Can God die

[Michael Joseph]

"Rapture Doctrine is Trite Nonsense. If anyone here wants to pick up that argument - I say bring it on. Lets get it on and lets explore that argument before this assembly" Michael Joseph

You will get no argument from me.....

But I feel that just as there has been a time of forgetfulness there will be a time of remembering. RE-Activation of our DNA. Your Thought Joseph Michael would be most welcome. Frederick Burrell

Thank you Frederick Burrell. Please elaborate. Do you want to discuss vibrations/frequencies in regard to DNA or do you want to delve into the fallacy of Rapture Doctrine?

Granted this discussion has as its basis the Masoretic and the Septuagint Texts. Should you desire we can go into Quantum Mechanics and explore dimensions in relation to frequency. Yet, I think if you want to discuss Quantum Physics and God then we will need to start a new thread.

Thank you for engaging.

Shalom,
mj

[Axe]

Hey everybody,

MJ, I find your assertions stimulating, and I have no desire to "force my point of view" onto you or anyone else I do find it necessary to refute some of what you say. Not for the purpose of "arguing", but because I feel that those reading this in the future may be influenced, I believe incorrectly.

I'm surprised at how far you have to reach in order to make your case for the serpent seed doctrine. I like to keep it simple. Maybe that makes me simple minded, maybe not. I believe the truth is always simple.

It is the enemy of truth that must be complicated. First, I want to talk about "context". Specifically "proximity context". When interpreting the Holy Scriptures it's everything. It simply means that one has to consider the immediate proximity of language around whatever is in question.

This will always take precedence over any implied meanings taken from further away.

The word "tree" is used similarly throughout the chapter in question. The Hebrew as well. The tree of life: The tree of knowledge of good and evil.

You can't have it both ways. Either both were really trees, or both were really something else. And don't forget about all the other "trees" in the garden.

There is only one logical answer.

And there were no other "people" as you assert in the garden or in creation.

Male and Female He created them. Them is plural because that is the correct vernacular when talking about "male and female", not, I believe because there were "others" apart from Adam and Eve. Again, context.

And there is a bloodline for Cain; Gen 4:17. And the answer to your direct question is right there in Gen 4:1. Adam is his father. Nuff said about that.

I could go on and on, but I found a great piece which I will paste below. Mostly because I don't want to plagiarize the guy, even by accident.

--

Two additional distinguishing and erroneous doctrines of the Shepherd's Chapel are known as the Serpent Seed doctrine and the Kenite doctrine. The two are intimately related. The Serpent Seed doctrine is the teaching that in the Garden of Eden, the serpent (the devil) had sexual relations with Eve. The result was that she bore Cain. The descendents of Cain are called Kenites. Abel, however, is the result of Adam and Eve having relations.

Arnold Murray, the pastor of the Shepherd's Chapel, is the primary advocate of these doctrines which he adamantly teaches and which his followers have adopted as biblical truth. Mr. Murray states,

"When you look for the in-depth meaning of "men as trees, walking", you are able to see that Christ wants us to understand there are plantings of God and plantings of the devil. The plantings of that wicked one began in the garden of Eden with the conception of Cain and follow down through his progeny, the Kenites."
(Newsletter #195, Jan 1995. See also, #202, August 1995).

The Kenites, according to Mr. Murray, must be exposed. "We must continue to teach who the Kenites are," says Mr. Murray, (Newsletter #190, August 1994). He states that the Kenites survived the flood (he denies the global flood) and are found in the lineage of Israel, not Judah, (Newsletter #179, Sept. 1993). Eventually, the Kenites permeated the nation of Israel and are the ones who shouted "Crucify Him," in reference to Jesus, (Newsletter #179, Sept. 1993).

In an attempt at biblical support, on his website at Answers to Critics, Mr. Murray states:

"In Gen. 3:15 God is speaking to the serpent, 'and I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shall bruise his heel.'"

Mr. Murray infers that when God says "thy seed" to Satan, He is referring to the Kenites, the descendents of Cain which were produced through the literal "seed" of Satan.

Mr. Murray is wrong. We do not really know exactly what form Satan was in the Garden, though I will submit to God's word and affirm it was a serpent of some sort. Now the Hebrew word used there is "nachash" and it means "serpent" or "snake." If we take the word literally as snake, then Mr. Murray would be forced to explain how a literal snake could have sexual intercourse with Eve.

If Mr. Murray were to acknowledge the potential of a figurative usage of the term here, then he needs to explain why the term "serpent" would be figurative and the term "seed" would be literal. Furthermore, if the serpent were Satan in a different form, and Eve spoke to the serpent, then did Eve have sex with a snake or with a different form of the snake; that is, did the snake change into another more apropos form to consummate his deception?

If so, wouldn't Eve have been suspicious of a talking snake that changes form into something else with which she then agrees to have sexual intercourse? As you can see, the issue, from Mr. Murray's perspective, is wrought with problems.

Nevertheless, his entire position on the Serpent Seed doctrine is easily refuted when we examine Gen. 4:1:

"Now the man had relations with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain, and she said, 'I have gotten a manchild with the help of the Lord.'"

We can see that the Bible clearly tells us who the Father of Cain is: Adam. The Serpent Seed idea is proven wrong.

In addition, it is more natural to attribute the term "seed" in Gen. 3:15 as a reference to the spiritual decedents of Satan, not his literal ones. We can see that being a true spiritual descendent is by faith, not by biology. Consider the following verses which speak of spiritual identification.

"For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 29But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God," (Rom. 2:28-29).

"For all who are being led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God," (Rom. 8:14).

"The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, 17and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him in order that we may also be glorified with Him," (Rom. 8:16-17).

"That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants," (Rom. 9:8).

Clearly, being a descendent has a spiritual quality. Likewise, Satan's descendents are those who identify with him in his lies. This is why Jesus said in John 8:44 to the Pharisees,

"You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature; for he is a liar, and the father of lies."

In addition, "seed" is also referred to as the word of God (Matt. 13:18-23; Luke 8:11; 1 Pet. 1:23) and as the spiritual life in (1 John 3:9). The whole flavor of spiritual identification with God is included in terms of being the offspring of God (Gal. 3:29; Acts 17:28) and the children of God (Rom. 8:16-17).

Consider 1 John 3:9 which says, "No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God." Obviously, the Christian does not contain the literal seed of God in him. Seed here, must refer to a spiritual element of indwelling, of ideology, and of faith.

That is why the Christian does not practice sin. It is against his beliefs and confession before God and man. Therefore, God's seed abides in the Christian, but it isn't literal seed, it is a reference to spiritual identification.
Us against Them

The Serpent Seed doctrine is an unscriptural and unfortunate teaching. From it is derived an "us against them" mentality in which anyone who disagrees with Mr. Murray can easily be accused of being a Kenite. This is obvious in some of his quotes:

"How many today are teaching from a quarterly written by a Kenite, rather than teaching from God's Word? (Newsletter #193, Nov. 1994).

How can we sum this up? If you are doing God's will, don't worry about criticism from others. "Well, Pastor Murray they say we are a cult." Who cares what they say? God is on our side. Victory is a certainty. Does it ever seem like the enemy is winning?

Anytime you get to feeling this way, turn to Psalms 9. This Psalm tells us what we should be earnestly expecting. Keep the meaning of "apokaradokia" in mind as we read this Psalm. (Newsletter #229 - November 1997).

Of course, if you study with him you are not being deceived, but if you are studying elsewhere, you're studying with a Kenite or siding with the enemy. Such are the machinations of this leader who teaches false doctrines.

Taken from: http://carm.org/serpent-seed-and-kenites

--

Thank you for starting this thread. The discussion is welcome and has prompted me to increase the volume of my own study as well.

Kindly,

T.

[Axe]

Oh and more on the "people before Adam and Eve" thing:

Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 15:45, “And so it is written, ‘The first man Adam became a living being.’” This passage very clearly affirms that Adam was “the first man.” Physically, he was the father of all living, just as, spiritually, Christ, “the last Adam,” is the originator of our spiritual lives (15:45-49).

Another New Testament passage also supports this proposition. In Acts 17:24-26 Paul says to the Athenians, “God, who made the world and everything in it...has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth…” If God, in the beginning, had created other humans besides just Adam and Eve then Paul’s statement would be incorrect. Indeed, we would be descendants not of “one blood” but of “many bloods.” Yet, that was not what Paul believed or taught to the Corinthians or Athenians.

Great article here: http://www.kokomochurch.com/Study%20...ansCreated.htm

Kindly,

T.

[Frederick Burrell]

Thank you Frederick Burrell. Please elaborate. Do you want to discuss vibrations/frequencies in regard to DNA or do you want to delve into the fallacy of Rapture Doctrine?

Granted this discussion has as its basis the Masoretic and the Septuagint Texts. Should you desire we can go into Quantum Mechanics and explore dimensions in relation to frequency. Yet, I think if you want to discuss Quantum Physics and God then we will need to start a new thread.

Thank you for engaging.

Shalom,
mj

Yes perhaps another thread would be appropriate. I was thinking more along the lines of energies coming into the planets and how it effects our DNA and consciousness. But perhaps another time or should I say thread. I thought is relative in regards to the conversation in regards to rapture. frederick burrell

[Michael Joseph]

Oh and more on the "people before Adam and Eve" thing:

Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 15:45, “And so it is written, ‘The first man Adam became a living being.’” This passage very clearly affirms that Adam was “the first man.” Physically, he was the father of all living, just as, spiritually, Christ, “the last Adam,” is the originator of our spiritual lives (15:45-49).

Another New Testament passage also supports this proposition. In Acts 17:24-26 Paul says to the Athenians, “God, who made the world and everything in it...has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth…” If God, in the beginning, had created other humans besides just Adam and Eve then Paul’s statement would be incorrect. Indeed, we would be descendants not of “one blood” but of “many bloods.” Yet, that was not what Paul believed or taught to the Corinthians or Athenians.

Great article here: http://www.kokomochurch.com/Study%20...ansCreated.htm

Kindly,

T.

Regarding your latter post, Paul writes the First "Eth-ha-aw-dawm" - man in Garden. Remember there are two.

-----

Dear reader, take a very close look at the study provided, go to the Hebrew provided - Eth-ha-aw-dawm is different. The English has been twisted to confuse [babel]. Eth-ha-aw-dawm is emphatically THE MAN - why is this so hard for people to see? Why do you think Nehemiah was Furious when Yisra'el started mixing [inbreeding] with other races? The Bloodline to Yehoshuah had to be PURE. That's why. Why do you think it took Noah 500 years to find a wife? Because he was faithful to find one who was from Eth-ha-aw-dawm's loins - undefiled by other races and Angelic DNA. Well now, dear reader, if we all sprang from one man - why in the heck would it matter in regard to blood-lines? This is so obvious it strains my mind to even write these words. But for some reason men are content with their traditions.

And the Scripture is about One Man - Yehoshuah - and it is His-Story. Yehovah Saves.

-----

Remember at Gen 1:27 - He created Him in his own image. Yehovah made Yehoshuah in his own image - If you have seen the Son you have seen the Father.

The Cut/Paste from the internet does not get it with me. Gen 4:1 also in no way is Eth-ha-aw-dawm's geneology.

Clearly a student/scholar of Scripture does not REACH - a Scholar presents many, many examples in Yehovah's Word - I just picked a Sampling of Many verses that support the assertion. I could have picked many, many more.

I leave it to the reader to make up their own mind. After reading this so called Christian site - I too deny a world wide flood as it does not conform with the rest of the Story.

I think the study attached speaks for itself.

The Garden.pdf

However should you decide to produce a Study of your own that can actually support your claims, I for one shall be glad to entertain it.


Axe: I know you have good intentions in joining this discussion; however consider the "one blood" is NOT of Eth-ha-aw-dawm: It is of Yehoshuah - the Blood of Atonement - so that all nations can enjoin in the Commonwealth of Yisra'el. He told Peter: Slay and eat - Call no man Common.

G129
αἷμα
aima
hah'ee-mah
Of uncertain derivation; blood, literally (of men or animals), figuratively (the juice of grapes) or specifically (the atoning blood of Christ); by implication bloodshed, also kindred: - blood.


Going to Scripture so that the Reader will not be confused by Claims:

Act 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

Act 17:27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:

Act 17:28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.


If your assertion is correct then we should live in Eth-ha-aw-dawm [the first Adam] for we are his offspring. How absurdly ridiculous. We are to live move and have our being in Yehoshuah - the Second Eth-ha-aw-dawm [Adam].

I think the readers can see thru this smoke an mirror job from some group called CARM. After checking up this morning on this Murray guy he seems okay with me - but why should that matter - my opinion does not mean a hill of beans - what matters is the opinion of the dear reader.

If you are one who is swayed by Titles such as Pastor or Doctor and you put your trust in man's titles in stead of doing the work yourself in the Word, then you like all of the other good little fishies, may be found wanting like the five virgins Matthew 25. The Son's of Cain are upon the Great Work they do intend to "Slay the good llittle Christian fishies - as many as they can - spiritually murdering them with 1/2 truths and false doctrine - do your own work and build your own foundation on the Rock. And in fact it is Ephraim himself a symbolic name for the ten tribes who delivers his children up freely to the slayer.

Hos 9:13 Ephraim, as I saw Tyrus, is planted in a pleasant place: but Ephraim shall bring forth his children to the murderer.


Murderer of Souls. Be careful dear reader where you find your information. If you cannot support your doctrine in multiple places in Yehovah's word, then it is false.

Again, I leave it to the reader to decide.

-------

[Michael Joseph]

Yes perhaps another thread would be appropriate. I was thinking more along the lines of energies coming into the planets and how it effects our DNA and consciousness. But perhaps another time or should I say thread. I thought is relative in regards to the conversation in regards to rapture. frederick burrell

Perhaps you can express another thread and we can engage that discussion there?

[Treefarmer]

Michael Joseph, the Bible uniformly spells Adam as Adam, and not "Eth-ha-aw-dawm" or other such names, because the Masoretic text uniformly spells Adam as אָדָם
When you see other constructions, such as וְהָאָדָם in Genesis 4:1, it is because of Hebrew grammatical construction, meaning "And Adam".
The first word of Genesis 3:17 for example is וּלְאָדָם which is correctly translated "And unto Adam".

There is only one Adam, the first man, who had children with his wife Eve (Chavvah), who was flesh of his flesh and who "was the mother of all living" (Gen. 3:20). All means all.

Also, nowhere does the Bible say that angels or cherubim (such as Satan) have the ability to procreate sexually, even though angels sometimes appear in the form of men. Jesus makes this clear in Matthew 22:30 and Mark 12:25.

Trees are indeed likened to people and people to trees in the Bible.
Several parables include trees that talk like people. But these are just parables and they do not teach that trees are people, or that angels are trees.
The blind man in Mark 8 said "I see men as trees, walking". Notice the word is "as" and not "are".

As far as the Kenites go, if you study carefully, you will find that they are mostly comprised of inhabitants of Canaan who trace their ancestry to Abraham and Judah.
The designation Kenite is equivalent to the contemporary European/American surname Smith in English, and Schmidt and its derivations in German.
I'll post a study on this soon in the blog space.

The Kenites are all of the offspring of Noah and family, who were the only survivors of the world wide flood.
God tells us in Genesis 6:17: "And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein [is] the breath of life, from under heaven; [and] every thing that [is] in the earth shall die."
In Genesis 9:11 God says: "And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth."
See also Genesis 9:15.
Here the word all means all, save the ones in the ark which were saved by a miracle from God.
Luke 17:27 also affirms this.

When interpreting scriptures, keep in mind what Peter says in 2 Peter 1:
"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost."

And Isaiah tells us in chapter 8:20 "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, [it is] because [there is] no light in them."

Let's heed this admonition:
"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 longsuffering 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."
2 Timothy 4:1-5

Bright blessings

[motla68]

We do not have to become it, just understand the vibrations of history that keep repeating itself through the symbolisms/instruments upon this earth all around us.

