Posted on 03/09/2017 7:25:55 PM PST by Salvation
**A TV does nothing but translate information into a parameter which the human mind can process.**
I told you it was a crude example, but look at what you said, and then look at what the perfect example said:
“Jesus cried and said, He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent me. And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me........For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said uno me, so I speak.” John 12:44,45,49,50.
“Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.” John 14:10
Every divine and physical attribute that the Son displayed was given to him by the Father, even his life:
“For as the Father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;” John 5:26
Ask me what the Father did not give the Son, and I will tell you:
ghastly wounds.
**Even Paul took a ritual mikvah when he set about to accomplish a holy purpose.**
Ritual? No, I think that he obeyed the same commands found in Acts 2:38.
And here, from his own testimony, is the command given to him by Ananias:
“And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” Acts 22:16 (harmonizes quite nicely with the other detailed conversions found in Acts, and with Peter’s testimony in 1Peter 3:20,21)
**1 - Without Time, events do not occur
2 - Without Space a thing does not exist**
And dwelling on that probably helps somehow to see that the blood of Jesus Christ washes away sin.
Understanding that God is invisible, is a good foundation to be taught. That’s enough to get the gospel message off and running: “in the beginning God”.
If you are not familiar with it, I was referring to the time later in his mission work when he took a vow, to satisfy the Jewish leadership at the Temple.
see you in the clouds, brother.
2 - Without Space a thing does not exist
3 - Without energy, mass does not exist
Excellent ... but beyond the scope of religious discussion, usually.
Yes, he went through all of that, to the extreme recommended by believing Jews in the church, only to end up nearly getting the ‘Zechariah treatment’ outside the temple. And that, because unbelieving Jews mistakenly thought that he had brought a Gentile into the temple (as we know, they just wanted him dead regardless).
Moral of the story: don’t go to church, cuz it makes the devil unhappy. /s
The Universe is blowing out like a bubble, increasing the latent energy to astonishing levels. Scientist have euphemistically named this ‘zero point energy’, referring to the artifice of even at zero degrees Kelvin energy continues to seethe below the atomic level. As packets of space-time-energy move through this seething ‘field’ gravity / mass effect is the artifact.
I’ll bet you would enjoy the Barry Setterfield Youtube videos, particularly the interview with Chuck Missler regarding the speed of light slowing down.
**see you in the clouds, brother.**
I’m hoping!....just think,...the good life (times infinite to the infinite power)!
YES!
If they'd have PERSISTED in their 'unbelief'!
You got all this from US and OUR?
Not according to the formula:
E=mc2
That’s exactly what I said. Without energy, no mass.
I don’t know about that. Without light, no mass. “Light” is not merely what the human eye can see. Fiat lux, when God speaks Latin.
The voice of GOD acted upon the light (electromagnetic energy in all wave lengths) to cause world to leap into existence. GOD created via information, from God to the created spacetime and energy, photon energy packets.
Yep. God is light, and in Him is no darkness at all.
Well, when the Lord prayed to the Father for them (John 17:6-26), he seemed pretty confident those flunkies (s) were going to be able to do the job.
Actually, a reminder from him, on how little faith they had, was nothing new for those fellows.
There was the time they thought they were headed for davey jones locker,
The time that they couldn’t cast out the demon,
The parables that they failed to understand,
Peter fails at walking on water for more than a few steps.
And shame on them for turning into scairdee kats when all he did was drop in unannounced,... before scolding them.
I could only hope to have done as well as any of them.
**You got all this from US and OUR?**
Well, whatshername, the witch writer, could probably write something longer, cuz the Devil has known, longer than any of us, who God is
Is it? Not without context. And not without understanding the purpose of the baptism of the 3,000 or so souls on or after the day of Pentecost that the 120 members of The Company were all together Spirit-baptized.
In Acts 2:38, you must take into consideration the Greek grammar and syntax as it was understood by the first-century Common-Greek-speaking readers of Luke's writings, most particularly the eye-witnesses and still-living apostles by whom Luke's books the Gospel (55-58 A.D. during his ministry at Philippi) and the Acts (sent out by him from Rome in 62-63 A.D.) were certified as Holy Spirit Truth.
Now, as to the verse in view, this translated phrase occurs:
"Repent, and be baptized every one of you . . . for the remission of sins, . . ." (KJV).
I figure that you are going to attempt interpreting this as saying that it is the baptismal rite that effectuates the forgiveness of sins, and that it is God/Jesus that is the forgiver, but only when some form of application of water by a human agent baptizer consummates the rite by claiming authorization from the Triune Godhead to do so.
In contrast, I believe that a correct interpretation of the language in which the phrase is couched will prove otherwise. Here is the Greek as obtained from the Textus Receptus:
μετανοησατε και βαπτισθητω εκαστος υμων . . . εις αφεσιν (τwν) αμαρτιων
(R&PBMT and TR agree; UBFS1904 adds the definite article; DRB and Vulgate add "your" rather than "the", both inconsistent to the original)
In this phrase, it is understood that Peter's imperative to repent is in the aorist, and (though yet in the offing) is to occur as people feel moved, but before each one's baptism (also in the aorist) is projected to take place) . One does not wait until being baptized to make the decision to repent; one repents and makes a confession of belief as a condition of becoming a candidate for the ritual.
Having established that sequence, one now looks at the central preposition and key word εις (pronounced ice, which the KJV translates as "for," a rather ambiguous use of the translator's liberty. The DRB and Darby versions also use "for" the same way, but Jerome's Vulgate uses the Latin "in," that leans a bit toward your (mis)interpretation."
Here's the nub: εις is ubiquitous in the Greek, and has many uses that are not necessarily having the telic use "for the purpose of" or "with a view toward," as some would like it to be translated here.
However, the correct translation a careful translator gives you is predicated on the foundational use of εις; that is, a use in which the action contemplated or cited (baptism) is based upon a previous action (a repentance culminating in forgiveness of sins based on faith in Christ alone, and is therefore translated "on the basis of" or "based upon."
One such use is clearly illustrated in Matthew 12:41:
οτι μετενοησαν εις το κηρυγμα ιωνα (R&PBMT, TR)
"because they repented on the basis of Jonah's proclamation as an herald" (A Precise Translation Glossary)(from the volume "The Gospels: A Precise Translation" (click here) freely available from Happy Heralds, Inc.
Going on, one must first be convicted of one's death-dealing innate sinfulness and sinning, then believe in the saving power of Jesus and His Blood, to even want to repent, and that must occur before one offers oneself for the baptismal rite; certainly before that person's profession is declared and evaluated by the agency doing the baptism. Only after that can the water baptism take place.
However, the act of baptism is a human work involving the efforts and decisions of both the candidate and the baptizing agency, and therefore cannot be the basis for remission of sins yet to take place, only the recognition of sins that have already and totally been washed away.
For baptism of the repentant convert to take place, his/her saving belief in Christ alone, apart from any boastworthy human works, must have already been proffered in confession, with regeneration in the Spirit presumptively already having taken place.
This is entirely consistent with the local and overall context of God's sole and sovereign work of salvation, an argument that completely eliminates your interpretation of what the meaning and purpose of water baptism consists of.
In fact, relating to remission of sins, that process must have already taken place, because the meaning and purpose of the water baptism of the professing believer is only the rite of induction into the Company of the Committed, the temporal unit of local organization of the Lord as His Body of believers, with a sealing of the applicant's dedication to a never-ending life of discipleship as a servant of Christ.
So there it is. No argument that you can come up with, or the RCC either, can be used to affirm that baptismal regeneration will agree with Ephesians 2:8-10. with Romans 10:8-10, or any legitimate statement of how God saves.
Regarding the remaining citations of Biblical examples, none of them will pass an examination as to whether God uses water as the medium to effect salvation by washing away sins and impart eternal life. A full discussion of each of the "Seven Baptisms of the New Testament" appears on the above cited site, with the Baptism of Christ Unto All Righteousness (click here) that you would do well to scrutinize.
The water baptism of Matthew 28:18-20 has nothing to do wit conferring the forgiveness of sins. It is the ceremony of inducting recruits into the Company of Committed Disciples of Christ, as an external symbol of their permanent enlistment as life-long constituents of the Bride of Christ. And that is all that the rite signifies.
Let me ask you if you can explain who baptized Andrew and Beloved John and Peter and Judas Iscariot and the others of The Twelve, when they were baptized, and for what purpose?
Another question you might want to research is how all of this group The Twelve obtained their authority to themselves baptize followers of Jesus during His earthly ministry, and how does that baptism relate to the one administered to the three thousand followers converted because of Peter's Pentecostal preaching, eh?
And how would the writer of the primary article of this thread view the correct doctrine of the New Covenant Baptism that they so agonizingly twist beyond recognition?
Hm?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.