|
Post by Διαμονδ on Sept 25, 2018 15:04:14 GMT
Because the Queen and DK now has her own personal theme about religious topics, anyone who wants to ask a question for them can leave the question here. This theme is open to all comers!
|
|
|
Post by Διαμονδ on Sept 29, 2018 16:19:01 GMT
DKTrav88My English is bad? I do not have practice in conversation but I understand the translation absolutely. If you pretend that I'm stupid then explain the biblical arguments from my last post!
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on Sept 29, 2018 16:41:44 GMT
DKTrav88My English is bad? I do not have practice in conversation but I understand the translation absolutely. If you pretend that I'm stupid then explain the biblical arguments from my last post! ...Yea, as I said, you don't know English, but you want me to believe you when you say English as a language is incapable of expounding God's word. It's quite funny.
|
|
|
Post by Διαμονδ on Sept 29, 2018 18:51:26 GMT
DKTrav88 My English is bad? I do not have practice in conversation but I understand the translation absolutely. If you pretend that I'm stupid then explain the biblical arguments from my last post! ...Yea, as I said, you don't know English, but you want me to believe you when you say English as a language is incapable of expounding God's word. It's quite funny. Ad hominem your power and argument! Instead of answering in essence. I have bad spoken English because I have no practice. But I is enough to understand the language...I got good practice on Internet forums by understand text. But you do not even try to understand what I write..you answer too quickly. So dismissive. Back to topic. You think I doubt the King James Bible? Please before you attack my posts you have get the essence this. I wrote that WASP had misunderstood the biblical concept...but this does not mean that other English-speaking Christians who have not abandoned the Tradition do not correctly understand the essence of what is written there. Receive a bonus. German Bible. You believe God gave the right understanding to all translations of the Bible, right? The German text does not contradict the Greek (original) and Slavic translations too. 48. denn er hat die Niedrigkeit seiner Magd angesehen. Siehe, von nun an werden mich selig preisen alle Kindeskinder…
(Evangelium nach Lukas 1:48) www.bibleonline.ru/bible/deu/42/01/#48dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/german-english/preisenen.langenscheidt.com/english-german/glorifyAs a result, we see that all my questions to the Protestants here remain in forse .
Mary said that people will glorify She all generations! She are talking about the period from the beginning of Christianity to the end. In practice, we see this in Orthodox Christians. Where is the practice of the Protestants of this?
Have a nice day!
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on Sept 29, 2018 20:02:10 GMT
...Yea, as I said, you don't know English, but you want me to believe you when you say English as a language is incapable of expounding God's word. It's quite funny. Ad hominem your power and argument! Instead of answering in essence. I have bad spoken English because I have no practice. But I is enough to understand the language...I got good practice on Internet forums by understand text. But you do not even try to understand what I write..you answer too quickly. So dismissive. Back to topic. You think I doubt the King James Bible? Please before you attack my posts you have get the essence this. I wrote that WASP had misunderstood the biblical concept...but this does not mean that other English-speaking Christians who have not abandoned the Tradition do not correctly understand the essence of what is written there. Receive a bonus. German Bible. You believe God gave the right understanding to all translations of the Bible, right? The German text does not contradict the Greek (original) and Slavic translations too. 48. denn er hat die Niedrigkeit seiner Magd angesehen. Siehe, von nun an werden mich selig preisen alle Kindeskinder…
(Evangelium nach Lukas 1:48) www.bibleonline.ru/bible/deu/42/01/#48dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/german-english/preisenen.langenscheidt.com/english-german/glorifyAs a result, we see that all my questions to the Protestants here remain in forse .
Mary said that people will glorify She all generations! She are talking about the period from the beginning of Christianity to the end. In practice, we see this in Orthodox Christians. Where is the practice of the Protestants of this?
