Does the following sound familiar?—Spring is in the air! Flowers and bunnies decorate the home. Father helps the children paint beautiful designs on eggs dyed in various colors. These eggs, which will later be
hidden and searched for, are placed into lovely, seasonal baskets. The
wonderful aroma of the hot cross buns mother is baking in the oven waft
through the house. Forty days of abstaining from special foods will
finally end the next day. The whole family picks out their Sunday best
to wear to the next morning’s sunrise worship service to celebrate the
savior’s resurrection and the renewal of life. Everyone looks forward to
a succulent ham with all the trimmings. It will be a thrilling day.
After all, it is one of the most important religious holidays of the

Easter, right? No! This is a description of an ancient Babylonian family—2,000 years before Christ.

Whats the truth behind this holiday called Easter? Is it of GOD, or of something else? If you offer it on the alter of GOD, will the FATHER's fire of approval fall on it as it fell on Elijah's offering, or will there be silence as like the Prophets of Jezebel?

Views: 217

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Yes GOD can pray to GOD and still be GOD. (green)

Deus praying to himself---un heard in latin ---such a homogod could only exist n euro imaging and image of nations.

Y would god or any god pray to himself--no master or creator worshiped themselves lets they be guilty of homo become consumed by their own likeness…(as Lucifer)
The mirror is the devils glass we all no that…
Oneness is not confusing because we no the creator deus, the holy man adam, the light seeker eve, and the light satan (and his seed)

No god no where in mythology or factology has ever prayed to or preyed upon himself or herself ---unless the god godess was possessed by homo or lebo…

(gospel 101)

GOD died on the Cross, but the Father didn't die there, the Son did.-green

(god dies on the cross (dead god), but the father didn’t die there (jew), the Sun did)

Therefore 2 people died and 1 didn’t--one name god one name father one name son…
If son and father are one with god (in euro logic) then god died with the father and son lest---god died on the cross, but the father didn’t die there, the son did---
be a false statement---and impossible occurance either all died or none died or some body lied.
(gospel 101]

Both David and Solomon were reigning as king of Israel at the same time, and yet they are both their own person (1st Kings 1:45-47). --green
david, d. c.970 B.C., king of ancient Israel (c.1010–970 B.C.), successor of Saul. The Book of First Samuel introduces him as the youngest of eight sons who is anointed king by Samuel to replace Saul, who had been deemed a failure. The Goliath story underscores his divine election and leads to Saul's obsession with killing him. On the death of Saul and Jonathan in battle, David assumes the throne in Second Samuel. The assassination of a rival king, Ishbosheth, in the north allows David to be crowned king of a united kingdom.
With the capture of Jerusalem, David moves his capital there and plans the construction of a temple. Through prophetic mediation, however, God declares David's successor as the future builder, who will build a “house.” God promises to establish the kingdom of his son as an everlasting kingdom. From this promise derives the later hope of a royal Messiah (“anointed one”) as an agent of God's establishment of an eschatological kingdom.
Second Samuel charts an era of decline beginning with David's adultery with Bath-sheba and the murder of her husband. Anarchy prevails among his children, leading to the revolt and usurpation of the throne by his son Absalom. David's son by Bath-sheba, Solomon, is nominated king and successor by David, though this was challenged by another son Adonijah. Nevertheless, David remains the model for subsequent monarchs of Israel.
David's musical skill became proverbial, and many psalms were attributed to him. Most of the narrative that recounts David's decline is omitted in the Book of Chronicles. The New Testament confesses Jesus as the “Christ” (Messiah) descended from David, and David is also attested in the Qur'an. Archaelogical excavations have failed, however, to find evidence that would confirm the existence of a powerful and unified Davidic kingdom. End quote…

(jkn8 not only does green mis-state well know history--he goes even further and indicates that this is possible…because

This was possible because the father was honored by and through his son, and the son was honored by and through his father.__-green

Jkm8 mr green is comparing the so-called virgin birth of chirist (his god) with sinful berth of Solomon (david and sheba the dark)…david is the one whom divided the 8 tribes as his name suggests---the Hebrew people as did his son Solomon---Solomon seeds are spread all around the world word---yet Solomon is not a direct descendant of the Hebrew line in the order of godly men…not to say that god was not in Solomon but to say that Solomon adhered to the beliefs of other gods.

They were literally at that point co-equal before the people, yet the father was greater than the son in the throne-room. --green

Greens very next sentence---follows the same line of fallacy--what is the meaning of co-equal (?)--at any rate equal is equal --meaning no matter where u have
Father =/is son then the father and son would be equal in all things; throne-room not excluded---
(whatever the throne room or threshing floor is)

O the danger of the false profit..
Jkn8 deus n us
I argee that Trevor is teaching False erroneous doctrine of two separate gods!!
i like what you said Kl:Would god or any god pray to himself--no master or creator worshiped themselves lests they be guilty of homo become consumed by their own likeness…(as Lucifer)
those are deus
words i am just a vassal ---not just a vessel
@KL Council

2Timothy 4:1-5 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine. 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. But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.
pass the kush ben...
Proof of your ministry?
euro god let u walk right into that one...'booyah

pass the green ben

New International Version (©1984)
And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground--everything that has the breath of life in it--I give every green plant for food." And it was so.
New Living Translation (©2007)
And I have given every green plant as food for all the wild animals, the birds in the sky, and the small animals that scurry along the ground--everything that has life." And that is what happened.

English Standard Version (©2001)
And to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the heavens and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food.” And it was so.

New American Standard Bible (©1995)
and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food"; and it was so.

GOD'S WORD® Translation (©1995)
I have given all green plants as food to every land animal, every bird in the sky, and every animal that crawls on the earth-every living, breathing animal." And so it was.

King James Bible
And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

American King James Version
And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creeps on the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

American Standard Version
and to every beast of the earth, and to every bird of the heavens, and to everything that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for food: and it was so.

Bible in Basic English
And to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the air and every living thing moving on the face of the earth I have given every green plant for food: and it was so.

Douay-Rheims Bible
And to all the beasts of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to all that move upon the earth, and wherein there is life, that they may have to feed upon. And it was so done.

Darby Bible Translation
and to every animal of the earth, and to every fowl of the heavens, and to everything that creepeth on the earth, in which is a living soul, every green herb for food. And it was so.

English Revised Version
and to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

Webster's Bible Translation
And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every animal that creepeth upon the earth, in which is life, I have given every green herb for food: and it was so.

World English Bible
To every animal of the earth, and to every bird of the sky, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food;" and it was so.

Young's Literal Translation
and to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the heavens, and to every creeping thing on the earth, in which is breath of life, every green herb is for food:' and it is so
(Latin: green crop, grass)
It is SOOOO funny that your doctrines all conflict with each other, and none of you can agree on what the Word says about GOD, but all can agree that I'm "preaching heresy". Della, have you ever done a study of the Council of Nicea, or was that just some Oneness doctrine commentary that you did? The Oneness doctrine teachers tell you that the Roman Emperor and the Pope commanded the Trinity to be taught, and yet thats not how it happened at all!

-Constantine was present, but silent most of the time! The few times that he even spoke had absolutely nothing to do with the Trinitarian doctrine. In fact, Emperor Constantine had little knowledge of the theological significance of the argument between Arius and Bishop Alexander. All Constantine wanted was for them to finally agree and unite.

-Several Bishops that attended the Council of Nicea weren't even from the Roman Empire, and therefore, couldn't have been under the authority or influence of the Emperor.

-If there was any Roman Catholic influence, then the Orthodox Churches would have mentioned such, for they have been apposed to each other for about a thousand years now.

-The Pope wasn't even there for the Council meetings, and his representatives, who had little authority, just expressed the Pope of Rome's opinion. Over all, when it was time to vote, the Roman Pope couldn't cast a vote at all. He did however back the vote of the Council 100% afterward.

I have seen you all blame the Trinitarian doctrine on the Council of Nicea, and on other things/people, and yet it is clearly evident that NONE of you have even read about it, just skimmed through some notes here and there. The Doctrine of the Trinity was around LONG before Nicea. Nicea just defined it clearly. The Arian, Unitarian, and Sabellius doctrines were the new ones to come. These heresies were argued against and embarrassed generation after generation. The Oneness doctrine is nothing more than an old heresy trying to make a 1916 comeback. Della, I have consulted with many Jews who believe in Christ, and they are more inclined to line up with the Trinity than your Oneness heresy because they know something that you and the Oneness doctrine people will never bother to learn: Hebrew. With their extensive studies, they see that the Trinity is a valid doctrine that lines up with the Tanakh completely.
Church History in Plain Language by Professor Bruce R. Shelley
Trevor I never said This! You Said: Della, have you ever done a study of the Council of Nicea, or was that just some Oneness doctrine commentary that you did? The Oneness doctrine teachers tell you that the Roman Emperor and the Pope commanded the Trinity to be taught, and yet thats not how it happened at all!

