xxx

AOL

#206 Nov 29, 2013
Dave P wrote:
<quoted text>
Luke wrote an "orderly account". Christian baptism doesn't come into play until after the church is born and the commission is given. Chronologically speaking.
Luke's gospel hit the high points of the life of Christ. Acts is afterwards chronologically. The church was born at Pentecost. That's why Christian baptism isn't in his gospel.
Like how you know what was happening in Theophilus' mind. xxx, you're trying too hard and stretching and breaking scripture to attempt to prove your point.
I’m not stretching or breaking scripture at all. Did I misquote any of the verses I referenced?

Chronologically speaking, Luke’s account is spot on. He mentions the main parts of Jesus’ life. You readily admit this. Jesus issues the ordinance of baptism in Matthew 28:19 before His ascension. He then is received into Heaven in Mark 16:19. Since Luke records the ascension in Luke 24:51, and since he doesn’t record the implementation of Christian baptism, and since you admit that Luke touched on the high points of His life, you are actually unwittingly agreeing with me that baptism was not a high point of Jesus’ ministry.

Lastly, if Christian baptism did not come into play until Pentecost, then there was little need for Jesus to bring it up beforehand. Such a revelation could have just as easily been made by the Holy Spirit when they received it in its fullness.
Dave P

Cleveland, GA

#207 Nov 29, 2013
xxx wrote:
<quoted text>
I’m not stretching or breaking scripture at all. Did I misquote any of the verses I referenced?
Chronologically speaking, Luke’s account is spot on. He mentions the main parts of Jesus’ life. You readily admit this. Jesus issues the ordinance of baptism in Matthew 28:19 before His ascension. He then is received into Heaven in Mark 16:19. Since Luke records the ascension in Luke 24:51, and since he doesn’t record the implementation of Christian baptism, and since you admit that Luke touched on the high points of His life, you are actually unwittingly agreeing with me that baptism was not a high point of Jesus’ ministry.
Lastly, if Christian baptism did not come into play until Pentecost, then there was little need for Jesus to bring it up beforehand. Such a revelation could have just as easily been made by the Holy Spirit when they received it in its fullness.
1. Jesus did bring it up beforehand. John 3, the great commission, etc. John 3 would be an especially powerful point. Mark 16 is impossible to get around unless you just discredit that as Scripture (as many like to attempt to do).
2. You are stretching Scripture. You don't have to misquote it to stretch it. You are stretching Luke's intentions, and Theophilus's knowledge and intentions. You have no idea what the man thought, what his belief system was, etc.
3. Luke 24:47 mentions repentance and remission of sins. Nice commentary about Acts 2:38.
4. Acts 1 states that Jesus taught the eleven for 40 days after the resurrection about things pertaining to the kingdom. Is it possible baptism may have been mentioned?
Dave P

Cleveland, GA

#208 Nov 29, 2013
xxx:

1. Jesus did bring it up beforehand. John 3, the great commission, etc. John 3 would be an especially powerful point. Mark 16 is impossible to get around unless you just discredit that as Scripture (as many like to attempt to do).
2. You are stretching Scripture. You don't have to misquote it to stretch it. You are stretching Luke's intentions, and Theophilus's knowledge and intentions. You have no idea what the man thought, what his belief system was, etc.
3. Luke 24:47 mentions repentance and remission of sins. Nice commentary about Acts 2:38.
4. Acts 1 states that Jesus taught the eleven for 40 days after the resurrection about things pertaining to the kingdom. Is it possible baptism may have been mentioned?

Since: Sep 13

Location hidden

#209 Nov 30, 2013
Dave P wrote:
<quoted text>
The term "age of accountability" isn't in the Bible but the principle is, in the OT and in Romans 7.
Infant baptism may have been practiced, but doesn't necessarily make it right or effective.
So you didn't restore the first century church because infants were baptized. Even the apostles baptized whole households. I know you don't count your children as part of your household but they did.

Are you the pillar and foundation of Truth or the Church.

Only low end Prots stopped doing what Jesus commanded 1.5 millennium after he said bring the children to me.

Of all of the the personal beliefs that SSers have, this low end prot, man made belief of age of accountability, a belief that you are rolling the dice with your children's soul is the worst.

When what you want to personally believe affects only you, go for it. You cloth, feed, educate, put them in sports, give them video games before the age of accountability, but hey, you are your on own on salvation buddy.

Why daddy? Because that is what I personally believe. But my friend were baptized as babies. But, they are going to hell, don't worry, we are right, Daddy promises.
xxx

AOL

#210 Nov 30, 2013
Dave P wrote:
xxx:
1. Jesus did bring it up beforehand. John 3, the great commission, etc. John 3 would be an especially powerful point. Mark 16 is impossible to get around unless you just discredit that as Scripture (as many like to attempt to do).
2. You are stretching Scripture. You don't have to misquote it to stretch it. You are stretching Luke's intentions, and Theophilus's knowledge and intentions. You have no idea what the man thought, what his belief system was, etc.
3. Luke 24:47 mentions repentance and remission of sins. Nice commentary about Acts 2:38.
4. Acts 1 states that Jesus taught the eleven for 40 days after the resurrection about things pertaining to the kingdom. Is it possible baptism may have been mentioned?
1. The argument that Jesus was talking about Christian baptism to Nicodemus makes zero sense. For one thing, it would have meant that Nicodemus was left hanging for at least 2-3 years before he could be saved. It also flies into the face of two (erroneous) CoC positions: 1.) the notion that Jesus forgave sins “anyway He saw fit while on earth”. If He forgave sins on a whim as is argued, then He could have just as easily saved Nicodemus on the spot. 2.) If Jesus was speaking of Christian baptism to him, then Peter did not preach the first gospel sermon as is alleged.

2. I don’t need to know Theophilus’ thought process, and The Book documents Luke’s intentions in Luke 1:1-4 and reiterates it in Acts 1:1-3.

3. But Luke does NOT include baptism, and since his gospel predates the writing of Acts, then Luke 24:47 cannot be a commentary on Acts 2:38 seeing as how Acts did not even exist yet.

4. No, it’s not possible that He mentioned it--it‘s definite. But again, Luke does not communicate this information to Theophilus when reiterating the high points of Jesus’ ministry, just as he did not record Jesus walking on the water as is documented in the other 3 gospels.

*extra: Luke does not begin Acts by saying that he left out important information that he will now communicate to Theophilus. He states that his previous work was sufficient in and of itself.
Dave P

Cleveland, GA

#211 Nov 30, 2013
xxx wrote:
<quoted text>
No, it’s not conjecture. Luke states in the first four verses of his gospel the reason he is giving an account of Jesus’ life.
He states that he (Luke) had PERFECT understanding of ALL things from the beginning of Jesus’ ministry and that he is writing his account to reinforce what Theophilus has been taught. He repeats his reasoning for writing his gospel in the first three verses of Acts: to record ALL that Jesus taught (1:1).
Luke does not mention Christian baptism at all in his gospel when giving his account of the Great Commission.
This means one of two things:
1.) Theophilus was an un-baptized “lover of God” and saved Christian who had not been baptized, or, more likely
2.) Theophilus had in fact been taught about and accepted baptism but Luke did not consider baptism to be important enough to reinforce its importance to him when detailing “...the certainty of those things, wherein [he had] been instructed”(Luke 1:4).
If baptism had in fact been essential to salvation, then why didn’t Luke reassure Theophilus of its importance?
Or 3. Luke simply had not chronologically gotten to the point where Christian baptism was thrust onto the scene. 1 and 2 are speculation and conjecture. "The SUM of Thy word is truth".

Yes, Jesus did speak of baptism in John 3, just as He spoke of communion (Lord's Supper) in John 6. Ask the catholics, they're older than we are.
Dave P

Cleveland, GA

#212 Nov 30, 2013
Mike_Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
So you didn't restore the first century church because infants were baptized. Even the apostles baptized whole households. I know you don't count your children as part of your household but they did.
Are you the pillar and foundation of Truth or the Church.
Only low end Prots stopped doing what Jesus commanded 1.5 millennium after he said bring the children to me.
I never claimed to restore the first century church.
"Bringing the children to me" didn't mean infant baptism.
The Church upholds and promotes truth. Infant baptism is on shaky ground- no scriptural example, no belief in the children at all.
Dave P

Cleveland, GA

#213 Nov 30, 2013
Mike_Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
Of all of the the personal beliefs that SSers have, this low end prot, man made belief of age of accountability, a belief that you are rolling the dice with your children's soul is the worst.
When what you want to personally believe affects only you, go for it. You cloth, feed, educate, put them in sports, give them video games before the age of accountability, but hey, you are your on own on salvation buddy.
Why daddy? Because that is what I personally believe. But my friend were baptized as babies. But, they are going to hell, don't worry, we are right, Daddy promises.
We're all on our own for salvation. We can't be saved for our kids; nor is our faith transferred to them. Proving that- we all are guilty of "original sin"; and we can be saved by baptism withou faith is key for the RCC stance.

