Secure Eternal Salvation

[Taken]

WOW.
Your arguments - angr and hateful as they are -

Noted; your argument is lost.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Noted; your argument is lost.

Sooooo, because YOU failed to articulate a coheaive response to my Scriptural argyment for the efficacy of Water Baptism - MY argument is "lost"??
What color is the sky in your bizarre world?

If you can't mount a defense for your position - just admit it and move on.
But don't embarrass yoiurself with these hit-and-run posts . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

2 Tim 3: 16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is PROFITABLE for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Sorry my friend, You just plain wrong.

Scripture will instruct us in all
Doctrine or spiritual truths

Scripture will reproof or correct a person in spiritual Error

it will correct a person. Give him so excuse for sin

it will instruct in righteousness or lead us how to be righteous people in our daily lives

All these things in order to make a man complete

If the word of God, which is inspired. Can make a man complete in christ. Then everything you said is in error.

while the church may be the body and teacher and everything else the church is still bound by scripture otherwise people can make up any truth they want and no one can refute them

hence as I said. People who reject scripture alone only do it because scripture alone will hurt them not help them

Scripture IS profitable foe ALL of those things.
However, as @Illuminator pointed out - this does NOT support the 16th century invention of sola Scriptura, which asserts that Scripture and Scripture ALONE is our "SOLE" Authority.

Scripture doesn't make this clai m about itself - but it DOES make the claim that Christ;s Church is the final earthly Authority (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23).

Reading the verses I just liisted - here's ONE thing you need to ask yourself:
If Scripture was our SOLE Authority and that is where we learn our doctrines - and WHY are there literally tens of thousands of disjointed and perpetually-splintering Protestant sects that ALL teach different doctrines based on the personal interpretatipons of their founders?

Some Protestant denominations believe in baptismal regeneration, while others do not.
Some believe in soul-sleep, while others do not.
Some believe in the total depravity of man, while others do not.
Some believe in the Holy Trinity, while others do not.
Some believe in doctrine of “once saved, always saved”, while others do not.
Some believe in a pre-tribulation “Rapture”, while others do not.
Some believe that only those who were predestined will make it to heaven, while others do not.
Some believe that some were predestined for hell, while others do not.
Some believe in a woman’s right to choose abortion, while others do not.
Some believe that practicing homosexuality is a sin, while others do not.
Most believe in contraception, while others do not – and the list goes on.

Shouldn't they ALL have learned the SAME doctrines?
OR - were theose doctrines contingent on the interpretational whims of mere men?

 

[Taken]

Sooooo, because YOU failed to articulate a coheaive response to my Scriptural argyment for the efficacy of Water Baptism - MY argument is "lost"??
What color is the sky in your bizarre world?

If you can't mount a defense for your position - just admit it and move on.
But don't embarrass yoiurself with these hit-and-run posts . . .

Blah, blah, blah....accusations mean nothing. Water baptism saves nothing.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Blah, blah, blah....accusations mean nothing. Water baptism saves nothing.

TRANSLATION:
"The Biblical evidence for Water Baptism is too overhelming to debate."

Got it.

 

[Taken]

TRANSLATION:
"The Biblical evidence for Water Baptism is too overhelming to debate."

Got it.

Not the first time you have mistranslated....eh, nothing new, seen it before.

 

[Marymog]

I did not say either.

There are two possibilities.

What we know is what is is not

Since Jesus did not mention water in his words of HOW one is born again, or baptism, we know it is NOT water baptism.

Good Morning EG,

Acts 2:38 (Repent and be baptized) doesn't mention water. So what did they do after they repented to fulfill the "baptized" portion of that command?

In Acts 10:48 some were ordered to be baptized but it doesn't' mention water. How was that order fulfilled?

Mark 16:16 (whoever believes and is baptized) doesn't mention water. So what am I to do after I believe? How do I fulfil the "baptized" portion of that command?

Acts 8:36 equates water with baptism but then Acts 8:12-13 and Acts 9:18 talks about baptism but doesn't mention water. Since Scripture does not mention water in 12-13 and 9:18, does that mean water wasn't used?

John 3:22 says that Jesus and his Apostles went into the countryside and baptized but it never says they used water. How did they baptize? You can't say with water since water wasn't mentioned.


Curious Mary

 

[BreadOfLife]

Not the first time you have mistranslated....eh, nothing new, seen it before.

Suuurrrrre . . . .

Let me know when you're ready yo have an intelligent debare.
And next time - come prepared.

 

[Marymog]

Its when a believer who is truly born again gives his testimony and is immersed in water in front of many people

Hi EG,

Thanks for the definition of "believers baptism". Do you accept or teach the "believers Baptism" practice? If so, I can't find in Scripture where it says that a person is to give their testimony and get immersed in water in front of many people AFTER they have been "truly born again".


Mary

 

[Marymog]

You never did answer me, Were you fully immersed in baptism or sprinkled?

I apologize. I missed that question. I don't know since I was a infant when I was baptized.

 

[Taken]

Suuurrrrre . . . .

Let me know when you're ready yo have an intelligent debare.
And next time - come prepared.

I don’t find you capable of a worthy spiritual discussion.
And what you advocate as an intelligent debate is laughable on it’s face.

 

[Marymog]

maybe? We don't interpret the word by maybe, We also do not know if Nicodemus knew Jesus was baptized or not. that's just mere speculation. We also do not know how long after the baptism even this conversation again, more speculation.

If jesus said baptism, then and only then would we know nicodemus would have guessed baptism.

buit the fact once again when Jesus explained HOW to be born again, He left the word baptize out. should be the greatest clue as to the fact baptism is not referenced here.

Hold on EG...... HOLD ON....


Soooooo Scripture says that the Pharisees were coming to John to be water baptized. But you have been taught by your men that Nicodemus, who was a ruler in the Pharisees council, didn't know if Jesus was baptized? You have been taught by your men that Nicodemus didn't know what Jesus was talking about when He used the word "water" in water and Spirit? Even though Nicodemus called Jesus a "teacher who has come from God" and pointed out his "signs" that were from God. But your men have taught you that Nicodemus probably didn't know that Jesus was baptized and when Jesus was baptized in water, the Spirit came down upon him....But Nicodemus, a leader of the Jews who was clearly secretly following Jesus (he met with Jesus at night), didn't know anything about all that???? Hmmmm.......

 

[Marymog]

so you see two strikes against the belief that water is baptism.

If you eliminate the passages that equate water and baptism and only read the passages that don't equate water with baptism then you are right! Baptism and water do not equate in Scripture.

 

[Taken]

MY argument is "lost"??

Yes.... you blathering “name calling and wrong, wrong, wrong” is you establishing your discussion, debate, argument is already lost.
Not a phenomenon to recognize gaslighting techniques.

 

[Marymog]

Why would Jesus tell Nicodemus that he must be baptized to be saved, even though he was still under the Old Covenant?

What Jesus was doing was explaining to Nicodemus his need to be “born from above” or “born again.”

When Jesus told Nicodemus that he must “be born of water and the Spirit,” He was not referring to literal water but was referring to the need for spiritual cleansing. In this passage Jesus is the water, as he told the woman at the well. He's the living water that saves.
Jesus used figurative language more often than not.
After all, he had to explain that he wasn't literally saying to be physically born again but you want to believe that the water part was literal?
Of course it's both Jesus and the Holy Spirit that save, so both provide the " water" of redemption.
Born again,” “born from above,” and “born of water and Spirit” are three ways of saying the same thing.

Good Morning Renniks,

Why did the Apostles tell ALL the Jews (not just Nicodemus) they must be baptized to be saved even though they were under the Old Covenant? According to Scripture.....To establish a new covenant!!

What your men have taught you is very interesting. Would you PLEASE Ask your men: Why did the Apostles baptize, with water, and tell the Jews that they would receive the gift of the Holy Spirit after they were baptized (with water)? In Acts 22 the Jews are told to be baptized to wash away their sins. Did that mean they were being instructed to be baptized in water? After your men have answered those two questions, get back with me with their answers. I am curious what they are teaching you.

 

[Renniks]

Why did the Apostles baptize, with water, and tell the Jews that they would receive the gift of the Holy Spirit after they were baptized

Ok, first answer this:
Peter preaches to a group of Gentiles earlier in the book and they are filled with the Holy Spirit BEFORE they are baptized. Here people have been baptized but not yet filled with the Holy Spirit. Seems to me you have a problem if you think baptism is what brings the Spirit.
Oh and another problem:
At the time when Ananias prayed for Paul to receive his sight, Paul also received the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17)—this was before he was baptized. (Acts 9:18)
You are stuck on the words, "be baptized, and wash away your sins," but Paul was already cleansed spiritually at the time Christ appeared to him, so these words must refer to the symbolism of baptism. Baptism is a picture of God’s inner work of washing away sin. (1 Corinthians 6:11; 1 Peter 3:21).

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Scripture IS profitable foe ALL of those things.
However, as @Illuminator pointed out - this does NOT support the 16th century invention of sola Scriptura, which asserts that Scripture and Scripture ALONE is our "SOLE" Authority.

Scripture doesn't make this clai m about itself - but it DOES make the claim that Christ;s Church is the final earthly Authority (Matt. 16:18-19, Matt. 18:15-18, Luke 10:16, John 16:12-15, John 20:21-23).

Reading the verses I just liisted - here's ONE thing you need to ask yourself:
If Scripture was our SOLE Authority and that is where we learn our doctrines - and WHY are there literally tens of thousands of disjointed and perpetually-splintering Protestant sects that ALL teach different doctrines based on the personal interpretatipons of their founders?

Some Protestant denominations believe in baptismal regeneration, while others do not.
Some believe in soul-sleep, while others do not.
Some believe in the total depravity of man, while others do not.
Some believe in the Holy Trinity, while others do not.
Some believe in doctrine of “once saved, always saved”, while others do not.
Some believe in a pre-tribulation “Rapture”, while others do not.
Some believe that only those who were predestined will make it to heaven, while others do not.
Some believe that some were predestined for hell, while others do not.
Some believe in a woman’s right to choose abortion, while others do not.
Some believe that practicing homosexuality is a sin, while others do not.
Most believe in contraception, while others do not – and the list goes on.

Shouldn't they ALL have learned the SAME doctrines?
OR - were theose doctrines contingent on the interpretational whims of mere men?

Actually this post is proof of WHY we need Scripture Alone.

when we add the catholic interpretation and all the rest. There has to be a guide in which we KNOW is truly inspired of God. in order to test which of the many interpretations is correct.

Now if one person uses scripture and sees the catholic way. and another looks at it and sees it a Lutheran way. Is this the fault of scripture? NO!. its the fault of the one who is interpreting scripture.

And who will be held accountable for which way that person interprets?

The church? NO!!!!! the person who used scripture and did not interpret correctly!

Otherwise. We just blindly follow whatever church we think is correct, and have no basis or which to verify which is correct.

 

[Marymog]

Ok, first answer this:
Peter preaches to a group of Gentiles earlier in the book and they are filled with the Holy Spirit BEFORE they are baptized. Here people have been baptized but not yet filled with the Holy Spirit. Seems to me you have a problem if you think baptism is what brings the Spirit.
Oh and another problem:
At the time when Ananias prayed for Paul to receive his sight, Paul also received the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17)—this was before he was baptized. (Acts 9:18)
You are stuck on the words, "be baptized, and wash away your sins," but Paul was already cleansed spiritually at the time Christ appeared to him, so these words must refer to the symbolism of baptism. Baptism is a picture of God’s inner work of washing away sin. (1 Corinthians 6:11; 1 Peter 3:21).

I'm Not playing your game Renniks. Don't tell me to "FIRST answer this" without answering my 3 valid questions FIRST: Why did the Apostles baptize, with water, and tell the Jews that they would receive the gift of the Holy Spirit after they were baptized?

 

[Marymog]

Actually this post is proof of WHY we need Scripture Alone....

Hey EG,

Using Scripture alone tell me what books belong in your Bible.

The Bereans didn't practice "Scripture alone". Why do you?

 

[Marymog]

is the pope infallible?

Thank you for showing interest in The Church. Any question that you have on the teachings of The Church can easily be answered: The Holy See (vatican.va)

Where can I find what your denomination teaches?