What does the bible say about being qualified to baptise someone?
Does the bible teach us the requirements that are needed that gives one authority to cleanse one of his or her sins as the baptist did?
What Qualifies One To Baptise Another?
Posts
Total:
38
-->
@Stephen
Only human imagination would seem necessary for a baptism to take place. One simply imagines one participant has the spiritual authority sufficient that the other can imagine they have been somehow cleansed or otherwise made more worthy.
-->
@Stephen
Wild imagination and a pond.
-->
@Stephen
.
Stephen,
Within the same vein as everyone is going to heaven, even the Atheists, that I proposed in this link: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4754-in-prayer-with-jesus-last-night-he-said-atheists-are-going-to-heaven-wtf, the use of the pagan ritual of water baptism is not needed anymore because as Paul stated: "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit." (1 Corinthians 12:13)
Paul describes that every believer is spiritually baptized into one body because every Christian has God's Spirit within them. Therefore, on Sunday mornings, TRUE Christians like myself don't have to listen to crying and choking babies being submerged into water that is not warm enough for them, praise Pauls' direct words!
.
-->
@Stephen
What does the bible say about being qualified to baptise someone?Does the bible teach us the requirements that are needed that gives one authority to cleanse one of his or her sins as the baptist did?
Don't the Pharisees ask a similar question about Jesus? And does not Jesus then throw the question back to them? Mark 11:27-33.
-->
@Stephen
What does the bible say about being qualified to baptise someone?
Well I suppose it depends upon what baptism is? Whether there is only one reason for baptism, or whether there are various reasons for baptism?
In the OT. the word baptism is not used. In the NT the word baptism is used in different senses - sometimes in relation to a water ceremony, sometimes in reference to the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. sometimes it is used for ceremonial washing of the hands. Sometimes it is used as an example of something more. Sometimes it is connected with circumcision. Sometimes it is connected with the heart.
I ask questions of you because your questions are vague. Speak more plainly and perhaps we might decipher what answer you are looking for.
If you are asking merely about John the Baptist, then say so? If you are asking about Jesus then say so? If you are asking about the ceremonial cleanings that occurred both in the OT and the NT, then say so? If you are asking about the Christian teachings as identified in the NT, then say so? If you are asking about a general understanding of what the BIBLE says about ALL the DIFFERENT KINDS of BAPTISMS, then say so?
Does the bible teach us the requirements that are needed that gives one authority to cleanse one of his or her sins as the baptist did?
The Baptist never cleansed sins. That was the point of his message. Surely even you understand that? Preparing the way was not about cleansing people of their sins. The Baptist knew that only GOD can cleanse sins. And this is because GOD is the one against whom sin is. WE might be offended by sin. But it is not against us. We might be the victim of the sin. But sin by its nature is an affront to God, not to us. This is one of the reasons that humanity downplays sin. We really do not understand it.
The Priests in the OT did not have the power to remit sins. This is the point of the book of Hebrews.
-->
@Tradesecret
What does the bible say about being qualified to baptise someone?Does the bible teach us the requirements that are needed that gives one authority to cleanse one of his or her sins as the baptist did?Don't the Pharisees ask a similar question about Jesus?
Yes they do.
And does not Jesus then throw the question back to them? Mark 11:27-33.
No. What Jesus does is not answer the question. Instead, Jesus thought that he had answered the question by posing one of his own in response. And never did he answer the original question, a bit like yourself.
What does the bible say about being qualified to baptise someone?Well I suppose it depends upon what baptism is? Whether there is only one reason for baptism, or whether there are various reasons for baptism?
So you want to go through all that shite again. The bible makes it clear the reason for baptism as I have shown you multiple times here on this thread here #13.
The bible doesn't even mention any other reason for baptism. So lets not go down the rout of what the bible doesn't say.
In the NT the word baptism is used in different senses
No they are not and there are no different reasons for it either. Whether it be baptised in spirit or water, the sole reason for this ritual as far as the scriptures are concerned is all to do with sinner, sin, sins or sinning;
" repentance for the forgiveness of sins"(Mark 1:4-5) .
"a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins" . (Luke 3:3)
"in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins". (Acts 2:38)
"baptized and wash your sins away". (Acts 22:16)
sometimes it is used for ceremonial washing of the hands.
Really! and the biblical evidence for this is where?
