Question? - Page 15

Sabby · #**141** 06-22-2014, 09:38 PM

I do

Praxeas · #**142** 06-22-2014, 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by navygoat1998

Abraham's faith counted unto him as righteousness.

Yep...

Praxeas · #**143** 06-22-2014, 11:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILG

Yes, faith is the only qualifier. But the funny thing is that people always want your faith to "obey" THEIR rules. Funny thing, that.

So there are qualifiers.....ok

Obey the word. No laughing matter that

Praxeas · #**144** 06-23-2014, 12:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILG

I think what YOU say when YOU baptize someone needs to go by your convictions. But if you said Buddha and the person was being baptized in faith I don't think it would matter a hill of beans to THEIR salvation.

And here is an interesting thing, you quoted that Paul was commanded to call upon the name of the Lord in HIS OWN baptism. I did that. I felt cleansed and justified even though the preacher said FSHG. But I myself did call on the name of Jesus! And the next preacher told me I had to get rebaptized because the preacher did the wrong thing. That was legalism.

By your convictions and not by the word of God?

So essentially we can thumb our nose at God's word?

That's not faith. Abraham believed and YES it was credited to him for righteousness...and Abraham obeyed God.

In other words when it comes to baptizing he would have done it however God says to do it and not any way that fancied him.

All the great "faith" people of the bible obeyed what was commanded. That's not legalism. That's faith. Noah had faith and he followed God's instructions.

Praxeas · #**145** 06-23-2014, 12:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILG

But Abraham was following God Himself, doing what God required of him, not having some guy tell him what God required of him. See, I think we need to do what God requires of us. But what God requires of me may not be what you think.

Exactly. So the REAL issue then is if what some guy says is required is what God required.

So this issue really boils down to a debate over what the bible teaches we should do and how we should do it

shazeep · #**146** 06-23-2014, 05:11 AM

hmm while i think debate has a place, the outcomes of debates verify to me that it is ones convictions about Scripture that should lead them, via the Holy Spirit's guidance.
You cannot put new wine into old wineskins tells us that different people will interpret Scripture differently. If God does not have a problem with this, then who am I to debate someone else's beliefs with a view to altering them? And if God does have a problem with my view of a matter, i trust that the Holy Spirit can let me know.

But we are talking about 'for those who study Scripture;' how many is that? The rest, the many, accept the first interpretation they are given, and spend most of the rest of their lives, perhaps, defending it--ignorantly, no doubt.

ILG · #**147** 06-23-2014, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Praxeas

By your convictions and not by the word of God?

So essentially we can thumb our nose at God's word?

That's not faith. Abraham believed and YES it was credited to him for righteousness...and Abraham obeyed God.

In other words when it comes to baptizing he would have done it however God says to do it and not any way that fancied him.

All the great "faith" people of the bible obeyed what was commanded. That's not legalism. That's faith. Noah had faith and he followed God's instructions.

The Biblical directive was to call upon the name in baptism. So why don't Jesus name preachers believe that it is enough for the person being baptized to do that?? (Acts 22:16) Why do they think a 3rd party has to do it for them? I think it is legalistic to say that a 3rd party must utter the name for the recipient. I think it is extra-biblical to say that if a recipient calls on the name it is not enough.

ILG · #**148** 06-23-2014, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Exactly. So the REAL issue then is if what some guy says is required is what God required.

So this issue really boils down to a debate over what the bible teaches we should do and how we should do it

If some guy says it and he is right, it should be done. If some guy says it and he is wrong, the person doesn't have to do it. But they might think the guy is right and do it and then they get on a slippery path.

ILG · #**149** 06-23-2014, 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shazeep

hmm while i think debate has a place, the outcomes of debates verify to me that it is ones convictions about Scripture that should lead them, via the Holy Spirit's guidance.
You cannot put new wine into old wineskins tells us that different people will interpret Scripture differently. If God does not have a problem with this, then who am I to debate someone else's beliefs with a view to altering them? And if God does have a problem with my view of a matter, i trust that the Holy Spirit can let me know.

But we are talking about 'for those who study Scripture;' how many is that? The rest, the many, accept the first interpretation they are given, and spend most of the rest of their lives, perhaps, defending it--ignorantly, no doubt.

BrotherEastman · #**150** 06-23-2014, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Praxeas

By your convictions and not by the word of God?

So essentially we can thumb our nose at God's word?

That's not faith. Abraham believed and YES it was credited to him for righteousness...and Abraham obeyed God.

In other words when it comes to baptizing he would have done it however God says to do it and not any way that fancied him.

All the great "faith" people of the bible obeyed what was commanded. That's not legalism. That's faith. Noah had faith and he followed God's instructions.

Oh for crying out loud!!!!!!! That made too much sense!