Biblical Lexicography Example: What is “ministry”?

In my last post, I talk a little about Biblical lexicography and tried to give a simple explanation of the idea.  I commented in passing about how much of the bad ideas that Christians have come from misunderstandings of Biblical words; bad Biblical lexicography.

Now, I’m going to illustrate what Biblical Lexicography “for laypeople” looks like.  I’ve had several conversations with people over the last few months and have heard the word “ministry” thrown around in various contexts where basically everything and anything was called “ministry”.  I’ve wanted to clarify the term for myself, so I’m going to take the English word “ministry” and figure out what it means in the scripture.  First we’ll look at the Old Testament usages of the term in contemporary English translations:

1.  Let’s see where “ministry’ appears in the Old Testament.  We’ll start by looking up the occurrences of the word in the major English translations on

  • ESV – 3x – Numbers 4:47; 2 Chron. 7:6, 2 Chron. 8:14
  • NIV – 2x – 1 Chron. 25:1, 6
  • NASB – 2x – 1 Chron. 24:3, 19
  • NKJV – 5x – Ex. 31:10, 35:19, 39:1, 39:41; 2 Chron. 7:6
  • KJV – 4x – Num. 4:12, 4:47; 2 Chron. 7:6, Hosea 12:10.
  • I know there’s other translations, but this will more than suffice our needs since “ministry” doesn’t appear hundreds of times in the OT.  Also, you’ll notice I didn’t include where “ministry” appears in chapter titles, since chapter titles are added by the translators.

2.  Let’s check our references at and discover the Hebrew term in each verse:

Notice any patterns? We have some common terminology that shows up regularly.  That makes life fairly easy.

3.  Now we’re going to check out each of those Hebrew terms, look at their occurances in the OT, and try to get a feel for their range of meaning:

  • Kahan – Occurs 23 times in the OT and, with basically 1 exception, it refers to the temple work done by a priest. As a verb, you could loosely say that Kahan means “priesting” (or some other summary term for the whole of priestly work).
  • Serad – Occurs 4 times in the OT and every time is used adjectivally to describe the cloths used in the temple (think table cloths or something like that).
  • Sharath – Occurs 92 times in the OT and it means “to serve” (verb).  It’s used in a common sense with reference to serving in a household/business (i.e. Gen. 39:4) and in a sacred sense with reference to serving in the tabernacle/temple (i.e. Ex. 30:20).
  • Abodah –  Occurs 141 times in the OT and it means “service/work” (noun).   It’s used in a common sense with reference to the work done in a household/business (i.e. Gen. 30:26) and in a sacred sense with reference to work done in the tabernacle/temple (i.e. Ex. 38:21).
  • Yad – Occurs 1615 times in the OT, and it means “hand”.  When it’s used in 2 Chron. 7:6 and Hos. 12:10, it’s shorthand for the work done by the hands of the priests.

Notice any patterns again?  The Hebrew terms that are translated “ministry” in English carry a specific idea, at least when they’re used in any sort of religious context, of being service and work done in the temple by priests.

Very Interesting.

Let’s do the same thing in the New Testament:

1.  English Translations:

  • ESV – 22x – (remember we’re not including chapter headings) – Luke 3:23; Acts 1:17, 25, 6:4, 20:24, 21:19; Rom. 11:13, 15:19; 2 Cor 3:7, 8, 9, 4:1, 5:18, 6:3, 9:1, 12; Gal. 2:8; Eph. 4:12; Col. 4:17; 2 Tim. 4:5, 11; Heb. 8:6.
  • NIV – 19x – Luke 3:23; Acts 1:17, 25, 6:2, 4, 8:21, 21:19; Rom. 11:13; 2 Cor 3:3, 7, 8, 9, 4:1, 6:3; Gal. 2:8; 2 Tim. 4:5, 11; Heb. 8:6, 9:6.
  • NASB – 20x – Luke 3:23; Acts 1:17, 25, 6:4, 20:24, 21:19; Rom. 11:13; 2 Cor 3:7, 8, 9, 4:1, 5:18, 6:3, 9:1, 12, 13;  Col. 4:17; 2 Tim. 4:5; Heb. 8:6, 9:21.
  • NKJV – 24x – Luke 3:23; Acts 1:17, 25, 6:4, 12:25, 20:24, 21:19; Rom. 11:13, 12:7; 1 Cor. 16:15; 2 Cor 3:7, 8, 9, 4:1, 5:18, 6:3, 9:13;  Eph. 4:12; Col. 4:17; 1 Tim. 1:12; 2 Tim. 4:5, 11; Heb. 8:6, 9:21.
  • KJV – 18x – Acts 1:17, 25, 6:4, 12:25, 20:24, 21:19; Rom. 12:7; 1 Cor. 16:15; 2 Cor 4:1, 5:18, 6:3;  Eph. 4:12; Col. 4:17; 1 Tim. 1:12; 2 Tim. 4:5, 11; Heb. 8:6, 9:21.

2.  Find the Greek terms at BlueLetterBible:

  • Luke 3:23 – No Greek term for”ministry” is in the original.
  • Acts 1:17 – Diakonia
  • Acts 1:25 – Diakonia
  • Acts 6:2 – No Greek term for “ministry” is in the original
  • Acts 6:4 – Diakonia
  • Acts 8:21 – No Greek term for”ministry” is in the original.
  • Acts 12:25 –Diakonia
  • Acts 20:24 – Diakonia
  • Acts 21:19 – Diakonia
  • Romans 11:13 – Diakonia
  • Romans 12:7 – Diakonia
  • Romans 15:19 – No Greek term for”ministry” is in the original.
  • 1 Corinthians 16:15 – Diakonia
  • 2 Corinthians 3:7 – Diakonia
  • 2 Corinthians 3:8 – Diakonia
  • 2 Corinthians 3:9 – Diakonia
  • 2 Corinthians 4:1 – Diakonia
  • 2 Corinthians 5:18 – Diakonia
  • 2 Corinthians 6:3 – Diakonia
  • 2 Corinthians 9:1 – Diakonia
  • 2 Corinthians 9:12 – Diakonia
  • 2 Corinthians 9:13 – Diakonia
  • Galatians 2:8 – No Greek term for”ministry” is in the original.
  • Ephesians 4:12 – Diakonia
  • Colossians 4:17 – Diakonia
  • 1 Timothy 1:12 – Diakonia
  • 2 Timothy 4:5 – Diakonia
  • 2 Timothy 4:11 – Diakonia
  •  Hebrews 8:6 – Leitourgia
  • Hebrews 9:21 – Leitourgia

3.  Check out the usage of the Greek terms in the NT and try to get a feel for their range of meaning.

  • Diakonia – Occurs 36 times in the NT and it means “service” or “work”.  It is also  a term related to the biblical office of “deacon”. It’s used in a common sense with reference to any sort of work done for others (i.e. Luke 10:40) and in a sacred sense with reference to the work of the apostles done for Christ (i.e. Acts 120:24), work for the benefit of others in the church (Acts 6:1), work of 1 church for the benefit of another (Acts 11:29), the spiritual gift of “service” (Rom. 12:7), the work of the Holy Spirit on behalf of God (2 Cor. 3:8), and  as a general term for the work of the individuals within the church (Eph. 4:12).
  • Leitourgia – Occurs 6 times in the NT and it means “service” (noun). It’s used in a common sense with reference to any sort of service of others (i.e. 2 Cor. 9:12) and in a sacred sense with reference to the specific work done of priests in the temple (i.e. Luke 1:23).  You may recognize this as being the root word for the English words “liturgy”, “liturgical”, etc.

Notice any patterns again?

In the New Testament, the Greek terms that are translated “ministry” carry the idea, at least when they’re used in any sort of religious context, of being service/work done in the temple/church by either the shepherds or the sheep.  That “work” includes all the activities of the priests (administering the sacrifices, teaching the Torah, etc.) and the eldership of the church (preaching, evangelism, counseling, teaching, etc.).

So what does that mean?

Well, it definitely means that certain things that are labelled “ministry” in an effort to sanctify them aren’t actually “ministry”, at least in the sacred sense.

  • Building a skatepark isn’t “ministry”, though “ministry” could be done at a skatepark.
  • Being a professor at a Bible college isn’t being “in ministry”, though it’s possible that “ministry” could be done at a Bible College.
  • Hanging out with teenagers and playing video games isn’t “ministry”, though “ministry” could occur around teenagers and video games.
  • Making “Christian” movies isn’t a “ministry”, though it could facilitate “ministry” or lead to “ministry”.
  • Feeding the unbelieving poor isn’t “ministry”, though it could definitely lead to “ministry” or be done concurrently with “ministry”.

I could go on, but I’m guessing that I’ve already mentioned something that someone may find hard to swallow (especially the last point).  Either way, I search the scriptures to learn and conform my thoughts to the scriptures, not thrust them into my preconceived mold.

Until Next Time,

Lyndon “The Armchair Biblical Lexicographer” Unger


16 thoughts on “Biblical Lexicography Example: What is “ministry”?

    • Thanks for the link Marie. You possibly don’t know Karen King, but she’s well known as a nutty professor. In Biblical studies, she’s equivalent to the people who think the moon landing was faked. It’s not a shock and it’s absolutely irrelevant to the New Testament. In the future, you have my permission to simply ignore the entire school of “Biblical studies” at Harvard; Harvard has a great law school (and many other great schools) but it’s “Biblical studies” school has more quacks than a duck pond.

      • Thanks for your sanction to have no need pay heed to these sort of press releases. It just seemed to me they should not be referring to themselves as “Biblical Studies”, instead “Archaeology Studies”. It reminded me of a t.v. channel that likes to air “Biblical” information such as our being descended from aliens, placing me in a position of having the responsibility of debating with a dying friend the accuracy of what he is viewing. Thank you.

      • First, with respect, I hope it is understood you have a very busy Ministry and home life that takes precedence over blog communications. As I am homebound due to illness, most of my access has been thru several evangelicals on television. Translation: I am content to wait until and when you have opportunity and choice to answer my questions.

        Now: This has been bothering me for years. In the Bible, quite a few times, it is stated in different forms “no man goes to the Father but through Me”. It is my understanding etiquette-wise, if I pray, I should therefore preface it with “Dear God in Your Son Lord Jesus Christs Name”.

        Also, we are told it is alright to talk with Him all the time, He enjoys it and relishes the conversations.

        Now, I have noticed in prayer groups, many sincere believers preface prayers with “God” or “Lord” or even no preface. Are these prayers heard.

        Truly, it does concern me. I am afraid NOT to address Him without first proper manners by addressing both.

        I also have a tendency to rather ”rank” The Holy Spirit as 3rd because I consider Him an integral combination of Our God and Christ. I sometimes wonder if this is inaccurate of me. I love The Holy Spirit very much, yet tend to see Him as the gift Christ left behind for us, an EXTENSION of God and Our Lord and Saviour.

        Thank you.

      • I’m not too sure what community regards Karen King as a “nutty professor” or regards Harvard as filled with “quacks”, but to clarify, Karen King did not claim this text proved Jesus was married; she only claimed that it indicated that a certain community regarded Jesus as married. What the media spins this afterward is out beside the point.

        Here’s King- fairly directly- in the NY Times: “this fragment should not be taken as proof that Jesus, the historical person, was actually married. The text was probably written centuries after Jesus lived, and all other early, historically reliable Christian literature is silent on the question, she said. But the discovery is exciting, Dr. King said, because it is the first known statement from antiquity that refers to Jesus speaking of a wife.”

      • Steve –

        1. I love the “exactly where is this true?” line of thinking, as if you’re the measure of what’s normal in this universe.

        Karen King is not exactly relevant, or even regarded as a biblical scholar of ANY relevance, in communities outside the one that you’re apparently in. Nobody that I take seriously takes her seriously. I mean, she thinks that the “gospel” of Judas, the “gospel” of Mary, and dozens of other works that were centuries late and blatant theological attacks on the teachings of Christ and the early apostles were somehow involved in the shaping of the belief system of early Christianity. She writes long books about ideas that are absolutely self-referentially incoherent IF the Bible is true. King doesn’t believe the scriptures anymore than you or I think that the movie “First Blood” was a historic documentary. You may think she’s a herald of Christian reason, but several million people would disagree with you regarding her orthodoxy and contributions to bible-believing Christianity.

        2. King is double-tongued and is so intentionally because if stirs the press and sells books.

        The link that Marie provided contained a choice quote –

        “We still have some work to do, testing the ink and so on and so forth, but what is exciting about this fragment is that it’s the first case we have of Christians claiming that Jesus had a wife”

        In the linked article, she then offers caveats because she knows that what she just said isn’t true and her fellow academics would butcher her if she didn’t back-pedal a mile back from what it sounds like she just said. The quote is for the fellow in the pew (or local “free thinker” society), and the caveat is for her peers.

        Steve, you may be new to the world of mainstream scholarship (I don’t mean that as an insult, I just don’t have a clue who you are) so I’ll explain something to you. Everyone who wants to get in the paper or sell books needs to make a totally unbelievable and sensational claim, and then once that claim is out with their name on it, they can back-pedal all day long and claim “I didn’t mean THAT” when they knew full well what everyone would assume. Most people read the sensational headline and never read on to find the dozens of caveat statements. Bart Ehrman is a classic case of the double-tongued nature of popular academics, writing books with titles that over-sell the book by a few light-years (think “Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why” or “Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible [And Why We Don’t Know About Them]”) and then going around and expressing confusion as to why everyone thought he was suggesting what the title clearly suggests. Ehrman doesn’t produce any solid proof that the bible was changed, doesn’t make a case for who did it, and admits that all the “contradictions” in the bible are well known by everyone who studies the Bible at any level of depth. I’ve heard him, in debates, get pressed and basically renounce his own books…but who cares once he’s got the royalty check? (and maybe 0.01% of those who bought the book hear the debate).

        I do like your e-mail though. Do you have to explain it to everyone or do all your friends have a giggle at it?

        • Steve, Pastor Mennoknight does not need any mortal’s defense in my opinioin, I just wanted to mention even releasing the information was sensationalistic and much of the response was from experts already contesting the ”find”. It’s just another example of info being released, probably in preparation for yet another t.v. show of ”what if” rationale and perhaps a book discussing what isn’t but might be depending on numerous methodologies. It just makes it more difficult for me to convince my terminally ill platonic dear friend that what he views is not always accurate. I’m already up against his wanting to believe aliens were really the Angels, etc., an other sorts of msinformation. If it’s not proven beforehand, why announce it. Why the shows and books. $$$$$$ and attention-seeking imo.

    • 1. My friends love my email, but are confused about my Karen King t-shirt and commemorative hat. My Bart Erhman tattoo is a big hit at all the parties, however.

      2. “as if you’re the measure of what’s normal in this universe.”

      I hate to once again point out the “pot calling the kettle black” irony of things, but this coming from a man who spends his time denouncing everyone and their blasphemous dog is a bit rich. You actually “grant permission” for people to ignore Harvard DS in the future. Thank you, oh soothsayer of soothsayers!
      I get it, you disagree with lots of people in the traditional academy, but I’m not sure that makes them “quacks”. I get it, lots of other people disagree with them in your tiny, conservative circle (Master’s Seminary isn’t exactly “mainstream”), but I’d be hard pressed to find folks at SBL or AAR who are on board with the way you read the Bible. Does that make you a “quack”? Millions of people in the Episcopal, Methodist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, and Catholic tradition would think you’re wrong. Folks in the halls of Harvard, Duke, Princeton and literally any other mainline seminary would think you’re highly unorthodox. Do the folks at SBL have your permission to ignore you in the future?

      3. To the actual substance of my point, I hear a lot of anecdote and “well, I know what she’s actually trying to do, no matter what she says”, but not a lot of actual information on the topic of the “Jesus’ wife” manuscript. Did the media run wild with this? Sure. Was that what she intended? Well, unless I read malice into what she’s saying, I’d be hard pressed to find any actual evidence that her “intent” was to have people claim the opposite of what she’s saying. What you’re calling “caveats” appear to be her actual “point”, which is that this is obviously not proof of Jesus’ marriage, but instead proof that one community thought he was married. If CNN wants to turn that around and say “Jesus had a wife and here’s proof”, I’m not sure what she can do but continue to reiterate that that’s not what she said.

      4. Lastly, evidently you’re so confident, firm and bellicose in your writing that your readership claims you no longer need any “mortal’s defense”, which puts you on par with the Pope and some of the Apostles. Congratulations are no doubt in order for your sainthood. Will there be a ceremony for us mere mortals to enjoy, or do you get raptured straight to heaven now?

      ught he was married. dfdfaadsfdsfasfafaafafafafafafafaaaaa

      • Steve – The people at SBL all ignore me, you bet. Harvard DS, Duke, Yale, Princeton and all the mainstream schools don’t even bother reading anyone I read because, by default definition, I read people with multiple earned doctorates who cannot possibly be “scholars”. They cannot be “scholars” because the people who control the academic schools have a club that only their fellow liberals are allowed to join.

        You’re right. I’m not mainstream.

        The scholars I read continually rebut the tripe coming out of Harvard DS, Yale, Duke, etc. but those divinity schools don’t care about theological consistency, biblical exegesis, or even truth in general. They reject the propositional content of scripture and explicitly combat the core beliefs of biblical Christianity. They definitely don’t care about critical evaluation that disagrees with them; it’s not even worth reading because it cannot, by genetic fallacy, ever possibly have an ounce of substance.

