/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>557471

I'm am hesitant to bring up my views here, but I feel I should even though its controversial.

I've studied the Gnostic texts and the ideas at the root of that weird religion. And for the most part I agree with them. The Gnostics you meet online tend to ignore those things at the base of their 'religion' and fedora tip about their cosmology.

But often times when I read the gospels, whenever Christ speaks of the 'Kingdom of God' in those specific terms it seems, to me at least, that he is referring to a state of mind instead of the afterlife.

So, from this viewpoint of mine, this makes since. In order to enter into the 'Kingdom of God' state of mind, you need to be both baptized by Christ and the Holy Ghost.

>Please no ban for heresy

Orthodox essentially believe in this. There is baptism, done with water and chrismation, where one receives the Holy Spirit. They are traditionally done together.

John 3:5 isn't about baptism, it's about being saved. The birth of water is physical birth, the birth of the Holy Ghost is believing on the Son. See the next sentence.

John 3:6

That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

>See that they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus, probably refering to the baptism of water, but they didn't have the Holy Ghost.

The Holy Ghost falling upon believers was through the Apostles. They spoke in tongues and prophesied and drank poison with no harm coming to them. See for instance Acts 11:28. Charismatics/pentecostals meanwhile are continuationists who say these signs continue to today.

>>557503

>John 3:5 isn't about baptism

lol

>>557471

Baptism with water makes one clean and therefore fit for the Holy Spirit.

Confirmation is when the Holy Spirit comes with gifts.

>But if this is true wouldn't the Confirmation also be necessary for salvation?

No because salvation does not depend on the presence of the Holy Spirit, only on the state of grace. After baptism, you are in a state of grace whether the Holy Spirit has come or not.

>"Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."

I think that Jesus was not offering a one-size-fits-all approach here. Rather, he was simply acknowledging that the baptism of John by itself was insufficient for the vast majority of people. If you had been baptized by John and died immediately after, without having received the Spirit, then you would enter the Kingdom because your sins were forgiven and you didn't have time to commit any more.

For the average person, the intervening years until death present plenty of opportunity to amass new sins, which will need new (non-baptismal) reconciliation. The Holy Spirit is the means by which we resist temptations. It is the font of grace, with which we have new strength to say yes to the will of God.

Furthermore, I do not believe that it usually comes all at once, but little-by-little, as if testing us.

Luke 16:10

<"Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much.

>>557593

see >>557737

aaa

>>557743

>Jesus: Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit

>You: "Born again again of water"

Have fun in hell

For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

>>557750

Pit away your false version heathe

Here's what the glouris and Godly KJV says

John 3

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

>>557752

Also in (((douay-rheims))) it probably says the same in verses 15/16/18 so then that would contradict

also i think they changed verse 36 which would contradict in it's own verse

>>557752

Wow I bate phone posting. I spelled a lot wrong.

But really though KJV over (((D-R)))

>>557755

>>557753

>>557752

"Respondit Jesus: Amen, amen dico tibi, nisi quis renatus fuerit ex aqua, et Spiritu Sancto, non potest introire in regnum Dei."

>>557765

Speak english

Yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue.

>>557765

Also I don't speak latin but "Spiritu" looks like it means "spirit" which (((D-R))) doesn't say

>Now I have some questions. Why those people didn't receive the Holy Ghost through laying hands right after they were baptized?

Who? Those of Samaria? Seems like Philip only baptized them with water, for whatever reason. It's not that he couldn't, since he was ordained by the apostles. It could be that he didn't know, maybe? I haven't read patristic commentary on this passage yet.

>Maybe Jesus was refering to the sacrament of Confirmation that consists of laying hands too. But if this is true wouldn't the Confirmation also be necessary for salvation?

Yes, confirmation/chrismation is the baptism with the Holy Spirit. One complaint we Orthodox have against Catholics is that while we all do Baptism, Chrismation, and the Eucharist as one service, you delay Chrismation and the Eucharist after Baptism.

>>557774

>what's the Holy Ghost?

>>557800

It clearly looks like it says "spirit" not "Holy Ghost". If Jesus wanted to say Holy Ghost then he would have.

>>557803

>Latin = Greek

>>557812

Spiritu Sancto = Holy Spirit = Holy Ghost

>>557814

Okay I was wrong on that since I don't speak latin but either way it doesn't say "again" in greek(I don't care what the latin says) and if it did then it would contradict

>>557821

Again the Bible wasn't even written in latin. If anything you should post a greek version saying that bit if itbdid then that would contradict verses 15/16/18/36

In the Greek, John 3 verse 5 does not contain the modifier to say born "again", but verses 3 and 7 do have this modifier. Verse 5 is correct to say "be born of water and of the Spirit."

And also verse 6 uses born in a different tense, in the sense that it has already happened. What is born of flesh is flesh, what is born of the Spirit of spirit.

>renatus

I'm sure this discrepancy from the Greek is one of the reasons why the Vulgate was known as an unreliable translation.

In which also coming he preached to those spirits that were in prison: Which had been some time incredulous, when they waited for the patience of God in the days of Noe, when the ark was a building: wherein a few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water. Whereunto baptism being of the like form, now saveth you also: not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the examination of a good conscience towards God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ. 1 Peter 3:19-21

Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. Romans 6:4

He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit. Titus 3:5

>>558245

That's a misleading version of 1 Peter 3:21. It doesn't even make grammatical sense if that's how it really appears in your version. Nice try anyway.

1 Peter 3:21

The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

>>557471

So you mean confirmation? come on man.

>>557824

Ἀπεκρίθη ὁ Ἰησοῦς καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ, Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, ἐὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν, οὐ δύναται ἰδεῖν τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ.

ἀπεκρίθη ὁ Ἰησοῦς, Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, ἐὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἐξ ὕδατος καὶ Πνεύματος, οὐ δύναται εἰσελθεῖν εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ Θεοῦ.

ἄνωθεν=ἐξ ὕδατος καὶ Πνεύματος

And if you are autistic enough to deny it, have Titus 3:5 which reads, "he saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit,"

λουτροῦ - bath, washing, baptism παλιγγενεσίας - re-birth καὶ - and ἀνακαινώσεως - renewal

>>558262

So is the Confirmation necessary to salvation? That was my question.

>>558444

From Summa

Objection 3. Further, the sacraments are ordained unto man's salvation. But man can be saved without Confirmation: since children that are baptized, who die before being confirmed, are saved. Therefore Confirmation is not a sacrament.

Reply to Objection 3. As stated above (III:65:4), all the sacraments are in some way necessary for salvation: but some, so that there is no salvation without them; some as conducing to the perfection of salvation; and thus it is that Confirmation is necessary for salvation: although salvation is possible without it, provided it be not omitted out of contempt.

And about necesserity of sacraments:

I answer that, Necessity of end, of which we speak now, is twofold. First, a thing may be necessary so that without it the end cannot be attained; thus food is necessary for human life. And this is simple necessity of end. Secondly, a thing is said to be necessary, if, without it, the end cannot be attained so becomingly: thus a horse is necessary for a journey. But this is not simple necessity of end.

In the first way, three sacraments are necessary for salvation. Two of them are necessary to the individual; Baptism, simply and absolutely; Penance, in the case of mortal sin committed after Baptism; while the sacrament of order is necessary to the Church, since "where there is no governor the people shall fall" (Proverbs 11:14).

But in the second way the other sacraments are necessary. For in a sense Confirmation perfects Baptism; Extreme Unction perfects Penance; while Matrimony, by multiplying them, preserves the numbers in the Church.

>>557752

>>557753

>Calling the version which was used to translate your bible false

>using false echos

>>557817

>Something cannot say X because that would contradict my interpretation the bible!

>>557579

The gentiles in Acts 10:44 received the Holy Spirit before being baptized; how does that fit?

>>558496

WOW! That completely answered my doubt. Thank you, anon.

Saint Thomas Aquinas was really a remarkable man.

>>558512

Such may be the grace of God occasionally towards men, and such their great charity and contrition, that they may have remission, justification, and sanctification, before the external sacraments of baptism, confirmation, and penance be received; as we see in this example: where, at Peter's preaching, they all received the Holy Ghost before any sacrament. But here we also learn one necessary lesson, that such, notwithstanding, must needs receive the sacraments appointed by Christ, which whosoever contemneth, can never be justified. (St. Augustine, sup. Levit. q. 84. T. 4.)