughter does not give me a dollar, then no change. But what if my daughter gives me a dollar but not a water bottle. Then it depends. If she says, I looked but I was unable to find a water bottle, then I will still give her change. But if she says something disrespectful, and refuses to give me a water bottle that she can get, then no change. A Church of Christ counter example was given as: "if you eat and digest your food you will live, if you do not eat, you will die." Digesting your food is implied. However, applying to Mark 16:16 this example of an involuntary bodily action to a command of God we are to voluntarily obey contradicts the Word of God, that promises salvation to all who truly believe in the following places: John 3:16,18,36; John 5:24; 6:47; 11:25-26; Acts 10:43-48; Romans 9:33; Joel 2:32a + Acts 2:21 + Romans 10:9-10; 10:13; 1 John 5:1,10-13 John 3:4-6 "‘Nic-o-de’mus saith unto Him, ‘How can a man be born when is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?’ (5) Jesus answered, ‘Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. (6) That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." (KJV) Jn 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." (KJV) Jn 3:18a "He that believeth on him is not condemned" (KJV) One reason John 3:4-6 does not mean all who are not baptized go to Hell is that it would contradict John 3:16; 18a and the other whosoever verses. A second reason is that Jesus said John 3:4-6 before the resurrection. Jn 3:46 said before the resurrection a) If baptism essential before resurrection: Thief on the cross problem in Lk 23:43 b) If baptism not-essential, then since Jesus told Nicodemus prior to His resurrection, John 3:5 cannot teach no unbaptized person can be saved. But if b), note that believers were to be baptized in Jn 4:2 Water baptism: Not practiced in the OT, a command in the New, but never was it simply a suggestion! Acts 2:37-38 yet Acts 10:43 Acts 2:37-38 "When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, ‘Brothers, what shall we do?’ (38) Peter replied, ‘[ya’ll] Repent and [he/she] be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for [eis] the forgiveness / remission [aphesin] of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." (NIV/NKJV) Yet Acts 10:43 "To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission / forgiveness of sins." (NKJV/NIV) Yet Acts 2:21 (Joel 2:32a; Rom 10:13) "And it shall come to pass That whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved" (NKJV) So right before Acts 2:36, Peter told us the criteria for receiving salvation: Acts 2:21. A second reason Acts 2:37-38 does not teach all who are not baptized go to Hell is that it would contradict the other whosoever verses. Forgiveness/Remission [Aphesin] are the Same word in Greek The word forgiveness/remission is the same Greek: aphesin (Strong’s 859) The same Greek word is used as: Remission (KJV/NKJV) Mt 26:28; Mk 1:4; Lk 1:77; 3:3; 24:47; Heb 9:22; 10:18 Forgiveness (KJV/NKJV), Mk 3:29; Acts 5:31; 13:38; 26:18; Eph 1:7; Col 1:14 NIV has forgiveness/forgiven in all these verses Many Meanings of Eis (Strong’s 1519) Eis mean in order to cause (looking forward) Lk 5:14 Jesus told the cleansed leper to show himself to the priests as Moses commanded eis a testimony to them. Eis means "because of" (looking backward) Mt 3:11 "John baptized eis repentance. If eis could only mean to cause remission of sins in Acts 2:38, then eis would have to baptize to cause repentance in Mt 3:11 Mt 12:41 [Ninevites] "repented eis the preaching of Jonah" Eis means "to" Jn 4:5 "He [Jesus] comes eis a city of Samaria" Jn 11:31 "She goes eis the tomb" Isa 13:14 (Septuagint) "a man shall turn back to his own people" This means "[return] to", but it is looking backward, not forward. They did not just become his people, they were already his people. Eis means "about" or "in reference to" Acts 2:25 David speaks eis him Cause and Effect and Eis If eis could only mean "caused" The Ninevites "caused" the preaching of Jonah? Mt 12:31 Mary goes to "cause" the tomb"? Jn 11:31 Through one man sin "caused" the world"? Rom 5:12) John the Baptist had a baptism for repentance to cause forgiveness of sins too. (Then what about the thief on the cross?) (Lk 3:3) You cannot base a doctrine on a grammatical ambiguity! Looking Backward with eis Church of Christ people claim eis never looks backward. However, besides Mt 3:11 and 12:41; it looks backward (as well as forward) in the Old Testament Septuagint. It looks backward in Mal 2:2 Did not One God (eis) create you? Mal 2:11 [Judah] has gone (eis) after other gods. Acts 22:16 yet Acts 22:13a Acts 22:16 [Ananias told Paul] "And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name." (NIV) Acts 22:13a "He stood beside me and said, ‘Brother Saul, receive your sight!’…" (NIV) Saul/Paul was already a fellow believer in Acts 22:13. 1) This does not say baptism saved, and 2) if it was the water that washed sins away that would be against 1 Peter 3:21. One reason Acts 22:16 does not refer to unbaptized believers going to Hell is that it would contradict the whosoever verses. More on Brother Now brethren meant fellow Jews in Rom 9:3; Acts 3:17; 13:26; 22:1,2; 23:1,5. However: We have no proof that Ananias was Jewish Ananias and Paul had a bond that was closer than being Jewish: even prior to Paul’s baptism, both were genuine believers. All genuine believers are our brothers. Baptism is only something a brother and sister believer does. The key issue here, is, can a genuine "brother", like the thief on the cross, or Cornelius before he was baptized, be in Hell if He dies before he does the "work" of water baptism? Alexander Campbell Christian Messenger, 1831 p.19,21 "My opinion is that immersion is the only baptism. But shall I therefore make my opinion a term of Christian fellowship? If in this case I thus act, where shall I cease from making my opinions terms of fellowship? I confess I see no end. . . . Let us still acknowledge all to be brethren, who believe in the Lord Jesus, and humbly and honestly obey him, as far as they know his will, and their duty." Rom 6:3-5 yet Rom 10:9-13 Rom 6:3-5 "Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? (4) Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. (5) For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:" (KJV) While Rom 6 refers to water baptism, not just Spirit baptism, this never says cannot be saved if not baptized. Rather, it gives the meaning of baptism (our identification with Christ’s death and resurrection. Yet Rom 10:9-13 Rom 10:9-13 "that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. (10) For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. (11) For Scripture says, ‘Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame. (12) For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. (13) For whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved." (NKJV) 1 Cor 6:11 yet Rom 8:11; Eph 1:13-14a 1 Cor 6:11 "And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of God." (NIV) Washed by the Spirit here, not water. Baptism of the Holy Spirit is in Mt 3:11b; Mk 1:8; Lk 3:16b; Acts 1:5+2:4; 8:16-17; 19:2-7; 1 Cor 12:13 Yet Rom 8:11; Eph 1:13-14a Rom 8:11 "But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you." (NKJV) Eph 1:13-14a "In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, (14) who is the guarantee of our inheritance…" (NKJV) Gal 3:26-27 yet 2 Cor 5:4-5 Gal 3:26-27 "For you are all sons of God though faith in Christ Jesus, (27) For all of you who were baptized in Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ." (uNASB) The Greek word enduo "clothed/put on" (Strong’s 1746) "in the sense of sinking into a garment); to invest with clothing (lit. or fit.): array, cloths (with), endue, have (put) on." As a soldier has a uniform, being clothed with Christ is an external emblem or an inward change and new identity. Yet 2 Cor 5:4-5 Yet 2 Cor 5:4-5 "For we who are in this tent groan, being burdened, not because we want to be unclothed, but further clothed, that mortality may be swallowed up by life. Now He who have prepared for this very thing is God, who also has given us the Spirit as a guarantee." (NKJV) Even we are not fully clothed while in this life, but in the New Testament those who have the Spirit are guaranteed they will be fully clothed. Eph 5:26 & Titus 3:5 yet Acts 1:5+2:4 Eph 5:26 "To make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word," (NIV) Titus 3:5 "he saved us, not because of the righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior" (NIV) This is baptism (washing) of the Holy Spirit, which is mentioned in Acts 1:5 and fulfilled in Acts 2:4 Alexander Campbell Design by Baptism p.262 (1st part) "In this sense we are to understand what is said by Paul, that Christ sanctifieth and cleanseth the church ‘with washing of water by the word.’ Eph 5:26, and in another place, that ‘according to His mercy he saved us, but the washing of regeneration, and of renewing of the Holy Ghost’ Titus 3:5, and by Peter that ‘baptism doeth save us’ 1 Pet. 3:21, For it is not the intention of Paul to signify that our ablution and salvation are completed by water, or that water contains in itself the virtue to purify, regenerate, and renew; nor did Peter mean that it was the cause of salvation, but only the knowledge and assurance of it is received in this sacrament: what is sufficiently evident from the words they have used." Alexander Campbell Design by Baptism p.262 (2nd part) "For Paul connects together the ‘word of life’ and ‘the baptism of water;’ as if he had said, our ablution and sanctification are announced to us by the Gospel, and by baptism this message is confirmed. And Peter after having said the baptism doth save us, immediately adds, that it is ‘not the putting away the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God’ which proceeds from faith. But on the contrary, baptism promises us no other purification than by the sprinkling of the blood of Christ; which is emblematically represented by water, on account of its resemblance to washing and cleansing." Col 2:11-13 yet Rom 2:29; Acts 15:1-21 Col 2:11-13 "In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: (12) Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. (13) And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses." (KJV) Yet Rom 2:29 Rom 2:25-28 said that circumcision had value if you obeyed the law, but not for lawbreakers. Even those who kept the law but were uncircumised will be regarded as circumcised. Rom 2:29 "But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God." (KJV) Yet Acts 15:1-12 Some men [falsely] taught that unless you are circumcised you cannot be saved. The apostles COULD have said, "Not circumcision anymore but baptism." But instead Peter said, "No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are." So they told Gentile believers to abstain from meat sacrificed to idols, sexual immorality, blood, but "missed their chance" to say that baptism is required. Heb 10:22 yet 1 Pet 3:21 Heb 10:22 "let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water." (NIV) Yet 1 Pet 3:21a (NIV) "and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also - not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God…" 1 Pet 3:21a (KJV) "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God.)" The body washed with pure water is a visible emblem of our changed hearts. 1 Peter 3:21 says that it is not the water that saves us but the pledge of a good conscience towards God. 1 Pet 3:20b-21 yet 1 Pet 2:6b Pet 3:20b-21 "days of Noah, while the ark was preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. (21) The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:" (KJV) Note: KJV’s "by water" is incorrect; the Greek is "through water (di udatos)" per (NKJV, NIV, uNASB, Green’s literal translation, NRSV) Yet 1 Pet 2:6b "he who believes on Him will by no means be put to shame." (NKJV) Response to 1 Pet 3:20b-21 Both Noah and Abraham were obedient servants of God prior to the flood and testing with Isaac. 1 Peter 3:21 says it is NOT the water, but the pledge of a good conscience before God. It does not refer to people who made a pledge but were not able to get baptized. The Bible also uses word save in the fourth tense (of working out our salvation. So baptism only saves in the on-going sense that we can turn others from sin (James 5:20) we can save ourselves (Acts 2:40), we can save others (1 Cor 7:16, 9:22; 1 Tim 4:16) Alexander Campbell Millennial Harbinger, 1837 p.411-412 (1st part) "But who is a Christian? I answer, every one that believes in his heart that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, the Son of God; repents of his sins, and obeys him in all things according to his measure of knowledge of his will. . . . I cannot make any one duty the standard of Christian state or character, not even immersion into the name of Father, of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and [cannot] in my heart regard all that have been sprinkled in infancy without their own knowledge and consent, as aliens from Christ and the well-grounded hope of heaven." Alexander Campbell Millennial Harbinger, 1837 p.411-412 (2nd part) "Should I find a Pedobaptist [one baptized as an infant] more intelligent in the Christian Scriptures, more spiritually-minded and more devoted to the Lord than a Baptist, or one immersed on a profession of the ancient faith, I could not hesitate a moment in giving the preference of my heart to him that loveth most. Did I act otherwise, I would be a pure sectarian, a Pharisee among Christians." It if False to Claim Church of Christ Always Taught This This, it is wrong for Church of Christ literature to claim Churches of Christ always believed a person not immersed for sins is going to Hell. One of the founders, Alexander Campbell, said a pedobaptist could be saved Alexander Campbell was never immersed for remission of sins Nobody in the church prior to this time said that belief without baptism would send someone to Hell However, Ambrose, Augustine, and others did teach that baptized babies go to Heaven, and unbaptized babies go to Hell. Understanding Salvation in Eph 2:8-10 Eph 2:8-10 "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, (9) not of works, lest anyone should boast. (10) For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them." (NKJV) Counter-argument1: Naaman the Syrian In 2 Ki 5:10-15, Naaman was not cleansed of leprosy until he washed in the Jordan. a) This act of faith was for cleansing from leprosy, not salvation. b) It does not matter what river, or baptism water you use. But here it had to specifically be the Jordan River to make a point to Naaman. c) There was no water baptism in the Old Testament. d) Finally, if someone tried to make it relate to baptism, then Naaman did not know for sure there was only one God except the God of Israel until AFTER he washed in the Jordan in 2 Kings 5:15. Counter-argument 2: Walls of Jericho God by His grace gave Jericho to the Israelites without them working for it (Josh 6:2) But they still had to march around the city for seven days, 13 times, before it fell. Counter-argument 2 Answer Their marching did not cause the walls to fall; God supernaturally did. Obediently doing works DOES give us blessings, but this was not for their salvation, but to their conquering strongholds in their life as believers. It would be a false caricature of our position to say that we are against works, or that works have nothing to do with a saved person’s life. Works are an output of salvation, not an input. Thief on the Cross in Luke 23:40-43 Baptism was a much "for" remission of sins before Jesus’ resurrection as after. (Mk 1:4; Lk 1:77; Lk 3:3b same wording as Acts 2:38) Rejecting John’s baptism was rejecting God’s will for them (Lk 7:30) The disciples baptized too (Jn 3:26; 4:2) Jesus had high regard for at least one near-death conversion! No opportunity for water baptism, but did not reject. One answer: God is understanding Martyrs Potamiaena and the soldier Basilides About 202 A.D., as the Christian lady Potamiaena was being lead to her martyr’s death in the arena, the soldier Basilides kindly kept the rabble from bothering her. She said she would tell God of his kindness, and he would receive a reward. Three days after her death, he had a dream about her. Afterwards, when he was asked to swear something, he said he could not, as he was a Christian. First they thought he was joking, then they put him in prison; he was martyred too. Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History (323-326 A.D.) book 6 ch.5 p.253) So would someone like that go to Hell, who truly trusted in Christ and was martyred for Him? More on Basilides In fairness to the other side, I must mention something else too. Brothers of the church met with Basilides in prison, and after talking with him gave him "the seal of the Lord". It is unclear that this is baptism, but it probably was. However, the pagan jailers would not have let a prisoner leave the prison to get baptized. So how could he get baptized? Early Church: Immersion when Practical Didache (c.125 A.D.) ch.7 p.379 "baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if thou have not living water, baptize into other water; and if thou canst not in cold, in warm. But if thou have not either, pour out water thrice upon the head into the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit." Early Church Errors But the early church made mistakes too. Around 210 A.D. the early Church got the idea that before baptism you needed to go through a long, two year class for catechumens. What if someone came to Christ and was martyred before completing their lengthy class? So according to this Church of Christ doctrine, all the Christian martyrs, including Basilides, who were killed before getting immersed in water, will be in Hell, I supposed studying Greek forever. Maybe they will have the thief on the cross as their instructor though. Holy Spirit and Cornelius in Acts 10:43-48 They had the Holy Spirit prior to water baptism So do we (John 14:16-17,23) In the New Testament, all who have the Holy Spirit are in Christ. (1 John 4:13; Rom 8:9-11,14,16a) Rom 8:14 "For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God." (uNASB) Rom 8:16-17a "The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God, (17) and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ." (uNASB) Cornelius according to 1 John 4:13 1 Jn 4:13 "By this we know that we abide in Him, and He in us, because He has given us of His Spirit." (KJV, NKJV, uNASB) Cornelius According to Rom 8:9-11 Rom 8:9-11 "But ye are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you, Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His. (10) And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the spirit is life because of righteousness. (11) But if the Spirit of him that raised Jesus from the dead dwell in you, He that raised Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by [through] His Spirit that dwelleth in you." (KJV) (Greek dia is "through" as NKJV, NIV, uNASB, Green’s) Summary Through Faith (Jn 3:16,18,36, Jn 5:24; 6:29,35,40 Rom 10:9-13; 1 Cor 1:14,17a etc.) Response of a Believer (Mk 16:16; Jn 3:3-6; Acts 2:38; 22:16; 1 Pet 3:20-21 etc.) Understanding Salvation (Eph 2:8-10) Thief on the Cross (Luke 23:40-43) Holy Spirit & Cornelius (Acts 10:43-48) Conclusion Water baptism is what a believer should do. Even all Church of Christ people will agree, but they try to differentiate between a genuine believer and a saved person. Water baptism by immersion is only as essential for salvation as it was for the thief on the cross, Cornelius, Basilides and other early martyrs Quote on Potamiaena and the soldier Basilides Basilides may be counted the seventh of these. He led to martyrdom the celebrate Potamiaena, whose is still famous among the people of the country for the many things which she endured for the preservation of her chastity and virginity. For she was blooming in the perfection of her mind and her physical graces. Having suffered much for the faith of Christ, finally after tortures dreadful and terrible to speak of, she with her mother, Marcella, was put to death by fire. They say that the judge, Aquilla by name, having inflicted severe tortures upon her entire body, at last threatened to hand her over to the gladiators for bodily abuse. After a little consideration, being asked for her decision, she made a reply which was regarded as impious. Thereupon she received sentence immediately, and Basilides, one of the officers of the army, led her to death. But as the people attempted to annoy and insult her with abusive words, he drove back her insulters, showing her much pity and kindness. And perceiving the man’s sympathy for her, she exhorted him to be of good courage, for she would supplicate her Lord for him after her departure, and he would soon receive a reward for the kindness he had shown her. Having said this, she nobly sustained the issue, burning pitch being poured little by little, over various parts of her body, from the sole of her feet to the crown of her head. Such was the conflict endured by this famous maiden. Not long after this Basilides, being asked by his fellow-soldiers to swear for a certain reason, declared that it was not lawful for him to swear at all, for he was a Christian, and he confessed this openly. At first they thought that he was jesting, but when he continued to affirm it, he was led to the judge, and, acknowledging his conviction before him he was imprisoned. But the brethren in God coming to him and inquiring the reason of this sudden and remarkable resolution, he is reported to have said the Potamiaena, for three days after her martyrdom, stood beside him by night and placed a crown on his head, and said that she had besought the Lord for him and had obtained what she asked, and that soon she would take him with her. Thereupon the brethren gave him the seal(4) of the Lord; and on the next day, after giving glorious testimony for the Lord, he was beheaded." Footnote 4 says, "The word aphragis, ‘seal,’ was very commonly used by the Fathers to signify baptism (see Suicer’s Thesaurus)." The Early Church on Cornelius Anonymous Treatise on Re-baptism (254-257 A.D.) ch.5 p.669-670 On speaking of Cornelius said, "And there will be no doubt that men may be baptized with the Holy Ghost without water, - as thou observest that these were baptized before they were baptized with water; that the announcements of both John and of our Lord Himself were satisfied, - forasmuch as they received the grace of the promise both without the imposition of the apostle’s hands and without the [baptismal] laver, which they attained afterwards. And their hearts being purified, God bestowed upon them at the same time, in virtue of their faith, remission of sins; so that the subsequent baptism conferred upon them this benefit alone, that they received also the invocation of the name of Jesus Christ, that nothing might appear to be wanting to the integrity of their service and faith." Cyprian (246-258 A.D.) Letter 71 p.378 strongly emphasized baptism (even of infants), and one can see the doctrine of baptismal regeneration in his writings. Yet in discussing Cornelius he even said, "For we find also, in the Acts of the Apostles, that this is maintained by the apostles, and kept in the truth of the saving faith, so that when, in the house of Cornelius the centurion, the Holy Ghost had descended upon the Gentiles who were there, fervent in the warmth of their faith, and believing in the Lord with the whole heart; and when, filled with the Spirit, they blessed God in divers tongues, still none the less the blessed Apostle Peter, mindful of the divine precept and the Gospel, commanded that those same men should be baptized who had already been filled with the Holy Spirit, that nothing might seem to be neglected to the observance by the apostolic instruction in all things of the law of the divine precept and Gospel." We cannot find a single person in history who held to both believer’s baptism plus all who are lost who are not immersed for remission of sins. In other words, according to the doctrine of many Churches of Christ, outside of the New Testament we cannot find in history a single person who had any possibility of going to heaven, until after the restoration movement started, and even Alexander Campbell was never baptized for remission of sins. Note that Acts 2:38 says "ya’ll (second person plural) repent and each of you (third person singular) be baptized. So forgiveness/remission of sins does not modify repent. Other Notes Two Classes of Verses 1. Mention of belief/faith for salvation, no mention of baptism 2. The Promise of All who believe/ have faith … are saved (John 3:16,18, etc.) Verses Showing Salvation Can Come Before or Without Water Baptism Thief on the cross (Luke 23:40-43). The thief was not permitted to get down, get baptized, and then get back up on the cross again. If God is understanding of the situation of the thief, then that proves water baptism is not essential for salvation. Even though the thief died before Christ’s resurrection, water baptism was still practiced by Jesus and his disciples (Jon 3:26; 4:2), and water baptism was for repentance for remission of sins by John the Baptist (Mk 1:4; Lk 1:77; 3:3b). Jesus was said to have baptized (John 3:26), though actually Jesus had His disciples do the baptizing (John 4:2) In Lk 3:3b John the Baptist was "preaching a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins" (NKJV) and the words for remissions/forgiveness are the same in Acts 2:38 and Lk 3:3 in Greek as they are in English. (See also Mk 1:4; Lk 1:77) Cornelius (Acts 10:43-48) Note that they had the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 10:45b) prior to water baptism. In New Testament times, Romans 8:9,11,14,16-17 says that those who have the spirit in them, their spirit is alive, are sons of God, (17b) "heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory." Jn 3:16,18 "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. (18) He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he was not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." (36) He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." (NKJV) Jesus was said to have baptized (John 3:26), though actually Jesus had His disciples do the baptizing (John 4:2) In Lk 3:3b John the Baptist was "preaching a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins" (NKJV) and the words for remissions/forgiveness are the same in Acts 2:38 and Lk 3:3 in Greek as they are in English. (See also Mk 1:4; Lk 1:77) Jn 5:24 "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life." (NKJV) Rom 4:1-6 "What than shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he as something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. 4) Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt. But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, (6) just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:" (NKJV) Acts 10:43 "To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins." (NKJV) Rom 5:1 "Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, though whom we also have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God." (NKJV) Rom 10:9-13 "that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. (10) For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. (11) For Scripture says, ‘Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame. (12) For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. (13) For whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved." (NKJV) Joel 2:32a and Acts 2:21 and Rom 10:13 "And it shall come to pass That whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved" (NKJV) 1 Cor 1:17a "For Christ did not send me [Paul] to baptize, but to preach the gospel," (NKJV) Eph 2:8-10 "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them." (NKJV) 1 Cor 10:2 (indirectly) "all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea." (NKJV) Yet Moses, Joshua, Caleb, and other godly Israelites followed God before the crossed the Red Sea. Gal 3:22b (indirectly) "that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe." (NKJV) Heb 4:2 (indirectly) "For indeed the gospel was reached to us as well as to them; but the word which they heard did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in those who heard it." They had to have faith for it to profit them. It does not say faith and baptism. Jn 1:11-12 (indirectly) "He [Jesus] cam into His own, and His own did not receive Him. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe His name;" Says have to believe to become children of God; does not specify whether other steps or not. Jn 2:11b, 23b (belief only) ""…and His disciples believed in Him. (23b) many believed in His name when they saw the signs which He did." Jn 6:29,35,40 "Jesus answered and said to them [the crowds], ‘This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent." (35) And Jesus said to them, ‘I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst." (40) "And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day." (NKJV) Jn 7:38,39 "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water. (39) But this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those believing in Him would receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified." (NKJV) Jn 8:30-32 "As He spoke these words, many believed in Him. Then Jesus aid to those Jews who believed Him, ‘If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed, And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.’" (NKJV) Jn 11:25-26 ""Jesus said to her, ‘I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me; though he may die, shall live. And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?" (NKJV) Jn 12:46 I have come as a light into the world, that whoever believes in Me should not abide in darkness." (NKJV) Jn 16:9 [The Holy Spirit will convict the world] "of sin, because they do not believe in Me;" No mention of conviction for not being baptized. Jn 17:20 "I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one,…" Php 1:29 "For it has been granted on behalf of Christ, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake" (not mention of baptism) 1 Jn 5:1 "Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves Him who begot also loves him who is begotten of Him." (NKJV) 1 Jn 5:10-13 "He who believes in the Son of God has the witness of himself; and he who does not believe God has made Him a liar, because he has not believed the testimony that God has given of His Son." (11) And this is the testimony: that God has given us eternal life; and this life is in His Son. (12) He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life. (13) These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God." (NKJV) Other verses mentioning belief but not baptism: Jn 4:39a; 4:41; 9:35; 10:42; 11:45,48; 12:11,42,44; 14:1,12 Mark 16:16 "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." (NIV) Yet: John 3:36 "He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." (NKJV) Q: Does Mark 16:16 prove that a person must be baptized in order to be saved? A: No, it does not specify. It says that a person who believes and is baptized will be saved, and a person who does not believe is condemned. It is silent about people who believe but are not baptized. Let me give you a simple illustration. If my daughter’s in the kitchen and she asks me for four quarters for a dollar, I could tell her to bring me a dollar, and also a water bottle. Now if she brings me a dollar and a water bottle I will give her change. If she does not bring me the dollar I do not give her change. But if she brings the dollar but no water bottle, I did not specify what I would do. If she refuses, perhaps making a disrespectful remark, I would not make change for her. On the other hand, if she tries to bring me a water bottle but cannot find one, should I still refuse her? - of course not. Matthew 7:7-8 says that "everyone who asks receives" Likewise Mark 16:16 does not specify about those who believe and are not baptized, and probably for similar reason. Is it because a person was not able to be baptized, or a person rejected obeying God. Scripture that says salvation comes at the point of faith in Jesus include Acts 16:31; Jn 1:12; 3:14-18; 3:36; 6:47; 30:31. Proverbs 30:6 and 1 Corinthians 4:6 are strict warnings not to add to God’s word. If you say that Mark 16:16 states what happens to those who believe and are not baptized, when that verse is silent on that, you are adding to God’s word. While some people, called ultra-dispensationalists, say we are not to be baptized today, that is wrong. Baptism, along with other works, are in fact involved in salvation; they are an output, not an input. Baptism and other works are the obedient response of a saved person, not the work of a lost person. John 3:4-6 "’How can a man be born when he is old?’ Nicodemus asked. ‘Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother’s womb to be born!’ Jesus answered, ‘I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit." (NIV) Q: Does John 3:5 imply a person must be baptized in water to be saved? A: No, Jesus blood saves. Water would not save Nicodemus any more than it would save the thief on the cross. First five reasons why did does not teach that, and then what it does teach. Why it does not teach that: On the surface, this might sound like one of the strongest verses supporting that you must be baptized to be saved. However, four points completely eliminate that teaching from this verse. 1. Thief on the cross: If John 3:5 taught that no unbaptized person can be saved, then the thief on the cross could not be saved, contradicting Luke 23:43. 2. Said before the resurrection too: If someone notices that the thief on the cross was before the resurrection, this command was before the resurrection too. 3. Jesus’ disciples baptized before the crucifixion: Do not forget that believers WERE to be baptized before the resurrection; otherwise why were Jesus’ disciples baptizing in John 4:2? 4. Contradicts believe only passages: Saying water baptism were essential for salvation, whether before or after the resurrection, John 3:16 "whoever believes in him", Romans 10:9-10, and other verses that say our point of contact with salvation is our belief or faith. There is no work, of any category, involved, as Ephesians 2:8-10 teaches. 5. God is understanding: Even one Church of Christ pastor told me that God is understanding of believers who are not baptized but did not reject water baptism. He and I agree on this. But if God can be "understanding" then getting baptized is still an important command to be followed, but no longer "ties the hands of God Almighty" if a person dies before being baptized. In contrast to this, I heard of a Church of Christ boy who was killed in a car accident on his way to being baptized. Would you teach that he is in Hell now, despite his intent? What it does teach: Christians see at least two truths Jesus is teaching here. 1. Do-over: We were born as sinners, with a sinful nature and we need to be born again. "…born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit". A lost person reforming themselves into salvation does not work; we must be born again, and have the Holy Spirit living inside of us (Romans 8:10,11,15). 2. Baptism visibly joins us to the kingdom of God now: Genuine believers will go to heaven eventually, but we are a part of the kingdom of God now. Believing intellectual facts is not enough (James 2:19), saving faith includes trusting Jesus as our Lord. We pledge our life to God, our Master, and one of the acts of an obedient believer is to be baptized. Baptism is not just a bath, but an outward sign of an inward pledge. Acts 2:37-38 "When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, ‘Brothers, what shall we do?’ Peter replied, ‘[ya’ll] Repent and [he/she] be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ eis the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." (NIV) [remission of sins in the NKJV, aphesin (Strong’s 859, from 863] Yet Acts 10:43: "To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him will receive remission/forgiveness of sins." (NKJV) (forgiveness in NIV) Q: Does Acts 2:37-38 prove a person must be baptized in water to be saved? A: No, you cannot base a major doctrine solely on 1. Contradicts Acts 10:43 2. A grammatical error: Repent is second person plural [ya’ll] and baptized is third person singular, so the forgiveness of sins here only modifies the second part: baptized, not the forgiveness of sins too. 3. An ambiguous use of a single word. The Greek word here, eis (Strong’s 1519), like the English word "for" can mean many things, and it can mean "because of [the past]" as well as "to cause [the future]" 4. Choosing the ambiguous use that contradicts scriptural meaning. In Mk 1:4; Lk 1:77; 3:3b John the Baptist was "preaching a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins" (NKJV) and the words for remission / forgiveness are the same in Acts 2:38 and Lk 3:3 in Greek, as they are in English. Do you believe that baptism was essential for salvation prior to Jesus; ministry with John the Baptist? (Most Christians would say no.) Of course the thief on the cross was not allowed to get down and get baptized before Jesus said he would be with Him in paradise. As for details, here are some examples of different meanings of eis. Eis mean in order to cause Lk 5:14 Jesus told the cleansed leper to show himself to the priests as Moses commanded eis a testimony to them. Eis means "in [the]" Mt 10:41 "receives a prophet eis name of the prophet" … "receives a just one eis name of the just one" Eis means "because of" Mt 3:11 "John baptized eis repentance. If eis could only mean "to cause" in Acts 2:38, then eis would have to baptize to cause repentance in Mt 3:11 Mt 12:41 [Ninevites] "repented eis the preaching of Jonah" Eis means "into" Rom 5:12 "sin eis the world entered" Rom 6:3 "all who were baptized into Christ Jesus, eis the death of Him were baptized." Lk 14:23 "Go eis the ways and hedges" Acts 22:10 "Bring [Paul] eis the fortress Eis means "in" Acts 10:43 "through the name of Him [Jesus everyone believing eis Him. Mk 1:9 Jesus was baptized of John eis Jordan. Acts 19:3 Ephesians baptized eis John’s baptism Eis means "about" or "in reference to" Acts 2:25 David speaks eis him Eis means "towards" Rom 5:8 "of Himself love eis us God," Eis means "to" Jn 4:5 "He [Jesus] comes eis a city of Samaria" Jn 11:31 "She goes eis the tomb" Green’s literal translation says, "…baptized each of you on the name of Jesus Christ to forgiveness of sins." Wuest’s Expanded Translation says "and let each one of you be baptized upon the ground of your confession of belief in the sum total of all that Jesus Christ is in His glorious Person, this baptismal testimony being in relation to the fact that your sins have been put away," The Greek word eis, is a less precise word that English. Thayer’s A Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament 20th printing 1979 (Zondervan) spends almost six pages discussing the Greek word eis. On p.183 he writes, "[Preposition] governing the Accusative, and denoting entrance into, or direction and limit: into, to, towards, for, among" It has a variety of uses, but Thayer classifies Rom 5:12 as Properly of Place. He says, "4. of the limit to which ; with acc. of place, as far as, even to : ... Lk 14:23 ; with [accusative plural] or pers. to, unto; Acts 23:15 ... Ro. v.12; xvi.10; 2 Co ix. 5 ... x.14." Just prior to this he writes "3. of motion (not into a place itself, but) in a vicinity of a place; where it may be rendered to, near, towards..." Examples include Mk 3:7, Jn 4:5;11:31,38;20:1,3. In Rom 5:8 (eis) means unto, towards or one [Thayer p.184]. In Rom 5:12 and 15 (eis) is equivalent to the Latin in and ad [Thayer p.186]. In conclusion, for verses 16 and 18, one can see why most major English translations (NKJV, NASB, NIV, and Wuest) render this as "resulting" or "bringing". This more precisely conveys the meaning than simply translating "to" as the KJV does. Acts 22:16 [Ananias told Paul] "And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name." (NIV) Yet Acts 22:13a "He stood beside me and said, ‘Brother Saul, receive our sight!’…" (NIV) Q: Does Acts 22:16 prove a person must be baptized in water to be saved? A: No. Saul/Paul was already saved by then, for Ananias called him "brother Saul" in Acts 22:13. Baptism is an emblem of washing our sins away. But even if someone that this was literally washing their sins away, they would probably still agree with three things. 1) If it was the liquid water that literally took away the sins, then future sins would not be taken way unless a person was baptized again and again. 2) It is not the water that is special, but rather the water is an identification with the blood of Christ. 3) It does not say people can have sins washed away without baptism. God is not incapable of taking ways the sins of the thief on the cross, and early Christians who were martyred before they had the opportunity to be baptized. So it is not the drops of water that take away anything. Rather it is the pledge of a good conscience before God that connects us with Christ’s blood, and baptism is an acknowledgement, and emblem, of that. Rom 6:3-4 "Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized in to Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just a Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life." (NIV) Q: Does Rom 6:3-4, prove a person must be baptized in water to be saved? A: No this verse uses a spiritual illustration from the normal experience of baptism that Christians normally have, but it does not mention the people who were not baptized or any power in the water. Rather it shows that our baptism visibly signified our decision to identify with Christ’s death, and likewise with His resurrection. Paul’s teaching here has similarities to Colossians 2:11-14. We have been "circumcised", not in the Old Testament way, but in the New Testament way. Colossians 2:12 says, "having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead." 1 Cor 6:11 "And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of God." (NIV) Q: Does 1 Cor 6:11 show that believers must be immersed to be baptized? A: We are cleansed or washed in Christ. But the Greek word here, apeloussathe, (Strong’s 628) is not related to baptism. I do not know that Church of Christ people do not try to appeal to this verse very often, but occasionally they might grasp at it. Gal 3:26-27 "You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, (27) for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ." (NIV) Q: Does Gal 3:26-27 prove a person must be baptized in water to be saved? A: No, this verse does not mention salvation, but it shows some of the importance of baptism after salvation. Baptism is an outward, external sign; we agree that the water is not magic; its soaking into our skin does not do anything. Nevertheless baptism is an external clothing with Christ symbolic of both an external and internal change. External: We need to be externally clothed with Christ as a sign to the world and a visible sign of our joining God’s kingdom and a pledge of ourselves toward God. As a soldier puts on a uniform we put on baptism. The uniform does not make a soldier; it is what a soldier is commanded to put on. Water does not make a Christian, baptism is what a Christian is commanded to do. Symbol of internal change: Baptism is an outward symbol of an inward change: believers are baptized with the Holy Spirit; who now lives in us. (1 John 4:13; Rom 8:9-11) Eph 5:26 "To make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word," (NIV) Titus 3:5 "he saved us, not because of the righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior" (NIV) Q: Do Eph 5:26 and Tt 3:5 prove that a person must be baptized in water to be saved? A: No, Titus 3:5 refers to the baptism of the Holy Spirit, On Ephesians 5:25, rather than answer myself, I will let Alexander Campbell, one of the founders of the Restoration Movement speak. He taught various things at various time, but here is what he wrote in Design by Baptism by Alexander Campbell p.262. "In this sense we are to understand what is said by Paul, that Christ sanctifieth and cleanseth the church ‘with washing of water by the word.’ Eph 5:26, and in another place, that ‘according to His mercy he saved us, but he washing of regeneration, and of renewing of the Holy Ghost’ Titus 3:5, and by Peter that ‘baptism doeth save us’ 1 Pet. 3:21, For it is not the intention of Paul to signify that our ablution and salvation are completed by water, or that water contains in itself the virtue to purify, regenerate, and renew; nor did Peter mean that it was the cause of salvation, but only the knowledge and assurance of it is received in this sacrament: what is sufficiently evident from the words they have used. For Paul connects together the ‘word of life’ and ‘the baptism of water;’ as if he had said, our ablution and sanctification are announced to us by the Gospel, and by baptism this message is confirmed. And Peter after having said the baptism doth save us, immediately adds, that it is ‘not the putting away the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God’ which proceeds from faith. But on the contrary, baptism promises us no other purification than by the sprinkling of the blood of Christ; which is emblematically represented by water, on account of its resemblance to washing and cleansing." Col 2:11-12 "In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, (12) having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through you faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead." (NIV) Q: Does Col 2:11-12 show that believers must be immersed to be baptized? A: This only says that we are buried with Christ in baptism. Colossians 2:11-12 discusses circumcision in the Old Testament and baptism in the New Testament. No one in the Old Testament was declared righteous by circumcision, especially since only half of infants were circumcised. Heb 10:22 "let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water." (NIV) Q: Does Heb 10:22 show that believers must be immersed to be baptized? A: In Hebrews 10:22 "having been washed with water" does nothing to save us. In fact, the washing itself does NOT save us according to 1 Peter 3:21. Rather believers’ bodies are washed with water in baptism as an emblem of their pledge of accepting Christ as their Lord and Savior. As a side note, the Greek words here are having been sprinkled (errantismenoi, Strong’s 4472), having been washed is leloumemoi Strong’s 3068), neither of which, of course is baptism. 1 Pet 3:20b-21 "days of Noah wile the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also - not the removal of dirt from the body but he pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ," (NIV) Q: Does 1 Pet 3:20b-21 prove a person must be baptized in water to be saved? A: No. Baptism is the normal response of a follower of Christ, but it is neither essential to salvation nor prior to salvation for five reasons. 1. Both Noah and Abraham were obedient servants of God prior to the flood and testing with Isaac 2. 1 Peter 3:21 says it is NOT the water, but the pledge of a good conscience before God. 3. It does not refer to people who made a pledge but were not able to get baptized. 4. The water does not take the place of the cross. 5. Neither water nor faith are a way to heaven. There is no other way to Heaven except through Christ (Acts 4:12; John 14:6), 5. The Bible also uses word save in the fourth tense (of working out our salvation. So baptism only saves in the on-going sense that we can turn others from sin (James 5:20) we can save ourselves (Acts 2:40), we can save others (1 Cor 7:16, 9:22; 1 Tim 4:16) However, as 1 Peter 3:20b-21 shows, baptism is the normal way we show our acceptance and faith in what Christ did for us. A person is to show their pledge of a good conscience towards God by water baptism, but if they cannot, this verse does not say there is no other way to show acceptance. Around 202 A.D. the martyrs Potoiaemina and the soldier Basilides. Other Christian martyrs, and the 2-year catechetical school. Patrick’s baptismal candidates Q: In Mt 4:17; 10:17; Mk 1:15; Lk 8:10; Jn 3:5 are the kingdom of God and Kingdom of heaven identical, or is there a slight difference between the two? A: Many have seen them as identical; you will not be a part of one if you are not a part of the other. Matthew uses both terms, and Mark, Luke, and John use only the kingdom of God. Jesus uses both terms in adjacent verses in Matthew 19:23-24. Others see a slight difference; the kingdom of heaven is where all believers go when we die, and the kingdom of God is what we belong to now when we are saved. Regardless of the individual words, we can all agree that our salvation has both a "now" aspect on earth and a future aspect in heaven (1 Cor 13:12; Php 1:21-24) that will not be realized until we reach heaven. In John 3:5 some think water refers to amniotic fluid when a baby is born, but others think it refers to baptism. It cannot mean Jesus told Nicodemus that a person cannot be saved unless they are baptized, unless the thief on the cross was not saved! But it can mean that a person is not a visible part of God’s kingdom on earth until they are baptized. Similar to this, many churches do not want someone to take the Lord’s Supper until they are baptized. See the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary p.991 for more info. Nevertheless, as Jesus spoke foreshadowing his death and communion in John 6:51-56, Jesus spoke not only foreshadowing Christian baptism, but they were already very familiar with baptism for repentance, thanks to John. This view is advocated by: John Chrysostom (392-407 A.D.) Homilies of St. John Homily 25 Gregory Nanzianzus (330-391 A.D.) Oration on Holy Baptism ch.8 F.F. Bruce in Hard Sayings of the Bible p.495-496 Jamieson, Fausset, Brown Harper’s Bible Commentary. 3a. The water stands for baptismal regeneration. The early church fathers held this view. However, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.281 mentions that this interpretation contradicts being saved by faith alone, as Ephesians 2:8-9 and John 3:16 show. This view is advocated by Justin Martyr (wrote about 138-165 A.D.) First Apology chapter 61 Irenaeus (182-188 A.D.) in fragment 34 Tertullian (200-220 A.D.) in On Baptism ch. 12 Cyprian (wrote 248-258 A.D.) in Epistle 71. Gregory Nanzianzus (330-391 A.D.) Oration on Holy Baptism chapter 8. Basil of Cappadocia (357-379 A.D.) On the Spirit 15:35 John of Damascus Exposition of the Orthodox Faith chapter 9 Ambrose of Milan (340-397 A.D.) Of the Holy Spirit 3.10.63-64 Constitutions of the Holy Apostles (c.80-190 A.D.) 6.3.15 (This was a spurious work, which had an early date. Among other things, it also supports infant Baptism.) However, interpreting John 3:5 this way sounds close to making baptism (whether John’s baptism or Christian baptism) a requirement for salvation. Nevertheless, John’s baptism was looking for salvation, not something that brought salvation. In Acts 2:38, Peter said the people had to repent and baptized and they would receive the Holy Spirit. Hebrews 4:2 said some were not saved because they did not share the faith (or combine it with faith.) Things such as repentance, faith, and obedience, including obedience in water baptism are evidence of us receiving salvation, not that which saves us. This view is advocated by: The Applied New Testament Commentary p.368 Matthew Henry’s Commentary says that "it is probably that Christ had an eye to the ordinance of baptism." 4. Water stands for conversion. Converts to Judaism went through a baptism ceremony. Jesus was implying that one had to convert to experience the new birth. Thus Jesus was saying "by conversion and by the spirit". This view does not preclude believing other views, too. However, while Jewish converts were washed, a more common scene was Jews washing for ritual purification. This viewpoint is perhaps not so much false, as too narrow a view of 3. This view is advocated by: The IVP Bible Commentary : New Testament (1993) p.270. 5. Water stands for the baptizing ministry of John the Baptist, and the Spirit for Jesus’ ministry. No one at that time could think of "baptism" and "new things" in the same sentence without thinking of John the Baptist’s ministry. This view is advocated by F.B. Meyer in The Gospel of John p.64. The Bible Knowledge Commentary : New Testament p.281 gives five views, but commends only this view as having "the merit of historical propriety as well as theological acceptability." The Life Application Bible gives various views, one of which is the repentance that John the Baptist’s ministry signified. 6. Water is an image for the pouring out of the Spirit in Old Testament times. Jesus said in John 7:38, "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water. But this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those believing in Him would receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified." (NKJV). The New Geneva Study Bible p.1676 says that while this is not an exact quote of any Old Testament Scripture, it can be a general reference to both Isaiah 44:3 and Ezekiel 36:25-27. Titus 3:5 has very similar phrasing to John 3:5, saying "washing of rebirth and renewal of/by the Holy Spirit" While Acts showed some special cases, the norm was for Christians to be baptized with literal water and the Holy Spirit. However, water is used for ritual washings, not the pouring of the Spirit in the Torah. Also, the Believer’s Bible Commentary p.1478 points out that if the water represented nothing more than the ministry of the Spirit, then the verse would seem to say "unless one is born of the Spirit and the Spirit", which would be redundant. 1 John 5:8 speaks of the water, spirit, and blood. Since the spirit and blood are different, the water is different, too. This view is advocated by the New Geneva Study Bible p.1665. The Companion Bible says it is "spiritual water" as opposed to literal water. The IVP Bible Commentary : New Testament says that the Greek can either be translated "water and the spirit, or water, that is, the spirit." MY CONCLUSION: 1. is not particularly compelling. It only makes sense if you downplay the precision of the Greek, and think Jesus was telling Nicodemus one had to be physically born. 2. relies on Jesus chiding Nicodemus for understanding scripture that was not written yet. For some, this view is necessitated by the opinion that if "baptism" has to mean the error of baptismal regeneration, it cannot be baptism. 3a. is unbiblical, as Acts 10 shows that people could be saved and receive the Holy Spirit prior to water baptism. 3b, 4, and 5. can all be tied together. This view has the merit of the plain meaning, as well as the universal understanding of the Greek-speaking early church. 6. has no merit, except as a secondary implication of 3b, 4, and 5. Perhaps we should focus less on "what this would mean to me" and observe "what this would mean to Nicodemus and early Christians". The most likely answer is a combination of 3b, 4, and 5. While views 2 and 6 are implied symbolism, they would not be recognized by Nicodemus as its main meaning, and were not recognized by any known Greek-speaking Christians. When Critics Ask p.406 also discusses some of the views, without committing to a particular one. Q: In Jn 3:5, is "baptismal regeneration" true, the belief that water baptism is necessary for salvation? A: No. The Gentiles who were filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues in Acts 10:44-48, prior to being baptized with water, probably did not think so. Jesus apparently did not think so either when He spoke to the thief on his right. One could try to argue that the thief on the cross was prior to Jesus’ resurrection, but then Jesus’ words to Nicodemus were spoken, and were true, prior to Jesus’ resurrection, too. Of course all of this was prior to the Holy Spirit at Pentecost and there being Christian baptism; John’s baptism and Old Testament washings were all they knew. However, if an interpretation of a verse makes part of the verse without any meaning whatsoever, then that interpretation undoubtedly is incorrect. So what is the meaning of Jesus’ words here? The answer is implied in Luke 7:29-30, where it was said the Pharisees and experts in the Law had rejected God’s purpose for themselves. The reason given is that they had not been baptized by John. Water baptism is neither a meaningless ritual nor merely an optional thing, like choir practice, to show special love to God. If a person with full knowledge rejects water baptism, and the truth it represents, they have rejected God. Unless they turn around, they are not going to Heaven. See also 1001 Bible Questions Answered p.118-119, When Critics Ask p.406, When Cultists Ask p.165-166, and the Complete Book of Bible Answers p.210-211 for more info. For more see our playlist, "Dealing with "Saved by Works & Baptism", "Church of Christ"" with 71 videos & 63 hours of teaching material at ru-vid.com/group/PLBD55090718DA6D3D. See also IS WATER BAPTISM NECESSARY TO ESCAPE HELL & BE SAVED & ARE YOU "BORN AGAIN" (JOHN 3:3-8) BY IT?; THE EVANGELICAL CHRISTIAN ROMANCE WITH APOSTATE ROMAN CATHOLICISM (PART 1): WATER BAPTISM SALVATION?; & Uncomfortable Questions for Catholics #2: Is Water Baptism Essential & Does Mass Bread Become God?. Also see our newsletter on the "Church of Christ" on our website www.BibleQuery.org (once on our homepage click on the "Experience" box to the left & scroll down to the newsletter section & click on "Church of Christ" & particularly notice the article, "Questions to Consider Concerning Baptism." 1 Corinthians 1:14-17, "14 I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; 15 Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name. 16 And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. 17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect."

Apparently the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society of Jehovah's Witnesses has no fear of Revelation 22:18-19. The easiest way to demonstrate contradictions in the Jehovah's Witness New World Translation of the Bible is by contrasting it to the Watchtower 1969 Kingdom Interlinear Translation also published by them & also their original 1950 edition of the NWT which differs significantly from their more modern editions. By pitting their own translations against each other the Jehovah's Witnesses lose either way. I use my 1969 "K.I.T." (The JWs call it their "The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures" which has a purple cover but I've always referred to it as the "Purple People Eater" as a joke among my friends) & in meetings with JWs I have pointed out such passages as Acts 10:36, Colossians 2:6-12, Romans 1:20, Philippians 3:11 cross referenced to Philippians 1:19, 1 Peter 1:11, Revelation 3:14, Ephesians 3:19, Hebrews 12:9,23 etc. showing differences in their Greek renditions that differ from what their English NWT says. Of particular interest is their own violations of their own "rules" of translation given in both their "Forwards" of the KIT & NWT such as : examples of biased paraphrase in John 15:5,7 "in Christ," John 17:26, 2 Corinthians 5:19, Galatians 1:16, Romans 8:9-10; examples of non literal translation of English - Colossians 1:16 "other," Philippians 2:9 "other," Hebrews 9:27 "for all time;" not following their own rule of "assigning each word one meaning or definition: Matthew 25:46 "cutting off" cf Acts 4:21, Matthew 27:50 "yielded up his breath" cf Luke 23:46 "spirit" cf Hebrews 12:23 "spiritual lives;" Philippians 2:10-11 "Lord," but translated in Romans 14:11 as "Jehovah," see also John 1:1, John 8:58, Romans 10:12, Acts 12:23, Acts 4:12 & 1 Peter 3:15. Their NWT translates "torture stake" in Matthew 10:38 instead of the word "cross" but both the KIT & NWT would refute that in John 20:25 by the plural use of the word "nails" since you need "nails" for a cross (a nail for each hand) but only one nail for a "torture state" (one nail going through both hands at the same time) as they say (pages 1154-1155, KIT, 1969). I cover some of the above information in our videos "THE JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES FRAUDULENT BIBLE: EVALUATING THE "NEW WORLD TRANSLATION" VERSE BY VERSE" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-CtqstNm5WI4.html & "EXAMINING THE JEHOVAH'S WITNESS "NEW WORLD TRANSLATION" OF THE BIBLE" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-oGT82qj4cj0.html. An internet search on "Contradictions in the New World Translation" will yield further results (such as www.eldaleonwhite.com/jw/jw3.pdf). For example I found the following useful information just doing a quick web search. Is The New World Translation Accurate? The New World Translation of The Holy Scriptures (NWT) is the main bible used by Jehovah’s Witnesses worldwide. After only a casual reading of it, lovers of God’s Word will quickly realize its peculiarity. It has sent shivers down the backs of many well-known theologians and contemporary Greek scholars. Many proof texts Christians use to teach and defend the foundational truths of their faith are rendered quite differently in this translation. Often, the verses presented represent radical departures from orthodox Christian beliefs. However, just because something is different doesn’t mean that it is wrong. According to the bible, we need to test all things (1 Thess. 5:21). How can we test the accuracy of the NWT? Well, since the New Testament was originally written in Greek, we can compare the New Testament of the NWT to a widely recognized, accepted and scholarly Greek text. In fact, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society has already done that for us. In 1969 and again in 1985, the Watchtower printed and published the Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures (KIT). This book compares the NWT’s New Testament to the scholarly 1881 Westcott and Hort Greek text of the New Testament. The KIT is arranged so that the Greek text is on the left side of the page with the English rendering below it and the NWT is on the right side. According to the 1985 KIT on p. 5, the arrangement is beneficial because, “....the accuracy of any modern translation can be determined”. So, lets compare some verses in the KIT to see if the NWT is in fact accurate. Before we dig in, I want to refer to 2 statements found in the 1985 KIT. On p.9 it says, “We offer no paraphrase of the scriptures. Our endeavor throughout has been to give as literal a translation as possible ....”. And on p.10, “To each major word we have assigned one meaning and have held to that meaning as far as the context permitted”. So, with those statements in mind let’s check out the 1985 KIT. Scripture Verses: John 8:58 John 17:3 Hebrews 12:22-23 Philippians 2:9 Colossians 1:16-20 Colossians 2:9 John 1:1 Matthew 25:46 vs. Acts 4:21 Acts 11:14 Summary John 8:58 NWT- “Jesus said to them: “Most truly I say to you, Before Abraham came into existence, I have been””. Literal Greek Text- “Said to them Jesus Amen amen I am saying to you Before Abraham to become I Am.” Why has the NWT violated their own standard and paraphrased the Greek words ego eimi (I AM) into I have been? After all, the NWT translates ego eimi accurately into I am in versus 18, 23, 24 and 28. To answer that question, one needs to read Exodus 3:13-14 in any approved bible translation. For example, in the King James Version (which Jehovah’s Witnesses used prior to 1950), Moses asks YHWH (LORD) what His name is. God’s answer is “I AM”. This presents a problem for the Watchtower, because Jesus is claiming to be the I AM, the Almighty God of the Old Testament. Notice the next verse in John 8:59, “Therefore, they picked up stones to hurl at him....”. The religious Jews of Jesus’ day knew very well who Jesus was claiming to be. They acted as if Jesus was a blasphemer (see Lev 24:16). Return to Scripture Verses John 17:3 NWT- “This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ.” Literal Greek Text- “This but is the everlasting life in order that they may be knowing you the only true God and whom you sent forth Jesus Christ.” Notice the change? “They may be knowing you” has been translated into the NWT as, “taking in knowledge of you”. Witnesses will say that both wordings mean the same thing. However, this is not true. One may take in an abundance of knowledge about the president, for example, but never actually know him personally. The same is true of Christ. Many people know about Jesus but they don’t have a personal relationship with Him. Jesus actually spoke about this in Matthew 7:22-23. He said, “Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then I will profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity”. See also John 5:39-40. Why would the Watchtower want to distort the meaning of this text? Because by saying that eternal life comes by “taking in knowledge”, the Society keeps the Jehovah’s Witness dependent on them for salvation. Studying their literature becomes a matter of life and death and therefore, the Witness remains under the complete control of the Watchtower. Sadly, one never knows how much knowledge he must take in to gain everlasting life. Return to Scripture Verses Hebrews 12:22-23 NWT- “But you have approached a Mount Zion and a city of [the] living God, heavenly Jerusalem, and myriads of angels, in general assembly, and the congregation of the firstborn who have been enrolled in the heavens, and God the Judge of all, and the spiritual lives of righteous ones who have been made perfect.” Let’s look at the end of v. 23 in the Greek: Literal Greek Text- “....and to spirits of righteous (ones) having been perfected....” Why has the Watchtower again violated their own standard and paraphrased the word “spirits” from the Greek text into “spiritual lives” in the NWT? Because, since the text is clearly speaking of heaven, if the NWT used the accurate rendering “spirits”, it would conflict with their doctrine of soul sleep. Soul sleep is the belief that man does not possess an immaterial nature that survives the death of the physical body. The Watchtower teaches that once a man is dead, he remains unconscious in the grave until the future resurrection, which began, according to the Society, in 1918, when dead members of the anointed class (the 144,000) were raised into heaven as invisible spirits. However, the above verse clearly states that in the first century A.D., when it was written, there were already spirits of saved men in heaven. The doctrine of soul sleep can be refuted by many other scriptures such as Mt. 10:28, Jn. 11:25-26, 2 Co. 5:8, Rev. 6:9-11. Return to Scripture Verses Philippians 2:9 NWT- “For this very reason also God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every [other] name....” Literal Greek Text- “through which also the God him put high up over, and he graciously gave to him the name the over every name....” Why has the Watchtower inserted the word “other” in the NWT? Again, this conflicts with their theology that Jesus is a lesser being than that of the Father. If the word “other” is taken out of the text, the verse says that Jesus has been given the highest name in all the universe. This puts Jesus on a level equal with Jehovah God. Return to Scripture Verses Colossians 1:16-20 NWT- “because by means of him all [other] things have been created....all [other] things have been created through him....Also, he is before all [other] things and by means of him all [other] things were made to exist....” Literal Greek Text- Suffice it to say that the word “other” is not found in the Greek text. Why has the Watchtower added the word other four times in the above passage? Without the word “other” present, the text says that Jesus is the Creator of all things. By sticking the word other in, Jesus becomes Jehovah’s “master worker” who was created by Jehovah and was then used to create all other things in existence. Interestingly, the very first edition of the NWT’s New Testament didn’t even bracket the word “other” to show that it was added to the text. Later editions became somewhat more honest. However, many times when the Watchtower quotes the above verses in their literature, they remove the brackets. We see that again, the Greek text contradicts the Watchtower’s own theology. Return to Scripture Verses Colossians 2:9 NWT- “....because it is in him that all the fullness of the divine quality dwells bodily.” Literal Greek Text- “....because in him is dwelling down all the fullness of the divinity bodily” Why has the Watchtower translated the word divinity as divine quality? Again, just as in John 8:58, the verse has been paraphrased to strip Jesus of His Deity. The Watchtower teaches that when Jesus walked on the earth, he was nothing more than a perfect man. His very essence or being was not divine, he only possessed the qualities of divinity. It is interesting that the 1969 KIT used the word godship instead of divinity in the literal Greek text, although the NWT on the right side still translated it “divine quality”. Although in Romans 1:20 when referring to the Father, the Watchtower translated the word “godship” in the Greek text into “Godship” in the NWT text. Does the words double-standard cross your mind? The fact that they changed the English word from godship in the 1969 version to divinity in the 1985 version is also revealing. On p.5 of the 1985 KIT, it says, “Between the lines of the Greek text will be found the word-for-word English translation of 1969”. However, we find an example here where it is not word-for-word from the 1969 translation. The Watchtower can’t even conform to their own standards. Return to Scripture Verses John 1:1 NWT- “In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.” Literal Greek Text- “ In beginning was the Word, and the Word was toward the God, and god was the Word.” Of all the scriptures in the NWT, this one in particular makes Christians cringe the most. The difference is obvious. Notice that their is no “a” in the Greek text before the last rendering of “god”. It has been inserted into the NWT. Why? The Watchtower argument from p.1139 of the 1985 KIT goes like this: “.... because the Greek word ....(theos) is a singular predicate noun occurring before the verb and is not preceded by the definite article.” What this means is that since the definite article, the, is before the first mention of God but not the second, and the verb, was, is after the second mention of god, then the rendering “a god” is justified. (If you’re thoroughly confused, don’t worry.) This is a perfect example of the Watchtower making up a grammatical rule and only applying it when it fits their theology. If they applied this rule to the rest of the New Testament, the outcome would be ridiculous. The following are some examples of how a few scriptures would turn out in the book of John if they applied their rule consistently: John 1:12 “However, as many as did receive him, to them he gave authority to become a god’s children.” John 1:13 “and they were born, not from blood or from a fleshly will or from man’s will, but from a god’s.” John 1:18 “No man has seen a god at any time....”. John 3:2 “....Rabbi, we know that you as a teacher have come from a god....” Obviously, the Watchtower has gone to great lengths to deny the Deity of Christ. They are hard-pressed to find any reputable source to agree with their translation of John 1:1. (see article Does the Watchtower Endorse Spirit Mediums) Even B.F. Westcott, whose Greek text is used in the KIT and is the basis for the NWT, doesn’t agree with them. He said, “The predicate (God) stands emphatically first, as in iv.24. It is necessarily without the article (theos not ho theos) inasmuch as it describes the nature of the Word and does not identify His Person....No idea of inferiority of nature is suggested by the form of expression, which simply affirms the true deity of the Word.” The Gospel According to St. John (Eerdmans, 1958 reprint), p.3. Similarly, Greek scholar Dr. Julius R. Mantey, who was quoted in the 1969 KIT p.1159, called the Watchtower’s rendering of this verse, “A grossly misleading translation.” Return to Scripture Verses Matthew 25:46 vs. Acts 4:21 Matthew 25:46 NWT- “And these will depart into everlasting cutting-off, but the righteous ones into everlasting life.” Literal Greek Text- “And will go off these into lopping off everlasting, but the righteous (ones) into life everlasting.” Notice that the old English words “lopping off” in the Greek text have been translated as “cutting-off” in the NWT. Why haven’t they translated the words “lopping off” into “punishment” as do all reputable bible translations available today? Because, since the Watchtower doesn’t want any Jehovah’s Witnesses to believe in hell, a place of eternal punishment, they have to use the words “cutting-off” so that it will agree with their doctrine of annihilation. This is the belief that no one will go to a place of everlasting punishment, God will annihilate the unsaved so they will just cease to exist. Let’s compare this verse to another verse. Acts 4:21 NWT- “....they released them, since they did not find any ground on which to punish them....” Literal Greek Text- ....they released them, nothing finding the how they might lop off them....” How did the NWT render the words “lop off” in this verse? PUNISH! Obviously, the Watchtower is not consistent with their translation. When the words “lop off” are in a verse that doesn’t challenge their teaching, they use “punish”, but when it doesn’t agree with their doctrine they use “cutting-off”. Remember the statement written on p. 10 of the KIT: “To each major word we have assigned one meaning....”. Their goes that promise out the window. Return to Scripture Verses Acts 11:14 NWT- “....and he will speak those things to you by which you and all your household may get saved.” Literal Greek Text- “....who will speak sayings toward you in which will be saved you and all the house of you.” Why has “will be saved” been translated into “may get saved”? Because a rank and file Jehovah’s Witnesses has no assurance of his salvation. The Watchtower’s gospel is a works based system so the Witness never knows if he has done enough to merit eternal life. There is no end to knocking on doors, taking in knowledge and serving at the Kingdom Hall. Even if he makes it into the thousand reign of Christ, he still may be annihilated if he doesn’t measure up to Jehovah’s standard. The Jehovah’s Witness is kept in a state of spiritual bondage. If he only knew that Christ’s blood frees us from dead works and gives all who place their faith in Him alone the assurance of eternal life (John 5:24, 10:28; 1 Peter 1:3-5). Return to Scripture Verses In summary, it is obvious that the NWT is not an honest translation. The Watchtower has secretly smuggled in their own peculiar doctrines to the scriptures by paraphrasing and changing verses where necessary. No wonder why the Watchtower won‘t reveal the names of the men on the “New World Translation Committee”. Who would want to take the blame? Finally, one must wonder what kind of organization can publish such a corrupted translation and say in their publication, All Scripture Is Inspired of God and Beneficial, “The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures is a faithful translation of God’s Word....” p. 331. And, “Thanks be to God that he has provided the New World Translation, with its clear and accurate Bible text.” p.327 For those interested please see our playlist "Dealing with Jehovah's Witnesses, Watchtower Society" with 22 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLCF0ADB29C0EB8C40. Matthew 7:15, "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves."

It's always exciting to see the Sovereignty of God in action during true evangelism activities. You don't need fake "sales techniques" to get "converts." Recently SermonAudio put a testimony of a French lady who came to the Lord out of Roman Catholicism through our videos on RU-vid in their "Staff Picks" section. You can hear "Testimony: Camille Jolly" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sermonID=6414192554 (or on RU-vid at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE--oXfZEP6hL4.html). Glory to God alone for this. Larry Wessels, Director, Christian Answers of Austin, Texas / Christian Debater RU-vid Channel: ru-vid.com Home Church: Dayspring Fellowship, Austin, Texas www.dsf.org/, Reformed Baptist Pastor: Greg Van Court at www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp?speakeronly=true&currsection=sermonsspeaker&keyword=Greg_Van_Court 2 Timothy 4:2-5

See our video "RISE OF THE CULTS: WHERE DID ALL THESE STRANGE AMERICAN RELIGIOUS SECTS COME FROM?" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-HfVTXbFrvh8.html & our playlist "Dealing with Mormonism, The Con Man Religion of Joseph Smith, Jr." at ru-vid.com/group/PL11CD0EE613306BB5 with 20 videos. The history of Mormonism is as follows: 1805 Joseph Smith, founder of Mormonism, is born in Sharon, Vermont. 1820 In response to his first uttered prayer, Joseph Smith purportedly has First Vision of God the Father and Jesus (Pearl of Great Price, "Joseph Smith - History" vv. 3, 17-19). (See 1832a, 1834d, 1835a, b, 1840b, 1842a, 1855a, 1879a.) 1827 Angel Moroni gives Smith the Golden Plates which will become the Book of Mormon (Ibid., v. 59). 1830 (a) Smith finishes translation of the Golden Plates and publishes Book of Mormon (BoM). This book contains two very interesting doctrines which would become pivotal in later years. First, only one God in the Godhead (Alma 11:22-35; cf. 1842a, 1844a, c, d.) Second, David's and Solomon's polygamy was an abomination to God (Jacob 2:24-35; cf. Doctrine &Covenants, 132:38-39). (See 1838c cross dates.) (b) April 6, church founded - Name: The Church of Christ (David Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ, p. 73). (See 1834b, 1838d.) 1832 (a) First Vision account recorded for the first time. Joseph Smith says he was "in the 16th year of my age," and "I saw the Lord ... (who) was crucifyed for the world." No mention of the Father (Joseph Smith's 1832 Diary). (See 1820 cross-dates.) (b) Joseph Smith gives prophecy of temple to be built at Independence, in Jackson County, Missouri. "A revelation of Jesus Christ unto his servant Joseph Smith ... to stand upon Mount Zion, which shall be the city of New Jerusalem ... in the western boundaries of the State of Missouri ... beginning at this place, even the place of the temple, which temple shall be reared in this generation. For verily this generation shall not all pass away until an house shall be built unto the Lord..." (D&C, 84:1-5) This proved to be a false prophecy (see 1833b, 1871, 1996b). 1833 (a) First 65 revelations printed in Book of Commandments. (See 1835c.) (b) Mormons are driven out of Jackson County, Missouri. (See 1832b, 1871, 1996b). 1834 (a) Lectures on Faith first published for "School of the Elders" (Church News, 7 January, 1989, p. 4). (See 1835c, 1842a.) (b) Name of church changed to "The Church of the Latter Day Saints" (Whitmer, An Address to All Believers in Christ, p. 73). (See 1830, 1838d.) (c) February 24, Smith receives revelation explaining persecution of Mormons in Jackson County, Missouri, wherein Independence, and the appointed temple lot are located. They are promised, "I have decreed a decree which my people shall realize, inasmuch as they hearken from this very hour unto the counsel which I, the Lord their God, shall give unto them. Behold they shall, for I have decreed it, begin to prevail against mine enemies from this very hour. And by hearkening to observe all the words which I, the Lord their God, shall speak unto them, they shall never cease to prevail until the kingdoms of the world are subdued under my feet, and the earth is given to the saints, to possess it forever" (Doctrine and Covenants, 103:5-7). This, too, proved to be a false prophecy (see 1841). (See also 1838b, 1839b, 1840a.) (d) New First Vision information on Joseph Smith's age. "I shall, therefore, pass over that, till I come to the 15th year of his life" (Messenger and Advocate, Dec. 1834, Vol. 1, p. 42). (See 1820 cross-dates.) 1835 (a) New First Vision information on Smith's age in Mormon newspaper, Messenger and Advocate. "You will recollect that I mentioned the time of a religious excitement, in Palmyra and vicinity to have been in the 15th year of our brother J. Smith Jr.'s, age - that was an error in type - it should have been in the 17th" (Ibid., Feb. 1835, Vol. 1, p. 76). (See 1820 cross dates.) (b) New First Vision account. Joseph Smith writes in his diary, "...a personage appeared in the midst of this pillar of flame...another personage soon appeared like unto the first, he said unto me thy sins are forgiven thee, he testifyed unto me that Jesus Christ is the Son of God; and I saw many angels in this vision when I was about 14 years old when I received this first communication" (1835 Diary, Nov. 9). (See 1820 cross dates.) (c) The Doctrine &Covenants, containing the Lectures on Faith (see 1842a) and the purported revelations of Joseph Smith up to this date, is published. This is a major revision of the Book of Commandments. Hundreds of words are changed from the original revelations (see 1833a). A new section on marriage (101), contains: "Inasmuch as this church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy: we declare that we believe, that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband, except in the case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again. (See 1838c cross-dates.) (d) Church purchases Egyptian papyrus manuscripts from Michael H. Chandler. Joseph Smith claims to translate them by revelation, says they were actually written by Abraham of the Bible (making them thousands of years older than any extant manuscript of the Bible). Carbon-14 and most of the sophisticated dating methods known to modern science are still unknown. Study of ancient Egyptian language is an infant science and Joseph has no contemporaries who can disprove his translation. (See 1851, 1912b, 1966a, 1967.) 1836 First Mormon Temple is built in Kirtland, Ohio. Joseph Smith would later claim to see Jesus, Moses, Elijah and Elias in this temple (Deseret News Church Almanac, 1979, p. 47). 1838 (a) April 17, Joseph Smith receives revelation to send David W. Patton on a mission "next spring" (1839) "in company with" other Mormon Twelve Apostles (D&C,;sec. 114; see also sec. 118). However, in October David W. Patton is shot and killed in mob action (History of the Church, Vol. 3, p. 171). (See 1839a.) (b) April 26, Smith receives another revelation, wherein the people are commanded to "build a house" unto the Lord at Far West, Missouri. They were to "recommence laying the foundation of my house" one year later, 26 April, 1839, and were to "labor diligently" on it "from that time forth...until it shall be finished, from the cornerstone thereof unto the top thereof, until there shall not anything remain that is not finished" (D&C,115:8-12). (See 1839b, 1840a, 1841, 1996b.) (c) Church publicly denies belief in polygamy. In questions and answers prepared for and printed in The Elder's Journal, Joseph Smith writes: Q: "Do the Mormons believe in having more wives than one?" A: "No, not at the same time" (History of the Church, Vol. 3, p. 28). (See 1829, 1835c, 1838c, 1843b, 1844b, c, 1852b, 1853, 1854c, 1855b, 1856c, 1866b, c, 1876, 1879b, 1887a, 1890a, b, 1898b, 1906, 1963.) (d) Name of the Church changes again. "For thus shall my church be called in the last days, even The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" (D&C,115:4). (See 1830, 1834b.) (e) July 4, In a carefully prepared speech approved by Joseph Smith, Sidney Rigdon declares, "...that mob that comes on us to disturb us, it shall be between us and them a war of extermination; for we will follow them until the last drop of their blood is spilled; or else they will have to exterminate us,...one party or the other shall be utterly destroyed" (Comprehensive History of the Church, Vol. 1, p. 441). (See 1838f, 1840a.) (f) October 27, Missouri Governor Lilburn Boggs issues orders to militia Major-General John Clark, "...The Mormons must be treated as enemies, and must be exterminated, or driven from the state, if necessary for the public peace" (Document 61, LDS church Historical Department, quoted in Richard Van Wagoner, Sidney Rigdon, A Portrait of Religious Excess, p. 236). (See 1838e, 1840a). 1839 (a) Sometime between midnight and dawn of April 26, seven Mormon Apostles (two of them ordained on the spot) "officially" take their leave of "the saints" - eighteen of them present - for their mission to England. However, their vain attempt to fulfill Joseph Smith's prophecies of the previous year fails. David W. Patton is dead and unable to go with them as called and prophesied. Neither is there a full Quorum of Twelve in existence at the time, able to depart "in company with" each other as prophesied. Two of those in the Quorum at this time are temporarily dropped from it just eight days later. And not even all of the seven present actually go on their mission "over the waters." Of those who do, none leaves that spring as prophesied, but not until late August and September following. Frequently touted by Mormons as a "fulfilled prophecy," this "event" is in fact a complete failure (History of the Church, Vol. 3, pp. 336-39; Comprehensive History of the Church, Vol. 1, pp. 531-32; Vol. 2, pp. 22-24; Deseret News 1993-1994 Church Almanac, pp. 44, 46, 47, 52-54). (See 1838a.) (b) Another cornerstone of the "Lord's House" in Far West is laid in an attempt to also fulfill Doctrine &Covenants section 115 (see 1838b). However, this also fails as the Mormons do not labor diligently from this time forward to complete the building until it is finished. They can not. The forced Mormon exodus from Missouri is in full progress. (See also 1841, 1996b.) 1840 (a)Fully routed from Missouri and settling in Commerce, Illinois, the Mormons rename it, Nauvoo. (b) New First Vision information. "You will recollect that I informed you, in my letter published in the first No. of the Messenger and Advocate, that this history would necessarily embrace the life and character of our esteemed friend and brother J. Smith...I shall, therefore, pass over that, till I come to the thirteenth year of this life" (Times and Seasons, Dec. 1, 1840, p. 1). (See 1820 cross-dates.) (c) Lorenzo Snow, who will become fifth prophet of the Mormon Church, receives the following "revelation" according to his own words. "As man now is, God once was: As God now is, man may be." This is explicitly confirmed by Joseph Smith in 1843 (Ensign, Feb. 1982, pp. 39-40). 1841 January 19: in a revelation requiring the saints to build both a boarding house and a temple in Nauvoo, Smith finds it necessary to allay concerns over previous failed prophecies and commands to build temples (see 1832b, 1833b, 1838b, 1839b). "Verily, verily, I say unto you, that when I give a commandment to any of the sons of men to do a work unto my name, and those sons of men go with all their might and with all they have to perform that work, and cease not their diligence, and their enemies come upon them and hinder them from performing that work, behold, it behooveth me to require that work no more at the hands of those sons of men, but to accept their offering....Therefore, for this cause have I accepted the offerings of those whom I commanded to build up a city and a house unto my name, in Jackson county, Missouri, and were hindered by their enemies, saith the Lord your God" (D&C, 124:49, 51). By thus acknowledging both their diligence to obey and their failure to succeed due to their enemies, Smith inadvertantly contradicts promise of revelation given seven years previous (see 1834c), that if the saints diligently obeyed they would from that time forth always prevail over their enemies. 1842 (a) Section 130 is added to the Doctrine &Covenants, in which God the Father is declared to have "a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's," and the Holy Spirit is said to be "a personage of Spirit." Official First Vision account also finally published. This is the account found today in the Mormon Scripture, The Pearl of Great Price, in which God the Father and Jesus appear to Joseph Smith in separate physical bodies. (See 1820 cross-dates.) These two additions conflict with former teachings contained in the Lectures on Faith, which from 1835 have been the "Doctrine" part of the Mormon scripture, Doctrine &Covenants (see Preface, "Lecture First" and "Section 1," D&C,;1835 ed.). The Lectures on Faith describe not the Holy Ghost, but God the Father as a "personage of spirit." They call the Holy Ghost the Holy Spirit, and include the Holy Spirit in the Godhead. However there are only two personages in the Godhead, the Father and the Son (cf. 1829, 1844a, d). The Holy Spirit is described as merely the mind shared by the Father and the Son (N.B. Lundwall, comp., Lectures on Faith, Lec. 5, pp. 48-53). Publication of all these conflicting teachings together in the same volume of scripture for many years (see 1921) inevitably leads to unbiblical Momon distinction between Holy Spirit and Holy Ghost. (b) August 20, Orson Pratt, one of the original Twelve Mormon Apostles, is excommunicated for apparent disagreements with Joseph Smith over polygamy and Smith's sexual advances to Sarah Pratt, Orson's wife (Nauvoo: Kingdom on the Mississippi, pp. 269-70). 1843 (a) Orson Pratt reinstated January 20 as member of the Twelve Apostles (Deseret News Church Almanac, 1979, p. 104) (See 1842b and 1875.) (b) Revelation recorded July 12, 1843, authorizes eternal, plural marriage. As noted in current editions of the Doctrine &Covenants, "it is evident from the historical records that the doctrines and principles involved in this revelation had been known by the Prophet since 1831." That is, historical records show Joseph Smith was sexually involved with women other than his legal wife Emma, long before this revelation is written, despite published denials. (See 1835c, 1838c, 1844b.) Revelation makes eternal and plural marriage essential to exaltation (see 1852b, 1855b, 1866b). It is also called an "everlasting covenant," leading later Mormon prophets and apostles to frequently claim its practice was protected by God and could never be stopped (see 1856c, 1866c, 1879b). (See also 1829, 1844c, 1876, 1887a, 1890a, b, 1898b, 1906.) 1844 (a) In April, Joseph Smith preaches perhaps his most famous sermon. "God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!...I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil so that you may see...He was once a man like us; yea that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth, the same as Jesus Christ himself did...Here, then is eternal life...you have got learn how to be Gods yourselves,...the same as all Gods have done before you" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 345-46). (See 1829, 1842a, 1844c, d.) (b) May 26, Smith again denies polygamy: "What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one. I am the same man, and as innocent as I was fourteen years ago; and I can prove them all perjurers" (History of the Church, Vol. 6, p. 411). (See 1838c cross-dates.) (c) June 7, first and only copy of the Nauvoo Expositor published. Accuses Smith of practicing polygamy and teaching polytheism. (See 1838c cross-dates.) (d) June 16, Joseph Smith preaches on the plurality of Gods: "I have always declared God to be a distinct personage, Jesus Christ a separate and distinct personage from God the Father, and the Holy Ghost was a distinct personage and a Spirit: and these three constitute three distinct personages and three Gods" (History of the Church, Vol. 6, p. 474) (See 1829, 1842a, 1844a.) (e) June 27, mob attacks jail in Carthage, Illinois, where Joseph Smith and others are being held on charges of treason. Overwhelmed in an obviously unfairly matched gunfight, Joseph Smith nevertheless kills two men and wounds a third with a small pistol previously smuggled into the prison. Both Joseph Smith and his brother Hyrum are killed (History of the Church, Vol. 7, p. 103). The mob's action is inexcusable. But fighting for his life with an illegally obtained weapon, Joseph cannot legitimately be called a martyr in the sense with which that word has been applied down through the centuries to Christian martyrs who were willing to suffer death for their faith. (f) Several splinter groups break off from main group in Nauvoo during the next few years (see Shields, Divergent Paths of the Restoration). 1845 Brigham Young, who will become the second Mormon prophet, seems to teach against Blood Atonement. "When men have come into our midst who were as corrupt as the devil himself, many have supposed it would have been better to have cut their throats with a feather and exposed their sins of corruption, and let them go to hell where they belonged, than to have borne with them as Brother Joseph Smith did; but this course would meet with a conflicting argument" (History of the Church, Vol. 7, p. 366). (See 1856a, 1977a.) 1846 (a) Nauvoo Temple dedicated. (b) The Oath of Vengeance is implemented into the Temple ceremony. This is an oath against the killers of Joseph Smith (Diary Journal of Abraham H. Cannon; as quoted in Tanner, Mormonism: Shadow or Reality?, p. 475). (See 1926.) (c) Brigham Young guides the majority of the people left in Nauvoo in move to Utah (Nauvoo: Kingdom on the Mississippi, p. 306). 1847 (a) Mormons reach the Salt Lake Valley. (b) Brigham Young officially becomes the second Prophet of the Mormon church (Deseret News Almanac, 1079, p. 92). 1851 The first edition of the Pearl of Great Price, including the "Book of Moses" and the "Book of Abraham," is printed (see 1835d cross-dates). Moses 7:8 and Abraham 1:21-27 become "scriptural basis" for denying priesthood to Blacks of African descent (see 1854b cross-dates). 1852 (a) Young teaches Adam-God doctrine. "When our father Adam came into the garden of Eden, he came into it with a celestial body, and brought Eve, one of his wives, with him. He helped to make and organize this world. He is Michael, the Archangel, the Ancient of Days! about whom holy men have written and spoken - He is our Father and our God, and the only God with whom we have to do" (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1, p. 50). (See 1854a, 1856b, 1873, 1903, 1912a, 1976, 1981a.) (b) Polygamy is openly taught in specially convened conference in Salt Lake City. Revelation dated July 12, 1843, which teaches, even commands, plural marriage to be practiced, is publicly read, then expounded on by Apostle Orson Pratt and President Brigham Young (Smith, Essentials in Church History, p. 394). The revelation is incorporated twenty-four years later (see 1876) into the Doctrine &Covenants. (See 1838c cross-dates.) 1853 Mormon apostle and later counselor to Brigham Young in Church's First Presidency Jedediah M. Grant quotes with approval pagan philosopher Celsus, "The grand reason why the gentiles and philosophers of his school persecuted Jesus Christ, was because he had so many wives; there were Elizabeth, and Mary, and a host of others that followed him." He goes on to say, "The grand reason of the burst of public sentiment in anathemas upon Christ and his disciples, causing crucifixion, was evidently based upon polygamy, according to the testimony of the philosophers who rose in that age. A belief in the plurality of wives caused the persecution of Jesus and his followers. We might almost think they were 'Mormons'" (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1, p. 345-46; see 1854c, 1963a). (See also 1838c cross-dates.) 1854 (a) Orson Pratt vehemently disagrees with Brigham Young concerning the Adam God doctrine. "But behold ye, there were some that did not believe the sayings of the Prophet Brigham. Even our beloved brother Orson Pratt told me that he did not believe it. He said he could prove by the scriptures that it was not correct. I felt sorry to hear Professor Orson Pratt say that" (Diary of Joseph Lee Robinson, pp. 102-03 as quoted in Joseph Musser, Michael Our Father and Our God, p. 23 ftnt.). (See 1852a cross-dates.) (b) Brigham Young speaks on those with a Black skin, the descendants of Cain, and the priesthood. "When all the other children of Adam have had the privilege of receiving the Priesthood...and have received their resurrection from the dead, then it will be time enough to remove the curse from Cain and his posterity" (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, p. 143). (See 1851, 1866a, 1945c, 1954b, 1958, 1978b, c, 1979a, b.) (c) Orson Hyde, one of the LDS Twelve Apostles, explains the marriage at Cana found in the biblical account of John 2: "Jesus was the bridegroom at the marriage of Cana.... Now there was actually a marriage; and if Jesus was not the bridegroom on that occasion, please tell who was.... We say it was Jesus Christ who was married, to be brought into the relation whereby he could see his seed, before he was crucified....[B]efore the Savior died, he looked upon his own natural children, as we look upon ours;..." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, p. 82; see 1853, 1963a). (See also 1838c cross-dates.) 1855 (a) New First Vision information given by Brigham Young. "The Lord did not come with the armies of heaven.... But he did send His angel to this same obscure person, Joseph Smith jun.,...and informed him that he should not join any of the religious sects of the day, for they were all wrong" (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 2, p. 171). (See 1820 cross-dates.) (b) Brigham Young preaches a sermon on polygamy in which he explains, "Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned; and I will go still further and say, take this revelation, or any other revelation that the Lord has given, and deny it in your feelings, and I promise that you will be damned" (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 3, p. 266). (See 1838c cross-dates.) 1856 (a) Brigham Young teaches doctrine of Blood Atonement. "There are sins that men commit for which they cannot receive forgiveness in this world, or in that which is to come, and if they had their eyes open to see their true condition, they would be perfectly willing to have their blood spilt upon the ground, that the smoke thereof might ascend to heaven as an offering for their sins; and the smoking incense would atone for their sins,.... It is true that the blood of the Son of God was shed for sins through the fall and those committed by men, yet man can commit sins which it can never remit" (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 4, p. 53-54). (See 1845, 1977a.) (b) Orson Pratt's disagreement with Brigham Young on Adam-God continues. "A very serious conversation took place between President B. Young and Orson Pratt upon doctrine. O.P. was directly opposed to the President's view and very freely expressed his entire disbelief in them after being told by the President that things were so and so in the name of the Lord. He was firm in the position that the President's word in the name of the Lord, was not the word of the Lord to him" (History of Samuel W. Richards, p. 15; as quoted in Musser, Michael Our Father and Our God, p. 23 ftnt.). (See 1852a cross dates.) (c) October 12, in a Sunday afternoon address in the Bowery on Temple Square, Mormon Apostle Heber C. Kimball declares, "You might as well deny 'Mormonism,' and turn away from it, as to oppose the plurality of wives. Let the Presidency of this Church, and the Twelve Apostles, and all the authorities unite and say with one voice that they will oppose that doctrine, and the whole of them would be damned" (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 5, p. 203; see 1843b, 1866c, 1879b). (See also 1838c cross-dates.) 1857 (a) Heber C. Kimball, First Counselor to Brigham Young in the First Presidency exclaims, "Wake Up, Ye Elders of Israel, and live to God and none else; and learn to do as you are told, both old and young: learn to do as you are told for the future. And when you are taking a position, if you do not know that you are right, do not take it - I mean independently. But if you are told by your leader to do a thing, do it. None of your business whether it is right or wrong" (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 6, p. 32). (See 1945b.) (b) Mountain Meadows Massacre. Of the more than 100 people in the Fancher party passing through Utah, only a few of the children are not slaughtered. (See 1877a.) 1860 Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints officially organized in Amboy, Iowa. This is the largest of the many groups into which Joseph Smith's church has splinterd. Joseph Smith III is called as their Prophet (Shields, Divergent Paths of the Restoration, p. 65). 1866 (a) Brigham Young reiterates his stance on the Blacks gaining the Priesthood. "And when all the rest of the children have received their blessing in the Holy Priesthood, then that curse shall be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to" (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 11, p. 272). (See 1854b cross-dates.) (b) Brigham Young states, "The only men who become Gods, even the sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy" (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 11, p. 269; see 1852b, 1855b). (See also 1838c cross-dates.) (c) Heber C. Kimball exclaims, "It would be as easy for the United States to build a tower to remove the sun, as to remove polygamy, or the church and kingdom of God" (Millenial Star, Vol. 28, p. 190; see 1843b, 1856c, 1879b). (See also 1838c cross-dates.) 1867 Brigham Young publicly ridicules Orson Pratt's concept of God. "They appear to be bound in their capacity for acquiring knowledge, as Brother Orson Pratt, has in theory, bound the capacity of God. According to his theory, God can progress no further in knowledge and power; but the God that I serve is progressing eternally, and so are his children" (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 11, p. 286). 1870 Brigham Young explains one of the purposes of the sun. "So it is with regard to the inhabitants of the sun. Do you think it is inhabited? I rather think it is. Do you think there is any life there? No question of it; it was not made in vain" (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, p. 271). 1871 Orson Pratt, in General Conference, discusses Joseph Smith's Independence Temple revelation. "Here then we see a prediction, and we believe it. Yes! The Latter-day Saints have as firm faith and rely upon this promise as much as they rely upon the promise of forgiveness of sins...a temple will be reared on the spot that has been selected, and the corner-stone of which has been laid, in the generation when this revelation was given; we just as much expect this as we expect the sun to rise in the morning...But says the objector, 'thirty nine years have passed away.' What of that? The generation has not passed away; all the people that were living thirty-nine years ago have not passed away; but before they do pass away this will be fulfilled" (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 14, p. 275). (See 1832b, 1996b.) 1873 Despite opposition, Brigham Young continues to teach the Adam-God doctrine. "How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which I revealed to them, and which God revealed to me - namely that Adam is our Father and God -.... He was the first man on the earth and its framer and maker....he said, 'I want my children who are in the spirit world to come and live here. I once dwelt upon an earth something like this, in a mortal state. I was faithful, I received my crown and exaltation....I want my children that were born to me in the spirit world to come here and take tabernacles of flesh...'" (Deseret News, June 14, 1873; see Mormonism: Shadow or Reality, p. 175, for photo-mechanical reproduction). (See 1852a cross-dates.) 1875 Orson Pratt's seniority as one of the Twelve Apostles is stripped from him by Brigham Young. Pratt would have been third prophet had he retained his status (Deseret News Church Almanac, 1979, p. 104). (See 1842b, 1843a.) 1876 First edition of Doctrine & Covenants without revelation prescribing monogamous marriage is published. Section 132 (current editions) which authorizes polygamy is added (Temple Lot Case, p. 309). (See 1838c cross-dates.) 1877 (a) March 23, John D. Lee is executed for his part in the Mountain Meadows Massacre (Confessions of John D. Lee, p. 383) (See 1857b.) (b) St. George, Utah, temple dedicated. (c) Brigham Young dies. 1879 (a) New First Vision information given by John Taylor, who will become the third prophet. "None of them was right, just as it was when the Prophet Joseph asked the angel which of the sects was right that he might join it. The answer was that none of them are right....the angel merely told him to join none of them that none of them were right" (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 20, p. 167; emphasis added). (See 1820 cross-dates.) (b) Mormon Apostle George Q. Cannon declares, "If plural marriage be divine, as the Latter-day Saints say it is, no power on earth can suppress it, unless you crush and destroy the entire people." At the October General Conference Apostle Franklin D. Richards declares, "...the government has determined that polygamy shall be abolished, but the government of heaven had previously determined that polygamy should be established..." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 20, pp. 276, 314; see 1843b, 1856c, 1866c). (See also 1838c cross-dates.) 1880 John Taylor becomes third Mormon prophet. 1884 Logan, Utah, temple is dedicated. 1887 (a) The Edmunds-Tucker Act is passed in Congress. This legislation "sought to facilitate conviction of polygamists by permitting exceptions to standard judicial and law enforcement procedures" (B.Y.U. Studies, Vol. 26, No. 4, p. 117; see 1890a). (See also 1838c cross-dates.) (b) Mormon prophet John Taylor dies. 1888 Manti, Utah, temple is dedicated. 1889 Wilford Woodruff becomes fourth Mormon prophet. 1890 (a) "The final blow for Mormon polygamy was the Supreme Court's decision in The Late Corporation of the Church of Jesus Christ vs. United States which upheld the seizure of Church holdings by the federal government" (Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol. 21, No. 1, p. 120; see 1887, 1890b). (See also 1838c cross-dates.) (b) Wilford Woodruff issues the Manifesto in which it is stated, "We are not teaching polygamy or plural marriage, nor permitting any person to enter into its practice ... Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages ... I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws ... And I now publicly declare that my advice to the Latter-day Saints is to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land" (Doctrine &Covenants, "Official Declaration-1", 1981 ed., p. 291-92). Following Joseph Smith's earlier example (see 1835c, 1838c, 1844b), Church leaders continued to practice polygamy for many years after the manifesto, while lying about the subject to the government, the public and even church members (see 1898b, 1906). (See also 1838c cross-dates.) 1893 Salt Lake City, Utah, temple dedicated. 1895 December 9, "At a special conference held at Colonia Juarez, Chihuahua, Mexico, the settlement of the Saints in Mexico were organized as the Juarez Stake of Zion by Apostles Francis M. Lyman and George Teasdale; Anthony W. Ivins, president; Henry Eyring and Helaman Pratt, counselors" (Jenson, Andrew, Church Chronology, 1899 ed., p. 210). This community is known for its polygamist activity. 1898 (a) Wilford Woodruff dies. Lorenzo Snow becomes fifth Mormon prophet. (b) October 17, "The Presbyterian synod of Utah, at its closing session in Ogden, passed resolutions declaring that polygamy was still practiced by the 'Mormons' in Utah" (Jenson, Church Chronology; see 1890b, 1906). (See also 1838c cross-dates.) 1901 Lorenzo Snow dies. Joseph F. Smith becomes sixth Mormon prophet. 1903 Mormon historian and member of the First Council of the Seventy, B.H. Roberts declares, "Some of the sectarian ministers are saying that we 'Mormons' are ashamed of the doctrine announced by President Brigham Young to the effect that Adam will thus be the God of this world. No, friends, it is not that we are ashamed of that doctrine" (The Mormon Doctrine of Deity, 1903 ed., p. 42). (See 1852a cross-dates.) 1906 The Congressional Committee on Privileges and Elections issues report on testimony taken in the Reed Smoot Case, stating, "A sufficient number of specific instances of the taking of plural wives since the Manifesto of 1890, so called, have been shown by the testimony as having taken place among Officials of the Mormon Church to demonstrate the fact that the leaders in this church, the first presidency and the twelve apostles, connive at the practice of taking plural wives, and have done so ever since the Manifesto was issued..." (Reed Smoot Case, Vol. 4, p. 476). There followed a long list of cases, including apostles of the church, of plural marriages contracted after the Manifesto. (See 1838c cross-dates, esp. 1890b, 1898b.) 1912 (a) In a letter to Central States Mission President Samuel O. Benion, dated February 20, 1912, the First Presidency officially renounces Brigham Young's Adam-God doctrine. Restricting their response to only one of the many places where Young taught the doctrine, they attempt to explain the whole thing away as a misunderstanding or misinterpretation (Messages of the First Presidency, Vol. 4, pp. 266-67). (See 1852a cross-dates.) (b) Headlines on the December 29 New York Times concerning Joseph Smith's "Book of Abraham" (found in the Mormon scripture The Pearl of Great Price) reads, "Sacred Books Claimed to Have Been Given Divinely to the First Prophet Are Shown to be Taken from Old Egyptian Originals, Their Translation Being a Work of Imagination." (See 1835d cross-dates.) 1916 The Father and the Son: A Doctrinal Exposition by the First Presidency and the Twelve, standardizes Mormon usage of terms Elohim and Jehovah, applying them to God the Father and God the Son, respectively. Previously, Jehovah had been used to refer to God the Father by Brigham Young, John Taylor and others. Bulk of the exposition given to explaining why the Son can be called the Father. 1918 Joseph F. Smith dies. Heber J. Grant becomes seventh Mormon prophet. 1921 The Lectures on Faith, which had been regarded and published as scripture, are decanonized by removing them from the Doctrine &Covenants (Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Vol. 20, No. 3, p. 71). (See 1834a, 1835c, 1842a.) 1922 B.H. Roberts performs study on The Book of Mormon< Mormonism does not even fulfill their own requirements for being a true Christian church. 17 POINTS OF THE TRUE CHURCH The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints prints a small card that is normally entitled "Seventeen points of the True Church." At times the front of the card will read "Does it meet the Test?" Whatever the form, many Christians have been handed this card. What of its claims? Are the 17 listed points true? Do the claims made by the LDS Church stand the test of the Bible? This article will examine, briefly, the claims made by this little card. It is not intended to be an in-depth doctrinal treatise on each point, as the card hardly attempts to be, either. Instead, it is meant to give the Christian reader more background into just what the Mormon Church is claiming, and how this does not in any way reflect the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ and the Apostles as recorded in the Word of God, the Bible. We will follow the outline of the card itself. (Some cards list more or fewer points. This card seems to be the most prevalent). #1. Christ organized the Church. Ephesians 4:11-14. This is true. However, we might ask our Mormon friends, since Ephesians 4:11 lists evangelists and pastors, where are these "offices" in the LDS Church? Since "apostles" in the original Greek language refers simply to a "sent one," does it not make sense to understand this to refer to missionaries, the very ones who, like Paul and Apollos, spread the word concerning Christ throughout the entire known world? Should we not also point out that the very same book here quoted (Ephesians) also says in chapter 3, verse 21, that God would receive glory "in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end"? How does this square with the Mormon teaching that the Church of Jesus Christ disappeared after only a few years? #2. The true church must bear the name of Jesus Christ. Ephesians 5:23. Exactly how Ephesians 5:23 relates to this is difficult to say. At any rate, the point normally made by Mormons in regard to this is that the name on the letterhead of your church must include the phrase "Jesus Christ." Just how official names are involved in saving someone is again not clear. Biblically, the Church is called the Church of Christ. It is also called the Body of Christ. Does that mean we should make sure the phrase "Body of Christ" is on our letterheads, also? Or is it more consistent to see that the Church as it is expressed universally is the Church of Christ, and the local assembly takes the name that would best describe it - such as the Church at Rome, the Church of the Thessalonians, the Church at Philippi? The Bible nowhere commands us to attach a specific name to our local congregation. Christians are Christians whether they worship in the same building and in the exact same manner or not. #3. The true church must have a foundation of Apostles and Prophets. Ephesians 2:19-20. This, again, is true, as far as it goes. Unfortunately, the LDS Church takes it too far. The Mormons take this to mean that the true church must have official positions entitled "Apostle" and "Prophet," which, of course, they have. This is not what Ephesians 2:19-20 teaches. First, the context includes verses 21 and 22, and these must be read also. The text actually says that the church is built on a foundation. Stop there. The word "built" as translated in the King James Version translates the Greek participle epoikodomethentes, which, properly syntaxed is translated "having been built." It is an aorist passive participle. It refers to a past action, one that (in this case) has been completed. To say that today we must continue to build the foundation of apostles and prophets is to misunderstand the text. Next, we would like to point out that the Bible identifies Jesus Christ as the foundation (1 Corinthians 3:10-11). The Church is built upon this foundation, and is continually growing unto an "holy temple in the Lord." The question must be asked, how many times does one lay a foundation? If one is continually laying a foundation, how will the house be built? The answer is obvious. The Mormon Church is still trying to lay a foundation that was laid two thousand years ago. Since this is so, it is obvious to see that in this passage Paul is referring to something other than a continuing office of apostle and Prophet. The phrase "of the apostles and prophets" is in a genitive construction that can easily give the sense that the foundation of the apostles and prophets is Jesus Christ Himself. This would be completely consistent with Paul's use of themelios (foundation) in other letters. Again we see how examining the actual text of the Bible we can avoid errors such as the kind propagated by the Mormon Church. One final thing. In the lists of "offices" in the church (e.g., 1 Corinthians 12:28), the apostles" are placed before the "prophets." Aside from the fact that there were obviously many "prophets" in the Church (rather than the one of the LDS Church), it is clear that the Mormon hierarchy of Prophet then Apostles is backwards, at least Biblically speaking. It is also plain to see that "apostles" (literally, "sent ones") and "prophets" functioned quite differently than the LDS Church believes they did. #4. The true church must have the same organization as Christ's Church. Ephesians 4:11-14. This point overlaps with the discussion given above. We have already pointed out that the organization the Mormon Church has forced upon the Bible is not an accurate understanding of just how the ancient church was organized. As examples of this have already been brought up, we will move on to the next point. #5. The true church must claim divine authority. Hebrews 5:4-10. The Christian Church does claim divine authority, for each and every believer, male or female, is a king and priest unto God (Revelation 1:6). However, again the LDS Church has forced its own theology upon the Scriptures instead of allowing the Bible to be the guide. Mormon leaders claim to have divine authority in that they have the "Melchizedek Priesthood." Younger men are called to the "Aaronic Priesthood," and at age 18 they can received the Melchizedek Priesthood. Though space does not allow a complete discussion of the topic of the priesthoods, it should be pointed out that the Mormon doctrine falls short of the truth at a number of points: 1) It ignores the fact that there is no distinction made between male and female in their relationship with Christ. This is not to say that in the home God does not ordain a certain order, as He obviously does. However, to claim the stupendous things that the Mormon Church does for its "priesthood" and yet deny those privileges to women (and blacks for 148 years) is certainly outside Biblical teaching. 2) It ignores the fact that the Aaronic priesthood was fulfilled and done away with at the cross of Calvary. When Christ died, the veil in the Temple was torn in two, from top to bottom. The function of Aaronic priests, that of making animal sacrifices and, once a year, going through the veil to offer the atonement for the nation, was finished for all time. The intermediacy of a priesthood was done away with because of the immediate access each believer has to the throne of grace through the shed blood of Jesus Christ. To re-establish an organized, intermediate priesthood as the LDS Church has done, when God has done away with it at the cross, is nothing short of blasphemous! Though it is truly amazing to anyone who has studied the New Testament book of Hebrews, Joseph Smith once wrote, "...it is generally supposed that sacrifice was entirely done away when the Great Sacrifice [i.e., the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus] was offered up, and that there will be no necessity for the ordinance of sacrifice in the future: but those who assert this are certainly not acquainted with the duties, privileges and authority of the priesthood ... These sacrifices, as well as every ordinance belonging to the Priesthood, will, when the Temple of the Lord shall be built, and the sons of Levi purified, be fully restored and attended to in all their powers, ramifications, and blessings." (Documentary History of the Church, volume 4, page 211). Again we see the depth of error that can be attained by ignoring the Biblical teachings on a subject. 3) It ignores the Biblical fact that there is but one High Priest (the Mormon Church has many), and only one worthy to hold the Melchizedek Priesthood, that being Jesus Christ (Hebrews 7:24-25). To claim to hold that priesthood is an affront to the person of the Son of God. #6. The true church must have no paid ministry. Isaiah 45:13, 1 Peter 5:2. The reader is asked to examine the two references given to gain yet another example of out-of-context reading. Neither passage has anything to do with paid or unpaid ministers. One has to do with Cyrus, king of Persia, and the other with the motivation of the heart of the minister. Also, note that the sections of the New Testament that directly address this issue are ignored. Paul clearly taught that a minister had the right to pay in return for his work (1 Corinthians 9:1-14). Paul calls it a "right" of the minister to reap material benefit from those who receive spiritual leadership. It might be pointed out that the leadership of the LDS Church in Salt Lake certainly do not live unrewarded. How does this square with their teaching? #7. The true church must baptize by immersion. Matthew 3:13-16. We agree. Again, however, the LDS Church goes beyond what is written and adds to this the ideas that 1) baptism is for remission of sins (when Jesus was baptized, was it for remission of sins? We are forgiven of our sins because of the blood of Christ, not the water of a baptistry (1 Peter 1:18-21), and 2) that the only persons "authorized" to baptize are those who hold the "Aaronic" priesthood. This error has already been discussed in #5 above. #8. The true church must bestow the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands. Acts 8:14-17. Aside from the fact that it is Holy Spirit, not Holy Ghost, it must be pointed out that again the LDS Church is ignoring the majority witness of Scripture. Laying on of hands for the reception of the Holy Spirit occurs only three times in the New Testament: Acts 8:17 as a sign of unity between the Jewish and Gentile believers, Acts 9:17 as an identification of Saul, and Acts 19:6 where the baptism they had undergone was not Christian baptism but the baptism of John. In the vast majority of cases no mention is made of any special ceremony of laying on of hands being necessary for the Holy Spirit to come upon someone. Laying on of hands does show unity and support of an individual, and as such there is nothing wrong with it. But the Scriptures teach that the Holy Spirit comes into a person's life at the point of conversion (Romans 8:9, Acts 10:44-48), not at some secondary time later on. If this were not so, then Romans 8:9 would be false, as it identifies the Holy Spirit as that which makes a person Christ's (see also Ephesians 1:10-14). #9. The true church must practice divine healing. Mark 3:14-15. One of the gifts of the Spirit is that of healing (1 Corinthians 12:28). Of course, not all have this gift (v. 29). The actual operation of the gift is seen to be a corollary to prayer, as the special gift of touching someone was of apostolic authority, not present today. We have seen many people healed through the power of prayer in the Christian church, as God still is the great physician, and He still works miracles. However, to claim to have God on a string, and have Him in your control so as to be able to heal anyone, is not Biblical. Even the great apostle Paul had to pray that a close friend would not die, as his gift was for particular uses, not personal gain (Philippians 2:25-30, 2 Timothy 4:20). #10. The true church must teach that God and Jesus Christ are separate and distinct individuals. John 17:11 and John 20:17. The true church must first teach that there is one true God. The number of passages that teach this is astounding. Just for an example see Deuteronomy 4:35, 39, 6:4, 32:39, 1 Chronicles 16:25-26, 2 Samuel 7:22 (1 Chron. 17:20), Psalm 86:10, Isaiah 43:10, 44:6-8, 44:24, 45:5-6, 46:9, John 17:3, 1 Corinthians 8:4-6 and so on and so on. Mormonism teaches that there are many, many Gods, while God denies any such thing (Isaiah 44:8). Hence, Mormonism is off track right from the start. This is the most basic revelation of God, and when one misses it, nothing after that will make any sense. It is true that the Father is not the Son nor is the Son the Father. As far as the above statement reflects this, it is true. However, the Mormon viewpoint is that the Father and Son are two separate and distinct individuals, and hence two separate and distinct gods (see Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, page 370)! This is completely contradicted by the Bible, and is based upon the error of polytheism. Mormons cannot understand the Christian doctrine of the Trinity because they reject the Bible's teaching of monotheism (one God). #11. The true church must teach that God and Jesus Christ have bodies of flesh and bone. Luke 24:36-39 and Acts 1:9-11. Here the Mormons take two references to the fact that Jesus Christ became flesh (John 1:14) and infer from them that God the Father also has a body of flesh and bone. What does God say about this? "You thought that I was just like you; I will reprove you, and state the case in order before your eyes" (Psalm 50:21, NASB). "...for I am God, and not man, the Holy One in the midst of thee..." (Hosea 11:9). "God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent" (Numbers 23:19). Instead, Jesus taught that God was spirit (John 4:24). God is not limited to time and space as we are, but rather is eternal (Psalm 90:2), unchanging (Malachi 3:6), and omnipresent (Jeremiah 23:24, 2 Chronicles 6:18). What Mormons need to realize is that the gospel is not that man can become God, but that God became a man. #12. The officers must be called by God. Hebrews 5:4, Exodus 28:1, Exodus 40:13-16. As the Old Testament passages here quoted have little to do with the New Testament Church, we will look at Hebrews 5:4 (which also has little to do with the subject at hand, but it's closer than the others!). First, we agree that the leaders of the church should be called by God, and, in the Christian church, they are. However, again the Latter-day Saints are seen to be adding to what is written. The Mormons interpret this within their framework of "priesthood authority," again leading to error. It might be asked whether their Aaronic priests are called in the same way as was Aaron? A quick look at Exodus chapter 29 and Leviticus chapter 8 will reveal that they certainly are not! #13. The true church must claim revelation from God. Amos 3:7. This position can only be maintained by ignoring what comes after Amos 3:7. Luke 16:16 says "The law and the prophets were until John; since that time the kingdom of God is preached...." The New Testament presents a very different picture. Jesus Christ, the final and complete revelation of God (Hebrews 1:13) has made "further revelation" obsolete and unnecessary. To claim to have such a "revelation" is to say that Jesus really wasn't what and who He said He was, and who the Bible describes Him as being. In actuality, it is the simple fact that Mormonism's teachings cannot be supported from the Bible that drives the leadership to find another source of authority. Everything that has ever claimed to be "further revelation" has failed the test of Scripture, including the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price. #14. The true church must be a missionary church. Matthew 28:19-20. We heartily agree at this point, and are forced to ask why it is that the Mormon Church has thrived on taking people from other churches rather than trailblazing into unknown areas, as the Christian Church has done for hundreds of years? #15. The true church must be a restored church. Acts 3:19-20. An examination of the text chosen to represent this claim will show just how weak this argument is. Acts chapter 3 is not in any way discussing the Church. This is seen in two ways. First, verse 21 says that the restitution of all things "was" spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began." As Paul points out in Colossians 1:25-27, the mystery of the church was not made known to the past ages and generations (see also 1 Peter 1:10-12), hence this certainly is not talking about the church. Second, the prophets spoke of the restoration of Israel to its own land, and the restoration of the theocracy under David's Son. This is what Peter is discussing in Acts 3. Besides all of this, we must ask when it was that Christ returned, as verse 19 says this would happen at the "restitution of all things." As we pointed out, the true church founded by Christ did not fail (see #2-#4 above). #16. The true church must practice baptism for the dead. 1 Corinthians 15-16 and 29. The Christian church had never practiced baptism for the dead in the sense that the LDS Church wants us to believe. They are forced to take 1 Corinthians 15:29 out of its context and force their own peculiar meaning on it. First, the Bible does not teach that baptism saves anyone (even 1 Peter 3:21, upon close examination, does not do so), hence it certainly would not be needed to "redeem the dead" as Mormons put it. 1 Corinthians 13:29 is found in the "resurrection chapter." The needed clue to its meaning is found in the language in which it was originally written, that being Greek. The word "for" is the Greek term huper. It refers to the taking of someone's place, or to substitution. Baptism "for" the dead is not baptism of a living person in behalf of or for the benefit of a dead person, but rather the immersion of a living person in the place of or into the former position of a now deceased person. It is the baptism of a new convert who takes the place in the church of one who has died. The baptism of a young child, for example, the day after an elderly saint of the Lord has passed away could be viewed as the younger person coming to "fill" the position of the person who has gone home to be with the Lord. This vein of thinking is carried on in the context when Paul says in the next verse, "Why are we also in danger every hour?" (NASB). Being a Christian in those days was a dangerous business. Paul's whole point in the entire passage has to do with the fact that if the dead are not raised (v. 12) there is absolutely no point in bringing new converts into this dangerous position through baptism when there is no future life to promise them, no reward in the future for their faithfulness. Why not just let everyone die off without filling their positions in the church, since, if there is no resurrection, "we are of all men most to be pitied" (v. 19). Belief in baptizing the living to somehow help in saving the dead demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of the New Testament teaching concerning the nature, extent, and purpose of salvation. #17. By their fruits ye shall know them. Matthew 7:20. Indeed, but that is not the only test we are given, thankfully. We know people of many religions, and many of them are kind, decent, moral, loving people. Does this mean that they are all right? Of course not. At the same time, we know people of many different religions that are mean, nasty, unloving, hateful, dishonest, etc. and etc. Does that mean those religions are false? No, it doesn't. We know Mormons that fit in both the above categories. Does this prove Mormonism true or false? Neither. Instead, we are given other tests to utilize. The main one is, what do you teach concerning Jesus Christ (e.g., Colossians 2:8-9)? The Mormon Church teaches that Jesus is the spirit brother of Lucifer (see, for example, "Ensign", June 1986, page 25). This is completely untrue, as the Bible says Jesus created all things (John 1:3, Colossians 1:16-17), which would include Lucifer (Ezekiel 28:13-15). Hence, how can the Creator be the spirit-brother of his creation? Such is nonsense. The fruit of this teaching is falsehood concerning the person of Jesus Christ. Again, even using the test prescribed by the LDS Church, we find Mormonism wanting. This little card ends with, "Why are these things important? HEBREWS 13:8." Yes, Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever. How different from the Mormon teaching that God was once a man who evolved (or progressed) to Godhood! Much more important than this is the dire warning of the Bible: "But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed" (Galatians 1:8-9). Those are serious words indeed. and the LDS people would do well to heed them. Questions for Mormons: Mormon Prophets 1. Why does the Mormon Church still teach that Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God after he made a false prophecy about a temple being built in Missouri in his generation (Doctrine and Covenants 84:1-5)? 2. Since the time when Brigham Young taught that both the moon and the sun were inhabited by people, has the Mormon Church ever found scientific evidence of that to be true (Journal of Discourses, 1870, v.13, p.271)? 3. Why did Brigham Young teach that Adam is “our Father and our God” when both the Bible and the Book of Mormon (Mormon 9:12) say that Adam is a creation of God (Journal of Discourses, Apr. 9, 1852, vol.1, p.50)? 4. If Brigham Young was a true prophet, how come one of your later prophets overturned his declaration which stated that the black man could never hold the priesthood in the LDS Church until after the resurrection of all other races (Journal of Discourses, Dec. 12, 1854, 2:142-143)? 5. Since the Bible’s test to determine whether someone is a true prophet of God is 100% accuracy in all his prophecies (Deuteronomy 18:20-22), has the LDS Church ever reconsidered its teaching that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were true prophets? 6. Since the current LDS prophets sometimes contradict the former ones, how do you decide which one is correct? 7. Since there are several different contradictory accounts of Joseph Smith’s first vision, how did the LDS Church choose the correct one? 8. Can you show me in the Bible the LDS teaching that we must all stand before Joseph Smith on the Day of Judgment? Mormon Scripture 9. Can you show me archeological and historical proof from non-Mormon sources that prove that the peoples and places named in the Book of Mormon are true? 10. If the words “familiar spirit” in Isaiah 29:4 refer to the Book of Mormon, why do familiar spirits always refer to occult practices such as channeling and necromancy everywhere else in the Old Testament? 11. Why did Joseph Smith condone polygamy as an ordinance from God (Doctrine and Covenants 132) when the Book of Mormon had already condemned the practice (Jacob 1:15, 2:24)? 12. Why were the words “white and delightsome” in 2 Nephi 30:6 changed to “pure and delightsome” right on the heels of the Civil Rights campaign for blacks? 13. If God is an exalted man with a body of flesh and bones, why does Alma 18:26-28 and John 4:24 say that God is a spirit? 14. Why did God encourage Abraham & Sarah to lie in Abraham 2:24? Isn’t lying a sin according to the 10 commandments? Why did God tell Abraham and Sarah to lie when 2 Nephi 9:34 condemns liars to hell? 15. Why does the Book of Mormon state that Jesus was born in Jerusalem (Alma 7:10) when history and the Bible state that he was born outside of Jerusalem, in Bethlehem? 16. If the Book of Mormon is the most correct of any book on earth, as Joseph Smith said, why does it contain over 4000 changes from the original 1830 edition? 17. If the Book of Mormon contains the “fulness of the everlasting gospel”, why does the LDS Church need additional works? 18. If the Book of Mormon contains the “fulness of the everlasting gospel”, why doesn’t it say anything about so many important teachings such as eternal progression, celestial marriage, the Word of Wisdom, the plurality of Gods, the pre-existence of man, our mother in heaven, baptism for the dead, etc? 19. Why do you baptize for the dead when both Mosiah 3:25 and the Bible state that there is no chance of salvation after death? 20. Since the word grace means a free gift that can’t be earned, why does the Book of Mormon state “for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do” (2 Nephi 25:23)? 21. Does the LDS Church still regard the Pearl of Great Price as Holy Scripture even after several prominent Egyptologists proved it was an ancient funeral scroll? 22. Why does the Book of Abraham, chapters 4 & 5, contradict Alma 11 in stating that there is more than one God? 23. Why does Doctrine and Covenants 42:18 say there is no forgiveness for a murderer when 3 Nephi 30:2 says there is forgiveness for him? 24. If the Adam-God doctrine isn’t true, how come Doctrine and Covenants 27:11 calls Adam the Ancient of Days which is clearly a title for God in Daniel chapter 7? 25. Why does the Book of Mormon contain extensive, word-for-word quotes from the Bible if the LDS Church is correct in teaching that the Bible has been corrupted? 26. Why do the Bible verses quoted in the Book of Mormon contain the italicized words from the King James Version that were added into the KJV text by the translators in the 16th and 17th centuries? 27. If the Book of Mormon was engraved on gold plates thousands of years ago, why does it read in perfect 1611 King James Version English? Bible Questions 28. If marriage is essential to achieve exaltation, why did Paul say that it is good for a man not to marry (1 Corinthians 7:1)? 29. Since the Word of Wisdom teaches us to abstain from alcohol, why did Paul encourage Timothy to drink wine for his stomach (1 Timothy 5:23)? 30. If obeying the Word of Wisdom - which tells us to abstain from caffeine, alcohol and tobacco - is important for our exaltation, why did Jesus say that there is nothing that can enter a man to make him defiled (Mark 7:15)? 31. If Jesus is the Jehovah of the Old Testament and Elohim is referred to as God in the Old Testament, can you explain Deuteronomy 6:4 to me: “Hear, O Israel: the LORD (Jehovah) our God (Elohim) is one LORD (Jehovah)? 32. Why does the Mormon Church teach that we can be married in heaven when Jesus said in Matthew 22:30 that in the resurrection men neither marry, nor are they given in marriage? 33. How can worthy Mormon males become Gods in the afterlife when God already said that before him no God was formed, nor will there be any Gods formed after him (Isaiah 43:10)? 34. If God had a father who was a God, how come Isaiah 44:8 says that he doesn’t know him? 35. If God was once just a man who progressed to becoming a God, how do you explain Psalm 90:2: “…even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God”? 36. How can God be an exalted man when Numbers 23:19 says that God is not a man? 37. Why does the Mormon Church teach that Elohim had sexual relations with Mary to produce Jesus when both Matthew and Luke teach she was a virgin (The Seer, January, 1853, p.158)? 38. Why does the LDS Church teach that Jesus paid for our sins in the garden of Gethsemane when 1 Peter 2:24 says it was on the cross? 39. Why did Bruce McConkie write that a man may commit a sin so grievous that it will place him beyond the atoning blood of Christ (Mormon Doctrine, 1979, p.93) when the Bible says that the blood of Christ cleanses us from all sin (1 John 1:7)? 40. Why does the LDS Church teach that man first existed as spirits in heaven when 1 Corinthians 15:46 says that the physical body comes before the spiritual? 41. Since Jesus statement, “Be ye therefore perfect” (Matthew 5:48) is in the present tense, are you perfect right now? Do you expect to be perfect soon? According to Hebrews 10:14, how are we made perfect? 42. Why do Mormons say the sticks in Ezekiel 37 represent the Bible and the Book of Mormon when Ezekiel 37:20-22 tells us that the sticks represent two nations, not two books? 43. Why does the LDS Church teach that Jesus and Lucifer are spirit brothers when both the first chapter of John and Colossians teach that Jesus is the Creator of all things, including Lucifer? 44. Why do worthy Mormon males hold the Aaronic priesthood since Hebrews 7:11-12 clearly teaches that it was changed and superceded by something better? 45. If your leaders are correct about the complete falling away of the true church on earth, was Jesus in error when he said that the gates of hell would not prevail against it (Matthew 16:18)? General 46. If having a physical body is necessary to become a god, how did Jesus become a god before he had a body? 47. Do you think the LDS Church will reconsider its teachings that the American Indians are descendants of the Jewish race now that DNA evidence has proven that they are actually descendants of the Asian race? 48. If polygamy was officially re-instituted by the Mormon Church, how would your wife feel about you taking another woman? 49. Since the LDS Church teaches that there was a complete apostasy of the true church on earth, does that mean that the 3 living Nephites and the Apostle John went into apostasy also? 50. Why are Mormon Temple ceremonies secret to the public when the Old Testament temple ceremonies were open to public knowledge?

This is a very important topic, and is not talked about very often. Everybody knows the JW's are a cult, but if you try to say anything about adventism or Mormonism, you are immediately called "being judgmental" or "not respecting religion". The documentary called "The Bible vs Joseph Smith" is a great example of what it's like to try and point out something clearly un-biblical. It is about Mormonism, however the man in the documentary reminds me a lot of adventists, except they are a lot more defensive. If you call a counterfeit diamond real, it doesn't make it a real diamond.

Thank you for the extensive and informative sermon, but I would just offer you a kind and important piece of advice: Be less wordy next time. Get right to the point! You can joke around and tell your life's story in some less serious and more informal sermons. Merry Christmas 2019, and Happy and Blessed New Year 2020!

The key to understanding the relationship between the Christian and the Law is knowing that the Old Testament law was given to the nation of Israel, not to Christians. Some of the laws were to reveal to the Israelites how to obey and please God (the Ten Commandments, for example). Some of the laws were to show the Israelites how to worship God and atone for sin (the sacrificial system). Some of the laws were intended to make the Israelites distinct from other nations (the food and clothing rules). None of the Old Testament law is binding on Christians today. When Jesus died on the cross, He put an end to the Old Testament law (Romans 10:4; Galatians 3:23-25; Ephesians 2:15). In place of the Old Testament law, Christians are under the law of Christ (Galatians 6:2), which is to “love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind…and to love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 22:37-39). If we obey those two commands, we will be fulfilling all that Christ requires of us: “All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments” (Matthew 22:40). Now, this does not mean the Old Testament law is irrelevant today. Many of the commands in the Old Testament law fall into the categories of “loving God” and “loving your neighbor.” The Old Testament law can be a good guidepost for knowing how to love God and knowing what goes into loving your neighbor. At the same time, to say that the Old Testament law applies to Christians today is incorrect. The Old Testament law is a unit (James 2:10). Either all of it applies, or none of it applies. If Christ fulfilled some of it, such as the sacrificial system, He fulfilled all of it. “This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome” (1 John 5:3). The Ten Commandments were essentially a summary of the entire Old Testament law. Nine of the Ten Commandments are clearly repeated in the New Testament (all except the command to observe the Sabbath day). Obviously, if we are loving God, we will not be worshipping false gods or bowing down before idols. If we are loving our neighbors, we will not be murdering them, lying to them, committing adultery against them, or coveting what belongs to them. The purpose of the Old Testament law is to convict people of our inability to keep the law and point us to our need for Jesus Christ as Savior (Romans 7:7-9; Galatians 3:24). The Old Testament law was never intended by God to be the universal law for all people for all of time. We are to love God and love our neighbors. If we obey those two commands faithfully, we will be upholding all that God requires of us. Recommended Resources: The End of the Law: Mosaic Covenant in Pauline Theology by Jason Meyer & see our playlist "Dealing with Seventh-day Adventism & Their "Prophetess" at ru-vid.com/group/PL5316CC6F66F24283.

Hundreds of thousands of Seventh-day Adventists have left Adventism after realizing they've been duped by a false cult. There is now a mandate for true Christians to learn how to minister to these spiritually deceived victims. See "Former Seventh-day Adventist Pastor for 13 Years Gives His Testimony Why Adventism is Wrong" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-c37bNhYzdbE.html, "Is Sabbath Keeping Essential to Be a Real Christian? Former SDA Pastor Answers This Question" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-w0L3rSSL_H8.html, "False SDA Gospel of Ellen G. White Leads to Baby Abortions Just Like Planned Parenthood" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-7EsY1srHYJc.html, "Cult Doctrine of Seventh-day Adventism: 1844 Probation & Satan As A Final Sin Bearer for Adventists" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-J50HlZFYHtY.html & "Did God Really Give Ellen G. White "Divine" Health Reform Visions From Book of Revelation Angels?" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-nhKoS2Fk1Y4.html. For further information see the websites www.TruthorFables.com, www.GreatControversyExposed.com, www.ExAdventism.com & www.LifeAssuranceMinistries.com. Email: proclamation@gmail.com. Jude 3, "Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints."

“Then said one unto him, Lord, are there few that be saved? And he said unto them, Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able.” -Luke 13:23-24 Do you understand the question in the above Scripture? “Lord, are there few that be saved?” Someone came to Jesus and wanted to know if “few” people were saved. It's interesting that the person didn't ask if “many” people were saved. Evidently the person had been listening to Jesus' preaching and became convinced that few people were really saved. When the Bible speaks of being “saved,” it means saved from God's wrath upon Christ-rejecting sinners in Hell (for more on hell see our playlist "Dealing with Hell, Lake of Fire, Unpopular Bible Doctrines" with 30 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLE04A1D0DFE95B95E & "Eternal Punishment, Part 1" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=12607145320 & "Eternal Punishment, Part 2" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=12607143539). Romans 5:9, “Much more then, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him.” All Christ-rejecters go to Hell if they die in their sins. If a person is “saved,” then they are going to Heaven when they die. Romans 10:13, “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” We are saved from the eternal consequences of sin, which is punishment in hellfire. To be saved is synonymous with being “born again.” When a person becomes a born-again child of God, they are saved eternally. EVERY human being MUST to be saved (i.e., born again) to enter into Heaven. John 3:3, “Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” If a person dies in their sins without believing on Jesus as the Savior, the Son of God, they will burn in Hell forever (Revelation 20:11-15).Just as the disciple who asked Jesus the question in Luke 13:23, I myself often wonder how few are truly born again believers. I dare say not many. Let's consider the question again...“Lord, are there few that be saved?” There are over one billion Catholics in the world who errantly believe that the Catholic Church is going to save them. Roman Catholics do not trust Jesus Christ alone; but rather, rely upon manmade traditions and self-righteous works to save them. According to the Word of God, genuine Catholics are hellbound in their sins because they are trusting in self-righteousness (Romans 3:20; 10:3-4; Ephesians 2:8-9; Titus 3:5, see our playlist "Dealing with Roman Catholicism, Idolatry & the Virgin Mary" with 129 videos & counting at ru-vid.com/group/PLFFA8D69D1B914715). There are over one billion Islamic Muslims in the world who deny that Jesus Christ ever died upon a cross for our sins (see our playlist "Dealing with Islam, Muslims: Sunni, Shi'ite, Alawites, Sufis" with 67 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL1C7F68B548009FDD). According to the Bible, they are antichrists and liars on their way to Hell (1st John 2:22-23). There are over 183,000 cults in Japan alone that deny Jesus Christ as the only Savior of the world. Other false religions include Scientology, Hinduism, Wicca, Buddhism, Seventh Day Adventism, Zoroastrianism, Greek Orthodox, Judaism, Jehovah Witness, Mormonism, Freemasonry, and many more (see our RU-vid channel CAnswersTV at ru-vid.com with over 615 videos covering most of these anti Christian religions in detail). Why do I call them “false religions”? It's simply because they all corrupt the Biblical teaching of salvation, i.e., the gospel (see our playlist "Dealing with Anti Trinitarians (UPC) & Early Church History" with 48 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL9931642C7C8FFEAB). Most false religions ADD works to faith. Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses DENY the deity of Jesus Christ (i.e., that He is Almighty God) - see our playlists "Dealing with Mormonism, the Religion of Mitt Romney & Utah" with 20 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL11CD0EE613306BB5 & "Dealing with Jehovah's Witnesses, Watchtower Society" with 22 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLCF0ADB29C0EB8C40. Seventh Day Adventists falsely and deceitfully redefine faith to mean works (see our playlist, "Dealing with Seventh-day Adventism & Their "Prophetess" with 23 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL5316CC6F66F24283). There are hundreds of millions of followers of Hinduism who deny Jesus as the Savior, the Son of God (see our playlist "Dealing with Anti Christ Cults, "New Age" & World Religions" with 42 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL69A3047B3497590A). Judaism denies that Jesus is the Messiah. The same Pharisaical Jews who crucified Jesus 2,000 years ago are crucifying Him today. The Campbellite Church of Christ deceitfully speaks of faith in Christ, but also requires water baptism and living the Christian life to be saved. That is works salvation, which is a lie of the Devil (Romans 3:20; Romans 4:5-6, see our playlist "Dealing with "Saved by Works & Baptism", "Church of Christ" with 72 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLBD55090718DA6D3D). Every Catholic claims not to worship Mary, but the second commandment (Exodus 20:3-5) forbids even bowing to Mary (which every Catholic does, for more on the Roman Catholic installation of the worship of saints, images, & polytheism in church history hear "Perseverance of the Saints & the Worship of Saints (Historical Theology Vol. 1, #17)" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=14101149112 & "The Worship of Images & Civil Authorities (Historical Theology Vol. 1, #18)" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=15101057200). There are hundreds of millions of so-called Charismatic & Pentecostal "Christians" who trade the Word of God for their own wild emotional experiences & replace the Biblical gospel for a gospel of "heath & wealth" despite 1 Timothy 6:10 saying, "For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows" - see our two video series on this: "Blasphemous Charismatic & Pentecostal Mayhem #1: Mad Delusional Experiences Replace Scripture Alone" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Kbv7YsyMf0I.html begins one series while "AGONY OF THE PHONY WORD-FAITH TV PREACHERS #1: MIND SCIENCE ORIGINS OF KENNETH HAGIN & HIS DISCIPLES" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-VwQ5BLrYD_U.html begins another series. Even secular humanism, atheism & agnosticism can be considered faith based religions due to the fact that atheists & humanists have a faith that God does not exist while agnostics are willingly ignorant concerning God (see our playlist "Dealing with "God Hating" Atheists, Agnostics, Know-It-Alls" with 20 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL640E505B96CD6B39). Many animistic religions exist throughout the world as well which are described in Romans 1:18-32, see our video "FOREIGN MISSIONS FOR CHRIST: PREACHING TO CANNIBALS, WITCH DOCTORS & TRIBAL NATIVES" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-ACnDLyXa9H0.html. All of the religions I have just mentioned account for well over seven eighths of the earth's population or more. Keep in mind, besides all of this, Jesus said, "And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God" (Matthew 19:24). Who are considered "rich people"? It's not just millionaires & world leaders but many lesser wealthy persons who exceed the vast majority of mankind in money & possessions (Luke16:19-31 is a good example of this in the parable of the rich man & Lazarus). See the video "It is Difficult for Americans to Enter Heaven - Tim Conway" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-bDwNGXciNCQ.html. Statistics provided in this video show that even the poorest Americans living in the United States have a better net income than most of the world. For instance, according to Forbes magazine, June 1, 2013, the bottom 5% of United States citizens are richer than 68% of people living throughout the rest of the world; U.S. citizens who make $50,000 a year are richer than 99.69% of the people in the rest of the world; U.S. citizens who make $20,000 a year are richer than 96% of the people in the rest of the world, U.S. citizens who make $10,000 a year are richer than 84% of the people in the rest of the world; U.S. citizens who make $100,000 a year are in a category that only 8 out of every 10,000 people achieve in the entire world. Will it be difficult for rich Americans who don't think they're rich to enter into the kingdom of heaven? Jesus already gave the answer. For more on this hear "Those Whom God Hates He Is Often Pleased To Give Plenty Of Earthly Things To, Edwards" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=427121150346 by the well known theologian Jonathan Edwards who also preached the most famous sermon on North American soil called, "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=770213541. If you don't like what I am telling you then get mad at God because He wrote the Bible. If you take the Bible at FACE VALUE, you can only interpret it one way. The best way to interpret the Bible is with the Bible. God said what He meant and meant what He said. Let the Bible speak for itself. Jesus answered the question in Luke 13:24 with the following words...“...for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able.” Most of the people in this world are going straight to Hell when they die because they have not been born again (hear "Few Saved From A Burning Hell" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=3514145121). Lies and deception are everywhere! Catholics and Jehovah Witnesses claim to be born-again but they are NOT. You can't get born-again by doing good works, confessing your sins to a priest, getting water baptized, joining a church or keeping the Sabbath Day. Salvation is NOT found in any religion; but rather, in a Person-The Lord Jesus Christ! Most people today have churchianity without Christianity, and they are all going to Hell if they don't repent toward God of their unbelief (for more on this see our video "TRUE BELIEVERS & NON BELIEVERS ACCORDING TO THE GOSPEL OF THE REFORMATION: WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE?" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-3_dN0oC57Rk.html). The vast majority of so-called "Evangelical Christians" in the world today do not know what the Biblical gospel is or what "justification by faith alone" is (see our video "SAD STATE OF THE CHURCH: 87% OF EVANGELICAL "CHRISTIANS" DON'T KNOW WHAT GOSPEL JUSTIFICATION IS" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-im4ozy_EiR4.html. There are only two types of religions in the world: DO and DONE. Either you believe that you have to DO something to go to Heaven; or else you believe that it is DONE, paid for by Jesus' precious blood. Jesus said in Luke 13:24 that “many” will seek to enter into Heaven but will not be able. That is quite startling. Jesus said the same thing in Matthew 7:21-23 . . . “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” The reason why these religious people were not allowed into Heaven was because they attempted to enter Heaven through their own self-righteousness. In Matthew 5:20 Jesus spake concerning the religious leaders of His time . . . “For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.” Most of the religious churchgoers in the world today are as lost as can be, still hellbound in their wickedness. They have not done the will of God concerning salvation, which is to BELIEVE ON THE LORD JESUS CHRIST (John 6:40; Acts 16:30-31). Jesus provides two contrasts in Luke 13:24, the contrast between seeking to enter and striving to enter and the contrast between seeking to enter through the narrow door and seeking to enter by any other means. Let’s now focus on the second contrast. Look at verses 25-27:"Once the head of the house gets up and shuts the door, and you begin to stand outside and knock on the door, saying, 'Lord, open up to us!' then He will answer and say to you, 'I do not know where you are from.' 26 "Then you will begin to say, 'We ate and drank in Your presence, and You taught in our streets'; 27 and He will say, 'I tell you, I do not know where you are from; DEPART FROM ME, ALL YOU EVILDOERS.' (Luke 13:25 NAU) Jesus’ statement at the end of 25 and the middle of 27 is translated well in the NIV: “I don't know you or where you come from.” In effect, He is saying, “I don’t know you at all! You may think that you are mine, but I have nothing to do with you - I don’t even know your family, your village” So what does Jesus mean by the narrow door? What is His intended contrast with other methods of entering? Again, let’s begin by considering what the narrow door is not: The narrow door is NOT being in a church, reading the Bible, listening to sermons, looking to others like a Christian. This is clear from verse 26: these evildoers looked just like believers who had been with Jesus. They had listened to His preaching. But He does not know them, and they stand condemned.The narrow door is NOT being prominent in this life. Jesus says in verse 30 that some who are presently first will be last. Prominence now is no guarantee of one’s entering through the narrow door.The narrow door is NOT being a descendant of a great believer. See verse 28. Remember, Jesus is speaking to descendants of Abraham and Jacob. I sometimes like to use the expression, “God has no grandchildren.” Each of us must come to Jesus on our own, not through our parents, our grandparents, or other ancestors. Then what does Jesus mean by the narrow door? Elsewhere, Jesus says He Himself is the door: I am the door. If anyone enters by me, he will be saved and will go in and out and find pasture. (John 10:9) In what sense is this door narrow? In two ways. First, the door is narrow in the sense that no one comes to the Father any other way (John 14:6). No religious activities - Christian or non-Christian - bring us into the Kingdom. Sincere beliefs do not bring us in. Good works do not bring us in. Good feelings about our relationship with Christ do not bring us in. Though in our pluralistic society this message is despised, we must preach, teach, and live out this truth: There is only one door, and that narrow door is Jesus. The Lake of Fire is waiting for "many" when they die. Jesus' disciple asked Him if few people are going to Heaven. Jesus replied that many people will attempt, but fail. When the floods came in Noah's day, many people tried to get on the ark, but it was too late once the door was closed. When the bridegroom came in Matthew 25:1-13, the five foolish virgins were left behind because they were gone buying oil at the last moment. Do not likewise make the mistake of delaying salvation, for you will be sorry when it is too late. Few souls are going to Heaven. Jesus said, "Only those who find that strait gate and narrow way that leadeth unto life (Matthew 7:13-15), which is the righteousness of Jesus Christ will make it to heaven. So many churchgoers have religion, but they have never truly been born of the spirit of God, which is the Spirit of Christ (Romans 8:9, hear "Why Are So Few People Saved?" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=111710103558). Salvation happens when a person acknowledges their guilt of sin unto God in repentance; believing on Jesus as the Christ, the Son of God, to be forgiven (this is a supernatural action caused by God in the heart of a repentant sinner in 2 Timothy 2:24-26; see also "SUPERNATURAL BIBLE PROPHECY CONCERNING JESUS THE JEWISH MESSIAH (PART #1)" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-DVByqkjwChs.html). We are SINNERS and Jesus is the wonderful SAVIOR! Acts 10:43, “To Him give all the prophets witness, that through His name whosoever believeth in Him shall receive remission of sins.” Salvation is given to those "few" who have been ordained to eternal life by God Himself (Acts 13:48). And who are those "few"? Jesus answers that question in John chapter 6:37,39,44,63 & 65: "All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out." "And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day." "No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day." " It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life." "And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father." For more on this see our video "The Sovereignty of God Versus Man-Made Religions, Hollywood Movies & Petty Emotionalism" - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-1UQABR_9gGI.html. Keep in mind that God works with relatively few numbers throughout world history (remember how Elijah thought he was the last prophet of God left in Israel in 1 Kings 19:13-18 & the Lord had to correct Elijah about the number but still the number God told Elijah was small). The God of the Bible has always had His way of operating His plan in this world & it has always been consistently with small numbers (1 Corinthians 1:26-29, "For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: 27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; 28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:29 That no flesh should glory in his presence." For an excellent message concerning the small numbers God has historically employed please hear the outstanding theologian Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones in his sermon "Sermon 113 - Three-score and Fifteen Souls" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=99217141430450. We also have a video along these lines called " Biblical Predestination #6: God Only Chooses a FEW for Salvation (Many Called/Few Chosen)" - ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-veCdGzYsc70.html. See also our video "Strive To Enter - But Many Will Not Be Able To - Greg Van Court - Dayspring Fellowship, Austin, TX" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-qr2Rn-7o4RA.html. 2 Timothy 2:15, "Study to show yourself approved unto God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." 2 Corinthians 13:5, "Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?"

Larry, do you have a digital copy of the outline you where reading from? Can you point me to a copy?

Please check out our latest video on Jehovah's Witnesses called "Who's Knocking? #2: Jehovah's Witnesses Hidden History, Spiritism, Racism, Doctrines of Demons" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-b9LFhzOb-_g.html. The "flickering" flashlight of the so-called "new light" of the Jehovah's Witnesses. The Watchtower Society emphasizes that they are a progressive organization, blessed with spiritual insights from God. They call these insights "new truths." Members are encouraged to keep abreast of "present truth" and to adjust their thinking when "old truth" changes. They are then encouraged to embrace "new light" or "new truths," called "enhanced understanding," "progressive understanding," "progressive truth" or "progressive knowledge." Whichever way you slice it, members are expected to believe the new truth and teach it, even if it contradicts former truth or is a reversal to a previously held viewpoint (very similar to the Muslim doctrine of abrogation in Islam - see "The Quran and the Problem of Abrogation" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-fkRCpQ8LA4Y.html). The Society likens their changes in viewpoint to a boat that tacks, moving side-to-side but always moving forward. Most of us have traveled in a boat that, pushed about by the waves, didn't always move forward in a straight line. But tossed about or not, if the boat had something to propel it, we eventually got to where we were going. Using the Society's own tacking rationale, let's see if their teachings about the men of Sodom have truly moved forward progressively, helping members to an enhanced understanding. As you read the quoted statements below, ask yourself which is the actual scenario: tacking or reversal to a previously held viewpoint? Sodomites Will-Will Not be Resurrected Watchtower 7/1879 p. 8 “the Sodomites will be resurrected.” Watchtower 6/1/1952 p.338 “The men of Sodom will not be resurrected.” So, years (approximately 73) pass and they change their viewpoint--but this is fine because in this case, it truly could be said to be a progressive understanding, because it has changed. Except that ... Watchtower 8/1/1965 p. 479 “The men of Sodom will be resurrected.” Hmm ... no side-to-side tacking here but a complete return to a viewpoint held 85-86 years earlier. so, at this juncture, it cannot be said to be progressive, rather regressive. But, did they finally have it right? Watchtower 6/1/1988 p.31 “men of Sodom will not be resurrected.” Twenty-three years pass and ... nope. Two complete reversals spanning over 100 years, and they still haven't gained or presented any additional insights to members. "Insight" publication Vol. 2, 1988 p. 985 “men of Sodom will be resurrected.” "Revelation Book," 1988 p. 273 “men of Sodom will not be resurrected.” You Can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth (Book published by the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society in 1982) The men of Sodom WILL be resurrected. You Can Live Forever in Paradise on Earth (Secondary Edition, published by the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society in 1989) The men of Sodom WILL NOT be resurrected. Wow! Lightening-fast reversals but no progressive "the light is getting brighter" truth, merely a replay of "will, will not." Recycled Information is Not Progressive Truth When the Society claims that a teaching that reverts to a previous viewpoint is in actuality "new light" or a "new spiritual truth," this is incorrect. While it may be "new" to a new generation of members, it is old, recycled information. Returning to a previous point of view is not the same thing as adopting a truly new understanding, nor does this indicate that God gave any type of progressive understanding to the Governing Body regarding the men of Sodom. If the Governing Body came up with a completely different understanding, one that didn't mirror previous teachings, this could be said to be an actual new understanding and could reasonably be said to be progressive (even if not necessarily from God). True Humility: Not Passing Off Human Teachings as God's Truths When old ideas are readopted, it would be more accurate to dub these, "a changed understanding." Far better still, religious organizations should refrain from stating that something comes from God and from presenting the information as "God's truth." A truly humble approach would be to say that this is a present understanding but that it is merely an understanding and not new light flashing forth from the Most High. For more information on the Watchtower see our playlist ""Dealing with Jehovah's Witnesses, Watchtower Society" with 22 videos & 24 hours of teaching material at ru-vid.com/group/PLCF0ADB29C0EB8C40.

See our playlist "Dealing with Anti Trinitarians (UPC) & Early Church History" with 45 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL9931642C7C8FFEAB&feature=plcp. John 10:30, "I and [my] Father are one." ] Not in person, for the Father must be a distinct person from the Son, and the Son a distinct person from the Father; and which is further manifest, from the use of the verb plural, "I and [my] Father", (esmen) , "we are one"; that is, in nature and essence, and perfections, particularly in power; since Christ is speaking of the impossibility of plucking any of the sheep, out of his own and his Father's hands; giving this as a reason for it, their unity of nature, and equality of power; so that it must be as impracticable to pluck them out of his hands, as out of his Father's, because he is equal with God the Father, and the one God with him. The Jew F16 objects, that ``if the sense of this expression is, that the Father and the Son are one, as the Nazarenes understand and believe it, it will be found that Jesus himself destroys this saying, as it is written in ( Mark 13:32 ) , for saith Jesus, "that day and that hour, there is knoweth, not the angels, nor the Son, but the Father only"; lo, these words show, that the Father and the Son are not one, since the Son does not know what the Father knows.'' But it should be observed, that Christ is both the Son of God, and the son of man, as the Christians believe; as he is the Son of God, he lay in the bosom of his Father, and was privy to all his secrets, to all his thoughts, purposes, and designs; and as such, he knew the day and hour of judgment, being God omniscient; and in this respect is one with the Father, having the same perfections of power, knowledge but then as the son of man, he is not of the same nature, and has not the same knowledge; his knowledge of things was derived, communicated, and not infinite; and did not reach to all things at once, but was capable of being increased, as it was: and it is with regard to him as the son of man, that Jesus speaks of himself in ( Mark 13:32 ) ; whereas he is here treating of his divine sonship, and almighty power; wherefore considered in the relation of the Son of God, and as possessed of the same perfections with God, he and his Father are one; though as man, he is different from him, and knew not some things he did: so that there is no contradiction between the words of Christ in one place, and in the other; nor is he chargeable with any blasphemy against God, or any arrogance in himself, by assuming deity to himself; nor deserving of punishment, even to be deprived of human life, as the Jew suggests; nor is what he produces from a Socinian writer, of any moment, that these words do not necessarily suppose, that the Father and the Son are of the same essence; since it may be said of two men, that they are one, end yet are not the same man, but one is one man, and the other another; for we do not say they are one and the same person, which does not follow from their being of one and the same nature, but that they are one God, and two distinct persons. FOOTNOTES: F16 Isaac Chizzuk Emuna, par. 2. c. 50. p. 438, 439. John 10:29 John 10:31

Someone said, "I don't think that SDA's are not saved because of their beliefs, as long as they maintain their belief in Jesus Christ, that is sufficient." One reason we have invested so much time & effort in confronting Seventh-day Adventism is because they have "another Jesus" & "another gospel" (2 Corinthians 11:4). Keep in mind that even the Muslims believe in "Jesus" but it is not the same Jesus as taught in the Bible (for proof see our website www.MuslimHope.com). The "Jesus Christ" of Ellen G. White is not the final sin bearer for sinners but Satan is (see our video "Cult Doctrine of Seventh-day Adventism: 1844 Probation & Satan As A Final Sin Bearer for Adventists" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-J50HlZFYHtY.html) & their "gospel" is a false gospel (see our video "Truth About Seventh-Day Adventist "Truth?": A False Gospel of Imperfect Law Keeping to Earn Heaven" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-7EsY1srHYJc.html). The consequences of following a phony "Jesus" & a phony "gospel" is eternal damnation (& we're not talking about "soul sleep" - see our video ""ANNIHILATIONISM" TO ESCAPE HELL: ANOTHER DOCTRINE OF THE DEMONS (& JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES & OTHERS)" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-_O-LMpP6bAg.html) as laid out by the Apostle Paul in Galatians 1:6-10, "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: 7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. 10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ." Thus the false religion of Ellen G. White has dire significance for those who risk their souls to believe in it. See www.TruthorFables.com, www.ExAdventist.com & our playlist "Dealing with Seventh-day Adventism & Their "Prophetess"" with 23 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL5316CC6F66F24283. SDAs need to repent of their false Jesus & false gospel & come to a true saving knowledge of the real Jesus Christ as taught in the Bible (see our video "IS JESUS GOD ALMIGHTY IN THE FLESH MEANING THE SECOND PERSON OF THE TRINITY OR IS HE SOMETHING ELSE?" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-_BlPm7M7uv8.html). Please remember 1 John 4:1, "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world." The person to whom this message was sent replied that they didn't have time to do further research & would just believe as they desired. We replied to that with this - You prove by your statement that you are willingly ignorant of what the Seventh Day Adventists actually believe but prefer rather to wishfully hope they might have it right (you of course taking the proverbial "three monkey approach" - hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil). Pardon me but that is a hopelessly senseless & inane way to rationalize Biblical theology or SDA theology for that matter. Saint Paul would give you an "F" on your report card for being so naïve. Don't you realize that Jesus would flunk you out of class too since He said in Matthew 7:13-29 that few would be saved & then he qualifies it in verses 21-23 where He states he is talking about people who say they "believe" in Him (see also Luke 13:23-30). Thus claiming to believe in a "Jesus" is not good enough according to Jesus. Judging by what you say, the Mormon Jesus is good enough (the brother of the Devil), the Jehovah's Witness Jesus is good enough (the archangel Michael), the Muslim Jesus is good enough (just a human prophet of Allah), the Christian Science Jesus is good enough (just an idea Mary had one day), the Roman Catholic Jesus is good enough (a bread wafer in their Mass) or whatever "Jesus" anyone cares to believe in. Based on what you said you do not have time to research things further, either official SDA theology or Biblical theology, therefore be my guest in going on your merry way into your own imagined world of Biblical La-La Land (the "pick & choose" what I want to believe out of the Bible predicated on my own personal interpretations built on my own preference for lack of study & research). Good luck with that. Titus 1:9-16

See our field trip to the Seventh-day Adventist General Conference in San Antonio, Texas where 70,000 Adventists from around the world gathered to exalt Ellen G. White & their depiction of Jesus as some sort of a Norwegian white man just like the Mormons do despite what Isaiah 53:2 says. The proof of this is in our video "Seventh-day Adventists Glorify Ellen G. White & a White Jesus in San Antonio SDA Conference" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-dlfUnuRwwm8.html. Titus 1:9-16

See our latest video on the Jehovah's Witnesses called "Who's Knocking? #2: Jehovah's Witnesses Hidden History, Spiritism, Racism, Doctrines of Demons" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-b9LFhzOb-_g.html. Although this video is from a lecture I gave to one of my Christian apologetics classes back in the 1990s on the subject of Jehovah's Witnesses my video man & myself spent weeks in editing this particular video (we usually edit once a week for 4 to 5 hours). I decided to put the time & effort into placing primary Jehovah's Witness source material into this video which then made it into a very tedious project. Since I own many Jehovah's Witness books that are over 100 years old & are little known I thought it would be useful for viewers to see with their own eyes this material. With knowledge of these original Watchtower publications true Christians can then use this information as an effective tool in witnessing to Jehovah's Witnesses who have been deceived by this false prophet organization (I even included some of the court documents from Watchtower founder Charles Taze Russell's divorce case with his wife Maria over his affair with an underage female). Over the past 33 years I have been able, by God's grace, to lead many people & families out of the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society. This has been done not so much by arguing Bible verses with them (playing "Bible ping pong") but by knowing their history (which they cannot change). Once you can crack their faith in the Watchtower with their own history then they are much more open to discussing what the Bible actually says rather than what the Watchtower tells them the Bible says. Be prepared to meet the Jehovah's Witnesses who come knocking at your door. See also our playlist "Dealing with Jehovah's Witnesses, Watchtower Society" with 22 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLCF0ADB29C0EB8C40. 1 Peter 3:15, "But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:" See our playlist "Dealing with UFOs, Ghosts, Magic, Spiritual Warfare, Satan" with 18 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL2CF1129D311BF9A6. The background of the Jehovah's Witnesses' Watchtower Society is built on the occult (relating to magical powers, esoteric activities, mysticism, etc.). Hear "Occult History of Jehovah's Witnesses" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=1120515352 by former Jehovah's Witness Lorri MacGregor (she was a guest on our radio show at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-cGNnOs3UP1I.html). Hear her other lectures: "Ex-Jehovah's Witness speaks out" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=12250542425, "What Mormons Wont tell you at the door" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=12100515958 & "Counterfeit Christians" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=120516534. 2 Timothy 4:2-5, "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. 5 But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry."

The ten commandments were given only to the nation of Israel & not to anyone else (Gentiles). The New Testament only reaffirms nine out of the ten commandments under the terms of the New Covenant. Sabbath keeping as found in the ten commandments is a ceremonial law associated only with Old Testament Israelites & is not a moral law that must be followed by Gentiles. The Old Testament Scriptures always state that the covenant written on the Tablets of Stone was made only with Israel at Sinai. Look at the first time the words "Ten Commandments" were used in the Bible. This same text states that the Ten Commandments, as the covenant document, was given only to the nation of Israel: And the LORD said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and WITH ISRAEL. And he was there with the LORD forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments. Ex 34:27,28 When Moses refreshed Israel's mind concerning their covenant relationship with God, he specifically says that the covenant (Ten Commandments) was given at Horeb. This is clear in the following text: The Lord our God made a covenant [Remember the covenant is the Ten Commandments or Tablets of Stone] with us at Horeb. The Lord did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, with all of us alive here today. Deut. 5:2,3 Moses insists that the covenant was "not made with our fathers," meaning the patriarchs, 11 but with the people that came out of Egypt. He then repeats the words of the covenant, or Ten Commandments, that were written on the Tablets of Stone. The Prophets saw the coming of a New Covenant and spoke of it in glowing terms. Whenever they contrasted the Old Covenant with the New Covenant, they always state when and with whom the Old Covenant was made. Notice this in a classic passage in Jeremiah: Behold days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel..., not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hands to bring them out of the land of Egypt..." Jer. 31:31.32. Notice the following things clearly set forth in this passage: 1.There was going a New Covenant. "I will make a new covenant." 2.The New Covenant was going to be different in nature from the Old Covenant. "Not like the covenant I made with their fathers" 3.The Old Covenant being replaced was made at Sinai and made only with Israel. "Made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt" How is it possible to read these words in Jeremiah and say, "God was not actually promising to make a new and different covenant with Israel. He was really promising a new administration of the same covenant they were already under?" It seems to us that such statements are literally contradicting what Jeremiah said. The rest of the Bible always says the same thing that Jeremiah said when it speaks on this subject. The following passage from I Kings appears to be going out of its way to affirm the facts we are setting forth: There was nothing in the ark save the two tables of stone, which Moses put there at Horeb, WHEN the LORD made a covenant with the children of Israel, WHEN they came out of the land of Egypt. I Kings 8:9 The phrases "Tables of Stone," "Moses at Horeb," "made a covenant" and "children of Israel," in this text are the same key ingredients that we always find connected with the Ten Commandments. This passage of Scripture uses the word "when" two times. We could put a period after "children of Israel" and not lose the thought or argument. The last phrase in the sentence "When they came out of the land of Egypt" is almost redundant. The Holy Spirit must have wanted to impress this point on our minds. The NT Scriptures always connect the Old Covenant with Israel. Heb 8:6-9 is the Apostolic interpretation of Jer 31:31,32. The author of Hebrews clearly states: (1) when the Old Covenant was made; (2) with whom the Old Covenant was made; (3) the fact the New Covenant would be different than the Old Covenant. The passage is clear: .......... the time is coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel .......... It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out Egypt.......... Heb 8:7,8 It is not possible to make this verse promise a new administration of the same covenant. Nor is it possible relate this covenant back to Adam in the garden. Neither the words in prophecy of Jer 31:33 nor the Apostolic interpretation in Heb 8:7,8 will allow such an idea. "Having the law" as a covenant and the Gospel as a promise as opposed to "not having the law" and being without covenant or hope was the great difference between the nation of Israel and the Gentiles (Eph 2:11-21). The following text is a key passage on this particular point: For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness..... Rom 2:14. First of all, the word "law" in this passage clearly refers to the Tablets of Stone. It cannot refer to "a sense of moral duty" since all men have that by virtue of being God's image bearers. Paul is talking about a law that all men definitely do not have. If all men have "the law" in the sense that Paul is using the word in this passage, his argument does not make sense. He is contradicting himself in the same breath. Paul's whole point in the context of this passage is to show that the Jews are more guilty than the Gentiles. The basis of his proof is that the Gentiles "without the law" live better lives than the Jews do "with the law." The Jews alone have the special gift of the Law. And the specific law that he is talking about is the law written on the Tablets of Stone as a covenant. Rom 2:14 is not talking about a so called "ceremonial law." Whatever the "law" is in this passage, it convicts the conscience of sin. Conscience, by nature and without special revelation, cannot convict men of disobedience to "ceremonial" laws. One of the many proofs that the Sabbath is not a "moral law" is the fact that we have never discovered a single instance of anyone knowing, by nature, the Sabbath law. This particular law must always be taught as special revelation just as it was to Israel at Sinai. 12 Gentiles intuitively knew that adultery was wrong but they know that the seventh day is to be kept holy. Most people misquote this passage of Scripture. Paul does not say, "The law" is written in the Gentile's heart. He says that certain behavior proves that there is a conviction of right and wrong in all men. This fact shows that conscience is alive and well even in the Gentiles. In fact, it is more alive and well in them than it is in the Jew. This power of conscience "shows the work of the law written in their hearts." The "work" of the law is to accuse or excuse according to the standard given to it. It condemns all violations of known wrong and rewards obedience to what is known to be right. All men have a conscience and they all experience, to a greater or lesser degree, conviction they have done wrong. The Gentiles did not have "the law" but they did have the "work of the law" in their hearts. The law can only "work" true repentance that leads to faith if there is (1) a covenant with clear terms and (2) the individual has a knowledge of those terms. In giving Israel the law as a covenant, God enlightened the mind and sharpened the conscience. He sandwiched conscience under the Old Covenant and its threat of judgment. This caused a very painful death to all hope of eternal life in those who truly experienced the end for which the law covenant was given, namely, genuine "conviction of guilt." The same law actually "blinded" the rest of the Jews and made them worse off spiritually than the Gentiles. We say again, it was most gracious of God to kill Israel's hope in their own efforts. However, it took a covenant of pure law with the power of life and death to do the job. There was not an ounce of grace in the Tablets of Stone but it was most of God to give them to Israel as a covenant that could prepare the heart to receive grace! Regardless of whether the reader agrees or disagree with what has just been said, one thing is certain. We cannot change a passage that emphatically states that Israel had a specific law that the Gentiles did not have into a text that says "all men have the same law." This is to destroy the text. Paul can only be referring to the Tables of Stone as a covenant. It both amazes and amuses us to watch people waver back and forth when they cannot fit clear passages of Scripture into their theological system. They usually want to "eat their cake and have it too." If they are discussing the "unchanging moral law," they will insist that "the moral law (Ten Commandments) is written on ever man's heart." However, if they are discussing the canon of conduct for believer's today, these same people will insist that in regeneration "the moral law" (Ten Commandments) is written on the heart" by the Holy Spirit. In both cases it is said to be the same law that Scriptures clearly state was given only to the nation of Israel at Sinai on the Tablets of Stone. Something seems to be a bit out of focus when all of this is put together. (1) If the first point is true, and the same law that was given to Israel at Sinai (the Ten Commandments) is indeed written on every man's heart, it is impossible to say the Gentiles are "without the law." They cannot be "without" the very law that is written "in" them. (2) If the second point, affirming that the same law written in the heathen, and given to Israel at Sinai, is also written on the heart of believer in regeneration, is true, there appears to be a contradiction. What need is there to write something on the heart that is already there? (3) If, in regeneration, the Holy Spirit writes the Ten Commandments on the heart of every believer, what then is the necessity of preaching those commandments to the Christian? We must distinguish between the Ten Commandments as the terms of a legal covenant and the duties commanded by the individual commandments. The moment we do this a lot of confusion disappears and some difficult passages of Scripture become clear and simple. We will illustrate this point with one passage of Scripture. This passage in its context is pivotal to any correct understanding of the change of covenants: But the ministry Jesus has received is as superior to theirs as the covenant of which he is mediator is superior to the old one, and it is founded on better promises. For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. But God found fault with the people and said: "The time is coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they did not remain faithful to my covenant, and I turned away from them, declares the Lord. This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. No longer will a man teach his neighbor, or a man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' because they will all know me, from the least of them to the greatest. For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more." By calling this covenant "new," he has made the first one obsolete; and what is obsolete and aging will soon disappear. Heb 8:6-13 We have already noted the three distinct contrasts in verse 6. We saw the following: (1) Christ has a better ministry than Aaron; (2) because Christ's ministry is based on a new and better covenant; (3) the covenant Christ administers is superior to the covenant under which Aaron ministered because it is based on better promises. Heb 8:7-9 settles any discussion as to either when (at Sinai) or with whom (Israel only) the Old Covenant was made. Heb 8:11 shows that everyone, without a single exception, in the New Covenant community, or Church, "know the Lord." In other words, the text proves that the Church born under the New Covenant has a totally regenerate membership. We will now look at verse 10: This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people. HEB 8:10 The text emphasizes several important things. First, God promises to make a new covenant, and this covenant will be with the "house of Israel." We will not digress from the point under discussion except to say that the "house of Israel" in Heb 8-10 must be the Church. The writer is not talking about the future but the present. This covenant cannot be pushed into a future millennium. Hebrews is talking about the priestly ministry of Christ over the Church. However, that is not our subject in this book. The second major thing in the text is God's promise to put his laws in the mind and write them on the hearts of His New Covenant people. Now here is the question: "What is the difference, if any, between the "covenant" and the word "laws" in this passage?" Exactly what is God promising to do in this verse? Exactly what is the "New Covenant" He is making and precisely what "laws" is He going to write on the heart? We should carefully note that God did not say, "In that day I will give a new administration of the same covenant that I gave Israel. I will write the old law of Sinai into the new heart of the Christian." That is how some theologians read this passage. Likewise, the text does not say, "I will make a New Covenant that destroys all of the Ten Commandments and allows a believer to do as he pleases." That is how some liberals view the text. No, the text, and its context, is talking about both a new and better covenant than the old covenant at Sinai and the new experience of the law being written on the heart by the indwelling Spirit. The clear answers to the two questions that we asked lies in understanding the three comparisons made in verse 6. Why did the Old Covenant fail and thereby need to be replaced by a new and better covenant? The answer is that it could not secure the necessary obedience to its terms. It could not write on the heart the desire to do the things that were written on the Tablets of the Covenants. It could write on stone but not on flesh (II Cor 3). By nature all men hate God's authority (Rom 8:7) and even the mighty Law of God cannot change that rebellion into a sincere desire to obey. The Old Covenant failed to bring sinners into God's presence because it could not change the sinner's heart. It could not conquer sin in the flesh nor it could cleanse the conscience from the guilt of sin. Now read carefully! The greater glory of the New Covenant is not that the standards or laws have been either lowered or done away. It is not that the moral duties demanded on the Tables of Stone are no longer binding on a Christian. No, No, that is to miss the whole point. The greater glory of the New Covenant is that no obedience at all is required as the terms of being saved simply because the very terms of the Tablets of the Covenant have been finally and fully met in the Person and work of Surety, the Lord Jesus Christ. The glory of the New Covenant is in the words, "IT IS FINISHED." Paul states the glory of the New Covenant in the classic passage in Rom 4:5. Here is a paraphrase of that text: However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness. Rom 4:5 This is the "rest" that weary souls enter into when they come under the yoke of Christ and are liberated from the yoke of the covenant given to Moses on Sinai. We doubt not that our Lord Jesus had this very contrast in mind when He gave that great gospel invitation in Matthew 11: Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light." Matt 11:28-30. Every thing in that passage is a contrast with Moses and old law covenant. The yoke of the covenant written on the Tables of Stone was a burden impossible to bear. The yoke written in the blood of Calvary is a privilege and delight to bear. The New Covenant is nothing less than Christ Himself and His finished work. When God said, "I will make a new covenant," He was saying, "I will give you Christ to be your covenant Keeper. He will both keep the law and die under its curse." The message has now become "It is finished" instead of "Do or Die." The New Covenant is grace and not works. What then are the "laws" spoken of in Heb 8:10? Exactly what "laws" does the Holy Spirit write on the heart of a New Covenant believer? These laws, as far as their content, are basically the very same moral laws that were written on the tables of stone. Heb 8:10 is not talking about two different "sets" of laws that totally contradict each other as if there were two "kinds of morality." The morality of the New Covenant does not destroy the true morality demanded in the laws of the Old Covenant. It takes that morality to a higher level. It is true that Christ adds laws that were impossible for Moses to ever give but that does not mean Christ contradicts Moses. 13 Hebrews is talking about two different motivations that grow out of two different kinds of covenants." II Cor 3 is the Holy Spirit's commentary on Heb 8:10. Neither of these passages are teaching that God "tattoos" the exact words of the Decalogue on our hearts. Both passages are talking about the powerful effect of regeneration that results in a totally new and different attitude toward God. These two passages are picturing the removal of the stony heart that hated the Tablets of Stones and all they represented. It is describing the effect of regeneration in replacing the stony heart with a heart of flesh. The new heart of flesh loves all of God's revealed laws, not just a one small code, simply because it loves the new Lawgiver Who teaches us those laws. The difference is not in the specific duties demanded but the difference between law and grace as covenants. It is the difference, in some cases, of the identical duties being enforced from without by fear and force, in the case of the Old Covenant, and being constrained by love from within a heart rejoicing in a covenant of grace. These two passages are talking about the difference between the conscience being under the old Pedagogue, the Tables of Stone, and being under the new Pedagogue, the indwelling Holy Spirit. 11. The writer of Hebrews, as well as the prophecy in Jer 31:33, establish beyond question that the "fathers" referred to in this passage are the patriarchs. To make the statement refer to the immediate fathers of the people to whom Moses is speaking would involve a contradiction. It was specifically to these very "fathers" that God gave the covenant at Sinai. 12. John Bunyan wrote an excellent article proving the Seventh Day Sabbath could not possibly be a so called "Creation Ordinance." To our knowledge, no one has attempted to answer his arguments. See, "Questions about the Nature and Perpetuity of the Seventh-Day Sabbath," by John Bunyan, The Works of John Bunyan, Vol. II, pp 359-387, Baker Book House. 13. We have worked this out in a book entitled But I Say Unto You. This book shows that Christ supercedes and replaces Moses as the New Lawgiver. Christ changes some of the laws of Moses; raises some others to a higher level; discards some others altogether; and adds some laws that are totally new. However, this is not contradicting Moses as he were wrong. Why do we worship on Sunday instead of Saturday? In the Old Testament, God stated, "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of the Lord your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you," (Exodus 20:8-10, NASB). It was the custom of the Jews to come together on the Sabbath, which is Saturday, cease work, and worship God. Jesus went to the synagogue on Saturday to teach (Matt. 12:9, John 18:20) as did the apostle Paul (Acts 17:2; 18:4). So, if in the Old Testament we are commanded to keep the Sabbath and in the New Testament we see Jews, Jesus, and the apostles doing the same thing, then why do we worship on Sunday? First of all, of the 10 commandments listed in Exodus 20:1-17, only 9 of them were reinstituted in the New Testament: five in Matt. 19:18, murder, adultery, stealing, false witness, and honor parents; in Rom. 13:9, coveting; worshiping God properly covers the first three commandments. The one that was not reaffirmed was the one about the Sabbath. Instead, Jesus said that He is the Lord of the Sabbath (Matt. 12:8). Upon the completion of Creation, God rested on the seventh day. However, since God is all-powerful, He doesn’t get tired. He doesn’t need to take a break and rest. So, why did/does it say that He rested? The reason is simple: Mark 2:27 says, "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath." In other words, God established the Sabbath as a rest for His people--not because He needed a break but because we are mortal and need a time of rest--a time to focus on God. In this, our spirits and bodies are both renewed. The Old Testament system of Law required keeping the Sabbath as part of the overall moral, legal, and sacrificial system by which the Jewish people satisfied God’s requirements for behavior, government, and forgiveness of sins. The Sabbath was part of the Law in that sense. In order to "remain" in favor with God, you had to also keep the Sabbath. If it was not kept, then the person was in sin and would often be punished (Ezekiel 18:4; Rom. 6:23; Deut. 13:1-9; Num. 35:31; Lev. 20:2, etc.). But with Jesus’ atonement, we are no longer required to keep the Law. We are not under Law but grace (Rom. 6:14-15). The Sabbath is fulfilled in Jesus. He is our rest. We are not under obligation, by Law, to keep it; and this goes for the Sabbath as well. It is not a requirement that we keep the Sabbath. If it were, then we would still be under the Law; but we are not. Evidence of the Change of Days can be Seen in the NT The New Testament has ample evidence that the seventh day Sabbath is no longer a requirement. Rom. 14:5-6, "One man regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Let each man be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God." The entire section of Rom. 14:1-12 is worth careful study. Nevertheless, the instructions here are that individuals must be convinced in their own minds about which day they observe for the Lord. If the seventh day Sabbath were a requirement, then the choice would not be man's but God’s. Col. 2:16-17, "Therefore let no one act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day--17things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ." Notice here that time sequence mentioned. A festival is yearly. A new moon is monthly. A Sabbath is weekly. No one is to judge regarding this. The Sabbath is defined as a shadow; the reality is Jesus. Jesus is our Sabbath. Acts 20:7, "And on the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to depart the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight." The first day of the week is Sunday, and this is the day the people gathered. This passage can easily be seen as the church meeting on Sunday. It has two important church functions within it: breaking bread (communion) and a message (preaching). Additionally, Luke did not use the Jewish system of counting days: sundown to sundown. He used the Roman system: midnight to midnight. This is a subtle point that shows the Jewish Sabbath system was not the one utilized by Luke. 1 Cor. 16:1-2, "Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I directed the churches of Galatia, so do you also. 2 On the first day of every week let each one of you put aside and save, as he may prosper, that no collections be made when I come." Notice here that Paul is directing the churches to meet on the first day of each week and put money aside. It would seem that this is tithing. So, the instructed time for the church to meet is Sunday. Is this an official worship day set up by the church? You decide. Rev. 1:10-11, "I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and I heard behind me a loud voice like the sound of a trumpet, 11saying, "Write in a book what you see, and send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus and to Smyrna and to Pergamum and to Thyatira and to Sardis and to Philadelphia and to Laodicea." The New Bible Dictionary says regarding the term, ‘The Lord’s Day’ in Revelation 1:10: "This is the first extant occurrence in Christian literature of τῇ κυριακῇ ἡμέρᾳ, "ta kuriaka hamera." The adjectival construction suggests that it was a formal designation of the church’s worship day. As such, it certainly appears early in the 2nd century (Ignatius, Epistle to the Magnesians, 1. 67). In many churches today, the term "The Lord’s Day" is used to designate Sunday--the same as it was in the second century. I hope this is evidence enough to show you that the Bible does not require that we worship on Saturday. If anything, we have the freedom (Rom. 14:1-12) to worship on the day that we believe we should. And, no one should judge us regarding the day we keep. We are free in Christ and not under law (Rom. 6:14). See our videos "Christ Has Fulfilled & Replaced the Law of Moses With Higher Laws of the New Covenant, Hebrews 8:6-13" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-EkZ2Cn8TLzE.html, "Sabbath Keeping Is Not Required For New Testament Christians: Seventh-Day Adventists Beware" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-TEFt4TOR6E8.html & "Is Sabbath Keeping Essential to Be a Real Christian? Former SDA Pastor Answers This Question" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-w0L3rSSL_H8.html. 2 Timothy 2:15

@lumeriam If you want to talk about geoscience & radiation by Moret that's one thing but I'm talking Biblical theology which totally contradicts the cultic teachings of Quakerism & their "God is my Pilot" religion (Ezekiel 13:2-9, 14:10; Deuteronomy 18:20-22, etc.). The Bible itself condemns people who don't conform to its demands (John 3:18-21, John 14:6, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Galatians 5:19-21, etc)& that's why there's a burning hell (Matthew 25:41,46). Elizabeth C. Prophet is a false prophet!

Hear "Why You Can Believe The Bible" by Voddie Baucham at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=91314616480 & Dr. James White concerning "Can I Trust My Bible?" at www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp?seriesOnly=true&currSection=sermonstopic&sourceid=immanuelbc&keyword=Can+I+Trust+My+Bible%3F&keyworddesc=Can+I+Trust+My+Bible%3F which includes "Textual Criticism: Reliability, Answering Critics, Bible Versions & Sufficiency of Scripture." How Do We Know the Bible is True? Is it Really the Word of God? Many critics of Christianity attack the Bible’s truthfulness. Many don’t believe it because they say it was written by man. Is the Bible really God speaking to man? Is the Bible of human origin or a direct revelation from God? The Bible The word Bible is from the root word “biblios” which is Greek for “little books.“ The Bible contains 66 books and was written by 40 authors. The books you see in most Bibles have been tried and tested and were generally accepted by the early church. For centuries the Bible was not available to the general public due to their being only hand-copied ones available. The Bible has been banned from many nations, it has been burned by others, it has been declared out of date by moderns, but it has brought salvation to untold millions. It is the unbridled truth and the unchangeable Word of God that changes those who read it. When people read it, it reads them too! It comforts the afflicted and afflicts the comfortable. What follows is conclusive evidence that we can believe that the Bible is God speaking to us and not just the words of men. Thus Says the Lord or Thus Says Man? If the Bible were indeed a work of man, then we would expect some of the words to say, “thus says the prophet Jeremiah” or “thus says Peter an Apostle of God” but it doesn’t. From what I could count, “Thus says the Lord” is recorded 418 times. If it were of human origin, then we would read somewhere that the Bible or the message came from a certain author but we never see that anywhere. On the contrary, we read over 1,000 times where “Jesus said” and “Thus says the Lord” were written down. In fact, even the Book of Revelation is not called John’s Book of Revelation at all. In Revelation 1:1-2 we see where the words of this book came from: “The revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John.” So John was just the recipient of the book as he just wrote down what he was told. Paul said, “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness” (2 Tim 3:16). Paul clearly said that all Scripture is God-breathed…not just the New Testament or the Old Testament, but all Scripture. Peter reiterates it by writing, “For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Pet 1:21). Peter would tell you that “you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation” (2 Pet 1:20). God gives a very serious warning to anyone who takes away or adds to any of the words in the Bible, indicating that only He gives the words of this book and no human had better tamper with it. In Revelation 22:19 God warns that if anyone adds to or takes away any of the words of the Bible, He “…shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city (heaven or the new Jerusalem)”. This same warning is given in the Old Testament in Deuteronomy 4:2. Alleged Errors in Transcribing When the Word of God was reproduced to make another copy, well before the printing press was invented, there were 70 scribes that worked on it with expert precision second to none. Imagine that each of the scribes had the other sixty-nine scribes check their writings for error. Each of these seventy scribes reviewed each other’s work and every written copy, letter by letter, line by line, book by book were examined meticulously. If any errors were found, the started all over again on that particular book or page. Imagine you’re one of the scribes and you have just finished a section. Now the other sixty-nine scribes check your work and compare it to the original. The amazing fact is that their methods resulted in such an accurate reproduction of scripture that only one error for every fifteen hundred words occurred and these errors were so slight that they never affected the content. This copying left absolutely no room for any private interpretation or mistranslation at all. By modern standards, the accuracy rate is superior to that of Microsoft’s Spelling and Grammar Check, which by the way is not perfect. When you consider the stringent guidelines and conditions, no one can dispute that the translation differences had any negative effect on the message of the Bible or its general context. Manuscript Evidence New Testament manuscripts have been preserved by the thousands and the fact is that no other ancient works in human history have such enormous documented and recorded histories as does the Bible. There are about 6,000 complete or fragmented Greek manuscripts, 10,000 Latin manuscripts and over 9,000 manuscripts in various other ancient languages. The dates of these manuscripts range from the 2nd century up to the invention of the printing press in the 15th century. Nearly ever year there are more New Testament manuscripts discovered that were handwritten in the original Greek format which continues to add to the enormous collection already on hand. In 2008, 47 new Greek manuscripts were discovered in Albania. Of these, 17 of them were unknown to Western scholars. The fact is that the amount of manuscript evidence is astounding. There are over 25,000 New Testament manuscripts of which 5,000 of these date from the first century. What that translates into for Historians is what is called a primary source. A primary source is a source that comes from eye witnesses. The nearly 6,000 Dead Sea Scrolls are so close in agreement, contextually, that there is only 0.01% in differences and the main differences are only in the differentiation of vowels. In no way do these miniscule differences affect the text or the context. One of the greatest supportive facts is that the evidence verifies the dating of Matthew’s Gospel as far back as A.D. 60. Scholars argue that Mark wrote the first Gospel. This places the composition of Mark to within 20 years of the events that took place and were recorded in his Gospel. With the evidence that the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) and Luke’s second volume, Acts, were written so close to the time of the crucifixion, the record of the events of Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection makes these facts indisputable. Luke and Acts was originally one book but was later separated into two books for the reader’s convenience but the content never changed. The fact that they were written within the lifetimes of those who were eyewitnesses is evidence strong enough to hold up in a court of law. Since the Old and New Testament manuscripts have been preserved by the thousands and there are no other ancient works in human history to compare to it, what we have today in the Bible is as a reliable source as any current historical account or newspaper printed today. The Bible is the Word of God, as men were moved by the Holy Spirit to write it. It is God speaking to us and it is without error and full of truth. If God has revealed Himself in propositional form, that revelation would have certain properties due to His infinite knowledge and moral perfection: It would be entirely true - His infinite knowledge would prevent errors and His truthfulness would keep Him from deception. It would be a coherent unity, therefore not self- contradictory. It would contain God's will for man, and provide the motivation to live according to that will (1). God has revealed Himself in the Bible without error. The Bible itself claims this inerrancy (2 Timothy 3:16-17 (2); Matthew 5:18 (3); etc.). Let's look at some of the proofs for the Bible's claim to be the infallible word of God. Archaeological evidence The first proof we have testifying to the reliability of the Bible is the archaeological evidence. Nelson Glueck, a respected Jewish archaeologist claims: "It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever contradicted a biblical reference." (4) The liberals made wild claims against the Bible a hundred years ago but now they are silent. This is not true of other religions. The Mormon claim for inspiration of the Book of Mormon has been categorically condemned by the Smithsonian Institute because of the fallacies shown by archaeology; this is not so with the Bible. A.N. Sherwin-White, a respected classical historian at Oxford says, "For Acts the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming...", although, not being a Christian, he still regarded it as being "propaganda."(5) Historicity of Jesus A case in point is the historicity of Jesus. Although many atheists state that Jesus never lived, He is mentioned by many contemporary, non-Christian historians. Let us look at the evidence. Flavius Josephus, a first century Jewish historian wrote of Jesus and the Christians: "so he [Ananus, son of Ananus the high priest] assembled the sanhedrin of judges, and brought before him the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others (or some of his companions) and when he had formed an accusation against them, he delivered them to be stoned." (6) Other Jewish rabbinical writings, including Rabbi Eliezer and writers of the Talmud, talk about Jesus and his miracles. Surprisingly to many atheists, they never denied that miracles took place, but attempted to explain them as a result of evil (7). More information about Jesus in the Talmud can be found at Jesus Christ In The Talmud. Cornelius Tacitus wrote about Jesus and the first century Christians in his Annals (a history of the Roman empire): "Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus." (8) Thallus, a Samaritan historian, wrote ca. 52 A.D. attempting to give a natural explanation for the earthquake and darkness which occurred at the crucifixion of Jesus. Mara Bar-Seraphon wrote a letter to his son in 73 A.D. which tells of the deaths of Socrates, Pythagoras, and of Jesus, "What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise king?...Nor did the wise king die for good; he lived on in the teaching which he had given." Jesus is also mentioned by Phlegon, a first-century historian, Lucian of Samosata (in The Passing Peregrinus), and Plinius Secundus, (Pliny the Younger). Scholars have made statements such as, "no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non-historicity of Jesus ." (9) The latest version of Encyclopedia Britannica says in its discussion of the multiple extra-biblical witnesses: "These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries." (10) Even the atheist H. G. Wells spoke of Jesus, "...one is obliged to say, "Here was a man. This part of the tale could not have been invented." (11) Scientific evidence Recent scientific evidence is adding to the evidence supporting the reliability of biblical chronology from the scriptures. This study demonstrated the reliability of the Biblical record regarding the Egyptian plagues and demise of Jericho. Drs. Hendrik J. Bruins and Johannes van der Plicht reported in the prestigious British journal, Nature (12), that the destruction of Jericho was dated to 1580 (+/- 13 years) B.C. (using 14C dating). This date is significant, since several archeologists have insisted that Jericho was destroyed by the Egyptians between 1550 and 1300 B.C. The recent study discredits the Egyptian theory, since the date is much too old. What is even more exciting is that scientists, using 14C dating and tree rings, have found evidence of a volcanic eruption from the Aegean island of Thera, which recently has been dated to 1628 B.C. (13). This would place the eruption at 45 years prior to the destruction of Jericho, at a time which coincidentally corresponds to the time of the plagues the Lord unleashed upon Egypt. Check out Exodus 10: Then the Lord said to Moses, "Stretch out your hand toward the sky, that there may be darkness over the land of Egypt, even a darkness which may be felt." So Moses stretched out his hand toward the sky, and there was thick darkness in all the land of Egypt for three days. (Exodus 10:21-22) Even the researchers commented that the 45 years difference in events was "rather striking." The Bible's Uniqueness and Unity The next proof is the Bible's uniqueness and unity. The Bible was written by over 40 authors who came from just about every walk of life conceivable, including fisherman, kings, a butler, priests, and a tax collector. The 66 books of the Bible were written over a 1,500 year span in three languages on three continents with one theme and no contradictions. C.J. Sharp captures this miracle well: "If a fragment of stone were found in Italy, another in Asia Minor, another in Greece, another in Egypt, and on and on until sixty-six fragments had been found, and if when put together they fitted perfectly together, making a perfect statue of Venus de Milo, there is not an artist or scientist but would arrive immediately at the conclusion that there was originally a sculptor who conceived and carved the statue. The very lines and perfections would probably determine which of the great ancient artists carved the statue. Not only the unity of the Scriptures, but their lines of perfection, suggest One far above any human as the real author. That could be no one but God (14)." Prophetic evidence Yet another reason Christians believe God is the ultimate author of the Bible is the predictive prophecies in the Bible. This aspect is unique to the world's religions because if one predicts something will happen and it does not, they are proven to be phony. The Bible is literally filled with detailed prophecies that have been fulfilled with 100% accuracy. Here is a list of 85 Messianic prophecies along with their fulfillment through the life, ministry, death and resurrection of Jesus: Prophecies of Jesus of Nazareth as Messiah #Prophetic ScriptureSubjectFulfilled 1 Genesis 3:15 seed of a woman Galatians 4:4 2 Genesis 12:3, Genesis 22:18 descendant of Abraham Matthew 1:1, Acts 3:25 3 Genesis 17:19, Genesis 21:12 descendant of Isaac Luke 3:34, Luke 3:23-24 4 Genesis 28:14, Numbers 24:17 descendant of Jacob Matthew 1:2, Luke 3:23-24 5 Genesis 49:10 from the tribe of Judah Luke 3:23-24, Luke 3:33 6 Isaiah 9:6, 11:1-5, Jeremiah 23:5-6 descendant of David Matthew 1:1, Luke 3:23-24 7 Isaiah 11:1 descendant of Jesse Luke 3:23-24 8 Ezekiel 37:24 will shepherd His people Matthew 2:6 9 Isaiah 9:7 heir to the throne of David Luke 1:32-33 10 Micah 5:2 His pre-existence Colossians 1:17 11 Isaiah 9:6, Micah 5:1 eternal existence John 8:58, 11, 14, Ephesians 1:3-14, Colossians 1:15-19 12 Psalm 45:6-7, Psalm 102:25-27 anointed and eternal Hebrews 1:8-12 13 Psalm 110:1 called Lord Matthew 22:43-45 14 Isaiah 33:22 judge John 5:30 15 Psalm 2:6 king Matthew 27:37 16 Micah 5:2 born in Bethlehem Matthew 2:1, Luke 2:4-5, 7 17 Daniel 9:25 time for His birth Matthew 2:1, 16, 19, Luke 2:1-2 18 Isaiah 7:14 to be born of a virgin Matthew 1:18, 24, 25, Luke 1:26-27, 30-31 19 Psalm 72:9 worshipped by shepherds Luke 2:8-15 20 Psalm 72:10 honored by great kings Matthew 2:1-11 21 Jeremiah 31:15 slaughter of children Matthew 2:16-18 22 Hosea 11:1 flight to Egypt Matthew 2:14-15 23 Isaiah 40:3-5 the way prepared Matthew 3:1,2, Luke 3:3-6 24 Malachi 3:1 preceded by a forerunner Luke 7:24, 27 25 Malachi 4:5-6 preceded by Elijah Matthew 11:13-14 26 Psalm 2:7, Proverbs 30:4 declared the Son of God Matthew 3:17, Luke 1:32 27 Isaiah 9:5-6, Jeremiah 23:5-6 God's name applied to Him Romans 10:9, Philippians 2:9-11 28 Isaiah 11:2, 61:1, Psalm 45:8 anointment of Holy Spirit Matthew 3:16, 17, John 3:34, Acts 10:38 29 Isaiah 9:1-2 Galilean ministry Matthew 4:13-16 30 Psalm 78:2-4 speaks in parables Matthew 13:34-35 31 Isaiah 56:7, Jeremiah 7:11 temple becomes a house of merchandise instead of prayer Matthew 21:13 32 Psalm 69:9 zeal of Jews for the temple instead of God John 2:17 33 Deuteronomy 18:15, 18 a prophet Matthew 21:11, Acts 3:20, 22 34 Isaiah 29:18, Isaiah 35:5-6 blind, deaf, and lame are healed by the Messiah Luke 7:22, Matthew 9:35, 11:3-5 35 Isaiah 40:11, 42:2-3, Isaiah 53:7 Messiah will be meek and mild Matthew 12:18-20, Matthew 11:29, Hebrews 4:15 36 Isaiah 53:9 Be sinless and without guile 1 Peter 2:22 37 Isaiah 42:1, Isaiah 49:1 will minister to Gentiles Matthew 12:18-21Luke 2:32 38 Isaiah 61:1-2 to bind up the brokenhearted Luke 4:18-19 39 Isaiah 53:12, Isaiah 59:16 to intercede for the people Romans 8:34, Hebrews 7:25 40 Isaiah 53:3, 8:14, 28:16, 63:3, Psalms 69:6, 118:22 rejected by His own people, the Jews John 1:11, 7:5,48, Luke 23:18, Acts 4:11, 1 Peter 2:6-8 41 Psalm 118:22 Be rejected by the Jewish leadership Matthew 21:42, John 7:48 42 Psalm 2:1-2 plotted against by Jews and Gentiles alike Acts 4:27 43 Psalm 110:4 priest after the order of Melchizedek Hebrews 5:5-6 44 Zechariah 9:9 enter Jerusalem on donkey Mark 11:7, 9, 11, Luke 19:35-37 45 Haggai 2:7-9, Malachi 3:1 entered the temple with authority Matthew 21:12, Luke 2:27-38 46 Psalm 8:2 adored by infants Matthew 21:15-16 47 Isaiah 53:1 not believed John 12:37-38 48 Zechariah 13:7 sheep of the Shepherd scattered Matthew 26:31, Mark 14:50 49 Psalm 41:9, 55:13-15 betrayed by a close friend Matthew 10:4, Luke 22:47-48 50 Zechariah 11:12 betrayed for thirty pieces of silver Matthew 26:14-15 51 Zechariah 11:13 betrayal money used to buy Potter's field Matthew 27:6-7 52 Psalm 35:11 accused by false witnesses Mark 14:57-58 53 Isaiah 53:7 silent to accusations Matthew 27:12, Mark 15:4-5 54 Isaiah 50:6 spat on Matthew 26:67, 27:30 55 Isaiah 50:6 beaten Matthew 26:67, 27:26, 30 56 Micah 4:14 struck on cheek Matthew 27:30 57 Isaiah 49:7, Psalm 35:19, Psalm 69:4 hated without reason John 7:48, 15:24-25 58 Isaiah 53:5 wounded and bruised Matthew 27:26 59 Isaiah 53:5 vicarious sacrifice John 1:29, , 3:16, Romans 5:6, 8 60 Daniel 9:24-26 cut off, but not for Himself Matthew 2:1, Luke 3:1, 23 61 Isaiah 53:12 crucified with malefactors Matthew 27:38, Mark 15:27-28 62 Zechariah 12:10, Psalm 22:16 pierced through hands and feet Luke 23:33, John 20:25-27 63 Psalm 22:7-8 sneered and mocked Matthew 27:31, Luke 23:35 64 Psalm 109:24, 25 fell under the cross Luke 23:26 65 Psalm 69:9 was reproached Romans 15:3 66 Psalm 38:11 friends stood afar off Luke 23:49 67 Psalm 109:25 people shook their heads Matthew 27:39 68 Psalm 22:17 stared upon Luke 23:35 69 Psalm 22:16, 69:21 given vinegar for His thirst Matthew 27:34, John 19:28-29 70 Psalm 109:4, Isaiah 53:12 prayer for His enemies Luke 23:34 71 Psalm 22:17-18 soldiers gambled for His clothing Matthew 27:35-36, John 19:23, 24 72 Psalm 22:1 forsaken by God Matthew 27:46 73 Psalm 31:5 committed Himself to God Luke 23:46 74 Exodus 12:46, Psalm 34:20 no bones broken John 19:32, 33, 36 75 Psalm 22:14 heart broken John 19:34 76 Zechariah 12:10 His side pierced John 19:34 77 Amos 8:9 darkness over the land Matthew 27:45 78 Isaiah 53:9 buried with the rich Matthew 27:57-60 79 Psalm 3:5, 16:10, 49:15 to be resurrected Mark 16:6-7, Acts 2:31 80 Isaiah 44:3, Joel 2:28 sent the Holy Spirit John 20:22, Acts 2:16-17 81 Isaiah 55:3-4, Jeremiah 31:31 establishes a new covenant Matthew 26:28, Luke 22:20, Hebrews 8:6-10 82 Psalm 68:18, Psalm 110:1 His ascension to God's right hand Mark 16:19, Acts 1:9, 1 Corinthians 15:4, Ephesians 4:8, Hebrews 1:3 83 Psalm 29:11, Micah 4:3 peace proclaimed by disciples Luke 2:14, John 14:27, Acts 10:36 84 Isaiah 60:3 "Light" to Gentiles Acts 13:47,48 85 Isaiah 11:10, 42:1, 49:1-12 the Gentiles will seek the Messiah Romans 11:25, 15:10 Although some of these prophecies are vague and could have been deliberately fulfilled, many are very specific: 16. Place of birth (Micah 5:2). 17. Date of birth (Daniel 9:25). 18. Manner of birth (Isaiah 7:14). 62. Manner of death (Zechariah 12:10; Psalm 22:16 prophesied before the invention of crucifixion). 76. Piercing in side (Zechariah 12:10). 78. Burial (Isaiah 53:9). The Bible made several prophecies of the complete destruction of cities. Many of the cities it said would be rebuilt and several it claimed would never be rebuilt - The Bible is 100% accurate in both categories as archeology shows. One amazing example is the city of Tyre. Ezekiel 26:3-5,7,12,14 and (15) predict: Nebuchadnezzar will take the city. Other nations will participate in the fulfillment. The city is to be made flat like the top of a rock. It is to become a place for spreading nets. Its stones and timber are to be laid in the sea. The old city of Tyre will never be rebuilt. History records that Nebuchadnezzar took the adjacent mainland settlement of Ushu ("Old Tyre"), but the people escaped out to the island city. Later, Alexander the Great took the island off the coast by taking the old city's rubble and throwing it into the sea making a land-bridge (this caused the old city to look flat like a rock due to the scraping of the material). The old city is now a place for fisherman but no city has been planted there even though there is an excellent water supply to support a major city. Shelly, Rubel. 1990. Prepare To Answer. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, p 92. All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. (2 Timothy 3:16) "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass away from the Law, until all is accomplished." (Matthew 5:18) Nelson Glueck, Rivers in the Desert, Farrar, Strauss and Cudahy, New York, 1959, p. 31. "For Acts the confirmation of historicity is overwhelming. Yet Acts is, in simple terms and judged externally, no less a propaganda document than the Gospels, liable to similar distortion. But any attempt to reject its basic historicity even in matters of detail must now appear absurd." A. N. Sherwin-White. 1978. Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament. Baker, Grand Rapids, p. 189. Flavius Josephus The Antiquities of the Jews 20.9.1 Matthew 12:24, Mark 3:22, Luke 11:15, Flavius Josephus The Antiquities of the Jews 18:63, Talmud P. Ta'an. 65b, and the Sanhedrin 3a Cornelius Tacitus Annals 15.44 from The Tech Classics Archive translated by Alfred John Church and William Jackson Brodribb Otto Betz. 1968. What do We Know about Jesus?, SCM Press, page 9. Encyclopedia Britannica (Article on "Jesus") H. G. Wells, Outline Of History. Bruins, H.J. and J. van der Plicht. 1996. The Exodus enigma. Nature 382: 213-214. Friedrich, W.L., P. Wagner, and H. Tauber. 1990. Thera and the Aegean World III Thera Foundation, London, UK. Kuniholm, P.I., B. Kromer, S.W. Manning, M. Newton, C.E. Latini, and M.J. Bruce. 1996. Anatolian tree rings and the absolute chronology of the eastern Mediterranean, 2220-718 BC. Nature 381: 780-783. Renfrew, C. 1996. Kings, tree rings and the old world. Nature 381: 733-734. Shelly, Rubel. 1990. Prepare To Answer. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, p 114. therefore, thus says the Lord God,` Behold, I am against you, O Tyre, and I will bring up many nations against you, as the sea brings up its waves. And they will destroy the walls of Tyre and break down her towers; and I will scrape her debris from her and make her a bare rock. She will be a place for the spreading of nets in the midst of the sea, for I have spoken,' declares the Lord God, `and she will become spoil for the nations.'... For thus says the Lord God, "Behold, I will bring upon Tyre from the north Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses, chariots, cavalry, and a great army.... Also they will make a spoil of your riches and a prey of your merchandise, break down your walls and destroy your pleasant houses, and throw your stones and your timbers and your debris into the water.... And I will make you a bare rock; you will be a place for the spreading of nets. You will be built no more, for I the Lord have spoken," declares the Lord God.... "Then all the princes of the sea will go down from their thrones, remove their robes, and strip off their embroidered garments. They will clothe themselves with trembling; they will sit on the ground, tremble every moment, and be appalled at you." (Ezekiel 26:3-5,7,12,14,16) Is the Bible inspired? The doctrine of the inspiration of the Bible means that the Bible in the original documents is God-breathed, and that it is a divine product; and because it is divine, the original documents are inerrant. The copies of those documents are not inspired. We have copies of inspired documents. 2 Tim. 3:16-17 says, "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." Paul who wrote this epistle was obviously referring to the entirety of the Old Testament as being inspired. The word "inspired" is literally "God-breathed." This is an interesting phrase since it implies that the Scriptures are from the mouth of God. Likewise, Peter says in 2 Pet. 1:21, "for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." Notice that Peter is stating that prophecy is not the product of human will. Instead, prophecy occurs by those moved by the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, we can easily see that the Old Testament Scriptures are full of statements and phrases claiming to be the Word of God. "Thus says the Lord" occurs 418 times in the NASB, 413 in the KJV Exodus 4:22, "Then you shall say to Pharaoh, Thus says the Lord, 'Israel is My son, My first-born.'" 1 Kings 11:31, "And he said to Jeroboam, 'Take for yourself ten pieces; for thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, Behold, I will tear the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon and give you ten tribes.'" Isaiah 7:7, "thus says the Lord God, 'It shall not stand nor shall it come to pass.'" "God said" occurs 46 times in both the NASB and the KJV Genesis 1:3, "Then God said, 'Let there be light'; and there was light." Exodus 3:14, "And God said to Moses, 'I AM WHO I AM'; and He said, "Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, I AM has sent me to you." Exodus 6:2-3, "God spoke further to Moses and said to him, 'I am the Lord; and I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as God Almighty, but by My name, Lord, I did not make Myself known to them.'" God spoke through prophets 1 Kings 14:18, "And all Israel buried him and mourned for him, according to the word of the Lord which He spoke through His servant Ahijah the prophet." 2 Sam. 24:11-12, "When David arose in the morning, the word of the Lord came to the prophet Gad, David's seer, saying, 12 'Go and speak to David, Thus the Lord says, "I am offering you three things; choose for yourself one of them, which I may do to you."'" Zech. 7:7, "Are not these the words which the Lord proclaimed by the former prophets, when Jerusalem was inhabited and prosperous with its cities around it, and the Negev and the foothills were inhabited?" The Spirit of the Lord spoke through people 2 Sam. 23:2, "The Spirit of the Lord spoke by me, and His word was on my tongue." 1 Kings 22:24, "Then Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah came near and struck Micaiah on the cheek and said, 'How did the Spirit of the Lord pass from me to speak to you?'" 2 Chron. 20:14-15, "Then in the midst of the assembly the Spirit of the Lord came upon Jahaziel the son of Zechariah, the son of Benaiah, the son of Jeiel, the son of Mattaniah, the Levite of the sons of Asaph; 15 and he said, 'Listen, all Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem and King Jehoshaphat: thus says the Lord to you, Do not fear or be dismayed because of this great multitude, for the battle is not yours but God's.'" As you can see, the Old Testament Scriptures are clearly full of statements showing the inspiration of God through the writers. The Old Testament assumes and speaks from the perspective of divine inspiration. Should we do any less? What about the New Testament? We see that the Old Testament is repeatedly spoken of as being inspired via the numerous references cited above but what about the New Testament? Are the New Testament books inspired as well? The Christian church has always considered the New Testament documents to be inspired. Though in the early church there were some debates on which New Testament books to include in the Bible, God worked through the Christian church to recognize those inspired works. Therefore we now have 27 inspired books for the New Testament. In 1 Cor. 14:37 Paul said, "If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord's commandment." In 2 Pet. 3:16 Peter said, "as also in all [Paul's] letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction." Also, Jesus said in 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 that I said to you." This means that the Lord has commissioned the apostles to accurately record what Jesus had said because the Holy Spirit would be working in them. So, we can see that Jesus promised direction from the Holy Spirit, that Paul considered what he wrote to be the commands of God, and that Peter recognized Paul's writings as Scripture. In addition, since the Christian Church recognizes the 27 books of the New Testament are inspired and since we see internal claims of inspiration in the New Testament, we conclude that inspiration applies to the New Testament documents as well. Objections Inspiration violates free will. A. Inspiration does not violate free will. What if the person through whom God is working has been regenerated by the Holy Spirit and desires to have the Lord speak through him? Would this negate the ability of God to inerrantly speak through such a person? Would it also mean that the person has no free will if he has voluntarily subjected his will to the will of God? B. Certainly, God has the ability to work through individuals to bring them to a place where they can record inerrant statements. Cannot God manifest himself to someone, deliver to him a verbal message, and have that person record it? Would that statement not be inspired of God? C. Proverbs. 21:1,"The king's heart is like channels of water in the hand of the Lord; he turns it wherever He wishes." This verse clearly states that God is able to work through an individual's "free will" to bring about what God desires. 2. What about the numerous contradictions in the Bible? A. It is true that there are difficulties with in the Word of God. But these are due to copying errors through the centuries. As more and more historical, archaeological, and manuscript evidence is uncovered, the fewer Bible difficulties there are. Nevertheless, for an examination of answers to the alleged Bible contradictions, please see www.BibleQuery.org. 3. The manuscript evidence doesn't support inerrancy of the originals. A. This is a subjective conclusion. The more I have studied about the ancient manuscripts, the more I have concluded that the original documents were indeed inspired and inerrant. B. The logical implication of the statements within the Bible is that they are inerrant since they claim to be offered from God. They either are or are not inspired of God. If they are not, then their claims of speaking for God are lies. 4. Inspiration applies to scripture--not people. A. God works sovereignly through people to inspire his documents. It is the people whom God indwells with his spirit and the people who are inspired by God to write his word. If inspiration only refers to Scripture, and somehow means that people are not themselves inspired, the Scriptures are still God-breathed and necessarily inerrant. For more see our website www.BibleQuery.org.

But "faith without works is dead ... James 2:20." If you are Roman Catholic see our playlist "Dealing with Roman Catholicism, Idolatry & the Virgin Mary" with 123 videos & counting at ru-vid.com/group/PLFFA8D69D1B914715. If you are a Seventh-day Adventist see our playlist "Dealing with Seventh-day Adventism & Their "Prophetess"" with 23 videos & counting at ru-vid.com/group/PL5316CC6F66F24283. If you are a Campbellite follower of the "Church of Christ" see our playlist "Dealing with "Saved by Works & Baptism", "Church of Christ"" with 72 videos & counting at ru-vid.com/group/PLBD55090718DA6D3D. See our video "KEEPING THE OLD TESTAMENT LAWS & COMMANDMENTS CANNOT EARN HEAVEN OR SALVATION WITH GOD!" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-aIh3T31ujuU.html. Are We Justified by Faith (Romans) or by Works (James)? In Romans it says, "because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight . . . " (Rom. 3:20) "for we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law." (Rom. 3:28) "For what does the Scripture say? ‘And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.'" (Rom. 4:3) "Therefore, having been justified by faith . . . " (Rom. 5:1) "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness." (Rom. 4:5). In James it says, "You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone." (James 2:24) " . . . so also faith without works is dead." (James 2:26). Which is it? Are we justified by faith or by works? Does the Bible Contradict--Itself? It is a fundamental Christian belief that we are justified by faith. Justification means that God declares a sinner to be righteous. He does this by crediting--by reckoning the righteousness of Jesus to the sinner. This is done by faith. That is, when the sinner puts his faith in the sacrifice of Jesus and trusts in Him and not himself for righteousness, then God justifies him. "And Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him as righteousness." (Rom. 4:3). But, if the Bible teaches that we are justified by faith, does it also teach we are justified by works as James "seems" to say? Do we have a contradiction? The answer is no. Context is Everything It is erroneous to take a verse, read it without its context, and then attempt to develop a doctrine from that verse alone. Therefore, let's take a look at the context of James 2:24 which says that a man is justified by works. James chapter 2 has 26 verses: Verses 1-7 instruct us not to show favoritism. Verses 8-13 are comments on the Law. Verses 14-26 are about the relationship between faith and works. Notice that James begins this section by using the example of someone who says he has faith--verse 14. He then immediately gives an example of what true and false faiths are. He begins with the negative and demonstrates what an empty faith is (verses 15-17). Then he gives an example of the type of faith that isn't much different from the faith of demons (verse 19). Finally, he gives examples of living faith by showing Abraham and Rahab as the type of people who demonstrated their faith by their deeds. James is examining two kinds of faith: one that leads to godly works and one that does not. One is true, and the other is false. One is dead, the other alive; hence, "Faith without works is dead." (James 2:20). This is why in the middle of his section on faith and works, he says in verse 19, "You believe that God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder." James says this because the demons believe in God; that is, they have faith, but the faith they have is useless. It does not result in appropriate works. Their faith is only a mental acknowledgment of God's existence. Ascentia and Fiducia Two words are worth introducing here: ascentia and fiducia. Ascentia is the mental assent--the mental acknowledgment of something's existence. The demons acknowledge and believe that God exists. Fiducia is more than mental acknowledgment. It involves a trust in something--a giving over to it, a complete believing and acceptance of something. This is the kind of faith that a Christian has in Christ. A Christian, therefore, has fiducia; that is, he has real faith and trust in Christ and not simply an acknowledgment that He lived on earth at one time. Another way to put this is that there are many people in the world who believed that Jesus lived: ascentia. But they do not believe that He is their savior, the one to whom they should look and trust for the forgiveness of their sins. Ascentia does not lead to works. Fiducia does. Ascentia is not of the heart. Fiducia is. What is James Saying? James is simply saying that if you ‘say' you are a Christian, then there had better be some appropriate works manifested, or your faith is false. This sentiment is echoed in 1 John 2:4 which says, "If you say you have come to know Him, yet you do not keep His commandments, then the truth is not in you and you are a liar." Apparently, there were people who were saying they were Christians but were not manifesting any of the fruit of Christianity. Can this faith justify? Can the dead ‘faith' that someone has which produces no change in a person and no good works before men and God be a faith that justifies? Absolutely not. It is not merely enough to say you believe in Jesus. You must actually believe and trust in Him. If you actually do, then you will demonstrate that faith by a changed and godly life. If not, then your profession is of no more value than the same profession of demons: "We believe Jesus lived." Notice that James actually quotes the same verse that Paul uses to support the teaching of justification by faith in Rom. 4:3. James 2:23 says, "and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, ‘and Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.'" If James was trying to teach a contradictory doctrine of faith and works than the other New Testament writers, then he would not have used Abraham as an example. Therefore, we are justified by faith. That is, we are made righteous in the eyes of God by faith as is amply demonstrated by Romans. However, that faith, if it is true, will result in deeds appropriate to salvation. After all, didn't God say in Eph. 2:8-10, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, that no one should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them." What is the relationship between faith & works? The relationship between faith and works is that works are the result of faith. In the Bible, faith and works are very often contrasted. They are not the same thing, and the combination of faith and works does not bring salvation. Salvation is by faith alone. Rom. 3:28, “For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.” Rom. 4:5, “But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness.” Gal. 2:16, “nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus…” False religious systems always teach that faith plus a person's works result in salvation. This is false, because our good works are filthy rags before God (Isa. 64:6). Therefore, we can’t do anything to please God by our good works. Gal. 2:21 says that if righteousness comes by the law (works), then Christ died needlessly. Faith without works is dead James 2:26 says that faith without works is dead, but what James is talking about is that dead faith produces no works. The context of the chapter begins in verse 14 where James says, “What use is it, my brethren, if a man says he has faith, but he has no works? Can that faith save him?” Notice that James asks, “can that faith save him?" The faith he is talking about is false faith, which he further clarifies when he mentions how the devil also believes in God (v. 19). The Devil has dead faith. He only acknowledges God’s existence. So, with a real Christian, good works are the result of saving faith, not a contributing factor to salvation. Nor do our good works keep us saved. If that were the case, then salvation would be by works. Are we saved by faith alone, or do we need works, too? Roman Catholics often mention that the Bible never says we are saved by faith alone and that the phrase "faith alone" occurs only once in James where it says that we are not saved by faith alone. If this is so, then why do the Protestants say we are justified by faith alone and not by works? Because the Bible teaches that we are justified by faith alone--and not by works. The following is a list of verses about being saved by faith. Please take note that faith and works are contrasted. In other words, we are saved by faith "not by works" and "apart from works," etc. The point is that there are only two options. We are saved by faith alone, or we are not. Since we have faith and works (both conceptually and in practice), then we are either saved by faith alone or by faith and works. There is no other option. If we see that the Scriptures exclude works in any form as a means of our salvation, then logically, we are saved by faith alone. Let's take a look at what the Bible says about faith and works. Then, afterwards, we will tackle James' statement about "faith alone." Rom. 3:28-30, "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. 29Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one." Rom. 4:5, "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness," Rom. 5:1, "therefore having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ;" Rom. 9:30, "What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith;" Rom. 10:4, "For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes." Rom. 11:6, "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace." Gal. 2:16, "nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by faith in Christ, and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified." Gal. 2:21, I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly. Gal. 3:5-6, "Does He then, who provides you with the Spirit and works miracles among you, do it by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? 6Even so Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness." Gal. 3:24, "Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, that we may be justified by faith." Eph. 2:8-9, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God. 9Not by works, lest any man should boast." Phil. 3:9, "and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith." Again, works/Law is contrasted with faith repeatedly; and we are told that we are not justified by works in any way. Therefore, we are made right with God by faith--not by faith and our works, hence, faith alone. James 2:24, not by faith alone The Scriptures clearly teach that we are saved (justified) by faith in Christ and what He has done on the cross. This faith alone saves us. However, we cannot stop here without addressing what James says in James 2:24, "You see that a man is justified by works, and not by faith alone." There is no contradiction. All you need to do is look at the context. James chapter 2 has 26 verses: Verses 1-7 instruct us not to show favoritism. Verses 8-13 are comments on the Law. Verses 14-26 are about the relationship between faith and works. James begins this section by using the example of someone who says he has faith but has no works, "What use is it, my brethren, if a man says he has faith, but he has no works? Can that faith save him?" (James 2:14). In other words, James is addressing the issue of a dead faith--a faith that is nothing more than a verbal pronouncement, a public confession of the mind, and is not heart-felt. It is empty of life and action. He begins with the negative and demonstrates what an empty faith is (verses 15-17, words without actions). Then he shows that type of faith isn't any different from the faith of demons (verse 19). Finally, he gives examples of living faith that has words followed by actions. Works follow true faith and demonstrate that faith to our fellow man but not to God. James writes of Abraham and Rahab as examples of people who demonstrated their faith by their deeds. In brief, James is examining two kinds of faith: one that leads to godly works and one that does not. One is true, and the other is false. One is dead, the other alive; hence, "Faith without works is dead," (James 2:20). But, he is not contradicting the verses above that say salvation/justification is by faith alone. Also, notice that James actually quotes the same verse that Paul quotes in Rom. 4:3 amongst a host of verses dealing with justification by faith. James 2:23 says, "and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, and Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.'" If James was trying to teach a contradictory doctrine of faith and works than the other New Testament writers, then he would not have used Abraham as an example. Therefore, we can see that justification is by faith alone and that James was talking about false faith--not real faith--when he said that we are not justified by faith alone. What about Faith vs. Works? Question: What about Faith vs. Works? Answer: Faith vs Works--a quick and simple explanation James 2:22 is addressing a worldly way to show our faith to others who watch us operate as a church. We know this because he says "Pure religion is . . . to visit the fatherless and widowed" (James 1:27). The Apostle Paul is explaining faith as God sees it. "What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh?* 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt. 5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works: 7 "Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, And whose sins are covered; 8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin," Rom 4:1-8. Now, let's see how James looks at a dead faith without works: "What doth it profit, my brethren [target audience=church], though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? Can faith save him? [that faith is a false or a DEAD faith] 15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, 16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit? 17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. 18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my [true] faith by my works. 19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. 20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? 22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? 23 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. 24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only [a false faith]," James 2:14-24. James is saying that a person with dead faith will walk by the hungry because he or she is not really saved. When a Christian feeds the hungry, that is how he or she shows others that he has a real faith. On the other hand, the Apostle Paul says that Abraham was not justified by his works because his works do not justify him "before God," Romans 4:2. This is a true faith that God sees apart from works. What does Romans 4:1-4 say? “What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? 2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. 3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. 4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. 5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness,” Romans 4:1-4. True faith will be enough for God. However, to the church, faith is revealed in our efforts. Thus, there is no contradiction between the book of James and the book of Romans. Galatians 1:6-9, "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: 7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. 9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." For more information see our website www.BibleQuery.org.

The wicked hate the wrath, justice & judgment of a Holy God. Get an in-depth study of the Biblical Doctrine of Hell besides videos on our playlist "Dealing with Hell, Lake of Fire, Unpopular Bible Doctrines" at ru-vid.com/group/PLE04A1D0DFE95B95E by going to "Eternal Punishment, Part 1" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=12607145320 & "Eternal Punishment, Part 2" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=12607143539 by A.W. Pink. Great preaching on this subject can be found at "Heaven & Hell" by Charles Haddon Spurgeon at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=8702112616 & "The Sinner's End, Hell Opens Wide Her Jaws, the Sinner Falls To Destruction, Spurgeon" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=1014131452290; "A Few Sighs From Hell" by John Bunyan at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=112903233617; "The Eternity of Hell Torments" by George Whitefield at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=11307232342; Men Don't Regard Warnings of Future Punishment As Hell Doesn't Seem Real - Edwards" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=1031121125362, "The Torments of Hell Are Exceeding Great, A Rich Man Went to Hell and Was Tormented" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=51513154140, "They That Are Gone to Hell Are All of Them in Despair, Eternal Damnation by Edwards" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=219131311338 & "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=113003134610 by Jonathan Edwards, "God's Hell" by John Wagner at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=6501212239; "A Tour of Hell" by E.A. Johnston at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=7251216250; other great Biblical messages about the doctrine of Hell can be found at www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp?currSection=sermonstopic&keyworddesc=Hell&keyword=hell. See our newsletter on Hell with plenty of Biblical references on our website www.biblequery.org/ (once on the homepage click on the "experience" box to the left then scroll down to the newsletter section & click on "Turn or Burn." The wicked hate the Biblical doctrine of Hell & will create any myth to pretend it is not real or eternal in the conscious divine punishment of the damned. "Be not deceived, GOD IS NOT MOCKED: For whatsover a man soweth, that shall he also reap" (Galations 6:7). "VENGEANCE IS MINE; I WILL REPAY SAITH THE LORD" (Rom. 12:19). "Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and THAT WILL BY NO MEANS CLEAR THE GUILTY" (Exodus 34:7). Jesus said, "It would have been good for that man if he had not been born" (Matthew 26:24). Why would Jesus say this if there wasn't something far worse waiting for that man after this life is over? Interestingly enough, over the years many atheists have flocked to our RU-vid hell videos with unusual curiosity. Why do they bother if they don't think it is real? 2 Timothy 2:15

The Only True Church - Hear the following: "Is the Pope in the True Church?" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=820752920, "The One True Church" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=81212170178, "Papacy's Claim to have the Authority of the Apostle Peter, Roman Catholicism, Pope" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=121312161512, "Institutes of the Christian Religion #42 The Ancient Form of Goverment Utterly Corrupted by the Tyranny of the Papacy/Antichrist" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=21308121690 & see our playlist "Dealing with Roman Catholicism, Idolatry & the Virgin Mary" at ru-vid.com/group/PLFFA8D69D1B914715. Just about everyone who has started a movement has declared themselves the only true church on earth. In this they claim one must join their exclusive group or organization to be saved and to be a Christian. Many believe there has been a complete apostasy already, so there is need of a full restoration. While God does have a true Church on earth, he has already stated how one enters to be part of this Church. First lets go through the many familiar and some not so familiar groups that claim to be the ONE TRUE CHURCH. Then we will look at how one enters the true church. Mormonism LDS- 13th LDS President Ezra Taft Benson, “This is not just another Church. This is not just one of a family of Christian churches. This is the Church and kingdom of God, the only true Church upon the face of the earth...” (Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, p.164-165). This church is the only true and living church on the face of the whole earth (D and C 1:30) “There is no salvation outside the church of Jesus Christ of Latter -day Saints (Mormon Doctrine, p.670) “Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the Church of the Lamb of God and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore who so belongeth not to the church of the lamb of God belongeth to that great church; which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth.” (The Book of Mormon, 1 Nephi 14:10) on April 8, 1973, LDS Apostle Mark E. Petersen proclaimed that salvation “comes only through the Church itself as the Lord established it... Therefore it was made clearly manifest that salvation is in the Church, and of the Church, and is obtained only through the Church.” “The Roman Catholic, Greek, and Protestant church, is the great corrupt, ecclesiastical power, represented by great Babylon....” (Orson Pratt, Writings of an Apostle, “Divine Authenticity,” no.6, p.84). the LDS church is, “the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth, with which I, the Lord, am well pleased ...” Brigham Young (Mormonism's Second President) “Our message is so imperative, when you stop to think that the salvation, the eternal salvation of the world, rests upon the shoulders of this Church. When all is said and done, if the world is going to be saved, we have to do it “ (“Church Is Really Doing Well,” Church News (a bi-weekly publication by the Mormon church), July 3 1999, 3) Jehovah’s Witnesses- The Gospel of the Kingdom ceased to be proclaimed shortly after the death of the apostles. It was not preached again until after 1918.(WT, 12/1/1928, pp. 363-64) We acknowledge as the visible organization of Jehovah on earth the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, and recognize the Society as the Channel or instrument through which Jehovah and Christ Jesus give instruction and meat in due season to the household of faith. (Watchtower, April 15, 1939 p. 125) “ The Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society the one and only channel which the Lord has used in dispensing his truth continually since the beginning of the harvest period?” (WT 4/1/1919, p. 6414) “The world is full of Bibles…why then do the people not know which was to go? Because, they do not also have the teaching or law of the mother, which is light.”(WT 5/1/1957, p.274) “Outside the true Christian congregation what alternative organization is there? Only Satan’s organization…”(Watchtower 3/1/1979 p.24) “Consider too, the fact that Jehovah's organization alone in all the earth is directed by God's holy spirit or active force.” (Watchtower, July 1, 1973, page 402) Iglesia ni Cristo- “the complete disappearance of the first-century Church of Christ and the emergence of the Catholic Church” (Pasugo, July-Aug. 1979, p. 8). Thus, outside the Church of Christ no one can be considered a true believer.'' (PASUGO, September/October 1981, p.9) “Each member ... should submit himself to the Administration of the Church in order to be saved.”(PASUGO, January 1976, p. 9) ''People who embraced the true church will be saved not because of the good deeds they have done, but through God's merciful act of commissioning messengers entrusted with words of reconciliation.'' (PASUGO September/October 1986, p. 20) International Church of Christ - “There is one church! There is one God. There is one kingdom of God and this is it! (The Great Commission, audio tape, Weger/Rock, Hodge/Hamann/Fulcher/Fields) “you are in the only family that exists on the face of the earth.”( Phil Lamb, We Are Family, audio tape 1990 West Coast Conf.) “We're the last hope the world has. Nobody else is going to do what we're doing. Nobody else has the right message. Nobody else has the right commitment.”( Gordon Ferguson, Radical Men, Radical Times Hosea Radical Love of God, Manila World Leadership Conf., Aug. 1994 ) “your salvation is hanging in the balance. .... When you walk away from the movement of God, there is no where to walk. Walking out of the light into the darkness. There is nobody else There is nobody else in this country that That has the true gospel -- that is, trying to make disciples of Jesus. There is nobody else in this entire world. This is the movement of God! There is no place to go.” (Nick Young. Tulsa Reconstruction meeting, August, 1992, audio one, side two) “When you preached who is really saved: that you gotta have faith, you gotta repent, you gotta become a true disciple of Jesus, and then you gotta be water immersed for the forgiveness of sins received through the Holy Spirit, that excludes all other denominations…everybody else out there.”( Kip McKean. “Preach the Word.” Johannesburg World Missions Leadership Conference. Aug. 1995, audiotape #10091, side 2) True Jesus Church- On 5. on the web they emphatically state “The True Jesus Church is the true church restored by God through the Holy Spirit of the latter rain. She is the revival of the apostolic church in the end times.” on the web “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by Me” (John 14:6). Therefore, one can receive eternal life only through the true church.” The Philadelphia church- Mr. Flurry “The “household” is God's Family or true church. It's the family that God rules. This is God's inner circle--His very elect. One servant, one leader or one man is made ruler over God's church. Only this church (The PCG) gives meat in due season. Only this church is doing God's work!” (The Philadelphia Trumpet, p.1 May 1995) “Some in the world try to label the PCG a cult. Actually, we are God's only true representative on this earth!...”( The Philadelphia Trumpet, p. 19 March, 1994) “...that truth is in only one church today, God's church. Only God's Philadelphia Church has retained God's Law in this end time” (The Philadelphia Trumpet , p.5 March 1994). Roman Catholic Church-”But by divine institution it is the exclusive task of these pastors alone, the successors of Peter and the other Apostles, to teach the faithful authentically, that is with the authority of Christ ....” (Vatican Council II Vol. 2, p. 430, 1984) “If anyone says that in the Roman Church, which is the mother and mistress of all churches, there is not the true doctrine concerning the sacrament of baptism, let him be anathema.” (The Canons And Decrees Of The Council Of Trent, p. 53 -- Seventh Session, Sacrament Of Baptism, Canon 3) “This loyal submission of the will and intellect must be given, in a special way, to the authentic teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, even when he does not speak ex cathedra in such wise, indeed, that his supreme teaching authority be acknowledged with respect, and that one sincerely adhere to decisions made by him, conformably with his manifest mind and intention ....” (Vatican Council II ,Vol. 1, p. 379) The Second Vatican Council’s Decree on Ecumenism explains: “For it is through Christ’s Catholic Church ALONE, which is the universal help toward salvation, that the fullness of the means of salvation can be obtained.” Pope Boniface VIII declared: “There is one holy Catholic and apostolic church, outside of which there Is NO SALVATION ... it is altogether NECESSARY FOR SALVATION for every creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.' (“infallible papal bull, Unam Sanctam) Vatican II declared: ... this holy Council teaches ... that the church .. Is NECESSARY FOR SALVATION.” (VATICAN COUNCIL II, Costello Publishing, Austin Flannery, O.P., General Editor, Vol 1, pp. 364-365) All Christians will be gathered in a common celebration of the Eucharist, into the unity of the one and only Church, ... The unity, we believe subsists in the Catholic Church as something she can never lose. (Vatican II, Decree on Ecumenism, chap. 1, 4, p. 416). The local Church (Witness Lee)- When we were in the denominations, we were blind. I do not believe that any dear Christians who have really received sight from the Lord could still remain in the denominations. Everyone who sees must leave the fold and enter the pasture, under the sunshine, in the fresh air, in liberty. Where are you now? Are you in the fold, or are you now in the pasture? Allow me to say this: if anyone is still in the fold, he is blind. Of course, a blind person requires the fold to keep him. But when he receives his sight, he will swiftly leave the fold for the pasture, for the sunshine, for the fresh air.” (Witness Lee, Christ Versus Religion LSM, 197,1 p.109-110) The only way to follow the Lord absolutely is to go the way of the local church. (Witness Lee, The Practical Expression...p.94) If you leave the church (the Local Church), you miss the mark of the Lord's testimony. You must be in the testimony of Jesus. Only the golden lampstands, the local churches, are the testimony of Jesus....if you are not in the local churches you are not the testimony of Jesus.”( Witness Lee, The Stream magazine Nov. 1976, p.7) House of Yahweh-”With all the Churches and Religious Organizations in these Last Days preaching what they call Salvation, why would Yahweh need to establish another organization in order to get his way--the True Way of Salvation--taught? “The One Body of Messiah IS The House of Yahweh! “...IF we 'separate' from the One Body of Messiah: The House of Yahweh, then we succumb to Satan, then at that very moment we become worshipers of Satan...of if one LEAVES The Body - The only Prophesied, Established Work that Yahweh Himself has chosen, then that one does NOT partake, or is NO LONGER a partaker, with the rest of The body of Messiah - The House of Yahweh” (What Yahweh's Feasts Mean to You, pp. 78, 87). “ The churches in the world today do not even pretend to keep Yahweh’s Laws. How could they pretend such a thing anyway, they all blatantly rebel against every one of them.... It should be very obvious why Yahweh had to establish His House in these Last Days--the Christian Churches are not The House of Yahweh. They do not stand in Yahweh’s counsel. They are not the Pillar and Ground of the Truth. They do not teach Yahweh’s Laws, therefore, they do not turn the people away from sin--breaking Yahweh’s Laws.” “I urge you to obtain the books … and start learning the true way to Salvation. This way is not taught in the world by any organization, other than the one established by Yahweh--The House of Yahweh.” Hawaii fellowship of the Universal World Church “a voice thundered and uttered these words “This is my daughter in whom I am well pleased. As Jesus, my son, paid the price through his faithfulness upon the cross.. my anointed daughter, Miss Velma, has paid the price through her faithfulness at the golden altar. Therefore, all who will believe in her, will receive my gift of eternal youth which is new revelation Mamre.” (The mighty Miracle of the new Revelation of Mamre p.49-50) The new Revelation of Mamre is the greatest gift ever given to a people by almighty God. “(The mighty Miracle of the new Revelation of Mamre p.7) “Miss Velma has paid the price! She has become the sacrificial offering required by God that all of mankind may reap one of god's greatest rewards, new revelation Mamre”( ibid.p.51) 7th day Adventists-”I saw that God has honest children among the nominal Adventists and the fallen churches, and before the plagues shall be poured out, MINISTERS AND PEOPLE WILL BE CALLED OUT FROM THESE CHURCHES and will gladly receive the truth....But the light will shine, and ALL WHO ARE HONEST WILL LEAVE THE FALLEN CHURCHES, and take their stand with the remnant” (Early Writings, p. 261 ) We can see the common thread of these churches. They are separatists and deny anyone else can have the right message. That one must come to their CHURCH to be saved. That is the common deviation from Scripture and what makes them a cult. 1 Jn.2:19 “they went out from us but they were not of us, if they had been of us , they would have continued with us, but they went out that they might be made known that none of them were of us.” This was already occurring in the early church. Now that we have read through just a few churches that claim exclusivity to being the only representatives of Christ and God on earth. We need to go to the Bible to see what it states on this matter. It is possible that one of these groups that claim this can be right. But it is impossible for all of them to be right since they all claim exclusivity. Who would know? Jesus who is the head of the Church would know, and the Apostles he appointed to write down his teachings are the ones we need to go to, to find the truth. What is the Church? The first time we find the word Church is in Mt.16:18 where Jesus said he will build his church upon the revelation the Father gave Peter when he openly confessed that Christ is “ the Son of the living God.” “Upon this rock I will build my church.” So this must be the Churches confession of faith, if not, then it is not the Church. What this meant in the Judaic culture is that Christ is equal to God, having the same nature as his Father. The Scripture is clear only God is to be worshipped Ex.34:14: “For thou shall worship no other God for the Lord (Yahweh), whose name is jealous, is a jealous God.” The Church worships God and also worships Christ. The Father in Heb.1:6 tells all the angels to worship the Son. Both the Father and the Son are worshipped in heaven (Rev.4-5) and on earth. The Bible teaches that Jesus is not only worshipped, but also called God by Thomas in Jn.20:28 “My Lord, my God.” (Greek- The Lord of me, the God of me). We find the wise men worshipped Jesus as a child. Mt.2:11.The leper worshipped Jesus Mt.8. The ruler bowed and worshipped Mt.9:18 .The believer who was blind worshipped him Jn.9:38. The women worshipped him Mt. 15:25, Mary Magdalene worshipped him Mt.28:9, the disciples worshipped him Mt.28:17.Jesus was worshipped just as the Father was worshipped. It is called the Church of God which he had purchased with his own blood (Acts 20:28). After Christ raised from the dead and ascended he sent the Holy Spirit to birth a new entity, the church. The Greek word is ekklesia (which is used 114 times in the New Testament) which means a called out assembly (Ek = out of, Kaleo= to call). It is never used of a building or of the kingdom of God. The Church is not the kingdom, but included in it. The Church is a invisible living spiritual organism, composed of all the believers world wide, from the time of its inception on Pentecost, until the taking away of the Church at the rapture. Its origin is found in God as the Holy Spirit gave it its birth in Acts 2:1-4 with the disciples and the Jews at Pentecost in v.33. And we become part of this same Church today the same way they did, by spirit baptism, being born again of the Spirit. No one joins the Church unless they are first joined to Christ. This is why Jesus said you must be born again, (by the Spirit Jn.3:5) not join the Church! The Church began in Jerusalem, not Rome. Any Church that does not trace its start to Jerusalem on Pentecost is not His church. Those who claim the Church needed to be restored from an apostasy are not part of the original Church. Jesus said the gates of hell would not prevail against the Church, she would never be overcome, no matter how many were killed, it would never result in a complete apostasy. So any church claiming theirs as a restoration can't be traced back to the original. Jesus told Peter: “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.” (Matt. 16:18). Meaning it would not remove it nor hinder it's growth, work or people. If his Church had apostatized then the gates of hell would have prevailed against it, which makes Christ a liar, that is uncomfortable even for the cult's to say. Christ will not abandon his bride, he said he would always be with. How could Christ be with his Church always if his Church ceased to exist for over 1800 years? The Church is already made and continues to grow through history. No devil or man can stop or hinder it because Jesus is the architect, not man. While it is valid to claim that there needs to be repentance or reformation throughout the church's history, to get back to the bible when we drift. To restore a church from apostasy has quite a different meaning. The true Church is built upon what Peter said Christ is- The Son of the living God- the eternal one. We can only have this by revelation the same way Peter did, from heaven. It is not man revealing this truth but God himself. Christ teaches In Matthew 28:20 he said, “I am with you always even until the end of the world.” And in John 14:16, 18 he said, “And I will pray to the Father, and he will give you another Counselor, to be with you forever. . . . I will not leave you desolate.” Christ promised that nothing would prevail against his Church, that he would be with it always, that the Holy Spirit, the Comforter, the third person of the Holy Trinity would be with her always. Christ will not abandon his bride. How could Christ be with his Church always if his Church ceased to exist for 1800 years? We are the Church We (the people) are the Church, which is likened to the temple 1 Pet. 2:5 “you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.” We are bricks cemented together our spiritual sacrifice is ourselves, our lives. As Rom.12:2 tells to present ourselves as living sacrifices. We no longer sacrifice animals for a sin offering but present ourselves, our lives to God continually each day to be used by Him. 1 Cor.3:16 teaches that each of us as individuals are the temple of God because “the Spirit of God dwells in you.” You are not Christ's possession or part of his Church unless you have the proof by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. (by the way this does not mean one must speak in tongues or have another spiritual manifestation). We are called Col. 1:24: “His body, which is the church” 2 Cor. 6:16 that “we are the temple of the living God.” As God has said: “I will dwell in them and walk among them. I will be their God, and they shall be My people.” 2 Cor.3:7 The church will be God's dwelling place. together we are the temple (the church) the dwelling of God. Christ “In You” is the hope of glory. Eph. 2:20-22: “Having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone, in whom the whole building, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.” Jesus is the cornerstone and the apostles the foundation stones. Paul explains further in Eph. 4:15-16: “but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head-- Christ-- from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love.” The Church is a living temple made up of bricks whom are the people. We are all interdependent on one another. Just as a house is not made with one brick but all are cemented together. Each brick has a different gifting and talents and all are to be used so that the body can be healthy. Just as Paul's example of the outside of the body we are all different and the least is to be honored as much as the greatest. Certainly the pancreas adrenal glands on the inside of the body if they were not functioning would affect the rest of its health. Heb 3:1-6: “For every house is built by someone, but He who built all things is God. And Moses indeed was faithful in all His house as a servant, for a testimony of those things which would be spoken afterward, but Christ as a Son over His own house, whose house we are if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm to the end.” How Does one Join the Church? 1 Cor. 12:27: “Now you are the body of Christ, and members individually.” Notice collectively and individually. This means one does not have to belong to a certain denomination or group but to Christ. No one is told to join the Church by the apostles because it is an automatic placing of one in the body of which Christ is the head. 2 Cor.5:17 “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.” We are put in Christ to become a new creature, not in a Church. Becoming part of a Church is the natural outcome of the new birth. Jn.1:12-13 “ But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name. Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” To be born of God is to have the Holy Spirit regenerate the dead spirit in man back to a relationship with God. This comes through Christ alone, no Church or minister can give you this. 1 Cor.12:12-13 “For as the body is one and has many members, but all the members of that one body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ. For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body-- whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free-- and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.” This is how one enters the Church by the Spirit who comes inside us and unites us with the rest of the body which is invisible and visible. Paul writes in Rom.3:24: “Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” This is one of Paul's favorite technical terms. Paul points to our spiritual life coming from being connected to the Son. It is Christ that uses examples to show us that He is the gate, the door, the way. We enter the Church (become part of the church) by a person and his work for us. As we come to Christ He puts each one in his spiritual body the Church. You don’t join a church but are born into a family that is the Church. And it is not limited to a local body but a worldwide family of faith. When Paul was persecuting the church, Jesus said he was persecuting him, because he was the owner of it, we are his body and his Spirit indwells those who he killed. By killing Christians he was fighting against Christ himself. The Church is Christ's invisible body on earth. The Church is called “the Church of God” Eph.5:23-24: “also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body.” 24... “the Church is subject to Christ.” The Church is ruled by God, just as our body takes instructions from its head. Col.1:18: “And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence.” If we want to obey the truth we receive our sustenance and instructions from Christ alone, collectively and individually! Jesus referred to those who were part of his body/ Church as “my sheep”. In John 10:16, Jesus spoke of other sheep which were not of this fold, them also I must bring and they will hear my voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd. What he meant is that the Gentiles outside the nation of Israel were to be grafted into the covenant and have him as their shepherd. You are the branches “I am the vine.” All these relate to our connection to the Son who brings us to the Father, and is the source of our eternal life. We cannot produce fruit apart from him Jn.17. Mark 6:34 “So He began to teach them many things.” Listening to Christ is the first step to having him be your shepherd, you then become a disciple by following his teachings. The leaders or shepherds are to train the sheep to hear the chief shepherds voice. The word “Church of Christ” is not singular but plural in the Scriptures, which is a problem for those that call themselves the exclusive Church of Christ.1 Cor.1:2, 1 Cor.10:32, also Rom.16:16 calls them the Churches of Christ. Rev.1:20 says Christ holds the seven golden lamp stand's, the seven stars and the messengers (angels) of the seven churches in his hand showing his control. This becomes a problem for numerous groups that claim the name “Church of Christ”, since it is plural not single. Likewise for the Jehovah’s Witnesses, since they are Jehovah’s “organization” and not a Church nor Christ’s. Not because of name only, but because they do not look to Christ as the head. Actually if one asks the question to these groups who is the head of your Church? You can various answers from a prophet, apostle, a revelator, to a Pope. Even those who claim Christ can have a different Jesus from the Scriptures. (2 Cor.11:4) So we must examine who Jesus is to them and their relationship to him. Rev 2:23 “and all the churches shall know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts. And I will give to each one of you according to your works.” Only God is able to search the heart and give rewards. The Church's Purpose The true Church teaches the bible alone, and promotes evangelism to fulfill the commission Christ gave in Mt.28:18-19. Our purpose Eph. 3:9-10: “... to make all men see what is the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God, who created all things; that through the Church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places.” This is done by teaching the Scriptures equipping the body for our growth first then for the work of ministry Eph.4. So the message can go out to there communities. We are to gather to be taught, equipped for ministry so we can evangelize to bring others to the Lord. The church is a spiritual hospital for sinners so they can be healed from sin. The church is not a building to meet in to come to the Church, instead we should be going out being the church. We have a mission. To make disciples and grow in their relationship with God. We have them join in the body, whether its our particular local body or another that is part of the church universal. Everyone needs to be involved in a local body of believers, an assembly to help bring health to themselves and the body. Different churches have different focuses and different ways of doing ministry. Within the main framework of evangelism there is other ministries, this does not mean any one way is the only way as a long as it is all biblical. Each church may have a specific way to minister to its own communities needs and essentially have different focuses. It is from this variety God is able to meet the needs of individuals and their personalities. The One TRUE Church The true Church holds to the core beliefs of Christianity without subtracting or adding to them. Christ is the eternal God come in the flesh, there is one God and 3 distinct identities (persons) who exist simultaneously as the One God. The virgin conception, the sinfulness of man and the need of a savior, the new birth, the Gospel which is the death burial and physical resurrection, the 2nd coming, baptism, eternal mediator and priesthood of Christ, the priesthood of all believers, the infallibility and inerrancy of Scripture, judgment and rewards to the believers. These are the essentials that are clarified in the Scriptures. If the Church one attends does not hold to these essential beliefs, they are not Christ's Church no matter what name they have on their outside or on paper. This is not my opinion, but the Bibles explanation what the apostles taught through the Gospels, the book of Acts, and in the Epistles. In conclusion there is one true Church, but it is not found in a certain denomination or group by itself. Those who claim you must join their group or Church to be right with God, only prove they do not understand what the word Church or body of Christ means. It is not exclusive but inclusive, as it is found in the heart of all those who have accepted the true Jesus, and have come to God the way He has provided (through His son on the cross), and hold to the essentials of the faith. Whether one is Lutheran, Anglican, Baptist, Presbyterian, Episcopalian, Charismatic, or Pentecostal, etc. The Church transcends denominational barriers, it exists within denominations, as well as outside of them. This is the Universal Church that has continued from the beginning of Pentecost. While denominations may have differences on peripheral issues, they do hold to the core beliefs that make them all part of the body of Christ, the Church. Two items that come in handy in knowing about when Romanists argue that anything said against the Roman "church" is not the truth is to tell them about the following two items: 1. The following website is by self proclaimed Roman Catholics following the so-called "true church" (in other words their Roman church is their true savior not the Biblical Jesus Christ) at www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/. These Romanists destroy the new Romanists since the invention of Vatican 2 in 1965. They present great information proving modern Romanism & their popes (they call them anti-popes) to be a false & apostate religion. It doesn't get much better than this when one group of apostate Romanists attack another brand of apostate Romanists in order to prove to the world they are false! 2. Our video "The Homosexual Pope, Priests, Universalists, Evolutionists & Disunited Roman Catholic Apologists" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-hThonwrX6QU.html proves from Roman Catholic sources themselves that one of their popes was a practicing homosexual, that almost 50% of Roman Catholic priests are homosexuals (for more on this see our video "FORMER ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST SAYS CHURCH OF ROME HAS A FALSE GOSPEL & WIDESPREAD HOMOSEXUALITY" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-0y4C-nBQ3mE.html), that the Roman church buys the theory of evolution which denies the first eleven chapters of Genesis in the Bible, that Pope John Paul II kissed the Muslim Qur'an & said Islam has the same god as Roman Catholics have (see the videos "Top Ten Reasons Muhammad Is Not a Prophet" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-MO8sZ1JyP1A.html, "Ten MORE Reasons Muhammad Is Not a Prophet" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-T4p7HuuhF8k.html, "50 Reasons Muhammad Was Not a Prophet (in Under Five Minutes)" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-4Q3f15NXrLI.html, "David Wood: Five Reasons the Quran Is Not the Word of God" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-NvlzlBov9zc.html, "Who Killed Muhammad?" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-6st_tFj6ouM.html, "Why Did Muhammad Wear Women's Clothing?" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE--50CraaniT0.html; also see www.AnsweringMuslims.com & www.MuslimHope.com) & how Roman Catholic apologists are at each others' throats because of the vast differences within Romanism itself. Besides all that see the following websites for detailed information on Romanism & how it is a counterfeit religion at www.BereanBeacon.org, www.CWRC-RZ.org & www.mtc.org/. Remember Titus 1:9-16, "9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers. 10 For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision: 11 Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake. 12 One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said, the Cretians are alway liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. 13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; 14 Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth. 15 Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled. 16 They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate." www.BibleQuery.org www.historycart.com/ www.muslimhope.com/ John 14:6

@unityspirit52 You must call Biblical Christianity ("fundamentalist") a cult since it entails simply believing what the Bible clearly teaches thus showing your antithesis to it. The Unity School of Christianity to which you subscribe doesn't believe the Bible in it's clear teaching but perverts the Bible to whatever it wants to believe. Your "new age" religion was begun by Chuck & Myrtle Fillmore in the 1890s who believed "By Christ is not meant the man Jesus," which is antiChrist (1 John 2:22).

To see all our videos which come with free written transcripts please click on www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp?currpage=1&keyword=christiananswers&SourceOnly=true&mediatype=PDF&AudioOnly=false&sortby= which add up to 50 videos & counting at this time. Keep in mind that these free written transcripts are also available in 20 different languages by going to any of the individual videos and locating the "View Transcript" area. For example, say you want a foreign language transcript from our video "Biblical Canon of Scripture is the Basis for Authentic Christian Belief & Doctrine" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=21519512147884 & you want the transcript in Chinese just follow these basic steps: 1. Click on "select translation" next to the "Google Translate" indicator 2. Click on the type of Chinese you want to use, you have two choices either "Simplified" Chinese or "Traditional" Chinese 3. Let's say you click on "Traditional Chinese" 4.Then you click on "Translate" which brings up another screen which has the entire video translated into traditional Chinese 5. From there you have additional options to share this Chinese translation with others as indicated 6. This is very cool & is an just another opportunity for evangelism around the world in this digital age! Jude 3, "Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints."

It has been properly pointed out that many of the early church fathers fell into numerous heresies & in some cases damnable heresies because, after all, they were not writers of inspired scripture. It is also a fact that the further in time the early church got away from the original apostolic age the more the apparent declension or deterioration of scriptural truth is to be found in the writings of the early church writers (for documented evidence of this please review the writings of early church historian & scholar William Cunningham at www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp?speakeronly=true&currsection=sermonsspeaker&keyword=William_Cunningham). In fact, the sixteenth century Reformers looked like university presidents compared to the early church fathers who seemed to be mere school boys by contrast when it came to scriptural apostolic understanding (although Martin Luther did suffer some from his heavy Romanist indoctrination & tradition in some regards). Although the early church fathers can be useful they cannot be put on the same level as the Word of God itself (Psalm 138:2). If the early church fathers say anything that contradicts what the apostolic writers have stated in scripture then any anti scriptural teachings of the early church fathers must be rejected completely (Isaiah 8:20, "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.") & the warning of Peter remembered, 2 Peter 3:15-16, "And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction." Water Baptism Under the heading of salvation, it is important at this point to touch on baptism. Although it may seem inconsistent to digress into what may be considered an "ordinance" or "sacrament" of the church after indulging in the metaphysical realities of being "in Christ" and being revealed as a son of God, it is necessary since so many of the early church fathers equated our regeneration with the act of immersion. The actual issue of baptismal regeneration, however, we will only touch on at the end. Instead, we will first investigate the apostolic practice, including what was considered valid and the development of baptismal theology in the early church. Baptism is perhaps the most universal of all Christian ordinances. It is considered the "portal" into the Christian church by many branches of Christianity. The early church fathers put a tremendous amount of emphasis on baptism, which sparked a significant amount of debate. Other than the controversies regarding the deity of Christ, the debates and controversies that raged over baptism and rebaptism stand out as the most intense theological debates of the third and fourth centuries. Some of the questions that are still asked today are : a) Did the early church baptize infants? b) Does baptism wash away "original sin"? c) Is an individual regenerated (ie. "born-again") at baptism? In the beginning of all of the gospels, we find how baptism was the central facet of John the Baptist’s ministry. In Judaism, ritual washing was already a practice, particularly with the Essenes and many ascetic groups, but John’s baptism is distinguished as a "baptism unto repentance" (Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3; Acts 19:4). In this respect John represents the personification of all of the prophets thus far. The highest moral teaching of Judaism can be seen in the prophets in their emphasis of the heart attitude that God seeks, rather than ritual observances (See Amos 5:21-23). Yet even during John’s ministry, there was already a foreshadowing that the pattern of water baptism served as a type for the spiritual baptism that would be introduced by the Messiah. John says in Matthew’s gospel that he baptized with water, but he that comes after me shall "baptize you with fire and the Holy Spirit". For this reason, we should always keep before us the truth that the water has no "magical" properties about it, nor can it be considered an end itself. Infant Baptism It is a common practice among orthodox, Roman Catholic, as well as several Protestant bodies (ie. Lutheran, Covenant, etc.) to baptize individuals when they are infants. The practice is frequently justified on the grounds that, under the Mosaic economy of salvation, God's covenant was extended to even infants through circumcision, which was to be performed on the eighth day after birth. The covenant of circumcision is said to be a type or foreshadowing of baptism, which serves a similar function under the New Covenant. This reasoning appears in the church documents Apostolic Constitutions (ca. 4th Century) "Do not delay to turn to the Lord, for thou knowest not what the day will bring forth." Do you also baptize your infants, and bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. For He says "Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not." (VII:457) as well as Cyprian (V:353) -For this reason we think that no one should be hindered from obtaining the grace under the law that was already ordained, and that spiritual circumcision ought not be hindered... and nobody is hindered from baptism and grace- how much more should we not hinder an infant, who being lately born, has not sinned, except in being born after the flesh in the nature of Adam. Furthermore, the waters of baptism were thought by many to have a "medicinal" property, and that the water itself was effectual in affecting a rebirth of the spirit of an individual, and they would be regenerated in the act of baptism itself. Are we then to expect that this was the apostolic practice, observed by the apostles and their successors in the apostolic churches? Although the previously mentioned texts demonstrate a belief in an objective and effectual power resident in the waters of baptism, there is even more evidence that would denote the contrary. It can be sufficiently shown that the earliest apostolic teaching on baptism did not make provisions for infants. The primary reason is because faith is an integral element of salvation. Whether one believes in baptismal regeneration or not, it is undeniable that personal faith is the active agent in applying the benefits of Calvary to our lives. Baptism is an ordinance that is entered into only when an individual has made the decision to fully believe in Jesus Christ. We see in the Bible when the apostle Philip was to baptize the Ethiopian eunuch whom he had converted, the eunuch asked "What is to prevent me from being baptized?" Philip answered "If you believe with your whole heart, it is permissible." (Acts 8:36,37) It is interesting that the critical part of verse 37, which clearly implies that one must fully believe in Jesus before being baptized, is missing from many contemporary translations, even though it is found in the majority of original Greek manuscripts. The best evidence for the authenticity of the verse lies in the fact that it is quoted by Scripture by Irenaeus ( Against Heresies XI, 8), and Cyprian (Treatise IX, 2, 43), many, many years before the oldest manuscripts which do not include it were ever written. This fact establishes without question the principle that, according to scripture and church tradition, personal faith is a prerequisite to baptism. Looking through the rest of the New Testament, there are no clear examples of infants being baptized. The inference is that they were not, since such stress in put on repentance, faith and confession of the Lordship of Christ as being intrinsic to the New Birth. Most baptismal texts found in the Patristic church likewise infer that those being baptized are at least old enough to enter into baptism of their own volition. Consider some of the texts from the early church regarding baptism. Didache (ca. 100 A.D.): But before the baptism, let the baptizer fast, and also the baptized, and what ever others can; but thou shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before. Justin Martyr (First Apology; ca 155 A.D.) As many are persuaded and believe that what we teach and say is true, and undertake to live accordingly, are instructed to entreat God with fasting...then they are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we ourselves were...For Christ also said :"'Unless you be born-again, you cannot see the kingdom of God". Tertullian (On Baptism) They who are about to enter baptism ought to pray with repeated prayer, fasts, and bendings of the knee, and vigils all the night through, and with the confession of all bygone sins, that they may express the meaning of the baptism of John. Virtually every text from the first two hundred years of Christianity that deal with baptism mention the obligation on the part of those being baptized to be spiritually prepared, usually by repentance and faith, and extended periods of prayer and fasting. This would preclude any possibility of baptism being applicable to infants. Any reference to infants being baptized is conspicuously missing. The whole matter is decisively answered by one text from Tertullian. Tertullian:(On Baptism-III:678) "Unless a man be reborn of water and spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven" has tied to faith the necessity of baptism. Accordingly, all thereafter who became believers used to be baptized...and so according to the disposition, circumstances and even the age of each individual, the delay of baptism is preferable, principally, in the case of little children....For the Lord does indeed say "Forbid them not to come to me". Let them come, then, while they are growing up. Let them come while they are learning; while they learn whither to come; let them become Christians when they have become able to know Christ. Why does the innocent period in life hasten to the "remission of sins"? ..Let them know how to "ask" for salvation, that it may seem to have given "to him that asketh". . If this is indeed the unanimous consent of the church, how did it happen that infant baptism became the norm? Although the answer may be somewhat speculative, we need to look to one of the baptismal texts from Irenaeus. Irenaeus, who held to the orthodox position regarding when one should be baptized, wrote a text which supported the common perception that we are born-again when we are baptized. He said in Against Heresies in 180 A.D. We are lepers in sin, we are made clean by means of the sacred water and invocation of the Lord, from our old transgression; being spiritually regenerate as new born babes, even as the Lord has declared "except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter the kingdom of heaven. Years later, we see some Christian writings taking Irenaeus' words and interpreting "spiritually regenerate, as newborn babes" as meaning that we are baptized as new-born babes! In the proper historical and textual context however, this is inconceivable. Thus, sometime in the mid 3rd century and in contradiction to the norm, the practice of baptizing infants started, built largely on a misinterpretation of Irenaeus. Baptism and Original Sin One of the most common arguments in favor of the necessity of infant baptism involves the question of original sin. The Roman church today, for example, views baptism as the means that an individual is cleansed from guilt incurred in the original sin of Adam and Eve. It is thought that the effectiveness of the baptism is in no way dependent upon the recipient of the sacrament. Therefore, it was considered expedient to baptize someone as soon as possible, namely, right after their birth. This is quite different from the biblical teaching, which is that baptism is the symbolic ordinance that typifies our identification with the burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. It is a death to our old life, and the beginning of our new life in Christ. Rather than baptizing immediately after birth, it was actually more common to wait late until the twilight of one's years to be baptized. The rationale for this was that baptism was thought by many to be a one shot deal at forgiveness and pardon, so a late baptism would minimize the opportunity for an individual to accrue any damning sins. Even in the Fourth century this mindset was prevalent, witnessed by the fact that Constantine himself would not be baptized until he was on his deathbed. The earliest archeological evidence we have that a child was baptized comes from an epitaph on a young boys tomb in the Lateran. The quote is from the fourth century and it reads: Florentius set up this inscription for his well deserving son Appronianus, who lived one year, nine months and five days. Since he was truly beloved by his grandmother, and she saw that he was destined for death, she asked of the church that he might depart a believer. Many who have pointed to this as evidence for infant baptism have missed the point of the epitaph altogether. It does not support the idea that infants were baptized. On the contrary. The boy was almost two, not yet baptized, and when it was apparent that he was not going to survive to a mature age, the grandmother made a special request (presumably to baptize him) before his death. This epitaph actually supports the view that infants were not baptized as a normal procedure at that point in church history, and that putting off the practice until later in life was still the most common opinion. If it is true that infants were not baptized, then what about the understanding of original sin? What did happen to a child or an infant that was not baptized? Were they damned because of Adam’s guilt? Again, looking closer at the earliest documents, we find that the early church had a vastly different perception of Adam's sin and it's effects. Shepherd of Hermas (ca. 150 A.D) They are as infant children in whose hearts no evil originates; nor did they know what wickedness is, but always remain as children. Such accordingly without doubt, dwell in the kingdom of God, because they defiled in nothing the commandments of God. ...all infants are honorable before God, and are first in persons with Him. The Shepherd of Hermas, previously noted, was considered canonical by several fathers of the church. According to him, there is no evil in the heart of an infant, and they dwell in the kingdom of God. Below we have a statement by Justin scolding the Roman dignitaries for allowing their pagan priests to sacrifice children from the womb for the purpose of divination. Justin Martyr, First Apology XVIII, 155 A.D) For you let even necromancy, and the divinations, whom you practice on immaculate children, and the invoking of departed human souls. Notice that he calls the children "immaculate". Tertullian apparently held the same regard for infant children. Tertullian, Treatise on the Soul, 204 AD those abodes; if you mean the good why should you judge to be unworthy of such a resting-place the souls of infants and of virgins, and those which, by reason of their condition in life were pure and innocent? In the previously noted text from Tertullian’s On Baptism, he likewise referred to unbaptized infants as "innocent". In addition to these, we have a frequently cited text from the Apocalypse of Peter from the 2nd century, that is quoted by Clement of Alexandria, Theodotus and others, that states emphatically that aborted children are immediately ushered by a guardian angel into paradise, and share in a "better fate". It is understood by these fathers that Adam’s guilt did not extend to one who had not sinned. If it did, then we would all need to concede that every aborted child, miscarriage, stillborn child, or otherwise unbaptized infant that died was in hell. Such an idea would be abhorrent to the early church. The issue is understood biblically in Romans 5:12 which states that "sin entered the world through one man (Adam), and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men for all have sinned". Notice that the actual agent of death to each individual is that individual’s personal sin. Likewise the next verse states that sin is not imputed where there is no law, that is, no understanding of right and wrong, which surely would be the case with an infant. It must be noted, however, that it would be equally wrong to propose that the descendants of Adam were unaffected by his actions. Man was qualitatively changed, now having the potential to know good and evil. Apparently his will was crippled and frustrated from being able to "do as he ought". (Romans 7:12-24) God, by his own sovereignty, has decreed that all man are bound over to disobedience (Romans 11:32; Galatians 3:22). The operation of sin in our lives, likened to a conception and gestational period in the book of James, "brings forth death ( James 1:14-15). To summarize the issue, then, we could fairly say that the early church taught that infants are guilt free, yet, the due to the fall we know that no natural mortal, upon being able to distinguish right from wrong, can stay guilt free, but instead is prone to sin. When Cyprian of Carthage started promoting infant baptism as a cure from Adam’s sin. He immediately had to defend it against the charge of novelty. As shown, it was not the church’s understanding that infants were in need of cleansing from sin. At the time, however, no major theological counter-thesis was offered. It was not until Pelegius started preaching in the early 5th century that the orthodox church was forced to define the doctrine of "Original Sin". Pelegius, who up to this point had been an orthodox bishop and writer, propounded that Adam’s sin had absolutely no effect on his offspring, and that every individual had the potential to live a perfect and holy life. Pelegius asserted that man was by nature good, and could, by his own will and accord, live pleasingly before God. This extreme position, threatened the very necessity for the sacrifice and atonement of Christ. If justification was by the law, then Christ died in vain (Galatians 2:21). St. Augustine, through a number of polemical writings and Councils, refuted and condemned the teaching of Pelegius. Unfortunately, as is with many conflicts of ideas and words throughout history, the rhetoric and polemic overstated the orthodox position. In order to counter the inherent goodness of all, as taught by Pelegius, Augustine championed the inherent depravity of all, including infants. As a result, he held to the position that all infants are in a state of damnation before God, not because of their sin, but Adam’s. According to Augustine, unbaptized infants go to suffer in hell. Some Roman Catholic theologians have attempted to soften this somewhat, hypothesizing a place called "limbo" which is more humane then hell, so as to deflect the obvious charge of injustice that would come with consigning newborn babies to eternal torment. This has never been officially defined by the Roman church, however. The Augustinian concept of Original Sin, then, must be rejected as a departure from the apostolic rule of faith. Another viewpoint of infant baptism is one which equates the baptismal act with the sign and seal of the New Covenant, akin to circumcision of the Old Covenant. Some of the later texts which support infant baptism suggest that the baptism should be done on the eighth day, as was the circumcision of the Old Covenant. It must be kept in mind, however, that the New Testament frequently mentions circumcision, but never as a type for baptism. Instead, it says "neither circumcision nor uncircumscision means anything, but what counts is a new creation" (Galatians 6:15) which subordinates any "sign or seal" of a covenant to the spiritual reality of being born-again by trust in Christ. Likewise, Paul also points out that even Abraham was justified by believing God, before and independently of the sign of circumcision. (Romans 4:9-11). Consequently, since the New Testament minimizes the alleged typology of circumcision, it is not likely that we would find any apostolic teaching that would equate baptism with the same function of sealing an individual into God’s New Covenant. Instead, we find that both circumcision and baptism both serve as types for the spiritual reality of putting off our flesh and being washed of the impurities of the old nature. The spiritual reality, of course, is most applicable to an adult. Baptismal Regeneration The belief in baptismal regeneration was apparently held by the majority of the early church fathers. Although one could debate writer by writer through the first few centuries as to whether this was indeed an apostolic teaching, in brief, the larger question would be as to whether an individual is saved (regenerated) by faith alone or by faith and baptism. The answer to that question is simply found by examining the scriptures to see whether salvation is imputed to those who believe and are baptized, or to those who merely believe. If the baptismal waters are indeed necessary for salvation, as even some writers proposed, then we should not find any cases in scripture where individuals are "saved" apart from baptism. There are, of course several glaring examples. The thief on the cross (Luke 23:40-43), as well as those in the household of Cornelius who believed and were filled with the Holy Spirit before they were baptized with water (Acts 10:43-48) are two clear examples. There are also numerous examples of Paul’s missionary endeavors, where he preaches and many believe, yet there is no reference to water baptism. With this being the case, we must conclude that water baptism cannot be equally an agent to salvation, since there are cases of individuals being saved by faith apart from the waters of baptism. Neither can the act of baptism carry salvific power in and of it’s self, since there are scriptural examples of individuals receiving baptism at the hand of the apostles, yet that individual still declared to be perishing because there heart was not right with God (cf. The Story of Simon Magus, Acts 8:9-24). Why then did so many early church fathers attribute regeneration at the point of water baptism? We could speculate that the hostile anti-Christian culture may have had a role to play. In the early church, baptism was the public profession before all that the individual was joining themselves to the Christian community. They were declaring that they were dead to their old life of idolatry and paganism. For many, it was the act that destined them to a martyr’s fate. Culturally, there was also the de-emphasis of such rites with many of the Gnostics. Those Gnostics that did have a baptismal ritual (Sethians and Valentians) had it so "super-spiritualized" that it would be construed by many to be a polemic against the normal, orthodox baptismal practice. We would consequently expect an increased emphasis on the act of baptism itself, certainly far more than our culture would remit. It could also be that the significance of water baptism is not derived so much from the agency of the water, but from the agency of faith and public profession of the Lordship of Christ. "If you confess me before men, I will confess you before my heavenly Father" (Matthew 10:32). In any respect, I would deduce that the emphasis on the ritual of baptism with respect to regeneration by the fathers was more a product of these cultural forces than actual apostolic teaching. In summary of the issue, we can see that the post-apostolic church may have had a deeper awareness of the mechanics of salvation, without the burdens of some of today's debates. This is not to say that everyone in the first three centuries understood the magnitude and glorious liberty of salvation in Christ. On the contrary; salvation by faith was one of, if not, the first foundational tenet to fall prey to the apostasy. Very early in the third century, because of the necessity of bearing up under persecution, we can see references to good works (ie. public profession) being necessary for salvation. By the middle of the third century, the regeneration of the believer was ascribed most commonly to happen at baptism. Ultimately, as the Roman Empire broke apart in the fifth century, and the church assumed the role of maintaining order in that civilization, eternal salvation was joined to the reception of the sacraments. Later in western history, this would give the papacy exceptional control over the princes, barons and kings throughout Europe. If a certain ruler would not side with the demands of the Pope, the Pope could vow to withhold the sacraments from that ruler and his subjects. Although that might not have struck fear into the ruler, the prospect of eternal damnation for an entire duchy or kingdom would create a panic and terror among the masses, and the ruler's hand would be forced to reconcile with the Pope. Today there is need to renew the original apostolic understanding of salvation. The gospel message, as typified by the Pauline revelation of grace, righteousness and adoption, is forever coupled to the truths borne by the act of baptism, that of self-abandonment and death to the old life, so as to fully serve God in the newness of life. So many have tried to reinterpret the gospels as merely a means to the end of raising one’s self-esteem, or instilling dignity and human worth. For others, it is a "feel good" message, brimming with warm snugglies of how much God loves us. All though there is truth in both views, we cheat ourselves of the fullness of our common salvation when we see it as less than a total redemption, of the total man, to be fully adopted into Gods’ family as a true child of God. Likewise, we cheat God when we respond with anything less than laying down every aspect of our old life and being, in complete service to God, for His glory alone. For more on the issue of water baptism see our videos: "IS WATER BAPTISM NECESSARY TO ESCAPE HELL & BE SAVED & ARE YOU "BORN AGAIN" (JOHN 3:3-8) BY IT?" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-wYJtMV9qrWg.html & "THE EVANGELICAL CHRISTIAN ROMANCE WITH APOSTATE ROMAN CATHOLICISM (PART 1): WATER BAPTISM SALVATION?" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-XobZCIzK-Zo.html. See our website www.BibleQuery.org & the article posted there called "Water Baptism Not Essential for Salvation." See also our newsletter posted there called "Church of Christ." The following link concerning water baptism is very useful at www.gotquestions.org/baptism-salvation.html. 2 Timothy 2:15

