Johann!@#
Member
- Sep 10, 2023
- 709
- 204
Glad to hear you read the article.i searched the scriptures and the bereans are wrong and not authorized apostles or the church established by Christ on Peter!
J.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Join Hidden in Him and For His Glory for discussions on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/become-a-vessel-of-honor-part-2.112306/
Glad to hear you read the article.i searched the scriptures and the bereans are wrong and not authorized apostles or the church established by Christ on Peter!
Acts 17:11i searched the scriptures and the bereans are wrong and not authorized apostles or the church established by Christ on Peter!
the church established by Christ does!Do any scriptures teach that infants were sprinkled with water for baptism?
did Christ establish the church to teach & sanctify all men? matt 28:19The teachings of Catholicism are not biblically.
No where did the scriptures teach us to “sprinkle infants” for baptism.
No where did Jesus command for a Roman Vatican to be built and a pagan sun god obelisk to be erected, and prayers to be made to Mary or other human being, or Rosary beads, or bowing down to statues of “saints”, or indulgences, or forbidding priests to marry…
Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, forbidding to marry.
1 Timothy 4:1-2
1 tim 4:1-2 refers to the albigensian's who had two gods one spiritual and good one material and evil so they never marriedThe teachings of Catholicism are not biblically.
No where did the scriptures teach us to “sprinkle infants” for baptism.
No where did Jesus command for a Roman Vatican to be built and a pagan sun god obelisk to be erected, and prayers to be made to Mary or other human being, or Rosary beads, or bowing down to statues of “saints”, or indulgences, or forbidding priests to marry…
Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, forbidding to marry.
1 Timothy 4:1-2
Berea was an Greek-speaking city in what is now north-central Greece; the scriptures that they studied were logically the Greek Septuagint. According to Acts many Jews and Greeks believed as result of Paul and Silas's teaching. The fact the Greeks (probably God-fearers) were part of the synagogue community further demonstrates that the Greek scriptures were what the Bereans examined.Acts 17:11
10 hen the brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea. When they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so. 12 Therefore many of them believed, and also not a few of the Greeks, prominent women as well as men.
This is what happens when you put yourself under men, who tell you to listen to them only.
The bereans did not say that so how are they wrong?
paul said. it. so I guess than apostle paul was wrong?
One thing is for sure. you just proved not only did you not search the scripture. you also show you do not know it.
I am confused.Berea was an Greek-speaking city in what is now north-central Greece; the scriptures that they studied were logically the Greek Septuagint. According to Acts many Jews and Greeks believed as result of Paul and Silas's teaching. The fact the Greeks (probably God-fearers) were part of the synagogue community further demonstrates that the Greek scriptures were what the Bereans examined.
In addition, Paul and Silas's preaching had to be extra-biblical teaching since the books of the New Testament had not been written, and a complete version of the New Testament was centuries away. The gospel that Paul and Silas preached was only available in spoken form. Thus the description in Acts shows the validity of the Septuagint scriptures and the value of extra-biblical teachings, both of which violate the modern doctrine of sola scriptura.
For reference here are the verses from Acts about the trip to Berea:
That very night the believers sent Paul and Silas off to Beroea; and when they arrived, they went to the Jewish synagogue. These Jews were more receptive than those in Thessalonica, for they welcomed the message very eagerly and examined the scriptures every day to see whether these things were so. Many of them therefore believed, including not a few Greek women and men of high standing. Acts 17:10-12
The gospel only existed in spoken form, so that was the extra-biblical teaching.
I always find it humorous when Evangelicals try to lay claim to the Bereans, given that there has NEVER been a Protestant church in Berea (modern day Veria), EVER.
Evangelical Protestants live in a fantasy world. Christianity of antiquity is demonstrably Catholic. I can provide the names of Catholic bishops, writings, Councils, archaeological sites, churches, baptistries (yes, Christians always believed in WATER baptism), the saints, martyrs, liturgical prayers, Scriptures, psalters, epitaphs, art work, names of her opponents, etc. from each century, beginning with the first. The same cannot be said for Protestants.
I guess you missed the point. Here it is...I am confused.
Paul said they did not takes pauls words as gospel truth (they did not trust man) but they used the word to test that what he said and the word of God were in agreement.
