The Neverending Story (The Christian Chronicles) -- Thread 162

Southern Baptists ending talks with Catholic Church ^ | 3/24/01 | AP

[malakhi]

The Neverending Story
An ongoing debate on Scripture, Tradition, History and Interpretation.

Statesmen may plan and speculate for liberty, but it is religion and morality alone which can establish the principles upon which freedom can securely stand. The only foundation of a free constitution is pure virtue. - John Adams

Threads 1-50

Threads 51-100

Threads 101-150

Thread 151	Thread 152	Thread 153	Thread 154	Thread 155	Thread 156	Thread 157
Thread 158<;/a>	Thread 159	Thread 160

The Neverending Story (The Christian Chronicles) -- Thread 161

[SoothingDave]

As far as the Koran or book of Mormons, Jesus did not quote from them as he did from the OT Scriptures according to the Bible.

Using that logic, angelo can reject the New Testament, because YHWH never quoted it in the Old Testament.

Point is that the New Testament is a, well, new revelation from God. And the Muslim will tell you that the Koran is a new revelation from God. And the Mormon will tell you that the Book of Mormon is a new revelation from God.

Why would a Jew believe any of them?

Oh, and if you go to the very bottom of the screen you can select to see the message in "new style" (If it says "old style" you're aready doing the new thing. ) Click on "settings" and customize how many message you would like to download at one time. To speed up things on WebTV you might want to set it for 20 messages. Then you can see messages 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, etc. all on different screens.

SD

[malakhi]

Nope, no italics in IE either. Must be your browser.

[SoothingDave]

Taking someone's word for face value just destroyed 0ver 6000 lives in NY not too long ago, plus collateral damage. Yet, you all would like us to just take everybody's word for it.

This is low. Very low. I'll give you the opportunity to retract that and save yourself from looking like a "big time" asshole.

SD

[pegleg]

All Christians have been around since the beginning of Christianity. Anyone who says differently lives in a fantasy world and can't be taken seriously.

I don't know what you mean by all Christians. However, to say that Baptists have been around since Apostolic times is pure fantasy.

[al_c]

Good afternoon, everybody. Sorry I'm late ... I'm off today and don't get online at home much.

Friday, October 12, 2001
My daughter Hannah's first birthday!

First Reading: Responsorial Psalm: Gospel:

Joel 1:13-15 & 2:1-2 Psalm 9:2-3, 6, 8-9, 16 Luke 11:15-26 We are at Jesus' disposal. If he wants you to be sick in bed, if he wants you to proclaim His work in the street, if he wants you to clean the toilets all day, that's all right, everything is all right. We must say, "I belong to you. You can do whatever you like." And this ..is our strength, and this is the joy of the Lord.  -- Mother Teresa

---------------

From wau.org ...

Throughout his Gospel, St. Luke painted vivid pictures of the devil's reality and power, but he was just as quick to show demons trembling in Jesus' presence, begging for mercy. In other words, as powerful as Satan is, Jesus is far more powerful.

As he has done since he first rebelled against God, Satan continues to roam the earth, seeking to rob God of his children's love and trust. We all experience this in the temptations we face every day. In many subtle and not-so-subtle ways, the devil tries to undermine the truths we've received in Scriptures and to weaken our trust in the Father's love and provision. Jesus, too, endured Satan's attempts to lure him to mistrust his Father, to desire power, to pursue the things of the world, or to be consumed with selfish ambitions (Luke 4:1-13). But, because of his steadfast love for God, Jesus triumphed over the enemy. Now, by the blood of his cross, Jesus has provided deliverance and freedom for all of us as we learn to rely on him.

Jesus loves to deliver us from evil. He loves setting his people free. But as powerful a thing as deliverance is, it's not enough for Jesus. For him, deliverance from the evil one is only a doorway to an even greater blessing. Jesus wants to deliver us so he can fill us with his very life. He wants to free us from bondage to sin so that we will be more open to the life, love, and power of the Trinity.

Today is a good day to ask yourself, "How do I view my life? What are the limits of my horizon?" Do you see yourself as a sinner who struggles to love God? Or are you a lover of God who needs to be set free from sin? How much hope do you have in your future? Do you see the vast potential for holiness and service God has placed in you? Or do you think you will just barely squeak into heaven? In your prayer today, let Jesus raise your sights. Let him convince you of his absolute victory over Satan so you can confidently take up all the blessings your Redeemer has won for you.

"Father, I thank you for sending Jesus to destroy Satan's power. Come, Lord Jesus, and fill every corner of my life. I want to be an overcomer with you."

---------------

Have a great day, everyone. And pardon my shameless plug for my little birthday girl ...

Happy Birthday, Hannah!

[Iowegian]

He may not have grasped the finer points of the philosophy, but he sure lived it. That is the point. His authority was Scripture.

This is not true. He is an anarchist, who seemingly hates all authority (RC and Protestant). You've seen his posts and know that. This is not sola Scriptura, because Scripture does not teach this, quite the contrary. Once again, you still attack it based on your misperceptions.

[Invincibly Ignorant]

wow........moron and then asshole on the same thread.

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Moron was much gentler.

[malakhi]

I got a freepmail back from John Rob, and he says "You can have up to 65,535 posts on one thread."

I'm checking a few other things, to make sure that everyone will be able to access replies on looooooong threads, but I'm looking at changing the format to take advantage of the new navigation features.

I'm also in the process of setting up an off-site archive of old threads. Once these things are done, I will post a new thread with the links. In the meantime, it looks like we can keep posting to this one!

Please flag me with any suggestions you may have. Thanks!

[malakhi]

Happy Birthday Hannah! What a cutie, al! My daughter Adrienne is 14 months old today.

[SoothingDave]

This is not sola Scriptura, because Scripture does not teach this, quite the contrary

"Scripture" does not teach it to us, but it apparently does to him. And guess what his final authority is? Nope, not the Catholic Church. Not any church, any group of believers. Just him and the Scriptures and the "Holy Spirit."

SD

[SoothingDave]

Congratulations to the lovely Hannah. Do the supermarkets there give out a free cake for your child's first birthday?

They used to just give 'em out here freely, now I think they give you a special cake for her to have as her own when you buy one.

SD

[SoothingDave]

I got a freepmail back from John Rob, and he says "You can have up to 65,535 posts on one thread."

Let's go for it! We'll make him have to switch to 32 bits. :-)

SD

[the808bass]

We are the ones with history on our side, not you. You don't want to buy the historical evidence from the early churchmen? Fine. If you are consistent, you will say that there is no reliable historical record before about 300 A.D., and all before that is pre-historic. This is just another example of your denying the evidence because it doesn't match the doctrinal innovations of Protestantism.

Please read the following carefully. Then, before you post a paragraph like unto the above, refrain in the interest of good judgment and intellectual honesty.

There is no positive New Testament indication for infant baptism. From the Church of England:

It is clear that the recpients of Baptism were normally adults and not infants; and it must be admitted that there is no conclusive evidence in the New Testament for the Baptism of infants. All we can say is that it is possible that the "households" sais to have been baptized may have included chlidren (Acts 16:15; 1 Cor. 1:16). But at any rate it is clear that the doctrine of Baptism in the New Testament is stated in relation to the Baptism of adults, as was also the case (with two or three exceptions) in the writers of the first three centuries... In every recorded case of Baptism in the New Testament, the Gospel has been heard and accepted, and the condition of faith (and presumably of repentance) has been consciously fulfilled prior to the reception of the Sacrament (Baptism and Confirmation Today, a report of the Joint Committees on Baptism, Confirmation, and Holy Communion of the Church of England).

If you would like to take Joachim Jeremias' view of the usage of "household" in those (in)famous passages, I will respond with the well-reasoned argument of Beasley-Murray. Further, Cullman and Jeremias' attempts to read baptism into Mark 10:13-16 and then say it was an early justification for infant baptism is curious as baptism is not mentioned. When Jesus made the point about becoming as a child to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, in context, it is clear that he is speaking of the necessity of simple trust, not infant baptism.

Let us turn our attention now to the Didache, dated probably to the first half of the second century (a bit before the 3rd by my reckoning). In Schaff's (who is, in the interests of integrity, a Presbyterian) translation (pp.184ff)

Now concerning baptism, baptize thus: Having first taught all these things baptize ye into [eis] the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost in living water. And if thou hast not living water, baptize into other water; and if thou canst not in cold, then in warm [water]. But if thou has neither (is that what we're reduced to? Do we have churches without running water? No water nearby?), pour water thrice upon the head in [eis] the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

Note that there is no allowance for infant baptism in the passage which predates the ones you cited. In fact, there is an implicit prohibition. "Having first taught all these things." This would seem to imply that in the 1st century, Believer's Baptism (quelle horreur) was de rigeur.

[dignan3]

In the spirit of our Protestant brethren, my suggestion is, if we are just going to continue without any more "move to thread x"'s then we should start a entirely new thread and entitle it something like "The Neverending Story (The Christian Chronicles - Reformed)" and proceed from there.

Considering that a thread can contain 65,535 posts and that our first 100 threads constituted 18,854 posts, we should be OK with a continuos thread for quite a while. I knew my seemingly worthless "first 100 threads statistics" would come in handy someday!

Pray for John Paul II

[Iowegian]

"Scripture" does not teach it to us, but it apparently does to him. And guess what his final authority is?

Kinda sounds like it might be the Watchtower. Sola Scriptura does not reject church authority and does affirm sound doctrine. All false doctrines are, like crimes, personal responsibilty. BTW, RCC false doctrine is your personal resposibilty too.

[Iowegian]

I knew my seemingly worthless "first 100 threads statistics" would come in handy someday!

Worthless? That was really cool. Thanks again for doing it.

[SoothingDave]

Kinda sounds like it might be the Watchtower.

Agreed.

Sola Scriptura does not reject church authority and does affirm sound doctrine.

Really? If your current pastor is convinced from Scripture that A is true, but you know from your reading that A is false and B is true, do you listen to your pastor or do you listen to your reading of Scripture?

All false doctrines are, like crimes, personal responsibilty.

And like crimes, we need to assess a person's culpability.

BTW, RCC false doctrine is your personal resposibilty too.

Whew. Good thing there isn't any.

SD

[Iowegian]

Good thing there isn't any.

You know who the final authority for that is. (It's not the Pope or the magic sternum.)