Biblical understanding

[miamited]

Oh donadams

And as WIP Has mentioned, your thread is in the political venue now as the subject matter was just a bit heavy for the 'lounge'.

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations…

What does the end of that statement say that we should be teaching the nations? You see, this is now a matter of using unfinished statements that God has made in His word and filling in how we want it to end. That's the same thing the Jewish leadership did with the Sabbath practices.

God bless,
Ted

 

[donadams]

That thread was not closed. It was moved and you were sent a notice of that action. Please do not attempt to derail this thread here.

Ok thanks

 

[donadams]

Oh donadams

And as WIP Has mentioned, your thread is in the political venue now as the subject matter was just a bit heavy for the 'lounge'.


What does the end of that statement say that we should be teaching the nations? You see, this is now a matter of using unfinished statements that God has made in His word and filling in how we want it to end. That's the same thing the Jewish leadership did with the Sabbath practices.

God bless,
Ted

Please explain

 

[miamited]

Please explain

Hi donadams
Well, one of the problems that I see with the evangelical movement is that they believe to think that God has sent us out to conquer the word. God hasn't done that.

Jesus left us with the command of what God asks of us:
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

I believe that the order of the command is of quite a bit of importance. He starts off saying that we should go and make disciples of all nations. For those who will listen and believe, we are to then baptize those who have believed, just as the first Apostles did. Finally, once we have gained a believer and baptized them into the faith...then we are to teach them to obey everything I have commanded.

Paul was clear. We are not to judge those outside. We are to judge those inside. I'm pretty confident that God isn't interested in us wasting our time doing the 'teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded us' except for those in all nations, to whom we have proclaimed the gospel and have then believed and been baptized. It is that group that we are to then teach to obey the Lord.

God bless,
Ted

 

[BB1956]

One of the biggest crimes perpetrated by the early church was to distance themselves from normative Judaism. In there lies the answer to your question.

In the first century bc there were 2 prominant rabbis named Shammai and Hillel. Shammai was the president of the Pharisee half of the Sanhedrin and Hillel his 2nd in command. They were best friends, but doctrinally disagreed (often vehemently and publicly) with over 100 different points of contention recorded in the Talmuds. They both started Pharisee schools in Jerusalem and Paul was trained by Hillel's grandson Gamaliel. Despite their differences, and them teaching those differences to their students, they remained personally close. So close, that both men made a requirement of their students to marry daughters of the graduates from the OTHER school.

They are an example of how someone can read scripture and come up with something different than others around him or her, but to not let that separate them from everyone else.

What I see as the problem with that story is that they both were Pharisees. Pharisees were a prominent religious sect of Judaism in the first century C.E. They were not of priestly descent, but they were strict observers of the Law in its smallest detail, and they elevated oral traditions to the same level as the law covenant, which was completely wrong. (Matthew 23:23) They opposed any Greek cultural influence, and as scholars of the Law and the traditions, they had great authority over the people. (Matthew 23:2-6) Some were also members of the Sanhedrin. They often opposed Jesus regarding Sabbath observance, traditions, and association with sinners and tax collectors.

The Pharisees considered themselves to be followers of Moses. They formed their own league, or fraternity (Hebrew, chavurah). To be admitted, one had to pledge before three members strict observance of Levitical purity, avoidance of close association with the amhaarets, which meant, unlearned multitude, and scrupulous payment of tithes. Some of this party were professional scribes and teachers, while others were laymen.(Matthew 23:1-7)
They fostered the synagogue as a place of worship, study, and prayer, and raised it to a central and important place in the life of the people, which rivaled the Temple.”(Encyclopedia Judaica).
The Pharisees lacked appreciation for YHWH God's temple. This can be seen from Jesus’ words: “Woe to you, blind guides, who say, ‘If anyone swears by the temple, it is nothing; but if anyone swears by the gold of the temple, he is under obligation.’ Fools and blind ones! Which, in fact, is greater, the gold or the temple that has sanctified the gold? Also, ‘If anyone swears by the altar, it is nothing; but if anyone swears by the gift on it, he is under obligation.’ Blind ones! Which, in fact, is greater, the gift or the altar that sanctifies the gift? Therefore he that swears by the altar is swearing by it and by all the things on it.”(Matthew 23:16-20)
How could the Pharisees become so twisted in their reasoning? What were they overlooking? Note what Jesus says next. “And he that swears by the temple is swearing by it and by him that is inhabiting it.” (Matthew 23:21) Concerning this verse, scholar E. P. Sanders observed: “The temple was holy not only because the holy God was worshipped there, but also because he was there.” (Judaism: Practice and Belief, 63 BCE—66 CE) The Pharisees didn't get that fact because the Pharisees believed in an omnipresent God so because they believed God to be everywhere
YHWH God's special presence would mean little to those who thought that he was everywhere.
The fact is because the Pharisees cared more about their oral law than the law covenant they were constantly in opposition with Jesus Christ who always went by what God had inspired men to write down.

 

[D-D-W]

The fact is because the Pharisees cared more about their oral law than the law covenant they were constantly in opposition with Jesus Christ who always went by what God had inspired men to write down.

SOME Pharisees. Not all were like that. Some, like Nicodemus, were honest and good men. Some actually supported Our Lord.

Luke 13:31
Just at that time some Pharisees approached, saying to Him, “Go away, leave here, for Herod wants to kill You.”

No one can have a proper discussion of first century Pharisaism without discussing Hillel and Shammai, the 2 great leaders and teachers from the first century bc; and the differences in their approach to the OT and oral traditions. Most christians find it shocking that Our Lord's teachings were very similar to Hillel's. Knowing what they taught makes it easy to see that most of the Pharisees who were critical followed the teachings of Shammai and NOT Hillel. (BTW - Hillel was the grandfather of Paul's mentor Gamaliel)

 

[donadams]

Hi donadams
Well, one of the problems that I see with the evangelical movement is that they believe to think that God has sent us out to conquer the word. God hasn't done that.

Jesus left us with the command of what God asks of us:
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

I believe that the order of the command is of quite a bit of importance. He starts off saying that we should go and make disciples of all nations. For those who will listen and believe, we are to then baptize those who have believed, just as the first Apostles did. Finally, once we have gained a believer and baptized them into the faith...then we are to teach them to obey everything I have commanded.

Paul was clear. We are not to judge those outside. We are to judge those inside. I'm pretty confident that God isn't interested in us wasting our time doing the 'teaching them to obey all that Jesus has commanded us' except for those in all nations, to whom we have proclaimed the gospel and have then believed and been baptized. It is that group that we are to then teach to obey the Lord.

God bless,
Ted

What did Jesus command in Matt 28:20?
How do you list the Ten Commandments?
Is Christ king? If yes then the whole world must submit unto Him. Matt 28:18 all authority lk 1:32-33 Jesus replaced David as king
Matt 21:43 the kingdom is taken from them (successors of Moses Matt 23:1) given to the church who bears fruit Jn 15:1-5 the church replaced Israel as the kingdom of God and the new covenant replaced the mosaic covenant

The new covenant should have many similarities to the mosaic covenant cos everything Moses did in the old covenant was by pattern heb 8:5 of the heavenly things, and cos the new covenant is a reformation of the old heb 9:10

Both have a Temple:
Altar:
Ark:
Priesthood:
Sacrifice:
Sacraments:
Eternal flame:
Golden sensor with sweet smelling incense:

Liturgical propitiatory sacrifice

Thanks

 

[miamited]

Hi donadams

Not sure how all that connects to the issue at hand, but I hear you. I think I've already copy and pasted what Jesus said in Matthew 28 and I'm pretty confident that he listed the order in which we are to do what he has asked us to do.

One of the reasons that I believe that, is that Jesus himself told us that one required the Holy Spirit to gain understanding, wisdom and truth of God. He even told the disciples, when beginning his church, that they were to wait until the Holy Spirit would be available to them. He knew that without the present Holy Spirit, that preaching would be ineffective because he also knew that his Father uses the Holy Spirit to draw people to Him.

So, if we follow Jesus list of assignments for us in order: We go out into all the world preaching the gospel. It goes out to millions of people and many resist and refuse and, as I think many have found out, you often wind up beating your head against the wall trying to convert someone who has no desire to be converted.

However, for some, as you present the gospel with love, God's Spirit works within their heart to make them receptive to what they've heard. As they listen and hear the words their hearts are pricked, just as mine was, to believe the gospel and they offer a testimony of faith.

Then Jesus tells us to baptize those who have heard and believe.

Then Jesus tells us to sit down and teach those, to obey all that he has commanded us.

But, when dealing with an unbeliever, all we do is share the gospel. The good news that God has sent us a Savior, who is Jesus, and that through faith in him we can have eternal life with God. I mean, again, I've read the Scriptures through a number of times. None of the first disciples and Paul seem to spend much time 'condemning' the people and listing out all of their sins, but rather just telling them who Jesus is and then receiving the harvest from that and then, as Paul's letters do, teach us the things of God.

God bless,
Ted

 

[DiscipleDave]

How can we eliminate strife and confusion and come to a biblical understanding?

Scripture says be if “one mind one heart” Rom 12:16rom 15:16 2 cor 13:11 Phil 1:27

How can we lose the “us verses them” mentality and Hopefully help each other find biblical understanding!

God reveals to whom God reveals.

Go to DiscipleDave(dot)com click on YouTube Videos, then midway down Third Column is my video called "Be of One Mind"

You also may like the video called "The Church Has NO POWER" further down the same column. Because the Body of Christ is so divided, because it does NOT have One Mind. Everyone in this last days generation has their own mind, their own truths, their own beliefs. Everyone has a doctrine. Everyone only seeks for those who agree with the doctrines they believe in. Truly we are in the last days. They did not listen to the prophets in the past, they will most certainly not listen to the prophets today.

 

[for_his_glory]

Jn 14:6 the truth is not something but somebody Jesus Christ!
It is unlawful to not accept a doctrine reveled by God thru Christ and proposed for belief by holy mother church! Matt 28:19 eph 4:5 Jude 1:3

Truth must be revealed by God thru Christ to His church (the apostles Jude 1:3) then must be proposed by the church, (Matt 28:19 gal 3:23) without error by the Holy Spirit! (Jn 16:13)

Christ and His church are one! (Acts 9:4 eph 5:31 Jn 15:1-5)

The evidence of true faith is humble subjection and obedience to Christ & His holy church!

The rule of faith for Christians is Jesus Christ Jn 14:6 and His church! Matt 18:17 acts 2:42 1 Tim 3:15

True Christians cannot listen to the errors of excommunicated heretics, but we listen faithfully to Christ, in the bosom of holy mother church, the only ark of salvation!
1 pet 3:20-21 matt 18:17 matt 16:18-19 matt 28:19-20 Jn 16:13 Jn 20:21-23

Only one has authority to found a church Jesus Christ Matt 16:18-29 one is head or the church and shepherd Jn 10:16
All others are sects full of errors the tradition of men

No such thing as holy mother church in the Bible. All Biblical understanding only comes by the Holy Spirit that Jesus sent down after He ascended up to heaven. Only those who are Spiritually born again from above have the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Man can not teach us anything apart from the Holy Spirit teaching through them.

 

[for_his_glory]

Hi donadams

Not sure how all that connects to the issue at hand, but I hear you. I think I've already copy and pasted what Jesus said in Matthew 28 and I'm pretty confident that he listed the order in which we are to do what he has asked us to do.

One of the reasons that I believe that, is that Jesus himself told us that one required the Holy Spirit to gain understanding, wisdom and truth of God. He even told the disciples, when beginning his church, that they were to wait until the Holy Spirit would be available to them. He knew that without the present Holy Spirit, that preaching would be ineffective because he also knew that his Father uses the Holy Spirit to draw people to Him.

