Christian Forums and Message Board

Layceers,

No denying those passages you mentioned--all true. But I'll add a perspective not recognized by the Christian worldview later.

When the scriptures we have today were translated, “baptize” was an untranslated word.   The Greek writers wrote as “baptizo.”  It came from the Koine (common) Greek language of the first century.   When it was later translated the “o” was dropped and they added the “e” and made the English verb baptize.    In Greek, baptizo means to immerse, dip, sink or submerge.   

I think it is doubtful that any of writers of the New Testament would give this verb any other meaning that what was common at that time

When the scriptures we have today were translated, “baptize” was an untranslated word.   The Greek writers wrote as “baptizo.”  It came from the Koine (common) Greek language of the first century.   When it was later translated the “o” was dropped and they added the “e” and made the English verb baptize.    In Greek, baptizo means to immerse, dip, sink or submerge.   

I think it is doubtful that any of writers of the New Testament would give this verb any other meaning that what was common at that time

  Yes.

Covkeeper,

I'm sorry, I was responding to Rella's post.    I'm waiting to learn you insights and how differently you interpret baptism.

I agree with Covkeeper  maybe on the point of being an X Christian . As he I no longer consider myself a Christian in the sense the word has become so cheap in the modern-day organized traditional church system.  Don't get me wrong I also agree with Chosen that there are many  followers of Christ in the orders. It's the orders that is the problem. Names that divide us into categories of beliefs.  I'm not sure what Cov is wanting to do. I don't count myself as any brain child of the scriptures but I don't consider myself as one who thinks he knows when he actually knows nothing. Still many here can dance circles around me with their  knowledge. What I have been given is a strong and reasonable  understanding having been a believer for thirty five years. I have seen a lot and the Lord has shown me a lot. So just what is your drive Cov that you thing you know that no one else knows. 


So Sorry my reply should have left back on the first page.

 

Layceers,

I noticed you hit on a Greek definition of baptism. Why would you consult the Greek if baptism for the sake of this discussion is a Hebraic thing? Shouldn't you go with the Hebraic definition (s) of baptism, one of which is MIKVAH?

That was a pretty good warm up asking what you all believe about baptism. Many of you claim or I am led to believe that many of you would claim to have the Spirit of Truth in you. How is then you don't agree on what "baptism" certain verses are referring to? The Spirit isn't divided in His mind concerning this but some of you are. I'm going to slowly show why that is.

Here's some Biblical rules you all can use from now on in discussions and I promise you'll never go wrong:

1) Consistency rules. If you believe it's true in the NT, it should be consistently true in the FT (first testament), first. Why? Because the first half of the volume is the foundation of the second half.

2) Witnesses. If you believe it's true in the NT, you should be able to produce at least two or three witnesses to verify. You should be able to find witnesses from the FT. It's too easy to put verses together and say 'Ha, this is what it means!'. Not always true at all and we all know this. But the dividing line is: can you produce actual examples to what you claim as a correct interpretation?

If you keep these two rules you can eliminate so many false Christian beliefs and that's exactly what I'm going to do here.

Lastly:

3) My greatest weapon in discussions with Christians is that I will employ common sense, good reasoning, and reality to your study. Common sense is the greatest of the three because no one can win an argument against common sense....tthink about it.

Sooo....

Consistently, from Genesis to Revelation,  there is a definition for what Sin is. Would anyone like to say what that is?

Quote from: LexKnight on Mon Nov 30, 2015 - 21:14:45

Because it's written in Greek, and that's the word they chose to use?

Here's another problem in Christianity.  The word may be Greek but the people aren't thinking Greek when it comes to things that are Hebraic/Jewish in origin or nature. Define baptism from the Hebraic, please.

It doesn't really matter to me right now what it is in Hebrew, because those letters were written to a Greek-speaking people, they would have written in a way for them to understand it. No confusion from God, remember?

