Tradition Versus Scripture

[Brakelite]

Lol...........you keep me in stitches Brokelite...............

I actually don't think spiritual adultery is really a laughing matter.
KJV Revelation 17:1-2
1 And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will shew unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters:
2 With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and the inhabitants of the earth have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication.
Have you ever read the book of Hosea?

 

[Brakelite]

"What stands written" requires interpretation.

KJV Matthew 11:25-29
25 At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.
26 Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight.
27 All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.
28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
29 Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls.

KJV John 17:3
3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

The Christian walk is one of relationship. Being a friend of God, being willing to honour Him in all things, and obey His commandments. God loves us. So much He died in our place that we may be forgiven and cleansed of all sin. Do you not believe He also desires for His children to understand what is truth? Is He going to deny truth to those who diligently seek Him?

KJV Hebrews 11:6
6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

KJV John 8:31-32
31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;
32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

KJV John 14:16-21
16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.
21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

KJV John 17:17
17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

 

[Brakelite]

"What stands written" requires interpretation

I find that the scriptures need very little "interpretation". I understand English quite well. Sometimes I do need assistance in fully understanding some of the more difficult passages, but none of those of not understood correctly, affect salvation. The important salvation issues are clearly and succinctly dealt with. God has ensured there be no mistakes made by the sincere genuine Christian seekers of truth and righteousness. He will guide them into all truth.
I think people are more inclined to need "interpretation" if they aren't willing to obey or accept the more plain meaning of the text. They are looking for an escape clause. And the magisterium, in claiming ownership of sole interpreters of scripture, have therefore provided the perfect escape clause for all those who do not desire to obey scripture. They can have their traditions and historic myths regarding saints and continue to feel justified in believing they can continue in sin and still get to heaven.

 

[Johann]

No offense taken. For it is not MY dogma/tradition that I adhere to. I adhere to the 2,000 year dogma/traditions of The Church.

Well, you didn't refute my point, you just said Jewish sources will back you up.....but you didn't provide those sources soooooooo you know what the next step is.

Mary

Very easy-in the Jewish Community no infant baptism-only those who have reached the age of accountability-Bar Mitzvah-very ancient practice-soooo-you are still in error.
I'm not sharing my sources.
J.

 

[Johann]

Hi Johann,

According to Scripture, there is no assurance of salvation.

According to Jesus if I endure to the end I will be saved (Matthew 24). Will you endure to the end Johann? Or will you fall away (Luke 8:13)?

Have your men assured you that you are saved?

Curious Mary

Can show you MANY Scriptures that believers are secure-hence assurance of salvation-you don't have that assurance-sadly.
J.

 

[Johann]

Lol Johann.....I don't think you know the meaning of circular reasoning....but I get the gist of your rant.

Are you suggesting that the word "children" in that passage does not at EVER mean infants? I am already one step ahead of you kiddo.

Neuter diminutive of G3816; a childling (of either sex), that is, (properly) an infant, or (by extension) a half grown boy or girl; figuratively an immature Christian: - (little, young) child, damsel.

Thayer Definition:
1) a young child, a little boy, a little girl
1a) infants
1b) children, little ones
1c) an infant
1c1) of a (male) child just recently born


Also, I asked you to "Show me in Scripture where Jesus said that the promise of salvation is for you, but not your children." You failed to show me anything from Scripture to support what your men have taught. Would you like to try again?

Keeping it real......Mary

Already answered-no infant baptism in Jewish Communities.
J.

 

[Johann]

Lol....Dear Johann,

"What stands written" requires interpretation. You have accepted the interpretation of men that lived 500 years ago (or less). I have accepted the interpretation of men that were students of the Apostles.

There is no debate........students of the Apostles beat out 16th century men!!!

And I have accepted what stands written, Perfect Tense-you the traditions of men as more authoritative.
J.

 

[Johann]

Huh???? I don't understand what you are saying?

You said: Offense taken-
J.

 

[Johann]

Eventually it totally changed the church, it's what introduced syncretism and compromise. It also resulted in divorce. Apostasy.

Your men are lying to you. An
apostolic teaching? Show me from Romans 6 how baptism was an infant appropriate event.
Show me an example of John the Baptist baptising infants.

She cannot-an appeal to the Church fathers an Imperative-forgetting what ancient rabbinical rabbis wrote.
J.

 

[BreadOfLife]

LOL....I'm sorry but the "scriptural acrobatics" employed by the RCC are centuries older than you or I.
I wasn't born into my faith, but went searching for God in my early twenties after balking at what was passed off as "Christianity" in Christendom for quite some time....the fact that it was OK to do what Christ taught....except when justification was needed to ignore him.

Nowhere was this more obvious than when nations went to war. All the churches supported their nation in their side of the war effort and the Catholic church particularly was right at the forefront, blessing weapons that would inevitably take the lives of innocent people, even fellow Catholics at times, and absolving troubled consciences at the front line. The question was then, if Christians were on both sides of the conflict, whose side was God taking? Jesus told them, but they ignored him to curry favor with the world. (Matt 5:43-44; James 4:4)

The fact that I did go into so much detail is because I am a student of the Bible and have been for over 50 years. If you don't know the details of why you hold something to be true, then you are what Paul describes as a 'clashing cymbal'....like a brass object that echoes loudly when struck and makes a harsh, jarring, and discordant noise that repels rather than attracts.

Its a shame your red flags don't alert you to the things that are red flags to God....like idolatry and bloodguilt.

I don’t engage in either – so your point is moot.

Please...I would welcome such an examination. The NWT was sorely needed because most English translations of the Bible available today are skewed towards the teachings of the church...not the Christ. I would be very happy to go down that rabbit hole with you...

As I stated before – the numerous perversions of the NWT it’s a topic for another thread because it IS a rabbit-hole . . .

If you have not been indoctrinated with this nonsense then you would read that and laugh at its absurdity.
You have three gods there......"God the Father"...."God the Son"....and "God the Holy Spirit".....three separate entities whom you collectively call "God"...they can talk to one another...be in different places at the same time....have different wills.....and only one prays to the Father. The Father is clearly superior, so how can they be equally "God"?

Jesus never once claimed to be Almighty God and the apostles did not think that Jesus was God incarnate, but always deferred to the son as God's representative on earth.....they worshipped the Father, not the son who was a "god like" one who had full authorization from his Father. (Matt 28:18)

Guess again:
John 20:28
Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my GOD!”

If he was God why did he need authority to be "given" him?

The Father sends the Soon (John 3:16).
The Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son (Rev. 22:1)..

 

[BreadOfLife]

Hilarious.

Thanks for that non-response . . .

 

[Aunty Jane]

You crack me up aunty jane.

You seem to crack up a lot Marymog......be careful how hard you laugh.
After the apostle Paul spoke of the sins that Israel committed, and God’s response to them, he said...
“Now these things happened to them as examples, and they were written for a warning to us upon whom the ends of the systems of things have come.
12 So let the one who thinks he is standing beware that he does not fall.” (1 Cor 10:11-12)

What your men have taught you such nonsense! Or are you self taught?? None the less.....What denomination do you belong to? That would help me better understand where you are coming from.

Can I ask what men have taught you?.....because the nonsense taught by the RCC is indeed ancient, but biblical truth is missing. An apostasy was foretold by Jesus and his apostles.....a falling away from the faith was going to happen and it was starting towards the end of the first century. The second century saw men who claimed to be taught by the apostles, come in and alter everything Christ taught. As time went on the additions became laughable. Christianity was unrecognisable.

Genuine Christianity shouldn’t have “denominations” because it was supposed to be one united brotherhood, all believing the same things with no divisions (1 Cor 1:10) What happened? Humans who substituted tradition for scriptural truth....that’s what happened. History was repeating as “the church” did exactly what Judaism had done to God’s worship.....they corrupted it until there was no resemblance. Jesus said that their worship was “in vain” because what they taught were the traditions of men. (Matt 15:7-9)
The devil is having a lend of you and laughing at your lack of spiritual discernment.

Sooooo "the "scriptural acrobatics" employed by YOU are amazing. You deviate from 2,000 years of Christian teaching to employ your own version (or, what your men have taught you) of Scripture. Do you really trust those men that have taught you that?

I trust the scriptures because I have studied them carefully like the ancient Beroeans who never accepted anything unless they saw that it was from scripture. Humans are prime targets for the devil to persuade in introducing lies masquerading as truth......tell the lies often enough to the ignorant masses who were denied access to the scriptures by their spiritual authorities, and you have the RCC. Dare to question their doctrines and the trials for heresy would end in torture, forced confessions and death. Where did Christ ever authorise such things?

Why is it that that Protestants, such as yourself, teach that ANYONE can read Scripture and properly interpret it but when a Catholic interprets it, they are wrong?????????? Weird.......

What makes Catholic men in self imposed authority, think that they can alter everything Christ taught and interpret scripture to mean things that Christ never taught, and then accuse others of heresy, when they were the real heretics? Their reign of terror lasted for 1500 years.....and then Martin Luther as a Catholic priest had had enough of their disgusting behaviour and wanted the church to get back to serving Christ instead of serving themselves as the Pharisees had done. Christendom and Judaism are mirror images of one another....both systems were corrupted by the same enemy of God.

Very confusing.............Why are YOU (or the men that have taught you) right and the men of the catholic church wrong?

Scripture tells us plainly that what the RCC teaches finds NO support in the Bible.....none whatsoever.
If Christ did not teach it....it isn’t true.
Ask yourself where you would find these teachings the Bible....?

That Mary was “the mother of God”.
That she was ever virgin.
That she and Joseph had no other children.
That Mary was “immaculately conceived” and rose bodily to heaven.
That men could introduce traditions that argue with scripture.
That infants could be baptised.
That there is a place called purgatory.
That there is a burning hell that awaits the wicked.
That there is more than one mediator with God.
That reciting phrases or prayers repetitively was penance for sin.
That confession to a priest (who is also a sinner) can result to in absolution.
Just for starters....

Curious Mary

Not curious enough Mary.....

 

[The Learner]

Here is my question to you: Where does Scripture say that infants are not to be baptized? After all, you Protestants say that everything that we Christians do must be affirmed by Scripture. So give your Scriptural evidence that infants are NOT to be baptized!!!

Curious Mary

Here is my question to you: Where does Scripture say that we can use inside plumbing?

 

[The Learner]

Don't run around in circles-show me from Scripture infants-not knowing good or evil-were regenerated and justified-an "ongoing" justification" in the waters of baptism.
Heck-you won't find that from Jewish sources.
The one cracking me up is you.

Leviticus 12
King James Version
12 And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,

2 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a woman have conceived seed, and born a man child: then she shall be unclean seven days; according to the days of the separation for her infirmity shall she be unclean.

3 And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.

4 And she shall then continue in the blood of her purifying three and thirty days; she shall touch no hallowed thing, nor come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purifying be fulfilled.

5 But if she bear a maid child, then she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her separation: and she shall continue in the blood of her purifying threescore and six days.

6 And when the days of her purifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb of the first year for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon, or a turtledove, for a sin offering, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, unto the priest:

7 Who shall offer it before the Lord, and make an atonement for her; and she shall be cleansed from the issue of her blood. This is the law for her that hath born a male or a female.

8 And if she be not able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons; the one for the burnt offering, and the other for a sin offering: and the priest shall make an atonement for her, and she shall be clean.

Exodus 13:14-15

King James Version

​

14 And it shall be when thy son asketh thee in time to come, saying, What is this? that thou shalt say unto him, By strength of hand the Lord brought us out from Egypt, from the house of bondage:
15 And it came to pass, when Pharaoh would hardly let us go, that the Lord slew all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both the firstborn of man, and the firstborn of beast: therefore I sacrifice to the Lord all that openeth the matrix, being males; but all the firstborn of my children I redeem.

Luke 2:22
King James Version
22 And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;

This is all that comes to mind, I see if poking around finds anything else.

 

[The Learner]

articles related to last post

FIRST-BORN, REDEMPTION OF - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

jewishencyclopedia.com

CHILD, THE - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

jewishencyclopedia.com

best ABLUTION - JewishEncyclopedia.com
best CONSECRATION - JewishEncyclopedia.com

BAPTISM - JewishEncyclopedia.com

Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.

jewishencyclopedia.com

 

[The Learner]

"

Was Baby Jesus Impure?←⤒https://www.christianstudylibrary.o...tion-baby-jesus#outline-was-baby-jesus-impure​

This is the reason they come to Jerusalem. Yet this raises some questions. Through the ritual of Leviticus 12, the mother, who is a sinner, and the child, who is born covenantally dead, are restored to the congregation of Israel. This comes through a washing with water and with blood sacrifice. By blood and water, they are incorporated into the covenant people. (If you think about it, Leviticus 12 proves that every infant in Israel was baptized, which is pretty strong evidence for the continuation of infant baptism in the new covenant!)

But how can this be? Jesus is not just Mary's son. He is the Son of the Most High. He was conceived by the Holy Spirit and he is sinless. This means that as an infant, he is not born covenantally dead. He was not conceived and born in sin. Why does he go through this rite?

A clue is found in Luke 2:22. Luke speaks of "their purification." Leviticus, however, speaks only of the mother's purification. The child is, of course, unclean and in need of cleansing, but it is an uncleanness derived from his mother. Why then speak of "their" purification? Because Jesus already ritually shares in Mary's judgment, already suffers under the curse for sin. We can go further: Jesus is born in blood and from Mary's innermost parts.

Thus, though in himself he has no sin, merely his birth makes both his mother and himself unclean, and his birth requires the blood of sacrifice and washing with water. This leaves no doubt that he is true man, that he took our sin-cursed nature to himself. This leaves no doubt that he is subject to the Law — "born of a woman, born under the law" (Galatians 4:4).

