- Status
P
Pat_De
Guest
No one is a Christian who is not “baptized/immersed by Christ” via the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. No one is justified by water immersion and it cannot wash away sin. Who cares what any early man says when you have the Bible to confirm it all.
Listen to John the Baptist who was spoken to by God and knew Jesus personally:
***"The axe is already laid at the root of the trees; therefore every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. "As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. “His winnowing fork is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clear His threshing floor; and He will gather His wheat into the barn, but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.” ***
Luke also has a parallel account of this and what did John say that Jesus would do? Baptize you with the Holy Spirit; that is the true baptism that saves, not water as many suppose and base it usually on Acts 2, but when taken in light of all of Scripture it becomes obvious how one is saved and Titus 3:4-7 articulates the true Gospel in a few words. It is the hearing and accepting the Gospel, which is when one receives the Holy Spirit and is reconciled to God.
Not many people care to read and really study the Bible so you have all kinds of views on this subject among others, but one outward sign of a true believer is they “hunger and thirst” for His righteousness and this will manifest itself in the life of a believer in many ways including the reading and studying of His word to know His will and in their prayer life among other manifestations.
F
FidesSpesCarita
Guest
Luke 3:16 “John answered, saying unto all: I indeed baptize you with water; but there shall come one mightier that I, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to loose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire”
John 3:5 “Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”
Romans 6:4 “For we are buried together with him by baptism into death; that as Christ is risen from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also may walk in newness of life.”
Eph 4:5 “One Lord, one faith, one baptism”
Col 2:12 “Buried with him in baptism, in whom also you are risen again by the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him up from the dead.”
1pet 3:21 “Whereunto baptism being of the like form, now saveth you also: not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the examination of a good conscience towards God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”
So, baptism does nothing? True, salvation is by the free gift of God’s Grace only. it is not by faith, works, baptism, keeping the law (torah) or anything else. Yet, we are told that baptism is required (John 3:5) so what does it do? Just looking for your opinion, back it up however you choose or dont back it up at all, I dont mind either way.
FSC
F
FidesSpesCarita
Guest
FTR: Titus 3:4-7
hmmm… according to his mercy he saved us by the laver (washing) of regeneration (Baptism anyone?) and renovation of the Holy Ghost whom he hath poured forth (wow, sounds like baptism again)… Thanks for the verse. I will add it to my quiver
F
FidesSpesCarita
Guest
See Veritas Bible for a good biblical rundown on this.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Truer words were never spoken on this forum!Frankly it has been my expreience that such people cannot be convinced by any argument whether scriptural or not. If Not Scriptural they put no trust in it for that reason, if it is Scriptural then they tell you that you understand the citation wrong.It really becomes a no win situation. Only the Holy Spirit can open her eyes.
P
Pat_De
Guest
You know not what you write in context. For example, when Scripture speaks of “buried with him in baptism”, this refers to our being immersed into Him into newness of life and water is not the baptism that Jesus bore on the cross.
Baptism of the Holy Spirit, a gift of God done by Jesus, as John the Baptist clearly stated in Matthew and in Luke, the moment we believe on the Lord Jesus. Water baptism is a command by Jesus that identifies us with Him in His death, burial and resurrection; an outward profession of faith in Christ for the care of our souls.
John 3:5 doesn’t even relate to water baptism, but the OT purification process and one way you know is that NT baptism wasn’t implemented at that time; Jesus was still alive and well completing His ministry.
It almost amuses me, not really, how many people see the word “water” in the NT and automatically attach water baptism to it without a thought to the context much less the whole of Scripture.
P
Pat_De
Guest
Add it and use it, but the context will always remain the same and it is not as you use. Washing of regeneration is the same principle in John 3 with Nicodemus. Regeneration is the word paliggenesia, which means born again or newness of life which is from whom? You figure it out.FTR: Titus 3:4-7
hmmm… according to his mercy he saved us by the laver (washing) of regeneration (Baptism anyone?) and renovation of the Holy Ghost whom he hath poured forth (wow, sounds like baptism again)… Thanks for the verse. I will add it to my quiver
Perhaps you can use Ephesians 5:26 into you water filled quiver?
P
Pat_De
Guest
Perhaps it isn’t her eyes that need opening - just a thought and a possibility. You cannot argue against the truth of God and win the argument for the wisdom of men is foolishness to God and those in Christ Jesus are made alive in Christ Jesus.Frankly it has been my expreience that such people cannot be convinced by any argument whether scriptural or not. If Not Scriptural they put no trust in it for that reason, if it is Scriptural then they tell you that you understand the citation wrong.
However, in regards to question one, I would fall back on the same argument I would use with a Mormon. She is using a bible canon (NT) that was established around 400 AD by Ecumenical Church Councils - Long after she claims error had entered the Church. Therefore she is basing her entire theology (Bible alone) on a canon that was established by (in her view) an already corrupted Church.
Realize though that this line of argument will not likely make a dent in her position. As I said earlier, nothing really will. The best you can do is to plant a few seeds that will perhaps later grow through teh action of the Holy Spirit.
Peace
James
J
JRKH
Guest
F
FidesSpesCarita
Guest
Oh come on now, You almost had it with your reference to OT purification. It was Ritual Washing that made you “Technically”, or legally, clean. This was the OT type of Baptism that makes you LITERALLY clean. An actually washing away of Sin. When many, not all but many, of the verses that refer to washing are taken in context (heck, just rip them out and they still mean the same thing) they can only refer to baptism, without a serious distortion of intent.
Eph 5:22-27
Ok, so cleansing it by the washing of water in the word of life. Seems to me to be instructions for how to handle marriage. But, any wordsmiths want to break down this verse for us? Perhaps Pat de would care to give us some exegetical knowledge
Think about that statement for a moment. Whose wisdom are you depending on to make your interpretation? Whose understanding are you counting on to determine the meaning of Scripture? If you are going to be honest, your own. If you are going to be disingenuous you will say something along the lines of “I am being led by the Holy Spirit”, which although it may be true (I cant determine that for you), you cannot know that. You might FEEL that you are being led by God, you might BELIEVE it. But you cannot KNOW. Which leaves only your feeling of being led by the Holy Spirit coupled with your human wisdom attempting to understand biblical wisdom. But as you stated above, the wisdom of men is foolishness to God.
You seem to think that YOUR wisdom is better than everyone elses wisdom, which is a very common protestant problem. There is nothing that states that YOUR interpretation is correct other than your feelings on the matter. Although I respect your willingness to stand by and fight for your understanding, at the end of the day your foundation is based on shifting sands of pastors, emotion, and man-made wisdom. And I reject it.
FSC
P
PRmerger
Guest
Exactly.
In the end, if we subscribe to the non-Catholic Christian’s POV, it’s merely his fallible, non-authoritative, non-binding interpretation versus another person’s interpretation. They have no authority whatsoever to say that their interpretation is the correct one.
In fact, if they’re claiming fallibility, then, by definition, they’re going to be wrong at some point on their interpretation. That’s what fallible means, right? Going. To. Be. Wrong.
F
FidesSpesCarita
Guest
True. The place where the disagreement begins, IMHO, is when we make the claim that our Church (THE Church) is infallible in matters of Faith and Morals. Many people (and I was one of them) get hung up on the word infallible and stop listening, so when you continue with “in matters of faith and morals” that goes around their head, without even going in and out. The hard thing to understand is that, in their eyes, they are correct. Many many protestants (and many Catholics for that matter) dont stop to think “Hey, what if those crazy Catholics (or lutherans/methodists/evangelicals) are right? Let me figure it out!”
The other thing is the Primacy of Peter as lived out in the Chair of Peter (since few credible biblical scholars claim that Peter is not the rock any more). That is a topic for another thread and one that I am not fit to explain.
But thats just my take on this.
FSC
P
Pat_De
Guest
Do you argue that water baptism is a requirement of salvation or not? If you do believe that water imparts saving grace, then you argue against God if you don’t then you agree with what God has said in His Word. In obedience to Jesus command, one will be baptized with water to identify oneself with His death, burial and resurrection - that is a outward confession of a proclamation that one has faith in who Jesus claims to be and what He did.
*** But what does it say? “THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, IN YOUR MOUTH AND IN YOUR HEART”–that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, that if you confess with your mouth Jesus {as} Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.*** – Romans 10
Think about how it went, the people heard the preaching of the gospel and upon hearing they what? Believed and upon believing then what? They received the Holy Spirit and are declared righteous in His sight (that is positional). Then immediately after hearing, believing, & receiving, then what was the first act of obedience? Baptism by water. That is the Biblical pattern and model and is consistent in all of the NT with one exception and God had a real good reason for the exception when Peter was with a group of Jewish converts and speaking to the gentiles who had already believed but had not yet received the Holy Spirit or was baptized and that was done in the presence of the Jewish converts and Peter made the Jewish converts baptize the new gentile converts (Peter did not baptize these gentiles) so they, the Jewish converts, would be the ones to give testimony to other Jews that the Gentiles had received salvation exactly as the Jewish converts had; therefore there would be no distinction between Jew or Gentile. God in His wisdom made this one exception for His purpose. For those that hang strictly onto Acts 2:38 will find conflict with other Scripture in Acts, but that is easily reconciled by applying the Greek construction to the proper order without changing the context or meaning; in fact it actually clarifies and reconciles it with the rest of Scripture. I believe, in my opinion, God puts those little challenges into His word to separate the true seekers from the others.
P
Pat_De
Guest
Scripture will always verify itself and only those indwelled with the Holy Spirit can have an understanding of the meaning of Scripture. It is not by osmosis, but by hard work and time with God.Oh come on now, You almost had it with your reference to OT purification. It was Ritual Washing that made you “Technically”, or legally, clean. This was the OT type of Baptism that makes you LITERALLY clean. An actually washing away of Sin. When many, not all but many, of the verses that refer to washing are taken in context (heck, just rip them out and they still mean the same thing) they can only refer to baptism, without a serious distortion of intent.
Eph 5:22-27
Ok, so cleansing it by the washing of water in the word of life. Seems to me to be instructions for how to handle marriage. But, any wordsmiths want to break down this verse for us? Perhaps Pat de would care to give us some exegetical knowledge
Think about that statement for a moment. Whose wisdom are you depending on to make your interpretation? Whose understanding are you counting on to determine the meaning of Scripture? If you are going to be honest, your own. If you are going to be disingenuous you will say something along the lines of “I am being led by the Holy Spirit”, which although it may be true (I cant determine that for you), you cannot know that. You might FEEL that you are being led by God, you might BELIEVE it. But you cannot KNOW. Which leaves only your feeling of being led by the Holy Spirit coupled with your human wisdom attempting to understand biblical wisdom. But as you stated above, the wisdom of men is foolishness to God.
You seem to think that YOUR wisdom is better than everyone elses wisdom, which is a very common protestant problem. There is nothing that states that YOUR interpretation is correct other than your feelings on the matter. Although I respect your willingness to stand by and fight for your understanding, at the end of the day your foundation is based on shifting sands of pastors, emotion, and man-made wisdom. And I reject it.
FSC
Ephesians 5:26 I was using sarcasm; the point being that just because you see the word water or washing does not necessitate “water” as Ephesians 5:26 demonstrates. As I said before in John 3, Christian water baptism had not been implemented; so it cannot possibly be water baptism as you are taught; it is impossible chronologically. Just as washing of regeneration is a metaphor for ALL of ones sins being cleansed, not by water but by faith and the power of the Holy Spirit.
Whether you believe I am telling the truth or not makes no difference to me; I have to answer to God not you. Likewise, whether I believe your interpretation or not; I will answer to God. Something we both agree on I am sure, which is we will answer to God for what we say and what we are teaching concerning His word. That is something to either fear or take comfort in. There are some denominations that take the same position because they are taught to hang onto Acts 2:38 and ignore the entire rest of Scripture on the topic; yet when the Greek construction remains the same but the English translation is put into the Biblical order, then it is reconciled to the rest of scripture. Is it a salvation issue; maybe?
P
PRmerger
Guest
That is another man-made tradition.
No where in Scripture does it say “Scripture will always verify itself”.
It’s a man-made, non-biblical tradition that has been around for a few decades or so, but it has no foundation in Scripture whatsoever.
A
Apollos
Guest
by way of reply to NO ONE IN PARTIKLER y’all’r arguin the wrong argumint.
J
JRKH
Guest
H
Hiskid1973
Guest
Hey Bro James…Hey not to start a rabbit trail, you say you are a “revert”…Does that mean you Were Catholic then Protestant then back Catholic or Orthodox…Were you always Catholic and had some powerful conversion experience or just unsettled where you were…I know there are some who see vibrancy and godly life in their protestant brethren so they go there in search of more or they are protestant that never really connected with Christ but got connected to Him in the CC …I worked helping a lady a few years back that was coming out of Catholic to Protestant…She was loaded on with condemnation from her Catholic brethren…She was denying Christ and walking away from Him…Man this lady had a passion for Christ there was no way she was walking away from Him…I gave her a lot of scripture about who she is "in Christ…She had somethings as she matured in her walk and she just couldn’t reconcile with in the CC…She is doing great the last contact I had with her…Anyway I was just wondering about your title…We all have interesting paths we follow in growing closer to our Lord Jesus…Grace and peace to you James beloved of out Lord…
J
JRKH
Guest
Revert means I was raised RC, left the Church for some 35 years, more out of sloth than anything, and returned, formally, about 3 years ago.
I never formally joined a protestant Church because, frankly any I looked at seemed to be at least as faulty as I came to see the Catholic Church as being. In fact, the more I looked at protestantism in general, the more convinced I became that the Protestant Churches were fundementally MORE faulty than the Catholic Church. Several reasons for that conclusion.
As to any conversion experience, it was somewhat gradual. Beginning with an undeniable yearning to return to the sacraments, especially the Eucharist. My life situation at the time made returning difficult but God provided three very clear and undeniable signs to me that the time was right and I was able to resolve the issues and return.
Since then, I have been becoming better educated in boh the Bible, primarily NT, the Church teachings, and most interesting to me, the Mystical Doctors of The Church. (I’ve always been drawn to the mystical side of things)
I hope that helps.
Peace
James
- Status