An Article on free will

[synergy]

Never intentionally would I ever pass over any verse, it just was not one I in that post dealt with, but be sure before this post is over I will.

All right. Looking forward to seeing you talk about 2 Th 2:13 and John 8:24.

Secondly, I never go around flaunting and boasting my knowledge ~ those who have known me for a few years should testify to that if they would, like @ MTMattie. Why are judging another man's spirit as though you were God? Does not Paul say those who are spiritual (born again) have the mind of Christ, do you have problem with that?

1st Corinthians 2:15​

“But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ."

Still waiting for you to address 2 Th 2:13 and John 8:24 so that you can show me your "mind of Christ".

You probably do since you have a problem with many scriptures, as we shall prove.

@synergy pretty I been in the warfare much longer than you, so I would be careful if I were you to take heed to some good advice given by a king:

1st Kings 20:11​

“And the king of Israel answered and said, Tell him, Let not him that girdeth on his harness boast himself as he that putteth it off.”

Novices are full of pride, even against elders who have been in the faith longer than they have been born, and love to boast, when truly they have not one thing to boast about. I have met you kind many times before and will add, not one thing have I ever read that posted, would cause me to fear your positions.

We've now established that you're not a novice. Great! Now show us how your "mind of Christ" is aligned with 2 Th 2:13 and John 8:24.

If you had worded your sentence/confession like this: "One that is chosen by God's grace, and born again in time by the Spirit's power, from that point forward, they have the power to believe." then I would have no problem, for then, and "ONLY" then you would have removed man from having a part in his salvation from sin and condemnation. Man has no active part in his salvation from sin and condemnation, none whatsoever. Salvation is of the Lord, totally, 100%.

Jonah 2:9​

“But I will sacrifice unto thee with the voice of thanksgiving; I will pay that that I have vowed. Salvation is of the LORD.”

Salvation is of the Lord, that's for sure. We've established that, now what about 2 Th 2:13 and John 8:24.

Mocking God's word synergy? I would not say I narrowed down regeneration down to a particular time frame, I actually enlarged the time frame as to when one can be born again by the Spirit of God using the testimony of God's word. If what I gave witness to is not so, then prove it wrong.

Your sentence "So, the new birth happens sometimes after conception and before one's death" is not found in God's word, so it's not God's word. I hope you don't think you're God?

Do you truly understand just how oxymoron your statement is? I do not think you do. God's election of grace is only reason anyone believe, it is why some do believe and others do not believe.

Acts 13:48​

“And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.”

Your position goes against God's testimony as to why some believe and others do not.

2 Th 2:13 and John 8:24 not mentioned here.

John 10:26​

“But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:”

I gave the true sense of the scriptures something you have no clue as to how to do the same!

2 Th 2:13 and John 8:24 not mentioned here either.

Nehemiah 8:8​

“So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.

It is very true, by nature all of God's elect are conceived with Adam's fallen nature, which nature is dead in trespasses and sin, until God is please to quicken them to life. Just because God's people were chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world, does not means they have spiritual life at that point of being chosen, if that is what you are attempting to say.

Only because of your corrupt thinking of what constitute election of grace. Your think one's believing precedes God's election, thereby you have come up with this Living dead person. Btw, you are the only one that is ranting against God word, and a friendly reminder for you.......... the scriptures concerning God's election of grace will forever stand!

Still waiting for you to mention 2 Th 2:13 and John 8:24.....

Romans 9:11​

“(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth”

Looks like we reached the end with no mention of 2 Th 2:13 and John 8:24. So much for your "mind of Christ".
Well, looks like you forgot what you first sought out to do. We're all going to get old sooner or later.
Anyways, you gave me a chuckle today. Thanks for that.

BTW, we can explore each and every verse you mentioned above. Just be sure to remember to keep your promise about 2 Th 2:13 and John 8:24.

 

[MTMattie]

So, the new birth happens sometimes after conception and before one's death. The evidence of such a birth is belief of the truth, or fruits of the indwelling Spirit.

@Red Baker .... Can you honestly say YOU believe this comment of yours? And yes Red I know you are going to jump on me for this one... but IDC.

"Sometimes after conception"... which would mean before birth???????????????????????????????????????????????//

You do realize what you are saying here.... You are saying that some people will have received their new birth while still in their mother's womb.

As seems to be evidenced by John the Baptist when leaped in Elizabeth, when Mary , with child, came to visit ... See Luke 1: 41.

If you were referring to ONLY to John the Baptist you need to modify that to say ... Once it happened.... but you state sometimes after conception... meaning more then once.

No wonder Calvin was supportive of infant baptisms... I know, I know... you always disavow being a Calvinist... and you disdain infant baptisms...
but what IF? What if that one baby was chosen for the new birth for a reason. What if the baptisms, that you support AFTER one believes is done on that infant.? For the church is charged with raising up that child in the faith.... THIS I KNOW. I WAS THERE, as you know. (Ever wonder why
I became a free-will believer? Another forum another day)

Because, like you say, the new birth can happen sometimes after conception... or does the problem lie because not all in the womb are little boys.. some are girls and God is not going to select a girl for important teaching or prophet. As in the one you have heard of more then enough, as I have... like Mrs White.

You could be right. In which case the church... those pesky Calvin followers should have only baptized little boys... They did only circumcise little boys... so???????????????????

 

[GodsGrace]

You opening barrage of questions are premised on the shifting sand (Matthew 7:26-27) of you self-willed (2 Peter 2:9-10) pre-maturely terminating the Word of God.

And, more revealing, your answer to your own barrage of questions is based upon your self-willed adulteration of the Word of God. When you intentionally truncated the Word of God, then your heart (Matthew 15:16-19, Matthew 6:21) adulterated the Word of God.

Let's review the Word of God “he who practices the Truth comes to the Light, that his works may be revealed, that they are having been worked in God” (John 3:21).

You capitalized the dependency of "HE WHO PRACTICES THE TRUTH" (John 3:21) in order to emphasize that incomplete statement of Lord Jesus Christ's whole pronouncement.

The work of practices the Truth is entirely dependent upon having been worked in God (John 3:21). Notice, this is not dependent upon the human.

Furthermore, the work of comes to the Light is entirely dependent upon having been worked in God (John 3:21). Notice, there is no mention of human free-will, so a person initially coming to Jesus the Light (John 1:4) is having been worked in God (John 3:21).

Christ, Himself, is "THE TRUTH" (John 14:6), and King Jesus of the Kingdom of God integrates "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God" (John 3:3) by His saying "THE TRUTH" (John 3:21).

Continuing about the word "world".

Here is a question for you, again, do you believe that you are always a part of the whole world wherever Holy Spirit inspired John wrote the whole world?

@GodsGrace, your Free-willian Philosophy includes everybody everywhere (believer and unbeliever considering entire lifetimes) in the scope of the word "world" in John 3:16, so your Free-willian Philosophy sums up as:

• God loves Daphne of the world before and after Daphne hears of Christ. Daphne chose to love/believe in Christ, so God rewards Daphne with eternal life.
• God loves Fred of the world before and after Fred hears of Christ. Fred chose not to love/believe in Christ, so God punishes Fred with eternal death.
• Conclusion: the Love of God is so very weak that people like Fred draw the Love of God to burn in hell for eternity according to your Free-willian Philosophy.

Your thoughts "Yes....God loves Fred...snip...Fred CHOSE not to be saved" preserves and maintains the third bullet as active:

​

Conclusion: the Love of God is so very weak that people like Fred draw the Love of God to burn in hell for eternity according to your Free-willian Philosophy.​

​

The Sovereignty of God is described in “he who practices the Truth comes to the Light, that his works may be revealed, that they are having been worked in God” (John 3:21). God is love, and my loving God causes me and every Christian to be saved from the wrath of God! Thank you, Jesus, my Savior!

You do not believe “he who practices the Truth comes to the Light, that his works may be revealed, that they are having been worked in God” (John 3:21), so you believe that you are sovereign above God, so you believe anti-truth.

"I, YHWH your God, am a jealous God" (Exodus 20:5) says the Word of God, and the Word of God says "I will not give My glory to another" (Isaiah 42:8), so God jealously reserves the glory for man's salvation to God alone (Psalm 3:8, John 3:3-8, John 3:21, John 6:29).

Man in man's flesh jealously glorifies the man, and it is here that we find a corollary attribute between Eve and God - see that Eve jealously engaged in self-glorification.

In the absence of the Word of God declaring man was imparted a free-will, your heart (Matthew 15:16-19, Matthew 6:21) awards yourself a free-will. God never imparted Adam nor you nor anyone with a free-will, but you were created with a self-will (2 Peter 2:9-10).

You repeatedly convey "The word FOR means BECAUSE...snip...so I don't know why it present a problem" regarding John 3:16, yet it (a conjunction) is not a problem as described in post #6,494, an ancestor post to this current exchange. Your problem (deadly error) is you adulterating the Word of God as recorded in (John 3:14-16 by your illegal elimination of the grammatical function of the conjunction "for" ("because" would still function as a conjunction). The Word of God conclusively proves that the context establishes the word "world" as used by Jesus in John 3:16 includes ONLY the population of persons that currently believe in Jesus or will in the future believe in Jesus. Jesus died specifically for His chosen people.

Your heart makes false statements about God and man. Free-will is a conjured concept of the traditions of men that leads to worship in vain (Matthew 15:9).

In Truth (John 14:6), the Almighty God is Sovereign (Genesis 1:1) in man's salvation and affairs of man (Daniel 4:34-35)! PRAISE THE GREAT I AM!!!

Kermos.....
Let me make this abundantly clear to you:

1. You believe in a God that causes man to sin and causes evil.
THIS GOD DOES NOT EXIST.

2. You believe in a loveless God that sends most of humanity to hell and for no other reason than for His own good pleasure.
THIS GOD DOES NOT EXIST.

3. Your theology did NOT EXIST before Luther, Calvin, Knox and the rest...so IT IS HERETICAL and UNORTHODOX.
THIS THEOLOGY IS NON-EXISTANT IN CHIRSTIANITY.

4. Your theology blasphemes God....attributing to God the work of SATAN.
You attribute sin and evil to God...
THIS IS BLASPHEMOUS.

I wouldn't be so hung up on a WORD if I were you since you're practicing HERESY and are BLASPHEMING GOD.

I'd much more worry about that when you finally face your maker and have blasphemed Him all your life.

 

[GodsGrace]

@Red Baker .... Can you honestly say YOU believe this comment of yours? And yes Red I know you are going to jump on me for this one... but IDC.

"Sometimes after conception"... which would mean before birth???????????????????????????????????????????????//

You do realize what you are saying here.... You are saying that some people will have received their new birth while still in their mother's womb.

As seems to be evidenced by John the Baptist when leaped in Elizabeth, when Mary , with child, came to visit ... See Luke 1: 41.

If you were referring to ONLY to John the Baptist you need to modify that to say ... Once it happened.... but you state sometimes after conception... meaning more then once.

No wonder Calvin was supportive of infant baptisms... I know, I know... you always disavow being a Calvinist... and you disdain infant baptisms...
but what IF? What if that one baby was chosen for the new birth for a reason. What if the baptisms, that you support AFTER one believes is done on that infant.? For the church is charged with raising up that child in the faith.... THIS I KNOW. I WAS THERE, as you know. (Ever wonder why
I became a free-will believer? Another forum another day)

Because, like you say, the new birth can happen sometimes after conception... or does the problem lie because not all in the womb are little boys.. some are girls and God is not going to select a girl for important teaching or prophet. As in the one you have heard of more then enough, as I have... like Mrs White.

You could be right. In which case the church... those pesky Calvin followers should have only baptized little boys... They did only circumcise little boys... so???????????????????

Your last sentence is very interesting!
I never thought of this.
Thanks.

 

[civic]

Kermos.....
Let me make this abundantly clear to you:

1. You believe in a God that causes man to sin and causes evil.
THIS GOD DOES NOT EXIST.

2. You believe in a loveless God that sends most of humanity to hell and for no other reason than for His own good pleasure.
THIS GOD DOES NOT EXIST.

3. Your theology did NOT EXIST before Luther, Calvin, Knox and the rest...so IT IS HERETICAL and UNORTHODOX.
THIS THEOLOGY IS NON-EXISTANT IN CHIRSTIANITY.

4. Your theology blasphemes God....attributing to God the work of SATAN.
You attribute sin and evil to God...
THIS IS BLASPHEMOUS.

I wouldn't be so hung up on WORD if I were you since you're practicing HERESY and are BLASPHEMING GOD.

I'd much more worry about that when you finally face your maker and have blasphemed Him all your life.

Yep

 

[Red Baker]

@Red Baker .... Can you honestly say YOU believe this comment of yours? And yes Red I know you are going to jump on me for this one... but IDC.

"Sometimes after conception"... which would mean before birth???????????????????????????????????????????????//

You do realize what you are saying here.... You are saying that some people will have received their new birth while still in their mother's womb.

As seems to be evidenced by John the Baptist when leaped in Elizabeth, when Mary , with child, came to visit ... See Luke 1: 41.

If you were referring to ONLY to John the Baptist you need to modify that to say ... Once it happened.... but you state sometimes after conception... meaning more then once.

Not going to jump on you, you have ever right to ask this question.

Well, it is true, that I was referring to John the Baptist, and by the fact it did happen to him, and God chose to recorded this for us to consider, then the burden of proof would be on those that reject this truth recorded for us in the word of God.

@MTMattie, if one truly understood the new birth, then they would know that God alone is the only active person working, whereby, he creates a new man within his elect, after the image of Jesus Christ apart from all means whatsoever, including but not limited to..... man's so-called free will, the will of another person laboring to get one..... quote: "saved" ....the written word of God.....etc., etc. Knowing this truth, why would anyone have trouble understanding that the new birth could take place within the mother's womb? Not only could, but did in the case with John the Baptist. Selah.

No wonder Calvin was supportive of infant baptisms... I know, I know... you always disavow being a Calvinist... and you disdain infant baptisms...but what IF? What if that one baby was chosen for the new birth for a reason. What if the baptisms, that you support AFTER one believes is done on that infant.? For the church is charged with raising up that child in the faith.... THIS I KNOW. I WAS THERE, as you know. (Ever wonder why I became a free-will believer? Another forum another day)

Calvin believed in means, he also believed that faith is the means/channel of justification. Both I reject, yet I still have great respect for much of what he (and Martin Luther) stood for, more so on the practical side of godliness which both was very good on.

Because, like you say, the new birth can happen sometimes after conception... or does the problem lie because not all in the womb are little boys.. some are girls and God is not going to select a girl for important teaching or prophet. As in the one you have heard of more then enough, as I have... like Mrs White.

Not sure what you are trying to prove, but, there are some godly women in the scriptures whose life of faith would put many of us men to shame.

You could be right. In which case the church... those pesky Calvin followers should have only baptized little boys... They did only circumcise little boys... so???????????????????

Men are the head of the woman and leader in the worship of their family, (at least this God's ordained rule to follow, of course there are exceptions, but exceptions only proves the rule stands. ) it started with them as the head ~ I'm sure much more could be said concerning this, but enough.

 

[Red Baker]

All right. Looking forward to seeing you talk about 2 Th 2:13 and John 8:24.

Why do you not read others posts more carefully? For if you did, then you would have read this which I clearly posted: #6597

synergy: ”(John 8:24) Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I AM, you will die in your sins.” That means you are dead in your sins as long as you do not believe. So if one is chosen in Christ (made alive in Christ) but still dead in his sins,

It is very true, by nature all of God's elect are conceived with Adam's fallen nature, which nature is dead in trespasses and sin, until God is please to quicken them to life. Just because God's people were chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world, does not means they have spiritual life at that point of being chosen, if that is what you are attempting to say.

Also, I have already dealt with 2ns Thess 2:13 ...it seem to me that you are one dishonest person with no desire for the truth. All you do is mock those that have truth, much like Ismael did to Isaac Galatians 4:29-30!

I prefer the KJV: 2 Thessalonians 2:13“But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:”

You asked: So, when is one born again? Well now, if you truly understood the word of God, you would never ask such a Spirit void question, never. That question is asked by those unlearned, untaught by the Spirit of God!

Let me ask you this question: When was John the Baptist born again? Need help? shortly after conception, before he was born of flesh! Surely you are not so bold as to deny this truth. When was the thief on the cross born of the Spirit? Need help? I'm sure you do. Just before he died with Jesus.

So, the new birth happens sometimes after conception and before one's death. The evidence of such a birth is belief of the truth, or fruits of the indwelling Spirit.

2nd Thessalonians 2:13~“But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:”

Paul carefully distinguishes God's children from those living under a strong delusion, by them being "brethren beloved of the Lord" ~ by the very fact they (not beloved of God) had not the love of the truth in their hearts, God, had harden their hearts to the truth just as he did Pharaoh and others before them. Not that God worked in their hearts to harden them, but he left them to the deception of their own fleshly heart they were born with which is deceitful above all things, who can know it! (Jeremiah 17:9)

"brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation"~by the very facts God had chosen them to salvation (from sin and condemnation) proved that God loved them, they certainly did not love the truth apart from God's election of free grace, for that's impossible for those born with Adams' fallen nature, which nature is under the power of the devil, sin, and all of its lust, far from being free to do spiritual acts that only a new man created by God's power can do, and even then very imperfect!

"through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:”~Set apart by the Spirit of God, given the power, right to believe per John 1:12,13! It is election ~ God’s choice ~ that delivers us from Satan and the lies of false religion. Again, the sanctification of the Spirit is that washing of regeneration that gives us new hearts. Belief of the truth for the most part (there are some exception, infants dying as infants, mentally feebleminded folks, heathens who may never hear of Jesus Christ, etc.) follow regeneration and is brought forth by gospel preaching.

No man is able to deliver his own soul from lies – only the Lord can do it (Is 44:18-20). If God chose to save any from their own folly, then they are bound to thank Him always, and we should for them as well.

Your sentence "So, the new birth happens sometimes after conception and before one's death" is not found in God's word, so it's not God's word. I hope you don't think you're God?

Then you explain Luke 1: 15 Dr. Theologian. While you are at it, give us your understanding of: Matthew 27:44 cp. Luke 23:39-43 what cause this thief to have a major change of heart in a short period of time? The two examples I provided.

BTW, we can explore each and every verse you mentioned above. Just be sure to remember to keep your promise about 2 Th 2:13 and John 8:24

You are way behind, and I doubt you have the ability to do very much explaining, at a least I have not seen it as of yet, and probably never will. The only thing you have perfected is mocking and wasting time playing childish games. Christ would not waste his time with men like you, an di most likely will not. My promises were kept, pretty sure you will never attempt to do the same.

 

[MTMattie]

Your last sentence is very interesting!
I never thought of this.
Thanks.

I hope others might respond to this because I know how the recipient of the post will.

 

[synergy]

Why do you not read others posts more carefully? For if you did, then you would have read this which I clearly posted: #6597

Also, I have already dealt with 2ns Thess 2:13 ...it seem to me that you are one dishonest person with no desire for the truth. All you do is mock those that have truth, much like Ismael did to Isaac Galatians 4:29-30!

Then you explain Luke 1: 15 Dr. Theologian. While you are at it, give us your understanding of: Matthew 27:44 cp. Luke 23:39-43 what cause this thief to have a major change of heart in a short period of time? The two examples I provided.

You are way behind, and I doubt you have the ability to do very much explaining, at a least I have not seen it as of yet, and probably never will. The only thing you have perfected is mocking and wasting time playing childish games. Christ would not waste his time with men like you, an di most likely will not. My promises were kept, pretty sure you will never attempt to do the same.

Ahhh. So when you were discussing Nehemiah 8:8, you actually had John 8:24 in mind. Last time I checked I still can't read people's minds. I'm sorry to inform you but having a "mind of Christ" does not give you telepathic abilities....

As for your Neh 8:8 statement, are you saying that when one is chosen by God, he is not imparted spiritual life? So then by what act is one given life if not by God's choosing?

As for 2 Th 2:13, when I asked you to talk about it, I meant it, not your altered version of it. Is that too much to ask for or is your "mind of Christ" telling you that your version is better? So when I asked you to talk about it, I meant it, the actual text as it appears in the Bible, not your changed phraseology. Here is my statement again:

For 2 Th 2:13, you shamelessly changed the wording from "through belief in the truth" to "evidence of such a birth is belief of the truth". So changing Biblical words is what having the "mind of Christ" means to you? Sorry, I want no part of that, that's for sure.

You say you're not a novice but you fail.to grasp the seriousness of your position.

As for the thief on the Cross, he obviously acknowledged his own sins, saw no sin in Christ, repented of his sins, and was granted repentance by God. That's synergism right there. There is no calvinist monergism there if that's what you're imagining.

 

[synergy]

@Red Baker .... Can you honestly say YOU believe this comment of yours? And yes Red I know you are going to jump on me for this one... but IDC.

"Sometimes after conception"... which would mean before birth???????????????????????????????????????????????//

You do realize what you are saying here.... You are saying that some people will have received their new birth while still in their mother's womb.

As seems to be evidenced by John the Baptist when leaped in Elizabeth, when Mary , with child, came to visit ... See Luke 1: 41.

If you were referring to ONLY to John the Baptist you need to modify that to say ... Once it happened.... but you state sometimes after conception... meaning more then once.

No wonder Calvin was supportive of infant baptisms... I know, I know... you always disavow being a Calvinist... and you disdain infant baptisms...
but what IF? What if that one baby was chosen for the new birth for a reason. What if the baptisms, that you support AFTER one believes is done on that infant.? For the church is charged with raising up that child in the faith.... THIS I KNOW. I WAS THERE, as you know. (Ever wonder why
I became a free-will believer? Another forum another day)

Because, like you say, the new birth can happen sometimes after conception... or does the problem lie because not all in the womb are little boys.. some are girls and God is not going to select a girl for important teaching or prophet. As in the one you have heard of more then enough, as I have... like Mrs White.

You could be right. In which case the church... those pesky Calvin followers should have only baptized little boys... They did only circumcise little boys... so???????????????????

Personally, I'm supportive of Church baptisms, for everyone and at any age. That's the position of the Early Church. They baptized male and female, young and old. We bless/consecrate things, and many don't bless/consecrate/dedicate what is most precious to us, our bambenos?

 

[Johann]

Personally, I'm supportive of Church baptisms, for everyone and at any age. That's the position of the Early Church. They baptized male and female, young and old. We bless/consecrate things, and many don't bless/consecrate/dedicate what is most precious to us, our bambenos?

I don't- no offense.

. Biblical Pattern of Baptism: Always Tied to Faith
Matthew 28:19-20 – Jesus commands, "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things I have commanded you."

Baptism follows discipleship and teaching, which presupposes faith and understanding. Infants cannot be taught or become disciples.

Mark 16:16 – "He who believes and is baptized shall be saved, but he who does not believe shall be condemned."

Faith precedes baptism, and unbelief results in condemnation. Infants cannot believe or disbelieve.

Acts 2:38 – Peter preaches, "Repent, and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

Baptism is linked to repentance, which an infant cannot do.

Acts 8:12 – "But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women."

Baptism follows belief. No mention of infants.

Acts 8:36-38 – The Ethiopian eunuch asks, "What hinders me from being baptized?" Philip responds, "If you believe with all your heart, you may." The eunuch confesses faith, and only then is he baptized.

Again, faith is a prerequisite for baptism.
Acts 10:47-48 – Cornelius and his household receive the Holy Spirit, and Peter commands them to be baptized.

There is no indication of infants; those baptized had received the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues (Acts 10:44-46).

Acts 16:30-34 – The Philippian jailer asks, "What must I do to be saved?" Paul responds, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you shall be saved, you and your household." They then spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all in his house, and afterward, they were baptized.

The text implies that all who were baptized had heard and understood the Word.
Acts 18:8 – "Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his household; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed and were baptized."

Faith precedes baptism.
Romans 6:3-4 – "Do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death, so that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so, we also should walk in newness of life."

Baptism symbolizes death to sin and a new life in Christ, which requires a personal faith commitment.
Colossians 2:12 – "Buried with Him in baptism, wherein also you are risen with Him through the faith of the operation of God."

Baptism is connected to faith, making it incompatible with infant baptism.

2. Household Baptisms: Any Evidence of Infants?
Some argue that because "households" were baptized (e.g., Acts 16:15, 16:33, 1 Corinthians 1:16), infants might have been included. However, in each case, belief is explicitly mentioned:

Acts 16:34 – The jailer "rejoiced, having believed in God with all his household."
Acts 18:8 – "Crispus believed on the Lord with all his house."
John 4:53 – Another instance of a household coming to faith: "He himself believed, and his whole household."
In every instance, faith is attributed to the whole household. Infants cannot exercise faith, so it is unwarranted to assume their inclusion in these baptisms.

3. Arguments for Infant Baptism and Their Refutation

1. Parallel with Circumcision (Colossians 2:11-12)?
Some argue that baptism replaces circumcision because both are signs of the covenant.

However, baptism requires faith (Colossians 2:12), while circumcision was given to infant males under the Old Covenant.
Circumcision was not based on personal faith, but baptism always follows belief in the New Testament.

2. "Let the little children come to Me" (Matthew 19:14)?
Jesus blesses children, but He does not baptize them.
There is no mention of infants being baptized anywhere in the New Testament.

3. "Your children are holy" (1 Corinthians 7:14)?
The verse speaks of relational sanctification (a believing parent having an influence on their children), not baptism.
It does not say children of believers are saved or should be baptized.

4. Early Church History on Infant Baptism
No clear evidence of infant baptism in the first 150 years.

Tertullian (c. 200 AD) opposed infant baptism, saying that children should wait until they can personally choose faith (On Baptism, 18).

Origen (c. 250 AD) mentions the practice but does not claim it was apostolic.

Augustine (c. 400 AD) argued for infant baptism based on his doctrine of original sin, but this was not an apostolic teaching.

Conclusion: No Biblical Evidence for Infant Baptism

Every instance of baptism in the New Testament is tied to faith, repentance, and belief, which infants cannot do.
Household baptisms do not provide evidence for infant baptism, as they involve those who heard, believed, and rejoiced in the Lord.
Arguments from circumcision, Jesus' blessing of children, or 1 Corinthians 7:14 are misapplied and do not teach infant baptism.

The early church did not uniformly practice infant baptism, and opposition existed in the early centuries.

Thus, Scripture does not support infant baptism—only believers' baptism (credobaptism).

I know you are going to oppose this @synergy.

J.

 

[Kermos]

Why do you not read others posts more carefully? For if you did, then you would have read this which I clearly posted: #6597

Also, I have already dealt with 2ns Thess 2:13 ...it seem to me that you are one dishonest person with no desire for the truth. All you do is mock those that have truth, much like Ismael did to Isaac Galatians 4:29-30!



Then you explain Luke 1: 15 Dr. Theologian. While you are at it, give us your understanding of: Matthew 27:44 cp. Luke 23:39-43 what cause this thief to have a major change of heart in a short period of time? The two examples I provided.

You are way behind, and I doubt you have the ability to do very much explaining, at a least I have not seen it as of yet, and probably never will. The only thing you have perfected is mocking and wasting time playing childish games. Christ would not waste his time with men like you, an di most likely will not. My promises were kept, pretty sure you will never attempt to do the same.

Another well-written post, by God's grace, for God's glory! In some instances, it takes me a little time to absorb what you write.

The first paragraph of the next post was written yesterday. God has us here proclaiming similarly.

If synergy shows repentance and humility then synergy would be showing readiness for further dialog, so I ask you to please let me know if synergy apologizes to you.

God reigns!

 

[Kermos]

If you actually do follow Christ, you would have acknowledged the Bible verses I placed in front of you. Instead, you ran away from them as fast as you possibly could.

Let’s revisit the Bible verses so that we can reveal who exactly you are a follower of.

(Th 2:13) But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers and sisters loved by the Lord, because God chose you as firstfruits to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth.

If you actually believed 2 Th 2:13, then you would know that our election by God is through belief (and sanctification of the Spirit). IOW, belief is before election. You ran away from 2 Th 2:13 as fast as you possibly could; nevertheless, just for argument’s sake let’s imagine your election before belief heresy is true. Let’s bring up John 8:24 and see what happens:

(John 8:24) Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I AM, you will die in your sins.”

That means you are dead in your sins as long as you do not believe. So if one is chosen in Christ (made alive in Christ) but still dead in his sins, well, that makes him a Living Dead person, a zombie monstrocity that is an impossibility and proves your heresy is an abomination. Your continuous rants against the Bible will not change those facts. We refuse to believe in your Zombie Man-Made Traditions.

Again, Red Baker is a big boy and he possesses human will so he can respond back to me if he wills. This is just a lame excuse for you to once again run away from having to face up to Bible verses that expose your Man-Made Anti-Biblical Zombie Traditions.

John 3:3 is indeed a wonderful verse which we totally believe. So, when is one born again? When one is chosen by God. And when is one chosen by God? When one is called by God and repents and believes. See Th 2:13 for proof that once again destroys your Zombie Man-Made Traditions.

More wonderful verses that warn you of Man-Made Zombie Traditions like yours and that declare the Sovereignty of God.
Keep those Biblical anti-calvinism anti-Zombie verses coming!

In conclusion, you think that by running away from Bible verses that's how you prove that you follow Christ. What type of mind-rattling logic is that? So stop with the lame excuses and man up to the verses I mentioned.

Your relentless pride in shunning of apology over you bearing false witness against Red Baker is the issue, not whether "Red Baker is a big boy". A Christian humbly apologizes, but a non-christian stands stubbornly stiff-necked.

As previously conveyed to you, if you want me to consider addressing your points, then you need to apologize to Red Baker for your long standing and repeated position of bearing false witness against him as shown per the below. You need to apologize publicly in this thread for your publicly visible behavior.

Self-willed (2 Peter 2:9-10) you continues to refuse to apologize, that is clear, and you persist in bearing false witness against @Red Baker who stated:

Nicodemus' child like confession proved that he was already born of the Spirit of God, or, else he would had been just like the other leaders of the Pharisees who said that jesus did what he did under the power of the prince of the devils
​

in post #2,814 regarding the Lord’s saying "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God." (Lord Jesus Christ, John 3:3).

As a blessed Christian in Christ, the work of God is that I believe in Him whom He has sent (John 6:29) according to Christ who is the Truth (John 14:6), so you calling me a follower of "Zombie Traditions" means that you insult my loving Leader Jesus Christ by calling Christ your wicked "walking dead", and no Christian applies walking dead to Lord Jesus Christ. Lord Jesus Christ is Life (John 14:6)! Your absence of humility regarding Christ is astounding.

Your heart makes false statements about God and man. Free-will is a conjured concept of the traditions of men leading to worship in vain (Matthew 15:9).

In Truth (John 14:6), the Almighty God is Sovereign (Genesis 1:1) in man's salvation and affairs of man (Daniel 4:34-35)! PRAISE THE ONE WHO IS, AND WAS, AND IS TO COME!!!

 

[MTMattie]

Not going to jump on you, you have ever right to ask this question.

Well, it is true, that I was referring to John the Baptist, and by the fact it did happen to him, and God chose to recorded this for us to consider, then the burden of proof would be on those that reject this truth recorded for us in the word of God.

I agree. I also say this is well applied to Jeremiah when he said on Ps 139:13 For You formed my inward parts; You covered me in my mother’s womb. The trouble with this one is... We know that John the Baptist was and integral part of Jesus start of His ministry, and therefore needed trro be placed in the Holy Book or else those that reject most of the truths of Jesus being the Reason would find another way to argue against such truths as the "Trinity". or they would claim there was nothing special in Jesus own baptism.

As to Jeremiah though... I will go out on a limb and say that I suspect the same could have been said about every prophet that walked the earth
then and maybe , or not, some now... or even those that became the decuples and apostles and who were influential through out. It just is not talked about.

People use Jeremiah to claim that because Jeremiah had this then all mankind has too. I always have thought that to be a stretch, but if it isn't then how many more could God have molded before birth into what they would have become?

The following is an article from Bible Hub...https://biblehub.com/topical/g/god's_creation_of_the_individual.htm Do you agree fully or in part with this or disagree with it all?

The creation of the individual is a profound theme in the Bible, reflecting the intimate and purposeful act of God in forming each person. This concept is rooted in the belief that every human being is uniquely crafted by God, bearing His image and intended for a specific purpose within His divine plan.

Biblical Foundation

The foundation for understanding God's creation of the individual begins in Genesis. Genesis 1:27 states, "So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them." This verse underscores the unique status of human beings as image-bearers of God, distinguishing them from the rest of creation. The creation of man and woman reflects God's intentional design and the inherent dignity bestowed upon each person.

In Genesis 2:7 , the creation of the individual is described with intimate detail: "Then the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed the breath of life into his nostrils, and the man became a living being." This act of forming and breathing life into man highlights the personal involvement of God in the creation process, emphasizing the value and significance of each individual life.

The Sanctity of Life

The Bible consistently affirms the sanctity of human life, rooted in the belief that each person is created by God. Psalm 139:13-14 beautifully articulates this truth: "For You formed my inmost being; You knit me together in my mother's womb. I praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made." These verses celebrate the intricate and intentional work of God in the formation of each person, affirming the sacredness of life from conception.

Jeremiah 1:5 further emphasizes God's foreknowledge and purpose for individuals: "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I set you apart and appointed you as a prophet to the nations." This passage reveals that God's relationship with each person begins even before birth, with a specific calling and purpose in mind.

Individual Purpose and Calling

The Bible teaches that God not only creates individuals but also endows them with unique gifts and purposes. Ephesians 2:10 declares, "For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance as our way of life." This verse highlights the idea that each person is crafted by God for a particular mission, with good works prepared in advance for them to accomplish.

(Ummmm. side trip this as I say I can see this. I can see this in the life of Karla Faye Tucker and how in the end she ended up glorifying God....
Good for her, but bad for the 2 people she took a pickaxe to.... YEs, you ARE old enough to remember that)

The Apostle Paul, in 1 Corinthians 12, discusses the diversity of gifts within the body of Christ, illustrating how each individual contributes to the whole. Verses 4-7 state, "There are different gifts, but the same Spirit. There are different ministries, but the same Lord. There are different ways of working, but the same God works all things in all people. Now to each one the manifestation of the Spirit is given for the common good." This passage underscores the unique role each person plays in God's plan, equipped with specific gifts for the benefit of the community.

The Value of the Individual

The value of the individual is further emphasized in the teachings of Jesus. In Matthew 10:29-31 , Jesus reassures His followers of their worth: "Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father. And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. So do not be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows." This teaching affirms God's intimate knowledge and care for each person, highlighting their immense value in His eyes.

Conclusion

The biblical narrative consistently affirms the creation of the individual as a deliberate and meaningful act of God. From the formation of Adam and Eve to the intricate knitting together of each person in the womb, the Bible reveals a God who is intimately involved in the creation and purpose of every human life. Through His Word, God communicates the inherent dignity, value, and calling bestowed upon each individual, inviting them to participate in His divine plan.

@MTMattie, if one truly understood the new birth, then they would know that God alone is the only active person working,

Here is where we drastically disagree even more then we usually do.

I have never denied, nor do I believe that anything other then God alone is responsible for my rebirth. But I am not sure if you are meaning God the Father, or the total of father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Fir me it is the later. For if it were not for Jesus' shed blood that he did, I would be a goner
.

I see the new birth ... the born again experience, if I can crudely call it that as being a spiritual experience. My spirit with God's Spirit and
today I can enjoy the Paraclete for He has been immensely helpful in my growth and learning of things. And, truth be told... is quite the
wordsmith in these and other forums because He IS the one frequently making replies. (Ill explain that to you someday.

whereby, he creates a new man within his elect, after the image of Jesus Christ apart from all means whatsoever, including but not limited to..... man's so-called free will, the will of another person laboring to get one..... quote: "saved" ....the written word of God.....etc., etc. Knowing this truth, why would anyone have trouble understanding that the new birth could take place within the mother's womb? Not only could, but did in the case with John the Baptist. Selah.

I have no trouble with that... a new birth could well take place in the womb. Hence it would be appropriate for that child to have a baptism not long after birth. And more appropriate that all get an infant baptism because we do not know who that new birth in the womb affected.

Calvin believed in means, he also believed that faith is the means/channel of justification. Both I reject, yet I still have great respect for much of what he (and Martin Luther) stood for, more so on the practical side of godliness which both was very good on.

Not sure what you are trying to prove, but, there are some godly women in the scriptures whose life of faith would put many of us men to shame.

Oh I agree... but then you know that God has put men over women... And God has had them be quiet in services... and we both know specific men who grab onto that. And I am sure there are some here.

Men are the head of the woman and leader in the worship of their family, (at least this God's ordained rule to follow, of course there are exceptions, but exceptions only proves the rule stands. ) it started with them as the head ~ I'm sure much more could be said concerning this, but enough.

 

[synergy]

Your relentless pride in shunning of apology over you bearing false witness against Red Baker is the issue, not whether "Red Baker is a big boy". A Christian humbly apologizes, but a non-christian stands stubbornly stiff-necked.

As previously conveyed to you, if you want me to consider addressing your points, then you need to apologize to Red Baker for your long standing and repeated position of bearing false witness against him as shown per the below. You need to apologize publicly in this thread for your publicly visible behavior.

So RB at least made a least a feeble and failing attempt to address 2 Th 2:13 and John 8:24. You, on the other hand, continue to run away from them as fast as you possibly can. ‍

Let’s revisit the Bible verses so that we can reveal what exactly you're running away from:

(2 Th 2:13) But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers and sisters loved by the Lord, because God chose you as firstfruits to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth.

If you actually believed 2 Th 2:13, then you would know that our election by God is through belief (and sanctification of the Spirit). IOW, belief is before election. You ran away from 2 Th 2:13 as fast as you possibly could; nevertheless, just for argument’s sake let’s imagine your election before belief heresy is true. Let’s bring up John 8:24 and see what happens:

(John 8:24) Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I AM, you will die in your sins.”

That means you are dead in your sins as long as you do not believe. So if one is chosen in Christ (made alive in Christ) but still dead in his sins, well, that makes him a Living Dead person, a zombie monstrocity that is an impossibility and proves your heresy is an abomination. Your continuous rants against the Bible will not change those facts. Edit by Admin

Self-willed (2 Peter 2:9-10) you continues to refuse to apologize, that is clear, and you persist in bearing false witness against @Red Baker who stated:

​

Nicodemus' child like confession proved that he was already born of the Spirit of God, or, else he would had been just like the other leaders of the Pharisees who said that jesus did what he did under the power of the prince of the devils​

This is just a lame excuse for you to once again run away from having to face up to Bible verses that expose your Man-Made Anti-Biblical Zombie Traditions.

in post #2,814 regarding the Lord’s saying "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God." (Lord Jesus Christ, John 3:3).

John 3:3 is indeed a wonderful verse which we totally believe. So, when is one born again? When one is chosen by God. And when is one chosen by God? When one is called by God and repents and believes. See Th 2:13 for proof that once again destroys your Zombie Man-Made Traditions.

As a blessed Christian in Christ, the work of God is that I believe in Him whom He has sent (John 6:29) according to Christ who is the Truth (John 14:6), so you calling me a follower of "Zombie Traditions" means that you insult my loving Leader Jesus Christ by calling Christ your wicked "walking dead", and no Christian applies walking dead to Lord Jesus Christ. Lord Jesus Christ is Life (John 14:6)! Your absence of humility regarding Christ is astounding.

Your heart makes false statements about God and man. Free-will is a conjured concept of the traditions of men leading to worship in vain (Matthew 15:9).

In Truth (John 14:6), the Almighty God is Sovereign (Genesis 1:1) in man's salvation and affairs of man (Daniel 4:34-35)! PRAISE THE ONE WHO IS, AND WAS, AND IS TO COME!!!

More wonderful verses that warn you of Man-Made Zombie Traditions like yours and that declare the Sovereignty of God.
Keep those Biblical anti-calvinism anti-Zombie verses coming!

In conclusion, you think that by running away from Bible verses that's how you prove that you follow Christ. What type of mind-rattling logic is that? So stop with the lame excuses and man up to the verses I mentioned.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Kermos.....
Let me make this abundantly clear to you:

1. You believe in a God that causes man to sin and causes evil.
THIS GOD DOES NOT EXIST.

2. You believe in a loveless God that sends most of humanity to hell and for no other reason than for His own good pleasure.
THIS GOD DOES NOT EXIST.

3. Your theology did NOT EXIST before Luther, Calvin, Knox and the rest...so IT IS HERETICAL and UNORTHODOX.
THIS THEOLOGY IS NON-EXISTANT IN CHIRSTIANITY.

4. Your theology blasphemes God....attributing to God the work of SATAN.
You attribute sin and evil to God...
THIS IS BLASPHEMOUS.

I wouldn't be so hung up on a WORD if I were you since you're practicing HERESY and are BLASPHEMING GOD.

I'd much more worry about 100%that when you finally face your maker and have blasphemed Him all your life.

100%

 

[civic]

Your relentless pride in shunning of apology over you bearing false witness against Red Baker is the issue, not whether "Red Baker is a big boy". A Christian humbly apologizes, but a non-christian stands stubbornly stiff-necked.

As previously conveyed to you, if you want me to consider addressing your points, then you need to apologize to Red Baker for your long standing and repeated position of bearing false witness against him as shown per the below. You need to apologize publicly in this thread for your publicly visible behavior.

Self-willed (2 Peter 2:9-10) you continues to refuse to apologize, that is clear, and you persist in bearing false witness against @Red Baker who stated:

​

Nicodemus' child like confession proved that he was already born of the Spirit of God, or, else he would had been just like the other leaders of the Pharisees who said that jesus did what he did under the power of the prince of the devils​

​

in post #2,814 regarding the Lord’s saying "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God." (Lord Jesus Christ, John 3:3).

As a blessed Christian in Christ, the work of God is that I believe in Him whom He has sent (John 6:29) according to Christ who is the Truth (John 14:6), so you calling me a follower of "Zombie Traditions" means that you insult my loving Leader Jesus Christ by calling Christ your wicked "walking dead", and no Christian applies walking dead to Lord Jesus Christ. Lord Jesus Christ is Life (John 14:6)! Your absence of humility regarding Christ is astounding.

Your heart makes false statements about God and man. Free-will is a conjured concept of the traditions of men leading to worship in vain (Matthew 15:9).

In Truth (John 14:6), the Almighty God is Sovereign (Genesis 1:1) in man's salvation and affairs of man (Daniel 4:34-35)! PRAISE THE ONE WHO IS, AND WAS, AND IS TO COME!!!

Your relentless pride in shunning of apology over you bearing false witness against Christ is the issue.

Your heart makes false statements about God and man. Fatalism is a conjured concept of the traditions of men leading to worship in vain (Matthew 15:9).

hope this helps !!!

 

[civic]

100%

ditto

 

[MTMattie]

2. Household Baptisms: Any Evidence of Infants?
Some argue that because "households" were baptized (e.g., Acts 16:15, 16:33, 1 Corinthians 1:16), infants might have been included. However, in each case, belief is explicitly mentioned:

Of course not. None of the household in the bible had any infants or young children. (They must have had fabulous birth control back then!)

@Johann

I was baptized as an infant. I was baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
I was given a baptismal certificate and it was done by our ordained minister for in our church baptisms are only accepted in church by an prdained minister or an elder.

Afterward the minister charged the parents to bring up me in the ways of the church, teaching me in said ways.

Also, the entire congregation was also charged with advancing the Christian beliefs to me.

And as I grew I learned all about Jesus. Why he had to die such a horrible death. Why his mother had to be a virgin at conception. And the basic Christmas story.

When I was in grade school, and it was time for me to learn the truth about Santa I was not overly upset because that was not what Christmas was about.

Approaching the age of 12ish came the time that serious sturdies were to begin on Christianity and all about Jesus in weekly lessons at church for
all children about that age who were going to be joining the church. Without the classes we could not.

In hind sight those teaching may have been in error simply because the church was rooted in the Westminster Confession of Faith (Predestination..
Calvin style) though in truth I do not recall a discussion or teaching in the church about predestination... it was all about why Jesus had to die and
who we HAD to place our faith.

In any event... the Sunday came and we all... maybe 8 or 10 (baby boomers) were lined up in the front pew when we had to confirm our belief in Jesus being born of a virgin and dieing on a cross and he was sitting in heaven with His Father by saying I do and then we were told we were members of the church and sent to sit with our parent(s).

After that we were all given our "FIRST HOLY COMMUNION" that would have been denied to us before we confirmed our beliefs.

It that church you do not mess around with the Holy Sacraments. One of only 2 Sacraments in the church. The other is baptism.

But as I recall I felt I had a firmer knowledge and belief in things then others who did not have the classes but just when they said they believed...
(not sure they knew in what) and had their baptisms. No idea about their communions?????/

My neighbor across the street and I were talking last year about baptisms. His daughter .. age 44... in a home was born with Cerebral Palsy and Spina Bifida.

Anyway he said he did have an immersion baptism. There were several of them who had this done... I believe it was outdoors... but he had zero idea of what it was for. He was in his teens at the time. Today he is 81. Having joined the Marines maybe the group did so "just in case"?

Now you know my story (part of)

 

[MTMattie]

Personally, I'm supportive of Church baptisms, for everyone and at any age. That's the position of the Early Church. They baptized male and female, young and old. We bless/consecrate things, and many don't bless/consecrate/dedicate what is most precious to us, our bambenos?

See my reply to Johann #6619