JFJ Forums

Why won't anyone who believes you have to be water baptized answer this question? DOES THE HOLY SPIRIT SAVE YOU OR NOT????

-Clear scripture shows the Holy Spirit was received before they were water baptized....SO ANSWER MY QUESTION.....

If you look at early history, you will see the “development” of the understanding of the Triune God. “Sola-scripturists” were all over the place on this one.  Some denied Jesus divinity while others denied his humanity.  The Holy Spirit worked through the Bride of Christ to make clear to Her what was not so clear to every one from scripture alone.  It wasn’t until the 4th century that the Trinity was proclaimed a dogmatic truth within the Church.  This is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth at work.

What you really should be saying is that you agree with anyone whose doctrines are in line with YOUR INTERPRETATION of scripture.  This is how “sola-scriptura” works in the absence of a Pillar and Foundation of Truth.  Where there is disagreement there is division and accusations that another person’s interpretation does not “align with the bible”.



Amen (except for the "not baptism")!!!!  And baptism is one of the means by which we receive the Holy Spirit through God’s grace by the work of Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit works in many, many powerful ways and baptism is one of them. Though I can quote many verses, I need only quote one: "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS; and YOU SHALL RECEIVE THE GIFT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.”

When you uphold Evangelical Protestant tradition, why should any Jew come to the Messiah?  Evangelical Protestantism looks absolutely nothing like Judaism.  It rejects sacred tradition, it rejects Rabbinic/Apostolic succession, it rejects the Real, Physical Presence of God, it rejects liturgical worship, it rejects a period and place of purification before seeing God’s face, it rejects spiritual cleansing by water, it rejects the notion of an “Al-bayit” for the Kingdom of the Chosen People, …..  


First of all, I would never try to argue anyone (Jew or Gentile) into accepting Jesus as the Messiah.  My part is to proclaim the Gospel and, through my life, be a light reflecting what Jesus Christ has done for me.  Conversion is through the power of the Holy Spirit, not how well I can argue against a person with a hardened heart.  When I witness, I don’t start tossing out bible verses (most people find this very annoying) or talk about worship services or tradition.  I talk about how Jesus Christ has changed my life and let them ask questions.  (Loaded question by the way)

Ripley’s – you brought this up and it is pertinent to baptism and Sola-Scriptura.  “In all his [Paul’s] letters, there are of course some passages which are hard to understand, and these are the ones that uneducated and unbalanced people distort, in the same way they distort the rest of scripture ..” What is the context of this passage?  False teachings.  Who are the false teachers?  The ones “uneducated”.  Despite their best intentions, sola-scriptura just wasn’t working out for them.  It’s kind of like Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:31) or Peter warning about “false prophets” just after he states: “Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.” 2 Pt 1:20.

So with regard to baptism, given that we both have scripture to back up our beliefs, who are the “uneducated and unbalanced”?  I argue that they are those that reject the teachings of the Apostles, those that reject the teachings of the Pillar and Foundation of Truth, that reject what a majority of Christians believe today.  They are very much divided and accept a teaching that has ABSOLUTELY NO evidence of ever having been taught in the pre-reformation history of the Pillar and Foundation of Truth.

Ripleys' -
Where have I ever said that one should not turn to scripture for truth?  My argument has always been that sacred tradition compliments sacred scripture, it does not trump it.  If scripture alone was sufficient, there would hardly have been a need for a gathering in Jerusalem as recorded in Acts 15.  The “uneducated and unbalanced” Judaizers began to require Gentiles to observe Jewish laws based on their interpretation of scripture.  The Pillar and Foundation of Truth held a council meeting to properly interpret scripture and the teachings of Jesus Christ.  This is sacred tradition.  The Pillar and Foundation continues to gather to this day, with the Holy Spirit guiding her into truth just as he did in Jerusalem.

