I agree for there is a big night and day difference between "believe" and "believe alone" as there is between "faith" and "faith alone". Jesus nor His Apostles ever taught 'believe alone' or 'faith alone'.
Amen to that bro!!!
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
Strengthening families through biblical principles.
Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.
Read daily articles from Focus on the Family in the Marriage and Parenting Resources forum.
I agree for there is a big night and day difference between "believe" and "believe alone" as there is between "faith" and "faith alone". Jesus nor His Apostles ever taught 'believe alone' or 'faith alone'.
No, it requires compassion and understanding.That requires compromise
This is not as much about what the Catholics believe as it is on how we act toward those we disagree with. You and I agree that infant baptism is not biblical, but simply condemning them to hell based on not being baptized as adults is not biblical and lacks the fundementals understanding of God's rightousness and justice.Catholics must learn their way out of this error. In the meantime I will not compromise. Why do you continue to insist I must compromise but do not seek compromise from Catholics in what they believe?
Job was an upright man, rightous even in God's sight. What do we learn from Job? We learn that God isn't only interested in going through the motions and meeting the requirements. Instead, God is seeking a relationship with his people. God wants us to see him, not just know of him, or talk about him.How many posts have I made showing obedience, as submitting to water baptism is a work of obedience? And that obedience is meeting a condition God placed upon a free gift in order to receive the free gift. Therefore obedience earns NOTHING. Out of all the obedience that men did in the Bible has anyone here yet produced the first verse that says Noah's Abraham's Paul's etc obedience earned their justification? No.
Time and time again Jesus showed great compassion to those living in error. The greatest act of compassion can be seen on the cross where he says, Father forgive them...to those who earlier vowed, Let this be on us and our children. These are the same ones we see in Acts 2.There is NO COMPASSION in letting people continue in error. The compassion is to get them out of error.
No compassion in compromise.
Not every Pharasis was bad, so it's wrong to paint them with the same brush. Regardless, what I want to separate are the teachers and the students. Your average Catholic / Lutherine etc is taught infant baptism from sanctioned doctrines supported from the top down without much question. Teachers will be held at a much higher level than students.Jesus was not compassionate in that He would not compromise with the Pharisees but condemned them instead?
Might I interject?
This thread reminds me of one of those family squabbles around the Thanksgiving table. Jesus never participated in a 'formal' Thanksgiving dinner, but he did indeed give thanks.
We may observe that there is No argument to be found if and when we back our point-of-view out past the cultural divide.
Just saying.
Why yes, you are on the outside looking in on an in house squabble between two cofc members over issues that predate my birth. (although I am no longer a member as of recent). I suspect most readers don’t fully understand the broader context in which we squabble.This thread reminds me of one of those family squabbles around the Thanksgiving table. Jesus never participated in a 'formal' Thanksgiving dinner, but he did indeed give thanks.
Its true what you say, we can anoint infants and dedicate them to God. Samuel's mother did this to him. Its in the bible.I am a new member here, and I was just rereading through the "statement of faith" at the top of the forums. I have a problem with the line where it says, "those [immersed] as infants will not be excluded."
Immersion of an infant does nothing other than get the infant wet, and possibly angry. The passage cited as support for accepting infants who were immersed excludes them rather emphatically in saying "make disciples, and immerse them ..." You cannot make a disciple of someone who does not understand what you are talking about (an infant). They do not understand the need for salvation. They do not understand what sin is. They do not even understand the difference between right and wrong.
You have an obvious bias against the church of Christ, therefore the reason I need to compromise but no one else has to compromise.No, it requires compassion and understanding.
I believe that grace is not a licence to sin. Grace says you've missed the mark, but let's walk this walk together. Condemnation is analogous to saying Racca to your brother. Or does this raise the question "who is my brother?". In short, I understand that many in the cofc do not recognize "other religions, I e, Baptists, methodists, RCC, Nazarene etc at "brothers". If this is also your position, then how does Jesus teach us to deal with those "outside the church". Are we to have an attitude of condemnation toward them?
This is not as much about what the Catholics believe as it is on how we act toward those we disagree with. You and I agree that infant baptism is not biblical, but simply condemning them to hell based on not being baptized as adults is not biblical and lacks the fundementals understanding of God's rightousness and justice.
Job was an upright man, rightous even in God's sight. What do we learn from Job? We learn that God isn't only interested in going through the motions and meeting the requirements. Instead, God is seeking a relationship with his people. God wants us to see him, not just know of him, or talk about him.
Job 42:5 I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but now mine eye seeth thee.
Baptism is a response to the gospel. We don't force baptism as some kind of law that needs to be obeyed or we bear the consequences. Instead, baptism is a response made willingly without duress, much like the Eunuch. We call this faith in action because it's belief in motion and fear has no place in the baptismal pool. Nobody should get married out of duress, nor should anyone enter the baptismal waters in duress.
Time and time again Jesus showed great compassion to those living in error. The greatest act of compassion can be seen on the cross where he says, Father forgive them...to those who earlier vowed, Let this be on us and our children. These are the same ones we see in Acts 2.
There is no compromise with sin as it needs to be accounted for, and it has been through the cross. With love, there is always grace and a hope to those who are willing to receive it at the right time. We do not dictate that time, God does and for those who willfully refuse, God does not rejoice over their destruction
Not every Pharasis was bad, so it's wrong to paint them with the same brush. Regardless, what I want to separate are the teachers and the students. Your average Catholic / Lutherine etc is taught infant baptism from sanctioned doctrines supported from the top down without much question. Teachers will be held at a much higher level than students.
Let me circle back to God's rightousness and how it pertains to the centuries of good hearted Catholic parationers who lived their life for God... But more than that, they loved God and lived out their faith in obedience as they knew how in loving God and their neighbor.
I hear you saying that God is Just and his rightousness is on full display by sending every devoted follower of Christ to eternal punishment because of their ignorance or were beguiled by erroneous church teachings on infant baptism on the sole fact that they were taught wrong and did not understand baptism was for believers only.
No.[
For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. Romans 10:10 KJV
- with the heart man believeth unto righteousness;
Again my question is:
Can a person be right with God (righteous) and still be in their sins?
JLB
I do not agree that by believing in our heart we are made righteous (at that point), but believing in our heart is clearly a requirement for salvation, which precludes infant immersion because the infant has not, and cannot have, yet believed.So we see that by believing in our heart we are made righteous, right with a God.
Case Closed.
My brother, I have the utmost respect for many of the members within the churches of Christ including yourself. I was a member for about 23 years and my wife has roots that go back many generations which helped shape and develop the church. I know the doctrines as well as you, including the arguments.You have an obvious bias against the church of Christ, therefore the reason I need to compromise but no one else has to compromise.
So we see that by believing in our heart we are made righteous, right with a God.
Case Closed.
Why is it that the first century Church spoke of baptism as a shield, in the same way Paul writes to the Ephesians in chapter 6? Yet we consume our time debating it? What did the Apostles and first century Church know about baptism that we've seemed to have lost? It would seem to me that if we want to restore the Church to the first century teachings, then we should mirror our speech from those who wrote about baptism (The Apostles) and then first century deciples who learned directly from the Apostles themselves.
That's sad. But I am sure she had her reasons. There are a handfull of cofc that are extreemly legalistic and void of understanding. Who is my brother is one such teaching that can tear families apart and create division where reconcilliation should have occured.Addendum to my post #287.
On another forum many years ago I had debates with an 'ex church of Christ member'. Even though it was many years ago I will never forget what she had to say about the Bible. To her all the Bible is is an "old relic full of legalistic rules".
First, I don't think baptims is a "requirement". Jesus doesn't command anyone to be baptized. What Jesus commands is that his deciples baptize. This puts the requirement on deciples, not new believers. When I read scripture, baptism is a response to the gospel, not as a legal requirement to fulfill God's wrath. It's a picture of dieing with Christ and being raised with Christ. It's about commitment and affirmation where we rejoice that we are one, united with Christ. It is a picture of Christ and his bride, the Church where baptism is a means of entry into the body, the ceremony of the bride.Thing is, if water baptism is a requirement for salvation why isn't there at least one chapter in the Bible describing water baptism? If baptism is a requirement why doesn't John 3:16 mention it? If baptism is a requirement why is there people saved prior to receiving water baptism?
Close, there is definitely that aspect to the storyline but, and like all things both holy and eternal, He, The Author of Creation, has the final say.If I were to sum up the Bible, it's God's love story to us.
Thing is....you can't believe in your heart unless God opens it.
Acts 16:14 One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul.