Ask Me Help Desk - Who are the evil ones who say Lord, Lord?

The De Maria business: Yeah, you're taking her point of emphasis and disregarding her other posts.

Here's what I wrote and #145: As for the thief: It looks like he DID something, he performed a work, an ergon. How does this vitiate the claim that works, along with faith, are required for salvation?

Here's what I wrote at #154: Back to the thief: Can God in his infinite mercy and power save someone who isn't baptized? Sure he can. It doesn't follow from this that we are not instructed to be baptized. He can save unbelievers, too, it he wants to. Does it follow from that fact that we shouldn't believe? Presumably not. Now, if I'm wrong about Titus and Jn. explain my error; explain to me what those verses are saying.

As for your question: I don't quite understand what you are asking. Could you please rephrase it, explaining what you mean by "indwelling"?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

If a person had lived a depraved life, drugs, sex, robbery, etc., and was laying in the gutter and received a Holy Spirit clarity of mind, realized that the gospel that he heard as a child was his only hope, cried out to Jesus to be saved and received him as lord and saviour - and then got hit by a car in the next second, would he go to hell?

Deal with those issues.

Oh, that's the question. The point that De Maria and I made earlier is that WE cannot know. All we can do is to entrust the poor soul to God's judgment and mercy. How would you answer Joe's version of the question?

Oh, are you ever goiing to set me straight on Titus and Jn 3.5? I've looked and you still haven't said anything about them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeT777

This question shows a fundamental misconception of baptism. Baptism is the regeneration by being re-born by water and the Holy Ghost, being born again in the dignity of adoption as sons of God and heirs of God’s Kingdom. Through matter (the water) and form (the invocation of the Holy Trinity) we receive a new spiritual life, rebirth declared to Nicodemus.

The Church holds that there are three kinds of baptism; 1. The baptism of water, 2. The baptism of desire, and 3. the baptism of blood. The first is a sacrament, the others being only an effect of baptism, the receipt of grace, and the remittance of sins. The latter two forms are only effective when baptism by water becomes a physical or moral impossibility.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Baptism

It behoves us, then, with all our strength to steadfastly keep ourselves pure from filthy works, that we may not, like the dog returning to his vomit 2 Peter 2:22, make ourselves again the slaves of sin. For faith apart from works is dead, and so likewise are works apart from faith James 2:26 . For the true faith is attested by works.

Now we are baptized into the Holy Trinity because those things which are baptized have need of the Holy Trinity for their maintenance and continuance, and the three subsistences cannot be otherwise than present, the one with the other. For the Holy Trinity is indivisible. An Exposition of the Orthodox Faith (Book IV) CHURCH FATHERS: An Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, Book IV (John of Damascus)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

Originally Posted by JoeT777
No. What is said [ in Scripture is that baptism is essential for redemption B][SEE ABOVE][/B]

That is not found anywhere in scripture. For example, if that were the case, we would not see those examples that you have not dealt with where people are saved prior to water baptism.

Evidence:

Amen, amen, I say to thee, unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God… Amen, amen, I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. (John 3:3 ff)

JoeT

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akoue

The De Maria business: Yeah, you're taking her point of emphasis and disregarding her other posts.

She said what she said. If she does not believe that and said something else elsewhere, then she should come forward with a clarification.

Quote:

Here's what I wrote and #145: As for the thief: It looks like he DID something, he performed a work, an ergon. How does this vitiate the claim that works, along with faith, are required for salvation?

And I responded pointing out that we are discussing baptism with respect to the thief, therefore your comment does not address that specific issue.

Quote:

Here's what I wrote at #154: Back to the thief: Can God in his infinite mercy and power save someone who isn't baptized?

Then baptism is not essential for salvation. You cannot take all the cases in scripture and claim these to be exceptions. The reality is that we find fewer people in scripture baptized than those who are. Are they all exceptions?

Quote:

Now, if I'm wrong about Titus and Jn. explain my error; explain to me what those verses are saying.

What about Titus and John?

Quote:

As for your question: I don't quite understand what you are asking. Could you please rephrase it, explaining what you mean by "indwelling"?

