Steve Winter the RCC is seperate from the Fundamentalist church!
Bible John
RCC. For the last time there is division between the RCC and the fundamentalist
church.
We do not associate with the RCC, nor anyone who holds to their theology.
Article from the New Dictionary of Theology (not avaialble on the Internet).
Fundamentalism
Fundamentalism developed its distinctive characteristics primarily in North
America, and has had its widest influence in the USA whererevivalist
evangelicalism has been the dominant religious heritage.Although it has many
missionary exports and also many parallels in anti-modernist Protestant
movements in other countries, we can bestunderstand its distinguishing features
by looking at the prototypical andwidely influential American developments.
The word ‘fundamentalism’ originated in the USA in 1920 as thedesignation
that editor Curtis Lee Laws (1868-1946) used for his anti-modernist party
in the Northern Baptist Convention. The term was soonused to describe a broad
coalition of evangelical Protestants who foughtmilitantly against modernist
(i.e. liberal) theology and against somefeatures of secularization of modern
culture. This remains the mostaccurate way to use the word. Essential to being
a fundamentalist is thatone be 1. an evangelical Protestant; 2. an
anti-modernist, meaning that onesubscribes to the fundamentals of traditional
supernaturalistic biblicalChristianity; and 3. militant in this anti- modernism
or in opposition tocertain aspects of secularization. A fundamentalist, then,
is a militantlyanti-modernist evangelical. The picture is complicated by a
number of other broader and narrowerusages. Sometimes the word is used
generically to designate any religiousanti-modernist, hence ‘Islamic
fundamentalists’. Or opponents ofProtestant fundamentalism may use the term
loosely to describe almostany of the features, especially the more extravagant
or anti-intellectualones, of evangelical revivalism, such as those especially
common in theAmerican South. Such usage invites contusion of fundamentalism
withrevivalism generally and with several closely related movements
withrevivalist roots. For instance, the holiness movement, which arose in
thesecond half of the 19th century, was distinguished especially by emphasison
experiences of outpourings of the Holy Spirit leading to lives ofsinless
perfection. Pentecostalism, arising in the early 20th century, wasmarked by
stress on receiving spectacular spiritual powers.Fundamentalist anti-modernist
militancy was sometimes also adopted bythese groups, so that they often become
fundamentalistic. Nonetheless,these movements tended to remain distinct and
ecclesiastically separate.All three, however, were related by common origins
to the broader andstill more diverse heritage of 19th-century American
revivalism and manyof their traits commonly called ‘fundamentalist’ are more
accuratelycalled ‘revivalist’. Still another broad use of ‘fundamentalism’
is that common in Britishparlance. There, ‘fundamentalism’ often refers to
any evangelicalconservatism that has a high view of the Bible and its
fundamental claims.For instance, J. I. Packer defended fundamentalism in this
sense in his ‘Fundamentalism’ and the Word of God (London, 1958), and James
Barrin Fundamentalism (London, 1977) conflates most of the branches
ofconservative evangelicalism in his attack on the movement. In America, on
the other hand, ‘fundamentalism’, when used carefully,has come to refer to
the more narrow phenomenon of the main groups ofmilitantly anti-modernist
white evangelicals. (American black evangelicalsare often revivalist in style,
fundamental in doctrine, and anti-modern inethics; but they do not typically
call themselves ‘fundamentalists’.) The characteristics of the distinctively
‘fundamentalist’ movement can beseen best from its history. As Ernest R.
Sandeen has shown in hisimportant study, The Roots of Fundamentalism: British
and AmericanMillenarianism, 1800-1930 (Chicago, 1970), one major source
offundamentalism was the premillennial prophecy movement originating fromthe
work of J. N. Darby and others. Although in England this movementproduced
primarily the Plymouth Brethren who left the traditionalchurches, in the United
States its main expressions in the late 19thcentury were within major northern
denominations, such as thePresbyterian and the Baptist. Dispensationalism
was the distinctive feature of this movement and became almost canonized in
the notes of C.I. Scofield's famous Reference Bible (New York, 1909). Many
Americandispensationalists also adopted the moderate holiness teachings
fosteredby England's Keswick Convention. Dispensationalism, which predicted
the ruin of the church in this epoch,encouraged militancy against the rise
of aggressive theological modernismin the early 20th century. In the USA,
especially, where modernism wasstrong, dispensationalists found many allies
who wished to defend thefundamentals of the faith against modernism. Among
the northernPresbyterians, conservatism was strong, bolstered by the
intellectualleadership at Princeton Theological Seminary (see Princeton
Theology).Conservative Presbyterians first developed the strategy of
defendinglists of fundamental doctrines. Dispensationalists also organized
thepublication, from 1909 to 1915, of The Fundamentals, defendingtraditional
doctrines. Many fundamentalist groups had lists of ‘fundamental’ doctrines,
though no one list was ever standard. Thecommonest points were the inerrancy
of Scripture (see Infallibility andInerrancy), the deity of Christ, his virgin
birth, the substitutionaryatonement, Christ's resurrection, and his second
coming. During the 1920s fundamentalists fought hard against modernist gains
inthe major northern Presbyterian and Baptist denominations.
Smallerfundamentalist controversies occurred in other denominations,
andparallel splits between conservatives and liberals took place in a numberof
churches in the United States and Canada. Meanwhile, fundamentaliststook on
a cultural as well as an ecclesiastical dimension as they attackedaspects
of moral erosion after World War I. The campaign led by WilliamJennings Bryan
(1860-1925) to keep evolution from being taught in American public schools
was the chief expression of such concern. Thespread of evolutionary teaching
was seen as undermining the authority ofthe Bible in American life and as
fostering moral relativism. Marxism,Romanism, alcohol, tobacco, dancing,
card-playing and theatreattendance were other major targets for fundamentalist
attacks. Amidthese conflicts, fundamentalism grew as a coalition of
anti-modernistProtestants from many traditions, throughout the USA, north
and south, other English-speaking countries, and their missionary outposts.
At thecentre of the coalition were American dispensationalists,
whosefundamentalism was least tempered by other traditions. By the 1930s
fundamentalism was beginning to take a distinctiveecclesiastical expression.
Increasingly the most militant fundamentalistsfelt that they should separate
from groups which contained modernists,and form independent congregations
or denominations. Most such fundamentalists became Baptist and were
dispensationalist. Separatismwas becoming a test of true faith. What had been
the broader militant anti-modernist coalition of the 1920sthus began to split
by the 1940s. One major group in America softened itsmilitancy and tried to
retain contact with mainline denominations. Led byspokespersons such as Harold
John Ockenga (b. 1905), Carl F. H. Henry,and Edward J. Carnell, they at first
called themselves ‘neo-evangelicals’and by the later 1950s simply
‘evangelicals’. Their associations with BillyGraham (b. 1918) signalled the
growth of this inclusivist wing of‘evangelical’ ex-fundamentalists. Meanwhile,
militant separatists, such asJohn R. Rice (1895-1980), Bob Jones (1883-1968),
and Carl McIntire (b.1906) claimed they were the only true fundamentalists.
After 1960‘fundamentalism’ in America could be used to distinguish this
separatist sub-group from the broader ‘evangelicalism’, which included
ex-fundamentalists and Bible-believing Christians from many traditions.
Separatist fundamentalism continued to grow, although it probably
neverconstituted more than 10% of America's estimated forty to fifty
million‘evangelicals’ in the 1970s and 1980s. By the 1980s, especially with
therise of Baptist fundamentalist Jerry Falwell's (b. 1933) Moral Majority,the
political concerns of fundamentalists to preserve traditionalistChristian
mores in American public life had become prominent again, asthey had been
in the 1920s. Fundamentalist politics now also includedstrong support for
the state of Israel, important to dispensationalprophetic interpretation.
Bibliography G. W. Dollar, A History of Fundamentalism in America
(Greenville, SC,1973); G. M. Marsden, Fundamentalism and American Culture:
theShaping of Twentieth-Century Evangelicalism, 1870- 1925 (New York,1980);
C. A. Russell, Voices of American Fundamentalism: SevenBiographical Studies
(Philadelphia, 1976). G.M.M. G
--
Posted with a Jornada 720 Handheld PC running Ink Spot CE
Usenet wherever you are - http://www.dejavusoftware.com/
[Rev 3:20] Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear
my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him,
and he with me.
http://johnw.freeshell.org/bible
Bill
It is nothing more than an 'opinion' unsupported by any objective verifiable
evidence.
"Bible John" <johnw...@yahoo.comPDA> wrote in message
news:121ni22...@corp.supernews.com...