Baptize them as infants, go ahead. Just take away any reason or motivation to be born again after they do know and understand. Heap condemnation on them.

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#214 Nov 30, 2013
Where do preachers in the denomination calling itself the Church of Christ derive their authority to perform weddings and funerals given there are zero examples of how to conduct these in the New Testament?

It would seem if anyone in the CofC should be doing these ceremonies it would be a presbuteros. But where do the words they say come from? Tradition? Then this tradition can only have come from one place!
Older and Wiser

Rolla, MO

#215 Nov 30, 2013
Mike_Peterson wrote:
<quoted text>
That would be a waste of anybody's time. The COC is completely insignificant in Christian history and is splitting up even on this forum. 2 million members in the whole world and 1/2 are in Texas and Tenn.
Current memberships of the 15 largest protestant communities. Before this forum, I thought the Church of Christ was the The Church of God in Christ. They have 4 times the number of members.
1. Southern Baptist Convention: 16.2 million members
2. The United Methodist Church: 7.8 million members
3. The Church of God in Christ: 5.5 million members
4. National Baptist Convention: 5.0 million members
5. Evangelical Lutheran Church, U.S.A.: 4.5 million members
6. National Baptist Convention of America: 3.5 million members
7. Assemblies of God: 2.9 million members
8. Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.): 2.8 million members
9. African Methodist Episcopal Church: 2.5 million members
10. National Missionary Baptist Convention of America: 2.5 million members
11. The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS): 2.3 million members
12. The Episcopal Church: 2.0 million members
13. Churches of Christ: 1.6 million members
14. Pentecostal Assemblies of the World: 1.5 million members
15. The African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church: 1.4 million members
Your remark that the Church of Christ is completely insignificant in Christian history just shows how IGNORANT you are!

Because the (CHURCH OF CHRIST) is the BEGINNING OF CHRISTIAN HISTORY!!!!!!!!!!

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#216 Nov 30, 2013
Older and Wiser wrote:
<quoted text>
Your remark that the Church of Christ is completely insignificant in Christian history just shows how IGNORANT you are!
Because the (CHURCH OF CHRIST) is the BEGINNING OF CHRISTIAN HISTORY!!!!!!!!!!
Members of the denomination calling itself the Church of Christ like to quote from The History of the Christian Church by Philip Schaff. The funny thing is there is not one syllable mentioning the CofC in any of the 8 volumes.
Older and Wiser

Rolla, MO

#217 Nov 30, 2013
MarkEden wrote:
<quoted text>
"When the Roman Catholic came in power - they persecuted the 1st century Christians & the Lord's church had to meet in secret...(in hiding)..."
THIS IS SO F**KING DUMB!!! You are a MAJOR FRUITCAKE!!!
It's clear you are the only person here lacking in historical knowledge and you can't spell either. Remember brainiac I grew up in the denomination which calls itself the Church of Christ and I became a Catholic as an adult after graduating from a major university not some low end bible college. I've heard all your crap many many times before and used to spout it myself until I learned the truth about Campbell and Sommer.
I'm going to tell you ONCE again - the CHURCH OF CHRIST IS NOT A DENOMINATION!

I have clearly shown you - that it is not! The only way I can explain your lack of comprehension - is that you're either dim-witted, forgetful, or just down right REBELLIOUS!!! Personally, I tend to believe you're just you rebelling to the TRUTH OF GOD'S WORD & THE FACTS.

Maybe, you're even rebelling against your upbringing or your parents. My only hope is when & if you ever do GROW UP, you will return to what you were taught in your youth - THE TRUTH...

It's clear you're far more concerned about my spelling than the truth of the Bible! It would seem you have OVER-EDUCATED yourself to the point that you have forsaken the teachings of the Bible.

I'm sure your PARENTS ARE VERY VERY DISAPPOINTED IN YOU...

I'm going to tell you more time - I don't waste my time worring about spelling, or other kinds of mundane errors. MY MAIN CONCERN IS THE MESSAGE & THE TRUTH IN THE BIBLE!

Did you even take time to watch the video's which I presented to you??? If you didn't - it's clear that it is YOU WHO ARE LACKING IN CHURCH HISTORY & YOU REFUSE TO BE EDUCATED...
Older and Wiser

Rolla, MO

#218 Nov 30, 2013
MarkEden wrote:
<quoted text>
I do not consider the denomination calling itself the Church of Christ to be a cult. It is just one of many in a long line of low end protestant denominations ignoring its founders and claiming to be in possession of the "truth." There can be no doubt the denomination calling itself the Church of Christ came from the disaffected Presbyterian/Baptist Alexander Campbell and was polished into its present state by Daniel Sommer.
You keep claiming you were raised in the Chruch of Christ & then you brag about going out into the world & graduating from a GREAT UNIVERSITY (not some low-class bible college).

If your parents are still alive - do you actually talk like this in front of them? If you were a son of mine - I WOULD BE HEART-BROKEN & WORKING NIGHT & DAY TRYING TO BRING YOU BACK INTO THE FOLD OF TRUTH.

When you get on this forum with your constant boasting - did it ever occur to you that your parents or family might be following your rantings?

Did it ever occur to you how disrespectful you're being to THE LORD'S CHURCH & AND YOUR FAMILY??

OR IS IT - THAT YOU JUST DON'T CARE...?

Is it really so important to you to TEAR DOWN THE LORD'S CHURCH on this forum that you would take the chance of breaking your family's heart over & over & over...?

I guess it takes all kinds to make up a world - EVEN LOW LIFES LIKE YOU...

You are to be pitied...

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#219 Nov 30, 2013
Older and Wiser wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm going to tell you ONCE again - the CHURCH OF CHRIST IS NOT A DENOMINATION!
I have clearly shown you - that it is not! The only way I can explain your lack of comprehension - is that you're either dim-witted, forgetful, or just down right REBELLIOUS!!! Personally, I tend to believe you're just you rebelling to the TRUTH OF GOD'S WORD & THE FACTS.
Maybe, you're even rebelling against your upbringing or your parents. My only hope is when & if you ever do GROW UP, you will return to what you were taught in your youth - THE TRUTH...
It's clear you're far more concerned about my spelling than the truth of the Bible! It would seem you have OVER-EDUCATED yourself to the point that you have forsaken the teachings of the Bible.
I'm sure your PARENTS ARE VERY VERY DISAPPOINTED IN YOU...
I'm going to tell you more time - I don't waste my time worring about spelling, or other kinds of mundane errors. MY MAIN CONCERN IS THE MESSAGE & THE TRUTH IN THE BIBLE!
Did you even take time to watch the video's which I presented to you??? If you didn't - it's clear that it is YOU WHO ARE LACKING IN CHURCH HISTORY & YOU REFUSE TO BE EDUCATED...
Thank you so much for proving my point. You are a winner!

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#220 Nov 30, 2013
Older and Wiser wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm going to tell you ONCE again - the CHURCH OF CHRIST IS NOT A DENOMINATION!
I have clearly shown you - that it is not! The only way I can explain your lack of comprehension - is that you're either dim-witted, forgetful, or just down right REBELLIOUS!!! Personally, I tend to believe you're just you rebelling to the TRUTH OF GOD'S WORD & THE FACTS.
Maybe, you're even rebelling against your upbringing or your parents. My only hope is when & if you ever do GROW UP, you will return to what you were taught in your youth - THE TRUTH...
It's clear you're far more concerned about my spelling than the truth of the Bible! It would seem you have OVER-EDUCATED yourself to the point that you have forsaken the teachings of the Bible.
I'm sure your PARENTS ARE VERY VERY DISAPPOINTED IN YOU...
I'm going to tell you more time - I don't waste my time worring about spelling, or other kinds of mundane errors. MY MAIN CONCERN IS THE MESSAGE & THE TRUTH IN THE BIBLE!
Did you even take time to watch the video's which I presented to you??? If you didn't - it's clear that it is YOU WHO ARE LACKING IN CHURCH HISTORY & YOU REFUSE TO BE EDUCATED...
And once again I'm telling you the denomination calling itself the Church of Christ is a denomination whose history barely makes it past piano hating Daniel Sommer. By the way I also attended a Methodist College where I took courses in the Old and New Testament...and got straight A's. Perhaps you will soon realize you are out of your league and will never prevail in a discussion with me.
Older and Wiser

Rolla, MO

#221 Nov 30, 2013
MarkEden wrote:
<quoted text>
And once again I'm telling you the denomination calling itself the Church of Christ is a denomination whose history barely makes it past piano hating Daniel Sommer. By the way I also attended a Methodist College where I took courses in the Old and New Testament...and got straight A's. Perhaps you will soon realize you are out of your league and will never prevail in a discussion with me.
Being highly educated does not an intelligent man/woman make - all it makes SOME people are EDUCATED FOOLS & you, Mark Eden, are a prime example of an EDUCATED FOOL...

You have just enough bible knowledge & EDCUATION to be DANGEROUS...

What is clearly & sorely lacking in your HIGHER EDUCATION - is plain ole common horse sense. Do you know how many millionaires & billionaires have NO COLLEGE EDUCATION AT ALL???

HECK, our 33rd President of the United States (Harry S. Truman) never even attended college! Yes, that's right, President Truman only had a High School Education.

Yes, Higher Education & College/University degrees are very important - BUT ON SOME PEOPLE THEY ARE WASTED...

Tell me, Mark Eden (with all your higher education) DO YOU EVEN WORK??? Or, does your wife or your parent's trust fund support you???

It's hard to see how someone who stays on this forum (seemingly 24 hrs a day) would ever have time to hold down a job...

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#222 Nov 30, 2013
Older and Wiser wrote:
<quoted text>
Being highly educated does not an intelligent man/woman make - all it makes SOME people are EDUCATED FOOLS & you, Mark Eden, are a prime example of an EDUCATED FOOL...
You have just enough bible knowledge & EDCUATION to be DANGEROUS...
What is clearly & sorely lacking in your HIGHER EDUCATION - is plain ole common horse sense. Do you know how many millionaires & billionaires have NO COLLEGE EDUCATION AT ALL???
HECK, our 33rd President of the United States (Harry S. Truman) never even attended college! Yes, that's right, President Truman only had a High School Education.
Yes, Higher Education & College/University degrees are very important - BUT ON SOME PEOPLE THEY ARE WASTED...
Tell me, Mark Eden (with all your higher education) DO YOU EVEN WORK??? Or, does your wife or your parent's trust fund support you???
It's hard to see how someone who stays on this forum (seemingly 24 hrs a day) would ever have time to hold down a job...
Actually I have software which automatically notifies me when crazies from the denomination calling itself the Church of Christ and the Paedocommunionists are on line posting nonsense. My trust fund enables me to have a staff to assist in formulating responses and doing historical research. We are all continually amused by both minuscule denominations though it does appear the CofC is somewhat larger than the Paedos but they do share much in common.
xxx

AOL

#223 Nov 30, 2013
Dave P wrote:
<quoted text>
Or 3. Luke simply had not chronologically gotten to the point where Christian baptism was thrust onto the scene. 1 and 2 are speculation and conjecture. "The SUM of Thy word is truth".
Yes, Jesus did speak of baptism in John 3, just as He spoke of communion (Lord's Supper) in John 6. Ask the catholics, they're older than we are.
You might have had a point by saying that Luke had not yet gotten chronologically to Christian baptism if Luke’s gospel and Acts were one work. But since Luke saw fit to write them at separate times and provided commentary in his latter treatise about how sufficient his former treatise was, your point fails. 1 and 2 are indeed valid.

"The SUM of Thy word is truth". Amen! The problem is, not all of the scripture we have today was available to Theophilus and Luke tells him how complete his former treatise was in Acts 1:1.

And why do you use an Old Testament verse to argue that all of scripture is “profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” and yet deny the validity of Old Testament salvation as an example for us today?

If John 3 is talking about baptism, then the excuse that says that Mr. You Know Who that died beside Jesus did not have to be baptized because the command to be baptized had not yet been given goes out the window.
Annoying Proxy

France

#224 Nov 30, 2013
MarkEden wrote:
<quoted text>
By the way I also attended a Methodist College where I took courses in the Old and New Testament...and got straight A's. Perhaps you will soon realize you are out of your league and will never prevail in a discussion with me.
Been drinking again?
Annoying Proxy

France

#225 Nov 30, 2013
MarkEden wrote:
<quoted text>
My trust fund enables me to have a staff to assist in formulating responses and doing historical research. We are all continually amused by both minuscule denominations though it does appear the CofC is somewhat larger than the Paedos but they do share much in common.
It would be impossible to have a staff and show the ignorance that your posts do.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Axton Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Catholics (Feb '14) 5 hr Bobby 1,906
Hard Passages: Matt. 19:9 16 hr William 2
Hard Passages: Acts 2:38 Tue Ernie 221
5 Acts of Worship: The error of The Church of C... (Sep '11) Tue gospel-preacher j... 270
Catholic deception Nov 24 vannietrap 312
Hard Passages: Hebrews 6:4-6 Nov 21 Eyeseaewe 171
Church of Christ - Rug of Hypocrisy (May '13) Nov 20 anonymous 32
Axton Dating
Find my Match

Axton People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Axton News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Axton

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 12:55 am PST