orthodox and baptism, split from are pc anabaptist?

General Christian Theology
Hats Off
Posts: 2532
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:42 pm
Affiliation: Plain Menno OO

Re: orthodox and baptism, split from are pc anabaptist?

Post by Hats Off »

I hope not - but if I give you false confidence by affirming some of the things you believe in then I am guilty of helping you to you death. If however, I have attempted to show you why I believe you are wrong, then I have done what is required of me.
0 x
Valerie
Posts: 5309
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 6:59 am
Location: Medina OH
Affiliation: non-denominational

Re: orthodox and baptism, split from are pc anabaptist?

Post by Valerie »

ohio jones wrote:
Valerie wrote:We are born with the need to be "Born Again" by water & the Spirit (Baptism)-
I thought the Orthodox linked baptism to birth, rather than to the new birth. :?
No, to the New Birth- The New Birth is where by anointing and the grace of the Holy Spirit, the Baptized, at whatever age is receives the Holy Spirit and becomes a part of the Kingdom of God- if when young, they are holy, and raised in the fear and hurture of the Lord. Born Again-
0 x
Valerie
Posts: 5309
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 6:59 am
Location: Medina OH
Affiliation: non-denominational

Re: orthodox and baptism, split from are pc anabaptist?

Post by Valerie »

Hats Off wrote:I hope not - but if I give you false confidence by affirming some of the things you believe in then I am guilty of helping you to you death. If however, I have attempted to show you why I believe you are wrong, then I have done what is required of me.
Question- on judgement Day, will someone suffer eternal punishment for not interpreting Scripture the same as Anabaptists?
Is misunderstanding these particular things being discussed here, a salvation issue? Are they unpardonable sins if someone finds out on judgement day, that their understanding, or misunderstanding of 'baptism' or 'serving in the service' was wrong?
Especially when these people are Christians in a time when there are thousands of sects?
One thing I consider Hats Off, when we were seriously seeking out Anabaptism, was the realization that from the beginning there were different interpretations- it did not seem as if, there was a prophet of God sent to start the Church over, and that the Church was waiting for the Anabaptist all these centuries to set everything straight- if so, there wouldn't have been so many splits from the start would there? We had to consider this when trying to discern 'truth' on doctrines that we had not been exposed to - example headcovering. We were convinced of that. Footwashing, we tend to agree with Sudsy on in making applications that would mean the same today- humility & serving one another. Eucharist- well we tend to believe the Orthodox have this right- I really cannot fathom how the Anabaptist came to do commnion twice a year, that was not an early Church practice, nor was pouring (unless there was not a body of water to immerse) for baptism-
I respect ANabaptist people highly for practicing what they believe- but on judgement day, I don't think some of these interpretation differences we have here & there will necessarily cast us into the lake of fire if we are mistaken. I have read too much early Church history to feel confident in everything the Anabaptist came to believe in the 16th century as correct interpretation- I mean no offense by this, any more than your implication that not believing 'just like you' may mean eternal damnation.
0 x
Valerie
Posts: 5309
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 6:59 am
Location: Medina OH
Affiliation: non-denominational

Re: orthodox and baptism, split from are pc anabaptist?

Post by Valerie »

ken_sylvania wrote:
Valerie wrote:
Josh wrote:
Understood. In times past, myself, and some of my friends, would have objected to something that is so "narrow" it can't include full fellowship with practicing, same-sex-married homosexuals. But I feel if I am going to exclude such people, then I'd best exclude people who disobey Jesus' other direct commands, like the ones where he tells us to not to murder each other.
This is where interpretation and early church history enter in- God never equated military service to murdering each other- think back to the 10 commandments "Thou shalt not murder"- if He saw those as the 'same thing' He would have then not had His own Elect, bearing His name, kill every man, woman, child & animal in many areas on the way to the promised land- so if killing was His commandment to Israel He obviously doesn't consider military & murder as the same thing, and the early Church had people who served in the service. Even instructions to 'soldiers' so there we have not disobedience to Jesus, as you suggest, but a difference in 'interpretation'.
Come on, Valerie. Do you remember what the instructions to the "soldiers" were (btw, they were John Baptist's instructions, not Jesus' instructions)? The soldiers were instructed to "do violence to no man." Do you suppose that meant that it was OK to kill by some kind of non-violent means????

The instructions Jesus gave to his sword-bearing friend were to "put the sword into its sheath."
Jesus said explicitly that under the old law, hatred of one's enemies was acceptable, but that his (Jesus') followers are to love their enemies.

Do you really think maiming and killing people is a good way to demonstrate your love for them?

Jesus' own words explain very well how interpretation and church tradition enter into excusing "christians" going to war. "And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition." Mark 7:9
That is exactly what the so-called church has done. They have rejected Jesus' commandment so that they can keep their own tradition of killing other people. It doesn't make God happy.
This is the passage in KJV:

Luke 3:14King James Version (KJV)

14 And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages.

First time I realized the difference so much between KJV & NKJV

Luke 3:14New King James Version (NKJV)

14 Likewise the soldiers asked him, saying, “And what shall we do?”

So he said to them, “Do not intimidate anyone or accuse falsely, and be content with your wages.”

I don't know Ken, I sincerely believe that you can look at this from both sides- it seemed that even if John was saying not to harm anyone, he also didn't tell them to leave the service- there are ways of serving where you won't harm anyone but we know the NT does condone wielding the sword against evil-
I don't see a misunderstanding of this either way, as a salvation issue- truly Jesus said love your enemies- but those who are not against joining the service sincerely believe He met 'personal' enemies, not applicable if one was in the service. He referred back to the law "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" (which was between 'two' people- not armies.
Then He said to love these enemies. I can see both sides. Sincerely.
0 x
ken_sylvania
Posts: 3970
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 12:46 pm
Affiliation: CM

Re: orthodox and baptism, split from are pc anabaptist?

Post by ken_sylvania »

Valerie wrote:
Hats Off wrote:I hope not - but if I give you false confidence by affirming some of the things you believe in then I am guilty of helping you to you death. If however, I have attempted to show you why I believe you are wrong, then I have done what is required of me.
Question- on judgement Day, will someone suffer eternal punishment for not interpreting Scripture the same as Anabaptists?
No. However, there will be plenty of people saying "Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name, and in thy name done many wonderful works?" who will be doomed to eternal misery because they couldn't be bothered to actually obey the Lord's commands. While he was on earth, Jesus condemned those who used their "interpretations" to sidestep God's commands. I have no reason to believe he has changed his mind about how awful that practice is.
Valerie wrote: Is misunderstanding these particular things being discussed here, a salvation issue? Are they unpardonable sins if someone finds out on judgement day, that their understanding, or misunderstanding of 'baptism' or 'serving in the service' was wrong?
Especially when these people are Christians in a time when there are thousands of sects?
Do you really think God to look the other way if we disobey Him? Think again of the scene in Matthew 25. Those people who got put over on the King's left seem to have honestly believed their "interpretation" of God's will, but it didn't do them a whit of good.
Being mistaken doesn't give us a free pass to disobey God. Hence the warnings about deception.
Valerie wrote: One thing I consider Hats Off, when we were seriously seeking out Anabaptism, was the realization that from the beginning there were different interpretations- it did not seem as if, there was a prophet of God sent to start the Church over, and that the Church was waiting for the Anabaptist all these centuries to set everything straight- if so, there wouldn't have been so many splits from the start would there?
You seem to labor under the impression that the Bible truths that the early Anabaptists held dear were something new that they came up with. On the contrary, ever since the beginning of the church there were various, (often persecuted) groups who held onto and passed down the truth.
Valerie wrote:We had to consider this when trying to discern 'truth' on doctrines that we had not been exposed to - example headcovering. We were convinced of that. Footwashing, we tend to agree with Sudsy on in making applications that would mean the same today- humility & serving one another. Eucharist- well we tend to believe the Orthodox have this right- I really cannot fathom how the Anabaptist came to do commnion twice a year, that was not an early Church practice, nor was pouring (unless there was not a body of water to immerse) for baptism-
I respect ANabaptist people highly for practicing what they believe- but on judgement day, I don't think some of these interpretation differences we have here & there will necessarily cast us into the lake of fire if we are mistaken. I have read too much early Church history to feel confident in everything the Anabaptist came to believe in the 16th century as correct interpretation- I mean no offense by this, any more than your implication that not believing 'just like you' may mean eternal damnation.
I don't think Hats Off was at all implying that not believing "just like him" might mean eternal damnation. What he was saying is that disobeying Jesus' plain commands may mean eternal damnation. Do you believe otherwise? Do you think you can disobey Jesus and still go to heaven?
0 x
Valerie
Posts: 5309
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 6:59 am
Location: Medina OH
Affiliation: non-denominational

Re: orthodox and baptism, split from are pc anabaptist?