See our playlist "Dealing with UFOs, Ghosts, Magic, Spiritual Warfare, Satan" with 18 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL2CF1129D311BF9A6. The background of the Jehovah's Witnesses' Watchtower Society is built on the occult (relating to magical powers, esoteric activities, mysticism, etc.). Hear "Occult History of Jehovah's Witnesses" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=1120515352 by former JW Lorri MacGregor (she was a guest on our radio show at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-cGNnOs3UP1I.html). Hear her other lectures: "Ex-Jehovah's Witness speaks out" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=12250542425, "What Mormons Wont tell you at the door" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=12100515958 & "Counterfeit Christians" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=120516534. 2 Timothy 4:2-5, "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. 5 But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry."

To those who wish to discuss issues brought up in our video posted here to a greater extent please know that you can email one of our ministry volunteers at certainandsecure@gmail.com. Also realize that we may have an entire playlist of videos on this subject on our RU-vid channel at ru-vid.com. Besides that know that we have three websites to answer additional questions at www.BibleQuery.org (answers over 8500 questions on the Bible & refutes critics of the Bible), www.HistoryCart.com (this website deals with an in depth analysis of early Christian church history) and www.MuslimHope.com (this website is a documented refutation of Islam, a false religious & political ideology of warlike jihad against all unbelievers invented by Muhammad while he was in Medina for the last 9 years of his life where he averaged one offensive military jihad of pillage, rape & slavery every month to six weeks against his neighbors which eventually led to conquering all of Saudi Arabia- see also www.politicalislam.com/, www.answeringmuslims.com/, answering-islam.org/, www.jihadwatch.org/ & our playlist "Dealing with Islam, Muslims: Sunni, Shi'ite, Alawites, Sufis" with 71 videos & counting at ru-vid.com/group/PL1C7F68B548009FDD). 1 Peter 3:15

Investigate whether Seventh Day Adventism is real Christianity or a counterfeit cult. Please check the following: "Does Seventh Day Adventism have a damnable gospel, what do they really believe?" - www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=813141143413, "Is Seventh Day Adventism a Cult?" - www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=429152354502; the contrast between a biblical worldview and an Adventist, great controversy worldview - www.lifeassuranceministries.org/proclamation/2011/2/greatcontroversy.html; discusses the somewhat hidden but horrific fact of Adventists widespread practice of abortion and the organization's two sets of guidelines, one of which is known by the members, and one of which is “secret”, available to doctors and Adventist hospitals -www.lifeassuranceministries.org/proclamation/2014/2/abortioninadvent.html; examines the roots of Ellen White’s and the SDA’s “health message”, the Adventists’ “right arm of the gospel”. It begins on page 14 of the PDF: lifeassuranceministries.org/Proclamation2015_1web.pdf; see the playlists which includes videos from the annual Former Adventist Conferences with multiple testimonies of Former Adventists as well as the weekly inductive studies through books of the Bible taught at their Word Search studies ru-vid.complaylists, see the following websites: www.TruthorFables.com, www.LifeAssuranceMinistries.org, www.ExAdventist.com, & www.GreatControversyExposed.com. 2 Timothy 2:15, "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." The previous resources will be very valuable in an investigative study of whether Seventh Day Adventism is a Biblically true Gospel believing organization or if it is a false cultic religion peddling a false gospel invented by Ellen G. White & her associates thus violating Galatians 1:6-9, " I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." The original Greek word for "accursed" is "anathema" which means "condemnation to Hell by the decree of God" & is consistent with other scriptural passages containing it: Acts 23:14 cf. David's oath in 2 Samuel 3:35, Romans 9:3, 1 Corinthians 12:3, 1 Corinthians 16:22). It is also significant to note that the Septuagint (the oldest Greek translation of the Old Testament, dating from the third century B. C.) uses the word anathema in a similar sense in every case where someone is described as being set apart and devoted to destruction, because that person is abhorrent to God (e.g., the inhabitants of Jericho in Joshua 6:17). It is also used of persons or things what were given up to God and could not be redeemed (e.g., Leviticus 27:28-29.). the un-Biblical sense of anathema as a declaration of condemnation by man began to enter the church in its early centuries. By the time of the Protestant Reformation, the Roman Catholic church not only used the term in the sense of excommunication from the visible church, but also used it to usurp the exclusively Divine right to pronounce condemnation to Hell upon a person. It was thus that Rome, in Canon 11 of the Sixth Session of the Council of Trent (1547) said of anyone who believed in justification by faith alone, "let him be anathema." At the same council Rome also said, of anyone who denied that salvation is a cooperative effort between man and God, "let him be anathema" (Canon 4). Rome declares men condemned to Hell for believing and preaching the one true Gospel. Five hundred years after the Reformation, Rome continues to misuse and abuse anathema in this way. The current edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia says this: Anathema remains a major excommunication which is to be promulgated with great solemnity. A formula for this ceremony was drawn up by Pope Zachary (741-52) in the chapter Debent duodecim sacerdotes...The Roman Pontifical reproduces it in the chapter Ordo excommunicandi et absolvendi, distinguishing three sorts of excommunication: minor excommunication, formerly incurred by a person holding communication with anyone under the ban of excommunication; major excommunication, pronounced by the Pope in reading a sentence; and anathema, or the penalty incurred by crimes of the gravest order, and solemnly promulgated by the Pope. In passing this sentence, the pontiff is vested in amice, stole, and a violet cope, wearing his mitre, and assisted by twelve priests clad in their surplices and holding lighted candles. [The symbolism of all of this is the damnable falsehood that the Roman pope is the "vicar of Christ" or vice-Christ, the visible representation of Christ on earth.] He takes his seat in front of the altar or in some other suitable place, and pronounces the formula of anathema which ends with these words: "Wherefore in the name of God the All-powerful, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, of the Blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and of all the saints, in virtue of the power which has been given us of binding and loosing in Heaven and on earth, we deprive [name of person] himself and all his accomplices and all his abettors of the Communion of the Body and Blood of Our Lord, we separate him from the society of all Christians, we exclude him from the bosom of our Holy Mother the Church in Heaven and on earth, we declare him excommunicated and anathematized and we judge him condemned to eternal fire with Satan and his angels and all the reprobate, so long as he will not burst the fetters of the demon, do penance and satisfy the Church; we deliver him to Satan to mortify his body, that his soul may be saved on the day of judgment." Whereupon all the assistants respond: "Fiat, fiat, fiat." [That is, we concur that this declaration is legally binding.] The pontiff and the twelve priests then cast to the ground the lighted candles they have been carrying, and notice is sent in writing to the priests and neighboring bishops of the name of the one who has been excommunicated and the cause of his excommunication, in order that they may have no communication with him.11. Catholic Encyclopedia, entry on "Anathema," www.newadvent.org/cathen/01455e.htm, as viewed on 11/7/2009. The meaning of anathema in Galatians chapter one is clearly, "let him be condemned to Hell." No lesser penalty can be exacted against those who persist in proclaiming a counterfeit gospel of any kind. Rome's concept of anathema is clearly un-Biblical, since it is centered upon the judgment of man and not of God. Worse yet, Rome uses its un-Biblical anathema most often to enforce conformity to its false gospel and its man-made doctrines and regulations, and loyalty to a papal hierarchy that Scripture condemns. After thorough examination Seventh Day Adventism qualifies as a non Christian anti Christ cult due to the following reasons: 1. It is built on the woman Ellen G. White & her teachings despite the Bible saying women are not permitted to teach or usurp authority over men (1 Timothy 2:12, "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.") See links at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=112706102442, www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=59131749272 & ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Ql_obI6wA9w.html). 2. Ellen White claimed to be equal with the Biblical prophets & apostles through her many writings (sort of a "Spirit of Prophecy") & her SDA followers believed her (2 Peter 3:16); see www.truthorfables.com/EGW_Writings_Infallible.htm. Question: Are there modern day prophets or is there a need for prophets today? Answer: In the New Testament, the gift of the office of prophet was a temporary one granted by God for the purpose of building His Church. Contrary to the apostles, who had broad ministries, these men had localized ministries within local churches, as we see illustrated in such places as Acts 11:21-28 and Acts 13:1.Scripture shows us that the prophets of the New Testament had two primary purposes:They were gifted men given to the Church and appointed by God (Eph. 4:11, 1 Cor. 12:28) for the purpose of helping to lay the foundation of the Church (Eph. 2:20). They, like the apostles, received God’s revelation (Eph. 3:5) and truth and proclaimed it to their churches. It is important to remember that the early Church did not have a completed Bible, so God granted this revelation for the purpose of teaching His message to the Church. The New Testament prophets also spoke forth and taught the apostles’ doctrine. Everything taught by these prophets had to be consistent with the teaching of the apostles (1 Cor. 14:36-37). So, are prophets still needed today? Looking at the two functions listed above, we can see that the office of prophet is one that is no longer necessary and has ceased within the Church because:The foundation of the Church was laid long ago. God’s revealed Word was completed with the close of the New Testament canon. The Church’s foundation does not need to be laid again and there is no need for further revelation beyond what God has provided for us in His complete Word, the Bible. Today we are blessed to have Scripture as our complete and final authority in all things (2 Tim. 3:16-17). If someone now claims to have received a “special revelation,” we must test it against Scripture. If it is contrary to the Word of God, then it must be rejected. If it is consistent with Scripture, then we have to ask why an “extra” word was necessary if its truth is already contained in the Bible. So while we always need men who are willing to proclaim boldly the Word of God as contained in Scripture (as pastors, teachers, and evangelists), there is no need for the office of “prophet” as it existed in the New Testament. 3. Ellen G. White is a false prophet due to her false & failed prophecies (Deuteronomy 18:19-22); see www.mmoutreachinc.com/seventh_day_adventists/egw_false_prophet.html, 1timothy4-13.com/files/bible/sda_morefailed.html & www.bible.ca/7-prophecy-blunders.htm. 4. Ellen G. White had delusional dreams & visions much like phony Charismatic & Pentecostal TV preachers do today; see www.truthorfables.com/Visons_of_%20EGW_by_Snook_&_Brinkerhoff.htm & ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Kbv7YsyMf0I.html. 5. Seventh Day Adventism has a damnable false gospel (Galatians 1:6-10) for several reasons: a) Satan is the final sin bearer for Seventh Day Adventists; see www.truthorfables.com/Scapegoat.htm & www.truthorfables.net/50-contradictions-satan-bears-sins.htm, b) They say Jesus had a sinful nature just like fallen man otherwise He can't be a Savior; see kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2011/09/seventh-day-adventisms-anti.html & jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Seventh-Day%20Adventist/sda_exposed.htm, c) Ellen G. White taught the cult doctrine of the 1844 investigative judgment of Jesus in the heavenly sanctuary for the purpose of allowing Seventh Day Adventists final access to heaven while all others would be destroyed; see www.truthorfables.com/investigative_judgment_made_simple.htm, www.truthorfables.com/white_elephant.htm, www.truthorfables.com/My_Testimony.htm, www.truthorfables.com/SDA_Cult.htm & ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-J50HlZFYHtY.html, d) Seventh Day Adventism denies the New Testament Christian gospel by saying Old Testament "Saturday" Sabbath keeping is essential for salvation; see www.truthorfables.com/Sabbath_Not_A_Law.htm, www.truthorfables.net/who-changed-the-sabbath-a.htm, www.truthorfables.com/Sabbath_is_Friday.htm & ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-w0L3rSSL_H8.html, e) Although SDAs say they believe in salvation by grace they redefine the meaning of grace in order to incorporate into their religious system a salvation by law keeping to achieve final works righteousness; mmoutreachinc.com/seventh_day_adventists/sda_law.html, searchingthescriptures.net/main_pages/answering_cults/seventh_day_adventism/sda_a_cult.htm & ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-aIh3T31ujuU.html. If the apostle Paul cursed the Galatian Judaizers to hell for adding only one stipulation to the gospel which was circumcision then how much more would he curse the SDAs for all their added terms & conditions to the simple gospel of grace (Ephesians 2:8-9, "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast." Cross reference this to Galatians 2:16, "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified."). 6. Seven Day Adventists teach the false doctrine of soul sleep; see carm.org/soul-sleep, www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=12151314134510, www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=85122122530 & www.casagrandebaptistchurch.com/SoulSleep.html. 7. SDAs teach the false doctrine of the annihilation out of existence of the wicked including Satan & his demons rather than an eternal conscious punishment in a never ending lake of fire; carm.org/clear-word-bible-annihilationism, "Eternal Punishment, part 1" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=12607145320 & "Eternal Punishment, part 2" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sid=12607143539 where at the same time this refutes the arguments of universalists, annihilationists & heretics who say God is "all loving" & would not torment the wicked forever while they ignore the fact that God hates the wicked (Psalm 5:4-6, 11:5, Hosea 9:15, etc.; see our video "The God of the Bible Does Not Love Everybody But Actually Hates Many Instead (Romans 9:22)" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-0zHEJCHgQVg.html, www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=91713193277, www.jashow.org/wiki/index.php?title=Annihilationism, www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=94081054442, www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=9110884114, www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=219131311338, ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-_O-LMpP6bAg.html & see our playlist "Dealing with Hell, Lake of Fire, Unpopular Bible Doctrines" with 30 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLE04A1D0DFE95B95E. 8. SDAs support alternate Bible translations that pervert the written word of God thus placing themselves under the curse of Revelation 22:18-19, "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." See exadventist.com/Home/Articles/clearwordbible/tabid/450/Default.aspx, www.truthorfables.com/SDAs_Destroyers_of_the_Bible.htm & ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-7EsY1srHYJc.html. For more information on Seventh Day Adventism see our playlist "Dealing with Seventh-day Adventism & Their "Prophetess"" with 23 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL5316CC6F66F24283, see also "Cult of Seventh Day Adventism" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=61210437590 & "Damnable Heresies of Seventh Day Adventism" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=6201014412510. See the following websites: www.TruthorFables.com, www.LifeAssuranceMinistries.org, www.ExAdventist.com, www.RethinkingAdventism.com, www.Sabbatismos.com, & www.GreatControversyExposed.com. Titus 1:9-16

See our video "The Counterfeit Water Gospel Church ("Church of Christ") that Alexander Campbell Built" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-2m6BvMS5Z7g.html. Question: "Does Acts 2:38 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation?" Answer: Acts 2:38, “And Peter said to them, ‘Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.’” As with any single verse or passage, we discern what it teaches by first filtering it through what we know the Bible teaches on the subject at hand. In the case of baptism and salvation, the Bible is clear that salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, not by works of any kind, including baptism (Ephesians 2:8-9). So, any interpretation which comes to the conclusion that baptism, or any other act, is necessary for salvation, is a faulty interpretation. For more information, please visit our webpage on "Is salvation by faith alone, or by faith plus works?" Why, then, do some come to the conclusion that we must be baptized in order to be saved? Often, the discussion of whether or not this passage teaches baptism is required for salvation centers around the Greek word eis that is translated “for” in this passage. Those who hold to the belief that baptism is required for salvation are quick to point to this verse and the fact that it says “be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins,” assuming that the word translated “for” in this verse means “in order to get.” However, in both Greek and English, there are many possible usages of the word “for.” As an example, when one says “Take two aspirin for your headache,” it is obvious to everybody that it does not mean “take two aspirin in order to get your headache,” but instead to “take two aspirin because you already have a headache.” There are three possible meanings of the word “for” that might fit the context of Acts 2:38: 1--“in order to be, become, get, have, keep, etc.,” 2-“because of, as the result of,” or 3-“with regard to.” Since any one of the three meanings could fit the context of this passage, additional study is required in order to determine which one is correct. We need to start by looking back to the original language and the meaning of the Greek word eis. This is a common Greek word (it is used 1774 times in the New Testament) that is translated many different ways. Like the English word “for” it can have several different meanings. So, again, we see at least two or three possible meanings of the passage, one that would seem to support that baptism is required for salvation and others that would not. While both the meanings of the Greek word eis are seen in different passages of Scripture, such noted Greek scholars as A.T. Robertson and J.R. Mantey have maintained that the Greek preposition eis in Acts 2:38 should be translated “because of” or “in view of,” and not “in order to,” or “for the purpose of.” One example of how this preposition is used in other Scriptures is seen in Matthew 12:41 where the word eis communicates the “result” of an action. In this case it is said that the people of Nineveh “repented at the preaching of Jonah” (the word translated “at” is the same Greek word eis). Clearly, the meaning of this passage is that they repented “because of’” or “as the result of” Jonah’s preaching. In the same way, it would be possible that Acts 2:38 is indeed communicating the fact that they were to be baptized “as the result of” or “because” they already had believed and in doing so had already received forgiveness of their sins (John 1:12; John 3:14-18; John 5:24; John 11:25-26; Acts 10:43; Acts 13:39; Acts 16:31; Acts 26:18; Romans 10:9; Ephesians 1:12-14). This interpretation of the passage is also consistent with the message recorded in Peter’s next two sermons to unbelievers where he associates the forgiveness of sins with the act of repentance and faith in Christ without even mentioning baptism (Acts 3:17-26; Acts 4:8-12). In addition to Acts 2:38, there are three other verses where the Greek word eis is used in conjunction with the word “baptize” or “baptism.” The first of these is Matthew 3:11, “baptize you with water for repentance.” Clearly the Greek word eis cannot mean “in order to get” in this passage. They were not baptized “in order to get repentance,” but were “baptized because they had repented.” The second passage is Romans 6:3 where we have the phrase “baptized into (eis) His death.” This again fits with the meaning “because of” or in "regard to." The third and final passage is 1 Corinthians 10:2 and the phrase “baptized into (eis) Moses in the cloud and in the sea.” Again, eis cannot mean “in order to get” in this passage because the Israelites were not baptized in order to get Moses to be their leader, but because he was their leader and had led them out of Egypt. If one is consistent with the way the preposition eis is used in conjunction with baptism, we must conclude that Acts 2:38 is indeed referring to their being baptized “because” they had received forgiveness of their sins. Some other verses where the Greek preposition eis does not mean “in order to obtain” are Matthew 28:19; 1 Peter 3:21; Acts 19:3; 1 Corinthians 1:15; and 12:13. The grammatical evidence surrounding this verse and the preposition eis are clear that while both views on this verse are well within the context and the range of possible meanings of the passage, the majority of the evidence is in favor that the best possible definition of the word “for” in this context is either “because of” or “in regard to” and not “in order to get.” Therefore, Acts 2:38, when interpreted correctly, does not teach that baptism is required for salvation. Besides the precise meaning of the preposition translated “for” in this passage, there is another grammatical aspect of this verse to carefully consider-the change between the second person and third person between the verbs and pronouns in the passage. For example, in Peter’s commands to repent and be baptized the Greek verb translated “repent” is in the second person plural while the verb “be baptized,” is in the third person singular. When we couple this with the fact that the pronoun “your” in the phrase “forgiveness of your sins” is also second person plural, we see an important distinction being made that helps us understand this passage. The result of this change from second person plural to third person singular and back would seem to connect the phrase “forgiveness of your sins” directly with the command to “repent.” Therefore, when you take into account the change in person and plurality, essentially what you have is “You (plural) repent for the forgiveness of your (plural) sins, and let each one (singular) of you be baptized (singular).” Or, to put it in a more distinct way: “You all repent for the forgiveness of all of your sins, and let each one of you be baptized.” Another error that is made by those who believe Acts 2:38 teaches baptism is required for salvation is what is sometimes called the Negative Inference Fallacy. Simply put, this is the idea that just because a statement is true, we cannot assume all negations (or opposites) of that statement are true. In other words, just because Acts 2:38 says “repent and be baptized….for the forgiveness of sins…and the gift of the Holy Spirit,” it does not mean that if one repents and is not baptized, he will not receive forgiveness of sins or the gift of the Holy Spirit. There is an important difference between a condition of salvation and a requirement for salvation. The Bible is clear that belief is both a condition and a requirement, but the same cannot be said for baptism. The Bible does not say that if a man is not baptized then he will not be saved. One can add any number of conditions to faith (which is required for salvation), and the person can still be saved. For example if a person believes, is baptized, goes to church, and gives to the poor he will be saved. Where the error in thinking occurs is if one assumes all these other conditions, “baptism, going to church, giving to the poor,” are required for one to be saved. While they might be the evidence of salvation, they are not a requirement for salvation. (For a more thorough explanation of this logical fallacy, please see the Question: Does Mark 16:16 teach that baptism is required for salvation?). The fact that baptism is not required to receive forgiveness and the gift of the Holy Spirit should also be evident by simply reading a little farther in the book of Acts. In Acts 10:43, Peter tells Cornelius that “through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins” (please note that nothing at this point has been mentioned about being baptized, yet Peter connects believing in Christ with the act of receiving forgiveness for sins). The next thing that happens is, having believed Peter’s message about Christ, the “Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message” (Acts 10:44). It is only after they had believed, and therefore received forgiveness of their sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit, that Cornelius and his household were baptized (Acts 10:47-48). The context and the passage are very clear; Cornelius and his household received both forgiveness of sins and the Holy Spirit before they were ever baptized. In fact, the reason Peter allowed them to be baptized was that they showed evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit “just as Peter and the Jewish believers” had. In conclusion, Acts 2:38 does not teach that baptism is required for salvation. While baptism is important as the sign that one has been justified by faith and as the public declaration of one’s faith in Christ and membership in a local body of believers, it is not the means of remission or forgiveness of sins. The Bible is very clear that we are saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone (John 1:12; John 3:16; Acts 16:31; Romans 3:21-30; Romans 4:5; Romans 10:9-10; Ephesians 2:8-10; Philippians 3:9; Galatians 2:16). Recommended Resources: Believer's Baptism: Sign of the New Covenant in Christ by Schriener and Wright and Logos Bible Software. See also: Does Galatians 3:27 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation? at www.gotquestions.org/baptism-Galatians-3-27.html Does Mark 16:16 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation? at www.gotquestions.org/baptism-Mark-16-16.html Does 1 Peter 3:21 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation? at www.gotquestions.org/baptism-1Peter-3-21.html Does John 3:5 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation? at www.gotquestions.org/baptism-John-3-5.html Does Acts 22:16 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation? at www.gotquestions.org/baptism-Acts-22-16.html See our playlist "Dealing with "Saved by Works & Baptism", "Church of Christ"" with 72 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLBD55090718DA6D3D. Titus 1:9-16

You asked, "Watchman4u - Hey can you point to where they got the "Three Angels" & "the Everlasting Gospel" got these teachings & what are they exactly? Thx." For more on the "Three Angels" see our video "Did God Really Give Ellen G. White "Divine" Health Reform Visions From Book of Revelation Angels?" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-nhKoS2Fk1Y4.html & see www.truthorfables.com/EGW_Health_Reform.htm. For her "Everlasting Gospel" see our video "Truth About Seventh-Day Adventist "Truth?": A False Gospel of Imperfect Law Keeping to Earn Heaven" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-7EsY1srHYJc.html & www.TruthorFables.com. Matthew 7:15

Our RU-vid channel CAnswersTV (which stands for Christian Answers Television) features over 639 videos from a Biblical worldview organized according to topics. Our main channel can be accessed at ru-vid.com where all our videos & playlists are on display. Here are our available playlists: 1. "Popular Uploads" at ru-vid.com/videos?shelf_id=2&view=0&sort=p 2. "Dealing with Jehovah's Witnesses, Watchtower Society" with 25 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLCF0ADB29C0EB8C40. 3. "Dealing with Islam, Muslims: Sunni, Shi'ite, Alawites, Sufis" with 73 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL1C7F68B548009FDD. 4. "Dealing with Roman Catholicism, Idolatry & the Virgin Mary" with 140 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLFFA8D69D1B914715. 5. "Dealing with Darwin's Metaphysical Evolution Religion" with 21 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL0703E78058346A52. 6. "Dealing with Seventh-day Adventism & Their "Prophetess" with 26 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL5316CC6F66F24283. 7. "Dealing with Anti Trinitarians (UPC) & Early Church History" with 53 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL9931642C7C8FFEAB. 8. "Dealing with "God Hating" Atheists, Agnostics, Know-It-Alls" with 21 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL640E505B96CD6B39. 9. "Dealing with Phony TV Preachers (TBN) & King James Onlyites" with 30 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL2CDA855486B09128. 10. "Dealing with UFOs, Ghosts, Magic, Spiritual Warfare, Satan" with 19 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL2CF1129D311BF9A6. 11. "Radio Shows with National Christian Authors & Music Vids" with 52 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLF01B4264276D2990. 12. "Dealing with Black Muslims, Louis Farrakhan, Nation of Islam" with 25 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLD3B79AA00CCF21B7. 13. "Dealing with Mormonism, The Con Man Religion of Joseph Smith, Jr." with 23 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL11CD0EE613306BB5. 14. "Dealing with Hell, Lake of Fire, Unpopular Bible Doctrines" with 33 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLE04A1D0DFE95B95E. 15. "Dealing with AntiChrist Cults, "New Age" & World Religions" with 45 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL69A3047B3497590A. 16. "Dealing with "Saved by Works & Baptism", "Church of Christ" with 75 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLBD55090718DA6D3D. 17. "Charles H. Spurgeon, Jonathan Edwards, Our Spanish Videos" with 26 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLE91032ED05E42487. 18. "End Times, Supernatural Prophecies, Tough Bible Questions" with 49 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL141F261EEFCFD536. 19. "Dealing with Predestination, Arminianism & Calvinism" with 82 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLA932903698A56780. We also have channels on Sermon Audio at www.sermonaudio.com/source_detail.asp?sourceid=christiananswers & www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp?speakeronly=true&currsection=sermonsspeaker&keyword=Larry_Wessels. Although the 30 plus videos we have posted on www.SermonAudio.com are also on RU-vid the thing that makes these particular videos of interest is that we have produced written transcripts of many of them which has helped quite a few people. Once you click on one of the transcribed videos scroll down to "Sermon Transcription" & choose your options: "View Transcript!," "Download PDF," or "Send to Kindle." Viewers also have the option of over 20 different languages to get the transcription in by going to the "Google Translation" option. Everything is free with nothing to buy. Here are just a few examples of some of our videos that have free transcriptions available: "Early Christian Church History Proves Roman Catholicism False" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=113161415591, "Divine Curse of the Hebrew Roots Movement - Replacing Jesus with the Old Testament" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=108151527437, "Debate: Larry Wessels Versus Two Jehovah's Witnesses at a University Study Center" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=108141526191, "Spiritual Counterfeit: ONENESS PENTECOSTALISM DENIES THE BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF TRINITY" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=52015115043, "Unpopular Bible Doctrines #1: The God No One Wants To Know" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=311141259524, "Islam's 1400 Year History of Violent Jihad For Sex Slaves, Money & Jew Hatred" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=324161224286, "The Sovereignty of God Versus Man-Made Religions, Petty Emotionalism" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=52015125752, "The Biblical Doctrine of the Trinity- Part 3 (Answering Common Attacks Against the Trinity)" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=32416129330. There are many more but this is just a small sampling of what is available at no charge. Blessings to all. 2 Timothy 2:15, "Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

When it comes to Mormonism see our playlist "Dealing with Mormonism, the Religion of Mitt Romney & Utah" with 20 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL11CD0EE613306BB5. Particularly notice our video "RISE OF THE CULTS: WHERE DID ALL THESE STRANGE AMERICAN RELIGIOUS SECTS COME FROM?" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-HfVTXbFrvh8.html. Question: "What is Mormonism? What do Mormons believe?" Answer: The Mormon religion (Mormonism), whose followers are known as Mormons and Latter-day Saints (LDS), was founded less than two hundred years ago by a man named Joseph Smith. He claimed to have received a personal visit from God the Father and Jesus Christ (Articles of Faith, p. 35) who told him that all churches and their creeds were an abomination (1 Nephi 13:28; Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith - History 1:18, 19). Joseph Smith then set out to "restore true Christianity" and claimed his church to be the “only true church on earth” (Mormon Doctrine, p. 670; 1 Nephi 14:10). The problem with Mormonism is that it contradicts, modifies, and expands on the Bible. Christians do not have a reason to believe that the Bible is untrue or inadequate. To truly believe in and trust God means to believe in His Word, and all Scripture is inspired by God, which means it comes from Him (2 Timothy 3:16). Mormons believe that there are in fact four sources of divinely inspired words, not just one: 1) the Bible “as far as it is translated correctly” (8th Article of Faith). Which verses are considered incorrectly translated is not always made clear. 2) The Book of Mormon, which was “translated” by Smith and published in 1830. Smith claimed it is the “most correct book” on earth and that a person can get closer to God by following its precepts “than by any other book” (History of the Church 4:461). 3) Doctrine and Covenants, containing a collection of modern revelations regarding the “Church of Jesus Christ as it has been restored.” 4) The Pearl of the Great Price, which is considered by Mormons to “clarify” doctrines and teachings that were lost from the Bible (Articles of Faith, p. 182-185) and adds its own information about the earth’s creation. Mormons believe the following about God: He has not always been the Supreme Being of the universe (Mormon Doctrine, p. 321) but attained that status through righteous living and persistent effort (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345). They believe God the Father has a “body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s” (Doctrine and Covenants 130:22). Brigham Young taught that Adam actually was God and the father of Jesus Christ-although this teaching has been abandoned by modern Mormon leaders. In contrast, Christians know this about God: there is only one true God (Deuteronomy 6:4; Isaiah 43:10; 44:6-8). He always has existed and always will exist (Deuteronomy 33:27; Psalm 90:2; 1 Timothy 1:17). He was not created but is the Creator (Genesis 1; Psalm 24:1; Isaiah 37:16). He is perfect, and no one else is equal to Him (Psalm 86:8; Isaiah 40:25). God the Father is not a man, nor was He ever (Numbers 23:19; 1 Samuel 15:29; Hosea 11:9). He is Spirit (John 4:24), and Spirit is not made of flesh and bone (Luke 24:39). Mormons believe that there are different levels or kingdoms in the afterlife: the celestial kingdom, the terrestrial kingdom, the telestial kingdom, and outer darkness (Mormon Doctrine, p. 348). Where mankind will end up depends on what they believe and do in this life (2 Nephi 25:23; Articles of Faith, p.79). In contrast, the Bible tells us that after death we go to heaven or hell based on whether or not we had faith in Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior. To be absent from our bodies means, as believers, we are with the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:6-8). Unbelievers are sent to hell or the place of the dead (Luke 16:22-23). When Jesus comes the second time, we will receive new bodies (1 Corinthians 15:50-54). There will be a new heaven and new earth for believers (Revelation 21:1), and unbelievers will be thrown into an everlasting lake of fire (Revelation 20:11-15). There is no second chance for redemption after death (Hebrews 9:27). Mormon leaders have taught that Jesus’ incarnation was the result of a physical relationship between God the Father and Mary (Journal of Discourses, vol. 8, p. 115; Mormon Doctrine, p. 547). Mormons believe Jesus is a god, but that any human can also become a god (Doctrine and Covenants 132:20; Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345-354). Mormonism teaches that salvation can be earned by a combination of faith and good works (LDS Bible Dictionary, p. 697). Contrary to this, Christians historically have taught that no one can achieve the status of God-only He is holy (1 Samuel 2:2). We can only be made holy in God's sight through faith in Him (1 Corinthians 1:2). Jesus is the only begotten Son of God (John 3:16), is the only one ever to have lived a sinless life, and now has the highest place of honor in heaven (Hebrews 7:26). Jesus and God are one in essence, Jesus being the only man who existed before physical birth (John 1:1-8; 8:56). Jesus gave Himself to us as a sacrifice, God raised Him from the dead, and one day everyone will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord (Philippians 2:6-11). Jesus tells us it is impossible to get to heaven by our own works and that only by faith in Him is it possible (Matthew 19:26). We all deserve eternal punishment for our sins, but God's infinite love and grace have allowed us a way out. “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23). Clearly, there is only one way to receive salvation and that is to know God and His Son, Jesus (John 17:3). Receiving salvation is not done by works but by faith (Romans 1:17; 3:28). We can receive this gift no matter who we are or what we have done (Romans 3:22). “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). Although Mormons are usually friendly, loving, and kind people, they are deceived by a false religion that distorts the nature of God, the Person of Jesus Christ, and the means of salvation. (Editor’s note: many of the references in our articles on Mormonism are Mormon publications, such as Mormon Doctrine, Articles of Faith, Doctrines of Salvation, History of the Church, Doctrine and Covenants, and so forth. Others are from the Book of Mormon itself, e.g., books such as 1 Nephi, 2 Nephi, and Alma.) Question: "Are Mormons Christians? Are Mormons saved?" Answer: Although Mormons profess to be Christians and say they believe the Word of God, there are many of their beliefs that contradict Christianity. In fact, Mormonism can be referred to as a cult, which can be defined as “a religious group that denies one or more of the fundamentals of biblical truth.” Mormons say they are Christians, but because they reject foundational truths from the God’s Word, they are not. Joseph Smith, who referred to himself as “The Prophet,” founded the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the mid-1800s. He claimed to have seen a vision of God the Father and God the Son, in which they denounced modern Christianity and appointed Smith to reveal and restore “true” Christianity (Articles of Faith, p. 182-185). Three years later, Smith alleged that the angel Moroni told him about some golden plates on which the Book of Mormon was written. In spite of Smith’s questionable background and proclivity toward bending the truth (see The Origin, Rise, and Progress of Mormonism, New York, 1861; and Mormonism Unveiled, Painesville, Ohio, 1834), many believed Smith, and a new “religion” was born. Today, the members of the Mormon Church number in the millions. The Book of Mormon is purported to be a new revelation, one that Mormons say is part of the new covenant to Israel and “another witness” to the truth of the Bible (History of the Church 4:461, 8th Article of Faith). Aside from the many theological conflicts with the Bible and historical and archeological fact, the writing of the Book of Mormon was shrouded in mystery and false claims. For example, Joseph Smith and his associates asserted that one Professor Charles Anthony of Columbia University verified the Egyptian characters on the golden plates. However, this same professor wrote a rebuttal letter soon after, saying that he never did any such thing and had, in fact, found the characters to be a hoax. In addition, many verses in the Mormon scriptures have been changed over the years, as the church leaders attempt to cover up something embarrassing in their past and to defend themselves against criticism. These facts alone are enough to cast much doubt on the veracity of the Book of Mormon. One of the many areas in which Mormons fall short of saving faith is their belief that God is merely an exalted man who earned his position by good works (Mormon Doctrine, p. 321; Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345). This directly contradicts the Bible, which states that God has existed in His position as God of the universe from eternity past (Revelation 1:8; 1 Timothy 1:17; 6:15-16; Psalm 102:24-27). God was never a man (Numbers 23:19; 1 Samuel 15:29; Hosea 11:9) and is the holy and powerful Creator of all things (Genesis 1; Psalm 24:1; Isaiah 37:16). Mormons also believe that they themselves can attain the status of gods in the afterlife through their works here on earth (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345-354). However, no man can ever become like God (1 Samuel 2:2; Isaiah 43:10-11; 44:6; 45:21-22), despite what the serpent told Eve in the garden (Genesis 3:5). Mormons also believe that Jesus was a god, but not God Himself (Mormon Doctrine, p. 547; Articles of Faith, p. 35; Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 372). It is essential to Christian faith that Jesus is one with God and that He is God’s only begotten Son who became flesh (John 1:1, 14; John 3:16). Only Jesus’ oneness with God would have allowed Him to live a sinless, blameless life (Hebrews 7:26). And only Jesus Christ was able to pay the price for our sins by His death on the cross (Romans 4:25; Acts 4:12). Those who follow the Mormon faith also believe that they can attain heaven through works (Doctrine and Covenants 58:42-43; 2 Nephi 9:23-24; Alma 34:30-35; Articles of Faith, p.92). While they claim faith in Christ, they also rely on following the commandments of the Mormon Church (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, p 188; Mormon Doctrine, p. 670) and practicing good works (2 Nephi 25:23; Alma 11:37) in order to achieve salvation. The Bible is very clear on this point, stating that good works can never earn the way to heaven (Romans 11:6; Ephesians 2:8-9; Titus 3:5) and that faith in Jesus Christ alone is the only way to salvation (John 10:9; 11:25; 14:6; Acts 4:12). Salvation by grace is incompatible with salvation by human works (Romans 11:6). Sadly, many in the Mormon Church are unaware of the religion’s shady past, amended scriptures, and even the full doctrine of their church. Many Mormons who have discovered these things have left the church and come to a true saving faith in Jesus Christ. As Christians, we must treat Mormons with love and understand that they are among those deceived by Satan himself (1 Peter 5:8). Satan’s goal is to distort the truth, produce false assurance of salvation, and extend a deceptive hope of godhood (2 Corinthians 4:4). Question: "How should Christians view the Book of Mormon?" Answer: When Mormon missionaries (properly called Latter Day Saints or simply "LDS") come to your door, they will often offer a free copy of the Book of Mormon and tell you about its author, Joseph Smith. Smith, they will say, translated the Book of Mormon from golden plates he dug up in a hill in New York in the early 1800s. This is supposed to confirm his calling from God as the new prophet on the earth in these latter days. Further, they will tell you that the Holy Ghost will confirm the truth of the Book of Mormon by producing good feelings in you. Next will come the invitation to "read the Book of Mormon, pray, and ask God to show you it is true." Of course you must do this with sincerity, or it won't work. Before you fall to your knees, there are some things you need to know that they are not telling you (and won't unless you ask). The first concerns many LDS beliefs that separate them from historical, orthodox Christianity. These are not found in the Book of Mormon. In fact, there is really very little in that book that is doctrinally disagreeable to orthodox Christians. The real meat of Mormonism is found in their other scriptures, The Doctrine and Covenants and The Pearl of Great Price. These books, however, Mormons do not hand out at the door-and for good reason. If people knew up front what they were really going to be asked to believe (things such as God once being a man, denial of the Trinity, Satan being Jesus' brother, pre-existence of souls, etc.), they may not be quite so willing to put aside their skepticism. The second thing to realize is that in accepting the Book of Mormon, one is, in fact, accepting Joseph Smith as a prophet. So what about this test of a prophet? Isn't it legitimate to "give this question up to God?" No, it isn't. This is because God has already revealed His test for would-be prophets, and it has nothing to do with prayer or feelings, and God has no obligation to answer prayers that He has already answered! We do not have to ask God whether or not we should rob a bank or murder someone. Rather, James 1:5 says, "If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God . . . and it will be given to him." Wisdom is applied knowledge, not lack of it. God never tells us to pray about what is true. When we want to know how tall a wall is, we don't pray about it; we get something that we know is true (a ruler) and compare it to the wall. The Bible, God's Word, is true. That is our measuring stick for truth. See Acts 17:11, for example, which describes a group of people who were considered noble because when Paul came to them with the Christian message they "received the word with great eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily, to see whether these things were so." Feelings are unreliable because they are subjective, easy to produce, and are not meant to discover facts but to tell us how we feel about facts. Psychological persuasion techniques, intensity, eye contact, or mere desire can produce feelings that feel real because they are real! But real feelings are still just letting us know how we are reacting to something, not the truthfulness of that thing. The Mormon missionary handbook specifically details these techniques, and missionaries go through training on how to persuade people before they ever leave the house. What are the biblical tests for a prophet? They are in God's Word: Deuteronomy 18:21-22 says, "You may say to yourselves, ‘How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD?’ If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him." Did Joseph Smith ever claim "in the name of the LORD" that something would happen when it did not? Yes-many times, in fact. Joseph Smith prophesied that New York would be destroyed if they rejected the [Mormon] gospel (D&C 84:114-115). He also prophesied that the rebellion of South Carolina and the War Between the States would result in war being poured out upon all nations; slaves would revolt; the inhabitants of the earth would mourn; famine, plague, earthquake, thunder, lightning, and a full end of all nations would result (D&C 87). Oddly, this prophecy is the one most often cited by Mormons to prove Joseph Smith's prophetic power! Further, Deuteronomy 13:1-3 says that "if a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a miraculous sign or wonder, and if the sign or wonder of which he has spoken takes place, and he says, ‘Let us follow other gods’ (gods you have not known) ‘and let us worship them,’ you must not listen to the words of that prophet or dreamer. The LORD your God is testing you to find out whether you love him with all your heart and with all your soul." Did Joseph Smith lead his followers to other gods? Yes. Joseph Smith was a polytheist. History of the Church 6:474 records Smith stating, "I wish to declare I have always and in all congregations when I have preached on the subject of the Deity, it has been the plurality of Gods." Joseph Smith declared that "God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens!" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 345). This is clearly not the biblical God. Galatians 1:6-7 says that people may be "turning to a different gospel-which is really no gospel at all . . . trying to pervert the gospel of Christ." And Paul pronounced a curse upon them for doing so. In Romans 1:16 Paul tells us that the gospel is "the power of God unto salvation"-that's pretty important. Did Joseph Smith teach a "different gospel"? Yes. Mormons believe that the Book of Mormon contains the "fullness of the gospel." The Book of Mormon says so itself in its introduction (see also Doctrines and Covenants 20:9; 27:5; 42:12; and 135:3). So what is the gospel according to Mormonism? It's a tough question for many LDS to answer. According to Mormon apostle Bruce McConkie, author of the book Mormon Doctrine, the gospel is "the plan of salvation [that] embraces all of the laws, principles, doctrines, rites, ordinances, acts, powers, authorities, and keys necessary to save and exalt men." In other words, the whole of Mormon theology. In the Mormon gospel we see belief + repentance + baptism + laying on of hands + temple work + mission work + church ministry + tithing + ceasing from sin + abstaining from the use of intoxicants and strong drinks and tobacco and caffeine + confessing Joseph Smith as Prophet + temple marriage + baptism for the dead + genealogy research . . . the list could go on and on and on. Only upon completion of all these things may Mormons attain to the third and highest level of heaven, thus achieving the ultimate goal of the Mormon gospel-godhood. (see McConkie, Mormon Doctrine 116-117; Book of Mormon [3 Nephi 27:13-21]; Doctrines of Salvation 1:268; 18:213; The 4th Article of Faith; Smith, Gospel Doctrine pg. 107; Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 3:93; 3:247; 9:312; Gospel Principles 290; Doctrine and Covenants 39:5-6; 132:19-20). In essence, Christ's death means nothing more to a Mormon than the gaining of the ability to be resurrected so that his works may be judged. While we cannot judge another person's motives, we can and must judge what a person does or says. Joseph Smith, and hence the Book of Mormon, fails the twin tests of Deuteronomy 13 and 18. God takes false prophets very seriously. Deuteronomy 13:1-3 says, "That prophet or dreamer must be put to death, because he preached rebellion against the LORD your God...; he has tried to turn you from the way the LORD your God commanded you to follow. You must purge the evil from among you." Deuteronomy 18:19-21 says, "If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account. But a prophet who presumes to speak in my name anything I have not commanded him to say, or a prophet who speaks in the name of other gods, must be put to death..." And Galatians 1:8-9 says, "But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!" The gospel is God's power to bring us to Him. He will not stand for those who pervert it. He has given us the ability and the responsibility to discern whether or not the gospel is being tampered with. We must carefully investigate the claims of the LDS if we are to follow what God has commanded. In fact, we are invited to judge by Mormons themselves: "Convince us of our errors of doctrine, if we have any" (LDS Apostle Orson Pratt, The Seer, p.15). (Editor’s note: many of the references in our articles on Mormonism are Mormon publications, such as Mormon Doctrine, Articles of Faith, Doctrines of Salvation, History of the Church, Doctrine and Covenants, and so forth. Others are from the Book of Mormon itself, e.g., books such as 1 Nephi, 2 Nephi, and Alma.) The reason Mormonism is not Christian is that it denies one or more of the essential doctrines of Christianity. Here is a basic list of what true Christianity teaches as essential doctrine according to the Bible. There is only one God in all existence (Exodus 20:1-4, Isaiah 43:10, 44:6, 8, 45:5). Jesus is divine (John 1:1, 14, 8:24, Col. 2:9). Forgiveness of sins is by grace alone without works (Eph. 2:8-9, Rom. 3:28, 4:1-5). Jesus rose from the dead physically (John 2:19-21, Luke 24:39). The Gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus (1 Cor. 15:1-4). Mormonism denies that there is only one God in all existence and also denies the forgiveness of sins alone in Christ alone. Therefore, it is outside Christianity. It is not a Christian religion. Mormonism teaches . . . Mormonism teaches that God the Father has a body of flesh and bones (D. & C. 130:22) and that Jesus is a creation who was begotten in heaven as one of God’s spirit children (See the book, Jesus the Christ, by James Talmage, p. 8). This is in strict contrast to the Biblical teaching that He is God in flesh (John 1:1, 14), eternal (John 1:1, 2, 15), uncreated, yet born on earth (Col. 1:15), and the creator of all (John 1:3, Col. 1:16-17). Jesus cannot be both created and not created at the same time. Though Mormonism teaches that Jesus is God in flesh, it teaches that He is "a" god in flesh, one of three gods that comprise the office of the Trinity (Articles of Faith, by Talmage, pp. 35-40). These three gods are the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. This is in direct contradiction of the Biblical doctrine that there is only one God (Isaiah 43:10, 44:6, 8, 45:5). See Trinity for a correct discussion of what the Trinity is (See also, false trinity). Because Mormonism denies the Biblical truth of who God is, who Jesus is, how forgiveness of sins is attained, and what the Gospel is, Mormonism is not Christian. What else does Mormonism teach? Mormon theology teaches that God is only one of countless gods, He used to be a man on another planet, He became a god by following the laws and ordinances of that god on that world, and He brought one of His wives to this world with whom He produces spirit children who then inhabit human bodies at birth. The first spirit child to be born was Jesus. Second (though this is disputed among Mormons) was Satan, and then we all followed. But, the Bible says that there is only one God (Isaiah 43:10, 44:6, 8, 45:5) and that God has been God eternally (Psalm 90:2)--which means He was never a man on another planet. Since the Bible denies the existence of other gods (and goddesses--there is a mother goddess in Mormonism), the idea that Jesus is the product of a god and goddess couple is rejected. The Bible tells us that Jesus--The Jesus of Mormonism--is definitely not the same Jesus of the Bible. Therefore, faith in the Mormon Jesus is faith misplaced because the Mormon Jesus doesn't exist. Mormonism says Jesus' Sacrifice is not enough Mormonism teaches that the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross itself (and receiving it by faith) is not sufficient to bring forgiveness of sins. It teaches that the forgiveness of sins is obtained though a cooperative effort with God, that is, we must be good and follow the laws and ordinances of the Mormon church in order to obtain forgiveness. Consider the late James Talmage, an LDS apostle who said, "The sectarian dogma of justification by faith alone has exercised an influence for evil," (Articles of Faith, p. 432), and "Hence the justice of the scriptural doctrine that salvation comes to the individual only through obedience," (Articles of Faith, p. 81). This clearly contradicts the Biblical doctrine of the forgiveness of sins by grace through faith (Rom. 3:28, 5:1, 6:23, Eph. 2:8-9) and the doctrine that works are not part of becoming saved (Rom. 4:1-5) but a result of them (James 2:14-18). To further confuse the matter, Mormonism states that salvation is twofold. It maintains that salvation is both forgiveness of sins and universal resurrection. So when a Mormon speaks of salvation by grace, he is usually referring to universal resurrection. But the Bible speaks of salvation as the forgiveness of sins--not universal resurrection. Where Mormonism states that forgiveness of sins is not by faith alone (2 Nephi 25:23, Moroni 10:32), the Bible does teach it is by faith alone (Rom. 3:28, 4:1-5). Both cannot be true. Mormonism and the Bible In order to justify its aberrant theology, Mormonism has undermined the authority and trustworthiness of the Bible. The 8th Article of Faith from the Mormon Church states, "We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly." This means that when the Bible contradicts Mormonism, the Bible isn't trustworthy. This allows them to say and teach whatever they want even when it contradicts Scripture. Conclusion Mormonism is not Christian because it denies that there is only one God, denies the true Gospel, adds works to salvation, denies that Jesus is the uncreated creator, distorts the Biblical teaching of the atonement, undermines the authority and reliability of the Bible, says that God used to be a man who came from another planet and we can become gods, and there is a goddess mother in heaven, etc. CARM does not deny that Mormons are decent helpful people and that they do many good things. But that isn't what makes someone Christian--nor does putting "Jesus Christ" in your title make you Christian if you deny who Jesus really is. Jesus said in Matthew 7:21-23, "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name? And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!" (NKJV) Notice that Jesus condemns those who combine their faith with their works in order to be saved. If you doubt that, see also Luke 18:9-14 where Jesus teaches the same thing again. Becoming a Christian does not mean belonging to a church, doing good things, or simply believing in a god from another planet. Being a Christian means that you have trusted in the true God for salvation, received the True Jesus--not the brother of the devil, not the god of Mormonism, not the gospel of Mormonism. Becoming a Christian means believing the Gospel of Christ, who is God in flesh, 2nd person of the Trinity, who was sent by the Father, bore our sins in His body on the cross (1 Pet. 2:24), died, was buried and rose again (1 Cor. 15:1-4). You must trust Jesus. Believe what He did. Put your faith in Him. Mormonism is false and cannot save anyone. Titus 1:9-16

what religion is this?

Death can come suddenly & unexpectedly. Hear deathbed testimonies of the damned during their last days, hours & moments before going into eternity: "Horrifying & Terrifying Death Bed Scenes Of Atheists, Apostates & Reprobates (1/3)" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sid=731131047310, "Horrifying & Terrifying Death Bed Scenes Of Atheists, Apostates & Reprobates (2/3)" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sid=731131111372, "Horrifying & Terrifying Death Bed Scenes Of Atheists, Apostates & Reprobates (3/3)" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sid=731131132150, "Death-Bed of a Free-Thinker, Exemplified in the Last Hours of Hon. Francis Newport" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sid=72913130359, "Death-Bed Scenes, Death-Bed Repentance Rarely Occurs, As Men Live, So Do Men Die #1" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sid=927131122460, "Death-Bed Scenes, Death-Bed Repentance Rarely Occurs, As Men Live, So Do Men Die #2" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sid=927131158132; "Dying Testimonies Of The Unsaved, The Awful Death Of An Infidel Son Who Hated Jesus" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sid=104131120148, & although this next recording is not an actual deathbed testimonial it is highly informative concerning Judas & other reprobates, "The Repentance of Judas, or, the Lamentable Effects of a Startled Conscience" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sid=310141542316. Listeners will notice numerous similar patterns among the final words & actions of the damned. Many seem to sense the flames of hell & the presence of demonic entities before death overtakes them. An excellent Biblical analysis of eternal punishment in hell & the lake of fire is given by the outstanding theologian A.W. Pink - "Eternal Punishment, part 1" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=12607145320 & "Eternal Punishment, part 2" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sid=12607143539 where he at the same time refutes the arguments of universalists, annihilationists & heretics who say God is "all loving" & would not torment the wicked forever while they ignore the fact that God hates the wicked (Psalm 5:4-6, 11:5, Hosea 9:15, etc.; see our video "The God of the Bible Does Not Love Everybody But Actually Hates Many Instead (Romans 9:22)" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-0zHEJCHgQVg.html). Hear also Charles Haddon Spurgeon on this subject in his sermon "The Sinner's End, Hell Opens Wide Her Jaws, the Sinner Falls To Destruction" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=1014131452290 & Jonathan Edward's famous sermon "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=113003134610. Besides all this readers can click on our playlist "Dealing with Hell, Lake of Fire, Unpopular Bible Doctrines" with 30 videos & 31 hours of teaching material at ru-vid.com/group/PLE04A1D0DFE95B95E. Don't depend on a last second deathbed conversion to save you from the wrath of a holy God. Come to the Biblical Jesus Christ today for salvation in repentance & faith (2 Corinthians 6:2, "behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation; Acts 16:31, "And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved;" Mark 1:15, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel;" 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, "Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you-unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures," Revelation 1:8, Jesus is the "Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.", Revelation 1:18, Jesus says "I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death." Becoming a true Christian is not easy therefore count the cost. Becoming a true Christian is not saying a quick prayer & thinking you're okay. Becoming a true Christian is not getting water baptized as a baby or as an adult (see our video "IS WATER BAPTISM NECESSARY TO ESCAPE HELL & BE SAVED & ARE YOU "BORN AGAIN" (JOHN 3:3-8) BY IT?" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-wYJtMV9qrWg.html. You must be supernaturally "born again" by a sovereign act of God through the power of the Holy Spirit (John 1:12-13, 3:3-8; Titus 3:5-7; John 6:37, 39, 44, 63, 65; Ephesians 3:16-21; Romans 8:1-17; 1 Corinthians 2:10-16; Luke 14:26-35, “If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple. 27 And whoever does not bear his cross and come after Me cannot be My disciple. 28 For which of you, intending to build a tower, does not sit down first and count the cost, whether he has enough to finish it- 29 lest, after he has laid the foundation, and is not able to finish, all who see it begin to mock him, 30 saying, ‘This man began to build and was not able to finish’? 31 Or what king, going to make war against another king, does not sit down first and consider whether he is able with ten thousand to meet him who comes against him with twenty thousand? 32 Or else, while the other is still a great way off, he sends a delegation and asks conditions of peace. 33 So likewise, whoever of you does not forsake all that he has cannot be My disciple.34 “Salt is good; but if the salt has lost its flavor, how shall it be seasoned? 35 It is neither fit for the land nor for the dunghill, but men throw it out. He who has ears to hear, let him hear!” Luke 6:46, Jesus said, "And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?" Becoming a true Christian will change your life forever in this life & the next (2 Corinthians 5:17, "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new."). Beg God to save you since you cannot get into heaven by your own righteousness & good works (Ephesians 2:8-10, "8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast. 10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them."). Keep begging God for salvation through Jesus Christ until the day comes that He grants your request (Acts 13:48, "Now when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of the Lord. And as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed." & 2 Timothy 2:25-26, "24 And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, 25 in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, 26 and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will."). When you are supernaturally regenerated by the Holy Spirit you will know it & suddenly have the power to repent of your evil ways & for the first time you will actually love God more than your own life knowing that nothing in creation is more important than God alone. You will then spend the rest of eternity loving, serving & praising God for He is worthy. John 14:6, "Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." See our video "IS JESUS GOD ALMIGHTY IN THE FLESH MEANING THE SECOND PERSON OF THE TRINITY OR IS HE SOMETHING ELSE?" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-_BlPm7M7uv8.html.

Seventh Day Adventism qualifies as a non Christian anti Christ cult due to the following reasons: 1. It is built on the woman Ellen G. White & her teachings despite the Bible saying women are not permitted to teach or usurp authority over men (1 Timothy 2:12, "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.") See links at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=112706102442, www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=59131749272 & ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Ql_obI6wA9w.html). 2. Ellen White claimed to be equal with the Biblical prophets & apostles through her many writings (sort of a "Spirit of Prophecy") & her SDA followers believed her (2 Peter 3:16); see www.truthorfables.com/EGW_Writings_Infallible.htm. Question: Are there modern day prophets or is there a need for prophets today? Answer: In the New Testament, the gift of the office of prophet was a temporary one granted by God for the purpose of building His Church. Contrary to the apostles, who had broad ministries, these men had localized ministries within local churches, as we see illustrated in such places as Acts 11:21-28 and Acts 13:1.Scripture shows us that the prophets of the New Testament had two primary purposes:They were gifted men given to the Church and appointed by God (Eph. 4:11, 1 Cor. 12:28) for the purpose of helping to lay the foundation of the Church (Eph. 2:20). They, like the apostles, received God’s revelation (Eph. 3:5) and truth and proclaimed it to their churches. It is important to remember that the early Church did not have a completed Bible, so God granted this revelation for the purpose of teaching His message to the Church. The New Testament prophets also spoke forth and taught the apostles’ doctrine. Everything taught by these prophets had to be consistent with the teaching of the apostles (1 Cor. 14:36-37). So, are prophets still needed today? Looking at the two functions listed above, we can see that the office of prophet is one that is no longer necessary and has ceased within the Church because:The foundation of the Church was laid long ago. God’s revealed Word was completed with the close of the New Testament canon. The Church’s foundation does not need to be laid again and there is no need for further revelation beyond what God has provided for us in His complete Word, the Bible. Today we are blessed to have Scripture as our complete and final authority in all things (2 Tim. 3:16-17). If someone now claims to have received a “special revelation,” we must test it against Scripture. If it is contrary to the Word of God, then it must be rejected. If it is consistent with Scripture, then we have to ask why an “extra” word was necessary if its truth is already contained in the Bible. So while we always need men who are willing to proclaim boldly the Word of God as contained in Scripture (as pastors, teachers, and evangelists), there is no need for the office of “prophet” as it existed in the New Testament. 3. Ellen G. White is a false prophet due to her false & failed prophecies (Deuteronomy 18:19-22); see www.mmoutreachinc.com/seventh_day_adventists/egw_false_prophet.html, 1timothy4-13.com/files/bible/sda_morefailed.html & www.bible.ca/7-prophecy-blunders.htm. 4. Ellen G. White had delusional dreams & visions much like phony Charismatic & Pentecostal TV preachers do today; see www.truthorfables.com/Visons_of_%20EGW_by_Snook_&_Brinkerhoff.htm & ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Kbv7YsyMf0I.html. 5. Seventh Day Adventism has a damnable false gospel (Galatians 1:6-10) for several reasons: a) Satan is the final sin bearer for Seventh Day Adventists; see www.truthorfables.com/Scapegoat.htm & www.truthorfables.net/50-contradictions-satan-bears-sins.htm, b) They say Jesus had a sinful nature just like fallen man otherwise He can't be a Savior; see kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2011/09/seventh-day-adventisms-anti.html & jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Seventh-Day%20Adventist/sda_exposed.htm, c) Ellen G. White taught the cult doctrine of the 1844 investigative judgment of Jesus in the heavenly sanctuary for the purpose of allowing Seventh Day Adventists final access to heaven while all others would be destroyed; see www.truthorfables.com/investigative_judgment_made_simple.htm, www.truthorfables.com/white_elephant.htm, www.truthorfables.com/My_Testimony.htm, www.truthorfables.com/SDA_Cult.htm & ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-J50HlZFYHtY.html, d) Seventh Day Adventism denies the New Testament Christian gospel by saying Old Testament "Saturday" Sabbath keeping is essential for salvation; see www.truthorfables.com/Sabbath_Not_A_Law.htm, www.truthorfables.net/who-changed-the-sabbath-a.htm, www.truthorfables.com/Sabbath_is_Friday.htm & ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-w0L3rSSL_H8.html, e) Although SDAs say they believe in salvation by grace they redefine the meaning of grace in order to incorporate into their religious system a salvation by law keeping to achieve final works righteousness; mmoutreachinc.com/seventh_day_adventists/sda_law.html, searchingthescriptures.net/main_pages/answering_cults/seventh_day_adventism/sda_a_cult.htm & ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-aIh3T31ujuU.html. If the apostle Paul cursed the Galatian Judaizers to hell for adding only one stipulation to the gospel which was circumcision then how much more would he curse the SDAs for all their added terms & conditions to the simple gospel of grace (Ephesians 2:8-9, "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast." Cross reference this to Galatians 2:16, "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified."). 6. Seven Day Adventists teach the false doctrine of soul sleep; see carm.org/soul-sleep, www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=12151314134510, www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=85122122530 & www.casagrandebaptistchurch.com/SoulSleep.html. 7. SDAs teach the false doctrine of the annihilation out of existence of the wicked including Satan & his demons rather than an eternal conscious punishment in a never ending lake of fire; carm.org/clear-word-bible-annihilationism, "Eternal Punishment, part 1" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=12607145320 & "Eternal Punishment, part 2" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sid=12607143539 where at the same time this refutes the arguments of universalists, annihilationists & heretics who say God is "all loving" & would not torment the wicked forever while they ignore the fact that God hates the wicked (Psalm 5:4-6, 11:5, Hosea 9:15, etc.; see our video "The God of the Bible Does Not Love Everybody But Actually Hates Many Instead (Romans 9:22)" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-0zHEJCHgQVg.html, www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=91713193277, www.jashow.org/wiki/index.php?title=Annihilationism, www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=94081054442, www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=9110884114, www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=219131311338, ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-_O-LMpP6bAg.html & see our playlist "Dealing with Hell, Lake of Fire, Unpopular Bible Doctrines" with 30 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLE04A1D0DFE95B95E. 8. SDAs support alternate Bible translations that pervert the written word of God thus placing themselves under the curse of Revelation 22:18-19, "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." See exadventist.com/Home/Articles/clearwordbible/tabid/450/Default.aspx, www.truthorfables.com/SDAs_Destroyers_of_the_Bible.htm & ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-7EsY1srHYJc.html. For more information on Seventh Day Adventism see our playlist "Dealing with Seventh-day Adventism & Their "Prophetess"" with 23 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL5316CC6F66F24283, see also "Cult of Seventh Day Adventism" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=61210437590 & "Damnable Heresies of Seventh Day Adventism" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=6201014412510. See the following websites: www.TruthorFables.com, www.LifeAssuranceMinistries.org, www.ExAdventist.com, www.RethinkingAdventism.com, www.Sabbatismos.com, & www.GreatControversyExposed.com. Titus 1:9-16

This is in response to the many "Church of Christ" Campbellites who keep quoting 1 Peter 3:21 to prove salvation is by water baptism. These Campbellites are deceived & worship a water baptism idol although they would deny it just as Romanists worship Mary while also denying it. See our video IS WATER BAPTISM NECESSARY TO ESCAPE HELL & BE SAVED & ARE YOU "BORN AGAIN" (JOHN 3:3-8) BY IT? at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-wYJtMV9qrWg.html which will clean up Campbellite 1 Peter 3:21 idolatry. See our playlist "Dealing with "Saved by Works & Baptism", "Church of Christ" at ru-vid.com/group/PLBD55090718DA6D3D with 72 videos. What does 1 Peter 3:21 mean? "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ." Are infants "born again" (John 3:3-8) & then suddenly become Christians when they are sprinkled with water? Is salvation found in being water baptized? Do you have to be a believer in Christ to be water baptized? The following is an excerpt from our newsletter "Christian Debater Guide, "Church of Christ," Vol. 2, #1" (found at our website www.BibleQuery.org, click the "Experience" box on the homepage): "Q:In Acts 2:38, does this mean water baptism is necessary for salvation? A: No, Jesus is necessary for salvation. Neither repentance nor water baptism merits our salvation. Those are our responding to Jesus' work. Baptism is to be an outward sign of our prior inward faith and repentance. Note that Acts 2:38 was a command not a formula. Some might erroneously conclude that loving God, faith, believing, and trusting God are unnecessary, as they are not mentioned here. All who come to Christ should be baptized, and that is as true today as it was then. However, It is Jesus' blood, not our baptism that saves us. Q: In Acts 10:45-48, is water baptism essential to be saved? A: Four points to consider. 1. They spoke in tongues prior to being baptized with water. 2. Speaking in tongues is a sign (but not the only sign, 1 Cor. 12:1-13) of being filled with the Holy Spirit. 3. Being filled with the Holy Spirit is only for those who are born again. 4. Those who are born again are saved. So, they were born again prior to being baptized with water. See the discussion on Acts 22:16 for a second example of being saved prior to water baptism. See also the next question. Q: In Acts 10:45-48, since this passage was a very special occurrence, does this negate using this passage to show water baptism is not essential for salvation? A: No. This passage does describe an important transition for the church, but that does not disqualify us from understanding all of its teaching. Three points to consider. 1. Gentiles could be filled with the Holy Spirit, and thus be saved, prior to baptism at this time. This was not impossible for God to do and still be true to His Word. 2. Thus, it is possible for people to be saved , prior to baptism at other times, without God breaking His Word. 3. If your interpretation of the Bible requires that God cannot be true to His Word if anyone after Christ is saved prior to being baptized, perhaps it would be your interpretation, and not God's Word, that is wrong. Q: In Acts 22:16, how do people get baptized and wash away their sins? A: Is it OK to say that people wash away their sins here as long as you remember four points. 1. The power to wash away is with God, not magic in the water. 2. God is not restricted to being "unable" to save people who are not baptized, because the thief on the cross was with Jesus in Paradise. 3. For our part, the pledge of a sincere conscience before God is more important than the water, as in 1 Peter 3:21. However, being baptized with water is a command for every single Christian. 4. The Jews were familiar with ceremonial washings in the Old Testament Law. Thus, Paul's audience understood what he meant and did not mix it up with the errors of "magic water" or "a restricted God". The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament p. 418 sheds some helpful light on the Greek here. The phrase "calling on His name" is a Greek aorist participle, which "refers either to action which is simultaneous with or before that of the main verb. Here Paul's calling on Christ's name (for salvation) preceded his water baptism. The participle may be translated, "having called on His name." John Gill's Commentary on 1 Peter 3:21 states the following: "The like figure whereunto [even] baptism doth also now save us. The ark, and deliverance by it, as it was a type of Christ, and salvation by him, so it was a figure of baptism, and baptism was the antitype of that; or there is something in these which correspond, and answer to, and bear a resemblance to each other: as the ark was God's ordinance, and not man's invention, so is baptism, it is of heaven, and not of men; and as the ark, while it was preparing, was the scorn and derision of men, so is this ordinance of the Gospel; it was rejected with disdain by the Scribes and Pharisees, as it still is by many; and as the ark, when Noah and his family were shut up in it by God, represented a burial, and they seemed, as it were, to be buried in it, it was a lively emblem of baptism, which is expressed by a burial, ( Romans 6:4 ) ( Colossians 2:12 ) and as they in the ark had the great deep broke up under them, and the windows of heaven opened over them, pouring out waters upon them, they were, as it were, immersed in, and were covered with water, this fitly figured baptism by immersion; nor were there any but adult persons that entered into the ark, nor should any be baptized but believers; to which may be added, that as the one saved by water, so does the other; for it is water baptism which is here designed, which John practised, Christ gave a commission for, and his disciples administered: it saves not as a cause, for it has no causal influence on, nor is it essential to salvation. Christ only is the cause and author of eternal salvation; and as those only that were in the ark were saved by water, so those only that are in Christ, and that are baptized into Christ, and into his death, are saved by baptism; not everyone that is baptized, but he that believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved, ( Mark 16:16 ) , for baptism is not the putting away of the filth of the flesh; the design of it is not to take off the sordid flesh, as circumcision did; or in a ceremonious way, outwardly, to sanctify to the purifying of the flesh, as the Jewish baptisms did; see ( Hebrews 9:10 Hebrews 9:13 ) , or to take away either original or actual sin; this only the blood of Christ can do; and it is not a mere external cleansing of the body: but the answer of a good conscience towards God; the Vulgate Latin renders it, "the interrogation of a good conscience"; referring, it may be, to the interrogations that used to be put to those who desired baptism; as, dost thou renounce Satan? dost thou believe in Christ? see ( Acts 8:36 Acts 8:37 ) , others render it, "the stipulation of a good conscience"; alluding also to the ancient custom of obliging those that were baptized to covenant and agree to live an holy life and conversation, to renounce the devil and all his works, and the pomps and vanities of this world; and baptism does certainly lay an obligation on men to walk in newness of life; see ( Romans 6:4 Romans 6:5 ) , the Ethiopic version renders it, "confession of God"; and to this the Syriac version agrees, rendering it, "confessing God with a pure conscience"; for, to baptism, profession of faith in Christ, and of the doctrine of Christ in a pure conscience, is requisite; and in baptism persons make a public confession of God, and openly put on Christ before men: the sense seems plainly this; that then is baptism rightly performed, and its end answered, when a person, conscious to himself of its being an ordinance of Christ, and of his duty to submit to it, does do so upon profession of his faith in Christ, in obedience to his command, and "with" a view to his glory; in doing which he discharges a good conscience towards God: and being thus performed, it saves, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ; being a means of leading the faith of the baptized person, as to the blood of Christ, for pardon and cleansing, so to the resurrection of Christ, to justification; see ( Acts 2:38 ) ( 22:16 ) ( Romans 4:25 ) , moreover, the sense of the passage may be this, that baptism is a like figure as the ark of Noah was; that as the entrance of Noah and his family into the ark was an emblem of a burial, so their coming out of it was a figure of the resurrection; and just such a figure is baptism, performed by immersion, both of the resurrection of Christ from the dead, and of the resurrection of saints to walk in newness of life. The Arabic version renders the whole verse thus; "of which thing baptism is now a type saving us, not by removing the filth of the flesh only, but by exhilarating a good conscience towards God, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ." For more see our website www.BibleQuery.org & once on the homepage click on the "Experience" box to the left & scroll down to the article "Water Baptism Not Essential for Salvation" & click on it. After that scroll a little further down to our newsletter section & click on the newsletter "Church of Christ" & wait for it to download. Larry Wessels, director of Christian Answers of Austin, Texas/ Christian Debater (RU-vid channel: CANSWERSTV at ru-vid.com, websites: www.BIBLEQUERY.ORG, www.HISTORYCART.COM & www.MUSLIMHOPE.COM) has attended Dayspring Fellowship in Austin, Texas (website: www.DSF.org; 5500 Avenue G, Austin, TX 78751) from1981 to the present & Jackson Boyett has been the pastor there the entire time until his death in 2011. Pastor Boyett has an earned degree from the University of Texas & a Master of Divinity degree from seminary. To hear & see other messages by Pastor Boyett type "JACKSON BOYETT" in the RU-vid search box (which will include his rendition of Jonathan Edward's famous sermon, "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God"). Greg Van Court is now the teaching elder at Dayspring Fellowship (hear his sermons at www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp?speakeronly=true&currsection=sermonsspeaker&keyword=Greg_Van_Court). 1 Corinthians 1:14-17, " I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; 15 Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name. 16 And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. 17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect."

Jesus broke the Sabbath & was accused of this by the Jews (see our video "Is Sabbath Keeping Essential to Be a Real Christian? Former SDA Pastor Answers This Question" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-w0L3rSSL_H8.html). The expression "the Lord's day" is found only once in the Bible. In Revelation 1:10 John relates the beginning of his visionary experience to being in the Spirit "on the Lord's Day." The phrase seems to have become more common in the second century a.d., where it is found in such early Christian writings as Ignatius's Epistle to the Magnesians 9:1 (c. a.d. 108), the Didache 14:1 (c. a.d. 100-125), and the Gospel of Peter 9:35; 12:50 (c. a.d. 125-50). The presence of the adjective kuriakos [kuriakov"] makes the expression grammatically different from the common biblical phrase "the Day of the Lord, " which uses the genitive form of the noun kurios [kuvrio"]. The adjective is found only one other time in the New Testament, in 1 Corinthians 11:20, where Paul speaks of "the Lord's Supper." Non-Christian parallels suggest that the adjective was used with reference to that which belonged to the Roman emperor; early Christians seem to have used it, perhaps in conscious protest, to refer to that which belonged to Jesus. The particular "day" that belonged to Jesus seems to have been Sunday, or, by Jewish reckoning, Saturday sundown until Sunday sundown. According to the Gospels, Jesus was raised from the dead on "the first day of the week" ( Matt 28:1 ; Mark 16:2 ; Luke 24:1 ; John 20:1 ), that is, Sunday. New Testament evidence suggests that by the 50s, if not earlier, Christians were attaching special significance to Sunday. In 1 Corinthians 16:1-3 Paul exhorts the church at Corinth to set aside a sum of money "on the first day of every week" for the church at Jerusalem, as the Galatian churches were already doing. Similarly, Luke notes that when Paul arrived at Troas near the end of his third missionary journey, the church gathered together to break bread "on the first day of the week" ( Acts 20:6-7 ). Although the identification is not made explicit, there is therefore good reason to believe that John has Sunday in mind when he mentions "the Lord's Day" in Revelation 1:10. Certainly the second-century Gospel of Peter, which twice speaks of the day of Jesus' resurrection as "the Lord's Day" (9:35; 12:50), makes the connection. Similarly, the Epistle of Barnabas (c. a.d. 130) notes that Christians celebrate Jesus' resurrection of "the eighth day" (15:9; cf. John 20:26 ), or Sunday, which is the day after the seventh daythat is, the Jewish Sabbath (Saturday). Justin Martyr affirms that Jesus was raised on "the day of the Sun" (Apology 67). How quickly the Lord's Day emerged as a specific day of worship for the early church is not clear. Luke observes that in the period immediately following the outpouring of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost the earliest Christians met "every day" in the temple courts. Whether their breaking of bread in their homes was a daily or weekly occurrence he does not specify, but the former seems more likely ( Acts 2:46 ). Alternately, Paul's comments to the Corinthians concerning the laying aside of money on the first day of the week do not indicate whether this action was connected with a formal gathering of the church ( 1 Cor 16:13 ). Luke's description of the meeting of believers at Troas is the first clear indication of a special gathering as taking place in the evening, by which he probably means Sunday, using Roman reckoning from midnight to midnight, rather than the Jewish system. By the second century the Lord's Day was clearly set apart as a special day for worship. In a letter to the emperor Trajan (c. a.d. 112), the Roman governor Pliny the Younger notes that Christians assembled before daylight "on an appointed day" (Epistle 10:96), undoubtedly Sunday. The Didache specifically exhorts believers to come together on the Lord's Day (14:1), and the Epistle of Barnabas sees it as a special day of celebration (15:9). Indeed, Justin Martyr (c. a.d. 150) gives a detailed account of typical Sunday worship (Apology 67). A clear picture of how the early Christians celebrated the Lord's Day emerges only gradually. Luke records that the Christians at Troas came together to break bread, which may well denote a meal that included the Lord's Supper (cf. Acts 2:42 ; 1 Cor 11:20-22 ). That Paul spoke (at great length!) to the assembled believers ( Acts 20:7-11 ) implies nothing about their typical practice, since Paul was a special guest and intended to leave the next day. The Didache makes explicit the connection between the breaking of bread and the Lord's Supper on the Lord's Day but says little else concerning the meeting, apart from mentioning the practice of confession of sin (14:1). Pliny mentions two meetings on the "appointed day": the Christians first meet before dawn to sing a hymn to Christ "as to a god" and to affirm certain ethical commitments; then they depart and reassemble for a meal. Not being a Christian himself, Pliny would not have understood the significance of the meal as a setting for the Lord's Supper; for him it was enough that the meal consisted "of ordinary, innocent food" (Epistle 10:96). The most extensive account of an early Christian Sunday worship service is provided by Justin Martyr (Apology 67, cf. 65). According to Justin, the gathering begins with readings from "the memoirs of the apostles" the Gospelsor the writings of the prophets for "as long as time permits." The "president" then delivers a sermon consisting of instruction and exhortation. Next, the congregation rises for prayer, following which the bread and wine are brought in for the Lord's Supper. After prayers and thanksgivings by the president and a congregational "Amen, " the deacons distribute the bread and wine to those who are present (and then carry some to those who are absent). There follows a collection of "what each thinks fit" for the needy, and, apparently, the end of the service. Noteworthy in these early texts is the lack of identification of Sunday with the Jewish Sabbath. Luke has little to say about early Christian observance of the Sabbath, apart from recording Paul's preaching on the Sabbath in Jewish synagogues ( Acts 13:14 Acts 13:42 Acts 13:44 ; 17:2 ; 18:4 ; 16:13 ), which perhaps says less about Paul's commitment to Sabbath observance than about his missionary strategy. Indeed, Paul has little interest in observing special days as sacred ( Rom 14:5-6 ; Gal 4:9-11 ; Col 2:16 ). Ignatius contrasts observance of the Sabbath with living for the Lord's Day (Magnesians 9:1). The Epistle of Barnabas views the significance of the biblical Sabbath as being a symbol of the future rest established at the return of Jesus (15:1-8; cf. Heb 4:3-11 ). Justin Martyr speaks of the Sabbath in terms of a perpetual turning from sin (Dialogue with Trypho 12). In 321 Constantine proclaimed Sunday to be official day of rest in the Roman Empire (Codex Justinianus 3.12.3), but this does not seem to have been related to any concern with the Jewish Sabbath. By the end of the fourth century, church leaders such as Ambrose and John Chrysostom were making such a connection, defending relaxation from work on Sunday on the basis of the Fourth Commandment and paving the way for later Catholic and Protestant elaboration on Sunday as the Sabbath. In the early church, then, the Christians began to give a special place to Sunday as the day on which Jesus was raised from the dead. It soon became a fixed day for worship, a celebration of the resurrection centered around the Lord's Supper. As Christianity distanced itself from Judaism, it is not surprising that eventually the church would see its special day in terms of the special day of the Jews, the Sabbath, and would transfer the provisions of the Fourth Commandment to Sunday. Does the Bible allow Christians to worship on Sunday? In the Old Testament, God stated, "Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of the Lord your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you," (Exodus 20:8-10, NASB). It was the custom of the Jews to come together on the Sabbath, which is Saturday, cease work, and worship God. Jesus went to the synagogue on Saturday to teach (Matt. 12:9; John 18:20) as did the apostle Paul (Acts 17:2; 18:4). So, if in the Old Testament we are commanded to keep the Sabbath and in the New Testament we see Jews, Jesus, and the apostles doing the same thing, then why do we worship on Sunday? First of all, of the 10 commandments listed in Exodus 20:1-17, only 9 of them were restated in the New Testament. (Six in Matt. 19:18, murder, adultery, stealing, false witness, honor parents, and worshiping God; Rom. 13:9, coveting. Worshiping God properly covers the first three commandments) The one that was not reaffirmed was the one about the Sabbath. Instead, Jesus said that He is the Lord of the Sabbath (Matt. 12:8). In creation, God rested on the seventh day. But, since God is all powerful, He doesn’t get tired. He doesn’t need to take a break and rest. So, why does it say that He rested? The reason is simple: Mark 2:27 says, "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath." In other words, God established the Sabbath as a rest for His people, not because He needed a break, but because we are mortal and need a time of rest, of focus on God. In this, our spirits and bodies are both renewed. The OT system of Law required keeping the Sabbath as part of the overall moral, legal, and sacrificial system by which the Jewish people satisfied God’s requirements for behavior, government, and forgiveness of sins. The Sabbath was part of the Law in that sense. In order to "remain" in favor with God, you had to also keep the Sabbath. If it was not kept, then the person was in sin and would often be punished (Ezek. 18:4; Rom. 6:23; Deut. 13:1-9; Num. 35:31; Lev. 20:2, etc.). But with Jesus’ atonement, we no longer are required to keep the Law as a means for our justification. The requirements of the Law were fulfilled in Christ. We now have rest from the Law. We now have "Sabbath", continually. Are we free to worship on Sunday? Within the New Testament is ample evidence that the seventh day Sabbath is no longer a requirement. "One man regards one day above another, another regards every day alike. Let each man be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day, observes it for the Lord, and he who eats, does so for the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who eats not, for the Lord he does not eat, and gives thanks to God," (Rom. 14:5-6). The entire section of Rom. 14:1-12 is worth careful study. The instructions here are that individuals must be convinced in their own minds about which day they observe for the Lord. If the seventh day Sabbath were a requirement, then the choice would not be mans’, but God’s. To me, this verse is sufficient to answer the question beyond doubt. Furthermore, "Therefore let no one act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day- 17things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ." (Col. 2:16-17). Notice the time sequence mentioned in Col. 2:16-17 above. A festival is yearly. A new moon is monthly. A Sabbath is weekly. No one is to judge in regard to this. The Sabbath is defined as a shadow, the reality is Jesus. Jesus is our Sabbath. So, if someone is judging you because you worship on the Sabbath, they are wrong. Likewise, if you regard Sunday above Saturday (Rom. 14:5-6), all you need to do is be convinced in your own mind that that is alright. Is there any evidence in the NT that Christians met on Sunday? "And on the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul began talking to them, intending to depart the next day, and he prolonged his message until midnight," (Acts 20:7). The first day of the week is Sunday and this is the day the people gathered. This passage can easily be seen as the church meeting on Sunday, though it does not necessitate it. It has two important church functions within it: breaking bread (communion) and a message (preaching/teaching). Additionally, Luke included the Roman system as well as the Jewish system of counting days. The Jewish system was sundown to sundown. But Luke also used the Roman system: midnight to midnight (Luke 11:5; Acts 16:25; 20:7; 27:27). This is a subtle point that shows the Jewish Sabbath system was not exclusively used by Luke. If the Sabbath was mandatory, why the use of the non-Jewish system? "Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I directed the churches of Galatia, so do you also. 2On the first day of every week let each one of you put aside and save, as he may prosper, that no collections be made when I come," (1 Cor. 16:1-2). Notice here that Paul is directing the churches to meet on the first day of each week and put money aside. It would seem that this is tithing. So, the instructed time for the church to meet is Sunday, the first day of the week and it is that day the Galatians were to set money aside collections. Is this an official worship day set up by the church? You decide. Does this verse apply to Christians today? It most certainly does. "I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and I heard behind me a loud voice like the sound of a trumpet, 11saying, "Write in a book what you see, and send it to the seven churches: to Ephesus and to Smyrna and to Pergamum and to Thyatira and to Sardis and to Philadelphia and to Laodicea," (Revelation 1:10-11). The New Bible Dictionary says regarding the term, ‘The Lord’s Day’ in Rev. 1:10: "This is the first extant occurrence in Christian literature of "te kuriake hemera." The adjectival construction suggests that it was a formal designation of the church’s worship day. As such it certainly appears early in the 2nd century" (Ignatius, Epistle to the Magnesians, 1. 67). In many churches today, the term "The Lord’s Day" is used to designate Sunday, the same as it was in the second century. I hope this is evidence enough to show you that the Bible does not require that we worship on Saturday. If anything, we have the freedom (Rom. 14:1-12) to worship on the day that we believe we should. And, no one should judge us in regard to the day we keep. We are free in Christ and not under law, (Rom. 6:14). Conclusion The Seventh Day Adventists have every right to worship on the Sabbath and they should if they are convinced that is the right thing to do. However, if any sect or group such as the SDA were to require a person to worship on the Sabbath as a sign of "true" Christianity or "true" redemption then that organization would be promoting a false gospel of salvation & would be cursed by God for it (Galatians 1:6-10). This then means the Seventh-day Adventists are dead wrong when they accuse true Christians of having the "mark of the beast" for worshipping on Sunday & thus they have brought themselves under the divine curse "if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed" by adding Sabbath keeping as a condition of obtaining eternal salvation. According to Rom. 14:1-12, true Christians are free in this matter & thus are not under bondage to Old Testament Sabbath keeping. Additionally, Sunday is the day that the Lord Jesus rose from the dead. The Jewish people who had rejected Jesus continued to worship on Saturday, the Sabbath. But it was the Christians who celebrated Jesus' resurrection and this was most probably the driving force to gather on the first day of the week. The Law of God promises blessings & curses (read Leviticus 26:3-13 for blessings & read Leviticus 26:14-39 for cursing). During these New Testament times the Paul said the Ten Commandments, etc. were a ministry of death & condemnation (2 Corinthians 3:3,7-9). Why? The Law of God shows sinners that they are not able to keep the whole law of God & are therefore condemned to eternal doom. In fact just committing one sin against God means the sentence of eternal perdition (James 2:10, "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all."). Thus the Law of God is a curse to the sinner but a blessing to the sinner who puts his trust & faith in Jesus Christ who kept the Law of God perfectly for those who believe on His name (John 3:18). The Law of God reflects the holiness & righteousness of God & therefore is a tremendous blessing to repentant sinners who strive to please God not to get saved by good works but because they have already been saved by the sovereign grace & love of God (Ephesians 2:8-10, 3:16-21; John 3:3-8, Romans 8:1-17, Titus 3:5, 1 Corinthians 2:10-16, 3:16; Romans 5:4-5, Galatians 2:16, 4:6; see our video "KEEPING THE OLD TESTAMENT LAWS & COMMANDMENTS CANNOT EARN HEAVEN OR SALVATION WITH GOD!" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-aIh3T31ujuU.html). Thus the Man of God reflects on the Law of God all the days of his life (Psalm 1, Psalm 119). What is legalism? In Christianity, legalism is the excessive and improper use of the law (10 commandments, holiness laws, etc.). This legalism can take different forms. The first is where a person attempts to keep the Law in order to attain salvation. The second is where a person keeps the law in order to maintain his salvation. The third is when a Christian judges other Christians for not keeping certain codes of conduct that he thinks need to be observed. Let’s examine each one more closely. The first kind of legalism is where the law of God is kept in order to attain salvation. This is a heresy, a completely false doctrine. We are not able to attain salvation by our keeping the law. Rom. 3:28, "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. Rom. 4:5, "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness.” Gal. 2:21, “I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly.” It is simply not possible to keep the Law enough to be saved. Therefore, to try and gain salvation through one’s efforts is a false teaching. It is so bad that those who hold to it cannot be Christians since it would deny salvation by grace through faith. The second kind of legalism is where a person tries to keep or maintain his salvation by keeping the law. This is also a false doctrine. We receive our salvation by faith (Eph. 2:8-9), not by our ability to be good because no one does good (Rom. 3:10-12). As Rom. 3:28, 4:5, and Gal. 2:21 clearly show, we are justified by faith, not by faith and works. Furthermore, there are strict warnings about attempting to keep the law in order to maintain salvation: Gal. 3:10, “For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them.” And James 2:10, “For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.” So, if a person is seeking to be either saved by his works (Law) or maintain his salvation by his works (Law), then he is under obligation to keep all of it, and if he does not then he is guilty before God. Furthermore, consider Jesus’ words in Matt. 7:22-23, “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ 23 “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’” Jesus condemns them because they were appealing to their salvation based on their faith and doing good. So it should be obvious that we do not keep our salvation by our efforts. The last kind of legalism, where a Christian keeps certain laws and regards other Christians who do not keep his level of holiness with contempt, is a frequent problem in the church. Now, we want to make it clear that all Christians are to abstain from fornication, adultery, pornography, lying, stealing, etc. Christians do have a right to judge the spirituality of other Christians in these areas where the Bible clearly speaks. But, in the debatable areas we need to be more careful, and this is where legalism is more difficult to define. Rom. 14:1-12 says that we are not to judge our brothers on debatable issues. One person may eat certain kinds of foods where another would not. One person might worship on a particular day where another might not. We are told to let each person be convinced in his own mind (Rom. 14:5). As long as our freedom does not violate the Scriptures, then everything should be acceptable in the sight of the Lord. 2 Timothy 2:15

Seventh-day Adventism: Satan will bear your sins. See our video "Cult Doctrine of Seventh-day Adventism: 1844 Probation & Satan As A Final Sin Bearer for Adventists" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-J50HlZFYHtY.html. The founding false prophetess of Seventh-day Adventism (Ellen G. White) offered the following whopper of a heresy on page 422 of her book The Great Controversy: It was seen, also, that while the sin offering pointed to Christ as a sacrifice, and the high priest represented Christ as a mediator, the scapegoat typified Satan, the author of sin, upon whom the sins of the truly penitent will finally be placed. When the high priest, by virtue of the blood of the sin offering, removed the sins from the sanctuary, he placed them upon the scapegoat. When Christ, by virtue of His own blood, removes the sins of His people from the heavenly sanctuary at the close of his ministration, he will place them upon Satan, who, in the execution of the judgment, must bear the final penalty. The scapegoat was sent away into a land not inhabited, never to come again into the congregation of Israel. So will Satan be forever banished from the presence of God and His people, and he will be blotted from existence in the final destruction of sin and sinners. Rank heresy! Utter blasphemy! Jesus alone had our iniquity placed upon Him (Isaiah 53:6); He who knew no sin became sin on our behalf (2 Corinthians 5:21); and it was Jesus Christ-God in the flesh-who bore our sins in his body on the cross (1 Peter 2:24). The Reason for the Scapegoat The scapegoat is a type or figure of Christ’s atonement to save mankind in the Old Testament Sanctuary service. When our first parents sinned in Eden, they would have died at that very instance if Jesus had not provided a way out to save them. Gen 3:15 (NIV) And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.” God speaks to Satan, telling him that there will be hatred between him and the woman and between her children and the Devil’s children. The outcome will be that Christ would crush Satan’s head, and Satan will strike at Christ’s heel. The fulfillment of this prophecy was when Satan and his children, the ungodly Pharisees and the Romans bruised Jesus’ heel by putting Jesus to death on the cross. At the end of the world Jesus will crush Satan’s head by casting him into the fires of Hell and sin and death will be no more. God commanded animal sacrifices to illustrate the consequences of sin. It was to show them that the Lamb of God would have to bear their sins and die to save them. Up until the time that Israel became a nation, the Patriarchs, built altars and sacrificed animals for the atonement from sin. After God called his people out of Egypt, he instructed Moses to build a sanctuary that he could dwell among them. Moses was to build the sanctuary after the pattern shown him on the mount. Exodus 25:40. It is important to note that this was not patterned in every detail after the one in heaven. For example, the Heavenly Sanctuary does not have animals to be slain or brass basins for the priests to wash or have animals waiting to be slaughtered or walls made from dyed animal skins. The Day of Atonement Every day animals were sacrificed for the sins of Israel. But once a year on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur) a special service was held. It was to be on the 10th day of Tishri, coming on different days of our calendar. It came in the month of September to early October. The Day of Atonement was the only day of the year that the priest entered the holy of holies to make sin offerings for himself, his family, and the "assembly of Israel." After making these offerings, the nation’s sins were symbolically laid on the scapegoat and it was led out into the wilderness and released. Before the sacrifice of the two goats, the High Priest was required to make a sin offering for himself. Lev 16:11 (NIV) ""Aaron shall bring the bull for his own sin offering to make atonement for himself and his house and he is to slaughter the bull for his own sin offering." After completing his sin offering the High Priest was to take two goats provided from the Israelite community and he is to cast lots for them. The term scapegoat or Azazel depending on the Bible translation you are using is found three times in Scripture in Leviticus 16. Lev 16:8 (NIV) "He is to cast lots for the two goats-one lot for the LORD and the other for the scapegoat." Lev 16:9 (NIV) "Aaron shall bring the goat whose lot falls to the LORD and sacrifice it for a sin offering." Lev 16:10 (NIV) "But the goat chosen by lot as the scapegoat shall be presented alive before the LORD to be used for making atonement by sending it into the desert as a scapegoat." Lev 16:20 NIV) ""When Aaron has finished making atonement for the Most Holy Place, the Tent of Meeting and the altar, he shall bring forward the live goat." Lev 16:21 (NIV) "He is to lay both hands on the head of the live goat and confess over it all the wickedness and rebellion of the Israelites-all their sins-and put them on the goat’s head. He shall send the goat away into the desert in the care of a man appointed for the task." Lev 16:22 (NIV) "The goat will carry on itself all their sins to a solitary place; and the man shall release it in the desert." Lev 16:26 (NIV) ""The man who releases the goat as a scapegoat must wash his clothes and bathe himself with water; afterward he may come into the camp." The Azazel Controversy The term Azazel has created a controversy among Bible translators as to what or who is Azazel. Some Bibles do not use the term Azazel while some use scapegoat or other terms as shown. This is a sample of different Bible translations and how they translated Azazel from Leviticus 16:8: The Septuagint Bible: "one lot for the Lord and one lot for the escape." NKJV: "one lot for the Lord and the other lot for the scapegoat." KJV: "one lot for the Lord and the other lot for the scapegoat." The New English Bible: "one to be for the Lord and the other for the Precipice." RSV: "one lot for the Lord and the other lot for the scapegoat." The Amplified Bible: "one lot for the Lord the other lot for Azazel (or removal). New American, Catholic: uses azazel. Holy Scriptures, Jewish: uses azazel. The Hebrew term for scapegoat from Strongs is: 5799. 'aza'zel, az-aw-zale'; from H5795 and H235; goat of departure; the scapegoat:-scapegoat. From the Hebrew definition of azazel, the meaning is "goat of departure." Leviticus 16:8 should then read: "one lot for the LORD and the other for the goat of departure." Because the first goat called "a lot for the Lord," the translators wanted the Hebrew word Azazel, to be a representation of someone. Therefore some translators have concluded that Azazel must represent an evil spirit or Satan. Other translators see the scapegoat being sent to a place where Azazel, or evil spirit is located in the wilderness. Keeping in mind from Leviticus 16:10, that the scapegoat is for making atonement to God because of their sins. This atonement has to be made to God. It would be a sin to make atonement to Satan. Satan cannot remove sin nor would he want to. Some translators saw that the scapegoat represented Christ. Those that thought the scapegoat represented Satan or an evil spirit did not understand that this goat was a representation of the Living Christ that has removed the sins of God’s people. They failed to see that after the shedding of blood by the first goat the second goat demonstrated the removal of sins. Both goats were representing the completed atonement. Without the shedding of blood there cannot be forgiveness of sins. (Mat 26:28 NIV) "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins." From Hard Sayings of the Bible: "The Greek translators did not regard azazel as a proper name, but connected it with, ‘a z’zel a verb that does not appear in the Old Testament. The meaning they gave it was "to send away." Hence the full meaning of the Hebrew expression would be "in order to send away." The Latin translation followed this same understanding. The most adequate explanation is to view the term ‘aza’zel as being composed of two words: the first part, ‘ez, meaning "goat," and the second part, ‘azel, meaning "to go away." With recent evidence from the Ugaritic (the language of ancient Canaan from which Hebrew is derived), compound names such as this one are turning up more frequently than what we had expected based on evidence from the Hebrew alone. This is how the rendering "scapegoat" came to be... Originally, however, the King James translators meant "the goat that was led away." Hard Sayings of the Bible by Walter C. Kaiser Jr. Peter H. Davids, F.F. Bruce and Manfred T. Brauch INTER VARSITY PRESS, Downers Grove, Illinois. Some authorities do not identify Azazel with the scapegoat of the sin offering. They regard the goat being sent to Azazel, an evil spirit. McClintock and Strong says: "The goat, however, that was sent to the evil spirit…was no sacrifice, but rather a witness that the accepted sacrifice had been made." (CYC. Vol. IX, Art. Scapegoat). From this statement they do not accept the scapegoat and the evil spirit as being one and the same, nor one representing the other. From their point of view the scapegoat itself cannot be an evil spirit. The scapegoat was led out to the desert to witness to the evil spirit the accepted sacrifice had been made. God is vindicating his people through the atonement of the scapegoat. Two Goats One Atonement From Students Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: "The two goats set out the death and victory of Christ, thus furnishing a complete salvation. The one goat was for Jehovah, the other for Azazel. The goat for Jehovah was slain, and its blood sprinkled upon the Mercy Seat, thus making atonement: the goat for Azazel, that is for Satan, the Adversary, was sent out in the desert as the living one to challenge and put to silence that Accuser, and all accusers. The one is Rom. III., i.e. every sin covered; the other, Rom. VIII. every accuser silenced." Students Commentary on the Holy Scriptures. 4th edition, published in 1932, by Thynne & Co. Notice that the Students Commentary says "the goat is for Azazel that is for Satan," not the goat is Azazel. Also it purpose is to put to silence the accuser." From this interpretation the sins of God’s people are not transferred from the scapegoat to Satan so that he can be punished for them but a witness that God's people have been vindicated. The "accuser" is Satan, Rev 12:10. There was another service where two birds were required for the cleansing of a person with an infectious disease. The priest was to take two birds, and slay one of them and the other was dipped in its blood and then released. Lev. 14:1-7. There are differences in the two services. For the scapegoat was not dipped in the blood of the slain goat. However there are similarities, as one bird being slain and the other released. There is no doubt that the slain bird represented Jesus’ shed blood on Calvary, setting people free from the condemnation of sin. The bird set free represents Jesus removing the sins and setting people free from the penalty of sin which is death. The two goats make a complete atonement as well as the two birds. This is made clear: Lev 16:10 (NIV) "But the goat chosen by lot as the scapegoat shall be presented alive before the LORD to be used for making atonement by sending it into the desert as a scapegoat." Questions and Answers If, as Seventh-day Adventists claim, the scapegoat is a figure of Satan then we are faced with a lot of problems. How can the high priest confess his sins and the sins of Israel over Satan? Remember the scapegoat is for atonement for Israel to God. Can God’s people make atonement with Satan? NO. Will Satan forgive them and remove their sins? NO. By placing the sins of Israel on the scapegoat does this mean that Satan is now carrying their confessed sins and will be punished for them? NO. The Scapegoat is only a picture of Christ carrying away our sins. The new covenant calls the old covenant laws a shadow of the reality of Christ which is the finished work of Christ. Col 2:13-17. The scapegoat was sent away alive bearing confessed sins. Can this represent Satan, who will be cast into the fires of Hell at the end of the world? NO. If the scapegoat was a representation of Satan, then the goat should have been burned alive as Satan will, instead of being set free. Can the scapegoat represent Christ, who bore the sins of the world to the cross? YES. The first goat represented Jesus bearing the sins of the world and covering them with his blood. The scapegoat represented Christ removing sins from his people. Did Jesus fulfill the scapegoat being let out into the wilderness? Jesus did not have to fulfill every minute detail of the sanctuary service. The scapegoat being led by a man into the wilderness was necessary to show that the sins of God’s people were separated from them and removed a long distance away from them. Jesus did not have to fulfill the type by going out into the wilderness being led by a man, as did the goat. Jesus did not fulfill having lots cast for him to be determined by God to offer himself on Calvary. The scapegoat was simply an illustration of Jesus’ plan to remove sin and restore man, so God can accept him. This is the atonement. The two goats that were chosen for a sin offering had to be without defects for the atonement to God. Lev. 4:3,23,28,32. We ask this question, could the scapegoat without defects be a representation of Satan? NO. Satan is far from being without defects. He is a liar and a murder from the beginning. Only a goat without defects could represent Christ. Is there a Bible text that indicates that Satan bears confessed sins of God’s people or will be punished for them? NO. Satan will never bear the confessed sins of God’s people neither will he be punished for them. Jesus has bore the punishment and paid the price for our sins. Satan can never bear our sins. It is God himself that removes our transgressions. God tells us through the writer of Hebrews that in the new covenant, “Their sins and lawless acts I will remember no more.” Never does God tell us in his word that he will lay the sins of God's people on Satan. Heb 10:16 - 17 (NIV) “This is the covenant I will make with them after that time, says the Lord. I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds.” Then he adds: “Their sins and lawless acts I will remember no more.” Only Jesus Bore and Removed Our Sins Psa 103:12 (NIV) "as far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us." 1 Pet 2:24 (NIV) "He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed." Isa 53:6 NIV) "We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all." Isa 53:11 (NIV) "After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light of life and be satisfied ; by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities." Satan’s punishment Rev 20:10 (NIV) And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever. The Devil will be destroyed because he deceived the world. Satan will be judged on the sins he committed and not for the sins the people committed whom he deceived. If somehow I convinced you to sin or deceived you into committing a sin, I would be held accountable for deceiving you. But you would be accountable for committing the sin. It is the same for Satan, when he deceived our first parents to sin in Eden. Adam and Eve were responsible for their own sin of not believing God which was a lack of faith. Not for Satan for deceiving them. Every sin a person commits they will have to give an account. The confessed sins of the repentant sinners are removed by faith in our Savior. Why Jesus is Our Scapegoat Jesus bore our sins at Calvary. Jesus died in our place the death we deserved to die. Jesus’ death on the cross fulfilled the figure of the atonement of the two goats. Our sins were atoned by the shed blood of the Lord’s goat and removed from us completely by the Living Scapegoat, Jesus. Jesus, in bearing the sins of God’s people makes our salvation a reality even though we are not worthy. Satan has no part in bearing the sins of God’s people and can never be the scapegoat. Those who believe that Satan is the scapegoat and bears the sins of the redeemed and is going to be punished for them are saying that the death of Jesus on the cross was not sufficient to save man. And that Jesus needed Satan’s help to complete the atonement to save mankind. If this were true then the redeemed would be indebted to Satan as well as to Jesus for all eternity for their salvation. Bible 1 Pet 2:24 (NIV) "He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed." Satan is Ellen's and the SDA's Scapegoat and Sin Bearer Mrs. E. G. White and the Seventh-day Adventist Church make it very clear that Satan is their scapegoat and sin bearer. EGW: "It was seen, also, that while the sin offering pointed to Christ as a sacrifice, and the high priest represented Christ as a mediator, the scapegoat typified Satan, the author of sin, upon whom the sins of the truly penitent will finally be placed. When the high priest, by virtue of the blood of the sin offering, removed the sins from the sanctuary, he placed them upon the scapegoat. When Christ, by virtue of His own blood, removes the sins of His people from the heavenly sanctuary at the close of His ministration, He will place them upon Satan, who, in the execution of the judgment, must bear the final penalty. The scapegoat was sent away into a land not inhabited, never to come again into the congregation of Israel. So will Satan be forever banished from the presence of God and His people, and he will be blotted from existence in the final destruction of sin and sinners." The Great Controversy, page 422. EGW: "In like manner, when the work of atonement in the heavenly sanctuary has been completed, then in the presence of God and heavenly angels and the hosts of the redeemed the sins of God's people will be placed upon Satan; he will be declared guilty of all the evil which he has caused them to commit." The Great Controversy, page 658." EGW: "Satan bore not only the weight and punishment of his own sins, but also of the sins of the redeemed host, which had been placed upon him." Early Writings, pp. 294, 295. What is Mrs. White’s teaching about the scapegoat? Mrs. White by saying: "the scapegoat typified Satan" it takes away the glory of Christ's ministry, by making Satan the sin bearer for God's people. Mrs. White in saying: about confessed sins, "He will place them upon Satan." This teaching makes God a liar, for God promised, (Isa 43:25 NIV) ""I, even I, am he who blots out your transgressions, for my own sake, and remembers your sins no more." According to Ellen, at the end of time God will remember the forgiven and forgotten sins, and then place them on Satan and he will be blotted out of existence. Mrs. White by saying, "when the work of atonement in the heavenly sanctuary has been completed," is saying that the work of atonement was not completed on the cross and that Jesus has to complete it in the Sanctuary in heaven. Jesus said, (John 19:30 NIV) "When he had received the drink, Jesus said, "It is finished." With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit." As in the OT sanctuary service, the atonement was fully completed on Day of Atonement by removing the confessed sins of Israel. The atonement was full completed on Calvary. Ellen White claims the atonement is still going on. She says we are in the great Day of Atonement. She has Jesus making atonement in the Heavenly Sanctuary for 2000 years and she has Jesus ending the atonement when Satan bears the sins of God’s people and is destroyed. Keep in mind that when Christians are confessing their sins, Jesus is not making an atonement to forgive them. The atonement is what Jesus has does for man at Calvary and Satan will never be a part of it. Adventists Teach that God Rewards The Devil for His Deviltry EGW: "Also it would be for his [Satan's] own interest to keep from Jesus as many as possible. For the sins of those who are redeemed by the blood of Christ will at last be rolled back upon the originator of sin, and he must bear their punishment, while those who do not accept salvation through Jesus, will suffer the penalty of their own sins." Early Writings, p. 178. "It would have been far better for him [Satan] if he had never led men into sin. But having entered upon this work, we see that he has a personal motive of the most powerful kind to induce him to hold persons in sin to the last; for then they receive the punishment for their own salvation through Christ, adds an additional weight to his accumulating load of woe." Looking Unto Jesus, p. 271, by Uriah Smith. "This puts God in the position of paying a premium on deviltry. If the devil is diligent and keeps on the job so that few are saved he doesn't receive so much punishment as he will if he "lays down on the job" and allows people to become Christians. This is offering the devil a reward for successful deviltry." Examining Seventh-day Adventism, E. S. Ballenger. See our playlist, "Dealing with Seventh-day Adventism & Their "Prophetess"" with 20 videos & counting at ru-vid.com/group/PL5316CC6F66F24283. See also the website www.TruthorFables.com. Seventh-day Adventists do not seem to understand that true Christians do not need the teachings of their so-called "prophetess" Ellen G. White (born November 26, 1827) or her spiritual mentor William Miller (born February 15, 1782) who said, "My principles in brief, are, that Jesus Christ will come again to this earth, cleanse, purify, and take possession of the same, with all the saints, sometime between March 21, 1843, and March 21, 1844." Even though another Millerite follower named Samuel S. Snow predicted the return of Christ on October 22, 1844 which Ellen White also believed, all of these prophecies proved to be false making all of these people false prophets (Deuteronomy 18:20-22, "But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. 21 And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the Lord hath not spoken? 22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him."). Ellen G. White & the rest of them also violated Jesus' words in Matthew 24:36, "But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only." True Christians throughout the centuries before Ellen G. White have followed Jesus Christ faithfully through His Word (2 Timothy 3:15-17) thus invalidating the need for this woman completely. Matthew 7:15, "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves." See our videos "Former Seventh-day Adventist Pastor for 13 Years Gives His Testimony Why Adventism is Wrong" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-c37bNhYzdbE.html & "Is Sabbath Keeping Essential to Be a Real Christian? Former SDA Pastor Answers This Question" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-w0L3rSSL_H8.html. Titus 1:9-16

