Search Members

[Richard of Decatur]

None of you know anything about Jesus from the time He was born until about twelve and then to the time He was about thirty when He went to the Jordan River to be baptized by John the Baptist. Other that the fact that He astounded the priests and scholars in the Temple in Jerusalem with His knowledge and understanding of the holy scriptures when He was twelve, you are clueless as to what He was doing and in fact where He was actually living. You assume He continued to live in Nazareth. The Bible states He was born in Bethlehem and live there until age two when the Magi came and gave Him gifts. Then He was taken to Egypt and after some period of time was taken to Nazareth. But, you do not know one thing that He actually did Himself all those years. You assume He was a carpenter. Joseph was a carpenter but that does not mean Jesus was. Jesus could have been living anywhere on the planet for all you know. I might add there is a high probability that He left the entire region after age twelve and did not return until age thirty. (Take that and chew on it for a while you self proclaimed scholars of the Word of God.) [Sorry, guys I just could not help myself from adding that barb.] And to assume He was somehow less than perfect or that He did not have the Holy Spirit before He was baptized is stupid if not blasphemy. To be the ‘Lamb of God’ to be sacrificed for all of mankind, He had to be perfect and not sin His entire life and there was no way He could have done this without help from the Holy Spirit. That He was sinless and perfect His entire life is exactly what He was as pointed out in Hebrews 4: 14, 15
“14 Seeing then that we have a great High Priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. 15 For we do not have a High Priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.”

[Richard of Decatur]

Nick and EdJ:
I looked at my KJV John 12: 41 and here it is “41These things said Esaias, when he saw his glory, and spake of him.” Guess what? No, mention of the word Jesus. What translation are you reading???
Also, the blood mentioned was from Jesus on the Cross while He was half human half divine.
Sure there are some words the KJV translator used in 1611 that were not in the Textus Receptus like Easter instead of Passover. Actually, I must agree that 1611 English is certainly different from the KJV language I read so there must have been some updates. Need to check this out as it has been a while since I did some research in the development of the KJV I am reading. Just remember it used mainly the Textus Receptus (TR)and not the more recent scrolls that are not as accurate as older copies of the TR. Wanted to also add that you should not be so sure their concepts of “Hades, Tartarus, and Gehenna to the word Hell” are accurate or true to the Word of God if you are basing them on other translations than the AV of the KJV 1611 translation of the Textus Receptus. Of course you are going to say the same to me.
Based on what I am reading on all the posts on various subjects, I am not sure what you all really believe on really important things.
You guys sound like all you like to do is argue and criticize others and their views. Opps, that sounds a bit like myself. Okay, I am going to cut you guys some slack. There are reasons we have favorites and I guess that affects what we read. So, use whatever. Just pray that God will guide your mind and reasoning and have mercy where wrong and that applies to me as well.
Love and kindness, my brothers

[Richard of Decatur]

More errors have been committed by individuals trying to establish doctrines by using the NIV than can be imagined. The NIV is easy reading but systematically uses phrase and words to distort the truth.
I simply would never accept any writing that uses the NIV as its source to justify concepts, ideas, and truths the Word of God contains.
I use the Authorized 1611 King James Version translated primarily from the Textus Receptus to find truth and I accept no other translation, period.
From the errors I read on this site, apparently most are basing their ideas after reading other versions instead of the Authorized King James Version of 1611.
I challenge the writer of this posting to rewrite it using only the KJV not the NIV and see if it supports what he is writing.

[Richard of Decatur]

Jesus who is called the Son of God has other names and He shares all these names with God the Father as we read in Isaiah 9: 6 “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.”

All these discussion on Heaven Net are trying to pry apart the Godhead like Biology students dissecting a frog. Simply because the writers do not understand that while Jesus and the Father used the very same names at times they were two distinct entities. Though one in purpose each had a role to perform. Those writers are like Philip. They read about God but do not seem to really know Him and understand how one could be the Father and the other one could be the Son. Both were and are God from eternity past to the future. Yes, they have different names because they are two. Yet, they are one as no human could ever understand as each of us are so independent and carnal.

John 14: 9Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? 10Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works. 11Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves.

Read the rest of John 14 and accept the fact that Jesus is God and so is the one we call the Father who is also God not because I wrote this but because that is what the Word of God clearly states to those who will read it and not twist its meaning to say otherwise.

Richard of Decatur

[Richard of Decatur]

John chapter 1: 1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.
14And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
Based on Scripture not opinions and foolish ramblings of men.
1. The Word was in the beginning with God.
2. The Word was God.
3. The Word became flesh and dwelt among us (that Word was the one we now call Jesus Christ.)
4. Since all things were made or created by or through Him, how could He have been created? Did He create himself??? (answer that one Mikeboll64???)

I have quoted the Word of God. Keep on arguing against the truth of God and one of these days you will stand before Him and He will ask you why you wrote those awful things you did about Jesus Christ not being God.

[Richard of Decatur]

t8:
I know this topic is a couple of years old, but thought I would ask.
While reading postings on this topic I saw that you like the version AKJV of the Bible. What does the ‘A’ stand for? I generally use the NKJV which is the New King James Version for its readability and being very close to the KJV. I also check other versions when I am researching information in the Bible.
Richard

[Richard of Decatur]

I fully support your rules and am glad they are there for the sake of those of us who get tired of someone coming out with the same old garbage.

[Richard of Decatur]

Nick,
Do you realize what you are doing. You disagree with me, fine. However, in attempting to refute what I wrote, look at what you wrote.
In one of your replies, you accuse me of inferring that Jesus is a liar.
In another, you infer that I am using or encouraging the use of opinion as a foundation for making decisions.
In the last reply, you say I am encouraging others to doubt the book of Jude which is in the Bible simply because I do not find this supposed ‘quote’ supports the authenticity of the Book of Enoch.
All these are personal attacks against me and none really address the subject with facts.

Just because a ‘book’ contains a quote that is ascribe to a person that does not mean that person said anything else that is written in the book before or after the quote nor does this prove the person who is quoted is the author of that book. I accept the quote of Enoch presented in the book of Jude. That quote, I know is truth. However, everything else in the Book of Enoch is not quoted by Jude or anyone one else and is not in the Word of God. Therefore, I do not accept anything else written in the Book of Enoch as being truth especially when much of it goes counter to what the Bible says and particularly some things that Jesus stated. Such as that angels do not marry, which I believe means they do not engage in sex and most likely do not have the physical organs to make it possible for them to have sex.
Now, before anyone jumps on this last statement as OPINION not FACT, let me say. Jesus was very clear that no one who wants to be in God’s Kingdom should have sex outside of marriage. That would be fornication or adultery. Both will keep one out of the Kingdom of God (Galatians 5: 19 – 21). I think this prohibition applies to angels as well.

Guess this could start another topic: Does God have sex organs? I hope such a discussion does not take place. I think this is too personal about God for mortals to discuss.

[Richard of Decatur]

Ed J,
Thank you for your comment. Your consideration and kind word about what I wrote means a lot.

To the rest of you fellows: I apologize for being so judgmental in my last post.

There are some subjects that I just do not want to go off in what I think of as a tangent. A tangent is a line that touches a circle at exactly one point while missing the rest of the circle. In this respect, I guess I am the tangent and you all are the circle.

While I have wrote about subjects that I am sure are sensitive subjects to others, I now realize that I need to present my words and expressions with more kindness. Still, it is hard to recognize kindness when a person seems to be ‘attacking’ something we hold dear.

For the most part it seems from one post to the next, you all have been basically kind and when you end with “peace, brother” it is hard feel bad toward someone who disagrees with you.

Guess I am not going to pull the plug (YET). Still this subject is too extreme for me at this time.

Peace and love to you all.

Richard

[Richard of Decatur]

Fellows: There is no need to waste your time trying to convince me of something you think you know and understand. I have stated my case simply by calling your attention to 3 scriptures that I believe are clear and understandable. Enough said and written.
Nick, I am the son of my father as well as my mother. If I stated that I am the son of my father that does not make me a liar because I did not say I was also the son of my mother at the same time. There are many things about myself that I might not say but that does not make me a liar because I do not tell about them as well. Hope you get my meaning.
Mike, if what Kerwin said is true about what you believe, I guess I missed it as the comment you wrote that I read seemed to be close to what I believe but I guess I was wrong and you are more in line with the rest of this group than with what I believe.
I am trying not to get personal, impute motives, or try to reason further with you all about this issue. I will pray for you all.
If anyone wants to comment in support of what I have written, I would love to hear from you.
To the rest, save your time and words that I do not for a second believe, support, or care to read what you have to say on this topic. Perhaps, I can find something more truthful in other forums and topics. I am pulling the plug on this one. Enough is enough.
I am simply growing sadly more disappointed as I read comments on this topic by many of you that simply does not line up with the Word of God. I really thought I had found something special.

[Richard of Decatur]

I agree with Mikeboll64. He wrote a lot of things to refute what others wrote about Jesus not being God and not pre-existing before He was born. Baloney, Jesus was God in the beginning, was with the Father, both being God. Jesus was God during His earthly life, and continued being God after His resurrection.
Amen, Mike.

[Richard of Decatur]

I am somewhat confused by everything that I have read posted on this subject. So many opinions, few substantiate what is being talked about, but that is my ‘opinion’.
Can’t remember exactly where and who that were writing about “Jesus is not God.” So, was Thomas blaspheming when he said the following in verse 28 of John 20:
27Then He said to Thomas, “Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your hand here, and put it into My side. Do not be unbelieving, but believing.”

28And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”

29Jesus said to him, “Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
30And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; 31but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

How can you deny that Jesus is God after reading John 1: 1-4, 14. The Word of God says, “the Word became flesh and dwelt among us” this proves Jesus is the Word. The Word of God says “the Word was God”. This absolutely says that Jesus was God. While He and the One called the Father are not the same entity, both are GOD.
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was in the beginning with God. 3All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.
14And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and trut

Also, how can you not understand that the Word of God tells us that Jesus was “equal with God”.
Philippians 2
5Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, 6who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, 7but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. 8And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. 9Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, 10that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

These three passages prove Jesus was God and pre-existed His birth by the virgin Mary. While Mary was His mother, His Father was God. How did this happen? I believe Jesus transformed Himself into a sperm cell. In that condition, He could not do anything. So, it required God the Father through the power of the Holy Spirit to place that sperm cell into Mary’s womb to fertilize one of her eggs and that was how Jesus was born truly human and also truly divine.
You all may think you are pretty smart with all your reasoning and logic. I am not buying it. I will trust only in the Word of God and all your ideas are meaningless unless they conform to the Word of God and some of you seem clueless in this regard.
Richard of Decatur

[Richard of Decatur]

Nick:
You are making the same mistake everyone else on this net is making. While Jude mentions Enoch, he does not mention any ‘Book of Enoch’. There was a considerable amount of information from Adam to the writers of the New Testament that was carried forward orally and was not written down (at least no copies of it remain AND the Book of Enoch is not inspired by God, Period).
The Book of Enoch that everyone on the net is writing about is spurious. Just because it bears the name of Enoch in no way proves the writer was the same Enoch mentioned in Jude or in Genesis. In fact, so much of this book states things that are so base and ungodly I find it amazing people are taking it seriously or saying it helps us in any way to understand any real truth of God. This book is about as authentic as the Book of Mormon. Both are demon inspired and profane.
Follow God, read His Word and follow what it says unto real knowledge and truth. Forsake the writings and ramblings of ungodly men and their foolishness.