Sometimes it is used as an example of something more.
And you have a biblical example of this do you?
Sometimes it is connected with circumcision.
And which NT verses mention baptism in relation to circumcision?
Sometimes it is connected with the heart.
I see, and you are going to offer the biblical evidence for all your above claims are you?
But regardless, none of your claims so far have answered the op, have they? What you have chosen to do instead is dance around and made claims without a single drop of biblical evidence and that have nothing to do with the op.
I ask questions of you because your questions are vague. Speak more plainly and perhaps we might decipher what answer you are looking for.
It is a straight forward enough question. What qualifies one to baptise another? Or to put it simpler for you, what qualifications does one need to be able to perform the sacred ritual of baptism?
If you are asking merely about John the Baptist, then say so?
[A] No. I am asking about what qualifies one person to baptise another. I cannot see why it is you are struggling with this very simply question.
If you are asking about Jesus then say so?
See[A] above
If you are asking about the ceremonial cleanings that occurred both in the OT and the NT, then say so?
See[A] above
If you are asking about the Christian teachings as identified in the NT, then say so?
See[A] above
If you are asking about a general understanding of what the BIBLE says about ALL
How do you keep missing it? I am asking about >>>>>>>QUALIFICATIONS NEEDED <<<<<<<, are you blind??????? I am asking at post #1 above _ Does the bible teach us the requirements that are needed that gives one authority to cleanse one of his or her sins as the baptist did? #1
-->
@Stephen
Wild imagination and a pond.
-->
@zedvictor4
Yes vic. You have said so twice already.
-->
@Stephen
I've said it twice and it's factually correct as far as anyone actually knows.
Any other sin based bulls**t as far as anyone actually knows, is sin based bulls**t.
-->
@zedvictor4
Wild imagination and a pond [..........] it's factually correct as far as anyone actually knows.
Or a river. Or a lake. Or a sea. Or an ocean. Or a stream. Or a tub of bath water. Or a Font even. And all without the slightest bit of imagination. No Vic, one only needs to"believe" they are cleansing or being cleansed, Vic.
-->
@Stephen
True. But what is belief?
It's a word that ambiguously defines something.
And imagination is what we base belief upon.
In fact if you think about it without imagination nothing would change, we would still be dunking them in the pond rather than a nice font, and sin would always be fun. In fact we wouldn't be dunking them at all.
Nonetheless baptism is for repressive types.
Thou shalt keepest thy member within thy trousers, or be damned by some god bloke...Splish splash splosh, now run along and stone an adulteress to death, for god lovest a good stoning. I err he findeth it quite exciting. OOOOH!
Baptism is therefore for repressive hypocritical types...... Or mummies or daddies of course who want to be seen to do things properly.
-->
@Stephen
And does not Jesus then throw the question back to them? Mark 11:27-33.No. What Jesus does is not answer the question. Instead, Jesus thought that he had answered the question by posing one of his own in response. And never did he answer the original question, a bit like yourself.
Please read what I said? Does not Jesus throw the question back at them. I never said he answered it. But hey don't let the facts get in the road of pointscoring.
What does the bible say about being qualified to baptise someone?Well I suppose it depends upon what baptism is? Whether there is only one reason for baptism, or whether there are various reasons for baptism?So you want to go through all that shite again. The bible makes it clear the reason for baptism as I have shown you multiple times here on this thread here #13.The bible doesn't even mention any other reason for baptism. So lets not go down the rout of what the bible doesn't say.
LOL! I have said before that baptism refers to lots of things. You rejected that - never proved it of course but rejected it. I don't agree with your rejection just because you make an assertion. Baptism does refer to lots of things in the NT. Get out a concordance, do your own work.
In the NT the word baptism is used in different sensesNo they are not and there are no different reasons for it either. Whether it be baptised in spirit or water, the sole reason for this ritual as far as the scriptures are concerned is all to do with sinner, sin, sins or sinning;" repentance for the forgiveness of sins"(Mark 1:4-5) ."a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins" . (Luke 3:3)"in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins". (Acts 2:38)"baptized and wash your sins away". (Acts 22:16)
Yes it does. And very often so.
sometimes it is used for ceremonial washing of the hands.Really! and the biblical evidence for this is where?
Matthew 15: 1-2. Look at the Greek dear Stephen and not just the English. The greek word here is baptism where we see the word wash in English.