Quote from: LexKnight on Mon Nov 30, 2015 - 21:35:19

Quote from: Covkeeper34 on Mon Nov 30, 2015 - 21:31:17

Quote from: LexKnight on Mon Nov 30, 2015 - 21:14:45

Because it's written in Greek, and that's the word they chose to use?

Here's another problem in Christianity.  The word may be Greek but the people aren't thinking Greek when it comes to things that are Hebraic/Jewish in origin or nature. Define baptism from the Hebraic, please.

It doesn't really matter to me right now what it is in Hebrew, because those letters were written to a Greek-speaking people, they would have written in a way for them to understand it. No confusion from God, remember?

LexKnight,

There's fault with your understanding,  because we know when Jesus spoke in the Gospels about baptism of which ever sort, His audience wasn't Greek. No, they were Hebrews. Do you think those Hebrews were looking for a Greek interpretation to things Hebraic in nature? Of course not. But what's possessing you to think otherwise--a translation? Yes that and of course "Westernized Christianity".

Luke and Acts was written to a Greek audience for sure, and Acts is very big on baptism, part of it is what's being addressed here. So of course, being there's no confusion with God, the accounts and teachings would have been written so the Greek audience would understand them. It's a story among Hebrew people... being retold to a Greek audience. I can't say that any clearer.

Baptizo means immersion, simple.

Just to clear things up....here is the Hebrew definition of Mikveh.

"The term mikveh in Hebrew literally means any gathering of waters, but is specifically used in Jewish law for the waters or bath for the ritual immersion."

They used the "mikveh" for several reasons, many pertaining to the cleansing rituals they practiced, such as for women after their monthly, etc.

Both "baptizo" and "mikveh" mean immersion in water.

Layceers,

Thank you for the definition. With that we know that baptism really isn't a NT thing. Many Christians are unaware of this.

Let's talk about Water baptism and how Christians define it. Then, I'll show how inconsistent their definition is with how Scripture defines it as.

Before we move on to defining sin, it's your turn.

How do you define water baptism?

Quote from: mclees8 on Mon Nov 30, 2015 - 18:06:05

I agree with Covkeeper  maybe on the point of being an X Christian . As he I no longer consider myself a Christian in the sense the word has become so cheap in the modern-day organized traditional church system.  Don't get me wrong I also agree with Chosen that there are many  followers of Christ in the orders. It's the orders that is the problem. Names that divide us into categories of beliefs.  I'm not sure what Cov is wanting to do. I don't count myself as any brain child of the scriptures but I don't consider myself as one who thinks he knows when he actually knows nothing. Still many here can dance circles around me with their  knowledge. What I have been given is a strong and reasonable  understanding having been a believer for thirty five years. I have seen a lot and the Lord has shown me a lot. So just what is your drive Cov that you thing you know that no one else knows. 


So Sorry my reply should have left back on the first page.

 

 For myself I dont think that we should ever deny what we are, Christians, just because some who use that name are a bad example. Should I say that I am an 'ex woman' because some women are awful?OR 'ex mother' because there are some terrible mothers out there? it makes no sense at all.

 Its up to us to be proud of using the name of Christ and be a GOOD example, and I for one will never ever deny what I am and call myself the weird name of 'ex Christian', especially if its because I think myself 'above' and 'more knowledgeable'  than the rest of Christs body an that they need me to teach them because they have it all wrong.  WHat arrogance  .

He doesnt know what no one else knows, he merely has his own opinions and ideas on what the Bible says, as we all do. Mclee your beliefs and opinions and understandings are just as valid as his, its just that you have far more humility. I have often been impressed by your posts.     

Have you also noticed that he appears to ignore the verses and views from the women here?

In all fairness to the OP,  in his original post he stated that....

"I like to have a friendly talk with only strong Christians who know their bibles
well....."

and

"I'd like to speak with only teachable and humble disciples. ....."



Right from the start he was straight forward about this.

So I believe it has nothing to do with women,  but as an observer of your posts

in this thread so far,  it is very well possible that you don't fit the criteria he laid

out from the start as to who he will engage in speaking to.

chosenone,

I do fellowship and have a congregational home. Why? Are you trying to find something to discredit me on? I won't let that happen.

