Roman Catholic Resources

Page 12 of 16 (315 items) « First ... < Previous 10 11 12 13 14 Next > ... Last »
This post has 314 Replies | 2 Followers

Posts 31933
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Dec 29 2009 5:04 PM | Locked

Bryan Brodess:

No, but this is not what we are after. we are after the correct meaning of the word.. are we not??

No, I'm after the correct meaning of the Word - and for correction, reproof, education etc. that means understanding the words of Scripture  in the language I am reading, its relationship to the words in the original language, and the words I am using in conversation with fellow Christians.

 

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 198
Bryan Brodess | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Dec 29 2009 5:07 PM | Locked

MJ. Smith:

Bryan Brodess:

No, but this is not what we are after. we are after the correct meaning of the word.. are we not??

No, I'm after the correct meaning of the Word - and for correction, reproof, education etc. that means understanding the words of Scripture  in the language I am reading, its relationship to the words in the original language, and the words I am using in conversation with fellow Christians.

 

Then you must make sure the word agrees with context of the passage and does not contradict other areas of scripture..

 

Like I said depending on who is doing the defenition, or writing the commentary or doing the exegesis,, your going to get their bias as to what it means.. how do you know who is right??  you will not fail taking context and making scripture not contradict.. guaranteed..

 

Posts 1537
Blair Laird | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Dec 29 2009 6:00 PM | Locked

Oden holds to a similar belief, I am pretty fond of his theology except what he believes about the knowledge of God and minor other issues. They both do happen at the same time (two sides of the same coin)  and that understanding gives no leeway for reformed theology (doctrine of total depravity according to them). You have good logic, my point was that faith precedes this (born again, justified and adoption). Calvinist put born again before faith, you have made an excellent point. I just dont separate being justified and being regenerated as though one comes before the other even on logical terms. Excellent point none the less..

 

God bless">

Posts 31933
Forum MVP
MJ. Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Dec 29 2009 6:32 PM | Locked

Bryan Brodess:
Then you must make sure the word agrees with context of the passage and does not contradict other areas of scripture..

Okay, I promise this is my last attempt to get you to understand my statement. There are a number of different definitions of a word that could meet your context/noncontradiction criteria - as long as one is consistent in your meaning. This is especially true when we speak of God who is beyond human language.

A trvial example, assume English is my second language. If I were to switch the meaning of "red" and "green" and do so consistently, I could read the Scripture in context and without contradition. A colorblind person would never discover I had the colors reversed. However, someone using "red" and "green" in the standard way could discover through questioning that I used "red" to mean something different than it meant to them.

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."

Posts 320
John Bowling | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Dec 29 2009 7:11 PM | Locked

Blair,

I didn't want to pull this thread further off topic so I've opened a new thread responding to you. See here.

perspectivelyspeaking.wordpress.com

Posts 198
Bryan Brodess | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2009 4:27 AM | Locked

MJ. Smith:

Bryan Brodess:
Then you must make sure the word agrees with context of the passage and does not contradict other areas of scripture..

Okay, I promise this is my last attempt to get you to understand my statement. There are a number of different definitions of a word that could meet your context/noncontradiction criteria - as long as one is consistent in your meaning. This is especially true when we speak of God who is beyond human language.

A trvial example, assume English is my second language. If I were to switch the meaning of "red" and "green" and do so consistently, I could read the Scripture in context and without contradition. A colorblind person would never discover I had the colors reversed. However, someone using "red" and "green" in the standard way could discover through questioning that I used "red" to mean something different than it meant to them.

I think I understand in part.. although I do not see how someone who spoke english could get "red and green" mixed up.. as they are not anywhere near the same.

I think I am refering to things like in John 6. where many people to take Jesus literaly when he says eat my flesh and drink my blood and you will have eternal life.. and thus they recieve the eucharist weeklly.. Yet as I attempted to show earlier, ( it was breef, I have a whole outline on john 6 that explains it but probably to large for in here, ) it is out of context.. so the greek word used for flesh and blood should not be taken literal as in the actual body of Christ. but symbolic as to the logos of Christ.. the gospel.. as paul calls it the death burial and ressurection of Christ.. That is what gives us eternal life. faith in that..

That is what I am trying to point out. Baptismo and its derivitives coould also be taken.. as many interpretations to do and fall with even classical greek interpretations.. it is just water..so every time many see the word baptise, they automatically assume water.. why? because many interpret the greek word and associate with water at all times, .. which is wrong..