Pastor Steve Winter
>You keep on stereotyping all who believe in the trinity to be a part of the
>RCC. For the last time there is division between the RCC and the fundamentalist
>church.
What a deceitful false-christian scum we find in the devil's
servant John Wolf!
The nutty false-christian scum John Wolf IS a trinity cultist
himself!
The blatant hypocrisy of false-christian scum like John Wolf says
more about them than I ever could. How can these scum like John
Wolf make such a blatant mockery of the Bible and still expect to
be taken seriously.
So far the deceiving, polytheistic false-christian dirt John Wolf
always avoids answering when he is asked what the difference is
between the trinity that he worships and the trinity that the
pope worships. That is because, in spite of his ravings John
Wolf worships the EXACT same "Romanist" god squad.
In what way is John Wolf's Roman idol god squad different from
the popes three headed Roman idol god squad?
In what way is John Wolf's trinity cult baptism different than
the pope's trinity cult baptism?
John Wolf can't answer these questions without making major
admissions, eh?
Pastor Winter
--
Apostolic Oneness Pentecostal /*/ PreRapture Ministry
http://www.apostolic.biz for Bible studies (text and audio)
Have you obeyed Acts 2:38 as Paul taught in Acts 19:4-6?
Kelly A. Siebecke
> What a deceitful false-christian scum we find in the devil's
> servant John Wolf!
I'm probably beating a dead-horse (because I suspect I am not the first
person here to question you on this particular subject) but WHY as a
Pastor would you even CONSIDER calling anyone "scum" or any other
derogatory name for that matter?
If you are a follower of Jesus, a Christian, you are called to follow
the personal example of Jesus Christ. I don't recall Jesus ever
instructing His disciples to call anyone names. To the contrary, He
told them to "turn the other cheek" and "love your neighbor".
Furthermore, Jesus tells us to not be concerned with the sin of our
brothers and sisters because we are just as sin guilty as they are sin
guilty.
Why are you so aggressive toward John Wolf? I understand that you and
he come from different theological camps. But here's the deal: you can
disagree with his theology, you can hate the things he says and does,
you can just plain dislike him but you are still called to love him if
you are indeed a saved, sancitifed believer in Jesus.
If your common ground is the same Jesus Christ of the Bible then you
should hold on to that commonality and not waste your time with these
petty name-calling arguments that bring absolutely no glory to God
whatsoever.
Kelly A. Siebecke
> What a deceitful false-christian scum we find in the devil's
> servant John Wolf!
CaptainCatechism
Bible John wrote:
> You keep on stereotyping all who believe in the trinity to be a part of the
> RCC. For the last time there is division between the RCC and the fundamentalist
> church.
>
> We do not associate with the RCC, nor anyone who holds to their theology.
How does your view of the Trinity differ from the Roman Catholic
Church's view?
Thanks,
CC
cub brave
Goodbye, scumbag,
cub brave
Rod
> You keep on stereotyping all who believe in the trinity to be a part of the
> RCC. For the last time there is division between the RCC and the fundamentalist
> church.
>
> We do not associate with the RCC, nor anyone who holds to their theology.
You can't hold to your own theology and not be associated with
Catholisism. They claim Christ as Lord and Saviour the same as you
do, and many other Christ based faiths.
I can see that you don't realise this, but you are dead wrong, and
you rail against Steve without a just cause ! At least, if you MUST
do this, do it justly....even unjust men can write entire essays on
theology....
Rod
lyndsey...@yahoo.co.uk
Bible John wrote:
> You keep on stereotyping all who believe in the trinity to be a part of the
> RCC. For the last time there is division between the RCC and the fundamentalist
> church.
>
> We do not associate with the RCC, nor anyone who holds to their theology.
That's sad because Jesus associated with everyone from his family to
the tax collectors. You sound rather like those who questioned Jesus
about such associations.
>
> Article from the New Dictionary of Theology (not avaialble on the Internet).
Surprise, surprise!
>
> Fundamentalism
>
> Fundamentalism developed its distinctive characteristics primarily in North
> America,
Not from the Bible then?
and has had its widest influence in the USA whererevivalist
> evangelicalism has been the dominant religious heritage.Although it has many
> missionary exports and also many parallels in anti-modernist Protestant
> movements in other countries, we can bestunderstand its distinguishing features
> by looking at the prototypical andwidely influential American developments.
> The word 'fundamentalism' originated in the USA in 1920 as thedesignation
> that editor Curtis Lee Laws (1868-1946) used for his anti-modernist party
> in the Northern Baptist Convention.
But modern days call for modern measures!
The term was soonused to describe a broad
> coalition of evangelical Protestants who foughtmilitantly against modernist
> (i.e. liberal) theology and against somefeatures of secularization of modern
> culture. This remains the mostaccurate way to use the word.
According to whom exactly ?
Once agein your post is of a ridiculous length! A pity really - I
couldn't be bothered to read it all.
lyndsey...@yahoo.co.uk
Bill wrote:
> The 'Trinity of Gods' is purely and 'creation' of the RCC.
If you are going to make a statement, at least get your fact right. The
Trinity is a term used to label the 'GOD' in the Bible(note : that was
singular -God) ie One God - The Father, Son and Holy Spirit .
Also there are many churches besides the RCC that believe in the
Trinity - baptist(where I became a Christain), presbyterian(where I was
brought up), pentacostal, free, and so the list goes on!
lyndsey...@yahoo.co.uk
Kelly A. Siebecke wrote:
> Pastor Steve Winter wrote:
> > What a deceitful false-christian scum we find in the devil's
> > servant John Wolf!
He is not a real pastor - he was but they kicked him out. I have no
idea why ;-)
>
> I'm probably beating a dead-horse (because I suspect I am not the first
> person here to question you on this particular subject) but WHY as a
> Pastor would you even CONSIDER calling anyone "scum" or any other
> derogatory name for that matter?
Dead horses make less noise than him. I suspect that he is more of a
hyena type creature! No You are not the first to question this odd
creatures motives.
>
> If you are a follower of Jesus, a Christian, you are called to follow
> the personal example of Jesus Christ. I don't recall Jesus ever
> instructing His disciples to call anyone names. To the contrary, He
> told them to "turn the other cheek" and "love your neighbor".
> Furthermore, Jesus tells us to not be concerned with the sin of our
> brothers and sisters because we are just as sin guilty as they are sin
> guilty.
Indeed he is just as guilty as all the other people her but he seems
incapable of responding with any form of civility(is there such a
word?)
>
> Why are you so aggressive toward John Wolf?
He is aggressive to everyone who disagrees with him. He even has a
website naming and shaming all who disagree with him. you have blotted
your copy book and you will now have your name entered on the list of
impsmail (the name of his site). I wouldn't worry about it though cos
the FBI ignore his incessant complaints about harrassment from other
posters.
I understand that you and
> he come from different theological camps. But here's the deal: you can
> disagree with his theology, you can hate the things he says and does,
> you can just plain dislike him but you are still called to love him if
> you are indeed a saved, sancitifed believer in Jesus.
>
> If your common ground is the same Jesus Christ of the Bible then you
> should hold on to that commonality and not waste your time with these
> petty name-calling arguments that bring absolutely no glory to God
> whatsoever.
Oh and , by the way, if you are female he will not reply to you either.
Probably a blessing ;-)
CaptainCatechism
So what you are saying is "I don't know the difference between my
belief in the Holy Trinity and the RCC belief." Thanks.
CC
Free Lunch
lyndsey...@yahoo.co.uk wrote in
<1142723981.6...@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>:
>
>Bible John wrote:
>> You keep on stereotyping all who believe in the trinity to be a part of the
>> RCC. For the last time there is division between the RCC and the fundamentalist
>> church.
>>
>> We do not associate with the RCC, nor anyone who holds to their theology.
>
>That's sad because Jesus associated with everyone from his family to
>the tax collectors. You sound rather like those who questioned Jesus
>about such associations.
So many modern "Christians" seem unaware that they are acting just like
the Pharisees as they were portrayed in the Gospels.
Pastor Steve Winter
wrote:
>I'm probably beating a dead-horse (because I suspect I am not the first
>person here to question you on this particular subject) but WHY as a
>Pastor would you even CONSIDER calling anyone "scum" or any other
>derogatory name for that matter?
>
>If you are a follower of Jesus, a Christian, you are called to follow
>the personal example of Jesus Christ.