To answer your question I did all this research on my own! My Church doesn't say that at all!You are the one who's seriously misinformed! Trevor all you have to do is Google search trinity ,Matthew 28:19 and there's a whole wealth of information about it!

Don't just take my word for it. Look it up for yourself!
I have provided the references with the page numbers.

Encyclopedia International, 1975 Edition, Vol.18, p.226 - The doctrine of the "Trinity" did not form part of the apostles' preaching, as this is reported in the New Testament.

New Catholic Encyclopedia, 1967 Edition, Vol.13, p.1021 - The first use of the Latin word "trinitas" (trinity) with reference to God, is found in Tertullian's writings (about 213 A.D.) He was the first to use the term "persons" (plural) in a Trinitarian context.

Encyclopedia Americana, 1957 Edition, Vol.27, p.69 - The word "Trinity" is not in Scripture. The term "persons" (plural) is not applied in Scripture to the Trinity.

World Book Encyclopedia, 1975 Edition, Vol. T, p.363 - Belief in Father, Son and Holy Ghost was first defined by the earliest general council of churches. This was the First Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D.

New International Encyclopedia, Vol.22, p.476 - The Catholic faith is this: We worship one God in Trinity, but there is one Person of the Father, another of the Son and another of the Holy Ghost. The Glory equal - the Majesty co-eternal. The doctrine is not found in its fully developed form in the Scriptures. Modern theology does not seek to find it in the Old Testament. At the time of the Reformation the Protestant Church took aver the doctrine of the Trinity without serious examination.

Life Magazine, October 30, 1950, Vol.29, No.18, p.51 - The Catholics made this statement concerning their doctrine of the Trinity, to defend the dogma of the assumption of Mary, in an article written by Graham Greene: "Our opponents sometimes claim that no belief should be held dogmatically which is not explicitly stated in Scripture... But the PROTESTANT CHURCHES have themselves accepted such dogmas as THE TRINITY, for which there is NO SUCH PRECISE AUTHORITY in the Gospels"

Many use the human reasoning and logic that the non-Biblical words "trinity", "triune" or "persons" (pertaining to God and/or the Godhead) should be accepted just as the words "rapture" and "Bible" are .... or even the word "sandwich" (for that matter). And, even though "sandwich" is not a Biblical word, I know they're real 'cause I ate one yesterday. So, my point ... or my question ... is, what Biblical words could be used in the place of the words "trinity", "triune" OR "persons" pertaining to God and/or the Godhead? I wouldn't have any trouble at all finding Biblical words to use in the place of "sandwich", "rapture" and "Bible". They are: "bread" and "meat", "caught up" "Word of God" and "book".

Now, if those who embrace the man-made theory of the Trinity can find any words that will do for "truine", "persons" or "trinity" what the words "bread" and "meat", "caught up" "Word of God" and "book" will do for "sandwich", "rapture" and "Bible", I would love to see them. Unless or until they can, I suggest that they stop adding to or taking from (depending on how you look at it) the Word of God by embracing, as dogmatically held doctrine, a theory which is NOT specifically mentioned in the Bible ... and without any Biblical words which could serve as a substitute to describe a "tag-team of wrestlers". And, while the Bible does NOT authorize a belief in three "persons" who jointly form One God, it does accurately describe God as the Father in Creation, the Son in Redemption and the Holy Spirit living in the hearts of believers throughout the New Testament Church Age. There is more Scriptural to support three "forms" of God ... three "manifestations" of God ... three "titles" of God ... three "offices/positions" which God holds or ... three "roles" in which God functions ... than there is THREE PERSONS of God. That is strictly a flawed theory!

If it’s a matter of semantics, "one God in three persons" is an "add on" that people would be wise to just leave off.

My Dad can be very accurately be described as a father, son and husband ... or a teacher, student and administrator. While He functions in more than one capacity and can occupy more than one office, and wear a number of different hats, He is still just ONE person. As a matter of fact, He be in the same room with, and in the presence of, my mother, His wife and daughters, and He can speak, act and function as a father, son and a husband without anybody getting confused as to how many persons He is or who is talking.

English was my worst subject in school, but I do remember a few things. For illustration purposes only, it is not proper to link the singular pronoun "He", which refers to one "person", to verbs like: "see", "hear" and "warn" ... which would look like this ... "He see", "He hear" and "He warn". When using the singular pronoun "He", it is necessary to use the verbs "sees", "hears" and "warns" ... "He SEES", "He HEARS" and "He WARNS". In order to use the verbs "see", "hear" and "warn", you must use a noun or pronoun which is "plural" and identifies "more" than one person like, "People" ... "People see", "People hear" and "People warn". Yet, intelligent people who know this rule, but who have been indoctrinated to believe that there are three "persons" of God, ignore this rule when it comes to the word "GOD" (the Hebrew word Elohim).

**IF** the word "GOD" (Elohim) identifies more than one "person", as the trinitarians insist, the Bible should read like this, "God SEE", "God HEAR" and "God WARN" ... AND IT DOESN'T! The word "GOD" is never linked to a verb like that. Instead, the word "GOD" is ALWAYS linked to verbs just as the word "He" (a singular person) is ... like this, "God SEES", "God HEARS" and "God WARNS". Again, I use these particular words for illustration purposes only, but I hope I have made my point ... and that it's CLEAR.

Men started "reading" things into the Scriptures a couple centuries or so AFTER Jesus ascended back up into Heaven, and after the "foot print followers" of our Lord had passed on. As a result, there has evolved all sorts of religious beliefs and denominations. However, in order to get people to stop and think about a few things, I use the Clark Kent/Superman analogy quite a bit. Jesus said and did some of the things He said and did to set an example for those who witnessed it to follow, as well as for those of us who would read about it 2,000 years later. At any rate, the reason I use Clark Kent/Superman is because people are familiar with the scenario. And, although Clark Kent/Superman is a fictitious character, I contend that the Incarnate Christ was, indeed, the REAL Superman. And, as a result, Jesus often spoke of the Father as if the Father where someone other than Himself who was way off in another galaxy or solar system. As a former trinitarian, myself, I understand why those who have been indoctrinated to believe there's two or three of 'em up there believe such, as well as those who interpret ... and try to understand ... the Bible "literally". However, spiritual things are NOT understood with human reasoning and logic. And, Jesus was unlike any one else who has ever walked upon planet Earth. While He possessed the Glory and Power of Deity, He went about as a lowly servant. He had a "human" nature as a result of actually being born of a woman. And, He had a "Divine" nature as a result of Him being God manifested in the flesh. Also, Jesus served as the example ... or the template (so to speak) ... for all Christians to pattern themselves after. And, as a result, He said and did many things for our benefit ... AND to set an example for us to follow. By the way, I am NOT saying Jesus was deceitful, nor that He lied ... far from it. It's just that He could (and did) speak, act and function as any "ordinary" man, at times. And, He also could (and did) speak, act and function as Almighty God, at other times, while here on Earth. Those who have ears to hear, hears what the Spirit saith, and aren't trying to fuel a flawed, man-made, pre-conceived and indoctrinated agenda, will, I believe, come to the understanding as to who Jesus "really" is **IF** they truly hunger and thirst for righteousness. Then, it will be up to them what they do from that point. They can continue on in their traditions and doctrines of men OR they can come out from among them and be ye separate.

Since Isaiah was a MAJOR Messianic Prophet in the Old Testament, my challenge for every "natural" Jew and every professing Christian who believes the man-made theory of the Holy Trinity OR those who believe Jesus was Michael the Archangel or some other inferior subordinate is very simple. I challenge all "natural Jews", all professing Christians who believes the man-made theory of the Holy Trinity, the entire Watchtower Society constituency, the Vatican, and the entire Roman Catholic Church constituency, as well as any and all members and/or associates, past and present, of the various and sundry Protestant denominations, any and all independent Bible students and scholars including the entire constituency of the anything connected to or remotely resembling the Mormon Church ... or anyone else (**IF** I missed anybody) ... to read 11 Chapters in the Book of Isaiah (Chapters 41, 43, 44, 47, 48, 49, 53, 54, 59, 60, and 63) and then provide me with the Scripture(s) they believe supports the belief that the coming (prophesied and promised) MESSIAH would be someone BESIDES Jehovah/God, Himself.

Those of us who embrace the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine understand something very important: The Incarnate Christ was the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last ... God manifest in the flesh. And, these are just a few of the documenting Scriptures I use ... Isaiah 9:6, Isaiah 44:6; Isaiah 48:12; Micah 1:2-3; John 1:1-14; John 10:30-33; John 14:6-11; Colossians 2:8-10; 1 Timothy 3:16; Rev. 2:8; Rev. 21:6; and Rev. 22:13.

