Another Gospel “faith alone”!

[atpollard]

There is ZERO error in the things you listed Regarding the Church.

Define “baptizo” … the Greek word from which we derive the English word “baptism” … then talk to me about “zero errors” in your man-made traditions.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Yet … (which was my point against your “Apostolic” Tradition).

Which Apostle “spoke” that to you in 383?
(Again … my problem with your so-called “Apostolic” Tradition).

Sacred Tradition are those Traditions that are binding on Christians. Much of Sacred Tradition is exclusively Apostolic – that is to say, teachings from the Apostles themselves. A perfect example of this is the teaching on Infant Baptism, which the Early Church Fathers credited as being handed down by the Apostles themselves.

They site the examples of Peter (Acts 10:1-49, 11:13-14) and Paul (Acts 16:23-33, 1 Cor. 1:16)who baptized entire households based in the faith of the leaders of those households. This is similar to the initiation into the Old Covenant of male infants who were circumcised on the faith of their parents.

The NT Canon of Scripture, although it is a Sacred Tradition is not exclusively or singularly Apostolic – although the Apostles are included as its the writers.

As for the OT – this can truly be said to be Apostolic because along with the 66 Books accepted by Protestants – the 7 Deuterocanonical Books that are rejected by Protestants are references almost 200 times in the NT. In fact – these Books were only rejected about 70 years AFTER the Ascension of Christ and a couple of decades AFTER the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem.

After the destruction of Jerusalem, a group of Rabbis established a rabbinical school in the Jewish city of at Jabneh (or Jamnia). It became center for Jewish political and religious political thought. Because the Temple had been destroyed in 70 AD – this school led by Rabbi Akiba ben Joseph (A.D. 37-137) redefined certain aspects of Judaism until the Temple could be restored.

One of the things discussed was the use of the Greek translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint) by early Christians.

They decided to eject 7 Books (and portions of Esther and Daniel) that they felt were “uninspired”. They provided a new Greek translation because the early Christians were converting the Jews using the Septuagint, which was compiled about 200 years before the birth of Christ. According to historical sources, the rabbinical gathering at Jabneh was not even an "official" council with binding authority to make such a decision. It can be clearly shown that Jesus and the Apostles studied and quoted from these 7 Books. In the New Testament, we see almost 200 references to them.

The main advocate for removing the 7 Deuterocanonical Books was Rabbi Akiba, who was also known for proclaiming that a man named Simon Bar Kokhba was the “real” Messiah during the 2nd Jewish Revolt (circa 132 AD). It was during THIS time that the Jewish Canon had still been an OPEN Canon during the life of Christ was closed.

So, the Protestant Fathers chose to go with a POST-Christ, POST-Temple Canon of Scripture that was declared by a FALSE Prophet (Akiva) who proclaimed a FALSE “Christ” (Kokhba).

This is who Protestants have chosen to follow instead of Christ’s Church, on whom He bestowed supreme earthly Authority (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23).

 

[atpollard]

A perfect example of this is the teaching on Infant Baptism, which the Early Church Fathers credited as being handed down by the Apostles themselves.

Ok, I’ll play.

Which ECF exactly and could you point to what he said (so I do not have to read all of his writings looking for a sentence or paragraph.)

 

[BreadOfLife]

Ok, I’ll play.

Which ECF exactly and could you point to what he said (so I do not have to read all of his writings looking for a sentence or paragraph.)

Irenaeus
He [Jesus] came to save all through himself – all, I say, who through him are reborn in God; INFANT, and children, and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an INFANT for infants, sanctifying INFANTS; a child for children, sanctifying those who are of that age . . . [so that] he might be the perfect teacher in all things, perfect not only in respect to the setting forth of truth, perfect also in respect to relative age (Against Heresies 2:22:4 [A.D. 189]).

Hippolytus
Where there is no scarcity of water the stream shall flow through the baptismal font or pour into it from above; but if water is scarce, whether on a constant condition or on occasion, then use whatever water is available. Let them remove their clothing. Baptize first the children, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them (The Apostolic Tradition 21:16 [A.D.215]).

Origen
The Church received from the APOSTLES the tradition of giving baptism even to INFANTS. The APOSTLES, to whom were committed the secrets of divine sacraments, knew there is in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).

Cyprian
As to what pertains to the case of INFANTS: You [Fidus] said that they ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after their birth, that the old law of circumcision must be taken into consideration, and that you did not think that one should be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day after his birth. In our council it seemed to us far otherwise. No one agreed to the course which you thought should be taken. Rather, we all judge that the mercy and grace of God ought to be denied to no man born" (Letters 64:2 [A.D. 253]).

Augustine
It is this one Spirit who makes it possible for an infant to be regenerated . . . when that infant is brought to baptism; and it is through this one Spirit that the INFANT so presented is reborn. For it is not written, "Unless a man be born again by the will of his parents" or "by the faith of those presenting him or ministering to him," but, "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit." The water, therefore, manifesting exteriorly the sacrament of grace, and the Spirit effecting interiorly the benefit of grace, both regenerate in one Christ that man who was generated in Adam (Letters 98:2 [A.D. 408]).

 

[atpollard]

A perfect example of this is the teaching on Infant Baptism, which the Early Church Fathers credited as being handed down by the Apostles themselves.

The claim is ECFs crediting Infant Baptism to Apostolic traditions.

Irenaeus
He [Jesus] came to save all through himself – all, I say, who through him are reborn in God; INFANT, and children, and youths, and old men. Therefore he passed through every age, becoming an INFANT for infants, sanctifying INFANTS; a child for children, sanctifying those who are of that age . . . [so that] he might be the perfect teacher in all things, perfect not only in respect to the setting forth of truth, perfect also in respect to relative age (Against Heresies 2:22:4 [A.D. 189]).

Irenaeus clearly states that Jesus became an infant to save infants. This is viewed by some as a clear early reference to Infant Baptism (which in my opinion is only a maybe since infant baptism is really NOT the focus of the discussion … Jesus’ baptism was). In any event, nothing here suggests “Apostolic tradition” even if it were interpreted to demonstrate “Church Tradition”.

Hippolytus
Where there is no scarcity of water the stream shall flow through the baptismal font or pour into it from above; but if water is scarce, whether on a constant condition or on occasion, then use whatever water is available. Let them remove their clothing. Baptize first the children, and if they can speak for themselves let them do so. Otherwise, let their parents or other relatives speak for them (The Apostolic Tradition 21:16 [A.D.215]).

This quote from Hippolytus is about HOW to baptize and again demonstrates “Church Tradition” without making any reference to it being Apostolic in origin. From the title, there may be another quote from this source to indicate “Apostolic Verbal Tradition” as the source of this advice, but a certain skepticism is justified.

Cyprian
As to what pertains to the case of INFANTS: You [Fidus] said that they ought not to be baptized within the second or third day after their birth, that the old law of circumcision must be taken into consideration, and that you did not think that one should be baptized and sanctified within the eighth day after his birth. In our council it seemed to us far otherwise. No one agreed to the course which you thought should be taken. Rather, we all judge that the mercy and grace of God ought to be denied to no man born" (Letters 64:2 [A.D. 253]).

Cyprian mentions nothing about any Apostolic Tradition and is merely presenting a majority opinion over a minority opinion on when infants should be baptized. It clearly indicates that infants were baptized in AD 253, but says nothing about whether that was because John (the last Apostle) said to do it, or the Judiazers (associated with James) said to do it, or Gnostic teachings said to do it. It only affirms that babies were baptized (which I personally never challenged as a historic fact in the third century and later … it is the Book of Acts where I think you are employing eisegesis and reading too much into TWO households, one of which also had “children” old enough to be commended for their service to the church.)

Augustine
It is this one Spirit who makes it possible for an infant to be regenerated . . . when that infant is brought to baptism; and it is through this one Spirit that the INFANT so presented is reborn. For it is not written, "Unless a man be born again by the will of his parents" or "by the faith of those presenting him or ministering to him," but, "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit." The water, therefore, manifesting exteriorly the sacrament of grace, and the Spirit effecting interiorly the benefit of grace, both regenerate in one Christ that man who was generated in Adam (Letters 98:2 [A.D. 408]).

