Has Jesus ever disclosed the name of GOD?

Post Reply New Topic

That's right. Absent these steps, one remains "unsaved." Methodists do not follow these formalities.


Methodist are having discussions on homosexuality, and are divided on the issue. Southern Baptists, as I understand it, are not at all divided on homosexuality. Except maybe as to what sort of everlasting torment they shall have to endure. Some think that Dante had it right. You aren't really having church discussions on how to welcome and accomodate homosexuals, are you?


http://www.sbc.net/resolutions/amResolution.asp?ID=1214
"The Unrighteous will be consigned to Hell, the place of everlasting torment."

Southern Baptists maintain a rather rigid view on what constitutes Righteousness. Even President Carter got fed up and left the fold.

http://www.adherents.com/largecom/bapti ... arter.html


Even if they were only baptized as infants?



The question stands: "What if....?" Would you hold it against Yahweh, or go right on loving him and worshipping him? Maybe set up a community of believers within Hell?

I hope those of us who are baptized as infants will get into heaven, or else I'm in trouble.
And while I believe in Jesus, I must say, I have never had a born again experience in my life, and I don't ever plan on having one.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I may be born again, but I wasn't born again yesterday

Southern Baptists don't claim that making one's conversion public is what saves, nor does immersive baptism, nor does any combination of sacrament, etc. Baptists believe that believers ought to make their faith public, and there is scriptural support for such a declaration of faith in Mark 8:38, also Matthew 10:32. Baptism by immersion is not a requirement for salvation. It does, however, follow in the example of Jesus and was practiced by the earliest disciples of John and Jesus and was a practice of the early church.


So?


Homosexuality is explicitly stated in the Bible as an abomination. If you don't like what the Bible says, then that is something you have to pray about. I can't help you with that. But Southern Baptists are not preoccupied with sending people to hell because of one sin or another. We believe that all people are sinners who deserve eternal separation from God and only by God's grace can we be saved from eternal torment. We also believe that anyone who wants to receive God's forgiveness can receive it.


All sinners are welcome in Baptist churches. There is no need for homosexuals to receive special treatment.


You're still exaggerating. Where in that resolution do Baptists explicitly point out that Methodists are unrighteous and going to hell? I can't seem to find it. I think you're attacking a straw man here.

And what does President Carter have to do with anything? It looks to me that Carter more likely is trying to better align himself with the liberals in his political party, though I can't for the life of me figure out what for. He doesn't like conservatives, and that's fine. But I'm confused, is he a baptist or not? One part of that article seemed to indicate he still attends a CBF affiliate. They're still (s)outhern Baptists, they just happen to differ with SBC on ordaining women as pastors. It's even possible for baptist churches to be both SBC and CBF.

Southern Baptists do take the Bible seriously. I see nothing wrong with that since it informs our faith. I see nothing wrong with desiring to adhere to Biblical teachings.


Infant baptism is not practiced by SBC because infants are unable to make the decision to accept Christ and follow in baptism. We believe that only believers should be baptized.

But that doesn't mean you're going to hell for baptizing infants, nor are you going to hell for being baptized as an infant. If you accept Christ as Savior, that is sufficient. The role of baptism in SBC is not to save the sinner.


It's a silly question. "What if" nothing. I believe Yahweh sent His Son Jesus to die for my sins. I believe I am forgiven and that I have no need to fear being separated from God. There is no "what if."

Well, what exactly are we talking about being a "born again experience?" Jesus said (Gospel of John) that you must be born again. For me, I became aware of my faith at a very early age but waited some years before coming forward about it. I never had some mystical experience in which my life was suddenly changed, but I don't really recall a time in which I didn't believe. I don't believe that being "born again" requires some kind of altered-state-of-consciousness-religious-experience, but rather that "born again" just means that you accept Jesus at some point--born of the Spirit as well as of the flesh. That's all it means.

What used to give me fits growing up, though, was old-school preachers teaching that if you didn't have that "Damascus Road" kind of experience, you're not saved. A lot of people do have those experiences, and I don't doubt their validity because for a lot of people there has been an abrupt change of life brought about along with their conversion. But neither do I doubt the salvation of people who have accepted Christ through faith early on as I have.

Do you believe that the blood of Christ saves the believer from sin? Yes? Then what exactly are we disagreeing about?

It seems to me that anything you and I would disagree on really amounts to very little in the grand scheme of things. Rather than go on debating about it, I'd rather seek out exactly where it is we could find some unity. Last I checked, Jesus' disciples already had the debate about who is greatest in heaven. Just because the Baptists won the debate doesn't mean I'm going to look down on my Lutheran brothers.

I also don't recall a time when I didn't believe. But I believe that that faith was a gift given to me by the Holy Spirit, that had been earned for me by Christ. We Lutherans take Christ's explanation that one must be "born again to enter the Kingdom of God" was not a call to make a choice, but rather a statement of a spiritual state we must have. And that spiritual state comes from God.
Incidentally, while I am glad you don't have a myopic view of other denominations, I have seen evangelical sites on the internet where they damn Lutherans and other mainline denominations to hell for not "choosing" to accept Christ, followed by a believer's baptism.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

It is no sillier than any other religious question. One should always have a backup plan of one sort or another.

Otherwise, you end up sounding like Lennie in Of Mice and Men, when Crooks poses him the question, "Supposin' George don't come back?"

Lennie had absolute faith that George would come back after a night of carousing, and couldn't get his mind around any other possibility.

What are you going to do if you die tonight and don't quite make the cut? Or, if everyone else in your church is raptured away, and you're left behind?

So?


Oh, yes they are. Homosexuality is a particular obsession.


I suspect that any open or exposed homosexual would receive very special treatment in your church.


Are you saying that Methodists are righteous, and just as worthy of Heaven as Baptists?


Baptists cherry-pick what suits them, and misinterpret quite a lot.

Which indicates that Southern Baptists maintain a low opinion of people generally.




Quid pro quo. A Southern Baptist proclaims to believe in God, and gets his pie in the sky when he dies as his reward. It really is nothing more than spiritual materialism that is preached. A Southern Baptist can't even conceive of not getting his reward.

No, Jesus never mentioned Odin, not as recorded in the bible anyways.

Those are things believers don't have to worry about. Besides that, hedging bets is something one might do if he's insecure about the choices he's made. I have no need to place faith in anything except Jesus' atoning sacrifice. There is no "if."

I suppose IF I were to play at devil's advocate, I'd have to say you've answered your own question. If I didn't make the cut, then I'd do the same thing I'd do anyway: Die. If I got left behind, then I'd be left behind. What would it really matter what I did, anyway?

But I don't see that as reflective of a strong faith or even Christian truth. For believers, there is no "if". And there is no "cut" with those who believe. Either one believes or one doesn't. Among those who place their faith in Christ there will be no one excluded.

No. I'm saying that we are all equally unrighteous, Baptist and Methodist alike, and just as unworthy of heaven. Only God can make someone righteous and worthy.


Ok, but it looks to me like you just described every denom and non-denom church out there. Assuming that to be true, there is nothing about this that makes us unique. You're doing an awful lot of cherry-picking yourself, even appearing to outright fabricate some things to make a case against us. You're difficult to take seriously when you do that.

Not any more/less than anyone else. It's a matter of Biblical truth. Does the Bible hold that all have sinned and fallen short of God's glory?


Some people are like that, sure. But you can find that attitude in pretty much any church of any tradition. Why make Baptists a special case?

I personally go with the name Wodan.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I like Votan, mostly because that's how Czernobog pronounced it in American Gods, and Czernobog was awesome in that book.

I go with Wodan (probably pronounced Uaodan or Votan) because that was his name in Pre-Christian Germany, and my family is mostly German on both sides.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer