Sacraments...Does your church respect them?

[stovebolts]

Vic,
Let me scratch my head on this for a bit. I'm stuck at work babysitting till 10pm tonight so I should have some time to try and put my head around this. I think I was a bit confused because my bible says 9, not the 3rd hour for Acts 2:15. My foot note said 3rd hour so I see where I was a bit confused.
Throw me a bone here. If it's 9am, but it's considered the 3rd hour, would it be correct to say that it's the third hours after daylight, assuming that the sun came up at 6am? It that's the case, what's it called lets say the third hour after the sun went down? In basic form, what did a Jewish day look like? I'm asking for two reasons. First, I don't understand the Jewish day and second, midnight is found 6 times in the KJV NT with two different greek words. So, I don't understand greek well enough to make a conclusion.

The bottom line for me is; I believe Jesus rose somewhere after sunset of the first day, but before sunrise. So, regardless of when Paul broke bread, it was the first day and that's fine with me no matter what calendar is being used..

We agree in many areas. Again, I just find this topic interesting and I hope that we can both get something good out of it.

To back up your statment, have you ever considered Leviticus 23:9-14 (First Fruits). In regard to the burnt offering spoken of, it is accompanied by the drink offering, look at Exodus 29:38-42.
So, Leviticus 23:9-14 should tie into 1 Corinthians 15:20. My Bible links the Corinthians verse to 1 Thessalonians 4:15-16
What I find interesting in Leviticus (what caught my eye), was the timing. "on the day after the Sabbath"
One day I want to do some follow up here...

 

[thessalonian]

Vic,
Throw me a bone here. If it's 9am, but it's considered the 3rd hour, would it be correct to say that it's the third hours after daylight, assuming that the sun came up at 6am? It that's the case, what's it called lets say the third hour after the sun went down? In basic form, what did a Jewish day look like? I'm asking for two reasons. First, I don't understand the Jewish day and second, midnight is found 6 times in the KJV NT with two different greek words. So, I don't understand greek well enough to make a conclusion.

I just read a bit on this the other day. Here is what the Navarre Bible Commentary has to say on it:

http://groups.google.com/group/CIN-Dail ... fe4afaccf5
"
3. The Jewish method of calculating time was different from ours. They
divided the whole day into eight parts, four night parts (called
"watches") and four day parts (called "hours")--the first, third, sixth
and ninth hour.


The first hour began at sunrise and ended around nine o'clock; the
third ran to twelve noon; the sixth to three in the afternoon; and the
ninth from three to sunset. This meant that the first and ninth hours
varied in length, decreasing in autumn and winter and increasing in
spring and summer and the reverse happening with the first and fourth
watches.


Sometimes intermediate hours were counted--as for example in verse 6
which refers to the eleventh hour, the short period just before sunset,
the end of the working day. "

 

[stovebolts]

Cool, Thanks Thess :smt023 , that was pretty simple and easy to understand :D

 

[cyberjosh]

As far as the crowd that was baptised in the 'Spirit', what was Peter's response? Wasn't it something like, "Who can stop them from being baptised from water"? Why do you think he said that?

Well that's what I was trying to tackle above. I see constantly in Acts water Baptism being a public evidence and affirmation of repentance to follow Jesus. Baptism was always assumed when you were saved, that is why it is always mentioned. Now I think that after Peter had his revelation of the Gentiles that he was realizing that the Jews can no longer exclude the Gentiles (or view them as being excluded) from those who follow God (Christ), and the biggest sign that they could no longer be denied was allowing them to be baptised for all to see in light of God's out-pouring of His Holy Spirit on them. The Jews were wondering what happened and Peter recounts this in the next chapter saying that he had no reason to not let them be baptized because God demonstrated their salvation openly through the out-pouring of His Spirit on the Gentiles.

Look at what Peter says:

"Therefore if God gave to them the same gift as He gave to us also after believing in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God's way?" (Acts 11:17)

He asked who he was to stand in God's way after seeing that they had believed and been given the same gift the 120 were on Pentecost. So after that happened then he permitted them to be baptized, in light of it.

 

[golfjack]

reply

Cyber, you are exactly right on. First they came to accept Christ, then received Baptism in the Holy Spirit, then were water Baptized to make an outward appearance to show they were saved. When Peter and John went down to Samaria, First they knew they were saved, Second, they got filled with the Holy Spirit, then Were water Baptized. One must be saved before He can be filled with the Holy Spirit.



May God bless, golfjack

 

[jgredline]

Re: reply

Cyber, you are exactly right on. First they came to accept Christ, then received Baptism in the Holy Spirit, then were water Baptized to make an outward appearance to show they were saved. When Peter and John went down to Samaria, First they knew they were saved, Second, they got filled with the Holy Spirit, then Were water Baptized. One must be saved before He can be filled with the Holy Spirit.



May God bless, golfjack

AMEN to that
Well said cyber and Golf

 

[thessalonian]

High fives a flying but noone will give a reasonable explanation of 1 Pet 3:20-21. It continues to be ignored. :wink:

 

[golfjack]

Reply

I will give you a hint: Read 1 Peter 3:19. Also Peter was using symbolism to demonstrated what Noah's ark did. Don't you know that Jesus Christ is the ark, and it is wide open now. ? To say otherwise, to me is ridiculous.



May God bless, golfjack

 

[ttg]

Now that we all agree on baptism :roll: lets move on to the sacrament of reconciliation.

What did Jesus mean in John 20:21-22 when he breathed on the Apostles and told them listen to men's sins and they could either forgive them or hold them bound? He wasn't speaking metaphorically, he was telling them to go out and get to work. We all are sinners and we all need forgiveness. Saying we are sorry is not enough, we also need to make up for our sins (penance). Think of sinning as spilling juice on the floor. You may be sorry, but the juice is still there. You have to clean it up (do penance) or else the stain still exists.

Even the thief on the cross next to Jesus had to do his penance, even though he was forgiven. Jesus told him that this day he will be in heaven, but Jesus didn't alleviate the man's suffering. He continued to hang on the cross and suffer one of the worst punishments the Romans could think of.

Objections?

 

[jgredline]

OK
Thess Here is what I have so far. When I was attending Biola for bible study this was one of those debated pasages. Since your a Catholic you will view it a little differantly and dought what I say will change you mind. I hope you atleast read it and disect it as it took about 2 hours or so to put together and going back old notes and such.
Ok lets go. 1 pet 3:20-21 nkjv
3:19 Verses 19, 20 constitute one of the most puzzling and intriguing texts in the NT. It has been made the pretext for such unbiblical doctrines as purgatory on the one hand and universal salvation on the other. However, among evangelical Christians, there are two commonly accepted interpretations.
According to the first, Christ went to Hades in spirit between His death and resurrection, and proclaimed the triumph of His mighty work on the cross. There is disagreement among proponents of this view as to whether the spirits in prison were believers, unbelievers, or both. But there is fairly general agreement that the Lord Jesus did not preach the gospel to them. That would involve the doctrine of a second chance which is nowhere taught in the Bible. Those who hold this view often link this passage with Ephesians 4:9 where the Lord is described as descending “into the lower parts of the earth.†They cite this as added proof that He went to Hades in the disembodied state and heralded His victory at Calvary. They also cite the words of the Apostles’ Creed â€â€Ã¢â‚¬Å“descended into hell.†This is simply not true.
The second interpretation is that Peter is describing what happened in the days of Noah. It was the spirit of Christ who preached through Noah to the unbelieving generation before the flood. They were not disembodied spirits at that time, but living men and women who rejected the warnings of Noah and were destroyed by the flood. So now they are spirits in the prison of Hades. With me so far? Ok lets move on.

This second view best fits the context and has the least difficulties connected with it. Let us examine the passage phrase by phrase. Its the only way this makes sense.
By whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison. The relative pronoun whom obviously refers back to Spirit at the end of verse 18. I understand this to mean the Holy Spirit. In 1:11 of this Letter the “Spirit of Christ,†that is, the Holy Spirit, is described as speaking through the prophets of the OT. And in Genesis 6:3, God speaks of His Spirit, that is, the Holy Spirit, as nearing the limit of endurance with the antediluvians.
He went and preached. As already mentioned, it was Christ who preached, but he preached through Noah. In 2 Peter 2:5, Noah is described as a “preacher of righteousness.†It is the same root word used here of Christ’s preaching. Make sense so far???? Ok
To the spirits now in prison. These were the people to whom Noah preachedâ€â€living men and women who heard the warning of an impending flood and the promise of salvation in the ark. They rejected the message and were drowned in the deluge. They are now disembodied spirits in prison, awaiting the final judgment.
So the verse may be amplified as follows: “by whom (the Holy Spirit) He (Christ) went and preached (through Noah) to the spirits now in prison (Hades).â€Â
But what right do I have to assume that the spirits in prison were the living men in Noah’s day? The answer is found in the following verse.
3:20 Here the spirits in prison are unmistakably identified. Who were they? Those who formerly were disobedient. When were they disobedient? When once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared. What was the final outcome? Only a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. hERE is where it gets good.
It is well to pause here and remind ourselves of the general flow of thought in this Letter which was written against a general background of persecution. The Christians to whom Peter wrote were suffering because of their life and testimony. Perhaps they wondered why, if the Christian faith was right, they should be suffering rather than reigning. If Christianity was the true faith, why were there so few Christians?
To answer the first question, Peter points to the Lord Jesus. Christ suffered for righteousness’ sake, even to the extent of being put to death. But God raised Him from the dead and glorified Him in heaven (see v. 22). The pathway to glory led through the valley of suffering.
Next Peter refers to Noah. For 120 years this faithful preacher warned that God was going to destroy the world with water. His thanks was scorn and rejection. But God vindicated him by saving him and his family through the flood.
Then there is the problem, “If we are right, why are there so few of us?†Peter answers: “There was a time when only eight people in the world were right and all the rest were wrong!†Characteristically in the world’s history the majority has not been right. True believers are usually a small remnant, so one’s faith should not falter because of the small number of the saved. There were only eight believers in Noah’s day; there are millions today.
At the end of verse 20, we read that a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. It is not that they were saved by water; they were saved through the water. Water was not the savior, but the judgment through which God brought them safely.
To properly understand this statement and the verse that follows, we must see the typical meaning of the ark and of the flood. The ark is a picture of the Lord Jesus Christ, As Golfjack mentioned in his post. The flood of water depicts the judgment of God. The ark was the only way of salvation. When the flood came, only those who were inside were saved; all those on the outside perished. So Christ is the only way of salvation; those who are in Christ are as saved as God Himself can make them. Those on the outside could not be more lost.
The water was not the means of salvation, for all who were in the water drowned. The ark was the place of refuge. The ark went through the water of judgment; it took the full brunt of the storm. Not a drop of water reached those inside the ark. So Christ bore the fury of God’s judgment against our sins. For those who are in Him there is no judgment (John 5:24).
The ark had water beneath it, and water coming down on top of it, and water all around it. But it bore its believing occupants through the water to safety in a renewed creation. So those who trust the Savior are brought safely through a scene of death and desolation to resurrection ground and a new life.
3:21 There is also an antitype which now saves usâ€â€baptism. Once again we are in difficult and controversial territory! This verse has been a battleground between those who teach baptismal regeneration and those who deny that baptism has any power to save. I will stop here for now and will study the next few verses and see about tackling the Baptism beliefs.

OK, Thess, feel free to tear me apart.
Jg

 

[stovebolts]

Hello Cybershark,

I just lost the last 30 minutes of typing.. ahhh,… can’t believe I just did that… grrrr. I’m ok.. really… grrrr

Ok, I agree with most of what you’ve said, except the assumed part. All in all, I pretty much agree. However, Let me touch (again.. grrr) on why I asked you the questions I asked you.

I think it was pretty much the view of the Jews that the gentiles couldn’t receive the Holy Spirit. I believe that they still had the mentality that they were ‘All That’… if you know what I mean. I’d like to look at Matthew 15:22-27. I’m sure you know the story. She was a gentile <yuk>, a dog according to Jesus himself. Imagine being thought of as a dog… The disciples even wanted to send her away. Imagine that. It’s almost ironic that Jesus esteems her faith. However, I don’t think the disciples ‘Got’ it. Same thing with the Centurion in Luke’s account (Luke 7:2-9). I mean, the gentiles knew where they stood in relation to the promise to the point where even the centurion sent an elder to Jesus as a buffer. Yet look what Jesus says in Luke 7:9. Wow.. I don’t think the Jews liked that <ouch>

Coming back to Acts 10, I think that the vision that Peter had was in direct relation to him going to the house of Cornelius. I don’t think Peter would have went into the house of Cornelius if it weren’t for the vision because Peter didn’t want to become defiled by entering a Gentiles house. Furthermore, I think that the whole purpose of Acts 10 and part of 11 was to make a clear statement to the Jews that indeed gentiles could be baptized. Look at their responses in Acts 10:34, Acts 10:45 (Greatly Astonished and Even the gentiles?) and Acts 11:18 for the “Ceased†their objections. Look how Luke, a gentile himself sums this story up. â€ÂSo then, God has granted the repentance that leads to life even to the Gentiles.â€Â

