KH believes the Light Doctrine??

[Praxeas]

Anyone can say they understand the underlying greek of John 3:6 speaks of a single baptism, but that remains to be seen.

In fact Jesus gives us the perfect biblical example of Spirit in the analogy of WIND, not water.

And if water is meant to symbolize Spirit why even add then "and of Spirit he can not enter the kingdom of God". That's redundant.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Anyone can say they understand the underlying greek of John 3:6 speaks of a single baptism, but that remains to be seen.

In fact Jesus gives us the perfect biblical example of Spirit in the analogy of WIND, not water.

And if water is meant to symbolize Spirit why even add then "and of Spirit he can not enter the kingdom of God". That's redundant.

Are you serious Praxeas? ... there are a host of of analogies of the Spirit being compared to water .... in the Word.

Redundancies in the Word also abound ... often for emphasis.

If this is the best you can do ... Get to studying.

[HangingOut]

Water/Spirit association between John 3 and Acts 2:38 is not sound doctrine to say the least. The stretching of “born of the water” when the scripture clearly likens baptism unto is death always baffled me even when introducing the Romans 6. Please don’t tell me I am confused. The majority of the Christian world is confused at that. 25 years, UPC bible college, etc.

Raven, Dan, Hangingout,

You and others of your similar beliefs should really go and join ReformedDave in his reformed faith. What with all the deprogramming and the like, you have made the heritage of no value. All the hooplah that birthed the pentecostal movement was so much poppycock and stupidity. There is no revelation and it was just the twisted understanding of a group of uneducated rednecks that didn't know how to properly parse the Greek texts. We have now come full circle to the enlightenment of darkness.

There is much more I would say but it would not be profitable for any of us. I will just say that I am very disturbed in my spirit.

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by pelathais

You seem to be focusing exclusively on the human angle; asking all the time, "What must I do to be saved?"

How would you respond to a slightly different approach? One like, "the only absolute needed for salvation is God's sovereign choice that you will be saved."

Everything about YOU is in the passive sense and God is the only Actor - the only One doing anything for you to be saved because He is the only One Who could do anything about salvation.

The only "absolute doctrine of salvation" you would seek then, would be "What has God already done?" and the "What must I do?" part becomes secondary.

You folks crack me up. So God in his sovereignty is going to bypass the Word that he calls forever settled in heave, and save someone outside of the plan that HE chose.

Carry on though. It was not my intent for this to become a debate on whether "light was right", but get the responses of 3 step folks that are UPC to give their thoughts on their commander in chief believing something that is contrary to their views. But alas, none have come and took the bait. Only the 1 steppers have come.

[Barb]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

You folks crack me up. So God in his sovereignty is going to bypass the Word that he calls forever settled in heave, and save someone outside of the plan that HE chose.

Carry on though. It was not my intent for this to become a debate on whether "light was right", but get the responses of 3 step folks that are UPC to give their thoughts on their commander in chief believing something that is contrary to their views. But alas, none have come and took the bait. Only the 1 steppers have come.

Ummm...I am not a preacher, but I responded...

Originally Posted by Barb

As a PAJCer in doctrine (I don't refer to myself as a 3-stepper), my reaction is no reaction.

Since coming to internet forums some years ago now, I have learned MUCH about what I thought I knew.

I am neither surprised nor appalled...

[stmatthew]

Originally Posted by Barb

Ummm...I am not a preacher, but I responded...

I am sorry Barb, You did respond.


But you are so nice that it didn't satisfy my desire to stir up a big stink.

[Barb]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

I am sorry Barb, You did respond.


But you are so nice that it didn't satisfy my desire to stir up a big stink.

LOL!! Thank you for that, Matt...

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

You folks crack me up. So God in his sovereignty is going to bypass the Word that he calls forever settled in heave, and save someone outside of the plan that HE chose.

Carry on though. It was not my intent for this to become a debate on whether "light was right", but get the responses of 3 step folks that are UPC to give their thoughts on their commander in chief believing something that is contrary to their views. But alas, none have come and took the bait. Only the 1 steppers have come.

He will not bypass His Word that is forever settled, "...that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, NOT counting their trespasses against them..." He will not hold His creation to man's interpretation of His plan.

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by Stephen Hoover

This post deserves to be bumped!

Originally Posted by keith4him

You are right, sorry I overlooked it, good post Felicity.

Thanks guys. This is one of my firm held convictions that really hasn't changed at all over the years I've been posting on forums.

It's not that I'm trying to find loopholes for anyone - it's not that at all.

I know that doctrine has to be established and that it can't be a wishy washy thing, and that doctrine has to be established upon the Word of God which stands forever settled and nothing is going to change that.

I want everybody to be saved but not at the expense of allowing another way that is not endorsed by Scripture.