Search results

And my hope for sitting back and watching a debate ends badly.

You can bracket the debate as you see fit, but personally I see no need to limit the discussion that way. I am interested in your opinions on these Scripture verses. Why would I not be interested in early church father opinions on the same topic?

Could we start with the verses I wrestle with in Post #861? I'd like to sit back and watch the two of you debate them.

Ah, magical incantations! Of course! Rumpelstiltskin lives! You subscribe to the same type of barren formalism that Jesus chastised the Pharisees for. If Jesus Christ is "the Son" (as you concede to be true) and I am baptized in the name of "the Son," that is functionally equivalent to...

Agree with the first sentence, disagree with the second. RCC baptism is in the name of the Father and of the Son (= Jesus Christ) and of the Holy Spirit, so they have already been baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.

Not sure. On Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Sundays I read Mark 16:16, Gal. 3:27 and 1 Pet. 3:21 that way. On Mondays, Thursdays and Fridays I read them the other way. On Saturdays I am just unsure. Today is Saturday.

Exactly my point. We quote the same source. I just added more of his quote -- the part about water, which you don't like.

Anglicans, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Eastern Orthodox, Methodists and Congregationalists, among other Protestant sects, practice infant baptism as well. It has a very long tradition. Chapter 21 of The Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus, written around 210-215 AD, mentions it: ¹At cockcrow...

Paul rebaptized 12 men because they had been baptized in John's baptism. That's what Acts 19:1-7 tells us. I was baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son (= Jesus Christ) and of the Holy Ghost, precisely as commanded in Matt. 28:19. If you tell me my baptism was ineffective and I...

The early Church didn't see it as a metaphor. The early Church took John 6:55 at face value. I guess you don't. So be it.

I don't have my NWT handy, but tell me if it says this in Mark 14: 23 And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them: and they all drank of it. 24 And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many. 24a And Lo, the apostles to a man...

If I am understanding your answer correctly, the phrase "ordained in heaven" is superfluous. Da?

Are you guys debating whether the concept of a Spiritual Israel is Biblical, or whether the exact phrase "Spiritual Israel" can be found in the Bible?

What do you mean by "a promise of God ordained in heaven?" Is there another kind?

I know lots of judges and prosecutors, and they don't lie or steal. I've been a trial lawyer for 45 years, and I don't lie or steal (although I know of such rare instances occurring). And the judicial system that I know intimately is NOT "rigged." You are making an assumption without any...

No doubt he went to the cross willingly. But it was still punishment on our behalf rather than for his own transgressions.

Even though God enjoins the opposite on us (Deut. 24:16), it seems that God Himself is not skittish about punishing children and grandchildren for the sins of a father (Ex. 34:7, Num. 14:18, Deut. 5:9; but see Ezek. 18:20).

Didn't Jesus get punished for our sins?

That's true. Alexandria called its bishop "Pope" in early fourth-century, and other bishoprics did as well. It was an honorific term for Metropolitan Archbishops, and didn't take on the connotation of exclusive reference to the Bishop of Rome until later.

I think Trump's conviction will be overturned on appeal. I don't support the murder of babies. But I don't understand how the "rigging" you reference got pulled off. How did "the Dems" pull it off? Are you going to tell me or not? You say you've spent hours in courtrooms, and I believe...