Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: Belteshazzar

“Why did you drag “believer’s baptism” into this?”

Because it IS relevant.

Theologians and creeds can’t even figure out the obvious - that Believer’s Baptism is clearly taught in scripture. If theologians can’t even get THAT right, then just how useful are their speculations on the nature of man and deity in Christ to salvation?

Why should we worry about the creeds of a church that taught the existence of priests instead of the universal priesthood of all believers, and infant baptism versus believer’s baptism? Just how essentials are creeds developed by man for salvation?

The point Andy Stanley seems to have been making was simply that knowledge of and acceptance of the Virgin Birth is not a prerequisite for salvation. There isn’t anything radical about that, provided he ALSO teaches that believers need to accept the revealed truth of the Virgin Birth - once they know it.

I’m not the one who brought up the Athanasian Creed as essential teaching.


46 posted on 12/28/2016 9:07:00 AM PST by Mr Rogers (We're a nation of infants, ruled by their emotion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies ]


To: Mr Rogers

We’ll try this one more time, and one only, keeping it very simple. Which assertion of the Athanasian Creed is not faithful to the Scriptures? If you designate one, or more, please cite Scripture that contradicts it.


48 posted on 12/28/2016 9:16:04 AM PST by Belteshazzar (We are not justified by our works but by faith - De Jacob et vita beata 2 +Ambrose of Milan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson