Scott if you noticed I am working my way down your posts. I have not made it to your post on eis yet. But dont you worry I will. I will do my best to get to all of your arguements. Just be patient because it takes time for me to get to all these arguements you have presented. Real quickly I would like to make a comment on your last post and ask you to expound on part of it.
I dont contend at all that baptism is a WORK OF MAN. Col 2:12 very clearly says that baptism is a work of God and not of man. Baptism is a act of obedience. There are 2 kinds of works in the bible works of merit which we dont do and works of obedience which we do today. Do you not agree that we must have an active faith to be saved? Scott did you know that Jesus himself told us that faith is a work. John 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent. They wanted to know in vrs 28 how they could do the works of God. Jesus tells them that the work that is approved by God is for them to belive on Jesus. So Faith is a work.
You left out love. I want to know where love comes in. For example is it before faith or after faith? I also want you to tell me where at in your order is someone saved? For example is someone saved at faith or is at faith and confession. etc...
I am still looking into your supposed exeception but like I already said very clearly and plainly you can not produce a reason for an exception to the Greek rule I have already stated in this verse now can you. So that there is no confusion Scott I want you to admit to the following. Even if you could find 1 or 2 execeptions to rule of aorist participles not occuring before the main verb in some other verses there would have to be a reason found within the grammatical structure of the sentence to cause the rule to be broken and this would'nt have any effect on the grammatical structure of Mark 16:16 now would it. You would have to show in Mark 16:16 from the Greek why the standard rule is broken in this sentence and you can not do it can you Scott? This verse must really bug you since you can not change its clear teaching. I could camp out on this if I wanted to Scott, because if it teaches that baptism is part of salvation here then guess what it is teaching baptism is a part of salvation in those other verses as well.
What questions have I not answered? Your saying if the majorty says it it has to be right. I disagree with that because the majorty is not always right now are they. The bible says it best. Matthew 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
Remeber those men I mentioned in one of my earlier post that were from about 90ad to 250 ad that proclaimed in their writings that water baptism was for the remmisson of sin? It was'nt until around 250 and afterwards that men started corupting the word of God teaching Faith only doctrine without water baptism or water baptism by sprinking or infant baptism. The evidence is on my side friend both internal and external.
So why is baptism singled out as a work? What about not lying? What about any kind of sin? Does that make a person not saved? Baptism is just that - a WORK. Thanks for admitting that.
I dont contend at all that baptism is a WORK OF MAN. Col 2:12 very clearly says that baptism is a work of God and not of man. Baptism is a act of obedience. There are 2 kinds of works in the bible works of merit which we dont do and works of obedience which we do today. Do you not agree that we must have an active faith to be saved? Scott did you know that Jesus himself told us that faith is a work. John 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent. They wanted to know in vrs 28 how they could do the works of God. Jesus tells them that the work that is approved by God is for them to belive on Jesus. So Faith is a work.
Ordi salutus. The Holy Spirit convicts a man of sin. The Holy Spirit offers the gift of eternal life to the believer. Because of the BELIEF that Jesus Christ is LORD, he confesses his sin, and God is faithful and just to forgive that man of sin (I John 1:8). Repentence and confession are the result of belief in Christ. It's in virtually every NT book. "Believe in the Lord and you will be saved." A man will not confess if he doesn't believe. A man will not repent if he doesn't believe. However, millions and millions of men have confessed, repented, and believed WITHOUT water baptism. Are you taking their salvation away?
You left out love. I want to know where love comes in. For example is it before faith or after faith? I also want you to tell me where at in your order is someone saved? For example is someone saved at faith or is at faith and confession. etc...
So you can't disprove the exception I showed you earlier, so you resort to this? Very well.
I am still looking into your supposed exeception but like I already said very clearly and plainly you can not produce a reason for an exception to the Greek rule I have already stated in this verse now can you. So that there is no confusion Scott I want you to admit to the following. Even if you could find 1 or 2 execeptions to rule of aorist participles not occuring before the main verb in some other verses there would have to be a reason found within the grammatical structure of the sentence to cause the rule to be broken and this would'nt have any effect on the grammatical structure of Mark 16:16 now would it. You would have to show in Mark 16:16 from the Greek why the standard rule is broken in this sentence and you can not do it can you Scott? This verse must really bug you since you can not change its clear teaching. I could camp out on this if I wanted to Scott, because if it teaches that baptism is part of salvation here then guess what it is teaching baptism is a part of salvation in those other verses as well.
You have clearly shown nothing. I think it's clear reading the majority of theologians throughout the last 2000 years that it is you and your denomination who are pushing the interpretation to meet your theology. There are way too many questions you have to answer - and you've ignored them all the while.
What questions have I not answered? Your saying if the majorty says it it has to be right. I disagree with that because the majorty is not always right now are they. The bible says it best. Matthew 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
Remeber those men I mentioned in one of my earlier post that were from about 90ad to 250 ad that proclaimed in their writings that water baptism was for the remmisson of sin? It was'nt until around 250 and afterwards that men started corupting the word of God teaching Faith only doctrine without water baptism or water baptism by sprinking or infant baptism. The evidence is on my side friend both internal and external.
Useing your logic I could say well teaching is part of making a disciple but one does not have to necessarly be taught to be a disciple.And you would be correct.
You have got to be kiding me Scott. You are prepared to say that a person could become a disciple without being taught. That is completly crazy. At least your staying consistent with your logic which is obviously illogical. Watch this Scott using your logic on this a person can become a christian without any knowledge of Christ. Somehow they can just magical become a diciple of Christ without being taught about him or being baptized. I am so glad you straightend that out for me.
Upvote
0