661
News:
If you are a new member, don't forget to post in the "Introduce Yourself"
section of the forum, as it is a requirement for new members! 
NOTE: If you have trouble logging in, click the
"Login" link above the username/password boxes.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
662
Introduce Yourself / Re: Hello from a redeemed sinner!
« on: October 07, 2020, 11:02:58 AM »
Well, of course you can stay. We don't kick people out for disagreements; we kick people out if they claim to be Christians and have contentious and railing attitudes, which is not what you're showing us now. (And anyone can listen and read without joining the forum, so you do not need anyone's permission to continue to watch and learn.)
The main point I was bringing up, which I will mention again, was what the "Baptist man" taught you (i.e. "You need a personal relationship with Jesus"), and that you claimed that message was the Gospel of Jesus. My purpose was to explain to you, from the Scripture, that what you said he taught you was not the Gospel of Jesus, nor is it what we are to preach to others. If you already understand that, then that's what I needed to know, and I can presume that what you originally said was probably just poorly written, and that's not a big deal because I've done that before too. (I just have not done it from a smart phone because I do not own one.)
The main point I was bringing up, which I will mention again, was what the "Baptist man" taught you (i.e. "You need a personal relationship with Jesus"), and that you claimed that message was the Gospel of Jesus. My purpose was to explain to you, from the Scripture, that what you said he taught you was not the Gospel of Jesus, nor is it what we are to preach to others. If you already understand that, then that's what I needed to know, and I can presume that what you originally said was probably just poorly written, and that's not a big deal because I've done that before too. (I just have not done it from a smart phone because I do not own one.)
663
Introduce Yourself / Re: Hello from a redeemed sinner!
« on: October 06, 2020, 04:36:31 PM »Quote
You mentioned my offense at your initial response. You are right I was shocked and even a little hurt. especially after I spent so much time trying to connect. I even considered not answering.That was not my initial response; that was Tim's initial response. Tim and I are not the same person.
Quote
But then the Lord brought to my mind 1 Peter 3:15 Be ready to give an answer to anyone who asks for the hope you have in Christ.I did not forget to mention that because that was not part of what I was addressing. Is there a particular reason you require that I bring up 1Pe 3:15? I saw where you mentioned "first Peter" to Tim, but that had no relevance to what was being discussed. The reason I did not bring that up is because no one here is asking you to give a reason for the hope that is in you, but rather, we are asking you about what you believe the Gospel of Jesus Christ is, and as far as I can tell, in your response to my comment, you still have not addressed that point.
You forgot to mention this part in your rebuke.
That is strange to me because other Christians who have joined us love talking about that subject, but you seem to be expecting us to automatically accept everything you say, and not to question you in any sense, so you can feel good about being here. That's not what we are here for, and that is certainly not why we created this forum.
Quote
I cant help but notice, rather than see the work of the Holy Spirit. you used my confession as a club to hit me with.I have not seen the work of the Holy Spirit yet. The work of Holy Spirit is defined in Scripture, because Scripture is authored by the Holy Ghost, and some things you wrote contradicted Scripture (which I demonstrated to you), but so far, you have been unwilling to address those things. You said "I will start out by saying I agree with you," but then you proceed to argue against me in the rest of your post, which is contradictory and raises other concerns.
Quote
So instead of following my flesh which wanted to be offended. instead I followed the Bibles instructions and tried to answer your Questions.If you addressed that to me, I am not following you. I do not see where you tried to answer anything I said as of yet.
Quote
Next, you surmised my testimony into I wanted to have a relationship with the Lord my whole life and finally came to the conclusion I didnt have one.Are you reading it too quickly? Because you missed the entire point of what I was saying. You declared what you believed was the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and that contradicted what the Gospel of Jesus Christ says. I pointed those things out to you, showed you that you defended yourself in conversation with Tim that the "Baptist man" taught you the true Gospel (which was a false gospel, based on what you told us), and now turn around and claim that you agree with me on what I said when I pointed out that it was a false Gospel. Those are contradictory statements, and thus, I still do not understand what you believe.
I agree, that is part of my testimony. But you forgot the second half where the Lord brought me to repentance with the word.
This is why I am seeing something odd about your testimony and responses, but I cannot put my finger on exactly what it is. That is why I first offered a presumption that it was just poor communication in writing, but the more you post, the more cautious I am becoming.
Quote
You seemed to like it when I rephrased it in my second post. But then you doubted my sincerity saying that was not a part of my original testimony. Sorry brother, that is not true.What's not true? It's not true that I made those statements? You are not being clear. I don't know what to make of this.
Quote
If you reread my original post you will see that I even mentioned the The book and chapter that God used to show me my sin.I do not need to reread it. I noticed that the first time, and that's why I quoted from 2Ti 3 to help you understand the fullness of the matter.
Quote
Im not quite done, I need to move my truck.I hope you are okay because it's been two hours since you gave your response; that's a long distance to move a truck.
664
Introduce Yourself / Re: Hello from a redeemed sinner!
« on: October 06, 2020, 11:25:15 AM »Quote
My first post took several tries I think they got less informative by my third attempt.Yep, I've done that before. Although, my posts are usually so detailed, I just give up after a point. However, if you were working on a computer, you can actually hit the back button, and everything you wrote should still be in the box you typed it in. I'm not sure how that works on phones.
Quote
Im also having problems with Making a quote. So instead Ill take it in sections (I dont have access to a laptop I drive for a living)The little buttons above the box you type in things have all sorts of features. The button with the text bubble on it is the quote button.
Quote
The nice Baptist man actually did tell me the gospel over our many conversations. I was illustrating that My take away My take away was, I didnt have a relationship with The Lord that he had. But, I knew needed one. Also, keep in mind I was laughing at myself and my stupidity.But Tim was asking what specifically he taught, and I would like to know too because I agree with Tim. When someone is preaching, "You need a personal relationship with Jesus," that is not the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and if you want to say that it is, I will listen to your argument, but I would like you to quote Scripture on that. I can show you were Jesus and His disciples taught repentance (i.e. godly sorrow) and remission (i.e. forgiveness) of sins, but I cannot show you any Scripture where Jesus said "You need a personal relationship with me." I am not saying that a born again Christian's relationship with Jesus Christ is not personal from a conceptual standpoint, but that is not what is taught in Scripture for the preaching of God's Word. So if you have something you would like to share on the Scriptures, I would be interested to read that.
Quote
Not sure why I put saved in quotes. I was tired and I was trying to convey my understanding Not all who say a prayer are saved.That makes sense, and I agree, not all who say a prayer are saved.
Quote
this was me laughing at myself again. I thought I thought I was having fun, But really I was just a sinner greedy for my sin. I didnt know that relationship with the one true God was better than anything in this world.I think this is where Tim started to discern that something was off, and I will confess, when I read your testimony this morning, I got the same impression as Tim did. Tim works quite a bit at his job, so I don't know if he got time to explain it as thoroughly as he wanted to, but again, what you are saying there is not the Gospel of Jesus Christ. What I mean is that to say, "I am a greedy sinner, and therefore, I need a personal relationship with Jesus," is NOT the Gospel, that is not repentance, and that is not what it means to be born again.
Of course, there are some people who have come here who have not had much experience expressing themselves in writing, and that's alright. But we have to point these things out because we want to make sure that all have heard the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and that's also because we care more about your soul than whether or not you like us.
In your first post, you said you came here because you had read/heard my teaching on repentance, and you "wanted to hear more." Assuming that is true, let me explain more.
Quote
What I wanted to express in my post was I wanted a relationship with the lord.The problem with that is you were claiming to have sought God before repentance of sin. I don't know if you noticed or not, but even when you mentioned repentance in your first post, your post never contained any words like of sin, wrongdoing, corruption, wickedness, guilt, the law... or any other words along those lines. Other Christians who come here have no problem addressing those things because they understand what they were saved from, and when someone preaches the Gospel of Jesus Christ, those things cannot be avoided because:
Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
-Gal 3:24
The reason for this is because the law is the knowledge of sin:
Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
-Rom 3:10
With the knowledge of sin, we can understand our own wickedness and corruption:
Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
-Rev 3:17
Therefore, when we understand how wretched we are, that brings us to (not just sorrow, but) GODLY sorrow, which is breaks us down in tears of grief and humility towards Him, and then through faith, we are born again anew in Christ.
And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
-Mark 1:15
Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
-John 3:3
This is why, when Jesus was approached by a man and asked how he could get to heaven, Jesus did not say, "Well, you need to get to know me better and have a personal relationship," but rather, He gave him the law:
And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
-Mat 19:16-19
Thus, the "Baptist man" who supposedly "told you the Gospel" did not teach you the proper Gospel of Jesus Christ because he does not know it himself, and therefore, because you still believe him, it provides us evidence that you do not understand the Gospel of Jesus Christ either. That Baptist man might have learned a bunch of things about the Bible, but he has not come to knowledge of the truth:
Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
-2Ti 3:5-7
So getting back to my point, what was the problem with your statement that you "wanted a relationship with the lord?" The Bible says the opposite:
As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
-Rom 3:10-12
Thus, after reading your posts, I have gotten an impression from you that you will have to correct if what I am about to say is incorrect. My impression is this: "Melanie knew her whole life that she needed to seek Jesus, then one day, she accepted it." That was the general impression I got from your testimony, and I can assure you that, according to Scripture, that is not how people are saved.
Now, of course, if you have written something accidentally, or if you forgot to talk about something when you were writing, or anything along those lines, let us know. However, if you think that what you presented to us was the Gospel of Jesus Christ, we are going to be at odds because there are a lot of people here who study Scripture, and very likely, all of them will not be agreement with you.
Quote
when the Lord showed me in his word that I was sinning against him, I was sick And I beg forgiveness. He Gave it to me even though I didnt deserve it.I hope that is the case, but that was not the testimony you gave initially, so that is why there is a lot of confusion for us right now.