        The guys at Harvard DS, Yale, Duke, etc. are fairly loud to suggest that I don’t worship the same god as them, and I agree.

        I’m not a pope. I don’t encourage anyone to make me a saint. I’m a Protestant…but I’m sure that was sarcastic mockery.

        Karen King didn’t say that Jesus had a wife. She only loudly insinuated. We’ll read her paper when it’s published and see how it corresponds to her press interviews.

        • Well, Steve. now you gave the pleasant opportunity of giving my own opinion by referring to me in a most derogatory manner. I’ve been reading Pastor Mennoknights’s blogs for quite awhile and haven’t found anything to disagree with, in particular his view of the press release. I’m aware for my own knowledge Universities in particular are prone to sensationalize archaeological finds and from the aspect of their science, not Theology. You’ve made your own views clearly known and understood. Fine. As I stated before, I have a terminally ill friend who tends to believe what he sees on certain major channels who like very much to derive their “Biblical” material on hearsay and I end-up having to spend major time with a believer who also happens to believe the latest theories presented as fact via the commercialism of the theories. To me, that’s the entire example of the article, a rush to reveal and how many times the reveal, unconfirmed, then goes into book format and the rounds of talk shows and eventually television masterpieces. I don’t ”follow” Pastor Mennoknight, I respect him and am one of those strange people who likes to allow a very long time to pass before I trust someone’s Biblical opinion. Partially because my knowledge level is high enough Biblically to separate the wheat from the chaff. BTW, did you know all the wheat now grown are “GMO”s”, genetically modified organisms??? Some call that progress, others a blatant risk of health. Thanks for your opinions and good day to you.

  1. Thank you for this gift. As I read Jer.:20:7, I cried and began to read Jeremiah from the beginning. A thought kept recurring to me of when the Apostles said basically (remember, please, I’m just a believer/layperson) why are we serving the food, we’re here to serve the Gospel, now what decision do we make??? Of course, feel free to correct me I can take it. It seems to me the OT Biblical meaning of Ministry were tending to be actual assignments from a person deemed to be in higher authority, often it’s implied the person with authority was given that authority by God. It seems as though OT Ministry was often based upon works and activities, encompassing literally work with the hands, singing, musical instruments and often inferring preparation for Worship. Fleetingly, I considered the NT verse (Corinthians?) speaking of Him designating gifts. I had to discard the thoughts because in this discourse the focus is the OT. It perplexed me mind that to me it appeared as if David only carried what we currently call Ministry. I always considered Ministry to be the Correct Message of the Bible by a Pastor to his flock. Then I had to remember there were many Laws constituting the Chosen’s Rules to Live by, so these were already in-place. The Law was Their Form of Ministry. David, so well an example of the good and not-so-good in people, did love the Lord. Now this makes me want to learn if David loved the Lord like that before or after the worst of his transgressions. I remembered how David in defiance would open his windows and sing out the Praises to the Lord even though his life was on the line. And how ”his wife” was disgusted with him. The wife, of course, has to be the one he has sunning on the roof. Made me wonder what that marriage was like in terms of quality in the long-run.
    I can’t find anything to disagree with, perhaps that day might come, perhaps not ever it will come. I, too, have been confused about everything under this old Sun being suddenly a “Ministry”.
    My very favourite part is where current examples of Ministry are listed. Because by this point, I was persuaded to understand OT Ministry validly carried a different definition that Ministry as defined in the NT. OT Ministry was of Law and Works. Everything accurate as given by definition. Although I have noticed the OT fits like a glove with the NT, in terms of corralaries (msp?), the major difference is Him. In my opinion, every Ministry of a Christian Church is to be carrying out the work of His Teachings, the trick of it is to teach it clearly, unmistakably and without apologies. I found it easier to give serious consideration to Our Christ’s view of a skatepark, a Bible Professor, hanging out with teenagers, making Christian movies, and feeding the unbelieving poor. Would He define these actions and vocations as ministry. While back, you stated the best advice is The Bible. Therefore, He would not consider these ministries. Moreso, the expression of a believer’s belief in Him, the verse that Paul admonishes if you are to be Christian, you shall be wanting to give and behave as a Christian. More an expressed act of faith, not a Ministry. We’re not saved by works. Not even a monumental bake sale would qualify as Ministry.
    Therefore, the word Ministry is being misunderstood by many, many people. A Ministry can only be defined by Christ’s terms, to build His Church on The Rock. Believers are not rocks. Ministry is the calling to the soul to deliver His Message and carries a burden of massive responsibility. Therefore, conclusively, believers are confusing the wanting to show thru their belief in Him Ministry with belief in Him. In fact, I could see many problematic situations occurring in the examples given of Ministry, and now believe a Minister should at least be consulted in such activities and act as Guidance. As for feeding non-believers without mentioning the Word, all is achieved for Christ is nothing, therefore it cannot even be counted as work for Christ. It is far better to feed a non-believer along with feeding Him with the Bread of Life to go along with it. Some will just have their bellies temporarily full. Some instead will fall in love with The Trinity and end-up feeding others. Now I need to start reading Jeremiah for his lament touched upon my situation.
    And I thank you for being a True Minister of the Word of Christ. +++

  2. I have to say most of us at points in our lives experience betrayal. I have discovered the culmination of the highest point of betrayal, oddly combining all prior forms of betrayal experienced. Yet I now understand why He said belief in Him will come with tribulation. I chose Him over a person. So now the tears don’t hurt as much nor the pain. There is a knowing in me that He must must must come first. Unknowingly to you, He utilized your skills to give to me a source of Biblical advice and solace.

    • Marie, thanks for the thoughts and comments.

      I’m glad that I can be a blessing to you in some way.

      Also, you made a lot of points in your previous post. Could I ask you to pick maybe 1 question and I could try to tackle it for you?

  3. Thanks very much and I also promise to focus more on paragraphs properly. Yes, indeed, there is a question pertaining to both the last post about betrayal and the long posting as well:

    Do we have the right, as Christians, to arrive at a point of deploring, even detesting and hating another ”denomination”?

    A good friend put the icing on the cake by writing to me it was amazing how many people of this particular faith had figured in a very negative way in my life. Starting with one particular parent who almost became a ”bride of Christ”. I am hesitant to name the denomination. Many pastors believe the denomination in question is ”the great red whore” mentioned in Revelation.

    Now, Christ said to Peter to build the Church upon the Rock. I take this to mean Christ’s teachings were The Rock. I see nowhere where this particular denomination was given the right to call themselves the only true faith and church. Instead, having been subjected to interpretative teachings from a very young age until around 12, I was often in serious trouble for questioning what I was being taught, for it certainly didn’t seem Christ-like to me.

    Being human and somewhat thick in the head, I left ”religion” for a long time, until God kindly pointed out to me He was not a Religion and I needed to learn to make the distinction between the Word and the Trinity and mankind.

    So, I say to you: when repeatedly the same traits are noticed amongst one ”religion” amongst various people over a period of time, and you notice they profess service to the Lord, yet engage in immorality according to Biblical standards, through their words and actions, is it alright to have what I can only call a furious form of anger at a mega-church brainwashing millions of people, setting on pure gold thrones while starvation kills daily.

    Yet still believe they do if they choose to be sorry and profess penance it is alright to bend the rules the very next week. I am only telling you the truth of how deep my dislike now runs.

    And I can ”spot one” a mile away now. In conclusion I will say I once found a verse in the KJV where Christ Himself states His mother is not to be worshipped, only The Father. We are too worship even Our Christ through the Father. Yet this same ”religion” saw fit to remove whatsoever they chose without proper reasoning. This religion’s version of the Bible does not state Our Lord had siblings, alright, half-siblings.

    I am bordering, teetering, on hatred of this ”church” and the profound mis-truths given to millions…Thank you. They dare to take His Word and change it and include the Apocrypha in their Bible. Ohhhhhh I am angry at what their teachings did to my life and the hyprocrisy of this ”Church” that masked many sins over many years. JESUS DID NOT SAY ”HERE, PETER, GO FOUND THE _________ CHURCH”. BLASPHEMERS.

    Respectfully, Marie

  4. Steve, the reason for mentioning Pastor Mennoknight does not require a ”mortal’s” defense is he is well-versed in the Scriptures without need of those less educated coming along and starting a defense movement. If you’ll note, I’m responding to your mockery of me and disrespect. Debate is and can be an encouraging experience yet just making statements about me isn’t exactly fair from a Biblical perspective. Blessings your way +++

  5. Pingback: Are You Called to Ministry? « Watch Your Life and Doctrine Closely…

Share your thoughts

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s