BAPTISM

  • 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!

justbyfaith

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2018
21,740
4,114
113
51
San Pedro
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
God made a way for sinners to be saved. He did not make them sinless in the flesh.
While the Lord did not make them sinless in the flesh, He did provide that they could live a life that is set free from the committing of sin. Sin can be eradicated as a practice from your life; if you will surrender your will to the Lord.

Scriptures:

Hebrews 10:10,14 (kjv), 1 John 3:9 (kjv), 1 Thessalonians 5:23-24 (kjv), Jude 1:24 (kjv), 2 Peter 1:10 (kjv), 1 John 2:10 (kjv)...

...and there are many more besides these...however I think that these make the case quite nicely all by their lonesome...so the rest are not even really needed to prove my case.
 

epostle

Well-Known Member
Jun 21, 2018
859
289
63
72
essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
I take it that you are a Catholic. If I were in your place I would be ashamed to say that after all that has been in the news lately.

How can a Catholic say their Priests are men of God and represent Him when some of them are child molesters. Do they really think they are men of God?

Anyone that places their faith in a man's religious organization to save them is placing it on sand.
I suppose people like you were around when they tried to get the Apostles to abandon Peter because of Judas.
 

epostle

Well-Known Member
Jun 21, 2018
859
289
63
72
essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
Well, we get yet another sex scandal obsessed pervert sadistically attacking the Church because of a few sick members, most who are defrocked, dead or in jail. They keep pounding that drum, no matter how many times they are shown that the current rate of abuse in the Catholic Church is so low, it cannot be matched by any institution, including their very own church. The sex abuse card is always played when they are stumped or corrected on any given issue. They refuse to believe the sex abuse crisis has ended. They just hate authority.

Sadism is defined as getting pleasure from inflicting harm on people.
Forum sadism is inflicting discomfort on target group using as few words as possible. Trolling is another word.

Ironically, sadism is classed by psychologists as a sexual perversion.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,946
3,391
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I take it that you are a Catholic. If I were in your place I would be ashamed to say that after all that has been in the news lately.

How can a Catholic say their Priests are men of God and represent Him when some of them are child molesters. Do they really think they are men of God?

Anyone that places their faith in a man's religious organization to save them is placing it on sand.
That's a silly question.
Why would you blame ALL priests or the ENTIRE Church for the sins of a few??

Whether YOU understand it or not - and whether you like it or not - the Church is made up of PEOPLE with Christ as the Head of the Body (Col. 1:18). It's not a museum of perfect people and NEVER has been. It's a hospital for sinners in need of God's mercy. It was built by CHRIST (Matt. 16:18) - not men.

When you can understand that - then you will understand why I am NOT ashamed part of His Church.
 

epostle

Well-Known Member
Jun 21, 2018
859
289
63
72
essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
The sex abuse card is also played by sadists to derail a thread, especially when preconceptions and myths get shattered, like the "works" myth. Then these sadists can hold on tight to their precious lies and falsehoods because that is their real religion.

b7d.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: historyb

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,946
3,391
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Who says I want it to mean what it means? I would love it if you could be justified in asking dead people to pray for you; there would be more people in heaven that way.

I think that the crux of the issue is that you want it to mean something else...which is why, after giving one definition from one dictionary, and didn't like the results, you decided on the definition that another dictionary would give you...your itching ears led you to go to a different (teaching) source for your information.

The scripture implicitly states:

2Ti 4:3, For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
YOU have shown that you desperately want "necromancy" to mean something else.
The plain fact is that it doesn't mean what you want it to mean.

It means "contacting the dead for the purpose of gleaning information about the future."
Asking
the saints in Heaven to pray for us if NOT an attempt to "glean information" from them.

Finally - YOUR position that those in Heaven are "DEAD" people is Biblically-bankrupt.
They are MORE alive than YOU are because they have been made perfect in Christ and are forever in the presence of Almighty God (Heb 12:2, Rev. 5:8). For YOU to day they are "DEAD" shows how little you know of God or His Word . . .
 

justbyfaith

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2018
21,740
4,114
113
51
San Pedro
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Asking the saints in Heaven to pray for us if NOT an attempt to "glean information" from them.

If you say so...

I do not need to argue this point with you as it does not make any difference to me...for I am not asking dead people to pray for me and therefore if it is necromancy, it is no skin off my back, and if it is not, neither does it affect me in any way. So I have no reason for wanting to believe that what you are doing is necromancy. I hope for your sake that it isn't, I really do...but for my own life, I do not think it would be wise for me to take chances on something that is doubtful. Whatsoever is not of faith is sin, Romans 14:23.