In response to Tim, you were offended, saying, "Not as welcoming as I was expecting," but I would respond that your testimony was, "Not as Biblical as we were expecting." That is because, to us, how we feel about a matter is not anywhere near as important to us as what the Word of God says about a matter, and that your soul is more important than feeling welcomed.
The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.
-Psa 19:7
The fruit of the righteous is a tree of life; and he that winneth souls is wise.
-Pro 11:30
If I may borrow your words, "I hope that clears it up. Let me know if you have more questions."
665
What's New @ CLE / (WEEKLY TEACHING) Corruptions of Christianity: Catholicism p7
« on: October 05, 2020, 02:15:04 PM »666
Introduce Yourself / Re: Hi, I'm Jesse From The Greater Chicago Area
« on: October 01, 2020, 12:37:47 PM »
Oh, Tim did end up banning him. I did not notice until I checked Jesse's profile this morning. I agree with Tim on that because that guy was going to do nothing but cause trouble after this point. I do not believe any of Jesse's testimony about repentance, and I think what he did was simply repeat what he thought needed to be said for him to be accepted.
667
Introduce Yourself / Re: Hello everyone!
« on: October 01, 2020, 11:20:50 AM »
I appreciate your thoroughness in your writing.
If you were willing to give me a more detailed testimony about Hillsong, I might use it in my book. I'm currently in the process of writing a book on exposing the "Christian" music industry, and depending on how much details you provide, I might add your testimony to it if you are willing. I would need times and locations to go with it. If you were willing to post it in full detail publicly on this forum, that would be best, but if not, I would take a private email.
That's up to you if you want to or not, and again, I will not guarantee that I will use it, but it may help others who read it.
What gave you desire join up with us?
If you were willing to give me a more detailed testimony about Hillsong, I might use it in my book. I'm currently in the process of writing a book on exposing the "Christian" music industry, and depending on how much details you provide, I might add your testimony to it if you are willing. I would need times and locations to go with it. If you were willing to post it in full detail publicly on this forum, that would be best, but if not, I would take a private email.
That's up to you if you want to or not, and again, I will not guarantee that I will use it, but it may help others who read it.
What gave you desire join up with us?
668
Bible Discussion / Re: What are strangled meats?
« on: September 30, 2020, 10:39:07 AM »
Ruth, you may want to do research on fish if that is your question. Looking to the Bible for answers about filleting fish is probably not the best idea because that is not why God wrote the Bible; it is for reproof, instruction, and philosophy for righteousness and doctrine, not butchering or kitchen techniques.
Fish have blood and blood vessels, but they do not have much blood. Often, a fish is either directly killed, draining its blood after cutting off its head, or if it is bought store fresh before gutting (as you might see a professional do on a YouTube video), the blood has congealed at the point of butchering, and since it is a such a small amount, it does not effect the meat. Even if it did, it would be quickly cooked out of the meat, just as you would with a steak.
Having to behead fish the moment you take them out of their natural environment would be impossible for those who make a living catching fish. There are far too many, and they need to be sold at market. The stipulations in Scripture were for vertebrate animals, who are living naturally in their environment and have much blood, like we do. You will notice that fish were not acceptable sacrifices in the temple (in the days of the Old Testament) because of the lack of much blood, and therefore, the same respect is not shown to shown to fish in the same manner because all animals serve their individual purposes.
As Megan had pointed out, buying things at the butcher or grocery store (which is one step away from the butcher) is fine, but I would add: So long as you do not have any prior knowledge that the animal meat in your purchase had be tampered with in an incorrect manner. If you have that knowledge, then do not buy it, but if you do not have that knowledge, then God will still bless it for the sake of our ignorance.
Fish have blood and blood vessels, but they do not have much blood. Often, a fish is either directly killed, draining its blood after cutting off its head, or if it is bought store fresh before gutting (as you might see a professional do on a YouTube video), the blood has congealed at the point of butchering, and since it is a such a small amount, it does not effect the meat. Even if it did, it would be quickly cooked out of the meat, just as you would with a steak.
Having to behead fish the moment you take them out of their natural environment would be impossible for those who make a living catching fish. There are far too many, and they need to be sold at market. The stipulations in Scripture were for vertebrate animals, who are living naturally in their environment and have much blood, like we do. You will notice that fish were not acceptable sacrifices in the temple (in the days of the Old Testament) because of the lack of much blood, and therefore, the same respect is not shown to shown to fish in the same manner because all animals serve their individual purposes.
As Megan had pointed out, buying things at the butcher or grocery store (which is one step away from the butcher) is fine, but I would add: So long as you do not have any prior knowledge that the animal meat in your purchase had be tampered with in an incorrect manner. If you have that knowledge, then do not buy it, but if you do not have that knowledge, then God will still bless it for the sake of our ignorance.
669
Introduce Yourself / Re: Hi, I'm Jesse From The Greater Chicago Area
« on: September 29, 2020, 10:25:51 AM »
So in his latest response, what you will probably notice about Jesse's words is that he is not responding to anything. He is not answering anything. He does not respond to Scriptures either. He simply goes on the attack, and that's the contention I was talking about when I mentioned his emulations, wrath, and strife, but it's interesting that he did realize that I made a good point with the Scriptures on that, which is why you will notice that he backed off of his all-caps rage, and tried to lower the tone of his rage response to stand on pretense and try to give everyone another impression, even though his words still drip of venom.
I find it amazing that he wants to be here, even though he has already accused everyone here of being in a religious cult. If what we say and do here is wrong, then he should use the Scripture to rebuke us and then sanctify himself from the leaven, but that's not what he's doing. At the very least, he put 'Other' as his religious belief because that is accurate; I do not believe he is brethren at this point because I do not see any evidence for it, and his vicious responses reflect the dry introduction post he wrote that seemed to be him following a formula to appease an audience rather giving his own testimony of repentance and faith.
Jesse will continue to act this way, attempting to be more deceptive with each post as he chooses where he will attack on the forum, and we will end up having to ban him. In fact, I am a little surprised Tim has not done it already, but that might just because he's busy at work right now.
I find it amazing that he wants to be here, even though he has already accused everyone here of being in a religious cult. If what we say and do here is wrong, then he should use the Scripture to rebuke us and then sanctify himself from the leaven, but that's not what he's doing. At the very least, he put 'Other' as his religious belief because that is accurate; I do not believe he is brethren at this point because I do not see any evidence for it, and his vicious responses reflect the dry introduction post he wrote that seemed to be him following a formula to appease an audience rather giving his own testimony of repentance and faith.
Jesse will continue to act this way, attempting to be more deceptive with each post as he chooses where he will attack on the forum, and we will end up having to ban him. In fact, I am a little surprised Tim has not done it already, but that might just because he's busy at work right now.
670
Introduce Yourself / Re: Hi, I'm Jesse From The Greater Chicago Area
« on: September 29, 2020, 01:11:15 AM »
Jesse, thank you for your forthcoming manner. I expected that would be your response, and it does help me be able to discern the matter more easily, so I always appreciate it when men like yourself are more open with their real attitude and words, instead of standing on pretense.
But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.
-Mat 15:18
Your introduction post was rather odd, and I figured this would be your attitude before I responded to you, but I decided to be patient and wait to see what you would do first. It is obvious that you did not come here to learn and fellowship, but rather, you came to debate and tell everyone what you want them to believe. Again, I could see this in your first post. Therefore, I have no interest in responding to you further (because it would be endless debate with a hypocrite), but I will address everyone else so they can understand why your introduction was so strange.
If you all look at Jesse's post as a whole, you will notice that half of his introduction post is arguing about the term 'Christian'. As soon as I saw this, I knew this man had no intention to fellowship with us, and I figured he would likely leave upset. If you look at other introductions written by those who have been born again in Christ, they have come forward to tell us a lot about themselves and what Christ has done for them because they are excited to share those things, but with Jesse, it was very... hmm... the only way I know how to describe it is "cookie-cutter," meaning that he was just going through the motions of a "testimony" rather than giving an actual testimony.
Go read these two introductions, and the subsequent posts made in them, and then compare it to Jesse's thread, and you should see clearly what I mean:
http://www.creationliberty.com/forum/index.php?topic=1137.msg9189#msg9189
http://www.creationliberty.com/forum/index.php?topic=1140.msg9225#msg9225
In the first half of his post, it was like he was making a lot of effort to say all the keywords and phrases that he thought we would expect from a Christian in order to be accepted as brethren. In other words, he was so focused on "saying the right thing," and just giving his testimony of what Christ had done for him. So much of what he wrote was just repeating what I had said in some of my teachings, almost as if he was just now learning these things, even though he claimed to have been saved and understood them 22 years ago (i.e. 4 years longer than I have been saved). He gave absolutely NO personal details whatsoever, which was very odd.
Furthermore, there were certain phrases he used that did not make sense. For example:
"So, I set my heart to seek Him in truth. I didn't want to see His hands. I wanted to seek to know Him."
I suspect that, without him explaining what that means, there is likely no one here who understands what he was trying to say by that. If any of you read that and understood it before you read my post here, let me know.
Other things Jesse said put me on guard. For example:
"In my discovery of the deceptions in the institutions of men, I have found articles on this platform that are in harmony with what I had learned"
Essentially, it is not that Jesse is looking to Scripture to see what is in accord with the Word of God, but rather, he is comparing what I write to "what he had already learned," like his thoughts and opinions, before accepting what I write. Therefore, his words tend to show that he holds the opinions of his own mind in higher regard than Scripture.
Then, the rest of his post was arguing that Christians should not be called Christians, while hypocritically quoting 2 Timothy 3:16, to make everyone think that he gives honor to God's Word. His argument came from etymology, not from Scripture, however, when being addressed on the Scripture, rationally and respectfully, he lashed out, which is exactly what I expected him to do.
Instead of responding with Scripture, he responds in an all-caps rage. Part of the reason I suspected he might do this is because this is very common with those who are part of "conspiracy ministries," and you will notice that he did not depart from his church building for doctrinal reasons, separating himself from the leaven, but rather, he departed because of things like 501c3, which shows me that he is likely more political in nature than looking to Scripture. I was unsure about that at first, but his responses provided some evidence of that.
Even the way he wrote "US-26-501(c)3" was odd because no one has ever come to this forum (or any email I have received) talking about 501c3, and wrote out "US-26-501(c)3" in that way. They just say "501c3." It was as if Jesse was trying to be overly official in some way to appear more intellectual? I'm not sure about that either, but there were tons of little things like that which did not seem... normal. I don't know how else to describe it, except... odd.
Without knowing more about Jesse personally, I don't think I could conclude a whole lot. All I know is that, based on his email address on his account, he goes by the username "jesseathleanx," and "Athlean" seems to be a body building workout series/products. At this point, he likely won't reveal anymore about himself because he does not want anyone to know, which is why he did not provide hardly any details in his original post.
Concerning his responses to Tim, he claims that all three times in the Bible, the word 'Christian' is "attributed to them by the heathen," and in order to believe that, Jesse would have to believe that Peter was a heathen. So either his statement is wrong, or Peter was nothing more than a pagan, which would make Peter's letters in the Bible a lie.
Jesse expressed his offense against me by saying, "This is the way in which you 'welcome' a born again believer," but first of all, based on his attitude, I have no idea if he was born again or not because he gave a long list of impersonal, cookie-cutter sentences about coming to repentance, and yet, he has not yet expressed any such thing in his writing; all the evidence of his words is pointing in the opposite direction, showing wrath and strife, rather than meekness and temperance:
Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
-Galatians 5:19-24
But worse still is that he is accusing me of "welcoming" him in the wrong way, when Jesse was the one who bought up the topic. He wants to shift the focus of everyone's attention on to my response, that he can take everyone's focus away from the fact that he chose to write his introduction on that topic; thus, I simply responded to what Jesse decided to write about.
While I was typing all this out, there has been contention that Jesse has been aiming at Tim, and also, everyone else on the forum, in which Jesse has already begun to accuse all of you of being in a religious cult. However, that is unsurprising because we have seen this many times before (just as Christ and His disciples were accused of the same thing from those who claimed to be believers), and I already see the pattern where we are probably going to have to ban Jesse because he is already breaking forum rules and he has barely been here for a day.
The hypocrisy was the thing that a little shocking, and I will give you all an example. If you read my post, you will notice that I said:
"I do not care about your ability to explain etymologies when the Bible gives us other details."
Anyone can see, in the context of what I said, I had no concern about what a man claims he can say about definitions of words when the Bible tells us something and defines what it means.
Though my meaning was obvious to any reader, and I spelled it out clearly, Jesse attempted to cherry pick four words I said out of its context and apply another meaning:
"Christopher, you said a lot when you said 'I don't care...' I can see that."
What he was implying (very heavily) is that I do not care about what he says, nor do I care about correction and instruction, which is why he accused you all of being in a religious cult. However, when Tim brought up the problems with what Jesse was saying (which correlates with what I am writing here), Jesse responds:
"Context is everything."
A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.
-Jms 1:8
Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded.
-Jms 4:8
Well, context was NOT everything to Jesse when he started to falsely accuse me. Context was NOT everything to Jesse when we quoted Scripture to him. However, suddenly context becomes important when Jesse wants to justify his sinful attitude and words, having no fear of God that he will be held accountable for everything he says.
But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.
-Mat 12:36
So as we can see, after just a few posts, the hypocrisy and arrogance out of Jesse is profound, and he can go give his cookie-cutter, so-called "testimony" to as many people that will believe him if he wants, but I did not believe him from his first post, and I noticed that a lot of people here stayed very quiet, which usually only happens when they are discerning something is wrong as well.
But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man.
-Mat 15:18
Your introduction post was rather odd, and I figured this would be your attitude before I responded to you, but I decided to be patient and wait to see what you would do first. It is obvious that you did not come here to learn and fellowship, but rather, you came to debate and tell everyone what you want them to believe. Again, I could see this in your first post. Therefore, I have no interest in responding to you further (because it would be endless debate with a hypocrite), but I will address everyone else so they can understand why your introduction was so strange.
If you all look at Jesse's post as a whole, you will notice that half of his introduction post is arguing about the term 'Christian'. As soon as I saw this, I knew this man had no intention to fellowship with us, and I figured he would likely leave upset. If you look at other introductions written by those who have been born again in Christ, they have come forward to tell us a lot about themselves and what Christ has done for them because they are excited to share those things, but with Jesse, it was very... hmm... the only way I know how to describe it is "cookie-cutter," meaning that he was just going through the motions of a "testimony" rather than giving an actual testimony.
Go read these two introductions, and the subsequent posts made in them, and then compare it to Jesse's thread, and you should see clearly what I mean:
http://www.creationliberty.com/forum/index.php?topic=1137.msg9189#msg9189
http://www.creationliberty.com/forum/index.php?topic=1140.msg9225#msg9225
In the first half of his post, it was like he was making a lot of effort to say all the keywords and phrases that he thought we would expect from a Christian in order to be accepted as brethren. In other words, he was so focused on "saying the right thing," and just giving his testimony of what Christ had done for him. So much of what he wrote was just repeating what I had said in some of my teachings, almost as if he was just now learning these things, even though he claimed to have been saved and understood them 22 years ago (i.e. 4 years longer than I have been saved). He gave absolutely NO personal details whatsoever, which was very odd.
Furthermore, there were certain phrases he used that did not make sense. For example:
"So, I set my heart to seek Him in truth. I didn't want to see His hands. I wanted to seek to know Him."
I suspect that, without him explaining what that means, there is likely no one here who understands what he was trying to say by that. If any of you read that and understood it before you read my post here, let me know.
Other things Jesse said put me on guard. For example:
"In my discovery of the deceptions in the institutions of men, I have found articles on this platform that are in harmony with what I had learned"
Essentially, it is not that Jesse is looking to Scripture to see what is in accord with the Word of God, but rather, he is comparing what I write to "what he had already learned," like his thoughts and opinions, before accepting what I write. Therefore, his words tend to show that he holds the opinions of his own mind in higher regard than Scripture.
Then, the rest of his post was arguing that Christians should not be called Christians, while hypocritically quoting 2 Timothy 3:16, to make everyone think that he gives honor to God's Word. His argument came from etymology, not from Scripture, however, when being addressed on the Scripture, rationally and respectfully, he lashed out, which is exactly what I expected him to do.
Instead of responding with Scripture, he responds in an all-caps rage. Part of the reason I suspected he might do this is because this is very common with those who are part of "conspiracy ministries," and you will notice that he did not depart from his church building for doctrinal reasons, separating himself from the leaven, but rather, he departed because of things like 501c3, which shows me that he is likely more political in nature than looking to Scripture. I was unsure about that at first, but his responses provided some evidence of that.
Even the way he wrote "US-26-501(c)3" was odd because no one has ever come to this forum (or any email I have received) talking about 501c3, and wrote out "US-26-501(c)3" in that way. They just say "501c3." It was as if Jesse was trying to be overly official in some way to appear more intellectual? I'm not sure about that either, but there were tons of little things like that which did not seem... normal. I don't know how else to describe it, except... odd.
Without knowing more about Jesse personally, I don't think I could conclude a whole lot. All I know is that, based on his email address on his account, he goes by the username "jesseathleanx," and "Athlean" seems to be a body building workout series/products. At this point, he likely won't reveal anymore about himself because he does not want anyone to know, which is why he did not provide hardly any details in his original post.
Concerning his responses to Tim, he claims that all three times in the Bible, the word 'Christian' is "attributed to them by the heathen," and in order to believe that, Jesse would have to believe that Peter was a heathen. So either his statement is wrong, or Peter was nothing more than a pagan, which would make Peter's letters in the Bible a lie.
Jesse expressed his offense against me by saying, "This is the way in which you 'welcome' a born again believer," but first of all, based on his attitude, I have no idea if he was born again or not because he gave a long list of impersonal, cookie-cutter sentences about coming to repentance, and yet, he has not yet expressed any such thing in his writing; all the evidence of his words is pointing in the opposite direction, showing wrath and strife, rather than meekness and temperance:
Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.
-Galatians 5:19-24
But worse still is that he is accusing me of "welcoming" him in the wrong way, when Jesse was the one who bought up the topic. He wants to shift the focus of everyone's attention on to my response, that he can take everyone's focus away from the fact that he chose to write his introduction on that topic; thus, I simply responded to what Jesse decided to write about.
While I was typing all this out, there has been contention that Jesse has been aiming at Tim, and also, everyone else on the forum, in which Jesse has already begun to accuse all of you of being in a religious cult. However, that is unsurprising because we have seen this many times before (just as Christ and His disciples were accused of the same thing from those who claimed to be believers), and I already see the pattern where we are probably going to have to ban Jesse because he is already breaking forum rules and he has barely been here for a day.
The hypocrisy was the thing that a little shocking, and I will give you all an example. If you read my post, you will notice that I said:
"I do not care about your ability to explain etymologies when the Bible gives us other details."
Anyone can see, in the context of what I said, I had no concern about what a man claims he can say about definitions of words when the Bible tells us something and defines what it means.
Though my meaning was obvious to any reader, and I spelled it out clearly, Jesse attempted to cherry pick four words I said out of its context and apply another meaning:
"Christopher, you said a lot when you said 'I don't care...' I can see that."
What he was implying (very heavily) is that I do not care about what he says, nor do I care about correction and instruction, which is why he accused you all of being in a religious cult. However, when Tim brought up the problems with what Jesse was saying (which correlates with what I am writing here), Jesse responds:
"Context is everything."
