ezra
Member
my point is water baptism never saved anyone and infants dont need baptized
Last edited:
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
Bible Study History of the Christian Church
- Thread starter GodsGrace
- Start date
-
- Tags
- church history
When reading about the ECF's, you'll find that they're all lumped together. The ECF's usually incompasses the anti-Nicene Fathers....those before the Council of Nicea in 325 AD.
If someone wanted to be more specific, then the difference is in the degree of separation from the Apostles.
The Apostolic Fathers are those that were taught by the Apostles themselves.
The Early Church Fathers are those that were taught by the Apostolic Fathers.
Here is a chart: (right click and open in new tab for enlargement)
I agree that baptism does not, by itself, save.
The reason some churches batptize infants is because they believe that Adam's sin is imputed to us, and since nothing impure can enter into heaven, it becomes necessary to baptize babies. In fact, it becomes imperative.
I should add, as information only, that the Catholic church no longer teaches this. I don't know about the other denominations that baptize infants.
Shall be could mean "you are to be perfect".
Shall does not necessarily refer to the future.
Also, what do you believe turning the other cheek means??
Atheists don't usually turn the other cheek because they don't have belief in God and in His ways.
Mathew 5:39
You make a very good and valid point, and I agree with you and so do most of Christian denominations.
It is, however, true that the early church did baptize infants: babies and small children.
They believed that this included children in the "family" of God. That children needed to be absolved of all sin and made pure. They felt that if they did not baptize babies, they were withholding blessings from them.
I'm sorry I can't list sources...it's from memory. Cannot find a link quickly.
ezra
Member
same here
chessman
Member
In the case of Matt 5:48 it’s the future tense of the word eimi ( I Am). 12/12 times in this form it means you will be (shall be).
https://biblehub.com/greek/esesthe_1510.htm
Just what it says it means, to “not resist the evildoer”.
A whole Scripture/sentence has a way of explaining Itself this way. You know, like the whole of 1 Tim 4:1-3 explains exactly what Paul meant by “depart from the faith” in the rest of the sentence.
Here's what I got from Eimi...which you stated is the word being used in Mathew5:48.
https://www.messie2vie.fr/bible/strongs/strong-greek-G1510-eimi.html
I don't know Greek and don't make believe I do. I don't care for the Greek lexicon, as you know. However, I can find out what exactly Jesus meant in Mathew 5:48 by discussing this with someone who DOES know Koine Greek...it's far more complicated than you care to accept even though the actual language is rather simple.
Going by what the previous verses are speaking about, which is Jesus teaching about how we are to love our enemy so that we may be sons of our Father in heaven.
Verse 45
If we greet (present tense) our brothers only, what do we do more than others? DO more than others. (present tense)
verse 47
Then, suddenly --- according to your understanding --- verse 48 goes into the future and tells those listening that we WILL BE (sometime in the future) perfect as our Father in heaven is perfect).
Well Chessman, when we are perfect, in the future because we're in heaven, we WILL NOT NEED Jesus' instructions on how to love our enemies and greet them. Jesus is giving instruction on how we are to be NOW,,,,not when we're in heaven.
See Leviticus 19:2
1Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying:
2“Speak to all the congregation of the sons of Israel and say to them, ‘You shall be holy, for I the LORD your God am holy.
Do you believe God is telling the Israelites to be holy when they're in heaven or AT THAT TIME in the present?
Scripture explains itself, but sometimes it's helpful to know the customs of the day and exactly how words are meant...also for 1 Timothy 4:1-3.
Here is what turning the other cheek meant at the time of Jesus:
Mathew 5:39
39“But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. "
Jesus is giving instruction on this verse and those that precede it. He's teaching us:
1. We're to be unselfish and value others more than ourselves
2. We should trust God so much that vindication is left to Him and not sought by us.
3. We have no property or honor more valuable than the opportunity to show how much we love God and everyone else.
4. By not coming down to someone's level, we appear unrealistic and "supernatural" to the world.
5. Through the eyes of our faith, our actions of non-retaliation seem reasonable even to the world.
Slapping someone on the cheek was an insult - an affront to someone's dignity. God's prophets suffered such treatment:
1 Kings 22:24
We should indulge the offender to show that we are secure in our status with God...and thus, by turning the other cheek, we show contempt for the insulter's opinion,,,not only to him but to any onlookers to whom this would be a testimony. We show allegiance and faithfulness to a higher power.
(from my own notes when teaching Mathew)
This is what turning the other cheek means.
This is a fine example of how biblical truth can be understood by reading the context.
Thank you Wondering.
It’s refreshing to see the straightforward truth proclaimed.
God bless you.
JLB
chessman
Member
Yep, that’s what the verse literally says.
No. The verb tense here is not future tense as it is in the Greek of Matt 5:48.
Sure. It’s something someone does to you that’s evil.
You didn’t ask me about the preceding verses or what my understanding of them is.
You could still tell me....
I know you're not going to agree...
You have your own understanding of verses.
I don't really understand how you study?
Do you study under the guidance of a church?
Do you read biblical scholars?
Do you do your own studying?
Please explain Mathew 5:48 and reconcile it to the verses that come before it.
Getting late here, I might not be back...
chessman
Member
Okay, I’ll explain it but there’s no reconciliation necessary as v48 is not in conflict with any of the previous verses. Nor did I say anything about it that’s in conflict with any of the previous verses.
Ah, so you do actually agree then that this attitude of the beatitudes is descriptive of a perfected future attitude we will share “in Heaven” with our Father?
Regardless, the context of v49 is indeed a conclusion (a “therefore” statement) making a summary statement from the previous verses (going back to v17, at least). [There’s a lot of things we agree upon.]
For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, one iota or one stroke will by no means pass away from the Law until all things take-place. Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and in this manner teaches people— he will be called least in the kingdom of the heavens. But whoever does and teaches them — this one will be called great in the kingdom of the heavens.
Matthew 5:18-19 - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=Matthew 5:18-19&version=DLNTMany more of the previous verses also demonstrate my point about v49 being completed/accomplished/perfected in the future resurrection (in the New Heaven/Earth). Yes, we are to express these attitudes now (in this life) but my point (and Jesus’s) is that they SHALL be “perfected” in the next life (in Heaven with our Heavenly Father). Quite literally, that’s what v49 says.
“Therefore you shall be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
Matthew 5:48 - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=Matthew 5:48&version=DLNTRight! That was my point. Then “when we are perfect, in the future” we “SHALL be perfect” like our Father is now (but we aren’t). That’s what v49 concludes. I happen to believe Jesus. Contrary to this
“You have heard that it was said, You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so? Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect. Matthew 5:43-48
- But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven;
This is what all Christian’s are commanded to do now in this life.
There will be no enemies, in heaven, so this is not speaking of a “future perfected attitude”, but rather the attitude we are to have now; Love.
Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments. He who says, “I know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoever keeps His word, truly the love of God is perfected in him. By this we know that we are in Him. 1 John 2:3-5
JLB
Chessman, half of what I write is to correct what you understood instead of what I wrote...this wastes a lot of time.
I didn't say YOU said there was a conflict...I'm saying that I'M saying there's a conflict.
Mathew 5:48 is speaking about the present time...NOT the future time in heaven. If YOU believe it's speaking about the future time in heaven, then YOU have to show me how you reconcile all the verses that come before 48 and HOW they pertain to heaven?!
What I said is that there will be no need of instruction for heaven -- we WILL BE perfect at that time...Jesus is giving instruction for NOW.
no no no! Please stop putting words in my mouth and/or misunderstanding me. Here's what I said to which you're replying:
Jesus is teaching about how we are to love our enemy so that we may be sons of our Father in heaven.
Verse 45
I'm exegeting verse 45. Which teaches us how we are to behave IF we want to be sons of God who is in heaven..
Here, I'll color code it for you...
...sons of our Father in heaven...
NOT
sons of our Father when we get to heaven.
Please slow down and try to understand what I write.
Jesus is teaching us how to be sons of our Father NOW.
We do NOT agree on Mathew 5:48.
And what does Mathew 5:18-19 have to do with our discussion?
So Jesus is advising us that when we get to heaven we'll be perfect like our heavenly Father is perfect??
This even needed to be said?
No. Jesus is speaking to the now. WE ALL KNOW that we'll be perfect when we get to heaven ... no need to say it or teach it.
And to conclude, let me say that I don't believe in:Right! That was my point. Then “when we are perfect, in the future” we “SHALL be perfect” like our Father is now (but we aren’t). That’s what v49 concludes. I happen to believe Jesus. Contrary to this
positional
prescription
description
or any other of these modern words that are used to teach doctrine that is not, IMHO, biblical. Here YOU are adding words and ideas to scripture that did not exist when it was penned.
Again, if you believe Mathew 5:48 refers to the future time in heaven, you'll have to reconcile it with the verses that come before by exegeting them. Or you'll have to accept that Jesus meant something different by being perfect, now, which BTW, I did explain in post. 52.
chessman
Member
I didn’t say v44 was a future tense, because it’s not.
But I say to you, be loving your enemies, and be praying for the ones persecuting you,
Matthew 5:44 - https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=Matthew 5:44&version=DLNTIf you believe Jesus’s command in v44 is to be loving our enemies now (presently, actively) because that’s what He commanded, then why don’t you believe Him when He said we “shall be” (future) perfect?
Is the Father commanded to love enemies?
I didn’t say, “you said” v44 was a future tense.
Here is plainly what I said -
This is a direct response to what you stated -
I reiterate what wondering said -
However I will add that we spend much time correcting what you willing misrepresent as to what we write.
JLB
chessman
Member
Okay but there is no conflict, which is what I pointed out to you. Take it or leave it.
Actually, that’s an incorrect statement. It’s a future tense, imperative verb. Take it or leave it.
But to save a lot of time, you just carry on saying there IS a conflict and that it’s a PRESENT tense. I wil not reply about it any longer.
I’m gonna start my New Year’s resolution early and only show the evidence for my position once per thread. See #67 where I proved it’s future tense.
Last edited: