Staight Path or Rabbit Trail...

[Wansvic]

Many are blinded where the subject of water baptism is concerned. One cannot fail to see it is one, if not the most contested topic in the word of God. The question all should consider is, Why is that? What truth lies behind the ongoing resistence to administer water baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus?

Many have no idea that water baptism as administered in most churches today is a total distortion of what is taught in the word of God. And in fact today's tradition, begun years after the apostolic era, actually results in stripping away the very core of God's intended purpose of water baptism; being joined/buried with Jesus into His death. (Rom. 6:3-6) Jesus' sacrifice paid the penalty for all mankind. Yet, not all will take hold of what He died to provide for them personally.

For those who are unaware, it was the forerunners of the Roman Catholic Church that changed how water baptisms were administered. They rejected the biblical mandate to water baptize individuals in the name of Jesus. And opted rather to insist on using the phrase Father, Son and Holy Ghost. The detour down the rabbit trail began around 325 A.D. and continues even unto today. This truth as recorded in numerous historical encyclopedias is accessible to all those willing to search it out.

Again, scripture is plain. It reveals the apostles water baptized in the name of Jesus as the command specifically relates to His sacrifice. Those who believe and obey the command are justified through faith, being buried with Jesus into His death, and rising a new creation in Him. This truth is found throughout scripture but many fail to see it. Why? Because they associate Father, Son and Holy Ghost with water baptism when in fact every time the bible references baptism in the name of Jesus it speaks of water baptism.

I believe those willing to remove the lens of distortion, (perpetuated by the RCC) that has kept so many in darkness for so long, will see the truth. Go ahead, take a peek, there is no mention of Father, Son and Holy Ghost when the apostles water baptized individuals. What is revealed is the Name above all names, Jesus... (Acts 2:4-41, 8:12-18, 10:43-48, 19:1-7, 22:16)

The account in Acts 19 confirms how a person is water baptized does matter. Those previously baptized in water by John had to be rebaptized in the name of Jesus. (Acts 19:1-7) Therefore, those who have not been water baptized in the name of Jesus should do so. "Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?..." Romans 6:3-6

 

[GWH]

Many are blinded where the subject of water baptism is concerned. One cannot fail to see it is one, if not the most contested topic in the word of God. The question all should consider is, Why is that? What truth lies behind the ongoing resistence to administer water baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus?

Many have no idea that water baptism as administered in most churches today is a total distortion of what is taught in the word of God. And in fact today's tradition, begun years after the apostolic era, actually results in stripping away the very core of God's intended purpose of water baptism; being joined/buried with Jesus into His death. (Rom. 6:3-6) Jesus' sacrifice paid the penalty for all mankind. Yet, not all will take hold of what He died to provide for them personally.

For those who are unaware, it was the forerunners of the Roman Catholic Church that changed how water baptisms were administered. They rejected the biblical mandate to water baptize individuals in the name of Jesus. And opted rather to insist on using the phrase Father, Son and Holy Ghost. The detour down the rabbit trail began around 325 A.D. and continues even unto today. This truth as recorded in numerous historical encyclopedias is accessible to all those willing to search it out.

Again, scripture is plain. It reveals the apostles water baptized in the name of Jesus as the command specifically relates to His sacrifice. Those who believe and obey the command are justified through faith, being buried with Jesus into His death, and rising a new creation in Him. This truth is found throughout scripture but many fail to see it. Why? Because they associate Father, Son and Holy Ghost with water baptism when in fact every time the bible references baptism in the name of Jesus it speaks of water baptism.

I believe those willing to remove the lens of distortion, (perpetuated by the RCC) that has kept so many in darkness for so long, will see the truth. Go ahead, take a peek, there is no mention of Father, Son and Holy Ghost when the apostles water baptized individuals. What is revealed is the Name above all names, Jesus... (Acts 2:4-41, 8:12-18, 10:43-48, 19:1-7, 22:16)

The account in Acts 19 confirms how a person is water baptized does matter. Those previously baptized in water by John had to be rebaptized in the name of Jesus. (Acts 19:1-7) Therefore, those who have not been water baptized in the name of Jesus should do so. "Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?..." Romans 6:3-6

Perhaps it would have been better for you to post this on the other thread about baptism, but I will copy what I said there here also:

My family has been water baptized with the Baptist understanding that by this means or rite we profess our faith in Jesus, portray his death-burial-resurrection, and pledge to follow him as Lord.

