Some consistently preach incorrect information and then act as if that false information should not be corrected. Correction works the same way judgment does: As soon as you declare that others shouldn't judge, you are guilty of making a judgment yourself. Likewise, proclaiming that we should not go around correcting others is indeed a correction given by the one complaining.
This verse just seems to fly right over the heads of some:
Romans 2:1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.
Besides, if one has a problem with correction, it would behoove them not to publicly say false things.
-And just for the record, the wrong-headed idea that edification is somehow separate from correction is ludicrous.
Edification without correction only enables and protects the nurture of false doctrine.
For example, some fake stories about historical events are floating around. There is a very specific reason why this has taken place. It has been done in an effort to poison the well concerning the truth about the triune nature of the Godhead.
Popular contempt toward the Roman Catholic church is being used as a tool to convince others that the concept of the tri-unity of God (easily found in scripture) is as evil as this widely despised religious organization. The lies being told as "proof" of these fabrications find their basis in wild assumptions which ridiculously claim that the Roman Catholic church invented the 3-in-1 nature of the Godhead.
However, these false history stories are easily disproven when one takes the initiative to seek out objective evidence for themself. Many have just not taken the time to do their own research and, worse, tend to lean toward confirmation bias as their proof. They have unobjectively allowed these false stories to dictate what they now believe the scriptures tell us about the nature of our God.
To be direct, these revisionist historians have declared a single word to be evil. Yes, you read that correctly. -A single word that came into existence in the very same manner as all the other words we speak.
In their haste to create evil surmisings over a simple word, they have lent credibility to the very organization they protest against.
Don't be fooled. The Roman Catholic Church is more than happy to accept credit for inventing everything about the word trinity. It goes along with their agenda, claiming that their organization is just a continuation of the early Apostolic Church. They also claim Peter is their first Pope. But it's funny how those with a single-minded agenda against Catholicism are not denouncing Peter as they do with the word trinity.
Did you know that the Roman Catholic Church doesn't even own the word catholic? Yet they sure have fooled many into believing they do. Ignatius of Antioch used the word as early as 107 AD in reference to the collection of assemblies as a unified church.
The word katholikos (translated into the Latin catholicus) literally comes from two Greek words that mean "throughout [the] whole." This word was first used in text long before there were any Roman Catholics in sight. But by claiming the word catholic as their identity, they have effectively deceived the masses into believing they are THE original church from Acts 2.
Ironically, Catholic-based websites have Ignatius of Antioch CAPITALIZING the first letter of the words catholic and church when they quote him. Yet the Greek alphabet used to write these words had no lowercase letters at the time, nor any punctuation. Meaning, there is no evidence these words were ever meant to be seen as proper nouns. However, by capitalizing the first letter of catholic and church- they have caused it to appear as if Ignatius was acknowledging the Roman Catholic church all the way back in 107 AD. -Which is an utter impossibility.
-Deceived and deceiving.
In case it has gone unnoticed, the internet is pretty handy these days. You can look up historical documents - objective evidence that resides in libraries worldwide. You can also translate documents using most search engines. And from there, you can draw your own conclusions.
We know that it isn't as fun, interesting, or easy as hopping on YouTube and watching an overproduced conspiracy documentary, or listening to some self-absorbed authoritarian give you their interpretation of actual historical events. Or only searching out websites that tell you exactly what you already wanted to hear... But keep the following in mind:
Truth exists, even when shaded by the darkness of lies...Truth remains. Unchanged. Untarnished. Ever-constant truth. But only those who seek it will find it. Look beyond the falsehood which craves the spotlight. Truth is in the shadows...because it isn't popular. **
Here's a bit of what we have found in the shadows:
The Roman Catholic church didn't invent, create, originate, or define the word trinity. Just like everything else they've put forth, they stole it and pretended to have come up with it on their own.
The word trinity and the Roman Catholic Holy Trinity doctrine are different things.
Trinity is an English word that ONLY means 3 in unity (unity meaning: as one.) Simple etymological research of the word will show that. There was no semblance of any English language until the 5th century in Britain; there was initially only Latin: trinitas, and Greek: trias. The English word trinity, as we know it today, did not come about until several centuries later in Middle English, but the definition has never changed.
Regardless of what some amateur historians try to claim, the Greek word, which would later be translated into the English word trinity, was first used in 180 AD by Theophilus of Antioch -not Tertullian. In addition to that, the official Roman Catholic church didn't even begin until 590 AD with Pope Gregory the 1st, when the Papal States were established.
Nonetheless, lately, Tertullian has been blamed for creating the Roman Catholic Holy Trinity doctrine and even for supposedly making up the word trinity (Trinitas, in Latin.) This is despite the obvious fact that he wasn't the first to use the word (unless he was also a time traveler.) He lived and died long before the official Roman Catholic church even existed.
Strangely enough, some are very adamant that Tertullian worked for and is even responsible for helping to start an organized religion that didn't even exist until well after his death. How that is even possible is quite a mystery. -Obviously, these fake news reporters have failed to do any serious research. Had they done a simple inspection of actual Catholic resources, they would have already found this:
The Roman Catholic church does not currently, nor have they ever recognized Tertullian as one of their own church fathers.
Simply put: He just didn't make the cut.
So what about the assumption that Constantine started the Roman Catholic Church in 325 AD? (Which is still much later than Tertullian's first usage of the word "trinitas," by the way)
No, Constantine is not the founder of the Roman Catholic Church either. Before he was born, while he was alive, and for the next couple of centuries after his death, there was only Eastern and Western Orthodoxy: with theologians, apologists, government officials, believers, and church leaders on a multi-century quest; a collision of ideas about what Christianity should and should not look like. Quite ironically, the word "catholic" was also used to describe the orthodox assemblies at that time, just as it was in the 2nd century.
Even though he didn't start Roman Catholicism, the Roman Catholics claim Constantine as one of their own. -They just conveniently leave out the detail of his deathbed baptism being performed by an Arian priest.
-Not exactly inconspicuous is the fact that they never canonized him as a saint. It's likely because his supposed conversion story is sketchy at best. As usual, the winners get to dictate how history is written down. So, the official Roman Catholic Church claimed all of what they wanted (including the terms catholic and trinity) and has been convincing the masses that they are the sole originators of Christianity for nearly 1500 years now.
There's a reason why they keep historical items and manuscripts locked away with no access in the Vatican basement.
Here's something else the Roman Catholic church doesn't want you to know: Early Orthodox church councils were the ones who determined which manuscripts were inspired and should be included as scripture, NOT the Roman Catholic church. All of these councils took place between 250 AD (for the Hebrew scriptures) and 397 AD (27 books of the New Testament.)
But, Surprise-Surprise: The Catholic Church claims credit for the existence of the Bible as well.
Yes, it's true: men of the early orthodox church were the ones who chose which books belong in our Bibles and which ones do not. Except for the Apocrypha (which was never viewed as "inspired" anyway) the selection of books which were placed in our King James Bible directly resulted from those decisions made during the 3rd and 4th centuries by some who are now referred to as church fathers (whom the Roman Catholic church claims for themselves as well.)
But, just like the word trinity, the word catholic, and the Apostle Peter as the first pope, the compilation of the books included in your bible is not the work of the Roman Catholic Church either.
And now you know why virtually everything "early christian" gets blamed on (and CREDITED to) the Roman Catholic church.
All this to say, don't make the mistake of listening to revisionist historians. They definitely have an agenda. Beware of people who tell you to "stay off of internet search engines" when researching this information. -The same people use those same search engines to find the false information they feed you.
Here's another example of the madness that is being spoon-fed to anyone who will swallow it: There's an article that is against the triune nature of the Godhead floating around on Facebook, being used by a group that calls themselves right dividers. This article is from an Apostolic Pentecostal ONENESS Assembly.
For some strange reason, a few unsuspecting people who also call themselves right dividers seem quite impressed with it. -Most likely because it is always posted without the source or author listed, leading the reader to believe the person posting is the one who actually wrote it.
When people don't cite their sources, it's either an oversight, or they don't want you to know where it came from. I understand oversights may happen occasionally...
However, when one posts an entire article from an Apostolic ONENESS Pentecostal website to try and convince actual Bible Believers that Jesus is somehow His own Father- one might be hiding that source for a very specific reason.
There is nothing impressive about this Oneness article. This isn't exactly a new denomination. Below is a link to this article, which twists scripture to promote the ONENESS doctrine.
If you happen to see it being passed around on Facebook by anyone whom you have considered to be a trusted source, you now will be able to identify it and determine for yourself if the source is still worthy of your trust:
https://greaterbiblewaytemple.org/jesus-is-the-father-incarnate/
But be forewarned: the same person(s) who posted this ONENESS article as their own work might also curse you out for correctly identifying that their beliefs are identical to ONENESS Christology. Go figure...
But then again, the same person(s) also take pride and joy in creating contention, mocking, and hypocritically ridiculing others and then suddenly becoming martyred victims after being called out for their own hatefulness.
In addition to that, it's pretty rich when the same person(s) publicly lambast others for writing or reading any other book outside of scriptures - when they, themselves, actually learned from and promote another heretick"s book to prop up their ONENESS theology:
"The Godhead Doctrine" by a racist Lordship Salvationist, who calls himself "Born Again Barbarian" is where much of this Jesus is His own Father nonsense comes from, as of late.
So, when you hear: "Don't listen to them," or "Stay away from them, stay right here with us." "Don't use Google," "Don't read or write books," "Don't think," etc. ---Beware. These demands only apply to you, not to them. ie. "Rules for thee but not for me."
Be careful, question motives, and try not to be so easily impressed.
-Things are not always as they seem.
-No marvel: Deceivers abound.
-The mask will fall off eventually.
2 Timothy 3:13 — But evil men and 👉seducers👈 shall wax worse and worse, 👉deceiving, and being deceived.👈
There is SO much mis- AND dis-information that has been put out liberally and carelessly on this subject - which will be addressed. This is just a small snippet of how history is re-written in an attempt to garner unearned credibility for fantastical stories.
The sources and the motivation of this heretical doctrine which attempts to utterly destroy the deity of the Godhead, will be exposed thoroughly, in due time.
These inventors of evil things have created another Jesus for sure - one that justifies their tendencies to be vile, crude, abusive, hateful, malicious, self-seeking, pridefully boasting, arrogant, deceitful, false accusers, tale-baring gossipers, unruly vain talkers who subvert whole houses.
Titus 1:11 — Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake.
** f.s. 2010
Add comment
Comments