Thread to determine some basic tenets of Christianity

[FreedByte]

Only the word of God determines what is the truth.

Okay, that doesn't exactly specify an answer to the questions I posed though.

 

[SavedByGraceThruFaith]

Only the word of God determines what is the truth.

For example, the following passage shows that a person must believe in Jesus Christ (and this are saved) before water baptism.

Acts 9:36-38
36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.

The following passage show the very same thing. Note they are saved when they believe and receive the Holy Spirit in verse 44.

Acts 10:36-48
36 The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all:)
37 That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;
38 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.
39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree:
40 Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly;
41 Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead.
42 And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead.
43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

 

[FreedByte]

For example, the following passage shows that a person must believe in Jesus Christ (and this are saved) before water baptism.

Acts 9:36-38
36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.

The following passage show the very same thing. Note they are saved when they believe and receive the Holy Spirit in verse 44.

Acts 10:36-48
36 The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all:)
37 That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached;
38 How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him.
39 And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree:
40 Him God raised up the third day, and shewed him openly;
41 Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead.
42 And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead.
43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

How do you explain the very early evidence of infant baptism in the Church?

 

[SavedByGraceThruFaith]

How do you explain the very early evidence of infant baptism in the Church?

There us no infant baptism in the word of God.

And Acts 8:36-38 and Acts 10:36-48 show that there cannot be any.

 

[FreedByte]

There us no infant baptism in the word of God.

And Acts 8:36-38 and Acts 10:36-48 show that there cannot be any.

You didn't answer the question.

 

[SavedByGraceThruFaith]

You didn't answer the question.

I do not have to answer your question if I just disproved it with the facts.

So they were wrong and your question was answered with the word of God.

No infant baptism in the word of God as clearly refuted in Acts 8:36-38 and Acts 10:36-48

 

[FreedByte]

I do not have to answer your question if I just disproved it with the facts.

So they were wrong and your question was answered with the word of God.

No infant baptism in the word of God as clearly refuted in Acts 8:36-38 and Acts 10:36-48

"So they were wrong" doesn't answer it either. I'm asking when and why you think it was introduced.

On a separate note, are you curious as to the practices of the early Church? Do you care what they were?

 

[SavedByGraceThruFaith]

"So they were wrong" doesn't answer it either. I'm asking when and why you think it was introduced.

On a separate note, are you curious as to the practices of the early Church? Do you care what they were?

I did answer that they were wrong. That is the answer.


I only use the word of God as absolute truth.

 

[FreedByte]

I did answer that they were wrong. That is the answer.


I only use the word of God as absolute truth.

Okay, how and when do you think they went from being right (the time that the Scriptures were written) to being wrong?

 

[SavedByGraceThruFaith]

Okay, how and when do you think they went from being right (the time that the Scriptures were written) to being wrong?

I do not know and it does not matter as the word of God us what is the absolute truth.

 

[FreedByte]

I do not know and it does not matter as the word of God us what is the absolute truth.

So you entrust the early Church with determining the canon but don't trust their views on infant baptism? How do you know what is and is not Scripture without the establishment of the New Testament canon?

 

[BelCantoBaptist]

Okay, how and when do you think they went from being right (the time that the Scriptures were written) to being wrong?

you do know that the Didache mentions credobaptism right? The only solid mention of paedobaptism is when Tertullian absolutely excoriates the practice in 206AD

EDIT: also I suggest you read these by Dr. Michael Kruger,

http://michaeljkruger.com/the-compl...t-canon-that-every-christian-should-memorize/


http://michaeljkruger.com/the-complete-series-10-misconceptions-about-the-nt-canon/

 

[SavedByGraceThruFaith]

So you entrust the early Church with determining the canon but don't trust their views on infant baptism? How do you know what is and is not Scripture without the establishment of the New Testament canon?

The word of God is as early as you can get for the church.

I trust the preserved word of God as the absolute truth

Why do you not trust the earliest writings that are the preserved word of God ?

Surely you believe Peter in Acts 10 and Philip in Acts 8.

Paul makes no mention in any of his letters
Nor does John, James, and Peter
Nor does Jesus Christ

 

[Rick Otto]

So you entrust the early Church with determining the canon but don't trust their views on infant baptism? How do you know what is and is not Scripture without the establishment of the New Testament canon?

I trust them as far as I can throw them.


"Trust, but verify". - da Gipper

 

[FreedByte]

you do know that the Didache mentions credobaptism right? The only solid mention of paedobaptism is when Tertullian absolutely excoriates the practice in 206AD

EDIT: also I suggest you read these by Dr. Michael Kruger,

The Complete Series: Ten Basic Facts About the NT Canon that Every Christian Should Memorize | Canon Fodder


The Complete Series: 10 Misconceptions About the NT Canon | Canon Fodder

It's not so much that it mentions credobaptism so much as it doesn't mention infant baptism. Most groups baptize adult converts.

 

[FreedByte]

The word of God is as early as you can get for the church. Why do you not trust the earliest writings that are the preserved word of God ?

You do know that the Church determined the canon and there were many writings, some of them earlier than the writings of the New Testament, that were not included?


How do you know that the New Testament is Scripture?

 

[~Anastasia~]

Originally Posted by FreedByte
Okay, how and when do you think they went from being right (the time that the Scriptures were written) to being wrong?

I do not know and it does not matter as the word of God us what is the absolute truth.

Forgive me if I misunderstand what is being said here, but I have to wonder if I am getting your points correctly?

(BTW, I am not addressing paedobaptism vs. credobaptism, I'm talking about what one deems trustworthy information?)

Does this mean to say that what actually happens in the early church - and I mean the church that was visited by the Apostles while the church was first being established - that that is irrelevant and to be discarded? And yet, the earliest foundation to be accepted is the compilation of the letters and such written to those churches which found their way to be included in a canon centuries later?

But actually not that, because I suspect many who hold that opinion, would also say that the canon decided upon at that time is not the one to trust, nor even the first one bound by Luther - but rather the one that came out - when would that be? Some 17 centuries or so after the Apostles were establishing those churches?

I'm just checking that I understand the sentiments correctly???

 

[MoreCoffee]

So you think the church at Galatia was just one gigantic megachurch?

That saint Paul speaks of the churches in Galatia (a Roman province) implies that there are several local churches within the province. It doesn't imply that the churches taught different doctrine or were out of fellowship one with another.

 

[BelCantoBaptist]

It's not so much that it mentions credobaptism so much as it doesn't mention infant baptism. Most groups baptize adult converts.

I'm going to have to insist you read this: Tertullian Does not Want You to Baptize Your Babies

along with the links on the canon issue.

 

[FreedByte]

I'm going to have to insist you read this: Tertullian Does not Want You to Baptize Your Babies

along with the links on the canon issue.

Tertullian also believed in baptismal regeneration, which most credobaptists I've encountered reject. Tertullian was writing against an established practice.