 

edit.  I wanted to add, I was hoping the Luthran would respond.. I know the catholic response to my john 6 proposal.. Have never heard a non catholic who takes the eucharists viewpoint..

 

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2009 8:14 AM | Locked

Bryan Brodess:

That is what I am trying to point out. Baptismo and its derivitives coould also be taken.. as many interpretations to do and fall with even classical greek interpretations.. it is just water..so every time many see the word baptise, they automatically assume water.. why? because many interpret the greek word and associate with water at all times, .. which is wrong..

"associate with water at all times, .. which is wrong"  But a vast majority of the time that is the correct association. Not only did the Ethiopian eunich understand this but in the whole history of baptism (pre- and post-apostolic) it is the predominant method employed.  But I am way off-topic here. Zip it!

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 198
Bryan Brodess | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2009 8:24 AM | Locked

Matthew C Jones:

Bryan Brodess:

That is what I am trying to point out. Baptismo and its derivitives coould also be taken.. as many interpretations to do and fall with even classical greek interpretations.. it is just water..so every time many see the word baptise, they automatically assume water.. why? because many interpret the greek word and associate with water at all times, .. which is wrong..

"associate with water at all times, .. which is wrong"  But a vast majority of the time that is the correct association. Not only did the Ethiopian eunich understand this but in the whole history of baptism (pre- and post-apostolic) it is the predominant method employed.  But I am way off-topic here. Zip it!

Yes, and we will all agree the theopian was immersed in water.. I am talking about passages like 1 cor 12 ( baptised into the body) or romans 6 (baptised into death and burial) were I do not believe any water in in reference. I believe it tells us exactly what we are immersed into.. the bodym, death and burial of Christ.. yet people wish to force water into their defenitions here. Which is my point..

 

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2009 9:12 AM | Locked

Bryan Brodess:

Yes, and we will all agree the theopian was immersed in water.. I am talking about passages like 1 cor 12 ( baptised into the body) or romans 6 (baptised into death and burial) were I do not believe any water in in reference. I believe it tells us exactly what we are immersed into.. the bodym, death and burial of Christ.. yet people wish to force water into their defenitions here. Which is my point..

I fail to understand WHY the Ethiopian eunuch even bothered to get immersed in "much water" if it were not for the effect of being joined to the body through the death, burial & resurrection of Christ. It seems to me you want to be at the end destination without going through the process to get there. If God agreed with that method He would have moved the Israelites from Egypt to the Canaan using a Star Trek transporter instead of having them trek through the Red Sea.
(God did move Phillip in similar fashion to get him to the eunuch.Wink)

If water baptism is not what 1 Cor 12 & Romans 6 are talking about what type of baptism are referenced? How does a believer go about joining to the body and the death, burial & resurrection? My Pentecostal friends say it is by the baptism of the Spirit evidenced by speaking in tongues. What say you? Certainly there is SOMETHING you are baptised in/through/with. I am not disputing the purpose, I am just asking what is the method?

 

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 198
Bryan Brodess | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2009 9:22 AM | Locked

Matthew C Jones:

Bryan Brodess:

Yes, and we will all agree the theopian was immersed in water.. I am talking about passages like 1 cor 12 ( baptised into the body) or romans 6 (baptised into death and burial) were I do not believe any water in in reference. I believe it tells us exactly what we are immersed into.. the bodym, death and burial of Christ.. yet people wish to force water into their defenitions here. Which is my point..

I fail to understand WHY the Etheopian eunuch even bothered to get immersed in "much water" if it were not for the effect of being joined to the body through the death, burial & resurrection of Christ. It seems to me you want to be at the end destination without going through the process to get there. If God agreed with that method He would have moved the Israelites from Egypt to the Canaan using a Star Trek transporter instead of having them trek through the Red Sea. (God did move Phillip in similar fashion to get him to the eunuch.Wink) If water baptism is not what 1 Cor 12 & Romans 6 are talking about what type of baptism are referenced? How does a believer go about joining to the body and the death, burial & resurrection? My Pentecostal friends say it is by the baptism of the Spirit evidenced by speaking in tongues. What say you? Certainly there is SOMETHING you are baptised in/through/with.

 

Yes I have heard about this tongues thing. However, I think we can see that Paul makes it clear that certain gifts, including tongues, are only given to certain people. and only to do what God needs done.

