Baptism

[Meshavrischika]

The need is ours not God's. Man needs things he can point to or touch to make things real.

A lot of this thread could be taken as an argument for infant baptism. Since we are saved by grace thru faith and not works, and if that grace is imparted at baptism, who better than a helpless infant to baptise? It certainly is no work of their own.


**and the arguments go round and round -- wonder if they will go dow the drain when the bapistry plug is pulled?***

hehehe, that's why you use a natural source so there is no plug to pull (but what am I saying, that's OT talk)

 

[MamaZ]

Um...you're not reading my posts. I acknowledged that it is an act, but stipulated that it is God doing the acting. We're not told to baptize ourselves, but to BE baptize (passive voice).

So, you had to do the work of "agreeing"...and here I thought it was God who saves, not us by our works.

It is much more than that. It is a light that goes on and one just stands there and says WOW... God is not being baptized.. You are..

 

[Meshavrischika]

everyone is speaking in "active" "passive" "tense" etc. which is really funny because using the English version, you're right, but unless you read Hebrew on alot of stuff, or Greek and understand Hebrew tradition and thought pattern, you (and I for that matter) have no clue

 

[JamesThaddeusMartin]

LOL don't know what happened but the only part of that post that was mine was adding words to the scriptures.

Ill ask again because Im not sure I understand your answer...

If I may ask, where (or from whom) did you learn all that you know concerning the scriptures?



pax

 

[JamesThaddeusMartin]

no it's not silly. Either we just need God and everything else is ceremonial at best, or we do not and can do it ourselves. There is no "us helping God". If no one ever lifted a hand again to baptise and if no one even said the word again, are you asserting that all rom that time forth who found God would lack salvation and the Holy Spirit because they didn't take a dunk?

Gods does not save us without us...what would be the point? We are not stones. He created us to be in communion with Him.

Moses was called upon to help God, the Apostles were called upon to help God and so on and so on...



pax

 

[Meshavrischika]

but if no other Christian took a hand in doing anything WOULD GOD SAVE ANOTHER SOUL? you didn't answer my question.

 

[Melethiel]

everyone is speaking in "active" "passive" "tense" etc. which is really funny because using the English version, you're right, but unless you read Hebrew on alot of stuff, or Greek and understand Hebrew tradition and thought pattern, you (and I for that matter) have no clue

I read Greek.

 

[Meshavrischika]

and you understand the cultures behind the times, and the cultures behind the translators to this point as well along with the religious environment that was present during each translation.

 

[Melethiel]

and you understand the cultures behind the times, and the cultures behind the translators to this point as well along with the religious environment that was present during each translation.

Church history is my hobby.

While I may not know as much as someone who has a doctorate, I'm not ignorant of the subject.

 

[Meshavrischika]

ah. an armchair theologian like everyone else here.

 

[Melethiel]

Pretty much. But I DO love languages and cultural studies. The only thing I find annoying is that I can only really concentrate on one language at a time, and when I do, I start to lose the others. So at the moment, my German is quite strong, but my Greek is a lot weaker than it was a year ago.

 

[Meshavrischika]

my point being, we're no more able to be 100% sure than anyone else, even those who have had extensive study are only just barely scratching the surface. We cannot, alone or as a group of people, come up with this only using intelligence and study.

 

[Melethiel]

Doesn't mean we're just supposed to up and do whatever we want.

 

[Thekla]

I do think a certain "parallel" could be given in the writing of the NT. The apostles experienced Christ and rendered their interpretation in written form. Further, especially in the epistles and the Gospel of John, they clearly delineate between correct and incorrect "interpretations" of Christ. This interpretation is evidenced in description of event as well as reiterations of teachings and later in the corrections to 'misinterpretation' in the epistles.

 

[anisavta]

so, when Christ said "be following me...", He didn't mean it ?

What is your definition of "be following me"?

 

[Thekla]

What is your definition of "be following me"?

hard to summarize exhaustively,

"If you love Me, you will keep my Commandments ..."

through the Holy Spirit to keep what He taught through iteration and example, as also 'outlined' in the Beatitudes ... that the image may be restored and move toward the likeness (to use particular terminology)

 

[anisavta]

hard to summarize exhaustively,

"If you love Me, you will keep my Commandments ..."

through the Holy Spirit to keep what He taught through iteration and example, as also 'outlined' in the Beatitudes ... that the image may be restored and move toward the likeness (to use particular terminology)

So to paraphrase you:
To keep Torah
To follow in the dust of Rabbi Yeshua - learning and doing everything He says. To imitate His mannerisms and customs.

 

[Thekla]

So to paraphrase you:
To keep Torah
To follow in the dust of Rabbi Yeshua - learning and doing everything He says. To imitate His mannerisms and customs.

not exactly; but if Torah is the second person of the Trinity, then closer ...

 

[Meshavrischika]

Doesn't mean we're just supposed to up and do whatever we want.

if you cannot discern the truth in a human type way, and you rely on Spirit to lead you then you are not just up and doing whatever... right?

 

[Meshavrischika]

I do think a certain "parallel" could be given in the writing of the NT. The apostles experienced Christ and rendered their interpretation in written form. Further, especially in the epistles and the Gospel of John, they clearly delineate between correct and incorrect "interpretations" of Christ. This interpretation is evidenced in description of event as well as reiterations of teachings and later in the corrections to 'misinterpretation' in the epistles.

all John is is basically a gospel written after others so he'd have had a source to glean from and expand on. it's in no way a measuring stick in itself for the others. If any were a measuring stick, you'd have to say it was Mark since that was the first.