What is meant by saying we are made righteous?
-
-
First Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
I think this might opem many truth and solve alot of issues and misunderstanding about the good gospel and also who we are in Christ Jesus and about , the do's and don'Ts some say we have to do to get on God side , or get saved, redeemed, justified and holy!To start I more... I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
Edited by evangelist on 11/27/2011 16:05:31
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 01/25/2012
Location: USA
quote:
I think this might opem many truth and solve alot of issues and misunderstanding about the good gospel and also who we are in Christ Jesus and about , the do's and don'Ts some say we have to do to get on God side , or get saved, redeemed, justified and holy!
Jesus said, "Be holy as My father in Heaven is holy."
St. Paul said, "Work out your salvation with fear and trembling."
Jesus said, "Do the Commandments."
Jesus answered,"Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God!"
Jesus said, "Take and eat, this is My Body." "Take and drink, this is My Blood."
Jesus said, "Do this, in remembrance of Me."
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
quote:
Originally posted by Faith_at_Large
That's right. That is why under the New Covenant, both men and women are baptized.
Quote Evangelist:
We all should get water baptized, but it is not a must, and that is why Paul said I am glad I came not to baptize!
So if baptism was a condition way to for salvation and to get born again Paul would have to repent for saying what he said in the bible!
Now lets look at right Biblical principal and precept. Paul compares Baptism to Circumcision. Baptism is the new Circumcsion made without hands - in that foreskins are not physically cut off the body. Both enter someone into a covenant. But the New Covenant is much better than the old.
Quote Evangelism:
Baptism and circumcision are both works , dome with the hands and both are physicaly done, but Paul is saying the oppersite, it is a spiritual heart condition to the NT covenant!
Even under the Old Covenant, baptism was special and both men and women did this. Baptism was to wash away ritual impurity. This was preparation for what was to come. John the Baptist prepared the people with a Baptism of Repentence for the Remission of Sins.
Even John's Baptism remitted sins, so I am shocked when some come out and say that Christian water baptism does not.
Quote Evangelist:
Yes! and make notes it was the OT way which John the baptist ritually did to get sins forgiven before Jesus died, but now after Jesus death it different don't you see that Rom 10:9,10??
The problem you have is that you assume that everything is a one shot deal.
Quote Evangelist:It is not a problem it is the gospel good news which you reject, and the finished works of the cross for us which is a done deal, so the believers authtority is in our hand now, praise the Lord!
Please FAITH get out being under the Old covenant and come into the NT Covenant which is better and for real!
Converts to Judaism had to be of the age of reason before they could be circumcized, but children of believing Jews were circumcized at 8 days.
Quote Evangelist:
That why salvation in Christ being born again is at an age of reasoning, and that is another reason why getting an infant baptized is only getting them wet with no effects!
Converts to Christianity had to be of the age of reason before they could be baptized, but children of believers could be baptized after they were born (initially, they too were baptized at 8 days.)
Of course, once either group reached the age of reason, they had to accept the faith for themselves. That is only reasonable, but why would the children of believers be treated like outsiders? Like pagans.
According to Paul, children of believers were made holy by virtue of their parent's faith, else they would be unholy. That is why pagan infants could not be baptized until they were old enough to profess their faith.
Why do you treat the children of God as if they were unholy pagans?
That is self righteousness to the core, and also you can't ne made holy by someone else, salvation and getting saved is personal , and only you can get saved though Jesus alome not your parents or family members, because thier blood can't save anyone only Christ , and that is activated to people only by faith personally!
that is why the whole world is not saved, because if it would be possible to have it your way Jesus our Father would have the whole world saved, because He said in Peter He want none to perish, and Jesus love and concern is more than any parent or family comcern!
one love
I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/17/2007
Location: Canada
Wow. Let's take your response to me one peice at a time.
quote:
Quote Evangelist:
We all should get water baptized, but it is not a must, and that is why Paul said I am glad I came not to baptize!
So if baptism was a condition way to for salvation and to get born again Paul would have to repent for saying what he said in the bible!
Context. Why did Paul say that he was glad that he did not come to baptize them? What was going on that prompted Paul to say this?
Please responde to this one question before we continue with the next one.
Pax et Bonum,
Faith_at_Large
"There are some in the Church, who not only do not do what is good, but even persecute it, and hate in others what they neglect to do themselves. The sin of these men is not that of infirmity or ignorance, but deliberate willful sin." — Pope St. Gregory the Great (AD 540-604)
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
quote:
Originally posted by Faith_at_Large
Wow. Let's take your response to me one peice at a time.
quote:
Quote Evangelist:
We all should get water baptized, but it is not a must, and that is why Paul said I am glad I came not to baptize!
So if baptism was a condition way to for salvation and to get born again Paul would have to repent for saying what he said in the bible!
Context. Why did Paul say that he was glad that he did not come to baptize them? What was going on that prompted Paul to say this?
Please responde to this one question before we continue with the next one.
There was strife in Corinth and many other pride people who he didn't want to baptized them at that time but at that time water baptism was essential for corithians church!
Again I am for water baptism and teach and believe every believer should get baptized in obedience and a witness of ehst happen in the real spiritual world before God!
one love
I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/17/2007
Location: Canada
What was the strife? Be specific. What exactly was Paul objecting to that made him glad that he had not baptized any of them?
Pax et Bonum,
Faith_at_Large
"There are some in the Church, who not only do not do what is good, but even persecute it, and hate in others what they neglect to do themselves. The sin of these men is not that of infirmity or ignorance, but deliberate willful sin." — Pope St. Gregory the Great (AD 540-604)
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
quote:
Originally posted by Faith_at_Large
What was the strife? Be specific. What exactly was Paul objecting to that made him glad that he had not baptized any of them?
Pride, and also believing more on the spiritual than on the carnal ritual of get baptized!
Joh:3:6: That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
one love
I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
Edited by evangelist on 02/05/2012 11:24:45
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/17/2007
Location: Canada
quote:
Originally posted by evangelist
quote:
Originally posted by Faith_at_Large
What was the strife? Be specific. What exactly was Paul objecting to that made him glad that he had not baptized any of them?
Pride, and also believing more on the spiritual than on the carnal ritual of get baptized!
Joh:3:6: That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
one love
This is going to be a lengthy discussion.
Let go back to the basics. This is the context for that verse directly from Paul's letter to the Corinthians:
1 Corinthians 1:10-15 10Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
11For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.
12Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
13Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
14I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;
15Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.
You are partially correct in that pride was involved, but not specifically over baptism but rather over who did the baptism. The primary issue was not pride or baptism but schism as each group was dividing the church along the lines of WHO did the baptizing, they were judging each other by which Apostle or Evangelist brought them into the Faith. Each judging that the man who led their group was more important than the man leading the other groups.
This exact same issue rose up during the Reformation as each group aligned themselves with the one who founded their group. I of Martin Luther, I of John Knox, I of John Calvin.
This is why Paul was glad that he had not baptized them, so that they could no say that they belonged to him.
All Christians are baptized into Christ, not the man who baptized them.
This has NOTHING to do with flesh or spirit. Zip, Nada, absolutely nothing. This was not an issue flesh or spirit, but schism.
It did not even have anything do do with baptism. The only part that baptism played was in how they lined up.
Please read that first chapter again and see if you come up with anything different. And please support your position with scriptures from that chapter and no place else. In this case, this is important as we are exploring the specific context for that line Verse 14 "I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;"
Pax et Bonum,
Faith_at_Large
"There are some in the Church, who not only do not do what is good, but even persecute it, and hate in others what they neglect to do themselves. The sin of these men is not that of infirmity or ignorance, but deliberate willful sin." — Pope St. Gregory the Great (AD 540-604)
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
quote:
Originally posted by Faith_at_Large
quote:
Originally posted by evangelist
quote:
Originally posted by Faith_at_Large
What was the strife? Be specific. What exactly was Paul objecting to that made him glad that he had not baptized any of them?
Pride, and also believing more on the spiritual than on the carnal ritual of get baptized!
Joh:3:6: That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
one love
This is going to be a lengthy discussion.
Let go back to the basics. This is the context for that verse directly from Paul's letter to the Corinthians:
1 Corinthians 1:10-15 10Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
11For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you.
12Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.
13Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
14I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;
15Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.
You are partially correct in that pride was involved, but not specifically over baptism but rather over who did the baptism. The primary issue was not pride or baptism but schism as each group was dividing the church along the lines of WHO did the baptizing, they were judging each other by which Apostle or Evangelist brought them into the Faith. Each judging that the man who led their group was more important than the man leading the other groups.
This exact same issue rose up during the Reformation as each group aligned themselves with the one who founded their group. I of Martin Luther, I of John Knox, I of John Calvin.
This is why Paul was glad that he had not baptized them, so that they could no say that they belonged to him.
All Christians are baptized into Christ, not the man who baptized them.
This has NOTHING to do with flesh or spirit. Zip, Nada, absolutely nothing. This was not an issue flesh or spirit, but schism.
It did not even have anything do do with baptism. The only part that baptism played was in how they lined up.
Please read that first chapter again and see if you come up with anything different. And please support your position with scriptures from that chapter and no place else. In this case, this is important as we are exploring the specific context for that line Verse 14 "I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;"
What be even more better if you start another water baptism thread here which we really have dozen of old thread on the topic here in the pass before your time here!
one love
I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/17/2007
Location: Canada
If you like, but this is more than water baptism. This is all about context. I will copy and paste your original response to me on the new thread, and we can take it bit by bit on that one.
Pax et Bonum,
Faith_at_Large
"There are some in the Church, who not only do not do what is good, but even persecute it, and hate in others what they neglect to do themselves. The sin of these men is not that of infirmity or ignorance, but deliberate willful sin." — Pope St. Gregory the Great (AD 540-604)
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/17/2007
Location: Canada
Done. We can continue on my new thread on context. I will be focussing on that one for a while and not answering any others until we get a grip on the proper context for Paul's position on Baptism.
Pax et Bonum,
Faith_at_Large
"There are some in the Church, who not only do not do what is good, but even persecute it, and hate in others what they neglect to do themselves. The sin of these men is not that of infirmity or ignorance, but deliberate willful sin." — Pope St. Gregory the Great (AD 540-604)
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
quote:
Originally posted by Faith_at_Large
Done. We can continue on my new thread on context. I will be focussing on that one for a while and not answering any others until we get a grip on the proper context for Paul's position on Baptism.
WELL, as long as you reject the bible to be a sort of a mirror, and don't see it as your final authority it will be a bunch of loops and merry-go-round discusions, so have fun , but don't let any pride get in the way!
one love
I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
Christ's holiness has to become our holiness.
God recognizes only one person as holy: Jesus Christ, our Savior, stands alone in perfect holiness. And because Jesus alone is holy and perfect, God won't recognize any other person. Therefore, if we are ever to be received by the heavenly Father, we must be in Christ. As we stand before him, it is solely by the grace of Christ and no merit of our own.
"That he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby" (Ephesians 2:16). "Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain [two] one new man, so making peace" (2:15).
Because of Christ's work on the cross, man could no longer attempt to be holy by keeping God's law. He couldn't become holy by good works, righteous deeds or any human effort. Instead, the Father would accept only one man as holy: the new, resurrected man.
And when this new man presented to his Father all who believe in him, the Father responds: "I receive them all as holy, because they are in my holy Son." "He hath made us accepted in the beloved" (1:6).
Now, this one holy, blameless man has a body. And we comprise that body. "Ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular" (1 Corinthians 12:27). We are made bone of Christ's bone and flesh of his flesh. And we are adopted into his family: "We, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another" (Romans 12:5).
Here is the important part: Because we are in Christ, we are made holy. "If the root be holy, so are the branches" (Romans 11:16). "I am the vine, ye are the branches" (John 15:5).
So, you see, holiness is not something we can attain or work up. Rather, it is something we believe by faith and trust in Jesus' work. God accepts us as holy only as we have faith in Christ and abide in him by the Holy Spirit. I repeat: The path to holiness is not through human ability, but through faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, who has accomplished all for us.
What a wonderful answer to the anxious cries of multitudes who thirst to be holy. We are holy as we rest in Christ's holiness! Our holiness is his holiness — flowing to us, the branches, from the root.
Yet this doctrine of holiness hasn't always been the practice of the church. Often holiness has been thought of only in terms of outward behavior
one love
I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/17/2007
Location: Canada
quote:
Originally posted by evangelist
quote:
Originally posted by Faith_at_Large
Done. We can continue on my new thread on context. I will be focussing on that one for a while and not answering any others until we get a grip on the proper context for Paul's position on Baptism.
WELL, as long as you reject the bible to be a sort of a mirror, and don't see it as your final authority it will be a bunch of loops and merry-go-round discusions, so have fun , but don't let any pride get in the way!
one love
Evangelist, I consider the Word of God to be my Final Authority. I have proven that time and again on this forum.
I have been quoting the Bible alone in all of our discussions and and only quoted the Catechism when you asked specifically about the Catholic position as taught by the Church.
I have never quoted a Pope or any other man.
You on the other hand, have quoted Andrew Wommack more often than the Bible, and especially when the Bible did not support your position.
You have shown the teachings of men to be your final authority repeatedly so do go insulting me with any accusations of loops and confusion.
I have shown you what I believe from the Scriptures. You have consistantly refused to answer my scripture passages and instead showed out of context verses that you forced into a man-made contradiction with the plain texts that I have shown you.
So stop with the insults.
Either deal with that thread and work with me. Or admit that you don't know the scriptures because you have been spoonfed everything you know from men and not the Bible.
Pax et Bonum,
Faith_at_Large
"There are some in the Church, who not only do not do what is good, but even persecute it, and hate in others what they neglect to do themselves. The sin of these men is not that of infirmity or ignorance, but deliberate willful sin." — Pope St. Gregory the Great (AD 540-604)
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
quote:
Originally posted by Faith_at_Large
quote:
Originally posted by evangelist
quote:
Originally posted by Faith_at_Large
Done. We can continue on my new thread on context. I will be focussing on that one for a while and not answering any others until we get a grip on the proper context for Paul's position on Baptism.
WELL, as long as you reject the bible to be a sort of a mirror, and don't see it as your final authority it will be a bunch of loops and merry-go-round discusions, so have fun , but don't let any pride get in the way!
one love
Evangelist, I consider the Word of God to be my Final Authority. I have proven that time and again on this forum.
I have been quoting the Bible alone in all of our discussions and and only quoted the Catechism when you asked specifically about the Catholic position as taught by the Church.
I have never quoted a Pope or any other man.
You on the other hand, have quoted Andrew Wommack more often than the Bible, and especially when the Bible did not support your position.
You have shown the teachings of men to be your final authority repeatedly so do go insulting me with any accusations of loops and confusion.
I have shown you what I believe from the Scriptures. You have consistantly refused to answer my scripture passages and instead showed out of context verses that you forced into a man-made contradiction with the plain texts that I have shown you.
So stop with the insults.
Either deal with that thread and work with me. Or admit that you don't know the scriptures because you have been spoonfed everything you know from men and not the Bible.
Where did you learn to read from the Holy Ghost like wiggle worth or from men?
one love
I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
Edited by evangelist on 02/06/2012 09:40:03
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/17/2007
Location: Canada
My mother taught me how to read. A public school gave me my first personal Bible. I read on my own, no man to teach me because the local congragation of my Church betrayed me by refusing to teach doctrine or history or provide any instruction on interpretation of the scriptures.
I had no choice but to be self-taught with the Holy Spirit as my ONLY guide.
I did not have ANY influence from men because even my own parents trusted the Church to provide better instruction on the faith than they could.
I was BETRAYED by the men in my Church. And I would not be a Catholic today were it not for the Holy Spirit dwelling in me.
Were it not for the Grace of God, I would be a militant atheist tearing down the Church and all of Christianity with her at every opportunity.
MY CHURCH BETRAYED ME. They left me to fend for myself with nothing but a Protestant Bible - published by Gideons - King James Version New Testament and Psalms.
I did not have any teacher. The ones who were supposted to teach me taught me warm fuzzy theology only - Jesus loves me. That is as deep as it got. But they would not teach me who HE really was, or what HE taught. They treated the Bible as if it were a fairy tale and taught it as such.
But, the Holy Spirit was already inside me in spite of the local Church's arrogance and insufficiency. The sacraments work even if the priests are the most decadent and unholy of sinners. The sacraments work because ultimately Christ is their minister, not any man.
The Holy Spirit guided me in my studies and helped me to understand what I was reading. Like all who are born again, I was given an extraordinary gift which has stood me in good stead. I survived the failure of my Church in Canada. And as an adult, I was there to see the Holy Spirit sweep through her like a raging fire, burning away all that nonsense that stole the faith of a whole generation of Catholics.
I got to witness the renewal of my Church by a power greater than any man. I got to see saints walking among us, real men and women of God like you have never seen.
I am Catholic because the Holy Spirit showed me the way.
Pax et Bonum,
Faith_at_Large
"There are some in the Church, who not only do not do what is good, but even persecute it, and hate in others what they neglect to do themselves. The sin of these men is not that of infirmity or ignorance, but deliberate willful sin." — Pope St. Gregory the Great (AD 540-604)
|
|
Topic Locked
Subscribe by Email
RSS