1 Timothy 2:12, "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." See links: "The Sheep Need Men to be Their Pastors - The Blasphemy of Women Pastors" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=112706102442, "Can Women Be Pastors?" at www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=59131749272 & "Unpopular Bible Doctrines #7: God Condemns Astrology, Witchcraft, & Sin; No Women Pastors Allowed" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Ql_obI6wA9w.html). Question: "Women pastors / preachers? Can a woman be a pastor or preacher?" Answer: There is perhaps no more hotly debated issue in the church today than the issue of women serving as pastors/preachers. As a result, it is very important to not see this issue as men versus women. There are women who believe women should not serve as pastors and that the Bible places restrictions on the ministry of women, and there are men who believe women can serve as preachers and that there are no restrictions on women in ministry. This is not an issue of chauvinism or discrimination. It is an issue of biblical interpretation. The Word of God proclaims, “A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent” (1 Timothy 2:11-12). In the church, God assigns different roles to men and women. This is a result of the way mankind was created and the way in which sin entered the world (1 Timothy 2:13-14). God, through the apostle Paul, restricts women from serving in roles of teaching and/or having spiritual authority over men. This precludes women from serving as pastors over men, which definitely includes preaching to them, teaching them publicly, and exercising spiritual authority over them. There are many objections to this view of women in pastoral ministry. A common one is that Paul restricts women from teaching because in the first century, women were typically uneducated. However, 1 Timothy 2:11-14 nowhere mentions educational status. If education were a qualification for ministry, then the majority of Jesus’ disciples would not have been qualified. A second common objection is that Paul only restricted the women of Ephesus from teaching men (1 Timothy was written to Timothy, the pastor of the church in Ephesus). Ephesus was known for its temple to Artemis, and women were the authorities in that branch of paganism-therefore, the theory goes, Paul was only reacting against the female-led customs of the Ephesian idolaters, and the church needed to be different. However, the book of 1 Timothy nowhere mentions Artemis, nor does Paul mention the standard practice of Artemis worshipers as a reason for the restrictions in 1 Timothy 2:11-12. A third objection is that Paul is only referring to husbands and wives, not men and women in general. The Greek words for “woman” and “man” in 1 Timothy 2 could refer to husbands and wives; however, the basic meaning of the words is broader than that. Further, the same Greek words are used in verses 8-10. Are only husbands to lift up holy hands in prayer without anger and disputing (verse 8)? Are only wives to dress modestly, have good deeds, and worship God (verses 9-10)? Of course not. Verses 8-10 clearly refer to all men and women, not just husbands and wives. There is nothing in the context that would indicate a narrowing to husbands and wives in verses 11-14. Yet another objection to this interpretation of women in pastoral ministry is in relation to women who held positions of leadership in the Bible, specifically Miriam, Deborah, and Huldah in the Old Testament. It is true that these women where chosen by God for special service to Him and that they stand as models of faith, courage, and, yes, leadership. However, the authority of women in the Old Testament is not relevant to the issue of pastors in the church. The New Testament Epistles present a new paradigm for God’s people-the church, the body of Christ-and that paradigm involves an authority structure unique to the church, not for the nation of Israel or any other Old Testament entity. Similar arguments are made using Priscilla and Phoebe in the New Testament. In Acts 18, Priscilla and Aquila are presented as faithful ministers for Christ. Priscilla’s name is mentioned first, perhaps indicating that she was more prominent in ministry than her husband. Did Priscilla and her husband teach the gospel of Jesus Christ to Apollos? Yes, in their home they “explained to him the way of God more adequately” (Acts 18:26). Does the Bible ever say that Priscilla pastored a church or taught publicly or became the spiritual leader of a congregation of saints? No. As far as we know, Priscilla was not involved in ministry activity in contradiction to 1 Timothy 2:11-14. In Romans 16:1, Phoebe is called a “deacon” (or “servant”) in the church and is highly commended by Paul. But, as with Priscilla, there is nothing in Scripture to indicate that Phoebe was a pastor or a teacher of men in the church. “Able to teach” is given as a qualification for elders, but not for deacons (1 Timothy 3:1-13; Titus 1:6-9). The structure of 1 Timothy 2:11-14 makes the reason why women cannot be pastors perfectly clear. Verse 13 begins with “for,” giving the “cause” of Paul’s statement in verses 11-12. Why should women not teach or have authority over men? Because “Adam was created first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived” (verses 13-14). God created Adam first and then created Eve to be a “helper” for Adam. The order of creation has universal application in the family (Ephesians 5:22-33) and in the church. The fact that Eve was deceived is also given in 1 Timothy 2:14 as a reason for women not serving as pastors or having spiritual authority over men. This does not mean that women are gullible or that they are all more easily deceived than men. If all women are more easily deceived, why would they be allowed to teach children (who are easily deceived) and other women (who are supposedly more easily deceived)? The text simply says that women are not to teach men or have spiritual authority over men because Eve was deceived. God has chosen to give men the primary teaching authority in the church. Many women excel in gifts of hospitality, mercy, teaching, evangelism, and helps. Much of the ministry of the local church depends on women. Women in the church are not restricted from public praying or prophesying (1 Corinthians 11:5), only from having spiritual teaching authority over men. The Bible nowhere restricts women from exercising the gifts of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12). Women, just as much as men, are called to minister to others, to demonstrate the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23), and to proclaim the gospel to the lost (Matthew 28:18-20; Acts 1:8; 1 Peter 3:15). God has ordained that only men are to serve in positions of spiritual teaching authority in the church. This is not because men are necessarily better teachers or because women are inferior or less intelligent (which is not the case). It is simply the way God designed the church to function. Men are to set the example in spiritual leadership-in their lives and through their words. Women are to take a less authoritative role. Women are encouraged to teach other women (Titus 2:3-5). The Bible also does not restrict women from teaching children. The only activity women are restricted from is teaching or having spiritual authority over men. This precludes women from serving as pastors to men. This does not make women less important, by any means, but rather gives them a ministry focus more in agreement with God’s plan and His gifting of them. Women pastors - what does the Bible say? The only way to have a productive dialogue on the women pastors issue is to discuss it biblically. Yes, undeniably, there are men whose views on the issue are clouded by chauvinism. At the same time, there are men and women on both sides of the discussion. So, it should never be assumed that one holds a particular view due to latent chauvinism. The issue should be decided based on what the Bible teaches, not on who can make the strongest ad hominem attack. The key passage on the women pastors issue is 1 Timothy 2:11-12, which reads, "Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. I do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet." At its face, this passage is abundantly clear. Paul restricts women from teaching or having spiritual authority over men. While it is not explicitly laid out in the text, the focus seems to be on the concept of pastoring/shepherding. A pastor's duties are primarily teaching and leading. It is this shepherding role over men that God, through Paul, restricts to men. There are several lines of argument against this interpretation of the women pastors issue in 1 Timothy 2:11-12: (1) Women were uneducated at that time, and therefore not qualified to be teachers. The passage nowhere mentions education. Education is not mentioned as a qualification for church leadership in 1 Timothy 3:1-13 or Titus 1:6-9. If education was a requirement, few, if any, of Jesus' disciples would have been qualified. (2) Paul was only dealing with Artemis worship at Timothy's church in Ephesus. The context, and all of 1 Timothy for that matter, nowhere mention Artemis or the prominence of women in the worship of Artemis. If there was a problem with women usurping authority over men in the church in Ephesus, Paul would have addressed it directly. (3) Paul is referring to husbands and wives, not men and women. Wives are not to teach or have authority over their husbands. The Greek words could refer to husbands and wives, but the context indicates otherwise. Are only husbands to lift up holy hands in prayer? Are only wives to dress modestly (1 Timothy 2:8-10)? The immediate context indicates that men and women in general are the subject, not husbands and wives exclusively. (4) There are women in the Bible who served in ways that contradict this interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:11-12. Miriam, Deborah, Huldah, Priscilla, and Phoebe are the most commonly given examples. Ultimately, Miriam, Deborah, and Huldah are meaningless to the issue, as Paul is addressing leadership in the church. Leadership in old covenant Israel is not the subject at hand. In regards to Priscilla and Phoebe, the New Testament nowhere describes them serving in a way that contradicts 1 Timothy 2:11-12. Priscilla, with her husband Aquila, discipled Apollos in their home (Acts 18:26). Phoebe is simply identified as a servant/deaconess of the church (Romans 16:1). (5) Galatians 3:28 says that men and women are equal in God's eyes. Men and women are absolutely equal in God's eyes, but that is not the issue. The subject of Galatians 3:28 is equality in Christ, equal access to the salvation Christ offers. Men and women, Jews and Gentiles, slave and free are absolutely equal in this context. Church leadership is not the subject of Galatians 3:28. Further, we cannot take one verse and use it to cancel out another verse. Both Galatians 3:28 and 1 Timothy 2:11-12 are absolutely true. They do not contradict each other. If education, culture, or marriage are not the reason for the restriction on women in 1 Timothy 2:11-12, what is the reason? The answer is given in the next two verses: "For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived" (1 Timothy 2:13-14). The order of creation and the nature of the fall impacts spiritual leadership in the church, and in the family (see Ephesians 5:22-33). Women are not to teach or have spiritual authority over men because women were created to be "helpers" to men and because Eve was deceived into sin. Through creation, and because of the Fall, God has chosen to give men the primary teaching authority in the church. So, what exactly does this mean practically? What are women restricted from doing? The clear implication is that women are not to serve in any role which involves the authoritative spiritual teaching of men. By this definition, the role of teaching pastor/shepherd is reserved for men. This is confirmed in the two passages which deal specifically with the qualifications for church leadership (1 Timothy 3:1-13; Titus 1:6-9). Church leaders are described as the "husband of one wife," "a man whose children believe," and "men worthy of respect." Rather than focusing on what ministries women are restricted from, the focus should be on the multitude of ways God calls and gifts women to serve. Women are nowhere restricted from proclaiming the gospel to the lost (Acts 1:8; 1 Peter 3:15). Women are encouraged to teach other women (Titus 2:3-5). Women are nowhere restricted from teaching children. Women seem to excel, far beyond men, in some of the spiritual gifts and fruit of the Spirit (1 Corinthians 12; Galatians 5:22-23). Women being restricted from spiritual teaching authority over men is not a punishment. Rather, it is a refocusing to the ministries, skills, and gifts God with which blesses women. Question: "What roles can women fill in ministry?" Answer: Women in ministry is an issue upon which Bible-believing Christians can and do disagree. The point of separation centers on the passages of Scripture that forbid women to speak in church or "assume authority over a man" (1 Timothy 2:12; cf. 1 Corinthians 14:34). The disagreement is whether or not those passages were relevant only to the era in which they were penned. Some contend that, since there is neither “Jew nor Greek . . . male nor female . . . but you are all one in Christ” (Galatians 3:28), women are free to pursue any field of ministry open to men. Others hold that 1 Timothy 2:12 still applies today, since the basis for the command is not cultural but universal, being rooted in the order of creation (1 Timothy 2:13-14). First Peter 5:1-4 details the qualifications for an elder. Presbuteros is the Greek word used sixty-six times in the New Testament to indicate “seasoned male overseer.” It is the masculine form of the word. The feminine form, presbutera, is never used in reference to elders or shepherds. Based on the qualifications found in 1 Timothy 3:1-7, the role of an elder is interchangeable with the bishop/pastor/overseer (Titus 1:6-9; 1 Peter 5:1-3). And since, according to 1 Timothy 2:12, a woman should not “teach or exercise authority over a man,” it seems clear that the position of elders and pastors-who must be equipped to teach, lead the congregation, and oversee their spiritual growth (1 Timothy 3:2)-should be reserved for men only. However, elder/bishop/pastor appears to be the only office reserved for men. Women have always played a significant role in the growth of the church, even being among the few who witnessed the crucifixion of Christ when most of the disciples had run away (Matthew 27:55; John 19:25). The apostle Paul held women in high regard, and in many of his letters to the churches he greeted specific women by name (Romans 16:6, 12; Colossians 4:15; Philippians 4:2-3; Philemon 1:2). Paul addresses these women as "co-workers," and they clearly served the Lord to the benefit of the whole church (Philippians 4:3; Colossians 4:15). Offices were created in the early church to fit the needs of the body. Although many modern churches interchange the positions of elder and deacon, they were not the same office. Deacons were appointed to serve in a physical capacity as the need arose (Acts 6:2-3). There is no clear prohibition against women serving in this way. In fact, Romans 16:1 may indicate that a woman named Phoebe was a respected deaconess in the church at Rome. There is no scriptural precedent that forbids women from also serving as worship leaders, youth ministers, or children’s directors. The only restriction is that they do not assume a role of spiritual authority over adult men. Since the concern in Scripture appears to be the issue of spiritual authority rather than function, any role that does not bestow such spiritual authority over adult men is permissible. Question: "What does the "husband of one wife" phrase in 1 Timothy 3:2 mean? Can a divorced man serve as a pastor, elder, or deacon?" Answer: There are at least three possible interpretations of the phrase “husband of one wife” in 1 Timothy 3:2. 1) It could simply be saying that a polygamist is not qualified to be an elder, a deacon or a pastor. This is the most literal interpretation of the phrase, but seems somewhat unlikely considering that polygamy was quite rare in the time that Paul was writing. 2) The phrase could also be translated “one-woman man.” This would indicate that a bishop must be absolutely loyal to the woman he is married to. This interpretation focuses more on moral purity than marital status. 3) The phrase could also be understood to declare that in order to be an elder/deacon/pastor, a man can only have been married once, other than in the case of a remarried widower. Interpretations 2) and 3) are the most prevalent today. Interpretation 2) seems to be the strongest, primarily because Scripture seems to allow for divorce in exceptional circumstances (Matthew 19:9; 1 Corinthians 7:12-16). It would also be important to differentiate between a man who was divorced and remarried before he became a Christian from a man who was divorced and remarried after becoming a Christian. An otherwise qualified man should not be excluded from church leadership because of actions he took prior to coming to know the Lord Jesus Christ as his Savior. Although 1 Timothy 3:2 does not necessarily exclude a divorced or remarried man from serving as an elder/deacon/pastor, there are other issues to consider. The first qualification of an elder/deacon/pastor is to be “above reproach” (1 Timothy 3:2). If the divorce and/or remarriage results in a poor testimony for the man in the church or community, it may be the “above reproach” qualification that excludes him rather than the “husband of one wife” requirement. An elder/deacon/pastor is to be a man that the church and community can look up to as an example of Christ-likeness and godly leadership. If his divorce and/or remarriage situation detracts from this purpose, perhaps he should not serve in the position of elder/deacon/pastor. It is important to remember, though, that just because a man is disqualified from serving as an elder/deacon/pastor, he is still a valuable member of the body of Christ. Every Christian possesses spiritual gifts (1 Corinthians 12:4-7) and is called to participate in edifying other believers with those gifts (1 Corinthians 12:7). A man who is disqualified from the position of elder/deacon/pastor can still teach, preach, serve, pray, worship, and play an important role in the church. Question: "What are the responsibilities of deacons in the church?" Answer: In the New Testament, the word usually translated "serve" is the Greek word diakoneo, which literally means "through the dirt." It refers to an attendant, a waiter, or one who ministers to another. From this word we get the English word “deacon.” We first see the word "deacon" used this way in the book of Acts. “And the twelve summoned the full number of the disciples and said, "It is not right that we should give up preaching the word of God to serve tables” (Acts 6:2). The men who were giving themselves to feeding the flock by preaching and teaching realized that it wasn’t right for them to leave those activities to wait tables, so they found some other men who were willing to serve, and put them in place to minister to the church’s physical needs while the elders or pastors ministered to their spiritual needs. It was a better use of the resources they were given, and a better use of everyone’s gifts. It also got more people involved in serving and helping one another. Today, for the biblical church, these roles are essentially the same. Elders and pastors are to “preach the word…reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching” (2 Timothy 4:2), and deacons are to be appointed to take care of everything else. In a modern church, this might include taking on administrative or organizational tasks, ushering, being responsible for building maintenance, or volunteering to be the church treasurer. It depends on the need and the gifts of the available men. The responsibilities of a deacon are not clearly listed or outlined; they are assumed to be everything that does not include the duties of an elder or pastor, which is to preach, teach, and exhort. But qualifications for a deacon’s character are clearly outlined in Scripture. They are to be blameless, the husband of one wife, a good household manager, respectable, honest, not addicted to alcohol and not greedy (1 Timothy 3:8-12). According to the Word, the office of deacon is an honor and a blessing. “For those who serve well as deacons gain a good standing for themselves and also great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus” (1 Timothy 3:13). Is God/the Bible sexist? Sexism is generally defined as one gender having dominance over another and is usually applied to men dominating women. Because the Bible includes many references to women that appear demeaning from our contemporary context, some conclude that God and/or the Bible are sexist. Is this true? The time period of the Old Testament included a cultural system that was patriarchal. Rather than viewing men and women as created in God's image as the Bible states (Genesis 1:27), women were typically seen as less important than men in society. This is part of fallen human nature in which people lived in ways contrary to God's design. To discover and develop the view God has given for the roles of men and women in society, we must look to Scripture. Though in Old Testament accounts many references to women appear sexist from our modern perspective, two things must be considered before making such an accusation. First, many references in the Bible that appear sexist are simply stating actions that took place without reference to whether they were right or wrong. For example, in Judges 11 Jephthah appears to have sacrificed his own daughter to keep a vow he made to the Lord. Scripture does not state that God approved this action; it only records it as a fact of history. Second, many references to women that appear sexist based on contemporary standards were appropriate or even better than the norm of the original cultural setting. For example, 1 Timothy 2:9 says Christian women should not adorn themselves with braided hair. Why not? In that time, braided hair was associated with the practices of immoral women in the area. Further, braided hair as understood in that cultural context was a costly, extravagant luxury. However, even in a time when women's rights were different than today, there are several biblical accounts of women being treated with dignity and respect above the level of cultural norms. For example, Jesus publicly spoke with a Samaritan woman at a well, something that even she noted as uncommon (John 4:9). Jesus also allowed women to serve among His followers (including Mary and Martha and Mary Magdalene), and even appeared first to women after His resurrection rather than to men. Far from being sexist, Scripture presents both men and women in high regard. In the beginning, woman was made in God's image, complementing man as a helper with him. She would serve as woman, wife, mother, and various other roles. In the Old Testament, women are seen in many influential roles. In addition to Eve, the mother of all people, Scripture speaks highly of Abraham's wife Sarah, Isaac's wife Rebekah, Deborah who served as a judge in the book of Judges, the mother of Moses, Miriam the sister of Moses, Ruth the faithful Moabite, Hannah the mother of Samuel, and Queen Esther who saved the Jewish people. In the New Testament, women served in prominent roles as well. Mary the mother of Jesus is presented as an ideal servant of God. Four women are mentioned by name in the family lineage of Jesus. Mary's relative Elizabeth obediently raised John the Baptist. Many women also served Jesus during His ministry, with Mary Magdalene in particular noted. Several women existed among the 120 first followers of Jesus in the upper room when the church began (Acts 1-2) and led in a variety of roles within the early church. While it is unlikely that women served as apostles and did not serve as elders, some women served as prophets or at least gave prophecies. Acts 21:8-9 shares, "On the next day we departed and came to Caesarea, and we entered the house of Philip the evangelist, who was one of the seven, and stayed with him. He had four unmarried daughters, who prophesied." Further, the New Testament speaks highly in favor of strong families and discourages divorce, something that culturally hurt women greatly at the time of writing. James 1:27 is exemplary of Scripture's instructions to care for widows, those women without husbands to provide for the needs of their family. Though some portions of the Bible may appear sexist, the overall teaching of Scripture presents a beautiful view of women that provides much insight for today. Question: "What does the Bible say about the form of church government (polity)?" Answer: The Lord was very clear in His Word about how He wishes His church on earth to be organized and managed. First, Christ is the head of the church and its supreme authority (Ephesians 1:22; 4:15; Colossians 1:18). Second, the local church is to be autonomous, free from any external authority or control, with the right of self-government and freedom from the interference of any hierarchy of individuals or organizations (Titus 1:5). Third, the church is to be governed by spiritual leadership consisting of two main offices-elders and deacons. “Elders” were a leading body among the Israelites since the time of Moses. We find them making political decisions (2 Samuel 5:3; 2 Samuel 17:4, 15), advising the king in later history (1 Kings 20:7), and representing the people concerning spiritual matters (Exodus 7:17; 24:1, 9; Numbers 11:16, 24-25). The early Greek translation of the Old Testament, the Septuagint, used the Greek word presbuteros for “elder.” This is the same Greek word used in the New Testament that is also translated “elder.” The New Testament refers a number of times to elders who served in the role of church leadership (Acts 14:23, 15:2, 20:17; Titus 1:5; James 5:14) and apparently each church had more than one, as the word is usually found in the plural. The only exceptions refer to cases in which one elder is being singled out for some reason (1 Timothy 5:1, 19). In the Jerusalem church, elders were part of the leadership along with the apostles (Acts 15:2-16:4). It seems that the position of elder was equal to the position of episkopos, translated “overseer” or “bishop” (Acts 11:30; 1 Timothy 5:17). The term “elder” may refer to the dignity of the office, while the term “bishop/overseer” describes its authority and duties (1 Peter 2:25, 5:1-4). In Philippians 1:1, Paul greets the bishops and deacons but does not mention the elders, presumably because the elders are the same as the bishops. Likewise, 1 Timothy 3:2, 8 gives the qualifications of bishops and deacons but not of elders. Titus 1:5-7 seems also to tie these two terms together. The position of “deacon,” from diakonos, meaning “through the dirt,” was one of servant leadership to the church. Deacons are separate from elders, while having qualifications that are in many ways similar to those of elders (1 Timothy 3:8-13). Deacons assist the church in whatever is needed, as recorded in Acts chapter 6. Concerning the word poimen, translated “pastor” in reference to a human leader of a church, it is found only once in the New Testament, in Ephesians 4:11: “It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers.” Most associate the two terms “pastors” and “teachers” as referring to a single position, a pastor-teacher. It is likely that a pastor-teacher was the spiritual shepherd of a particular local church. It would seem from the above passages that there was always a plurality of elders, but this does not negate God’s gifting particular elders with the teaching gifts while gifting others with the gift of administration, prayer, etc. (Romans 12:3-8; Ephesians 4:11). Nor does it negate God’s calling them into a ministry in which they will use those gifts (Acts 13:1). Thus, one elder may emerge as the “pastor,” another may do the majority of visiting members because he has the gift of compassion, while another may “rule” in the sense of handling the organizational details. Many churches that are organized with a pastor and deacon board perform the functions of a plurality of elders in that they share the ministry load and work together in some decision making. In Scripture there was also much congregational input into decisions. Thus, a “dictator” leader who makes the decisions (whether called elder, or bishop, or pastor) is unscriptural (Acts 1:23, 26; 6:3, 5; 15:22, 30; 2 Corinthians 8:19). So, too, is a congregation-ruled church that does not give weight to the elders’ or church leaders’ input. In summary, the Bible teaches a leadership consisting of a plurality of elders (bishops/overseers) along with a group of deacons who serve the church. But it is not contrary to this plurality of elders to have one of the elders serving in the major “pastoral” role. God calls some as “pastor/teachers” (even as He called some to be missionaries in Acts 13) and gives them as gifts to the church (Ephesians 4:11). Thus, a church may have many elders, but not all elders are called to serve in the pastoral role. But, as one of the elders, the pastor or “teaching elder” has no more authority in decision making than does any other elder. Some liberal theologians, cultists, New Agers & apostates have argued that the "Jezebel spirit" allows for the Christian church to have women pastors which only shows the absurdity that they will go to disobey God's straightforward & clear commands in scripture that women pastors are not allowed. The people that would use the "Jezebel spirit" argument to allow for any kind of church leadership model whatsoever have clearly demonstrated that they themselves have the very "Jezebel" spirit they claim for their authority to have women pastors, etc. What a ridiculous position to hold since they themselves are condemned by the very argument they use. Question: "What is the Jezebel spirit?" Answer: There is a variety of opinions about what constitutes a Jezebel spirit, everything from sexual looseness in a woman to the teaching of false doctrine-by a man or a woman. The Bible does not mention a Jezebel spirit, although it has plenty to say about Jezebel herself. Jezebel’s story is found in 1 and 2 Kings. She was the daughter of Ethbaal, king of Tyre/Sidon and priest of the cult of Baal, a cruel, sensuous and revolting false god whose worship involved sexual degradation and lewdness. Ahab, king of Israel, married Jezebel and led the nation into Baal worship (1 Kings 16:31). Ahab and Jezebel’s reign over Israel is one of the saddest chapters in the history of God’s people. There are two incidents in the life of Jezebel which characterize her and may define what is meant by the Jezebel spirit. One trait is her obsessive passion for domineering and controlling others, especially in the spiritual realm. When she became queen, she began a relentless campaign to rid Israel of all evidences of Jehovah worship. She ordered the extermination of all the prophets of the Lord (1 Kings 18:4, 13) and replaced their altars with those of Baal. Her strongest enemy was Elijah, who demanded a contest on Mount Carmel between the powers of Israel’s God and the powers of Jezebel and the priests of Baal (1 Kings 18). Of course, Jehovah won, but despite hearing of the miraculous powers of Jehovah, Jezebel refused to repent and swore on her gods that she would pursue Elijah relentlessly and take his life. Her stubborn refusal to see and submit to the power of the living God would lead her to a hideous end (2 Kings 9:29-37). The second incident involves a righteous man named Naboth who refused to sell to Ahab land adjoining the palace, rightly declaring that to sell his inheritance would be against the Lord’s command (1 Kings 21:3; Leviticus 25:23). While Ahab sulked and fumed on his bed, Jezebel taunted and ridiculed him for his weakness, then proceeded to have the innocent Naboth framed and stoned to death. Naboth’s sons were also stoned to death, so there would be no heirs, and the land would revert to the possession of the king. Such a single-minded determination to have one’s way, no matter who is destroyed in the process, is a characteristic of the Jezebel spirit. So infamous was Jezebel’s sexual immorality and idol worship that the Lord Jesus Himself refers to her in a warning to the church at Thyatira (Revelation 2:18-29). Most likely referring to a woman in the church who influenced it the same way Jezebel influenced Israel into idolatry and sexual immorality, Jesus declares to the Thyatirans that she is not to be tolerated. Whoever this woman was, like Jezebel, she refused to repent of her immorality and her false teaching, and her fate was sealed. The Lord Jesus cast her onto a sick bed, along with those who committed idolatry with her. The end for those who succumb to a Jezebel spirit is always death and destruction, both in the physical and the spiritual sense. Perhaps the best way to define the Jezebel spirit is to say it characterizes anyone who acts in the same manner as Jezebel did, engaging in immorality, idolatry, false teaching and unrepentant sin. To go beyond that is to engage in conjecture and can possibly lead to false accusations and divisiveness within the body of Christ. Female based religious cults such as Seventh Day Adventism (see our playlist "Dealing with Seventh-day Adventism & Their "Prophetess"" with 24 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL5316CC6F66F24283), Christian Science of Mary Baker Eddy & other New Age cults (see our playlist "Dealing with Anti Christ Cults, "New Age" & World Religions" with 42 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL69A3047B3497590A & many of today's modern Charismatic & Pentecostal TV preachers like Joyce Meyer & Paula White (see our playlist "Dealing with Phony TV Preachers (TBN) & King James Onlyites" with 26 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL2CDA855486B09128) promote the type of "Jezebel spirit" & "doctrine of the Nicolaitans" the scripture warns about. Question: "Who are the Nicolaitans mentioned in Revelation 2:6, 14-15?" Answer: The exact origin of the Nicolaitans is unclear. Some Bible commentators believe they were a heretical sect who followed the teachings of Nicolas-whose name means “one who conquers the people”-who was possibly one of the deacons of the early church mentioned in Acts 6:5. It is possible that Nicolas became an apostate, denying the true faith and became part of a group holding "the doctrine of Balaam," who taught Israel "to sin by eating food sacrificed to idols and by committing sexual immorality." Clement of Alexandria says, “They abandoned themselves to pleasure like goats, leading a life of self-indulgence.” Their teaching perverted grace and replaced liberty with license. Other commentators believe that these Nicolaitans were not so called from any man, but from the Greek word Nicolah, meaning "let us eat," as they often encouraged each other to eat things offered to idols. Whichever theory is true, it is certain that the deeds of the Nicolaitans were an abomination to Christ. They, like the Gnostics and other false teachers, abused the doctrine of grace and tried to introduce licentiousness in its place (2 Peter 2:15, 19; Jude 1:4). According to the writings of the Early Church leaders, Nicolas taught a doctrine of compromise, implying that total separation between Christianity and the practice of occult paganism was not essential. From Early Church records, it seems apparent that this Nicolas of Antioch was so immersed in occultism, Judaism, and Christianity that he had a stomach for all of it. He had no problem intermingling these belief systems in various concoctions and saw no reason why believers couldn't continue to fellowship with those still immersed in the black magic of the Roman empire and its countless mystery cults. Occultism was a major force that warred against the Early Church. In Ephesus, the primary pagan religion was the worship of Diana (Artemis). There were many other forms of idolatry in Ephesus, but this was the primary object of occult worship in that city. In the city of Pergamos, there were numerous dark and sinister forms of occultism, causing Pergamos to be one of the most wicked cities in the history of the ancient world. In both of these cities, believers were lambasted and persecuted fiercely by adherents of pagan religions, forced to contend with paganism on a level far beyond all other cities. It was very hard for believers to live separately from all the activities of paganism because paganism and its religions were the center of life in these cities. Slipping in and out of paganism would have been very easy for young or weak believers to do since most of their families and friends were still pagans. A converted Gentile would have found it very difficult to stay away from all pagan influence. It is significant that the "deeds" and "doctrines" of the Nicolaitans are only mentioned in connection with the churches in these two occultic and pagan cities. It seems that the "doctrine" of the Nicolaitans was that it was alright to have one foot in both worlds and that one needn't be so strict about separation from the world in order to be a Christian. This, in fact, was the "doctrine" of the Nicolaitans that Jesus "hated." It led to a weak version of Christianity that was without power and without conviction - a defeated, worldly type of Christianity. Nicolas' deep roots in paganism may have produced in him a tolerance for occultism and paganism. Growing up in this perverted spiritual environment may have caused him to view these belief systems as not so damaging or dangerous. This wrong perception would have resulted in a very liberal viewpoint that encouraged people to stay connected to the world. This is what numerous Bible scholars believe about the Nicolaitans. This kind of teaching would result in nothing but total defeat for its followers. When believers allow sin and compromise to be in their lives, it drains away the power in the work of the Cross and the power of the Spirit that is resident in a believer's life. This is the reason the name Nicolas is so vital to this discussion. The evil fruit of Nicolas' "doctrine" encouraged worldly participation, leading people to indulge in sin and a lowered godly standard. In this way he literally conquered the people. God wants to make sure we understand the doctrine the Nicolaitans taught, so Balaam's actions are given as an example of their doctrine and actions. Revelation 2:14,15 says, "But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication. So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate." When Balaam could not successfully cure the people of God, he used another method to destroy them. He seduced them into unbridled, sensual living by dangling the prostitutes of Moab before the men of Israel. Numbers 25:1-3 tells us, "And Israel abode in Shittim, and the people began to commit whoredom with the daughters of Moab. And they [the daughters of Moab] called the people [the men of Israel] unto the sacrifices of their gods: and the people [the men of Israel] did eat, and bowed down to their gods. And Israel joined himself unto Baal-peor...." Just as the men of Israel compromised themselves with the world and false religions, now the "doctrine" of the Nicolaitans was encouraging compromise. As you are well aware, compromise with the world always results in a weakened and powerless form of Christianity. This was the reason Jesus "hated" the "doctrine" and the "deeds" of the Nicolaitans. Jesus commends the church of Ephesus for hating the deeds of the Nicolaitans as He does (Revelation 2:6). No doubt the leaders of the Ephesian church protected their flock from these destructive heresies and kept their people from committing the same evil deeds. All sin is hateful to Christ, as it should be to His followers, as we hate men’s evil deeds, not the men themselves. For the church at Pergamos, Jesus had not commendation, but censure. Unlike the Ephesians, they actually embraced the teachings of the Nicolaitans (Revelation 2:15). Jesus warns them that unless they repent, they are in danger of the judgment that is sure to fall on those who teach false doctrine, attack His church, and destroy His people. The sword of judgment is poised over their heads, and His patience is not limitless (Revelation 2:16; 19:15). The lesson for us is that the church of the Lord Jesus throughout the ages has been plagued by those of the Nicolaitan spirit. The only way to recognize false teaching is to be intimately familiar with truth through the diligent study of the Word of God. See our website www.BibleQuery.org which answers over 8000 bible questions. 2 Timothy 2:15

See our playlist "Dealing with Jehovah's Witnesses, Watchtower Society" with 22 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLCF0ADB29C0EB8C40. YHWH - What is God's name, YHWH or Jehovah? Almighty God was referred to by a number of names and titles in the Old Testament. Jews traditionally say there were seven names. One of these names was YHWH. The letters YHWH are named in Hebrew Yod-Heh-Waw-Heh. The Jewish Encyclopaedia states: "Of the names of God in the Old Testament, that which occurs most frequently (6,823 times) is the so-called Tetragrammaton, Yhwh ( ), the distinctive personal name of the God of Israel. This name is commonly represented in modern translations by the form "Jehovah," which, however, is a philological impossibility." jewishencyclopedia.com (as of 25/09/2005) Prior to the time of Jesus, mainline Judaism came to believe that YHWH, the divine name of God, was too sacred to be uttered, and the ineffable name stopped being uttered aloud. Because written Hebrew contained consonants but no vowels, it is now unknown exactly how YHWH was pronounced by ancient Jews. However, there is consensus by scholars that God's name was rendered as Yahuweh or Yahweh. "There is almost universal consensus among scholars today that the sacred Tetragrammaton (YHWH) is to be vocalized and pronounced Yahweh. Probably the name means literally "He is."" New International Version: The Making of a Contemporary Translation CHAPTER 9: YHWH Sabaoth: "The Lord Almighty" Kenneth L. Barker Jews recognise the divine name in modern times as Yahweh. The Jewish Encyclopedia published between 1901 and 1906 by Funk and Wagnalls includes the divine name as Yahweh when translated into English. Nazarene Judaism is a source of information on the pronunciation of YHWH because they see importance in the use of the name and continued to utter the name after mainstream Judaism had ceased saying the word out loud. The following quote is from an article written by a Nazarene and explains that there is significant evidence that Yahweh is the correct. Nazarenes and the Name of YHWH by James Trimm states; "It is clear when examining the many sources that the pronunciation of YHWH can be recovered as YAHUWEH sometimes abbreviated as YAHWEH, YAHU or YAH. This is attested to by the Yahwitic names of the Masoretic text, the Peshitta Aramaic and the Marashu texts. The true pronunciation of YHWH is also preserved in ancient transliterations of the name written in Egyptian Hieroglyphics, cuneiform and Greek, all of which had written vowels. The restoration of the use of the name of Yahuweh with its correct pronunciation is as prophetically significant as the restoration of the ancient sect of the Nazarenes. Such a restoration of the name of Yahweh to his people is promised in scripture: For then will I turn to the people a pure language, That they may call upon the name of YHWH (Zeph. 3:9)" The first half of the Tetragrammaton is commonly used as an abbreviation for God's name and is included in the a number of Biblical names. The shorten form of YHWH is Yah. The New World Translation Reference Bible states; ""As Jah." BHSftn(Heb.), ki Yah; M(Heb.), beYah´, "by Jah." Yah is the first half of the Tetragrammaton, YHWH. It occurs 49 times in M distinguished by a point (mappik) in its second letter and once, in Ca 8:6, without the mappik. TLXXSyVg, "Jehovah." See Ex 15:2 ftn, "Jah"; App 1A." New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures Footnote to Psalm 68:4 This is attested to by a number of English Biblical references. The word Hallelujah means 'Praise Yah" and shows that YH was pronounced as yah. The names Elijah, Isaiah and Jeremiah all end with Yah. On the other hand, Jehosaphat begins with the incorrect "Jeho" in place of Yah. This carries the same inaccuracy as Jehovah. The inaccuracy is due to Masorite additions from the nineth century C.E. The correct way to transliterate this name is Yahosaphat and is a combination of the word Yah, with the Hebrew 'shaphat', which means 'judge'. The first letter was Y as the letter J did not exist in the Hebrew language. The Encyclopedia Americana contains the following on the J: "The form of J was unknown in any alphabet until the 14th century. Either symbol (J,I) used initially generally had the consonantal sound of Y as in year. Gradually, the two symbols (J,l) were differentiated, the J usually acquiring consonantal force and thus becoming regarded as a consonant, and the I becoming a vowel. It was not until 1630 that the differentiation became general in England." The pronunciation of the name of God has been preserved in a number of other languages that do contain vowels. The Murashu texts were found at Nippur and date back to 464 B.C. These were written in Aramaic cuneiform script on clay tablets. The version of the Old Testament used by Aramaic speaking Assyrians, Syrians and Chaldeans was the Peshitta text. In the fourth century CE vowels were added to the Aramaic text. When they added vowels to names that begin with part of the divine name the result was to start with Yah, such as in Yahosaphat. Egyptian hieroglyphics contain written vowels. In Budge's An Egyptian Hieroglyphic Dictionary page fifteen shows that the shortened form of YHWH was transliterated as "IA" or "YA", also supporting that God's name begins with the sound Yah. Assyrian cuneiform script has been found which had the divine name spelt with written vowels. A.H.Sayce published Halley's Bible Handbook in 1898. On page sixty two it discusses three clay cuneiform tablets dating from the time of Hammurabi which contain the phrase Jahweh. Josephus also can be used to support the idea that the sacred name was pronounced Yahweh. In Jewish Wars, chapter V, Josephus wrote; "... in which was engraven the sacred name: it consists of four vowels." Yahweh or Yahuweh contains four 'vowels', being pronounced as ee-ah-oo-eh, whereas Jehovah only contains three. In Jesus time the Greek transliteration of the divine name was Iaoue or Iabe. This supports Yahweh as it was pronounced ee-ah-oo-eh. In the second century Clement of Alexandria wrote: "The mystic name which is called the Tetragrammaton, by which alone they who had access to the Holy of Holies were protected, is pronounced Iaoue, which means 'who is, and who shall be.'" In Latin it was similarly written as Iabe. History of the word Jehovah It is interesting to understand how the word Jehovah was derived, as the history of the word shows why the word is incorrect. In an unfortunate stroke of the pen the Watchtower Society chose to adopt the rendition of YHWH that has least resemblance to the original name and incorporates the very reason the exact pronunciation is unknown. Ancient Hebrew did not contain vowels and so the pronunciation of words was handed down. In order to preserve the pronunciation of the Hebrew language, the Masoretes created a system for introducing vowels into the Hebrew language during the ninth century A.D. However, when it came to YHWH, rather than putting the correct vowel signs, they put vowel signs for Adonai (Lord) or Elohim (God), in order to remind the reader to use the word Lord or God instead of the name of God. Adonai (Lord) was predominantly used, however, in passages where Adonai and YHWH appeared together, Elohim was used instead, to avoid repetition of the word Lord. As proposed by the 19th-century Hebrew scholar Gesenius, it is generally accepted that mixing the vowels for Lord and God with the consonants YHWH that led to the manufacture of the hybrid word Jehovah. Hence, it was the effort to avoid pronouncing God's name that led to the manufacture of the hybrid word Jehovah. "The form Jehovah is of late medieval origin; it is a combination of the consonants of the Divine Name and the vowels attached to it by the Masoretes but belonging to an entirely different word. The sound of Y is represented by J and the sound of W by V, as in Latin. The word "Jehovah" does not accurately represent any form of the Name ever used in Hebrew." Revised Standard Version pp.6-7 "Yahweh-the personal name of the God of the Israelites . . . The Masoretes, Jewish biblical scholars of the Middle Ages, replaced the vowel signs that had appeared above or beneath the consonants of YHWH with the vowel signs of Adonai or of Elohim. Thus, the artificial name Jehovah (YeHoWaH) came into being. Although Christian scholars after the Rendssance and Reformation periods used the term Jehovah for YHWH, in the 19th and 20th centuries biblical scholars again began to use the form Yahweh. Early Christian writers, Such as Clement of Alexandria in the 2nd century, had used the form Yahweh, thus this pronunciation of the Tetragrammaton was never really lost. Greek transcriptions also indicated that Yhwh Should be pronounced Yahweh." Encyclopedia Britannica (Micropedia, vol. 10) In the Hebrew Bible the Jews wrote the consonants of the Tetragrammaton as YHWH, but out of reverence for the sacred name of God (or out of fear of violating Exod. 20:7; Lev. 24:16), they vocalized and pronounced it as Adonai or occasionally as Elohim. It is unfortunate, then, that the name was transliterated into German and ultimately into English as Jehovah (which is the way the name is represented in the American Standard Version of 1901), for this conflate form represents the vowels of Adonai superimposed on the consonants of Yahweh, and it was never intended by the Jews to be read as Yehowah (or Jehovah). The Jewish Encyclopaedia explains the word Jehovah in a similar way. jewishencyclopedia.com (25/9/2005) "A mispronunciation (introduced by Christian theologians, but almost entirely disregarded by the Jews) of the Hebrew "Yhwh," the (ineffable) name of God (the Tetragrammaton or "Shem ha-Meforash"). This pronunciation is grammatically impossible; it arose through pronouncing the vowels of the "?ere" (marginal reading of the Masorites: = "Adonay") with the consonants of the "ketib" (text-reading: = "Yhwh")" The first time the Tetragrammaton appeared in an English Bible was on the title page of William Tyndale's Bible translation of 1525, where it was written as Iehouah. This was an interlace of YHVH and Adonai. The King James Version also originally used Iehouah, influenced by the Ben Chayim codex. The King James Bible changed the spelling to Jehovah for the 1762-1769 edition. Combining YHWH with Adonai is referred to as interlacing, fusing or superimposing. It could hardly be considered accurate or respectful. The illogical fusion of the sacred Name with the vowel points of another name is shown in the preface to The J.B. Rotherham Emphasized Bible: "To give the name JHVH the vowels of the word for Lord [Heb. Adonai], is about as hybrid a combination as it would be to spell the name Germany with the vowels in the name Portugal - viz., Gormuna. The monstrous combination Jehovah is not older than about 1520 A.D." The Watchtower argues that Jehovah is acceptable as it is a translation. ""Yahweh" is obviously a transliteration, whereas "Jehovah" is a translation, and Bible names generally have been translated rather than transliterated." Awake! 1973 March 22 p.27 As already seen, this is not accurate as Jehovah is also a transliteration, but of two separate words. By combining the consonants from YHWH with the vowels from Adonai or possibly Elohim the word Jehovah incorporates the very reason the original pronunciation was lost. Advocates of the word Jehovah argue that it does not matter whether the word is accurate or not, what is important is that God is distinguished by a personal name. The Divine Name Brochure p.10, by the Watchtower Society states: "Even though the modern pronunciation Jehovah might not be exactly the way it was pronounced originally, this in no way detracts from the importance of the name. While many translators favor the pronunciation Yahweh, the New World Translation and also a number of other translations continue the use of the form Jehovah because of people's familiarity with it for centuries." When translating between languages the pronunciation of names change and so it may not be essential that in English the divine name is pronounced as God originally spoke it to Moses. However, it is ironic that the word Jehovah mixes God's name with the very superstition that caused it to stop being used in the first place. Every time the word Jehovah is pronounced it is a reminder of this very superstition Jehovah's Witnesses claim Hebrew was the first language as given to Adam and Eve and that it will possibly be the language spoken in the New System. (g71 2/22 p.10) The Watchtower Society prides itself on possessing the pure language, on being the only religion to teach truth. "Through the Theocratic organization of his anointed witnesses he has been clearing up the Bible truth more and more and thus purifying their speech. So now they talk and live in harmony with the language of the approaching new world. And here, in this year of 1950, his providence brings forth this New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures as a further purification of the speech of his people. He has graciously provided it as a further powerful means for turning to the peoples a "pure language"." Watchtower 1950 September 15 p.320 One might assume then that the Watchtower would prefer to use the accurate version of God's name, rather than the superstitious rendition. The word Jehovah is not an accurate form of the divine name. It can be argued that it is the common pronunciation in English and it is not important to use the name in its correct version. It is strange though that the version chosen actually incorporates the very reason that the divine name stopped being used in the first place. The History of the name Jehovah's Witnesses Of key importance to Jehovah's Witnesses, Isaiah 43:10 is known as their namesake. Isaiah 43:10 ""YOU are my witnesses," is the utterance of Jehovah, "even my servant whom I have chosen ..."" Most Witnesses believe that there have always been a group of witnesses to Jehovah's name, and hence it must have been of great importance to Russell. In actual fact, Russell placed greater emphasis on Jesus than Jehovah, with his most important teaching being "atonement" through Jesus' Ransom Sacrifice. Russell's followers were referred to as Bible Students, and he remained opposed to being known as anything other than a follower of Christ. "It was an evidence that those Corinthians, who took the party names, had never really appreciated the oneness of the Body of Christ; that they did not really appreciate that Christ is the only head, leader and standard; and that his is the only name by which his followers should recognize themselves and each other. Where scoffers apply a name in derision, it is not the fault of the faithful. But the true, loyal soldiers of the cross, should never own or recognize such a name. Instances of names so originating are Methodists and Baptists, both of which were first given in derision, but were afterwards adopted as party names, representing sects, factions, or divisions in the body of Christ. All true teachers are not only sent by Christ but receive their instructions from him; and any man who attempts to put his own or any other name upon all or any portion of the church is an opponent, an adversary to the true and only Lord and Head of the church." Zion's Watch Tower Oct 1888 p.3 It is admitted in Jehovah's Witnesses - Proclaimers of God's Kingdom that: "Isaiah 43:10, 12 was never discussed in any detail in The Watch Tower during its first 40 years of publication." p.152 Russell expressed that salvation is through Jesus, which is the core message of the New Testament. It certainly was not Jehovah, which is not a name that appears in the New Testament. "The correct Scriptural conviction that the only name by which any can be saved is the name of Jesus: - faith in his sacrifice, and obedience and devotion to him." Zion's Watchtower 1901 Aug 15 p.264 It was in 1926 that the importance of the word Jehovah was introduced by Rutherford, and it was not until 1931 that the term "Jehovah's Witness" was taken. "Especially since the year 1926 they have been making known the name of the heavenly Father of the King Jesus Christ, even going to the extent of embracing the name "Jehovah's witnesses" in the year 1931." God's Kingdom of a Thousand Years Has Approached p. 288 In response to the radical new direction Rutherford was taking the Watchtower Society, many left the Organization and formed independent Bible Student groups. In an effort to distance his followers from this "evil slave class", Rutherford introduced the distinguishing name Jehovah's Witnesses. This is discussed in the Watchtower 1931 September 15 and October 1. Rutherford used Isaiah 62:2 as his principle reference. Isaiah 62:2 "And you will actually be called by a new name, which the very mouth of Jehovah will designate." This was poor choice of Scripture as just 2 verses later the name given is not Jehovah but Hephzibah. Isaiah 62:4 "but you yourself will be called (Hephzibah RSV) My Delight Is in Her." This erroneous reasoning was not corrected till several years later, and Isaiah 43:10 brought to prominence instead. "Although the evidence points persuasively to Jehovah's direction in selection of the name Jehovah's Witnesses, The Watchtower (February 1, 1944, pp. 42-3; October 1, 1957, p. 607) and the book "New Heavens and a New Earth" (pp. 231-7) later pointed out that this name is not the "new name" referred to at Isaiah 62:2; 65:15; and Revelation 2:17, though the name harmonizes with the new relationship referred to in the two texts in Isaiah." Jehovah's Witnesses - Proclaimers of God's Kingdom p. 156 Footnote The Watchtower gives precedence to the name Jehovah's Witnesses based on Isaiah 43:10 in favour of the wealth of New Testament guidance to be "witnesses of me" (Acts 1:8) - Christ Jesus. Luke 24:46-48 "In this way it is written that the Christ would suffer and rise from among the dead on the third day, and on the basis of his name repentance for forgiveness of sins would be preached in all the nations-starting out from Jerusalem, YOU are to be witnesses of these things." Acts 10:43 "To him all the prophets bear witness, that everyone putting faith in him gets forgiveness of sins through his name." Hebrews 12:1-2 "… we have so great a cloud of witnesses surrounding us, … as we look intently at the Chief Agent and Perfecter of our faith, Jesus." Revelation 17:6 "… the witnesses of Jesus." Further effort to shift attention from Jesus to Jehovah was made in March 1939, when The Watchtower and Herald of Christ's Kingdom was renamed The Watchtower Announcing Jehovah's Kingdom. Related to this topic is that the Watchtower promoted the Worship of Jesus until 1954. Jehovah's Witnesses worshipped Jesus until 1954, after which they were told such worship was idolatrous. This made them a polytheistic religion for most of their history. The core to religion is God, and to change the God you worship is to change the very essence and basis of the religion. Of the countless alterations in Witness doctrine, the one regarding the Worship of Jesus is most important of all. The major issues concerning the history and doctrine of the Jehovah's Witnesses are prevalent within the Watchtower doctrine of Jesus, clearly highlighting the manner in which the leaders operate. These pandemic symptoms are threefold. Significant teachings change The Watchtower misquotes its sources Current doctrines are not necessarily correct Changed Teaching on Jesus Russell taught that we should worship Jesus and the initial Watchtower Charter's specified that establishment of the Watchtower Society was to promote the worship of Jehovah and Jesus. Yet since the 1950's, worshipping Jesus became regarded as wrongful idolatry. Russell promoted the worship of Jesus and prayer to him because he is our God. "It seems clear that His Divinity was retained in humanity because He repeatedly spoke of Himself as having come down from heaven, and because He, though passing through trial and sorrow as a man, was yet possessed of the authority and exercised the prerogatives of a God. He was the object of unreproved worship even when a babe, by the wise men who came to see the new-born King. Matt. 2:2-11. Even the angels delighted to do Him honor. "When He bringeth the first-begotten into the world, He saith, "And let all the angels of God worship Him." Heb. 1:6. He never reproved any one for acts of worship offered to Himself, but when Cornelius offered such service to Peter--the leading apostle-- "he took him up, saying, stand up; I myself also am a man." .... Had Christ not been more than a man the same reason would have prevented from receiving worship...." Zion's Watch Tower 1880 Oct pp.2-3 "It is undoubtedly proper enough for us to address petitions to our Redeemer and Advocate, who loved us and gave himself for us....Although we are nowhere instructed to make petitions to him, it evidently could not be improper so to do; for such a course is nowhere prohibited, and the disciples worshiped him." Zion's Watch Tower 1892 May 15 p.157 "Question. The fact that our Lord received worship is claimed by some to be an evidence that while on earth he was God the Father disguised in a body of flesh and not really a man. Was he really worshiped, or is the translation faulty? Answer. Yes, we believe our Lord Jesus while on earth was really worshiped, and properly so. It was proper for our Lord to receive worship in view of his having been the only begotten of the Father and his agent in the creation of all things, including man." Zion's Watch Tower 1898 Jul 15 p.216 "In one respect many of Christendom could learn numerous important lessons from these wise Gentiles....They worshiped him in three senses of the word: (1) They fell before him, prostrated themselves, thus physically expressing their reverence. (2) They worshiped him in their hearts and with the tongue gave expression to their rejoicing and confidence. (3) They opened their treasure-box and presented to him three gifts appropriate to royalty: the myrrh representing submission, frankincense representing praise, gold representing obedience." Zion's Watch Tower 1906 Jan 1 p.15 Rutherford continued this teaching. "Jehovah God commands all to worship Christ Jesus because Christ Jesus is the express image of his Father, Jehovah, and because he is the Executive Officer of Jehovah always carrying out Jehovah's purpose (Heb.:3-6)." Watchtower 1939 Nov 15 p.339 "During the Millennium, "the princes will lead the people in their worship of Jehovah and of Christ." Vindication Volume 3 (J. F. Rutherford, 1932) p.295 "The people of all nations who obtain salvation must come to the house of the Lord to worship there; that is to say, they must believe on and worship Jehovah God and the Lord Jesus Christ, his chief instrument (Philippians 2:10, 11)." Salvation (J. F. Rutherford, 1939) p.151 Knorr continued to teach we should worship Jesus and the 1940's Watchtower articles still stated that Jesus was to be worshipped. "Now, at Christ's coming to reign as king in Jehovah's capital organization Zion, to bring in a righteous new world, Jehovah makes him infinitely higher than the godly angels or messengers and accordingly commands them to worship him. Since Jehovah God now reigns as King by means of his capital organization Zion, then whosoever would worship Him must also worship and bow down to Jehovah's Chief One in that capital organization, namely, Christ Jesus, his Co-regent on the throne of The Theocracy." Watchtower 1945 Oct 15 p.313 In 1945, Knorr amended the Watchtower's legal Charter. Included within the Charter was the statement that the purpose of the Watchtower Society is to promote the worship of Jehovah and Jesus. The 1945 Yearbook includes the Charter in full. Part of the current charter states as follows: "The purposes of this Society are: To act as the servant of and the legal world-wide governing agency for that body of Christian persons known as Jehovah's Witnesses to preach the gospel of God's kingdom under Christ Jesus unto all nations as a witness to the name, word and supremacy of Almighty Good JEHOVAH; to print and distribute Bibles and to disseminate Bible truths in various languages by means of making and publishing literature containing information and comment explaining Bible truths and prophecy concerning establishment of Jehovah's kingdom under Christ Jesus to authorize and appoint agents, servants, employees, teachers, instructors, evangelists, missionaries and ministers to go forth to all the world publicly and from house to house to preach and teach Bible truths to persons willing to listen by leaving with such persons said literature and by conducting Bible studies thereon to improve men, women and children mentally and morally by Christian missionary work and by charitable and benevolent instruction of the people on the Bible and incidental scientific, historical and literary subjects to establish and maintain private Bible schools and classes for gratuitous instruction of men and women in the Bible, Bible literature and Bible history; to teach, train, prepare and equip men and women as ministers, missionaries, evangelists, preachers, teachers and lecturers to provide and maintain homes, places and buildings for gratuitous housing of such students, lecturers, teachers and minister; to furnish gratuitously to such students, lecturers, teachers, educators and ministers suitable meals and lodging and to prepare, support, maintain and send out to various parts of the world Christian missionaries, teachers and instructors in the Bible and Bible literature and for public Christian worship of Almighty God and Christ Jesus; to arrange for and hold local and world-wide assemblies for such worship to use or operate radio broadcasting stations for preaching this gospel of the kingdom; and to do any and all other lawful things that its Board of Directors shall deem expedient for the purposes stated." Therefore the Jehovah's Witness 1945 Charter states to worship Christ Jesus. It was not until 1999 that worship of Jesus was finally removed to simply state "arrange for and hold assemblies for religious worship;" Worship of Jesus Becomes Idolatry In the 1950's, the Watchtower changed their doctrine on Jesus to coincide with the release of the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures. Contrary to most other translations, this new Bible version for Jehovah's Witnesses translated the word proskuneō as obeisance rather than worship whenever it referred to Jesus. This is despite the fact that with almost every other occurrence, the New World Translation translates proskuneō as worship. Proskuneō occurs 60 times in the Greek Scriptures. Of the 17 times it applies to Jesus, all 17 occurrences were translated by the New World Translation as obeisance. (In the 2013 revision, 2 of these times have been changed to "bow".) The only other instance where prokuneō is translated as 'obeisance' is when Cornelius bows to Peter. (Worship would be correct here as well. Peter interprets this act as a form of worship, as he rejects it immediately.) Of the remaining 42 times proskuneō appears, it is always translated as worship, regardless of whether it is referring to Jehovah, angels, humans, Satan, demons, the wild beast and its image, or idols. Why this unusual stance in connection with Jesus? This is because the teaching about Jesus was undergoing a dramatic change. The first clear statement that Jesus must not be worshipped was in 1954. From that time forward there was a new belief in the position of Jesus; that he should be neither prayed to or worshipped. "Should we worship Jesus? Consequently, since the Scriptures teach that Jesus Christ is not a trinitarian co-person with God the Father, but is a distinct person, the Son of God, the answer to the above question must be that no distinct worship is to be rendered to Jesus Christ now glorified in heaven. Our worship is to go to Jehovah God. However, we show the proper regard for God's only-begotten Son by rendering our worship to God through and in the name of Jesus Christ. Even now when we kneel in prayer, as Paul did according to Ephesians 3:14-19, we offer prayer in the name of Jesus Christ in obedience to his own directions (John 15:16; 16:23-26), but the prayer itself is addressed, not to Jesus, but to God his Father. In this way we keep things in their relative positions." Watchtower 1954 Jan 1 p.31 "Trinitarians who believe that Jesus is God, or at least the second person of the triune God, do not like to have Jehovah's witnesses say that it is unscriptural for worshipers of the living and true God to render worship to the Son of God, Jesus Christ" Watchtower 1964 Nov 1 p.671 "Reverent adoration should be expressed only to God. To render worship to anyone or anything else would be a form of idolatry, which is condemned in both the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures. Accordingly, true Christians do well to direct their worship only to Jehovah God, the Almighty." Awake! 2000 Apr 8 pp.26,27 "Though some claim that prayer may properly be addressed to others, such as to God's Son, the evidence is emphatically to the contrary." Insight on the Scriptures Volume 2 p.667 Watchtower Misquotes On occasion the Watchtower use misquotes to hide its history or prove doctrines. For example, look at the way in which the charter is quoted since the doctrine was changed. Though a Witness is bluntly told not to worship Jesus, the Charter was not amended to reflect this new doctrine until 1999. Therefore, for 45 years Witnesses were counselled against worshipping Jesus even though to do so was stated as the express reason for the existence of the Watchtower Society. This is despite the fact that it is considered idolatry to worship and pray to Jesus and will result in a Witness being disfellowshipped. It is interesting to see how the Watchtower dealt with having in its charter that Jesus is to be worshipped. They either misquoted it or avoided it completely. The Yearbook of 1969 p.50 leaves the words "and Christ Jesus" out altogether, cheekily replacing them with dots. "for public Christian worship of Almighty God … ; to arrange for" The section of the charter shown above is quoted almost in full in the footnote of the 1971 Watchtower on page 760, altering one small but significant word (which it correctly places in brackets) to significantly hide and change the true meaning of the sentence. "for public Christian worship of Almighty God [through] Christ Jesus; to arrange for..." Watchtower 1971 Dec 15 p.760 The 1993 Proclaimers book, outlining a history of the Watchtower Society, failed to even admit what is in the Charter. Current Questionable Doctrine Up until 1938, the Watchtower title included the words Herald of Christ's Presence. In 1939, the title of the January 1st issue changed to The Watchtower and Herald of Christ’s Kingdom. On March 1st, 1939 the word Christ was removed and replaced with Jehovah. To this day it is now The Watchtower Announcing Jehovah's Kingdom. It is interesting to understand why it was originally taught that Jesus is a God worthy of our worship and prayers. Jesus is a God John 1:1 " and the Word was a god." John 20:28-29 "In answer Thomas said to him: "My Lord and my God!" Jesus said to him: "Because you have seen me have you believed? Happy are those who do not see and yet believe."" Jesus was worshipped The Bible repeatedly says that Jesus was worshipped. The New World Translation is virtually alone in translating the word proskuneo as obeisance. Yet look at the context of the following scripture to understand that the thought given is one of reverential worship. Hebrews 1:6 "But when he again brings his Firstborn into the inhabited earth, he says: "And let all God's angels do obeisance (proskuneo, worship) to him." Jesus is our creator John 1:2-4 "This one was in [the] beginning with God. All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence. What has come into existence by means of him was life, and the life was the light of men." Jesus was prayed to Acts 7:59 "And they went on casting stones at Stephen as he made appeal and said: "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." Stephen prayed to Jesus whilst being stoned to death. Unlike most translations, the New World Translation uses the word appeal instead of prayer. However, the footnote to New World Translation, 1950 edition, states (footnote b: "invocation; prayer"). The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson and published by the Watchtower Society also refers to "the prayer of Stephen" in its' footnote. Regardless of whether Stephen appealed or prayed to Jesus, it is clear what the writer meant. The reason the New World Translation is averse to using the word prayer is that it is an indication of worship. Can you imagine what would happen today if an elder stood on the platform and prayed to Jesus instead of Jehovah? This leads to a very interesting problem. If Jehovah's Witnesses worshipped Jehovah and worshipped Jesus that means they were worshipping two Gods. Does that not then make them Polytheistic? Yet Deuteronomy 6:4 states 'Jehovah our God is one Jehovah". The first of the ten commandments stated at Exodus 20:2-3 "I am Jehovah your God, who have brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slaves. You must not have any other gods against my face." By current Watchtower teaching, until 1954 Russell and all Jehovah's Witnesses were idolaters, a sin Revelation 21:8 describes as worthy of the second death. If that is the case, they cannot be part of the 144,000 heavenly rulers. Early Jewish Christians grappled with this concept. Their background was Monotheistic, yet they were to worship Jesus, pray to him and refer to him as God. This left first century Christians with a Father and a Son and the Holy Spirit referred to as their God (Matthew 28:19, "Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," Acts 5:3-4, "But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land? Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.") their creator and to be worshipped; yet they could not accept polytheism. Christianity worshipped only one God therefore the Trinitarian concept was understood to mean within the nature of the one, eternal God were three eternally distinct persons. The very earliest of the Christian writers describe Jesus as immortal (Mathetes), God (Justin Martyr) and co-equal (Tertullian) with the Father. It is with this understanding that a Jehovah's Witness can start to consider that the current Watchtower doctrine of God which has evolved over time does not have strong Scriptural support at all. For more information on the Biblical nature of God see our playlist " Dealing with Anti Trinitarians (UPC) & Early Church History" with 48 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL9931642C7C8FFEAB. With significant & continual Watchtower doctrinal change on essential Biblical issues, concerned persons should really question whether the Holy Spirit directs the Governing Body of Jehovah's Witnesses in anything they do or say. Once it is recognized that Watchtower articles have dishonestly hidden information from their readers & have been doing so for a long, long time how can anything they produce be trusted without suspicion. Jehovah's Witnesses, like a herd of cattle being guided unsuspectingly to the slaughterhouse, have failed to question the trustworthiness of Watchtower material & their truth claims leading to a fulfillment of Jesus' statement, "they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch." (Matthew 15:14) For more information see: www.jwinfoline.com, www.cftf.com & www.BibleQuery.org. Matthew 7:15, "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves."

Are Christians still under the Law of Moses or have the terms of the New Covenant as found in the New Testament changed Old Covenant requirements that were originally designated for the Old Testament Israelites (Hebrews 7:12, 8:6-13, 10:9)? No, true Christians are not under the Law of Moses but under Grace (this does not mean antinomianism however, see our video "Apostate Grace Evangelical Society (GES) Teaches Phony Grace & the Easy Believism of Another Gospel" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-wMMvdPtyYvM.html). When you are under New Covenant grace true Christians still try to keep the moral laws of God because they love God & His righteousness. They are not trying to keep those moral laws of God in order to accomplish their salvation with God but because they have already received salvation by God's grace through being "born again" supernaturally by the Holy Spirit - John 3:3-8, Romans 8:1-17, 1 Corinthians 2:10-16, Ephesians 4:30, John 6:37, 39, 44, 63, 65 - see our video, "Sabbath Keeping Is Not Required For New Testament Christians: Seventh-Day Adventists Beware" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-TEFt4TOR6E8.html). Too many so-called legalistic & heretical "Christians" think they have to work to keep the law in order to either earn their salvation or try hard to keep from losing it (see our videos "True Christians Cannot Lose Their Salvation But Fake & Deluded "Christians" Never Had It At All" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-meUD2vCv3oo.html & "DEBATE: ONCE SAVED ALWAYS SAVED (CALVINISM) OR DOING ENOUGH WORKS TO KEEP SALVATION (PELAGIANISM)?" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-H7e1aWfrQHg.html). To be under the Law means that a person is under the power and authority of the Law to judge and condemn anyone who breaks the Law. Take a look at these verses that talk about being under the Law. Rom. 2:12, "For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law; and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law," (ἐν νόμῳ, en nomo, literally 'in law'). Gal. 3:23, "But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed," (ὑπὸ νόμον, hupo nomon, literally 'under law'). Gal. 4:5, "in order that He might redeem those who were under the Law, that we might receive the adoption as sons," (ὑπὸ νόμον, hupo nomon, literally 'under law'). As you can see, to be under the Law means you will be judged by the Law. In the Old Testament Law found in Deuteronomy 27:26 it says, "‘Cursed is he who does not confirm the words of this law by doing them.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’" So, to be under the Law means you have to keep it all. In Galatians 3:10 Paul said, "For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them.'” That is what it means to be under the Law. But, as I said above, Christians are not under the Law. In other words, Christians are not obligated to keep the Law so as to be saved from God's righteous judgment, so they don't go to hell. Rom. 6:14, "For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law, but under grace." Gal. 5:18, "But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the Law." Christians are freed from having to please God and be saved by keeping the Law of God. We are not under the Law. We are not under its authority. It has no power over us. Why are Christians not under the Law? Christians are not under the Law because they have died to the Law. They have died with Christ, and those who have died are not bound by the Law. "for the Law brings about wrath, but where there is no law, neither is there violation." (Rom. 4:15). "knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, that our body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin;" (Rom. 6:6). "Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him," (Rom. 6:8). "Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, that we might bear fruit for God." (Rom. 7:4). "But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter." (Rom. 7:6). So, Christians have died with Christ. They are identified with Christ so closely that it can be said that when Christ died, they died with him. Since Christians have died with him, they are no longer under the Law because he who has died is freed from the Law (Rom. 7:6). That is why Christians are not obligated to keep the Law of God in order to be saved from God's righteous judgment. Christians are saved from that requirement and penalty. Does Romans 2:13 mean that we are justified before God by keeping the Law? "For there is no partiality with God. 12 For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law; and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law; 13 for not the hearers of the Law are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified. 14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, 15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness, and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, 16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus.” (Romans 2:11-16). Verse 13 is often used by people (Roman Catholics, Mormons, etc.,) to say that we must keep the Law (along with faith in Jesus) to be saved, but this isn’t so. Paul was talking to the Jews (Romans 2:17) about their judging of the Gentiles, and then points them to their own Law (standard of judgment) and hypocrisy and tells them that the doers of the Law are just before God (v. 13). The standard they wanted to keep was the Law. Paul was telling them that they could be justified before God by keeping it. So, keep the Law. Keep all of it, but if you don’t, you’re in trouble. It is the doers of the Law who are justified before God. He tells them that the Gentiles who didn't have the Law according to the knowledge of the Jews were instinctively keeping the Law (v. 14) and will be judged accordingly. How much more the Jews? Paul was showing the self-righteous Jews who judged the Gentiles that they were not able to keep a perfect standard. They were hypocrites. This is why Paul tells us in the very next chapter, in Romans 3:28, that we are justified by faith apart from the works of the Law--which includes the Law of loving God (Deut. 6:5), and loving your neighbor (Lev. 19:18). No one is able to keep the Law. If you fail even once, then you become guilty of it all. James 2:10, “For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all.” Gal. 3:10, “For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them.” The Jews (and anyone else) can be justified before God by keeping the Law, but he or she has to be perfect. A person can’t fail even once--ever. But since all fail, that is why we have the gospel that tells us Jesus kept the Law perfectly (1 Pet. 2:22), and that we can be justified before God by faith in Him (Romans 4:3, 5; 5:1; John 1:12; 3:16). See our video "KEEPING THE OLD TESTAMENT LAWS & COMMANDMENTS CANNOT EARN HEAVEN OR SALVATION WITH GOD!" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-aIh3T31ujuU.html. Galatians 2:16, "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified." Philippians 3:2-3, 9, "Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision. 3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh. And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:"

1 Peter 5:8, " Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:). See our playlist called "Dealing with Mormonism, The Con Man Religion of Joseph Smith, Jr." with 23 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL11CD0EE613306BB5. Research the websites concernedchristians.com/ , www.MormonInfo.org, www.utlm.org, & for a host of other anti-Mormon websites see www.utlm.org/navotherwebsites.htm Jude 22-23, "And have mercy on those who doubt; 23 save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh."

Some of the best Christian material against the false religion of Islam is available by going to answering-islam.org/, www.answeringmuslims.com/ & www.muslimhope.com/. Some of the best Christian videos available on the internet against Islam can be found on ru-vid.com & RU-vid videos by Christian Islamic expert Sam Shamoun at ru-vid.com?search_query=sam+shamoun (see also his articles at answeringislam.net/authors/shamoun.html, answeringislam.net/Shamoun/ & answeringislam.net/Responses/index.htm). Christian Islamic expert Robert Spencer at ru-vid.com?search_query=robert+spencer+islam & Christian apologist James White videos against Islam at ru-vid.com?search_query=james+white+islam are also excellent resources for Christians seeking to refute the Muslim religion created by the false prophet Muhammad. Many may not know that Christian apologist Sam Shamoun has also written articles against the Jehovah's Witnesses. To read his many articles against the Jehovah's Witnesses please go to the following link - badmanna.wordpress.com/?s=sam+shamoun. Particularly notice his article series "The King James Version of the Holy Bible: The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Nightmare" beginning with Part 1 at badmanna.wordpress.com/2015/04/10/the-king-james-version-of-the-holy-bible-the-jehovahs-witnesses-nightmare-pt-1-a-post-by-sam-shamoun/. There are also many videos by Sam Shamoun concerning Jehovah's Witnesses at ru-vid.com?search_query=sam+shamoun+jehovah%27s+witnesses. See also the many videos by Christian apologist James White concerning the Jehovah's Witnesses at ru-vid.com?search_query=james+white+jehovah%27s+witnesses. See also our playlist "Dealing with Jehovah's Witnesses, Watchtower Society" with 22 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLCF0ADB29C0EB8C40. 2 Timothy 4:2-5, "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine. 3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. 5 But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry."

Heretics who believe they & even unbelieving newborn infants will be saved by water baptism go to no limits in perverting scripture in order to justify themselves that their water baptism is what has saved them (making them water baptism idolaters of the worse sort who replace faith alone in Jesus Christ alone by grace alone with a man made "work" of performing a human ritual of water baptism thus promoting "another gospel" which is cursed in Galatians 1:6-9 by the apostle Paul; see also Ephesians 2:8-10). See our video "IS WATER BAPTISM NECESSARY TO ESCAPE HELL & BE SAVED & ARE YOU "BORN AGAIN" (JOHN 3:3-8) BY IT?" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-wYJtMV9qrWg.html. Heretics even turn to Old Testament verses to argue for their water baptism savior. The following are some of the arguments made by them for water baptism salvation in the Old Testament: "Old Testament references to Holy Baptism with water - As with the other sacraments, references to Holy Baptism with water can be found in the Old Testament. The deliverance of Noah and his family in the ark is regarded in 1 Peter 3: 20-21 as an "antitype of baptism" and a reference to future salvation. In Christian tradition, the Israelites' passage through the Red Sea-their deliverance from Egyptian captivity-is also understood as a reference to the deliverance that occurs through baptism with water. The Mosaic Law strictly distinguishes between "clean" and "unclean". Water is one of the means used to bring about ritual purity. Persons who were unclean in a religious sense had to subject to a bath of purification (Leviticus 13-15). Ezekiel 16: 9 mentions a washing with water and an anointing with oil, through which Jerusalem was received into a covenant of salvation. This can also be understood as a reference to Holy Baptism with water and Holy Sealing. Likewise, the situation of the Aramaic commander Naaman can be related to baptism: at the instruction of the prophet Elisha, the leper washed himself by dipping his body seven times into the Jordan, and the disease abated (2 Kings 5: 1-14). This can be understood as a symbol for the washing away of original sin through baptism." Weak arguments for water baptism salvation such as these are easily refuted by a proper New Testament understanding of Biblical salvation. 101 Reasons Why Water Baptism is Not Necessary to be Saved Thesis: We are saved by the grace (gift) of God through a living faith, via the agency (baptism) of the Holy Spirit because of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. Water baptism is a most important part of the Christian life. Since the earliest days, baptism has been consistently practiced by Christians to confirm their faith and relationship with the Father, Son, And Holy Spirit. Certainly a person with a sincere saving faith will be baptized (or if they were baptized as an infant will acknowledge and cherish that fact). Water baptism is a physical act that testifies to a spiritual event. But does the actual act of being baptized get one to heaven? Christians sometimes assume that whenever they see the term baptism, that it is referring to water baptism. This is not always a correct understanding. The New Testament uses the term baptism in four different ways: baptism by water, by the Holy Spirit, and by fire (Matthew 3:11, etc.). It also uses it as a metaphor for the association believers have in Christ's death (Romans 6:4, etc.). Items 1 through 41 are concerned with how we are saved, that is how we get to heaven. Many verses emphasize salvation by grace through faith without mentioning water baptism: 1. John 1:12 2. John 3:14-18, 36 (whoever) 3. John 5:24 4. John 6:29-40, 47, 69 (whoever, everyone) 5. John 11:25-26 (whoever) 6. John 12:46-50 (whoever) 7. John 16:7-9 (not believe) 8. John 17:20-22 9. John 20:31 10. Acts 2:21,33 (everyone) 11. Acts 10:43-48 (whoever, water baptism follows belief and Holy Spirit’s work of salvation) 12. Acts 13:38-39, 48 (everyone) 13. Acts 15:8-11 14. Acts 16:30-31 (answer to a direct question: What must I do to be saved?) 15. Acts 26:18 16. Romans 1:16 (everyone) 17. Romans 3:20-31 (all who believe) 18. Romans 4:1-11 19. Romans 4:23-25 20. Romans 5:1-21 21. Romans 9:30-33 (whoever) 22. Romans 10:4-13 (everyone, whoever) 23. Galatians 2:15-21, Galatians 3:1-28 (whoever, baptism secondary to faith) 24. Galatians 5:5-6 25. Ephesians 2:8-10 26. Philippians 3:4-14 27. 2 Thessalonians 2:16-17 28. Hebrews 4:2-3 29. 1 Peter 2:6 30. 1 John 1:5-10 31. 1 John 4:15 (God abides in whoever confesses Christ) 32. 1 John 5:1, 10-13 (whoever) 33. Other verses mention belief without water baptism: Luke 7:50; John 2:11, 23; John 4:39, 41; John 7:38-39; John 8:30-32; John 9:35-36; John 10:42; John 11:45, 48; John 12:11, 42-44; John 14:1, 12; John 20:31; Acts 14:23; Acts 20:21; Romans 15:13; Philippians 1:29; Titus 3:8. There nine instances of conversion in the book of Acts without reference to baptism: Acts 3:1-4:4, Acts 5:1-14, Acts 9:32-35, Acts 11:19-24, Acts 13:6-12, Acts 13:42-52, Acts 14:1, Acts 17:10-12, Acts 17:22-34. Did the authors miss the opportunity to mention baptism in these many passages if it is so important? 34. Many of the above verses use the language “whosoever” (King James) or “whoever” or “everyone” who believes. This language is all-encompassing. That is, by the language of the text nothing else is required for salvation except faith. Thus, in addition to not mentioning water baptism, the all-encompassing language of whoever precludes other requirements. SO HERE WE HAVE THE THESIS OF SALVATION BY GRACE THROUGH FAITH DEMONSTRATED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. 35. Further, many verses specifically preclude works as a way to salvation: Acts 13:39; Romans 3:20, 28; Galatians 2:15-17; Ephesians 2:9; 2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 3:5; Philippians 3:8-9 (“everything”), etc. Others say that we cannot boast before God-a similar concept (Romans 3:27; 1 Corinthians 1:29). Note: some of these passages could be construed to mean we are not saved by the Law of Moses-the Old Testament law- leaving open that other works (“laws of Christ”) are necessary for salvation. However, other passages clarify that “works” are any works. See Romans 3:20-27 (clearly speaking of moral law thus broader than ceremonial law of Moses); Galatians 2:21 (“nothing”), Galatians 3:21-22 (“if a law”); Galatians 3:25 (no longer a guardian law); Titus 3:5. And please consider Romans 13:10 in Young's Literal Translation: "Love therefore is the fulness of law." Note that in the Greek there is no "the" in front of "law," making law a general term and not a reference to Old Testament law. So Paul is making a general case that we are not saved by works of any kind. Jesus himself explains in John 6:27-29 that the “work” we must do is to believe. Thus we are not saved by what we do; we cannot get to heaven by what we do. HERE WE HAVE THE THESIS OF GRACE THROUGH FAITH DEMONSTRATED IN THE NEGATIVE. 36. Baptism in the Bible typically follows one’s saving faith as an act of obedience after being saved. 37. We listed numerous passages that say that forgiveness of sins comes with faith. There are also passages that indicate that forgiveness of sins is associated with repentance (without mention of water baptism), for example Mark 1:15; Luke 24:47; Acts 3:19; Acts 5:31; Acts 19:4; Acts 20:21; 2 Corinthians 7:10. 38. Faith and repentance are closely associated. They are like two sides of the same coin. You cannot turn toward Christ without turning away from sin. So the command to non-Christians is to repent and believe. All other commands to obedience in the New Testament, including water baptism, are to people who are already Christians. 39. Having pointed out the above, we must clarify that the type of faith that saves is one that is obedient. Ephesians 2:8-10 confirms that we are saved by grace through faith and not of our own doing, but through a faith that results in good works. James 2 confirms that we cannot be saved by a “dead” faith. Thus we are saved by a living faith. Someone who has a genuine faith will seek to conform their life to the will of God. Ephesians 2 confirms that even faith itself is a gift of God. Yet a living faith is still faith. Faith expressed is still faith. We would question whether a person who refused water baptism has a genuine (living) faith. A person who had received a saving faith would want to be obedient, thus would be baptized, not for salvation but because of it. 40. Yes, “works” are indeed necessary for salvation-Christ’s work (Romans 5:19)! For us humans, works are an output rather than an input. In terms of a formula: (a) Correct Formula: GRACE THROUGH FAITH = SALVATION + WORKS (b) Incorrect Formula: GRACE THROUGH FAITH + WORKS = SALVATION Formula (b) is biblically incorrect as well as logically incorrect. The first law of logic says that 2 contradictory things cannot both be true at the same time and in the same relationship. The definition of grace is unmerited favor (www.carm.org/christianity/dictionary-theology/gehenna-hypostatic-union#_1_75) and is a free gift (Romans 5:15, 5:16, 6:23). So it would be merited favor if works are required for salvation. Something cannot both be unmerited and merited at the same time. This is precisely what Paul is arguing in Romans 11:6 (“But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace.”) and in Galatians 2:9 (“I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died needlessly.”) 41. Nowhere does the Bible say the words, “cannot be saved without water baptism,” or “an unbaptized believer is not saved.” Items 42 through 59 pertain to Acts 2:38, Mark 16:16, 1 Peter 3:21, and Acts 22:16-passages which are often used to show that water baptism saves. 42. Acts 2:38 in most translations says, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins….” But there are valid reasons why for in Acts 2:38 does not necessarily mean “in order to achieve” forgiveness of sins. The Greek word eis (“for”) can have a variety of translations or meanings. Possible meanings include "in," "into," "unto," "to,"towards," "at," or even “because of,” “as a result of,” or “in light of.” There are many passages in the New Testament that show these various nuances in meaning: Matthew 3:11, 10:41, 12:41, 28:19; Mark 1:9; Luke 5:14, 14:23; John 4:5, 11:31; Acts 2:25, 10:43, 19:3, 22:10; Romans 4:20, 5:8, 5:12, 6:3; 1 Corinthians 10:2. Thus, whatever follows eis (for) may even be something that has already been accomplished. Here is an online Bible that the reader can look up each of these passages: www.biblegateway.com/. Also see Got Questions, a site that has the most extensive list of Bible answers on the Internet. Robert Morey cites many Bible translations that render eis in Acts 2:38 as “because of” or “as a result of” or “in light of.” Also helpful is an essay by Lanny Tanton, a former Church of Christ preacher that changed his mind on this: Change of Mind. Eis also “looks backward” in the Old Testament Septuagint (Malachi 2:2, 2:11). 43. The English dictionary gives about a dozen ways that the word “for” is used. For example, consider the statement, “John was beheaded for his faithfulness.” Isn't it accurate to say that “for” does not mean “in order to obtain” in this sentence? Similarly, the statement "Take two aspirin for a headache" does not mean "Take two aspirin in order to get a headache." 44. Further regarding Acts 2:38, The Hebrew-Greek Key Study Bible (page 1357) says this, “The main verb in this verse is metanoesate (3340), meaning 'repent.' This refers to that initial repentance of a sinner unto salvation. The verb translated ‘be baptized’ is in the indirect passive imperative of baptizo (907) which means that it does not have the same force as the direct command of ‘repent.’ The preposition ‘for’ in the phrase ‘for the remission of sins’ in Greek is eis (1519), ‘unto.’ Literally it means ‘for the purpose of identifying you with the remission of sins.’ This same preposition is used in 1 Corinthians 10:2 in the phrase ‘and were all baptized unto [eis] Moses.’ These people were identifying themselves with the work and ministry of Moses. Repentance is something that concerns an individual and God, while baptism is intended to be a testimony to other people. That is why baptistheto, ‘to be baptized,’ is in the passive voice indicating that one does not baptize himself, but he is baptized by another usually in the presence of others.” 45. Thayer’s A Greek English Lexicon of the New Testament confirms many alternative meanings to the Greek word eis. 46. People are saved after (1) hearing God’s word (Acts 2:22-37). They then (2) received God’s word (Acts 2:41) and (3) believed in Jesus (Acts 10:43, Romans 10:9-13) for salvation. Peter’s audience “gladly received his word”-and by necessary inference believed in their hearts and put their trust in Jesus-before they were water baptized (Acts 2:41). Salvation thus comes at the point of receiving God’s word and taking it to heart. 47. Those who believed Peter’s message clearly received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized. Peter said, “Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” (Acts 10:47) Peter’s first emphasis is on having received the Holy Spirit (just as we have); baptism comes later as a follow-up. 48. Scripture must be interpreted so that it harmonizes. Language is often not straight forward or literal, and interpretation is required. There are passages that may seem to be saying, on the surface, that we must do something to be saved (water baptism)-such as Acts 2:38 or Mark 16:16. But if they actually meant that, Scripture would be contradictory. Any concept or statement that is contradictory cannot be true. Note for example, that Mark 16:16 does not specifically say that all who believe but are not baptized go to hell. If it did, it would contradict the “whoever” passages such as John 3:16 or Acts 10:43 (whoever believes shall be saved) and would also contradict the numerous passages that say we are not saved by works (Romans 3, Ephesians 2, Galatians 3, Titus 3, etc.). Similarly, Acts 2:38 cannot mean that water baptism is necessary for salvation because Acts 2:21 says that “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.” The way to harmonize these concepts is to understand that works such as water baptism are things that a true saved believer will do to be obedient. But (in the case of an adult convert) such works follow salvation. Thus we are saved by a living faith (James 2). But faith expressed is still faith-and it is faith that saves us-not the works. 49. To emphasize, if eis has the meaning of “in order to be saved” in Acts 2:38, it suggests that salvation is based on works-an idea that runs counter to the theology of Acts, namely: (a) repentance-and sins blotted out-often precedes baptism (cf. Acts 3:19, 26:20), and (b) salvation is entirely a gift of God, not procured via water baptism (Acts 10:43 [cf. v. 47]; Acts 13:38-39, 48; Acts 15:11; Acts 16:30-31; Acts 20:21; Acts 26:18). 50. Acts 2:44 speaks of “all who believed” as constituting the early church, not necessarily all who were baptized. 51. According to theologians Geisler and Howe (book When Critics Ask), in view of the many factors, “It seems best to understand Peter’s statement in Acts 2:38 like this: ‘Repent and be baptized with a view to the forgiveness of sins’ (or ‘because of forgiveness of sins’). Believing (or repenting) and being baptized are placed together, since baptism should follow belief. But nowhere does it say, ‘He who is not baptized will be condemned’ (Mark 16:16). Yet Jesus said emphatically that ‘he who does not believe is condemned already’ (John 3:18). So neither Peter nor the rest of Scripture makes water baptism a condition of salvation.” 52. Mark 16:16, which is often used to support water baptismal regeneration does not appear in the oldest and most reliable manuscripts. So many scholars question whether it should even be considered part of Scripture. See Got Questions on Mark. 53. Does Mark 16:16 prove that a person must be baptized in order to be saved? No, it does not specify. It says that a person who believes and is baptized will be saved, and a person who does not believe is condemned. Proverbs 30:6 and 1 Corinthians 4:6 are strict warnings not to add to God’s word. If you say that Mark 16:16 states what happens to those who believe and are not baptized, when that verse is silent on that, you are adding to God’s word. 54. The Hebrew-Greek Key Study Bible (page 1260) says about Mark 16:16, “The word ‘believeth’ is pisteuo [4100], an aortist participle referring to one who has believed at some time in the past. Also, baptistheis (907), translated ‘is baptized,’ is an aorist participle but in the passive voice. This form refers to an act of outward obedience, in this case, baptism. Therefore, the correct translation here should be stated, 'He who believed and who was baptized shall be saved.' However, the Lord adds, ' …but he that believeth not shall be damned.’ It should be noted that this negative statement does not include a reference to baptism, making it clear that what saves a person is living faith in Jesus Christ. This is made clear in Ephesians 2:8, ‘For by grace are ye saved through faith….’ The word ‘saved’ is translated from the Greek word sesosmenoi, which is a perfect passive participle. It means that this salvation took place at some point in the past and is continuing on in the present, being accomplished by Jesus Christ Himself. If baptism were necessary for salvation, Ephesians 2:8 and many other verses should have been translated ‘ye are saved through faith and baptism.’…Baptism is a distinct act of obedience apart from salvation. This is clarified by the order in which the words ‘believe’ and ‘baptize’ occur in the text…” 55. 1 Pet 3:21 (NIV): “and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also-not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God…” 1 Pet 3:21 (KJV): “The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God.)” The body washed with pure water is a visible emblem of our changed hearts. The key word in the Greek in this sentence is antitypos, which means “a thing resembling another” (Blue Letter Bible). So the NIV rendering “symbolizes” is correct. 1 Peter 3:21 says that it is not the water that saves us but the pledge of a good conscience towards God, which is symbolized by baptism. See Got Questions on Peter. 56. Regarding 1 Peter 3:21, the notes in the The Hebrew-Greek Key Study Bible (pages 1539-1540) explains, “The expression ‘baptism doth now save’ should be understood in light of verse twenty: ‘eight souls were saved by water.’ Noah and his family, being in the ark, were able to pass safely ‘through’ the waters….In the same way, the term ‘baptism’ should be understood as the visible representation of deliverance through Christ, just as the ark represented deliverance from the waters of the flood. When a person accepts Christ, he is saved; when the believer is baptized, he is identified with the One who has delivered him (i.e. Jesus Christ).” 57. KJV’s “by water” is incorrect; the Greek is “through water (di udatos)” per (NKJV, NIV, NASB, Green’s Literal Translation, NRSV, Young's Literal Translation). Wasn’t Noah saved before the flood (Genesis 6:8)? So aren’t believers saved before baptism in the same way, baptism being a symbol of a saving faith? It also seems significant that Peter here (1 Peter 3:21) explains his own statement by stating that baptism is "an appeal to God for a good conscience through the resurrection of Christ." 58. Further regarding 1 Peter 3:21, is referring not the the dirt on the surface of the body, but most likely to our sinful nature. The Greek word is sarx (Blue Letter Bible). So Peter is saying specifically that water batpism does not remove our sinful nature. See Filth of the Flesh. 59. Acts 22:16 says, “Now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name.” According to the John MacArthur study Bible, “Grammatically the phrase, ‘calling on His name,’ precedes ‘Get up and be baptized.’ Salvation comes from calling on the name of the Lord (Romans 10:9, 10, 13), not from being baptized.” Items 60 through 76 are concerned with baptism of the Holy Spirit Here's a helpful article: Got Questions on Baptism of the Holy Spirit 60. In Acts 10:43-48 those who believed Peter’s message clearly received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized. Before receiving water baptism, they believed, praised God and spoke in tongues, so they had already become children of God before receiving water baptism. Then Peter said, “Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.” So water baptism followed their salvation. The Hebrew-Greek Key Study Bible (page 1372) says, “This is similar to the circumstances at Jerusalem and Samaria in that each time, many believers were baptized in the Holy Spirit at the same time (cf. Acts 2:1-4, 8:14-17). It is interesting to note that apostles were present in each instance. The special manifestation of the Holy Spirit here, which allowed these Gentiles to speak in tongues, proved that God gave the Gentiles the same ‘gift’ (v. 45) as the Jews. Notice that the baptism of the Holy Spirit [normally] took place prior to water baptism. ‘Spiritual’ baptism is what actually places believers into the body of Christ while water baptism only demonstrates to others that a person is in the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:13)….” 1 Corinthians 12:13 specifically confirms that baptism by the Holy Spirit is what places us in the body of Christ. Peter in Acts 10:43 makes it clear that it is faith that produces remission of sins, and that water baptism comes later as a symbol of one’s new life in Christ. Also, we note that in Acts 11, where Peter explains what happened in Acts 10, he makes no mention of water baptism, and in Acts 11:16 indicates that Holy Spirit baptism superceded water baptism of John the Baptist. 61. The situation in Acts 8:14-17 is somewhat different from the ones in Acts 2 and Acts 10 however. The Samaritans received the laying on of hands and the Holy Spirit after water baptism. So it is obvious from this story that it is possible to be regenerated and not to have received the Spirit’s empowering presence yet. Even today, it is certainly true that we receive certain aspects of the Holy Spirit’s work at the point of regeneration and some afterward. The Holy Spirit is working in our lives before, during, and after water baptism. See www.faithfacts.org/bible-101/christian-cram-course#holyspirit. Certainly we should not put God in a box about how he works in a person’s life. There are some logical reasons why this situation occurred as it did. Apparently the apostles were not present when the original conversions took place. This was a group of Samaritans, who were not fully Jewish and there was a lot of hostility that existed between the Samaritans and Jews. It would have been desirable in this early ministry to receive apostolic approval to prove that this new church was “kosher.” This passage does not in any way indicate that water baptism saves. 62. Romans 8:14: “For all who are being led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.” Similarly, Romans 8:16-17: “The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs-heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him.” Who would be “sons” or “children?” In modern figurative language, children would have the DNA of the father-having been “born again” (John 3). 63. Romans 15:13. “May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, so that by the power of the Holy Spirit you may abound in hope.” Thus, our hope is in the power of the Holy Spirit through faith (not our power to obey or whatever legalistic requirement). 64. Included in the many things the Holy Spirit does is that he is active in the salvation of a person. He regenerates us, this being made quite clear in Titus 3:5. He transforms us (2 Corinthians 3:18). He sanctifies us (Galatians 5:16-23; 2 Thessalonians 2:13). Remembering that we are saved by a transformation of the heart-the Holy Spirit pours out God’s love in the heart (Romans 5:5), He seals God’s promises in believers’ hearts (Ephesians 1:13-14), and He strengthens the inner being (Ephesians 3:16). It is by his power that we have hope (Romans 15:13). Further, he shapes the individual’s community life to Christ’s (Romans 8:1-17), etc, etc. See also Who Is the Holy Spirit. 65. Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:8; Acts 1:5; Acts 2:4; 1 Cor 6:11 shows that we are baptized, washed, justified, and sanctified by the Spirit of God. (We are washed by the Holy Spirit-not by water.) The Holy Spirit is everywhere in the Scriptures from beginning to end doing his work in the world and in people. 66. The Holy Spirit is the seal of the believer’s salvation (Ephesians 4:30; 2 Corinthians 1:22; Romans 8:9), not water baptism. Indeed, we are sealed by the Holy Spirit when we believed (Ephesians 1:11-14), and even before at the foundation of the world (Ephesians 1:3-12). Note: Certainly, predestination is a difficult concept, but we believe it because God says it. 67. Titus 3:3-8 shows that it is the Holy Spirit that regenerates a person, not water baptism or any other work. Notice also that it is by the work of God that we are saved, and specifically not because of any righteousness things we have done. This is baptism (washing) of the Holy Spirit, which is mentioned in Acts 1:5 and fulfilled in Acts 2:4. 68. 2 Tim 1:9-14 shows that it is the power of the Trinity-Father, Son, and Holy Spirit- that saves us, not because of our works. 69. Many verses show that the Holy Spirit dwells in a person or is the helpmate of God’s or Jesus’ indwelling (John 14:17; Romans 8:9-11; 1 Corinthians 3:16, 6:19; Galatians 4:6; Ephesians 3:16-19; 2 Timothy 1:14; 1 John 4:13-17). The Holy Spirit’s indwelling is the means whereby “Christ is in you.” Paul views this relationship as so close that he can even say “the Lord is the Spirit” (2 Corinthians 3:17, Galatians 4:6, etc.) Elsewhere, in Galatians 2:20 Paul says, “It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me.” Paul teaches that the Holy Spirit and Christ work together in applying the resurrected life of Christ to the believer. Indeed, the Spirit’s presence now is a guarantee, if you will, of the future bodily resurrection of the believer (Romans 8:11). 70. In further context, those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God (Romans 8:14). What does it mean to be a son of God? We should think that in some sense in modern language it means that we have his DNA. He also intercedes for the Saints (8:27)-which is mentioned in the context of predestination (8:29). All this is to say that it is the Holy Spirit who is working salvation in the person. Just as our physical birth is not something we earn or have any control over, spiritual birth is something the God gives rather than something we earn or have any control over (1 Peter 1:3-5). 71. John 3 is an interesting passage. Here Jesus tells Nicodemus that unless one is born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Some might say that water here refers to the water being released when one is born physically by a woman. Others would say that water here means water baptism. But this latter interpretation seems quite unlikely, since Christian baptism had not been instituted yet and would have been meaningless to Nicodemus. (Others find reference to John’s baptism in this statement, but Jesus nowhere makes John’s baptism a requirement for salvation.) Remembering who Jesus is speaking to-a leading Jew-he is most certainly referring to Old Testament passages the Nicodemus would have been familiar with: Isaiah 32:15, Isaiah 44:3, and Ezekiel 36:25-27. According the notes in The Reformation Study Bible, linguistic considerations point to understanding “water” and the “Spirit” as referring to a single spiritual birth. In these OT passages, the concept expressed is the pouring out of God’s Spirit in the end times. The presence of such rich Old Testament imagery accounts for Jesus’ reproof of Nicodemus (John 3:10) as a “teacher of Israel,” which he should have understood. The Reformation Study Bible, of note, also says that the passage emphasizes the priority and sovereignty of God in salvation, though it does not exclude the reality of human response in repentance and faith. So the message is that salvation is through baptism of the Holy Spirit, not water baptism. 72. Can the word water as used in John 3:5 mean water baptism? Why didn't Christ say what he meant to say? If he really meant baptism-when he said water-by the same reasoning he evidently meant baptism in the next Chapter (John 4:7-15). Read again the story of the Woman at the Well and substitute the word baptism for water everywhere it is found in the story exactly as you substitute the word baptism for water in John 3:5, and see what a story you make. False doctrines always lead to muddy water. 73. Jesus baptizes via the Holy Spirit (Mat 3:11 and Mark 1:8) and never personally baptized with water as far we know. If water baptism is so important, why didn’t Jesus do so? 74. There is a close relationship between how we are saved and the gospel. Romans 1:16 says that the gospel is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes. Understanding clearly from this passage that it is the power of God that saves (and not the power of a person), at the very least to deny that God the Holy Spirit is active in the believer is, we think, a gross distortion of the gospel, which we further demonstrate at www.faithfacts.org/world-religions-and-theology/church-of-christ#gospel. 75. The Holy Spirit is most certainly active today. Denying the work of the Holy Spirit, especially as regards to salvation, is very close to being the unforgivable sin that the Bible speaks of in Matthew 12:31-32 and Mark 3:22-30. 76. 1 Corinthians 12:13 plainly states that "we were all baptized by one Spirit...." See Baptism by the Holy Spirit. The conclusion must be, it seems to us, that indeed we are saved by the spiritual baptism of the Holy Spirit creating an inner change in the heart rather than water on the skin. The Bible makes a distinction between spiritual baptism and water baptism (Matthew 3:11). But we would not put God in a box, and so this would not preclude the Holy Spirit working through water baptism as a means of God’s grace- as the Holy Spirit works before, during, and after one is saved. But it does preclude the legalistic view that water baptism is a work of the individual that one must do to be saved. Items 77 through 95 pertain to other Scripture passages and concepts on baptism 77. There is no record of the apostles ever receiving water baptism. Though they probably did, it would be a glaring omission for the writers of the New Testament to omit this if it is so important. 78. Paul separates baptism from the Gospel, saying, “Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the Gospel” (1 Corinthians 1:17). But it is the Gospel which saves us (Romans 1:16, 1 Corinthians 15:1-8). Therefore, water baptism is not part of what saves us. See “What is the Gospel”: www.faithfacts.org/bible-101/what-is-the-gospel. 79. Jesus implied in Matthew 3:13-16 that water baptism is a work of righteousness. But Titus 3:5 teaches that it is “not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us.” 80. Not once in the entire Gospel of John, written explicitly so that people could believe and be saved (John 20:31), does it give water baptism as part of the condition of salvation. It simply says over and over that people should believe and be saved (cf. John 3:16, 18, 36). 81. While a legalist may say, “Our salvation depends on a proper baptism.”-there is no terminology or concept of a “proper” baptism in the New Testament. This is simply a term that identifies the speaker as a legalist. 82. The thief on the cross was saved without water baptism. Some claim that water baptism was not necessary because the thief died under the Old Covenant. But because Jesus died BEFORE the thief, it follows that the thief was saved without water baptism AFTER the atonement. Another problem with the Old Covenant claim as to the thief on the cross comes from Romans 2:12: "and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law." Was the thief on the cross judged by the law or by grace through faith alone? Of course, it was by faith alone. Finally, some claim that he must have been baptized previously. This assumption is not probable and seems suspect to fit a pre-conceived doctrine. 83. In addition to the thief on the cross, there are other instances in the Bible where a sinner was saved without baptism: the paralytic man in Matthew 9:2; the penitent woman in Luke 7:37-50; the publican in Luke 18:13-14. See also: Acts 15:9; Acts 26:18; Ephesians 1:11-13; 1 Jn 5:4; etc. 84. The apostle Paul (Acts 9:6-9, 22:6-16, 26:12-23) obeyed before he received water baptism. Was he saved before he was baptized? Yes! Ananias called him “brother Saul” in Acts 22:13. He became a child of God-a true Christian-when he called on the name of the Lord (and obeyed Jesus) before being baptized. He had a living faith, not a “dead faith” when he called on the name of the Lord and was obedient prior to water baptism. Baptism was another-though certainly important-event of obedience after he was saved. In Acts 26:20, Paul makes the statement “...and also to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, performing deeds in keeping with their repentance.”(ESV) In the NIV, it is translated “...that they should repent and turn to God and prove their repentance by their deeds.” This confirms Paul’s understanding of his own conversion, as well as others, that salvation occurred before water baptism. Just before that he quotes Jesus as saying that people are “sanctified by faith in me [Jesus],” (Acts 26:18)-further proving that salvation comes with faith. In Acts 3:19 we see Paul making a similar statement: “Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out.” So it is faith and repentance that save, without regard to water baptism. 85. In Romans 4:9-11, Abraham was saved before the obedience of circumcision, which is the Old Testament correlation to New Testament baptism. 86. Acts 15:1-12. Some men (falsely) taught that unless you are circumcised you cannot be saved. The apostles COULD have said, “Not circumcision anymore but baptism.” But instead Peter said, “No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.” So they told Gentile believers to abstain from meat sacrificed to idols, sexual immorality, blood, but “missed their chance” to say that baptism is required. 87. Water baptism is a sacrament, like the Lord’s Supper. Both are symbols of the reality of our salvation in Christ. Just as we do not literally eat Christ’s body in the Lord’s Supper, we are not literally saved by water trickling over our skin. 88. Water baptism is like the ring in a wedding. We use the term “with this ring I thee wed.” The language indicates that we are literally married by the ring. But it is not the ring that marries a couple. It is the commitment under God. Similarly, water baptism is to a Christian what a uniform is to a soldier. The soldier puts on the uniform because he is ordered to. It identifies him outwardly as what he is in his person. 89. Water baptism is like physical birth, while our salvation is like conception prior to physical birth. See www.freedomsring.org/ftc/chap27.html. Life began at conception, not at birth. Baptism does not initiate life, it was initiated earlier at the point of faith, that is, at the point of the work of the Holy Spirit. 90. Steve Morrison (www.biblequery.com) argues that “baptism is an emblem of washing our sins away. But even if someone says that this was literally washing their sins away, they should probably still agree with these things: a. If it was the liquid water that literally took away the sins, then future sins would not be taken away unless a person was baptized again and again. b. It is not the water that is special, but rather the water as the identification with the blood of Christ. c. The Bible does not say people cannot have sins washed away without baptism. God is capable of taking away the sins of the thief on the cross, as well as early Christians who were martyred before they had the opportunity to be baptized. d. So, it is not the drops of water that take away anything. Rather, it is the pledge of a good conscience before God that connects us with Christ’s blood, and baptism is an acknowledgment-an emblem, of that.” 91. Ephesians 2:1-10 explains that regeneration actually precedes faith, and the faith itself is a gift of God! See www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/sproul01.html. 92. Did Christ personally, at any time or place tell a sinner to be baptized FOR or IN ORDER to the Remission of Sin? If so, where and when? Why didn’t Jesus regularly practice water baptism if it is so important? 93. “Washing” in 1 Cor 6:11 may not necessarily mean water baptism. Revelation 1:5 and Revelation 7:14 make it clear that we are washed by the blood of Christ! 94. The healing of Naaman in the Jordan River (2 Kings 5) does not mean that water baptism saves. The healing of leprosy is not evidence of salvation. Naaman did not even believe in God when he was healed. 95. What if a person met all the requirements to be saved, but was killed in a car wreck on his way to being baptized. Would he not be in heaven? Items 92 through 101 pertain to historical interpretations 96. Alexander Campbell in Design by Baptism p.262 said: “In this sense we are to understand what is said by Paul, that Christ sanctifieth and cleanseth the church ‘with washing of water by the word.’ Ephesians 5:26, and in another place, that ‘according to His mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and of renewing of the Holy Ghost’ Titus 3:5, and by Peter that ‘baptism doeth save us’ 1 Peter 3:21. For it is not the intention of Paul to signify that our ablution and salvation are completed by water, or that water contains in itself the virtue to purify, regenerate, and renew; nor did Peter mean that it was the cause of salvation, but only the knowledge and assurance of it is received in this sacrament: what is sufficiently evident from the words they have used. For Paul connects together the ‘word of life’ and ‘the baptism of water;’ as if he had said, our ablution and sanctification are announced to us by the Gospel, and by baptism this message is confirmed. And Peter after having said the baptism doth save us, immediately adds, that it is ‘not the putting away the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God’ which proceeds from faith. But on the contrary, baptism promises us no other purification than by the sprinkling of the blood of Christ; which is emblematically represented by water, on account of its resemblance to washing and cleansing.” 97. Alexander Campbell in Millennial Harbinger, 1837, p.411-412 said: “But who is a Christian? I answer, every one that believes in his heart that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, the Son of God; repents of his sins, and obeys him in all things according to his measure of knowledge of his will. . . . I cannot make any one duty the standard of Christian state or character, not even immersion into the name of Father, of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and [cannot] in my heart regard all that have been sprinkled in infancy without their own knowledge and consent, as aliens from Christ and the well-grounded hope of heaven. Should I find a Pedobaptist [one baptized as an infant] more intelligent in the Christian Scriptures, more spiritually-minded and more devoted to the Lord than a Baptist, or one immersed on a profession of the ancient faith, I could not hesitate a moment in giving the preference of my heart to him that loveth most. Did I act otherwise, I would be a pure sectarian, a Pharisee among Christians.” 98. The early church document the Didache (c.125 A.D.) ch.7 p.379 said: “baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if thou have not living water, baptize into other water; and if thou canst not in cold, in warm. But if thou have not either, pour out water thrice upon the head into the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.” 99. In another early church document, Anonymous Treatise on Re-baptism (254-257 A.D.) ch.5 p.669-670: On speaking of Cornelius said, “And there will be no doubt that men may be baptized with the Holy Ghost without water, as thou observest that these were baptized before they were baptized with water; that the announcements of both John and of our Lord Himself were satisfied, forasmuch as they received the grace of the promise both without the imposition of the apostle’s hands and without the laver [baptismal font], which they attained afterwards. And their hearts being purified, God bestowed upon them at the same time, in virtue of their faith, remission of sins; so that the subsequent baptism conferred upon them this benefit alone, that they received also the invocation of the name of Jesus Christ, that nothing might appear to be wanting to the integrity of their service and faith.” 100. In an extensive study of what the early church fathers said about baptism, Steve Morrison (www.biblequery.org/) says, “We cannot find a single person in history who held to both believer’s baptism plus all are lost who are not immersed for remission of sins. In other words, according to the doctrine of many Churches of Christ, outside of the New Testament we cannot find in history a single person who had any possibility of going to heaven, until after the restoration movement started, and even Alexander Campbell was never baptized for remission of sins.” 101. And finally, for the record, the word baptism does not necessarily always mean immersion. For example, in 1 Corinthians 10:1-4 the Israelites were baptized by only getting their feet wet, while it was the Egyptians who got immersed. Luke 11:38 is a reference to the washing of hands, not of total body immersion. In Mark 7:4 baptism is described as washing of vessels, which is not necessarily immersion but could be pouring or scrubbing. Hebrews 9:10 speaks of “various ceremonial washings.” The word here is baptismos. The ceremonial washing, or baptisms, that follow are rites of purification in the Old Testament (cf. Hebrews 9:13-31). In all of these ceremonial washings, the method of application was sprinkling. In fact, all Old Testament purifications or washings were by sprinkling (Numbers 8:7, 19:19, Leviticus 14:7, etc). Doesn't it stand to reason that New Testament Jewish Christians would have appreciated that method of baptism? Conclusion: (a) We get to heaven by God’s grace through a genuine living faith in Jesus. The view that water touching skin is what saves us is a superficial view of the doctrine of salvation. (b) Requirements of a “proper” baptism are not bibilical and are a mark of legalism-especially when combined with other works requirements. (c) However, anyone who refuses to be baptized probably does not have a genuine faith. “Christian baptism, which has the form of a ceremonial washing (like John’s pre-Christian baptism), is a sign from God that signifies inward cleansing and remission of sins (Acts 22:16; 1 Corinthians 6:11; Ephesians 5:25-27), Spirit-wrought regeneration and new life (Titus 3:5), and the abiding presence of the Holy Spirit as God’s seal testifying and guaranteeing that one will be kept safe in Christ forever (1 Corinthians 12:13; Ephesians 1:13-14). Fundamentally, Baptism signifies union with Christ in his death, burial, and resurrection (Romans 6:3-7; Colossians 2:11-12), and this union with Christ is the source of every element in our salvation (1 John 5:11-12). Receiving the sign of baptism in faith assures those baptized that God’s gift of new life in Christ is freely given to them. At the same time, it commits them to live in a new way as disciples of Jesus.” (The Reformation Study Bible, page 1623.) See also other articles: Christian Cram Course at www.faithfacts.org/bible-101/christian-cram-course What is the Gospel? at www.faithfacts.org/bible-101/what-is-the-gospel Bible Questions for the Church of Christ at www.faithfacts.org/world-religions-and-theology/church-of-christ Other links: CRI Baptism for the Forgiveness of Sins Part 1 at www.equip.org/PDF/DB055-1.pdf CRI Baptism for the Forgiveness of Sins Part 2 at www.equip.org/PDF/DB055-2.pdf Baptismal Regeneration at www.ovrlnd.com/FalseDoctrine/Refuting_baptismal_Regen.html Grace to You at www.gty.org/resources/questions/qa79 Titus 3 at www.zianet.com/maxey/reflx609.htm "Baptism Now Saves You"?"All the fountains of the great deep burst open and the floodgates of the sky were opened... after Noah and his family of seven had entered the ark. It rained for forty days and forty nights, the waters rose above the mountains, and the ark floated on the surface of the water... All flesh that moved on the earth perished... and only Noah was left, together with those that were with him in the ark" (Gen. 7:11,18,21,23)."...the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. And corresponding to that, baptism now saves you - not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience - through the resurrection of Jesus Christ . . . " (I Peter 3:21) What was the baptism that was saving the first-century saints? We have two basic choices: It was either a ritual baptism or a spiritual (or non-ritual) baptism.If we say that the New-Testament saving baptism to which the Noahic experience corresponded was a ritual baptism, one of many problems immediately presents itself: It is Biblically incongruous that an old-testament event prefigured a ritual. It is on the other hand an established hermeneutical principle that old-testament rituals prefigured New-Testament events / experiences / realities. And since old-testament rituals (such as sacrifices) symbolized New-Testament non-rituals (such as the death of Christ/the believer’s sacrifice of praise), it seems even more likely that the non-ritual Noahic salvation foreshadowed a New-Testament non-ritual baptism.But ignoring this obstacle for now, let us examine how I Peter 3:21 might be understood to teach that the salvation of Noah and his family in the ark could have somehow typified a ritual-baptism: Perhaps Peter might have been speaking of one of the ritual baptisms mentioned in Heb. 9:10,13,19-22 ("various washings" in 9:10 is literally "various baptisms"). The problem with this proposal is that those baptisms were only to be "imposed until a time of reformation" (Heb. 9:10), that is, until the consummation of the old covenant. It is hardly believable that ritual-baptisms which could not perfect one's conscience (Heb. 9:9), and which were destined to be done away in the disappearance of the old covenant (Heb. 8:13; 9:10) were "saving" the Christians in the apostolic era. But perhaps Peter was talking about the ritual-baptism which was being administered to converts to Christianity. If we are going to say this, we must presuppose that Christian ritual-baptism was not included in the "various baptisms" of Heb. 9:10 that were only to be imposed until A.D. 70. If Christian ritual-baptism came out of the old covenant, and was thus to be no longer "imposed" after A.D. 70, then it would be axiomatic that Christian ritual-baptism was not the saving baptism of I Peter 3:21. (We will save a discussion on the cessation or continuation of Christian ritual-baptism for another place.) There is another problem though with the idea of the saving baptism in I Peter 3:21 being a ritual, and that is the tense of the verb "saves." The verb is present tense, active voice, and the phrase literally reads, "baptism is now saving you." The meaning seems to be that just as Noah and his family were in process of being saved by a baptism in the ark, so were the first-century believers in process of being saved by baptism. This should further lead us to consider the saving baptism as being spiritual. Thus far, general hermeneutical principles of typology, the weakness and temporary nature of the old-covenant rituals and the tense of the verb "saves" ("saving") direct us toward the idea that the baptism of I Peter 3:21 might be a non-ritual, spiritual baptism. But what kind of a non-ritual baptism could have been in process of saving the first-century Christians? Spiritual BaptismThe first New-Testament reference to a non-ritual baptism is found in Matt. 3:11 (and Mk. 1:8; Lk. 3:16; cf. Acts 1:5), where John the Baptizer said, "As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He Who is Coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire." {1}The old covenant could offer only typical and temporary ritual-baptisms such as the one John was offering. {2} But Christ was coming to administer the true, spiritual, New-Testament Baptism to the people of Israel, which baptism was first experienced on the day of Pentecost when the Scripture was fulfilled: "I will pour forth of My Spirit upon all mankind" (Acts 2:17,18; Joel 2:28,29). That baptism was later accompanied by signs a second time in Acts 10:44-46; 11:15,17 when the first Gentiles were converted to Christ. As Peter said concerning that time, "the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out upon the Gentiles also" and, "the Holy Spirit fell upon them." (Acts 10:45; 11:15) {3} Subsequently, the Lord baptized all believers with the Holy Spirit: "For with one Spirit (cf. Eph. 4:5) we were all baptized into one Body." (I Cor. 12:13)In this spiritual light we should understand Gal. 3:27, "All of you who were baptized into Christ {4} have clothed yourselves with Christ"; and Col. 2:11,12, "In Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, . . . having been buried with [Christ] in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God . . . "; and Rom. 6:3,4, "All of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death. Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, in order that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life."Spiritual baptism coincides with receiving the Spirit of God (Acts 2:17,18; 10:45; 11:15), with being spiritually clothed with Christ (Gal. 3:27) and with being circumcised with the circumcision made without hands (Col. 2:11,12). And as we shall see, the ongoing spiritual baptism for the believer is equivalent with being daily and experientially unified / identified (Ps. 133:1,2; Rom. 6:5; Eph. 4:3-13) with Christ's death, burial and resurrection (Rom. 6:1-11).Union / identity with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection is the essence of spiritual baptism. In I Peter, it is the "suffering" or "fiery" aspect of spiritual baptism for Christians that is the running theme. Peter wrote his epistle to the persecuted, scattered Jewish believers who were living as aliens and strangers (1:1; 2:11). Many of them were being distressed by various trials (1:6), being slandered, reviled and maligned (2:12; 3:16; 4:4,14); their faith was being tested by fire (1:7). This same baptism was predicted by Jesus in Matt. 20:22,23 (AV); Mk. 10:38,39 (cf. Lk. 12:50), where Jesus asked James and John, "Are you able to . . . be baptized with the baptism which I am baptized?" And they answered, "We are able." And Jesus said, ". . . You shall be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized." Christ was prophesying to His disciples that they were going to become sharers of His sufferings, i.e., they were going to be experientially / spiritually unified and identified with Him in His sufferings, death and burial. They were going to be "crucified with Him" (Rom. 6:6; Gal. 2:20; 5:24) through persecution, but were also going to endure unto victory through the power of Christ’s resurrection.Union with Christ in His sufferings was further borne out in I Peter when Peter told his readers that it was their calling to patiently endure their persecutions, just as Christ when He suffered, kept entrusting Himself to God. (2:23) "Therefore, since Christ has suffered in the flesh, arm yourselves also with the same purpose" (4:1), and, "you share the sufferings of Christ" (4:12,13). It was this spiritual baptism that was saving the first-century Christians. Just as a small remnant, eight souls (I Peter 3:20), had been brought safely through the flood waters in Noah’s day (I Peter 3:20), so was a small remnant (Rom. 9:27,29) being brought safely through the fire of God's Last-Days wrath. (Matt. 24:38,39; Lk. 17:26,27; II Peter 2:5-9) {5} Their saving baptism was a refining, purifying baptism, as they were being sovereignly preserved by God through their persecutions until the end of the age. As Paul said in II Cor. 4:17, "For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all." (Cf. Acts 14:22) Not the Cleansing of the Flesh, but a Good ConscienceWhat did Peter mean when he said that the saving baptism was "not the removal of the filth of the flesh?" Heb. 9:8-10 helps us to understand this: "[At] the present time, . . . both gifts and sacrifices are offered which cannot make the worshiper perfect in conscience, since they relate only to . . . various baptisms, regulations for the flesh imposed until a time of reformation."Ritual baptisms removed the filth of the flesh, or as Heb. 9:13 reiterates it, they only "sanctified for the cleansing of the flesh." That was their purpose. They could not make the worshipers perfect in conscience. Only spiritual baptism could effect that result. In saying then, "not the removal of dirt from the flesh," Peter was explaining to his readers that the baptism that saves is not ritual ("not the removal of dirt from the flesh") but spiritual.This spiritual saving baptism of suffering was for Peter's brothers "an appeal to God for a good conscience." As I Peter 2:19 says: "For this finds favor, if for the sake of conscience toward God a man bears up under sorrows when suffering unjustly," and in I Peter 3:16,17, "Keep a good conscience . . . For it is better, if God should will it so, that you suffer for doing what is right . . . "Paul wrote similarly in II Cor. 1:12 of the intense sufferings of the apostles: "For our proud confidence is this, the testimony of our consciences, that in holiness and godly sincerity, . . .we have conducted ourselves in the world . . . "The writer of Hebrews also, in writing to his persecuted brothers, promised a clean conscience through spiritual baptism, in Heb. 9:14, ". . . the blood of Christ . . .[will] cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God."Without the cleansing baptism from God above, the Church was not, and could not, be ultimately saved, for it was only that divine baptism of Spirit-power that could keep the Church faithful and spotless through the fiery judgment of God unto the end. {6} Conclusion As Noah and his family endured patiently in the ark, so were the first-century Christians patiently enduring a spiritual and fiery baptism, sharing the sufferings of Christ. Old-Covenant baptisms were a fading and ceremonial removal of the filth of the flesh, but New-Covenant, spiritual baptism in Christ was the appeal of a good conscience toward God. (Heb. 10:2) By means of it, believers remained faithful through the power of God in Christ, and retained a clean conscience. (I Peter 3:16) And as Christ was exalted after He patiently endured, so to was His Church-Body called and chosen through His resurrection-power to soon be exalted with Him in the end of the old-covenant age. Footnotes:1. The predicted baptizing with the Holy Spirit here is a future-active baptizing, which corresponds with the present-active saving work of the baptism in I Peter 3:21, indicating that I Peter 3:21 is a record of the fulfillment of John's prediction of the coming spiritual baptism.2. The fact that John was administering an old-testament ritual is borne out in Jn. 1:25 where the Pharisees asked him, "Why then are you baptizing, if you are not the Christ?" We should infer from this question that the Scriptures teach that Messiah was to come baptizing as John was doing, and that John was thus working in accordance with the Law. 3. Note that the mode of spiritual baptism in these passages was pouring. It is not unlikely then that John's baptism, which was a symbol / foreshadow of spiritual baptism, was administered by pouring (or sprinkling), the water coming from above as the Spirit from heaven. The references below demonstrate that spiritual baptism was not an immersion but a pouring / sprinkling:Isa. 44:3, "For I will pour out water on the thirsty land and streams on the dry ground; I will pour out My Spirit on your offspring, and My blessing on your descendants." Zech. 12:10, "And I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and of supplication, so that they will look on Me whom they have pierced...." (See also, Prov. 1:23, Isa. 32:15;45:8; Eze. 39:29). Isa. 52:15, "He will sprinkle many nations." Eze.36:25, "Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols."4. Christian ritual-baptism was administered by men with water, and was a baptism "into the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" in Matt. 28:19; "into the Name of the Lord Jesus" in Acts 8:16; 19:5; "in the Name of the Lord" in Acts 10:48 (Some manuscripts have for Acts 10:48, "in the name of Jesus Christ"); and "on the name of Jesus Christ" in Acts 2:38. (Cf. I Cor. 1:13,15). In contrast, spiritual baptism is administered by God with His Spirit, and is a baptism not into the "name" of, but into Jesus Christ in I Cor. 12:13; Rom. 6:3; and Gal. 3:27 (Cf. I Cor. 10:2). The difference between being baptized into the name of someone and being baptized into someone is the difference between ritual and non-ritual baptism. The one is a sign and the other is what the sign signified.5. It was a fiery baptism (I Peter 4:12) of which Peter spoke as being the antitype to the experience of Noah and his family "through waters," even as Peter made the same water / fire parallel in his second epistle:"...The world at that time was destroyed, being flooded with water. But the present heavens and earth by His word are being reserved for fire..." (II Peter 3:6,7).6. Note that the mode of the various baptisms that could not make the worshipers perfect in conscience in Heb. 9:9,10 was explained to be that of "sprinkling" in Heb. 9:13,19,21. Note also (below) that the mode of spiritual baptism in the context of keeping a good conscience is spoken of as "sprinkling." That baptism was the sprinkling of the redeeming blood of Christ on the hearts of believers:Heb. 10:22 (cf. 12:24), "Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, our hearts having been sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our body having been washed in pure water [of the Word]." (Cf. Eph. 5:26). I Peter 1:2, "...unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ."It is also helpful to note here that Christ's "one baptism" of the Church with the Holy Spirit was a triune baptism:1. a pouring out of His "Spirit" upon the Church (uniting the church with Christ), 2. a spiritual sprinkling of His "blood" on the heart of the Church (creating a clean heart and conscience), and 3. a spiritual washing of the Church body with pure spiritual "water" in the Word (making the body and works of the Church acceptable to God).This reveals the meaning of I Jn. 5:8: "There are three who bear witness on the earth: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three agree in one." See our playlist "Dealing with "Saved by Works & Baptism", "Church of Christ"" with 73 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLBD55090718DA6D3D. See also our website www.BibleQuery.org. Titus 1:9-16

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, known as the Mormons, teaches that God the father used to be a man on another planet, that he became a God by following the laws and ordinances of that God on that planet and came to this world with his wife (she became a goddess), and that they produce a spirit offspring in heaven. These spirit offspring, which includes Jesus, the devil, and you and me, are all brothers and sisters born in the preexistence. The preexistence spirits come down and inhabit babies at the time of birth and their memories of the preexistence are lost at the time. Furthermore, faithful Mormons, who pay a full 10% tithe of their income to the Mormon church through Mormon temples, have the potential of becoming gods of their own planets and are then able to start the procedure over again. The Bible does not teach that God came from another planet, or that he has a goddess wife, or that we can become gods. In fact, the Bible clearly and definitely contradicts those teachings. But, the Mormon Church responds by saying that the Bible is not really trustworthy, that the true faith was lost, and that its leader, Joseph Smith, restored the so-called "true" Christian faith: god from another world, becoming gods, goddess mother, etc. Of course, the Mormon Church's claim is not true. These teachings are documented from Mormon writers, not anti-Mormon writers: 1.Book of Mormon The book of Mormon is more correct than the Bible, (History of the Church, vol. 4, p. 461.) 2.Devil, the A.The Devil was born as a spirit after Jesus "in the morning of pre-existence," (Mormon Doctrine, p. 192.) B.Jesus and Satan are spirit brothers and we were all born as siblings in heaven to them both, (Mormon Doctrine, p. 163.) 3.God A.God used to be a man on another planet (Mormon Doctrine, p. 321; Joseph Smith, Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 613-614; Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p. 345; Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 333). B."The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as mans..." (D&C 130:22). 4.God, becoming a god A.After you become a good Mormon, you have the potential of becoming a god (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345-347, 354). B."Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them," (DC 132:20). 5.God, many gods A.There are many gods (Mormon Doctrine, p. 163). B."And they (the Gods) said: Let there be light: and there was light," (Book of Abraham 4:3). 6.God, mother goddess A.There is a mother god (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 443). B.God is married to his goddess wife and has spirit children (Mormon Doctrine, p. 516). 7.God, Trinity The trinity is three separate Gods: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. "That these three are separate individuals, physically distinct from each other, is demonstrated by the accepted records of divine dealings with man," (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 35). 8. Holy Ghost, the The Holy Ghost is a male personage (A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, Le Grand Richards, Salt Lake City, 1956, p. 118; Journal of Discources, vol. 5, p. 179). 9. Joseph Smith, Jr. If it had not been for Joseph Smith and the restoration, there would be no salvation. There is no salvation [the context is the full gospel including exaltation to Godhood] outside the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon Doctrine, p. 670). 10. Heaven There are three levels of heaven: telestial, terrestrial, and celestial (Mormon Doctrine, p. 348). Matthew 7:15

"Evangelical" Christianity (see our video "ECUMENICAL CHAOS: Going to Bed With Roman Catholic False Prophets & Idolaters" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-S76Nvi6p0lw.html) is awash in bad theology (via Wesley & Finney), bad leadership (like Billy Graham & TBN), & Biblical ignorance (87% don't know the Gospel or what justificaton is) thus it seems to accept anyone who claims to be a Christian (like Romanists, Mormons, Seventh-day Adventists or whoever). For proof of this see the following: "Methodist Founder & Self Proclaimed Heathen John Wesley Said He Never Believed In or Loved God" (short version) at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-L_bz2RyShFI.html & "JOHN WESLEY, FOUNDER OF METHODISM & AN ARMINIAN, SAID HE DID NOT LOVE GOD & WAS "AN HONEST HEATHEN" (long version) at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-6Vo3ljr7ccs.html; BEWARE OF FALSE PROPHETS: CHARLES GRANDISON FINNEY - PHONY REVIVALIST & ARCH-HERETIC at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-0rUbi8AJRw4.html, "Exclusive Interview with Dave Hunt about the Gospel-less Mother Teresa & Compromiser Billy Graham" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-8YtX1DirDI4.html, Our playlist "Dealing with Phony TV Preachers (TBN) & King James Onlyites" at ru-vid.com/group/PL2CDA855486B09128 & "SAD STATE OF THE CHURCH: 87% OF EVANGELICAL "CHRISTIANS" DON'T KNOW WHAT GOSPEL JUSTIFICATION IS" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-im4ozy_EiR4.html. See our playlist "Dealing with Roman Catholicism, Idolatry & the Virgin Mary" with 119 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLFFA8D69D1B914715, our playlist "Dealing with Mormonism, the Religion of Mitt Romney & Utah" with 20 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PL11CD0EE613306BB5 & our playlist "Dealing with Seventh-day Adventism & Their "Prophetess" at ru-vid.com/group/PL5316CC6F66F24283 with 23 videos. Billy Graham's false views on universal salvation & hell distort the Gospel message & is another reason he is so popular with the world (Galatians 1:6-10, see our playlist "Dealing with Hell, Lake of Fire, Unpopular Bible Doctrines" with 30 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLE04A1D0DFE95B95E). Please reference the websites: www.BereanBeacon.org & www.CWRC-RZ.org. The simple Biblical fact is that few are going to be saved from the wrath of God & hell (Luke 13:23-30, Matthew 7:13-29, etc.); see our video on this: "Unpopular Bible Doctrines #2: Many "Christians" Are Not Real; God Loves Judgment; No Forgiveness" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-iJIlReP9SFw.html. All the ecumenical "love" & "harmony" in the world is not going to change the fact that God still hates false religions (Deuteronomy 28:64, 32:17, 21, Leviticus 17:7, Psalm 106:37, Jeremiah 44:3, 1 Corinthians 10:20, see also biblehub.com/deuteronomy/32-17.htm) & false doctrine (Revelation 2:6,14-15, 2 Peter 2:15, etc.). Thus following the Bible alone is the only safe path to travel (2 Timothy 3:15-17, 4:2-5, 1 Timothy 1:3-11, 6:3-5, etc.; see our video "WITHOUT "SOLA SCRIPTURA" (THE BIBLE ALONE), WHO IS TELLING THE TRUTH?" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-dcMnF6tgya0.html). 2 Timothy 2:15

@lumeriam The problem you have is you just don't accept what the Bible plainly teaches so thus you condemn & "brow beat" real Christians who take the Word of God seriously (2 Timothy 3:14-17). Let's face it you just don't want the God of the Bible (see our RU-vid video. "UNPOPULAR BIBLE DOCTRINES #1: THE BIBLICAL GOD NO ONE WANTS TO KNOW") because it would mean changing your life-style from a worldly one (which is condemned by the Bible, 1 John 2:15-17, James 4:4) to a godly one (Luke 13:3,5).

I am lost and want to join a cult,/group/community, can someone point me In the right direction please. I'm from the UK, I have nothing & want to feel a part of something that is more than my own desires.

Are "Church of Christ" churches which originated with Alexander & Thomas Campbell, Barton W. Stone & Walter Scott (the "restorers" of the "ancient gospel" back in 1827 according to them) good Bible based churches? No! Church of Christ churches, such as these are religious cult organizations in their preferences, practices, and doctrines. Many American based cults such as Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses, Christadelphians, Seventh-day Adventists & others spawned out of the "Church of Christ" restoration movement of the Campbells, Stone & Scott (see our video "RISE OF THE CULTS: WHERE DID ALL THESE STRANGE AMERICAN RELIGIOUS SECTS COME FROM?" at ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-HfVTXbFrvh8.html). "Churches of Christ" major in "minor" doctrines in order to make it appear that they are righteous while everyone else is wrong. One “minor” issue is the Church of Christ policy of not allowing musical instruments in their church services. The problem is that many within the Church of Christ are fanatically against musical instruments. Some are fanatical to the point of declaring any church that uses musical instruments as not being a true, biblical, or godly church. Such dogmatism on a clearly non-essential issue is the mark of a cult, not the mark of a good biblical church. A second issue is the fact that some in the Church of Christ claim to be “the one true church,” outside of which there is no salvation. By no means do all Church of Christ members believe this, but it is prevalent enough to warrant concern. Some go so far as to argue that since the name is “Church of Christ,” that indicates that the church / denomination is the one and only true Church of the Lord Jesus. This is completely unbiblical. There is no one church or denomination that encompasses the entire Body of Christ. The “one true church of Christ” is comprised of all those who have, by grace through faith, personally received Jesus Christ as Savior. The Church is composed of true believers everywhere, no matter the local church or denominational affiliation. The claim of exclusive access to salvation is another common identification of a cult, not the teaching of a good biblical church. A third and very important issue is the Church of Christ’s emphasis on baptism as being necessary for salvation. Church of Christ advocates point to Scriptures such as Acts 2:38, John 3:5, Mark 16:16, 1 Peter 3:21, and Acts 22:16 as biblical evidence that baptism is required for salvation. There is no denying that baptism is very important. Baptism is intended to be an initial act of obedience to Christ, an illustration of Christ’s death and resurrection, a public declaration of faith in Christ, a step of identification with Him, and a proclamation of desire to follow Him. In the minds of the apostles and early Christians, baptism was so inextricably linked with salvation that the two were viewed as inseparable. The idea that a person could receive Christ as Savior and not be baptized was completely foreign to the early church. With that said, however, baptism is not required for salvation. There are biblically plausible and contextually valid interpretations of each of the above Scriptures that do not indicate baptism as being necessary for salvation. There are many Scriptures that declare salvation to be received by faith / believing, with no mention of baptism or any other requirement (John 3:16; Acts 16:31; Ephesians 2:8-9). If baptism is necessary for salvation, these Scriptures are in error and the Bible is contradictory. A person who has genuinely received salvation will produce good fruit. Good works are the inevitable result of salvation (Ephesians 2:10). What differentiates a “living faith” from a “dead faith” in James 2:14-26 is the presence of good works. Church of Christ advocates are right to denounce churches that teach intellectual assent to the facts of the Gospel as sufficient for salvation. The Church of Christ is right to reject the idea that a dead faith, a faith that produces no good works, is what saves a person. Faith / trust in Christ as the Savior is what saves a person, but this faith is a living faith that always results in and produces good works. To say that good works must be present BEFORE a person is saved is to make salvation dependent on our obedience, which is works-salvation, not salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. As Titus 3:5 declares, “He saved us - not by works of righteousness that we had done, but according to His mercy, through the washing of regeneration and renewal by the Holy Spirit.” Churches of Christ are made up of religious heretics believing they are saved by their good works & water baptism (see our playlist "Dealing with "Saved by Works & Baptism", "Church of Christ"" with 75 videos at ru-vid.com/group/PLBD55090718DA6D3D). Thus the Campbellite "Church of Christ" cult has an extreme over-emphasis on the absence of musical instruments, with a claim of exclusive access to salvation, and with a doctrine of salvation that is works-based, therefore they should be avoided & definitely not be attended or participated in. This group is the mother of cults. Matthew 7:15