Now look at Acts 2:38. Peter said to them, “Repent, and each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. This tells me that water baptism, repentance, the forgiveness of sins and the Holy Spirit were a concept that couldn’t be separated. Furthermore, I think that Calvin understood this concept too. In regard to the house of Cornelius receiving the Holy Spirit before baptism, I believe it’s the exception, and not the rule. Just like people being brought back from the dead, it was an exception as I haven’t heard any credible stories lately of anyone being brought back to life from the dead. (aside from incidents that are within the realm of current medical technology)

I want to focus on one word from Acts 2:38 and that word is receive. Baptism is where God does his most wonderful work in us. It’s so much more than an outward declaration of an inward walk with Christ. It’s the reality of what Christ did on the Cross. (Romans 6:3-6 for starters) Was the cross simply an outward declaration of obedience to His Father or was it so much more? As Christ came to serve (John 13), we too become servants of Christ (Romans 6). Likewise, the Holy Spirit isn’t primarily for us, it’s for those around us if it is to follow in the pattern set by Christ. Christ died to atone for our sins as he served His Father in loving obedience and thus served mankind with that same love and compassion. It is up to us to confess our sins (1 John 1:9) which is a concept that goes all the way back to Moses. We respond through obedience in faith and we are assured, without doubt, that our sins are forgiven and that we will receive the Holy Spirit. Again, the word is receive, it’s nothing that we do. It’s not earned, it’s received. This leaves me with; it’s where God does His most wonderful work in us.

 

[stovebolts]

Hello Cybershark,

I just lost the last 30 minutes of typing.. ahhh,… can’t believe I just did that… grrrr. I’m ok.. really… grrrr

Ok, I agree with most of what you’ve said, except the assumed part. All in all, I pretty much agree. However, Let me touch (again.. grrr) on why I asked you the questions I asked you.

I think it was pretty much the view of the Jews that the gentiles couldn’t receive the Holy Spirit. I believe that they still had the mentality that they were ‘All That’… if you know what I mean. I’d like to look at Matthew 15:22-27. I’m sure you know the story. She was a gentile <yuk>, a dog according to Jesus himself. Imagine being thought of as a dog… The disciples even wanted to send her away. Imagine that. It’s almost ironic that Jesus esteems her faith. However, I don’t think the disciples ‘Got’ it. Same thing with the Centurion in Luke’s account (Luke 7:2-9). I mean, the gentiles knew where they stood in relation to the promise to the point where even the centurion sent an elder to Jesus as a buffer. Yet look what Jesus says in Luke 7:9. Wow.. I don’t think the Jews liked that <ouch>

Coming back to Acts 10, I think that the vision that Peter had was in direct relation to him going to the house of Cornelius. I don’t think Peter would have went into the house of Cornelius if it weren’t for the vision because Peter didn’t want to become defiled by entering a Gentiles house. Furthermore, I think that the whole purpose of Acts 10 and part of 11 was to make a clear statement to the Jews that indeed gentiles could be baptized. Look at their responses in Acts 10:34, Acts 10:45 (Greatly Astonished and Even the gentiles?) and Acts 11:18 for the “Ceased†their objections. Look how Luke, a gentile himself sums this story up. â€ÂSo then, God has granted the repentance that leads to life even to the Gentiles.â€Â

Now look at Acts 2:38. Peter said to them, “Repent, and each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. This tells me that water baptism, repentance, the forgiveness of sins and the Holy Spirit were a concept that couldn’t be separated. Furthermore, I think that Calvin understood this concept too. In regard to the house of Cornelius receiving the Holy Spirit before baptism, I believe it’s the exception, and not the rule. Just like people being brought back from the dead, it was an exception as I haven’t heard any credible stories lately of anyone being brought back to life from the dead. (aside from incidents that are within the realm of current medical technology)

I want to focus on one word from Acts 2:38 and that word is receive. Baptism is where God does his most wonderful work in us. It’s so much more than an outward declaration of an inward walk with Christ. It’s the reality of what Christ did on the Cross. (Romans 6:3-6 for starters) Was the cross simply an outward declaration of obedience to His Father or was it so much more? As Christ came to serve (John 13), we too become servants of Christ (Romans 6). Likewise, the Holy Spirit isn’t primarily for us, it’s for those around us if it is to follow in the pattern set by Christ. Christ died to atone for our sins as he served His Father in loving obedience and thus served mankind with that same love and compassion. It is up to us to confess our sins (1 John 1:9) which is a concept that goes all the way back to Moses when God himself set up the sacrifical system. We respond through obedience in faith and we are assured, without doubt, that our sins are forgiven and that we will receive the Holy Spirit. Again, the word is receive, it’s nothing that we do. It’s not earned, it’s received. This leaves me with; it’s where God does His most wonderful work in us.

 

[golfjack]

reply

Stovebolts, How in the world can a believer lose the Holy Spirit? Calvin has said some goods, but many of his teachings I don't agree with.



May God bless, golfjack

 

[Georges]

Re: reply

Stovebolts, How in the world can a believer lose the Holy Spirit? Calvin has said some goods, but many of his teachings I don't agree with.



May God bless, golfjack

Balaam is a believer who turned his back on God for profit....

Num 24:2 And Balaam lifted up his eyes, and he saw Israel abiding [in his tents] according to their tribes; and the spirit of God came upon him.

In the case of Samson...

Jdg 6:34 But the Spirit of the LORD came upon Gideon, and he blew a trumpet; and Abiezer was gathered after him.

Jdg 13:25 And the Spirit of the LORD began to move him at times in the camp of Dan between Zorah and Eshtaol.

The Spirit comes and goes on Samson....

Jdg 14:6 And the Spirit of the LORD came mightily upon him, and he rent him as he would have rent a kid, and [he had] nothing in his hand: but he told not his father or his mother what he had done.

and again,

Jdg 14:19 And the Spirit of the LORD came upon him, and he went down to Ashkelon, and slew thirty men of them, and took their spoil, and gave change of garments unto them which expounded the riddle. And his anger was kindled, and he went up to his father's house.

and again,

Jdg 15:14 [And] when he came unto Lehi, the Philistines shouted against him: and the Spirit of the LORD came mightily upon him, and the cords that [were] upon his arms became as flax that was burnt with fire, and his bands loosed from off his hands.

Obiously when Samson was captured the Spirit had left him....

With King Saul.....

1Sa 11:6 And the Spirit of God came upon Saul when he heard those tidings, and his anger was kindled greatly.

and departs....

1Sa 16:14 But the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD troubled him.


God's Holy Power can come and go on anyone as God chooses....

 

[stovebolts]

Thanks George :wink:

Golfjack,
By being a prostitute, just like ancient Israel. (You agree that we are the bride of Christ right?) God decreed a certificate of divorce on them, he can do it to you. (Jeremiah 3:8).

Christ's sacrafice affords us communion with God. Communion and fellowship are often translated from the same greek word…

1 Corinthians 10:20-21 But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons, and not to God: and I would not that you should have fellowship (communion) with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of demons: you cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of demons.

1 Corinthians 10:16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?

 

[ttg]

Nobody wants to move on to the next sacrament? C'mon, its controversial also.

Let me start the controversy. Die with your soul contaminated by a mortal sin and you risk going to hell. If your church does not offer the sacrament of reconciliation they are disobeying what Jesus told his Apostles to do.

Does this mean your church leaders have no Apostolic relationship? Or does it mean they pick and choose, with no guidance from the Holy Spirit, what they teach? Or do they simply want to hold hands and sing Kumbaya, because if they tell their members they are sinners and must seek forgiveness, the collection plate will get lighter each week?

 

[golfjack]

reply

My friend, I have been reconciled by the Blood of the perfect lamb. Give me scripture that says there Mortal sin? Sin is sin. This is why we need Jesus.





May God bless, golfjack

 

[cyberjosh]

In regard to the house of Cornelius receiving the Holy Spirit before baptism, I believe it’s the exception, and not the rule.

Well, that's your personal opinion. That's ok. There are other scriptural evidences that I could present, but most are controversial. Infact if you look at all the baptism scriptures some seem paradoxial.

One thing I do have to say though. My Father has not been baptised, and there is no way that he is not saved, listen closely it is impossible that he is not saved. Unbelievers cannot bear the fruit my Father has, unbelievers do not lead godly households, unbelievers to not raise up their children with intimate instruction from scripture, unbelievers do not speak in tongues, unbelievers do not have love for the brethren, unbelievers do not intercede, unbelievers do not understand the Bible because it requires the Holy Spirit. My dad does all these things, and bad tree cannot bear good fruit.

My Dad and I have talked about this baptism issue before and he has told me that he does have as the Scriptures say good concience before God. And he proved to me in multiple passages why water baptism is not necessary.

So what can I say?

 

[golfjack]

reply

Cyber, You are absolutely right. God bless your father for raising you in a sound Christian home.




May God bless, golfjack

 

[destiny]

Re: reply

Cyber, You are absolutely right. God bless your father for raising you in a sound Christian home.




May God bless, golfjack

I think he/she is right too, but what a can of worms. :wink: