born of water

[shazeep]

um...no. sorry. One need look no further than the parable of the Separation of Sheep and Goats to know that that cannot be true.

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by shazeep

um...no. sorry. One need look no further than the parable of the Separation of Sheep and Goats to know that that cannot be true.

Are you saying that both the faithful and unfaithful, believers and unbelievers will be judged regardless of whether or not
they repented, were baptized in water, or received the Holy Spirit? Are you touching upon the second death, or interweaving
the first and the second death?

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by shazeep

um...no. sorry. One need look no further than the parable of the Separation of Sheep and Goats to know that that cannot be true.

Are you saying that both the faithful and unfaithful, believers and unbelievers will be judged regardless of whether or not
they repented, were baptized in water, or received the Holy Spirit? Are you touching upon the second death, or
interweaving the first and the second death?

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by thephnxman

Are you saying that both the faithful and unfaithful, believers and unbelievers will be judged regardless of whether or not
they repented, were baptized in water, or received the Holy Spirit? Are you touching upon the second death, or
interweaving the first and the second death?

hmm, i don't know about all those; but i do know that many will cry "Lord, Lord," and many others, "unbaptized," at least by the Christian standard of baptized, will be in the KOG. I am pretty sure we just have poor definitions for the terms nowadays, in the verses that seem to indicate otherwise.For instance, i often hear "born of water" being confused for "baptism," etc.

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by shazeep

hmm, i don't know about all those; but i do know that many will cry "Lord, Lord," and many others, "unbaptized," at least by the Christian standard of baptized, will be in the KOG. I am pretty sure we just have poor definitions for the terms nowadays, in the verses that seem to indicate otherwise.For instance, i often hear "born of water" being confused for "baptism," etc.

You just said a mouthful!

Can anyone enter the kingdom and deny the scriptures? That's what you seem to be saying. Or can we enter the kingdom based on our own interpretation of scriptures?

The AOG believes that "born of water" points to the amniotic fluid taht protects the embryo: that one cannot be born of the Spirit, unless they are first born as a human. Is that you?

[shazeep]

ok, no arguments there, as long as it is realized that following protocol will not get you saved; and that there is deeper meaning to 'baptism' than we currently afford it. Our "baptism" is now a ceremonial thing, something people do, and then go back to their lives, tra-la. Not what was originally meant to happen.

Originally Posted by thephnxman

You just said a mouthful!

Can anyone enter the kingdom and deny the scriptures? That's what you seem to be saying. Or can we enter the kingdom based on our own interpretation of scriptures?

The AOG believes that "born of water" points to the amniotic fluid taht protects the embryo: that one cannot be born of the Spirit, unless they are first born as a human. Is that you?

yes--and i guess i'm just realizing that this is not a widely held view. And imo, you can only enter the kingdom based upon your own interpretation of Scripture, with the Holy Spirit's help, of course. There is even Scripture for this; to not be letting others interpret Scripture for you. King James included. A lexicon will at least provide a sense of the original.

And so no, one cannot deny Scripture and enter the kingdom, i don't think; but i write because i see many who fulfill Scripture without knowing it, and many who know Scripture without fulfilling it--with the best of intentions. By all means, and especially if it has meaning for you, get baptized in Jesus' Name--and i mean the dunking in actual water part. I pray that in a couple, few, ten (forty, for me ) years, one sees the real meaning of baptism, having learned the symbology; whereas church would have us go into navel-gazing mode. Again, with the best of intentions.

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by shazeep

ok, no arguments there, as long as it is realized that following protocol will not get you saved; and that there is deeper meaning to 'baptism' than we currently afford it. Our "baptism" is now a ceremonial thing, something people do, and then go back to their lives, tra-la. Not what was originally meant to happen.
yes--and i guess i'm just realizing that this is not a widely held view. And imo, you can only enter the kingdom based upon your own interpretation of Scripture, with the Holy Spirit's help, of course. There is even Scripture for this; to not be letting others interpret Scripture for you. King James included. A lexicon will at least provide a sense of the original.
And so no, one cannot deny Scripture and enter the kingdom, i don't think; but i write because i see many who fulfill Scripture without knowing it, and many who know Scripture without fulfilling it--with the best of intentions. By all means, and especially if it has meaning for you, get baptized in Jesus' Name--and i mean the dunking in actual water part. I pray that in a couple, few, ten (forty, for me ) years, one sees the real meaning of baptism, having learned the symbology; whereas church would have us go into navel-gazing mode. Again, with the best of intentions.

I hear you. Too often, baptism is preached but the full gospel is not! That is why it becomes essential to
preach the full gospel message.
Jesus said, "...he that believes not is condemned." So a person can be condemned even if one is baptized,
because he believed not! Or we can possibly fulfill all the elements of church tradition and still be lost because
"...he has not believed in the NAME of the only begotten son of God."

There are too many denominations that are not only detracting from the scriptures, but they would also delete
baptism, and even the NAME of Jesus from baptism! Or find a "more convenient" definition for His NAME.

There is only ONE gospel that saves: it is found in the mouth or writings of the Lord Jesus Christ, (Mk. 16:16);
the Apostle Peter, (Acts 2:38); and the Apostle Paul, (I Cor. 15:1-4).

That is the gospel I preach.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by thephnxman

I hear you. Too often, baptism is preached but the full gospel is not! That is why it becomes essential to
preach the full gospel message.
Jesus said, "...he that believes not is condemned." So a person can be condemned even if one is baptized,
because he believed not! Or we can possibly fulfill all the elements of church tradition and still be lost because
"...he has not believed in the NAME of the only begotten son of God."

There are too many denominations that are not only detracting from the scriptures, but they would also delete
baptism, and even the NAME of Jesus from baptism! Or find a "more convenient" definition for His NAME.

There is only ONE gospel that saves: it is found in the mouth or writings of the Lord Jesus Christ, (Mk. 16:16);
the Apostle Peter, (Acts 2:38); and the Apostle Paul, (I Cor. 15:1-4).

That is the gospel I preach.

Bingo!