Question about the remission of sins

[TexUs]

Is that what you believe or what the Church of England believes?

Since you responded by copying/pasting it seems like you can't articulate why you believe what you believe and you are blindly following their 39 articles?

 

[Templar81]

Very goodI thought you'd never find out where they came from.

No, I can't articulate

Yes, I follow the 39 articles blindly.

 

[TexUs]

Are you being facetious?

I've got no problem with you holding to those views if you know how they're established, but if you know how they're established then you should have no problem articulating it. That's why it just seems to me that you don't know why you believe it's right.... I'd like for you to show me I'm wrong?

 

[Templar81]

I don't have to prove anything to you, so you can think again if you think I'm playing that game.

 

[TexUs]

I don't have to prove anything to you, so you can think again if you think I'm playing that game.

No, you don't.
I just hope you'll be able to give an answer for why you preach what you preach someday and it be better than, "It's in the 39 Articles"

 

[jacobtaylor]

I don't have to prove anything to you, so you can think again if you think I'm playing that game.

I like the 39th. It includes a warning about the sect which he professeth, would that include the sect that made these 39 standers as well?

sect
A group of people forming a distinct unit within a larger group by virtue of certain refinements or distinctions of belief or practice. ...


Article XVIII

Of obtaining eternal salvation only by the name of Christ
They also are to be had accursed that presume to say that every man shall be saved by the law or sect which he professeth, so that he be diligent to frame his life according to that law and the light of nature. For Holy Scripture doth set out to us only the name of Jesus Christ, whereby men must be saved.

 

[Templar81]

I'm not trying to preach anything. It is soemthing I would never presume to do.

I only cut and pasted it becuse i thought that it said it better than I could and because there is more authority in the theologians that put it together than there is in me. The 39 articles are what defines Anglicans and I'm proud of them and I'd like it if more importance was placed on them in the church today. I could have explained Baptism in my own words but what if I said something wrong without intention and erred into heresy. But I believe that Baptism is esssential first and foremost from the orders that Christ gave to his discples, which was to Baptise in the Name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Jesus commanded it so we (his modern day discples) must support it.

Also, please note that I do believe Baptism is an outward sign of what has gone on inside already. A person doesn't have to be Baptised to call themself a Christian but because the scriptures place much importance on Baptism the aspiring Christian would have already been Baptised in his heart and would naturally seek to make it public and be truly recieved into the church and into the body of Christ.

 

[Joseph77]

The Passover event covered those Israelites who were in fellowship with God. Under the old covenant there was NO offering
for intentional sins. For example, sins of adultery were taken care of by stoning etc.

That made for short trial. (and no prisons)

 

[kcnalp]

But I personally disagree with calling the Church Israel though, but that is just my opinion.

Joshua David

I agree, the Church is not Israel. Israel was reborn in 1948 and recovered Jerusalem in 1967 as Jesus foretold. This is truly the terminal generation!