Trinitarian formula????????

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by LittleLambofJesus Living water?

It means running water. ie. stream, river, etc. Definitely not tap water

That is mentioned in Revelation 7:17

Zechariah 14:8 And it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea, and half of them toward the hinder sea: in summer and in winter shall it be.

Reve 7:17 that the lambkin the *above-midst of the throne shall be shepherding them and shall be leading/guiding them upon *of life/living springs of waters and shall be out-rubbing the God every tear out-of the eyes of them

 

[chestertonrules]

Flowing water. Not stagnate.

Forgive me...

Much better than my guess.

That makes sense!

 

[BreadAlone]

MOD HAT ​

PLEASE REMEMBER: General Theology is for CHRISTIANS ONLY as defined by the Statement of Faith. This means that all views expressed herein must be in allignment WITH the SoF. Any views to the contrary, **including but not limited to Non-Trinitarianism**, will be Deleted by Staff.

In other words, Non-Trinitarian Posts ARE NOT ALLOWED. ​

Thank you. ​

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Ah well. I am pretty much thru on this thread....LLOJ unsubscribes....

 

[Musa80]

Ah well. I am pretty much thru on this thread....LLOJ unsubscribes....

Right behind ya LLOJ

 

[lionroar0]

One baptism, one faith. If one is not baptised in the Trinitarian Formula then your not Christian.

Peace

 

[archierieus]

One baptism, one faith. If one is not baptised in the Trinitarian Formula then your not Christian.

Peace

Ahem. Yes, the verse goes something like, 'one Lord, one faith, one baptism.' I don't recall the reference. Although Paul WAS talking about, and described in Rom. 6:1-4, baptism by immersion (Gr. baptizo, to immerse) But more on point to this discussion . . . I am a firm believer in the Trinity, and have defended it against Arians of various stripes. HOWEVER, as for baptism, good question. I tend to believe that God takes into account the personal commitment and good faith of the one being baptized. I would be reticent to pronounce a person 'not Christian' because of irregularities not the fault of the candidate.

Dave

 

[lionroar0]

Ahem. Yes, the verse goes something like, 'one Lord, one faith, one baptism.' I don't recall the reference. Although Paul WAS talking about, and described in Rom. 6:1-4, baptism by immersion (Gr. baptizo, to immerse) But more on point to this discussion . . . I am a firm believer in the Trinity, and have defended it against Arians of various stripes. HOWEVER, as for baptism, good question. I tend to believe that God takes into account the personal commitment and good faith of the one being baptized. I would be reticent to pronounce a person 'not Christian' because of irregularities not the fault of the candidate.

Dave

I wouldn't be. Baptism in the trinitarian formula is necessary to be a Christian.

I don't see why there's even a debate about or discussion about it.

My guess it is because there are some denominations that state that a person is damned to hell if a person is not a Christian.

Which is an oxymoron in some cases.

Peace

 

[MrPolo]

I do not know how it is possible for you to not see the words "Matthew 28:19" and the word "text." It must be an act of God.[/SIZE][/I][/B]

And we are wondering how it's possible that you don't see that the words Matthew 28:19 are not in your Cardinal Ratzinger quote when the actual book was linked for you. Or how it's possible that you don't see the "text" is the text of the Creed, not Matthew 28:19, to beat a dead horse.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

Ahem. Yes, the verse goes something like, 'one Lord, one faith, one baptism.' I don't recall the reference. Although Paul WAS talking about, and described in Rom. 6:1-4, baptism by immersion (Gr. baptizo, to immerse) But more on point to this discussion . . . I am a firm believer in the Trinity, and have defended it against Arians of various stripes. HOWEVER, as for baptism, good question. I tend to believe that God takes into account the personal commitment and good faith of the one being baptized. I would be reticent to pronounce a person 'not Christian' because of irregularities not the fault of the candidate.

Dave

I understand your concern however, it seems to me that you are equating "salvation" with being a Christian.

I would agree that Christ gave us the Church to enhance the possability of our salvation, but she was not put here to stand in the way of our salvation. IOW ~ Christ saves whom he will, those who have lived by the law written upon their hearts will be judged by Christ differently. That is what the Church teaches.

Jhn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Forgive me...

 

[lionroar0]

I understand your concern however, it seems to me that you are equating "salvation" with being a Christian.

I would agree that Christ gave us the Church to enhance the possability of our salvation, but she was not put here to stand in the way of our salvation. IOW ~ Christ saves whom he will, those who have lived by the law written upon their hearts will be judged by Christ differently. That is what the Church teaches.

Jhn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Forgive me...

I was thinking something similar.

Peace

 

[ARBITER01]

One baptism, one faith. If one is not baptised in the Trinitarian Formula then your not Christian.

Peace

Really?

I don't see any of the apostles or disciples being water immersed after their spiritual conversion in acts 2.

No one received The Holy Spirit until He was given during Pentecost is quite clear since Jesus told them if He didn't go The Holy Spirit would not be given, and that meant to anyone. No one received Him until He was poured out by our Lord during Pentecost.

Man's teachings typically do not align with scripture and it's teachings, so maybe you should break out a bible here and review what you think you understand on this, because it is quite clear none of the apostles received anything in the way of salvation until Pentecost. If water immersion was so pertinent to their salvation, then all of them missed out on it.

 

[chestertonrules]

Really?

I don't see any of the apostles or disciples being water immersed after their spiritual conversion in acts 2.

No one received The Holy Spirit until He was given during Pentecost is quite clear since Jesus told them if He didn't go The Holy Spirit would not be given, and that meant to anyone. No one received Him until He was poured out by our Lord during Pentecost.

Man's teachings typically do not align with scripture and it's teachings, so maybe you should break out a bible here and review what you think you understand on this, because it is quite clear none of the apostles received anything in the way of salvation until Pentecost. If water immersion was so pertinent to their salvation, then all of them missed out on it.

You assume too much.

 

[ARBITER01]

You assume too much.

Sorry, but scripture is quite clear on it,..

Joh 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth: It is expedient for you that I go away; for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I go, I will send him unto you.

No one received Him prior to acts 2 is clear in this passage. Until Jesus was seated at the right hand of The Father did He pour Him out to us, Peter mentions that very fact in his sermon.

Scripture makes no mention of water immersion being ever performed on any of the disciples that day or after that day.

 

[chestertonrules]

Sorry, but scripture is quite clear on it,..



No one received Him prior to acts 2 is clear in this passage. Until Jesus was seated at the right hand of The Father did He pour Him out to us, Peter mentions that very fact in his sermon.

Scripture makes no mention of water immersion being ever performed on any of the disciples that day or after that day.

You assumed that the apostles were not baptized, if I read your post correctly.

That is speculation on your part with no scriptural substance.

 

[ARBITER01]

You assumed that the apostles were not baptized, if I read your post correctly.

That is speculation on your part with no scriptural substance.

The assumption would actually be on others parts. There is no scripture to denote them ever being water immersed after acts 2. If you want to say that they were, then present the scripture.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

The assumption would actually be on others parts. There is no scripture to denote them ever being water immersed after acts 2. If you want to say that they were, then present the scripture.

So.. If I were to say that St. Paul was baptised in water in ACTS 9 then it's just an assumption on my part?

Forgive me...

 

[ARBITER01]

So.. If I were to say that St. Paul was baptised in water in ACTS 9 then it's just an assumption on my part?

Forgive me...

What sort of immersion? Water is not mentioned here, do you assume it?

As I said, none of the disciples were water immersed in the scriptures. It would be assumption to think so.

 

[OrthodoxyUSA]

What sort of immersion? Water is not mentioned here, do you assume it?

As I said, none of the disciples were water immersed in the scriptures. It would assumption to think so.

Except that I have something else that tells me he was.

St. Paul was baptised by The Priest Ananias.

The Priest Ananias was a member of the clergy of The Church of Antioch.

The Church of Antioch still maintains the site where St. Paul was baptized.

I am a member of The Church of Antioch and trust her to tell the truth in the matter.

Is it still an assumption?

Forgive me...

 

[ARBITER01]

Except that I have something else that tells me he was.

St. Paul was baptised by The Priest Ananias.

The Priest Ananias was a member of the clergy of The Church of Antioch.

The Church of Antioch still maintains the site where St. Paul was baptized.

I am a member of The Church of Antioch and trust her to tell the truth in the matter.

Is it still an assumption?

Forgive me...

That would be a tradition. Does that tradition of yours agree with scripture or teach outside of it?

In this case, it adds to scripture thereby teaching outside of it. It would be an assumption that immersion somehow is directly tied with water, when the greek word is not. Additionally, the scripture section does not teach that water was applied to Paul or anyone else.

Again, none of the disciples were water immersed after their conversion or before it. Water in this case does not have scripture support to conclude that it has a regenerational aspect, as the person I originally quoted said it did. Sort of hard to say it does when there are no examples of the disciples using it.