|
|
Post by Cepha on Apr 11, 2009 6:01:44 GMT -5
My only point is I do not judge any individual, their fruit will be tested before God. What I must do is be obedient to what God has told me to do. Whether you believe God has told me to do it is irrelevant to me and my relationship with God, however if I disobey God then that would be of relevance to our relationship. No, no, no...that's not what you said. You said that you just obey the word of the Lord, then posted a scripture where God orders Jesus to be a Watchman. By posting that quote, you are tying in your supposed obedience to God with the command He gave to Jesus as if this command was given to you. Heck, you even called yourself "Watchman". But hey, don't take my word for it...here's your exact quote as evidence that you believe that you are doing God's will when God never mentioned you in the scripture you used to prove that you were doing so: What, now you think you're Jesus?  |
|
|
|
Post by asheseesyou on Apr 11, 2009 12:08:27 GMT -5
My only point is I do not judge any individual, their fruit will be tested before God. What I must do is be obedient to what God has told me to do. Whether you believe God has told me to do it is irrelevant to me and my relationship with God, however if I disobey God then that would be of relevance to our relationship. No, no, no...that's not what you said. You said that you just obey the word of the Lord, then posted a scripture where God orders Jesus to be a Watchman. By posting that quote, you are tying in your supposed obedience to God with the command He gave to Jesus as if this command was given to you. Heck, you even called yourself "Watchman". But hey, don't take my word for it...here's your exact quote as evidence that you believe that you are doing God's will when God never mentioned you in the scripture you used to prove that you were doing so: What, now you think you're Jesus? God was speaking to Ezekiel in Ezekiel 33 |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Apr 11, 2009 12:26:59 GMT -5
God was speaking to Ezekiel in Ezekiel 33 Ahhh, but Ezekiel33/Watchman stated that "he" was doing the obeying as if God was saying that to him. Read his response in the context of what he posted.  |
|
|
|
Post by asheseesyou on Apr 11, 2009 12:30:34 GMT -5
God was speaking to Ezekiel in Ezekiel 33 Ahhh, but Ezekiel33/Watchman stated that "he" was doing the obeying as if God was saying that to him. Read his response in the context of what he posted. Are you saying that it is not possible for God to use scripture meant for one person to commission another? |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Apr 11, 2009 12:36:55 GMT -5
Ahhh, but Ezekiel33/Watchman stated that "he" was doing the obeying as if God was saying that to him. Read his response in the context of what he posted. Are you saying that it is not possible for God to use scripture meant for one person to commission another? Nothing is impossible for God. The difference is that he stated that he was doing what God commissioned Jesus to do. When asked for proof that this was also commissioned of him, he didn't respond. (PS I also asked if his name was literally "in" that scripture since he is an "if it ain't in The Bible, then it can't be believed" type of Christian) But enough of him...we're not Ezekiel33/Watchman Disciples. How do you recognize the events of Easter? |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Apr 11, 2009 12:38:07 GMT -5
My bad...talking about Easter on a thread that's established to criticize American Christians.
I retract my question on Easter. However, if you'd like to stick to the topic, you can share how
you believe that American Christians are wrong too.
|
|
|
|
Post by asheseesyou on Apr 11, 2009 12:44:41 GMT -5
Are you saying that it is not possible for God to use scripture meant for one person to commission another? Nothing is impossible for God. The difference is that he stated that he was doing what God commissioned Jesus to do. When asked for proof that this was also commissioned of him, he didn't respond. (PS I also asked if his name was literally "in" that scripture since he is an "if it ain't in The Bible, then it can't be believed" type of Christian) But enough of him...we're not Ezekiel33/Watchman Disciples. How do you recognize the events of Easter? Watchman was doing what God had commissioned him do do, and in the context of this scripture God was commissioning Ezekiel. why do you keep claiming it was Jesus that was being commissioned? |
|
|
|
Post by asheseesyou on Apr 11, 2009 12:45:52 GMT -5
My bad...talking about Easter on a thread that's established to criticize American Christians. I retract my question on Easter. However, if you'd like to stick to the topic, you can share how you believe that American Christians are wrong too. Isn't that why Ezekiel was banned? For saying what he though was wrong with American christianity? |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Apr 11, 2009 13:06:13 GMT -5
Watchman was doing what God had commissioned him do do, and in the context of this scripture God was commissioning Ezekiel. why do you keep claiming it was Jesus that was being commissioned? It's a prophecy in relation to Revelation. Not a command. There is only one Son of Man and that is Jesus Christ. And, if it isn't in The Bible, it's not supposed to be believed right? So, show me where Watchman was told to do this (commissioned). I'd like to see his "real" name there. If you cannot show me in The Bible that God commissioned Ezekiel33/Watchman directly, then this is your personal belief and thus, not a doctrine to be believed by all Christians. [unless you believe that by making one's profile name like the one in the Bible entitles them to everything that mentions the scripture or the name] |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Apr 11, 2009 13:09:01 GMT -5
My bad...talking about Easter on a thread that's established to criticize American Christians. I retract my question on Easter. However, if you'd like to stick to the topic, you can share how you believe that American Christians are wrong too. Isn't that why Ezekiel was banned? For saying what he though was wrong with American christianity? No. I listed the reasons in detail. Why do you persist in continuing to ask after you've read the reasons? I only need one reason to ban him. He was banned long ago. I just kept him around for a while to expose him knowing I was going to ban him all along eventually. Now everybody knows how deceiptful Watchman really is and truth does not reside where dishonesty resides. It's impossible. I've already proven him to be a lier so for you to defend him associates you with that type of behavior. Am I right? |
|
|
|
Post by asheseesyou on Apr 11, 2009 13:15:44 GMT -5
Isn't that why Ezekiel was banned? For saying what he though was wrong with American christianity? No. I listed the reasons in detail. Why do you persist in continuing to ask after you've read the reasons? I only need one reason to ban him. He was banned long ago. I just kept him around for a while to expose him knowing I was going to ban him all along eventually. Now everybody knows how deceiptful Watchman really is and truth does not reside where dishonesty resides. It's impossible. I've already proven him to be a lier so for you to defend him associates you with that type of behavior. Am I right? you are the liar and the hypocrite, and that is why you have banned him because he exposes you and anyone else who walks in darkness. Jesus told us to be the light of the world and that the darkness hates the light because their deeds are evil, and that is why watchman was banned because you are darkness and he is light. |
|
|
|
Post by asheseesyou on Apr 11, 2009 13:17:35 GMT -5
Watchman was doing what God had commissioned him do do, and in the context of this scripture God was commissioning Ezekiel. why do you keep claiming it was Jesus that was being commissioned? It's a prophecy in relation to Revelation. Not a command. There is only one Son of Man and that is Jesus Christ. And, if it isn't in The Bible, it's not supposed to be believed right? So, show me where Watchman was told to do this (commissioned). I'd like to see his "real" name there. If you cannot show me in The Bible that God commissioned Ezekiel33/Watchman directly, then this is your personal belief and thus, not a doctrine to be believed by all Christians. [unless you believe that by making one's profile name like the one in the Bible entitles them to everything that mentions the scripture or the name] He already told you he didn't care what you believed. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Apr 11, 2009 13:35:15 GMT -5
It's a prophecy in relation to Revelation. Not a command. There is only one Son of Man and that is Jesus Christ. And, if it isn't in The Bible, it's not supposed to be believed right? So, show me where Watchman was told to do this (commissioned). I'd like to see his "real" name there. If you cannot show me in The Bible that God commissioned Ezekiel33/Watchman directly, then this is your personal belief and thus, not a doctrine to be believed by all Christians. [unless you believe that by making one's profile name like the one in the Bible entitles them to everything that mentions the scripture or the name] He already told you he didn't care what you believed. Uh, yeah, but this post was directed at "you" not at him. (wink, wink) |
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on Apr 11, 2009 13:39:17 GMT -5
No. I listed the reasons in detail. Why do you persist in continuing to ask after you've read the reasons? I only need one reason to ban him. He was banned long ago. I just kept him around for a while to expose him knowing I was going to ban him all along eventually. Now everybody knows how deceiptful Watchman really is and truth does not reside where dishonesty resides. It's impossible. I've already proven him to be a lier so for you to defend him associates you with that type of behavior. Am I right? you are the lier and the hypocrite, and that is why you have banned him because he exposes you and anyone else who walks in darkness. Jesus told us to be the light of the world and that the darkness hates the light because their deeds are evil, and that is why watchman was banned because you are darkness and he is light. After reading his posts (and no disrespect is intended to anyone here), Watchman did not expose anyone here. All those who outside the Apostolic Faith, not following the footsteps of Jesus Christ, the Holy Apostles, there Holy Successors, and the God-Bearing Fathers and Mothers of the Church has become apostates. You may call Cepha a hypocrite, but at least he is in a Church that is closest to the truth of the Early Apostolic Church. Watchman/Ezekiel is not part of the Apostolic Church, so how is he in the light?. Perhaps he has some truth in his theology, but like all Protestants, he will always be miles away from the Apostolic Faith. He only thinks he is in light and have sound doctrine, but since the 16th Century, Protestants have thrown away bits of the Faith for the sake of "saving" the Roman Catholic Church. Scriptures speaks of the Protestant dilemma: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables" (2 Tim 4:3-4). You may also believe you are in light and that your theology is sound and biblical, but as long you are outside the Apostolic Faith, as express in the Holy Scriptures, the Holy Apostles, there Holy Successors, and the God-Bearing Fathers and Mothers of the Church, and the Holy Seven Ecumenical Councils, you will always be in a cup half full. In IC.XC, Ramon |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Apr 11, 2009 13:41:53 GMT -5
you are the liar and the hypocrite, and that is why you have banned him because he exposes you and anyone else who walks in darkness. No, actually, you are the lier. That's why I tested you and left the IP unbanned. When I saw identical IP's, I wanted to see how long you'd go on with lieing. My proof? You stopped posting once I banned Ezekiel33's IP. Truth prevails. (Oh, and by the way, I posted your words with my thread proving that you were lieing and slandering that anybody could verify just by reading your words and my thread) Yeah, we were also taught... 2 Corinthians 11:12-1412
But what I do, that I will do, that I may cut off occasion from them which desire occasion;
that wherein they glory, they may be found even as we.
For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ.
And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Apr 11, 2009 13:54:56 GMT -5
you are the lier and the hypocrite, and that is why you have banned him because he exposes you and anyone else who walks in darkness. Jesus told us to be the light of the world and that the darkness hates the light because their deeds are evil, and that is why watchman was banned because you are darkness and he is light. After reading his posts (and no disrespect is intended to anyone here), Watchman did not expose anyone here. All those who outside the Apostolic Faith, not following the footsteps of Jesus Christ, the Holy Apostles, there Holy Successors, and the God-Bearing Fathers and Mothers of the Church has become apostates. You may call Cepha a hypocrite, but at least he is in a Church that is closest to the truth of the Early Apostolic Church. Watchman/Ezekiel is not part of the Apostolic Church, so how is he in the light? Perhaps he has some truth in his theology, but like all Protestants, he will always be miles away from the Apostolic Faith. He only thinks he is in light and have sound doctrine, but since the 16th Century, Protestants have thrown away bits of the Faith for the sake of "saving" the Roman Catholic Church. Scriptures speaks of the Protestant dilemma: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables" (2 Tim 4:3-4). In IC.XC, Ramon
I would replace every time you put "Protestant" there with the word "Anti-Catholic" because not all Protestants are Anti-Catholic and there are many Catholics who today are literally Anti-Catholic.
Satan used truth mixed with lies to try to seduce Jesus.
Watchman/Ezekiel33 did the same.
But, we got him in check... |
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on Apr 11, 2009 14:12:58 GMT -5
Well Ramon, we have to thank one of our "Protestant" sisters here for her help...Emily.
I would replace every time you put "Protestant" there with the word "Anti-Catholic" because not all Protestants are Anti-Catholic and there are many Catholics who today are literally Anti-Catholic.
Satan used truth mixed with lies to try to seduce Jesus.
Watchman/Ezekiel33 did the same.
But, we got him in check... Yes Cepha, not all Protestants are anti-Catholic. I know a few, that while disagreeing with several aspects of Catholicism, respect and love Latin/Eastern Catholics. I hope I didn't sound that I believe every Protestant is a anti-catholic....  While I respect Protestants and will not presume to know there salvation status, I firmly believe that they have lost the Faith once delivered to Saints. If they claim to have the fullness of faith....well Scriptures and History will prove them wrong. In IC.XC, Ramon |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Apr 11, 2009 14:22:24 GMT -5
Well Ramon, we have to thank one of our "Protestant" sisters here for her help...Emily.
I would replace every time you put "Protestant" there with the word "Anti-Catholic" because not all Protestants are Anti-Catholic and there are many Catholics who today are literally Anti-Catholic.
Satan used truth mixed with lies to try to seduce Jesus.
Watchman/Ezekiel33 did the same.
