• Amused
  • Angry
  • Annoyed
  • Awesome
  • Bemused
  • Cool
  • Crazy
  • Crying
  • Depressed
  • Down
  • Embarrassed
  • Enraged
  • Friendly
  • Geeky
  • Grumpy
  • Happy
  • Hungry
  • Innocent
  • Meh
  • Piratey
  • Poorly
  • Sad
  • Secret
  • Shy
  • Sneaky
  • Tired
  • Page 46 of 46 FirstFirst ... 36444546
    Results 451 to 460 of 460
    1. #451
      atpollard is offline Prodigy Member
      56
      Married
      Mood:
      Sad
       
      Join Date
      Feb 2017
      Posts
      730
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      2,976
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (10,500 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      5,416
      Level
      22
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      93.99%
      Rep Power
      169
      Quote Originally Posted by Josiah View Post
      Your entire apologetic is that what Scripture TEACHES is to be ignored and rather the rubric is what typically is shown as DONE in the few examples of such that just happens to be recorded in the NT.
      So when push comes to shove and you are asked to provide an example of what Scripture teaches (to see if Particular Baptists really are ignoring it) ... you have nothing to present. Your accusation appears to be 100% unsupported rhetoric. How disappointing.

    2. Likes MennoSota liked this post
    3. #452
      Josiah's Avatar
      Josiah is offline Bronze Member
      Supporting Member
      Married
      Mood:
      Happy
       
      Join Date
      Jun 2015
      Posts
      5,810
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      115,986
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      53,133
      Level
      58
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      48.65%
      Rep Power
      739
      Quote Originally Posted by atpollard View Post
      Quote Originally Posted by Josiah


      Your entire apologetic is that what Scripture TEACHES is to be ignored and rather the rubric is what typically is shown as DONE in the few examples of such that just happens to be recorded in the NT

      So when push comes to shove and you are asked to provide an example of what Scripture teaches (to see if Particular Baptists really are ignoring it) ... you have nothing to present. Your accusation appears to be 100% unsupported rhetoric. How disappointing.


      Of course not (perhaps you didn't read what you quoted).


      I'm REJECTING (not defending) the Anabaptist/Baptist apologetic that we must ignore what Scripture teaches and in stead of that, in lieu of that, in place of that, consider normative what is clearly and consistently DONE in the few examples of such that happen to be recorded in the NT. You know, the point you make about what was DONE and in an argument from silence, what appears NOT DONE. You know, your consistent point of "Where do you find an example of a blonde haired person being baptized in the Bible?!?!?!" You know, the consistent, perpetual apologetic used over and over that, "Every example of baptism that happens to be recorded in the NT is of receivers who FIRST had celebrated their Xth birthday, FIRST chose Jesus as their personal savior and gave adequate public proof of that, FIRST wept an adequate number of buckets of tears in repentance and supplied adequate public proof of that, FIRST proclaimed that baptism does nothing and FIRST personally requested to be baptized.... THUS we must do that and can do no other." Of course, it's wrong (the examples in the NT do not so indicate) and it's a silly rubric that no Anabaptist/Baptist accepts but uses as their key apologetic for their distinctive dogma anyway. I agree that Baptists ignore this reality....


      I also REJECT (and do not defend) the other point about the koine Greek word "kai" dogmatically mandating chronological sequence and thus a long (ever growing) chain of dogmatic prerequisites. Again, the whole apologetic is just wrong as it seems Anabaptist/Baptist agree but use anyway as the other apologetic for their new, distinctive dogma.


      My point to MennoSota, obviously, is 1) He needs to think through his own position (but of course, he won't) and 2) he has created a normative formula that he completely and consistently violates himself (but he just ignores that) and makes the discussion impossible: he is simply SO obsessed with parroting his unique, new denominational "spin" that he surrounds it with a rubric that he himself consistently violates - a hypocritical double standard. IMO, he shoots himself in the foot with ALL his attempts to defend the new denomination tradition of Anabaptist/Baptists by disagreeing with himself on every point, and he shoots himself in the foot with his normative insistence by completely and consistently violating it every single time. YOU may see this (although you've never noted so) .... but he won't.





      Quote Originally Posted by atpollard
      What does Scripture teach?

      GREAT! Let's abandon the silly apologetics of the Anabaptist/Baptists and the absurd normative practice they insist upon but consistently and constantly don't. Let's see if it teaches the new baptism dogmatic invention of the Anabaptist/Baptist denomination in 1523.... Perhaps you can give the references to the following (since you seem to support MennoSota's approach here; that Scripture must clearly teach as a denomination's tradition does)....


