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.
It is very offensive to me and many many born again Christians who are washed in the blood of Jesus and are on their way to heaven, to have a COC tell us that baptism is what saves when we know different and that is a Biblical teaching also. But God will lead as he lead me here to learn the real truth before I got involved. Again Thanks everyone....
I don't know if this has been said before, but I don't believe baptism saves you, not without the whole plan of salvation. Just as I don't believe just believing saves you.
the real theft...misinterpretation of scripture...
Quote:
Originally Posted by KySS
Read the scriptures
Jesus said to the thief on the cross who repented "Today (Present tense) you will be with me in paradise" (Luke 23:43). This thief was neither baptized nor partook of the Lords supper he believed and was promised to be with Jesus.
He did no works but only believed. This is hard to accept for those who add requirements to be saved or busy themselves to earn their way to heavens abode.
yes, we understand that the theif may not have been baptized...he may have; it is really a moot point, as jesus conferred personally w/ this man, and jesus obviously realized that the theif believed in the lord's message. we all realize, i think, that jesus had it w/in his power to make the declaration that he made to the theif...from this day thou shalt dwell w/ me in paradise...! the present tense of the verb has no significance in the argument...we all agree that the conversation occurred...we all agree that it occurred at the time of the crucifixation. the need for the theif's baptizm is an irrelevant and uncessary argument. again, the new testament church, the new covenant (hebrews), was not yet nailed to the cross. the institution of the lord's supper was a memoralization of the lord's death. obviously, the lord had not died at the time of the thief's crucifixition. as you probably know, no one is memoralized until that one has died...the lord was not yet dead, and again, the institution of the lord's supper was a remembrance for his death and resurrection in the coming new testament church. finally, man can do nothing to save himself. no works will ever save anyone. god's grace saves man. good works are only a manifestation of that faith...not to get into a faith only...works only squabble. show me your faith w/out works, i'll show you mine w/ them. i have no authority to add any requirements to what the lord authorized in his church; nor does anyone else. certainly, i have no need to busy myself in earning my way to heaven...i do have a responsibility to try to help others to a right path---through my call to" go ye into all the world..." that is a rather noble work, i'd say.
Towhee you can call me whatever you like due to the fact that I dont agree with you and your beliefs. It doesn't bother me I just turn the other cheek. As the bible states in the King James Version (KJV) 22But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the
judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
No matter our beliefs and our church that we attend we are brothers of Christ right. I am sorry that your ranting and your anger has led you to name calling but I am sure if your rebaptized God will forgive you.
??????????? I did not call you any name . I simply made a general statement. You chose to take it personally.
I guess it is like the old saying,....if the shoe fits, wear it.
No one is my brother "of Christ", or my brother inChrist, unless they have obeyed the gospel. I do not subscribe to the theory that everyone who calls themself a christian is a christian, anymore than sitting in a garage makes you a car, or roosting with the chickens makes you a chicken.
You appear to be saying you do not believe the scriptures, since that is what I believe and you do not agree with what I believe???
Last edited by Towhee; 04-22-2009 at 02:53 PM..
Reason: deleted last sentence
yes, we understand that the theif may not have been baptized...he may have; it is really a moot point, as jesus conferred personally w/ this man, and jesus obviously realized that the theif believed in the lord's message. we all realize, i think, that jesus had it w/in his power to make the declaration that he made to the theif...from this day thou shalt dwell w/ me in paradise...! the present tense of the verb has no significance in the argument...we all agree that the conversation occurred...we all agree that it occurred at the time of the crucifixation. the need for the theif's baptizm is an irrelevant and uncessary argument. again, the new testament church, the new covenant (hebrews), was not yet nailed to the cross. the institution of the lord's supper was a memoralization of the lord's death. obviously, the lord had not died at the time of the thief's crucifixition. as you probably know, no one is memoralized until that one has died...the lord was not yet dead, and again, the institution of the lord's supper was a remembrance for his death and resurrection in the coming new testament church. finally, man can do nothing to save himself. no works will ever save anyone. god's grace saves man. good works are only a manifestation of that faith...not to get into a faith only...works only squabble. show me your faith w/out works, i'll show you mine w/ them. i have no authority to add any requirements to what the lord authorized in his church; nor does anyone else. certainly, i have no need to busy myself in earning my way to heaven...i do have a responsibility to try to help others to a right path---through my call to" go ye into all the world..." that is a rather noble work, i'd say.
Thanks Kingchef for mentioning that the thief's baptism, if he was, is irrelevant. This is what I have being trying to get some people to understand.
Which Church has the true line back to Christ & St. Peter. That is the true Church. Jesus said the he would build his Church upon Peter. The Church of Christ Church has no Lineage or biblicial authority to the early church. The Bible was put together by these early Christians.
Which Church has the true line back to Christ & St. Peter. That is the true Church. Jesus said the he would build his Church upon Peter. The Church of Christ Church has no Lineage or biblicial authority to the early church. The Bible was put together by these early Christians.
Your church may have Peter as it's head, but ours only has Christ. Go back a few posts on here and you'll read what was discussed about Peter.
Which Church has the true line back to Christ & St. Peter. That is the true Church. Jesus said the he would build his Church upon Peter. The Church of Christ Church has no Lineage or biblicial authority to the early church. The Bible was put together by these early Christians.
the establishment of the new testament church is thoroughly documentated in Acts of the Apostles. you should start with the day of pentecost, which is the beginning of the new testament church. begin with acts, chapter 2. the church was established by christ. the church belongs to christ and it is described as the bride of christ. it is silly to take the position that the church, for their was only one established, has no lineage or biblical authority. the new testament is the only way the church was established. peter, although a great witness and a worker for the cause of christianity, was never the founder of the church, if he were, the church would have been known as the church of peter: not christ.
the establishment of the new testament church is thoroughly documentated in Acts of the Apostles. you should start with the day of pentecost, which is the beginning of the new testament church. begin with acts, chapter 2. the church was established by christ. the church belongs to christ and it is described as the bride of christ. it is silly to take the position that the church, for their was only one established, has no lineage or biblical authority. the new testament is the only way the church was established. peter, although a great witness and a worker for the cause of christianity, was never the founder of the church, if he were, the church would have been known as the church of peter: not christ.
I totally agree.
Also, it appears that those who give Peter so much authority either forget, or reject, Paul! He had a lot more input onto the epistles to the churches than Peter.
These people seem to reject what Paul said about preacher "followers".
We follow the word of God, and all of it came from God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit.
We follow the scriptures not because of who wrote them, but who authorized them.
Which Church has the true line back to Christ & St. Peter. That is the true Church. Jesus said the he would build his Church upon Peter. The Church of Christ Church has no Lineage or biblicial authority to the early church. The Bible was put together by these early Christians.
The church of Christ is the church that lines back to Christ and Peter and this is the true church. Jesus did not build His church upon Peter. It was the statement that Peter made that He was the Son of God. If you really look at that scripture, Jesus said "upon this" and not "upon you Peter", I will build my church. The church of Christ has all the lineage and biblical authority to the early church. It was the early church and the same church today.
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.
the real theft...misinterpretation of scripture...
i have no authority to add any requirements to what the lord authorized in his church; nor does anyone else. certainly, i have no need to busy myself in earning my way to heaven...i do have a responsibility to try to help others to a right path---through my call to" go ye into all the world..." that is a rather noble work, i'd say.
I did not call you any name . I simply made a general statement. You chose to take it personally. 