Common Christian practices that are not taught in scripture

[ken_sylvania]

The meaning of the word baptizo in Greek is essentially "dip" or "immerse," not sprinkle and the descriptions of baptisms in the New Testament suggest that people went down into the water to be immersed rather than having water brought to them in a container to be poured or sprinkled.

And who told us that what the Greek meant?

Sudsy did.

[Sudsy]

The meaning of the word baptizo in Greek is essentially "dip" or "immerse," not sprinkle and the descriptions of baptisms in the New Testament suggest that people went down into the water to be immersed rather than having water brought to them in a container to be poured or sprinkled.

And who told us that what the Greek meant?

Sudsy did.

Amen. But search it out for yourselves. This is my conviction and understanding of what actually occurred in the NT baptisms.

[ken_sylvania]

And who told us that what the Greek meant?

Sudsy did.

Amen. But search it out for yourselves. This is my conviction and understanding of what actually occurred in the NT baptisms.

I have searched it out. In order to force the various words translated "baptize" and "were baptized" to specify a mode you have to ignore certain instances of use and make too many assumptions for which there is no proof.

[Sudsy]

Sudsy did.

Amen. But search it out for yourselves. This is my conviction and understanding of what actually occurred in the NT baptisms.

I have searched it out. In order to force the various words translated "baptize" and "were baptized" to specify a mode you have to ignore certain instances of use and make too many assumptions for which there is no proof.

Then you should live by your understanding as should I. I have done likewise for the D&R issue and have an understanding I live by.

[Ernie]

Then you should live by your understanding as should I. I have done likewise for the D&R issue and have an understanding I live by.

The difference is that there is no question about what Jesus and the Apostles have to say about divorce and remarriage. The difference in opinions has to do with what God may tolerate. Not what he has to say.

[Sudsy]

Then you should live by your understanding as should I. I have done likewise for the D&R issue and have an understanding I live by.

The difference is that there is no question about what Jesus and the Apostles have to say about divorce and remarriage.

I disagree. The question regarding D&R is whether or not re-marriage is an initial act of adultery that can be forgiven or if re-marriage is a state of adultery one is living in. This link gives an explanation of why the re-married state is not a state of adultery. Your choice to agree or not.

https://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-qa/q ... n-forever/

[silentreader]

Then you should live by your understanding as should I. I have done likewise for the D&R issue and have an understanding I live by.

The difference is that there is no question about what Jesus and the Apostles have to say about divorce and remarriage.

I disagree. The question regarding D&R is whether or not re-marriage is an initial act of adultery that can be forgiven or if re-marriage is a state of adultery one is living in. This link gives an explanation of why the re-married state is not a state of adultery. Your choice to agree or not.

https://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-qa/q ... n-forever/

I suppose it also depends on whether you believe repentance should involve change or not.

[Sudsy]

The difference is that there is no question about what Jesus and the Apostles have to say about divorce and remarriage.

I disagree. The question regarding D&R is whether or not re-marriage is an initial act of adultery that can be forgiven or if re-marriage is a state of adultery one is living in. This link gives an explanation of why the re-married state is not a state of adultery. Your choice to agree or not.

https://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-qa/q ... n-forever/

I suppose it also depends on whether you believe repentance should involve change or not.

I don't know anyone who believes repentance does not involve change. Perhaps you could give your definition of what it means to repent ?

I believe it involves acknowledging one's sin, being sorry for that sin and turning with intent to not do that sin again. As scripture says that just because grace abounds doesn't mean we can freely sin.

Seems the issue might be whether one believes the state of being re-married is living in continuous adultery or if one has repented and the new marriage is acceptable to God as a legitimate married state. I believe, as this link says, the latter.

[silentreader]

I disagree. The question regarding D&R is whether or not re-marriage is an initial act of adultery that can be forgiven or if re-marriage is a state of adultery one is living in. This link gives an explanation of why the re-married state is not a state of adultery. Your choice to agree or not.

https://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-qa/q ... n-forever/

I suppose it also depends on whether you believe repentance should involve change or not.

I don't know anyone who believes repentance does not involve change. Perhaps you could give your definition of what it means to repent ?

I believe it involves acknowledging one's sin, being sorry for that sin and turning with intent to not do that sin again. As scripture says that just because grace abounds doesn't mean we can freely sin.

Seems the issue might be whether one believes the state of being re-married is living in continuous adultery or if one has repented and the new marriage is acceptable to God as a legitimate married state. I believe, as this link says, the latter.

My question is, what change did this repentance bring?

Looks like there was a sinful act, a profession of repentance was made, and then the act was made legitimate by a formality so that the sinner was then free to enjoy the fruits of his sin. Is that really how things work?

[Valerie]

Then you should live by your understanding as should I. I have done likewise for the D&R issue and have an understanding I live by.

The difference is that there is no question about what Jesus and the Apostles have to say about divorce and remarriage. The difference in opinions has to do with what God may tolerate. Not what he has to say.

Again we come to interpretation. We were guided through scripture in our case to justify remarriage because of our particular circumstances which Anabaptist s refer to as "the exception clause."