I don't assume anything, I ask questions so I don't.
We can judge a tree by its's fruits.
FOUNDATION, the 12 apostles or Pauls?
- Thread starter Ouch
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I don't assume anything, I ask questions so I don't.
We can judge a tree by its's fruits.
You completely ignored what I just wrote. You asked me to explain what I meant in the statement about protestants twisting the gospel and she I directly answer you say no I didn't. Either address want I said or stop bothering me
Yes indeed we can. You think your tree gives only perfect fruit don't you?
I like that you think asking questions means you aren't making assumptions. Lol of course you are.
So whos making assumptions?
Come back when you want to keep it about JESUS and HIS word where we can learn from each other not just one sided.
I did keep it about Jesus and his word, here it is AGAIN
Let's start with what they deny that is in the Bible. John 20: 21-23. Jesus clearly gives the apostles the authority to forgive sins. Do you agree or disagree?
Do you want to address that or not? I understand why you may not want to.
It surprises me that anyone would question the realiability of Luke's writings; Luke's gospel and the Acts of the Apostles. Luke was a close companion of the Apostle Paul's as indicated directly in scripture. As such, Paul would certainly have corrected Luke if he had been in error.
- Luke as Paul's Companion: Church fathers like Irenaeus and Tertullian, dating to the second century A.D., attest to the tradition that Luke, a physician and companion of Paul, wrote his works under Paul's authority. The narrative in the Book of Acts features "we" passages that imply the author was a traveling companion of Paul during some of his journeys, including the voyage to Rome.
- Approval by Association: The tradition posits that Mark recorded Peter's teachings, and Luke's narrative was regarded as belonging to Paul, meaning the works published by their disciples were seen as having the authority of their masters.
- Eusebius, an early church historian, described Luke as a "companion of Paul" who had "careful conversation with the other Apostles".
The Apostle Paul considered Luke a close companion and his writings (Luke-Acts) align closely with Paul's theology, with Paul even quoting Luke's Gospel as Scripture, indicating strong approval and acceptance of Luke's work within the early Christian community as authoritative. Paul referred to Luke as "the beloved physician" in Colossians 4:14, showing their close relationship, and Luke's account of Jesus's institution of the Lord's Supper in Luke 22:19-20 is affirmed by Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:23-25, demonstrating shared foundational teachings.
Evidence of Paul's Approval:
- Colossians 4:14: Paul calls Luke "the beloved physician," highlighting his personal affection and trust.
- Shared Teachings: Luke's Gospel reflects Pauline themes, such as God's heart for all people and grace through Christ, notes LukePrimacy.com.
- Scriptural Citation: In 1 Timothy 5:17-18, Paul quotes Luke 10:7 ("The laborer deserves his wages") as Scripture, placing it on par with Old Testament texts.
- Luke's Gospel and Acts as Companion Works: Luke wrote Acts as a sequel to his Gospel, detailing the spread of the Gospel, including Paul's ministry, and Paul's theology strongly resonates within Luke-Acts, suggesting mutual knowledge and affirmation, say Associates for Biblical Research and this Facebook post.
- Luke, a physician and historian, meticulously researched events to provide an orderly account for "Theophilus" (Luke 1:1-4).
- His detailed historical and geographical knowledge, as seen in Acts, supports his reliability as a narrator. AI generated.
If that's what you hear you really have no choice. I'm presenting the message for the mature...
Don't do this to yourself. I can find verses that say Repent and be baptized. See look at Acts 2:38, you don't even have to believe!
You can't just take John 3:16 and yoink it out of context and make it the end all be all. Read John 3, that same chapter says you must be born again of water and Spirit. That same chapter of John says you must obey the son in verse 36.
Baptists keep talking about this outward sign that baptism is of an inward reality, but I don't find any verses about that in the Bible?
Just get baptized people. That's the way it was in the Bible. There are no unbaptized Christians in the New Testament nor in Church history.
Disagree. They received the authority to administer water baptism in Jesus' name into remission of sins
Also relevant to the topic, the KJV has withstood the test of time. I find it no coincidence that the KJV is still the most circulated translation and has been for hundreds of years. If in fact it was not reliable it would have ended up in the trash bin long ago.
Ah yes mock someone else to try and make your point. Im to assume you believe to you're a "mature" believer? That's not at all self righteous band sanctimonious is it?
That's you reading into it. It makes perfect sense without any addition of water baptism.
No, it doesn't because giving a man besides Christ the authority to forgive peoples' sins goes so against everything in the bible, especially what Christ taught
Oh so you're deciding who Jesus can authorize to forgive sins. Nothing in that passage contradicts other passages. Jesus authorized them to baptize in the name of the father and the and the holy spirit so why couldn't they be authorized to forgive sins in the name of the Father. John notes Jesus breathed on them( the holy Spirit) just like when God breathed across the water in Genesis. I like how you folks just add and subtract at will.
No one's mocking you. Whatever we do we should do in faith. If you believe that water baptism is required to get to heaven then, by all means, get baptized in water. You really have no choice in the matter if you want your conscience to remain clear.
Well AGAIN I can listen to you or I can listen to Peter. Now it's not just my conscience at work here it's also my logical mind which God lovingly gave me. What would compel me to ignore Peter to listen to a rando on the internet? What evidence can you provide that your view is the authoritative view. If you do I must reconsider my position since you rightly point out I must do what my conscience dictates.
Right. If what I wrote seems like the writings of "some rando on the internet" then you don't really have a choice. You must do what appeals to your conscience.
You ARE a rando on the internet though just like me. Seems has nothing to do with it.