Yes, the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity is a flawed man-made theory, and is NOT "sound doctrine" at all. Therefore, upon learning this, a person should ask themselves this question, "Do I want Truth in its entirety, or do I want man's flawed theories and traditions?" Whatever you decide, it is entirely up to you. In the final analysis of things, you and I will be justified or condemned not by just our faith and beliefs alone, but also by the words we speak AND our deeds. Silence can be interpreted as consent. There are sins of omissions and sins of commission. And, there will be lots of "good" people in hell. Being "good" is NOT good enough. If you doubt or dispute that, read Acts Chapter 10. Cornelius was a good man but he still needed salvation.

A very closely related subject to this is the words that are invoked at baptismal services. The name that was alluded to in Matthew 28:19 is the precious name of JESUS. Quoting Matthew 28:19 does NOT fulfill the Great Commission. Those who knew how it was to be done, invoked the precious name of Jesus in Acts 2:37-41; Acts 8:14-17; Acts 10:44-48; and Acts 19:1-6. Jesus was NOT telling His disciples what to "say" in Matthew 28:19, He was telling them what to "do". Besides, nobody was baptized in Matthew 28:19. And, nobody in the entire Bible was baptized in the "titles" of Father, Son and Holy Ghost. We are admonished in Colossians 3:17 to do whatever we do in "word AND deed", to do it all of it in the "NAME of Jesus". And, besides the baptism examples, here are a couple other places (direct "quotes") where the "name of Jesus" was invoked in word and deed instead of the "titles" of Father, Son and Holy Ghost ....

Acts 3:6 Then Peter said, Silver and gold have I none; but such as I have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk.

Acts 16:18 And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.

History also documents baptism in the name of Jesus ...

Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics (1951). II, 384, 389: "The formula used was "in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ" or some synonymous phrase; there is no evidence for the use of the triune name… The earliest form, represented in the Acts, was simple immersion… in water, the use of the name of the Lord, and the laying on of hands. To these were added, at various times and places which cannot be safely identified, (a) the trine name (Justin)…"

Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible (1962), I 351: " evidence .. suggests that baptism in early Christianity was administered, not in the threefold name, but 'in the name of Jesus Christ' or 'in the name of the Lord Jesus.'"

Otto Heick, A History of Christian Thought (1965), I, 53: "At first baptism was administered in the name of Jesus, but gradually in the name of the Triune God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Hasting's Dictionary of the Bible (1898). I, 241: "[One explanation is that] the original form of words was "into the name of Jesus Christ" or 'the Lord Jesus,' Baptism into the name of the Trinity was a later development."

Williston Walker, A History of the Christian Church (1947), page 58: "The trinitarian baptismal formula,,, was displacing the older baptism in the name of Christ."

The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge (1957), I, 435: "The New Testament knows only baptism in the name of Jesus… which still occurs even in the second and third centuries."

Canney's Encyclopedia of Religions (1970), page 53: "Persons were baptized at first 'in the name of Jesus Christ' … or 'in the name of the Lord Jesus'… Afterwards, with the development of the doctrine of the Trinity, they were baptized 'in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.'"

Encyclopedia Biblica (1899), I, 473: "It is natural to conclude that baptism was administered in the earliest times 'in the name of Jesus Christ,' or in that 'of the Lord Jesus.' This view is confirmed by the fact that the earliest forms of the baptismal confession appear to have been single-not triple, as was the later creed."

Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed. (1920), II 365: "The trinitarian formula and trine immersion were not uniformly used from the beginning… Bapti[sm] into the name of the Lord [was] the normal formula of the New Testament. In the 3rd century baptism in the name of Christ was still so widespread that Pope Stephen, in opposition to Cyprian of Carthage, declared it to be valid."

My advice to you is, if you aren't affiliated with one now, that you find yourself a church which embraces, teaches and preaches the Apostles' One God Monotheistic Doctrine and baptizes in the precious name of Jesus ... the name that was alluded to in Matthew 28:19 ... and go there, and see (and feel) the difference for yourself!

Any United Pentecostal Church or Apostolic Pentecostal church in your area!

John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

I really hope you will consider what you've read in these articles and Pray. When we meet Jesus one day face to face, we will have to answer to Him what we believe. And I don't want it to be said about me that I didn't follow His Apostles Teachings to be saved but rather traditions of men! Jesus can open the Book and judge us out of it!
By then it will be too late. I am going to end with these verses for you to consider a well.

Colossians 2:7-9 (King James Version)

7Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.

8Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

9For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
In Who? Christ! I don't see three,but One God!

The Lord Bless you! Love in Christ, Della Morton
i can tell their are no scribe in your church green u cant write on copy--
ask euro god to give u lang of the every day brotha on the ground...
my negus..


© 2023   Created by Raliegh Jones Jr..   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service