Jesus is part of God's people Israel through his mother in the womb. He is born estranged from that people and from the covenant. That's part of what Leviticus 12 shows. Yet, this is not because of any sin in him, but because of the incompleteness of the old covenant. We do not often think of it, but Jesus Christ would have brought sacrifices throughout his life. Born under the law, he had to bring certain sacrifices. He lived in the midst of death, sin, and uncleanness, and he was obligated to bring sacrifices. He comes to the temple for the first time and receives the blood and water of the covenant. And it is the sacrifice for the poor: two clean birds. From the outset, Jesus is identified with the poor who wait on God to save. Sin, uncleanness, and sacrifice surround Jesus' birth."

Luke 2:22 – The Purification of Baby Jesus | Christian Library

www.christianstudylibrary.org

 

[The Learner]

Hello Johann,

Show me from Scripture that entire families were NOT baptized in the water of baptism. You can't!!! Can you? Infants are not part of families....are they Johann??????????????? you crack me up..........

Show me in Scripture where Jesus said that the promise of salvation is for you, but not your children. Scripture says OPPOSITE of your false prophecy (Acts 2:39)..............youi crack me up because you preach opposite of Scripture.................

Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.

But Johann says "Suffer little children and fordibd them from coming unto to me for the kingdom of heaven is NOT for them.


Wow....See how that is OPPOSITE of what Jesus said??????????????


YOU have accepted the 500-year-old teaching of Protestant men instead of looking at Scripture and the 2,000-year teaching of The Church.

How sad for you kiddo....how sad. I would say again that you crack me up but I am actually concerned for your spiritual wellbeing.

You called me and Scripture liars...OFFENSE TAKEN.....

Acts 16:33

King James Version

​

33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.

Acts 18:8

King James Version

​

8 And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized.

"
There are five cases of household baptism recorded in the New Testament.

1. Cornelius' Household (Acts 10)
2. Lydia's Household (Acts 16)
3. The Philippian Jailer's Household (Acts 16)
4. Crispus’ Household (Acts 18)
5. Stephanas’ Household (1 Corinthians 1)"

Household Baptisms in the New Testament

Since the subject of infant baptism seems so popular on PB lately, well… I am presently a credobaptist, although there was a time when I was partially, and really wanted to be fully convinced of paedobaptism. Yet as I undertook a prolonged study of the subject, in all honesty I had to conclude...

www.puritanboard.com

I Corinthians 7:14 and Household Baptisms

Since I’ve already addressed Acts 2:39 and Jesus’ blessing of children, I thought I would also address two more points of data in the New Testament commonly appealed to in arguments for…

gavinortlund.com

"Many biblical passages also connect household and children (e.g., Genesis 18:19; 31:41; 36:6; 47:12; Numbers 18:11; 1 Chronicles 10:6; Matthew 19:29; 1 Timothy 3:12), and several others reference entire households being saved (Luke 19:9; John 4:53; Acts 11:14; 16:31; 18:18). "

In the New Testament, ‘Household’ Baptism Includes Infant Baptism

It is quite probable, based on what we know about first-century families and Sacred Scripture, that baptisms of entire households included baptisms of children

www.ncregister.com

 

[The Learner]

Already answered-no infant baptism in Jewish Communities.
J.

tell that to my Jewish Mother please.

google jewish baptism ceremony

 

[The Learner]

She cannot-an appeal to the Church fathers an Imperative-forgetting what ancient rabbinical rabbis wrote.
J.

The Jewish Roots of Baptism

Our ministry, ONE FOR ISRAEL, is a movement of Jewish and Arab Israeli followers of Jesus with a commission to reach their country and the nations with the Gospel. We see our call to equip believers in Israel and around the world with the tools of ministry through our media outreach, and to...

www.oneforisrael.org

What is the pre-Christian history of the baptismal ceremony? - Christianity Today

What is the history of baptism or the baptismal ceremony? John the Baptist baptized Jews before Christ came on the scene. Where did he come by the practice of baptism? —Mike Depending on which Reformer you agree with, most Christians view baptism either as the means of salvation and entry into...

www.christianitytoday.com

The Jews used baptism in a couple of different ways. The priests were required to wash during certain ceremonies (Numbers 19:7; 2 Chronicles 4:6). The Essenes bathed regularly to clean their bodies as God had purified their souls. Jews bathed to become ritually clean after touching dead things (Leviticus 11) or being healed from a skin disease (Leviticus 13:6). Jewish ritual bathing is related to baptism. As specified by the Talmud, proselytes were also baptized into Judaism to show they washed themselves of idolatry and accepted the purification of God. If a family converted to Judaism, the Talmud allowed that the entire household, including babies, could be baptized into their new faith—although when the child came of age, he could reject the faith and the baptism. Babies and children of Jews or proselytes who had converted earlier were not baptized, as they were considerehttps://www.compellingtruth.org/infant-baptism.html
d to be born into the faith.

 

[The Learner]

good night falling asleep