As soon as someone rightfully and Scripturally defines SIN, I'll expound on baptism some more. It'll contradict Christianity but no one will be able to deny what's there. I wait patiently.

It's almost 1:30 AM here.  I will define sin tomm morn.     Have a great night...errr morning everyone.   

Quote from: chosenone on Mon Nov 30, 2015 - 22:12:39

Quote from: mclees8 on Mon Nov 30, 2015 - 18:06:05

I agree with Covkeeper  maybe on the point of being an X Christian . As he I no longer consider myself a Christian in the sense the word has become so cheap in the modern-day organized traditional church system.  Don't get me wrong I also agree with Chosen that there are many  followers of Christ in the orders. It's the orders that is the problem. Names that divide us into categories of beliefs.  I'm not sure what Cov is wanting to do. I don't count myself as any brain child of the scriptures but I don't consider myself as one who thinks he knows when he actually knows nothing. Still many here can dance circles around me with their  knowledge. What I have been given is a strong and reasonable  understanding having been a believer for thirty five years. I have seen a lot and the Lord has shown me a lot. So just what is your drive Cov that you thing you know that no one else knows. 


So Sorry my reply should have left back on the first page.

 

 For myself I dont think that we should ever deny what we are, Christians, just because some who use that name are a bad example. Should I say that I am an 'ex woman' because some women are awful?OR 'ex mother' because there are some terrible mothers out there? it makes no sense at all.

 Its up to us to be proud of using the name of Christ and be a GOOD example, and I for one will never ever deny what I am and call myself the weird name of 'ex Christian', especially if its because I think myself 'above' and 'more knowledgeable'  than the rest of Christs body an that they need me to teach them because they have it all wrong.  WHat arrogance  .

He doesnt know what no one else knows, he merely has his own opinions and ideas on what the Bible says, as we all do. Mclee your beliefs and opinions and understandings are just as valid as his, its just that you have far more humility. I have often been impressed by your posts.     

Have you also noticed that he appears to ignore the verses and views from the women here?

In all fairness to the OP,  in his original post he stated that....

"I like to have a friendly talk with only strong Christians who know their bibles
well....."

and

"I'd like to speak with only teachable and humble disciples. ....."



Right from the start he was straight forward about this.

So I believe it has nothing to do with women,  but as an observer of your posts

in this thread so far,  it is very well possible that you don't fit the criteria he laid

out from the start as to who he will engage in speaking to.

 

You are probably right, women tend to be much better at picking up on pride and arrogance, even though in this case it was glaringly obvious.      However we have also typed up Biblical verses in answer to him, which were of course ignored.
 
Maybe I need to get my husband on here who is a doctor, a scientist and a researcher, and who also reads his bible a LOT and who has been a Christian for 53 years since he was 5,  but I know what he would say if I explained the situation, he would laugh and say  "WHy do you waste you time on people like that?". Probably very wise.

MY concern is ALWAYS here that impressionable maybe newish believers will be taken in by it or totally confused by it. We have what we need with God and the Bible, its all there and not hard to understand(no matter if we are 'experts' or not) whether its what baptism is about or what sin is, or whatever else. We do not need a new 'revelation' from someone who seems ashamed to use the name of Christ to describe Himself. 

chosenone,

Here's the thing, I'm publicly and respectfully asking that you respect my Post by saying nothing except related to the Bible. Keep me out of your mouth, please. If you cannot keep your focus on Bible solely here, it's best that you go and create a Post where you can vent about people you've never met but seem to think you have figured out.

Now as asserted in my opening post, because you sound immature, at this point you are being ignored. Please post no more replies that embarrass good Christian manners.

Honestly, by the things you've said, it looks like you're begging for my attention. It looks like you feel ignored

Don't take it personal but, I'm really just responding to people who've sparked my interest. I feel people out to see who's patient and who's not. You don't possess that quality. You seem easily agitated.