Announcement

Collapse

Ecclesiology 201 Guidelines

Discussion on matters of general mainstream Christian churches. What are the differences between Catholics and protestants? How has the charismatic movement affected the church? Are Southern baptists different from fundamentalist baptists? It is also for discussions about the nature of the church.

This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and theists. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions. Additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Believer's Baptism

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by mossrose View Post
    You might.

    "Here, Muffin!"


    :outie:
    Why name cats? They never come when you call!
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
      I'm afraid that I still don't see it. Being born again implies that you've already been born once, which would have been obvious to Nicodemus. If by "born of water" Jesus meant "physical birth" then he wasn't adding anything new to the discussion that Nicodemus didn't already know. Unless of saying (ESV) "“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. ", Jesus could have said "“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. ", and no loss of meaning would have occurred.

      I simply cannot see how adding "of water" adds anything semantically meaningful to the text if it simply means "being born physically".
      Jesus said you had to be born again. Confused Nic asked Huh? How can someone be born again? Crawl back in the womb?

      And Jesus, probably chuckling, said, No silly. You have to be born of a woman AND of the spirit. (he added the second to the one nic was thinking about)

      First the womb, then the holy spirit. Born, AGAIN.

      And "born of water" was probably a figure of speech used back then. Or Jesus was just being descriptive.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
        Why name cats? They never come when you call!
        Ours did.

        Sometimes.


        Securely anchored to the Rock amid every storm of trial, testing or tribulation.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by mossrose View Post
          Ours did.

          Sometimes.
          How do you know he wasn't coming to you anyway, regardless of you calling him or not?

          My youngest daughter used to "train" her dog by watching what he was about to do, and quickly telling him to do it.
          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

          Comment


          • #65
            Yes, I’d go after the jailer’s family.





            And I’d point to the command to baptize all (no exceptions for age)





            And I’d say that baptism is a New Testament spiritualized replacement for circumcision (and other infant ceremonies that were for both boys and girls), just as the Lord’s Supper is a spiritualized replacement for the Passover.





            And I’d point to passages that teach that we are born in sin, that the only way to heaven is faith (no exceptions that some people are still innocent and don’t need Christ), but I’ll concede that that is getting a little too far afield of the present discussion.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
              How do you know he wasn't coming to you anyway, regardless of you calling him or not?

              My youngest daughter used to "train" her dog by watching what he was about to do, and quickly telling him to do it.
              With dogs that actually works. They are pretty smart. Jake the Younger learned "sit" that way.

              Now cats, I think if you could make the sound of a can opener, then THAT would be the perfect name for a cat. They always come for that.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Just Passing Through View Post
                Yes, I’d go after the jailer’s family.





                And I’d point to the command to baptize all (no exceptions for age)





                And I’d say that baptism is a New Testament spiritualized replacement for circumcision (and other infant ceremonies that were for both boys and girls), just as the Lord’s Supper is a spiritualized replacement for the Passover.





                And I’d point to passages that teach that we are born in sin, that the only way to heaven is faith (no exceptions that some people are still innocent and don’t need Christ), but I’ll concede that that is getting a little too far afield of the present discussion.
                OK, multiple lines between paragraphs (or sentences) means you're the rightest!!! (except you find no actual baptisms of infants in the NT) The Son of God was baptized as an adult, and not because he had ever sinned, and God was pleased.
                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                  Jesus said you had to be born again. Confused Nic asked Huh? How can someone be born again? Crawl back in the womb?

                  And Jesus, probably chuckling, said, No silly. You have to be born of a woman AND of the spirit. (he added the second to the one nic was thinking about)

                  First the womb, then the holy spirit. Born, AGAIN.
                  And again, adding "born of water" (if it only meant physical birth) was unnecessary, since it wouldn't have added anything meaningful to the discussion. The question was "what does a man/human need to do to be born again?", not "what does a spirit being need to do to be born again?". That a human is born physically goes without saying, so why would Jesus even need to add it as a requirement? If I say, "for a stone to be turned into a statue of a man it needs to first exist as a stone, and then be chiseled into the form of a man" what useful information am I adding with "it needs to first exist as a stone"? And if Jesus says that you need to be born of water and the Spirit to enter the kingdom of heaven, what useful information is he adding with "of water" if he by that means "physical birth" since the fact that humans are born physically is such an obvious thing that it shouldn't even need to be mentioned?
                  Last edited by JonathanL; 05-24-2019, 03:10 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                    Why name cats? They never come when you call!
                    If you raise them on canned cat food, all you have to do is run the can opener and they'll come a runnin'!
                    "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

                    "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      But he was circumcised as an infant, since baptism didn’t exist yet.

                      And I'm really not here to debate until one side is proved right (me), and one side bows down in utter defeat. I just wanted this additional perspective to have its due.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Just Passing Through View Post
                        But he was circumcised as an infant, since baptism didn’t exist yet.

                        And I'm really not here to debate until one side is proved right (me), and one side bows down in utter defeat. I just wanted this additional perspective to have its due.
                        I'm glad you did - I was just pickin on you.
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
                          And again, adding "born of water" (if it only meant physical birth) was unnecessary, since it wouldn't have added anything meaningful to the discussion. The question was "what does a man/human need to do to be born again?", not "what does a spirit being need to do to be born again?". That a human is born physically goes without saying, so why would Jesus even need to add it as a requirement? If I say, "for a stone to be turned into a statue of a man it needs to first exist as a stone, and then be chiseled into the form of a man" what useful information am I adding with "it needs to first exist as a stone"? And if Jesus says that you need to be born of water and the Spirit to enter the kingdom of heaven, what useful information is he adding with "of water" if he by that means "physical birth" since the fact that humans are born physically is such an obvious thing that it shouldn't even need to be mentioned?
                          He didn't add it as a requirement, he added it as an explanation. You can't have a new birth without having a first birth Nicodemus was confused and thought Jesus was talking about being physically born again so Jesus explained that sure you needed a natural birth but then you needed a second birth to get eternal life.

                          It makes perfect and plain sense to me. Maybe because you are not a native english speaker? How does it read in Finnish?

                          Or maybe you just don't want to "get it" so you are kinda squeezing your eyes closed here?

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            How can a person who has not been born be born again?
                            except a person be born of water and Spirit [that is one thing]
                            except a person born of the water be born of the Spirit [that is another thing]
                            1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                            .
                            ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                            Scripture before Tradition:
                            but that won't prevent others from
                            taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                            of the right to call yourself Christian.

                            ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              You used the wrong icon

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                grow thread, grow

                                Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                                I'm suddenly having Deja Vu remembering Mickiel - how we tried our best to show him that, and he kept going on and on about universal salvation. And I want to get into that. But I walk alone.
                                ...in the darkness.





                                And I want to get in to this.

                                I'm always still in trouble again

                                "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                                "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                                "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X