sit- rightly divided?

[irisheyes]

Hear! Hear! I would really like to hear what Allan and everyone else's "formula" for eternal life is. Also, I would like to pose this question:

Did the Old Testament "believers" believe in eternal life? Was it important to them? How were they "saved." Are they saved? Is all that in abeyance until Revelation? I mean the guys who have already lived and died; i.e., Moses, Joshua, David, Samuel, aren't they saved?

We started discussing this at Bible class today and I guess I just never thought of it before or I forgot if I did and a quick glance at the concordance seemed like there wasn't too much to find on the topic. :huh:

[templelady]

And why should I even care if i can "Prove" I'm born again to my fellow humans???!?!?!?

After all the only one I need to "prove" I'm "born again" to is God and His Son Jesus Christ.

There we go again with the "five Senses" Proving how we "rightly divide" the Word, proving our "stand" on the Word, Proving we can SIT and on and on

For a ministry dedicated to showing the futility of the "Five Senses" we spent an awful lot of time catering to those same five senses.

[Goey]

Hear! Hear! I would really like to hear what Allan and everyone else's "formula" for eternal life is.

I am not convinced that there is a particular "formula" for eternal life, salvation, or the other things of God . The scriptures don't seem to offer any specific formulas.

Formulas are prety much human invention born of a scientific society/mindset that is focused upon accuracy and exactness based upon a need for the guarantee of success - many times at the expense of love, faith and service.

I see no such mindset in the scriptures, but I do see it in much of modern Christianity. We have so-called biblical "formulas" for, salvation, eternal life, how to get rich, how to get prayers answered, etc.

I would think that if God would have wanted us to simply follow "formulas", He would have clearly laid them out for us.

God is an entity, a Person if you will, (no I am not trinitarian) He is not a doctrine or a system that is accessed or manipulated via formulas. I believe that access to God and the things of God is through a personal relationship with Him, guided by faith and the Holy Spirit rather than by formulas or so-called spirtual-laws.

Edited October 18, 2005 by Goey

[Allan]

Ummm.How about "confess Jesus as Lord and believe in your heart God raised him from the dead,you SHALL be saved. Fits in with 'grace' not works doesn't it.

So..what is the Catholics idea of 'getting saved ?'

What is the Mormon idea of 'getting saved ?'

[irisheyes]

Hey Goey, I know you and you know me! Ha!

Good to see you. Hope you are doing well. What about Michael?

I know there's no "pat" formula, but it just seems that something so vitally important should be easily understood. Anyway, it seemed like that's where this thread was "swaying." I am still open on being "saved" in the Old Testament, too. A big kiss your way . . . .

[markomalley]

Allan, the bible has no formula for receiving salvation. If you have one (and I suspect you do and I know it well, havin sat through piffle more times than I can count), I will suggest that your formula, as taught by Wierwille, is misunderstood.

Without going into a big thing on it, with some Bible study I think you'll find Luther's "faith alone" to describe things quite well. You'll find "faith plus confession" to be unnecessary, biblically.

Mark might disagree. What I'm describing is simplified mainstream protestant theology.

Evan, you'll find with Catholicism, being saved is more of a process than an event. In essence, we believe that when a person is buried with Christ in baptism and "quickened together" with Him, all guilt of sin is removed and the person becomes a "new creature" in Christ. We believe that, in baptism, a fundamental change of character happens...a true regeneration.

However, as we have freedom of will, we can do as the prodigal son did and walk away, which is just what happens when we make a deliberate decision to sin. Fortunately, God is merciful and will forgive us to the uttermost, cleansing us from all unrighteousness, as we approach Him with contrite hearts and beg his forgiveness, which He bountifully doles out to any who ask.

I know some Protestants fundamentally agree with the above and some will vehemently disagree, depending upon their denomination's dogma...but that's basically the fundamental view on salvation from a Catholic POV. Hope that gives the information you were (implying you were) looking for.

[Raf]

I originally replied to dmiller's question, then saw that I got to the party a little late.

You can speak in tongues if you have the holy spirit is NOT the same thing as You must speak in tongues or you don't have the holy spirit. I never heard Wierwille say anything even approaching that, and if TWI started ACTING as if that were true, they did it after I left, because I never heard it.

Edited October 19, 2005 by Raf

[Allan]

So Mark..when do the Catholics actually 'baptise' ?? I can't recall seeing one yet, unless you mean a little babies 'christening' ??!!

And Templelady..what does one do to get to the 'Mormon heaven' ??

[Oakspear]

Ummm.How about "confess Jesus as Lord and believe in your heart God raised him from the dead,you SHALL be saved. Fits in with 'grace' not works doesn't it.

Evan has put more time & thinking into this than I, but if this is the "formula", why do we never see it used anywhere in Acts?

[TheEvan]

Correct, Oakspear. And the belief/confession formula is only mentioned this once. Salvation is mentioned repeatedly in the New Testament and it is consistently equated with receiving God's righteousness. In all other cases it is received by faith alone.

Allan, an elementary principle in interpretation is to establish your proposed interpretation with supporting scripture. "In the mouth of two or three witnesses..."

I find ludicrous the idea that if one agrees that Jesus was raised and manages once to squeak out "Jesus is Lord" he is magically saved on the spot, glory hallelujah. Even Wierwille said (from I Cor) no man can really say Jesus is Lord but by the Holy Spirit. Must be a deeper meaning, nay? (Which brings us back on topic).

FYI, yes, the Catholics practice infant baptism. Presenting it as a means of grace imbues the practice with added importance, don't you think?

[def59]

Romans 10:9 is not simple nor formulaic. It is the culmination of a process that the chapter lays out.

We see a verses down that faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God.

To say Jesus is Lord connotes some sort of faith as does believing that God raised him from the dead. That takes some knowledge of his death and life, so some some instruction is called for.

Another verse says whoever calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. So confession is significant.

God cannot be put in a box, however, so each salvation story is different.

[markomalley]

FYI, yes, the Catholics practice infant baptism. Presenting it as a means of grace imbues the practice with added importance, don't you think?

Baptism is not only done with infants, but it is done when a person, either through choice or through family, becomes a member of the Church.

For example, in Acts 16:

"13 On the sabbath we went outside the city gate along the river where we thought there would be a place of prayer. We sat and spoke with the women who had gathered there.

14 One of them, a woman named Lydia, a dealer in purple cloth, from the city of Thyatira, a worshiper of God, 5 listened, and the Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what Paul was saying.

15 After she and her household had been baptized,"

30 Then he brought them out and said, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"

31 And they said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus and you and your household will be saved."

32 So they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to everyone in his house.

33 He took them in at that hour of the night and bathed their wounds; then he and all his family were baptized at once.

Its clear from these examples that whole families were baptized when the head of household converted.

But what about when the head of household gets a new family member (e.g., the birth of an infant)? That subject really wasn't dealt with directly in the Bible.

One clue we have comes from Colossians 2:

11 In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not administered by hand, by stripping off the carnal body, with the circumcision of Christ.

12 You were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.

13 And even when you were dead (in) transgressions and the uncircumcision of your flesh, he brought you to life along with him, having forgiven us all our transgressions;

You'll note that baptism is compared to circumcision, after a fashion. When was circumcision done to Jews? First, it was done to young infants (8 days old). Second, it was done to a person who converted to Judaism. It would be logical for baptism to parallel this process.

[Allan]

Well actually no Evan..I was 'christened' Church of England and then Catholic as a baby and it did squat for me, as I'm sure for the other 'millions' as well (including Mafioso babies) !!

In Acts you have for instance the Word being spoken to Cornelius and his household by Simon Peter and they got born again. I'm sure in those Words would have been something pertaining to the 'risen Christ' etc..

Well again Mark..we go around in circles because of the debate over water baptism or spirit baptism !

And I don't believe a baby can be 'baptised' as such. The child is sanctified by their believing Dad or Mom til they are of age to get 'born again', otherwise they are still 'unclean.' 1 Corinthians 7: 14

[templelady]

If by formula you mean a "recipe" ie. 1 cup faith, 2 confessions Jesus is Lord, simmer in a water bath of believing..............

No it isn't that simple.

Yes you confess Jesus is Lord. Yes you believe he is the Son of God who led a perfect life, suffered and died for our sins and was raised from the dead.

But there is more. YOU have TO BE a follower of Christ. That means in action and in thought. You need to be chaste, honest, virtuous, help the poor and needy, loving, forgiving etc. Every day you need to"renew your mind" (can't believe I used that phrase B) ) to follow in Christ's footsteps. .........

Saying Jesus is Lord is not a free pass that covers deliberate bad behavior

[TheEvan]

Allan, like many Protestants, I disavow infant baptism. I was making a comment on its role in Catholic doctrine as a means of grace for salvation. So, for them, the rite becomes imbued with more significance. But you understood that, right?

Allan, would you say "born again" and "saved" mean the same thing? Why or why not?

[Allan]

Evan..I believe the 'meaning' is interchangable in the NT as are other words like baptism etc..

[markomalley]

Allan, like many Protestants, I disavow infant baptism. I was making a comment on its role in Catholic doctrine as a means of grace for salvation. So, for them, the rite becomes imbued with more significance. But you understood that, right?

Allan, would you say "born again" and "saved" mean the same thing? Why or why not?

In addition to Catholics, the Orthodox practice it as well. Also Anglicans (Episcopals), Lutherans, Methodists, Nazarenes, Presbyterians (PCUSA and PCA, at least) allow infant baptism (there may be others, those are just the ones I am familiar with).

[TheEvan]

Quite right, Mark. And with each differing shades of meaning are attached to the practice.

BTW, Christian usually fight most bitterly about their smallest differences, or so it has gone in history. Personally, I feel quite united with the Universal church. And to me, orthodoxy is summed up in the briefer versions of the Apostle's Creed. Differences beyond that are tolerable. For me.

Oh, by Univerasl, I mean the invisible church, natch.

[Thomas Loy Bumgarner]

Mark,also Moravians practice both infant and adult baptism. Most of the groups you mention usually by their teenage years have Catechism and Confirmation.

Edited October 20, 2005 by Thomas Loy Bumgarner

[markomalley]

Mark,also Moravians practice both infant and adult baptism. Most of the groups you mention usually by their teenage years have Catechism and Confirmation.

Quite so, Thomas.

The reason I bring this up is that some branches of Protestantism and their practices are taken for the whole. Of course, that is not the case. For those who had no religious upbringing other than TWI, I believe that it is important to mention these things. I realize that rejection of sacramental baptism (to include baptism of children and infants) is very easy for those who may only hear a Catholic endorse the process (after all, we all know that the Pope is the antiChrist and any Catholic is a mind-numbed robot, right? ;) ), but when it is recognized that a good plurality of Protestant denominations also practice this, its not as easy to dismiss out of hand. Or so the theory goes, at least. B)

[ChattyKathy]

I was a Nazarene so I can join in and say yup, that's right Mark.

[lovematters]

I’ve been a regular at the Pentecostal church (Assembly of God) down the road for almost a year and the experience has made me more appreciative of VP’s teaching on tongues.

The pressure to speak in tongues in the twelfth session is nothing compared to the craziness of a “Holy Ghost” meeting. At this church they are typically run by visiting evangelists and I usually go down for the altar calls because they’re sort of fun. I stand there speaking in tongues like a house afire to show my bonafides as a “pen tee costal.” One Sunday the old boy that ran the meeting was a slayer in the spirit and (just like VP said) he walked up and gave my forehead a shove. It didn’t take with me but when he put the move on the lady next to me she went down for the count.

[Allan]

Lovematters..those are the same kind of things I stay thankful for for having learnt as well.

[lovematters]

Allan or Anyone,

Since leaving The Way, have you been in a meeting where there was T w/ I & P that wasn't run by an Ex-Way outfit?

Edited October 22, 2005 by lovematters

[penguin]

Lovematters,

I have been to meetings where there was tongues and "interpretation" but done different than twi. It was one of those where one person sit and another person interpreted. I heard one such "interpretation" It was very edifying and in the 3rd person and had NO King James in it, unlike twi version that I was used to at the time. It was not affiliated with twi at all and was held in the basement of a Catholic Church.

editted cuz I am sleepy :blink:

Edited October 22, 2005 by penguin