Not By Works
- Thread starter dcontroversal
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Here is the BAPTISM that SAVES:
1 Corinthians 12:12-13 (HCSB)
12 For as the body is one and has many parts, and all the parts of that body, though many, are one body—so also is Christ.
13 For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body
—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.
When was the Thief on the Cross, Baptized in WATER?
When were those who made a serious Death Bed Confession, Baptized in Water?
When were those with a Serious Handicap to where it was Dangerous for them to be Baptized in Water, actually Baptized in Water?
When were those who RECEIVED CHRIST after Incarceration on DEATH ROW, or Permanent Solitary Confinement Baptized in Water?
When were Soldiers who genuinely received Christ in there foxhole, and were killed during that battle, actually Baptized in Water?
When were Infants who only lived a few Minutes after natural Birth, were Baptized in Water?
When were children who were Aborted, actually Baptized in Water?
When were those Caught in a Mine Collapse who made a conversion, Baptized in Water, before the roof fell and killed them all?
ETC.
What does GOD actually mean by all ? ALL means ALL.
EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE WERE BAPTIZED INTO THE BODY OF CHRIST, because it does not require human effort,
IT IS A MINISTRY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, and it would take HIM only a micro second to SAVE SOME ONE, immersing them INTO CHRIST.
1 Peter 3:20-21 (HCSB)
20 who in the past were disobedient, when God patiently waited in the days of Noah while an ark was being prepared. In it a few—that is, eight people—were saved through water.
21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the pledge of a good conscience toward God) through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
The Infants were Saved because they are not old enough to know Right From Wrong.
Romans 5:13 (NKJV)
13 For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
-
1
- Show all
So according to your logic, the EFC's lived closest to the time of Jesus, so they must be right? 
The EFC's did not write the Bible.
That link is to a Roman Catholic website. At the bottom of the page under contact information it says - If you have questions about this website please contact the webmaster (a True Catholic who is in perfect standing with Holy Mother Church via e-mail at: [email protected].
Whoops! I thought that I already posted the link. Sorry about that. Here it is - http://www.justforcatholics.org/a116.htm
Yes it can, though God promised to preserve His Word.
According to that logic, then we can't fully trust the Bible, yet there is good reason to trust the Bible - http://home.earthlink.net/~ronrhodes/Manuscript.html
Political matters have always been around. Here are some quotes from the church fathers, which are often cited by Roman Catholics, in defense of their claim that the early church embraced transubstantiation.
Ignatius of Antioch (d. c. 110): “Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2–7:1).
Irenaeus (d. 202): “He took from among creation that which is bread, and gave thanks, saying, ‘This is my body.’ The cup likewise, which is from among the creation to which we belong, he confessed to be his blood” (Against Heresies, 4:17:5).
Irenaeus again: “He has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own body, from which he gives increase unto our bodies. When, therefore, the mixed cup [wine and water] and the baked bread receives the Word of God and becomes the Eucharist, the body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is eternal life—flesh which is nourished by the body and blood of the Lord, and is in fact a member of him?” (Against Heresies, 5:2).
Tertullian (160–225): “[T]he flesh feeds on the body and blood of Christ, that the soul likewise may be filled with God” (The Resurrection of the Dead).
Origen (182–254): “Formerly, in an obscure way, there was manna for food; now, however, in full view, there is the true food, the flesh of the Word of God, as he himself says: ‘My flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink’” (Homilies on Numbers, 7:2).
Do you believe in the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation?
The EFC's did not write the Bible.That link is to a Roman Catholic website. At the bottom of the page under contact information it says - If you have questions about this website please contact the webmaster (a True Catholic who is in perfect standing with Holy Mother Church via e-mail at: [email protected].
Whoops! I thought that I already posted the link. Sorry about that. Here it is - http://www.justforcatholics.org/a116.htm
Yes it can, though God promised to preserve His Word.
According to that logic, then we can't fully trust the Bible, yet there is good reason to trust the Bible - http://home.earthlink.net/~ronrhodes/Manuscript.html
Political matters have always been around. Here are some quotes from the church fathers, which are often cited by Roman Catholics, in defense of their claim that the early church embraced transubstantiation.
Ignatius of Antioch (d. c. 110): “Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2–7:1).
