Baptism Is Not Essential?
First Prev
of 7
Next Last

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#124 Dec 4, 2011
Barnsweb wrote:
Since no one of us at this time knows it all, I'm willing to have grace towards those who don't know better yet, but it's getting harder to have such grace towards those who continually and seemingly deliberately work at division of what God promised.
That's mighty nice of you to offer some "grace" to those of us who "don't know it all".

By you offering those who don't know it all some of your grace, you're presupposing that you know more (even if you don't know it all), and are therefore having to tolerate other's ignorance of the Bible. I haven't seen anywhere on here where your knowledge is any better than anyone else's knowledge. I've seen where you're offering your own personal interpretation of God's word, but it is in no way complete or correct. We are all offering our understanding of God's word as we read any study it for ourselves. For you to act all high and mighty like you're a Johnny Robertson wanna-be who has his finger on the pulse of God with perfect understanding is entertaining at best and heretical at worst. You don't even believe that Paul is a Holy Spirit-filled Apostle, because you doubt nearly everything he says, so how can you say that you understand more than others and are "offering your grace" to us less informed?

If anyone should be offered "grace" towards their "deliberately work at division", you're the one that needs it. You're trying to divide the Bible, and pit one verse against another, and Jesus against Paul. Nonsensical, considering Jesus CALLED Paul.

Fellow brethren and Bible students, let us offer Barndoor some grace towards his ignorance and attempted division of God's word. You are in our prayers.
lee

Houston, TX

#125 Dec 4, 2011
please pass the grace..........
lee

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#126 Dec 4, 2011
lee wrote:
please pass the grace..........
lee
I know, right...LOL!
Barnsweb

Newman, CA

#127 Dec 5, 2011
SeekingWanderer wrote:
<quoted text>
That's mighty nice of you to offer some "grace" to those of us who "don't know it all".
By you offering those who don't know it all some of your grace, you're presupposing that you know more (even if you don't know it all), and are therefore having to tolerate other's ignorance of the Bible. I haven't seen anywhere on here where your knowledge is any better than anyone else's knowledge. I've seen where you're offering your own personal interpretation of God's word, but it is in no way complete or correct. We are all offering our understanding of God's word as we read any study it for ourselves. For you to act all high and mighty like you're a Johnny Robertson wanna-be who has his finger on the pulse of God with perfect understanding is entertaining at best and heretical at worst. You don't even believe that Paul is a Holy Spirit-filled Apostle, because you doubt nearly everything he says, so how can you say that you understand more than others and are "offering your grace" to us less informed?
If anyone should be offered "grace" towards their "deliberately work at division", you're the one that needs it. You're trying to divide the Bible, and pit one verse against another, and Jesus against Paul. Nonsensical, considering Jesus CALLED Paul.
Fellow brethren and Bible students, let us offer Barndoor some grace towards his ignorance and attempted division of God's word. You are in our prayers.
SW, the truth is to be found exactly as Jesus said it would be, so if my belief in what Jesus said makes me a fool in your eyes, so be it. And btw, did you miss my post on my viewpoint of Paul conclusion? As I said, the evidence points to people today misunderstanding what Paul said, not that Paul was wrong.

Jesus said if any man wants to know if what He taught was true, that if that person would do what He said, that he would then know of a truth if what He taught was of God or not. Period.

So that's what I do, and that's how I know what He taught is true.

Cast dispersions all you want, but that won't nulify any of the words the Spirit ensured we have from the Lord Jesus, and it won't nullify the fact that Moses prophecied and Peter reintroduced to the faith in Acts 3:22,23, that we need to hear all of the words of Jesus to do them - not just John 3:16 or what Paul said in Romans 10:10.

The fact is that LDS practice more of Christainity in truth than all the Evangelical or CoC combined, and you know recognise their error, but fail to see the truth as taught by Jesus as a total package deal. LDS add to it, others take away from it.

If we could focus on the teachings of Jesus as the foundation of it all, including whatever Paul wrote, we would certainly be found to be abiding in His word rather than opinions, ommissions or additions of men.

Until you account for whatever He did teach, you really should not be casting accusations my way brother.
Barnsweb

Newman, CA

#128 Dec 5, 2011
Or, you don't see because you are not able to. Only those who have been enabled by God can see.
Barnsweb

Newman, CA

#129 Dec 5, 2011
If you are correct, show me what you believe I said that is wrong. That should be simple.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#130 Dec 5, 2011
Barnsweb wrote:
Or, you don't see because you are not able to. Only those who have been enabled by God can see.
"Enabled by God"? Predestination?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#131 Dec 5, 2011
Barnsweb wrote:
Or, you don't see because you are not able to. Only those who have been enabled by God can see.
This sounds like bobby... lol

You do realize the apostles did not understand each others writings completely dont you??

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

#132 Dec 7, 2011
Barnsweb wrote:
<quoted text>
SW, the truth is to be found exactly as Jesus said it would be, so if my belief in what Jesus said makes me a fool in your eyes, so be it. And btw, did you miss my post on my viewpoint of Paul conclusion? As I said, the evidence points to people today misunderstanding what Paul said, not that Paul was wrong.
Jesus said if any man wants to know if what He taught was true, that if that person would do what He said, that he would then know of a truth if what He taught was of God or not. Period.
So that's what I do, and that's how I know what He taught is true.
Cast dispersions all you want, but that won't nulify any of the words the Spirit ensured we have from the Lord Jesus, and it won't nullify the fact that Moses prophecied and Peter reintroduced to the faith in Acts 3:22,23, that we need to hear all of the words of Jesus to do them - not just John 3:16 or what Paul said in Romans 10:10.
The fact is that LDS practice more of Christainity in truth than all the Evangelical or CoC combined, and you know recognise their error, but fail to see the truth as taught by Jesus as a total package deal. LDS add to it, others take away from it.
If we could focus on the teachings of Jesus as the foundation of it all, including whatever Paul wrote, we would certainly be found to be abiding in His word rather than opinions, ommissions or additions of men.
Until you account for whatever He did teach, you really should not be casting accusations my way brother.
I completely agree that we should focus on Jesus' teaching, with one caveat: Certain teachings of Jesus were not meant for us, but for those in audience that He spoke to at that time and in that context. Just like if you read every single thing I ever wrote in conversations, they don't apply to you, so every single thing Jesus said does not apply to you. Please remember, the Bible was written for certain audiences, which were Jews, in a certain time frame, with certain cultural and political issues going on in their day. I personally can't read a quote about Jesus to a certain audience and then try to apply that quote to my life, as if that certain quote to that certain audience was meant for me. And I do believe that we can tell the difference between a rule meant for us in general, and a rule that Jesus was correcting the Jews of His day about.

Context, context, context, brother. Without it, we can never have a valid, fruitful discussion.

“What Does The Bible Say”

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#133 Dec 7, 2011
SeekingWanderer wrote:
<quoted text>
I completely agree that we should focus on Jesus' teaching, with one caveat: Certain teachings of Jesus were not meant for us, but for those in audience that He spoke to at that time and in that context. Just like if you read every single thing I ever wrote in conversations, they don't apply to you, so every single thing Jesus said does not apply to you. Please remember, the Bible was written for certain audiences, which were Jews, in a certain time frame, with certain cultural and political issues going on in their day. I personally can't read a quote about Jesus to a certain audience and then try to apply that quote to my life, as if that certain quote to that certain audience was meant for me. And I do believe that we can tell the difference between a rule meant for us in general, and a rule that Jesus was correcting the Jews of His day about.
Context, context, context, brother. Without it, we can never have a valid, fruitful discussion.
Agreed
1Corinthians 1 17

Axton, VA

#134 Nov 16, 2012
In 1Corinthians 1:17, Paul states that "Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel," thus clearly differentiating the gospel from baptism. That is difficult to understand if baptism is necessary for salvation. If baptism were part of the gospel itself, necessary for salvation, what good would it have done Paul to preach the gospel, but not baptize? No one would have been saved. Paul clearly understood baptism to be separate from the gospel, and hence in no way efficacious for salvation.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#135 Nov 19, 2012
1Corinthians 1 17 wrote:
In 1Corinthians 1:17, Paul states that "Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel," thus clearly differentiating the gospel from baptism. That is difficult to understand if baptism is necessary for salvation. If baptism were part of the gospel itself, necessary for salvation, what good would it have done Paul to preach the gospel, but not baptize? No one would have been saved. Paul clearly understood baptism to be separate from the gospel, and hence in no way efficacious for salvation.
When you leave out the context you get all messed up. That is what happened here.
1Corinthians 1 17

Axton, VA

#136 Nov 19, 2012
JustChristian wrote:
<quoted text>
When you leave out the context you get all messed up. That is what happened here.
The context of 1Corinthians 1:17 is addressing a problem within the Church. These ‘Church of Christ’ BRETHERN were having DISAGREEMENT and disunity over things thus some said they were of Paul and some of others. As with todays modern Church of Christ, they were focusing upon baptism rather than who saved them by the gospel. Paul addresses their problem by telling them that baptism is not the gospel. In other words, no need to divide over something nonessisteinal. Paul states plainly that he came to preach Jesus and Him crusified not come to baptize. If baptism were part of the gospel, necessary for salvation, what good would it have done Paul to preach the gospel, but not baptize? No one would have been saved. Paul clearly understood baptism to be separate from the gospel, and in no way efficacious for salvation.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#137 Nov 20, 2012
1Corinthians 1 17 wrote:
<quoted text>
The context of 1Corinthians 1:17 is addressing a problem within the Church. These ‘Church of Christ’ BRETHERN were having DISAGREEMENT and disunity over things thus some said they were of Paul and some of others. As with todays modern Church of Christ, they were focusing upon baptism rather than who saved them by the gospel. Paul addresses their problem by telling them that baptism is not the gospel. In other words, no need to divide over something nonessisteinal. Paul states plainly that he came to preach Jesus and Him crusified not come to baptize. If baptism were part of the gospel, necessary for salvation, what good would it have done Paul to preach the gospel, but not baptize? No one would have been saved. Paul clearly understood baptism to be separate from the gospel, and in no way efficacious for salvation.
What would be nice if you would post the text that tells the context of the statement Paul made about not being sent to baptize. Noticed you went into your explination when a simple copy and past of the scripture would answer the question you ask and dont understand.
JustChristian

Axton, VA

#138 Nov 20, 2012
JustChristian wrote:
<quoted text>
What would be nice if you would post the text that tells the context of the statement Paul made about not being sent to baptize. Noticed you went into your explination when a simple copy and past of the scripture would answer the question you ask and dont understand.
Enlighten me oh great teacher. Tell me what this passage means.
walkinginlove

Danville, VA

#139 Nov 20, 2012
JustChristian wrote:
<quoted text>
What would be nice if you would post the text that tells the context of the statement Paul made about not being sent to baptize. Noticed you went into your explination when a simple copy and past of the scripture would answer the question you ask and dont understand.
You mean context is important??!!, I find that interesting since you use John's baptism in Acts 19 where the issue that concerns Paul is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and you transition that into a knowledge based issue because they had not heard of the Holy Spirit and call for re-baptism of those baptized in Jesus name because of it even though Acts 19 isn't about knowledge nor is it about Jesus baptism!

Can the CoC publish a playbook of where context is important and where you can make it up as you go? Right now the standard seems to be because we say so, based on the context so far!
HeathEater

United States

#140 Nov 20, 2012
Walkinginlove speaks the truth. The context in 19th of Acts does not support the coc practice. Has justChristless answered this yet. No he has not.
dognes

Masontown, PA

#141 Nov 30, 2012
youtube.com/watch... …
Emotional manipulation is Baptism? Life doesnt require it to live

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#142 Nov 30, 2012
bonhoeffer wrote:
1) Faith
2) Repentance
3) Water baptism
At what point are you born again?
Yes.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 7
Next Last

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.

Collinsville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Catholics (Feb '14) Jul 22 William 3,351
Christians Murder American Indians (Jan '12) Jun '16 Kevo8263 32
Sarah Smith nude ! (Jul '12) Jun '16 sarasmith 2
The Bible teaches that the Earth will never end (Apr '15) May '16 Anonymous 38
thomas jefferson edwards Apr '16 nuks67 2
Norm Fields – FORMER employee of Johnny Robertson (Feb '12) Apr '16 GunFighter 29
Stop erasing my comments! Apr '16 Truth teller 1

Collinsville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Collinsville Mortgages