Chronological Snobbery Part 2 - David Bercot

[@veritas399]

1:31 "The further in time we are removed from the days of the Apostles, the better we understand their teachings " - This is a good way to highlight the thought process of many in the 21st century. . . who are 20 centuries removed from the apostles.

[@holleyd]

Outstanding message!! Thank you!!!

[@egosum7]

I remember reading Justin Martyr's answer to Trypho the Jew about the Millennial Kingdom when he says that "many who belong to the pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise", how shocked I was back then. Why doesn't he deem them as heretics? Why aren't they thrown out of the Church? Later to discover that the Early Church was a living movement and not a monolithic structure that resembles an army.

[@kennethfurr7397]

In regard to baptism, the passages mean exactly what they say. Just as "Turn the other cheek" means what it says. Just as "Love your enemies" means exactly what it says. Just as "If you look at a woman to lust after her you commit adultery" means exactly what it says. We should never try to fit the Scriptures into our way of thinking or our conditioning. We should get our way of thinking to fit with the Scriptures, to conform to them. God's way (which can be seen in His Word and in the life of Jesus) is The Way, not man's way. We really do need consistency with these things.

[@ezrajeremiah8631]

I have been struggling with how far I take the Early Church teachings. It's led me to really seeking out where the leaven crept in, that ultimately catalyzed at Nicea where the change is clear. What led to it was more subtle. If we can't identify where they went astray, than we open the door to falling into the same issues. You can identify Clement, and Origen as issues- however it goes back to even Ignatius on the subject of the power of the Bishop. These ideas carried over into Hippolytus, Iraneous, and the more allegorical Alexandrians. I pray we can take the good, and leave the bad. I pray you seek the larger story, and for us 1700 years later looking back to see the fruit of all their ideas. Good and bad. I do not believe the "Church" at the time of Nicea was really the Bride of Christ but mystery Babylon riding the beast. If true.. we must walk softly. God bless

[@w35655]

An interesting way to know what John 3:5 means is to look at a few conversions in Acts. John 3:5 has to happen before anyone can enter the Kingdom of God,so it has to be between Acts 2:37-41 Acts 8:35-39 and Acts 16: 30-34.

[@interxyz]

There's baptism in water, in The Holy Spirit, in fire, in blood... and all seem important. So to automatically assume that a passage that is talking about it, always means with water; is the hermeneutical problem. We tend to read into things to make it fit the things we preach or teach. We can read early works and do exactly this, thinking we found some proof of what be believe the scriptures say. In this case the verb "to baptize" means to stain or to dye; and was typically used for the process of dying cloth with a color; hence this verb is an infinitif, pointing so something permanent, which water is not even like that. I'm trying to say that plain reading isn't always sufficient to point out the meaning (wells of water John 4:14?), nor proof text from early writers. But totally agree we should always look to what they held, but remain to be vigilant. Observance lead to conclusions, but what was observed to be true doesn't necessarily mean it explains how things truly work or come about. In this case baptism is crucial, water seems a significant element, we read & observe that, but there's more to it then we can observe; hence the Greek word even points to that. Blessings and thanks for your work in the Lord.

[@interxyz]

Ephesians 5;26-27 KJV "That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by >>the word

[@brothernick7221]

Not sure the Brother can hear his hypocrisy. He is claiming those who lived further away from the NT new better than the those in the NT.

[@joegarry8983]

A question that frequently crosses my mind is, would Jesus, his apostles or any of the disciples of Jesus have considered themselves to have been ''''Christians'' way back in their day, say in relation as to what we generally consider it to be Christian now-a- days, if that makes any sense, or would it be more accurate to believe that they were, all of them, Orthodox, Torah observant, circumcised on the eight day, messianic Jews who were expecting the imminent arrival of the promised Jewish Messiah that would help them defeat the Romans and drive them from their lands as the Maccabees had done to the Greeks many years earlier, And the greatest mystery of all, why would Jesus, the second person of the Trinity Godhead need to have been baptised by John in the Jordan river, makes no sense to me.

[@arttyree4504]

The reason for His baptism, as He said, was "to fulfill all righteousness." He did not need a baptism of repentence; He did choose to be baptized in order to identify completely with those who do need a baptism of repentence. As divine Lord, He is the source of righteousness; as holy Savior, He became subject to humanity and all our needs--including the baptism of repentance. The Gospel of repentance is not given to make sense to the human mind, but to declare/fulfill righteousness--which is the divine calling. We take it by faith, as a mark that may go against (some)human reason, but it does fulfill the righteousness of God

[@adriansabo198]

Please consider prayer for clarity & truth as it pertains to the Holy Scriptures. The esv is NOT pure uncorrupted seed! Only the Authorized Verision in the English language is. Yes your right in saying that we dont know everything. Therefore i implore you ask God which translation is the right one, because both cannot be right! Things that are different are NOT the same!😮

[@kennethfurr7397]

If saying baptism is not necessary, why say a magical sinner's prayer is? Is this not a "work" as well? Honestly, it all seems ridiculous to me. Why not just take the Scriptures for what they say and be done with it? Why fight against what these passages clearly say? I will go with God's Word on this, not the explanations of man. from I Peter 3: "Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you-not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience-through the resurrection of Jesus Christ..."