 

As for 1 cor and rom 6, I take baptize as the verb, and the "body" , Death and Burial" as the nouns. in other words, Someone is baptising us, this would be God ( holy spirit to be precise) and what we are being placed into is the Body in 1 cor, and the death and burial of Christ in rom 6..

take it like this.

I was baptised in water.  water was the thing I was baptised in.

I was baptised in Christs death and burial, it was his death and burial I was baptised in.

I was baptised in the the boy of Christ. It was the body I was placed into.

 

do we not want to be in the body of a Christ??  Is that not out goal?  well paul tells us how that is done..

13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body

 

Who did the baptising? the one spirit.. or the holy spirit.. who is baptised,, all of us,, and what are we baptised into? the body which is what Body? the body of Christ..

 

why do people want to force water in this verse??

 

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2009 9:39 AM | Locked

Bryan Brodess:
As for 1 cor and rom 6, I take baptize as the verb, and the "body" , Death and Burial" as the nouns. in other words, Someone is baptising us, this would be God ( holy spirit to be precise) and what we are being placed into is the Body in 1 cor, and the death and burial of Christ in rom 6..
Interesting perspective that deserves a closer look.

I have two problems with this. 
1) Why did Jesus undergo water baptism? Could not the Holy Spirit have descended upon Jesus in the form of a dove without the water baptism that "fulfilled all righteousness?"
2) Why did the Great Commission include the command to baptize? If it were not something done by the believers to the new converts?

Bryan Brodess:
why do people want to force water in this verse??

Probably the same reason they have a memorial called Communion.  They place a symbolic value on a physical ritual.

FYI: I do not agree with my Pentecostal friends' interpretation.

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 198
Bryan Brodess | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2009 9:55 AM | Locked

Matthew C Jones:

Bryan Brodess:
As for 1 cor and rom 6, I take baptize as the verb, and the "body" , Death and Burial" as the nouns. in other words, Someone is baptising us, this would be God ( holy spirit to be precise) and what we are being placed into is the Body in 1 cor, and the death and burial of Christ in rom 6..
Interesting perspective that deserves a closer look.

I have two problems with this. 
1) Why did Jesus undergo water baptism? Could not the Holy Spirit have descended upon Jesus in the form of a dove without the water baptism that "fulfilled all righteousness?"
2) Why did the Great Commission include the command to baptize? If it were not something done by the believers to the new converts?

Jesus was doing what as per mosaic law needed to be done in order for arron to be high priest, He was washed, annointed then the sacrifice was given..

second.. If we read john, we also see why, John was told that the one he saw the spirit come like a dove is the one who would baptise with the holy spirit.. And john saw and testified of those things..

Just like the people saw moses wash arron, thus they knew who the high priest was, John saw jesus washed, thus he could testify who he was.

Third, John said Jesus would baptise with the holy spirit and fire.. would we not rather be baptised this way than water?

as for the commission. Look at the order.. make disciples first.. in order to be a disciple you must be saved, then baptise them.. He did not say baptise in order to make them a disciple..

I am not denying water baptism.. God commands all to be baptised, I am denying this is essential for eternal life.

but I do not want to replace spirit baptism with water.

Matt: 3: 11- 12

11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.[b] 12 His winnowing fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clean out His threshing floor, and gather His wheat into the barn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”

What is a winnowing fan? it seperates wheat from chaff..

What does wheat represent? I believe it represents all who come to Christ, the barn represents heaven. It is the baptism of the holy spirit that places us into the barn ( body of Christ)

What happens to the chaff ( I believe those who never come to Christ, thus are lost ) they are baptised with fire.. which shall NEVER BE QUENCHED.. sounds alot like hell to me..

So what do we want to be baptised with?  The holy spirit.. or fire??All of us will be baptized by Jesus.. Not all of us will like it..

Those of us who are baptised with the Holy spirit should be baptised in water.. as the first command.. burt water does not regenerate us..

Matthew C Jones:

Bryan Brodess:
why do people want to force water in this verse??

Probably the same reason they have a memorial called Communion.  They place a symbolic value on a physical ritual.

FYI: I do not agree with my Pentecostal friends' interpretation.

Yeah I can see this.. I agree completely!

 

Posts 2793
J.R. Miller | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2009 10:06 AM | Locked

Bryan Brodess:
but I do not want to replace spirit baptism with water.
I have read along this thread and since the discussion is on Spirit Baptism, I hope no one minds me making a shameless plug.  I have written two books on this topic outlining all the major views

"Promise Of The Father: Healing The Christian Legacy Of Segregation And Denominationalism"

and an analysis of all the major Scripture on this topic (along with a discussion of Jesus' water baptism and it relationship to the Saint)

"Have You Not Yet Received The Spirit?: Finding Unity Through The Baptism In The Holy Spirit"

Maybe someday I will get them published in Logos format :-), but until then if anyone is interested, you can get them from Amazon here

http://www.morethancake.org/my-books

Blessings!

My Books in Logos & FREE Training

Posts 653
Alex Scott | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2009 10:09 AM | Locked

Matthew C Jones:
If water baptism is not what 1 Cor 12 & Romans 6 are talking about what type of baptism are referenced? How does a believer go about joining to the body and the death, burial & resurrection?

I know this will offend the erudite theologians among us who insist on fragmenting everything into so many pieces that no one can understand or agree with anything or anyone, but for myself I like to keep things simple.  There is ONE BAPTISM.  Is it water, or is it Spirit?  I believe the apostles saw baptism as one - either one is INCOMPLETE without the other.  Read 1 Corinthians 10:1-2.  They were baptized IN THE CLOUD AND IN THE SEA.  Is that not an Old Testament picture or type of New Testament baptism?

Longtime Logos user (more than $30,000 in purchases) - now a second class user because I won't pay them more every month or year.

Posts 188
Kevin Taylor | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2009 10:26 AM | Locked

Dan Sheppard:

Peter Cellini:
Maybe I'm just naive...I thought that Methodists, Dispensationalists, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Baptists, Episcopalians were all protestants.  Aren't we still protesting the RC church?

 

Another "biggie" for Lutherans is infant baptism.  Not to argue, but to point out, the argument from a Lutheran point of view, is to look at circumcision.  How old was Jesus when he was circumcised?  Eight days.  HOW would Jesus know the meaning of this, unless it was done when he was grown up?  Answer: he was taught.  Also, one of the verses to which we look, is Colossians 2:11-12.  Obviously, the reference here being made, is Baptism to circumcision.

 

 

Well Dan...  Wih all due respect, the flaw of the arguement you used here for infant baptism is that circumcision has never saved one Jew and baptism by water has never saved one Christian.  All are saved by faith....  Circumcision is a sign of a covenant between Jews and God that is based on a racial identity which therefore can be applied to an infant.  All Jews are Jews whether infants or adults.  Water baptism is a ritual which demonstrates an inward work and decision of faith that an infant cannot possibly make.  The two things cannot be compared in such a way or reconciled as such.

 

 

Logos 5, Windows & Android perfect together....

Posts 198
Bryan Brodess | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2009 12:40 PM | Locked

Alex Scott:

Matthew C Jones:
If water baptism is not what 1 Cor 12 & Romans 6 are talking about what type of baptism are referenced? How does a believer go about joining to the body and the death, burial & resurrection?

I know this will offend the erudite theologians among us who insist on fragmenting everything into so many pieces that no one can understand or agree with anything or anyone, but for myself I like to keep things simple.  There is ONE BAPTISM.  Is it water, or is it Spirit?  I believe the apostles saw baptism as one - either one is INCOMPLETE without the other.  Read 1 Corinthians 10:1-2.  They were baptized IN THE CLOUD AND IN THE SEA.  Is that not an Old Testament picture or type of New Testament baptism?

Hi Alex. Thanks for your respons. Not to argue with you. But I see that "one" baptism" differently..

Scripture speaks of many baptism.. The jews being baptised into the cloud with moses. The baptism of the robe of Christ when he returns to earth as it is baptized in blood, The ceremonial baptisms of the jews according to mosaic law. Holy spirit baptism, We have jesus being baptosed in water "johns baptism" and the baptism he spoke of later

Luke 12: 50 - 51 50 I have a baptism to be baptized with, and how great is my distress until it is accomplished!
The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001. Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

which he was seperating his water baptism from the true baptism he came to do ( he also later asked his disciples if they could share in this baptism, and said they would certainly share in it.. which we all have the ability (rom 6) because I think he is talking about his baptism into our redemption through his blood, the cross)

The author of Hebrews talks about Baptism in plural ( heb 6:2 although it is translated washings in some bibles, the word baptizo is used.)

The one baptism in eph I believe is speaking of the only baptism that counts towards our eternal destination. which would be Holy Spirit baptism, the rest of the baptism, although important, do not have a bearing on ones eternal destiny.. which is why Paul said there is only one that realy matters..

anyway, this is how I interpret eph 4: 5.. of all the different baptism,, there is only one that counts..

Hope I made sense!

 

Posts 198
Bryan Brodess | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2009 12:46 PM | Locked

KevinTaylor:

Dan Sheppard:

Peter Cellini:
Maybe I'm just naive...I thought that Methodists, Dispensationalists, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Baptists, Episcopalians were all protestants.  Aren't we still protesting the RC church?

 

Another "biggie" for Lutherans is infant baptism.  Not to argue, but to point out, the argument from a Lutheran point of view, is to look at circumcision.  How old was Jesus when he was circumcised?  Eight days.  HOW would Jesus know the meaning of this, unless it was done when he was grown up?  Answer: he was taught.  Also, one of the verses to which we look, is Colossians 2:11-12.  Obviously, the reference here being made, is Baptism to circumcision.

 

 

Well Dan...  Wih all due respect, the flaw of the arguement you used here for infant baptism is that circumcision has never saved one Jew and baptism by water has never saved one Christian.  All are saved by faith....  Circumcision is a sign of a covenant between Jews and God that is based on a racial identity which therefore can be applied to an infant.  All Jews are Jews whether infants or adults.  Water baptism is a ritual which demonstrates an inward work and decision of faith that an infant cannot possibly make.  The two things cannot be compared in such a way or reconciled as such.

 

 

I agree

Col 2: 11 - 14

11 In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which yyou were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. 13 And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, 14 by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross.
The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001. Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

Paul makes it clear. Spiritual Circumcision, which represented cleansing to the jews, is done By god himself. Not the hands of men, Just like our spiritual baptism is done by the one who rose Christ from the dead, which is the holy spirit. and it is because of this spiritual cleansing that we are spirituallyu clean, why? because we shared in the death of Christ, and thus had the certificate of debt removed, and thus were passed from death to life ( spiritually thinking or in other words born again"

 

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2009 1:07 PM | Locked

Alex Scott:
There is ONE BAPTISM.  Is it water, or is it Spirit?  I believe the apostles saw baptism as one - either one is INCOMPLETE without the other.  Read 1 Corinthians 10:1-2.  They were baptized IN THE CLOUD AND IN THE SEA.  Is that not an Old Testament picture or type of New Testament baptism?

"There is ONE BAPTISM":    What? Could it be so simple as "One Lord, one faith & one baptism"? - Ephesians 4:5
I only wish my Independent Baptist friends would understand my baptism is into Jesus Christ and I am part of his body, the church-at-large, not just a "member" of a small local congregation.

 I agree Alex. Acts 2:38 shows the two distinctives, baptism and receiving the Holy Spirit, seem to go hand in hand.

I guess the bottom line for me is I am saved by the grace of God and my works have nothing to do with my salvation outside of possibly being a sign that God has saved me. Good works counts for nothing towards salvation but salvation will result in good works. But just because I can not earn my salvation does not mean I should not perform good works to glorify God and be obedient to my Lord's commands. (Baptism, communion, giving, worshipping.)

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 198
Bryan Brodess | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2009 1:12 PM | Locked

Matthew C Jones:

 

 I agree Alex. Acts 2:38 shows the two distinctives, baptism and receiving the Holy Spirit, seem to go hand in hand.

 

Conserning acts 2; 38.. Repent is 2nd person, Baptise is 3rd.. Literally Peter is saying all of you repent, and let them be baptised.. how can we get around this??  who is them who are baptised so we can recieve the holy spirit?

 

Just a thought and question

 

 

 

Posts 198
Bryan Brodess | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Dec 30 2009 1:13 PM | Locked

Matthew C Jones:
I guess the bottom line for me is I am saved by the grace of God and my works have nothing to do with my salvation outside of possibly being a sign that God has saved me. Good works counts for nothing towards salvation but salvation will result in good works. But just because I can not earn my salvation does not mean I should not perform good works to glorify God and be obedient to my Lord's commands. (Baptism, communion, giving, worshipping.)

 

Now this I agree with :)  Some people say I am anti baptism, communion which is far from the truth!!

 

Page 12 of 16 (315 items) « First ... < Previous 10 11 12 13 14 Next > ... Last » | RSS