Question for nominal Christians

Question for nominal Christians

Spirituality

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
28 Apr 11
2 edits

Originally posted by Suzianne
Teaching others is one thing.

Coming to a website forum and advertising the fact smacks of hypocrisy.

As I posted in another thread here:

"Actually, no. It's between Him and me, actually, and not exactly food for this forum.

Did not the Christ also say:

"Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no r ry".

Most likely the rest of us simply do not want to "sound the trumpet" before us.
I have only given personal testimony when asked for it, and why should I hide it?
Christ himself states,

(Matthew 5:14-16) . . .“you are the light of the world. A city cannot be hid when
situated upon a mountain.  People light a lamp and set it, not under the measuring
basket, but upon the lampstand, and it shines upon all those in the house.  Likewise let
your light shine before men, that they may see YOUR fine works and give glory to
your Father who is in the heavens.

Did he not? Your reference is not to ministry but to gifts of mercy!

Reminds me of a Lennon song, You've got to hide your love away!

Misfit Queen

Isle of Misfit Toys

Joined
08 Aug 03
Moves
36729
28 Apr 11

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I have only given personal testimony when asked for it, and why should I hide it?
Christ himself states,

(Matthew 5:14-16) . . .“you are the light of the world. A city cannot be hid when
situated upon a mountain.  People light a lamp and set it, not under the measuring
basket, but upon the lampstand, and it shines upon all those in the hou ...[text shortened]... istry but to gifts of mercy!

Reminds me of a Lennon song, You've got to hide your love away!
And what is ministry if not gifts of mercy?

I do not count only the material when I speak of alms. The "public ministry" you speak of could also be considered alms.

This passage does not speak of hiding the light of Christ. It speaks of the peril of "sounding a trumpet before thee".

There's a difference between someone pointing you out and saying "Look!" and you yourself blowing a horn and saying "Look at ME!"

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
28 Apr 11
1 edit

Originally posted by Suzianne
And what is ministry if not gifts of mercy?

I do not count only the material when I speak of alms. The "public ministry" you speak of could also be considered alms.

This passage does not speak of hiding the light of Christ. It speaks of the peril of "sounding a trumpet before thee".

There's a difference between someone pointing you out and saying "Look!" and you yourself blowing a horn and saying "Look at ME!"
yes the ministry is an expression of Gods mercy, its also an expression of his justice as
well, what of it? You are trying to shoehorn in a completely unrelated passage. I did
not forward my own personal testimony unless i was asked, mainly by JS357, so what
am i supposed to do feign false modesty and tell him that i had better say nothing
unless it embarrasses other Christians, no way, Christians are light of the world sister,
cannot be hidden under a measuring basket!

Misfit Queen

Isle of Misfit Toys

Joined
08 Aug 03
Moves
36729
28 Apr 11

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes the ministry is an expression of Gods mercy, its also an expression of his justice as
well, what of it? You are trying to shoehorn in a completely unrelated passage. I did
not forward my own personal testimony unless i was asked, mainly by JS357, so what
am i supposed to do feign false modesty and tell him that i had better say nothing
...[text shortened]... , no way, Christians are light of the world sister,
cannot be hidden under a measuring basket!
What are you supposed to do? Well, perhaps not creating such a thread in the first place.

Didn't you say yesterday that it was a mistake to do so?

I did not create such a thread to throw my works in the faces of others and yell out "What have you to compare? Nothing? Then how is it you call yourself Christian?"

Can't you see how self-serving that is?

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
28 Apr 11

Originally posted by Suzianne
What are you supposed to do? Well, perhaps not creating such a thread in the first place.

Didn't you say yesterday that it was a mistake to do so?

I did not create such a thread to throw my works in the faces of others and yell out "What have you to compare? Nothing? Then how is it you call yourself Christian?"

Can't you see how self-serving that is?
yes i said it was a mistake after i took to heart your words, but there are some good
things to be discussed now that my motives have changed, how Christ taught, what
methods he used, why its important to be teachers, is it obligatory to have a public
ministry etc etc , there are real issues and one must detach oneself from any feelings
of either guilt or egotism and view it as an opportunity to encourage!

The Near Genius

Fort Gordon

Joined
24 Jan 11
Moves
13644
28 Apr 11

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
what a pure lamebo excuse if ever there was one, here you go and do they work, ill
sponsor you and buy my way to heaven! This admonition of Christ is incumbent upon all Christians,

(Matthew 28:19-20) . . .[b]Go
therefore and make disciples of people of all the
nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the ho ...[text shortened]... vest, or will you pay someone else to go
into the field for you, begging off on some pretence?[/b]
I explained what was happening in that verse and gave you
an example of how other Christian churches were doing just
what Paul said by sending missionaries. It is ridiculous to
believe he meant that all should go. As Paul pointed out
himself, it was better that he remain unmarried so he did
not have to worry about a wife and baby. With your attitude,
I suppose you would expect all wives and children would go
to. And any one that is handicapped in some way must get
in there wheel chairs and get going.

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
28 Apr 11
5 edits

Originally posted by RJHinds
I explained what was happening in that verse and gave you
an example of how other Christian churches were doing just
what Paul said by sending missionaries. It is ridiculous to
believe he meant that all should go. As Paul pointed out
himself, it was better that he remain unmarried so he did
not have to worry about a wife and baby. With your attitude, ...[text shortened]...
to. And any one that is handicapped in some way must get
in there wheel chairs and get going.
Please tell the forum why its not incumbent upon all Christians, so far you have
proffered nothing but mere personal opinion. Here is the verse again, less you forget.

(Matthew 28:19-20) . . .Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit,
 teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you. And, look! I am with
you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things.

For your information and i had better be careful less Suzzianne considers it boastful,
although its simply a statement of fact, yes indeed, wife's and children go, and yes
indeed people in wheelchairs go if they are of a mind, in our congregation there is a
blind man who goes and in the other congregation there are deaf persons who go,
what of it? My best friend was knocked down by a car when he was young, its left
half his body almost paralysed, he cannot walk properly, he cannot speak properly,
he talks like a stroke victim and shakes uncontrollable with one had, yet he
zealously hands out Bible tracts along the streets of Maryhill, Glasgow where he is
well thought of by most. what about it?

As for married persons its an excellent opportunity for them to spend time together
in a spiritual environment!

Fighting for men’s

right to have babies

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
117061
28 Apr 11
1 edit

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
(Matthew 28:19-20) . . .Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit,
 teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you. And, look! I am with
you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things.
You haven't yet answered as to why you are quoting this scripture as an instruction to Jesus disciples and yet in EVERY instance documented in Acts, they baptised in the name of Jesus. Did they get it wrong...? And in fact do the JW's baptise as the disciples did - in Jesus name?

Seems harsh to expect others to explain to you, when you haven't reciprocated.

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
28 Apr 11
2 edits

Originally posted by divegeester
You haven't yet answered as to why you are quoting this scripture as an instruction to Jesus disciples and yet in [b]EVERY instance documented in Acts, they baptised in the name of Jesus. Did they get it wrong...? And in fact do the JW's baptise as the disciples did - in Jesus name?

Seems harsh to expect others to explain to you, when you haven't reciprocated.[/b]
I have not got the slightest idea of what you are trying to say, really, i have read your
text three times and it still makes no sense to me. Indeed are you trying to say that
this scripture is not true? Does it not state in the name of the father and the son? why
are you continually trying to diminish the role of the father, here and in other
instances? I really cannot say, its still remains to be answered why this admonishment
from Christ is not incumbent upon all Christians, that Acts mentions persons being
baptised in Jesus, hardly negates it, does it. We baptise persons in the name of the
father and the son, as directed by Christ.

Fighting for men’s

right to have babies

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
117061
28 Apr 11

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I have not got the slightest idea of what you are trying to say, really, i have read your
text three times and it still makes no sense to me. Indeed are you trying to say that
this scripture is not true? Does it not state in the name of the father and the son? why
are you continually trying to diminish the role of the father, here and in oth ...[text shortened]... it, does it. We baptise persons in the name of the
father and the son, as directed by Christ.
It's not a difficult concept.

Why do you think the disciples ALWAYS baptised into the name of Jesus?

Who's got it wrong JW's or the disciples?

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
28 Apr 11

Originally posted by divegeester
It's not a difficult concept.

Why do you think the disciples ALWAYS baptised into the name of Jesus?

Who's got it wrong JW's or the disciples?
perhaps a reminder,

(Matthew 28:19-20) . . .Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit,
teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you. And, look! I am with
you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things.

Christ's words i believe, dont you?

Fighting for men’s

right to have babies

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
117061
28 Apr 11

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
perhaps a reminder,

(Matthew 28:19-20) . . .Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations,
[b]baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son
and of the holy spirit,
teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you. And, look! I am with
you all the days until the conclusion of the system of things.

Christ's words i believe, dont you?[/b]
Why do you think the disciples ALWAYS baptised into the name of Jesus?

Who's got it wrong JW's or the disciples?

rc

Joined
26 Aug 07
Moves
38239
28 Apr 11
1 edit

Originally posted by divegeester
Why do you think the disciples ALWAYS baptised into the name of Jesus?

Who's got it wrong JW's or the disciples?
i have no idea why they did, we follow the command of the Christ, are we wrong for doing that, please explain why we are wrong for doing that, or remove your insinuation.

Fighting for men’s

right to have babies

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
117061
28 Apr 11

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
i have no idea why they did, we follow the command of the Christ, are we wrong for doing that, please explain why we are wrong for doing that, or remove your insinuation.
Don't get tetchy, there is a Royal Wedding tomorrow 😉

I know lots of people who have been re-baptised into the name of Jesus. If you remember the other thread there was lots from me on this so I don't want to trawl over it again, except to say that I believe that Jehovah has revelled himself in Jesus and given him the "only name by which we may be saved" and it's "the name that is above EVERY name" (for now). And that is why recognising who Jesus is (Yahweh revealed in the flesh) through a person being baptised into the singular name of the Father, AND of the Son, AND of the Holy Ghost is a demonstration of a persons recognition of who Jesus is.

That is why the disciples exclusively used the name of Jesus. I'm surprised you have never questioned this before yourself robbie.

The Near Genius

Fort Gordon

Joined
24 Jan 11
Moves
13644
29 Apr 11

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Please tell the forum why its not incumbent upon all Christians, so far you have
proffered nothing but mere personal opinion. Here is the verse again, less you forget.

(Matthew 28:19-20) . . .Go therefore and make disciples of people of all the nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit,
 teachin ...[text shortened]... sons its an excellent opportunity for them to spend time together
in a spiritual environment!
Jesus was only talking to his disciples in those verses, not every single
person in the world. Your understanding of the verses is ridiculous as I
said before.