Sometimes it is used as an example of something more.And you have a biblical example of this do you?
Hebrews 9:10. Mathew 28:18-20. 1 Cor 10:1-5.
Sometimes it is connected with the heart.
Mark 1:8
I ask questions of you because your questions are vague. Speak more plainly and perhaps we might decipher what answer you are looking for.It is a straight forward enough question. What qualifies one to baptise another? Or to put it simpler for you, what qualifications does one need to be able to perform the sacred ritual of baptism?
No not really. This is why I asked the question. In the NT we know that John and his disciples baptized. Jesus' disciples did not baptize prior to his ascension. Nor did Jesus personally baptize prior to his ascension. Jesus instructed his apostles in Matthew 28 to go out and baptize - and then in Acts we have examples of the apostles baptizing and then those set apart for ministry - such as Philip and Timothy - and Barnabas and Paul and Apollos. We don't see just anyone doing it. And we never see any females doing it.
We don't have any NT examples of any Pharisee baptizing although clearly performing cleansing ceremonies.
We certainly don't see any non-believers baptizing.
Jesus ultimately baptized the church with the Holy Spirit - Pentecost. This is what John the Baptist was referring to in his message.
In summary in the Christian church - it seems clear then that qualification requires a belief in Christ. It requires being set apart by the church or the leaders in the church.
For the Jewish religion - the OT is the reference we would have to use. And the understanding of baptism would need to be understood through the lens of water ceremonies - clearly at least from Aaron's time it would have given to the priests - Levites - who by the way are not just Levites by blood but by an offering from other tribes. Hence John the Baptist may well fall under that category.
How do you keep missing it? I am asking about >>>>>>>QUALIFICATIONS NEEDED <<<<<<<, are you blind??????? I am asking at post #1 above _ Does the bible teach us the requirements that are needed that gives one authority to cleanse one of his or her sins as the baptist did? #1
Sorry - I don't agree that baptism with water was ever used as a means to cleanse people of their sins. Water with water was only ever symbolic of a greater truth to be fulfilled by the messiah. Even John recognized that he only could wash the outside - but something more was required to wash the heart. The Holy Spirit. This of course was his reference to Jesus - who baptized with the Holy Spirit all those who belong to him.
What does the bible say about being qualified to baptise someone?Well I suppose it depends upon what baptism is? Whether there is only one reason for baptism, or whether there are various reasons for baptism?So you want to go through all that shite again. The bible makes it clear the reason for baptism as I have shown you multiple times here on this thread here #13.The bible doesn't even mention any other reason for baptism. So lets not go down the rout of what the bible doesn't say.LOL! I have said before that baptism refers to lots of things. You rejected that - never proved it of course but rejected it.
I din't have to prove a thing. It was you that made the claim without a single piece of supporting evidence.
Baptism does refer to lots of things in the NT.
Another unsubstantiated claim. just saying it doesn't prove it!
Get out a concordance, do your own work.
I am not here to prove fkn claims that YOU make and have made!
sometimes it is used for ceremonial washing of the hands.Really! and the biblical evidence for this is where?Matthew 15: 1-2. Look at the Greek dear Stephen and not just the English. The greek word here is baptism where we see the word wash in English.
We are talking baptism here as in the washing away of ones sins . We are not talking the practice of ones hygiene and ablutions. As you perfectly know well!
Sometimes it is used as an example of something more.And you have a biblical example of this do you?Hebrews 9: 10. Mathew 28:18-20. 1 Cor 10:1-5.
Hebrews 9:10.
More about personal hygiene
Mathew 28:18-20
28- 18-20Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”
Yes! That will be the washing away of ones sins - kind of baptism. Well done . I suppose if you throw enough shite while blindfolded and facing in the approximate direction , you are bound to hit...….. on what it is we are actually discussing here.; baptism to wash away ones sins as per scripture.
1 Cor 10:1-5.
"Baptism in the sea / water". So this mentions baptism by water in the sea. Which resembles the baptism rituals performed by John in the water of the Jordan - to wash away sins. which is not that different is it? AND I actually believe Jesus did this himself in the sea of Galilee but the scriptures are so vague and ambiguous on the matter that I would never be stupid enough stick my neck out and say I can prove it.
So again you haven't proven a damn thing. In your desperation to make things fit, you have just made shite up and are now trying to tell me that these verses somehow prove that baptism stands also for "something other than just washing away sins".. Your full of shite and this is the desperation I spoke of earlier here> #6
I ask questions of you because your questions are vague. Speak more plainly and perhaps we might decipher what answer you are looking for.It is a straight forward enough question. What qualifies one to baptise another? Or to put it simpler for you, what qualifications does one need to be able to perform the sacred ritual of baptism?No not really. This is why I asked the question. In the NT we know that John and his disciples baptized.
Do we? . Lets see your evidence that John's disciples performed baptism rituals
Jesus' disciples did not baptize prior to his ascension. Nor did Jesus personally baptize prior to his ascension. Jesus instructed his apostles in Matthew 28 to go out and baptize - and then in Acts we have examples of the apostles baptizing and then those set apart for ministry - such as Philip and Timothy - and Barnabas and Paul and Apollos. We don't see just anyone doing it. And we never see any females doing it.
Nothing to do with the questions. I am not asking about Jesus, his disciples, or if "females" performed baptism. this is just more filibustering that has fk all to do with the OP and the questions asked. IF YOU DON'T KNOW THEN SIMPLY SAY SO!
We don't have any NT examples of any Pharisee baptizing although clearly performing cleansing ceremonies.
Irrelevant!
We certainly don't see any non-believers baptizing.
Irrelevant!
Jesus ultimately baptized the church with the Holy Spirit - Pentecost. This is what John the Baptist was referring to in his message.
Irrelevant!
In summary in the Christian church - it seems clear then that qualification requires a belief in Christ. It requires being set apart by the church or the leaders in the church.
Well you certainly took your time didn't you? Now show us the evidence . - "a belief in Christ", pretty obvious, and "set apart" - I will take that to mean not a simple parishioner but an elevated member of the church such as a priest maybe? So what would his qualifications be apart from having to be obviously a Christian? And would he have had to be baptised himself?
For the Jewish religion - the OT is the reference we would have to use.
Which is what? Are the qualification different in the OT and the ones not even mentioned in the NT? And does the OT even mention the qualifications one needs to perform baptism?
It appears to me not only do you not know that there is only one single reason for baptism, but you also no nothing about baptism and those that baptise. Which is pretty astounding seeing that you portray yourself as somewhat an authority on matters biblical.
I fear that the only biblical matters that you are an authority on are the ones that you invent and the ones that you interpret to fit your narrative.
-->
@Stephen
Baptism does refer to lots of things in the NT.Another unsubstantiated claim. just saying it doesn't prove it!
I did express what the NT says - you reject it. Well good for you. If you like lying to yourself - go for it.
The word baptism is one which has many aspects. It means to wash. It means to dip. It is used in many ways in the NT and even in the OT LXX. John used it for his own purposes - so did others. The water barrels at the Wedding of Cana were baptismal water barrels. I don't care that it does not fit your narrative - your narrative is one you make up and which has no support from any credible sources - that you are prepared to acknowledge.
Get out a concordance, do your own work.I am not here to prove fkn claims that YOU make and have made!
You are such a child. You started this post. You never clarify what you want - because you have your own agenda. Well I am not here to fulfil your agenda.
-->
@Tradesecret
.
Tradesecret, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO, Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, states there is FICTION within the scriptures, and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3,
What part of what Paul said about Baptism didn't you understand in my post linked below within this thread, just like in the "Joe had 2 Dads" thread, where I have had to correct your Bible ignorance many times in your inept Bible understanding of certain narratives! LOL
Congratulations in actually adding to your biography page within DEBATEART where it was ZERO before, where it's at least a minimal start! Now, your problem with your gender being a 2nd class woman is troubling within a Religion forum setting. This is because of either two propositions, you have either had a sex change into a man as your moniker so concludes, or you are a woman directly. IN EITHER CASE, AND BIBLICALLY, YOU ARE NOT TO TEACH A MAN!
“ Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.” (1 Timothy 2:11-15 )
As shown in the passage above, this prohibition means women must never, ever teach men in the church, and in the same context, outside of church like this forum represents! Paul felt that because Eve was deceived, then the 2nd class women that you represent, are gullible and therefore mustn't teach men, period!
