Followers of Christ United

[CoreyD]

Yeah, that works better

Thanks.
I wonder if I will ever get an answer.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Oh, okay.
You may have zeroed in on that one, but what I mentioned included and was more focussed on the main cause of the splits - relying on their own interpretation of scripture..
If you have another reason for why the Protestants did not put up with the Roman Church's domination besides this - Protestants had used scripture to critique the Roman Catholic Church, claiming that any believer could read scripture and have a personal relationship with God. - please go ahead with what you had in mind.
I'll leave you to it, with @JesusFollowerForever.
I'll only butt in if there are important details that need to be added.


How about we go back to Marcionism - 144 CE.
Marcion considered himself a follower of Paul the Apostle, whom he believed to have been the only true apostle of Jesus Christ.

Or, we can just cut through the many years prior, and go back to 80 - 100 CE.

Spoiler: The state of the Church

Revelation 2:1-5
1 “To the angel of the church of Ephesus write,
‘These things says He who holds the seven stars in His right hand, who walks in the midst of the seven golden lampstands: 2 “I know your works, your labor, your patience, and that you cannot bear those who are evil. And you have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars; 3 and you have persevered and have patience, and have labored for My name’s sake and have not become weary. 4 Nevertheless I have this against you, that you have left your first love. 5 Remember therefore from where you have fallen; repent and do the first works, or else I will come to you quickly and remove your lampstand from its place—unless you repent. 6 But this you have, that you hate the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.

Revelation 2:8-10
8 “And to the angel of the church in Smyrna write,
‘These things says the First and the Last, who was dead, and came to life: 9 “I know your works, tribulation, and poverty (but you are rich); and I know the blasphemy of those who say they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan. 10 Do not fear any of those things which you are about to suffer. Indeed, the devil is about to throw some of you into prison, that you may be tested, and you will have tribulation ten days. Be faithful until death, and I will give you the crown of life.

Revelation 3:12-16
12 “And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write,
‘These things says He who has the sharp two-edged sword: 13 “I know your works, and where you dwell, where Satan’s throne is. And you hold fast to My name, and did not deny My faith even in the days in which Antipas was My faithful martyr, who was killed among you, where Satan dwells. 14 But I have a few things against you, because you have there those who hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balak to put a stumbling block before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed to idols, and to commit sexual immorality. 15 Thus you also have those who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate. 16 Repent, or else I will come to you quickly and will fight against them with the sword of My mouth.

Revelation 3:18-25
18 “And to the angel of the church in Thyatira write,
‘These things says the Son of God, who has eyes like a flame of fire, and His feet like fine brass: 19 “I know your works, love, service, faith, and your patience; and as for your works, the last are more than the first. 20 Nevertheless I have a few things against you, because you allow that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess, to teach and seduce My servants to commit sexual immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols. 21 And I gave her time to repent of her sexual immorality, and she did not repent. 22 Indeed I will cast her into a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation, unless they repent of their deeds. 23 I will kill her children with death, and all the churches shall know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts. And I will give to each one of you according to your works.
24 “Now to you I say, and to the rest in Thyatira, as many as do not have this doctrine, who have not known the depths of Satan, as they say, I will put on you no other burden. 25 But hold fast what you have till I come.

Revelation 3:1-5
1 “And to the angel of the church in Sardis write,
‘These things says He who has the seven Spirits of God and the seven stars: “I know your works, that you have a name that you are alive, but you are dead. 2 Be watchful, and strengthen the things which remain, that are ready to die, for I have not found your works perfect before God. 3 Remember therefore how you have received and heard; hold fast and repent. Therefore if you will not watch, I will come upon you as a thief, and you will not know what hour I will come upon you. 4 You have a few names even in Sardis who have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with Me in white, for they are worthy. 5 He who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not blot out his name from the Book of Life; but I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels.

Revelation 3:7-12
7 “And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write,
‘These things says He who is holy, He who is true, “He who has the key of David, He who opens and no one shuts, and shuts and no one opens”: 8 “I know your works. See, I have set before you an open door, and no one can shut it; for you have a little strength, have kept My word, and have not denied My name. 9 Indeed I will make those of the synagogue of Satan, who say they are Jews and are not, but lie—indeed I will make them come and worship before your feet, and to know that I have loved you. 10 Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth. 11 Behold, I am coming quickly! Hold fast what you have, that no one may take your crown. 12 He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall go out no more. I will write on him the name of My God and the name of the city of My God, the New Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God. And I will write on him My new name.

Revelation 3:14-21
14 “And to the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write,
‘These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God: 15 “I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. 16 So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth. 17 Because you say, ‘I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing’—and do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked— 18 I counsel you to buy from Me gold refined in the fire, that you may be rich; and white garments, that you may be clothed, that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed; and anoint your eyes with eye salve, that you may see. 19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten. Therefore be zealous and repent. 20 Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me. 21 To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne.
...

At that time, there were men such as Papias, Polycarp, and others, considered bishops in the Smyrna congregation.
I think I might check up on which bishops were in the Pergamos congregation, where the throne of Satan is. That might be interesting.

I don't know if you noticed the same thing I did, but during the late first century, what Paul prophesied was present.
Acts 20:29, 30

29 I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. 30 Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them.​

That was around 53 CE... or was it 63 CE. I'll have to recheck that for accuracy.
The great 'falling away' - apostasy, began shortly after- a rebellion against the early Christian teachings. 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 4

3 ...for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.​

Spoiler: he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God

The Holy See (Latin: Sancta Sedes, lit. 'Holy Chair[10]', Ecclesiastical Latin: [ˈsaŋkta ˈsedes]; Italian: Santa Sede [ˈsanta ˈsɛːde]), also called the See of Rome, Petrine See or Apostolic See, is the jurisdiction of the pope in his role as the Bishop of Rome. It includes the apostolic episcopal see of the Diocese of Rome, which has ecclesiastical jurisdiction over the worldwide Catholic Church and sovereignty or governance over the city-state known as the Vatican City. As the supreme body of government of the Catholic Church, the Holy See enjoys the status of a sovereign juridical entity under international law.

Look what the did to Peter.

If Peter were alive at that time, I would have wanted a front row seat to his speech. Not to mention if Paul were alive and present at that time.
Anyway, Jesus dealt with it.

So, the question can be asked... Why did the bishops of Rome, that formed the Apostolic See (Holy See) rebel against Christ's teachings, and his early Church?
Christ was angry, from what we read in Revelation 2, and 3.


This last sentence caught my interest.
Let's go there. You can start if you like.

I’d rather not get into the reasons for the reformation because I feel that it would undermine the purpose of the thread.

 

[CoreyD]

I’d rather not get into the reasons for the reformation because I feel that it would undermine the purpose of the thread.

Why would you think this question Why did the Protestants rebel against the Roman church? would not undermine the thread, but this would - Why did the bishops of Rome, that formed the Apostolic See (Holy See) rebel against Christ's teachings, and his early Church?

Neither question undermines the thread, because the thread is looking at the Church from its beginnings, until today.
It starts with the facts that the followers of Christ were united in his teachings, and involved in the work Jesus commissioned.
So, it's important to pinpoint where the division began, and what took root, and why the branches are not doing the work Jesus commissioned, nor united in their teachings.
This is the purpose of the thread.

In AD 2024, who carry the identifying marks of Jesus' early followers of the first century?

How could that undermine the thread?
There's nothing we want to hide is there?
It's all there in history, including how the Roman Church tried to suppress the truth...
However, it got out, and spread. They could not stop it, because it was God's will for Jesus followers to spread the truth throughout all the nations. Matthew 24:14; Matthew 28:18-20

We can compare the teachings of Jesus and his followers, with any existing religion today, and see their differences.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Neither question undermines the thread, because the thread is looking at the Church from its beginnings, until today.
It starts with the facts that the followers of Christ were united in his teachings, and involved in the work Jesus commissioned.
So, it's important to pinpoint where the division began, and what took root, and why the branches are not doing the work Jesus commissioned, nor united in their teachings.
This is the purpose of the thread.

