High Demand Religions?

[Martin]

How is this not just “If I think I’m saved, I am”?

I believe the assurance given by the Holy Spirit is not a 'think so' or a 'hope so' but a 'know so'.

I don't know if I will ever have your level of assurance. I personally believe in a living hope, but I cannot say, "I know I am saved." May ask if you felt this way after baptism?

[Soloist]

How is this not just “If I think I’m saved, I am”?

I believe the assurance given by the Holy Spirit is not a 'think so' or a 'hope so' but a 'know so'.

I don't know if I will ever have your level of assurance. I personally believe in a living hope, but I cannot say, "I know I am saved." May ask if you felt this way after baptism?

I had his level of assurance before I was saved. Now I agree with you.

[Sudsy]

How is this not just “If I think I’m saved, I am”?

I believe the assurance given by the Holy Spirit is not a 'think so' or a 'hope so' but a 'know so'.

I don't know if I will ever have your level of assurance. I personally believe in a living hope, but I cannot say, "I know I am saved." May ask if you felt this way after baptism?

No, before. I don't believe water baptism has any saving properties. Jesus didn't say to the thief on the cross 'that is nice that you believe in Me but you should have lived long enough to be baptised in water to enter into My Kingdom'. Within Christianity there are varying views on water baptism and the mode required. My belief in water immersion is that baptism is an outward sign of an inward spiritual reality that the believer has already experienced by faith in Christ. It is a public testimony that one has entered into a faith union with Christ.

I also believe salvation is not based on my feelings. Rather it is based on my faith in what Jesus did to save me. It is not about how good I am or how obedient I am as a Christian. How I live as a believer will determine my rewards or lack thereof. However, if there are not signs of being born again in my life, as scripture speaks of these signs, then my belief in Jesus is something to re-consider as scripture says when we are born again we are new creations. These changes are brought about by the Holy Spirit living within us and not to be confused with following a list of rules on how we must live as some group defines them.

So, I can have confidence that I am saved, am being saved and will be saved, not by my righteous works but by God's grace through faith in what Jesus did to save me. If I am tempted to doubt my salvation, I am likely thinking I need to perform to a certain level or be perfectly obedient or am afraid my failings will not make me good enough. But that would mean my salvation is not based on Jesus and what He has done to save me but rather my own performance. We cannot perform perfect enough to ever merit heaven.

Well, that is my understandings and when I am tempted to question my salvation, what satan loves to try, I point him to Jesus and remind him that it is not my perfectedness that saves me but through Jesus perfectedness. He doesn't like that when we say 'get thee behind me satan' my faith and trust is in Jesus.

[Valerie]

I will just say, there are Sola Scriptura arguments made by denominations making their case FOR infant baptism. That would be if you think early church writers saying Apostles taught to do this were liars. So those denominations make their case for Infant Baptism using Scripture and convey their understanding.

Show me these quotes from the early teachers directly taught by the Apostles and I’ll show you quotes that disagree from early teachers taught by Apostles.

I don't think it is God's leading to be SO SURE of something you cannot prove.

I completely disagree. For one, we all believe in unseen unprovable living God.

The early church fought and died to defend the faith once delivered to the saints. We can have opinions, sure- but to accuse of false teachings because "YOU" think it's false teachings, does not make it so.

The heretics did as well and you have repeatedly stated martyrdom isn’t proof of anything. Thus, you stating it’s true when it contradicts Scripture doesn’t make it true either.

Scripture teaches oral teachings were passed down.
Scripture says the Church is the pillar and ground of the truth. I can see why this assumption and error was made against the Church but perhaps they will be accountable if it turns out they assumed wrongly and created such havoc.

No objection. The objection is who is the church.

Even still, other Protestants at that time still use Scripture to support infant baptism even if you remove E Of & RC from the picture.

Yeah and they also killed the Anabaptists with the sword too.

You can search for quotes but I know dialogue is futile.
The arguments you raise, do not dismiss the facts.
I was open to be corrected, and have changed accordingly. Was willing to learn, and pray, and talk to those in priestly offices.
You may maintain your opinion, it just is that- you were not there when the Church was started nor when it was stated the Apostles taught it. That is why it's done in every country the Church was started by the Apostles.
My mind was able to be changed- after not agreeing with infant baptism all my life, but I NEVER called it heresy even then.

[Judas Maccabeus]

I would suggest that more fundamental than determining what beliefs are beyond question, is determining what answers are beyond question. What is the ultimate source of authority?

Is it the written Word?
A personal vision?
The "oral traditions", if someone can tell us what they are?
The written Traditions of The Church (which One)?
The Deposit of the Faith?
The ex cathedra pronouncements of the Pope?
The personal leading of the Holy Spirit?
The Ordnung or brotherhood agreement of the local fellowship?
More than one of the above, or only one?

This is not an "Anabaptist vs. anyone else" issue, people were being martyred for having views that conflicted with the Powers That Be long before the Anabaptists came along.

If we don't agree on what's authoritative, we won't agree on much of anything else.
Exhibit A: This thread.

In the end, the question is “where is final authority.”

The 'final authority' that I am going with is the Holy Spirit's revelation to my spirit that I am saved -

Romans 8:16 -The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God

The Holy Spirit has brought me to believe that my salvation is based on this alone -

Romans 10:9-10 - If you openly declare that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is by believing in your heart that you are made right with God, and it is by openly declaring your faith that you are saved.

What others chose to believe for their salvation is their choice. This, I believe, is the Gospel message that saves us from sin and eternal death and the one that I share with others.

Without a Bible that you know to be final truth, how do you differentiate this from a Mormon who has a “burning in his bosom” when he reads the Book of Mormon?

[Soloist]

You can search for quotes but I know dialogue is futile.
The arguments you raise, do not dismiss the facts.
I was open to be corrected, and have changed accordingly. Was willing to learn, and pray, and talk to those in priestly offices.

The problem is you dismiss any quotes from the early church fathers against infant baptism or say they are misunderstood.

You may maintain your opinion, it just is that- you were not there when the Church was started nor when it was stated the Apostles taught it. That is why it's done in every country the Church was started by the Apostles.
My mind was able to be changed- after not agreeing with infant baptism all my life, but I NEVER called it heresy even then.

None of the people that taught you that were there either.
The people that were there disagree with each other.
You are taking sides in one of these debates that is very very old. The older accounts are against infant baptism.
Infant baptism is heresy.

You can’t argue that we weren’t there when you weren’t there either… all you can really argue on is the historical written accounts. If you are unwilling to produce those quotes, why are you still arguing that it’s not heresy?

[RZehr]

My mind was able to be changed- after not agreeing with infant baptism all my life, but I NEVER called it heresy even then.

Maybe you should have been willing to.

[Sudsy]

In the end, the question is “where is final authority.”

The 'final authority' that I am going with is the Holy Spirit's revelation to my spirit that I am saved -

Romans 8:16 -The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God

The Holy Spirit has brought me to believe that my salvation is based on this alone -

Romans 10:9-10 - If you openly declare that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is by believing in your heart that you are made right with God, and it is by openly declaring your faith that you are saved.

What others chose to believe for their salvation is their choice. This, I believe, is the Gospel message that saves us from sin and eternal death and the one that I share with others.

Without a Bible that you know to be final truth, how do you differentiate this from a Mormon who has a “burning in his bosom” when he reads the Book of Mormon?

When I have a burning in my bosom it is usually indigestion. Sorry, being silly.

Although I haven't read the Book of Mormon, I would think I would be 'moved' by truths in it as I am 'moved' by reading some secular stuff that resonates with my thinking. However, to me, embracing truths in scripture goes beyond a feeling and is about trusting and putting my confidence in it's truths. I may or may not feel something but my heart accepts it as truth.

I believe it is very possible that some Mormons are saved from my talks with them as they evangelize. I would not want to make a judgment on their salvation over some of their beliefs. God alone knows our hearts. I even suspect some Anabaptists are saved.

[Valerie]

I believe the assurance given by the Holy Spirit is not a 'think so' or a 'hope so' but a 'know so'.

I don't know if I will ever have your level of assurance. I personally believe in a living hope, but I cannot say, "I know I am saved." May ask if you felt this way after baptism?

I had his level of assurance before I was saved. Now I agree with you.

I LOVE the Orthodox saying,: "I AM saved, I am Being saved, & I will be saved"

If you don't know you've been saved, there's something wrong it seems. I would not call myself a Christian if I put myself in the category of only hoping. Scripture teaches assurance and it also teaches you are "sealed" by the Holy Spirit. At the same time one has free will to fall away & stay away-

[ohio jones]

I would suggest that more fundamental than determining what beliefs are beyond question, is determining what answers are beyond question. What is the ultimate source of authority?

Is it the written Word?
A personal vision?
The "oral traditions", if someone can tell us what they are?
The written Traditions of The Church (which One)?
The Deposit of the Faith?
The ex cathedra pronouncements of the Pope?
The personal leading of the Holy Spirit?
The Ordnung or brotherhood agreement of the local fellowship?
More than one of the above, or only one?

This is not an "Anabaptist vs. anyone else" issue, people were being martyred for having views that conflicted with the Powers That Be long before the Anabaptists came along.

If we don't agree on what's authoritative, we won't agree on much of anything else.
Exhibit A: This thread.

An addition to the above list:
The teachings of those in priestly offices?