A VERY IMPORTANT DECISION OF YOURS NOW PRESENTS ITSELF, DO YOU WANT TO CALL JESUS' INSPIRED WORDS A LIE IN 1 TIMOTHY 2:11-15, AND NOT FOLLOW SAID PASSAGE ABOVE?
.
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Hi there Brother,
My profile is as honest as yours.
If you read the passages, it says that a woman shall not teach men who are believers. Since you are not a believer - it does not prevent me from instructing you.
SO Jesus is correct and I am correct. We are both correct. And you on the other hand are grasping at straws. Imagine being putting in your place by me - a mere female.
-->
@Tradesecret
What? So, a teacher that is a female cannot teach a Christian kid? That makes no sense.
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Within the same vein as everyone is going to heaven, even the Atheists, that I proposed in this link: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4754-in-prayer-with-jesus-last-night-he-said-atheists-are-going-to-heaven-wtf, the use of the pagan ritual of water baptism is not needed anymore because as Paul stated: "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit." (1 Corinthians 12:13)Paul describes that every believer is spiritually baptized into one body because every Christian has God's Spirit within them. Therefore, on Sunday mornings, TRUE Christians like myself don't have to listen to crying and choking babies being submerged into water that is not warm enough for them, praise Pauls' direct words!
Hi Brother, there is an element of truth in your words. Water does not make a person a believer. Water can only wash the outside- just like John the Baptist says. What is needed is the heart cleaned - by Jesus, our Lord and Savior. And he does this by baptising us - cleaning us by the Holy Spirit. Isn't this fantastic?
But of course this only applies to those who ACTUALLY trust in Jesus. Just like Jesus - the mighty King Jesus rightfully reminds us in John 3:16. For God so loved the world that he gave his only son so that whosoever believes in him shall not die but have everlasting life. I underlined the part that tells us that it is only for whosoever - not everybody. It is good that we can trust Jesus' words, eh?
I also agree that children should never be put under - or submerged under the water. In fact no one - even adults should be submerged. That is not how the bible portrays baptism. Baptism is a pouring out - or a sprinkling - just like the Holy Spirit was poured out from heaven and from above onto the disciples. Putting people under the water is just wrong. People should listen to Jesus' words.
-->
@Intelligence_06
What? So, a teacher that is a female cannot teach a Christian kid? That makes no sense.
The bible says - hey read the Brother's words - he knows - that females are not meant to teach Christian adult males in religious matters. Actually the term teach is a very specific word - it is not all forms of teaching - just in the didactic proclamation of the gospel in the worship service. She can teach in sunday school, she can teach in a home group bible study, she can even teach in a seminary. The teaching only really formally instructs that females cannot preach in the regular worship service.
But shhh don't tell the Brother, we don't want his faith to waiver under the force of the truth. Sometimes it is necessary to let people hold onto their nonsense or else they might go nuts. This is why I don't talk to strongly about evolution. I would not want to see a wave of nuts - not knowing what to do when their world caves beneath them.
.
Tradesecret, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO, Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, states there is FICTION within the scriptures, and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3,
Dear Hellbound woman, where does it state that you as a 2nd class woman are not to teach believers, and in addition, and as shown, I have forgotten more about the Bible than you will ever learn, where the proof of this proposition, is that you have RUN AWAY from the majority of my posts where I have shown you to be the Bible fool! LOL
.
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Dear Hellbound woman, where does it state that you as a 2nd class woman are not to teach believers, and in addition, and as shown, I have forgotten more about the Bible than you will ever learn, where the proof of this proposition, is that you have RUN AWAY from the majority of my posts where I have shown you to be the Bible fool! LOL
Dear Brother D Thomas, perhaps you might ponder about whether you really want me to respond to you or not? It seems to me and I suspect to the majority of the forum site that I am not running away. In fact this forum is very aware of the fact that I called you out - even devoting an entire post to demonstrate every one of your fibs to be untrue. And what did you do? You had a little cry about it. You did everything you could do to close me down. You cried "foul". That topic which remains for all to see - is a testament to the fact that I did not run away but in fact welcomed the opportunity to respond to you and your errors.
So everytime you repeat your tired old cliches', it just reminds us all of who really ran away.
I am not perturbed by your endless nonsense. You made the assertion about woman. Not me. I admit I responded - but it is clear Paul was talking to Christians within Christians circles and churches. (1 Timothy 2:11-15 ) is a good start. I don't hold to the non-thinking position that a suitable verse answers everything. I don't personally go looking for verses that support my position. Anyone can find a quote in the bible and then twist it the way they like. I suggest try reading it in context. That normally brings out the meaning. But why I should I tell you how to suck eggs? You can read can't you?
-->
@Tradesecret
Baptism does refer to lots of things in the NT.Another unsubstantiated claim. just saying it doesn't prove it!I did express what the NT says - you reject it. Well good for you. If you like lying to yourself - go for it.
No you didn't , you offered verses that have NOTHING AT ALL to do with the reason for the baptism ritual. You just made things up to stop yourself looking stupid. But you ignore what the bible SPECIFICLLY states is the reason for baptism; redemption of sins;
" repentance for the forgiveness of sins"(Mark 1:4-5) .
"a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins" . (Luke 3:3)
"in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins". (Acts 2:38)
"baptized and wash your sins away". (Acts 22:16)
One doesn't baptise themselves everything that take a bath, wash their hands or foreskin as you are desperate to say they do!!!!!
The word baptism is one which has many aspects. It means to wash. It means to dip. It is used in many ways in the NT and even in the OT LXX.
Stop lying .
John used it for his own purposes - so did others.
Stop telling lies.
The water barrels at the Wedding of Cana were baptismal water barrels.
Prove it?
Get out a concordance, do your own work.I am not here to prove fkn claims that YOU make and have made!You started this post.
I did, but not to prove any of the bullshit that you have spewed onto this thread.
You never clarify what you want - because you have your own agenda.
I couldn't have made it clearer. It is simply a case of YOU being stuck for true and honest answers that you just throw anything out there simply for the sake of needing to reply. The questions are plain simply enough. and you have gone someway to explaining it, but for some reason stopped abruptly, ignoring that actual question. Thisis what you said:
In summary in the Christian church - it seems clear then that qualification requires a belief in Christ. It requires being set apart by the church or the leaders in the church. #13
But you stopped dead and didn't get to the crux of the question. WHY ???? Why did you stop there and not mention that which actually qualified this Christian set apart from the rest by the church leaders to be able to perform the ritual of baptism.
You have said he needs to have "a belief in Christ".
Would he also need to be baptised himself or does by him simply having a belief in Christ alone qualify him to perform the sacred ritual of baptism?
Well I am not here to fulfil your agenda.
And I don't have one for you to "fulfil".
In summary in the Christian church - it seems clear then that qualification requires a belief in Christ. It requires being set apart by the church or the leaders in the church.
And would he have had to be baptised himself?
In the NT we know that John and his disciples baptized.
Do we? . Lets see your evidence that John's disciples performed baptism rituals.
-->
@Tradesecret
And what did you do? You had a little cry about it. You did everything you could do to close me down. You cried "foul". That topic which remains for all to see - is a testament to the fact that I did not run away but in fact welcomed the opportunity to respond to you and your errors.
Well that is not at all true. Very selective memory you have there. No surprises though.
I fact this is a deliberate lie to make it look like the Brother was running scared from you when the truth was about face. The Brother didn't seem to care either way.
The thread was actually flagged by someone else as "a call out thread"#2 and BEFORE the Brother had even posted on the thread. I won't ask that you apologise to the Brother, fake Christians can never do that. But I will say stop with your lies just for once!!!!
-->
@Tradesecret
.
TRADESECRET, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO, Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, states there is FICTION within the scriptures, and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3, and a Bible 2nd class woman,
YOUR COMICAL AND REVEALING QUOTE IN POST #22: “Dear Brother D Thomas, perhaps you might ponder about whether you really want me to respond to you or not?” It seems to me and I suspect to the majority of the forum site that I am not running away
WTF! LOL! Listen up Bible 2nd class woman, I have been trying to make you respond to me in the following link where you have RAN AWAY from many inspired by Jesus posts to you, as if we’re not to notice this blatant fact? Why do you make it so easy for me to show the membership in what a complete Bible fool you are as a Bible 2nd class woman, and to RUN AWAY from this fact in the link below? Please, tell me why?!
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4858-josephs-two-dads?page=2&post_number=31
WTF! LOL! Listen up Bible 2nd class woman, I have been trying to make you respond to me in the following link where you have RAN AWAY from many inspired by Jesus posts to you, as if we’re not to notice this blatant fact? Why do you make it so easy for me to show the membership in what a complete Bible fool you are as a Bible 2nd class woman, and to RUN AWAY from this fact in the link below? Please, tell me why?!
