So that makes your response correct and how I "share "my faith wrong?
It depends. Is your objective to help people improve their scriptural understanding? Or to turn them off from talking to you
and continuing to read scripture? If It's the latter, then you are spot on.
If two people have trouble understanding a specific direct command the same... there is probably other things that they need to discuss.
Which won't happen when people aren't interested in what you have to say.
On this discussion? I'm trying.
Interesting isn’t.
You use one of those 3 rules of interpretation without even knowing it when establishing the doctrines you hold.
There are 2 kinds of authority in scripture. Specific and General. What to bind as doctrine (salvation issues) is easily seen when using this method/rule of interpretation.
So, no source for that standard? A standard created by man, which is as fallible as any man. Who gets to say what is "acceptable" apostolic example? Whose interpretation of the direct command is correct? Who says what is a "necessary" inference or conclusion? I get that it may be necessary to have a standard of intepretation, but you have to be realistic about the limits of the standard you employ.
I used sprinkling for baptism as an example of how to use this method of interpretation.
I wasn't asking for your position on the issue. But, while we're at it, why don't you?
Heaven forbid I try to establish some common ground.
To answer your question: Mostly because it's not the example set, but I believe water baptism is symbolic anyway, and in no way tied to our salvation (and before we go down that rabbit hole again, I will stipulate for sake of conversation that I could be wrong about that). By that standard the sprinkling of water vs full submersion isn't much of an issue. My main objection is the baptism of babies who cannot make a conscious choice to accept Jesus as their savior, so it's a pointless religious "going through the motions" thing.
Because there is a basic minimum that Jesus teaches, particularly when it comes to salvation. There are a lot of extraneous doctrines, which people derive from scripture, and which add variety, flavor and depth to some people's experience. Assuming they don't contradict the teachings of Jesus, they don't concern me much.
Best I can tell, the scripture has done that.
Which shows in how you share your views and beliefs.
I'm sure you don't believe that you come across that way, otherwise, I assume, you wouldn't respond the way you do. But I'm fairly certain I'm not the only person who feels that way.
See above.
No one on any of
@Integrity's threads have said anything to me that has even started to turn my face half red, much less offend me.
That's good. I was concerned based on your phrasing that maybe I had gotten under your skin.
Anytime some one is challenged to answer why they believe something or why they hold the position they do when it comes to religious matters and they can't , and they are pressed to produce something from scripture that back it up and cannot, or they are shown scripture that proves the position they hold is wrong, the reaction is common.
I agree that some people lack the scriptural basis to support their doctrinal views, but those are the ones you need to be a little more gentle with so that you can help them understand the importance of reading and contemplating scripture.
Beat you to death with scripture? Good faith discussion?
Here is most everyone's idea of a good faith discussion about God. You can see in these threads.... You believe this and I believe that but after we discuss why we don't believe the same, let's hug and part ways because after all, we all love God in our own way, and he' is fine with that ,so I'll be fine with where you are, even though we don't see it the same way.
But then, someone comes along and says absolutely that the Bible says that baptism by sprinkling is absolutely wrong (just one example, so not to confuse) and those that teach and practice are not in accordance with the will of God..... Uh -oh..that guy thinks he's 100% right. Who does he think he is? He is so full of pride!
Yes, using "absolutely" means you believe your intepretation is 100% correct, and a sign of being prideful. But thanks for letting me know how you see yourself in these conversations. Do you really believe that people are turned off by the fact that you see things differently than them? It's not what you say, it's how you say it.
Nope. Not at all. I just take God at his word and am not ashamed of it.
I'm glad you're not ashamed. You clearly have spent time in the word.
How about you
@zubenelgenubi ? Are you willing to state that anyone who practices and teaches that sprinkling is baptism are wrong and are doing so against the will of God
See above.
I'm not one that you need to be gentle with, just to clarify. I have done my share of studying, and I know I'm still no expert and am willing to listen, discuss and learn because I sincerely wish to understand God better. From our few interactions on the subject I consider you someone I could learn from, except for the fact that your presentation is a turn off. Your logic in supporting your positions is often not logical, which makes discussion impractical at best. When you use "grammatically incorrect" as an excuse to infer something not clearly indicated by a scripture, that's not good faith, nor does it conform to your own standard of interpretation.