But, we got him in check... Yes Cepha, not all Protestants are anti-Catholic. I know a few, that while disagreeing with several aspects of Catholicism, respect and love Latin/Eastern Catholics. I hope I didn't sound that I believe every Protestant is a anti-catholic.... While I respect Protestants and will not presume to know there salvation status, I firmly believe that they have lost the Faith once delivered to Saints. If they claim to have the fullness of faith....well Scriptures and History will prove them wrong. In IC.XC, Ramon I've learned to be very careful about automatically assuming anyting about them either. As it's commonly said among Catholics, a good Protestant is better than a bad Catholic anyday. Through my apologetics, I've come to make some great Protestant friends and I've also learned alot from them. Catholics are taught that they are our brethren in the same body of Christ (if outside of the immediate Catholic Church). How are the EO's taught about them and your relation to them? |
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on Apr 11, 2009 14:39:22 GMT -5
Yes Cepha, not all Protestants are anti-Catholic. I know a few, that while disagreeing with several aspects of Catholicism, respect and love Latin/Eastern Catholics. I hope I didn't sound that I believe every Protestant is a anti-catholic.... While I respect Protestants and will not presume to know there salvation status, I firmly believe that they have lost the Faith once delivered to Saints. If they claim to have the fullness of faith....well Scriptures and History will prove them wrong. In IC.XC, Ramon I've learned to be very careful about automatically assuming anyting about them either. As it's commonly said among Catholics, a good Protestant is better than a bad Catholic anyday. Through my apologetics, I've come to make some great Protestant friends and I've also learned alot from them. Catholics are taught that they are our brethren in the same body of Christ (if outside of the immediate Catholic Church). How are the EO's taught about them and your relation to them? While we don't presume to know there salvation status and do not question whether or not God has used them for his works ( We know where the Holy Spirit is at, we do not, however, know where he is not), we still firmly believe that they are outside the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. For us, they are heterodox. They will never be in the fullness of the faith unless they come to the Holy Orthodox Church. Whatever happens outside the Church it's because of the grace flowing from Christ and His Church, persuading those to come home. Heterodox means that they follow doctrines/practices that are not part of the faith "once delivered to all the saints" which is preserved only in the Holy Orthodox Church. Though there are, surely, heretics among the heterodox, it would be best to avoid calling all heterodox heretics, for various reasons which need not be elaborated here. In IC.XC, Ramon |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on Apr 11, 2009 15:52:18 GMT -5
I've learned to be very careful about automatically assuming anyting about them either. As it's commonly said among Catholics, a good Protestant is better than a bad Catholic anyday. Through my apologetics, I've come to make some great Protestant friends and I've also learned alot from them. Catholics are taught that they are our brethren in the same body of Christ (if outside of the immediate Catholic Church). How are the EO's taught about them and your relation to them? While we don't presume to know there salvation status and do not question whether or not God has used them for his works ( We know where the Holy Spirit is at, we do not, however, know where he is not), we still firmly believe that they are outside the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. For us, they are heterodox. They will never be in the fullness of the faith unless they come to the Holy Orthodox Church. Whatever happens outside the Church it's because of the grace flowing from Christ and His Church, persuading those to come home. Heterodox means that they follow doctrines/practices that are not part of the faith "once delivered to all the saints" which is preserved only in the Holy Orthodox Church. Though there are, surely, heretics among the heterodox, it would be best to avoid calling all heterodox heretics, for various reasons which need not be elaborated here. In IC.XC, Ramon I was going to ask you if heterodox meant the same thing as heretic, but you beat me to it. For us, in order for a person to be considered a heretic, they have to first acknowledge that the Catholic Church is the Apostolic Church and "then" reject it, but a person who never believed in The Catholic Church cannot be guilty of heresy. So in the eyes of The Church, Protestants are not automatically heretics. The founders of The Reformatioin (not to be automatically confused with Protestantism) can be called heretics because they were former Catholics. That's why after the 16th Century, they weren't called heretics automatically and why today, there is The Catholic Church and everybody else that falls under Protestantism. Their beliefs are Catholic beliefs (that Jesus is The Son of God, that He was celibate, never married, died and was ressurected, etc...) even if they don't accept everything we believe in (the veneration The Blessed Mother, The Saints, the use of Biblical Sacramentals like incense, candles, holy water, annointing oil, the tabernacle, the altar, etc...). I never really noticed that until this year. Everything they believe that is Christian, we believed it before they did. We cannot reject them. They are our brethren without a doubt. |
|