I see evidence of divisions even during the time of the apostles. Acts 15 is a prime example as well as Galatians. Even during Jesus’ ministry there were divisions, that’s why many Jews didn’t believe that Christ was the Messiah. It seems to me that different people have different beliefs which is why we needed the scriptures to build a solid foundational doctrine upon.

 

[BNR32FAN]

How could that undermine the thread?
There's nothing we want to hide is there?
It's all there in history, including how the Roman Church tried to suppress the truth...
However, it got out, and spread. They could not stop it, because it was God's will for Jesus followers to spread the truth throughout all the nations. Matthew 24:14; Matthew 28:18-20

No I disagree with this idea because reformed theology isn’t biblical. It wasn’t the truth that got out but just a different interpretation of the scriptures.

 

[CoreyD]

I see evidence of divisions even during the time of the apostles. Acts 15 is a prime example as well as Galatians. Even during Jesus’ ministry there were divisions, that’s why many Jews didn’t believe that Christ was the Messiah. It seems to me that different people have different beliefs which is why we needed the scriptures to build a solid foundational doctrine upon.

Are you saying that you believe a disagreement is the same as division?
So, if elders disagree, and the matter is considered and resolved, where everyone agrees to follow the direction of the body, and the leadings of the holy spirit, to maintain unity and peace in the body, you see that as divisions, and compare that to the breakaways - divisions, among the more than 45, 000 denominations among those identifying as Christian?

Or are you just saying that because we must have a good reason to have divisions among Christians, and we are good?
There is an obvious difference. I hope you can see that.
The body of Christ was, and is not divided.

Can you please provided exact scriptures in Galatians, since I can't find anywhere where divisions exist, and I can't see what's in your mind, that you are seeing. Thanks.

No I disagree with this idea because reformed theology isn’t biblical. It wasn’t the truth that got out but just a different interpretation of the scriptures.

So, are you saying that truth did not exist among those who stuck with Jesus teachings, and these truths were not spread?
Am I understanding you correctly?
Surely, you aren't saying that Matthew 24:14, Matthew 28:19, 20, and Revelation 22:7 are wrong.
I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to say.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Are you saying that you believe a disagreement is the same as division?
So, if elders disagree, and the matter is considered and resolved, where everyone agrees to follow the direction of the body, and the leadings of the holy spirit, to maintain unity and peace in the body, you see that as divisions, and compare that to the breakaways - divisions, among the more than 45, 000 denominations among those identifying as Christian?

Or are you just saying that because we must have a good reason to have divisions among Christians, and we are good?
There is an obvious difference. I hope you can see that.
The body of Christ was, and is not divided.

Can you please provided exact scriptures in Galatians, since I can't find anywhere where divisions exist, and I can't see what's in your mind, that you are seeing. Thanks.


So, are you saying that truth did not exist among those who stuck with Jesus teachings, and these truths were not spread?
Am I understanding you correctly?
Surely, you aren't saying that Matthew 24:14, Matthew 28:19, 20, and Revelation 22:7 are wrong.
I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to say.

What are you expecting to be the definition of the word division in reference to the church?

 

[CoreyD]

What are you expecting to be the definition of the word division in reference to the church?

That can best be answered, by your answering the questions:
Are you saying that you believe a disagreement is the same as division?
So, if elders disagree, and the matter is considered and resolved, where everyone agrees to follow the direction of the body, and the leadings of the holy spirit, to maintain unity and peace in the body, you see that as divisions, and compare that to the breakaways - divisions, among the more than 45, 000 denominations among those identifying as Christian?

The reason is, that if you answer yes, to those question, then we are not talking about the same thing, and it would render the scriptures meaningless since everyone do not agree on everything, yet they can still be united, with no divisions among them.

For example, elders may not agree with a particular decision, but they accept and support that decision, because it does not go against Bible teachings or Bible principles. These elders are not divided. They are united. They just have different opinions.

On the other hand, if persons disagree on particular Bible teachings, and they separate for this reason - both teaching what they believe, which conflict, there is division. They are not united.

Do you see it differently? Please explain, if that is the case.

 

[BNR32FAN]

That can best be answered, by your answering the questions:
Are you saying that you believe a disagreement is the same as division?
So, if elders disagree, and the matter is considered and resolved, where everyone agrees to follow the direction of the body, and the leadings of the holy spirit, to maintain unity and peace in the body, you see that as divisions, and compare that to the breakaways - divisions, among the more than 45, 000 denominations among those identifying as Christian?

The reason is, that if you answer yes, to those question, then we are not talking about the same thing, and it would render the scriptures meaningless since everyone do not agree on everything, yet they can still be united, with no divisions among them.

For example, elders may not agree with a particular decision, but they accept and support that decision, because it does not go against Bible teachings or Bible principles. These elders are not divided. They are united. They just have different opinions.

On the other hand, if persons disagree on particular Bible teachings, and they separate for this reason - both teaching what they believe, which conflict, there is division. They are not united.

Do you see it differently? Please explain, if that is the case.

Ok I just needed to understand exactly what you meant by division. Well in the case of the unbelieving Jews and Christian Jews there was a division. Obviously Paul hunting them down and persecuting them constitutes a division and since they were both part of the same church/synagog. I would consider that to be a division. Then there’s the Judaizers who were trying to mix the law and grace which is what the entire epistle to the Galatians was about. It was the Judaizers who had caused the Galatians to stumble as well as the council meeting in Acts 15. They continued to be a problem both during the ministry of the apostles and long after their death for centuries. I would say that even today we still have Judaizers in the SDA. It’s been a constant problem since the beginning of Christianity.

 

[CoreyD]

Ok I just needed to understand exactly what you meant by division. Well in the case of the unbelieving Jews and Christian Jews there was a division.

Unbelieving Jews?
So they were unbelievers, and not Christians?
How then do you arrive at the Christians being divided?

Obviously Paul hunting them down and persecuting them constitutes a division and since they were both part of the same church/synagog. I would consider that to be a division.

Saul was a Christian?
I'm confused. Are we talking about divisions in Christianity, or divisions in the world? I thought it was the former.
In that case, a persecutor of Christians does not render the Christians divided.

Are you trying to find support for division among those identifying as Christians today?
There is no support for that, and it's impossible to dig up any, in the scriptures.

Then there’s the Judaizers who were trying to mix the law and grace which is what the entire epistle to the Galatians was about. It was the Judaizers who had caused the Galatians to stumble as well as the council meeting in Acts 15. They continued to be a problem both during the ministry of the apostles and long after their death for centuries. I would say that even today we still have Judaizers in the SDA. It’s been a constant problem since the beginning of Christianity.

Did you read Galatians 2:4, 5
4 This matter arose because some false believers had infiltrated our ranks to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus and to make us slaves. 5 We did not give in to them for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you.

Think of it this way...
Persecutors plant imposters in a group, in order to cause divisions.
Is there division among Christ's followers?

Because matters have to be corrected that are a product of the enemy, that does not translate to divisions. It's not what is under consideration. It's not the same thing as separating and teaching conflicting doctrines.
Are we clear on that, or are you still not seeing the difference?

I think what you are doing, is confusing matters that arise in the congregation, that need to be handled by the body of elders, with an entirely different matter - divisions among those who claim to be Christ's followers.

Would you then say that when counsel was given concerning the man that had relations with his mother, at 1 Corinthians 5, that was division?
That was a case of correcting wrong doing in the congregation.
So long as people with sinful nature are a part of the congregation, there will be a need to correct, admonish, reprove, etc.
Gossip, as well, needed to be addressed.
Once these matters are resolved, the congregation remained united in love, and teachings was never a problem. The elders handled that also.

The apostles and other pillars in the congregation, kept it together, by giving instructions, and teaching through letters, and talks.

That is different to what we see among the more than 45,000 different denominations identifying as Christian.
I'm not sure how else I can simplify this. I hope you understand.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Unbelieving Jews?
So they were unbelievers, and not Christians?
How then do you arrive at the Christians being divided?

Because Christianity is the continuation of the Jewish religion. When Abraham spoke with God when He told Abraham that this time next year Sarah would have a son, that was Jesus Abraham was speaking to. The prophecies in Isaiah and Jeremiah foretold of the coming of Christ. So in a sense, they were the first Christians (followers of Christ).

 

[CoreyD]

Because Christianity is the continuation of the Jewish religion. When Abraham spoke with God when He told Abraham that this time next year Sarah would have a son, that was Jesus Abraham was speaking to. The prophecies in Isaiah and Jeremiah foretold of the coming of Christ. So in a sense, they were the first Christians (followers of Christ).

That's how you see it - your version of it, but I haven't seen any scripture to support that.
Perhaps you can share one, if there are any.

Please read Galatians Chapter 3. There, in verses 26-29, we read...
26 So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, 27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Also, see Galatians 4:21-31, and Galatians 6:15, 16
Concerning the free woman and the woman in slavery, these are two covenants.
If you think there is a continuation, then I would like to hear from you why there are two covenants, instead of one.
Please also explain why one of those covenants is not in force, and why circumcision is no longer required.

In fact, there is quite a lot, I would like to hear explained.
Why did the Jewish leaders and the Jews have to be baptized as Christians, if they were Christians?
What is a Christian - not a follower of Christ?
Did the apostles agree with the view that people had - that they were a breakaway sect from Judaism? Acts 24:5, 14; Acts 28:22

 

[BNR32FAN]

That's how you see it - your version of it, but I haven't seen any scripture to support that.
Perhaps you can share one, if there are any.

You don’t think that the prophecies in Jeremiah and Isaiah support the idea that the Jews were supposed to be awaiting Christ’s coming? Are those not scriptures that support this idea? In my opinion this is more clearly supported than the Trinity.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Concerning the free woman and the woman in slavery, these are two covenants.
If you think there is a continuation, then I would like to hear from you why there are two covenants, instead of one.
Please also explain why one of those covenants is not in force, and why circumcision is no longer required.

God made a covenant with Noah as well. I don’t see three different agreements made by God as being different religions all together, God simply gave different expectations to different people at different times, that doesn’t mean they’re not serving the same God. Why is the Old Testament provided in every Christian Bible? The word Christian means follower of Christ. Was Abraham not the first Jew? Was he not a follower of Christ? Was he not saved by faith thru the grace of God by Jesus’ sacrifice the same as everyone else who has ever received salvation?

In fact, there is quite a lot, I would like to hear explained.
Why did the Jewish leaders and the Jews have to be baptized as Christians, if they were Christians?
What is a Christian - not a follower of Christ?
Did the apostles agree with the view that people had - that they were a breakaway sect from Judaism? Acts 24:5, 14; Acts 28:22

I don’t believe that water baptized is necessary for salvation. The scriptures record some receiving the Holy Spirit before being baptized and some not receiving the Holy Spirit after being baptized until the apostles came and laid hands on them.

You’re quoting Tertullius in Acts 24 which is a record of his accusations against Paul at the trial not a statement of truth and you’re quoting his accusers again in Acts 28. These were not statements of fact they were their accusations against Paul. Did you notice verse 17 where Paul said he had done nothing against the Jewish customs? Were the Jews not told that the Messiah would be their Savior in Isaiah 19:20 and Isaiah 43:11?

 

[CoreyD]

You don’t think that the prophecies in Jeremiah and Isaiah support the idea that the Jews were supposed to be awaiting Christ’s coming? Are those not scriptures that support this idea? In my opinion this is more clearly supported than the Trinity.

Can you please provide the scripture(s) that say the Jews were followers of Christ. That's what you claimed, I believe. Wasn't it?

God made a covenant with Noah as well. I don’t see three different agreements made by God as being different religions all together, God simply gave different expectations to different people at different times, that doesn’t mean they’re not serving the same God. Why is the Old Testament provided in every Christian Bible? The word Christian means follower of Christ. Was Abraham not the first Jew? Was he not a follower of Christ? Was he not saved by faith thru the grace of God by Jesus’ sacrifice the same as everyone else who has ever received salvation?

Please explain what is the Christ, and please provide the scripture(s) that show Abraham followed the Christ.

I don’t believe that water baptized is necessary for salvation. The scriptures record some receiving the Holy Spirit before being baptized and some not receiving the Holy Spirit after being baptized until the apostles came and laid hands on them.

Many people do not believe what the scriptures say, but you do not want to follow those people, do you?

Can you provide the scripture(s) that says one does not need to be baptized, please.
Also, in the case of Cornelius who was a Gentile, along with his household, and whom God showed his followers that the Gentiles were now being accepted by anointing them with holy spirit, please show me where in the scripture, they did not need to be baptized.

Here is one scripture that says Baptism saves one.
1 Peter 3:21
Are you saying you do not believe Peter?

You’re quoting Tertullius in Acts 24 which is a record of his accusations against Paul at the trial not a statement of truth and you’re quoting his accusers again in Acts 28. These were not statements of fact they were their accusations against Paul.

Thank you for observing that.
So, are you agreeing that the apostles did not agree with the view of the people?

Did you notice verse 17 where Paul said he had done nothing against the Jewish customs?

That's what he was being accused of.
Why would Paul commit an offense against the law?
Acts 25:8

Then Paul made his defense: “I have committed no offense against the law of the Jews or against the temple or against Caesar.”

Were the Jews not told that the Messiah would be their Savior in Isaiah 19:20 and Isaiah 43:11?

Yes. That's correct. So when did the Jews follow the Christ?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Can you please provide the scripture(s) that say the Jews were followers of Christ. That's what you claimed, I believe. Wasn't it?

Please explain what is the Christ, and please provide the scripture(s) that show Abraham followed the Christ.

Who is Abraham speaking to in Genesis 18? Before you answer please read these two passages.

“It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught of God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me. Not that anyone has seen the Father, except the One who is from God; He has seen the Father.”
‭‭John‬ ‭6‬:‭45‬-‭46‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

“No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.”
‭‭John‬ ‭3‬:‭13‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

 

[BNR32FAN]

Many people do not believe what the scriptures say, but you do not want to follow those people, do you?

Can you provide the scripture(s) that says one does not need to be baptized, please.
Also, in the case of Cornelius who was a Gentile, along with his household, and whom God showed his followers that the Gentiles were now being accepted by anointing them with holy spirit, please show me where in the scripture, they did not need to be baptized.

Here is one scripture that says Baptism saves one.
1 Peter 3:21
Are you saying you do not believe Peter?

No I believe being baptized with the Holy Spirit saves, not water baptism. I was baptized when I was about 5 years old and I had no idea what it meant. I didn’t receive the Holy Spirit and I lived a very sinful life until I was 38 years old and decided to devote my life to God. Then I received the Holy Spirit and was baptized a second time as a sign of my faith and have been serving God ever since. I don’t believe Peter is saying that we’re saved simply by water baptism. Simon the sorcerer certainly wasn’t saved by baptism in Acts 8 and Cornelius and his household received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized. Can you quote a passage that says they weren’t saved until they were baptized with water?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Thank you for observing that.
So, are you agreeing that the apostles did not agree with the view of the people?

Well that wasn’t your first interpretation of those verses. I feel like now that I’ve pointed out the proper context you’ve moved the goalpost so to speak. Your initial quote of the passage was to indicate that Christianity is a different sect than Judaism and now you’re twisting it into a different argument. In answer to your question neither Christianity nor Judaism is subjective to personal or popular opinion or interpretation. In other words Judaism has nothing to do with a person’s view and neither does Christianity. Both are defined by what God says they are, not what people think they are. Paul being a Christian at the time said he had not broken any of the Jews laws, he was a Pharisee very knowledgeable about Jewish law, his accusers disagreed. Who do you believe?

 

[CoreyD]

Who is Abraham speaking to in Genesis 18? Before you answer please read these two passages.

“It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught of God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me. Not that anyone has seen the Father, except the One who is from God; He has seen the Father.”
‭‭John‬ ‭6‬:‭45‬-‭46‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

“No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.”
‭‭John‬ ‭3‬:‭13‬ ‭NASB1995‬‬

So there are no scriptures that say Abraham followed or was a follower of Christ.
You can just say it. There is no need to quote scriptures that do not answer the question.

Do you also find it difficult to answer the question 'when did the Jews follow the Christ?'
Is that because you already answered it with this : Were the Jews not told that the Messiah would be their Savior in Isaiah 19:20 and Isaiah 43:11?, but do not want to say it directly?

I believe you do realize what the truth is, but there is a reason you won't admit it.

No I believe being baptized with the Holy Spirit saves, not water baptism. I was baptized when I was about 5 years old and I had no idea what it meant.

Are you saying you believe Peter, but you don't believe Peter?
Can you clarify? Did Peter say that water baptism saves one?
Could you answer yes or no, so that I can have a clear answer from you?
Thanks.

I have never read any scripture that says baptism is having ones head sprinkled with water, when they have not believed on the Lord Jesus christ.
So according to the Bible, you were not baptized at the age of 5. Nor were the over 1.2 billion children that are now adults.
It's important to follow the Bible, and what it says, rather than traditions that invalidate the word of God. Matthew 15:9

I didn’t receive the Holy Spirit and I lived a very sinful life until I was 38 years old and decided to devote my life to God.

It's good that you sought to turn your life around. Well done.

Then I received the Holy Spirit and was baptized a second time as a sign of my faith and have been serving God ever since.

So, you do think baptism is a requirement. That's good.
I hope you didn't do it because you felt forced, although you did not see a need for it, because you know that being ducked under the water isn't what will allow you to have a "pledge of a clear conscience toward God" - 1 Peter 3:21
God sees into the heart.

I don’t believe Peter is saying that we’re saved simply by water baptism.

Maybe I am confused about what you are saying.
Hopefully you aren't confused about what you are saying, and you can help me out.
When you said, I don’t believe that water baptized is necessary for salvation. did you not mean that it is not necessary to get baptized, because you can be saved without having to get baptized?
Or were you saying something else?
Please clarify.

Simon the sorcerer certainly wasn’t saved by baptism in Acts 8 and Cornelius and his household received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized.

Can you please explain what you view as saved, because I am getting the impression that you are referring to saved as referred to by Jesus, at Matthew 24:13, and no one is actually saved in that way... except for dead people, who have stayed the course of righteousness, to the end of their life.

Can you quote a passage that says they weren’t saved until they were baptized with water?

I'm now trying to understand what's in your mind, regarding being saved.
Cornelius and his household were not born again until they were baptized, after receiving holy spirit.
Please see "Water Births", and its accompanied link.

If however, "saved" refers to what Jesus said at Luke 7:50, then you do not even need to receive holy spirit to be saved in that case. All you need is faith, in God, and Jesus Christ, which allows you to have a relationship with God (2 Corinthians 5:19). Please also see Luke 8:50

So, which saved do you have in mind?

 

[CoreyD]

Well that wasn’t your first interpretation of those verses. I feel like now that I’ve pointed out the proper context you’ve moved the goalpost so to speak. Your initial quote of the passage was to indicate that Christianity is a different sect than Judaism and now you’re twisting it into a different argument. In answer to your question neither Christianity nor Judaism is subjective to personal or popular opinion or interpretation. In other words Judaism has nothing to do with a person’s view and neither does Christianity. Both are defined by what God says they are, not what people think they are. Paul being a Christian at the time said he had not broken any of the Jews laws, he was a Pharisee very knowledgeable about Jewish law, his accusers disagreed. Who do you believe?

Please quote where I interpreted anything.
I don't think you deliberately set out to misrepresent what I said. Only God knows your heart, and how you feel at this time, and why you would malign me.

Perhaps you misinterpreted this:

Did the apostles agree with the view that people had - that they were a breakaway sect from Judaism? Acts 24:5, 14; Acts 28:22

That was not saying the apostles were "a different sect than Judaism".
You are seeing what isn't there.

That happens to me sometimes, but I usually double check before I post, so I catch my mistake, and correct it. So, I forgive you.