|
|
Post by Cepha on May 8, 2009 12:54:11 GMT -5
I don't always say "then", personally...it's implied in a lot of what I say. little sister: "Can I have another brownie?" me: "If you finish your first one, you can have another one." If-then implied. Exactly "implied"? Sounds like that requires "personal interpretation" to me! ;D imply 1. to indicate or suggest without being explicitly stated: His words implied a lack of faith. 2. (of words) to signify or mean. 3. to involve as a necessary circumstance: Speech implies a speaker. 4. Obsolete. to enfold. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 8, 2009 12:55:05 GMT -5
Could you highlight in the color red where it says "then" there? I still don't see it (and I read English pretty darn well!). ;D I don't know how to do the colors but check out the IF you believe You may be baptized. If you have to believe before you can be baptized then belief must come first. I am no rocket scientist, but it is really not rocket science. Is this another case of you "implying" your personal belief here?  Also, you do realize that Jesus said that you have to be born of water and spirit, right? Notice how he put "water" before "spirit"?  |
|
|
|
Post by watchman on May 8, 2009 13:00:02 GMT -5
Different subject but it does prove that did eventually have relations. Not according to the definition of the word "until". ;D Yes it does. |
|
|
|
Post by watchman on May 8, 2009 13:03:10 GMT -5
I don't know how to do the colors but check out the IF you believe You may be baptized. If you have to believe before you can be baptized then belief must come first. I am no rocket scientist, but it is really not rocket science. Is this another case of you "implying" your personal belief here? No it is not just my personal belief anyone with a brain knows that if you are told you vcan have a brownie if you finish your dinner, that you must first finish your dinner then you can have a brownie. Same way with baptism Philip told the eunuch if you believe you may be baptized. Therefore belief on christ had to come first. This is not my personal belief it is the truth and the only way someone cannot see is if they refuse to. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 8, 2009 13:08:07 GMT -5
Not according to the definition of the word "until". ;D Yes it does. What's "your" definition of the word "until"? Here's mine: until –conjunction 1. up to the time that or when; till: He read until his guests arrived. 2. before (usually used in negative constructions): They did not come until the meeting was half over. –preposition 3. onward to or till (a specified time or occurrence): She worked until 6 p.m. 4. before (usually used in negative constructions): He did not go until night. 5. Scot. and North England. to; unto. As you can see, until means "before". ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 8, 2009 13:10:21 GMT -5
No it is not just my personal belief anyone with a brain knows that if you are told you vcan have a brownie if you finish your dinner, that you must first finish your dinner then you can have a brownie. Same way with baptism Philip told the eunuch if you believe you may be baptized. Therefore belief on christ had to come first. This is not my personal belief it is the truth and the only way someone cannot see is if they refuse to. But what does The Bible say exactly? Does the word "then" appear there as you claim it does? Or does the reader have to "imply" that that is what is meant by the words that are there? And, you never answer my question: What about those children of the saved parent that were saved because of his being saved? They didn't believe first, yet they were saved? They weren't even there when the parent got saved. |
|
|
|
Post by emily445455 on May 8, 2009 14:29:12 GMT -5
Sigh, this is getting ridiculous.
Phillip said to the eunich "if you believe'. If the man had said "no I don't believe" he wouldn't have been baptized. But he said he did believe, so phillip baptized him.
I agree with you watchman...not exactly rocket science here.
|
|
|
|
Post by watchman on May 8, 2009 16:49:47 GMT -5
What's "your" definition of the word "until"? Here's mine: until –conjunction 1. up to the time that or when; till: He read until his guests arrived. 2. before (usually used in negative constructions): They did not come until the meeting was half over. –preposition 3. onward to or till (a specified time or occurrence): She worked until 6 p.m. 4. before (usually used in negative constructions): He did not go until night. 5. Scot. and North England. to; unto. As you can see, until means "before". ;D If I were to tell my wife we cannot have relations until you find a baby sitter, then that means that as soon as my wife found a baby sitter we were going to have relations. So for the Bible to say that they did not have relation until the baby was born, most definitely means that they did after He was born. Now I know for a fact as a Catholic you are not allowed to believe that, however you will not change my mind, and I will not change your . Further more it is not the subject of this thread so there is no need for us to discuss it further. Just agree to disagree. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by watchman on May 8, 2009 16:50:59 GMT -5
No it is not just my personal belief anyone with a brain knows that if you are told you vcan have a brownie if you finish your dinner, that you must first finish your dinner then you can have a brownie. Same way with baptism Philip told the eunuch if you believe you may be baptized. Therefore belief on christ had to come first. This is not my personal belief it is the truth and the only way someone cannot see is if they refuse to. But what does The Bible say exactly? Does the word "then" appear there as you claim it does? Or does the reader have to "imply" that that is what is meant by the words that are there? And, you never answer my question: What about those children of the saved parent that were saved because of his being saved? They didn't believe first, yet they were saved? They weren't even there when the parent got saved. The only reason anyone would not realize that Philip is saying believe first then get baptized is if they are purposely blinding themselves to that truth. |
|
|
|
Post by emily445455 on May 8, 2009 16:55:32 GMT -5
The only reason anyone would not realize that Philip is saying believe first then get baptized is if they are purposely blinding themselves to that truth.[/quote] Agreed. That's why I can't (don't) get too overly stressed over these kinds of things. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 9, 2009 8:26:20 GMT -5
Sigh, this is getting ridiculous. Phillip said to the eunich "if you believe'. If the man had said "no I don't believe" he wouldn't have been baptized. But he said he did believe, so phillip baptized him. I agree with you watchman...not exactly rocket science here. LOL! The only thing that's ridiculous is that you guys don't believe you're personally interpreting The Bible when you believe in something that is not specifically written in The Bible. ;D I agree with you. Not rocket science...just "personal interpretation" as to what it means because when you believe something that is not specificaly written, then you are making your own belief based on what "is" written there.  |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 9, 2009 9:15:57 GMT -5
What's "your" definition of the word "until"? Here's mine: until –conjunction 1. up to the time that or when; till: He read until his guests arrived. 2. before (usually used in negative constructions): They did not come until the meeting was half over. –preposition 3. onward to or till (a specified time or occurrence): She worked until 6 p.m. 4. before (usually used in negative constructions): He did not go until night. 5. Scot. and North England. to; unto. As you can see, until means "before". ;D If I were to tell my wife we cannot have relations until you find a baby sitter, then that means that as soon as my wife found a baby sitter we were going to have relations. So for the Bible to say that they did not have relation until the baby was born, most definitely means that they did after He was born. Now I know for a fact as a Catholic you are not allowed to believe that, however you will not change my mind, and I will not change your . Further more it is not the subject of this thread so there is no need for us to discuss it further. Just agree to disagree. ;D That takes personal interpretation on you behalf. Pure conjecture and automatic assumption. No where in the Bible does it ever state that Mary either had children or that she even had relations. There just is no evidence scripturally that she had relations giving birth to Jesus. But I'll tell you what, I'll believe that she had relations after Jesus was born if you can provide me the scripture to prove it. This one has already been debunked (we've already defined what "until" means...all it means is "before" and nothing else). There is a Marian Section here where we can have this exchange and I would love to have this exchange because to believe that Jesus' Mother wasn't a virgin for her entire life is purely unBiblical. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 9, 2009 9:59:42 GMT -5
But what does The Bible say exactly? Does the word "then" appear there as you claim it does? Or does the reader have to "imply" that that is what is meant by the words that are there? And, you never answer my question: What about those children of the saved parent that were saved because of his being saved? They didn't believe first, yet they were saved? They weren't even there when the parent got saved. The only reason anyone would not realize that Philip is saying believe first then get baptized is if they are purposely blinding themselves to that truth. You never answer my question: What about those children of the saved parent that were saved because of his being saved?They didn't believe first, yet they were saved? They weren't even there when the parent got saved. |
|
|
|
Post by Cepha on May 9, 2009 10:01:28 GMT -5
Agreed. That's why I can't (don't) get too overly stressed over these kinds of things. Not my argument Em. I'm saying that The Bible doesn't literally say "that" and that it takes personal interpratation to retrieve that belief from what "is" written. |
|
|
|
Post by watchman on May 9, 2009 15:42:25 GMT -5
If I were to tell my wife we cannot have relations until you find a baby sitter, then that means that as soon as my wife found a baby sitter we were going to have relations. So for the Bible to say that they did not have relation until the baby was born, most definitely means that they did after He was born. Now I know for a fact as a Catholic you are not allowed to believe that, however you will not change my mind, and I will not change your . Further more it is not the subject of this thread so there is no need for us to discuss it further. Just agree to disagree. ;D That takes personal interpretation on you behalf. Pure conjecture and automatic assumption. No it take willful, purposeful, blindness for you not to see the obvious. |
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on May 9, 2009 18:56:22 GMT -5
No, it takes ignorance of Scriptures and Greek to assume the word "until" means a change in the future, whereas the Bible use the word in a different manner, unless you believe Christ will only be with us "until the end of age" has Jesus said in the Gospel of Mathew. It is very dangerous to imput moder usage of words in ancient Scriptures. I detailed this more fully in my my recent thread about Matt 1:25.
|
|
|
|
Post by watchman on May 9, 2009 21:15:58 GMT -5
No, it takes ignorance of Scriptures and Greek to assume the word "until" means a change in the future, whereas the Bible use the word in a different manner, unless you believe Christ will only be with us "until the end of age" has Jesus said in the Gospel of Mathew. It is very dangerous to imput moder usage of words in ancient Scriptures. I detailed this more fully in my my recent thread about Matt 1:25. If reality it takes years of indoctrination, and a refusal to see the plain truth to believe that Joseph and Mary never had marital relations. However my above post was not about that, but Philip statement to the eunuch that he had to believe before he could be baptized which needs just as much or more refusal to see truth, to not understand that. |
|
|
|
Post by Ramon on May 10, 2009 9:54:56 GMT -5
If reality it takes years of indoctrination, and a refusal to see the plain truth to believe that Joseph and Mary never had marital relations. That will be true if Scriptures actually taught the Virgin Mary had sexual relation, yet all the Scriptures given by you and others who believe such a thing doesn't show clearly that they did, as I proved in my recent thread about Matthew 1:25 and the "Brothers and Sisters of Christ". It takes plain ignorance of Scriptures, usages of words in Ancient Judaism, and Ancient Christianity to believe such a thing. However my above post was not about that, but Philip statement to the eunuch that he had to believe before he could be baptized which needs just as much or more refusal to see truth, to not understand that. That's already been dealt with. In Scriptures adults had to make a Profession of Faith before entering in the Baptismal Font. In the Old Testament, God punished Israel because the people had not circumcised their children (Joshua 5:2-7). This was based on the parent's faith. The parents play a critical role in their child's salvation. They would circumcised there Infants in order for them to enter into the Old Covenant (Gen. 17:12, Lev. 12:3) without there knowledge or awareness. However, in Col 2:11-12, Holy Baptism is the new "circumcision" for all people of the New Covenant. The parents of Christian Infants make this profession for Infants just like in the OT. "Let the little children come to me, and do not forbid them, for of such is the kingdom of heaven.”(Mt. 19:14) I guess agree to disagree on this issue. In IC.XC, Ramon |
|
|
|
Post by teresahrc on May 10, 2009 11:35:49 GMT -5
Acts 8
36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
I didn't want to bring this up, but did you know that Acts 8:37 is not found in many ancient manuscripts?
teresa
|
|
|
|
Post by emily445455 on May 10, 2009 13:31:20 GMT -5
Yet found in many, many others.
|
|
