JohnnyRudick

You understand what your quoted Scripture really means. And yes, I do understand. Just trying to (I just spent at least 15 min looking for a smiley called stirthepot or something like that I wantd to use right here;) can't find it. O' well:). . .) OK:D Latter;) Bro. Rudick

Yes, we really are. I only wanted to point out a reason many "saved" "Blood bought by Jesus Christ" wish to forgo the tool of His Sacrifice. I at one time wore a Rosery complete with Crusifix. But once I understood the deeper understandings of His Sacrifice I made myself give it up. Also remember what I pointed out as the Cross of Christ is also a charm worn by a growing number of people of whom Jesus the Christ is the last one on their minds. Just a thought. Bro. Rudick

I have no argument with Paul. Paul and I get along just fine:) The subject that Paul is talking about (if you follow the rest of his writings) is the message of the cross. What transpired around it. The subject is really the "Word". 1 Corinthians 1:31 That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. 1 Corinthians 2:1 And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God. 1 Corinthians 2:2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. I know Paul speaks of the "cross" but if you read through it "Jesus" and Him Crucified and Risen is what it is really all about. I am sure that is what is on your mind also. It is just that I see this "Image" worn around the necks of the most unsavory people who do not glorify what the cross is pointing to. The subject for them is the cross as if it was some sort of charm that in itself can bring them safety. Can you see what I am trying to get at? If Jesus was shot by a .44 would I wear a pistol around my neck? Bro. Rudick

We have many who see the Church as a religion comprised of ordinances and activities we must do to in order to "achieve the Celestial Kingdom". We also have those who Love the Lord and wish to serve Him and will do all that He asks that is in our power to do so. Serving the Lord is a way of life and would not think of livint any other way. Not to Do and achieve. But because we are new creatures in Christ and just love to please Him. We work not to be "saved" but we work because we are "saved". But yes, there are those who are "saved" in vain. 1 Corinthians 15:2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. Bro. Rudick

On this subject I get everyone on my case. Forgive me if I talk in circles. I do that sometimes more then others:confused: No Jim. It is not the Cross that saves. It is through the atoning blood shed by the sacrificial Lamb of God. His death, and resurrection that brings us everlasting Life. The Cross was a tool that brought Him down. It was the power of His God hood that raised Him from the grave and brought us with Him. Belief on Him and life through Him will "save" you. All "saved" people will testify to others through Baptism that they trust in Him for their Salvation and that He has bought them through His shed Blood. Baptism shows openly what has already take place. If that person dies before testifying of this step in his/her life this will be accomplished for the saints on the other side of the Vail through the acts of the living as this is a vital ordinance one must go through if the "saved" one wishes to grow spiritually in their "saved" condition. That is why we have Temples. Do you need to rush to baptism if you are "saved"? You will want to join a church and testify what Christ has done for you. Hopefully you will wish to join with the Lord's Church but no matter what church you will decide to join, the manner prescribed by God to testify of being bought by Jesus is Baptism. That is what you will head toward doing. Weather you achieve it on this side of the Vail or on the other side is still something every "saved" person will want to do. Bro. Rudick

Me too, me too:D Ummmmmmm, but first I must learn gooder English:p Bro. Rudick

Si:patriot:

Please sir, May I have some more? Bro. Rudick

English is the language of progress. I guess that is why I struggle so:p Bro. Rudick

Welcome Sister Anatess;) I pray we will all be of service to your needs and bless you in timely manner. That is, as needed:D Bro. Rudick

Brother Hemidakota; I will answer this way. Even though Paul (Saul) could easily be classified as a prophet, he insisted on being identified as an Apostle sent by God. Galatians 1:1 Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;) Sometimes we should just remain silent;) Bro. Rudick

OK. Thanks:) I was not using today's criteria as much as I was using Pre-incarnation or should I say Church era. God Spoke to Paul and sent him Himself for this work. I was using that as a designation to say that. I know that he was never set apart as a "prophet" by the Church (as far as I know, we are not told everything). Yet neither were most of the Old Testament prophets. Usually as far as I can remember, most men who had a personal visitation by God and sent on a mission were referred to as a prophet weather set apart in the office of a prophet or not. Yet I cannot find where any man with that office ever set him apart to that office. Acts 13:1 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. I will settle as referring to him as an Apostle, personally sent by God to the Gentiles. Bro. Rudick

James was next in session but Paul was sent. Happens sometimes. Bro. Rudick

Two Prophets Peter was sent to the Jews and Paul to bring in the Gentiles. And when was Peter in Rome? According to who's tradition? Bro. Rudick

Actually these letters of Paul we have today in the Bible are the surviving letters through time chosen to be most used for edification by the Christians in hiding from that church that sought dominion over all the earth. Satan made counterfeit copies of these letters and salted them down through history through Jerome Latin Vulgate, The Jesuit Bible of 1582 Dewey, on to the perversions of Wescott and Hort to this day. These letters have been crafted through out history by wicked men to make a bad mirror image of the letters which survived sampled in the Erasmus collection, the TR. I believe God has through out history raised up men to preserve His words given to prophets and apostles so that wa can see if we look who the deliberate distorter s of His words are. Paul was later a Prophet to the Gentile people. Preaching a dispensation God gave Paul taking the Church a new direction for that particular time to preserve His words apart from what was to become the world Church. Bro. Rudick

That is the way I see it used most often and I do not believe Paul believed that way when I read all his writings that have been canonized. Bro. Rudick

Not inferior. You know how we say the Temple is not "secret" it is "sacred". Well, Women are not inferior in Paul's point of view. No matter what "some scholars" may swear to you. Women and men have their place in the hierarchy of heaven. God the Angels man and women. Not inferior any more then a lieutenant is inferior to a captain. For some reason long hair is a badge of honor for a woman to wear but a shame for a man to wear. Man is to have nothing over his head between him and God. A Woman comes to the man to get what God has given to the family. She must wear a covering over her hair to signify that she believes this. If she reveals her hair she puts the angels to shame because of her uncovered glory. You know, women covered their long hair daily in public as with a sacred garment to show that they were either betrothed or married up til the mid 1800s. Men needed no covering as there was no one on earth that they would bow to but God. But today with Equal rights and all. . . Bro. Rudick

God had His reasons for ordering that in that day. I believe it to be true. But we cannot use that account to justify going out and capturing a virgin bride from the Gentiles:eek: Right:rolleyes: Ecclesiastes 3:1 To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: . . . Bro. Rudick

Funny to see this here. I brought this up (and a few others) years ago and got into trouble for it. Good questions;) Bro. Rudick

When you read a lot of one person's writings you can "read tone". Some refer to it as "reading between the lines" but you can after a while see the "tone" "color"?, of a person's character. Bro. Rudick

Joseph Smith Hebrews 7:3 For this Melchizedek was ordained a priest after the order of the Son of God, which order was without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life. And all those who are ordained unto this priesthood are made like unto the Son of God, abiding a priest continually. KJB Hebrews 7:3 Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually. Joseph Smith points out that the above verse in the King James Bible is referring to the priesthood of the believer not the necessarily the believer. I have been setting back. Was going to try to hit each of these verses Snow has dragged forth but as usal I see all of you are doing so well. Keep it up guys. I would like to add to all of this, most likely will get blasted for it, I believe the truthfulness of each ov the verses in question. Weather we follow then to day is beside the point. I still believe them to be Gods word to man in the day they were given and still gods word to man in the context given. Yes Snow. I believe account of the creation and the flood and the account that Goliath and his father had a hard death. I believe both genealogies of Jesus Christ. One of His mothers and the other of His earthly adopted father. His adopted fathers standing in the account of Luke. I have no problems with the KJB. Yeah. I know;) Bro. Rudick

:confused:For what man? We love ya;) Chill out:hippie: Bro. Rudick

I guess in our minds we make up for the short comings and are not aware how a gentile might see it. I was speaking to the "flavor" more then the History but . . . Sorry:( I still love the story:D Bro. Rudick

OK, I am speaking outside the Scriptures but I could find scripture that would fit into my (not really mine per say) ideas. JohnnyRudick chap. # Verse* Time is as a web stretched out throughout the Universe. Height, Width, Depth and Motion. Picture our Universe (billions of different types of stars with systems of their own) as a 4d object. Preferably a web stretching out in all directions. if you fully understood the mechanics of this web you would know how to manipulate it for your own designs. Maybe even create your own similar web within this one giving you absolute control of the one you created. "In the Beginning" of this time web we have assembled. This way they can see forward and back simultaneously. Yes a beginning in it's new form and a possible end but not necessarily prerequisite for it's function. Just a thought:D Bro. Rudick

Guess not:eek:, Sorry Jim:bawl:, Johnny:D Really, We love ya Jim. No mocking intended. Bro. Rudick