      Thou canst NOT baptize any unless and until they hath FIRST celebrated their Xth birthday! (To support the Anti-Paedobaptism dogma of Anabaptist/Baptist)

      Thou canst NOT baptize any unless and until they hath FIRST chosen Jesus as their personal Savior and hath first given adequate public proof of such! (to support the Credobaptism dogma of Anabaptist/Baptist)

      Thou canst NOT baptize any unless and until they hath FIRST wept X buckets of tears in repentance and hath first given adequate public proof of such! (to support the point 2 in this thread have dogmatically mandated)

      Thou canst NOT do ANYTHING unless such action is clearly and consistently illustrated as having been done in examples given in the New Testament! (to support the position of 2 in this thread and the Anabaptist apologetic on this topic)

      Baptism doth nothing! (to support the point 2 in this thread have dogmatically mandated)

      Does Scripture TEACH the new, unique denominational dogma and tradition of the Anabaptist/Baptist on baptism (anti-Paedobaptism and Credobaptism)? Reminder, MennoSota's MANDATE is that we can't assume anything, can't use any tradition, and can't say anything that the Bible doesn't clearly and consistently say (and you've been defending him for months now and have never once disagreed with him or corrected him on this).



      - Josiah




      .
      Last edited by Josiah; 04-20-2018 at 11:50 AM.
      We are justified by works - just not our own.

    4. #453
      MennoSota is offline Expert Member
      Mood:
      ----
       
      Join Date
      Sep 2017
      Posts
      2,500
      CH Cash
      10,443
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      9,379
      Level
      29
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      2.67%
      Rep Power
      231
      Quote Originally Posted by Josiah View Post
      Of course not (perhaps you didn't read what you quoted).


      I'm REJECTING (not defending) the Anabaptist/Baptist apologetic that we must ignore what Scripture teaches and in stead of that, in lieu of that, in place of that, consider normative what is clearly and consistently DONE in the few examples of such that happen to be recorded in the NT. You know, the point you make about what was DONE and in an argument from silence, what appears NOT DONE. You know, your consistent point of "Where do you find an example of a blonde haired person being baptized in the Bible?!?!?!" You know, the consistent, perpetual apologetic used over and over that, "Every example of baptism that happens to be recorded in the NT is of receivers who FIRST had celebrated their Xth birthday, FIRST chose Jesus as their personal savior and gave adequate public proof of that, FIRST wept an adequate number of buckets of tears in repentance and supplied adequate public proof of that, FIRST proclaimed that baptism does nothing and FIRST personally requested to be baptized.... THUS we must do that and can do no other." Of course, it's wrong (the examples in the NT do not so indicate) and it's a silly rubric that no Anabaptist/Baptist accepts but uses as their key apologetic for their distinctive dogma anyway. I agree that Baptists ignore this reality....


      I also REJECT (and do not defend) the other point about the koine Greek word "kai" dogmatically mandating chronological sequence and thus a long (ever growing) chain of dogmatic prerequisites. Again, the whole apologetic is just wrong as it seems Anabaptist/Baptist agree but use anyway as the other apologetic for their new, distinctive dogma.


      My point to MennoSota, obviously, is 1) He needs to think through his own position (but of course, he won't) and 2) he has created a normative formula that he completely and consistently violates himself (but he just ignores that) and makes the discussion impossible: he is simply SO obsessed with parroting his unique, new denominational "spin" that he surrounds it with a rubric that he himself consistently violates - a hypocritical double standard. IMO, he shoots himself in the foot with ALL his attempts to defend the new denomination tradition of Anabaptist/Baptists by disagreeing with himself on every point, and he shoots himself in the foot with his normative insistence by completely and consistently violating it every single time. YOU may see this (although you've never noted so) .... but he won't.








      GREAT! Let's abandon the silly apologetics of the Anabaptist/Baptists and the absurd normative practice they insist upon but consistently and constantly don't. Let's see if it teaches the new baptism dogmatic invention of the Anabaptist/Baptist denomination in 1523.... Perhaps you can give the references to the following (since you seem to support MennoSota's approach here; that Scripture must clearly teach as a denomination's tradition does)....


      Thou canst NOT baptize any unless and until they hath FIRST celebrated their Xth birthday! (To support the Anti-Paedobaptism dogma of Anabaptist/Baptist)

      Thou canst NOT baptize any unless and until they hath FIRST chosen Jesus as their personal Savior and hath first given adequate public proof of such! (to support the Credobaptism dogma of Anabaptist/Baptist)

      Thou canst NOT baptize any unless and until they hath FIRST wept X buckets of tears in repentance and hath first given adequate public proof of such! (to support the dogma 2 in this thread have dogmatically mandated)

      Thou canst NOT do ANYTHING unless such action is clearly and consistently illustrated as having been done in examples given in the New Testament! (to support the position of 2 in this thread and the Anabaptist apologetic on this topic)

      Baptism doth nothing! (to support the dogma 2 in this thread have dogmatically mandated)

      Does Scripture TEACH the new, unique denominational dogma and tradition of the Anabaptist/Baptist on baptism (anti-Paedobaptism and Credobaptism)? Reminder, MennoSota's MANDATE is that we can't assume anything, can't use any tradition, and can't say anything that the Bible doesn't clearly and consistently say (and you've been defending him for months now and have never once disagreed with him or corrected him on this).



      - Josiah




      .
      Again, you have provided no scripture. This thread has proven that you have no biblical support. You are merely creating a philosophical argument from thin air as your crutch for your position. The length of this thread proves this over and over again. You refuse to address scripture and always rest on your philosophy. The argument is over. You have no support. Mods, please lock and close this thread.

    5. #454
      Josiah's Avatar
      Josiah is offline Bronze Member
      Supporting Member
      Married
      Mood:
      Happy
       
      Join Date
      Jun 2015
      Posts
      5,810
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      115,986
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      53,133
      Level
      58
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      48.65%
      Rep Power
      739
      MennoSota, Again, you have provided no scripture. This thread has proven that you have no biblical support. You are merely parroting (verbatim) the new dogmatic invention of a couple of radical synergists in 1523, invented from thin air as a crutch for their radical synergism. The length of this thread proves this over and over again. You mandate that all denominational tradition must be disregarded but all you is parrot your denomination's tradition. You mandate that scripture must teach the position or it is to be disregarded, but you refuse to offer even one Scripture that teaches even one point of your denomination's new tradition you parrot. The argument is over. You have no support. Just repeating three absurd, silly apologetical points that you reject but think everyone must accept.
      We are justified by works - just not our own.

    6. #455
      psalms 91's Avatar
      psalms 91 is offline Silver Member
      Supporting Member
      69
      Mood:
      Happy
       
      Join Date
      Jun 2015
      Location
      Pa
      Posts
      11,508
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      501,152
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (1,278,758 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      42,583
      Level
      53
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      75.12%
      Rep Power
      427
      What this thread has proven is that neither of you will let it go, you are like dogs with a bone. It has went way beyond the point of who is right or wrong and entered into the rediculous and you are both equally guilty of it. There can be np argument if one is willing to let it go and neither of you are so perhaps we should all just go away and let you two wander aimlessly through this thread forever.
      Isaiah 40:31

    7. #456
      Josiah's Avatar
      Josiah is offline Bronze Member
      Supporting Member
      Married
      Mood:
      Happy
       
      Join Date
      Jun 2015
      Posts
      5,810
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      115,986
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      53,133
      Level
      58
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      48.65%
      Rep Power
      739
      Quote Originally Posted by psalms 91 View Post
      What this thread has proven is that neither of you will let it go, you are like dogs with a bone. It has went way beyond the point of who is right or wrong and entered into the rediculous and you are both equally guilty of it. There can be np argument if one is willing to let it go and neither of you are so perhaps we should all just go away and let you two wander aimlessly through this thread forever.

      @psalms 91
      @Albion
      @ImaginaryDay2


      I ask you to read and consider this....


      I think you are missing the entire point....


      I'm not making an argument. I'm not setting the rules. I'm EVALUATING and RESPONDING to MennoSota's arguments and normative mandates. And he's very, very skillfully ignoring every bit of it. I'm 100% sure why. I'm calling for intellectual honesty and an "equal playing field" and an end to the radical double standard he is demanding (it seems with support from others).


      What he is insisting upon is what "kills" any possibility of discussion. All these pages prove it.

      + He claims we must ignore tradition (but all he does is parrot his denomination's tradition!).
      + He claims Scripture must teach exactly what a denomination does (but he refuses to give one Scripture that teaches even one aspect of the dogma he promotes).
      + He claims we must reject assumptions and speculations (but bases his whole view on assumptions and speculations)
      + He claims we are permitted to do only what is clearly and consistently done in the Bible (but he rejects that view, proving every time he posts on the internet)
      and that's just for starters....

      There's a heavy dose of hypocrisy here, an absurd double-standard where he forbids the very thing he does worse of all. Why does this matter? Because it kills the discussion and makes any agreement impossible.


      The issue of Baptism is not an easy one. The questions these radical synergists began to ask in the 16th Century are not directly addressed in Scripture. BUT.,.

      1. We do have solid, ecumenical, universal tradition (consensus in theology and practice) since at least 63AD. And nothing in it runs contrary to Scripture (in teaching or practice) - and he knows that (I think atpollard even admitted it early on). SO MennoSota must reject any mention of Tradition, but that's all he's got - he's simply tossed out 2000 years of solid, ecumenical tradition for that of 3 German wackedoodle radical synergists invented out of thin air in 1523 NOT because of anything the Scripture says about baptism but because their new invention "jibes" better with their radical synergism. He can't have it both ways, he can't insist we not look to Tradition when that's ALL HE DOES, just parrots endlessly (and mindlessly) the talking points of the Anabaptist tradition.

      2. We do have Scripture that speaks of Baptism as being used by God, we do have the command to baptize, we do see it given enormous importance.... true, no verse that says "This command INCLUDES those under the age of X" but of course there's none that says "This command EXCLUDES those under the age of X" either. Of course, we DO have Tradition which notes that infant baptism was universal by 63 AD (when most of the Apostles were still alive) but Anabaptists disregard all ecumenical and historic tradition but declare their own newly and uniquely invented tradition to be infallible. And of course, we have no command that blonde-haired persons may be baptized either - the Anabaptist point that we can only baptize those groups of humans were examples of such are illustrated in the NT is profoundly silly.

      Frankly, MennoSota - rather than the intellectual honesty to admit this, rather than engaging in any discussion - has just resorted to echoing ENDLESSLY the same silly talking points and destroying any possibility of discussion with his endless prohibitions of the very things he consistently does. And more than a little "name-calling." I'm calling him out on it. NOT because of anything personal (I think I'm the one who invited him to join here!) but rather because he is so powerfully illustrating the problem - why Christianity is divided on this, why discussions go nowhere on this.



      - Josiah



      .
      Last edited by Josiah; 04-20-2018 at 12:44 PM.
      We are justified by works - just not our own.

    8. #457
      ImaginaryDay2's Avatar
      ImaginaryDay2 is offline Veteran Member
      Moderator
      Supporting Member
      49
      O Lord, You keep safe both man
      and animal.
       
      Mood:
      Friendly
       
      Join Date
      Jul 2015
      Posts
      2,417
      Country
      Canada
      CH Cash
      216,312
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (5,693 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      14,424
      Level
      34
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      78.31%
      Rep Power
      387
      @Josiah
      @MennoSota

      Again-

      Quote Originally Posted by ImaginaryDay2 View Post
      What we "want people to see" won't be seen sometimes (from either side) after 45 pages
      46 now...
      "Let us ask the Lord for a strong faith to see with his eyes the reality of family life, and for a deep love to approach all families with his merciful heart." - Pope Francis

    9. #458
      jsimms435's Avatar
      jsimms435 is offline moderator
      Moderator
      Married
      Mood:
      Cool
       
      Join Date
      Jul 2015
      Posts
      1,983
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      10,826
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      10,965
      Level
      31
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      1.12%
      Rep Power
      314
      Staff Notice

      We are closing this thread for staff review. It may be reopened later once it has been reviewed and possibly edited.

    10. #459
      jsimms435's Avatar
      jsimms435 is offline moderator
      Moderator
      Married
      Mood:
      Cool
       
      Join Date
      Jul 2015
      Posts
      1,983
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      10,826
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (0 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      10,965
      Level
      31
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      1.12%
      Rep Power
      314
      Staff Notice

      This thread is now permanently closed

    11. #460
      Lämmchen's Avatar
      Lämmchen is offline God's Lil Lamb
      Administrator
      Supporting Member
      Community Team
      Married
      Gloria In Excelsis Deo
       
      Mood:
      Cool
       
      Join Date
      Jun 2015
      Posts
      13,679
      Country
      United States
      CH Cash
      19,469
      Post Thanks / Like
      CH Cash
      (89,433 Banked)
      vBActivity - Stats
      Points
      156,444
      Level
      85
      vBActivity - Bars
      Lv. Percent
      85.75%
      Rep Power
      666
      I wanted to add to the staff notice that we normally do not like closing threads but this one was too far gone in the back and forth "you're wrong" "no, you're wrong" that it was no longer a productive thread. Besides, my original topic was not being addressed anymore so it is best that this thread just gets a staff death since members wouldn't allow it to die peacefully
      "Christianity does not require more work but more trust." Pr. Jonathan Fisk
      "Bearing fruit does not make you a branch. A branch is a branch because it grows from the vine." Pr. Jonathan Fisk
      "A Christian's life is not defined by what the Christian does. It is defined by Christ and what He has done for us." Pr. Rolf David Preus

    Bookmarks

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •