• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

If baptism is essential

Status
Not open for further replies.

muffler dragon

Ineffable
Apr 7, 2004
7,320
382
50
✟31,896.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married
I love the way you present your ideas. Precise; yet off the cuff.
 
Upvote 0

muffler dragon

Ineffable
Apr 7, 2004
7,320
382
50
✟31,896.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married
Q:

In viewing your posts to Toney (the last two), it has become evident that you and I may well be upon an impending path of "agreeing to disagree". You seem the sort that would validate such an approach, and who knows when we may or may take it; but I thought I would present it now.

The reason I bring it up is this:

I understand what you are saying when you talk about the assistance of the Holy Spirit throughout the ages. The part that causes me issue with this is that it does not appear that it allows the Spirt of G-d to be unchanging throughout time. It's as though, for some reason, G-d is allowed to change His mind, because some scholar in the last 2000 years has felt like there is a likelihood to his thinking. However, that can and has removed the context of the situation; especially, with pertaining to baptism. Baptism (Mikveh) is a Jewish activity. Therefore, regardless how Mr. 400, Mr. 1000, or Mr. 2005 want to cut it; the context needs to remain the same due to the unchangeable nature of G-d. I view the "New" Testament in light of the Tanakh. There are many who do the exact opposite. You may very well do such, and that is fine. I'm not you and I don't expect you to be me. What I would like to maintain, if you're willing, is the civility to let bygones be bygones. This topic has produced so much disdain that to add to the numbers of angst would be a continuous disservice.

Have a pleasant afternoon.

m.d.
 
Reactions: Toney
Upvote 0

Qoheleth

Byzantine Catholic
Jul 8, 2004
2,702
142
✟18,872.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private

Indeed I agree, you are a gentleman.

God Bless


Q
 
Upvote 0

Toney

Watcher
Feb 24, 2004
1,510
85
Kansas
✟24,724.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Qoheleth said:
Is this not simply Law and legalism with no real end if grace and forgiveness and salvation are not attached to it??

Q

Good point. I never suggested that grace was not attached. I would die for my belief that it is.

There is an important point that is perhaps being missed here and it involves grace. Throughout scripture (the whole of it), we find grace in the form of a reality check, confirmations of the Hand of God, as it were.

In the birth narratives, Mary "heard these things and treasured them in her heart." With Paul, he finds the person in Damascus (just as Jesus promised) who confirms his experience for him. There are numerous other examples such as Old Issac seeing the finger of God in his blessing of Jacob.

Jesus "sends" Paul just as he "sent" his disciples. Jesus himself also had to be "sent" -- there must be a heavenly sending as well as an earthly sending, the sacred as well as the profane. John, in baptizing Jesus, thus sends him. It also is a reality check.

Each person baptized into the Body of Christ is also sent. This is the grace of baptism, which may or may not lead to salvation. You know, the free will thing.
 
Upvote 0

Toney

Watcher
Feb 24, 2004
1,510
85
Kansas
✟24,724.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Qoheleth said:
If scholarship has "come a long way", than has the church been in complete error since the beginning? Is it Logic and scholarship that guides the scripture only or is the Holy spirit present to guide also.

Q

Yes, in error. The Holy Spirit guides scholarship.

I have a problem with parts of the Letter to the Hebrews. So do many others. First, since apostalic authorship is uncertain, it probably should not have been included in the canon. The debate in the early church on that point makes interesting reading. Paul did not write Hebrews, of that scholars are certain.

Anyway, it should be read in knowledge of at least to whom it was written and why it was written. That tempers the anti-Semitism, at least. For years the Church taught that Christianity has replaced Judaism as the New Israel. This is the error of Replacement Theology. It is why Gill's sermons are irrelevant today. The Church no longer endorses Replacement Theology, although RT was taught for over 1,800 years.

I won't argue it. But many Christians treat RT as gospel truth and it is not. Would that we were better informed of these changes.
 
Upvote 0

- DRA -

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2004
3,560
96
Texas
✟4,218.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

I am implying no more than Jesus did when he said what He said in Luke 6:46 and in Mark 16:16. Have you discussed this with Him?

Do you disagree with Him? If so, what is the nature of the disagreement? Is it that we don't have to do what He says, or is about the necessity of belief and baptism to be saved?

The implication is no different than in Acts 2:38,41,47. Those that repented of their sins and were baptized received the "remission of sins." What is the implication about those that did NOT do these things? Were they also saved? Or, were they "unsaved"?
 
Upvote 0

Andyman_1970

Trying to walk in His dust...............
Feb 2, 2004
4,069
209
55
The Natural State
Visit site
✟27,850.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

Yes I have "discussed" this with Him.

My question was not what Jesus thought about my baptism, my question was what is your implication you are making.

This can be answered with a simple yes or no from your point of view:

Are you implying that somehow I have not been obedient to the Lord? And are you implying that such "disobedience" renders me "unsaved"?

Now should your answer violate the CF rules, feel free to PM me, I sure don't want this to be viewed as "baiting" you into getting into trouble by asserting someone in the "Christians Only" section of CF is not a Christian. My desire is not to get you into trouble on here, before I answer the body of you post I think you can do me the service of answering the question I posed above.

Peace be with you brother...............
 
Upvote 0

Jim Woodell

Regular Member
Dec 31, 2004
382
18
83
✟23,108.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
THIS ARTICLE IS WELL WORTH THE READING!


This article is worthy of reading and considering. It is well done and any truth seeker will find it compelling.
 
Upvote 0

muffler dragon

Ineffable
Apr 7, 2004
7,320
382
50
✟31,896.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married
Jim Woodell said:
THIS ARTICLE IS WELL WORTH THE READING!

This article is worthy of reading and considering. It is well done and any truth seeker will find it compelling.

"any truth seeker" = anyone who agrees with "baptism is essential".

As I recall a post of yours on the other thread:

Jim Woodell said:
Scripture is clear: If you are going to speak in tongues you must have an interpreter. I responded to the part of your post that was in an understandable language.

Why would you present such a document as this, Jim? Is this not the same English that I used in my post? Hmmm... what could be the difference? Oh, the substance, the considerations, the arguments, and the context. That's right. I nearly forgot about that.

Bert Thompson is a recognized figure in the world of "creationism", but I don't think that necessarily transcends to the world of Biblical history.

http://www.christiananswers.net/creation/people/thompson-b.html

Does it give you a great deal of satisfaction to use an article like this that parrots your statements; yet still doesn't resolve the whole issue of context?
 
Upvote 0

muffler dragon

Ineffable
Apr 7, 2004
7,320
382
50
✟31,896.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married
- DRA - said:
Nehemiah 6:1-3. And, as Regis would say, that is my final answer.

Nehemiah 6
1Now when it was reported to Sanballat, Tobiah, to Geshem the Arab and to the rest of our enemies that I had rebuilt the wall, and that no breach remained in it, although at that time I had not set up the doors in the gates,

2then Sanballat and Geshem sent a message to me, saying, "Come, let us meet together at Chephirim in the plain of Ono." But they were planning to harm me.


3So I sent messengers to them, saying, "I am doing a great work and I cannot come down. Why should the work stop while I leave it and come down to you?"

*slap the floor laughing*

This is almost the best example of con---descension I've ever seen.
 
Upvote 0

- DRA -

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2004
3,560
96
Texas
✟4,218.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Originally Posted by: - DRA -

Nehemiah 6:1-3. And, as Regis would say, that is my final answer.


Thank you. I am glad to know that I brought a little humor into your life.

You left off part of my post. Why did you only respond to part of it? Why not spend just a few minutes -- that is, if you can stop laughing long enough to gain your composure -- and address Rom. 6:3-11 -- which is what the last part of Post #87 was dealing with? Andyman don't do it. Are you willing?

This was my COMPLETE post:

Originally Posted by: - DRA -

Nehemiah 6:1-3. And, as Regis would say, that is my final answer.

You didn't answer the last part of Post #87. Why not?


Oh, BTW, I'm working on the long-awaited response to posts #1635 and #1636. It is about time to address those posts. I really wasn't in any big hurry, but I am afraid if I don't get to them shortly you may blow a gasket or something.
 
Upvote 0

- DRA -

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2004
3,560
96
Texas
✟4,218.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Andyman_1970 said:
DRA / Stinker / Jim / Wes..........etc.

Would you guys do me a favor and list out all the verse you use to substantiate the doctrine of Baptismal regeneration (ie Baptism saves).

Thanks.

This seems to be an odd request from someone that has been involved in the discussion as long as you have been. Have we not posted passages before that support what we accept and teach about baptism?

Romans 6:3-11 is a good starting point.
 
Upvote 0

Andyman_1970

Trying to walk in His dust...............
Feb 2, 2004
4,069
209
55
The Natural State
Visit site
✟27,850.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
- DRA - said:
This seems to be an odd request from someone that has been involved in the discussion as long as you have been. Have we not posted passages before that support what we accept and teach about baptism?

Romans 6:3-11 is a good starting point.

Thank you. I was wanting to make sure I had fully reviewed all the proof texts.

Are there any other verses, a list would be nice.

Thanks in advance.
 
Upvote 0

Toney

Watcher
Feb 24, 2004
1,510
85
Kansas
✟24,724.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
As a public service, here is a list of all (to my knowledge) possible proof texts that can be used to argue an assertion that baptism is necessary for salvation. All can be refuted.

Matthew 28:19-20; Mark 16:16; Luke 7:30; John 3:5; John 19:34; Acts 2:38; Acts 8:35-38; Acts 10:48; Acts 22:16; Romans 6:3-4; I Corinthians 12:13; Ephesians 5:25-26; Colossians 2:12; Titus 3:5; Hebrews 10:22 and I Peter 3:19-21.

Again, sorry to but into your thread. Since I really have no interest in this argument, I will leave. God bless you all.
 
Upvote 0

Andyman_1970

Trying to walk in His dust...............
Feb 2, 2004
4,069
209
55
The Natural State
Visit site
✟27,850.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

Thank you for your time Toney - feel free to but in all you like.

Shalom..............
 
Upvote 0

muffler dragon

Ineffable
Apr 7, 2004
7,320
382
50
✟31,896.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married

I didn't respond to that part, because you didn't ask me. You asked Andyman. I'll check it out and let you know.

DRA said:
Oh, BTW, I'm working on the long-awaited response to posts #1635 and #1636. It is about time to address those posts. I really wasn't in any big hurry, but I am afraid if I don't get to them shortly you may blow a gasket or something.

Actually, DRA, I've turned over a new leaf today. I shouldn't expect anything from you or your cohorts. I speak in a completely different 'tongue' according to Jim, and maybe I should really evaluate that consideration. Besides, I have a rather general idea as to how you'll respond anyways. Feel free to respond if you want. I don't care anymore.
 
Upvote 0

muffler dragon

Ineffable
Apr 7, 2004
7,320
382
50
✟31,896.00
Faith
Judaism
Marital Status
Married

How do I agree with what Y'shua said? I think a passage (that I've come to rather like much) will suffice:

Matthew 7
21"(R)Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.


22"(S)Many will say to Me on (T)that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?'


23"And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; (U)DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'

According to this passage with Y'shua speaking, he clearly states that the goal of every human being is to do the will of the Father. Those who practice lawlessness do not do the will of the Father. Therefore, my goal is to practice the Law established by G-d.

Sure, DRA, you can "interpret" this passage however you would like. I care not. My heart is inclined toward it, and I believe that is the work of G-d.

In regards to Y'shua and baptism and what he says: well... it's difficult to say, because it appears that you don't see Y'shua as a Jewish rabbi. Therefore, our understanding of what he said would be rather different.

And, yes, you can come back and say, "Why don't you inform us of what you think he is saying?" But I have to wonder. That's not what you want. What you want is a perpetual fight. It's evident. You don't care about what is presented to you. You don't care about the evidence from everything else that the Bible presents. You don't care about the evidence of extra-biblical sources that give coherence to the picture of first century Judaism. You feel completely at peace and appeased to see it how you and your "restoration" movement want to see it. And to be honest with you - I think that's great. Wanna know why I think it's great? Because I am not you. That's the beauty of 'free will'.


I believe that people are saved when G-d saves them. Are you able to peer into the spiritual world to decipher what only G-d knows? Neither am I.

Have an absolutely fantabulous weekend!!!!
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.