Verses:
Matthew 10:32-33
‘So everyone who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven, but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father.’
Luke 12:8-9
‘And I tell you, everyone who acknowledges me before men, the Son of Man also will acknowledge before the angels of God, but the one who denies me before men will be denied before the angels of God.’
Blanket Statements 13a, 13b, 13c
13a: I do not deny Jesus in my belief that he rose from the grave to give hope and instruction towards a future eternal living state. I acknowledge him in my belief as I don’t want to be denied any presence with the Father and his angels. I understand that belief requires more than partial outlooks or loose association to church practice, rather through this blanket statement that I associate to, I see this as a means to fulfill the obligation of standing firm in the name of the Lord, for all eyes to see and be made aware of. Note (option A): To outside eyes, we believe there is a chance you could make heaven as a heaven coward (awesome person to be around but fear or desire to always go with the crowd, even wish washy emotions towards eternity with others, are faucets that offset some recognition earned; through still yet a faith and self confession in the son of man they do things right enough to earn a better eternity), and still be denied privilege to the father's quarter with angelic games and rhythms, though not condemned to hell as the flake coward unreliable person example usage of defined other eternity entries. Use this statement for reference if applicable in your daily journey.
13b: We believe in a narrow heaven entry as the enforceable teaching at all times and think all heaven entry will not be denied before the Father because making it requires persecution and grief or you didn't try, so the verse is about the separation prior to heaven. We see it more so, that the prophetic teachings of the Nicolaitans as something that can instigate the cause of a false faith. Mindset of one who holds this false vague approach teaching: 'I'll always assume 100% freedom, to me most verses imply that everything isn't exact as the teaching to embrace here and in society, I can be a hindu for 3 years in my life and would never fear being twice uprooted, I need not deny my natural thoughts and take to heart the pick up the cross daily meditational effort, I need no association to a gentile example, to a church believer, yet I do associate to a more clausable degree with Jesus and the largest religion, that like Zues who had a son into creation the real Creator this God the Father would increase the probability in the father son dynamic as the best example; but really I'm a person who grew up as a this or that denomination and would go with the evangelical free choice if you made me checkbox it,' being the example of the ‘Lord lord didn’t I teach and do it right for others,’ person that choose their own path only as ones 'Jesus never knew.' Therefore excessively stern or not, the outlook of my belief and leadership style is to take the B option and see the verse more so as regarding the initial judgement separation as we prefer no extra speculation. If cut off hands and eyes are made an example of, of the difference of the parched and quenched eternities, then I'll hold the fort down on this one.
13c: I am somewhere in the middle on this and that goes with my belief outlook regarding contextual interpretations as I believe modern day denominations have merit and the entirety of the blanket statements seems a bit doctrine like in itself.
Additional Verses: Matthew 7:21-23, Revelations 2:6, Revelations 21:8, Jude 1:12 (sacrifice over mercy and low 2nd commandment)
Matthew 10:32-33
‘So everyone who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven, but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father.’
Luke 12:8-9
‘And I tell you, everyone who acknowledges me before men, the Son of Man also will acknowledge before the angels of God, but the one who denies me before men will be denied before the angels of God.’
Blanket Statements 13a, 13b, 13c
13a: I do not deny Jesus in my belief that he rose from the grave to give hope and instruction towards a future eternal living state. I acknowledge him in my belief as I don’t want to be denied any presence with the Father and his angels. I understand that belief requires more than partial outlooks or loose association to church practice, rather through this blanket statement that I associate to, I see this as a means to fulfill the obligation of standing firm in the name of the Lord, for all eyes to see and be made aware of. Note (option A): To outside eyes, we believe there is a chance you could make heaven as a heaven coward (awesome person to be around but fear or desire to always go with the crowd, even wish washy emotions towards eternity with others, are faucets that offset some recognition earned; through still yet a faith and self confession in the son of man they do things right enough to earn a better eternity), and still be denied privilege to the father's quarter with angelic games and rhythms, though not condemned to hell as the flake coward unreliable person example usage of defined other eternity entries. Use this statement for reference if applicable in your daily journey.
13b: We believe in a narrow heaven entry as the enforceable teaching at all times and think all heaven entry will not be denied before the Father because making it requires persecution and grief or you didn't try, so the verse is about the separation prior to heaven. We see it more so, that the prophetic teachings of the Nicolaitans as something that can instigate the cause of a false faith. Mindset of one who holds this false vague approach teaching: 'I'll always assume 100% freedom, to me most verses imply that everything isn't exact as the teaching to embrace here and in society, I can be a hindu for 3 years in my life and would never fear being twice uprooted, I need not deny my natural thoughts and take to heart the pick up the cross daily meditational effort, I need no association to a gentile example, to a church believer, yet I do associate to a more clausable degree with Jesus and the largest religion, that like Zues who had a son into creation the real Creator this God the Father would increase the probability in the father son dynamic as the best example; but really I'm a person who grew up as a this or that denomination and would go with the evangelical free choice if you made me checkbox it,' being the example of the ‘Lord lord didn’t I teach and do it right for others,’ person that choose their own path only as ones 'Jesus never knew.' Therefore excessively stern or not, the outlook of my belief and leadership style is to take the B option and see the verse more so as regarding the initial judgement separation as we prefer no extra speculation. If cut off hands and eyes are made an example of, of the difference of the parched and quenched eternities, then I'll hold the fort down on this one.
13c: I am somewhere in the middle on this and that goes with my belief outlook regarding contextual interpretations as I believe modern day denominations have merit and the entirety of the blanket statements seems a bit doctrine like in itself.
Additional Verses: Matthew 7:21-23, Revelations 2:6, Revelations 21:8, Jude 1:12 (sacrifice over mercy and low 2nd commandment)