You know... what happens when a person is saved according to scripture.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeT777

Evidence:

Amen, amen, I say to thee, unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God… Amen, amen, I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. (John 3:3 ff)

JoeT

What does it mean to be born of the water and the spirit? Let’s look at it in the context of scripture:

John 3:5-7
5 Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Do not marvel that I said to you, 'You must be born again.'
NKJV

Note that he equates the water with the flesh, being born in the flesh, and being born again with being born in the spirit. This is not speaking about water baptism. Different topic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akoue

Oh, that's the question. The point that De Maria and I made earlier is that WE cannot know. All we can do is to entrust the poor soul to God's judgment and mercy.

If there is a chance of him being saved, then baptist is not essential for salvation.

Quote:

How would you answer Joe's version of the question?

Already did when he first asked. Maybe you did not read that one either.

Quote:

Oh, are you ever goiing to set me straight on Titus and Jn 3.5? I've looked and you still haven't said anything about them.

What about them?

Can anyone prove that Jesus did not ask his followers to confess their sins?
The argument that He knew their hearts does not hold water for He knows everyone's hearts now and then.
Fred

"all the cases in scripture"

I count one. Acts 10 doesn't work for you for reasons that have already been canvassed. I have REPEATEDLY asked you to address Titus 3.5 and Jn.35, both of which speak to the issue of baptism. I know you saw the post because you quoted from it earlier. You constantly accuse others of dodging questions, though I have been going back and forth through this thread in order to do my best to give you honest answers to your questions. Please repay the courtesy.

And you STILL have not explained to me my errors regarding Eph.2, James 2, Rom.3, Rom.8 (there are others, but I'll leave it here, for now). You incessanetly whine that others don't read your posts or respond to your challenges, but the last several pages show that I have repeatedly asked you to explain, in a detailed way, where I have erred in reading these passages. (My readings, and explanations of them, have already been posted.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

Scripture gives us example of those who were in fact saved before they were baptized in water. That along is fatal to your argument because you claim that cannot happen.

Second, you were also asked this:

If a person had lived a depraved life, drugs, sex, robbery, etc., and was laying in the gutter and received a Holy Spirit clarity of mind, realized that the gospel that he heard as a child was his only hope, cried out to Jesus to be saved and received him as lord and saviour - and then got hit by a car in the next second, would he go to hell?

Deal with those issues.

You missed what I said in the description of Baptism – a salient point. The following is reprinted for your benefit.
The Church holds that there are three kinds of baptism; 1. The baptism of water, 2. The baptism of desire, and 3. the baptism of blood. The first is a sacrament, the others being only an effect of baptism, the receipt of grace, and the remittance of sins. The latter two forms are only effective when baptism by water becomes a physical or moral impossibility.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Baptism

Do you see that there are three forms of baptism?

No more what "if's" we could shake this tree till dawn and not bring out a Squirrel .

JoeT

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcura

Can anyone prove that Jesus did not ask his followers to confess their sins?

That was not what was being discussed. Here is Joe's message that raise the question:

" Originally Posted by JoeT777 View Post
Sure he betrayed Christ. But, he was a disciple; to be a disciple you need to confess that you believe (have faith)."

So he referred to a confession of faith.

Quote:

The argument that He knew their hearts does not hold water for He knows everyone's hearts now and then.

I don't see why you think that invalidates the position - it seems to me that it confirms what I said.

Akoue,
Don't hold your breath.
I don't expect it to happen because it can not be done.
Fred

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

What does it mean to be born of the water and the spirit? Let’s look at it in the context of scripture:

John 3:5-7
5 Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Do not marvel that I said to you, 'You must be born again.'
NKJV

Note that he equates the water with the flesh, being born in the flesh, and being born again with being born in the spirit. This is not speaking about water baptism. Different topic.

Explain, please, how this is not speaking about baptism.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

What does it mean to be born of the water and the spirit? Let's look at it in the context of scripture:

John 3:5-7
5 Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Do not marvel that I said to you, 'You must be born again.'
NKJV

Note that he equates the water with the flesh, being born in the flesh, and being born again with being born in the spirit. This is not speaking about water baptism. Different topic.

No it doesn't! Being born again is to be baptized. Your explanation above is silly

JoeT

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akoue

"all the cases in scripture"

I count one. Acts 10 doesn't work for you for reasons that have already been canvassed.

You keep ignoring my response.

Are you saying that you believe that the Holy Spirit can indwell the unsaved?

Quote:

I have REPEATEDLY asked you to address Titus 3.5 and Jn.35, both of which speak to the issue of baptism.

I responded to John 3:5 just a few messages ago.

As for Titus here is it:

Titus 3:5-8
5 not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, 6 whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
NKJV

You need to show me how you get water baptism from that passage.

Quote:

And you STILL have not explained to me my errors regarding Eph.2, James 2, Rom.3, Rom.8 (there are others, but I'll leave it here, for now).

I don't even remember anymore what post that is from or what it is about. You seem to like repetition.

Quote:

You incessanetly whine that others don't read your posts or respond to your challenges, but the last several pages show that I have repeatedly asked you to explain, in a detailed way, where I have erred in reading these passages. (My readings, and explanations of them, have already been posted.)

In almost every single case that you have raised this, when I checked, I had already addressed it. Giving you the benefit of a doubt, Ic can only assume that you skim the messages way too fast.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeT777

No it doesn't! Being born again is to be baptized

JoeT

That may be your belief, but it is not in scripture.

I am still waiting for you to explain the thief on the cross or Acts 10.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeT777

You missed what I said in the description of Baptism – a salient point. The following is reprinted for your benefit.
The Church holds that there are three kinds of baptism; .....

What your denomination believes is of no consequence when discussing Biblical doctrine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

That may be your belief, but it is not in scripture.

I am still waiting for you to explain the thief on the cross or Acts 10.

Which get us to the central question, Tj3.

HOW MANY FAITHS in CHRIST ARE THERE?

JoeT

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeT777

Which get us to the central question, Tj3.

HOW MANY FAITHS in CHRIST ARE THERE?[/I][/B]

JoeT

Answer my questions first -and I'd be happy to answer yours. You have been evading these questions for pages.

I am still waiting for you to explain the thief on the cross or Acts 10.

The thief on the cross was not in a position to be baptized with water - obviously.
So he was baptized via intent and blood. His.
With God all things are possible and if Jesus said the thief was saved he was,
The argument that he was not baptized is moot. It has no basis under the circumstances.
Fred

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcura

The thief on the cross was not in a position to be baptized with water - obviously.
So he was baptized via intent and blood. His.

So water baptism is not essential for salvation.

What about Acts 10, Fred? In that case water was available, but they were saved before baptism.

If, as Tj has been arguing, it is just blazingly obvious that works don't matter and baptism is to be dispensed with and the rest of us are just really, really stupid to read Scripture as we do (he's made it clear he thinks I'm pretty dumb)... Why, I wonder, did the early Church require baptism and the necessity of works along with faith for salvation? And I'm talking the REALLY early Church--late first and second centuries. The only people in the period who denied this were Gnostics, and Tj agrees that Gnosticism is heresy. So, here's my thing: Was the revelation brought in the first half of the first century so ineffectual that even those who were working with the Apostles got it all so terribly wrong? It was so ineffectual that even Ignatius of Antioch, Clement of Rome, the Didache, etc. botched it? Was Christ a lousy teacher? Were the Apostles? Was the Spirit not guiding any of these people? Was the Spirit so shockingly absent from them, and from the poor people being instructed by them, that God permitted massive theological delusion in the space of less than a decade? That would make God a pretty lousy Father.

(Yeah, I'm bringing up another point, Tj, not changing the subject. I can't seem to get you to respond to the questions I've been asking since #11, so I thought I'd bring in another angle.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akoue

If, as Tj has been arguing, it is just blazingly obvious that works don't matter and baptism is to be dispensed with

Back into mis-representation, I see. You think abuse is a work of righteousness?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

Answer my questions first -and I'd be happy to answer yours. You have been evading these questions for pages.

I am still waiting for you to explain the thief on the cross or Acts 10.

I'll answer this one since you want to dodge it. The answer is ONE. One and only one as Christ required.

20 And not for them only [the deciples] do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me. 21 That they all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22 And the glory which thou hast given me, I have given to them: that, they may be one, as we also are one. 23 I in them, and thou in me: that they may be made perfect in one: and the world may know that thou hast sent me and hast loved them, as thou hast also loved me. 24 Father, I will that where I am, they also whom thou hast given me may be with me: that they may see my glory which thou hast given me, because thou hast loved me before the creation of the world. 25 Just Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee. And these have known that thou hast sent me. 26 And I have made known thy name to them and will make it known: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them. ( John 17)

JoeT

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeT777

I'll answer this one since you want to dodge it.

I dodged nothing. Talking about dodging, I am still waiting for you to explain the thief on the cross or Acts 10.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

What your denomination believes is of no consequence when discussing Biblical doctrine.

Well, Tj, did the Holy Spirit descend on you in tongues of fire at Pentecost? Did you receive the laying on of hands from someone who received the laying on of hands from someone who received the laying on of hands, etc..,. from an Apostle? Did you, or anyone from whom you've received the laying on of hands, receive the power to create halakha from Christ?

You attack denominations. Do you worhip alone? Do you worship with people who disagee with you? Or are you a denomination of one?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

I dodged nothing. Talking about dodging, I am still waiting for you to explain the thief on the cross or Acts 10.

I did that, and you haven't explained how I got either wrong. You also haven't addressed my claim that it doesn't follow from the fact that the thief was saved without baptism in water it doesn't follow that we aren't to be baptized.

Tell me, why did all the early Church Fathers preach the necessity of baptism and works, as well as faith? Were they antichrists? Did the Apostles do such a bad job that they ordained a bunch of antichrists?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akoue

Well, Tj, did the Holy Spirit descend on you in tongues of fire at Pentecost? Did you receive the laying on of hands from someone who received the laying on of hands from someone who received the laying on of hands, etc..,. from an Apostle? Did you, or anyone from whom you've received the laying on of hands, receive the power to create halakha from Christ?

Does scripture say that any of the above are essential? Why are you trying to divert from the question.

Do you believe that the Holy Spirit will indwell the unsaved?

Quote:

You attack denominations.

Do you specialize in mis-representations or is that just a hobby? I do not attack denominations. I have no issue with denominations.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akoue

I did that,

Again, you do not read carefully. Look who I posted that message to. It wasn't you.

Quote:

and you haven't explained how I got either wrong.

I responded. Maybe you did not read the responses.

Quote:

Tell me, why did all the early Church Fathers preach the necessity of baptism and works, as well as faith?

I have not denied the importance of any of the above. But I am discussing how and why scripture says that they are important, but what one person or another believes.

Do you believe that the Holy Spirit will indwell the unsaved?

I mentioned this just a little bit ago: Please explain what you mean by "indwell". Can't answer till I understand the question.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akoue

Do you believe that the Holy Spirit will indwell the unsaved?

I mentioned this just a little bit ago: Please explain what you mean by "indwell". Can't answer till I understand the question.

And I answered. Maybe you did not read.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

I responded. Maybe you did not read the responses.
.

Kindly repost, since I can't seem to find your response.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

Again, you do not read carefully. Look who I posted that message to. It wasn't you.
.

So what? This is a public space, and I'm not just talking to you. And neither has Joe been talking only to you. If you want to keep a conversation private, take it to PM.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akoue

Kindly repost, since I can't seem to find your response.

Maybe if you spent less time mis-representing what I say and more time reading what is said...

Here is it once again:

"You know ... what happens when a person is saved according to scripture."

I am making the assumption that you understand what the Bible says happens when a person is saved.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akoue

So what? This is a public space, and I'm not just talking to you. And neither has Joe been talking only to you. If you want to keep a conversation private, take it to PM.

It is not about privacy - it is about you claiming that I was saying this to you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

I dodged nothing. Talking about dodging, I am still waiting for you to explain the thief on the cross or Acts 10.

You haven't addressed anything either.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoeT777

You haven't addressed anything either.

An empty claim, Joe.

I am still waiting for you to explain the thief on the cross or Acts 10.

Water is essential when it is available .
Obviously it was not on the cross.
That is why there are three ways a person my be baptized.
Fred

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcura

Water is essential when it is available .

Then it is not essential. But that does not explain Acts 10 in any case.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tj3

It is not about privacy - it is about you claiming that I was saying this to you.

I didn't claim that. I said that I already answered it.

I just said that it IS essential when available.
Don't try to twist my words to mean something else as is your habit to do.
Fred