Welcome to Christianity Haven, thank you for visiting! If you have not already, we invite you to create an account and join in on the many discussions we have!
Please be aware that when registering you must not register while using a VPN. Any registrations made using a VPN will be rejected.
Additionally, registration emails are not being sent out which is an issue that is being worked on. Your registration may go into an approval queue for admin approval. We work to send manual emails to the email on file, so please ensure the email you use is one you can readily access!
This is interesting and something a little bit different. How can it be that God "never redeems anyone that he has not decreed"...etc? And what, exactly, do you mean by "decreed" and "covenant relationship?"
If this is your point, you need a different story to illustrate it. The one about the driver getting instructions and then disregarding them doesn't bear it out.
But you do not know that to be the case, nor is it what Scripture says about them.
By naming each of them, I suppose. :(
Do you not know how ridiculous that is, especially since what Scripture says, without naming names, is conclusive as it already stands. You had a reasonable point when it...
I'm still waiting for you to make a case for the baptismal regulations you stand by.
YOU started this exchange by making two claims about Baptism. It is up to you to substantiate the claims, if you can. Simply making them proves nothing. And as I said in closing my previous reply, you need to...
Let me help you out and shorten the routine for the benefit of other readers.
1. You begin by claiming that there is NO mention in the BIble of infant baptism or any mode of baptism other than immersion.
2. I say you are mistaken on both accounts.
3. You reply with a two-word challenge that...
Of course it DOES mention what you say it does not.
Even die-hard Baptist types normally try to find a way of talking around those "mentions" in Scripture, but you simply pretend that they don't exist...and this is coming from a self-styled Bible expert!
There are plenty of people who "believe in Jesus" or "believe Jesus," meaning that they believe something good about him but do not relate to Jesus as a disciple does and may not even know who Jesus was.
What's missing is Faith, true Faith, and not just intellectual assent. Gandhi was an...
All what trouble?
John was baptizing in the way that many other Hebrew revivalists were baptizing at that point in history. People were going through a ritual that symbolized their intention to turn back to God, etc.
But the fact that rivers were used doesn't tell us anything about the mode...
Analogies from Scripture are always subject to second-guessing, but on balance, I'd say yes.
For certain, the Fundamentalist's interpretation of Christ's words as being a reference to physical birth doesn't hold up. And then too, this is only one passage in the New Testament that supports the...
...which is yet another example of you altering Scripture in order to make your theory "fit." The verses in John do not say that they didn't believe because he didn't give his life for them.
On the contrary, it says that they didn't recognize him. That's because they had a totally different...
You've laid out the facts methodically, but your conclusion is a non-sequitur.
Yes, God saw something in Cornelius. God made a special move in Cornelius' case. God's love has been described in Scripture as being "qualified," as you termed it.
But none of that requires a conclusion that Christ...
which none of us has disputed.
Right.
Oh boy. Yes, I do.
Of course.
That was my point, too, but you probably made the point better than I did.
Exactly. If there is less support for X than for Y, meaning only that the information for one appears more times in Scripture than there are...
It looks more like the message is that the Gentiles are included, contrary to the usual Jewish POV, and if that is correct, then where does it leave predestination? It is ruled out.
I am only expressing my own reaction, but what you have presented here really seems to disprove the idea that...
...which raises a question.
Is it the case that NO ONE can have observed Jesus, listened to him and watched him and agreed with his moral teachings, etc. and, consequently, believed in him WITHOUT having been created by God to be a disciple (i.e., predestined), all the rest of this aside?
No, the less convoluted and clearer explanation of the meaning is that God so loved all of humanity that he made eternal life possible for humans. When we look at the verse you quoted as saying "Love not the world," the meaning is no more contrary or confusing than to say that WE should not...
You addressed that reply to someone else, but it seems to me that there's no denying that the one who knows the way to Light (according to your story) gave correct directions to a person who didn't know how to get there beforehand. True or not?
And the fact that the driver didn't get to Light...
Basically, what all the historic branches of Christianity hold to be true about the sacrament of Baptism, wouldn't you say?
That's in contrast to the more recent view of some people that Baptism's just a gesture that we act out in order for us to show God something or other! o_O
Well, '1689Dave' will probably be along any time now to offer the opposite belief, and then you'll be into a seemingly never-ending back and forth! Keep your powder dry!