So, if we follow Jesus list of assignments for us in order: We go out into all the world preaching the gospel. It goes out to millions of people and many resist and refuse and, as I think many have found out, you often wind up beating your head against the wall trying to convert someone who has no desire to be converted.

However, for some, as you present the gospel with love, God's Spirit works within their heart to make them receptive to what they've heard. As they listen and hear the words their hearts are pricked, just as mine was, to believe the gospel and they offer a testimony of faith.

Then Jesus tells us to baptize those who have heard and believe.

Then Jesus tells us to sit down and teach those, to obey all that he has commanded us.

But, when dealing with an unbeliever, all we do is share the gospel. The good news that God has sent us a Savior, who is Jesus, and that through faith in him we can have eternal life with God. I mean, again, I've read the Scriptures through a number of times. None of the first disciples and Paul seem to spend much time 'condemning' the people and listing out all of their sins, but rather just telling them who Jesus is and then receiving the harvest from that and then, as Paul's letters do, teach us the things of God.

God bless,
Ted

I would also add to what you have said with the reading of Romans 10:5-18 and Acts 2:14-41. There were added to the one and only church, being the body of Christ with He being the head of the body, over 3000 just on the day of Pentecost.

 

[for_his_glory]

What did Jesus command in Matt 28:20?
How do you list the Ten Commandments?
Is Christ king? If yes then the whole world must submit unto Him. Matt 28:18 all authority lk 1:32-33 Jesus replaced David as king
Matt 21:43 the kingdom is taken from them (successors of Moses Matt 23:1) given to the church who bears fruit Jn 15:1-5 the church replaced Israel as the kingdom of God and the new covenant replaced the mosaic covenant

The new covenant should have many similarities to the mosaic covenant cos everything Moses did in the old covenant was by pattern heb 8:5 of the heavenly things, and cos the new covenant is a reformation of the old heb 9:10

Both have a Temple:
Altar:
Ark:
Priesthood:
Sacrifice:
Sacraments:
Eternal flame:
Golden sensor with sweet smelling incense:

Liturgical propitiatory sacrifice

Thanks

 

[BB1956]

SOME Pharisees. Not all were like that. Some, like Nicodemus, were honest and good men. Some actually supported Our Lord.

Luke 13:31
Just at that time some Pharisees approached, saying to Him, “Go away, leave here, for Herod wants to kill You.”

No one can have a proper discussion of first century Pharisaism without discussing Hillel and Shammai, the 2 great leaders and teachers from the first century bc; and the differences in their approach to the OT and oral traditions. Most christians find it shocking that Our Lord's teachings were very similar to Hillel's. Knowing what they taught makes it easy to see that most of the Pharisees who were critical followed the teachings of Shammai and NOT Hillel. (BTW - Hillel was the grandfather of Paul's mentor Gamaliel)

Nichodemus a Pharisee and a teacher of Israel, was a ruler of the Jews, that is, a member of the Sanhedrin. Nicodemus was impressed with the signs that Jesus performed in Jerusalem at Passover time of 30 C.E. During the earthly ministry of Christ Jesus, the Pharisees exerted such great influence that prominent persons were afraid to confess him openly. (John 12:42, 43)
Which is why Nichodemus visited Jesus one night and confessed that Jesus must have come from God.
There is no Scriptural evidence for or against the traditions that say Nicodemus later became a disciple, or that he was cast out of the Sanhedrin and Jerusalem, or died a martyr’s death, and so forth. It's true that a few Pharisees did become Christians but once a Pharisee did become a Christian the religious organization of Pharisees and Sadducees were not friends with them and considered anyone including a Pharisee or Sadducee that became a Christian as a false servant or unfaithful servant of the True God YHWH.

At Luke 13:31 those Pharisees didn't say what they said out of concern for Jesus, they were trying to intimidate him to leave.

Also when it comes to the Pharisees as an religious organization Jesus himself said the were disciples of Satan because that Satan was their Father.(John 8:39-44)
The Pharisees elevated oral traditions to the same level as the law covenant which was completely wrong, these oral traditions were not the inspired word of God. They often opposed Jesus regarding Sabbath observance, traditions, and association with sinners and tax collectors.The Pharisees apparently thought that defilement resulted from association with persons who did not observe the Law according to their view of it. (Luke 7:36-39) Therefore, when Christ Jesus associated and even ate with sinners and tax collectors, this prompted them to object. (Luke 15:1, 2) The Pharisees found fault with Jesus and his disciples because of their not practicing the traditional washing of hands. (Matthew 15:1, 2; Mark 7:1-5; Luke 11:37, 38) But Jesus exposed their wrong reasoning and showed them to be violators of God’s law on account of their adherence to man-made traditions. (Matthew 15:3-11; Mark 7:6-15; Luke 11:39-44)
Rather than rejoicing and glorifying God in connection with the miraculous cures performed by Christ Jesus on the Sabbath, the Pharisees were filled with rage over what they deemed a violation of the Sabbath law and therefore plotted to kill Jesus. (Matthew 12:9-14; Mark 3:1-6; Luke 6:7-11; 14:1-6) To a blind man whom Jesus had cured on the Sabbath they said concerning Jesus: “This is not a man from God, because he does not observe the Sabbath.” (John 9:16)
They prided themselves on being righteous, actually, self-righteous, and looked down on the common people. (Luke 18:11, 12; John 7:47-49) To impress others with their righteousness, the Pharisees broadened the scripture-containing cases that they wore as safeguards and they enlarged the fringes of their garments. (Matthew 23:5) They loved money (Luke 16:14) and desired prominence and flattering titles. (Matthew 23:6, 7; Luke 11:43) The Pharisees were so biased in their application of the Law that they made it burdensome for the people, insisting that it be observed according to their concepts and traditions. (Matthew 23:4) They completely lost sight of the important matters, namely, justice, mercy, faithfulness, and love of God. (Matthew 23:23; Luke 11:41-44)

Jesus denounced the scribes and Pharisees, saying: “They bind up heavy loads and put them upon the shoulders of men, but they themselves are not willing to budge them with their finger.” (Matthew 23:2,4) Jesus was evidently referring to minute rules and burdensome traditions that these men laid upon the common people, being unwilling to lift even one small regulation to make things easier for them.—(Matthew 23:13, 23, 24.)

Jesus said to watch out for the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees,” because their leaven is hypocrisy.” So in scripture jesus warns to be on guard against false doctrine and hypocritical practices, “the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees,” which teaching had a corrupting effect. (Matthew 16:6, 11,12; Luke 12:1)
Jesus warned his followers: “If your righteousness does not abound more than that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter into the kingdom of the heavens.” (Matthew 5:20)

 

[donadams]

Hi donadams

Not sure how all that connects to the issue at hand, but I hear you. I think I've already copy and pasted what Jesus said in Matthew 28 and I'm pretty confident that he listed the order in which we are to do what he has asked us to do.

One of the reasons that I believe that, is that Jesus himself told us that one required the Holy Spirit to gain understanding, wisdom and truth of God. He even told the disciples, when beginning his church, that they were to wait until the Holy Spirit would be available to them. He knew that without the present Holy Spirit, that preaching would be ineffective because he also knew that his Father uses the Holy Spirit to draw people to Him.

So, if we follow Jesus list of assignments for us in order: We go out into all the world preaching the gospel. It goes out to millions of people and many resist and refuse and, as I think many have found out, you often wind up beating your head against the wall trying to convert someone who has no desire to be converted.

However, for some, as you present the gospel with love, God's Spirit works within their heart to make them receptive to what they've heard. As they listen and hear the words their hearts are pricked, just as mine was, to believe the gospel and they offer a testimony of faith.

Then Jesus tells us to baptize those who have heard and believe.

Then Jesus tells us to sit down and teach those, to obey all that he has commanded us.

But, when dealing with an unbeliever, all we do is share the gospel. The good news that God has sent us a Savior, who is Jesus, and that through faith in him we can have eternal life with God. I mean, again, I've read the Scriptures through a number of times. None of the first disciples and Paul seem to spend much time 'condemning' the people and listing out all of their sins, but rather just telling them who Jesus is and then receiving the harvest from that and then, as Paul's letters do, teach us the things of God.

God bless,
Ted

Do you believe only 66 books of the Bible?

 

[BB1956]

Where does it say that we must All agree about every single doctrinal issue?

Does it matter that A believes in infant baptism, while B only in adult baptism!

This is only one of many divisions that don’t matter.

But what about salvation.
Where are you prepared to compromise?
If another will not compromise there beliefs, how would you deal with that?

May I suggest that you start reading church history, to find out why different churches exist.

You asked, does it matter if one person believes in infant baptism while the other believes in adult baptism. See, the thing is this, do you believe God knows best? Do you love him enough to be able to exercise faith that what he says is what's important? So, do the scriptures say anything about infant baptism? No, it doesn't.
The scriptures show that Christian baptism is for those old enough to understand and believe in “the good news of the Kingdom of God.” (Acts 8:12) It is linked with hearing God’s word, accepting it, and repenting, these are actions that an infant cannot take.(Acts 2:22, 38, 41.)

The Bible shows that God views the young children of Christians as being holy, or clean in his sight, because of the parents’ faithful course. (1 Corinthians 7:14) If infant baptism were necessary then infants wouldn't need to be looked as being clean in God's eyes because of their parents faithful course in life.

 

[miamited]

Hi donadams

Do you believe only 66 books of the Bible?

Yes, I believe that the book that we have cobbled together today, that is still, as far as the new covenant writings, the full knowledge of God that He wanted to have preserved for us.

You see, the new covenant, is just an accounting of how the early believers began to spread the word and some of the teachings, predominantly Jesus' with Paul's that were going around in that day. Until, of course, the Revelation of Jesus. So, if they aren't complete, then one would have to show me why not. What writings do you have that teach us something different concerning what God asks of us.

I mean, I'm sure there may have been other writings that someone wrote about Jesus and the work of the first disciples...but does it teach us something different about what they believed of God, or are they just different places and recordings of other preaching that makes the same point, but just in a different place and time. I really don't need 47 books to tell me that Jesus wept. I believed it the first time in the accepted writings.

However, if some new writing has been found that the disciples walking with Jesus asked him, "Lord! How shall we cross a street?" And Jesus responded to them, "On Mondays, you must cross with your right thumb in your left ear as that pleases your Father who is in heaven." Then I'd seriously consider it, and if it could be proven, or at least accepted, as reasonably reliable, I might try to introduce that new writing into the canon.

Keep in mine that it's ok to read anything you like concerning God and His ways. Although I would certainly expect a believer not to put any credence into some obviously spurious writing. But we can read what we like. However, the only writing that I consider as being God's desired word that He wants us all to know about, are the current Scriptures.

First, the old covenant canon doesn't have anything to do with the new covenant canon. The two sections were canonized(?) by different groups at different times. There was, at the time that the new covenant canon was established, a fairly rigorous examination of all the writings of that day. Which should really be all that need be considered for entrance. Later writings are just going to be hearsay and full of the thoughts and ruminations of men's minds, rather than necessarily a word from God. My position is that if Jesus didn't cover it, and Paul didn't cover it, or any of the other 'known' writers, then it doesn't need to be covered. Might be interesting reading, but not on par with the importance of God's word.

Secondly, I believe in a God who loves me and wants me, and everyone who has ever lived since the life of His Son, to know the truth. So, I have a hard time considering that there's an all powerful, omniscient God who has allowed the majority of those living upon the earth to not have His word, through which they can come to love Him also. So yes, for me, as Paul attests, the Scriptures are complete.

Finally, in returning a moment to the old covenant, 2,000 years ago Jesus, the Son of the living God who loves us and wants us to know all about Him and what is truth, walked among us. He made reference to the Scriptures many, many times. In those days, what we hold today as the accepted Scriptures, as far as the old covenant, had already been established and Jesus would have known that. Now again, I just can't consider this loving God I spoke of before, not having His Son tell us that there were missing writings. That when he said the word 'Scriptures' he was talking about more writings than just what had been canonized as the Scriptures before his day. What everyone considered to be the Scriptures in Israel when Jesus walked among us.

66 books with a scarlet thread woven through them. From beginning to end. A thread that 'weaves' us, through the blood of the Lamb, to our Father who is in heaven and forever to be praised.

God bless,
Ted

 

[donadams]

God reveals to whom God reveals.

Go to DiscipleDave(dot)com click on YouTube Videos, then midway down Third Column is my video called "Be of One Mind"

You also may like the video called "The Church Has NO POWER" further down the same column. Because the Body of Christ is so divided, because it does NOT have One Mind. Everyone in this last days generation has their own mind, their own truths, their own beliefs. Everyone has a doctrine. Everyone only seeks for those who agree with the doctrines they believe in. Truly we are in the last days. They did not listen to the prophets in the past, they will most certainly not listen to the prophets today.

Thanks
What is the rule of faith for Christians or the source of truth?
What does the unity of Christ in His church consist of?

 

[donadams]

You asked, does it matter if one person believes in infant baptism while the other believes in adult baptism. See, the thing is this, do you believe God knows best? Do you love him enough to be able to exercise faith that what he says is what's important? So, do the scriptures say anything about infant baptism? No, it doesn't.
The scriptures show that Christian baptism is for those old enough to understand and believe in “the good news of the Kingdom of God.” (Acts 8:12) It is linked with hearing God’s word, accepting it, and repenting, these are actions that an infant cannot take.(Acts 2:22, 38, 41.)

The Bible shows that God views the young children of Christians as being holy, or clean in his sight, because of the parents’ faithful course. (1 Corinthians 7:14) If infant baptism were necessary then infants wouldn't need to be looked as being clean in God's eyes because of their parents faithful course in life.

Infants are devoid of grace without baptism and cannot enter the kingdom of heaven Jn 3:5 if they die before the age of reason
And the Bible does teach infant baptism acts 2:38-39 see below
Thanks

 

[donadams]

Acts 2:38-39 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

Promise is to you’re children! Vs 39

This promise made in ez 36
A promise from God is a sacred oath, and a sacred oath is a sacrament!

Ez 36:25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.

27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

Jn 3:5 born again by water and the spirit.

Acts 16:15 entire household baptized! Does not say adults only or except infants!

Ez 36:25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness.

(It does not say adults only or except infants!)
(Scripture does not say anywhere “do not baptized infants”)

Baptism is the Christian initiation sacrament of the new covenant for all men. Matt 28:19 Jn 1:29 Jn 3:16

1 Corinthians 12:13
For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. (It does not say except infants!) (but it does say “all”)!

Lk 1:10-11 all people including infants

Thee faith is required for adult baptism.
Mk 16:16 acts 8:36-38

If it’s not possible (as in the case of infants) it’s not required.

But the promise of the parents to raise and educate the child in the faith is required, then the child is confirmed in thee faith at the age of reason.

Repentance is required for adult baptism. Acts 2:38

If there is no personal sin to repent of (as in the case of infants) then it’s not required.

For two thousand years the church founded by Christ on Peter and the apostles has always baptized infants!

Acts 1:8
Witness of Augustine!

It is this one Spirit who makes it possible for an infant to be regenerated . . . when that INFANT is brought to baptism; and it is through this one Spirit that the infant so presented is reborn. For it is not written, "Unless a man be born again by the will of his parents" or "by the faith of those presenting him or ministering to him," but, "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit." The water, therefore, manifesting exteriorly the sacrament of grace, and the Spirit effecting interiorly the benefit of grace, both regenerate in one Christ that man who was generated in Adam (Letters 98:2 [A.D. 408]).

“The sacrament of baptism is most assuredly the sacrament of regeneration” (ibid., 2:27:43).

“Baptism washes away all, absolutely all, our sins, whether of deed, word, or thought, whether sins original or added, whether knowingly or unknowingly contracted” (Against Two Letters of the Pelagians 3:3:5 [A.D. 420]).

“This is the meaning of the great sacrament of baptism, which is celebrated among us: all who attain to this grace die thereby to sin—as he himself [Jesus] is said to have died to sin because he died in the flesh (that is, ‘in the likeness of sin’)—and they are thereby alive by being reborn in the baptismal font, just as he rose again from the sepulcher. This is the case no matter what the age of the body. For whether it be a newborn infant or a decrepit old man—since no one should be barred from baptism—just so, there is no one who does not die to sin in baptism. Infants die to original sin only; adults, to all those sins which they have added, through their evil living, to the burden they brought with them at birth” (Handbook on Faith, Hope, and Love 13[41] [A.D. 421]).

 

[donadams]

Hi donadams

Yes, I believe that the book that we have cobbled together today, that is still, as far as the new covenant writings, the full knowledge of God that He wanted to have preserved for us.

You see, the new covenant, is just an accounting of how the early believers began to spread the word and some of the teachings, predominantly Jesus' with Paul's that were going around in that day. Until, of course, the Revelation of Jesus. So, if they aren't complete, then one would have to show me why not. What writings do you have that teach us something different concerning what God asks of us.

I mean, I'm sure there may have been other writings that someone wrote about Jesus and the work of the first disciples...but does it teach us something different about what they believed of God, or are they just different places and recordings of other preaching that makes the same point, but just in a different place and time. I really don't need 47 books to tell me that Jesus wept. I believed it the first time in the accepted writings.

However, if some new writing has been found that the disciples walking with Jesus asked him, "Lord! How shall we cross a street?" And Jesus responded to them, "On Mondays, you must cross with your right thumb in your left ear as that pleases your Father who is in heaven." Then I'd seriously consider it, and if it could be proven, or at least accepted, as reasonably reliable, I might try to introduce that new writing into the canon.

Keep in mine that it's ok to read anything you like concerning God and His ways. Although I would certainly expect a believer not to put any credence into some obviously spurious writing. But we can read what we like. However, the only writing that I consider as being God's desired word that He wants us all to know about, are the current Scriptures.

First, the old covenant canon doesn't have anything to do with the new covenant canon. The two sections were canonized(?) by different groups at different times. There was, at the time that the new covenant canon was established, a fairly rigorous examination of all the writings of that day. Which should really be all that need be considered for entrance. Later writings are just going to be hearsay and full of the thoughts and ruminations of men's minds, rather than necessarily a word from God. My position is that if Jesus didn't cover it, and Paul didn't cover it, or any of the other 'known' writers, then it doesn't need to be covered. Might be interesting reading, but not on par with the importance of God's word.

Secondly, I believe in a God who loves me and wants me, and everyone who has ever lived since the life of His Son, to know the truth. So, I have a hard time considering that there's an all powerful, omniscient God who has allowed the majority of those living upon the earth to not have His word, through which they can come to love Him also. So yes, for me, as Paul attests, the Scriptures are complete.

Finally, in returning a moment to the old covenant, 2,000 years ago Jesus, the Son of the living God who loves us and wants us to know all about Him and what is truth, walked among us. He made reference to the Scriptures many, many times. In those days, what we hold today as the accepted Scriptures, as far as the old covenant, had already been established and Jesus would have known that. Now again, I just can't consider this loving God I spoke of before, not having His Son tell us that there were missing writings. That when he said the word 'Scriptures' he was talking about more writings than just what had been canonized as the Scriptures before his day. What everyone considered to be the Scriptures in Israel when Jesus walked among us.

66 books with a scarlet thread woven through them. From beginning to end. A thread that 'weaves' us, through the blood of the Lamb, to our Father who is in heaven and forever to be praised.

God bless,
Ted

We have the same New Testament books with a few variations in wording or translation, I was referring to the 7 OT books and more chapters in Esther and Daniel that we have thanks