Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh, thank God for Verna! We can all stop talking about this now. Where were you yesterday, Verna, when Katie started this thread? We've all been waiting for your pronouncement.
He is the only person specifically named in the Bible called to baptize by water, but that certainly isn't a reason to assume that there were not others who were also called. If Jesus Christ deemed water baptism so important that He insisted on receiving it Himself, it would not have suddenly ceased to matter after John's death.
So what was Philip doing when the Spirit took him the Eunuch? Freestyling?
The great commission says that there were many called to baptize.
In 1 Cor 1:17 Paul made it very clear that water baptism was not part of the gospel. It is believing the gospel concerning Christ through which a person is saved. Not through water baptism.
Again, Matthias was their choice. Drawing lots to determine who would replace Judas as the twelth apostle was one of Peter's harebrained ideas. They had no business trying to determine who would replace Judas. If you want to maintain that Paul was the 13th apostle then you are faced with the issue of why there are thirteen apostles but only the names of twelve of them are on the foundation stones of New Jerusalem.
Maybe it's the way I structured it, but with regard to my thread, no one seems to be getting the point of it which is that Acts 2:38 only applyed to the generation of Jews who had Christ crucified. It does not apply to anyone else.
I guess giving the "keys" to Peter was one of Jesus' hairbrained ideas, huh?
verna... you are almost correct. Everyone of the ten commandments are brought into the new testament,...
...correct.
Quote:
Originally Posted by atomtkirk
...except for the sabbath day.
...incorrect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by atomtkirk
...and something you need to understand, the 10 commandments were observed by the Jews.
...they were observed by Israel...and somethng you need to understand, those, TODAY, who obey God and observe His Commandments are condidered a member of the family of God...Israel...we are called "Spiritual Israel"...grafted into the "Olive Branch" as a "Wild Olive Branch"...blessed and protected by the Almighty!
In 1 Cor 1:17 Paul made it very clear that water baptism was not part of the gospel. It is believing the gospel concerning Christ through which a person is saved. Not through water baptism.
Again, Matthias was their choice. Drawing lots to determine who would replace Judas as the twelth apostle was one of Peter's harebrained ideas. They had no business trying to determine who would replace Judas. If you want to maintain that Paul was the 13th apostle then you are faced with the issue of why there are thirteen apostles but only the names of twelve of them are on the foundation stones of New Jerusalem.
Maybe it's the way I structured it, but with regard to my thread, no one seems to be getting the point of it which is that Acts 2:38 only applyed to the generation of Jews who had Christ crucified. It does not apply to anyone else.
Good points.
... "one of Peter's harebrained ideas"... I've never heard it put like that before, but true nonetheless.
How old were the individuals in Stephanus' household? You're assuming there were babies, but there is absolutely no reason to believe there were.
There was no reason to believe that there weren't any babies. The intention here is to get folks baptized as early as possible and while you can. These are only a few accounts. You know there must have been thousands of baptisms. Christianity wouldn't have spread so fast if this were the only three families baptized. Think about how many folks had the Authority to baptize back then. If one came to town, you and your whole family was baptized because you didn't know when they would come around again and you wouldn't skip the babies until later. It's just common sense.
The first protestant reformers all believed that baptism was necessary. The belief that baptism is NOT necessary is most likely a relatively recent (1800+) American protestant derivative concept.
Last edited by GoodToBeHome; 12-08-2011 at 11:59 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Where were you yesterday, Verna, when Katie started this thread? We've all been waiting for your pronouncement.
got it!