Post by Valerie »

ken_sylvania wrote:
Valerie wrote:
Hats Off wrote:I hope not - but if I give you false confidence by affirming some of the things you believe in then I am guilty of helping you to you death. If however, I have attempted to show you why I believe you are wrong, then I have done what is required of me.
Question- on judgement Day, will someone suffer eternal punishment for not interpreting Scripture the same as Anabaptists?
No. However, there will be plenty of people saying "Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name, and in thy name done many wonderful works?" who will be doomed to eternal misery because they couldn't be bothered to actually obey the Lord's commands. While he was on earth, Jesus condemned those who used their "interpretations" to sidestep God's commands. I have no reason to believe he has changed his mind about how awful that practice is.
Valerie wrote: Is misunderstanding these particular things being discussed here, a salvation issue? Are they unpardonable sins if someone finds out on judgement day, that their understanding, or misunderstanding of 'baptism' or 'serving in the service' was wrong?
Especially when these people are Christians in a time when there are thousands of sects?
Do you really think God to look the other way if we disobey Him? Think again of the scene in Matthew 25. Those people who got put over on the King's left seem to have honestly believed their "interpretation" of God's will, but it didn't do them a whit of good.
Being mistaken doesn't give us a free pass to disobey God. Hence the warnings about deception.
Valerie wrote: One thing I consider Hats Off, when we were seriously seeking out Anabaptism, was the realization that from the beginning there were different interpretations- it did not seem as if, there was a prophet of God sent to start the Church over, and that the Church was waiting for the Anabaptist all these centuries to set everything straight- if so, there wouldn't have been so many splits from the start would there?
You seem to labor under the impression that the Bible truths that the early Anabaptists held dear were something new that they came up with. On the contrary, ever since the beginning of the church there were various, (often persecuted) groups who held onto and passed down the truth.
Valerie wrote:We had to consider this when trying to discern 'truth' on doctrines that we had not been exposed to - example headcovering. We were convinced of that. Footwashing, we tend to agree with Sudsy on in making applications that would mean the same today- humility & serving one another. Eucharist- well we tend to believe the Orthodox have this right- I really cannot fathom how the Anabaptist came to do commnion twice a year, that was not an early Church practice, nor was pouring (unless there was not a body of water to immerse) for baptism-
I respect ANabaptist people highly for practicing what they believe- but on judgement day, I don't think some of these interpretation differences we have here & there will necessarily cast us into the lake of fire if we are mistaken. I have read too much early Church history to feel confident in everything the Anabaptist came to believe in the 16th century as correct interpretation- I mean no offense by this, any more than your implication that not believing 'just like you' may mean eternal damnation.
I don't think Hats Off was at all implying that not believing "just like him" might mean eternal damnation. What he was saying is that disobeying Jesus' plain commands may mean eternal damnation. Do you believe otherwise? Do you think you can disobey Jesus and still go to heaven?
I believe the only unpardonable sin, is what Jesus said: Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit- but I do believe in His mercy.
I do believe that 'willful' disobedience can lead to the loss of salvation. But those who believe that soldiers are giving their lives for people, and fighting evil, I don't see as 'willful disobedience' - during the Reformation these topics came up and some believed like ANabaptist, then there were the 'half-way Anabaptists, and then there were those who believed Jesus was referring to 'personal' enemies- they understand Him different in this command- fortunately I have never personally been in the position of having to make that choice in action, I would have never joined the service, I have a hard enough time killing a spider.
0 x
ken_sylvania
Posts: 3970
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2016 12:46 pm
Affiliation: CM

Re: orthodox and baptism, split from are pc anabaptist?

Post by ken_sylvania »

Valerie wrote: I don't know Ken, I sincerely believe that you can look at this from both sides- it seemed that even if John was saying not to harm anyone, he also didn't tell them to leave the service- there are ways of serving where you won't harm anyone but we know the NT does condone wielding the sword against evil-
I'm not aware of anything in the NT that suggests it is OK for a follower of Jesus to wield the sword against evil. Could you give me an example?
The closest thing to that that I can think of is when Jesus expressed a need for swords after the last supper (he said whoever has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one. Then the disciples said they had two swords with them, and Jesus said "it is enough.") At any rate, when Peter decided to use one of the swords on a person a bit later that evening, Jesus instructed him to put the thing away. Certainly not a persuasive argument for military service.
Valerie wrote: I don't see a misunderstanding of this either way, as a salvation issue- truly Jesus said love your enemies- but those who are not against joining the service sincerely believe He met 'personal' enemies, not applicable if one was in the service. He referred back to the law "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" (which was between 'two' people- not armies.
Then He said to love these enemies. I can see both sides. Sincerely.
If I'm sincerely wrong, will that absolve me from the consequences of my error?