Currents --> Currency / Ark of Noah --> Treasury . Do you really believe at the time of the flood in that ark anyone was concerned about money?
all them animals and that ark was just an equitable interest to be protected. Would a man sacrifice his time to protect his neighbors by a calling from a spirit?

[Axe]

However should you decide to produce a Study of your own that can actually support your claims, I for one shall be glad to entertain it.

Wow.

You can say all you want. You can even try to diminish what I bring forth because I post a link.

I can only take that to mean that all of your assertions are completely your own and have come from
no other reading or authors.

I'm not interested in making anyone believe that I am a mental titan, I only want to get the information
to the end user expediently. And as for "entertaining" you, that is not my concern. My concern is correcting
false doctrine that has the potential to lead many astray.

For all those "words" you post, you fail to overcome what to me seems a potent rebuttal to your whole assertion.

Why are the "trees" in the garden not all the same? Same word. Tree of life, tree of knowledge of good and evil,
and all the other "trees" in the garden. There is no need to go to Isa, or Ezk when there is plenty of "context" within
the same chapter, even the same verse!. A "scholar" it seems to me would know that.

Gen 2:9 And out of the ground the Lord God made every tree grow that is pleasant to the sight and good for food. The tree of life was also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil."

You ignore the context and go off on your expedition into confusion. There is no need. As you pointed out before,
the truth is there for all to see if they will but ask. No "scholarship" required.

There is another throughout history that does the same thing. I believe his first words in the Bible were:
"Has God indeed said..."

What was he doing? Taking what was clear cut, and twisting it. Promising more. Taking what was simple
and making it complex, confusing and casting doubt.

Your command of certain subjects is fantastic, however, bringing convoluted interpretations of God's Holy Word
from sources other than God's Holy Word is I believe a grave mistake.

I find you quoting gnostics alongside the Bible repugnant. You may as well offer the latest revelation you received from
Mad Magazine as well. That alone casts a stain on whatever assertion you bring forth, making you one of the, what I believe
Lenin called "useful idiots". Regardless of your "scholar" status or educational pedigree.

The there is the fact the Adam also "ate" of the fruit. So now following your interpretation, the first man was also
a homosexual.

Bloodline is important, as it is stated, "the Seed of David" many times.

If your assertion is correct then we should live in Eth-ha-aw-dawm [the first Adam] for we are his offspring. How absurdly ridiculous. We are to live move and have our being in Yehoshuah - the Second Eth-ha-aw-dawm [Adam].

Ridiculous indeed. We are all sons of Adam, which is why we are all under the curse of Adam. We are also called sons of Abraham, as well as sons of God. One refers to physical bloodline, the other to the spiritual. Even "scholars" agree on this.

I do not consider, or call myself a "scholar", I am a student, a sinner saved by grace and the blood of Jesus. Nothing more.

Clearly a student/scholar of Scripture does not REACH - a Scholar presents many, many examples in Yehovah's Word - I just picked a Sampling of Many verses that support the assertion. I could have picked many, many more.

Uuhhh, sure, but it's easy to take an isolated verse and twist it to mean whatever you want it to.
Happens all the time, pastors and frauds alike. That's why "context" is king when it comes to interpretation.

Context requires what is said immediately before and immediately after said verse to be considered first and
with the most weight. Any Bible college student learns that the first day.

Another important rule is to always search your reasoning for putting ANY assertion forward. Is it for your glory,
or for His. You can pray for "enlightenment" all you want, if you intentions are self aggrandizement they will go
unheard.

I want to believe that you are a genuine follower of Jesus, but some of things you say hit my "tuning fork" wrong.
To borrow a David Merrill term there.

You blatantly and broadly attack "pastors" and "churches" in sometimes a savage way. Casting sweeping dispersions
on the whole lot. Honestly, I don't disagree on some points as I know they are out there, but I also know that there
are some that are not.

Regardless, even many of those that have the message wrong, mean well. But your diatribes leave no room for them.
Someone that has been given a gift such as the one you seem to have also has a responsibility (I feel) to help.

I don't believe the Lord grants ANYONE knowledge, wisdom or understanding for their edification alone. Rather than
throwing stones at those that may lack understanding but may mean well, would it not be more "Jesus-like" to
have sympathy?

My observations may be incorrect and if I have cast you in an incorrect light I apologize. Rather than banter
back and forth, I will list them plainly. This is not to personally attack you, rather it is, and should only be taken
in the context of this thread alone.

Your heart does not seem to be in the right place.

You quote works that are direct contradiction with the Word of God.

Your assertions are not easy to understand or even follow, and don't stand up to analysis from the immediate context from which they come from.

If you are one who is swayed by Titles such as Pastor or Doctor and you put your trust in man's titles in stead of doing the work yourself in the Word, then you like all of the other good little fishies, may be found wanting like the five virgins Matthew 25.

It seems to me again that you more swayed than me. I don't consider the titles at all. They are but men,
like you and I. Some seeking truth, like you and I. You seem to disregard automatically based on the title.

I believe these men have just as much access to the truth as you or I. Some pursue it diligently.

I will say that someone that has devoted their life's work to the edification of the saints in Jesus name
has his heart in the right place, and far be it from me to think that I am "better" or "more enlightened"
or have "more access to insight or wisdom" than he, because of his title.

The "cut and paste from the internet" that you place yourself above in tone, comes from a man. Someone
that has studied and come to his own conclusions, as have you. I placed it there not because of the
organization he represents, but because of the truth he has found.

You also imply that means I'm incapable of forming my own thesis. Again, not very Christian. It happens that
I lack the time which you seem to have an abundance of. If you say you have never plagiarized someone else
in your posts, I'll accept that for value. You are a better man than me, but then that's not a very high standard :-)

When interpreting scriptures, keep in mind what Peter says in 2 Peter 1:
"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost."

And Isaiah tells us in chapter 8:20 "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, [it is] because [there is] no light in them."

Let's heed this admonition:
"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 longsuffering 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."
2 Timothy 4:1-5

Thanks for that TreeFarmer. Poignant indeed.

[Axe]

I do know there are good men of God, working as "men of God".

I don't think that churches should be 503c. That places them under the wrong master. Forbidden.

I don't think that pastors should give "messages" in their churches. This opens the door to taking any verse out of context, and making it mean whatever they want. Which is usually not what God meant in his word. Pastors should read The Word. They should teach about translation, interpretation and context.

I think that the gate is narrower than anyone realizes.

I don't agree that "going to church" saves anybody, but... I do believe that a true believer understands that going to church is not necessarily for them. I think that people who are mature in their faith have an obligation to to church for the edification of others.

I grew tired of going to church. My church was a chapter by chapter, verse by verse church. After I had been a believer for while, been on fire, got super involved, volunteered, read the whole Bible, attended Bible college ( 1 semester, didn't graduate), I grew weary knowing what was going to be covered at church every Wed. and Sun.

I started to get annoyed with more and more people at church. Only seeing everyone's faults. I got a negative attitude and stopped going.

I felt better, but something wouldn't stop bothering me. I keep feeling guilty, though I knew there was no where in the Bible that commanded me to go.

Then one day I was thinking about it, going over it (to myself) how I knew the Word, I knew the message, and I just didn't need to go. Then, I believe The Lord told me clearly,
"You don't need to go for you. you need to go for others that need what you know." (paraphrase)

That's when it hit me. Believers get so selfish. We want to go and "get fed" all the time. Never understanding that there comes a point when your feeding has to stop being the priority and feeding others should become the focus.

I didn't need to go to church for me. I needed to go to church for the people there that maybe needed my insight on their own journey. Also, because no matter how "scholarly" you think you are, you still need accountability from your peers to keep you on track. We are ALL susceptible without accountability.

Will people be damned for going to a 503c church? I doubt it. In the end, the truth is... Christ crucified. That's what's required. So rather than sit on a high horse, I decided that I am no better or worse than anyone else.

And if I'm sooo smart and knew sooo much, then I should be doing more.

That's my 2 cents.