Yes there should have been and be, one seed so to speak, however, that seed it would seem was lost, ignored what appears to be around 1-150 years after Jesus.
Jesus said, it would be like the days of Noah,......not sure, but wasn't it a very short time after him, that they strayed as well?
Now then, what you appear to fail to acknowledge, the key necessary basics, first milk of who and what God and Jesus are, is loud and clear in the Bible and if these words are taken on board for what their actually saying, all or most of these said takes by most, end up dead in the water.
And I could show you from the Bible, this is not horse sh...
I would also put it to you, that that is one of the reasons, you say we cannot just rely on the Bible, for these key and necessary areas I just mentioned, as the Bible will show conflict with many areas you believe and follow.
You go on about following forefathers and yet the evidence appears to suggest, the truth was fading by around 150 yrs after Jesus.
Now I just saw your post to Mr G, of what you accept.
A lot of it, all looks on track, however, what you have placed there is in effect, a very broad sweeping brush, so to speak.
Example -->
And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord
Which Jesus, is the Big question?
T
he moment you say we have a literal, physical pre-existent one of a kind here, You have immediately created another Jesus and given total neglect of the numerous OT passages.
The moment one says or insist that the first 13 verses of John are referring directly to Jesus, instead of viewing him as, still being the hidden mystery within God, the plan, you have robbed the Almighty God and Father, created another God and ignored the OT passages and to what John was to first do, Mal 3:1 etc.
The word, logos in 1:1 is clearly the likes of, means, Titus 1:2 & 2 Tim 1:9, God and his plan, thoughts,...........hence in 1:4, In Him (God), life was,..........and this life, light, is clearly in His Word, Titus etc as Psa 119:105, clearly shows, God's Word is the Light.
Hence Jesus being Given the Spirit/Word without measure, became "a" Light, the plan, into the world.
He can also say, he is the Light, Bread as the whole plan, Titus etc, before time eternal,as it was always going to be through a Future one to be.
Hence, in that very context, God's first thoughts, plan = Jesus was the beginning of the creation of God Rev 1:14 and in the exact same context, the firstborn of creation Col 1:15, Eph 3:9 and This is known as the Gory insofar held via God Alone, before the world actually existed John 17:5 (Greek truth that is).
---
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
This you say you believe in;
Now if you ever saw such a statement from me, I would in effect be saying, I believe in the Almighty God and Father who is this Holy Spirit and not another identity.
Jesus at John 14:13, makes reference to the Spirit of Truth, which is the Holy Spirit and at 14:15, which you quoted, Jesus now identifies the Spirit of Truth as the Father, therefore, I said He will show you --> the He in this verses is NOW the Father, which earlier, Jesus identified the Father as the Spirit of Truth, which will be showing you these exact same things.
To create another identity out of the Holy Spirit is to rob God and create an Idol, no question about it.
And if you rob him of his Spirit, you have to give him another as he is Spirit.
You would also have to then say, the Holy Spirit is the Father of Jesus, unless your suggesting, Jesus has two Fathers.
So,....if we take on the likes of Jesus's words, gate and path narrow and few find it, if we just look within the Christian world, the numerous variations, Jesus's words appear to be running true to form.
All these faiths, claim they follow the Same book, therefore the answers and reasons for the variations, are going to be in this Book and I put it to you, the answers are loud and Clear, IF one is able to Look at them, standing back out of their seeds, to do so.
And yes, I totally get and understand how most would simply sit back thinking, how could this guy have it, be on track etc?
But what they probably fail to consider, I have thought exactly the same, many times, hence why I have come back to it on numerous occasions, from various angles etc, you might say, cross referencing.
Also looked at most others takes to understand, how and why they come to their conclusions, but sadly, the common trend appears to be, they leave out many other areas, and references.
