2 Questions on the Early Church and Scripture

[JRKH]

You make that passage mean what you chose to make it mean and NOT what God has said it means as Peter clearly states. *“NOT the removal of dirt from the flesh”, *which is Peter telling a true believer that it is not speaking of Christian water baptism.

In fact in that passage the water represents JUDGMENT!!

I find it interesting that you accuse PRmerger of this (bolded section) above. When in fact, all she is is doing is expressing through herself the long understood meaning of the passage.
You then turn around and tell her what the passage really means. Well - you are wrong.

This is not her, “making”, the pasage mean what “she” wants, but expressing Church (community) teaching. The same Church teaching that has been understood for nearly 2000 years since the Apostles Baptized people in order that they be saved.

Now once again, I will point out how this demonstrates the need for the authoritative community (Church) to settle this matter.
Unfortunately because you have rejected the authority of the community (church) you are unable to obey Christ’s command to “Tell it To The church”.
I do not blame you personally for this, after all you are merely following a false paradigm handed to you by those who originally rejected the legitimate authority.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

James i am praying for you!! Nothing more needs to be said.

I agree that there is little more that can be said between us that will be of use. Thus it can be seen that we have completed steps one and two of Mt 18: 15-18.

I am willing to proceed to step three whenever you are.

Peace
James

 

[PJM]

=PRmerger;6981217]Pat, you are quite mistaken if you believe that we teach that Baptism removes dirt from the flesh. Baptism, as Scripture says, is not the removal of dirt from the flesh. [1] But it does indeed save you, as St. Peter said.

[2]I hope your church does indeed teach that baptism saves, otherwise it is teaching a non-biblical doctrine.

That’s your fallible, non-authoritative interpretation. But other Christians, also claiming to be inspired by the Holy Spirit, have not made that interpretation.

[3]In fact, in your paradigm of private interpretation, you cannot tell anyone what the passage represents. It’s up to the individual, right?/QUOTE]

COMMENTS from another Patrick:

Point 1: The Sacrament of Baptism indeed has the power of Salvation; yet it’s power does NOT extend to the sins we commit AFTER Baptism.

This means that should one die immediately after being Baptized; such a person, Blessed By God would immediately attain heaven.

However: This is seldom the case, so those Baptized that sin AFTER being Baptized are nolonger entitled to direct access to heaven without 1. Forgiveness of there sins [as perscribed by Christ Himself. Are you to listen to your human preacher or to what you are able to confirm from the Bible yourself?]

READ: 1 Jn. 1:8-10; 1 Jn.5:16-17 and John 20: vs. 19-23 TAKING SPECIAL NOTE OF V. 23.

Those of us in this catagory [the majority of souls] still benefit from the other effects of Baptism. 1. Being called by name by Jesus 2. Being invited into the community of Believers 3. Being chosen by God for specail graces.

Point 2. No “one” part of the bible can contradict other parts of the Bible or it could contan NO TRUTH, and it would be of No Value for the salvation of souls.[2 Tim. 3:15-17].

Point 3: Bible interpetation CANNOT be left to the individual. Because there can and is only a single truth on any given topic; what you propose would deny God His Truth, His Teaching, which may or MAYNOT corespond with your understanding.

These are NOT only my personal views; they reflect the 2,000 year Teaching Authority of th One Church Founded by Jesus Himself. [See Mt.16:19, Mt.18:18]. John 17:14-19, especially v. 19] show Christ Hismefl warants these truths.

Matt.3: 6 and they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.

Acts.2:38 And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Acts.22:16 And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.’

1Pet.2: 1 So put away all malice and all guile and insincerity and envy and all slander. [2] Like newborn babes, long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up to salvation;

1 Pet. 3: 13 But according to his promise we wait for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. [14] Therefore, beloved, since you wait for these, be zealous to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace.

2Tim.3: 15 and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings which are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus

Love and prayers,
Patrick

 

[JRKH]

That’s your fallible, non-authoritative interpretation. But other Christians, also claiming to be inspired by the Holy Spirit, have not made that interpretation.

In fact, in your paradigm of private interpretation, you cannot tell anyone what the passage represents. It’s up to the individual, right?

This is precisely correct. It always surprises me that SS proponents of private interpretation have no problem telling others that they are wrong.

Peace
James

 

[twinc]

uhh, the verse you listed had none of those words in it. I am wondering if you meant a different verse?

And there is no verse that says “the bible is enough”, “the bible is adequate”, “the bible is able”, “the bible is competent”, and definitely no “the bible is sufficient”.

What it DOES say is , but PROFITABLE does not mean SUFFICIENT.

Goodness gracious, I thought you were Catholic! Never thought I would have
to explain fundamentals to a Catholic considering my lowly convert status.

the reason is you are lookijng in the wrong place for the fault - the fault is that you are confused,mixed up and mistaken.What I quoted had nothing to do with what you quote but with Jn.20:31 - twinc

 

[PRmerger]

the reason is you are lookijng in the wrong place for the fault - the fault is that you are confused,mixed up and mistaken.What I quoted had nothing to do with what you quote but with Jn.20:31 - twinc

twinc, have you found those Scripture verses yet which tell us what things in the Bible need to be verified and what don’t?

You said the verse “Saul went into the cave to relieve himself” does not need to be verified. Fair enough. So what verses do? And how do you know?

Does the verse in Luke which says, “All generations shall call me blessed” need another verse to verify it?

What about “all Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching”?

Please cite the Scripture verses which tell us if they need verification.

(Note: I am not looking for verses which “verify”. I am looking for clues in Scripture which tell us IF something needs verification. Thanks!)

 

[twinc]

twinc, have you found those Scripture verses yet which tell us what things in the Bible need to be verified and what don’t?

You said the verse “Saul went into the cave to relieve himself” does not need to be verified. Fair enough. So what verses do? And how do you know?

Does the verse in Luke which says, “All generations shall call me blessed” need another verse to verify it?

What about “all Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching”?

Please cite the Scripture verses which tell us if they need verification.

(Note: I am not looking for verses which “verify”. I am look]

ing for clues in Scripture which tell us IF something needs verification. Thanks!)/QUOTE

you tell me how many have been verified if any or many and why not all - twinc

 

[PRmerger]

you tell me how many have been verified if any or many and why not all - twinc

Ah, so, twinc, you are not standing by your posts that you made earlier?
twinc;6958811 (but now it seems he might be rescinding this statement?):

not at all exactly - scripture does not need to verify itself where no verification is required or called for - twinc

Originally posted by twinc, (but now it seems he might be rescinding this statement?) : Samuel 24:3 does not require verifying nor does it need verifying that Jesus and his Apostles must have relieved themselves many times but not even mentioned once - twinc

If you now disagree with your original point, just say so. I would have more respect for your integrity if you did this.

If you are still insisting that “scripture does not need to verify itself where no verification is required”, then please tell us how you know “where no verification is required.”

 

[twinc]

Ah, so, twinc, you are not standing by your posts that you made earlier?

If you now disagree with your original point, just say so. I would have more respect for your integrity if you did this.

If you are still insisting that “scripture does not need to verify itself where no verification is required”, then please tell us how you know “where no verification is required.”

exactly the same way you think or know verification is required - QED - jimc

 

[PRmerger]

exactly the same way you think or know verification is required - QED - jimc

Well, then, good!

Firstly, Catholics ought never proclaim that “Scripture verifies itself”, for Scripture never says that. That is a man-made tradition.

What Catholics proclaim is that it is through the authority of the Catholic Church, through the Magisterium, that we understand what Scripture needs to be “verified”.

I am glad that you are in agreement with the Magisterium of the Catholic Church on this one!

 

[twinc]

Well, then, good!

Firstly, Catholics ought never proclaim that “Scripture verifies itself”, for Scripture never says that. That is a man-made tradition.

What Catholics proclaim is that it is through the authority of the Catholic Church, through the Magisterium, that we understand what Scripture needs to be “verified”.

I am glad that you are in agreement with the Magisterium of the Catholic Church on this one!

I doubt that there is anyone who doubts or can doubt that when a deadlock is reached then agreement should be sought and not monopoly or division - that is why unity is sought and so many conferences etc - for example type in Catholic/Luthern conference in your search box and be surprised and then try and deny as many still do - jimc

 

[JRKH]

I doubt that there is anyone who doubts or can doubt that when a deadlock is reached then agreement should be sought and not monopoly or division - that is why unity is sought and so many conferences etc - for example type in Catholic/Luthern conference in your search box and be surprised and then try and deny as many still do - jimc

Agreed. And this is what the Catholic Church has consistantly sought down through the centuries. To find, not just agreement (as in compromise), but Truth in The Spirit (as in consensus) that maintains the Gospel as handed to us from the Apostles.

I am heartened, not only that the Church is seeking reconciliation with our seperated bretheren, but that some ( The EO, The Anglicans, The Lutherans) have responded so positively.

Peace
James

 

[PRmerger]

I doubt that there is anyone who doubts or can doubt that when a deadlock is reached then agreement should be sought and not monopoly or division - that is why unity is sought and so many conferences etc - for example type in Catholic/Luthern conference in your search box and be surprised and then try and deny as many still do - jimc

While true, this is a nonsequitor.

The only way that a Christian knows what Scripture “needs verification” is through the authority of the Catholic Church.