A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.
-Jms 1:8
Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded.
-Jms 4:8
Well, context was NOT everything to Jesse when he started to falsely accuse me. Context was NOT everything to Jesse when we quoted Scripture to him. However, suddenly context becomes important when Jesse wants to justify his sinful attitude and words, having no fear of God that he will be held accountable for everything he says.
But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment.
-Mat 12:36
So as we can see, after just a few posts, the hypocrisy and arrogance out of Jesse is profound, and he can go give his cookie-cutter, so-called "testimony" to as many people that will believe him if he wants, but I did not believe him from his first post, and I noticed that a lot of people here stayed very quiet, which usually only happens when they are discerning something is wrong as well.
671
What's New @ CLE / (WEEKLY TEACHING) Corruptions of Christianity: Catholicism p6
« on: September 28, 2020, 03:08:47 PM »672
Introduce Yourself / Re: Hi, I'm Jesse From The Greater Chicago Area
« on: September 28, 2020, 10:33:26 AM »I used to identify myself as "a Christian," but many years ago I began to discern something wrong with that particular word. It only appears in the scriptures three times and every single time it is attributed to the saints by the heathen and not only do the saints not label themselves "Christians," in the Bible, but the Lord, Himself does not identify His saints as "Christians." He has many words that He identifies His people with; "Christian " is not one of them. Therfore I put "other" under religion, rather than "born again Christian." I have been born of the Holy Spirit of Christ and am a believer in His words. If any man seems to be contentious against my decision to not use that term to identify myself with, I would stand in full assurance that I can explain further in the etymology of the word, the history and the attribution of that identification, as to reason, rightly about it. I've also noted that this forum allows people of other religions to sign up, sick as Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, Atheist, etc, so I will say that this shouldn't be a problem that I chose to not use the word "Christian" when identifying my faith.Okay, so your selection of the term "Other" on your profile was purposeful. That's answers my question on that.
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:I'm glad you posted that Scripture because that will preface my response perfectly. I need to write an article on that very topic because, every few months or so, we have someone come here who claims they have rejected the term 'Christian' for Biblical reasons, and it is always for the same reasons. I also rejected the term for about a year, until I understood that I was being led astray by Hebrew-roots cultists.
That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." 2 Timothy 3:16
I do not care about your ability to explain etymologies when the Bible gives us other details. For example, when Paul was in court giving the Gospel of Jesus to King Agrippa:
Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.
-Acts 26:28
If you continue to read the chapter, Paul never corrects him, but actually encourages him, and everyone else listening in the court, to become a Christian:
And Paul said, I would to God, that not only thou, but also all that hear me this day, were both almost, and altogether such as I am, except these bonds.
-Acts 26:29
He said, "such as I am," in that, he was in agreement with Agrippa about being a Christian. This is because the disciples of Christ were first called Christians in Antioch, the base of operations for the early church:
And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.
-Acts 11:26
And therefore, Peter (whose words here are spoken by the Holy Spirit, not by etymology dictionaries) said that we should not be ashamed of suffering as a Christian:
Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.
-1 Peter 4:16
And yet, you are showing shame and throwing off the name, likely because of other false religious entities who call themselves such in hypocrisy. It does not matter what we would have ended up being called. The Bible could have called us "Zigaligapuffs" and all false religious cults would end up calling themselves Zigaligapuffs to deceive others. There are false teachers who claims to be disciples of Christ, apostles, pastors, the church, and many other terms that are used in Scripture, but that does not mean we stop using those terms as an outward symbol of sanctification; rather, we take the opportunity to show the true Christians from the false ones, and Christ has allowed this to happen for His purpose:
He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.
-Mat 13:28-30
Running away from what we are called in Scripture does not serve any useful purpose, and this is coming from a Christian who did that for a short time.
673
What's New @ CLE / (WEEKLY TEACHING) Corruptions of Christianity: Catholicism p5
« on: September 21, 2020, 04:16:58 PM »674
Introduce Yourself / Re: Hello!
« on: September 21, 2020, 10:29:52 AM »
Well, first of all, that is how a born again Christian writes an introduction post. There are so many people who join and do not give any kind of actual testimony in Christ, and it's just good to see to the few who have been given understanding by the Lord Jesus Christ.
As I read through what you wrote, I was mostly nodding my head and saying to myself, "Yeah, I know. I get it." I went through many of the same things in the process of growing in understanding.
Part of the reason that happens is because when you have a false preacher that is heading up a leavened church building, they only have a baby's understanding when it comes to Scripture. I'm not talking about history, lineage, or geography; I'm talking about the actual doctrine itself.
For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.
-Heb 5:12-14
Those who are newly born again in Christ are babes, having a babe's understanding, but the leavened preacher is likely not born again in Christ, but also having a babe's understanding. Therefore, the babes will go to the false preacher to learn some basic things, not knowing that he/she is receiving leaven from that preacher at the same time, but will still consider him a good preacher because the babe does not yet know enough to have discernment because he/she is just learning the basics.
This means that the babe will grow, but the leavened preacher will not grow, and this eventually leads to the conflict, oftentimes ending with the growing babe being chided for not respecting the person of the pastor. Therefore, because many basic doctrines are not understood by those pastors, but are understood eventually (after some months of study) by the babes, it becomes a situation in which the lofty pastor with a degree is brought to shame by the lowly new Christian who is humbled before God.
For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: That no flesh should glory in his presence. But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.
-1Co 1:26-31
If you read/heard my testimony (either on the website or in teachings), you will know that I also did not understand what happened to me when I was saved, but the difference is that I did not come to understanding until almost 10 years later. I'm just glad you learned it so early on because it will be very beneficial for Jesus Christ, for you, and for your family.
A curious question though, I read that you had picked up a KJB, which is great, but I noticed that when you quoted John 1:12 and Mark 13:22-23, you quoted them from the ESV -- was that accidental? I am not condemning you; I was just curious if that was an accident or not because it seemed contradictory to your statement, and it also seemed strange considering that you quoted the KJB with Lam 2:14.
As I read through what you wrote, I was mostly nodding my head and saying to myself, "Yeah, I know. I get it." I went through many of the same things in the process of growing in understanding.
Part of the reason that happens is because when you have a false preacher that is heading up a leavened church building, they only have a baby's understanding when it comes to Scripture. I'm not talking about history, lineage, or geography; I'm talking about the actual doctrine itself.
For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every one that useth milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness: for he is a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.
-Heb 5:12-14
Those who are newly born again in Christ are babes, having a babe's understanding, but the leavened preacher is likely not born again in Christ, but also having a babe's understanding. Therefore, the babes will go to the false preacher to learn some basic things, not knowing that he/she is receiving leaven from that preacher at the same time, but will still consider him a good preacher because the babe does not yet know enough to have discernment because he/she is just learning the basics.
This means that the babe will grow, but the leavened preacher will not grow, and this eventually leads to the conflict, oftentimes ending with the growing babe being chided for not respecting the person of the pastor. Therefore, because many basic doctrines are not understood by those pastors, but are understood eventually (after some months of study) by the babes, it becomes a situation in which the lofty pastor with a degree is brought to shame by the lowly new Christian who is humbled before God.
For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: That no flesh should glory in his presence. But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.
-1Co 1:26-31
If you read/heard my testimony (either on the website or in teachings), you will know that I also did not understand what happened to me when I was saved, but the difference is that I did not come to understanding until almost 10 years later. I'm just glad you learned it so early on because it will be very beneficial for Jesus Christ, for you, and for your family.
A curious question though, I read that you had picked up a KJB, which is great, but I noticed that when you quoted John 1:12 and Mark 13:22-23, you quoted them from the ESV -- was that accidental? I am not condemning you; I was just curious if that was an accident or not because it seemed contradictory to your statement, and it also seemed strange considering that you quoted the KJB with Lam 2:14.
675
Evangelism / Re: Practicing His Word
« on: September 19, 2020, 05:16:13 PM »
If such a thing were wrong, then it would be wrong to read or listen to any my teachings, and then it would likewise be wrong to read many of Paul's teachings in Scripture because he often poses questions in Scripture, such as "What then?" or "What shall we say?" in which he arguing a point of opposition, meaning that he is posing questions that might come from someone arguing against him, and therefore, training up others to prepare themselves for conversations.
Short answer: I do it all the time.
Short answer: I do it all the time.
676
Evangelism / Re: Practicing His Word
« on: September 19, 2020, 11:23:49 AM »
I am unsure of what what you mean, so I could not comment unless you were more specific.
677
Law/Legal / Re: Update on our Small Claims Lawsuit
« on: September 18, 2020, 10:15:32 AM »
I printed out copies of that petition for court. I also reported the petition to the website and provided them links to the open case. The petition was removed from their website this morning.
678
Law/Legal / Re: Update on our Small Claims Lawsuit
« on: September 17, 2020, 10:41:13 PM »
Megan emailed me the link, and yes, the woman is lying... A LOT. Most of her post to form a "petition" was lies, and useless ones at that because forming a petition does NOTHING in a court of law. However, she was also falsely accusing my dad, and a deputy in the process, and so I'm going to stop by that deputy's house and let him know what's going on with her pathetic and deceptive attempt to drum up support.
679
Law/Legal / Re: Update on our Small Claims Lawsuit
« on: September 17, 2020, 03:50:51 PM »
You did not ask me to search court dockets though. The name of the defendants brings up nothing on duckduckgo. Again, you are not being clear as to what you are talking about. I only refrained from providing their names out of courtesy, but I am not going to play this search engine game.
680
Law/Legal / Re: Update on our Small Claims Lawsuit
« on: September 17, 2020, 02:12:55 PM »
I have no clue what you're talking about. It does not make any sense to me at all, and I do not recall giving out his and her name and address at any time.