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!
Hmmmmm......well then either the Holy Spirit is confused or you and your Protestant friends are confused when you "reference" the bible since all of your "saved" members, teachers and pastors all received different instructions, truths, doctrines, words etc. from the Holy Spirit.
That's a 500 year teaching of men. I choose what Scripture says and has been taught for 2,000 years: The water is not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God! Christians liken it to....oh, I don't know...maybe in the days of Noah? You know, while the ark was being prepared in which a few....ummmm about eight persons.... were brought safely through water. Well that water (Baptism) corresponds to that which now saves you....Just like scripture says.
Mary, that was a frivolous response. Absence of evidence, is not evidence of absence. Plus, you didn't once show any concern for the source of your tradition.
You're wrong. It's no where in the Bible, therefore its origins are spurious, let alone 1500 years old. Plus the other Bulls or decrees, Immaculate Conception, Indulgences, Intercession of Saints, ... nothing Biblical here, all fabricated by wicked, defiant and irreligious men.
Hi,
Hi DNB<
Yes, arguably, but, the principle is broader. There is a reason that John said don't alter, it wasn't at his own discretion because he was being possessive or proud. He knew where the inspiration came from, he had the auspices of God behind him. No one else can make that claim, and again, Deuteronomy & Leviticus underscore the same point, and for the exact same reasons.
You continuously evade the point, continuously. No one is arguing against tradition, per se, but which tradition, and from whom. I only accept Apostolic tradition, that happened to get written down in its entirety, prior to the 2nd century.
No, the interdiction to not add to Scripture was used in several contexts, ...as any well versed Bible reader should know. There were several clauses, that you may live long on the earth, that you may inherent the land that I promised to Abraham, that I may bless you and curse your enemies, that you may find life in them. King David extolled the virtues and perfection of God's Word, he said that it was life to him and that nothing was greater.
You're being silly. The command was to not alter, for any reason, because they came from God. THAT IS THE POINT!
Did the thief have the water?That's a 500 year teaching of men. I choose what Scripture says and has been taught for 2,000 years: The water is not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God! Christians liken it to....oh, I don't know...maybe in the days of Noah? You know, while the ark was being prepared in which a few....ummmm about eight persons.... were brought safely through water. Well that water (Baptism) corresponds to that which now saves you....Just like scripture says.