Maybe you don't understand that false-christians will spend an
eternity in a lake of fire cursing filth like John Wolf who led
them there. This is not a game; some very nice people are being
deceived into a very real lake of fire by filth like John Wolf.
I also believe that some of you folks have some serious
misconceptions about the Lord of the Bible, who was the perfect
example for the Christian..
I Peter 2:21 For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ
also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should
follow his steps:
I Peter 2:22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his
mouth:
I Peter 2:23 Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he
suffered, he threatened not; but committed [himself] to him that
judgeth righteously:
But let us also look at a particular situation that shows us the
Lord exhibiting unusual behaviour; and that is, when he
encountered false preachers, false religionists, deceivers like
the devilish deceiver John Wolf.
Matthew 23:33 [Ye] serpents, [ye] generation of vipers, how can
ye escape the damnation of hell?
Matthew 23:27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!
for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear
beautiful outward, but are within full of dead [men's] bones, and
of all uncleanness.
Looking carefully at verse 27. In our modern language "full of
dead men's bones and all uncleanliness" would roughly translate
as the modern term "scum". That tells me that if the Lord was
walking our streets today and encountered a denominal trinitarian
deceiver like the filthy and devilish John Wolf, that He would
call him/her/it "scum", "snake", "hypocrite".
"Love incarnate" didn't coddle false preachers. The Apostle Paul
instructs us should we encounter anyone like John Wolf preaching
other than the original Acts 2:38 message:
Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any
other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you,
let him be accursed.
(Check out Acts 19, if you have any doubts that Paul adhered to
the Acts 2:38 re-birth of WATER and SPIRIT.)
Would Jesus Christ call you and/or your preacher "scum" ? If
he's not preaching the Acts 2:38 Apostolic message, He sure
would!
I hope this helps.
Pastor sTeve Winter
Kelly A. Siebecke
> Maybe you don't understand that false-christians will spend an
> eternity in a lake of fire cursing filth like John Wolf who led
> them there. This is not a game; some very nice people are being
> deceived into a very real lake of fire by filth like John Wolf.
If John Wolf has accepted Christ then he will no more spend eternity
in the Lake of Fire than anyone else who believes in Jesus as Savior.
Accepting Christ is a one-time deal and the act cannot be reversed.
Once a name is written in the Lamb's Book of Life it is there forever.
The only disqualifying factor would be denouncing God's sovreignty and
completely turning your back on Him. However - that determination is
reserved for the final judgement. It is not for us to decide; only
God.
> I also believe that some of you folks have some serious
> misconceptions about the Lord of the Bible, who was the perfect
> example for the Christian..
> I Peter 2:21 For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ
> also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should
> follow his steps:
> I Peter 2:22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his
> mouth:
> I Peter 2:23 Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he
> suffered, he threatened not; but committed [himself] to him that
> judgeth righteously:
None of these verses tells us it's okay to judge others, condemn them
to eternal damnation, and call them names.
> But let us also look at a particular situation that shows us the
> Lord exhibiting unusual behaviour; and that is, when he
> encountered false preachers, false religionists, deceivers like
> the devilish deceiver John Wolf.
>
> Matthew 23:33 [Ye] serpents, [ye] generation of vipers, how can
> ye escape the damnation of hell?
>
> Matthew 23:27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!
> for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear
> beautiful outward, but are within full of dead [men's] bones, and
> of all uncleanness.
>
> Looking carefully at verse 27. In our modern language "full of
> dead men's bones and all uncleanliness" would roughly translate
> as the modern term "scum". That tells me that if the Lord was
> walking our streets today and encountered a denominal trinitarian
> deceiver like the filthy and devilish John Wolf, that He would
> call him/her/it "scum", "snake", "hypocrite".
The entire 23rd chapter of Matthew is a demonstration of Jesus' anger
at the Pharisees' hypocrisy. The fact that on the outside they
appeared righteous and God-fearing while on the inside they were as
dead as bones locked in a tomb. REMEMBER - Jesus was a Jew speaking to
the Jewish leaders. In Jewish Law, to touch a dead body is to touch
uncleanliness and to touch uncleanliness is forbidden by God in the
Torah. Nowhere does this kind of uncleanliness translate to "scum"
(which is usually a type of sediment that floats to the top of liquid
after a chemical process occurs). To take the a verse and translate it
into something it was not meant to say is a perversion of the Word of
God. Nonetheless, you have not shown me how Jesus would refer to
anyone, even John Wolf as "scum".
> "Love incarnate" didn't coddle false preachers. The Apostle Paul
> instructs us should we encounter anyone like John Wolf preaching
> other than the original Acts 2:38 message:
Sorry, but Jesus told us to preach the Gospel (good news) and to
baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Because Acts
wasn't written until AFTER Jesus' death what do you think takes
precedence: doing what Jesus (who is God after all) said or doing what
Paul said?
> Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any
> other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you,
> let him be accursed.
Good example of what I said above. "preach [the] GOSPEL..."
> Would Jesus Christ call you and/or your preacher "scum" ? If
> he's not preaching the Acts 2:38 Apostolic message, He sure
> would!
As a believer in Jesus Christ I know that He would call me "beloved
child".
CaptainCatechism
Kelly A. Siebecke wrote:
> Pastor Steve Winter wrote:
> > Maybe you don't understand that false-christians will spend an
> > eternity in a lake of fire cursing filth like John Wolf who led
> > them there. This is not a game; some very nice people are being
> > deceived into a very real lake of fire by filth like John Wolf.
>
> If John Wolf has accepted Christ then he will no more spend eternity
> in the Lake of Fire than anyone else who believes in Jesus as Savior.
> Accepting Christ is a one-time deal and the act cannot be reversed.
What do you mean by "accept Christ"?
> Once a name is written in the Lamb's Book of Life it is there forever.
> The only disqualifying factor would be denouncing God's sovreignty and
> completely turning your back on Him. However - that determination is
> reserved for the final judgement. It is not for us to decide; only
> God.
True. Well said.
CC
Pastor Steve Winter
wrote:
>If John Wolf has accepted Christ then he will no more spend eternity
>in the Lake of Fire than anyone else who believes in Jesus as Savior.
You have been lied to by a filthy false preacher!
There are many today who claim to have "accepted Christ as their
personal savior" and they claim to be headed to a heaven that is
taught by the Bible. But, the Bible teaches that those who try to
enter heaven any other way than the Bible way, will be lost.
John 10:1 {Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not
by the door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way,
the same is a thief and a robber.}
By the way, the Bible makes NO MENTION WHATSOEVER of "accepting
Christ as your personal saviour by a mental/verbal affirmation
that He exists"; that is a MAN MADE FALSE DOCTRINE. People are
being taught everything from "Just flash your headlights twice"
(in the drive in "church") to "walk the Roman road and make a
public profession" or "Shake the preachers hand" as though these
activities could even save a gnat! The plan of salvation taught
by Jesus' disciples is:
Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized
every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of
sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Acts 2:39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and
to all that are afar off, [even] as many as the Lord our God
shall call.
Note the 39th verse "as many as the Lord our God shall call" Now,
if your preacher is teaching anything other than the apostles
doctrine (Acts 2:38), then YOUR BIBLE says to "let him be
accursed"
Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any
other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you,
let him be accursed.
The gospel that they had received was clearly Acts 2:38. So, do
you really think that a man like the filthy deceiver John Wolf
that God calls accursed can really be trusted?
Matthew 15:14 {Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the
blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the
ditch.}
Luke 6:39 {And he spake a parable unto them, Can the blind lead
the blind? shall they not both fall into the ditch?}
The ditch is hell. If you're following a false preacher you will
BOTH end up in hell. How can a man, accursed of God, tell you how
to be saved. Do you really think that God will honor a LIE just
to save a bunch of people that chose tradition instead of the
word of God??
II Corinthians 11:14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is
transformed into an angel of light.
II Corinthians 11:15 Therefore [it is] no great thing if his
ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness;
whose end shall be according to their works.
Satan's ministers like John Wolf and other trinity filth CLAIM to
be ministers of righteousness... They are of the world, and the
worldly LOVE to hear them preach..
II Peter 2:17 These are wells without water, clouds that are
carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved
for ever.
II Peter 2:18 For when they speak great swelling [words] of
vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, [through
much] wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who
live in error.
Romans 16:18 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus
Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches
deceive the hearts of the simple.
If you obey HIS word, then, and only then, have you "accepted
Christ". The multitudes who claim to have accepted him, while
rejecting his word are merely deceived..OR WORSE:
II Thessalonians 2:10 And with all deceivableness of
unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not
the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
II Thessalonians 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them
strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
II Thessalonians 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed
not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
God WILL not only *let* truth haters like John Wolf believe a
lie, he will even send them STRONG DELUSION...Read 2 :12 again,
Who does God say will be damned??
