• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Something about the trinity

Those who don't believe it's just a symbolic gesture would quote Acts 2:38 -- Acts 2:38New International Version (NIV)

38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Peter tells the crowd they must repent and be baptized in order to have their sins forgiven.
https://gotquestions.org/baptism-Acts-2-38.html

I think this explains it best.

Later Paul would say by grace are you saved by faith in Jesus Christ not of works least any man should boast.
One thing about the Bible I have come to realize is that words have multiple meanings. That was just the nature
Of the Greek and Hebrew language. This is why I stress context of passages rather than just single verses when reading the Bible.
 
Who are these "some"?

Catholics believe it. And some offshoots of the catholic faith.
That is why they hold baby baptisms

Churches of Christ believe that baptism is essential and it's literally the washing away of your sins. Churches of Christ aren't anywhere close to the Catholic faith and don't baptize babies.
 
Churches of Christ believe that baptism is essential and it's literally the washing away of your sins. Churches of Christ aren't anywhere close to the Catholic faith and don't baptize babies.

I didn't have time to delve into all the other misc religions that believe different things it would take to long.
 
Depends however according to the Bible it is a symbolic gesture.

This:

Those who don't believe it's just a symbolic gesture would quote Acts 2:38 -- Acts 2:38New International Version (NIV)

38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Peter tells the crowd they must repent and be baptized in order to have their sins forgiven.

I understand the Catholic concept behind it. I just don't see that in the Bible at all.

You quoted Act 2:38, which is quoted in the link I gave you from Catholic Answers. That's what they see in the bible.

I was baptized Catholic, attended sporadically throughout my life, for my Catholic family. But I would not say I've ever been a practicing Catholic. I understand where they are coming from. For them, my baptism was more than just symbolic. My great-grandma freaked out when my parents drove me to Chicago as a new born, before baptizing me. "You risked her eternal soul in driving here before baptizing her!"

She was genuinely upset they did that, though the point of the trip was to baptize me in the same church my father was. LOL

Various other Catholic members of my family have been troubled that my children were not baptized as infants. I couldn't do it if I can't say honestly I would raise them as Catholics. Again, it's much more than symbolic for Catholics.
 
This:





You quoted Act 2:38, which is quoted in the link I gave you from Catholic Answers. That's what they see in the bible.

I was baptized Catholic, attended sporadically throughout my life, for my Catholic family. But I would not say I've ever been a practicing Catholic. I understand where they are coming from. For them, my baptism was more than just symbolic. My great-grandma freaked out when my parents drove me to Chicago as a new born, before baptizing me. "You risked her eternal soul in driving here before baptizing her!"

She was genuinely upset they did that, though the point of the trip was to baptize me in the same church my father was. LOL

Various other Catholic members of my family have been troubled that my children were not baptized as infants. I couldn't do it if I can't say honestly I would raise them as Catholics. Again, it's much more than symbolic for Catholics.

I agree that it is more than symbolic, however biblically speaking baptism alone can't save anyone.
the only way to salvation is by faith and acceptance of Jesus Christ as savior.
 
By "non-traditional," do you mean non-denominational?

yes non-denominational/reformation theological.

You should check out John Piper's book Future grace.

also Upmost for his Highest.
 
This:

You quoted Act 2:38, which is quoted in the link I gave you from Catholic Answers. That's what they see in the bible.

I was baptized Catholic, attended sporadically throughout my life, for my Catholic family. But I would not say I've ever been a practicing Catholic. I understand where they are coming from. For them, my baptism was more than just symbolic. My great-grandma freaked out when my parents drove me to Chicago as a new born, before baptizing me. "You risked her eternal soul in driving here before baptizing her!"

She was genuinely upset they did that, though the point of the trip was to baptize me in the same church my father was. LOL

Various other Catholic members of my family have been troubled that my children were not baptized as infants. I couldn't do it if I can't say honestly I would raise them as Catholics. Again, it's much more than symbolic for Catholics.

And Episcopalians and Lutherans too. My best friend was a non-churchgoing Southern Baptist who married a non-churchgoing Episcopalian, and the birth of their first son sparked a terrible fight between them. Both sets of grandparents were devout churchgoers in their respective denoms, and my friend's father-in-law was the canon to the bishop of the Episcopal diocese, and his brother-in-law was also an Episcopalian priest.

The resolution to the conflict was that their children weren't baptized and never went to church unless for a funeral.
 
I agree that it is more than symbolic, however biblically speaking baptism alone can't save anyone.
the only way to salvation is by faith and acceptance of Jesus Christ as savior.

In your faith and religion. That is not the belief of all faiths.

The fact my children were recently baptized in a different Christian religion, did give a measure of relief to the Catholics in my family. As long as they were baptized, it's all good.
 
yes non-denominational/reformation theological.

You should check out John Piper's book Future grace.

also Upmost for his Highest.

Thank you for clarifying; "non-traditional" has a very different meaning for me.
 
And Episcopalians and Lutherans too. My best friend was a non-churchgoing Southern Baptist who married a non-churchgoing Episcopalian, and the birth of their first son sparked a terrible fight between them. Both sets of grandparents were devout churchgoers in their respective denoms, and my friend's father-in-law was the canon to the bishop of the Episcopal diocese, and his brother-in-law was also an Episcopalian priest.

The resolution to the conflict was that their children weren't baptized and never went to church unless for a funeral.

Indeed, at the least I should have mentioned Episcopalians. There are some of those in my extended family and they put great stock in baptizing babies and children. I stood as Godmother for a Lutheran baby a long time ago. Unfortunately, I moved away shortly afterwards.

That is the usual decision when religious beliefs are in conflict between families. No one wants to give in and no one wants to offend the other side.
 
In your faith and religion. That is not the belief of all faiths.

The fact my children were recently baptized in a different Christian religion, did give a measure of relief to the Catholics in my family. As long as they were baptized, it's all good.

Again I can only point to what the Bible says. It is pretty clear.
 
And so the Catholics believe it is too.

babies can't ask for forgiveness. they have no concept of right or wrong. So baptizing a baby can't save them.
 
babies can't ask for forgiveness. they have no concept of right or wrong. So baptizing a baby can't save them.

That's one of the fundamental differences in beliefs. You can argue all you would like because that is what your faith dictates. The catholic faith believes differently. Baptism washes away original sin. They don't need to be able to ask forgiveness.

I'm totally out of my element here. I'm just saying what I know of the Catholic faith and my experience, as limited as that is.
 
That's one of the fundamental differences in beliefs. You can argue all you would like because that is what your faith dictates. The catholic faith believes differently. Baptism washes away original sin. They don't need to be able to ask forgiveness.

I'm totally out of my element here. I'm just saying what I know of the Catholic faith and my experience, as limited as that is.

it has nothing to do with my faith. it has to do with what the bible says.
no only asking forgiveness in Jesus Christ can wash away your sin.

I know what Catholics say but it is contrary to what the bible says.

For by grace are you saved through faith in Jesus Christ not of works least any man should boast.
even in the book of acts it says to repent and believe in Jesus Christ.

How can a baby do that?

I am not criticizing but asking more of a theological question.

1 John 1:9
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

babies can do neither as they have no concept of sin or right or wrong.
 
Baptism is following in Christ footsteps of death burial and resurrection. It is an outspoken expression of an inward impression.
Baptism alone cannot save you, but it is a symbol that you accepted Christ as your savior.

The Lords supper is remembering what Christ did on the cross for you. How his body was broken and his blood spilt.

It's not protestant -- it's just Bible. Catholics take communion and perform baptisms (although they baptize infants - which I've never understood).

protestant's and catholics approach spirituality in very different ways but many protestant churches baptize infants too

I do understand

I was raised as a catholic although I no longer would label myself as a Christian since I do not accept the concept that Christ is the only way
 
I agree that it is more than symbolic, however biblically speaking baptism alone can't save anyone.
the only way to salvation is by faith and acceptance of Jesus Christ as savior.

"Sola Fide" Salvation by Faith alone is only accepted by Protestants. The majority of Christianity (Catholic and Orthodox) believe in a "works" component to salvation. The idea of Sola Fide comes from Pauline scripture. Paul was not a disciple, did not know Jesus, and did not become a Christian until after his death. Further Paul was not part of the Church of Jerusalem (founded after the death of Jesus and led by James - Brother of Jesus) and his doctrine was at odds with the doctrine of the Church of Jerusalem and ..... The Doctrine of Jesus.

Matt 5-7 is Jesus's most famous sermon (Sermon on the Mount). In this sermon Jesus describes what is required to get through the pearly gates.

There is not one word about faith in this sermon. No "Worship me" No "believe in me and be saved". The sermon is works works and more works.

Jesus opens the sermon with “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven" is this not the antithesis to "Faith" ?

Jesus then praises good works ... talks about obedience to the law and says

For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

By righteousness Jesus meant good works (lack of bad things). This is clear from the context of the passage. He sets the bar low as he did not think much of the Pharisees.

Jesus then goes on for the rest of Matt 5, 6 and most of 7 talking about doing good works and living a good life. Do not Murder, commit adultery, ... Judge not ... Pray in Private (don't be a hypocrite) and so on. The will of the Father

Jesus then sum's up "the will of the Father" with the Golden Rule ( The Rock on which Jesus bases his Teachings) "Do unto others as you would have them do to you"
12*So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.
Matt 7:12

Jesus then says:
Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22*Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23*Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers

Not everyone who "has Faith- believes in Jesus" gets through the gates. "ONLY those who do the will of the Father" = works works works.
 
it has nothing to do with my faith. it has to do with what the bible says.
no only asking forgiveness in Jesus Christ can wash away your sin.

I know what Catholics say but it is contrary to what the bible says.

For by grace are you saved through faith in Jesus Christ not of works least any man should boast.
even in the book of acts it says to repent and believe in Jesus Christ.

How can a baby do that?

I am not criticizing but asking more of a theological question.

1 John 1:9
If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

babies can do neither as they have no concept of sin or right or wrong.

You are talking about what Paul (the Bible) says as opposed to what Jesus says. The two contradict each other. Paul and Jesus are not on the same page in relation to how one get's through the pearly gates.

In Mark and Matt there is no (ask Jesus for forgiveness and you automatically get through the pearly gates). This is important because all other of the Synoptic Gospels use Mark as source material. Mark is also the earliest Gospel and the only one with a reasonably legitimate claim to the disciples. The author of Mark was reputed to be a student and follower under Peter.

John is a Pauline Hellenic Fusion work written decades after Mark at a time after the Jewish Temple had been destroyed and the influence of the Pauline Christians was starting to assert itself over that of the Judeo Christians (Church of Jerusalem). And in fact the animosity of the Church towards Jews (and Judaism was increasing)
 
"Sola Fide" Salvation by Faith alone is only accepted by Protestants. The majority of Christianity (Catholic and Orthodox) believe in a "works" component to salvation. The idea of Sola Fide comes from Pauline scripture. Paul was not a disciple, did not know Jesus, and did not become a Christian until after his death. Further Paul was not part of the Church of Jerusalem (founded after the death of Jesus and led by James - Brother of Jesus) and his doctrine was at odds with the doctrine of the Church of Jerusalem and ..... The Doctrine of Jesus.

I never said he was so that is a strawman argument. Paul constantly refers to himself as an apostle.
No his doctrine was consistant with everything including the church at Jerusalem and at time he had to admonish the disciples For leaving what Christ had taught at times.

Matt 5-7 is Jesus's most famous sermon (Sermon on the Mount). In this sermon Jesus describes what is required to get through the pearly gates.
No that is just the aspects of a Christian. Works cannot get you into heaven. If they could then there would be no need for christ's sacrifice.

There is not one word about faith in this sermon. No "Worship me" No "believe in me and be saved". The sermon is works works and more works.

I am the way the truth and the light and no man comes to the father but through me.
Unless you would like to say Christ is wrong in this regard.

Jesus opens the sermon with “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven" is this not the antithesis to "Faith" ?
Christ was quite humble (which is what poor in spirit means).

Jesus then praises good works ... talks about obedience to the law and says
Christ fulfilled the law.


By righteousness Jesus meant good works (lack of bad things). This is clear from the context of the passage. He sets the bar low as he did not think much of the Pharisees.

Our righteousness is as filthy rags.

Jesus then goes on for the rest of Matt 5, 6 and most of 7 talking about doing good works and living a good life. Do not Murder, commit adultery, ... Judge not ... Pray in Private (don't be a hypocrite) and so on. The will of the Father

Yep because works is a reaction to not a way to. They will know you by your works.

Jesus then sum's up "the will of the Father" with the Golden Rule ( The Rock on which Jesus bases his Teachings) "Do unto others as you would have them do to you" Matt 7:12

Actually it is love God with all your heart mind and soul and love your neighbor as yourself.

Jesus then says:

Not everyone who "has Faith- believes in Jesus" gets through the gates. "ONLY those who do the will of the Father" = works works works.

umm and many will come to me in that day saying we have cast out demons and healed the sick in your name.
And I will say get thee hence you workers of iniquity for I never knew you.
 
Last edited:
You are talking about what Paul (the Bible) says as opposed to what Jesus says. The two contradict each other. Paul and Jesus are not on the same page in relation to how one get's through the pearly gates.
I am not sure what bible you are using but they do not contradict each other at all.

In Mark and Matt there is no (ask Jesus for forgiveness and you automatically get through the pearly gates). This is important because all other of the Synoptic Gospels use Mark as source material. Mark is also the earliest Gospel and the only one with a reasonably legitimate claim to the disciples. The author of Mark was reputed to be a student and follower under Peter.

Right becaus Christ had not died on the cross. Yet really the first person to be saved was a thief and a murderer. So what works did he do to deserve to be saved?
Mathew was and actual disciple and so was john. All 3 accounts say the same.

John is a Pauline Hellenic Fusion work written decades after Mark at a time after the Jewish Temple had been destroyed and the influence of the Pauline Christians was starting to assert itself over that of the Judeo Christians (Church of Jerusalem). And in fact the animosity of the Church towards Jews (and Judaism was increasing)

Yet it is still consistent with the teachings of Christ, and so was Paul.
 
protestant's and catholics approach spirituality in very different ways but many protestant churches baptize infants too

I do understand

I was raised as a catholic although I no longer would label myself as a Christian since I do not accept the concept that Christ is the only way

You never answered my previous question how does imperfection weigh itself against perfection?
 
I never said he was so that is a strawman argument. Paul constantly refers to himself as an apostle.
No his doctrine was consistant with everything including the church at Jerusalem and at time he had to admonish the disciples For leaving what Christ had taught at times.

I did not say that you said Paul was a disciple ?? Then you completely avoided responding to my comments on "Sola Fide" ... such as that the majority of Christianity does not accept this doctrine ... Doctrine which you dogmatically state as if you were Jesus himself.

I agree that it is more than symbolic, however biblically speaking baptism alone can't save anyone.
the only way to salvation is by faith and acceptance of Jesus Christ as savior.

Then you ramble on incoherently.

No that is just the aspects of a Christian. Works cannot get you into heaven. If they could then there would be no need for christ's sacrifice.

In the Sermon on the mount Jesus talk about getting into heaven, what it takes to get there numerous times.


I am the way the truth and the light and no man comes to the father but through me.
Unless you would like to say Christ is wrong in this regard.

More incoherent rambling. The subject is the sermon on the mount. Jesus does not say this in this sermon.

Further - If you go to Matt 25 "Sheep and Goats parable". Jesus is case as the gate-keeper at the pearly gates. You have to go through Jesus to get in and in this parable Jesus judges on the basis of works. Those who do not know Jesus get in and those that do know Jesus do not get in.

Christ was quite humble (which is what poor in spirit means).

Christ fulfilled the law.

You are making stuff up. What on earth are you talking about ? What do you mean by "Jesus fulfilled the law" and what does this have to do with Jesus talking about works.

Our righteousness is as filthy rags.

More incoherent rambling. What does your response have to do with the meaning of being more righteous than the Pharisees in order to get into heaven ??

Actually it is love God with all your heart mind and soul and love your neighbor as yourself.

You are just rambling stuff that has no relation to what I have posted.

What does this have to do with Jesus saying "do unto others" is the rule that sums up the law and the prophets ??

umm and many will come to me in that day saying we have cast out demons and healed the sick in your name.
And I will say get thee hence you workers of iniquity for I never knew you.

Jesus is referring to people who had faith but no works (people that believed what you are preaching).

The sermon of Jesus is about "the will of the Father" ... his sermon is about works (not one thing mentioned about "faith" or belief in Jesus). Jesus then sums up by saying "only those that do the will of the Father" get into heaven.

You did not address one thing said by Jesus directly. When you were not saying something completely incoherent you spouted some man made dogma that did not relate to what Jesus was saying ?!

This was such a delusional and incoherent and whacked response I do not know what to say. What is with the head in the sand denial and avoidance ?
 
Back
Top Bottom