Have a nice day! That's not ad hominem diamond facepalm sigh It is a fact that you don't understand English, yes? Okay, so why should I believe you when you say God cannot convey His word in the English language when you don't even know English? You can't tell me the English language cannot convey the true meaning of the Bible when you aren't a language expert and you hardly understand English at all facepalm Right, let me take 5 days to answer your questions, will that make you happy? facepalm Maybe I should just ignore everything you have to say since I "respond too quickly" I think it is better that I don't respond at all because most of your claims are completely outrageous to begin with. It is mostly a waste of time trying to discuss things with you. "You think I doubt the King James Bible?" facepalm No, I don't think you understand English as well as you think you do. I never said anything about you doubting the KJV Bible. sigh Yeah, I know you think everyone who doesn't understand Greek doesn't understand the Bible. It's the same as the Muslims do with Islam, they think you have to read the quran in arabic to get the true meaning which makes it a cult because then you have to rely on arabic speaking people to give you the true meaning of the text. If you do the same with Christianity, then you make it a cult because then you have to rely on people who know Greek to get the true meaning of the text. I guess you don't believe God when He said He would preserve His word for ever. You'll probably say "Yes, preserve God's word in the Greek".. but that just means you have to rely on men for God's word, which obviously you have no issue with doing. sigh sigh sigh sigh Really, your claims are just fantastic... The German... Lukas 1 48 Denn er hat mich, seine Dienerin, gnädig angesehen, eine geringe und unbedeutende Frau.[v] Ja, man wird mich glücklich preisen – Translates as... 48 For he has mercifully regarded me, his servant, a small and insignificant woman. [ v ] Yes, they will bless me happily - now and in all generations to come. I did 4 different translations in German from the Hope for All German Bible, the Neue Genfer Übersetzung Bible, the Schlachter 1951, and the Schlachter 2000.. they said the following... I didn't fabricate these. I translated them via Google Chrome's website translator shrug so you can argue with them about what it says. If you don't doubt the KJV Bible like you say, then you'll agree with me that when it says "blessed" it means blessed. The word in the context in Greek, makariousin, even means blessed facepalm If you wanna praise Mary, go ahead. I'm done talking about it. These aren't genuine discussions.
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on Sept 29, 2018 20:10:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Διαμονδ on Sept 29, 2018 20:20:09 GMT
My argument is based on the fact that the original Scripture is not English. English even if accurate.. can not convey the intonation of the text (compared to the original)..especially for the ordinary readers. The assertion that children are not baptized, claimed Calvin.Calvinism has developed a systematic theology that creates a God who is quite literally an evil monster. The Calvinist god has arbitrarily selected a few to be saved while condemning most to an eternal fire pit of Hell.... Yes... This is to justify and glorify himself. The Fruits of Calvinism = Westboro 'Baptist' Cult. John Calvin was quoted saying... "there are babies a span long in Hell..." Calvinism is an excellent example on why the Church needed to stay steadfast to the Traditions handed down through the succession of the Apostles and the visible church. This was the promise given by Christ. The reformation while on it's surface seemed good at the time standing up to the heresies of Rome has shown in the protestant's 500 years of existence to be just another schismatic equation of absolute heresy and madness. Sola Scriptura has shown itself self refuting and detrimental to the faith once delivered to the saints. What does the Scriptures say about it?34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.Jeremiah 31: 34.Christ commanded: "let the children come to Me, and do not hinder them; for such is the Kingdom of God" (MK. 10: 14.) Then the wolf will live with the lamb, and the leopard will lay with the goat; and the calf, and the young lion, and the ox will be together, and the little child will lead them. Isaiah 11:6.You say I don't know the difference between Protestants. I absolutely know it ..be sure..but you even dont try to learn the difference between Orthodox and Catholics! You'll make argument against Calvin, but in practice, you're with him. You say the Church was wrong in the period but how does that fit the Scripture? I will create my Church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it (Matt. 16: 18). I am with you all days, even to the end of the age (Mat. 28: 20).It turns out Christ is beside the faithful even if not correctly baptize people? The Apostle Paul says: 11. In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ. 12. Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.(Col. 2:11-12). If Baptism is the uncircumcised circumcision of Christ, how can we remove infants from it, when in the old Testament man also made a Covenant with God through circumcision on the eighth day of his life (Gen. 17: 12). Why, in the days of Abraham, was it possible to enter into a Covenant with the Creator in infancy by the faith of his parents, and after the coming of the Savior such an opportunity was lost? P.S There are other Protestants in this forum..these questions are relevant to them too. I can’t take you seriously someone who doesn’t know English wants me to believe the English language isn’t good enough to convey what God says in an English Bible way to limit God. And way to make Christianity a cult by saying we have to learn Greek to truly understand God’s word. Way to go diamond, way to go For the record, again, I don't care what John Calvin said, I don't subscribe to his practices.. I don't even agree with many of the things he said and I don't subscribe to any church doctrine. But you can keep on attacking those things all day if you'd like I'm not going to defend either one. Keep on throwing labels on me. I'm rejoicing Why do you think all Christians believed as the Catholic church did before Protestantism came along? You do know that the Catholic church tortured people to get them to renounce anything the Catholic church deemed a heresy, right? They did terrible things to get people to follow their cult, and if they didn't renounce what they believed, they killed them. Is that what God tells us to do in the Bible? Schisms happen because God's word is a sword that divides right from wrong. The schism between the Catholic and Orthodox churches was petty, as both churches still have many of the same beliefs, traditions, and practices(a majority of which don't come from the Bible). "You say the Church was wrong in the period but how does that fit the Scripture? I will create my Church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it (Matt. 16: 18). I am with you all days, even to the end of the age (Mat. 28: 20)." What period? Not every church was a true church, even today that is truth. Paul even said churches fell away in Asia while he was a missionary. The way you find out a church is a true church is if they are following what the Bible says. The Bible, God's word, is the standard, not the church(man) telling you what God's word says. "the old Testament man also made a Covenant with God through circumcision" Yes, and we are not under that covenant. We are under a new covenant where circumcision isn't practiced anymore "Why, in the days of Abraham, was it possible to enter into a Covenant with the Creator in infancy by the faith of his parents, and after the coming of the Savior such an opportunity was lost?" What are you talking about? God still required a circumcision of the heart, I showed you those verses you always ignore verses when it's convenient for you circumcision was just an outward sign, it didn't mean you were actually saved. Just as baptism is an outward sign, it doesn't mean you are saved just because you are baptized. Anyone can get baptized and not put their faith in Christ. The whole point of baptism is flying right over your head. Answer me this one question; why does an adult have to confess Christ to be baptized and an infant doesn't? That's a double standard. Does God operate off of double standards? Baptism means nothing for an infant. Why? Because later in life, that infant grows up and becomes a person that can consciously make their own decisions and if they want to they can decide that God isn't real and not believe in Jesus Christ. What is the difference then, between an infant that gets baptised and one that doesn't if eventually all infants grow into adults that make their own decisions? There isn't a difference, because many people were baptized as infants and do not believe in Jesus Christ. AND many people were not baptized as infants and DO believe in Jesus Christ and then get baptized. Do you see how that works? Infant baptism in completely vain. You're welcome to believe in traditions and practices not found in the Bible, that's your God given right. I'll wipe the dust from my feet and move on, and you'll sit here speaking into the air Mr. you're not even going to understand the difference between Orthodoxy and Catholicism! You probably don't know the history at all if You write about of horror Catholicism( John was right when he said that your thesis envoy on anti-Catholicism) It has nothing to do with us. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Crusadesen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teutonic_Orderen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Livonian_OrderYes, the churches in Asia fell away...early Church Fathers also wrote about these churches.They do not have a relationship to us...read the history of Christianity. I don't understand your logic!I didn't say that the circumcision of salvation. I claimed it was a sign of the Covenant of God and Abraham(Gen. 17: 10-14) What does the Scriptures say about it? 34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.Jeremiah 31: 34. I understand you don't like Calvin..but your ideas are identical to his. I've already written how it's against the Scripture. Protestant - but if the Lord said that children and so is the Kingdom of God, then why baptize them? Orthodox-God did not say that children are the Kingdom, but such as children, that is, the same gentle and pure. If we accept your interpretation is correct, it turns out that Baptism is not necessary to anybody. After all, Jesus told adults that they imitate the children. And if they can be saved without Baptism, so can all others. That's bullshit! The need for Baptism for salvation was clearly spoken of by the Lord. But I must say that the Christian practice of infant baptism can be justified in another way. The Apostle Paul says that in Christ we are "circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the sinful body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; having been buried with Him in baptism" (Col. 2:11-12). If Baptism is the uncircumcised circumcision of Christ, how can we remove infants from it, when in the old Testament man also made a Covenant with God through circumcision on the eighth day of his life (Gen. 17: 12). Why, in the days of Abraham, was it possible to enter into a Covenant with the Creator in infancy by the faith of his parents, and after the coming of the Savior such an opportunity was lost? Protestant. - Well, it says that the circumcision was canceled and has no force. If so, then the Baptism of babies is not necessary. Orthodox-if you follow your logic, we do not need Baptism for adults.
|
|
|
Post by Διαμονδ on Sept 29, 2018 20:28:28 GMT
Ad hominem your power and argument! Instead of answering in essence. I have bad spoken English because I have no practice. But I is enough to understand the language...I got good practice on Internet forums by understand text. But you do not even try to understand what I write..you answer too quickly. So dismissive. Back to topic. You think I doubt the King James Bible? Please before you attack my posts you have get the essence this. I wrote that WASP had misunderstood the biblical concept...but this does not mean that other English-speaking Christians who have not abandoned the Tradition do not correctly understand the essence of what is written there. Receive a bonus. German Bible. You believe God gave the right understanding to all translations of the Bible, right? The German text does not contradict the Greek (original) and Slavic translations too. 48. denn er hat die Niedrigkeit seiner Magd angesehen. Siehe, von nun an werden mich selig preisen alle Kindeskinder…
(Evangelium nach Lukas 1:48) www.bibleonline.ru/bible/deu/42/01/#48dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/german-english/preisenen.langenscheidt.com/english-german/glorifyAs a result, we see that all my questions to the Protestants here remain in forse .
Mary said that people will glorify She all generations! She are talking about the period from the beginning of Christianity to the end. In practice, we see this in Orthodox Christians. Where is the practice of the Protestants of this?
Have a nice day! That's not ad hominem diamond It is a fact that you don't understand English, yes? Okay, so why should I believe you when you say God cannot convey His word in the English language when you don't even know English? You can't tell me the English language cannot convey the true meaning of the Bible when you aren't a language expert and you hardly understand English at all Right, let me take 5 days to answer your questions, will that make you happy? Maybe I should just ignore everything you have to say since I "respond too quickly" I think it is better that I don't respond at all because most of your claims are completely outrageous to begin with. It is mostly a waste of time trying to discuss things with you. "You think I doubt the King James Bible?" No, I don't think you understand English as well as you think you do. I never said anything about you doubting the KJV Bible. Yeah, I know you think everyone who doesn't understand Greek doesn't understand the Bible. It's the same as the Muslims do with Islam, they think you have to read the quran in arabic to get the true meaning which makes it a cult because then you have to rely on arabic speaking people to give you the true meaning of the text. If you do the same with Christianity, then you make it a cult because then you have to rely on people who know Greek to get the true meaning of the text. I guess you don't believe God when He said He would preserve His word for ever. You'll probably say "Yes, preserve God's word in the Greek".. but that just means you have to rely on men for God's word, which obviously you have no issue with doing. Really, your claims are just fantastic... The German... Lukas 1 48 Denn er hat mich, seine Dienerin, gnädig angesehen, eine geringe und unbedeutende Frau.[v] Ja, man wird mich glücklich preisen – Translates as... 48 For he has mercifully regarded me, his servant, a small and insignificant woman. [ v ] Yes, they will bless me happily - now and in all generations to come. I did 4 different translations in German from the Hope for All German Bible, the Neue Genfer Übersetzung Bible, the Schlachter 1951, and the Schlachter 2000.. they said the following... I didn't fabricate these. I translated them via Google Chrome's website translator so you can argue with them about what it says. If you don't doubt the KJV Bible like you say, then you'll agree with me that when it says "blessed" it means blessed. The word in the context in Greek, makariousin, even means blessed If you wanna praise Mary, go ahead. I'm done talking about it. These aren't genuine discussions. Certainly not real discussions...you're insincere. Once again you have taken for straw and manipulated about the English language...anyone can read what I wrote! I didn't say the English translation was bad. So your logic is to think that the Greek text(which was the original) is wrong? In the Greek text of the Gospel of Luke is: "tou nun makariousin me pasai ai geneai" 1: 48). The key word is the word makarizo (1. glorify, extol; 2. considered happy). The Evangelist Luke verb is put in the plural of the third person-makariousin. There is a mandatory rule for all exegetes and translators: if a word has several meanings, then take only the meaning that is in semantic agreement with other words of the translated or commented place, that is, take the text and context. If this is not observed, then it turns out literalism, which leads to errors and arbitrariness.You are so inconsiderate as to not even understand what I was saying here from the beginning. Shrug
|
|
|