Matthew 7:13 {Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide [is] the
gate, and broad [is] the way, that leadeth to destruction, and
many there be which go in thereat:}
Matthew 7:14 {Because strait [is] the gate, and narrow [is] the
way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.}
Matthew 7:15 {Beware of false prophets, which come to you in
sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.}
So, we see trinity denominations with their broad roads, and many
who claim to be saved. Yet they have abandoned Biblical
salvation..Is the Bible right?
Denominal preachers are going to their pulpits with a book under
their arm that teaches that they, and those that hear them, are
damned...
Pastor sTeve Winter http://www.jnahc.com/audio/sermons.html
Kelly A. Siebecke
> You have been lied to by a filthy false preacher!
I haven't been lied to by John Wolf. Bible John and I have never
discussed his salvation.
> There are many today who claim to have "accepted Christ as their
> personal savior" and they claim to be headed to a heaven that is
> taught by the Bible. > By the way, the Bible makes NO MENTION WHATSOEVER >of "accepting Christ as your personal saviour by a mental/verbal affirmation
> that He exists"; that is a MAN MADE FALSE DOCTRINE.
I never said a word about accepting Christ as your "personal savior".
Don't twist my words, please.
> Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized
> every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of
> sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
> Acts 2:39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and
> to all that are afar off, [even] as many as the Lord our God
> shall call.
Yep, that's what it says. What's your point?
> Note the 39th verse "as many as the Lord our God shall call" Now,
> if your preacher is teaching anything other than the apostles
> doctrine (Acts 2:38), then YOUR BIBLE says to "let him be
> accursed"
Oh, I see. so you are basing your entire understanding of salvation on
ONE verse in the Bible? What about the rest of the Bible?
> Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any
> other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you,
> let him be accursed.
>
> The gospel that they had received was clearly Acts 2:38.
Acts 2:38 isn't the Gospel; try Matthew, Mark, Luke, John. Those are
books of the Gospel.
> Matthew 15:14 {Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the
> blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the
> ditch.}
> Luke 6:39 {And he spake a parable unto them, Can the blind lead
> the blind? shall they not both fall into the ditch?}
Yes, Jesus said that. But I really think he was just talking about
ditches. You fall in, you get dirty. You get out and you wipe
yourself off.
> The ditch is hell. If you're following a false preacher you will
> BOTH end up in hell.
I am responsible for myself. When I accepted Christ's sacrifice for my
salvation I did it alone. When I stand before God in judgement I will
do it alone (as we all will). No matter what "preacher" I may listen
to I am still required to think for myself and rightly divide the Word
of Truth. I am responsible for my actions and my life - no one else.
> II Corinthians 11:14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is
> transformed into an angel of light.
> II Corinthians 11:15 Therefore [it is] no great thing if his
> ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness;
> whose end shall be according to their works.
> Satan's ministers like John Wolf and other trinity filth CLAIM to
> be ministers of righteousness... They are of the world, and the
> worldly LOVE to hear them preach..
I've never heard John Wolf preach. Does he preach?
> II Peter 2:17 These are wells without water, clouds that are
> carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved
> for ever.
> II Thessalonians 2:10 And with all deceivableness of
> unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not
> the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
> II Thessalonians 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them
> strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
> II Thessalonians 2:12 That they all might be damned who believed
> not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
Do you EVER quote verses from the Bible that have to do with God's
love? Why are you so seemingly obsessed with the dark and hell-laden
passages?
After reading some of your over 6,000 contributions to usenet groups on
the web and the public record regarding your litigious nature and need
to make complaints about others in court I have concluded that you,
Steve Winter of Durham, NC are likely a mentally ill man. You focus on
the negative, take on the stance of spiritual judge and jury and claim
to have the right answers that few others on the planet are privy to.
Interestingly enough, the angel Lucifer felt the same way - and look
what happened to him!
I pray the Shalom of Y'shua for you,
Rev. Kelly A. Siebecke
http://groups.google.com/group/ChristianAndGay
darth_s...@yahoo.com
darth_s...@yahoo.com
funny! Christ founded the Church.
Luther a man, founded the lutheran church. so which is really man made?