Washing of Regeneration is BAPTISM. It regenerates and makes one part of the New Covenant.
“For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.”" ( 1 Cor 12:13 KJV)
Hello and God bless,It is hard to disagree with someone who holds to the idea of "sola scriptura" and that everything that must be believed must be in the Bible.
You again know very little of what I have studied and read through my 61 years of life. I have a strong understanding of these things. And I believe I would see many things different in understanding of the history of the church and many men of history and their ideas, But I do not put men above that which is written or traditions of men that make the word of God of no effect as many do in various professing Christian groups.You have a limited understanding of Christian history.
God called me to himself and to withdraw from all things that are not true and according to the Spirit and the word. Even the other gatherings I went to afterwards, among those called protestants, i also withdrew from them as well, though I have many brothers and sisters still gathering among them.I don't blame you for leaving the Catholic faith.
We really do not need to base our understanding of the massive errors of the Roman catholic Church on a man called "Scott Hahn", or any other man. The Spirit of God will reveal to those who are seeking and who walk in the light of Christ the truth and lead them out if they will follow. Also we have the revelation of the scriptures that are profitable for doctrine,reproof, rebuke, correction , instruction in righteousness, and that clearly expose the errors in many man made religious forms and errors and those who's traditions of man and commandments of men make the word of God of no effect.The Catholic Church, according to Scott Hahn, a convert to the Catholic faith, did a wretched job of catechizing people over the last 200 years.
I have met some in Greek Orthodox and Pentecostal and baptist and man other professing groups that do not understand many things of their faith. But if there is genuine faith and they are weak in the faith , patience and grace in the love of Christ is needed and a spiritual walk and mind.cannot begin to tell you how many Roman Catholics I have met in my lifetime who were abysmally ignorant of their own faith,
Jesus saidthe Fathers of the Church,
To know a great deal about christian history is not needful for salvation or a close walk with God. It can be helpful to see how many gatherings today came to the dismal state they are in who make the word of God of no effect in soo many places, including the Orthodox Christ and the Roman catholics Church and soo many others.and Christian history in general.
They are not like me. You cannot try to group men into a kind of people and assume what you do the way you do. I have been called of God and sent by God to many places, and sent to preach all over as well, I have met few that are called this way.They, like you,
No I am not "easy prey". The JWs and Mormons are not Christian groups to me. They are cults to me. But I have still tried to speak to them and help them often.were easy prey for the various Protestant sects and the cultists such as the JW's and Mormons.
So far no problem has been shown at all. This is just your reflex reaction to anyone who is not part of your religious group and you assume they are not correct from the start. This is your problem to start with as I understand.Your problem,
skimming is not how you should read what I wrote.as I skimmed the lengthy posts you made,
Again false. I do not twist scripture. This is a reflect reaction by many who assume that all who disagree with them are wrong and they do not show how I have not used scripture right.is that you twist the Scripture mean what your chosen denomination has told you that they mean.
These things are serious and spiritually very important, not funny. Paul said this and i agree with himThe rather humorous part,
this does not mean anything. There have always been disagreements among believers and even Paul had to withstand against Peter at a time (Galatians 2). I am willing t hear any who disagree and examine what they say . But if I show them that what I say is true I hope they will believe it and act accordingly.as I said before, is that you can find probably three or four dozen equally vocal and dedicated Protestants from other assemblies who would vehemently disagree with you and would use the Scriptures to do so.
There is no problem. Believers are to always contend for the faith and withstand the gainsayers by sound doctrine and we see this all over scripture.Do you see the problem here? Is the Holy Spirit that schizophrenic?
I answer, as all believers must to my head, Christ, and to every other part of the body as they live and move and minister and speak in the head. We are to submit to one another as we read in scripture. Authority is only as we live and speak the word of God. Even jesus was question by the religious robe wearing crowd of hypocrites and challenged by what authority he spoke. They assumed, (wrongly) that he had no authority as they did. They had a positional authority in the world, but they were not in the spiritual authority. Jesus was not a earthly kind or leader as they knew. But he spoke as one having authority and he was in the authority of God. All believers are in this authority as they walk in Christ. Even a young believer with the Spirit and scriptures can tear down strongholds of a entire Pope system if they try to stand against him without scripture or in the Spirit. Yet they would assume as many others do in other gatherings that they are right because they have a man mad positional authority.Regarding your quote above, to whom do you answer in matters of Christian doctrine and morality?
I am not part of any man made religious group. The SDA i consider borderline cultish in my understanding and bound up under the law in many areas. With many doctrinal errors according to scripture. I have tried to speak to them at times.If a SDA member tells you that
I did not hear this from SDA. The scripture says that all believers are in Christ and Christ is the head of the body the church.A.) he is in the Church because he believes in Christ, and B.)
No I do not believe this, we worship every day.that you must worship on Saturday,
suppositionsAs regards the Church, let's make a few suppositions here:
I would say as scripture says1. The Church is the Body of Christ in the New Covenant. That means that Christians are people of the Covenant of God.
The word church means2. The Church existed in the Old Covenant. The word "church" is ἐκκλησία ekklēsia in the Greek and עֵדָה ʿēḏâ (literally "congregation") in the Hebrew. In this sense, one could have a "congregation" in a house, as in the house churches of the first century, or one could be speaking of the larger congregation.
the baptism in the new testament to be in the body of Christ is a spiritual one, where believers are baptized by one Spirit into one body.3. In order to be part of the congregation, one has to enter into the covenant. In the OT that was done by circumcision, and the man who was not circumcised was considered to be outside of the congregation of Israel. The same applies to the NT congregation. Baptism is that act of "covenant cutting" which enters one into the congregation.
no Hierarchy in the order of God in the New testament except Christ as the head working effectually in the measure of every part of the body ( Ephesians 4:15,16 KJV. Hebrews 13:20, 21 KJV).H - Hierarchy "Who is in charge here?"
read my study on the "E - Ethics "What are the rules of the covenant."
swear not at all as scripture showsO - Oaths and sanctions "Promises to keep the covenant ethics and sanctions upon disobedience."
yes and we should get into this massive error in church history and in many assemblies today.The principle germane to our discussion is hierarchy.
Christ is the head. Some do not hold the head and have another head of man.. This is shown that Christ is the head and those who do not hold the head are warned against in scripture.In any covenant structure, there is one who is the covenant head.
No, Paul said he was not a controller over them. He persuaded them, reasoned with them, and yes he could rebuke them. All believers have the power of God with them when they walk in the Spirit and the word.Not many. One. St. Paul made mention of this when he spoke of his authority to those who were dismissing and insulting his leadership in his absence. He warned them that he could either come with love or a rod of correction.
Christ rules in the hearts of all believers and those who speak and live in Christ are heard.There is no way to have one authority over thousands of independent assemblies who answer only to themselves.
You obviously are not led by the Spirit in what you say. You assume things in your natural mind.
And Abraham and Paul.“And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.”" ( Matthew 23:9 KJV)
The so called "fathers" of the past might be included in this warning. And especially the Roman catholic priest who call themselves "priest" and father" .
Yes, you did. As I proved.I make no assumptions.
No, you miss many things. When I left many of the religious forms we see today (having been through many of them) I saw by revelation the simplicity in Christ. We would meet in our homes have a covenant meal together and wait on the Lord for ministry and edification. We would sing spiritual songs as we were Jed and as Peter and Paul showed the order of God, we would minister the gifts to one another as God gave them.I follow what the Church has taught from the beginning,
No, I never said this. I showed how you assumed wrongly about me in the statement you made read it again.therefore, your accusation is that the very first Christian pastors, saints, and martyrs were not led by the Spirit.
This street preacher (a Pentecostal) was used to help you I would be closer to this man and the Pentecostals do believe in the gifts of the Spirit for today and somewhat of body ministry. Although they still elevate the one Mann pastor ministry over all, wrongly and against scripture. And they have other concerning doctrines.As for your question regarding my acceptance of the Orthodox faith, I have been on a long and winding journey over the many years of my life, having been raised Episcopalian, a short four-year stint as a self-declared atheist which almost killed me in my hedonistic pursuit of pleasure, the "saved" by the ministry of a neo-Pentecostal street preacher.
Which cult was that?From there, after his ministry devolved into a cult,
That would have caused sone problems for sure. And again the same one man pastor ministry over all and no body ministry in every gathering.I was in Fundamentalist Baptist assemblies for 12 years,
That online discussion was what (I believe) wrongly swayed you into another religious form. So far you have not showed me any correction from the scriptures I used to correct your thinking. I say this in love to your soul. I at first came out of the so called “Roman Catholic Church” after being in there for almost 18 years.followed by 13 years in the PCA. After two years of online debate/discussion with Roman Catholic apologists, I converted to the Byzantine Catholic Church, where I stayed for 21 years.
We don’t “convert” to a religious form. The conversion is into Christ and His body by the Spirit. All such carnal talk of “I am if the Orthodix faith or the Roman Catholic, or Baptist etc” is carnal as Paul showed,The Byzantine Catholic Church is called "Orthodoxy in Communion with Rome," however, as I furthered my study, the concept of what it means to be "in communion" meant that I could not reconcile trying to be Orthodox with having communion with Rome. In 2022 I converted to the Orthodox faith.
You do. not worship as the first Christian’s did. Not even close, as I could prove to you by scripture. But it seems that you are fearful to change after so long and perhaps don’t want to see the things that I share because it would trouble you in the form your in now .Therefore, I have been around, learned a lot, and studied a lot. Like a lot of Evangelicals and Protestants who are entering Orthodoxy (our parish is bursting at the seams, and we have many catechumens), I found that I wanted to worship as the first Christians did,
You just follow another form or branch now. I could “prove” by scripture that your form now is wrong but you have to be willing to examine things. And it seems sone are not willing. Like the Catholic who I would ask why their Pope does this or that against scripture they would just say they are not interested to talk.rather than follow any branch of Christianity which was invented 500 years ago as Protestantism was, or anything to do with the Roman Catholic Church, which has added a number of dogmas to the original faith of the Church.
I am always growing in the faith and I was not nor am now like you in your past. I am grounded in what I believe and have had it tested for many years but the truth still stands firm.I realize that you are set in what you believe, as I was
And yet you do not listen to the commands of the apostles in your religious form. I can prove this 100 percent.in each of the places I stopped on my way back to the original Church which was founded upon the Apostles.
I have the mind of Christ I don’t need my mind changed.I wish my journey to Orthodoxy could have been shorter, but for some reason, only known to God, it was long and drawn out. There is no further need for discussion as I am not going to change your mind. That will be up to God to do in His own way and in His own time.
If you really meant that you would be quick to give an answer for the reason of the hope that is in you and to earnestly contend for the faithThe blessing of the Lord be upon you.
So are you correcting Jesus words when he said call no man father ??And Abraham and Paul.
works salvation people will say that the Thief was extra biblically water baptized by John beforehand, or believed in Jesus before. but in Matthew 27:44, Mark 15:32 the thieves both Reviled Lord Jesus Christ, cast the same in his teeth. they were clearly both unsaved. Yet we see revealed in Lukes Gospel, one of the Thieves repents (changes his mind) and calls on the name of the Lord to be saved Luke 23:39-43, and Jesus saves him.
Matthew 27:38-44
38 Then were there two thieves crucified with him, one on the right hand, and another on the left.
39 And they that passed by reviled him, wagging their heads,
40 And saying, Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself. If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross.
41 Likewise also the chief priests mocking him, with the scribes and elders, said,
42 He saved others; himself he cannot save. If he be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him.
43 He trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if he will have him: for he said, I am the Son of God.
44 The thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth.
Mark 15:27-32
27 And with him they crucify two thieves; the one on his right hand, and the other on his left.
28 And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors.
29 And they that passed by railed on him, wagging their heads, and saying, Ah, thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days,
30 Save thyself, and come down from the cross.
31 Likewise also the chief priests mocking said among themselves with the scribes, He saved others; himself he cannot save.
32 Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.
Here we see in verse 32 that the thieves did in fact revile Lord Jesus Christ.
Luke 23:39-43
39 And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.
40 But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation?
41 And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss.
42 And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.
43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.
Here we see one of the thieves repented (changed his mind) and Believed on Lord Jesus, called on his name to be saved. Nothing is put in the Bible by accident, this story was clearly put in by God as a picture of salvation.
And the people who say "The thief couldn't haved been saved by faith because Jesus didn't die yet" that is false because all throughout the Old Testament we see people justified by grace through faith, calling on the name of the Lord. Abel Genesis 4:4, Noah Genesis 6:8, Abraham Genesis 15:6 . Hebrews 11 lists Abel Enoch, Sarah, Moses, Jacob, Isaac, Joseph, Gedeon, and of Barak, Samson, and of Jephthae; of David, and Samuel, as being justified by faith. Salvation has always been by grace through faith. Always. There has never been different ways of salvation, it has always been by grace through faith.
Romans 4:2-5
2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.
3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
I see a lot of people quote Luke 23:39-43 and rightly so, but I never see anyone bring up Matthew 27:38-44, or Mark 15:27-32 which is frustrating because one of the things works salvationists, lose your salvation people will hit you with is "Oh the Thief on the cross was saved beforehand, or water baptized beforehand" but that's biblically false and that is extra biblical nonsense.
The Word of God refers to Paul and Abraham as "father" because they are spiritual fathers, just like priests. You're missing the meaning of the words, it's not to do away with titles such as father or doctor.So are you correcting Jesus words when he said call no man father ??
Paul was no “called” father”, he was like a fatherly figure. That is different.
And we read,
Luke 3: 8. Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance, and begin 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.”
The word father can mean the originator or chief of something of something not used as a title.
No I’m not missing the meaning. It has to do with a nane or title and putting someone in absolute authority over you like a master as well. One is our master and one Father and the anointing teaches all things. So, while there are teacher gifts to the body, it is not the man in his old man that teaches it is the anointing in him.The Word of God refers to Paul and Abraham as "father" because they are spiritual fathers, just like priests. You're missing the meaning of the words, it's not to do away with titles such as father or doctor.
Jesus is not telling us that calling your dad "father" is wrong. We are to obey and honor our mother and father. Jesus is rebuking those teachers who do not teach the Word of God, we are only to follow the teachings of God and not of a man with his own worldly ideas that are contrary to God. Paul and Abraham are referred to as "father," because they are spiritual leaders who teach God's Word.No I’m not missing the meaning. It has to do with a nane or title and putting someone in absolute authority over you like a master as well. One is our master and one Father and the anointing teaches all things. So, while there are teacher gifts to the body, it is not the man in his old man that teaches it is the anointing in him.
The context is this
Matthew 23: 9.-12 “ And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. 10. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. 11. But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. 12. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.”
Then he begins to rebuke the Pharisees sharply.
I disagree with you here. No so called "priest" should take the title or name "father" , or even master over others as Jesus reveals.Jesus is not telling us that calling your dad "father" is wrong. We are to obey and honor our mother and father. Jesus is rebuking those teachers who do not teach the Word of God, we are only to follow the teachings of God and not of a man with his own worldly ideas that are contrary to God. Paul and Abraham are referred to as "father," because they are spiritual leaders who teach God's Word.
1 Cor 4: 15 For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel. RSVCE
Remember the entire Bible is God-breathed, it is easy to take a phrase out of context and apply our own meaning to it. The words must be considered in light of all of God's Word.
Your quotation from Barnes said "This does not, of course, forbid us to apply the term to our real father." Either "call no man" means every single man or it does not. Barnes admits it does not. What do you think about the following passage? That is, who are the "fathers?"I disagree with you here. No so called "priest" should take the title or name "father" , or even master over others as Jesus reveals.
Paul was a father like figure, who begat them in the faith, This was not a title or name or a supreme authority over them. The pharisees had this error.Paul also says he nursed them like a nurse
“But we were gentle among you, even as a nurse cherisheth her children:”" (1Thess. 2:7 KJV)
Paul was not saying to call him a nurse.
Others see things this way also. *though I really only need the scriptures in this, some comments by others believers might be helpful here
Barnes' Notes on the Bible
And call no man your Father ... - This does not, of course, forbid us to apply the term to our real father. Religion requires all proper honor to be shown to Him, Exodus 20:12; Matthew 15:4; Ephesians 6:1-3. But the word "father" also denotes "authority, eminence, superiority, a right to command, and a claim to particular respect." In this sense it is used here. In this sense it belongs eminently to God, and it is not right to give it to people. Christian brethren are equal. Only God has supreme authority. He only has a right to give laws; to declare doctrines that shall bind the conscience; to punish disobedience. The Jewish teachers affected that title because they seem to have supposed that a teacher formed the man, or gave him real life, and sought, therefore, to be called father. Christ taught them that the source of all life and truth was God, and they ought not to seek or receive a title which properly belongs to him."