"An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" was not between "two people." Go read it again. An eye for an eye as punishment was to be meted out through the OT justice system.

That being said, Jesus was not referring to "eye for eye" when he said to love our enemies. Love for one's neighbor was commanded under the OT law. Leviticus 19:18 says "Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the Lord." The "personal enemies" interpretation that you propose is basically the same as the OT commandment. If that was the case, why would Jesus suggest that he was changing anything. The law already forbade having personal enemies among the children of Israel. Basically, they were not allowed to hate anyone except their "national enemies."
Being willfully ignorant of Jesus' commands is not going to save anybody on judgement day.
0 x
Valerie
Posts: 5309
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 6:59 am
Location: Medina OH
Affiliation: non-denominational

Re: orthodox and baptism, split from are pc anabaptist?

Post by Valerie »

ken_sylvania wrote:
Valerie wrote: I don't know Ken, I sincerely believe that you can look at this from both sides- it seemed that even if John was saying not to harm anyone, he also didn't tell them to leave the service- there are ways of serving where you won't harm anyone but we know the NT does condone wielding the sword against evil-
I'm not aware of anything in the NT that suggests it is OK for a follower of Jesus to wield the sword against evil. Could you give me an example?
The closest thing to that that I can think of is when Jesus expressed a need for swords after the last supper (he said whoever has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one. Then the disciples said they had two swords with them, and Jesus said "it is enough.") At any rate, when Peter decided to use one of the swords on a person a bit later that evening, Jesus instructed him to put the thing away. Certainly not a persuasive argument for military service.
Valerie wrote: I don't see a misunderstanding of this either way, as a salvation issue- truly Jesus said love your enemies- but those who are not against joining the service sincerely believe He met 'personal' enemies, not applicable if one was in the service. He referred back to the law "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" (which was between 'two' people- not armies.
Then He said to love these enemies. I can see both sides. Sincerely.
If I'm sincerely wrong, will that absolve me from the consequences of my error?

"An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" was not between "two people." Go read it again. An eye for an eye as punishment was to be meted out through the OT justice system.

That being said, Jesus was not referring to "eye for eye" when he said to love our enemies. Love for one's neighbor was commanded under the OT law. Leviticus 19:18 says "Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the Lord." The "personal enemies" interpretation that you propose is basically the same as the OT commandment. If that was the case, why would Jesus suggest that he was changing anything. The law already forbade having personal enemies among the children of Israel. Basically, they were not allowed to hate anyone except their "national enemies."
Being willfully ignorant of Jesus' commands is not going to save anybody on judgement day.
I don't see that as willfully ignorant of Jesus' commands, having heard both sides of the debate, they are not 'ignorant' of what Jesus said, maybe they disagree on what He 'meant'. Two different things- He knows the hearts on this, and He will be the judge of anyone who mistakenly felt that they were called to serve and called to lay down their lives, or be willing to.
0 x
User avatar
Josh
Posts: 23823
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
Location: 1000' ASL
Affiliation: The church of God

Re: orthodox and baptism, split from are pc anabaptist?

Post by Josh »

So where does this end? I know lots of people who think they can follow Jesus whilst embracing homosexual marriage, cohabiting, and all manner of immorality. In fact they even encourage such things and promote them.

Yet the scriptures are clear that those who practice darkness will not inherit the kingdom of heaven.
0 x
User avatar
ohio jones
Posts: 5221
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:23 pm
Location: undisclosed
Affiliation: Rosedale Network

Re: orthodox and baptism, split from are pc anabaptist?

Post by ohio jones »

Valerie wrote:
ohio jones wrote:
Valerie wrote:We are born with the need to be "Born Again" by water & the Spirit (Baptism)-
I thought the Orthodox linked baptism to birth, rather than to the new birth. :?
No, to the New Birth- The New Birth is where by anointing and the grace of the Holy Spirit, the Baptized, at whatever age is receives the Holy Spirit and becomes a part of the Kingdom of God- if when young, they are holy, and raised in the fear and hurture of the Lord. Born Again-
I really don't think Nicodemus got the idea that Jesus was talking about infants being born again, nor would anyone else see this in that passage unless they were already convinced of it beforehand. In fact John 3, with its repeated use of the phrase "whoever believes" is a fairly clear statement against infant baptism.

Where in the New Testament is anything said about an infant receiving the Holy Spirit?
0 x
I grew up around Indiana, You grew up around Galilee; And if I ever really do grow up, I wanna grow up to be just like You -- Rich Mullins

I am a Christian and my name is Pilgram; I'm on a journey, but I'm not alone -- NewSong, slightly edited
Post Reply