[grip_daddy]

Ndigila,

I asked you a question on the other thread. Did the apostles work on Sabbath day? History provides that until around 3rd century, only the church of Rome and Alexandria regarded Sunday as a special day but the rest of Christendom kept the Sabbath as the commandment of God demanded. Please separate communion from work because profaning the Sabbath means work.

The state of the dead couldn't change because Jesus resurrected. Actually the resurrection of the saints on the last day will be equal to all, whether you died in OT times, or you died today. About God not accepting anyone to honour the dead, it was because through the honour of the dead the pagans worshipped or communicated with the devils who masqueraded as the dead person, see the story of Saul and the dead Samuel. I'll give you several verses if you need to cross check.

Yes give me the links detailing the defence against the accusations on the church fathers. The only problem is that they might be written by the same orthodox believers who will be in defence of their position. Personally I tend to follow history of Sabbath from secular history comparing the facts across board.

I think on scriptures I'll leave it that God safeguarded His word. Somehow even scholarstic study of New Testament alone will contradict orthodoxy on a number of issues including her disregard of the book of Revelation, her interpretation of Salvation by faith alone, Christian walk as personified by the individual believer, and the meaning and extent of worship. It is amazing that they canonised books that can be used against them, yet left behind the books that could strengthen their doctrines as I exemplified before.

[ndigila]

ndigila, i asked you a question on the other thread. Did the apostles work on sabbath day? history provides that until around 3rd century, only the church of rome and alexandria regarded sunday as a special day but the rest of christendom kept the sabbath as the commandment of god demanded. please separate communion from work because profaning the sabbath means work.

aish, grip. A most famous christian historian (eusebius of caesarea) recorded that christians worshipped on sunday, all christians. Even st cyril of jerusalem records it. I don't understand where you get the idea that only rome and alexandria did it. You may have to provide concrete quotes instead of simply saying "history proves..."

about the apostles working on saturday, i don't know.

the state of the dead couldn't change because jesus resurrected. actually the resurrection of the saints on the last day will be equal to all, whether you died in ot times, or you died today. About god not accepting anyone to honour the dead, it was because through the honour of the dead the pagans worshipped or communicated with the devils who masqueraded as the dead person, see the story of saul and the dead samuel. I'll give you several verses if you need to cross check.

but it did.

Consider these bible verses:

1 peter 4:6 for this reason the gospel was preached also to those who are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to god in the spirit

2 peter 3:18-20 for christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to god, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the spirit, by whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison, who formerly were disobedient when once the divine longsuffering waited in the days of noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is eight souls, were saved through water.

in old testament times, everyone who died went to hades. When jesus died, he descended to hades, and preached to the souls being held captive. Those who accepted him followed him to paradise and those who didn't remained in hades.

Phillipians 1:23-24: for i am hard-pressed between the two, having a desire to depart and be with christ, which is far better. Nevertheless to remain in the flesh is more needful for you.

paul knows very clearly that once he dies he was going to be with christ, he wasn't going to fall into a state of undefined unconsciousness. These bible verses destroy the soul-sleep argument.

So God forbid messing around with the dead in the Old Testament times because at time everyone went to Hades and it's a dangerous practice to mess around with those who are in Hades.

Hebrews 12:1 therefore we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us

we are surrounded by a great cloud of witnesses, so we can either ignore them or involve them in our worship.

Revelation 5:8 now when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty four elders fell down before the lamb, each having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.

revelation 8:3 then another angel, having a golden censer, came and stood at the altar. He was given much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne.

these bible verses attest to the fact that those in heaven are actively involved in the prayers of the saints on earth. In revelation 5, you see the elders offering up prayers of the saints to god. In revelation 8, you see the angels doing the same. So we can either acknowledge that they're actively involved in our worship or we can ignore it. By the way, note the liturgical nature of the worship in heaven, golden censers with incense being offered up at the golden altar.

Also, the early church did venerate the saints and the martyrs, a perfect example is in the martyrdom of st polycarp of smyrna (ch 17-18), where the church of the smyrna collected his remains and honored them "more than precious stones". St polycarp was also a disciple of john so this is evidence that veneration of saints was a practice done by the apostolic church.

yes give me the links detailing the defence against the accusations on the church fathers. The only problem is that they might be written by the same orthodox believers who will be in defence of their position. Personally i tend to follow history of sabbath from secular history comparing the facts across board.

of course they were written by orthodox believers because the accusations are made against the orthodox.
Anyway, here's an article in response to an accusation made by a scholar that Orthodox theology is Neo-Platonic.


I think on scriptures i'll leave it that god safeguarded his word. Somehow even scholarstic study of new testament alone will contradict orthodoxy on a number of issues including her disregard of the book of revelation, her interpretation of salvation by faith alone, christian walk as personified by the individual believer, and the meaning and extent of worship. It is amazing that they canonised books that can be used against them, yet left behind the books that could strengthen their doctrines as i exemplified before.

Grip, scholastic New Testament study resulted in 30,000+ church denominations, most of which are contradicting, so of course there's interpretations out there that contradict Orthodox teachings, this argument doesn't even get off the ground. Where'd you get the idea that the Orthodox church disregards the Book of Revelation? It has the strongest arguments for liturgical worship.

Do you the think the scriptures alone are sufficient enough for a person to fully live a Christian life?
If yes, then what do you with Bible verses that say that we should keep the Oral Tradition, (2 Thess 2:15, 2 Thess 3:6)
If no, then where would you get the other information and by what standard do you verify that information?

Enyewe pole for this long post, just had a lot to say. Also for some reason Mashada keeps removing all the formatting from my post, that's why most of the stuff is in lower case letters.

[grip_daddy]

Ndigila,

The New International Version of the Bible supports the notion that soul survives the body after death in its appendices but note its wordings of 1 Peter 4:6, "For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to men in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit". This verse in context of verse 1-5 reveals that the Christian person has stopped the former pagan practices, and that these pagans were also preached to, but now despite their physical death, their actions shall also be brought to judgment. Or how would you prefer Peter to word his epistle when talking about those to whom he and others had preached to in person, but by the time of his writing had died? They were dead already after the gospel had been preached to them, so for the reason of judgment "the gospel was preached to those who are dead." Note the past tense, was, and the present tense of the dead of are dead.

The death of Christ happened, and after His death, the Spirit of God (the Holy Ghost or better still God Himself) made Him (Christ) alive at the resurrection. It was through this Spirit that Christ preached to the spirits (or minds because the Greek word here for spirit means mind) he went unless to preach to the men and women of preflood to repent. The same Spirit that resurrected Jesus (made Him alive), is the same Spirit He used at the time of Noah (not at His death) to convict the conscience of the preflood people hence the preaching was in their spirit but not body. Again, please note the Greek word for mind (conscience) being translated spirit.

About Paul being in the flesh, you know that if you die and sleep in the Lord (unconsciously), you are assured of eternity because you cannot fall again into sin. You are sure of the resurrection, which when it shall happen, the duration between its occurrence and the time of your death will be like a twinkle of an eye. You cant be conscious of time progression at death and Paul understood this perfectly well, thus if anyone dies in Christ, that person is as sure of being with Christ already.

Lastly, let me say that not all the will of God can be known for every particular situation. Some people have been talked to by God through dreams (read Samuel), some received direct angelic messages, some saw visions, some received letters meant just for them, some groups of believers received a common letter (Revelation's letters to the seven churches come to mind), while others received miraculous signs. Now because God deals with people differently, and also the devil imitates God's methods (see Revelation 13 where the second beast imitates Elijah's fire from heaven), it is up to everyone to listen first to the small still voice of the Spirit speaking to the conscious (ones spirit), the revealed God's handiwork in people's lives, have an attitude to shun away from all manner of ungodliness, and compare this with God's overall will for humanity. It is up to every Christian to know the false prophets by their fruits (visible characters as corporate institution, and at individual level), see whether the preached doctrine about the saving power of Christ speak of His divinity, sovereignity, completeness, power, and might. Some denominations incorporate efforts by men to reach salvation (that there is something man can do to earn Christ's favours). If it is presented by any means that Christ alone is not adequate, that you should do any iota of works, that your complete trust, faith, and hope in Christ's saving ability is not enough, that some kind of ritual, communion, good works of others, can be used as a substitute for one's sins, then that denomination is wrong.

That a denomination cannot be right by preaching blind faith in Christ. A true denomination must not only preach the faith that is strongly grounded and built in Jesus, but also it must preach the faith that works. Jesus is a living Person, a powerful Lamb of God, a Creator, and a Loving Entity. Faith in Him must be real, powerful and working. Anyone who expresses faith in Christ to do changes in his life, then those changes must be visible, fruitful, and indispensable. You cannot claim faith in the saving power of God, then still express doubts as to your full extent of salvation. A faith in Christ must be lived, demonstrated, and shown as the light in the world. This is what James meant when he wrote, "show me your faith without works, and I will show you my faith by my works".

The power of God that is real, complete, overall, and enough for every individual's salvation must be experienced by any individual believer. The life and lifestyle of this believer will be confessing the saving power of Christ and thus there will be no need to walk around saying by mere lips that you are born again. Your disposition and character, habits, and choices to do God's laws will testify to this.

Now if the three broad principles are intrinsic in an individual in whom the Spirit of God is active, the truth of God can then be tested by them. Any doctrine that will be deviating from God's way to perform salvanic work in any person, to uphold His ark of His covenant to humanity (Rev 11:19). God's covenant for humanity is to save man from sin and give man eternity in which God's laws shall forever reign.

About Revelation and its application to worship, I wouldn't approach it literally.

[grip_daddy]

Ndigila have a look at the following links and quotes are evidences for Sabbath keeping throughout World's history Eden, et.

1. Sabbath from Creation

2. Some historians

JOSEPHUS
"There is not any city of the Grecians, nor any of the Barbarians, nor any nation whatsoever, whither our custom of resting on the seventh day hath not come!" M'Clatchie, "Notes and Queries on China and Japan" (edited by Dennys), Vol 4, Nos 7, 8, p.100.

PHILO
Declares the seventh day to be a festival, not of this or of that city, but of the universe. M'Clatchie, "Notes and Queries," Vol. 4, 99

So we have incontrovertible proof that the observance of sunday was NOT practiced by the apostolic church of the first century. Although the poison of apostasy had already begun, it did not reach the ascendancy until the passage of a few more centuries.

The next installment will show the historical record of the early christians observing the true seventh day Sabbath in the second century A.D.

3. First century Sabbath worhip

4. Lastly, I find this link to provide a non biased approach to the observance of Sunday as was slowly developed by the early church. Also check on this one.

[grip_daddy]

I got this excerpt from Jewish encyclopaedia online here

—In Post-Biblical Literature:

Josephus, in the main, follows the Biblical narrative, giving the word "Sabbath" the meaning "rest" ("Ant." i. 1, § 1), and controverting the stupid etymology of the name upheld by Apion, according to whom the Jews were forced to observe the Sabbath by the fact of their being afflicted with bubonic boils known in Egyptian by a word similar to the Hebrew word "sabbath" ("Contra Ap." ii., § 2). Moreover, his descriptions of Sabbath celebration do not differ from the Biblical. That the beginning and end of the Sabbath were announced by trumpet-blasts ("B. J." iv. 9, § 12) is shown by the Mishnah (Suk. v. 5).

Josephus makes much of the spread of Sabbath observance in non-Palestinian cities and among non-Jews ("Contra Ap." ii., § 39; comp. Philo, "De Vita Moysis," ii. 137 [ed. Mangey]). That he does not exaggerate is apparent from the comments of Roman writers on the Jewish Sabbath. Horace, in his "Satires" (i. 9, 69), speaks of "tricesima Sabbata," which certainly does not refer to a Sabbath so numbered by the Jews. Juvenal ("Satires," xiv. 96-106), Persius (v. 179-184), Martial (iv. 4, 7), and Seneca (Augustine, "De Civitate Dei," vi. 11) also refer to the Sabbath. In the Maccabean struggle the observance of the Sabbath came to have special significance as distinguishing the faithful from the half-hearted; but Josephus confirms I Macc. ii. 39-41, where the faithful, under Mattathias, decided to resist if attacked on the Sabbath, and not to permit themselves to be destroyed for the sake of literal obedience to the Sabbath law (comp. "Ant." xii. 6, § 2). He mentions instances in which the Jews were taken advantage of on the Sabbath-day—for example, by Ptolemy Lagi ("Ant." xii. 1; xviii. 9, § 2). Still, according to Josephus, the Jews carried on offensive warfare on the Sabbath ("B. J." ii. 19, § 2). Titus was outwitted by the plea that it was unlawful for Jews to treat of peace on the seventh day (ib. iv. 2, § 3). Josephus also publishes decrees exempting Jews from military service on the Sabbath, which exemption gave rise to persecutions under Tiberius ("Ant." xiv. 10, § 12 et seq.). The Essenes are referred to as very rigorous observers of the Sabbath ("B. J." ii. 8, § 9).

In Philo.

In Philo an element of mysticism dominates the interpretation of the Sabbath: the day was really intended for God, a part of whose divine happiness it is to enjoy perfect rest and peace. "Hence the Sabbath, which means 'rest,' is repeatedly said by Moses to be the Sabbath of God, not of men, for the one entity that rests is God." Divine rest, however, does not mean inactivity, but unlabored energy ("De Cherubim," § 26 [i. 154-155]). "Seven" being "the image of God," the seventh day is a pattern of the duty of philosophizing ("De Decalogo," § 20 [ii. 197]). The purpose of man's life being "to follow God" ("De Migratione Abrahami," § 23 [i. 456]), the commandment was given for man to observe the seventh day, ceasing from work, and devoting it to philosophy, contemplation, and the improvement ofcharacter ("De Decalogo," § 20 [ii. 197]). The Sabbath is the most appropriate day for instruction ("De Septenario," § 6 [ii. 282]).

Aristobulus, a predecessor of Philo, wrote a treatise on the Sabbath, fragments of which are extant. Following the Pythagoreans, he enlarges on the marvelous potency of the number "seven," but endeavors, like Philo after him ("De Septenario," §§ 6-7 [ii. 281-284]), to prove the observance of the day to be both reasonable and profitable (Eusebius, "Præparatio Evangelica," xiii. 12, §§ 9-16). He asserts that even Homer and Hesiod observed the Sabbath, citing lines from them and from Linus. According to his understanding, the Sabbath was primarily to be used for searching, the Scriptures, fostering the soul's powers, and striving after the knowledge of truth. The Sabbath might be called the first creation of the (higher) light, in which all is revealed (comp. the benedictions preceding the Shema'; Herzfeld, "Gesch. des Volkes Jisrael," p. 478, Nordhausen, 1867).

[grip_daddy]

In the Talmud.

These Alexandrian speculations partake of the nature of haggadic homilies. In those of the Tannaim and Amoraim similar strains are heard. The Sabbath overshadowed every other day (Pesiḳ. R. 23), while Shammai began even on the first day of the week to make provision for the proper observance of the seventh day. It was Hillel who recalled the dignity of other days (Beẓah 16a). The Sabbath is considered to be equivalent to the Abrahamitic covenant (Mek. 62b; Pesiḳ. R. 23; Agadat Bere****, xvii.). Its observance forestalls the threefold judgment—the Messianic sufferings, the wars of Gog and Magog, and the final day of retribution (Mek. 50b, 51a; comp. Shab. 118a). The privilege of celebrating the three great pilgrim festivals is the reward for faithful Sabbath observance (Mek. l.c.). The Sabbath is likened to wholesome spices (Shab. 119a; Gen. R. xi.; Jellinek, "B. H." i. 75). Whosoever keeps the Sabbath holy is protected against temptation to sin (Mek. 50b).