Irenaeus (d. 202): “He took from among creation that which is bread, and gave thanks, saying, ‘This is my body.’ The cup likewise, which is from among the creation to which we belong, he confessed to be his blood” (Against Heresies, 4:17:5).
Irenaeus again: “He has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own body, from which he gives increase unto our bodies. When, therefore, the mixed cup [wine and water] and the baked bread receives the Word of God and becomes the Eucharist, the body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is eternal life—flesh which is nourished by the body and blood of the Lord, and is in fact a member of him?” (Against Heresies, 5:2).
Tertullian (160–225): “[T]he flesh feeds on the body and blood of Christ, that the soul likewise may be filled with God” (The Resurrection of the Dead).
Origen (182–254): “Formerly, in an obscure way, there was manna for food; now, however, in full view, there is the true food, the flesh of the Word of God, as he himself says: ‘My flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink’” (Homilies on Numbers, 7:2).
Do you believe in the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation?
They were taught by either an Apostle or those the Apostles taught.
This seems of little importance to you?
The reason we can trust that Jesus was resurrected from death is because we trust the Apostles and what they told us.
1 John 1:1-4
If we don't trust the Apostles, then we can't be sure Jesus was resurrected.
In this same way, we can trust those to whom the Apostles spoke, travelled with and taught, just as Jesus said to teach all nations in Mathew 28.
If we can't trust those the Apostles taught, then who can we trust? No one.
And who said the ECF's wrote the bible? But it was these ECF's who put the bible together under the inspiration of God. If we can trust the bible, then we can trust them! If we cannot trust those that put the N.T. together, then neither can we trust the N.T.
I know what the ECFs thought about the body and blood of Jesus.
It seems they certainly thought more of it than it being a symbol...however this is something I'm not sure about.
-
1
- Show all
I say as long as we keep Jesus in our lives because I know some that claimed to be born again and then after some time -- even years -- they just decided they couldn't believe anymore and left the faith.
Jesus spoke to this...
He said that those that endure to the end will be saved.
Mathew 24:13
This is because some could fall away due to tribulation, even the tribulation life brings us.
He affirms the above in Luke 8:13 when He says that some believe for a while but then fall away when tribulation comes.
So, yes, I believe we are secure, but secure IN CHRIST. If we don't have Christ we are lost....so if we abandon Him, we become lost again.
Jesus said that those who believe in HIM will never die.
John 11:25-26
Do you believe we could be saved and NOT have Jesus in our lives?
Jesus = Life
Jesus spoke to this...
He said that those that endure to the end will be saved.
Mathew 24:13
This is because some could fall away due to tribulation, even the tribulation life brings us.
He affirms the above in Luke 8:13 when He says that some believe for a while but then fall away when tribulation comes.
So, yes, I believe we are secure, but secure IN CHRIST. If we don't have Christ we are lost....so if we abandon Him, we become lost again.
Jesus said that those who believe in HIM will never die.
John 11:25-26
Do you believe we could be saved and NOT have Jesus in our lives?
Jesus = Life
-
1
- Show all
Who's Jerry? I know you left the RCC, but they do put a lot of emphasis on the writings of the EFC's and so do you, so something must have rubbed off. Regardless, I'm doing my best to be civil with you.
I know you left the RCC, but they do put a lot of emphasis on the writings of the EFC's and so do you, so something must have rubbed off. Regardless, I'm doing my best to be civil with you.
Let me tell you something....
I became saved in the mid-70's.
I left the CC in about 1980 and went to a Nazarene church.
I'm also familiar with the Assembly of God churches, that's about it.
So nothing "rubbed off" because I had to leave the CC because they offered nothing for me or others like me.
So looks like I've been a bible thumper for about 40 years. Don't ask how that works out because I'm only 38.
I started to study the ECFs about 2 or 3 years ago because I kept hearing about them.
Wow. It opened my understanding to a lot!
I've also been studying church history from the very beginning, right after the resurrection.
I only go up to the Nicene creed (325 AD) because after that everything becomes messed up.
-
2
- Show all
What's wrong with the word MUST?
We must obey God.
It's not an option....
We love God.
We want to obey God.
But God is God,,,,He's the creator of the universe; He's almighty.
When He speaks, He doesn't request.
The 10 commandments are commandments.
So, yes, we must obey God.
We do it because of love...which is the difference between the Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant, BTW...but, nonetheless, we must obey Him.
It's not a choice.
If we choose not to obey, there's something wrong.
It's like the cooking thing.
One cooks because he loves the other.
But cook we must...or we don't get to eat !
We must obey God.
It's not an option....
We love God.
We want to obey God.
But God is God,,,,He's the creator of the universe; He's almighty.
When He speaks, He doesn't request.
The 10 commandments are commandments.
So, yes, we must obey God.
We do it because of love...which is the difference between the Mosaic Covenant and the New Covenant, BTW...but, nonetheless, we must obey Him.
It's not a choice.
If we choose not to obey, there's something wrong.
It's like the cooking thing.
One cooks because he loves the other.
But cook we must...or we don't get to eat !
Ha!
One year later and you're still afraid to say what "believe" means!
Because if you explain what it means....you'd be consenting that we must obey and follow Jesus
BECAUSE we BELIEVE in Him.
I dare you...
explain it.
I have many times but some on your thread just have too much respect for you to agree with me.
Double Dare....!
One year later and you're still afraid to say what "believe" means!
Because if you explain what it means....you'd be consenting that we must obey and follow Jesus
BECAUSE we BELIEVE in Him.
I dare you...
explain it.
I have many times but some on your thread just have too much respect for you to agree with me.
Double Dare....!
I've ALWAYS quoted scripture.
I said I'm a bible thumper.
@mailmandan posted more of the ECFs than I have in 3 years !
I said I'm a bible thumper.
@mailmandan posted more of the ECFs than I have in 3 years !
Hey SoF,
I was waiting for @dcontroversal to answer your questions since you asked him,,,but since he didn't, I will. One answer does not a derail make...
I won't speak to the gap theory because I don't believe this is the case. It would mean that God made a mistake and He's trying to fix it. I believe Genesis 2 is concentrating on the creation of man. There's a problem with the creation of vegetation, but it's accepted that Genesis was not written by the same person so whoever wrote chapter two is just concentrating on a different important aspect.
There's is nothing that says that A and E did NOT eat of the tree of Life. However, in scripture we have to go by what IS stated, and not by what is not stated. You can't prove a negative. IOW, scripture also says that babies were NOT baptized...so it works the same. If it's the same for baptism, it's the same for the Tree of Life. It's generally accepted theology that A and E did NOT eat from the Tree of Life.
This is shown by Genesis 3:22. " Lest they take ALSO from the Tree of Life"...this means it would have been for the first time.
Yes. You're right. We were sons in the beginning and God wants us to be sons again.
Jesus is the firstborn of many. As in Adam we fell, in Jesus we rise.
We will not, however, regain what we had before the fall of Adam. A and E had preternatural gifts which they gave up and which WE cannot have because of the sin nature. One of these gifts is immortality...now we die. Well-being...now we get sick. Etc.
I was waiting for @dcontroversal to answer your questions since you asked him,,,but since he didn't, I will. One answer does not a derail make...
I won't speak to the gap theory because I don't believe this is the case. It would mean that God made a mistake and He's trying to fix it. I believe Genesis 2 is concentrating on the creation of man. There's a problem with the creation of vegetation, but it's accepted that Genesis was not written by the same person so whoever wrote chapter two is just concentrating on a different important aspect.
There's is nothing that says that A and E did NOT eat of the tree of Life. However, in scripture we have to go by what IS stated, and not by what is not stated. You can't prove a negative. IOW, scripture also says that babies were NOT baptized...so it works the same. If it's the same for baptism, it's the same for the Tree of Life. It's generally accepted theology that A and E did NOT eat from the Tree of Life.
This is shown by Genesis 3:22. " Lest they take ALSO from the Tree of Life"...this means it would have been for the first time.
Yes. You're right. We were sons in the beginning and God wants us to be sons again.
Jesus is the firstborn of many. As in Adam we fell, in Jesus we rise.
We will not, however, regain what we had before the fall of Adam. A and E had preternatural gifts which they gave up and which WE cannot have because of the sin nature. One of these gifts is immortality...now we die. Well-being...now we get sick. Etc.
