Not Convinced.....

[zach_dunn]

Ok

Really, Richard? You really have nothing to say? Now it would seem you are not answering because you have nothing to prove that I am wrong, in which case I don’t know why you even bother debating everyone else. Maybe it’s just me? You have some problem carrying on a conversation with me for some reason? I just don’t know.

So zach you don’t believe that there will be or was after 100AD any more prophets? Why on earth would the Holy Spirit give the gift of prophecy?

I don’t deny that there will be prophets, the gift of prophecy is talked about by Paul no doubt. But you have a seriously deficient understanding of prophecy which I will show in a bit.

1Cor.12
4Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
10To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy

Eph.4
11And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

God’s end time remnant church has several characteristics two of those are revealed in Rev.12:17And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

It will keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
Do you know what the testimony of Jesus Christ is zach? Rev.19:10b for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

The spirit of **prophecy **is the testimony of Jesus Christ

And Joel 2seems to very much disagree with you. When speking of the end times Joel says 28And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions:

So prophecy is alive and well in God’s church.

As I stated above, you seem to not understand what is meant by “prophecy” in the biblical sense. You say “The spirit of prophecy is the testimony of Jesus Christ,” and I will agree with that; what you are not understanding is that “testimony of Jesus Christ” does not equal “new revelation outside of the Bible and Tradition”. After the death of the last Apostle, there would be no more revelation, period. That is what is meant by Jude 3. The Bible teaches that prophecy includes 3 things:

1. 
   *]Primarily to encourage, upbuild, and console the gathered congregation (1 Cor 14:3-4)[sup]1[/sup]
   *]Can include the power to predict the future (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10-11)[sup]2[/sup]
   *]Can make the gospel compelling to non-believers (1 Cor 14:24-25)[sup]3[/sup]
   
   None of these biblical uses of prophecy include adding new doctrine to the Christian faith that comes from any human since the death of the last Apostle, you just can’t find support for an interpretation like that. In fact, the Second Vatican Council actually affirmed that these gifts can still happen, but they warn against excessive wishfulness of them in its document Lumen Gentium. There’s nothing more that I can ask . . . do you understand why I differentiate “revelation” and “prophecy”?
   
   [sup]1[/sup] On the other hand, he who prophesies speaks to men for their upbuilding and encouragement and consolation. He who speaks in a tongue edifies himself, but he who prophesies edifies the church.
   
   [sup]2[/sup] Now in these days prophets came down from Jerusalem to Antioch. And one of them named Agabus stood up and foretold by the Spirit that there would be a great famine over all the world; and this took place in the days of Claudius. . . . While we were staying for some days, a prophet named Agabus came down from Judea. And coming to us he took Paul’s girdle and bound his own feet and hands, and said, “Thus says the Holy Spirit, ‘So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man who owns this girdle and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.’”
   
   [sup]2[/sup] But if all prophesy, and an unbeliever or outsider enters, he is convicted by all, he is called to account by all, the secrets of his heart are disclosed; and so, falling on his face, he will worship God and declare that God is really among you.

 

[benidict]

The prophets are in the bible right? and altho Timothy had to be taught orally, he was being taught the message that would later be written down in the scriptures. I’m more than willing to admit that the apostles taught and preached orally. What I am not willing to admit is that they taught and preached anything other than the Gospel message of Jesus Christ and Him crucified for our sins.

Jn.5
39Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

Gal.1
6I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

As far as baptism is concerned that is a NT phenomenon and is meant as our confession of faith in Jesus.

Rom6
3Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

Rom10
9That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
11For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

they sure did Richard. read the Didache. it is based off the oral tradition of the apostles, and in it are taught things NOT taught in the new testament, that apparently the person who wrote it thought were essential to salvation. he being a disciple of at least one of the apostles, i think would be a very reliable source. baptism also is a tradition held over from Judaism. it was practiced long before the new testament was written. did John the baptist just pull this out of a hat? i would say not. peace

 

[placido]

Are you saying that God will send no more prophets Kathleen? If so what do you base this statement on?

Prophets to deliver additional public revelation or private revelation … that is the question you will have to answer. Having more prophets deliver additional public revelation would mean what Christ revealed is not enough.

placido

 

[benidict]

Prophets to deliver additional public revelation or private revelation … that is the question you will have to answer. Having more prophets deliver additional public revelation would mean what Christ revealed is not enough.

placido

we were however warned that prophets who arose with public revelations, and having new and unusual doctrines, would be “false prophets” or “prophetesses.” and before he throws the prophecy of joel out there, lets remember that this particular prophecy was fulfilled at pentacost. at least Peter thought it was…Peace

 

[Genesius]

I seem to remember learning somewhere in the past (and I could be wrong) that the gift of prophecy (or the charism of prophecy as the Church calls it), can also be defined simply as preaching and/or testifying/proclaiming. In this context one could understand where there could be many modern day “prophets”, or preachers. It would also add another dimension in interpreting those portions of Scripture that mention it, and trying to sort out when it means “prophet” in that way, or in the sense of revealing new information and/or predicting future events.

However, if my definition is not possible, then I stand corrected. Just a thought. It might have been in the Baptist circles that I learned that definition, or even in Bible College (supported by Christian Church/Disciples of Christ). I can’t remember for sure.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

they sure did Richard. read the Didache. it is based off the oral tradition of the apostles, and in it are taught things NOT taught in the new testament, that apparently the person who wrote it thought were essential to salvation. he being a disciple of at least one of the apostles, i think would be a very reliable source. baptism also is a tradition held over from Judaism. it was practiced long before the new testament was written. did John the baptist just pull this out of a hat? i would say not. peace

What did the Didache teach that is necessary for our salvation that isn’t in the bible?

Baptism is taught in the bible Ben.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

we were however warned that prophets who arose with public revelations, and having new and unusual doctrines, would be “false prophets” or “prophetesses.” and before he throws the prophecy of joel out there, lets remember that this particular prophecy was fulfilled at pentacost. at least Peter thought it was…Peace

Ben, are’nt you arguing for SS and against oral tradition with this post?

 

[benidict]

Ben, are’nt you arguing for SS and against oral tradition with this post?

not at all Richard. not one of the Church Fathers taught anything different than the Apostles. weather it was in writing or orally transmitted to them by the Apostles. however we were warned against those, that were already there, and would come, that would claim prophecy, and create new doctrines. there are several that meet this criteria that can be found in our recent history. E.G. White, Joseph Smith, Mary Baker Eddy, and Charles Taze Russell. the fab 4 if you will. all 4 brought in new doctrines that were contrary to the teaching of the Apostles, and the Church Fathers. all 4 claimed authority from God. these were the types of false teachers we were warned against. in the apostles time, it was the Nicolations, and the Gnostics. and im sure there are, and will be many more in the centuries to come, if the Lord tarries. Peace

 

[benidict]

What did the Didache teach that is necessary for our salvation that isn’t in the bible?

Baptism is taught in the bible Ben.

where is it found in the scriptures that the Apostles used Richard? BTW that would be the law and the prophets. again Richard. as others have said. they did not have a New Testament. where in the law or the prophets is baptism clearly taught? find me chapter and verse that explains this rite, from the Jewish scriptures. Peace P.S.
weve already covered some items from the Didache. you can read it yourself, on the web if you like. its not hard to find…

 

[Mark01]

All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all; yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed, for salvation, are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them.

Richard do you agree with the above definition of SS and if so could you explain the portion in bold?

Thanks

 

[Richard_Kastner]

not at all Richard. not one of the Church Fathers taught anything different than the Apostles. weather it was in writing or orally transmitted to them by the Apostles. however we were warned against those, that were already there, and would come, that would claim prophecy, and create new doctrines. there are several that meet this criteria that can be found in our recent history. E.G. White, Joseph Smith, Mary Baker Eddy, and Charles Taze Russell. the fab 4 if you will. all 4 brought in new doctrines that were contrary to the teaching of the Apostles, and the Church Fathers. all 4 claimed authority from God. these were the types of false teachers we were warned against. in the apostles time, it was the Nicolations, and the Gnostics. and im sure there are, and will be many more in the centuries to come, if the Lord tarries. Peace

So you are agreeing with my definition of SS and that there is nothing contained in your oral tradition that is not contained in scripture? Glad to see that you have finally seen the light.

 

[KathleenGee]

Richard,

The whole problem revolves in how the Word of God is implemented. And who is going to do that and how is it going to be done?

leaving people to their own…look at the examples given us in the Epistles of the unruliness and misunderstanding and how the people repeatedly had to be taught, the faith clarified…it is human nature.

 

[benidict]

So you are agreeing with my definition of SS and that there is nothing contained in your oral tradition that is not contained in scripture? Glad to see that you have finally seen the light.

no Richard again im not. the Apostles taught oral tradition which can be found in the writings of the Didache, among others. teachings on Euthanasia, abortion, and infanticed are not taught in scripture, but must be believed if we are to be received into heaven. these are found in the oral tradition of the apostles. which were transmitted in later writings. all of Catholic teaching is a continueation of Apostolic tradition and the bible together. what part of this tradition that was orally taught by the apostles do you find fault with Richard. the assumption of Mary? asking the saints for intercessory prayer? you cannot deny the Churches traditional teaching of Mary, without getting dangerously close to denying the Trinity. what about Apostolic succession Richard. this is where the issue of authority comes in. personally i think it is clear in the bible, and oral traditon. again the Didache. how is it your faith does not see the clear truth of the real presence? again. bible, and oral tradition handed down. the two go hand in hand. you cannot have one without the other. Peace

 

[Richard_Kastner]

where is it found in the scriptures that the Apostles used Richard? BTW that would be the law and the prophets. again Richard. as others have said. they did not have a New Testament. where in the law or the prophets is baptism clearly taught? find me chapter and verse that explains this rite, from the Jewish scriptures. Peace P.S.
weve already covered some items from the Didache. you can read it yourself, on the web if you like. its not hard to find…

“where is it found in the scriptures that the Apostles used Richard?” I don’t think it is found any where that they used me. Kinda wish it was though.

Baptism is not taught in the old testament.

Are you saying that it is not taught in the new?

You’re the one who said that there are things in the Didache that are needed for our salvation. It’s up to you to provide them and since you don’t seem willing to do that, I think that we can dismiss them. Anyway the Didache is not scripture so who cares what’s in it?

 

[Richard_Kastner]

no Richard again im not. the Apostles taught oral tradition which can be found in the writings of the Didache, among others. teachings on Euthanasia, abortion, and infanticed are not taught in scripture, but must be believed if we are to be received into heaven. these are found in the oral tradition of the apostles. which were transmitted in later writings. all of Catholic tradition is based of of this tradition and the bible together. what part of this tradition that was orally taught by the apostles do you find fault with Richard. the assumption of Mary? asking the saints for intercessory prayer? you cannot deny the Churches traditional teaching of Mary, without getting dangerously close to denying the Trinity. Peace

The teachings against “Euthanasia, abortion, and infanticed” are taught in the bible.
Ex20:13Thou shalt not kill.
So you think that “the assumption of Mary? asking the saints for intercessory prayer” are necessary for our salvation?

“you cannot deny the Churches traditional teaching of Mary, without getting dangerously close to denying the Trinity” How do you figure this Ben?

 

[benidict]

“where is it found in the scriptures that the Apostles used Richard?” I don’t think it is found any where that they used me. Kinda wish it was though.

Baptism is not taught in the old testament.

Are you saying that it is not taught in the new?

You’re the one who said that there are things in the Didache that are needed for our salvation. It’s up to you to provide them and since you don’t seem willing to do that, I think that we can dismiss them. Anyway the Didache is not scripture so who cares what’s in it?

bad grammer on my part. lol! just got off work. so are you saying the Apostles got the teaching of Baptism from the New testament Richard? how in the world did John the baptist hear about it then? you just admitted that it is not found in the old testament, and you are quite right. although it is alluded to. Jesus stated to John the Baptist, that it must be done to fulfill all righteousness. i think it is very clear, that they were following a Jewish tradition, that was outside of the Scriptures they were using. and even Jesus believed that it was essential. so much so, that it was kept by the Lord Jesus Christ, and his Apostles. if they didnt get it from the Old Testament. then where did they get it Richard? two words. Jewish Tradition. and this tradtion had the same authority as the written word. peace

 

[benidict]

The teachings against “Euthanasia, abortion, and infanticed” are taught in the bible.
Ex20:13Thou shalt not kill.
So you think that “the assumption of Mary? asking the saints for intercessory prayer” are necessary for our salvation?

“you cannot deny the Churches traditional teaching of Mary, without getting dangerously close to denying the Trinity” How do you figure this Ben?

thou shalt not kill does not adress abortion and euthanasia Richard. nor infanticide. if it did, then God would not have ordered the Israelites to kill all of Jericho including the Children. if it did, then God would not have given the recipe to the priest to make a bitter drink that would induce an abortion if the wife had been unfaithful. if it did, then it would have said something about saul sinning after he asked his armour bearer to kill him, after being wounded in battle. this verse is about murdering a person who has already been born in cold blood. period. not about warfare, not about abortion. not about assisted suicide or euthanasia. if it were, then God violated his own law, by having Israel doom cities, and giving the priest a concoction that induced abortions. Peace

 

[benidict]

The teachings against “Euthanasia, abortion, and infanticed” are taught in the bible.
Ex20:13Thou shalt not kill.
So you think that “the assumption of Mary? asking the saints for intercessory prayer” are necessary for our salvation?

“you cannot deny the Churches traditional teaching of Mary, without getting dangerously close to denying the Trinity” How do you figure this Ben?

Richard. post 554 in the thread “are Marian domas wildly unbiblical” adresses just this question you have. your welcome to join us there. i will be happy to discuss it with you on that thread. Peace

 

[Richard_Kastner]

bad grammer on my part. lol! just got off work. so are you saying the Apostles got the teaching of Baptism from the New testament Richard? how in the world did John the baptist hear about it then? you just admitted that it is not found in the old testament, and you are quite right. although it is alluded to. Jesus stated to John the Baptist, that it must be done to fulfill all righteousness. i think it is very clear, that they were following a Jewish tradition, that was outside of the Scriptures they were using. and even Jesus believed that it was essential. so much so, that it was kept by the Lord Jesus Christ, and his Apostles. if they didnt get it from the Old Testament. then where did they get it Richard? two words. Jewish Tradition. and this tradtion had the same authority as the written word. peace

Baptism altho similar to the old testament Mikva or ritual cleansing from some sort of uncleanness ie. touching dead body. The teaching of John is different.

Matthew 3
1In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea,
2And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.
3For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.
4And the same John had his raiment of camel’s hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey.
5Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan,
6And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.
7But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
9And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
10And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
**11I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance. but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: **
12Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and gather his wheat into the garner; but he will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.
13Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him.
14But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?
15And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.
16And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:
17And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

John’s baptism was the baptism of repentance from sin or a spiritual cleansing, but John’s baptism was not the end of the story as Matt.3 v. 11 points out that the baptism of Jesus who by the way did not baptise anyone Himself, indicating that He was not just an officiator of the cerimony, but the originator of the cleansing involved. Jesus baptised with the Holy Spirit and fire. I believe this is somewhat of a warning. Baptism is a cleansing ritual. We had a choice. We could be baptised with the baptism of the Holy Spirit, faith in Jesus, or we could be baptised purged by fire at the end of the world. Anyway altho baptism does show a certain similarity to the Mikvah, baptism as practiced by John and later in an evolved form by the apostles was originally given by the Holy Spirit to John to herald the coming of the Messiah and later as the outward confessing of that Messiah.

 

[Nicea325]

HI Nicea. im gonna give Richard a break. (just a very short one.) i know you are very intelligent, and well versed in the bible. so maybe you can answer this question. other than moses sprinkling the congregation in blood, and the israelites walking through the dead sea, alluding to baptism. where in the o.t. is baptism clearly taught. apparently, the Lord Jesus Christ thought it was essential, so that all obedience might be fullfilled, and the apostle peter, most certainly believed it to be essential for salvation. and phillip was able to transmit this to the eunich. was this not an oral tradition passed down by the Jews, for converts, that the apostles kept, because it was essential? i cant find a clear reference to the practice of baptism in the law, the prophets, or the deautracannonicals. thx for your help my brother. Peace

The Old Testament is full of references to ritual washing. Of particular note are Elisha’s instructions to Naaman in 2 Kings 5 to ritually wash himself in the Jordan as a cure for leprosy, a biblical symbol of sinfulness. It is also a noteworthy part of Jewish tradition that the Jewish people from ancient times to the present have had ritual baths known as mikvahs. In fact, ancient mikvah sites have been found by archaeologists in the Holy Land.

The mikvah was commanded under Jewish law to cleanse a person of ritual impurity (e.g., a woman would go to a mikvah after her period of ritual impurity during and after menstruation). So it is likely that the people to whom John the Baptist preached had a good idea of what he was referring to when he instructed them to be cleansed of their sins in the Jordan, which, because it is a natural body of water, could itself have possibly been used as a mikvah.

Hope this helps?