Finally - YOUR position that those in Heaven are "DEAD" people is Biblically-bankrupt.
They are MORE alive than YOU are because they have been made perfect in Christ and are forever in the presence of Almighty God (Heb 12:2, Rev. 5:8). For YOU to day they are "DEAD" shows how little you know of God or His Word . . .

The point is that they have gone on to the next life...their bodies are dead in the grave and their spirits are separated from their bodies.

What if there is someone that you think was a saint but they really went to hell? You would then indeed be communicating with someone in hell...and they are not really dead either since they are conscious of their suffering in the pit.

What does dead even really mean, if not the fact that they are not with us any more?

Communicating with those who have gone to the other side is necromancy whether they went to heaven or hell...for it must be accomplished by occultic means; contacting people who have already died and gone on into the next life is necromancy.
 

justbyfaith

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2018
21,740
4,114
113
51
San Pedro
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The sex abuse card is also played by sadists to derail a thread, especially when preconceptions and myths get shattered, like the "works" myth. Then these sadists can hold on tight to their precious lies and falsehoods because that is their real religion.

b7d.jpg
If you don't want people to bring it up, correct the situation...
 

epostle

Well-Known Member
Jun 21, 2018
859
289
63
72
essex
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
If you say so...

I do not need to argue this point with you as it does not make any difference to me...for I am not asking dead people to pray for me and therefore if it is necromancy, it is no skin off my back, and if it is not, neither does it affect me in any way. So I have no reason for wanting to believe that what you are doing is necromancy. I hope for your sake that it isn't, I really do...but for my own life, I do not think it would be wise for me to take chances on something that is doubtful. Whatsoever is not of faith is sin, Romans 14:23.

The point is that they have gone on to the next life...their bodies are dead in the grave and their spirits are separated from their bodies.

What if there is someone that you think was a saint but they really went to hell? You would then indeed be communicating with someone in hell...and they are not really dead either since they are conscious of their suffering in the pit.

What does dead even really mean, if not the fact that they are not with us any more?

Communicating with those who have gone to the other side is necromancy whether they went to heaven or hell...for it must be accomplished by occultic means; contacting people who have already died and gone on into the next life is necromancy.
Prayers to the dead was explained in my reply to you in post #144. IT IS NOT NECROMANCY. Nobody is saying yo must follow this (or any) Catholic distinctives, but if you are going to challenge or question them, then TRY to understand our (amateurish) answers.
*****

Often there is confusion over Catholics’ use of the phrase, “praying to saints.” Protestants typically think that we can’t communicate to anyone who is not alive on this earth, and that to do so is tantamount to “praying” to them, and that this is wrong, because [so they claim] one can only pray to God.

They’re wrong. We can ask them to pray for us (which is what Catholics who know anything about their faith mean by “praying to saints”), and that is not prayer, if by prayer we mean (as Protestants believe) only that they grant our requests under their own power. No they don’t. They make powerful requests to God, Who then decides whether to grant our requests or not. They are intercessors to God, not the granters of the prayers.

That said, Catholics often use the phrase “pray[ing] to saints”: meaning “asking them to intercede.” Catholics understand the shorthand "pray to". Non-Catholics often don't get it.

St. Thomas Aquinas makes a very useful clarification:

Prayer is offered to a person in two ways: first, as to be fulfilled by him, secondly, as to be obtained through him. On the first way we offer prayer to God alone, since all our prayers ought to be directed to the acquisition of grace and glory, which God alone gives, according to Psalm 83:12, “The Lord will give grace and glory.” But in the second way we pray to the saints, whether angels or men, not that God may through them know our petitions, but that our prayers may be effective through their prayers and merits.” (Summa Theologica, Second Part of the Second Part, Question 83:4: “Should We Pray to God Alone?”)



edd4606c5de745cd7ed058b275683d6a.jpg


If you decide St. Thomas Aquinas is teaching necromancy, I give up.​
 
Last edited:

justbyfaith

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2018
21,740
4,114
113
51
San Pedro
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
But in the second way we pray to the saints, whether angels or men, not that God may through them know our petitions, but that our prayers may be effective through their prayers and merits.”
The merit of Jesus is alone enough. He is the one mediator between God and men. 1 Timothy 2:5.

And last time I checked, The Joker was a Super-Villain...not someone from whom I would want to obtain doctrine.
 

H. Richard

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2015
2,345
852
113
Southeast USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Indeed, if your answer to the question is that you are indeed attempting to say that all scripture is not inspired of God, then you are definitely in the wrong. But I want to hear it from the horse's mouth.