Later in life I came to realize that outward water baptism also symbolizes inner Spirit baptism into the body of Christ. (EPH 4:5, 1CR 12:13)

 

[bluto]

You said this regarding the Roman Catholic Church: "They rejected the biblical mandate to water baptize individuals in the name of Jesus. And opted rather to insist on using the phrase Father, Son and Holy Ghost. " And for good reason. Matthew 28:19, "God therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them, (that is the disciples) in the name of the Father and the Son, and the Holy Spirit." Btw, I am not a Roman Catholic and never have been. I'm just quoting what the Bible teaches.

You also quoted various verses in the book of Acts. I want to focus on Acts 10:43-48 and ask you a question? According to the text did the Gentiles, specifically the house of Cornelius at Acts 10:43 receive the gift of the Holy Spirit before or after they were water baptized?

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[GWH]

You said this regarding the Roman Catholic Church: "They rejected the biblical mandate to water baptize individuals in the name of Jesus. And opted rather to insist on using the phrase Father, Son and Holy Ghost. " And for good reason. Matthew 28:19, "God therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them, (that is the disciples) in the name of the Father and the Son, and the Holy Spirit." Btw, I am not a Roman Catholic and never have been. I'm just quoting what the Bible teaches.

You also quoted various verses in the book of Acts. I want to focus on Acts 10:43-48 and ask you a question? According to the text did the Gentiles, specifically the house of Cornelius at Acts 10:43 receive the gift of the Holy Spirit before or after they were water baptized?

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

You raise an interesting point regarding the transition of the rite during the ministry of Paul in ACTS and at the time Matthew wrote his Gospel, which apparently was some time later--after Mark but perhaps about the same time as Luke, who wrote his Gospel after the ministry of Paul wound up in Rome.

 

[Hakawaka]

For those who are unaware, it was the forerunners of the Roman Catholic Church that changed how water baptisms were administered. They rejected the biblical mandate to water baptize individuals in the name of Jesus. And opted rather to insist on using the phrase Father, Son and Holy Ghost. The detour down the rabbit trail began around 325 A.D. and continues even unto today. This truth as recorded in numerous historical encyclopedias is accessible to all those willing to search it out.

Simply not true people were baptizing in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost wayy before 325AD.... The Didache alone proves this, let alone the early church father quotes of the verse.

The question you should ask yourself: Why have YOU gone down the rabbit trail and INSIST on baptizing in the name of Jesus, these exact words must be said or its not valid. Why dont YOU walk the straight path and understand that Jesus gave the apostles that command and the church has followed that for a long time.

 

[Wansvic]

Perhaps it would have been better for you to post this on the other thread about baptism, but I will copy what I said there here also:

My family has been water baptized with the Baptist understanding that by this means or rite we profess our faith in Jesus, portray his death-burial-resurrection, and pledge to follow him as Lord.

Later in life I came to realize that outward water baptism also symbolizes inner Spirit baptism into the body of Christ. (EPH 4:5, 1CR 12:13)

The intent of this particular post is to shed light concerning how forerunners of the RCC muddied God's water baptism command.

Col 2:8-9
Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

 

[Wansvic]

You raise an interesting point regarding the transition of the rite during the ministry of Paul in ACTS and at the time Matthew wrote his Gospel, which apparently was some time later--after Mark but perhaps about the same time as Luke, who wrote his Gospel after the ministry of Paul wound up in Rome.

Actually the transition, if your reference is to the use of the name of Jesus in water baptism, began at Pentecost. Jesus prophesied about it: "Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem." Luke 24:46-47

The initial gospel message was presented in Jerusalem. Where the listeners were instructed to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus for remission of sin. (Acts 2:36-42)

 

[Wansvic]

Simply not true people were baptizing in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost wayy before 325AD.... The Didache alone proves this, let alone the early church father quotes of the verse.

The question you should ask yourself: Why have YOU gone down the rabbit trail and INSIST on baptizing in the name of Jesus, these exact words must be said or its not valid. Why dont YOU walk the straight path and understand that Jesus gave the apostles that command and the church has followed that for a long time.

Note the change noted in the Vatican II Edition Bible Catechism.

 

[Wansvic]

Simply not true people were baptizing in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost wayy before 325AD.... The Didache alone proves this, let alone the early church father quotes of the verse.

The question you should ask yourself: Why have YOU gone down the rabbit trail and INSIST on baptizing in the name of Jesus, these exact words must be said or its not valid. Why dont YOU walk the straight path and understand that Jesus gave the apostles that command and the church has followed that for a long time.

The apostles did not administer even a single baptism in the titles. Jesus gave the command to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, (Matt. 28:19) and the apostles obeyed by water baptizing everyone in the name of Jesus. (Acts 2:4-41, 8:12-18, 10:43-48, 19:1-7, 22:16) Why? For in Jesus dwells the fulness of the Godhead bodily. (Col 2:8-12)

As to the Didache, it contains supposed biblical instructions that go directly against the biblical record. Examples:

Confess your sins IN CHURCH

Concerning baptism, baptize in this way. Having instructed him in all of these teachings, baptize the catechumen in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in running water. But if you do not have running water, then baptize in other water. And if you cannot in cold water, use warm. But if you have neither, then pour water on the head three times, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. And before the baptism, let both the baptizer and the catechumen fast, and also any others who are able. And be sure that the catechumen fasts a day or two before.


FASTING d o NoT let not your fasts fall on the same days as the hypocrites, for they fast on Mondays and Thursdays. Keep your fast on Wednesdays and Fridays.


Pray the Lord’s Prayer 3 x a day. - CONCERNING PRAYER d o NoT pray as the hypocrites either, but pray as the Lord commanded in His Gospel: Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name; thy kingdom come; thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven; give us this day our daily bread; and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us; and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one; for thine is the power and the glory unto ages of ages. Pray this way three times each day.


Concerning apostles and prophets, act according to the Gospel’s teaching. Receive every apostle as the Lord. He should not stay for more than a single day, or two days if necessary. But if he remains for three days, he is a false prophet. When he leaves, let the apostle receive nothing except bread, until he finds a place to stay. But if he asks for money, he is a false prophet. Do not test or judge any prophet who speaks in the Spirit. Every other sin will be forgiven, but this sin will not be forgiven. And not everyone who speaks in the Spirit is a prophet, but only he who follows the ways of the Lord. From his behavior, then, you will know a false prophet from a true prophet. Any prophet who orders a meal in Spirit will not eat from it, but if he does eat of it, he is a false prophet. Any prophet who teaches the truth, but does not do the things he teaches, is a false prophet. Every true prophet, if he performs a worldly mystery of the Church, but does not teach others to do likewise, he must not be judged by you. He has his judgment in the presence of God, as with the prophets of old. If anyone says in the Spirit, “Give me money,” do not listen to him. But if he tells you to give to others who are in need, let no one judge him.

Now concerning the eucharistic thanksgiving, give thanks in this way. First, as concerning the cup: We give you thanks, our Father, for the holy vine of your son David,a which you made known to us through your Son Jesus. Yours is the glory unto ages of ages. Then as regards the broken bread: We give you thanks, our Father, for the life and knowledge which you made known to us through your Son Jesus. Yours is the glory unto ages of ages. ????As this broken bread was scattered upon the mountains and being gathered together became one, ???? u Acts 15:29. v Mat. 28:19. w Mat. 6:16. x Mat. 6:5f. y Mat. 6:9f. z 1 Cor. 11:23-25. a John 15:1. b Acts 3:13, 26. c John 3:15, 5:26, 6:68f. DIDACHE 9 so may your Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into your kingdom. For yours is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ unto ages of ages. Do not let anyone eat or drink of this Eucharist who has not been baptized into the name of the Lord, for concerning this the Lord has said, “Do not give the holy things to the dogs.”



GaTher together each Sunday,a break bread and give thanks, first confessing your sins, that your sacrifice may be pure.

 

[Wansvic]

...
For those who are unaware, it was the forerunners of the Roman Catholic Church that changed how water baptisms were administered. They rejected the biblical mandate to water baptize individuals in the name of Jesus. And opted rather to insist on using the phrase Father, Son and Holy Ghost. The detour down the rabbit trail began around 325 A.D. and continues even unto today. This truth as recorded in numerous historical encyclopedias is accessible to all those willing to search it out.

The following is but a small fraction of available encyclopedias that confirm what is clearly revealed in the word of God. Be like the Bereans and study, and in doing so make your election sure. ( Acts 17:11, 2 Peter 1:10)

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA, VOLUME 8
“Justin Martys was one of the early Fathers of the Roman Catholic Church who helped change the ancient baptism of “in the Name of Jesus Christ” to the titles of Father, Son and Holy Ghost”

FORMULA “With regard to the form used for baptism in the early Church, there is the difficulty that although Matthew 28:19 seems to speaks of the Trinitarian formula which is now used, the Acts of the Apostles (2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5) and Paul (I Corinthians 1:13, 6:11, Galatians 3:27, Romans 6:3) speak only of baptism “in the Name of Jesus.”

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA, 1967 edition, volume 2, pages 56, 59.
“An explicit reference to the Trinitarian formula of baptism cannot be found in the first centuries.”

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEIA, 1913 edition, volume 2, Page 265:
“They acknowledge that the original formula for baptism was in the Name of Jesus...”

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGION AND ETHICS Scribner‘s T & T Clark, Edinburgh, 1924, vol 1 Page 380
“Christian baptism, when connected with the mention of a formula, is alluded to four times in the Acts (2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5) and the formula is never that of (Matthew 28:19) but is twice in the name of Jesus Christ (Acts 2:38, 10:48) and twice in the name of the Lord Jesus (Acts 8:16, 19:5).

That this was the usual formula of Christian baptism is supported by the evidence of the Pauline Epistles, which speak of being baptized only into Christ or into Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:27, Romans 6:3).

Is it possible to reconcile these facts with the belief that Christ commanded the disciples to baptize in the trine name?

The obvious explanation of the silence of New Testament on the trine name, and the use of another formula in Acts and Paul is that this other formula was the earlier, and that the trine formula is a later edition. It would require very strong argument to controvert this presumption, and none seems to exist”.

ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA—1910, 11th Edition, Volume 3, pages 365-366
Page 361 “The trinitarian formula and trine immersion were not uniformly used from the beginning, nor did they always go together.

The teachings of the Apostles indeed prescribes baptism in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, but on the next page speaks of those who have been baptized into the name of the Lord—the normal formula of the New Testament.

In the 3rd century, baptism in the name of Christ was still so widespread that Pope Stephen, in opposition to Cyprian of Garthage, declared it to be valid.

From Pope Zachariah (ep.x) we learn that the Celtic missionaries in Baptizing omitted one or more persons of the trinity, and this was one of the reasons why the church of Rome anathematized them; Pope Nicholas, however (858867), allowed baptism to be valid (Tantum in nimineChristi), as in Acts.

Ursinus, an African Monk A.D. 1284), also asserted that baptism into the name of Christ alone was valid.

The formula of Rome is; “I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and Son, and holy Spirit” Page 366 No record of such use can be discovered in the Acts or the Epistles of the Apostles.

The baptisms recorded in the New Testament after the day of Pentecost were administered “in the Name of Jesus Christ” (Acts 2:38), “into the name of the Lord Jesus” (8:16) “into Christ” (Romans 6:3; Galatians 3:27). This difficulty was considered by the Fathers.



ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA 11th. Edition Volume 3, page 368
“We gather from Acts 19:4 that John had merely baptized in the name of the coming Messiah, without identifying him with Jesus of Nazareth.
The Apostolic Age supplied the identification, and the normal use seems to have been in the Name of Jesus.



ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA 13th. Edition Volume 3, pages 365-366
The baptismal formula, the trinitarian and the trine immersion were not uniformly used from the beginning nor did they always go together.



DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE - James Hastings 1925 Edition, page 83

“It has been customary to trace the institution of the practice to the words of Christ

recorded in Matthew 28:19, but the authenticity of this passage has been challenged on historical as well as on textual grounds.

It must be acknowledged that the formula of the threefold name, which is here enjoined does not appear to have been employed by the primitive Church, which, so far as our information goes, baptized ‘in’ or ‘into the name of Jesus’ (or ‘Jesus Christ’ or ‘the Lord Jesus’: Acts 2:38; 8:16; 10:48; 19:5; I Corinthians 1:13, 15), without reference to the Father or the Spirit



A DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE—James Hastings, Scribner’s New York Published 1900, Volume I. page 241.



“the original form of words was ‘into the name of Jesus Christ’ or ‘the Lord Jesus’. Baptism into the name of the Trinity was a later development”



DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE— James Hastings, 1906 Edition, volume 1, page 241

“Moreover there is no mention in the New Testament of any one being baptized into the name of the trinity.”



DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE—Grant and Rowley (Edited bv James Hastings), 1963 Revised Edition, page 88

…“the primitive Church baptized ‘in’ or ‘into the name of Jesus’ (or ‘Jesus Christ’, or ‘the Lord Jesus’, (1 Corinthians 1:13, 15; Acts 8:16; 19:5).... Thus the spoken formula, ‘in the name of Jesus’, effected the presence of the risen Lord and gave the baptized into His possession and protection.



HASTINGS ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGION—Vol 2, pages 377, 378, 389.

“The Christian baptism was administered using the name of Jesus. The use of the trinitarian formula of any sort was not suggested in the early Church history, Baptism was always in the Name of the Lord Jesus, until the time of Justin Martyr, when the trinity formula was used.

Volume 2, page 377, commenting on Acts 2:38, “Name was an ancient synonym for person. Payment was always made in the name of some person, referring to ownership, therefore, one being baptized in Jesus name became his personal property, (“Ye are Christ’s I Corinthians 3:23.)

 

[posthuman]

What truth lies behind the ongoing resistence to administer water baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus?

i am not aware of any church that refuses to baptize...?

 

[posthuman]

For those who are unaware, it was the forerunners of the Roman Catholic Church that changed how water baptisms were administered. They rejected the biblical mandate to water baptize individuals in the name of Jesus. And opted rather to insist on using the phrase Father, Son and Holy Ghost. The detour down the rabbit trail began around 325 A.D. and continues even unto today. This truth as recorded in numerous historical encyclopedias is accessible to all those willing to search it out.

i don't think you are correct.
the didache dates to the first century, some 500 years before the rcc even existed, and cites Matthew 28:19 saying we should baptize in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

 

[Wansvic]

... Jesus gave the apostles that command and the church has followed that for a long time.

What many fail to realize is the apostles obeyed Jesus' command by water baptizing in His name. (Matt. 28:19, Acts 2:38, 8:12, 16; 10:47-48, 19:6)

 

[Wansvic]

i am not aware of any church that refuses to baptize...?

Very few obey Jesus' command, but rather follow the tradition of water baptizing in the titles, Father, Son and Holy Ghost. And, if you will recall, the Apostle Paul warned that truth would be distorted after his death. (Acts 20:29) "The early church faced numerous heresies and false teachings, and Paul's warning is a call to be discerning and protective of the truth." Bible Hub

 

[Wansvic]

i don't think you are correct.
the didache dates to the first century, some 500 years before the rcc even existed, and cites Matthew 28:19 saying we should baptize in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Please note I said those making the change in 325 AD were forerunners of the RCC.

Also, note Didache inconsistencies relative to the biblical record:

Confess your sins IN CHURCH

Concerning baptism, baptize in this way. Having instructed him in all of these teachings, baptize the catechumen in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in running water. But if you do not have running water, then baptize in other water. And if you cannot in cold water, use warm. But if you have neither, then pour water on the head three times, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. And before the baptism, let both the baptizer and the catechumen fast, and also any others who are able. And be sure that the catechumen fasts a day or two before.


FASTING d o NoT let not your fasts fall on the same days as the hypocrites, for they fast on Mondays and Thursdays. Keep your fast on Wednesdays and Fridays.


Pray the Lord’s Prayer 3 x a day. - CONCERNING PRAYER d o NoT pray as the hypocrites either, but pray as the Lord commanded in His Gospel: Our Father, who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name; thy kingdom come; thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven; give us this day our daily bread; and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us; and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one; for thine is the power and the glory unto ages of ages. Pray this way three times each day.


Concerning apostles and prophets, act according to the Gospel’s teaching. Receive every apostle as the Lord. He should not stay for more than a single day, or two days if necessary. But if he remains for three days, he is a false prophet. When he leaves, let the apostle receive nothing except bread, until he finds a place to stay. But if he asks for money, he is a false prophet. Do not test or judge any prophet who speaks in the Spirit. Every other sin will be forgiven, but this sin will not be forgiven. And not everyone who speaks in the Spirit is a prophet, but only he who follows the ways of the Lord. From his behavior, then, you will know a false prophet from a true prophet. Any prophet who orders a meal in Spirit will not eat from it, but if he does eat of it, he is a false prophet. Any prophet who teaches the truth, but does not do the things he teaches, is a false prophet. Every true prophet, if he performs a worldly mystery of the Church, but does not teach others to do likewise, he must not be judged by you. He has his judgment in the presence of God, as with the prophets of old. If anyone says in the Spirit, “Give me money,” do not listen to him. But if he tells you to give to others who are in need, let no one judge him.

Now concerning the eucharistic thanksgiving, give thanks in this way. First, as concerning the cup: We give you thanks, our Father, for the holy vine of your son David,a which you made known to us through your Son Jesus. Yours is the glory unto ages of ages. Then as regards the broken bread: We give you thanks, our Father, for the life and knowledge which you made known to us through your Son Jesus. Yours is the glory unto ages of ages. ????As this broken bread was scattered upon the mountains and being gathered together became one, ???? u Acts 15:29. v Mat. 28:19. w Mat. 6:16. x Mat. 6:5f. y Mat. 6:9f. z 1 Cor. 11:23-25. a John 15:1. b Acts 3:13, 26. c John 3:15, 5:26, 6:68f. DIDACHE 9 so may your Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into your kingdom. For yours is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ unto ages of ages. Do not let anyone eat or drink of this Eucharist who has not been baptized into the name of the Lord, for concerning this the Lord has said, “Do not give the holy things to the dogs.”



GaTher together each Sunday,a break bread and give thanks, first confessing your sins, that your sacrifice may be pure.

 

[posthuman]

Very few obey Jesus' command, but rather follow the tradition of water baptizing in the titles, Father, Son and Holy Ghost. And, if you will recall, the Apostle Paul warned that truth would be distorted after his death. (Acts 20:29) "The early church faced numerous heresies and false teachings, and Paul's warning is a call to be discerning and protective of the truth." Bible Hub

do you deny the Trinity?

if not then what is the problem? what hersey? what falsehood?

 

[Wansvic]

do you deny the Trinity?

if not then what is the problem? what hersey? what falsehood?

The problem is people are following a tradition rather than obeying God. How water baptism is to be administered is revealed in the actions of the apostles. And partial obedience is actuality disobedience. (1 Sam. 15)

Consider the admonition in Jude 3 regarding the common salvation. Jude exhorts all to earnestly contend/seek out the faith that was FIRST given to the saints/apostles. In doing so the truth is found. (Acts 2:4-41, 8:12-18, 10:43-48, 19:1-7, 22:16) Sadly many are overlooking or just refusing to accept what the Bible reveals, and in error follow a manmade tradition that makes God's word of none effect.

 

[posthuman]

The problem is people are following a tradition rather than obeying God. How water baptism is to be administered is revealed in the actions of the apostles. And partial obedience is actuality disobedience. (1 Sam. 15)

Consider the admonition in Jude 3 regarding the common salvation. Jude exhorts all to earnestly contend/seek out the faith that was FIRST given to the saints/apostles. In doing so the truth is found. (Acts 2:4-41, 8:12-18, 10:43-48, 19:1-7, 22:16) Sadly many are overlooking or just refusing to accept what the Bible reveals, and in error follow a manmade tradition that makes God's word of none effect.

water baptism isn't "the faith" - - it's a rite publicly proclaiming ones identity with The Way.
that which was first delivered to the saints is a salvation that is by grace on the basis of belief, not of our works but by the work Jesus Christ did on our behalf.

what is a man-made tradition that makes Christ of no effect would be, for example, teaching the saints that salvation is by a set of magic words spoken with sprinkling, and that their faith is made void if they don't speak the mystical incantation just so.
wouldn't you agree?

 

[posthuman]

there is no copy of Matthew that does not include 28:19 except one made in 1385.
every direct quotation of it in the Church fathers includes the full text. the didache predates the rcc by hundreds of years and reveals that the original church was not terribly picky about the fine details of baptism, saying, use running water if possible, immerse if possible, but if you can't do those things, make do with what you have.

 

[posthuman]

GaTher together each Sunday,a break bread and give thanks, first confessing your sins, that your sacrifice may be pure.

James 4:8, 5:16, 1 John 1:9

but no one is claiming the didache is scripture. however it demonstrates what the church did in the first hundred years.