User Profile: by faith

by faith

Member Since: September 27, 2011


123 To page: Go
  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 4:40pm

    “byfaith, you are such an angry person.”

    well if you read it that way, then it must be true.
    I mean with all the LOL’s and free historical truths I’ve provided you, I must be angry.

    An English professor wrote these words on a chalkboard and asked his students to punctuate it correctly:

    “A woman without her man is nothing”

    All the men in the class punctuated it as:
    “A woman, without her man, is nothing.”

    And the women: “A woman: without her, man is nothing.”

    Thank you for proving my point Zippy.

  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 4:35pm

    All of this is Biblical evidence disproves pre-tribulation “rapture”

  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 4:34pm

    Let’s go to Matt 24:29
    Here the disciples have asked Christ what will precede his second coming
    29 Immediately AFTER the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken”

    Wait, He goes on:
    30 And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

    Do you see that this description lines up perfectly with the famous “rapture” passage of I Thess 4?

    Look at the similarities:
    I Thess 4:16-17
    For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout
    Matt 24:30-31
    They shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven

    I Thess 4:16-17
    with the voice of the archangel
    Matt 24:30-31
    And he shall send his angels

    I Thess 4:16-17
    and with the trump of God
    Matt 24:30-31
    with a great sound of a trumpet

    I Thess 4:16-17
    Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up
    Matt 24:30-31
    and they shall gather together his elect

  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 4:33pm

    I Thess 5:1-2
    1 But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you.
    (I think we can all agree that here, he is still addressing the “rapture” subject in the above verses)
    2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.
    (Again, he’s still in context with the famous “rapture” verses. Look at how he refers to this event by: the day of the Lord)
    What does the Bible tells us about the day of the Lord:
    Joel 2:31
    31 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and terrible day of the LORD come.
    Joel 3:14-15
    14 …for the day of the LORD is near in the valley of decision. 15 The sun and the moon shall be darkened, and the stars shall withdraw their shining.
    Isaiah 13:9-10
    9 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it. 10 For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine.

    Do you see the correlation between all these verses? They all describe the same celestial events:
    Sun & moon darkened, stars shall not give their light

  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 4:32pm

    “Oh but the rapture IS the harvest!”

    Ok. So according to those who hold to the pre-trib rapture theory, the harvest takes place BEFORE the tribulation and BEFORE the end of the world. This is clearly what they believe because according to this teaching, the world continues for another 7 years.

    What does Christ Jesus our Teacher say about this?

    Matthew 13:38-40 …’The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.’

    Thank you Jesus for giving us the clear truth on this matter, so that we should not be deceived!

    The rapture theory teaches a separation BEFORE the end. But the Bible clearly teaches that there is NO separation before the end.

    Read the famous “rapture” verses
    I Thess 4:16-17

    16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
    Most people stop right here but if you continue reading there is a clue to the timing of this event.

  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 4:32pm

    (Matthew 24:29-31)
    “But immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken, and then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of the sky with power and great glory. And He will send forth His angels with a great trumpet and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of the sky to the other.”

    Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins use this verse to support the Rapture Theory: Luke 17:26 “and as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of Man”
    Who was taken and who was left behind in the days of Noah?
    8 were saved and the rest were “taken”.

    “I will tell the reapers to first gather the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them” The unsaved are gathered and burned before the saved receive their reward

    The Word of God. It is so clear, we need not second guess what is going to happen.

    So what are we told in the pre-tribulation rapture theory?
    We are told that Christ will “gather” His people BEFORE the tribulation and separate the “wheat and the tares” BEFORE the harvest.

    And yet what does it clearly state in the Bible verse above? That the separation only takes place AT the harvest.

  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 4:29pm

    Matthew 24, 40
    “The two will be in the field, one will be taken and one will be left behind”
    Where will these people be taken? Heaven?

    Let look at the same story according to Luke
    Luke 17:31-37
    31 On that day, the one who is on the housetop and whose goods are in the house must not go down to take them out; and likewise the one who is in the field must not turn back. 32 Remember Lot’s wife. 33 Whoever seeks to keep his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it. 34 I tell you, on that night there will be two in one bed; one will be taken and the other will be left. 35 There will be two women grinding at the same place; one will be taken and the other will be left. 36 Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other will be left.” 37 And answering they said to Him, “Where, Lord?” And He said to them, “Where the body is, there also the vultures will be gathered.” (KJV mistranslates as eagles. The Greek aetos can be translated either way, but think about it what kind of birds are where the bodies are?) Matthew 24:28 “Wherever there is a carcass, there the vultures will gather” Does that sound like Heaven to you?

    Jesus is prophesizing about a real event that took place in 70AD when Titus and the Roman Legions rolled through Jerusalem and butchered and estimated 1.5 million Jews. A covenant judgment on Israel. Josephus wrote about it. The Romans were literally snatching some woman and leaving the rest to tell the story.

  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 4:27pm

    Yet another non-biblical man-made lie

    The word Rapture is connected to the Latin word rapiemur, which appears in Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians in the Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible. It means to be raised up or caught up:
    The dead in Christ will rise first; then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord. (1 Thess. 4:16–17)

    The theological notion of ”rapture”, however, was invented 185 years ago. In 1830, in Port Glasgow, Scotland, fifteen year old Margaret MacDonald had a vision concerning the return of Christ.
    Her vision was adopted by John Nelson Darby a British minister and founder of a denomination called the “Plymouth Brethern.”
    In 1909, an American, C. I. Scofield, pubished an annotated version of the “King James” translation of the Bible called the “Scofield Reference Bible.”
    Scofield’s annotations were based on the theology of John Nelson Darby. The “Scofield Reference Bible” popularized the teachings of Darby

    Fundamentalist Christians in the U. S. adopted Scofield’s Bible as authoritative. With the rise of fundamentalism in the U. S. in recent years, the popularity of the theological notion of the “rapture” has also gained popularity.

    However, the Pre-tribulation rapture does not appear in the Bible.
    Jesus’ second coming does not happen twice.

  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 4:17pm

    43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
    44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
    45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
    46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

    I even used your own Bible.
    Faith alone – no you must do something with that faith

    Bible alone – no where in the Bible does it claim that.

    But here in Matthew Jesus says you judged by both your faith and your works

  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 4:15pm

    Matthew 25:31-46King James Version (KJV)
    31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
    32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
    33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
    34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
    35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
    36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
    37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
    38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
    39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
    40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

    41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
    42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:

  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 4:14pm

    Faith alone or faith plus works?

    It’s not either Faith or Works its Both Faith and Works

    Works is how we show our cooperation with God’s plan.

    Jesus’ own words in MT 25:31-46 destroys Sola Fide

    Jam 2:24 – a man is justified by works and not by faith alone
    Jam 2:26 – faith without works is dead
    Gal 5:6 – only thing that counts is faith working in love
    1 Cor 13:2 – faith without love is nothing
    Jn 14:15 – if you love me, keep my commandments
    Mt 19:16-17 – if wish to enter into life, keep commandments

    Good Works
    Mt 7:21 – not lord lord, but he who does the will of the father
    Mt 19:16-17 to have life, keep my commandments
    Jn 14:21 he who keeps my commandments loves me
    Rom 2:2-8 eternal life by perseverance in good works
    Gal 5:4-6 nothing counts but faith working through love
    Eph 2:8-10 we are created in Christ Jesus for good works
    Phil 2:12-13 work out salvation with fear and trembling
    Jam 2:14-24 a man is justified by works and not faith alone

    Judged according to Deeds
    Rom 2:5-8 – God will repay each man according to his works
    2 Cor 5:10 – recompense accord to what did in body
    2 Cor 11:15 – their end will correspond to their deeds
    1 Pet 1:17 – God judges impartially according to one’s works
    Rev 20:12-12 – dead judged according to their deeds
    Col 3:24-25 – will receive due payment for whatever you do

    Non biblical?

  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 4:11pm

    “On the matter of history and the Bible, the Bible is a phenomenal book of history. Zero errors.”
    Except when Catholics read it, right?

    I’m so glad you approve of the books selected by the Catholic Church that make up the Bible

    All Christians before 1525 baptized infants. It’s illogical to think from the Apostles and up to the Anabaptist all got it wrong.
    Tell me more about forcing scripture to fit a preconceived bias….LOL

    Entire households were baptized… To claim none of these households had infant children in them is ludicrous.

    Wait Jesus called someone teacher? Once again you stumble on your own words.
    Call no man Father, teacher, master… Jesus broke His own rule?

    Believe and be saved, that’s it? Nothing else?
    “teaching that is not Biblical” that is exactly what you are doing.

    To piggy back on a point jb504079 was making. Are aborted children saved? What about mentally disabled children who never truly reach the age of reason, or a Muslim child who grows up in a home where he never learns the truth of Jesus, or isolated tribal member? Can any of these be saved without believing in Jesus first? Then what about the demons, they believe Jesus is the Messiah, are they saved?

    Having no scripture support? You mean having no scripture you accept.

    Wait first you said it’s the Bible alone, now you change to faith alone.
    Which is it.
    Wait, I already know….it’s neiter

  • [1] January 26, 2015 at 3:53pm

    I think some people believe it fell from the sky in its completed form.

    And all those people who lived before King James didn’t live the truth.
    How could they, King James perfected the Bible

  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 12:46pm

    Jimmy Swaggart Made Me Catholic: DVD Trailer and Excerpt

    Jimmy Swaggart Made Me Catholic shows how a die-hard Protestant came to realize that the Protestant faith which he sought to defend has no real response to the truths espoused by the Catholic Church.
    By Tim Staples

  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 12:29pm

    That’s why he was so relieved when he “discovered” Sola Fide (Faith Alone) while he was sitting on the privy in the monastery tower.

    He had only to believe, he said, and that relieved his tortured conscience.

    He removed eleven books from the canon of the Bible — seven and parts of Esther and Daniel from the OT and four from the NT — because he couldn’t make them conform to his new doctrines. He especially hated 2 Maccabees because it contains evidence of the purification of souls after death. The NT books were Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation. The NT books were restored by his followers in the 17th century, but they let his cuts to the OT stand.

    Luther was a very troubled soul. And He alone is the source of your Bible Only faith.

  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 12:28pm

    This practice changed with Martin Luther, who dropped the deuterocanonical books on nothing more than his own say-so. Protestantism as a whole has followed his lead in this regard.
    One of the two “pillars” of the Protestant Reformation (sola scriptura or “the Bible alone”) in part states that nothing can be added to or taken away from God’s Word. History shows therefore that Protestants are guilty of violating their own doctrine.

    Once again you prove to be long on opinion and short on facts

    Luther approved the bigamous marriage of Philip of Hesse — and when the new bride’s mother exposed him, he lied about it, then finally had to admit it. He said he would rather a man have two wives than one divorce.

    He also approved polygamy (plural marriage). He said he could find nothing in Scripture to oppose it.

    The truth about Luther is truly shocking.
    Most Protestants know nothing of the real Luther.
    They only know the white-washed Luther they were taught.
    Movies of Luther’s life are lies. They show him as the brave hero fighting the big bad Catholic Church, and never mention any of his changes to the Bible or his bizarre behavior.

    His feces fights with the devil are for real — documented history.

    The man was mentally disturbed. He is to be pitied. He was a victim of a savage mother and father who beat him mercilessly as a child. He never recovered. He suffered from “scrupulosity” — he imagined everything he did was a sin.

  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 12:25pm

    However, these books are “unscriptural” only if misinterpreted. It should also be noted that the first-century Christians–including Jesus and the apostles–effectively considered these seven books canonical.

    They quoted from the Septuagint, a Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures that contained these seven books. More importantly, the deuterocanonicals are clearly alluded to in the New Testament.

    Third, the canon of the entire Bible was essentially settled around the turn of the fourth century. Up until this time, there was disagreement over the canon, and some ten different canonical lists existed, none of which corresponded exactly to what the Bible now contains. Around this time there were no less than five instances when the canon was formally identified: the Synod of Rome (382), the Council of Hippo (393), the Council of Carthage (397), a letter from Pope Innocent I to Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse (405), and the Second Council of Carthage (419). In every instance, the canon was identical to what Catholic Bibles contain today. In other words, from the end of the fourth century on, in practice Christians accepted the Catholic Church’s decision in this matter.

    By the time of the Reformation, Christians had been using the same 73 books in their Bibles (46 in the Old Testament, 27 in the New Testament)–and thus considering them inspired–for more than 1100 years.

  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 12:24pm

    In no case does a book of the Bible state this for itself. Even if it does claim to contain divine revelations or visions (as does the book of Revelation), it does not say of itself that every word of its text was inspired. That is something we must infer from 2 Timothy 3:16. Since no protocanonical book of the Bible meets your test, it can scarcely be expected of the deuterocanonical books.

    Claiming to be inspired is a different thing from really being inspired. The Book of Mormon claims to be the Word of God, but isn’t; the Gospel of John doesn’t, but it is. To determine inspiration, one must use an external authority for verification, and the Church is the only institution that can be that external authority.

    The Catholic Church claims to be the guardian of the Bible, but it demonstrated its hostility towards God’s Word when it added unscriptural books to the Old Testament, namely the Apocrypha.

    A few things need to be said here. First of all, the seven books in question–Tobit, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, and Baruch–are properly called the deuterocanonical books.

    Second, the label “unscriptural” was first applied by the Protestant Reformers of the 16th century. The truth is, portions of these books contradict elements of Protestant doctrine (as in the case of 2 Maccabees 12, which clearly supports prayers for the dead and a belief in purgatory), and the “reformers” therefore needed some excuse to eliminate them from the canon.

  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 12:23pm

    So that brings us to our current time period. This is when the notion of a “Bible Only” church really began to take off. That is why we have 35,000+ Christian denominations and Non-denominations who all claim to read the same Bible yet all disagree with one another over the interpretation. That’s an average of 5 new churches every day, allowing for those that fade away due to any number of reasons.

    Is that the “Bible Only” church you are referring to?

    ** None of the books of the Apocrypha, what Catholics call the “deuterocanonical” books, claim to be divinely inspired– therefore they cannot be inspired and do not belong in the Bible.

    No book of the Bible claims itself to be divinely inspired.

    Divine inspiration means that God himself authored the exact words of the text (using the human writer’s mind, personality, and background), and no book states anything like, “The words of this book were chosen by God” or “This book is divinely inspired.”

    The term “inspired” (Greek, theopneustos) only occurs once in the Bible (2 Tm 3:16), where we are told that all Scripture is inspired. We first know that something is Scripture and then infer that it is inspired; we do not first know that it is inspired and then conclude it is Scripture.

    The only non-technical references to inspiration occur when one book of the Bible reports that God or the Spirit spoke through the words of a different book (for example, see Heb 3:7-11, concerning Ps 95).

  • [2] January 26, 2015 at 12:22pm

    Combine that with the fact that 90% of the population was illiterate and you once again are forced to come to the conclusion that a “Bible Only” church would not have been possible at this time.

    How about AD 1501-to 1900. Could we have a “Bible Only” church at this time? Finally, it is conceivable to even make the argument. But, we have problems. Which Bible? Are we to stick with the Catholic Bible which has been used for a century and a half, or are we to use the re-writes? Early on in this time frame we have many “versions” of the Bible being printed. Luther and others removed books that did not support his newly invented sola scriptura and sola fide.
    11 Books were either edited or completely removed.

    Many will point to the King James at this time as the summit and source of the authentic Bible.
    Why would Jesus establish a church that was to be “Bible Only” and wait until 1611 to provide the Bible part? And who was King James and by what authority did he get to publish the Bible? By the way the KJV has been re-written several times over the last 400 years. Unknown to most Protestants, the original 1611 King James Bible and the Bibles published for the use of the clergy and the church members until late in the 19th Century, contained 80 books.
    “Apocrapha” included, they were removed by the Archbishop of Canterbury in 1885. So it wasn’t until 1885 that this Bible Only church was using the correct Bible?

123 To page: Go