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
9. A...let us see to it that we retain the full spirit of this warning against that itch for ecclesiastical superiority which has been the bane and the scandal of Christ's ministers in every age. "
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
And call no man your father upon the earth,.... Not but that children may, and should call their natural parents, fathers; ...Christ's sense is, that he would have his disciples not fond of any titles of honour at all; and much less assume an authority over men, as if they were to depend on them, as the founders of the Christian religion, the authors of its doctrines and ordinances; and to take that honour to themselves, which did not belong to them; nor even choose to be called by such names, as would lead people to entertain too high an opinion of them, and take off of their dependence on God the Father, and himself, as these titles the Scribes and Pharisees loved to be called by, did: and who were called not only by the name of Rabbi, but Abba, "Father", also: hence we read of Abba Saul, or "Father" Saul (n); Abba Jose ben Jochanan, a man of Jerusalem (o), Abba Chanan (p), Abba Chelphetha, a man of the village of Hananiah (q); Abba Gorion (r), and others; and this name was , "a name of honour, even as Rabbi" (s), and of great authority: the wise men are said to be , "the fathers of all" (t), to whom all gave heed, and upon whom all depended, as so many oracles. There is a whole treatise in their Misna, called Pirke Abot, which contains some of the oracles, and peculiar sayings of these "fathers", the Misnic doctors, and which are preferred to the writings of Moses, and the prophets. In this sense, and upon this score, our Lord inveighs against them, and cautions his disciples against giving or taking all such titles, in such sense. "For one is your Father, which is in heaven"; who is so, both by creation and adoption, and is possessed of all paternal authority; and is to be honoured and obeyed by all; from whom all wisdom and knowledge is derived, and who has the care and government of all in heaven and in earth.
This doesn’t prove that either of the thieves weren’t baptized. If the apostles were baptizing people in John 4:1-4 then I would imagine that they were baptized as well which would mean that Judas was also baptized. So if a man who was baptized could betray Jesus causing His death why couldn’t two baptized thieves mock Him on the cross? Now I’m not saying they were baptized and I’m not saying they weren’t, what I am saying is that we can’t actually say either way with any certainty.works salvation people will say that the Thief was extra biblically water baptized by John beforehand, or believed in Jesus before. but in Matthew 27:44, Mark 15:32 the thieves both Reviled Lord Jesus Christ, cast the same in his teeth. they were clearly both unsaved. Yet we see revealed in Lukes Gospel, one of the Thieves repents (changes his mind) and calls on the name of the Lord to be saved Luke 23:39-43, and Jesus saves him.
Matthew 27:38-44
38 Then were there two thieves crucified with him, one on the right hand, and another on the left.
39 And they that passed by reviled him, wagging their heads,
40 And saying, Thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself. If thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross.
41 Likewise also the chief priests mocking him, with the scribes and elders, said,
42 He saved others; himself he cannot save. If he be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him.
43 He trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if he will have him: for he said, I am the Son of God.
44 The thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth.
Mark 15:27-32
27 And with him they crucify two thieves; the one on his right hand, and the other on his left.
28 And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors.
29 And they that passed by railed on him, wagging their heads, and saying, Ah, thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days,
30 Save thyself, and come down from the cross.
31 Likewise also the chief priests mocking said among themselves with the scribes, He saved others; himself he cannot save.
32 Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.
Here we see in verse 32 that the thieves did in fact revile Lord Jesus Christ.
Luke 23:39-43
39 And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.
40 But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation?
41 And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss.
42 And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.
43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.
Here we see one of the thieves repented (changed his mind) and Believed on Lord Jesus, called on his name to be saved. Nothing is put in the Bible by accident, this story was clearly put in by God as a picture of salvation.
And the people who say "The thief couldn't haved been saved by faith because Jesus didn't die yet" that is false because all throughout the Old Testament we see people justified by grace through faith, calling on the name of the Lord. Abel Genesis 4:4, Noah Genesis 6:8, Abraham Genesis 15:6 . Hebrews 11 lists Abel Enoch, Sarah, Moses, Jacob, Isaac, Joseph, Gedeon, and of Barak, Samson, and of Jephthae; of David, and Samuel, as being justified by faith. Salvation has always been by grace through faith. Always. There has never been different ways of salvation, it has always been by grace through faith.
Romans 4:2-5
2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.
3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.
4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
I see a lot of people quote Luke 23:39-43 and rightly so, but I never see anyone bring up Matthew 27:38-44, or Mark 15:27-32 which is frustrating because one of the things works salvationists, lose your salvation people will hit you with is "Oh the Thief on the cross was saved beforehand, or water baptized beforehand" but that's biblically false and that is extra biblical nonsense.
No, it does not have to meat what you said here. That is yout human reasoning. It is clarified and relates to certain things.Either "call no man" means every single man or it does not.
No, read the rest of his words.Barnes admits it does not.
I as Barnes do not extend this teaching to the human fathers. But even human fathers are not in the role Jesus warns of. So they also should be spoken of in a certain place and no more. and human mothers etc.What do you think about the following passage? That is, who are the "fathers?"
1 John 2:13-14 I am writing to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning. I am writing to you, young men, because you have overcome the evil one. I write to you, children, because you know the Father. I write to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning. I write to you, young men, because you are strong, and the word of God abides in you, and you have overcome the evil one.
RSVCE
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?