Who says I want it to mean what it means? I would love it if you could be justified in asking dead people to pray for you; there would be more people in heaven that way.

I think that the crux of the issue is that you want it to mean something else...which is why, after giving one definition from one dictionary, and didn't like the results, you decided on the definition that another dictionary would give you...your itching ears led you to go to a different (teaching) source for your information.

The scripture implicitly states:

2Ti 4:3, For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

It is you that is in the wrong. You wish to place the obvious FACTS that James got wrong by switching to an accusation against me.

What does the scriptures say about Abraham? Did God declare him righteous in Genesis 15:4-6 because he believed God or was he declared righteous in Genesis 22 as James said in James 2:20-21? I bet you won't give a straight answer.. Wake up, they both can't be right. Since James was not one of the 12 who declares his writing are inspired by God?

Don't give me junk about Abraham had to be called righteous again by his works. It won't fly.

James 2:20-21 is a direct contradiction to what Paul said in Romans 4:16-24? It is common sense that both can't be right. You take your pick. I certainly have.

Rom 4:16-24
16 Therefore it is of faith that it might be according to grace, so that the promise might be sure to all the seed, not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all
17 (as it is written, "I have made you a father of many nations") in the presence of Him whom he believed — God, who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did;
18 who, contrary to hope, in hope believed, so that he became the father of many nations, according to what was spoken, "So shall your descendants be."
19 And not being weak in faith, he did not consider his own body, already dead (since he was about a hundred years old), and the deadness of Sarah's womb. THIS IS BEFORE Isaac was born
20 He did not waver at the promise of God through unbelief, but was strengthened in faith, giving glory to God,
21 and being fully convinced that what He had promised He was also able to perform.
22 And therefore "it was accounted to him for righteousness."
23 Now it was not written for his sake alone that it was imputed to him,
24 but also for us. It shall be imputed to us who believe in Him who raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead,
NKJV
 

justbyfaith

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2018
21,740
4,114
113
51
San Pedro
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You wish to place the obvious FACTS that James got wrong by switching to an accusation against me.

Again, I didn't accuse you, but I asked you a question. "Are you attempting to contend for the idea that all scripture is not inspired of the Lord?"

If you are attempting to contend for the idea that all scripture isn't inspired of the Lord, then I discount your arguments outright.

But if you will agree that all scripture is indeed inspired of the Lord, then we can go from there.

Which one is it?
 

H. Richard

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2015
2,345
852
113
Southeast USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
That's a silly question.
Why would you blame ALL priests or the ENTIRE Church for the sins of a few??

Whether YOU understand it or not - and whether you like it or not - the Church is made up of PEOPLE with Christ as the Head of the Body (Col. 1:18). It's not a museum of perfect people and NEVER has been. It's a hospital for sinners in need of God's mercy. It was built by CHRIST (Matt. 16:18) - not men.

When you can understand that - then you will understand why I am NOT ashamed part of His Church.

That is not the point. You are still placing your faith in a church that is a man organized, man run system and that will not save you. Only faith in the shed blood of Jesus saves a person. The church does not save anyone.

You hang your hat on these verses.

Matt 16:16-18
16 Simon Peter answered and said,"You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
17 Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.
18 And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.
NKJV

Jesus was speaking of a Jewish church on this earth. It will be on this earth after the trib. And the 12 will sit on 12 thrones ruling the 12 tribes of Israel.

But I am sure you have heard this before and still place your faith in men. Men are deceitful. Placing your faith in men is building your hopes on sand.
 

H. Richard

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2015
2,345
852
113
Southeast USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Again, I didn't accuse you, but I asked you a question. "Are you attempting to contend for the idea that all scripture is not inspired of the Lord?"

If you are attempting to contend for the idea that all scripture isn't inspired of the Lord, then I discount your arguments outright.

But if you will agree that all scripture is indeed inspired of the Lord, then we can go from there.

Which one is it?


Why should I answer your question since you will not say who was right, James or Paul. Since you refuse to say which is right we have no where to go.

What you are trying to do is change the subject. It isn't about me. It is about the obvious difference in Paul's teaching and James teaching. This is also seen in Acts 21-20.
 

H. Richard

Well-Known Member
Sep 16, 2015
2,345
852
113
Southeast USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I suppose people like you were around when they tried to get the Apostles to abandon Peter because of Judas.

No there are people around that make the same mistake as the Pharisees who thought they were above the law. Don't you think those Priests who molested children though it was their right because they are men of God, right? After all wren't they just binding?

Matt 16:19
19 And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."
NKJV
 

justbyfaith

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2018
21,740
4,114
113
51
San Pedro
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Why should I answer your question since you will not say who was right, James or Paul. Since you refuse to say which is right we have no where to go.

They are both right.

Romans 4:2 explains the justification that is spoken of by James. Abraham was justified by works, so he has whereof to glory, but not before God. In other words, his justification by works is not in the sight of God; in the sight of God his justification is by faith alone, apart from works (Romans 4:6).

But from our perspective, man looking at the life of Abraham, we do not see Abraham's faith except in the fact that he offered Isaac. It becomes clear that Abraham believed that God would raise Isaac from the dead if he sacrificed him, because Isaac was the child of promise by which God had promised to give him a seed, a multitude like the stars of heaven. This becomes absolutely clear that Abraham believed this in that Abraham took the knife to plunge it into the flesh of his dear son. The only reason why Isaac did not die that day is because God called to Abraham and stayed his hand. But Abraham's faith was shown to those of us who see faith by behaviour, in that Abraham offered up Isaac; this was the proof that Abraham believed that Isaac would live on even if Abraham killed him. It testifies to what was written in Genesis 15, that Abraham believed the LORD and it was counted to him for righteousness. What was the word that Abraham believed? That Abraham's seed would be as the stars of heaven.

From the Lord's perspective, we know that He saw Abraham's faith invisibly the moment he believed. From our perspective, we call Abraham righteous in that we see the evidence of his faith in that he offered up his only begotten son.
 

justbyfaith

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2018
21,740
4,114
113
51
San Pedro
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Why should I answer your question since you will not say who was right, James or Paul.
I have given my response, now you give yours. Are you attempting to contend for the idea that all scripture isn't inspired of the Lord?
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,946
3,391
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If you say so...

I do not need to argue this point with you as it does not make any difference to me...for I am not asking dead people to pray for me and therefore if it is necromancy, it is no skin off my back, and if it is not, neither does it affect me in any way. So I have no reason for wanting to believe that what you are doing is necromancy. I hope for your sake that it isn't, I really do...but for my own life, I do not think it would be wise for me to take chances on something that is doubtful. Whatsoever is not of faith is sin, Romans 14:23.

The point is that they have gone on to the next life...their bodies are dead in the grave and their spirits are separated from their bodies.

What if there is someone that you think was a saint but they really went to hell? You would then indeed be communicating with someone in hell...and they are not really dead either since they are conscious of their suffering in the pit.

What does dead even really mean, if not the fact that they are not with us any more?

Communicating with those who have gone to the other side is necromancy whether they went to heaven or hell...for it must be accomplished by occultic means; contacting people who have already died and gone on into the next life is necromancy.
I don't know what's worse - your ignorance or your spiritual pride.

I have proven to you countless times that asking those in Heaven to pray for us is not "necromancy" - yet YOU still maintain that it is in light of ALL of the linguistic evidence to the contrary. Not sure WHY you're sticking to this phony position - but that's your prerogative.

Finally - as I have educated you now repeatedly - those in Heaven are MUCH more alive that YOU are because they are in the presence of Almighty God and hav been made perfect in Christ - whereas, YOU haven't. We don't worry about our prayers being "misdirected" to somebody who is in Hell.
God knows how to apply each and EVERY one of our prayers . . .
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,946
3,391
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
That is not the point. You are still placing your faith in a church that is a man organized, man run system and that will not save you. Only faith in the shed blood of Jesus saves a person. The church does not save anyone.

You hang your hat on these verses.

Matt 16:16-18
16 Simon Peter answered and said,"You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
17 Jesus answered and said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.
18 And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.
NKJV

Jesus was speaking of a Jewish church on this earth. It will be on this earth after the trib. And the 12 will sit on 12 thrones ruling the 12 tribes of Israel.

But I am sure you have heard this before and still place your faith in men. Men are deceitful. Placing your faith in men is building your hopes on sand.
Apparently, YOU don't understand what Christ's Church is.
Time for a Bible lesson . . .

- The Church is the Body of Christ and He is the Head (1 Cor. 12:12-31, Eph. 4:3-6, Col. 1:8).
- Jesus is Truth itself (John 14:6).
- Jesus promised His Church that the Holy Spirit would guide her to ALL Truth (John 16:12-15).
- The Church is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth (1 Tim. 3:15).
- The Church is the FULLNESS of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23).
- Jesus identifies His very SELF with His Church (Acts 9:4-5).


So, you see - it's not Christ OR His Church.
They are INSEPARABLE.