the bread and wine of THE LORD'S SUPPER.

we all know that the bread symbolizes Christ's flesh
and the wine symbolizes Christ's blood.

Jesus said that we MUST eat His flesh (the Word of God).......(Spiritual nourishment).
and drink His blood............WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? WHAT DOES IT SYMBOLIZE?

perhaps the wine is symbolic of the Joy that we find in SALVATION FROM SIN,.......which we enjoy after we have eaten (recieved SPIRITUAL NOURISHMENT) from His flesh (Word, Bible, Gospel).


dennis

Good question ! I have also wondered about it.

Gen 9:4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, ..............The life is in the blood. If you eat the flesh (the Word) you also are partaking of the blood, which have the zoe life of Christ Jesus in it. So when you read (eat) the Word you are partaking of the bread and the blood. That is the real meaning of "communion" . We have to do this whenever we get together: Share the Word.

Well, that is how I understand it
C

We must drink the blood since when we are saved, Jesus' blood washes FROM THE INSIDE!
Another condition! Be saved (wine/blood), keep the scriptures (bread/flesh)

Alright, since the Bible did not exist for nearly 400 years after the crucifixion, what bread was the earliest Christians eating?

Don't you believe that Jesus was the WORD?

sojourner

The early church shared all the Word that we have today, through letters and visits by the apostels.The revelation was given to Paul, and Paul shared the truth with the whole church and they were told to hold fast to that which they have heard from the beginning.
God confirmed Paul message through signs and wonders.

See, unlike the church today, the original message was ......Christ in you the hope of glory. Paul preached death to self to the church and they understood it as such. He preached perfection through faith, sinlessness through faith,and death to the old man. Then he told them that Christ (the Word) was in them and that He will grow until the end of time and then He will manifest in the body of Christ. Paul confirmed the words of Jesus (John 16), plus that of John in Rev 12. That message is now seldom heard or believed. (It is so , because of the time we are in. This was prophesied that it would be like this, so as such is perfectly in line with the will of God )

The Bible came into being , at the exact time that our sovereign God planned it to come in its present form.It was however always in the hands of the early believers.

Jesus is the Word.He came through the writings of the early prophets and the final revelation came through the NT writers.
What matters is what you and I now do with this living Word (Jesus)

here are some scriptures:1Co 11:2 Now I praise you that ye remember me in all things, and hold fast the traditions, even as I delivered them to you.

1Co 15:2 by which also ye are saved, if ye hold fast the word which I preached unto you, except ye believed in vain.

2Th 2:15 So then, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye were taught, whether by word, or by epistle of ours.

2Jn 1:6 And this is love, that we should walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, even as ye heard from the beginning, that ye should walk in it.

So to answer your question: Yes Jesus is the Word and the early church was eating the Word, just as we do today.

Romans was written about 50 AD

Revelations was written about 95 AD

i don't understand your question.

dennis

Dennis, I understand that the books and letters of the Bible were written much earlier. However, they were not compiled and made available in their entirity for all of Christianity for a few centuries.

I was just making the point that Jesus is the Living Word. The earliest Christians recognized the Eucharist as "Wisdom's banquet" of bread and wine, Prv 9:1-6. As well as a parallel or pattern of the angels feeding the prophet Elijah, 1 Kings 19:5-7. I celebrate a real presence in the Eucharist as a source of grace.

The Bible is vital and alive, but so is Jesus Christ in the bread and wine of the Eucharist. This is another parallel. Communion is what the earliest Christians depended on.

sojourner

i don't believe in the RCC
or transsubstantiation,.

the bread and wine that Jesus held in His hand was not His Flesh and Blood,.........it was bread and wine which symbolized His Flesh and Blood.

also,

the early Christians had the Gifts of the Spirit, such as Prophesying IN THE SPIRIT, discernment IN THE SPIRIT, speaking in tongues IN THE SPIRIT, etc...............they received direct revelation from God thru miraculous means, and ........they could recognize Holy Scripture , just by looking at it, when they were INSPIRED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT to do so,...............they didn't need a pope or an RCC to help them, and the RCC didn't exist until Constantine the Great.

Jesus specializes in empowering the "nobodies" of this world..........not many mighty and noble are called,...........Jesus didn't need or want a dictator pope to rule over Christendom.


dennis

GOD's Manna. Think about it.

Exd 16:15 And when the children of Israel saw [it], they said one to another, It [is] manna: for they wist not what it [was]. And Moses said unto them, This [is] the bread which the LORD hath given you to eat.

as per Peloubet's Bible dictionary:

1 Cor 11;20-34

verse 25
Jesus said "this cup is the New Covenant [ratified and established] in My Blood.
Do this to call Me [affectionately] to remembrance".

so, the cup = wine= blood = salvation = blood sacrifice for our sins = His death substitutes for our death

that's the NEW COVENANT

*****

what was the OLD COVENANT?

millions of gallons of animal blood (lambs, rams, bulls, doves, etc) spilled for sin, but those blood sacrifices were ONLY shadows of the future ONLY SACRIFICE (Christ's Blood) that would be effective.

*******

Why did God use BREAD instead of a lamb (or Blood) .......in the Lord's Supper?
Animal sacrifices should stop, after Christ sacrificed Himself on the Altar.
No need for any more spilled blood,..............because that one Spill of Blood, 2000 years ago, was totally adequate..............if we add anything to it, we imply that Christ's sarifice was in-complete and in-adequate.

dennis

Amen, Tigger. This is another absolute parallel.

sojourner




Irregardless Dennis, the early Christians practiced the rite of the holy Eucharist. It is a historical fact. This is how the rumors got started that Christians practiced human sacrifice in secret long before Constantine the great ever came along.

sojourner

We don't eat and drink Christ's literal PHYSICAL flesh and blood.

We eat and drink His SYMBOLIC, SPIRITUAL flesh and blood , which is the milk and meat of GOD'S WORD (the Bible).

What SPIRITUAL good would it do me to eat human flesh?
It will do me GREAT GOOD to (spiritually) consume the Word of God (the Bible).

In fact, a babe-in-Christ MUST drink the SPIRTUAL milk , and eat the SPIRITUAL meat of God's Word, ........or he will DIE SPIRITUALLY (loss of salvation).
Again, OSAS and Calvinism is wrong.

The Christian life is a SPIRITUAL life, not a PHYSICAL life.

The born-again quadriplegic is a far superior life, in God's eyes, .......than a Strongman/Rambo who is an un-believer (or a babe-in-Christ who has not fed on the Word).


dennis

"We don't eat and drink Christs literal physical flesh and blood."

What scripture do you use to support this claim, Dennis?

sojourner

in the OT, anointing was PHYSICAL with PHYSICAL olive oil.
in the NT, anointing is SPIRITUAL with the HOLY SPIRIT.


in the OT , baptism was PHYSICAL with mere water, to "cleanse" yourself from sweat, dirt, sin, etc.
in the NT, baptism is SPIRITUAL, with the HOLY SPIRIT , to (REALLY) cleanse yourself from sin and SPIRITUAL filth.

in the OT, sacrifices were PHYSICAL with the people offering PHYSICAL animal blood.
in the NT, our sacrifices are SPIRITUAL, we BELIEVE that Christ has made the sacrifice, so we offer SPIRITUAL sacrifices of praise, thanksgiving, worship in SPIRIT and in Truth.

when Jesus did the Lord's Supper, His cup was NOT filled with HIS OWN BLOOD, it was filled with wine, which symbolized HIS BLOOD.

in the OT, the Temple was PHYSICAL (VISIBLE) STONE.
in the NT, the Temple is the Body of Christ, and our bodies, SPIRITUAL TEMPLE.

i could go on and on and on, with examples

the SPIRITUAL is infinitely better than the PHYSICAL.

the SPIRITUAL is permanent and everlasting.
the PHYSICAL is temporal.

dennis

Matthew 26;29
amplified bible

Jesus said, "I shall not drink again of THIS FRUIT OF THE VINE"

this fruit of the vine was wine, not Christ's LITERAL blood.

Matthew 27;6
"it is the price of blood"

Matthew is capable of saying blood , when blood is meant, as this verse shows.

********

Acts 2;31

"nor did His Body know decay or see destruction"

which is the fulfillment of the prediction:
Psalms 16;10
"You will not suffer Your Holy One to see corruption".

My point is:
if i eat, drink, and digest and expell (a digested and wasted) Christ's Body and Blood into my toilet, that would be decay, destruction, and corruption of Christ's Body.

as if i could do such a thing! It's impossible for anyone to do that!
Christ is a grown man now (not a baby, toddler, or small boy), and He is in His resurrection Body, a Body which can never be sacrificed again (Hebrews 9;25-26) , or get sick, or be injured, or grow feeble.

There is no need or desire to sacrifice Christ again , since His Sacrifice is Adequate.
Hebrews 9;12-28

Notice that Christ is BOTH the sacrifice and the offerer of the Sacrifice.
We have nothing to add to it. Christ does it all, and provides all.
We shouldn't attempt to add any sacrifice to it. Our contributions to this transaction are totally in-appropriate and anti-biblical.
But, in the RCC Mass, the men claim that they are offering a sacrifice of Christ's Body (the wafer).


Note that Christ became a MAN
He will always forever be a MAN
He is 100% God and 100% MAN
He is not lion, giraffe, monkey, Martian, ET, spaceman, wafer,

My point is: He didn't become a Martian, because there are no Martians or ETs anywhere in the Universe.
Christ became one of us! (mankind)
God's focus is on Man, earth, Earthlings, Israel, Jerusalem, the New Jerusalem, etc

There are no ETs, UFOs, spacemen,

What does He do when He destroys the Heavens and the earth?
He makes a NEW HEAVENS AND A NEW EARTH.
God's focus is on Earth and Earthlings.
There are no UFOs and ETs.

Christ became a MAN, so that He could substitute for MEN (mankind). On the Cross. His Death for our death.

dennis

http://www.atruechurch.info/catholicism.html



http://www.bible.ca/catholic-doctrine.htm

QUOTE

In the year 1215:

The dogma of Transubstantiation was decreed by Pope Innocent III, in the year

By this doctrine the priest pretends to perform a daily miracle by changing a wafer into the body of Christ, and then he pretends to eat Him alive in the presence of his people during Mass. The Bible condemns such absurdities; for the Lord's Supper is simply a memorial of the sacrifice of Christ. The spiritual presence of Christ is implied in the Lord's Supper. (Read Luke 22:19-20; John 6:35; I Cor. 11:26).

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Rel...sies-a_list.htm

Dennis, Christ's sacrifice was very real and is very real. The mass is the "marriage supper of the Lamb" (Rev 19:9). Any person who hears this with understanding (only by the grace of the Groom himself) knows that this supper is going on at heaven's alter (Rev 8:3), where chalices are poured out (Rev 14:10). The Eucharistic chalices are cups of blessings for the faithful, but cups of wrath for sinners (1 Cor 11:28-30). I drink from the "blessing cup...a communion in the blood of Christ" (1 Cor 10:16).

If you are stating that the Eucharistic ceremony never took place prior to 1215 you are mistaken. The year that any dogma or practice becomes doctrine in no way dictates when it all began. It simply shows the date that debates among brethren proves it neccessary to make it official. There is insurmountable archaeological evidence that shows that the earliest Christians practiced the ceremony of taking the blood of Christ. So, what seems to be in debate here is what it meant to them.

Ignatius clarified this doctrine for anyone in doubt in 105 a.d. He defined heretics as those who "refrain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father in his goodness raised up."

So you see, this debate began very early in the Church. And you my friend would have been one of the heretics St. Ignatius was referring to. I don't mean this as an insult in any way. Things are what they are. If you do not feel Christ's presence in the Mass then you should not be there. I have to say that you have no idea of what you are missing. Praise be to God. Bless you, Dennis.

sojourner

With all due respect and love,
Who is Ignatius?
who is dennis?
who is sojourner?

i want to know what the Bible says.
the bible is the Word of God.
God is true.
that's what i believe.
i don't see transubstantiation in the bible.

dennis

Christ said "I am the Door".

Is He a LITERAL, PHYSICAL door?

dennis

A. Transubstantiation is a false doctrine for the following reasons:

No Bible verse teaches transubstantiation. Supposed proof texts put forward by Roman Catholic and Orthodox advocates are most naturally seen as proving that the bread and juice were symbols of the body and blood. To see transubstantiation in these texts requires one to strain the text as much as our mind.
Transubstantiation is a false doctrine because Jesus is not a liar: In Mt 26:29 after Jesus had said, "this is my blood" and prayed, he still referred to the contents as, "fruit of the vine". If transubstantiation of the juice into blood had occurred, as both Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches say it was at this time, then Jesus would never have referred to it as "fruit of the vine' but rather "blood". This proves that when Jesus said "take eat & drink" he LITERALLY gave them bread and juice.
In like manner, Paul also refers to the elements of the Lord's Supper as "eat this bread and drink the cup" in 1 Cor 11:26 after they should be transubstantiated. 1 Cor 11:26-27 proves transubstantiation wrong because Paul calls the loaf, "bread" after both Roman Catholics and Orthodox say the "change" was supposed to take place. Catholics make Paul a liar by calling the loaf "bread" rather than what Catholic false doctrine claims it was: Literal Flesh.
In 1 Corinthians 11:25, Jesus said literally that the "cup was the covenant". So which is it? Is the it the juice that is the covenant or the juice that is the blood? Is it the cup that is the covenant or is the cup the blood?
In 1 Cor 11:26-28, Paul instructs us to "drink the cup" instead of "drink the blood". The Holy Spirit would not use such a figure of speech as "synecdoche" (referring to a part for the whole) if such a literal transubstantiation was actually taking place. To use a symbol when such a literal change is taking place is unthinkable.
Transubstantiation is a false doctrine because Jesus instituted Lord’s Supper before his blood was shed and body broken! He spoke of His blood being shed, which was still yet future. This proves it was a symbol.
The very record of historically, (Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Cyprian and Hippolytus) which the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches love to quote as authority, proves that before 200 AD, the church viewed the bread and juice as symbols. Conversely, the earliest historical hint of transubstantiation was in the 4th century.
Obviously Jesus words, "this is my body" should be taken symbolically because it falls within a long list of symbolic statements Christ said: "I am the bread," (John 6:41), "I am the vine," (John 15:5), "I am the door," (John 10:7,9), "I am the good shepherd,"(John 10:11,12), "You are the world the salt, (Matthew 5:13), "You are the light of the world the salt, (Matthew 5:14)
The apostasy of withholding the Cup: Roman Catholics, in the 1415 AD Council of Constance, decreed that the laity could no longer drink of the cup, but the bread alone. This is completely contrary to Scripture and the earliest church traditions. Jesus’ own words are "drink from it, all of you" Matthew 26:26 and in Mark 14:22-23 it says "He gave it to them, and they all drank from it." The Greek Orthodox church does not withhold the juice.
The Greek orthodox church violates the Bible pattern by using leavened bread, whereas Roman Catholics use unleavened bread, just as Jesus did, (Matthew 26:17) and the Bible records in 1 Cor 5:7-8. Both Roman Catholic and Greek orthodox churches violate the Bible pattern by using leavened wine, instead of unleavened grape juice.
The Greek orthodox church violates the Bible pattern by using a "communion spoon" to dip into the cup to retrieve some wine-soaked bread. The Bible pattern for the Lord's Supper is that the bread and juice are not combined, but are two separate steps of "Holy communion".
We wonder why Roman Catholics and Orthodox doubt God will grant his full grace and love in the symbolic elements of the bread and the juice? Why is it so hard for them to believe that He grants us the full grace of His Body and Blood via symbols? The water of baptism washes away sin: Acts 2:38; 22:16. You don't get your sins forgiven until you are immersed in water! Water is a symbol of the blood that literally removes sin. For Roman Catholics and Orthodox to believe in "real presence", is as logical as the idea that water of baptism turns into literal blood!
B. Catholics and Orthodox misrepresent history:

Transubstantiation is completely unbiblical, being a doctrine that grew out of the Gnostic controversies of the mid second century and gradually developing to full flower in the 4th century. The Gnostics claimed that Jesus did not have literal flesh and blood, it only appeared that way. The early post-apostolic Christians countered that Jesus indeed had ordinary human flesh and blood and they began to emphasize this in the Lord's Supper.

"The early centuries were not exercised with a "moment" of consecration, for they had not become concerned with a conversion in the elements." (Early Christians Speak, Everett Ferguson, 1981, p 114)
Orthodox writers misrepresent history, but correctly identify the Lord's Supper as a battle ground between Christians and Gnostics.

"In the early Church, the only people who denied that the Eucharist was truly the Body and Blood of Christ were those who also denied that the Word had truly become man." (THE WAY: What Every Protestant Should Know About the Orthodox Church, Clark Carlton, 1997, p 173)
The historically accurate way of saying this would be:

"In the early Church, before 200AD, both Gnostics and the church took the same symbolic view of the bread and juice. Some Gnostics refused to eat the Lord's Supper altogether. Transubstantiation was not an issue that was discussed. By the fourth century, the church drifted away from the original symbolic view of the Apostles and began to teach transubstantiation. Only in the fourth century, were Gnostics isolated in their symbolic view. But amazingly, they were the ones who maintained the Apostolic traditional view. It was the church that had changed her theology towards transubstantiation."
Some Gnostics groups refused to break bread altogether. The only churches today that do not break bread at all, like the Gnostics, are groups like the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Salvation Army. But even still, the 2nd century Gnostics and the church both viewed the elements of the Lord's Supper as symbolic. Transubstantiation was never the issue at this time.

my thoughts:
the above article says:
"The water of baptism washes away sin: Acts 2:38; 22:16. You don't get your sins forgiven until you are immersed in water! Water is a symbol of the blood that literally removes sin."

but, the Scripture tells us that we believe FIRST (which includes being born-again), then,.....we get water-baptism , because we are obeying the Commandment to be baptized.

Water Baptism is a PHYSICAL RITUAL, which accomplishes no SPIRITUAL WORK.
It is a witness to the church and the world that the believer has identified (and believed in) with Christ.

Baptism with the HOLY SPIRIT is a SPIRITUAL WORK BY GOD, which accomplishes a great SPIRITUAL WORK (re-generation, born-again). When we first believe, God baptizes us with the HOLY SPIRIT , whether we realize it or not.

dennis

http://www.bible.ca/ntx-communion-transubstantiation.htm

Actually, I thought the acripture said the spirit is in the blood. I always took the offering of the bread and the wine (my daughter calls this "community" in her child-heart ways, and I have not corrected her because she is probably more correct than we are) to be a remembering. Kind of like remembering your mother on Mother's day or the Gift at Passover. We have the gift always but to devote a time to STOP AND STAND STILL in the awe of it before the Lord is a great thing for human brains.

The bread was the word and the word is Jesus. The wine is the blood and the blood is the spirit. Entering into worship and joining the Salvation power of the word and the community of the spirit is worship to the Father.

The three are then one.

leia

Luk 22:17 And he received a cup, and when he had given thanks, he said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves:
Luk 22:18 for I say unto you, I shall not drink from henceforth of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come.
Luk 22:19 And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and gave to them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.

According to their CLAIM, The Catholic Church sacrifices Jesus again and again . Remember, in Hebrews we are taught that Jesus was sacrificed "once for all " (that is a good Scripture to use)
We are told to do this in remembrance, not as a sacrifice.

"to strain the text as much as our mind." As for straining the text, it's just a matter of opinion. As for straining the mind, it's called faith, grace, or the power of the Holy Spirit.

It was a simple command, Dennis. Made by Jesus at a pivotal moment in his ministry. What it means to you is what is in question here. There is way more to the Eucharist than symbolism. It is as real as the power of the Bible. If you can believe in an actual presence taking place as you read the written word, granting you understanding, why would you think it impossible through an event that Jesus actually commanded us to perform?


Jn 26-58 "I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh." Plain and simple.

Why is it you insist on strictly a literal translation of the Bible until it comes to the subject of the Eucharist?


sojourner

*************

in the following article, it says that the RCC is guilty of millions of muders:

Shekel (Dean Coombs) wrote:
"Our leaders have deceived us, and we wanted to be deceived so that we would be more accepted by the world. But God is not deceived. Nor has He changed His mind about the millions tortured to death under the crucifixes of the Catholic Church; those that refused to bow their knee to popish doctrine. The blood of the martyrs still cries out!"

my thoughts:
why should i trust my murderers?
if i refuse the RCC Eucharist, will the Pope murder me?

dennis





Mene-Tekel Bible Code Hand Creation Lamb Menorah Tabernacle Moth Deep Impact

Dragon Eden (Same Sex) Lion/Acrostic Bible Prophecy Balance Bible Code (Audio) Yeshua/DNA Links

(Audio/visual) Comet Code Genuine? Bible Code Numeric 360-Bible Prophecy Heaven-bound? To Christians

Latest bible codes/articles Home Page Bible Prophecy Forum



From Genesis to Revelation,
the Bible Teaches that God Hates Mixture!

(and Roman Catholicism)



From Genesis to Revelation, the bible teaches that God hates mixture! From beginning to end, God hates compromise!

God separated the darkness from the light. "And in Him is no darkness at all," (1John 1). "Every good and perfect gift comes down from above from the Father of lights, in whom there is no variableness, neither shadow of turning," (James). God does not change! He hated mixture in the Old Testament. He hates it in the New, and He is the same yesterday, today, and forever.

The Catholic church is utterly mixed with the world. Who denies it?

Recall the world- day of prayer back a decade ago, when the Pope had the Deli Lama (leader of Buddhism) do his ceremony from his very own pulpit! After that, there was the witch doctors, the fire eaters, those from every religion! Back then we were shocked. But now we are so enlightened! We have become Christian New Agers with realizing it!

Our leaders have deceived us, and we wanted to be deceived so that we would be more accepted by the world. But God is not deceived. Nor has He changed His mind about the millions tortured to death under the crucifixes of the Catholic Church; those that refused to bow their knee to popish doctrine. The blood of the martyrs still cries out!

What did Paul say? "If any one preaches to you anther gospel other than that which I have preached to you, let him be eternally damned!" (Galatians). He even said it twice concerning those that mixed works with grace for salvation. Yet the Roman Catholic Church declares accursed and damned all who believe salvation is by faith and grace alone! Who shall we believe? God or men? Who shall we trust our eternal salvation to, God or men? "Come out from her my people, lest ye be a partaker of her sins and of her plagues. For her sins have heaped up to heaven," (Revelation).

If we love Catholics we would tell them the truth, but I see this film as another work of Satan to mix the godly seed with the ungodly seed. Evangelicals with Romanism. Since there is no common ground theologically, I see that Satan is using the arts to bridge the gap instead. And no wonder, for the devil was the musical cherub at the throne of God before evil was found in him. Thus, Satan is expert in those things that entertain the flesh.

From Genesis to Revelation, the bible teaches that God hates mixture!

Recall that it was Cain's line (whom God separated and drove out from the godly line of Seth) that first made musical instruments, and tools for plowing, and cities to live in. All these things are good in their right place, but the devil knows that the more at ease a people are, the more happy they are the less likely they will seek God. The natural man wants to make life as easy as possible during the few years he exists on earth. But the godly seed of Seth "began to call upon the name of the Lord," all the way to Noah. But in the days of Noah, things had become altogether mixed, "And violence was in the earth." So He destroyed them as He saw right. And then they built the tower of Nimrod in defiance of God. God had told them to disperse among the world. But they wanted to unite and build a name for themselves. So God confounded their languages and forced them to flee Babylon. A few hundred years later he called Abraham "out of Ur of Babylonia." 'Leave everything behind,' God told him, 'and come, and I will show you a land you don't know.'

From Genesis to Revelation, the bible teaches that God hates mixture!

But the wickedness of the land of Canaan was great, and the children of Abraham were in danger of being assimilated into the nations. So God sent Joseph ahead of them so that they may live in the finest part of Egypt completely separate from the Egyptians, "who hated shepherds".

In Egypt the Israelites multiplied greatly and became a nation. But the Egyptians feared them and made them their slaves. But God separated Moses from his people 40 years, until his call at the burning bush. God led them out of Egypt with a mighty hand under the very eyes of the Egyptians---but the rabble ("mixed multitude") went with them. The rabble stirred up the rest frequently to rebel against God and against Moses. (Moses is a type of Christ). Therefore, God slew every last one of them except for two. Only their children entered the promised land.

During the period of the Judges that followed, the people again prostituted themselves after other gods and mixed again with the nations. "Everyone did what was right in their own eyes." God repeatedly afflicted them until they reluctantly sent their gods away. God had explicitly told them not to worship Him according to the way the nations worshiped their gods. But they would not listen. Finally, God gave them up to have a king "like all the other nations," (though the Lord God was their king).

The king was instructed to control the people by force (rather than by mere moral persuasion). But still they mixed with the nations---both they, and their kings. To halt their backslidings, God split the nation of Israel into two camps---Israel (the Northern Kingdom), and Judah (the Southern Kingdom). Israel to the north mixed themselves completely with the nations so God sent them far away into exile in 722 BC. By 586 BC, God has sent Judah away as well, for Judah followed in her sisters path.

But God was merciful, and left himself a remnant for His names sake; (for Messiah would soon come through the line of Judah). God mercifully brought them out of Babylonian exile, but they again had mixed with pagan practices, so God stirred Ezra to force them to send away their pagan wives and children.

And again they mixed with the nations during the days of the Greeks, so that they became just like the Greeks. Then God allowed Antiochus Epiphanies in 138 BC to sift the true from the false. For all that would not bow to Greek god's were put to death. However, many gladly became Greeks, and fully participated in their lewd Olympic games, and in their great drama performances at the amphitheatres. Later, this was repeated with the Romans.

From Genesis to Revelation, the bible teaches that God hates mixture!

Than Jesus came, "undefiled, separate from sinners," (Hebrews). But His own people did not recognize Him. He called out 12 men to follow him. They were to establish His church of "called out ones." The church was to be a "peculiar people, a royal nation, a holy people," who alone were able and worthy to sing the praises of Him who had called them out from darkness into light. But Jesus warned them while He was yet alive that a day would come when others would think that they were doing God a service by putting them to death!

And so it was. First their Jewish brethren persecuted them to death, and then the Romans. But Satan could not defeat them. Persecution only purified them and kept them separate from all the heathen practices that surrounded them. So Satan changed tactics. He recalled Balaam of old in the days of Moses. Back then Israel could not be defeated by war since God was with them, but instead Satan had the false prophet Balaam trick Israel to participate in the sacrifices of Idolaters, Before long they were behaving just like them. God punished them with the plague because of their immortalities. So Satan repeats the Balaamite trick!

Suddenly, by the 3rd century AD, Satan suddenly reverses tables on the Christians. "Let us make love, and not war," was Satan's battle strategy. "That way we will turn God Himself against them!"

Suddenly it was now virtually illegal not to be a Christian! The Roman Emperor turned pagan temples into church temples, and an official 'church' priesthood replaced the old pagan ones. The pagans saw a good thing and converted so that they might cash in on high positions that were now vacant. The poor church suddenly became filthy rich, and decked with the finest of purple and scarlet. The church absorbed the pagan world and became pagan Christianity. Men fought for supremacy among themselves and soon popes ruled the whole religious Roman Empire. Now they were the ones who put to death all that would not compromise with her, and fornicate with the kings and leaders of the earth.

The Roman Catholic Church was not satisfied with the blood of true Christians, so they murdered by the hundreds of thousands Jews as well. God was angry and sent the Islamic scourge to slay whole nations. And so much of what was formerly 'Christian' became Islam. Pagan Islam was appalled at all the idols of Rome, and was there justification for their murderous rampage.

Satan's plan was working. Much of the world remained under the Papacy. But God rose up men to turn people back to biblical Christianity; they understood the words of John, "And we know that no murderer has eternal life in them." They lived holy lives. They had fled the lands of Rome's control and were safe, but only for a short time, because Satan rose up false churches there, too! Compromising churches sprung up almost overnight---married with the civil authorities---all the while professing Jesus as Lord. They, too, were mixed with the nations. They, too, began to kill in Jesus name. They persecuted the remnant that refused to worship in "the synagogue of Satan." Their persecutors indeed hated Roman Catholicism, but were yet her sisters. They bore similar resemblance, except the younger sister was more self righteous. And so together, (though enemies), they began to put to death all that loved the Lord and refused to mix with state worship. Thus, in Catholic countries the remnant were burned at the stake, while in Protestant countries they were slain with the sword. In pretense the sisters served Jesus, but in practice they slew the true brethren of our Lord.

Yet, Jesus himself had said, "By their fruits you will know them." But even these words fell deaf on many a true saint, intoxicated, stupefied, unwilling and unable to run. Like in a nightmare, many could not run away. But some did. "Come out from her," cried God's messengers! But they justified their remaining within her. "Perhaps she can be healed," they foolishly thought!

All was well nigh lost, but for God!

Amazingly, God had another world coexisting with the known world at that time. This new world was that of North and South America. After it was discovered, men fled to it from Britain and Spain and elsewhere, in search of freedom---freedom to serve God with a good conscience. But Rome sent her missionaries too. Rome, "the city on seven hills," conquered South America, and had her influence in North America too. But God rose up great revivalists such as Wesley and Edwards. They turned people back from compromise, and warned of the whorish church of Rome.

But succeeding generations fell away again. Affluence settled over the land in the 20th century. But the roaring twenties was replaced by the horrors of two world wars. Hitler tried to exterminate the Jews, and justified it on the ancient practices of Catholicism. Rome even had a concordant with Hitler.

The war ended. Peace and prosperity grew in North and South America, and in Europe, (though communist countries were thrust into darkness. Millions of Christians perished. Today, the KGB rules the Russian Orthodox church---likely the next source of official persecution there. In China they have an official state church as well. But there are millions of true believers in the underground house churches. Many are in prisons too. Satan has learned over time that the best place to hide is behind a priestly robe in a cathedral surrounded by religious trinkets that deceive the gullible.)

So after the great wars, the western world grew rich and fat again---much more rich than even before the wars. Correspondingly, the church generally became weak and anemic. Sensing her need, but not willing to sacrifice greed, the church of the west looked to Rome as an example of spirituality. Rome, after all, was adept at producing the feeling of religion, but woefully empty in substance. And Rome, always the opportunist, seized the opportunity to embrace her wandering child back to her breasts. Satan conjured up Vatican Two---the great council meeting at Rome---the great 20th century deception of God's elect!

In 1962, the windows of the Vatican flew open, and much of nothing was written, so as to distance herself from her past anathema's against bible believing evangelicals, and pull the wool over their eyes. (The Roman church never officially rejected any of these anathema's.)

But besides mainline evangelical Christianity, Rome craved the then blossoming Pentecostal movement too. And so, Rome created a new Pentecost---a new wind---a new spirit to reach out to the charismatic evangelicals. Thus, visions and prophecies and tongues in the name of the mother of God began to multiply! The Charismatic evangelicals were thrilled! Hence, Vatican II appealed to both groups of evangelicals. One, to the stuffy knowledge-based Christianity that worships the mind, and the other to the charismatic community that worships the emotions. The written documents of Vatican II appealed to all evangelicals who wanted to believe it, and the gifts of other spirits appealed to all charismatics who disdained stuffy-headed knowledge.

And so all was mixed, and has been steadily mixing for 50 years till the difference between truth and error is now nonexistent.

"What difference is there between us and Roman Catholics," the ecumenicalists demands.

"Not much," I respond!

Why, they have drama, we have drama!

They have cathedrals, we have cathedrals!

They have psychology, we have psychology!

They create a mood of worship and we create a mood of worship!

They have music experts and we have music experts!

They have institutions of learning and we have intuitions of learning!

They have removed the reproach of the cross and we have removed the reproach of the cross!

They are like the world and so are we! We are no better! We commit her sins, don't we? We are afflicted by her plagues are we not?

Is there not as much divorce in the church as in the world? Are there not almost as many molesters of boys among our leaders as the celibate priests of Rome? Are we not as spiritually blind as her? Yes, we are no better! Yes, there is little difference between us and them anymore! O countless martyrs, you all died in vain! This harlot seeks not our harm, but our pleasure!

Let us get on with it! Why this endless foreplay? Surely, we are just tempting ourselves! Let us fill up our sins! Let us enter her! Let us go back to Rome!

O' mother of harlots and of abominations in the earth (Revelation 13), we long for thee! Let us come in! Open up and let us come inside Babylon's walls!



Jesus warned, "Take heed that no man deceives you."

From Genesis to Revelation and from first to last, the Bible teaches that God hates mixture!

(Revelation 22:13-15.) "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end. Blessed are they that wash their robes, that they may have the right to come to the tree of life, and my enter in by the gates into the city. Without (the New Jerusalem) are the dogs, and the sorcerers, and the fornicators, and the murderers, and the idolaters, and every one that loveth and maketh a lie."



Also see: Do God's People Really Need to Repent?



You can post any comments at www.christian-forum.net

Message to Christians

Home Page



Important animated message:
Will you go to heaven when you die?

Bible Prophecy Forum!

Aw, come on Dennis, we're talking about the bread and parallels here. Which appears you're not getting. I'm sorry. May God open the eyes of your heart.

sojourner

Jn 26-58 "I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh."

The Bread is the Word= if anybody eat this Word, he will live forever. The Word is His flesh and blood. The life is in the blood

Joh 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth him that sent me, hath eternal life, and cometh not into judgment, but hath passed out of death into life.

Joh 6:63 It is the spirit that giveth life; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I have spoken unto you are spirit, and are life.


To eat the Word is to partake of His flesh, in that way we get eternal life. Not by eating a piece of bread and drinking wine. The wine and bread is a symbol . So each day when we share the Word with other believers, we are actually sharing the Bread and Wine with them as well. We "break bread" when we share the scriptures.

# Genesis 9:4
But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.
Genesis 9:3-5 (in Context) Genesis 9 (Whole Chapter)
# Genesis 9:5

# Matthew 4:4
But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
Matthew 4:3-5 (in Context) Matthew 4 (Whole Chapter)

The above is copied from the BIBLEGATEWAY.COM website.

Blood = life
Bread = word of God

# Exodus 12:8
And they shall eat the flesh in that night, roast with fire, and unleavened bread; and with bitter herbs they shall eat it.
Exodus 12:7-9 (in Context) Exodus 12 (Whole Chapter)
# Exodus 12:46
In one house shall it be eaten; thou shalt not carry forth ought of the flesh abroad out of the house; neither shall ye break a bone thereof.
Exodus 12:45-47 (in Context) Exodus 12 (Whole Chapter)

Flesh = the meat of the Passover lamb (the OT Exodus)………Jesus is the Lamb of God, slain from the foundation of the world.

In the NT, Christ is our Passover. (a vegetarian Passover, without an animal sacrifice, since Christ’s death 2000 years ago is an ADEQUATE, ONE-TIME SACRIFICE)

Exodus 12;7And they shall take of the blood, and strike it on the two side posts and on the upper door post of the houses, wherein they shall eat it.

In the OT Passover, they didn’t eat the blood,……..they put it on the doorposts.




Jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj


In the NT Passover (which is the Lord’s Supper),……..the wine symbolizes the blood , which is the Life of Christ, which we hope to live in our lives. Christ lives in us.

And, the bread symbolizes the Word of God, which is Christ’s Name,……..and is also our spiritual nourishment.

The wine symbolizes the Joy of the Lord.
The Bread symbolizes Christ himself, who is the “Living Bread that came down from Heaven”.


I reject transubstantiation. It’s not in the Bible.


……………..

NIV version
1. Exodus 16:4
Then the LORD said to Moses, "I will rain down bread from heaven for you. The people are to go out each day and gather enough for that day. In this way I will test them and see whether they will follow my instructions.
Exodus 16:3-5 (in Context) Exodus 16 (Whole Chapter)
2. Nehemiah 9:15
In their hunger you gave them bread from heaven and in their thirst you brought them water from the rock; you told them to go in and take possession of the land you had sworn with uplifted hand to give them.
Nehemiah 9:14-16 (in Context) Nehemiah 9 (Whole Chapter)
3. Isaiah 55:10
As the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and do not return to it without watering the earth and making it bud and flourish, so that it yields seed for the sower and bread for the eater,
Isaiah 55:9-11 (in Context) Isaiah 55 (Whole Chapter)
4. John 6:31
Our forefathers ate the manna in the desert; as it is written: 'He gave them bread from heaven to eat.' "
John 6:30-32 (in Context) John 6 (Whole Chapter)
5. John 6:32
Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven.
John 6:31-33 (in Context) John 6 (Whole Chapter)
6. John 6:33
For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world."
John 6:32-34 (in Context) John 6 (Whole Chapter)
7. John 6:41
At this the Jews began to grumble about him because he said, "I am the bread that came down from heaven."
John 6:40-42 (in Context) John 6 (Whole Chapter)
8. John 6:50
But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which a man may eat and not die.
John 6:49-51 (in Context) John 6 (Whole Chapter)
9. John 6:51
I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world."
John 6:50-52 (in Context) John 6 (Whole Chapter)
10. John 6:58
This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your forefathers ate manna and died, but he who feeds on this bread will live forever."
John 6:57-59 (in Context) John 6 (Whole Chapter)

More results from New International Version

i've read Dave Hunt's book..........A WOMAN RIDES THE BEAST.

i've read FOX'S BOOK OF MARTYRS.

Before his election to popehood, the current Pope was the Top man of the Department of the Inquisition.

It's well-known that OUR LADY OF FATIMA is/was a demon masquerading as Mary. In the apparition, Jesus was a little boy...........and, Mary was a grown woman, who contradicted the Bible..........Yet, the truth is: Jesus is a grown man now, and (the REAL) Mary would not appear to us as an apparition and contradict the Bible, so OUR LADY OF FATIMA must be a demon.

my point is: i don't trust anything that any catholic says or does.
It's not my fault that they've destroyed their credibility.

Num 35:33 So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye [are]: for blood it defileth the land: and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it.
Deu 12:16 Only ye shall not eat the blood; ye shall pour it upon the earth as water.
Deu 12:23 Only be sure that thou eat not the blood: for the blood [is] the life; and thou mayest not eat the life with the flesh.
Deu 12:27 And thou shalt offer thy burnt offerings, the flesh and the blood, upon the altar of the LORD thy God: and the blood of thy sacrifices shall be poured out upon the altar of the LORD thy God, and thou shalt eat the flesh.
Deu 15:23 Only thou shalt not eat the blood thereof; thou shalt pour it upon the ground as water.

the above is copied from the BLUELETTERBIBLE website



Jesus lived His whole life (and died) as an Israelite, and under the MOSAIC LAW.
If He had broken one single law or commandment or ordinance of the MOSAIC LAW, then He couldn't be our Savior.
If He broke the Law, then, He would be a sinner, in need of a Savior, just like me.

So, we know that He obeyed every bit of the law of Moses and the OT. Perfectly, to the letter.

Jesus said "Who convicteth Me of sin?"..........nobody could. He was sinless.

The Law said "Don't eat blood".

So, we know that He never drank or ate blood, even when He called it blood. He must have been speaking of SPIRITUAL, FIGURATIVE, SYMBOLIC language,........calling wine "blood".



And, wow!
The Pope is claiming that Jesus broke the Law, eating, drinking literal blood, at the Lord's Supper.

The Pope is wrong. Jesus is not sinful.

Jesus is/was the ULTIMATE, PERFECT ISREALITE, WITHOUT SIN!

Amen brother. You are speaking the truth.
C

"the wine symbolizes the blood." Where precisely does it say that in scripture?

You refer to the old covenant when you point out that the law said not to drink blood. Would you accept a blood transfusion?

One last question: Do you understand why God asked Abraham for a human sacrifice? I would like your explaination, not Dave Hunt's. After all, who is Dave Hunt?

One last point I would like to make, in 1 Pet. 3:15 St Peter instructs us to always be prepared to make a defense of the hope that is in us. Dennis, you're not defending, you're attacking. This was gnostic behavior. You might try sticking to what is right and wonderful about Christianity rather than participating in dissention from within. Focus on love, grasshopper.

Oh yeah, sorry, but I was just reading over your posts. You made one very important point, and that is that the Israelites ate the flesh of the sacrificial lamb. This is a very good parallel. Through the Eucharist, Jews will begin to see.

sojourner

God had promised to Abraham that Issac would be the son who would inherit the Abrahamic promises (from God to Abraham).
So, Abe believed that, somehow, that Promise would come true, even if God had to resurrect Issac from the dead.
Just as Abe's loins and Sarah's womb, though dead with great age, was resurrected to life, and produced the miracle birth, the birth of Issac.

Also, God was TESTING Abe's faith. Genesis 22;1-12

Dave Hunt is hated because he is a Bible-believer.

I'm not attacking and dissenting Truth and Love. You are.

i'm not a grasshopper,......... you are trying to put me down below you, by calling me ugly names.

I'm not gnostic.

I'm sorry Dennis. There was no intent to put you down. I guess you are too young to remember the old t.v. series "Kung Fu", so the light humor was lost to you. In the series Kieth Carradine played a budhist priest who was always remembering back to his childhood when his teacher called him "grasshopper". Meaning that he was small in the grand scheme of things. As we all are.

You replied that God was testing Abraham's faith when He asked Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. However our God is omniscient (oops, another word not in the Bible), so He knew Abraham's faith. He would have had no need to "test" Abrahams faith. I had to pray for this understanding for years. Maybe I can save you some time.

You see, all peoples are descendants of the garden. God's plan was to use Israel as a priesthood to bring all people back to Him. Every chapter and verse in the Bible has the ability to speak in all tongues to all cultures, as I'm sure you will agree. This story has layers and parallels like every other story in the Bible. If the idea that God didn't know how faithful Abe was was good enough for you, I was being challenged by Atheists who jeered the idea that a god who knows everything that ever was and ever would be might not know the extent of Abraham's faith. I stressed over this for a time, but I don't have to understand everything about God to believe in Him. So I backed off. But the question would come back to me ever so often. I had decided that this must have been some sort of benefit for Abraham himself and not our all-knowing God. Last winter I was taking a Bible study course and the answer was delivered to me as I was discovering hidden meanings and parallels in the O.T. PRAISE BE TO GOD! I love the feeling when the Holy Spirit breaths on me. Anyway...

Child sacrifice was the way of the world in Abraham's time. By staying Abe's hand in a narrative for the world to see God was marking the point in time that this practice was being put to an end. He wasn't just calling for Abraham to stop, He was calling for all people to stop. Abraham is our bookmark in time when God made it official that this practice was unacceptable to Him.

Peace
sojourner

I dis-agree with you.

I remember the Kung-Fu series,...........i watched it,..........i remember the old guy calling Keith "grasshopper",.............and your calling me grasshopper was not humor, imo.

You were belittling me, imo.

Just as, you've belittled, ignored, rejected, and twisted the Word of God.

The Law says "the Israelites MUST NOT eat, drink blood".
Jesus was/is an Israelite.
You said "Jesus drank LITERAL blood".
In effect, you said "Jesus is/was a Law-breaker".

You're in danger.
Repent of your Scripture-rejection.
Your everlasting destination depends on this.
Talk to Shekel.
He's far more better than I am.

You're wasting my time, I have far better things to do than argue with a Bible-hater.

Alright, I understand that you have no time for me, and I don't expect a reply. But I felt it necessary to set the record straight for posterity.

I'm not sure where the idea comes from that catholics hate scripture. We read from the O.T. and the N.T. every Sabbath. Laymen, we call Lectors read from chapters in the O.T. and the N.T., then the priest reads from the Gospels. This way we learn how the New Testament is hidden in the Old. The scriptures always tie in with each other. This is a wonderful revelation, that the New testament is a re-telling, if you will, of the old promise. Jews like Roy Shoeman and David Moss have recognized this. They don't bother themselves with Christianity's inner turmoil. They just find comfort in the Mass because it is like home for them since it so resembles their own ancient practices. David Moss calls for all Jewish converts to come together, catholic and protestant, for the sake of Jews that have not yet recognized the Messiah. He points out that no Jew needs to relenquish Jewishness to accept Jesus, because as you point out, Jesus was a Jew.

BTW, I never said that Jesus drank blood. It would not have been his own blood that he drank because it had not been shed yet. The Eucharist is a mystery revealed by faith. I'm in no danger, which will one day be revealed to you. Many are trying to understand by using reason. While God is most definately a God of reason, there is much more of Him that we haven't seen yet, which creates mystery by simple definition.

One other point I would like to make is that Jesus healed people on the sabbath and the apostles foraged for food on the sabbath. This was breaking Jewish law.

sojourner

1 Corinthians 5;7-8
amplified bible

purge (clean out ) the old leaven, for Christ our Passover Lamb has been sacrificed.

Therefore, let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with leaven of vice, malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of purity, nobility, honor, sincerity, and truth.

see also exodus 12;19
13;7
deut 16;3

****
my thoughts:

in the OT, the unleavened bread was PHYSICAL......actual bread
in the NT, the unleavened bread is SPIRITUAL.......purity, nobility, honor, sincerity, and truth.


in the Bible,........."spiritual" means "pertaining to the Holy Spirit.

Dennis: did you bother doing an actual bible study on bread in the bible or did you just choose to "guess" (which all you said and the rest mostly said were all just guesses, well, I think it means this or that, the jist of all the conversations).

Waht does the bible specifically say.

Whenever Christ talked in allegory or imegery, didn't he always say, this is likened to that? You knew there was imegary cuz he always explained waht he meant later. But with the last supper, ther eis tons of imergery from the old testament you all are not getting, for bible studying individuals, why are yo uall weak in true biblical imegery. I only speak like this cuz apparently, protestantism appears to not require the OT for interpretation. Chrsit, at the last supper specifically said, this is my body, this is my blood. HE tied in the blood at the lat supper to the blood that would be shed on Calvary. He didn't say, this is likened to the blood I will shed. HE said this is....

I am not getting into an apologetics dissertation here but all I have to do is read what all the early church fathers ALL had to say about the communion meal. Paul speaks about it in corinthians.. You do not discern the body of our Lord. Ther eis but one sacrifice left..... Waht sacrifice? I thought there were no more sacrifices?

If you understood the passover imegery and REALLY understood it, (for all the protestants out there), you would be catholic or a form of traditional church pre reformation.

THe RULE for the passover was to BOTH slay the lamb and then EAT the lamb. it was not symbolic, it was real, a lamb was slain and a lamb was eaten. The eatin gof the lamb was a memorial going back to the first passover. When Paul speaks of hte communion meal, he tells us what? the lamb has been slain, so now, lets move on to the feast or the eating of the lamb.

YOu cannot enter into the passover promises by just slaying the lamb and appyling it's blood to your doorposts. YOu must slay the lamb and then EAT THE LAMB. And so Paul, ties in passover and it's fulness to the meal they wer about to eat and ties in sacrifice to the only sacrifice left for the remission of sin.

The imegery at the last supper also ties into the covenant made, not just passover....

I am actually getting real tired of all the guesswork that goes on, as if that is making people so smart and spiritual.YOu know it, I know it, you are just guessing at best, trying to get it right.
The early church writings, when they speak of the communion meal, all speak of the reality of his body and blood, in fact, when it speaks contrary, it is to condemn people like you Dennis who say it is not.

Like you all said... the apostles walked around, spoke, so did their disciples. Their disciples and their students, orthodox in understanding wrote letters too and unanimously, back the catholic teaching of the last supper.

You want early church teaching and not latter day heresies? REturn to the original church teachings .

As per the Bible, and the hero of faith---Shekel,...........,

God said to the Christians within the RCC Catholic Church, "Come out of her, My people."

If God is against the RCC, who can be for the RCC? .........No-one, except the enemies of God..

Read the articles by Shekel, concerning the RCC.

i found this on one of Shekel's web-pages.

dennis
***********************







Mene-Tekel Bible Code Hand Creation Lamb Menorah Tabernacle Moth Deep Impact Names Code

Dragon Eden (Same Sex) Lion/Acrostic Bible Prophecy Balance Bible Code (Audio) Yeshua/ DNA

(Audio/visual) Comet Code Genuine? Bible Code Numeric 360-Bible Prophecy Heaven-bound? To Christians

Latest bible codes/articles Home Page Bible Prophecy Forum Blog

What are Bible Codes? My candid conclusions



Do God's People Really Need to Repent?



A generation ago, Roman Catholics would not have been considered "brethren" by most born-again believers. What has changed since then? Are Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses and Moonies our brethren too? I am not angry, by the way. But it is time to speak up! Enough is enough! Its time to read our bibles again! How about the letters to the seven churches. Most were rebuked for compromising with various groups that were themselves compromising with the world. Has God changed His mind?



The Catholic Church is far worse than any of those groups mentioned in the seven Churches, or in the book of Galatians. No, but we are severely backslidden. If someone speaks up, he is called proud and judgmental. Whoever would escape evil makes himself a prey. Well, then, all the prophets, and Apostles, and the Lord Himself were judgmental! I take my stand with them. And may God grant me a forehead like flint. Let God be true and every man a liar! And if this forum is nothing but a pillow-prophet tickle-the-ear place where people wag the tongue according to culturally acceptable norms then I should be allowed to wag mine a little too! But I will speak according to the norms of the bible instead. For it is to Him, indeed, that I must give an account. And to whom much is given, much is required.



Jesus caused division often when He spoke. John 6 records how that many of His disciples no longer walked with Him. They were offended at the degree of commitment He was expecting of them. "What! No more entertainment?" "No more loaves and fishes to fill our bellies." "Pick up our cross and deny ourselves?" "Come out from her my people?" "Surely there must be some broader path to take. Let us go back to Egypt! Let us make Jesus in our own image. One that is broad minded and inclusive of all religions. One that will nod agreement with all we believe and do!"



I don't often use satire and scorn to make a point. But sometimes it is effective to show how shamefully and foolishly we have all fallen from the purity of Christ. The prophets used this method often to show how far from common sense they had strayed in their day.



Jesus has "eyes like fire," and "a two-edged sword in His hands," (Revelation 3). It is time to purge ourselves of man-made religion. Its time to turn away from the money-mad comedians on TV who merchandize the gospel. It is time to humble ourselves and search our lives and remove every idol and cast away every vile thing from before our eyes. There is no such thing as revival without it.



Hype is not revival. Unity is not revival. Bigness is not revival. But repentance IS revival. All of us need to repent of practices that would have caused us to blush with shame not more than 30 years ago. Read the writings of the great leaders of the past century. They had convictions like those being expressed here. Go read Wesley, Edwards, Finney and Spurgeon. But now we are a shamed of those who are ashamed of those things we were ashamed of 30 years ago! We must repent. If America does not repent, she will have her lampstand removed, just like the seven churches did---who are now ruled by Muslims. God is making no idle threats with the North American and Rome blackouts 45 days apart. If we repent, then God will visit us with power and many will be converted unto Him in truth. But if we don't, then this whole nation is doomed. Nuclear war is hanging over our heads. We are asleep. The Russians are not. When God plunged San Francisco into darkness on Dec. 20, 2003, was it not a sign? Did not events soon take place that revealed what God was saying. San Francisco shortly became the pipeline of Sodomite marriages that is pressing upon all of America. And what will the next president do to stop it? All these events are also on a definite time frame as discussed in my web site. The pattern was observed before the Rome and San Francisco blackouts had even occurred. These are God's warnings, not mine! And I fear God enough to relay what He showed me.



God gave 4 years of time under the Bush government to repent. At the time of the election, as the nation was halting between two opinions, America was being weighed in the balances. But we have not repented. The backsliding continues, and this film will only increase our turning away from Him.



You can post any comments at www.christian-forum.net










Message to Christians

Home Page



Important animated message:
Will you go to heaven when you die?

Bible Prophecy Forum!










http://www.bible-codes.org/Repent-vile-movies-blackout.htm

Yes the bread of life is the Word, the scriptures.

And the Word was made flesh for us to see and become acquainted with on a one to one basis as a man to man. The bread of life is not some wafer sacrament such as the Catholic Church teaches. They teach that by eating the Eucharist wafer you are actually eating of the flesh of Christ. And so this is a physical thing rather than a spiritual thing they are replacing the truth with. Look up the teachings on the Eucharist.

The world does not need the Catholic Church, it never needed it. All of it's killings it committed. Replacing the Word with traditions just like the Jews did with replacing the word with the Talmud and Kabbalah. It is all just a mess.

Christ is the Sower who came sowing the seed of Yahweh. He tells us that the seed is the Word. And so every seed brings forth of it's kind and the seed of Yahweh brings forth more of those in whom the word dwells. The seed of faith sown in us is the word of faith that grows up in us and takes on our flesh that we too might be an image of Christ. And this is the only way you can become true flesh of His body, by having His word living in you. You will not have His word living in you if you are sowing the traditions of men into you soul. And Roman Catholiics know only the traditions of a long lineage of Priest and Popes and none of them are of the flesh and blood of Christ. Alarming fact for some of you. And so, one day the Church of Rome will come to it's end and reap the foul harvest it has sown down over the ages. It is responsible for the Dark Ages and Inquisitions and would have it that way again if it could.

It has a great enemy that will destroy it and that is the enemy of British Israelitism. And Christian Identity.

So tell me then who the Great Whore is in the book of Revelations? I mean where are the seven hills at that John mentions?

You asked:
So tell me then who the Great Whore is in the book of Revelations? I mean where are the seven hills at that John mentions?

Revelations 17;9
also verse 18

Babylon, the Whore, is a world-wide system of opposition to God, and the things of God.

Babylon Iraq is literal babylon.
rome is spiritual babylon.
washington DC is political babylon (also the UN)
pentagon is military babylon.
hollywood is entertainment babylon.
Frisco is homo-lust babylon
russia and china is communist babylon.
ESPN is sports babylon. (and NASCAR, etc)
my heart was my personal babylon, before i became a believer.

Benny Hinn (and many like him) is Charismatic fake-christian-religion babylon, with much occult super-natural power.
Matthew 24;24.....amplified bible....false christs and false prophets will arise , and they will show great signs and wonders, so as to decieve and lead astray , if possible, even the elect.

etc

The Whore is an idolatrous anti-christ religion.
The (True) Church is the chaste, virgin Bride of Christ .

satan has a murderous whore.
Christ has a perfect, humble, virgin bride.


i learned some of this from Shekel's posts.

I agree with this totally, Daniel. The Word is indeed the seed that produces after its own kind. Christ is formed in the good soil .It will bring forth fruit.

Dennis: I truly love you my brother . I agree with what you say as well.

Now: Take what Daniel is saying :The SEED is the Word, that is sowed. A Whore takes the seed from many men.
Esther was the virgin queen, that made herself ready only for the king. She was looked after by a eunuch. A eunuch cannot sow his own seed.Isa 56:4 For thus saith Jehovah of the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and hold fast my covenant:
Isa 56:5 Unto them will I give in my house and within my walls a memorial and a name better than of sons and of daughters; I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off. We are all to be "eunuchs: Only deliver the seed of the Word as it is and do not add the seed of men.

If we receive only the seed of the Word: we will bring forth Christ , because each seed brings forth after its own kind.
Jesus said:
Joh 16:21 A woman (the church) when she is in travail hath sorrow, because her hour is come: but when she is delivered of the child,(Christ) she remembereth no more the anguish, for the joy that a man (Christ) is born into the world.
Joh 16:22 And ye(the church) therefore now have sorrow:(the church is pregnant with the seed of the Word) but I will see you again,(Christ in us the hope of glory) and your heart shall rejoice, and your joy no one taketh away from you.

Again Jesus tells the same parable to John:Rev 12:1 And a great sign was seen in heaven: a woman (the church)arrayed with the sun,(the Son, we are the righteousness of God in Christ) and the moon under her feet,(reflecting only HIS glory) and upon her head a crown of twelve stars; (The teaching of the twelve apostles)Rev 12:2 and she was with child;(Christ in us the hope of glory) and she crieth out, travailing in birth, and in pain to be delivered.

Rev 12:5 And she was delivered of a son, a man child,( Rom 8:19 For the earnest expectation of the creation waiteth for the revealing of the sons of God.) 8 who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron: ( Rev 2:26 And he that overcometh, and he that keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give authority over the nations: ) and her child was caught up unto God, and unto his throne. (Rev 3:21 He that overcometh, I will give to him to sit down with me in my throne, as I also overcame, and sat down with my Father in his throne. )

Its very clear in fact. The Seed produces Christ and Christ will come forth in His Body on earth and rule the nations.

love C

The Vatican does not fit the description for the Great Whore:

The Vatican is built on one hill not seven. Ancient Pagan Rome was built on seven hills.


"'Rejoice over her, O heaven! Rejoice, saints and apostles and prophets! God has judged her for the way she treated you'. . . . In her was found the blood of prophets and of the saints, and of all who have been killed on the earth" (18:20, 24).
This shows that the Whore persecuted not just Christians, but apostles and prophets. Apostles existed only in the first century, since one of the requirements for being an apostle was seeing the risen Christ (1 Cor. 9:1).
Prophets existed as a group only in the Old Testament and in the first century (Acts 11:27-28, 13:1, 15:32, 21:10). ...Since the Whore persecuted apostles and prophets, the Whore must have existed in the first century.

"This calls for a mind with wisdom: the seven heads are seven mountains on which the woman is seated; they are also seven kings, five of whom have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come, and when he comes he must remain only a little while" (Rev. 17:9-10). ...


If five of the kings had fallen in Johns time and one is present and one is yet to come then the Whore had to be of Johns time. The Vatican was not around at Johns time.

The passage of Rev. fits perfectly with ancient pagan Rome and does not fit when applied to the Vatican at all.

This is truly a notion you need to file with the trash.

God Bless,
K.D.

KD I agree with you that it is not the RCH that is the Great Whore. This time round (the last time) the picture is much bigger than one institution. BUT I am not disputing the fact that the RCH will be part of the Great Whore. So will some of the Protestant and other Christian movements. But that is another matter.

Your statement that an apostle must have seen the risen Christ to be able to be an apostle is not correct

1Co 9:1 Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are not ye my work in the Lord?
IF that was true, and we have to use your logic: Then ONLY those who have seen Jesus would be free as well.
Many have seen Him and were not Apostles.apostolos
ap-os'-tol-os
From G649; a delegate; specifically an ambassador of the Gospel; officially a commissioner of Christ (“apostle”), (with miraculous powers): - apostle, messenger, he that is sent.
You have to look at the previous chapter (they did not have these chapters in the Greek) so just before Paul tells them that he is 1) free 2)seen Jesus 3) ye are my work . He is telling them how to treat each other and respect the weak faith of others. His (1)( 2 ) and (3) is proving his authority to tell them this: 1Co 8:8 But food will not commend us to God: neither, if we eat not, are we the worse; nor, if we eat, are we the better.
1Co 8:9 But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to the weak.
1Co 8:10 For if a man see thee who hast knowledge sitting at meat in an idol's temple, will not his conscience, if he is weak, be emboldened to eat things sacrificed to idols?
1Co 8:11 For through thy knowledge he that is weak perisheth, the brother for whose sake Christ died.
1Co 8:12 And thus, sinning against the brethren, and wounding their conscience when it is weak, ye sin against Christ.
1Co 8:13 Wherefore, if meat causeth my brother to stumble, I will eat no flesh for evermore, that I cause not my brother to stumble. 1Co 9:1 Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are not ye my work in the Lord?

Now if you want to make a case for an apostle, the next verse would be better:
1Co 9:2 If to others I am not an apostle, yet at least I am to you; for the seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord.
THEY are the seal of his apostleship, He was the reason that they came into the Kingdom, because he took the gospel to them because he was SENT by God and appointed by God and anointed by God. He had the gospel PLUS POWER. 1Th 1:5 how that our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Spirit, and in much assurance; even as ye know what manner of men we showed ourselves toward you for your sake.




That is the only condition: God sends an apostle as His messenger.
Please brother: there are enough false assumptions , so do not add to them. Read carefully and ask the Holy Spirit's guidance.
love C


The forum is so slow again to accept new posts

That was just a reference to the time line of when we have Apostles. They all were alive with Jesus. Surely you are not suggesting that we have apostles that did not see Jesus. If so who were they? I also did not say this was the only requirement.

Taking my post in context, you will see that this is where scripture contradicts the notion that the great Whore could be anything in the future. It was in reference to something of there time.

God Bless,
K.D.

I cannot agree, because Jesus said to John:Rev 4:1 After these things I saw, and behold, a door opened in heaven, and the first voice that I heard, a voice as of a trumpet speaking with me, one saying, Come up hither, and I will show thee the things which must come to pass hereafter.

BUT: you are also correct in another sense:

What you must see is that this "whore" has been around us since the beginning in the time of Adam . The Bible is telling us about a spirit that has operated through religion since the beginning. It is the same spirit that killed Abel, through Cain.

"'Rejoice over her, O heaven! Rejoice, saints and apostles and prophets! God has judged her for the way she treated you'. . . . In her was found the blood of prophets and of the saints, and of all who have been killed on the earth" (18:20, 24).
Certainly and of all who have been killed on the earth did not stop in the time of the apostles. And also the RCC is not responsible for all these deaths since the beginning.
Although this scripture tells us that the RCC HAS played a part in the whore, since the RCC has killed many in the name of religion, thus becoming very much part of what this scripture is saying.That you must see, even if you are pro-RC, because it is scripture. The Bible tells us "do not kill"

It is a spirit that has worked in and through people
People that say it is one institution (Like the RCC) have not really read what it says. They are looking at the letter and trying to find the culprit, but wont, because they are looking in the wrong place.
They keep on forgetting that the letter kills and the spirit gives life. We have to look at prophecy through the eyes of the spirit.

C

Rev 17
amplified bible
harlot is idolatrous
seated on many waters (lands, multitudes of people, nations, almost world-wide)
scarlet
blasphemous titles
purple and scarlet robes
bedecked with gold
precious stones and pearls
a golden cup
drunk with the blood of the saints

when John saw the harlot, he was utterly amazed and wondered greatly

7 hills, a city on 7 hills

the harlot is seated on many races, multitudes, nations, and dialects.

she dominates and controls the rulers and leaders of the earth

LITERAL BABYLON, IRAQ, is not on 7 hills.
so, babylon must be figurative code for some identity.


Isn't this the RCC? or is the RCC some kind of prototype for Babylon?

every clue that we have points to the RCC. or something just like the RCC.


The RCC had the Scripture,............Why did the RCC model herself just like Babylon the Great?
Which pope was the genius that engineered that?

Something super-natural is happening here!
This didn't happen by coincidence,.............God did it!............God turned the minds of the Popes to model the RCC to look exactly like the Harlot.

Wow!

Praise God!



i believe that the RCC is the harlot.
and
the end-times anti-christ world-wide religion is the harlot.
Both are true.

Dennis, if that is true, then the RCC must have been around far longer than history tells us, because the Bible tells us that the harlot is guilty of (and I quote) and of all who have been killed on the earth"

How would we find the "woman" that is ALL of the things described about the harlot?

Perhaps, Shekel was right.

Shekel said:
Babylon is the world-wide system of opposition to God.
and
Rome is Spiritual Babylon.
Washington DC is political babylon.
Pentagon is military babylon.
new york is economic babylon.
and so forth.

which is what i believe.

Both are true.

Perhaps , your answer is too narrow.

i hope we're not fighting, ..........because i like you.

dennis

PS
i also believe that there is much babylon within (what is called) protestant christianity.
for example,.........
health and wealth christianity
charismatic
benny hinn
calvinism
osas
king james only-ism
baby baptism = salvation from sin
high-church,........pomp and circumstance
zillion-dollar cathedrals
you can't understand the bible, unless you're a college-scholar
and more

No my dear brother, I will not ever fight with you, I really, really love you. I can see such honest searching in your posts and a genuine love for our Lord and I also know that you have been asking the Lord to show you His truth, because I can see His hand in your answers Dennis.

There is a lot of truth in your post here about Babylon being the world-wide system opposing God. Ask the Lord , because I know , that you know, that He is faithful in answering .
Maybe a good study would be on "harlots" in the Bible, because I know that God hides the answer normally in the "types and shadows" in the Old Testament.
your brother
C