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4858-josephs-two-dads?page=2&post_number=31
As adamantly shown in the link above, your “seems to be and I suspect to the majority of the forum site that I am not running away” comically FALLS FLAT UPON ITS PROVERBIAL FACE! LOL! You do provide some great comedy at times, runaway Bible 2nd class woman! LOL
YOUR EMBARRASSING QUOTE WHERE YOU GOT YOUR TEATS IN A RINGER?: In fact this forum is very aware of the fact that I called you out - even devoting an entire post to demonstrate every one of your fibs to be untrue.'
Besides the fact that I now have you crawling in dismay and embarrassment because of your RUNAWAY status to my ever growing list of posts to you, that you have not answered as shown in the link above, why don’t you bring forth this alleged “Thread” that you claim is calling me out? As a Bible 2nd class woman, are you too SCARED to do so in front of the godly men within this forum? Huh? As a 2nd class woman, let's see if you can perform this simple request, shall we? WAITING!
YOUR PLEADING AND CRYING POST ABOUT YOUR UNGODLY GENDER: “You made the assertion about woman. Not me. I admit I responded - but it is clear Paul was talking to Christians within Christians circles and churches.”
No dear, Jesus’ inspired words about your 2nd class Bible status as a woman and I made this assertion, understood? Yes, Paul within the church stated specifically that YOU and other Bible 2nd class women are NOT, I repeat, NOT to teach or usurp the authority over the godly man, but to be in silence, understood? Again, what part of this passage don’t you understand since your Sister Eve is responsible for the original sin, and where you degrading womanly status began?
“ Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.” (1 Timothy 2:11-15 )
The membership and I look forward to you bringing forth the alleged thread where you called me out, and then the real fun towards you begins, hang on to your “depends” because the real action is about to start, praise Jesus revenge towards the pseudo-christian Tradesecret! WAITING, DEAR!
Jesus' inspired words regarding the 2nd class woman: "But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man;
and the head of Christ is God." (I Corinthians 11:3)
and the head of Christ is God." (I Corinthians 11:3)
.
-->
@Stephen
Well that is not at all true. Very selective memory you have there. No surprises though.I fact this is a deliberate lie to make it look like the Brother was running scared from you when the truth was about face. The Brother didn't seem to care either way.The thread was actually flagged by someone else as "a call out thread"#2 and BEFORE the Brother had even posted on the thread. I won't ask that you apologise to the Brother, fake Christians can never do that. But I will say stop with your lies just for once!!!!
Read it however you like. The fact is I started that thread to address the Brother's questions. Although he did not call out my thread initially. Once it was called out - he did as best he could to try and have me banned. And you joined in as well. If he were wanting me to answer - he would not have tried to get me banned.
I don't recall in any post on that topic - that he wanted the mods to leave it alone so that I could respond. The only logical conclusion is he did not want me to respond.
I don't recall you doing the same either. The fact is - you wanted me to be banned for breaching the rules. And the only conclusion that makes sense about that is that you wanted me gone.
-->
@Tradesecret
And what did you do? You had a little cry about it. You did everything you could do to close me down. You cried "foul". That topic which remains for all to see - is a testament to the fact that I did not run away but in fact welcomed the opportunity to respond to you and your errors.Well that is not at all true. Very selective memory you have there. No surprises though.I fact this is a deliberate lie to make it look like the Brother was running scared from you when the truth was about face. The Brother didn't seem to care either way.The thread was actually flagged by someone else as "a call out thread"#2 and BEFORE the Brother had even posted on the thread. I won't ask that you apologise to the Brother, fake Christians can never do that. But I will say stop with your lies just for once!!!!Read it however you like. The fact is I started that thread to address the Brother's questions. Although he did not call out my thread initially.
I read it as YOU have wrote it. And you lied to incriminate and insinuate the Brother as some kind of cry baby coward when it simply wasn't true.
it was called out - he did as best he could to try and have me banned.
No. What he did was remind you that you had broken the COC rules BEFORE.. and posted that to you. This is an old argument that I do not tend to resurrect as YOU HAVE DONE, which, incidentally , is ANOTHER violation of the rules.
And you joined in as well. If he were wanting me to answer - he would not have tried to get me banned.
There is no evidence that the Brother wanted anyone banned. The call out was made by a moderator. Stop lying. Besides The Brother would have no one to correct and educate on all matters biblical had you got banned. I am not sure the Brother is stupid enough to cut of his nose to spite his face, are you? You are pure entertainment for the Brother. And I have never conspired , to get you banned EVER! So that's another load of old BS from you. I'll say it now and clear for you:
Declaration.
I would never want you -Tradesecret, - banned, even though I suffer your lies, double standard and sheer hypocrisy and made up versions of the scriptures. <<<< There. Now cutout and keep that into your memory and have it on hand if you ever feel you need to remind me of what I have said.
I don't recall in any post on that topic - that he wanted the mods to leave it alone so that I could respond.
It wouldn't have been up to him either way would it? A decision was made eventually and it wasn't made by the Brother, was it?
I don't recall you doing the same either. The fact is - you wanted me to be banned for breaching the rules. And the only conclusion that makes sense about that is that you wanted me gone.
Nope. I like you too much. So, Stop playing victim and re-read my Declaration above.
-->
@Tradesecret
Baptism does refer to lots of things in the NT.Another unsubstantiated claim. just saying it doesn't prove it!I did express what the NT says - you reject it. Well good for you. If you like lying to yourself - go for it.
No you didn't , you offered verses that have NOTHING AT ALL to do with the reason for the baptism ritual. You just made things up to stop yourself looking stupid. But you ignore what the bible SPECIFICLLY states is the reason for baptism; redemption of sins;
" repentance for the forgiveness of sins"(Mark 1:4-5) .
"a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins" . (Luke 3:3)
"in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins". (Acts 2:38)
"baptized and wash your sins away". (Acts 22:16)
One doesn't baptise themselves everything that take a bath, wash their hands or foreskin as you are desperate to say they do!!!!!
The word baptism is one which has many aspects. It means to wash. It means to dip. It is used in many ways in the NT and even in the OT LXX.
Stop lying .
John used it for his own purposes - so did others.
Stop telling lies.
The water barrels at the Wedding of Cana were baptismal water barrels.
Prove it?
Get out a concordance, do your own work.I am not here to prove fkn claims that YOU make and have made!You started this post.
I did, but not to prove any of the bullshit that you have spewed onto this thread.
You never clarify what you want - because you have your own agenda.
I couldn't have made it clearer. It is simply a case of YOU being stuck for true and honest answers that you just throw anything out there simply for the sake of needing to reply. The questions are plain simply enough. and you have gone someway to explaining it, but for some reason stopped abruptly, ignoring that actual question. Thisis what you said:
In summary in the Christian church - it seems clear then that qualification requires a belief in Christ. It requires being set apart by the church or the leaders in the church. #13
But you stopped dead and didn't get to the crux of the question. WHY ???? Why did you stop there and not mention that which actually qualified this Christian set apart from the rest by the church leaders to be able to perform the ritual of baptism.
You have said he needs to have "a belief in Christ".
Would he also need to be baptised himself or does by him simply having a belief in Christ alone qualify him to perform the sacred ritual of baptism?
Well I am not here to fulfil your agenda.
And I don't have one for you to "fulfil".
In summary in the Christian church - it seems clear then that qualification requires a belief in Christ. It requires being set apart by the church or the leaders in the church.
And would he have had to be baptised himself?
In the NT we know that John and his disciples baptized.
Do we? . Lets see your evidence that John's disciples performed baptism ritual
-->
@Stephen
I really don't see what you point is.
I do hold to the view that a person who baptizes another ought to be baptized themselves. Yet, I also think that there is no specific power in baptism since it is a symbolic picture of a far more important baptism. Yes, in the main, but with exceptions, baptism is to do with sin and even the remittance of sins. Yet, even this is gets screwed up by many because as John says - his baptism is deficient - which is why a greater one with a greater baptism is coming. In what way was his baptism deficient? It was washing on the outside -and it is the heart which is the problem.
The most important baptism in the NT is at Pentecost. This is the baptism that Jesus baptized with the Holy Spirit. This is the paradigm, not John's.
-->
@Stephen
I hear what you say. I am not persuaded by it at all. Nevertheless, I am prepared to accept it on good faith - and the condition that you stop accusing me of lying, to put it aside.