Furthermore, in Acts 15:19, James is not giving an OPINION.  The Greek word used is “krino” which has juridical connotations.  KJV uses “my sentence”, RSV, NASB, and NIV use “my judgment”.  The Apostle James is exercising his authority to “bind and loose”.  He, as a “semicha’d” Apostle, is authoritatively representing the Church in Jerusalem, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

And I see how you are trying to say that the Apostles are the Pillars of the Church.  I agree with this.  But you seem to imply that ONLY the original Apostles comprise the Pillars.  In other words, with the death of John, there are no more Pillars and the Pillar and Foundation of Truth comes crumbling down.  This is contrary to the promises of Jesus Christ.  The Pillar and Foundation of Truth is still standing today and she still holds council meetings.

It is true that appealing to scripture for truth is all over the bible.  I’ve never denied this and have always proclaimed the infallibility of scripture.  The part of “sola-scriptura” that I reject is that it is the SOLE source of God’s revelation.  NOWHERE in scripture is this claim ever made.  NOWHERE in scripture is the claim ever made to accept ONLY what is in scripture.  Paul even exhorts believers to hold fast to tradition delivered either by letter or word of mouth (2 Thes 2:15).

And which “denomination” “repressed” scripture?  The one through whom the Holy Spirit worked to bring forth it’s canon?  The “denomination” that commissioned St. Jerome to translate it into a language that could be understood by those who did not know both Hebrew and Greek?  The “denomination” that commissioned monks to spend years painstakingly duplicating it over the course of hundreds of years?  The “denomination” that has always read from sacred scripture in it’s liturgy?  

Krisi - this question has been answered over and over again.  God's grace is what saves us.  This grace is administered through the Holy Spirit.  We receive grace through the power of the Holy Spirit in many ways.  Is one "dose" of grace all we ever receive or do we receive grace upon grace?  Baptism is one of the means by which we receive God's graces: "Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." (Acts 2:38) ( see also Jn 3:5, Tit 3:5, 1Cor 6:11, Rom 6:4, 1Pt 3:21)

I’m familiar with Joe Mizzi and have exchanged e-mail with him.  He is nowhere as educated about Catholicism as he claims to be and continues to perpetuate misinformation about the Catholic Church.

Ripley's - So you actually got an e-mail from the “real” Mary Ann Collins?  You know this because when you asked her if she was a “real person”, she said “yes”? “My family knows it, my friends know it, and God knows it?”  She has been researched by Catholics and Protestants alike and no one claims to know who she really is, I guess besides God.  Where does she live?  She will claim she doesn’t give out this information for her own safety – hmmmmm.  Has anyone ever given this former nun an interview? Hmmmmm  Has she ever spoken in person to promote her message or the books she authors and sells? Hmmmmm.

Since you are in dialog with the “real” Mary Ann Collins, perhaps she will answer for you what she refuses to answer for anyone else.  What convent did she attend for two years?  Perhaps we can look up the records of this elusive convent.

Interesting person this Mary Ann Collins.  An elusive person but not so elusive that you cannot purchase her wares on her website.

That is not true. What was hapening was new. God was indwelling GENTILES, immediately. Previously, people had to convert to become "His People"...now they were full brothers without any of the previous 'rites'.

So what did James say? Seemed good to the Holy Spirit AND this is in accord to scripture.

He did NOT "come up with anything on his own".

JUDGEMENT- exactly. Not adding or taking away, but rightly dividing SCRIPTURE and applying it.

CRUMBLING DOWN- No, becuase after thry WROTE DOWN FOR US, the writings become the foundation of the faith, the writings directly from the Pillars, just like TORAH/Tanakh. We are only supposed to rightly APPLY it. AND the Holy Spirit is for all of us, not a select few like OT times.




You deny the many verses that show otherwise and misapply one verse to prove your point. You are like my friend SMR here who says blood is/was not necessary for atonement because God allowed a flour substitute. 27 verses say one thing, but one LOOKS LIKE IT MIGHT SAY SOMETHING ELSE, you build a whole doctrine on the one.

It always comes down to "scripture says this"..."well, no because church fathers say that"...YOU ARE IN FACT PLACING THEM HIGHER THAN SCRIPTURE. As do Talmudists.




YOURS! How many centuries of Latin only liturgies? In all the churches, not just those in Rome? It was a huge power play by the denomination that thought it had sole Authority of the entire body of Christ...AND STILL DOES. You assert that even now.

Jesus already answered your question...
John 3:5
Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.