Post by Διαμονδ on Sept 29, 2018 20:44:32 GMT
It is a fact that you don't understand English, yes? Okay, so why should I believe you when you say God cannot convey His word in the English language when you don't even know English? You can't tell me the English language cannot convey the true meaning of the Bible when you aren't a language expert and you hardly understand English at all such thrash...complete mess. I wrote that I have no conversational practice! Nothing else You don't have to believe me... the practice of the Church only. "...that if I slow down, you will know how to act in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and the affirmation of truth." (1 Tim. 3: 15.)Anyone can read what I wrote above in this thread. Well, if a person has an open heart I am with you all days, even to the end of the age (Mat. 28: 20)." What period? Not every church was a true church, even today that is truth. Paul even said churches fell away in Asia while he was a missionary. The way you find out a church is a true church is if they are following what the Bible says. The Bible, God's word, is the standard, not the church(man) telling you what God's word says.It doesn't even say period. They say from the first centuries of Christianity to the end...I've already written the rest, mister. Denn er hat mich, seine Dienerin, gnädig angesehen, eine geringe und unbedeutende Frau. Ja, man wird mich glücklich preisen – jetzt und in allen kommenden Generationen. Shrug www.bibleserver.com/text/NG%C3%9C/Lukas1
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on Sept 29, 2018 21:13:51 GMT
I can’t take you seriously someone who doesn’t know English wants me to believe the English language isn’t good enough to convey what God says in an English Bible way to limit God. And way to make Christianity a cult by saying we have to learn Greek to truly understand God’s word. Way to go diamond, way to go For the record, again, I don't care what John Calvin said, I don't subscribe to his practices.. I don't even agree with many of the things he said and I don't subscribe to any church doctrine. But you can keep on attacking those things all day if you'd like I'm not going to defend either one. Keep on throwing labels on me. I'm rejoicing Why do you think all Christians believed as the Catholic church did before Protestantism came along? You do know that the Catholic church tortured people to get them to renounce anything the Catholic church deemed a heresy, right? They did terrible things to get people to follow their cult, and if they didn't renounce what they believed, they killed them. Is that what God tells us to do in the Bible? Schisms happen because God's word is a sword that divides right from wrong. The schism between the Catholic and Orthodox churches was petty, as both churches still have many of the same beliefs, traditions, and practices(a majority of which don't come from the Bible). "You say the Church was wrong in the period but how does that fit the Scripture? I will create my Church, and the gates of hell will not overcome it (Matt. 16: 18). I am with you all days, even to the end of the age (Mat. 28: 20)." What period? Not every church was a true church, even today that is truth. Paul even said churches fell away in Asia while he was a missionary. The way you find out a church is a true church is if they are following what the Bible says. The Bible, God's word, is the standard, not the church(man) telling you what God's word says. "the old Testament man also made a Covenant with God through circumcision" Yes, and we are not under that covenant. We are under a new covenant where circumcision isn't practiced anymore "Why, in the days of Abraham, was it possible to enter into a Covenant with the Creator in infancy by the faith of his parents, and after the coming of the Savior such an opportunity was lost?" What are you talking about? God still required a circumcision of the heart, I showed you those verses you always ignore verses when it's convenient for you circumcision was just an outward sign, it didn't mean you were actually saved. Just as baptism is an outward sign, it doesn't mean you are saved just because you are baptized. Anyone can get baptized and not put their faith in Christ. The whole point of baptism is flying right over your head. Answer me this one question; why does an adult have to confess Christ to be baptized and an infant doesn't? That's a double standard. Does God operate off of double standards? Baptism means nothing for an infant. Why? Because later in life, that infant grows up and becomes a person that can consciously make their own decisions and if they want to they can decide that God isn't real and not believe in Jesus Christ. What is the difference then, between an infant that gets baptised and one that doesn't if eventually all infants grow into adults that make their own decisions? There isn't a difference, because many people were baptized as infants and do not believe in Jesus Christ. AND many people were not baptized as infants and DO believe in Jesus Christ and then get baptized. Do you see how that works? Infant baptism in completely vain. You're welcome to believe in traditions and practices not found in the Bible, that's your God given right. I'll wipe the dust from my feet and move on, and you'll sit here speaking into the air Mr. you're not even going to understand the difference between Orthodoxy and Catholicism! You probably don't know the history at all if You write about of horror Catholicism( John was right when he said that your thesis envoy on anti-Catholicism) It has nothing to do with us. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Crusadesen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teutonic_Orderen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Livonian_OrderYes, the churches in Asia fell away...early Church Fathers also wrote about these churches.They do not have a relationship to us...read the history of Christianity. I don't understand your logic!I didn't say that the circumcision of salvation. I claimed it was a sign of the Covenant of God and Abraham(Gen. 17: 10-14) What does the Scriptures say about it? 34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.Jeremiah 31: 34. I understand you don't like Calvin..but your ideas are identical to his. I've already written how it's against the Scripture. Protestant - but if the Lord said that children and so is the Kingdom of God, then why baptize them? Orthodox-God did not say that children are the Kingdom, but such as children, that is, the same gentle and pure. If we accept your interpretation is correct, it turns out that Baptism is not necessary to anybody. After all, Jesus told adults that they imitate the children. And if they can be saved without Baptism, so can all others. That's bullshit! The need for Baptism for salvation was clearly spoken of by the Lord. But I must say that the Christian practice of infant baptism can be justified in another way. The Apostle Paul says that in Christ we are "circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the sinful body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; having been buried with Him in baptism" (Col. 2:11-12). If Baptism is the uncircumcised circumcision of Christ, how can we remove infants from it, when in the old Testament man also made a Covenant with God through circumcision on the eighth day of his life (Gen. 17: 12). Why, in the days of Abraham, was it possible to enter into a Covenant with the Creator in infancy by the faith of his parents, and after the coming of the Savior such an opportunity was lost? Protestant. - Well, it says that the circumcision was canceled and has no force. If so, then the Baptism of babies is not necessary. Orthodox-if you follow your logic, we do not need Baptism for adults. "If we accept your interpretation is correct, it turns out that Baptism is not necessary to anybody." That isn't true. You completely misunderstand me every time I respond and it is because you don't understand English. It is either that, or you are doing it on purpose, which is disingenuous. There's no point in continuing discussion. Good day.
|
|
|
Post by Διαμονδ on Sept 29, 2018 21:33:13 GMT
Mr. you're not even going to understand the difference between Orthodoxy and Catholicism! You probably don't know the history at all if You write about of horror Catholicism( John was right when he said that your thesis envoy on anti-Catholicism) It has nothing to do with us. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Crusadesen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teutonic_Orderen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Livonian_OrderYes, the churches in Asia fell away...early Church Fathers also wrote about these churches.They do not have a relationship to us...read the history of Christianity. I don't understand your logic!I didn't say that the circumcision of salvation. I claimed it was a sign of the Covenant of God and Abraham(Gen. 17: 10-14) What does the Scriptures say about it? 34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.Jeremiah 31: 34. I understand you don't like Calvin..but your ideas are identical to his. I've already written how it's against the Scripture. Protestant - but if the Lord said that children and so is the Kingdom of God, then why baptize them? Orthodox-God did not say that children are the Kingdom, but such as children, that is, the same gentle and pure. If we accept your interpretation is correct, it turns out that Baptism is not necessary to anybody. After all, Jesus told adults that they imitate the children. And if they can be saved without Baptism, so can all others. That's bullshit! The need for Baptism for salvation was clearly spoken of by the Lord. But I must say that the Christian practice of infant baptism can be justified in another way. The Apostle Paul says that in Christ we are "circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the sinful body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; having been buried with Him in baptism" (Col. 2:11-12). If Baptism is the uncircumcised circumcision of Christ, how can we remove infants from it, when in the old Testament man also made a Covenant with God through circumcision on the eighth day of his life (Gen. 17: 12). Why, in the days of Abraham, was it possible to enter into a Covenant with the Creator in infancy by the faith of his parents, and after the coming of the Savior such an opportunity was lost? Protestant. - Well, it says that the circumcision was canceled and has no force. If so, then the Baptism of babies is not necessary. Orthodox-if you follow your logic, we do not need Baptism for adults. "If we accept your interpretation is correct, it turns out that Baptism is not necessary to anybody." That isn't true. You completely misunderstand me every time I respond and it is because you don't understand English. It is either that, or you are doing it on purpose, which is disingenuous. There's no point in continuing discussion. Good day. Certainly not true. Baptism is necessary for all... But finally, I must say that the Scripture says bluntly that children are worthy of baptism. On the day of Pentecost, the Apostle Peter clearly says, "Repent (note that you have not added 'all', for children cannot repent), and may every one of you be baptized (i.e., without exception) in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto you AND to YOUR CHILDREN (clearly it is impossible to witness the Orthodox teaching) About the English language funny to read. Does it reassure you that I'm not an English speaker? Then why did you make a attack to me that I quote the original (Greek) The Bible is not a modernist book..it's written for all generations. People read-oikos-always understood that we are talking about the whole family. 34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.Jeremiah 31: 34."Jesus, seeing their faith (who brought the sick), said to the paralytic: child, thy sins are forgiven thee" (MK. 2,5) 13. And Jesus said unto the centurion, Go thy way; and as thou hast believed, so be it done unto thee. And his servant was healed in the selfsame hour. (Matthew 8:13)The Lord healed people by the faith of others. Do you limit the possibilities of the Creator of the universe?I see it. You can not to participate in topic. There are other Protestants here. I always said that. Shrug
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on Sept 29, 2018 21:55:25 GMT
Good day diamond
|
|
|
Post by Διαμονδ on Sept 29, 2018 22:03:05 GMT
My questions remain valid!
|
|
|
Post by fschmidt on Sept 29, 2018 22:31:19 GMT
I would like to get the Protestant reaction to this Anabaptist perspective.
|
|
|
Post by DKTrav88 on Sept 29, 2018 22:55:44 GMT
I would like to get the Protestant reaction to this Anabaptist perspective. I agree with everything he said. Though I can tell you that most Protestants wouldn’t agree with him. He talks about that saying that most Christians would say “it’s faith alone that saves you” but it isn’t. He expounds on Jesus’s teachings which confirm that works come with faith, as well as James 2 which says faith without works is dead.
|
|
|
Post by Διαμονδ on Sept 30, 2018 9:03:13 GMT
I read carefully what wrote yesterday DK for me again. Ad hominem his argument for me. The essence of the claim that I am not English speaking..but this did not prevent him before when it was profitable for him to understand me and even agree on some issues. xD )) In general, I wrote all about my English language above .. but him will still stand on its own .. that makes him part of a cult - to find a reason to disagree with me!Ad hominem, or argumentum ad hominem (from lat. - "argument to person") - a logical error in which the argument is refuted by an indication of the nature, motive or other attribute of the person giving the argument, or the person associated with the argument, instead of pointing to the insolvency of the argument, objective facts or logical reasoning. Divided into types: ad personam ("transition to personality") - direct criticism of the person or insult of the opponent; ad hominem circumstantiae - explanation of the opponent's point of view by his personal circumstances; ad hominem tu quoque ("you too") — an indication that the opponent himself acts contrary to his own argument. Demagoguery often contains ad hominem.What interes me in this thread is not interested in the approach to the identity of the opponent (true one for all) only discussion of the Scriptures! I got from my opponent arguments about Catholics( I'm not Catholic ) I got arguments about my language cult ( although a careful and impartial reading of the material clear say that I'm not support this) What about the arguments about: Jeremiah 31: 34. (MK. 10: 14.) Isaiah 11:6. How does this fit with Protestantism?The answer is not available. I completely understood all his arguments.( for example circumcision of the heart and other) Why does he thinks like that ... his arguments do not interfere with my arguments at all (he does not intend to agree with me in advance .. makes the conversation insincere)... so the questions are still open. Closed question about my understanding of the English. All of this suggests that Protestants unfortunately do not follow Scripture.. Have a nice day to all! P.S Just subjective views of the thread.
|
|