|
Post by snow on Sept 13, 2015 13:48:17 GMT -5
The unprofessing spouse can't take part in the emblems because he/she is NOT a believer in Christ.That isn't a true statement, is it Nathan? It is because they haven't professed in the truth fellowship. It has nothing to do with whether they are a believer or not. I consider myself to be a believer. Would it be hunky-dory for me to partake of the emblems in a Sunday morning meeting? Yes, you're consider to be a believer but NOT as 2x2 believer... If a non-2x2 believer came as visitor in our Sunday morning meetings and decided to take the emblems, they are free to do so for awhile... Then the church elders and workers will have a visit with him or her to tell him/her what we believe and if they are agree with our doctrine, they are welcome to attend our gospel meetings and welcome to continue to take parts. Most of the time the visitors just sit and listen and chosen NOT to participate in speaking or taken the bread and wine.
Well, Scott... you raised in the meetings so you KNOW how these things work, and you KNOW what to do and NOT to do if you were to attend our Sunday morning meetings. However, to a new non-believer who comes as a visitor to our Sunday fellowship meeting his/her case will be treated differently... If they decide to partake the emblems they will NOT forbid him/her to partake the emblems right off the bat.
Why would it ever be forbidden since you all believe in the same guy?
|
|
|
Post by snow on Sept 13, 2015 13:52:42 GMT -5
Sorry, for not making my post clearer. I was talking about workers forbidden professing man or woman NOT to continue to take part in testimony or emblems for marrying non-professing people. The unprofessing spouse can't take part in the emblems because he/she is NOT a believer in Christ.
Sunday morning for believers in Christ coming together to worshipping Godhead= Father, Christ/Son and Holy Spirit in Spirit and in Truth. Paul wrote that every believer should examine himself/herself before partake the emblems in I Cor. 11:23-29 Partake the emblems should be between that person and the Godhead. ONLY God can forgive our sins NOT the workers.
For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
The workers in my field allowed my brother and I (ex-Pentecostal) partake the emblems before we were baptized.
Your last statement puzzles me. I've never heard of an unbaptized member NOT being allowed to partake. Baptism has nothing to do with it. If you've professed you can partake. That's a normal practice in Oregon. Not where I come from, actually where I have lived. You had to be baptized before you were allowed to take the bread and wine.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2015 16:17:27 GMT -5
Not where I come from, actually where I have lived. You had to be baptized before you were allowed to take the bread and wine. Yes, that is the normal practice around the world... baptized before you were allowed to take the bread and wine.... However, there are exceptional cases... Allow the Sprit to lead and guide then it works out for the best. The Spirit KNOWS the hearts of men and women better than the workers. The workers can only see the outward appearances of people but NOT their minds/thoughts and the motives of the hearts. I don't think its the normal practice here in Oregon/Washington. Baptism is emphasized but not a requirement to participate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2015 17:20:16 GMT -5
I don't think its the normal practice here in Oregon/Washington. Baptism is emphasized but not a requirement to participate. You mean not normal practice in Oregon to baptize first before partake the emblems? In Oregon Baptism is required before they can partake the emblems.Well, then I was an exception. I was immediately partaking in Sunday meetings without being baptized. In fact, I was told outright that baptism was not required.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Sept 13, 2015 18:09:23 GMT -5
Well, then I was an exception. I was immediately partaking in Sunday meetings without being baptized. In fact, I was told outright that baptism was not required. Like I told you... My brother and I gave testimonies and partook the emblems before we were baptized also. Well, baptism is one important part foundations of Jesus teachings, once the opportunity arise he/she must take the step of baptism, there is no way around about it. Jesus commanded his apostles and disciples to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and Holy Ghost.
Matthew 28:18-20 18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.That scripture is disputed Nate. It looks like another Trinitarian forgery. Please note that through the book of Acts they were baptising in the name of Jesus. Why do you think that was? Was it "valid"?
|
|
|
Post by fred on Sept 13, 2015 18:23:47 GMT -5
Wherever I have been around the world the link between Baptism and the emblems has been practised. Speak to the workers about it and they will tell you there is no scriptural precedent but it is a tradition. In all the years I have been in the fellowship I only know of two who did not follow the tradition as they were outsiders and unaware - caused the elder a bit of consternation.
|
|
|
Post by howitis on Sept 13, 2015 18:32:14 GMT -5
Why nathan would it be wrong of the workers to baptise in the name of the Father (the one we worship, whom we cannot come unto except through His Son), Jesus (whom we fellowship with, whom we go to to acess the Father), the Holy Spirit (our Comforter) regardless of 'trinity' or not? We are losing sight of other very needful 3 in 1's in this continual debate!
|
|
|
Post by howitis on Sept 13, 2015 18:49:56 GMT -5
Sorry Nathan I was not criticising, you said....Wow! Are you saying the 2x2 workers have been baptizing the friends all these years in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit=Trinity and they didn't know it? You better NOT tell the workers in your state that or they will count you as a heretic.....did you not? I am merely pointing out that regardless of 'trinity' doctrine it would not be wrong regardless!!! This debate all gets a bit long, a bit exhaustive and a bit old......IMO Christians need to listen more and say far less to help others!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2015 18:59:51 GMT -5
Well, Nathan. You and your brother were exceptions and I was an exception. I think this shows a pattern in the Pacific Northwest.
|
|
|
Post by emy on Sept 13, 2015 19:32:20 GMT -5
Well, Nathan. You and your brother were exceptions and I was an exception. I think this shows a pattern in the Pacific Northwest. I was an exception, too, but not in PNW.
|
|
|
Post by emy on Sept 13, 2015 19:38:14 GMT -5
THe "disputed" parts of the last verses of Matt. 28 do not read 'trinitarian' to me. It says "baptizing in the name of the Father AND OF the Son AND OF the Holy Ghost." It sounds like 3 separate beings to me - in spite of the singular 'name.'
|
|
|
Post by howitis on Sept 13, 2015 19:42:22 GMT -5
Sorry Nathan, I think YOU are the one criticising, and I find that really sad!! I was merely asking a question of you in regards to your question to fixit. Yes it will be a glorious day indeed and you know what? I believe there's going to be many, many there who have never uttered the word 'trinity', Jesus Himself comes to mind, and with all this slanging I doubt we're much encouragement to those non believers that its going to be such a nice place either!
|
|
|
Post by emy on Sept 13, 2015 20:05:01 GMT -5
THe "disputed" parts of the last verses of Matt. 28 do not read 'trinitarian' to me. It says "baptizing in the name of the Father AND OF the Son AND OF the Holy Ghost." It sounds like 3 separate beings to me - in spite of the singular 'name.' Explain that to fixit, please. Godhead= Father, Christ/Son and Holy Spirit. They are separate beings. Each Being has his own personality/individuality... They are ONE in Unity, Love and Unity.Can't do. I don't see Trinity or Godhead there.
|
|
|
Post by howitis on Sept 13, 2015 20:14:29 GMT -5
Thanks Nathan, so therefore it is as many have been saying it is only a matter of terminology. Perhaps now we can all move forward in the blessed assurance of faith that has been given us through Christ and manifest His life within our own, that others can see hope and love in our lives not bickering.
|
|
|
Post by howitis on Sept 13, 2015 21:05:32 GMT -5
Nathan it is you jumping to assumptions (feet first), I am way too busy trying to keep on track with my own life, loving those God has entrusted to me and caring about those He has given me as friends and acquaintances, than to be 'teaching'...... if in my life they happen to find something they desire I leave it to God to do the teaching!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2015 21:36:32 GMT -5
Well, Nathan. You and your brother were exceptions and I was an exception. I think this shows a pattern in the Pacific Northwest. I was an exception, too, but not in PNW. Emy, you, Nathan, his brother and I are simply exceptional people! Actually, I think that allowing those who profess to partake is generally how it's done here in Oregon/Washington. I could be wrong I suppose, that seems to be what I've observed.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2015 21:45:08 GMT -5
Can't do. I don't see Trinity or Godhead there. Is the Father God?
Why would Jesus put himself/name on the same footing as God the Father and the Holy Spirit, if he wasn't part of the Godhead?
It's a blasphemy for anyone to put himself/herself on the same level as God. Do you believe Jesus has committed the sin of Blasphemy for including himself on the same level as God?Jesus wasn't putting himself on the same footing as God. As the Mediator between God and man, one is baptized into Jesus' name. Think about this: before Jesus, many were baptized by John the Baptist. Was John putting himself on the same level as God? No, but as a prophet sent by God, people were baptized into 'John's baptism." Being baptized in the name of the Father, the name of the Son, and the name of the Holy Ghost is simply a way of acknowledging that: the Father sent the Son, the Son is the one we are baptized into, and the Holy Ghost then fully fills the individual. Emy explained this quite well above.
|
|
|
Post by maryhig on Sept 13, 2015 22:02:57 GMT -5
Can't do. I don't see Trinity or Godhead there. Is the Father God?
Why would Jesus put himself/name on the same footing as God the Father and the Holy Spirit, if he wasn't part of the Godhead?
It's a blasphemy for anyone to put himself/herself on the same level as God. Do you believe Jesus has committed the sin of Blasphemy for including himself on the same level as God?I'd like to know why you think Godhead means trinity?
|
|
|
Post by emy on Sept 13, 2015 22:06:58 GMT -5
Phil 2 says that Jesus was equal with God. Then he took on man's likeness. We don't know a lot about Jesus' life until he went out preaching his gospel of repentance. He was God-conscious at age 12. When he was baptized by John (about age 30?) he was surely from that time on totally filled with the Holy Spirit (if not before). Thus, he did not sin. 1John 3 says that the Spirit of Christ (and God) in us does not sin. Unfortunately, we also have our human spirit so we do sin because no one is completely filled with the Holy Spirit like Jesus was.
|
|
|
Post by maryhig on Sept 13, 2015 22:33:12 GMT -5
I'd like to know why you think Godhead means trinity? The term "Godhead" is found three times in the King James Version: 1) Acts 17:29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device. 2) Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse 3) Colossians 2:9 For in him/Jesus dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. Three different Greek words are used, but each one means “divinity.” It is important for us to understand from the outset that God exists in three Persons. The concept of the Godhead is that God is ONE= ONENESS in Unity, Harmony yet God is three separate Supreme Beings/Godhead.The 2nd century apostles....From A Dictionary of Early Christian Beliefs by David W. Bercot Hippolytus (205 A.D.) "Go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." By this, He showed that whoever omits any one of them, fails in glorifying God perfectly. For it is through the TRINITY that the Father is glorified. For the Father willed, the Son did, and the Spirit manifested. Tertullian (212 A.D.) For the very church itself is properly and principally the Spirit Himself, in whom is the TRINITY of the One Divinity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Cyprian (250 A.D.) Observing the third, sixth, and nineth month for a sacrament of the TRINITY, which was to be manifested in the last times. For the first hour in its progress to the third declared the completed number of the TRINITY. The TRINITY names of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.Exactly it's a concept! An idea. I can't see how Godhead has been made into trinity at all? Why on earth would anyone associate the word Godhead to mean the trinity? In him dwelt the fullness of the Godhead bodily, means that in him dwelt the fullness of God! He was in his express image! He had the mind and spirit of God dwelling within him, because he lived not to please himself. He denied sin and Satan and had the full power of the spirit within his heart. Isaiah 11 And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD; And shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of the LORD: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove after the hearing of his ears: Isaiah 42 Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street. The spirit of God was in Jesus fully, he had the fullness of Godhead bodily. The heart and mind of God fully within him in full power of the spirit. He never heard with his ears, saw with his eyes and his voice was not heard in the street, He was all God, because he denied the flesh fully, he was dead to Satan. He was the complete image of God, and there was no sin found in him!
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Sept 14, 2015 2:37:39 GMT -5
Oh, verily, my head doth ache! Must stop reading! -That word, -TRINITY, -again! It confused one beyond measure.
|
|
|
Post by howitis on Sept 14, 2015 3:29:44 GMT -5
Nathan notice the word 'some' in those verses in Eph you mentioned. If by posting on here and sharing is teaching as I guess you would deem other 'sharing', I have done these sorts of things for a long, long time and have never had to share the word 'trinity'. I think it needs a good break and perhaps we can focus on some other things......please, if not from all of us a good few....thanks in advance.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Sept 14, 2015 10:17:31 GMT -5
FWIW - it would be fine with me. Are you the elder in your meeting? I would think that in your home, I would get the whole enchilada meal, not just the emblems. While not a huge fan of Mexican food, I would certainly offer you perhaps some beef tartar as an appetizer and then seared tuna, perhaps with ice cold sake. And, yes, I think I will probably be the elder at any such meeting! If there are women there it is almost a certainty they will be rowdy and try to convince everyone they are right but if you get into the right frame of mind that just becomes background noise!
|
|
|
Post by howitis on Sept 14, 2015 13:39:55 GMT -5
All good Nathan, funny how so many threads seem to turn into a 'trinity' debate.......and I'm sure I'm not the only one just a tad weary of it. Never mind though you are were you're at and I'm oh so glad God understands our hearts thoughts and reasonings.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Sept 14, 2015 15:06:20 GMT -5
Actually the Trinity concept originated in Babylon. It is a pagan concept and it uses the term Godhead.
|
|
|
Post by howitis on Sept 14, 2015 15:08:35 GMT -5
Actually the Trinity concept originated in Babylon. It is a pagan concept and it uses the term Godhead. And quite possibly the 'christians' adopted it, like so many pagan ideas for popularity sake.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Sept 14, 2015 16:44:31 GMT -5
Actually the Trinity concept originated in Babylon. It is a pagan concept and it uses the term Godhead. And quite possibly the 'christians' adopted it, like so many pagan ideas for popularity sake. Yes, it wasn't something taught from the start and many Gnostic Christian groups didn't believe it either, though some also didn't believe that Jesus existed as a flesh and blood being either, but more as a Christ consciousness. The born again and Christ consciousness were important to some of the earlier groups that were also labelled heretics along with those who didn't believe in the Trinity. Here is a link that is interesting: www.christadelphia.org/trinityhistory.htm
|
|
|
Post by rational on Sept 14, 2015 17:30:56 GMT -5
Actually the Trinity concept originated in Babylon. It is a pagan concept and it uses the term Godhead. And quite possibly the 'christians' adopted it, like so many pagan ideas for popularity sake. Actually there are few aspects of christianity that did not exist elsewhere first.
|
|