Baptism form of doctrine...

[Scoobydoo]

Johnb, greetings in Christ from sunny Texas,

I have done extensive studies involving CENI and I do not believe your side can add anything new.
I know that from several such conversations

Thanks anyway

Scoobydoo

[marc]

That's kind of the point, you know.  Stop trying to add new prohibitions by finding some example and deciding it's "approved". 

Since CENI is itself, unBiblical, I don't see much of a point wasting time on it either.  Especially when the world is full of troubled, hurting people in need of Christ and the best we can do is divide until we are too miniscule to notice.

[Scoobydoo]

Greetings in Christ from sunny Texas,

If it is unbliblical why did Jesus use it?  However, that is the normal response to folks who don't like it. enjoy your day
Scoobydoo

[marc]

Greetings in Christ from sunny Texas,

If it is unbliblical why did Jesus use it?  However, that is the normal response to folks who don't like it. enjoy your day
Scoobydoo

*sigh*

You know, reverse-engineering isn't a profitable way to read the Bible.

I've heard some of the silliest things in discussions of CENI, topping out with the suggestion that if you cite a command, you're using CENI, because command is part of it. 

But I suppose you're content with hit-and-run posts that say nothing, but suggest a treasure trove of knowledge.  Wise and mysterious. 

[Johnb]

Johnb, greetings in Christ from sunny Texas,

I have done extensive studies involving CENI and I do not believe your side can add anything new.
I know that from several such conversations

Thanks anyway

Scoobydoo

Yes I understand.  It is easy to say we must obey commands and X is a command and here are the verses that prove it is a command.  However when it is pointed out that y, z, A,B,C etc are also commands that you don't think should be obeyed because they do not apply or they are not really command or that is not what was really ment it was just and objective lesson and on and on to justify why one does not apply CENU consistantly.  It is a flawwed and false theology.

[Livelysword]

That's kind of the point, you know.  Stop trying to add new prohibitions by finding some example and deciding it's "approved". 

Since CENI is itself, unBiblical, I don't see much of a point wasting time on it either.  Especially when the world is full of troubled, hurting people in need of Christ and the best we can do is divide until we are too miniscule to notice.

Lively:  It is not un-biblical... Jesus used it and so did the apostles...  I have time and time again shown the verses... and I am sure you have already seen them...  I see this subject as nothing but a chance to be divisive... and going directly against that which the bible clearly teaches as the acceptable way to interpret the scripture.  Jesus pointed out direct commandments from the OT scriptures... Jesus used examples of those who were written of in the OT scriptures, and Jesus also used Necessary inference, specifically when he showed the Saducees that there is to be a resurrection from the dead...  Peter and John clearly show that one is not free to go about and teach anything beyond what the scriptures teach.  That when they gave no commandment that gentiles must be circumcised, that silence must be upheld, otherwise those who refuse to remain silent where scripture is silent, do so by going beyond that which is written and subvert souls.  There is also the example in the Hebrew letter of Juda not giving attendance at the altar, that God's silence did not authorize such.  Really, you got nowhere to go on this issue and again I just view such as deliberate divisiveness... its not that you need to be taught more... its a matter of you simply refusing to accept that which scripture clearly teaches...  You certainly could do an internet search for Ceni and also read what many others have written concerning it as well...

[Scoobydoo]

JohnB, greetings in Christ from sunny Texas,
You stated---Yes I understand.  It is easy to say we must obey commands and X is a command and here are the verses that prove it is a command.  However when it is pointed out that y, z, A,B,C etc are also commands that you don't think should be obeyed because they do not apply or they are not really command or that is not what was really ment it was just and objective lesson and on and on to justify why one does not apply CENU consistantly.  It is a flawwed and false theology.

My observation--Not when it is done by covenants--Not even when it is not done by covenants just understand where the texts are.

CENI once it is discarded leaves you with "your own choices" and that is never good.

Scoobydoo

[Johnb]

Scoobey You keep refering to conenants.  Are you refering to the OT verses the NT ?

[Scoobydoo]

Johnb greetings in Christ from sunny Texas,

Actually I am not referring to the Old Testament and the New Testament. That division in our scriptures was make in the 14-1500's.

The Old Covenant refers to the Mosaic Covenant--Which ends not at the end of Malaci but at the cross in each of the gospels.

The New Covenant begins in Acts 2 thru the rest of the book.

We are not used to viewing the texts in this manner but it is how God divided {rightly} his word so you can see that it is met with a lot of resistence folks seem to think that because the gospels up to the cross are old Covenant--that they are now somehow worthless but that is not true.

Scoobydoo

[Johnb]

Scoobey. 
That is what I thought but I ask to be sure.  I was only applying CENI to NT commands and examples.   So the 2 covenants does not explain the difficulty I pointed out. 

[Scoobydoo]

Johnb, greetings in Christ from sunny Texas,

you said--Scoobey. 
That is what I thought but I ask to be sure.  I was only applying CENI to NT commands and examples.   So the 2 covenants does not explain the difficulty I pointed out.

My observation--generally, when i dig further into it--folks who have a problem generally have a problem with a teaching of the texts somewhere along the line.

It is only a difficulty for those who "make it so."

Scoobydoo

[Johnb]

Scoobey
So what you are saying is what all who hold to CENI say.  "It is only a command or approved example when I say it is"   Other wise one has not understood properly.  Either we have to follow NT commands and Approved example or not.  Other wise our salvation is based solely on human reasoning.  While every group picks and chooses which commands that must obeyed it is the legalist that attempts to bind their conclusions on all Christians.  That is the fallacy of CENI as applied by the conservative CoC.   

[Scoobydoo]

Johnb, greetings in Christ from sunny Texas,

you said--Scoobey
So what you are saying is what all who hold to CENI say.  "It is only a command or approved example when I say it is"

Here is what I said and it valid---

My observation--generally, when i dig further into it--folks who have a problem generally have a problem with a teaching of the texts somewhere along the line.

Scoobydoo

[Johnb]

Scoobey
So then can you give me a law or rule of logic (even though that is simply human reasoning) That can be applied equally to all NT scripture that clearly tell one when a command is one that must befollowed and and when an appoved example must be followed? 

[Scoobydoo]

Johnb, greetings in Christ from sunny texas,

My response is still the same you are missing the mark on this here

Scooby