Scripture to confirm that Jesus Christ is the Only true Son of God.,

[Justmerach]

Hi, I was following the “Do you believe in God thread” and it seems to have been closed. I read a post and wanted to reply to somebody who said that Jesus is not the Son of God. I just wanted to reply to them that why in Christianity in the scripture that we know that Jesus is the Son of God and explain why in my faith scripture supports that Jesus Christ is Only true Son of God.

Jesus is the Son of God but was also a prophet. He is also the redeemer to come as this post will explain.

Let me first say first in all three faiths we share much of the Old Testament and believe in the same God. I remember this topic right from my university days comparative studies between all three faiths.

I want to share a document about the Messiah prophecies about Jesus Christ to come that are in the Old Testament and commonly used online.

The Messiah prophecies have all be attached can be clicked on saved and enlarged. It comes in five images.

The word Christ and its Hebrew parallel means the anointed one which Christ is. Not added to that document above and to come to your attention-The Rod of Jesse in Isaiah 11 is also a prophecy of Jesus Christ to come. The Rod of Jesse/root of Jesse was the last rod for Jews and culminated with the Lord. Christians on this rod are his followers itself. God’s famous rods started with Aaron which placed which was placed in the arc of Covenant as a reminder and bore flowers as a promise of regeneration for the Jews. Jesus became as Christians our vine and we became him branches in the New Testament (John 15).

A photo of the Rod of Jesse from a church collection willl be attched in the next post.

It is Jesus the redeemer and heir to David who will redeem us all and the Jews to from exile-Jesus is from the offspring and roots of David (Revelation 22: 16). Some Jews believe that the Messiah prophecies are for David to come, but this is inaccurate and it is Jesus who will redeem them. "I will set up thy seed after thee (after King David), which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son (2 Samuel 7 12-13). God in this scripture also called David his servant and said that his Son was to come.

This scripture further points that Jesus Christ will be the one to redeem the Jewish people. Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, the Lord our righteousness Jeremiah (23: 1-6). David will return in the new Jerusalem (Hosea 3:4-5).

Jesus is also known as the Prince of Peace and more attributes which do not point to who is to come as being a mere mortal being and this is mentioned 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, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.”

God also confirms in the New Testament Jesus as his only Begeotteon beloved Son –“this is my Beloved only son who I am well pleased" (John 3:16 ). Then in Luke Jesus was asked to this question if was the Son of God and Jesus said that yes he is the Son of God (Luke 22:70). He does not lie and the God the Father simply does not lie as well.

The miracles and healing he gave as we all saw in the New Testament that Jesus Christ ministry gave are well known in the New Testament around 40 in number they were as recorded in the Bible and I saw too with my own eyes in church and in my life, the healing that he gave me. I saw a child who could not walk once an after a few times of healing work at church he started to walk again. This was a miracle of Jesus Christ in our era. It is Jesus Christ who primarily who approves the gifts of the Holy Spirit this as he is the head of the church who appoints these gifts and roles of ministry (Ephesians 4:11).

The Church Body which are made of human beings are the members of the church and Jesus is also the head of the Church and we are part of this body (Ephesians 1:22-23). He promised to send believers a comforter after his resurrection Christ as a Christian gave me the spoken comforter which is the Holy Spirit (John 4:11)? The comforter is the Holy Spirit you receive when you are baptised of water and spirit..

The Son of God is an expression which indentified Jesus of Nazareth as the being who has had an eternal relationship to his Father (Psalm 2:7 ) "You are my Son; today I have become your Father." "You are my Son; today I have become your Father." Christ claimed to be the Son of God (Matthew 4:3; 8: 29; 27:54). (Matthew 4:3; 8: 29; 27:54). This too makes clear that Jesus is the Son of God (John 5:18). Also in the New Testament the term the Son of God appears in the New Testament almost 50 times. God also confessed that Jesus was his son at his baptism and at the transfiguration (Matthew 3:16, 17; 17: 5). Jesus also said that he is the Son of God (John 4:15) Revelation (2:18) (John 20:31) (Matthew 4:3) (II Corinthians 1:19) (Luke 8:28), the Jewish Sanhedrin condemned Jesus for blasphemy (Matthew 26: 63-66); (Mark 14 :61).

Jesus also was eighty times called the Son of Man which means God and the Messiah for humans in the New Testament. In Psalm 80 he was also called the Son of Man and was to called the Son of Man throughout Ezekiel to.

Jesus came to life as a mortal divine being through an Immaculate Conception. Angel Gabriel told Jesus' mortal mother to be Mary that she would overpowered by the Holy Spirit and receive a child and that would be God's Son.

This story is found in the Gospels- (Luke 1:26-38)-" And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name Jesus. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David". The book of Luke is considered a highly reliable historical source which I know nearly all my life and it is the word of God.

I think in some countries more signs of Christ and the Holy Spirit presence will convince more people that Jesus is the Son of God and that eternal life is near and they will a season at least a while and will stay like young cubs parked with a lion on grass with him.

More history confirming Jesus Christ life is the Dead Sea Scrolls-
The Dead Sea scrolls contain (Isaiah 53) prophecy which is about Jesus Christ life to come. These scrolls were found in caves south of Jericho in the Dead Sea are and contain Biblical evidence the period of time between the end of the Old Testament and the beginning of the New Testament. There are two scrolls Isaiah, one being complete. To our understanding of the period of time between the end of the Old Testament and the beginning of the New Testament times, and to a better understanding of Hebrew and Aramaic.

We have done the 1st resurrection of Christ and are waiting for the Rapture (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18) which will happen in a twinkling of an eye (1 Corinthians 15:51-52) and then will come the 2nd judgement and second coming and judgement and then New Earth/Heaven.

We should be working in the field till he comes-"Then shall two be in the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left. Two women shall be grinding at the mill; the one shall be taken, and the other left." (Matthew 24:20).

I did go to church today. I go at 8am and it is local. Services are also streamed online later.

I’ve not read the bible but only need common sense to tell me that a person cannot be resurrected (confirmed by DH, a doctor). I doubt that it enough for you as you also don’t accept the impossibility of a virgin birth - would love to understand how you think that could happen!

However I did find an article written about how the story of the resurrection is full of holes (sorry very long).

Look at the account of the resurrection of each gospel side by side you start to notice significant ambiguities and contradictions in the retelling of the event. Here are some examples:

• John 20:1 says that Mary Magdalene came to the tomb while it was still dark, "Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early, while it was still dark,", but Mark 16:2 is adamant the visitors came after the sun had risen, "And very early on the first day of the week, when the sun had risen, they went to the tomb.", yet in Mark 16:9, which is considered to be of dubious origin and may have been a later addition according to many scholars, Mark changes the story and says that Mary Magdalene was the actual first, "Now when he rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons." Yet Luke and John suggest that Mary Magdalene did not see Jesus for the first time until after the sun was up, because in Luke 24:1, we see, "But on the first day of the week, at early dawn, they went to the tomb, taking the spices they had prepared.", yet upon this first visit they only see two men, not Jesus. Peter THEN goes to the tomb in verse 12 of Luke, "But Peter rose and ran to the tomb; stooping and looking in, he saw the linen cloths by themselves; and he went home marveling at what had happened.", in John this event in John 20:3, "So Peter went out with the other disciple, and they were going toward the tomb." is before the first time Mary sees Jesus in John 20:13-14, "They said to her, “Woman, why are you weeping?” She said to them, “They have taken away my Lord, and I do not know where they have laid him.” Having said this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing, but she did not know that it was Jesus." Matthew 28:8-10 further complicates things by suggesting that both Marys met Jesus before they met the disciples at all, "So they departed quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to tell his disciples. And behold, Jesus met them and said, “Greetings!” And they came up and took hold of his feet and worshiped him. Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid; go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee, and there they will see me." Again, Peter only goes to check out the tomb after the group of people mentioned in Luke comes back, which included both Marys, and John places Mary Magdalene's first sighting of Jesus after this event, though it was only Mary Magdalene in his account; the chronology and group of people doesn't make any sense. At this point there are multiple different contradictory points where Mary has been claimed to see Jesus first. Mary Magdalene's knowledge at any point in the morning is bizarre and incoherent in these accounts.
• In Mark Jesus appears to all of the eleven at a table in His first meeting with them according to Mark 16:14, which is again may be a later addition, "Afterward he appeared to the eleven themselves as they were reclining at table, and he rebuked them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they had not believed those who saw him after he had risen."In John, Thomas is not there at Jesus' first appearance, "Now Thomas, one of the twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came." In Matthew 28:16-17, we see a different story entirely, where the disciples have to go to some mountain to see Jesus, "Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. And when they saw him they worshiped him, but some doubted."
• In the gospel of John, only Mary Magdalene comes to visit the tomb first. In Matthew it is "Mary Magdalene and the other Mary", in Luke it is "Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James and the other women", so a total of least 5 people. In the first verses Mark it is, "Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome" who came to the tomb, but in Mark 16:9-20, which is not included in the earliest manuscripts of Mark, he goes back and says in Mark 16:9, "Now when he rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons."
• In Matthew, an angel comes to move the boulder as the Marys are coming to the tomb in Matthew 28:2-5, "And behold, there was a great earthquake, for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven and came and rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning, and his clothing white as snow. And for fear of him the guards trembled and became like dead men. But the angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified."" However, in Mark 16:4, "And looking up, they saw that the stone had been rolled back—it was very large.", Luke 24:2, "And they found the stone rolled away from the tomb,", and John 20:1, "the stone had been taken away from the tomb.", we find the stone is rolled away already with no angel character sitting on the stone.
• In Matthew, as I have already mentioned, there is an angel sitting on the stone to talk to the women visiting the tomb. In Mark 16:5 the man/angel character is sitting inside the tomb, "And entering the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, dressed in a white robe, and they were alarmed.", In Luke 24:4 it is two men standing, "While they were perplexed about this, behold, two men stood by them in dazzling apparel", while in John 20:12 it is two angels sitting, "And she saw two angels in white, sitting where the body of Jesus had lain, one at the head and one at the feet."
• Mark 16:8 says that the women who went to the tomb told no one what they had learned because they were afraid, "And they went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had seized them, and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.", but in Matthew 28:8, "So they departed quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to tell his disciples.", Luke 24:9, "and returning from the tomb they told all these things to the eleven and to all the rest.", and John 20:2 and 20:18, "So she ran and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him.”", "Mary Magdalene went and announced to the disciples, “I have seen the Lord”—and that he had said these things to her.", and literally in Mark 16:10-11 in the ending of Mark many scholars believe was added later, "She went and told those who had been with him, as they mourned and wept. But when they heard that he was alive and had been seen by her, they would not believe it." we obviously see that the women \do tell other people about what they learned.
• In Mark 16:3, the women ask, “Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance of the tomb?” If we were to go with the narrative that Mary Magdalene went to the tomb first beforehand, this conversation would make no sense because she would already know that the stone was rolled away.

All of these contradictions require at the bare minimum a moderate deal of mental gymnastics to reconcile, and it is nearly impossible to attempt to piece all of these various details together into one cohesive resurrection timeline without cherry-picking verses and discarding others. If you want to say that the detail differences are minor, go ahead, but to me they indicate a significant challenge when trying to piece together a coherent timeline of events. For a divinely inspired collection of texts, this level of variation, ambiguity, and flat-out contradiction between accounts of the same event are a bizarre choice, no? If the Bible wasn’t the literal word of God, this is no problem; but when considering all of these books are meant to be divinely inspired; I would at the bare minimum expect no apparent contradictions to be a given.

The Gospels are meant to be targetted to different audiences to convey different insights. I wanted to see what other were saying and this was recommended to me before.

"We also understand that if you were to put the four Gospels side-by-side, you would find some surface-level incongruities. A perceptive reader might ask, “Well, what’s going on here? Did this happen this way or that way?”
But this seeming incongruity is what we’d expect of any historical retelling of an event by different eyewitnesses. Every eyewitness account will involve summarizing, partial reporting, paraphrasing, or rearranging of the material chronologically. In Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, we find exactly this type of eyewitness testimony".
www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/tgc-asks-inconsistencies-gospels-undermine-scriptures-authority/

Basically the bible was purported to have been written by over 40 authors, in many different languages and over a period of 1,500 years - no one knows with certainty how much is true. Apply common sense and it’s obvious much isn’t.

If it was that amazing your god would have ensured it was correct and understandable. He might have more believers?

As an atheist life is good and my life wouldn’t be any better with a religion. Nothing negative is going to happen to me but am still looking forward to seeing what happens to believers on this day of reckoning!

I’m off this thread now - I love a good debate but unfortunately it’s not something you can do as you refuse to be open to research.

We agree on some things concerning scripture and disagree over some others. I am not debating that here and of course you are entitled to your opinion and faith.
I wanted to write that Jesus had a Jewish background and he seemed to conform to things that were of custom to this. However, God spoke in Acts 10 to Peter and said that all foods were permittable for Christians to eat and there was not a no pork rule in place. The only thing to not consume was blood and things strangled which was in another scripture.

Timothy as well a pastor was instructed by Paul to drink an amount of wine to help his infirmities. Now not to over do things may be, but drink alcohol doesn't seem to be banned in faith. If someone had an addiction it may be seen as a bondage. With circumsion to, Christians are free to decide what they wish to and it is not mandated that they must do this in Acts 15.

Acts 10-
And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending upon him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth:
Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air.
And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.
But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean.
And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.
This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven.

Acts 15-
" But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood".

1 Timothy 5:23
" Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities".

Stay well. I wanted to write you seem very keen to have evidence. I think that the Big Bang theory that God the creator can do this with cosmic inflation.I studied this in the 1990s and thought so at undergraduate so it is not a modern thing that I decided to think this. There are Christians like Hugo Ross who believe in science and christianity as well. Gerald Schroeder's work may be worth looking at as well. He was Jewish and I read some of his work as a student. Hugo Ross has their own website.

https://reasons.org/blog

I would say perhaps take a look at the story of Saints for their stories. Catherine of Siena a Saint had visions of Christ from 4 and was beheaded and her head I read went into petals in a bag and then returned for safety. I think that the story went like this. I think that there are Saints in heaven and some seek their intervention and had intervention they claim. There are so many stories out there that may help to get evidence.

Still catching up, but wanted to throw in that gods do exist - in the sense that billions of people believe in them and have shared understandings of what that means. They direct their actions and shape their (our) societies around their shared religious beliefs.

The question of how social constructs are 'real' keeps a lot of undergraduates busy. So does the matter of whether any gods exist outside of human culture. On that, I obviously agree the evidence is that they don't.

OMG, I read all these astoundingly accurate scientific facts a few years ago, following a similar discussion. I read surahs and hadiths, with the same type of explanatory commentaries that exist for Bible verses.

The 7th century AD marked the start of a scientific flourishing in the Asian world: Islamic, Byzantine, Sassanian, Indian and Chinese. At the same time, European knowledge was being lost and even suppressed. We went backwards. Lasting for almost a thousand years, this 'Golden Age' of knowledge could've gone so very much further, impressive as it was. Tragically, avenues of discovery always reached a religious 'thought block' preventing further examination - just as they had in ancient Greece, and would in the early European Enlightenment.

Going back to the knowledge in Muhammad's time: yes, people knew more than they had in biblical times. But not much more. The commentaries do exactly the same mind-tricks that bible commentaries do: they read the texts as saying something that they do not say, then go on to make massive conceptual leaps with no basis other than a wish to demonstrate incredible wisdom in the words of Iron Age preachers. I even read some stating that this verse or the other anticipated quantum physics! They still didn't understand how babies are made, let alone the intricacies of molecular science or outer space.

I'm willing to bet that any member of this thread could produce a clerical commentary on any daft bit of woo, 'proving' the author had mysteriously inspired knowledge.

As @RedTagAlan keeps saying, look at what the WORDS ACTUALLY SAY, not what somebody thinks you should read into them. Go back to literal translations of the original. Ask if it makes sense.(Clue: it very rarely does.)

Catherine died of a stroke. You might have mixed her up with some other woman, who was beheaded?

Oh, I missed that her head was removed after death. It was enclosed in a bronze frame (gruesome) which is still on display at the Basilica of San Domenico in Siena. She doesn't look too great by now.

Nothing about Acts 5 on that link. Just an index page.

The index page is a search facility! Easy to call up comments on the book/chapter you want.

The comments on Acts 5 are varied ...

... but there's not a peep on verses 1-10.

Yup. I scoured the web a few years back on acts 5, and none of the explanations made logical sense in the context of the NT up to that point. But my version that I posted above does.

Edit to add.

Of course, that there are so many different reasons given show just how flawed the whole thing is.

I wonder if the faithful among us have seen Derren Brown's first film about faith healing? If you're interested, @Justmerach, I will stress that Brown never says the holy spirit can't heal people. He says the pastors who claim to be channels of the spirit's healing power are harmful frauds who ruin people's lives. He shows how these 'healings' are done.
You might be interested:

It is rather long at over one hour. I can write that there is clear genuine healing through the Holy Spirit . I know as it happened to me after having the blessed Sacraments at church without asking for healing for a condition. I also had an intervention involving the Holy Spirit's presence also. The Holy Spirit, it is God's energy source.
I can say there seems to be nothing more complete than Jesus healing. May be some people will not go to the genunie source so it will not work for them with reliability.

I can say some people say they are Christians but may use bogus sources to get messages for people as unwanted for example I had some ones that was not true in my life through others and recently the Holy Spirit showed me what they said was not true to.

I don't know where they get their messages from. Ones from the Holy Spirit are always authentic. Jesus did say to test the spirits.

I was going to do a course once involving praying for people and the person in lead was not a Christian and when they told me they was not allowed to operate in church's I dropped it as clear it was not the same type of healing. I don't think I was given the gift of healing from the Holy Spirit but wanted to pray as an average Joe for them.
Not all conditions will Jesus heal through the Holy Spirit as it is not his will and there is God's timing as well.
I have been going to healing and wholeness at an Anglican church for about two years. Not for healing but for management of a condition and it helps me.

I don't know if Darren Brown did a fair report or where he went. It is wonderful when it happens and is truly from God.

. I have a version of her story in a book and yes you are right-that is how she died. I have attached the story from my book. However, there is something that happened post death with her head. I willl post what I found on this.

"CHAPEL OF SAINT CATHERINE
The chapel (1), created in the front part of the ancient sacristy, was built by Niccolò Bensi in 1466 to house the sacred head of Catherine, the most important of the saint's relics, brought to Siena from Rome after her death.
Catherine, in fact, died in Rome on 29 April 1380 and was buried in the cemetery of Santa Maria sopra Minerva, but shortly afterwards, due to the high humidity of the place, she was exhumed and entombed inside the basilica itself.

It was on that occasion that the blessed Raimondo da Capua, at the time General Master of the Order of Preachers, asked and obtained from Pope Urban VI the authorization to detach the head from the body. The sacred relic was brought secretly to Siena, inside a silk bag which is still preserved in the Sanctuary House.

In 1385 Raimondo himself reported to the Consistory of the Republic that Catherine's head was in Siena. A solemn procession was thus organised which started from the church of San Lazzaro, outside Porta Romana, and continued to the basilica of San Domenico, where the relic was placed, enclosed in the copper bust currently displayed in the case located to the right of the entrance to the chapel.

After the canonisation of Catherine, which took place on 29 June 1461 under Pope Pius II, Niccolò Bensi, a member of a Sienese family, decided to have this chapel built to provide a worthy setting for the precious relic. The wonderful marble altar placed in the centre of the back wall was sculpted in 1466 by Giovanni di Stefano, again at the request of Niccolò himself, as attested by the inscription which runs along the base (2). The sacred head is located inside the central cavity, protected by a golden grate. The original copper bust that contained it was first replaced by a silver one, designed by Giovanni di Stefano himself, and, in 1711, by an urn made by Giovanni Piamontini (currently placed in a chapel in the right transept), where the relic remained until 1931, when the Dominicans decided to place it in the current silver and enamel urn in the shape of a Gothic temple, made by the Florentine goldsmith David Manetti based on a design by the silversmith Angelo Giorgi (3).

Over the centuries, the sacred relic has been subject to many turbulent events, yet has remained intact. In 1531, it was at risk of being destroyed by a violent fire that broke out in the basilica, when one of the friars, Guglielmo da Firenze, threw himself into the flames, saving it. In May 1609, after a procession, the residents of Fontebranda attempted to seize it to keep it permanently in their neighborhood; there were several hours of rioting, until the Collegio di Balia intervened, having the sacred head returned to San Domenico. Nearly two centuries later, in 1798, the relic remained surprisingly unharmed following an earthquake that damaged the basilica; Transferred to the Cathedral, inside the Piccolomini Library, it was replaced in its place on Easter Sunday in 1806.

A few decades after the construction of the chapel and the marble altar, the pictorial decoration of the walls began. In 1526 Giovanni Antonio Bazzi, known as Sodoma, created two of his most famous masterpieces at the sides of the altar, the Mystic Fainting and the Ecstasy of the Saint, which testify to the intensity of Saint Catherine's prayer (4-5). The fainting was not a 'sentimental' excess, but a fainting in the face of the greatness of God's love. The ecstasy, on the other hand, consists in being completely absorbed in the contemplation of God, so much so that it is also defined as spiritual rapture. Despite the limited wall surface at his disposal, the artist managed to give these scenes an extraordinary monumentality, combining the perfection of the drawing and the masterly juxtaposition of colours with a solemn and measured compositional structure. The large and crowded fresco on the left wall, depicting the

Beheading of Niccolò di Tuldo (6), is also due to Sodoma. The episode is narrated in one of the most significant pages of the Epistolario. In 1377 Niccolò di Tuldo, a gentleman from Perugia, was unjustly condemned to death by the Sienese magistrates on charges of espionage. Once in prison, having fallen into deep despair, he received a visit from Saint Catherine, whose words comforted him to such an extent that he managed to accord his will to the divine plan, allowing himself to be led to the scaffold "like a meek lamb".

The painting that occupies the opposite wall was made in oil on wall by another great Sienese painter, Francesco Vanni, between 1593 and 1596. The scene, set in a loggia, depicts Saint Catherine freeing a possessed woman from the devil, amidst the amazement of a heterogeneous crowd of onlookers, made up of nobles, religious people, beggars and common people, almost as if to underline the universal nature of the saint's message (7).

The chapel is completed by the valuable 15th century marble floor depicting Orpheus and the animals, executed according to a design by an artist close to the style of Francesco di Giorgio Martini (8).
https://santacaterina-siena-it.translate.goog/basilica-di-san-domenico/?_x_tr_sl=it&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=sc#domenico6

From your post above :

"I can say some people say they are Christians but may use bogus sources to get messages for people as unwanted for example I had some ones that was not true in my life through others and recently the Holy Spirit showed me what they said was not true to."

"I was going to do a course once involving praying for people and the person in lead was not a Christian and when they told me they was not allowed to operate in church's I dropped it as clear it was not the same type of healing."

But you are a real Christian ?

And other Christians are maybe not real Christians ?

I am writing about people who do not get their sources not from the Holy Spirit, but still give this message to others when it is not from them. Btw, I haven't served in the minsitry since 17 and how I did was genuine and verified by church seniors as authentic. This is not about me though and I don't want to discuss about that. They may indeed people who use false sources and be a Christian-but they are not using the Holy Spirit those who give false messages and do other false things.
Jesus said to test the spirits-
(1 John 4:1-3)
"Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God:."

I looked on Amazon yesterday in the UK at the books on Acts and read a few on Kindle. They was all cheap less than £3 or free. May be a good place to look if you haven't to research on this further if interested.

Why do I need a book about Acts when I have a Bible ?

It seemed like you asking or interested about the interpretation of Acts 5 by others.

I have read all I could find on it in the past.

Do you not read what people post ?

Do you have any thoughts on my theory ?

I read what you wrote. It seems you are in line with what some people think about there being money gathered as in Acts 4. It doesn't state though that it was for themselves as such. It seems it was collected and then distributed in the early church among others.
So this couple was lying and was outside of the spirit of the church at that time. May be it was seen as early erioson of standards their behaviour. Most people do seem to take this litreal. If it is a test case it does not happen today by a long shot. It is difficult if anyone had to lose their lives. It has symbolic elements to it and some people think that they was taken by Christ after as well.
I think if you are a Christian and struggling over this scripture then you should consider applying a bigger picture view of it and how you have experienced the faith so far.

Why were they killed after the people there had heard Jesus order them to forgive ?

Well, myself as I have written before, I don't tend to think it is litreal-but used to represent unacceptable behaviour in the church at that time. I have written if it was litreal it was a test case as it does not happen today. If it would have to be agreed by Christ to as he is the head of the church.