FK : I was referring to this passage: 1 Cor 15:3-8 : 3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures 5 and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
Dear Paul says a lot of things, but we know he wasn't there when it happened, so don't use him as a witness. There are other objections to this. First, according to what Scriptures did Christ die? And according to what Scriptures did was He raised [sic] on the third day? The only Scriptures in Paul's days was the OT, and I don't remember the OT saying the Son of God will die and "will be raised" (rather than will rise) on the third day.
Second, he says Christ first appeared to "Peter and then to the Twelve [sic]." What Twelve? At the Pentecost (Mat 28) there were still only eleven and some even doubted Jesus.
Third, who are all the apostles in verse 7? How many apostles were there at the time of the Resurrection? Obviosuly, if this is what Paul really wrote, then he sounds like he was confabulating, but then the Greeks of Corinth wouldn't have known the difference anyway!
So, you question whether Jesus was objectively dead according to scripture based on these flimsy hypotheticals?
Flimsy hypotheticals? LOL! Let's not go there, FK.
We have to be reasonable [sic] here. The Romans had an IMAGE to maintain. If you went up, you didn't come down alive. NO ONE DID. We have this: Mark 15:42-45
Reasonable when it comes to a priori faith? LOL! And the Christians didn't have an agenda?
From here you have to wholly invent that the centurion was lying or otherwise covering for Christ. There is ZERO evidence of this...There IS evidence in scripture
Where was Mark when all this happened? Was he with Pilate? Or maybe with Peter who was neither by the Cross nor next to Pilate? You call this hearsay evidence? LOL!
These Romans were not pansies, their rep was on the line. Neither were the Jews who were also motivated to prove all of this a lie. No, if this was a scam it would have been found out, but it wasn't.
Well, Christians also had an agenda and an image to defend. And there is no reason whatsoever to claim that every conspiracy must be discovered.
Too many people saw Him resurrected with their own eyes and lived MANY years to testify about it, as Paul tells us.
The Gospels do not corroborate this. That is something coming from Paul who wasn't there and who was talking to Greeks who knew exactly nothing about the Jews or their religion, laws and customs, or what happened. Most of the people who preached Christ crucified never saw Christ crucified. They believed the stories they heard from others that He was crucified and that he rose on the third day.
I thought the Gospels are the only way for you to know God
Without the Gospels we could never know Christ.
The Bible says that its own words will be nonsense to the lost, all logic and sense notwithstanding. To a believer, though, the Bible fits like a glove, consistent in both history and reason.
I couldn't have said it better. :) If I wanted to give myself any credibility and fence off any forthcoming criticism, I would have used the same argument. I could just say, my own words will be nonsense to the lost...so now you know that if any of this doesn't make any sense you are lost. :)
My version just says "after", and Strong's backs that up as an acceptable definition. Your interpretation is not mandated at all. "At some point" after the resurrection they believed fully. True.
The Spirit was given to them after the Resurrection but before the Pentecost (John 2:22), and at Pentecost some of the 11 still doubted (Mat 28:17)
Paul's eyes were blind, but his faith could NOT have been more based in reality. He experienced a real zapping, first hand, for real. Paul is the LAST person who would ever say that his FAITH was blind. He says the opposite, that his faith was DIRECTLY from Christ.
What is reality, FK? He tells us he was zapped and then he not only believed but knew it all. Gnosticism par excellence! No reason involved, no growing in faith; just signed, sealed and delivered all in one package...the secret handshake and secret knowledge all given in an instant. But if I wanted people to believe me, I would have said it was from Christ too. Where else comes faith anyway if not from God?
That is like saying: "He who has believed and has been baptized and has balanced his checkbook shall be saved".
No, that's your interpretation. The sentence clearly says that those who believe and are baptized will be saved. Those who do not believe will be lost. Why would non-believers be baptized? But a believe is not to just believe but be baptized as well in order to be saved.
Belief is salvation, baptism is an obedience to God.
That's why the Church cries out for all those outside. They have convinced themselves that baptism is "obedience" to God and has no other meaning. Baptism is for the remission of sins and remission of sins necessary for salvation. You can believe all you want, without remission of sins you cannot be with God because sin is the ubridgable divide that separates us from Him.
Acts 1:5 : For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit."
What does that mean? Baptiso in Greek means to dunk. How does one "dunk" with the Holy Spirit?
Therefore, it is inaccurate to say that we have assurance in our own minds, "no matter what we do". There is NO license to sin, and our leaders do NOT teach that there is.
Luther says it is.
We teach what Paul taught
Yes, I know. And we preach what Jesus taught. And Jesus taught that believers can fall away and be lost.
What does that mean? Baptiso in Greek means to dunk. How does one "dunk" with the Holy Spirit?
BAPTIZO is also translated "to be immersed". When we are immersed with God the Holy Spirit, some experience something somewhat akin to being fully immersed in water in their serenity of mind. This is not to suggest a physical sensation or some type of emotional experience is identifiable with saving grace and initial regeneration of the human heart, but the regeneration of the human spirit is sometimes associated with other phenomenon in some believers coincident to that salvation.
Dear Paul says a lot of things, but we know he wasn't there when it happened, so don't use him as a witness.
I see. So throw everything Paul wrote out that he didn't witness personally, even though Christ gave him EVERYTHING personally, by Paul's eyewitness. And also, we need to immediately throw out two Gospels, I think by your count, because they were not eyewitness accounts either. Hmmmm. I think this topic is getting to "that" certain stage. :)
Where was Mark when all this happened? Was he with Pilate? Or maybe with Peter who was neither by the Cross nor next to Pilate? You call this hearsay evidence? LOL!
So once again, throw it out if it isn't eyewitness, but somehow follow anything that claims to be eyewitness. But then eyewitness only counts in the Gospels. All other eyewitness testimony is to be thrown out because it's not in the Gospels. Am I up to speed?
Well, Christians also had an agenda and an image to defend. And there is no reason whatsoever to claim that every conspiracy must be discovered.
Yes, at the time those powerful, dedicated, devoted warriors for Christ were fully organized and plotting for a way to cover all this fraud about Jesus' death all up. There you go! :)
FK: Too many people saw Him resurrected with their own eyes and lived MANY years to testify about it, as Paul tells us.
The Gospels do not corroborate this. That is something coming from Paul who wasn't there and who was talking to Greeks who knew exactly nothing about the Jews or their religion, laws and customs, or what happened. Most of the people who preached Christ crucified never saw Christ crucified. They believed the stories they heard from others that He was crucified and that he rose on the third day.
So if Paul said it, and it's not in one of two Gospels (eyewitnesses) then we KNOW it's false. OK.
No, that's your interpretation. The sentence clearly says that those who believe and are baptized will be saved. Those who do not believe will be lost. Why would non-believers be baptized?
Hundreds if not thousands of non-believing Orthodox are baptized every single Sunday, as infants. That does not save. If they become true believers later on, THEN they are saved, regardless of the baptism. The verse is consistent with that.
FK: Belief is salvation, baptism is an obedience to God.
That's why the Church cries out for all those outside. They have convinced themselves that baptism is "obedience" to God and has no other meaning. Baptism is for the remission of sins and remission of sins necessary for salvation. You can believe all you want, without remission of sins you cannot be with God because sin is the unbridgable divide that separates us from Him.
Why can't an unbaptized adult convert just confess his sins to a priest and be OK? What sins does a water baptism cover that a confession and absolution cannot?
FK: Acts 1:5 : For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit."
What does that mean? Baptiso in Greek means to dunk. How does one "dunk" with the Holy Spirit?
It means to be fully enveloped by the Holy Spirit, as in a water immersion. THAT is the baptism that is needed for salvation. Without the grace that comes at that time, nothing else happens. Man cannot come to God on his own, or with only a little nudge. :) The heart must be changed through baptism of the spirit, i.e. regeneration.