Most characteristic is the dialogue between Rufus and Akiba concerning the two signs of the Covenant—circumcision and the Sabbath (Sanh. 65b; Gen. R. xi.; Pesiḳ. R. 23; Tan., Ki Tissa; Jellinek, "B. H." i. 75). The will of God is alleged to be the sole reason for the day's distinction. As proof that the seventh day is the Sabbath the inability of the necromancer to call a spirit from the River Sambation, and the fact that the grave of Rufus' father sends forth smoke during the six week-days, but ceases to do so on the Sabbath, are adduced. Akiba meets the objection that God violates His own law by sending wind and rain on the Sabbath with the statement that the universe is God's private domain, within which the proprietor is at liberty even on the Sabbath. Moreover, God proved Himself to be a Sabbath observer by interrupting the fall of manna on that day. To observe the Sabbath is regarded as equivalent to having originally instituted it (Mek. 104a, b).

The Sabbath expresses the intimacy between God and Israel; from the days of Creation this relation has existed. Each week-day is associated with another, the first with the second, and so on; but the Sabbath stands alone. In answer to its complaint at being thus neglected, God explained that Israel is its peculiar associate (Beẓah 16a; Gen. R. xi.). Man's face takes on a new luster on the Sabbath. The two great heavenly lights, the sun and the moon, did not begin to lose their original brilliancy until after the first Sabbath (Mek. 69b; Gen. R. xi., xii.). If all Israel were to observe two successive Sabbaths as they should be observed, redemption would ensue at once (Shab. 118b; comp. Yer. Ta'an. 64a); if even one Sabbath were rightly kept the Messiah would appear (Shab. 118b). Simeon ben Yoḥai regarded too much talking as inconsistent with the proper celebration of the day (Yer. Shab. 15b); R. Ze'era reproved his pupils for committing this fault (Shab. 119a, b). Those that observe the Sabbath are ranked with those that give tithes and honor the Law; their rewards are identical (Shab. 119a; Gen. R. xi.; Pesiḳ. R. 23). Two angels, one good, the other evil, accompany every Jew on Sabbath eve from the synagogue to the house. If the Sabbath lamp is found lighted and the table spread, the good angel prays that this may be the case also on the following Sabbath, and the evil angel is compelled to say "Amen" to this; but if no preparations for the Sabbath are seen, the evil angel pronounces a curse, and the good angel is compelled to say "Amen" (Shab. 119b).

Haggadic References.

The law of the Sabbath is equal to all the other laws and commandments in the Torah (Yer. Ber. 3c; Yer. Ned. 38b; Ex. R. xxv.). The ẓiẓit is intended to be a constant reminder of the Sabbath (Yer. Ber. 3c). "Queen" and "bride" are two typical appellations for the day (Shab. 119a; B. Ḳ. 32a, b; Gen. R. x.); it is the signet on the ring (ib.). A special soul ("neshamah yeterah") is given to man on the eve of the Sabbath, and leaves him again at its close (Beẓah 16a; Ta'an. 27b). Simeon ben Laḳish explains the repetition of the Sabbath commandment by relating a parable of a father who sent his son to a merchant with a bottle and some money. The son broke the bottle and lost the money, whereupon the father admonished him to be more careful and gave him another bottle and some more money. Hence comes the use of the word in Deuteronomy ("be careful"; Pesiḳ. R. 23). According to R. Simlai, the "remember" in Ex. xx. 8 indicates the duty of thinking of the Sabbath before, the "observe" in Deut. v. 12 that of keeping it holy after, its advent (Pesiḳ. R. 23). The Sabbath is a precious pearl (Midr. Teh. to Ps. xcii., ed. Buber, p. 201a). The one day which belongs to God is, according to Ps. cxxxix. 16, the Sabbath; according to some it is the Day of Atonement (Pesiḳ. R. 23; Tan., Bemidbar, 20). The superior character of the seventh day is marked by the circumstance that everything connected with it is twofold: e.g., the double portions of manna (Ex. xvi. 22); the two lambs (Num. xxviii. 9); the double menace in Ex. xxxi. 14; the repetition of the Sabbath commandment (Ex. xx. 8 and Deut. v. 12); the double title of Ps. xcii.—"mizmor" and "shir" (Midr. Teh. to Ps. xcii., ed. Buber, p. 201b).

The Sabbath is a foretaste of the world to come (Gen. R. xvii., xliv.; Ber. 57b ["one-sixtieth of the world to come"]). The example of the Creator iscited to teach that all work, however important, should cease as soon as the Sabbath approaches; for God was about to create bodies for the demons whose souls He had fashioned when the Sabbath came and prevented the execution of the intention (Gen. R. vii.). The Patriarchs are said to have kept the Sabbath even before the revelation on Sinai (Gen. R. lxxix.; Tan., Naso, 33 [ed. Buber, p. 22a, b]).

[ndigila]

Originally Posted by grip_daddy

Ndigila have a look at the following links and quotes are evidences for Sabbath keeping throughout World's history Eden, et.

1. Sabbath from Creation

2. Some historians

The first link above firsts tries to discredit the early church fathers and then makes the claim that the Sabbath was kept by the Christians.

It was during this interval of obscurity in the history of the early church, that the "falling away" from the apostolic faith commenced (Acts 20:29, 30; 11 Thessalonians 2:1-7). By the middle of the second century the church had altered its course and practices so much that it was hardly recognisable as the church founded by the Messiah and His apostles.

This is definitely an SDA apologist. The problem with this thinking is that you are forced to believe that the church fell into apostasy as soon as the apostles died. First of all, those who claim Sunday worship (such as Ignatius of Antioch) had a good 30 year stint as Bishop of Antioch before his disciple, the Apostle John died. 30 good years, yet we're being told to believe that John didn't even bother to correct him.

There's no question that the early church had problems and some had heretical issues, but if you claim that this whole church fell into apostasy then you really can't trust anything of that church (including the Bible).

The second link above doesn't deal with writings of the early church fathers, instead it references to scholastic arguments that 2nd century Christians worshipped on Sunday.

You also have to take into account the possibility that Josephus and Philo may have been talking about the Jews of the Diaspora.

Originally Posted by grip_daddy;661101
4. Lastly, I find [URL="http://www.biblehistory.com/The%20Origin%20of%20Sunday%20Worship.html"

this link[/url] to provide a non biased approach to the observance of Sunday as was slowly developed by the early church. Also check on this one.

Well Grip, its not a non-biased approach. It also uses the Bible only approach, it compares the 2nd century church to their interpretation of the Bible. For instance, it mentions that there is no scriptural evidence that the Lord's day is Sunday. Also it tries to discredit Constantine's council of Nicaea.

[ndigila]

The posts following that one only make an argument on the significance of the Sabbath in Israel and Judaism, not in Christianity.

By the way, Philo kept the lunar sabbath, a sabbath based on lunar weeks, so this weakens the SDA argument.

[reggie_woic]

do you think the day we choose for sabbath matters, ndigila?
which one do you follow?

[ndigila]

Originally Posted by grip_daddy

Ndigila,

The New International Version of the Bible supports the notion that soul survives the body after death in its appendices but note its wordings of 1 Peter 4:6, "For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to men in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit". This verse in context of verse 1-5 reveals that the Christian person has stopped the former pagan practices, and that these pagans were also preached to, but now despite their physical death, their actions shall also be brought to judgment. Or how would you prefer Peter to word his epistle when talking about those to whom he and others had preached to in person, but by the time of his writing had died? They were dead already after the gospel had been preached to them, so for the reason of judgment "the gospel was preached to those who are dead." Note the past tense, was, and the present tense of the dead of are dead.

1 Peter 4:6 says the gospel was also preached to those who are dead. The significance of the past tense indicates that Jesus died in the past.

Originally Posted by grip_daddy

The death of Christ happened, and after His death, the Spirit of God (the Holy Ghost or better still God Himself) made Him (Christ) alive at the resurrection. It was through this Spirit that Christ preached to the spirits (or minds because the Greek word here for spirit means mind) he went unless to preach to the men and women of preflood to repent. The same Spirit that resurrected Jesus (made Him alive), is the same Spirit He used at the time of Noah (not at His death) to convict the conscience of the preflood people hence the preaching was in their spirit but not body. Again, please note the Greek word for mind (conscience) being translated spirit.

As Noah preached righteousness, suffered unjustly and rescued those who were with him, so also did Christ. Christ descended to those in darkness and death that light might shine on them and He might deliver them from death.

Originally Posted by grip_daddy

About Paul being in the flesh, you know that if you die and sleep in the Lord (unconsciously), you are assured of eternity because you cannot fall again into sin. You are sure of the resurrection, which when it shall happen, the duration between its occurrence and the time of your death will be like a twinkle of an eye. You cant be conscious of time progression at death and Paul understood this perfectly well, thus if anyone dies in Christ, that person is as sure of being with Christ already.

Grip, this doesn't solve your case, it rather complicates it.
Paul says he is torn between his desire to go and be with Christ and his desire to remain and care for the Church. You're interpretation makes Paul's dilemma a selfish one, as in, he's torn between going to an undefinite state of unconciousness (even though it's in the twinkle of an eye) and resurrecting at the final judgement and caring for the Church.

Originally Posted by grip_daddy

Lastly, let me say that not all the will of God can be known for every particular situation. Some people have been talked to by God through dreams (read Samuel), some received direct angelic messages, some saw visions, some received letters meant just for them, some groups of believers received a common letter (Revelation's letters to the seven churches come to mind), while others received miraculous signs.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by grip_daddy

Now because God deals with people differently, and also the devil imitates God's methods (see Revelation 13 where the second beast imitates Elijah's fire from heaven), it is up to everyone to listen first to the small still voice of the Spirit speaking to the conscious (ones spirit), the revealed God's handiwork in people's lives, have an attitude to shun away from all manner of ungodliness, and compare this with God's overall will for humanity. It is up to every Christian to know the false prophets by their fruits (visible characters as corporate institution, and at individual level), see whether the preached doctrine about the saving power of Christ speak of His divinity, sovereignity, completeness, power, and might. Some denominations incorporate efforts by men to reach salvation (that there is something man can do to earn Christ's favours). If it is presented by any means that Christ alone is not adequate, that you should do any iota of works, that your complete trust, faith, and hope in Christ's saving ability is not enough, that some kind of ritual, communion, good works of others, can be used as a substitute for one's sins, then that denomination is wrong.

That a denomination cannot be right by preaching blind faith in Christ. A true denomination must not only preach the faith that is strongly grounded and built in Jesus, but also it must preach the faith that works. Jesus is a living Person, a powerful Lamb of God, a Creator, and a Loving Entity. Faith in Him must be real, powerful and working. Anyone who expresses faith in Christ to do changes in his life, then those changes must be visible, fruitful, and indispensable. You cannot claim faith in the saving power of God, then still express doubts as to your full extent of salvation. A faith in Christ must be lived, demonstrated, and shown as the light in the world. This is what James meant when he wrote, "show me your faith without works, and I will show you my faith by my works".

The problem isn't as simple you claim it to be. Most denominations claim Holy Spirit revelation and make very good scriptural arguments, by what other standard do you use to judge who's right and who's wrong? There is any. This is why many churches are now taking the post-modern approach and saying that all denominations are essentially equal.

Originally Posted by grip_daddy

The power of God that is real, complete, overall, and enough for every individual's salvation must be experienced by any individual believer. The life and lifestyle of this believer will be confessing the saving power of Christ and thus there will be no need to walk around saying by mere lips that you are born again. Your disposition and character, habits, and choices to do God's laws will testify to this.

I agree that salvation is a personal issue, but by the simple fact that the Church pre-dates the New Testament and was entrusted with its preservation means that the significance of the Church can't be ignored. Even if you read Acts, when people accepted the Gospel message they were plugged into the Church where they learnt the faith, you can't do that in the modern day Protestant era.

Originally Posted by grip_daddy

Now if the three broad principles are intrinsic in an individual in whom the Spirit of God is active, the truth of God can then be tested by them. Any doctrine that will be deviating from God's way to perform salvanic work in any person, to uphold His ark of His covenant to humanity (Rev 11:19). God's covenant for humanity is to save man from sin and give man eternity in which God's laws shall forever reign.

Okay, since we have entirely different approaches towards Salvation, i'm not going to comment on this.

Originally Posted by grip_daddy

About Revelation and its application to worship, I wouldn't approach it literally.

Who decides what literal and what's symbolic?