The Neverending Story (The Christian Chronicles)

Associated Press ^ | 3/24/01

[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

Previous Thread

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

$412?

BigMack

[Invincibly Ignorant]

would you agree with C.S. Lewis

I do appreciate you quoting from a non-catholic who is thought by some in here to be catholic tho. :-)

[PayNoAttentionManBehindCurtain]

You talking to yourself now?

Hand over my money.

BigMack

[Invincibly Ignorant]

would you agree with C.S. Lewis

I do appreciate you quoting from a non-catholic who is thought by some in here to be catholic tho. :-)

[IMRight]

I'm pretty sure the "rebaptising" they were refering to was because they didn't accept "infant baptism" as valid. If it was merely a hedge against baptism by an "invalid" priest being invalid... then I don't think it would be quite as interesting.

[malakhi]

in the one case the person never, ever sins.

And this right here is the sticking point. You assume it to be true. Havoc doesn't.

[SoothingDave]

If it was merely a hedge against baptism by an "invalid" priest being invalid... then I don't think it would be quite as interesting.

OK, quick, find the priest who baptised you and find out if he's been living a good life or a sinful one. This investigation will tell you whether you are actually validly baptised or not.

The Donatist position is one designed, apparently, to introduce doubt into the entire sacramental priesthood.

SD

[IMRight]

Interesting, also, because the Essenes, and the groups which followed them, practiced daily "rebaptizing". This continues even today in the Mandaean/Sabeaen sects.

An interesting story from early in our courtship: My mother told Jen "I thought you were called 'Baptists' because you got Baptized every Sunday?"

Didn't know there really were such people. You sure it isn't a poor translation of "bathing" daily?

[malakhi]

There's a messianic pastor in this area that encourages multiple baptisms. If you feel like sin in your life is getting in the way of your relationship with God he encourages another baptism. I'm not sure where I stand on this. Haven't given it a whole lot of thought.

Can't say that I see anything wrong with it, understood symbolically, of course.

[SoothingDave]

And this right here is the sticking point. You assume it to be true. Havoc doesn't.

Yes, I understand his position quite well.

Does he undrstand mine? The analogies he uses and the other language make it seem that he does not. Not at all.

That is my point. What does his analogy about lying in confession have to do with anything?

SD

[malakhi]

I don't think it means that the mother or family committed some sin necessarily.

Right. The concept of ritual purity does not translate well to the modern understanding.

It's a catch-22 of sorts. If Mary is without sin, then she doesn't need the sin offering. But if she does not make the sin offering, then she has broken the Law, a sin in itself.

Yep!

[SoothingDave]

If you feel like sin in your life is getting in the way of your relationship with God he encourages another baptism. I'm not sure where I stand on this. Haven't given it a whole lot of thought.

Can't say that I see anything wrong with it, understood symbolically, of course.

One might as well confess to a priest and get absolution. It's the same type of "let's wipe the slate clean and start over" thing.

SD

[SoothingDave]

It's a catch-22 of sorts. If Mary is without sin, then she doesn't need the sin offering. But if she does not make the sin offering, then she has broken the Law, a sin in itself.

Yep!

And, as was alluded to, the proper path is found in the Baptism of the Lord. Though Jesus certainly had no need to repent of his sins, he underwent the baptism anyway, to point the way for His followers and to show obedience.

SD

[malakhi]

I dunno. Its historical that he appeared to 500 witnesses after ressurection. I'm one that believes the Bible has some historical value as well.

Accepting the report of the 500 witnesses as true, this still leaves open the question of the divinity of Jesus. In my view this question remained open until 325 C.E., when Constantine established one church and began suppressing all "heterodox" belief.

[Invincibly Ignorant]

One might as well confess to a priest and get absolution. It's the same type of "let's wipe the slate clean and start over" thing.

This is bad?

[malakhi]

Hence, given the Protestant canon derives from the Palestinian canon, there is a descrepency between what Matthew SAYS scripture says, and what that scripture actually says.

I agree. But, as I would point out, this is not the only such discrepancy.

Obviously, the author of Matthew held that the Septuagint was an inspired translation -- sort of the way KJV-only believers think that the KJV is more inspired than the original-language texts.

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Accepting the report of the 500 witnesses as true, this still leaves open the question of the divinity of Jesus.

but it doesn't leave the door opened about whether or not the ressurectioned happened. I told you before I accept "deity" based upon the OT (granted you differ on interpretation) and on extra biblical intertestamental writings.

[SoothingDave]

One might as well confess to a priest and get absolution. It's the same type of "let's wipe the slate clean and start over" thing.

This is bad?

No, not at all. For a people who reject the idea of priests and confession, the Baptismal moment is the seminal moment in their faith journey. To feel the need to be re-newed by repeating the ritual when the faith has been lagging and needs to be re-committed to seems only logical.

I, too, was once under the impression that all Baptists got baptised frequently. Not every week, but maybe once a year.

SD

[Invincibly Ignorant]

ressurectioned

without the ed even. :-)

[SoothingDave]

The question, for me anyway, is why you can accept "similarities" of the Jesus story to pagan myths as OK in this case, as not harmful, as not evidence of pagan influence.

But the exact same type of "similarities" in Mary to pagan myths is evidence, to you, of compromise and influence.

SD