Lone Wolf McQuade

WordWolf, you said... Well I sure can. It never happened did it?Is there any writing or record of one of the church fathers pleading with their fellow Catholics shouting, "No brothers, let this heretic be spared and take me in his place, for he knows not what he does!". I'll bet. <_< Why would any of the church fathers have given their lives for a heretic? As far as the Catholics were concerned, heretics were pawns of Satan to be exterminated. That's how I know they never would have died for a heretic. Belle, you said... . We're speaking here of church father's who would die for a heretic, not people who would die so that others could have access to the Bible.

"Mommas don't let your babies grow up to be homos, Don't let 'em wear earings and carry a purse, Let 'em chase women, drink whiskey and curse". - Tom Burke YEE-HAWWWWW!!!! Chase women, drinkin' whiskey and cursin'!! I wonder if LCM helped Tom write that song. Can you actually imagine Billy Graham selling music at his crusades with such lyrics??? How blind I was. Duhhhhhhhhhhh.

I remember Bob Stanley's music. I thought he had a powerful ministry for music. Some of his songs, especially "Welcome To The Family"....it just get's you right there every time. :-)

That's why I do not believe that God will judge us based on how much of the accuracy of the text we had right, per se. What God will reward us for is the fruit of the spirit and the character of Christ in our lives. Just because I can't discern from the text whether Eber or Abraham was the first Hebrew matters nothing when it comes to forgiving my brother who has sinned against me even though he doesn't deserve it. It is the state of our hearts and whether or not we are behaving Christ-like that is and always should be the center of our focus, not whether or not the past particple of some such Hebrew word is...blah, blah, blah. Don't get me wrong, those things are there to be investigated if so desired. But God is much more concerned with integrity of the heart, not whether you can read the Greek text or not. A scripture comes to mind. John 7:17-18 Jesus answered, "My teaching is not my own. It comes from him who sent me. If anyone chooses to do God's will, he will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own. People can argue about the texts their whole lives and get nowhere spiritually. The real key to knowing if what we have as the Bible is indeed God's word is to get busy DOING it (not intellectualizing, not philosophising, etc.) and then Christ will PROVE to you that it is indeed the word of God. That's really the only way to know for sure. And as for my life, he's proved himself to me and that's why it doesn't matter how many people come around wanting to bash the text and constantly question it's reliability. If Christ has proved himself to me, then I know it to be true. John 8:32 Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free. The greek word "know" is ginosko. Only by experience and application can we come to know the truth. And the proof of whether or not we have the truth is if we take what we know as the truth (oida) and then go and do it (ginosko), I should be set free. If I am set free, then I know I have the truth and therefore now I know that the source of my truth is reliable (The Bible). Skeptics (a.k.a. those without faith) will never do the Word and that's why they can "study" the texts all they want to and never come to a spiritual understanding. God unlocks the "hidden meaning" and the understanding to those who are meek and humble in heart. And I have been set free from many things. There's a whole lot I don't know about church history and there's a whole lot I don't know about all the different texts floating around out there, but I know this, the books that are in that Bible, God put those there. How do I know? Because I have been set free. I went and did his will, and now I know Jesus' teaching is from God (John 7:17).

Yeah, but at least he has made it available (by books and other things) to find out that information that was "unprotected".

dmiller, you said... Yes I would have to agree. They had no problems back then. As soon as they become a "ministry", look at how little time passed before there were problems. They should have stayed the way they were.

I have read my share of works regarding the canonizing of scripture. Well my view of the whole thing is actually a little blind faith. If there is indeed God, and if indeed he wanted his will, his plan, and his purposes known to us, then I have to believe that God was working mightily in history to make sure that the proper books were included. When you think about it, it would have been pretty crucial for God to do that because if he didn't then no one could ever know if what he was reading was indeed inspired by God or simply the writings of men. This would leave man direction-less and standard-less, never being able to know if what he believes is indeed the truth (which is exactly how adversary would have it). If you cannot know the truth and know that you know it, then any intellectual endeavor becomes a fool's errand. I cannot believe that God would leave man so stumbling in the dark. It wasn't only in the NT days when there were tons of other epistles floating around. In the OT, there were tons of writings and books about everything under the sun, mysticism, other religions, philosophy. Even by Solomon's time there was no end to the number of books and literature floating around. God would have worked hard to make sure the correct writings were assembled together as one unit of revelation so that when Jesus Christ was born he would know what his Father needed him to do. Jesus Christ as he studied the scrolls must have had the correct writings because if he had been missing even one, he may have missed a prophecy about him that he should have fulfilled or if a fake writing had crept into the scrolls that he studied from, he may have read a false prophecy and did something he wasn't supposed to. It's God Word. He put it together, he protected it. There are approx. 20 books mentioned in the Bible but not included in the cannon. A lot of those works are lost. God didn't protect them as he did the ones he inspired. If we could read some of those books, like Samuel The Seer or the Book of Nathan the Prophet, I'm sure we could learn some cool stuff. I'm sure there was plenty in there that corroborated the scriptures, which is why God is referencing them in the first place. But in regards to God's plan of redemption and the Savior of mankind, they weren't applicable. God didn't inspire those. They could even be called great books from great men....but they're not from God. Same with the NT. You can learn some cool things from other epistles not in the NT cannon. You may even find some things in there that corroborate what the scriptures say. You could even call them great books by great men....but they're not from God, and God let's everyone know by not including them in His Word. I think it's simply a matter of whether you believe in Jesus Christ or not. If you do, then the above argument is completely plausible and technically, impossible to disprove. If you don't believe in Jesus Christ, then no argument that would prove the point would be viewed as logical by you anyway. I guess it's one of those things where we just have to trust that God was big enough to pull it off. If he wasn't, we are indeed lost.

They would have looked at the U.S. Constitution and hunted down and killed all our forefathers of this great nation. Never anywhere did Jesus or his apostles ever kill unbelievers or command that this be done. Never. As a matter of fact, it says that even when we were his enemies, Christ died for us. Hmmm, do you think one of the church fathers would have died for one of the heretics? That would be the love of God. Fat chance. <_< It is God who will deal judgement for unbelief. That is not in man's responsibilities. We're called to love people and make disciples, not execute those who refuse to conform.

Year 2027, God loves you and so do I. So please take my comments in all sincerety and friendliness. :) You said... Well perhaps you may feel that is the best way. And if you were to put together a piece of work that you wanted to get "out", then I'm sure the Lord would work in your heart to do what was best in the situation for you, where you are moving the Word.But to say the internet is the best way and therefore that's the medium that should always be used because it costs less is a bit unreasonable. God works in people uniquely because each person's relationship with God is unique. This is why God exhorts us to "run in our own lane." It's dangerous to take what you see as the best way to move the Word and then look at others as though they should be doing it your way so they wouldn't have to charge any money. There are multiple ways to move the Word; T.V., radio, books, magazines, conferences, and of course internet sites. All of these are great ways to get the message out and some cost more to do than others. Heck if having everything costing nothing is such the great key to it all being genuine, then why have the internet site? Where is that money going to come from? Are you going to ask people for it? Why not just go out there and move the Word on the streets. After all, that's really the only form of getting the message out that is truly free. So what about every person who has ever produced a concordance or a Lexicon. Should all that be givena way free too? After all, it will help us understand the Bible better so shouldn't it be free? Shouldn't they want to give it all away? This certainly cannot be the case. But as for you TrustAndObey, you said... Are you saying this as though you have evidence that they only did it for themselves? I can't see the motives of their heart and neither can you. What do I think? I think they wrote it to help people. Why do I think that? Because it sure helped me. After being brain-washed by TWI my whole life, it was One God & One Lord that convinced me it was OK to fellowship, talk to, and pray to my Lord Jesus Christ. What a freedom I found and a new walk I have never experienced before. "And to think after all those years of research and work, they had the nerve to charge me a whopping $29 for it...Boo hoo.... my life's over, everyone's a counterfeit, everyone's only it for themselves....except me." This whole paragraph is dripping with error. So you're saying that because they are charging the money for the books, you know what their heart is? This is mysticism and a "super-spirituality". Is God just supposed to deliver the money on their doorstep in a nice leather bag? CES isn't telling God how they want to be paid. Isn't God providing that need in people who buy their study materials? Doesn't God work in people's hearts to give to meet that need? God meets needs through other believers. If I were to spend the next 5 years of my life studying a particular subject and committing it to a book and then gave it away for free and then said to God, "man God I'm praying and I'm serving you with all that I am, how come you haven't sent me any money so I can serve you more?? Duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. Do you feel that you are accomplishing this more than they are? Is John Schoenheit not giving his all? What proof do you have that he's not? The fact that he's charging $29 for his hard work for the past 3-5 years? I would say he is giving his all. His research is excellent and makes TWI's look childish. It's amazing the fact that because CES charges for their works, you suddenly know all kinds of things about them. You're implying that they wrote the book to help themselves. You're implying that their heart is to be served and not to serve, that they are looking to benefit themselves and that they don't trust God with their lives (all your words). You are making some mighty big assumptions about people who have helped many in the Body of Christ with the Word. You are judgmental. You are bitter. If you feel that you shouldn't contribute then don't. There's plenty of other places to send your money. But don't sit there in judgment like you're so spiritual implying if they were really loving people they would slave away in the scriptures their whole lives and then give it all away for free to some bozo who is offended that wisdom which can change your life might actually cost the same as a pizza and a six pack. How many of those have you bought in your life? You're just looking for a free handout and Jesus condemned such things. Luke 10:1-7 After this the Lord appointed seventy-two others and sent them two by two ahead of him to every town and place where he was about to go. He told them, "The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few. Ask the Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into his harvest field. Go! I am sending you out like lambs among wolves. Do not take a purse or bag or sandals; and do not greet anyone on the road. "When you enter a house, first say, 'Peace to this house.' If a man of peace is there, your peace will rest on him; if not, it will return to you. Stay in that house, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wages. Do not move around from house to house. "What do you mean Jesus? Are you saying that they should get wages for preaching the gospel of the kingdom? Well, shouldn't that be all free? When they are offered food and drink, they should refuse it and instead believe God to meet their need".....please. <_< Come on man, don't you have a little more insight?

"Unbelievers deserve not only to be separated from the Church, but also... to be exterminated from the World by death." - Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, 1271

Took this from the following://freetruth.50webs.org/A2a.htm In 380, the Roman Christian Emperor Theodosius passed a decree that read: "We shall believe in the single Deity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, under the concept of equal majesty and of the Holy Trinity. We command that those persons who follow this rule shall embrace the name of Catholic Christians. The rest, however, whom We adjudge demented and insane, shall sustain the infamy of heretical dogmas, their meeting places shall not receive the name of churches, and they shall be smitten first by divine vengeance and secondly by the retribution of Our own initiative, which We shall assume in accordance with the divine judgment." -- Helen Ellerbe, The Dark Side of Christian History In 317 Constantine's Roman Christian sectarians in Carthage filled the well outside the main Donatist [non-Roman Christian] church with the bodies of their Christian opponents. In 333 AD Constantine issued edicts against "Arius, wicked and impious," forbidding his teaching and even outlawing owning the Arian version of the New Testament. In 382, in Egypt, celebrating Easter on the day set aside by the local non-Roman Christian sect was punishable by death. In 383, in Spain, Urbanica was stoned to death and her bishop Priscillian was executed for their non-Roman Christian beliefs. The first Christian Emperor of Rome, Constantine the Great, after having many of his close relatives put to death, convened this Council to determine which of the Christian factions with opposing ideas on the matter of the nature of Jesus should be considered orthodoxy:.... The burning question of the council was the argument between Arius and Bishop Alexander of Alexandria. Arius claimed Jesus was essentially distinct from the Father, having been created ex nihilo by the latter. Alexander, however, claimed "as God is eternal, so is his Son — when the Father, then the Son — the Son is present in God without birth, ever-begotten, an unbegotten-begotten." By a packed vote, Arius was condemned as a heretic, excommunicated, and exiled. Three years later, however, Constantine ... recalled Arius to Constantinople. On the very day Arius was to reenter the Cathedral in triumph, his bowels suddenly burst out in a privy, obviating any need to redefine orthodoxy. The orthodox considered it a miracle; the Arians knew it was murder. In time, the rival doctrines of Arius were declared a heresy. For this, Arianism was persecuted out of existence: since the Northern tribes and many others belonged to this Christian sect, the mainstream Church persecuted the highly numerous Arians to their deaths. Whenever a vestige of this early heretical Christian sect resurfaced, it would be instantly suppressed. 16th century Protestant England, for instance, burnt an Arian to death. "Ecumenical" Council of Ephesus (A.D. 431): St. Cyril, the Pope of Alexandria, bribed enough bishops to be able to convene the Council before the arrival of the Patriarch of Antioch, whose opposition he feared. Without opposition from the delegation from Antioch it was a simple matter to condemn one Nestorius as a heretic, and to proclaim the Virgin Mary to be theotokos, or "mother of god." Such were the means by which truth was determined in the orthodox Catholic Church.

Markomalley, you said... And your point is?Roy, God loves you and so do I. :-) Markomalley said to you... Don't listen to him Roy, you're right on the money. What The Hey, you said... Excellent! Well said. Sunesis, you said... That's just it. There is no evidence at all that these so-called fathers were ever around Jesus or around anyone who was with Jesus (Paul, Peter, John, etc.) Therefore, I cannot give them "the benefit of the doubt" and assume that they ever were. They did not keep Christianity going. Christ did. Christianity had no chance of "dying out" because Jesus Christ is not a failure.T-Bone, you said... The keeper of true doctrine is Jesus Christ. I have no proof at all that God had any stock in these so-called fathers. It's so interesting that you will rail and rail on VPW and yet just from my quotes from one man (Ignatius), it is clear he taught the same bondage, people-controlling type of dogmas. Northing's OK and you serve Satan if you do anything for God outside of their approval. Disgusting. TheInvisibleDan, you said... I will not arrive anywhere near first century Christian understanding without them? This ludicrous. Psalm 25:9 He guides the humble in what is right and teaches them his way. God teaches those who are meek. You don't need the church fathers to understand the scriptures. A meek heart and and desire to know the truth and a perseverance to find wisdom is required and it's God who teaches them HIS WAY. John 16:13 But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come. The spirit of truth is what guides one to the truth. God gave me spirit so I could know HIM personally. Diligent study, a meek heart, faithfulness in prayer, and the spirit of truth is all that is necessary to find the truth. I am not lost without "them".

Hey check out some stuff that Ignatius said. Ignatius reportedly lived somewhere between 30 - 107 AD (interesting how he's never mentioned in scripture). It is said that he was a bishop in Antioch, that is, a Catholic bishop. In his epistle to the Smyrnaeans, Ignatius writes, Of course nothing should be done without the BIshop, the Bishop has to stay in-the-know about what's going on in people's lives and what they're thinking and believing. <_< So the antidote that keeps me from dying is obeying the bishop with an undivided (a.k.a. unquestioning) mind? Hmmm, I thought the shed blood of Christ was the medicine of immortality. I incur death by not believing in the Eucharist? Please. <_< <_< Boy oh boy, it's getting thicker in here. It is not right to have a love-feast without the bishop? Of course not, him being the MOG, he has to be first in line and make sure he sits at the head of the table. As long as I please the MOG, I'm pleasing to God. And here's the final card he plays. "Make sure you reverence ME and if you do anything without my knowledge, the adversary's gonna get you!" In his epistle to the Ephesians he writes, Hmmm, look at the bishop as the Lord Himself. And who's the bishop? Well he is, of course. <_<

As I have delved more and more into other Christian circles to hear what they have to share and from listening to Christian radio, it is very apparent that the church "fathers" have had such an impact on Christian doctrine. I have one simple question? Who the hell are these guys that they are so special that all of Christianity respects their views and interpretations? So a bunch of church fathers get together at some council and decide what Christians are going to believe as truth and what is heresy? Of course none of the councils conclusions as to what is the truth ever conflicted with their own views, only others whose doctrine was not theirs. This is pretty typical isn't it? "I have the truth and we have decided that YOU are a heretic, we're not heretics, but YOU are". How convenient. Who are these people that God gave them some sort of special revelation as to what the proper interpretation of the scriptures are? My dad laughs at them too. He calls them the "after the fact boys". And rightly so. These church fathers came decades and centuries after the first century Christians had long been dead. You want to know who the church fathers are? How about Christ first and foremost (I will build my church). Peter, Paul, John, Silas, Timothy, Barnabas....they're the church fathers, not these pre-Roman Catholic people who gave a mandate as to what will be acceptable as the truth. What a bunch of losers. If they were even born again, at best they were flawed, fallen men, who need to study and seek and pray and meditate for the understanding just like the rest of everyone else. And like everyone else, they were subject to personal bias and the heavy hand of the flesh in their own interpretations. God shows in the scripture that Paul was a great believer. The scripture tells me Peter was a great believer. But once I get to the end of the book of Revelation and then at the bottom of the page it says, "The End"....that's the truth of the matter. All those who came after that time period are not commented on by God. So to assume they were so spiritually keen is very dangerous. If God is so mysterious (as they will often say), then what made them think that they're perspective on God was so accurate? I hear a lot of people on GS saying to look at a man's life, look at his fruit to know whether he is a disciple of Christ. What fruit do I see from the church fathers? Hmmm, not much except a bunch of mysticism (which is why present day RC's are so ritual and mystical oriented), Aristotelian philosophy......and oh yeah, let's not forget about BURNING OTHER BELIEVERS TO DEATH FOR NOT AGREEING WITH THEIR COUNCIL'S CONCLUSIONS. Who the hell ever gave them the authority to do that? Only themselves. Nothing but losers, the whole bunch of them.

You scored as Adoptionist. You are an Adoptionist and you follow a heresy that originated in the 2nd century and was revived in the 8th. You deny Jesus' pre-existence and accept that he was only adopted as the Son of God during his earthly life. Condemned by the Council of Rome in 798. Adoptionist 75% Monarchianism 67% Socinianism 58% Pelagianism 50% Arianism 33% Apollanarian 33% Donatism 33% Docetism 0% Monophysitism 0% Chalcedon compliant 0% Nestorianism 0% Albigensianism 0% Modalism 0% Gnosticism 0% Isn't it interestig that the entire test is based on whether you believe the Trinity or not. So if I don't believe in the trinity I'm a heretic? Maybe in their eyes but not God's.