- This topic has 4,343 replies, 85 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
Cindy wrote:
Quote But we could never compare our self to our Savior so full of grace and love.
All that proves is that you do not believe Jesus when he states “blessed are those who hunger for righteousness for they will be filled” and later when he tells us if we believe in him we will be set free from servitude to sin. It is obvious that the righteousness that comes through faith in Jesus Christ is the true righteousness and holiness that God’s people seek. It is my hope you will have a change of heart and one day come to believe that God wants you to stop sinning and will do it for you if you follow the true gospel of Jesus the Messiah.
As for comparing Jesus to us Scripture does it as it is written that Jesus was tempted even as we are but without sin. Still his authority is King of kings and Lord of Lords but that mean but having a position of greater authority does not mean that you cannot be compared to those in a lesser position of authority. In such a comparison we are found wanting as we have sinned but through faith that Jesus is The Promised One of God we can stop sinning.
Quote Yes He was tempted many times, that was never a problem I had It contradicts your idea that he is God as God cannot be tempted by evil and God is not a God of contradictions.
Greetings Cindy/Irene And Kerwin
As for me, I think you are doing very well Irene. And while the sinfulness of the being we once were is indeed no longer imputed to us after acquiring faith, being baptised, receiving the holy spirit and loving the brothers, WE MUST NOT PRACTISE SIN. Now you and I will sin to one extent or another until the day we die, and when on such occassions we recognise it we must confess in prayer, and if there is a victim also to the victim, and it will no longer be counted to us. This is called atonement for us. For we are both flesh and spirit and the battle between these two will always rage. For as the apostle told us, he who says he does not sin is a liar and truth is not in him.
I do now confess to you now that I am a sinner
But if we practise sin, that is plan a sinful course and continue on it's path, even after we recognise it for what it is (and the Holy Spirit will always help us here), then, as Paul tells us, there will be no remission for sin left. Examples would be adulterous affairs, thieving for a living or as a supplement, etc. But I hear you say, we can cease to do such things and seek and receive foregiveness can we not – to which I shout YES. You can do it, cease and renounce, do it, cease and renounce and do it and as long as you cease and renounce you are saved. But it is the continued practising of sin that may result in us foregoing our faith (failing to renounce) in favour of sin's apparent but empty rewards that makes us dead to the Lord, at which point Paul tells us it is impossible to return again because it would mean the crucifiction of our Lord for us twice, which was once for all time.
Now I have something for Kerwin as a demontration of how the Holy Spirit has worked within me. There is a scripture in the Law of Moses that I read many times and passed over it as not being very significant. But one day I decided I wanted to know what it meant. And after asking some who are better than I who could not help, I prayed for knowledge of it's meaning. And the scripture is this:
“You shall not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk.
Ex 23:19 (ESV)It appears three times in the OT, also in Ex 34:26 and Deut 14:41. For on the witness of two or three a thing is established. Now we know that many of those under the law did comply as the pharasaic or othodox Jews did at the time of our Lord and do even today, as they use different utensils for milk and lamb/goat as part of kosher food handling rules to utterly avoid the possibility of breaching this law. The problem is that it had less to do with cooking and was more a prophacy and a warning, even indirectly for us today.
So, if you are interested to hear one case of the work of the holy spirit, I would first ask you what the scripture means.
May the undeserved kindness of the Lord be with you
RS
Quote (kerwin @ Jan. 26 2009,21:33) Cindy wrote: Quote But we could never compare our self to our Savior so full of grace and love.
All that proves is that you do not believe Jesus when he states “blessed are those who hunger for righteousness for they will be filled” and later when he tells us if we believe in him we will be set free from servitude to sin. It is obvious that the righteousness that comes through faith in Jesus Christ is the true righteousness and holiness that God’s people seek. It is my hope you will have a change of heart and one day come to believe that God wants you to stop sinning and will do it for you if you follow the true gospel of Jesus the Messiah.
As for comparing Jesus to us Scripture does it as it is written that Jesus was tempted even as we are but without sin. Still his authority is King of kings and Lord of Lords but that mean but having a position of greater authority does not mean that you cannot be compared to those in a lesser position of authority. In such a comparison we are found wanting as we have sinned but through faith that Jesus is The Promised One of God we can stop sinning.
Quote Yes He was tempted many times, that was never a problem I had It contradicts your idea that he is God as God cannot be tempted by evil and God is not a God of contradictions.
Your last sentence represents me wrong, when Jesus became man He emptied Himself of that glory of God and was tempted, but He was still the Son of God. I never said that after Jesus became a man that He was God. Being the Son of God is a bit diffrent, won't you say? And saying what you do that it proves that I don't believe in Jesus, again you representing me wrong and I feel you owe me an apology. How would you know what I or what not I believe, you have not met me. And truthfully with your attitude if I even want to, change that first brother, we had enough of that around here already. I have been around since 2007 under another name.
Our Savior was without sin, and you believe that you can compare yourself to Him? Nobody ever all have fallen short of the glory of God. Not Jesus. We all seek to grow in love and all that is righteous and good. All those that are called by His name. We will be changed one day, completely but now we are all sinners, John tells us if we believe otherwise that the
truth is not in you.
IreneKerwin wrote:
Quote I speak about immersion because the root word for baptism as it has evolved from the Greek word baptisma that means dipping or washing in water. The word has just become confused over time as it has been applied to many methods of conversion.
Greetings Kerwin,
I ususally try to stay away from discussing the mode of baptism beccause I believe it has been abolished. I try to stay focused on this. But you kept bringing up immersion so I gave in. The law of Moses required sprinkling and the water was applied with a hyssop branch. How could Peter have been physically able to dunk 2,000 people that day? I have seen Baptist pastors have trouble with one person. Peter must have sprinkled because the hostile Jews were present and they would have accused Peter for acting contrary to the law. He must have used the hyssop branch as was the custom.Quote What you say here sounds like nonsense as you are accusing God of being little since according to you at one time he did command people to be dunked.
Please give your Scriptural proof that the mode of baptism changed from sprinkling to dunking.Thinker said:
Quote Peter was entrusted with the gospel as it was originally given to Israel. But Paul was given the gospel for all men of all races indiscriminately. Paul's gospel is FAITH ALONE!
Kerwin replied:Quote You are making up what you are saying here to justify your doctrine since it is obvious from Romans 6 that Paul is telling the church as Rome that they were reborn at baptism.
You are confusing water baptism with spiritual baptism. Romans 6 is about spiritual baptism.Quote There is nothing in scripture that states the gospel evolved over time though I have heard that from false teachers of law such as the Mormons, Catholics, and Muslims. Like you they are probably trying to justify the difference between their doctrine and that of those that have gone before.
First, the Scriptures clearly teach that the Gospel evolved. I have already given you a statement by Paul where he said that HIS gospel was NOW being revealed. He said that it was kept secret before the foundation of the age. So what does “Now being revealed” and “kept secret before the foundation of the age” mean if the gospel did not evolve? (Romans 16:25-26).There are many more such statements by Paul. But I would like for you to please comment on the one I have provided before I provide anymore.Second, the Protestant Reformers taught “sola fide” (or, faith alone). Are you prepared to label the protestant reformers, Luther, Calvin, Zwingli and others as “false teachers”?
Quote As I have said before it is by the grace of God one has faith and it is through that faith that God does His works. Still if you do not have the works then you do not have the faith since God is faithful and will do as he promises. In short if you truly one you will have the other two.
The faith + works formula was old covenant. We are now under God's new covenant way.blessings,
thinkerQuote (kerwin @ Jan. 26 2009,21:33) Cindy wrote: Quote But we could never compare our self to our Savior so full of grace and love.
All that proves is that you do not believe Jesus when he states “blessed are those who hunger for righteousness for they will be filled” and later when he tells us if we believe in him we will be set free from servitude to sin. It is obvious that the righteousness that comes through faith in Jesus Christ is the true righteousness and holiness that God’s people seek. It is my hope you will have a change of heart and one day come to believe that God wants you to stop sinning and will do it for you if you follow the true gospel of Jesus the Messiah.
As for comparing Jesus to us Scripture does it as it is written that Jesus was tempted even as we are but without sin. Still his authority is King of kings and Lord of Lords but that mean but having a position of greater authority does not mean that you cannot be compared to those in a lesser position of authority. In such a comparison we are found wanting as we have sinned but through faith that Jesus is The Promised One of God we can stop sinning.
Quote Yes He was tempted many times, that was never a problem I had It contradicts your idea that he is God as God cannot be tempted by evil and God is not a God of contradictions.
Again, John 1:1 In the beginning was the Wiord and the Word was God and the Word was wth God. Before He came to earth He was called the Word. He then made everything for Him and in Him. Also
Colasians 1:15-18 He preexeisted before the World was as the Son of God. Not God the Akmighty, but never the less the Son of God. Under Him I am under the Blood of Christ the new Covenant.