I just wish others would consider these words about that ungodly book and heed my warning. Playing with the devil will cause you to get burned in the end.

[Richard of Decatur]

Gene:
Just wanted to make another point concerning the Saints and Job comparison. First, while God allowed Satan to try Job with very serious problems, God did not allow Satan to take his life. Job endured all of Satan’s trials and kept his faith in God. What Job repented of was ‘self-righteousness’ not yielding to Satan nor forsaking God. Job simply did not fully realize how great was God’s actions in his life and the power of God’s Spirit that kept him faithful. Job actually thought he was pretty strong and his obedience to God was mostly of his own doing. When he saw what God has done since before the world was created and what God did in forming the earth and all of the universe, he finally realized how awesomely great God was while infinitesimally small he was, he repented of his self-righteousness. Note: the sin of self-righteousness is a sin that Satan does not understand so he really did not realize that Job had this sin to begin with.

In the references to the end times mentioned in Revelation and Daniel, just because it says the Saints were worn out and given into Satan’s hand, I do not believe that means they were compromised into forsaking God and following Satan. There have been many martyrs in the past and will be in the future.
‘These things says the First and the Last, who was dead, and came to life: 9“I know your works, tribulation, and poverty (but you are rich); and I know the blasphemy of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan. 10Do not fear any of those things which you are about to suffer. Indeed, the devil is about to throw some of you into prison, that you may be tested, and you will have tribulation ten days. Be faithful until death, and I will give you the crown of life. 11“He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. He who overcomes shall not be hurt by the second death.”’ (Rev. 2: 8-11) Just like those who are beheaded because they will not take the mark of the Beast nor bow down and worship him. They will join the rest of the Saints in the first resurrection.

Thanks Gene for engaging us in an interesting discussion of events yet to be played out and yet to be fully understood.
Richard of Decatur

[Richard of Decatur]

I just finished reading (a considerable amount of it at least) the book of Enoch.
It kind of reminded me of the book of Mormon. Somebody trying to sound like other Biblical books presenting what they think and wholly made up of their own imagination.
The part about fallen angels mating with women is vulgar and ludicrous. This alone tells me to trash the book and not waste my time reading it.
Is some part of it true? Sure, I can copy a portion of scripture and then ramble on about something else. While the scriptural part is true that does not make anything else true.
Bottom-line, there is nothing in the book of Enoch that is true that cannot be found in the Bible books that are canonized both Old and New Testaments. Archeological facts may be interesting but even these do not make up for the outright errors.
If Jesus Christ tells us something, (Matt. 22: 30; and Mark 12: 25) that is what we should believe and not compromise it with our own reasoning or logic. Angels do not have the ability to mate with mortals. (Period, end of discussion.)

[Richard of Decatur]

t8:
Great subject and points for us to consider.
While we feel a desire to share what we learn in God’s Word, we need to be careful in sharing it with others who are not only not ready to hear it but will turn and attack us personally.
The Apostle Paul and others wrote in the New Testament of individuals within church congregations that had agendas and motivation to undermine those who were doing and teaching good. The more God’s Spirit works in any individual then and now, the more Satan moves others to try to slander, bring false accusations, and try to get others to form a conspiracy to attack them and drive them out so they can be in control.
I speak from experience, it is hard to believe how others you thought were truly godly men can change. Sadly, they do not understand that any good work that one does and ability that one has, comes from God. Of ourselves we are nothing. Those who attack what God’s Spirit accomplishes in us, attacks God not us personally.
Such individuals that turn into virtual animals are like a herd of swine. Very little intelligence, insatiable appetite, and always ready to push others aside to feast on their slop.

[Richard of Decatur]

Gene:
You make a strong case for your perspective.
I absolutely agree that no one now or in the future can make it on their own strengths in every respect without incredible power that God’s Spirit can give them. Those that make it into God’s Kingdom will have done so only because of God’s help. While I believe that the Saints will be tried by Satan to the point of breaking, those who overcome will be kept and rewarded (Rev. 2:11).

[Richard of Decatur]

Thank you Nick and Ed for your kind welcome and comments. Yes, you both nailed supporting scriptures to my quote.

I use this quote on all my articles and postings on my website: Biblesafety.com
One thing I am really trying to get through to others is the importance of finding multiple supporting scriptures taken in context and that are applicable when establishing what you believe as well as any doctrine or practice one follows. The world is full of religious organizations whose main doctrines, beliefs, and practices are based on only one verse or even a part of one verse often taken out of context or even worse (if that were possible) totally based on tradition without any scriptural support. Don’t take me wrong. Traditions can be just fine, except when they go against the truth of God’s Word. (Mark 7: 6-9)

I really like what I have read so far from the contributors, members, and the website’s ‘Admin’, programmer, editor, or whoever he is (also guessing he is a he but cannot rule out it may be a she, and by the way that would not bother me as “Truth is based on its own merit and is not dependent on who presents it.” another one of my quotes.)

When I first started reading posts and discussions there were somethings that caused me concern. However, I was just speed reading and did not fully grasp what was being presented. I will have to go back over those posts.

I am not going to take anyone’s ideas, concepts, or information at face value. If I am interested in pursuing a subject I will begin to search out scriptures presented and those that ‘pop’ into my mind until I feel I understand what God wants me to know. I do not expect I will agree with everything another person presents but may agree with a considerable amount. Somethings we can disagree about. That does not negate those things we agree about.

Again, thanks to all and I look forward to learning a lot from you all.

[Richard of Decatur]

Gene: There is probably a city named Decatur in nearly every state. No, I am not from Decatur, Texas. Thank you for the warm welcome.

You may be right in regard to what happens after Satan is released to some extent. I do not think the ‘whole world and every human living at that time’ will turn against God simply because Satan’s influence is again allowed. Here is what I base my understanding on.

Revelation 20: says, “7And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, 8And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. 9And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.”

Based on the scriptural account of this event, I conclude that there must be some human individuals living within a place that do not follow Satan. This account says specifically Satan and those that chose at that time to forsake God and follow Satan “compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city.” So, at least there are some within ‘the camp of the saints and the beloved city (which I believe is Jerusalem because that is where Jesus returns to, builds His temple, and I cannot find any scripture that says He abides elsewhere on earth.) I am also optimistic that there may be many human individuals living across the breath of the earth that also do not follow Satan. However, I will concede that this is speculation as I do not have specific or exact scripture to support this.

My reasoning is based on this: Reading the number that follow Satan expressed as great as ‘the sand of the sea’ is the same expression given to Jacob concerning his progeny in Genesis 32: 12. Even as many as that may be, the rest of earth’s population then, today, and very possibly in the future were, are, and could be, a substantial number excluding Jacob’s progeny. Therefore, there could be a substantial number of individuals living across the four corners of the world when Satan is released that do not follow him to destruction.

Again, this is speculation but if you disagree show me scriptural support for your reasoning, otherwise, your view is just opinion like mine.

It is very hard for me to think otherwise than I do. I also believe that when the final tally is made, those who ultimately find salvation in Jesus Christ will out number those who reject God and join Satan in hell will be like comparing ‘the sand of the sea’ to a single handful of sand.

[Richard of Decatur]

Gene:
First, I believe Satan is released at the end of the thousand years because God does not want anyone in His Kingdom who has not faced and overcome Satan. Second, when I read Revelation 20: 12 that says “And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books” it makes me think that the opening of the ‘Book of Life” means there will be individuals saved after Jesus returns and they prove their faithfulness by resisting and not following Satan.
Yes, I agree that there seems to be unfinished business as it were that is not completed when Jesus returns.

[Author]

Posts