Posted on 04/28/2015 8:36:56 AM PDT by RnMomof7
Now if we could just get whoever it is presently in the ISS to look out the windows at the right place at just the right time -- and take a picture...
No they were not "born again" in baptism ...but they did get a good shampoo
As you know this scripture has been bandied about for generations.. But seeing the thief on the cross was saved..as were all the saints of the OT without being baptized ...I think we an rule out the fallible RC interpretation
I present one that seems to present an interesting view of the scripture ...
Bengel's Gnomen John 3:5. Ἐξ ὕδατος καὶ Πνεύματος, of water and the Spirit) Jesus renders His speech the more difficult, in order to try [discipline] Nicodemus, and at the same time declares the difference between birth from above, and birth from a mother: and He defines birth from above by communion with [the partaking of] Himself and with [of] the Spirit (for He speaks concerning Himself and concerning the Spirit also at John 3:11, “we speak that we do know”). Comp. 1 Corinthians 6:11, “Ye are washed, ye are sanctified, ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.” No one can enjoy God without the Son and His Spirit. Water denotes the baptism of John into [preparing for] Christ Jesus, John 3:22-23 [Jesus tarried in the land of Judæa with His disciples, and baptized: “John was also baptizing in Ænon,” etc.]; which baptism the colleagues of Nicodemus, by omitting, John 3:1, despised the counsel of God: Luke 7:30, “The Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of John;” when nevertheless the Jews were accustomed to baptisms: Hebrews 9:10, “divers washings.” And Nicodemus himself appears to have entertained not sufficiently exalted views of John and his baptism, as being one who had wrought no miracle. Comp. John 3:2 [where he emphasises the ‘miracles’ of Jesus; thus forming a contrast to John]. Nor is communion needful with Christ only, but also with His Spirit: Acts 2:38, “Repent and be baptized—in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” And because the same Spirit glorifies Christ, for this reason, the mention of water being presently after omitted, mention is made of the Spirit alone, of whom we are to be born again: nor does He say at John 3:6, that which is born of water is water. Therefore the necessity of regeneration primarily, and of baptism secondarily, is here confirmed (comp. a similar καί, and, ch. John 6:40, every one which seeth the Son and believeth on Him): otherwise there would be but little hope of infants dying without baptism. Comp. as to water and the Spirit, Titus 3:5, “Not by works which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.”—εἰσελθεῖν, enter) Answering to the word enter [a second time into his mother’s womb] of the previous verse. The severity of His expression increases: comp. see, John 3:3. He cannot even enter, much less see. He must enter a house, whoever wishes to see thoroughly its internal structure. That which is not born, uses neither eyes nor feet.
Thank you for finally proving our point. Your points 1,2, & 3 are based on works based salvation.
Just present us with documents from the magisterium with an infallible definition of that scripture ...without that it remains simply ones own personal interpretation of that scripture..
Without that ya are simply "blowing smoke"
Can you square away Eph 1:13-14 with your statements?
Nope.. The magisterium has only INFALLIBLY defined a handful of scriptures. The RC Catechism is not an accumulation of "infallible doctrine" It is simply a fallible work of men
How many BTTT's have been posted on FreeRepublic in the last 17 years or so?
I've seen that fairly recently done by one of the RC sisterhood to comments which were then far enough out-of-line, those same "bumped to the top" comments ended up being deleted, with it occurring (fairly recently) twice in the same thread. lol.
So what's this complaint about high-fiving? I lent a pair of those to well thought out and well written comments which wrestled with (and defeated) complex forms of arguments presented in favor of what was referred to in the 19th century as 'Romish' claims to singular authority (for themselves, over and above all others, no ifs, ands, or buts) although that has been modified from Vatican I stances to Vatican II softening of those positions (while still attempting to retain those same claims, IN FULL).
Ah, you got me there, on poor choice and ill-usage of a word.
Wasn't the initial complaint you had against me, aimed towards this comment --- http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3283994/posts?page=1042#1042
Notice that that comment, was not addressed to you.
There's plenty of that. Try searching your own comments.
If you can't see it, then my pointing out particular paragraphs and explaining them --- how in context is often equates to a form of bullying likely as not won't help.
Yet I was intending reference to bullying to not be limited solely to any one individual who engages in bullying promotion of[alleged] papal 'authority'.
My apologies for having seemingly aimed that only towards yourself.
BTW, this doesn't mean we have to accept false statements of objective fact.
Fine. In the interests of this new accord proposed, I withdraw my posts 1050 and 1021, without conceding anything WRT the veracity of post 34, but admitting that those two specific posts (1050 and 1021) were no more than useless commentary from me that ultimately proved nothing.
Good day,
I wonder, do you realize that Jesus set Nicodemus straight when He said, ‘that which is born of flesh is flesh’? How could you miss the plain teaching of Jesus?
Well, there in fact is the problem - It isn't in the Bible for them any more than it is for y'all. You haven't read the Talmud, have you?
BUT, it isn't quite the same - Judaism assumes the infallibility of their great rabbis because of their great knowledge - more like your 'doctors' than your magisterium and pope... Maybe a bit less of a political nature for the Jews, though I guess their Sanhedrin makes up for that (It too, considers itself infallible)... But you should read the Talmud (and the Mishna). It might just astound you at the similiarities. A bunch of silly men claiming to be more than they are, in order to convince themselves that they are more than they are...
But the point is, just like some of your own, the rabbis have said that if they say the sky is green, then you'd better believe it, and in their hubris have declared that even YHWH must bow to their declarations... Infallibility per se, as who can have greater knowledge than the teachers of the knowledge? See, theirs is circular too...
And at the local level, the 'seat of Moses' was much like your 'chair of Peter' = When the chief rabbi spoke from the seat of Moses, that settled the matter. Period. I do not subscribe to the idea that there was a supreme Seat of Moses, though there may well have been, in the context of the Sanhedrin or the Temple... There is legend to that effect, but nothing substantial enough to call true - But still, the concept remains.
Thankfully, the Rabbi to which I am enjoined tore that entire system down... Too bad all y'all didn't get the memo. The power to bind and loose cannot destroy Torah, as that is the instrument defining the power at all... That is the sin of the Pharisees. Again, back to the original contract...
LOL Mom. Much of the time, the priest told me to say 5 Hail Marys and 5 our fathers. I called it the 5 squared rule. 😀 I went to confession every Saturday, because I thought I was such a terrible sinner, and I was sure I committed mortal sins every day, and I really was a terrible sinner. I was always sure my good works would get me a warm corner of Hell. That was the only unanswered question I had. Why couldn't I go to Heaven? Of course, I found the answer to my unanswered question in John 3:3 and Romans 4:3. Of course, for the benefit of some on these threads, you need to CAREFULLY define what it means to "believe," but you get the gist of what I am saying. 😇
I remember staring at him in the casket and wondering; "Where did yoiu go?"My brothers were ticked that I wasn't bawling my eyes out ... they didn't know the cerebral excersize I was having
A few months later, because I had started a friendship with "Jude", a cool catholic priest at a "Newman Center" in a college town ... I was in conversation with him and the opening for me to ask "Where is my Dad" came up and he replied ... "I don't know, and no one CAN know, 'cause no one's cvome back from the dead to tell us"
Which I bought because ... he was a priest and I had been reared to be Catholic and etc., etc.
A few MORE months later, I was at a party ... and havinhg not met a girl to sleep with, and being righteously stoned ... I was fading into dreamland when it hit me (I know NOW the words to say, but back then ... it hit me .. )
I flashed to that converrsation with Jude and realized ...
I don't know where my father is ...
YOU don't know where my father is ...
You're no closer to God than I am ...
A few MORE months later and I was facing a couple of felonies and I went on the run
I went to a guy I knew to ask for his help getting out of the state and .... he was a Messianic Jew, and led me to the Lord
The key element in my receiving Jesus was the bac and forth;
You DO know you've screwed up, knarf"
Yeah
"Did you ever stop to think Jesus died that you would not be such a screw up?"
Naaahhhh
"Have you ever asked Jesus to come into your life and make you into a new and better man?"
no
"Why not?
Why not indeed .... so I did
so at about 7:45 on August 18, 1981, I recieved Jesus as my saviour up _____________ Rd, in __________, WV, at ______________'s kitchen table
I stayed the night, awoke refreshed ... and had this insane desire to turn myself in
Which I did
I spent two months in pre-trial, the Holy Spirit worked in the hearts of my accusers (I WAS guilty) and my felony was dropped to a misdemeanor ... which I pled to, and walked.
While in jail, I read the bible for the first time in my life and was so ANGRY that no one had EVER suggested I actually READ THE BIBLE !!
I had a great desire to be baptised which is very, VERY weird for a Catholic (I still did not comprehend His salvation) ... but, anyway ... I looked in the phone book for a Baptist church .... sounded like the right thing to do at the time
The preacher on the otherr end had a bapticostal fit when I so innocently told and explained myself ... I was picked up the next Sunday, and for the first time in my life I heard a man speak the most profound words of wisdom I had EVER heard and I HAD to come back next week ...
That was 34 years ago .... still in an independent, fundamental Baptist congregation.
He, The Holy Spirit, has had a busy time these past decades teaching me how to get out of His way and let Christ live through a stubborn me. But God is true to His promises and He has never left me and has at times been long suffering with me grieving Him.
My friend is in Him and I too am in Him. Since I believe the Rapture will happen any moment, from now until 2017, I believe I will see my friend again, soon, and he will be in a well, glorified body. The last picture I took of my friend eleven days ago, he had an oxygen line running to his nose and he looked frail. He's not frail any more! I thank God for my friend coming to tell me of his being born again. It broke through a blindfold I had in my college days. I believed in God, but in a Deist way, as my beloved grandfather had believed. I knew nothing of being born again, like ol' Nic who came to Jesus at night, to ask Him what was up! (John 3)
Thanks be to God, knarf IS born again! (I know you said it was 34 years ago, but with God all time is now)
Each salvation experience is the same. The circumstances of yours and mine were different, but the ultimate end, is the same. I was in Germany during your experience. I had gotten saved in 1970, and got baptized by in the swimming pool at Bien Hoa Air Base, Republic of Vietnam. I had to come all the way back from Germany in 1983, for my dad. It took me 36 hours to get home. My dad died one hour after I got home. I had little or no confidence that he was where he really wanted to be. My parents almost had a semi funeral for me after I got saved by faith (oops, there’s that word again) so you can see where I did not have much confidence. I hope I am wrong, but like you, I cried too, not just because my dad died, but because I did not know if I would ever see him again. Later bro.
I don’t.
Other Catholics, however, disagree with you.
You have a weak God then, if your sin is greater than your god.
Sin does NOT kill the life of God in the soul and there's not one Scripture that even comes close to saying that.
On the contrary, where grace abounds, sin much more abounds and greater is He who is in you than he who is in the world.
The Holy Spirit seals us until the day of redemption. Jesus promised to NEVER leave us or forsake us.
He knows our frame and remembers that we are dust. He doesn't throw us under the bus every time we sin.
The Holy Spirit doesn't *flee* anything.
And sinning doesn't mean we don't want God in us. It simply means that we're weak and sometimes give in to temptation that we shouldn't cave to.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.