Augustine is not making an appeal to Apostolic Tradition but building a case from Scripture. This argues that infants should be baptized (as do Presbyterians) but is the antithesis of an appeal to “tradition”.

Origen
The Church received from the APOSTLES the tradition of giving baptism even to INFANTS. The APOSTLES, to whom were committed the secrets of divine sacraments, knew there is in everyone innate strains of [original] sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit (Commentaries on Romans 5:9 [A.D. 248]).

I saved Origen for last because this is a reference to third century infant baptism based on an appeal to Apostolic Tradition. This is exactly what was requested. Two thoughts:

• Two centuries after the death of the last apostle is a long time in oral traditions … how many and how reliable are your family stories from 1900?
  
• I am not an expert on Origen, but were not some of his beliefs ultimately rejected as heretical? (Is he reliable)?

Ultimately, few ECFs credited Infant Baptism to Apostolic instructions.
Most ECFs acknowledged the practice and defended it (centuries after the Apostles).

 

[Illuminator]

The claim is ECFs crediting Infant Baptism to Apostolic traditions.

Irenaeus clearly states that Jesus became an infant to save infants. This is viewed by some as a clear early reference to Infant Baptism (which in my opinion is only a maybe since infant baptism is really NOT the focus of the discussion … Jesus’ baptism was). In any event, nothing here suggests “Apostolic tradition” even if it were interpreted to demonstrate “Church Tradition”.

Because you rely on a false definition of "Church Tradition" as if it were opposed to Scripture. Your ongoing list of denials makes this abundantly clear.

This quote from Hippolytus is about HOW to baptize and again demonstrates “Church Tradition” without making any reference to it being Apostolic in origin. From the title, there may be another quote from this source to indicate “Apostolic Verbal Tradition” as the source of this advice, but a certain skepticism is justified.

It isn't necessary for ECF quotes to explicitly state "this is apostolic tradition" because it is as dumb as insisting they explicitly state that water is wet. Infant baptism was not a reformist issue, there was no skepticism until well after the prot revolt. Both Luther and Calvin baptized infants, but Calvin disagreed with Luther on Baptismal Regeneration and endless division over baptism still goes on to this day. The CC hasn't changed the doctrine of baptism for 2000 years.

Cyprian mentions nothing about any Apostolic Tradition and is merely presenting a majority opinion over a minority opinion on when infants should be baptized. It clearly indicates that infants were baptized in AD 253, but says nothing about whether that was because John (the last Apostle) said to do it, or the Judiazers (associated with James) said to do it, or Gnostic teachings said to do it. It only affirms that babies were baptized (which I personally never challenged as a historic fact in the third century and later … it is the Book of Acts where I think you are employing eisegesis and reading too much into TWO households, one of which also had “children” old enough to be commended for their service to the church.)

Cyprian doesn't have to explicitly state "this is Apostolic Tradition" because infant baptism was accepted by everyone everywhere. The evidence is overwhelming and now you want to play word games with "household", as if babies are excluded.

Augustine is not making an appeal to Apostolic Tradition but building a case from Scripture. This argues that infants should be baptized (as do Presbyterians) but is the antithesis of an appeal to “tradition”.

Again, you pit tradition as if it were opposed (antithetical) to Scripture because you rely on a faulty definition of tradition, as if it were a dirty word. The Bible doesn't do that, but you don't care, you do it anyway.

I saved Origen for last because this is a reference to third century infant baptism based on an appeal to Apostolic Tradition. This is exactly what was requested. Two thoughts:

• Two centuries after the death of the last apostle is a long time in oral traditions … how many and how reliable are your family stories from 1900?
  
• I am not an expert on Origen, but were not some of his beliefs ultimately rejected as heretical? (Is he reliable)?

This non-Catholic site explains Origen. He is reliable due to his holy life but was never canonized.

Ultimately, few ECFs credited Infant Baptism to Apostolic instructions.

Ultimately, not ONE ECF denied the apostolicity of infant baptism. I challenge you to produce evidence to the contrary. Your first thought shows you are sticking to a false definition of tradition. What is absent in one or two lines from the ECF does not mean it is non-existent.

Most ECFs acknowledged the practice and defended it (centuries after the Apostles).

Wrong. The ECF did not invent infant baptism. Infant baptism was practiced from the very beginning of the Church, not centuries after the Apostles. There is no evidence of anyone objecting to infant baptism in the early church.
SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM - Scripture Catholic

 

[atpollard]

Because you rely on a false definition of "Church Tradition" as if it were opposed to Scripture.

You are speaking of the writings of the Church in the THIRD Century as if they were written in the FIRST Century. If you can HONESTLY Claim that traditions in the RCC have not changed from 1822 to 2022, then I will yield the point and if traditions have changed within the RCC from 1822 to 2022 then you have proven my point.

So which is it?
Are Letters from 2022 a perfect representation of beliefs and practices in 1822 or not?

(I want a letter in 2022 to say that this is how things were in 1822 before I will assume that everything done in 2022 was taught by the Pope in 1822 ... I want an ECF to SAY that "this is what the Apostles told us" before I accept a practice that contradicts the WRITTEN APOSTOLIC INSTRUCTIONS.)

 

[atpollard]

There is no evidence of anyone objecting to infant baptism in the early church.

Outside of the Bible, is there any evidence at all (one way or another) from the First Century?
This sounds like an argument from silence.

 

[theefaith]

So the curses from the Council of Trent still stand, right?

I am ‘anathema’ for rejecting Tobit as uninspired … cursed, expelled from the Church and damned.

if anyone sayeth that a man can be justified by faith alone, let him be anathema!

yes, but you can repent and believe the gospel!

ever read the great biblical faith story of Susana in Dan 13?

 

[atpollard]

Wrong. The ECF did not invent infant baptism.

I never claimed they did. I only claimed that most of the ECFs quoted at me lived in the THIRD CENTURY (which IS "centuries after the Apostles" so John personally told them nothing) ... they just wrote about WHEN THEY LIVED (because the Flux Capacitor on their Delorian was broken).

For writing about the FIRST CENTURY, we must turn to the Book of Acts and the Letters of Paul and the others in the Bible. Josephus provides some information, but is demonstrably unreliable in other areas so must be used with caution.

 

[atpollard]

ever read the great biblical faith story of Susana in Dan 13?

... ever read the Gospel of Thomas? Why not?
(That is why I do not read "great biblical faith story of Susana in Dan 13".)

 

[atpollard]

yes, but you can repent and believe the gospel!

It would not be enough.
Rejecting the books that Jerome rejected would still make me "anathema" ... so I must violate my conscience and "eat meat dedicated to idols" even when MY CONSCIENCE tells me it is a sin to do so or YOUR POPE proclaims me "anathema".

(PS. "Do not say that you are justified by faith alone" ... is not "the Gospel".)

This is the Gospel ("Good News"):

John 3:14-21

“Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, so that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. For God loved the world in this way: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Anyone who believes in him is not condemned, but anyone who does not believe is already condemned, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only Son of God. This is the judgment: The light has come into the world, and people loved darkness rather than the light because their deeds were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the light and avoids it, so that his deeds may not be exposed. But anyone who lives by the truth comes to the light, so that his works may be shown to be accomplished by God.”
​

Romans 10:8-13

On the contrary, what does it say? The message is near you, in your mouth and in your heart. This is the message of faith that we proclaim: If you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. One believes with the heart, resulting in righteousness, and one confesses with the mouth, resulting in salvation. For the Scripture says, Everyone who believes on him will not be put to shame, since there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, because the same Lord of all richly blesses all who call on him. For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.​

Ephesians 2:1-10

And you were dead in your trespasses and sins in which you previously lived according to the ways of this world, according to the ruler of the power of the air, the spirit now working in the disobedient. We too all previously lived among them in our fleshly desires, carrying out the inclinations of our flesh and thoughts, and we were by nature children under wrath as the others were also. But God, who is rich in mercy, because of his great love that he had for us, made us alive with Christ even though we were dead in trespasses. You are saved by grace! He also raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavens in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might display the immeasurable riches of his grace through his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. For you are saved by grace through faith, and this is not from yourselves; it is God’s gift —  not from works, so that no one can boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared ahead of time for us to do.
​

It is in God and His word that I place my trust.
It is God and His word that will judge me.

Romans 14:4

Who are you to judge another's household servant? Before his own Lord he stands or falls. And he will stand, because the Lord is able to make him stand.​

 

[atpollard]

Ultimately, not ONE ECF denied the apostolicity of infant baptism. I challenge you to produce evidence to the contrary.

"The claim is ECFs crediting Infant Baptism to Apostolic traditions."

You (Catholics) failed to support YOUR CLAIM.
It is not MY JOB to prove your claims false. The burden of proof rests with the one making the claim.
One ECF claimed the tradition came from the Apostles ... three centuries later! Nobody before him seems to have felt the Apostolic Command important enough to bother mentioning.

[begin sarcasm] Why would anybody be skeptical with "proof" like that? [end sarcasm]
(Spare me your pointless attacks. I was willing to hear your evidence that "the Apostles told the ECFs". I listened and offered my evaluation where the quote had merit and where it did not address the specific claim.

"I challenge you to produce evidence to the contrary."
"Let the little children come to me so I can baptize them." - from the Big Book of Things Jesus Never Said but Should Have
"Repent and be Baptized, or have your parents repent for you and be sprinkled because we don't want to plunge babies under the water." - from the Big Book of Things Jesus Never Said but Should Have
(Sorry, I only have First Century writings to go by ... that whole "Sola Scriptura" thing.)

 

[theefaith]

... ever read the Gospel of Thomas? Why not?
(That is why I do not read "great biblical faith story of Susana in Dan 13".)

dan 13 was scripture for a thousand years before the English Bible society deleted it by the tradition of men
The gospel of Thomas was never declared scripture by the authority of Jesus Christ in his holy church under the administration of his papacy

how can you possibly know what is and what is not scripture less the church tells you?

Truth must be revealed by God, and in its fullness in the sacred deposit of faith by Christ to his church! Eph 4:5 Jude 1:3 and must be taught by the church, or proposed for our belief by the apostles!
Matt 28:19-20 Lk 1:4 Jn 20:21 acts 8:31 Rom 1:5 col 2:7 1 Tim 3:15
matt 18:17

Christ and His church are one! acts 9:4 Acts 5:32 Jn 15:1-5

Truth is immutable! Cannot change!

Truth and the church are divine!
They come from God and cannot be in error or imperfect so they cannot change or be reformed by man to say they can is blasphemy and treason against God who revealed them!

And same truths revealed by Christ and taught by the church are always believed and taught from the beginning when Christ taught his church in person! Jude 1:3 the faith once delivered to the saints or the deposit of faith eph 4:5 one faith!


Truth must be revealed by God thru Christ to His church (the apostles Jude 1:3) then must be proposed by the church, (Matt 28:19 gal 3:23) without error by the Holy Spirit! (Jn 16:13)

The evidence of true faith is humble subjection and obedience to Christ & His holy church!

The rule of faith for Christians is Jesus Christ Jn 14:6 and His church! Matt 18:17 acts 2:42 1 Tim 3:15

True Christians cannot listen to the errors of excommunicated heretics, but we listen faithfully to Christ, in the bosom of holy mother church, the only ark of salvation!
1 pet 3:20-21 matt 18:17 matt 16:18-19 matt 28:19-20 Jn 16:13 Jn 20:21-23

2 Thessalonians 1:8
In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:




Truth must be revealed by God thru Christ to His church (the apostles Jude 1:3) then must be proposed by the church, (Matt 28:19 gal 3:23) without error by the Holy Spirit! (Jn 16:13)

Christ and His church are one! (Acts 9:4 eph 5:31 Jn 15:1-5)

Rejection of the one true church or its teaching is rejection of Christ and God!

Christ and His church are one! Acts 9:4 eph 5:32 Jn 8:12 & Matt 5:14

This Apostolic Church never turned from the way of truth nor held any kind of error. It is imperative that nothing of the truths which have been defined be lessened, nothing altered, nothing added, but that they be preserved intact in word and meaning. This is the true rule of faith. Pope Agatho

God does not reveal His truth in a vacuum!

God does not set His true adrift on a sea of spiritual anarchy!

God sets His truth in His church, in the possession of His apostles to safeguard, to ensure it is not added to, or taken away from, or changed in any way!

And to teach the same truth to all nations and all ages!

Verified by scripture:

Matthew 24:35
Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

Matt 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost!

Jude 1:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints!

2 Thessalonians 2:15
Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

2 Timothy 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness!
(all scripture not 66 books alone)

Must be instructed in the faith:

Lk 1:4 That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.

Matt 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations…

Jn 29:21-23 as the father sent me, so I send you. (Same mission, power, and authority to teach all nations)

Lk 10:16 He who hears you, (His apostles) hear me.

Jn 13:20 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me; and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.

Jn 8:32 You (the apostles) shall know the truth; and the truth shall make you free.

Jn 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
(His apostles)


The whole purpose for the church of Jesus Christ is to teach all nations the truths revealed by Christ, with the sanctification and the salvation of souls!

 

[theefaith]

It would not be enough.
Rejecting the books that Jerome rejected would still make me "anathema" ... so I must violate my conscience and "eat meat dedicated to idols" even when MY CONSCIENCE tells me it is a sin to do so or YOUR POPE proclaims me "anathema".

(PS. "Do not say that you are justified by faith alone" ... is not "the Gospel".)

This is the Gospel ("Good News"):

John 3:14-21

“Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, so that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. For God loved the world in this way: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Anyone who believes in him is not condemned, but anyone who does not believe is already condemned, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only Son of God. This is the judgment: The light has come into the world, and people loved darkness rather than the light because their deeds were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the light and avoids it, so that his deeds may not be exposed. But anyone who lives by the truth comes to the light, so that his works may be shown to be accomplished by God.”
​

Romans 10:8-13

On the contrary, what does it say? The message is near you, in your mouth and in your heart. This is the message of faith that we proclaim: If you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. One believes with the heart, resulting in righteousness, and one confesses with the mouth, resulting in salvation. For the Scripture says, Everyone who believes on him will not be put to shame, since there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, because the same Lord of all richly blesses all who call on him. For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.​

Ephesians 2:1-10

And you were dead in your trespasses and sins in which you previously lived according to the ways of this world, according to the ruler of the power of the air, the spirit now working in the disobedient. We too all previously lived among them in our fleshly desires, carrying out the inclinations of our flesh and thoughts, and we were by nature children under wrath as the others were also. But God, who is rich in mercy, because of his great love that he had for us, made us alive with Christ even though we were dead in trespasses. You are saved by grace! He also raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavens in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might display the immeasurable riches of his grace through his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. For you are saved by grace through faith, and this is not from yourselves; it is God’s gift —  not from works, so that no one can boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared ahead of time for us to do.
​

It is in God and His word that I place my trust.
It is God and His word that will judge me.

Romans 14:4

Who are you to judge another's household servant? Before his own Lord he stands or falls. And he will stand, because the Lord is able to make him stand.​

you forgot the requirement of baptismal regeneration!


Baptism is the initiation of the new and eternal covenant!

You cannot enter on you’re own or by “faith alone”!

You cannot receive Christ or grace by “faith alone”!

“Accept Christ as you’re personal lord and savior” is fundamentalist baptist tradition not found scripture!

Jn 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

2 pet 1: 11 For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Baptismal regeneration a new creation in Christ! 2 Cor 5:17

A sacrament is an oath! A sacred promise from God! Ez 36:25-27
Acts 2:38-39 (this promise)

No baptism no grace!

A sacrament is an outward sign for all men including infants And a gift from God to help us see what he does inwardly and invisibly by his grace!

As grace Washes our souls in the merits of Jesus blood from original and personal sin, so the outward action of washing is visible!

without the outward action the inward action cannot take place!

Jn 3:5 Titus 3:5 water and washing
acts 22:16 wash away your sin!

Jn 3:5 Born again BY water and the spirit! Not by “faith alone”!

They did not go to Jerusalem and preach “accept Christ as you’re personal Lord and savior “

They went to the river (water) and they baptized! Jn 3:22

A covenant requires an outward sign of the inward action of grace!

Ez 36:25 I will sprinkle you with clean water and you shall be made white as snow.

Acts 22:16 washing away your sins.

Eph 4:5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism.

1 pet 3:21 baptism saves you.

You cannot enter on you’re own or by faith alone!

2 pet 1: 11 For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Heb 2:11 For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren,


Baptism!

God breathed life into Adam, gen 2:7 and we received this life from our fathers!

Christ breathed on the apostles our spiritual fathers, we receive the new covenant life of God’s grace from them thru faith & baptism! Jn 20:21-23 Mk 16:16 acts 8:36-38 eph 2

Born again! Born from above!

'The Father has set his seal' on Christ (John 6:27) and also seals us in him (cf. 2 Corinthians 1:22; Ephesians 1:23, 4:30). Because this seal indicates the indelible effect of the anointing with the Holy Spirit in the sacrament of Baptism,

Baptism indeed is the seal of eternal life." 87 The faithful Christian who I has "kept the seal" until the end, remaining faithful to the demands of his Baptism, will be able to depart this life "marked with the sign of faith," 88 with his baptismal faith, in expectation of the blessed vision of God - the consummation of faith - and in the hope of resurrection.

St. Paul tells the faithful at Ephesus that they have been “sealed with the promised Holy Spirit.” This is in terms of an indelible character imprinted on the soul in the sacraments of baptism and confirmation. It is not as if this invisible mark is simply decorative. Rather, through it, we are enabled to participate in Christ’s mission and in his offices of priest, prophet, and king. Eph 1:13

Sealed by God eph 1:13 sealed by God (ez 36:25-27) in the ark of salvation by baptism just as Noah was sealed by God in the ark of the flood gen 7:16

1 Pet 3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us!
(Ark of Noah a type of the church, member of Christ and his church and salvation by baptism!)
(Outside the ark of Noah none were saved, outside the church (the ark of salvation) none are saved!)

Sealed in the ark, sealed in the church the ark of salvation by God thru baptism!



Christ instituted the holy church for the salvation of all men, (repent and believe the gospel, with the institution of the sacraments to convey grace to sanctify souls!


Effects of faith & baptism!

Ez 36:25-27 washed in baptism, with a new heart and the Spirit
Jn 3:5 born again in baptism
Mk 16:16 faith & baptist
Acts 2:38 repentance & baptism
Acts 8:36-38 faith & baptism
Acts 22:16 baptism washes away sin
Rom 6:3 died with Christ
Col 2:12 risen with Christ
1 cor 12:13 baptized into the church
Gal 3:27 by baptism put on Christ
2 Tim 1:10 eph 2:1 and 5 brought to life
2 cor 5:17 new creation
Eph 1:13 sealed by the Holy Spirit
Eph 4:5 one baptism
Eph 5:26 faith and baptism
Titus 3:5 baptismal regeneration
1 pet 1:2 washed in Christ’s blood
1 pet 2:9 the kingdom of light
1 pet 3:20-21 baptism saves us!

“Faith alone” accomplishes nothing!
1 cor 13:2 even all faith (alone) without charity avails NOTHING!!!

Faith and baptism!

Scripture says none of the things about “Faith alone”!

2 Peter 1:11
For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

The Christian sacrament of baptism is the Initiation into the new covenant and must be ministered to you by the apostles!

 

[atpollard]

dan 13 was scripture for a thousand years before the English Bible society deleted it by the tradition of men

A thousand years, wow. Almost as long as burning Heretics was the TRADITION before men READ the Words of God in the 66 books that He authored and the Holy Spirit convicted them that was wrong, too.

On a serious note, I envy you your "tradition". If your heart embraces it then you should celebrate it (Just like the man who eats meat dedicated to idols "praises God" because his conscience is clear to allow him to do so.) I am like the man that cannot eat meat dedicated to idols because my conscience tells me that for me it is a sin. Do not ask me to sin by following your traditions when my conscience condemns me for doing so. I must follow Jesus (the same Jesus you follow) by following his word only. I tried but cannot embrace your Mariology or Paedobaptism when MY HEART screams that they are contrary to the words that I read in God's Holy Scripture.

Shalom (peace and well being),
Arthur
... a former atheist following Jesus as best he can.

 

[atpollard]

They did not go to Jerusalem and preach “accept Christ as you’re personal Lord and savior “

Technically, they (John the Baptist, then Jesus and the Disciples) preached "Repent, for the Kingdom of God is near/here." ... Baptism is how the people "repented".

The message changed a bit after Acts 2 and the Road to Damascus (the Holy Spirit shakes things up whenever He arrives).

 

[theefaith]

A thousand years, wow. Almost as long as burning Heretics was the TRADITION before men READ the Words of God in the 66 books that He authored and the Holy Spirit convicted them that was wrong, too.

On a serious note, I envy you your "tradition". If your heart embraces it then you should celebrate it (Just like the man who eats meat dedicated to idols "praises God" because his conscience is clear to allow him to do so.) I am like the man that cannot eat meat dedicated to idols because my conscience tells me that for me it is a sin. Do not ask me to sin by following your traditions when my conscience condemns me for doing so. I must follow Jesus (the same Jesus you follow) by following his word only. I tried but cannot embrace your Mariology or Paedobaptism when MY HEART screams that they are contrary to the words that I read in God's Holy Scripture.

Shalom (peace and well being),
Arthur
... a former atheist following Jesus as best he can.

thank God for that at least!

let’s take one thing at a time please cos they are large subjects and we can stay with you’re 66 books only!

We don’t eat meat sacrificed to idols either!

Have heard of biblical types and figures?
Biblical implications?
And biblical principles?

 

[theefaith]

Implications:

Statements have implications that cannot be denied!

There are true and false implications!

Many times Jesus used implications instead of a direct answer.

Jn 18:33 are you the king of the Jews? Vs 36 Jesus said: my kingdom is not of this world implying that He is a king.

Lk 7:19 And John calling unto him two of his disciples sent them to Jesus, saying, Art thou he that should come? or look we for another?

Vs 22 Then Jesus answering said unto them, Go your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached.
Implying that He is the messiah.

Matt 12:28 But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.
The kingdom is implied by the working of the spirit.

King: implies a queen.

New Adam: implies a new eve.

Disciple: implies faith, self denial, and suffering.

To reject the church is to reject Christ who founded it. Matt 16:18-19

To reject the teaching authority of Christ in his church or to accept the doctrine of the “Bible alone” is to reject Christ who established the teaching authority. Lk 10:16

The mother of God implies the divinity of Christ.

False implications:
To a fundamentalist the name of Mary implies false worship and idolatry feeding many misconceptions and misunderstandings.

The name Jesus implies salvation!

 

[theefaith]

A good tree!

Biblical principle:

Matthew 7:18
A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

The fruit of the tree of Mary is our salvation! Matt 1:21 Lk 2:30 Jesus is our salvation! This reflects the immaculate conception of Mary and the miraculous conception of Jesus!
Lk 1:30 Mary found our salvation!
Lk 1:38 consented to our salvation!

A good tree (immaculate conception) Lk 1:49 God has done this and it is marvelous in our eyes!

Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Matt 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

A sinner would be an evil tree with evil fruit, but the fruit of Mary is salvation!

Mary brings in the good fruits of our redemption and salvation!

So Mary CANNOT be a sinner or a bad tree!