Jesus was a Hindu Monk and Survived the Cross
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
We are talking about how "effective" prayer is. Fact is only 2-5% of prayers get answered.
Also I read an article about how praying for a dying person adds more anxiety because that person knows he's in "deep shit" already.
Wrong. In the Christian worldview, 100% of prayers get answered. But if you are only looking at "yes" answers, then you have simply entertained a genie-in-the-bottle deity which is not the God of the Bible.
-
Originally posted by Demon Bane:
Are we talking about christian prayers? Or does the study includes prayers from other religions ?
Exactly my question. The research did not specify what religion was being researched into.
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
1. I am not reductionist what. I know there are a few reasons. No, I really understand what you are saying about social and cultural background. Like christians in catholic churches worship in a different way compared to protestant christians like you etc. But the goal is the same, I understand.
But my question is - All christians supposedly hear the voice of God. And God apparently tells them whether E.g tongues is biblical/unbiblical. So one camp says "GOd tells me" and the other camp also says "God tells me". Yes it could probably be cultural differences or different understanding. But the problem comes when boths sides say "God tells me". If both claim "God tells me", then one has to be wrong because apparently, God cannot contradict himself.So how do you tell who is wrong and who is right when BOTH camps quote verses? This is what I am trying to ask you all the time. I know your answer will be "by the spirit". But both camps also do go by "the spirit". So how?
2. Lets skip this question of whether jesus is god or not because you seem not to understand that non-trinitarian christians also can quote verses in the bible to justify non-trinitarian beliefs, just like you can.
3. About salvation,
1 Peter 3:18-19 read as follows:
"For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;"
The Spirit of the Lord God is upon Me, because the Lord has anointed Me to preach good tidings to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to those who are bound.� (Isaiah 61:1)
So for christians who told me that jesus will go to "prison" to preach to the spirits to give the dead a second chance, they quote the above verses.
So yes you believe there's no second chance after we die by quoting verses, these christians also tell me that there's a second chance.
Tcmc,
1. Do Christians go round telling people "Hey, God just spoke to me audibly and told me that baptism is required?" Sorry, I don't think that is the case at all. God speaks primarily and mainly through His Word, which is why believers are to diligently study the Word of God. God has communicated to us all that is necessary for our instruction, faith and practice. I am usually skeptical of anyone who says "God told me this or that teaching..." because of the possibility that someone may be trying to override the clear teachings of Scripture and its authority by appealing to his own subjective experience that cannot be verified or proved. Unless that has to do with God revealing certain knowledge about some event or somebody which may require your action. I believe that happens still. In any case, whatever someone claims must always be tested by Scripture, properly interpreted. Again there are tonnes of books out there on Bible interpretation. Please check them out. There is no short-cut.
2. It's easy to cite prooftexts to support a certain position that one holds. The reader must then evaluate the case and see if it stands up to scrutiny. You say that there are anti-trinitarian verses. I'd say, "Bring them on and let's see if these verses really support your view." And those few verses that you earlier cited I believe I have already explained to you that the doctrine of the Incarnation can account for them all. You did not really respond to that.
3. Are you that easily swayed by what people are saying and always in a confused state just because Christians differ on things? Can't you evaluate what people are saying to see if it makes sense or support what they claim? Or you never had the training to do such Bible checking? You can't fault me for being skeptical of your claim to have studied the Bible for yourself.
Does 1 Peter 3:18-19 PROVE that the dead will get a chance to repent and be saved? I will say No. Why? Because those who quote the above verses to you FAILED to quote the rest of the passage and missed out verse 20. The complete text says "Christ suffered for our sins once for all time. He never sinned, but he died for sinners to bring you safely home to God. He suffered physical death, but he was raised to life in the Spirit. So he went and preached to the spirits in prison— those who disobeyed God long ago when God waited patiently while Noah was building his boat. Only eight people were saved from drowning in that terrible flood." So tell me, WHO are these spirits mentioned? Are these just the spirits of people who die daily, or do they refer to the fallen angels (who are also spirits) who sinned against God (by consorting with the daughters of men, giving rise to the nephilims and corrupting mankind to gross wickedness necessitating in the Flood) and are now held in chains in a spiritual prison, a view I hold to? The preaching to these spirits is IMO Jesus proclaiming to these rebellious spirits that their attempts at destroying mankind has failed and that they lost their perfect state whereas sinful men can be made perfect in Christ and enjoy the heavens that the angels forfeited. Anyway I am not keen to further this issue on the fallen angels with you, but suffice it to say that the idea that people who died will have a second chance to accept the Gospel cannot be supported by this verse. Not only that, you still have to contend with Hebrews that say it is appointed for man to die once and after that to face judgement. Does this sound like a second chance?
-
BIC
Try not to post lengthy answers like that. Most ppl wun read thru everything if the reply is very long. If u wan the info to get across, try to keep replies short.
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
Also BIC, respond to this, thanks. Need your opinion.
nd how do you explain these verses, some commanded by Jesus Himself :( ?
Mark 16:15-16 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
Acts 2:37-8 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 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.
Gal. 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
Thats my question lor.
How come some christians quote some verses to me to say baptism is not necessary for salvation, then some christians quote me other verses to say its necessary?
I am confused. Thats all.
Please enlighten me, BIC.
Tcmc,
I think your confusion stems from not understanding how things worked in the early church. Today we have the practice of altar calls, say the salvation prayer, and then get baptised later, sometimes much much later! In the early church, salvation was synonymous with baptism because baptism was the initiation rite into the faith, in other words, baptism was the "salvation prayer" so to speak. You want to be a Christian? Let's get baptised! Once you understand this then all the above verses will be easily explained. They do not prove that you need baptism to be saved, they only teach that one's salvation is expressed through baptism.
-
I have one question, why Jesus disciples dun recognize him immediately after his resurrection ? Does that mean he came back as another person with another body ?
-
Originally posted by Demon Bane:
Are we talking about christian prayers? Or does the study includes prayers from other religions ?
Prayers in general
-
Originally posted by despondent:
BIC
Try not to post lengthy answers like that. Most ppl wun read thru everything if the reply is very long. If u wan the info to get across, try to keep replies short.
I already tried to keep it short and edited it out some things and not say some things. I thought the length of the reply was rather manageable. Anyway, your advice is noted.
-
Originally posted by Demon Bane:
I have one question, why Jesus disciples dun recognize him immediately after his resurrection ? Does that mean he came back as another person with another body ?
Quick answer: They were not expecting Him to come back from the dead. The Jews have the idea of a resurrection of the dead at the end of history when the curtains are drawn, so to speak. So the idea of resurrection in 3 days not so expected. Or it could be that Jesus' dressing was different as usual but this is my speculation. It is same person same body. Remember He showed them the scars on His side and hands? Perhaps the glorified body is different in appearance in some ways, I don't know. But certainly the glorified body is qualitatively different.
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Tcmc,
1. Do Christians go round telling people "Hey, God just spoke to me audibly and told me that baptism is required?" Sorry, I don't think that is the case at all. God speaks primarily and mainly through His Word, which is why believers are to diligently study the Word of God. God has communicated to us all that is necessary for our instruction, faith and practice. I am usually skeptical of anyone who says "God told me this or that teaching..." because of the possibility that someone may be trying to override the clear teachings of Scripture and its authority by appealing to his own subjective experience that cannot be verified or proved. Unless that has to do with God revealing certain knowledge about some event or somebody which may require your action. I believe that happens still. In any case, whatever someone claims must always be tested by Scripture, properly interpreted. Again there are tonnes of books out there on Bible interpretation. Please check them out. There is no short-cut.
2. It's easy to cite prooftexts to support a certain position that one holds. The reader must then evaluate the case and see if it stands up to scrutiny. You say that there are anti-trinitarian verses. I'd say, "Bring them on and let's see if these verses really support your view." And those few verses that you earlier cited I believe I have already explained to you that the doctrine of the Incarnation can account for them all. You did not really respond to that.
3. Are you that easily swayed by what people are saying and always in a confused state just because Christians differ on things? Can't you evaluate what people are saying to see if it makes sense or support what they claim? Or you never had the training to do such Bible checking? You can't fault me for being skeptical of your claim to have studied the Bible for yourself.
Does 1 Peter 3:18-19 PROVE that the dead will get a chance to repent and be saved? I will say No. Why? Because those who quote the above verses to you FAILED to quote the rest of the passage and missed out verse 20. The complete text says "Christ suffered for our sins once for all time. He never sinned, but he died for sinners to bring you safely home to God. He suffered physical death, but he was raised to life in the Spirit. So he went and preached to the spirits in prison— those who disobeyed God long ago when God waited patiently while Noah was building his boat. Only eight people were saved from drowning in that terrible flood." So tell me, WHO are these spirits mentioned? Are these just the spirits of people who die daily, or do they refer to the fallen angels (who are also spirits) who sinned against God (by consorting with the daughters of men, giving rise to the nephilims and corrupting mankind to gross wickedness necessitating in the Flood) and are now held in chains in a spiritual prison, a view I hold to? The preaching to these spirits is IMO Jesus proclaiming to these rebellious spirits that their attempts at destroying mankind has failed and that they lost their perfect state whereas sinful men can be made perfect in Christ and enjoy the heavens that the angels forfeited. Anyway I am not keen to further this issue on the fallen angels with you, but suffice it to say that the idea that people who died will have a second chance to accept the Gospel cannot be supported by this verse. Not only that, you still have to contend with Hebrews that say it is appointed for man to die once and after that to face judgement. Does this sound like a second chance?
BIC,
1. Yes just like you all other christians dont go around saying "god told me this and that". Like you, they get their interpretation and beliefs from the bible and christian books. In this case, they believe that Jesus will give a second chance after humans die by interpreting the verses I gave you. You know what's the problem? You insist that your interpretation is the only correct one. They insist theirs is correct. So IN ESSENCE, you still have not given me a proper and reliable way to tell which christian's interpretation is correct. You use the bible, they use the bible You use christian articles, they use christian articles. You refute them they refute you. So can you give me other ways to know which christian's interpretation is correct? A clearer way.
2. Similarly I have posed as a non-trinitarian christian and also refute the verses you use to support your trinity beliefs. Strange. You can refute me and I also can refute you. You can refute non-trinity christians but non-trinity christians also can refute you. Why??
3. Yes I know you are reading in context and that the spirits referred to spirits in Noah's time. But christians who quote that verse to me also tell me that if God did that for Noah's time, he will do it also in the future. They tell me that God never changes, and is always merciful and compassionate. Well, you cant say they're wrong too right? God IS merciful and never changes!
GREAT! You mentioned hebrew verses that contradict with the verses other christians gave me.
Then again, if you mention hebrew verses, you must read it in context! Paul (or whoever the hebrew writer is, no one is sure) might be only referring to the people during his time! Read in context like how you read the 1 Peter 3:18-19 verse!!!
Or do you pick and choose which verses to read in context and which not to?
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Tcmc,
I think your confusion stems from not understanding how things worked in the early church. Today we have the practice of altar calls, say the salvation prayer, and then get baptised later, sometimes much much later! In the early church, salvation was synonymous with baptism because baptism was the initiation rite into the faith, in other words, baptism was the "salvation prayer" so to speak. You want to be a Christian? Let's get baptised! Once you understand this then all the above verses will be easily explained. They do not prove that you need baptism to be saved, they only teach that one's salvation is expressed through baptism.
How can you be using your wisdom to excuse yourself from the Word of God?
The verses I posted are very clear. It says baptism needed for salvation. How cna you pick and choose which ones you want to obey?
How cna you pick those verses that say baptism is not needed and then completely ignore those that say baptism is needed?
What is your criteria when you pick and choose?
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Quick answer: They were not expecting Him to come back from the dead. The Jews have the idea of a resurrection of the dead at the end of history when the curtains are drawn, so to speak. So the idea of resurrection in 3 days not so expected. Or it could be that Jesus' dressing was different as usual but this is my speculation. It is same person same body. Remember He showed them the scars on His side and hands? Perhaps the glorified body is different in appearance in some ways, I don't know. But certainly the glorified body is qualitatively different.
OIC...the scriptures did mentioned it hor....Okay!
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
BIC,
1. Yes just like you all other christians dont go around saying "god told me this and that". Like you, they get their interpretation and beliefs from the bible and christian books. In this case, they believe that Jesus will give a second chance after humans die by interpreting the verses I gave you. You know what's the problem? You insist that your interpretation is the only correct one. They insist theirs is correct. So IN ESSENCE, you still have not given me a proper and reliable way to tell which christian's interpretation is correct. You use the bible, they use the bible You use christian articles, they use christian articles. You refute them they refute you. So can you give me other ways to know which christian's interpretation is correct? A clearer way.
2. Similarly I have posed as a non-trinitarian christian and also refute the verses you use to support your trinity beliefs. Strange. You can refute me and I also can refute you. You can refute non-trinity christians but non-trinity christians also can refute you. Why??
3. Yes I know you are reading in context and that the spirits referred to spirits in Noah's time. But christians who quote that verse to me also tell me that if God did that for Noah's time, he will do it also in the future. They tell me that God never changes, and is always merciful and compassionate. Well, you cant say they're wrong too right? God IS merciful and never changes!
GREAT! You mentioned hebrew verses that contradict with the verses other christians gave me.
Then again, if you mention hebrew verses, you must read it in context! Paul (or whoever the hebrew writer is, no one is sure) might be only referring to the people during his time! Read in context like how you read the 1 Peter 3:18-19 verse!!!
Or do you pick and choose which verses to read in context and which not to?
Tcmc,
1. I know of no other way other than that which I have told you. Or perhaps you prefer the way of Rome, where the Pope speaks infallibly and everyone must take that as the final word, like it or not, disagree or not? Would that be clear enough for you? The heritage of the Reformation is such that the Word of God is made available even to the peasants and laymen. Anyone can read the Word of God and knows what it says for themselves, but that is not a license to mean that the meaning of the text is determined by anyone, the meaning of the text is discovered, not made up. And God has placed in the Church mature believers (teachers, elders) who understand the Bible more than others and who can teach the Word.
2. Since when did you refute my verses on the Trinity? You refuted John 10:33 meh? When? All you said was "I and the Father are one" can mean this or that. Did you refute my point that the Jews said that Jesus was claiming to be God and thus deserved to be stoned for blasphemy? You did not.
3. You need to discern what the text says and what Christians do with the text. Christians that say more than what the text says and infer this or that, you just have to tell them that they have went BEYOND what the text says. I will just say that they have went beyond the text and that there is no Biblical grounds to accept that. They are merely arguing for something that is not supported by the text and its context. Moreover there are other verses that negate their view. The whole of Scripture must be taken into account. Prooftexts is not the way to prove doctrine.
4. You are obviously trying to be funny here with the text in Hebrews. 1 Peter 3 clearly refers to the spirits at the time of the Flood. In Hebrews the writer is making a universal statement, not qualifying it in anyway, that "just as each person is destined to die once and after that comes judgment, so also Christ died once for all time as a sacrifice to take away the sins of many people." Where is the indication that it was only meant for the people living at the time when Hebrews was written? Still say you are not trolling here? You are just making an objection for the sake of it.
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
How can you be using your wisdom to excuse yourself from the Word of God?
The verses I posted are very clear. It says baptism needed for salvation. How cna you pick and choose which ones you want to obey?
How cna you pick those verses that say baptism is not needed and then completely ignore those that say baptism is needed?
What is your criteria when you pick and choose?
Tcmc,
You failed to read again as usual. Baptism is not needed for salvation. Had it been needed then Jesus would be lying to the thief. Would Jesus lie about this? But baptism is commanded because that is the normal way to become a Christian. Baptism should never be seen as an option, good to have but not required. Being faithful to the Scriptures means to be obedient to be baptised as a profession of one's faith. Why you want to complicate things when I already make it so easy? Trolling purposes?
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Tcmc,
You failed to read again as usual. Baptism is not needed for salvation. Had it been needed then Jesus would be lying to the thief. Would Jesus lie about this? But baptism is commanded because that is the normal way to become a Christian. Baptism should never be seen as an option, good to have but not required. Being faithful to the Scriptures means to be obedient to be baptised as a profession of one's faith. Why you want to complicate things when I already make it so easy? Trolling purposes?
Didnt you read the other verses I posted? How cna you just pick and choose which ones to read and obey? How about the ones below? You simply gonna just explain them away? Some of these verses also said by Jesus. Are you saying Jesus is bearing false witness? He cannot be. So please, read carefully.
Mark 16:15-16 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
Acts 2:37-8 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 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.
Gal. 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
Didnt you read the other verses I posted? How cna you just pick and choose which ones to read and obey? How about the ones below? You simply gonna just explain them away?
Mark 16:15-16 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
Acts 2:37-8 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 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.
Gal. 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
My explanation already accounted for ALL these verses. You failed to read.
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Tcmc,
1. I know of no other way other than that which I have told you. Or perhaps you prefer the way of Rome, where the Pope speaks infallibly and everyone must take that as the final word, like it or not, disagree or not? Would that be clear enough for you? The heritage of the Reformation is such that the Word of God is made available even to the peasants and laymen. Anyone can read the Word of God and knows what it says for themselves, but that is not a license to mean that the meaning of the text is determined by anyone, the meaning of the text is discovered, not made up. And God has placed in the Church mature believers (teachers, elders) who understand the Bible more than others and who can teach the Word.
2. Since when did you refute my verses on the Trinity? You refuted John 10:33 meh? When? All you said was "I and the Father are one" can mean this or that. Did you refute my point that the Jews said that Jesus was claiming to be God and thus deserved to be stoned for blasphemy? You did not.
3. You need to discern what the text says and what Christians do with the text. Christians that say more than what the text says and infer this or that, you just have to tell them that they have went BEYOND what the text says. I will just say that they have went beyond the text and that there is no Biblical grounds to accept that. They are merely arguing for something that is not supported by the text and its context. Moreover there are other verses that negate their view. The whole of Scripture must be taken into account. Prooftexts is not the way to prove doctrine.
4. You are obviously trying to be funny here with the text in Hebrews. 1 Peter 3 clearly refers to the spirits at the time of the Flood. In Hebrews the writer is making a universal statement, not qualifying it in anyway, that "just as each person is destined to die once and after that comes judgment, so also Christ died once for all time as a sacrifice to take away the sins of many people." Where is the indication that it was only meant for the people living at the time when Hebrews was written? Still say you are not trolling here? You are just making an objection for the sake of it.
1. Means there is no clearer way. ANd your ways and methods of interpretation and determining whether your interpretations are correct, are also the ways and methods the other camp of christians use. So I wonder why you also put your interpretations above theirs when you use their methods too.
2. You better go read my posts again. Yes saying jesus and father are one can mean anything. I say again. It can mean anything and not literally one as in that he's God. You got to include those non-trinitarian verses in the bible as well when you interpret whether jesus was God. The Mormon christians and JW christians do that.
3. Erm... But I think you infer a lot too from the verses like the verse about "jesus and the father are one". I am sure you do inference too with the bible verses. So whats wrong with other christians inferring?
4. No I am not trying to be funny.
You demand others to read in context 1 Peter 3, but you yourself exclude yourself from reading the hebrew verses in context.
If you really wanna talk about context, then paul (or whoever the writer was) wasnt talking to modern christians. He was talking to christians during his time!
In context. You know what that means?
-
wa... after so long... u all are still at it..
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
My explanation already accounted for ALL these verses. You failed to read.
So why do you explain away these verses and take those "no need baptism" verses literally???
Whats your rationale for ignoring my verses and believing in your pick of verses? You havent answered me!
You said
study bible
pray
read christian articles
But thats what other christians who told me that baptism is needed do too! Im seriously confused.
Yet you told me you dont have a clearer way..God help me!
Mark 16:15-16 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
Acts 2:37-8 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 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.
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
1. Means there is no clearer way. ANd your ways and methods of interpretation and determining whether your interpretations are correct, are also the ways and methods the other camp of christians use. So I wonder why you also put your interpretations above theirs when you use their methods too.
2. You better go read my posts again. Yes saying jesus and father are one can mean anything. I say again. It can mean anything and not literally one as in that he's God. You got to include those non-trinitarian verses in the bible as well when you interpret whether jesus was God. The Mormon christians and JW christians do that.
3. Erm... But I think you infer a lot too from the verses like the verse about "jesus and the father are one". I am sure you do inference too with the bible verses. So whats wrong with other christians inferring?
4. No I am not trying to be funny.
You demand others to read in context 1 Peter 3, but you yourself exclude yourself from reading the hebrew verses in context.
If you really wanna talk about context, then paul (or whoever the writer was) wasnt talking to modern christians. He was talking to christians during his time!
In context. You know what that means?
Tcmc,
Scientists all use the same scientific method, ya? But how come there can be scientific errors made? You tell me.
How come when a person say something, he can be misunderstood by many people? You tell me.
By the way, John 10:33? I did not infer anything. I clearly told you that the text itself says that the Jews wanted to stone Him for claiming to be God. It's in the text, read it for yourself.
And yes, you are really trying to be funny while in troll mode. Were you interested in context? Nope. Even when I showed you how the verse is universal, you insist in making the silly notion that the specific view of 1 Peter 3 must be applied to Hebrews 9:27. If there's a shoddy way of handling Scripture you would be a fine example. Simply bo chap!
And for what it's worth, please have the intellectual decency to actually read up.
http://creation.com/all-interpretation-equal
http://creation.com/the-bible-and-hermeneutics
-
Hey Tcmc, perhaps u wanna share with us why u left the christian faith and become an atheist ? If religion is like food...we have a choice.....
-
Originally posted by Tcmc:
So why do you explain away these verses and take those "no need baptism" verses literally???
Whats your rationale for ignoring my verses and believing in your pick of verses? You havent answered me!
You said
study bible
pray
read christian articles
But thats what other christians who told me that baptism is needed do too! Im seriously confused.
Yet you told me you dont have a clearer way..God help me!
Mark 16:15-16 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
Acts 2:37-8 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 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.
You look more like you are seriously trolling than seriously confused.
I did not explain away those verses. I actually EXPLAINED that they must be understood against the context of the early church whereby baptism is synonymous with salvation since that is the initiation rite into the Christian faith. It's like asking whether one must SAY the salvation prayer in order to be saved. The answer is no. Because if we say one must SAY it, then the mute people how?
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
You look more like you are seriously trolling than seriously confused.
I did not explain away those verses. I actually EXPLAINED that they must be understood against the context of the early church whereby baptism is synonymous with salvation since that is the initiation rite into the Christian faith. It's like asking whether one must SAY the salvation prayer in order to be saved. The answer is no. Because if we say one must SAY it, then the mute people how?
So now, YOUR current culture supercedes what Jesus said????????
Only only in these verses i posted, your culture supercedes what Jesus said?
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Tcmc,
Scientists all use the same scientific method, ya? But how come there can be scientific errors made? You tell me.
How come when a person say something, he can be misunderstood by many people? You tell me.
By the way, John 10:33? I did not infer anything. I clearly told you that the text itself says that the Jews wanted to stone Him for claiming to be God. It's in the text, read it for yourself.
And yes, you are really trying to be funny while in troll mode. Were you interested in context? Nope. Even when I showed you how the verse is universal, you insist in making the silly notion that the specific view of 1 Peter 3 must be applied to Hebrews 9:27. If there's a shoddy way of handling Scripture you would be a fine example. Simply bo chap!
And for what it's worth, please have the intellectual decency to actually read up.
http://creation.com/all-interpretation-equal
http://creation.com/the-bible-and-hermeneutics
Inference is the act or process of deriving logical conclusions from premises known or assumed to be true.
John 10:33 or whatever verses you posted do not directly or explicitly tell us that jesus is god.
You infer, through a "logical process" that he must be god.
SIMILARLY, other christians infer that if jesus preached to the spirits in prison, he will do it again because god does not change.
When you infer, you make a "logical assumption", in the context of the bible I mean.
And stop committing confirmation bias blatently.
-
Originally posted by Demon Bane:
Hey Tcmc, perhaps u wanna share with us why u left the christian faith and become an atheist ? If religion is like food...we have a choice.....
I think i shared it before but wouldnt want to share it again here.
You can msg me privately if you want to :)
Yes you are right. Choice is a "god-given" thing.