I have now I guess had to catholics say things that have no bearing on my argument
1. Said the bereans were wrong.,
and
2. I have no idea what this post has to do with what I said..
and I am supposed to look to the catholic church for truth?
receiving Christ by faith alone does not make you a child of God with union in Christ!thats called salvation. which we recieve by trusting in him (john 1, john 3)
then what is CTR and the JW'sthere may be,
but its not the church we call the roman catholic church. or as I call it. Pagan rome
whats matt 6:33 say?Does Peter and paul not tell us to look to scripture to test all spirits. and not follow men. because even in their day, false teachers and prophets were already sneaking in and turning people from Christ?
the church would follow the word of God. not privately interpreted or falsely instituted doctrines not supported by scripture
there must be obedience to men (apostles) acctto Christ and scriptureDoes Peter and paul not tell us to look to scripture to test all spirits. and not follow men. because even in their day, false teachers and prophets were already sneaking in and turning people from Christ?
the church would follow the word of God. not privately interpreted or falsely instituted doctrines not supported by scripture
Where does scripture say we have authority to read the bible for ourselves and decide doctrine on our own?Does Peter and paul not tell us to look to scripture to test all spirits. and not follow men. because even in their day, false teachers and prophets were already sneaking in and turning people from Christ?
the church would follow the word of God. not privately interpreted or falsely instituted doctrines not supported by scripture
Christ founded the apostolic church to teach (truth revealed by Christ) and sanctify (administer the grace of baptism) all men unto eternal salvation! Matt 28:19-20Does Peter and paul not tell us to look to scripture to test all spirits. and not follow men. because even in their day, false teachers and prophets were already sneaking in and turning people from Christ?
the church would follow the word of God. not privately interpreted or falsely instituted doctrines not supported by scripture
If you believe scripture you would believe the teaching of the apostolic church which alone possesses the authority of Jesus Christ in union with Jesus Christ! matt 28:19-20 matt 16:18:19 Jn 20:21-23 acts 1:1-8Does Peter and paul not tell us to look to scripture to test all spirits. and not follow men. because even in their day, false teachers and prophets were already sneaking in and turning people from Christ?
the church would follow the word of God. not privately interpreted or falsely instituted doctrines not supported by scripture
Infants have no capacity to believe.
Only those who believe with all their heart are qualified to be fully immersed in water baptism.
Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?”
Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”
And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him.
Acts 8:36-38
Infant baptism is unbiblical.
Infants are innocent.
Guys, I wasn't defending infant baptism, I was just explaining their practice of sprinkling instead of dunking, of course neither is biblical, and neither is necessary for salvation. Don't throw the book at me.there is nothing in scripture which tells us to baptize infants..
Baptism is the normative means by which God brings people to newness of life (Romans 6:4). It means the old life and person has died in baptism and is made new, born again (John 3:5). This belief is based on all the baptism texts of Scripture, which say baptism "forgives sins" (Acts 2:38), "washes sin away" (Acts 22:16), "regenerates" (Titus 3:4-7), "buries, unites us to Christ, and frees us from sin" (Romans 6:1-10), was typified in the Israelites crossing the Red Sea (1 Corinthians 10:1-4) and yes, "saves" us (1 Peter 3:21).Guys, I wasn't defending infant baptism, I was just explaining their practice of sprinkling instead of dunking, of course neither is biblical, and neither is necessary for salvation. Don't throw the book at me.
Baptism is an initiation ritual of your induction into a church community, a public declaration of your faith in Christ. As you said, if you don't believe in Christ in the first place, you just join the church for tradition or worldly benefits, then baptism is meaningless and useless. I made the analogy of wedding ceremony, a public declaration - and celebration - of your union with your spouse. But does it mark the beginning of your marriage? Actually, no. What does? In modern time, marriage license; in ancient time, betrothal.Baptism is the normative means by which God brings people to newness of life (Romans 6:4). It means the old life and person has died in baptism and is made new, born again (John 3:5). This belief is based on all the baptism texts of Scripture, which say baptism "forgives sins" (Acts 2:38), "washes sin away" (Acts 22:16), "regenerates" (Titus 3:4-7), "buries, unites us to Christ, and frees us from sin" (Romans 6:1-10), was typified in the Israelites crossing the Red Sea (1 Corinthians 10:1-4) and yes, "saves" us (1 Peter 3:21).
If you don't even believe baptism actually does that which Scripture says it does (see above), then arguing about the volume of water used like whether to immerse or sprinkle someone is entirely moot.