Which proves that the old man is at war with the new man daily per Paul in Romans 7.The born again Christian is free to walk according to the sinful desires of the flesh if he wants to.
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Which proves that the old man is at war with the new man daily per Paul in Romans 7.The born again Christian is free to walk according to the sinful desires of the flesh if he wants to.
On the contrary, you and nearly everyone on this forum have skipped Acts.Very, very few in the church skip it. You're getting all excited over nothing.
Sometimes. Sometimes it's not a war at all. Sometimes it's a real battle.Which proves that the old man is at war with the new man daily per Paul in Romans 7.
There aren't just a few thousand saved people in all of church history as you are contending. There are millions and millions. And most of them did not follow a legalistic formula to get saved.On the contrary, you and nearly everyone on this forum have skipped Acts.
They teach that after exposing a sinner to the gospels, skip the Acts 2 experience and take the sinner directly to Romans 10(Epistle to saved saints).
This is mass deception at an alarming rate.
What denominations do not baptize their people? I know there are probably a couple of rouge denom's out there that don't. Can you name one of them to satisfy my curiosity?Anti-baptismalists
See, when you insist that you have to specifically say the name of the Son, or else you aren't saved, that's legalism. You're no better than the Israelites were under the legalism of the law. You've missed the point.and ignoring the COMMAND of Peter to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ as per Acts 2.
Just pick who you're going to talk to, and who you're not going to talk to. You don't have to engage every ridiculous argument in Christianity. I don't. There's no reason to. Some contentions are so utterly meaningless that I can't even engage them long enough to finish reading the post.Honestly.... the forums have reinforced my belief of NOT listening to ANYONE.... truly... I have learned to guard my heart like a fortress... It boggles my mind that there is ONE JESUS and 50 million different reports on how to be a CHRISTIAN... Disturbing to say the least.
I'm not. It's worn thin for me.I'm enjoying this a bit too much... LOL
I'm not. It's worn thin for me.
LOLJust pick who you're going to talk to, and who you're not going to talk to. You don't have to engage every ridiculous argument in Christianity.
The HS was not given to vindicate one's beliefs, but to lead them to the truth of Acts 2:38 and remission of their sins.
Anti-baptismalists only see the HS outpouring in Acts 10, hitting the power brakes, and ignoring the COMMAND of Peter to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ as per Acts 2.....
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.
Suggested or COMMANDED?
So Mark 16, Jesus says he that believeth and is saved shall be baptized?
Your sect has turned water baptism into an idol, and into the savior.
Paul thanked God that he’d baptized only a few people, and emphasized that God sent him NOT TO BAPTIZE, but sent him to preach the gospel - proving that the focus of the gospel, and of salvation, is absolutely not at all on water baptism, as your sect erroneously does.
If God focused on water baptism in the way your sect does, Paul world have been sent both to preach the gospel, and to baptize.
That you turn any discussion on salvation into a debate on water baptism, illustrates that your sect has majored on the minors.
Romans 10:8-13 is where Paul specifically says, this is what we, the apostles, teach about how to be SAVED.
Yet there’s not one drop of water found in that instruction on salvation.
The born again Christian is free to walk according to the sinful desires of the flesh if he wants to.
Amen, sometimes the battle with our flesh has to get violent per resistance.Sometimes. Sometimes it's not a war at all. Sometimes it's a real battle.
On the contrary, Jesus never knew or knows the Acts skippers.There aren't just a few thousand saved people in all of church history as you are contending. There are millions and millions. And most of them did not follow a legalistic formula to get saved.
You must have heard the same message I did.I'm not. It's worn thin for me.
Mostly non denoms.What denominations do not baptize their people? I know there are probably a couple of rouge denom's out there that don't. Can you name one of them to satisfy my curiosity?
The name of the son(Jesus) is the point.See, when you insist that you have to specifically say the name of the Son, or else you aren't saved, that's legalism. You're no better than the Israelites were under the legalism of the law. You've missed the point.
No, PETER turned water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ into a command per salvation.Your sect has turned water baptism into an idol, and into the savior.
Paul thanked God that he’d baptized only a few people, and emphasized that God sent him NOT TO BAPTIZE, but sent him to preach the gospel - proving that the focus of the gospel, and of salvation, is absolutely not at all on water baptism, as your sect erroneously does.
If God focused on water baptism in the way your sect does, Paul world have been sent both to preach the gospel, and to baptize.
That you turn any discussion on salvation into a debate on water baptism, illustrates that your sect has majored on the minors.
Romans 10:8-13 is where Paul specifically says, this is what we, the apostles, teach about how to be SAVED.
Yet there’s not one drop of water found in that instruction on salvation.