By the way if you compare yourself with Christ the Bible tells you what you are. I am like the dust of the earth, made alive by Christ Jesus our Savior, who died for us. All is bad, all is made good by our Savior. All have fallen short of the glory of God. But since we are Baptized we are now the Children of God.
I asked for an apology from you before, because you seem to jump to conclusion when it comes to me.
IMO you have to learn a lot yet, because you seem to not believe in the prexsisting of Christ. That is so funny that you believe that you are without sin. Read
1 John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin we deceive ourself, and the truth is not in us.
We are under the Blood of Christ and He is our Mediator that if we do sin we can go directly to the Throne of God and receive forgiveness of that sin. He is our perfect sacrifice. (Jesus) There is a differnce to believe that we are without sin or that sin is not imputed to us. So maybe you need to have a change of heart and learn from somebody who has been around for a long time, in fact I hope and pray that you will understand, and not only that stop accussing others, that my friend is not like a Christian.
Just watch out there are many Anti-Christ coming in the last days that will even deny Satan and believe that they are like Christ. All are Anti-Christs. IMOPeace and Love Irene
Hi TT,
You say
“Peter must have sprinkled because the hostile Jews were present “Should speculation be added to scripture?
Hi TT,
You say
“I ususally try to stay from discussing the mode of baptism beccause I believe it has been abolished.”So is the inspired book of Acts now to be discarded in favour of the traditional teachings of men?
Hi,
Acts22
14And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth.15For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard.
16And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.
Nothing has changed.
Hi TT,
You say this describes SPIRITUAL BAPTISM
Rom63Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
Jesus was baptised by water and the Spirit.
His body was buried and raised by the Spirit.Spirits do not die so this does not relate to spirit.
Bodies are not spiritually baptised but are washed
Quote (Nick Hassan @ Jan. 27 2009,06:31) Hi TT,
You say
“Peter must have sprinkled because the hostile Jews were present “Should speculation be added to scripture?
Nick,
I was not speculating. I was leading Kerwin to draw the necessary conclusion on his own. Sprinkling was the mode of baptism under Moses. The water was applied with a hyssop branch. Peter was baptizing 2,000 people and dunking that many people would have been a physical impossibility for him. Add to this that the Jews were present and they were picking on every little thing that the Christians done wrong. Yet they were silent when Peter was baptizing. Therefore, Peter baptized exactly the way as prescribed in the law of Moses. That was sprinkling.Again, no degree in rocket science is necessary to figure out these things.
thinker
Hi TT,
We should rather work from what is written.
Our rationalisations do not compare.Was Peter alone or surrounded by those who had been baptised?
Hi TT,
Where is this form of baptism shown in the New testament?Acts 2:41
Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.No mention of any silence there so where is this written?
To All……Why did John tell Jesus that he needed to be Baptized with His baptism, and why did he say I indeed baptize with water , But he who comes after me will baptize with Fire and Spirit. Think about it. Whose baptism counts Johns or Jesus', and why did John say what he said if He did not perceive Jesus' baptism as more important then His? Is it the baptism of the Spirit and Fire you want or to get wet.? I got wet twice and Got baptized with Holy Spirit and Fire once and the only one that lasted was the baptism of the Spirit and Fire. IMO
love and peace to you all………………………gene
The Thinker:
Quote The Law of Moses required sprinkling and the water was applied with a hyssop branch.
The Jews practice a form of immersion to convert individuals to their faith and reconfirm their faith in God. That ritual if you will is called mikvah but it is somewhat different than what is practiced in the certain sects of the Christian religion. In Judaism mikvah is considered a general purity ritual.
I do know that hyssop was used in some cleansing rituals and Mosses did sprinkle the Hebrew people when they entered the Old Covenant which does give sprinkling a plausible argument for being the way to enter the New Covenant except that the Greek writers decided to use a word meaning immerse or dip instead of using Hran-tid’zo or Hran-tis-mos.
As for baptizing the numbers reported on Pentecost Peter was but one of a group numbering about 120 which gave him a whole lot of helping hands and that is if you do not believe those that were immersed earlier could turn around and help immerse others.
The Thinker:
Quote You are confusing water baptism with spiritual baptism. Romans 6 is about spiritual baptism.
There is no confusion since they occur at the same time. Paul is reported to have written Romans 6 and he is also reported to have asked a group of John the Baptizer’s students if they received the spirit when they believed. When they stated they were ignorant of the spirit he asked them then what immersion did you receive and they said John the Baptizer’s. His answer to them was to say that John the Baptizer’s immersion was one of repentance and that the needed to get immersed a second time to be reborn in spirit. They then proved their faith by obeying and doing the work.
All this displays is that you must believe Jesus is Lord and will do as he states and your faith leads to the action of obeying Jesus and thus you become reborn in Spirit through faith. Of course it does not stop there as you must persevere in that faith and thus strive to be like God in true righteousness and holiness. As Jesus taught if you do not bear the fruit of that faith which is righteous deeds then you will be pulled up and tossed into the fire.
The Thinker:
Quote So what does “Now being revealed” and “kept secret before the foundation of the age” mean if the gospel did not evolve?
The obvious conclusion is that the Old Covenant was replaced by the New Covenant since we are told this many times and it is even prophesized in the Old Testament. I see no reason to make up any other reason with such an obvious explanation.
The Thinker:
Quote Second, the Protestant Reformers taught “sola fide” (or, faith alone). Are you prepared to label the protestant reformers, Luther, Calvin, Zwingli and others as “false teachers”?
Yes. All churches that believe there is only one gospel would do the same which explains why there are so many denominations. There is a movement to unionize all religions and make them one such as the Unitarian Universalist teach or a more selective one that tries to unionize the majority of Christian Churches such as the evangelicals teach. These movements are obviously false as there can be only one true gospel of Christ and not many. There answer is to water down their interpretation of scripture which Calvin and Luther at least would not have done.
Cindy wrote:
Quote Your last sentence represents me wrong, when Jesus became man He emptied Himself of that glory of God and was tempted, but He was still the Son of God.
I did assume you were a mainstream Trinitarian and it seems I misunderstand your belief and I appreciate being corrected on the matter. I will certainly try to understand what you believe and so not offend you but God has placed certain limits on me. I am sorry those limits offend you.
Still to address your argument which if I understand you is that God stopped being God while Jesus was on earth. So who was God during that time? Or did we have no God? I am just pointing out that Trinitarians is a very confusing and illogical tenet as are other variation of the Jesus is God theme.
Cindy wrote:
Quote He preexeisted before the World was as the Son of God. Not God the Akmighty, but never the less the Son of God. Under Him I am under the Blood of Christ the new Covenant.
And why do you think John 1:1 is speaking of Jesus and not of the Righteousness of God?
If you like most Trinitarians believe in the Immaculate Conception then you have another contradiction in your doctrine since conception means “creation, or the event that occurred at the beginning of something” according to Princeton WordNet Search 3.0. So either Jesus began in Mary’s womb or he began before but not both.
As for the meaning of Son of God we are told in Romans 1:4 that Jesus was the Son of God because of the Holy Spirit that dwelled within him and that those that truly believe in him are sons of God because through Jesus the Holy Spirit dwells in them. You can thus believe those scriptures or what you have been taught by man. That is your choice.
Cindy wrote:
Quote There is a difference to believe that we are without sin or that sin is not imputed to us.
I certainly do have the sinful nature (sin) and so did Jesus which is why he was tempted by sin but even with the sinful nature Jesus did not sin. It helps to interpret scripture correctly and not to use it to justify your sinful ways. It is true that sin is not imputed to those who change their ways and truly seek to be like God in true Holiness and righteousness but we were told that in the Old Testament, Ezekiel 18:21-23, and we have a new promise, a way to actually reach the goal in the New Covenant if you would only believe that God is willing to and will do it through His Son Jesus Christ.
kerwin You know what I have posted with Scriptures and have proven my believe and you my friend are still accusing me of unbelieve. You show a self-righteous attitude not does not go along with being a Christian my friend. That is all. I will not debate with you any further, I do not need that kind of behavior that you have shown in these post of yours.BTW myname is not Cindy, that is only a users name, that is how little attention you pay. Good-bye.
IreneKerwin wrote:
Quote I do know that hyssop was used in some cleansing rituals and Mosses did sprinkle the Hebrew people when they entered the Old Covenant which does give sprinkling a plausible argument for being the way to enter the New Covenant except that the Greek writers decided to use a word meaning immerse or dip instead of using Hran-tid’zo or Hran-tis-mos. Greetings again Kerwin,
Please show from Scripture that the words you indicate meant to “immerse” or “dip”. And show that it was the person that was immersed or dipped. The only thing that would have been dipped would have been the instrument used to apply the water, namely, the hyssop branch.Quote As for baptizing the numbers reported on Pentecost Peter was but one of a group numbering about 120 which gave him a whole lot of helping hands and that is if you do not believe those that were immersed earlier could turn around and help immerse others. The narrative says nothing about 120 people helping with baptisms. Besides, only the apostles had the authority to baptize. This alone would rule out your theory that baptized people could turn around and baptize also.
BTW, this is an argument for the cessation of baptism. Jesus gave the authority to baptize only to the apostles. There are no apostles today. Ergo….Thinker said:
Quote You are confusing water baptism with spiritual baptism. Romans 6 is about spiritual baptism. Kerwin replied:
Quote There is no confusion since they occur at the same time. Paul is reported to have written Romans 6 and he is also reported to have asked a group of John the Baptizer’s students if they received the spirit when they believed. When they stated they were ignorant of the spirit he asked them then what immersion did you receive and they said John the Baptizer’s. His answer to them was to say that John the Baptizer’s immersion was one of repentance and that the needed to get immersed a second time to be reborn in spirit. They then proved their faith by obeying and doing the work. It is clear that you are putting your idea of immersion into the text. The word “baptizo” simply means “to wash”. Nothing about immersion is implied in the word. John the baptist could not have “immersed” for the law of Moses was still in effect. Jesus said that not one jot or tittle from the law would pass til all be fulfilled. Therefore, John was bound by the law of Moses to sprinkle.
There is a major problem with your interpretation of Acts 19. After those who followed John's baptism were baptized again it says that they received the Spirit by Paul's laying his hands on them. The spiritual baptism in Romans 6 occurs without the laying on of an apostle's hands.
Hebrews 6:1-2 says that the laying of hands is among those “elementary” teachings which were to come to an end.
Quote Therefore, leaving the doctrine of the elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God., of baptisms, of laying on of hands….” The Jewish Christians were clearly told to LEAVE the elementary principles of Christ and NOT to lay again that foundation. Seeing that those in Acts 19 received the Spirit by the laying of Paul's hands, and that the laying of hands is among those “elementary” things to be PUT OFF, then the spiritual baptism in Romans 6 cannot be contemporaneous with or associated in anyway with water baptism.
blessings,
thinkerGreetings Kerwin
We had been discussing the acceptability my baptism over a few posts after you invited me here from “context”, which raised the question of whether or not I had indeed received Holy Spirit. As a result, I offered to demonstraight my belief that I had in a post on the 26th, as follows:
< Now I have something for Kerwin as a demontration of how the Holy Spirit has worked within me. There is a scripture in the Law of Moses that I read many times and passed over it as not being very significant. But one day I decided I wanted to know what it meant. And after asking some who are better than I who could not help, I prayed for knowledge of it's meaning. And the scripture is this:
“You shall not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk.
Ex 23:19 (ESV)It appears three times in the OT, including Ex 34:26 and Deut 14:41. For on the witness of two or three a thing is established. Now we know that many of those under the law did comply as the pharasaic or othodox Jews did at the time of our Lord and do even today, as they use different utensils for milk and lamb/goat as part of kosher food handling rules to utterly avoid the possibility of breaching this law. The problem is that it had less to do with cooking and was more a prophacy and a warning, even indirectly for us today.
So, if you are interested to hear one case of the work of the holy spirit, I would first ask you what the scripture means.>
Accordingly, have you considered the matter?
RS
Hi TT,
Please can you show by scripture these things you say“The word “baptizo” simply means “to wash””
” Besides, only the apostles had the authority to baptize.”
” Jesus gave the authority to baptize only to the apostles”
“John the baptist could not have “immersed” for the law of Moses was still in effect.”
“There are no apostles today”
“The Jewish Christians were clearly told to LEAVE the elementary principles of Christ and NOT to lay again that foundation.”
“and that the laying of hands is among those “elementary” things to be PUT OFF,”etc etc
To ALL……God had all who were ceremonially unclean to wash by Immersion in water, before the could enter the temple , the Jews even had many bathing tubs for this purpose around the temple, and this is where Baptism got its start. It was a means of cleansing Physically and had nothing to do with Spiritual except as a shadow of the the Spiritual Cleansing that the Baptism of Spirit and Fire we received from Christ does for us Spiritually. While baptism with water cleansed the outside of the body, it never cleansed the inside of a person, as the baptism of Christ does. Why do you think John said to Jesus i Have need to be Baptized by you. John knew His baptism was not what saved a person. IMO
love and peace to you and yours…………………..gene
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
