Redroost32

@mtree81 Like credobaptism?

If your interpretation of Scripture is novel after 2000 years of church history, your INTERPRETATION has gained authority over the Bible itself.

@mtree81 Anglicans, RC, and EO are all referring to the Greek word, presbyteros, not hiereus when they say priest. The etymology of the word comes from Greek “presbyteros,” then Latin “presbyter”, then old English was “preost”, and in modern English “priest.”

@redroost32 Actually the word for elder is presbyteros and the word for priest is hiereus. The latter refers to Jewish priests in the Septuagint or Jesus as our priest but never for NT church leaders

The apostles could have appointed priests in every church, but instead they appointed elders. Priests were professionals with a predetermined pedigree. Elders were ordinary. The old order guarded access. The new order threw the doors wide open to peoples from every tribe.

@CatholicYemil @redeemed_zoomer @CapturingChrist He did endorse the general concept of total depravity and limited atonement, though.

@redeemed_zoomer @CapturingChrist Aquinas did not endorse total depravity, irresistible grace, or limited atonement.

Btw, Calvinism is evil.

@NathanBozeman2 @javierperd2604 You’re conflating salvation with justification. The Bible teaches we were saved, are being saved, and will be saved. As a former Baptist, this is what helped me. Justification is punctiliar, but salvation is not. Baptism saves in the same way God’s word saves.

@javierperd2604 I have a question on this that I've been trying to figure out (I was raised with Baptist views on baptism, and it's still a topic I'm working through). What are the necessary/sufficient conditions for salvation? I can't think of a coherent answer if baptism saves (I've tried).

As Noah and his family were saved through water, likewise, Baptism now saves us.

@TomBuck @JMunyan1689 @SlowToWrite Tom, that’s a feminist scholar interpretation, shocked to hear it from you. Paul says submit one to another, and the point is for them to rightfully submit to proper authorities, such as the example of wives,children,etc, not that each individual person must submit to each other.

@JMunyan1689 @SlowToWrite So, when Paul says in 5:21 that we are to "submit" to one another that he means we are to "obey" one another?

Look closely at Ephesians 5:22 in comparison with 6:1 and 6:5. Wives are told to "submit" (hupotasso - same word used in Titus 2:5)... which the verb, by the way, actually carries over from 5:21. So, whatever submission looks like to "one another" among believers is what submission looks like for the wife to the husband. Children and slaves are told to "obey" (hupakouo - hear and come under). This would at least indicate there's a difference in the nature of the relationship between husband/wife than there is between parent/children or slave/master. I am deeply concerned by how many professing Christian men on this site are saying that a wife is to obey everything her husband tells her to do - unless it is explicitly sinful. I believe this is a dangerous interpretation that is being pushed and will do great damage to many marriages - particularly wives. I completely affirm male headship. I do NOT believe submission means that a wife is to follow her husband's leadership only if she feels like it or agrees with it. But to say that Eph 5:22-23 gives the husband authority to tell her to do whatever he thinks is right and she is to always obey him without any recourse is dangerous to say the least. A wife is not a child nor a slave... and Paul intentionally used different verbs for those relationships. So, if a husband tells his wife what to wear everyday... (and I've actually dealt with such a situation)... I believe in an attitude of submission, she should seek out the elders of her church for help. If the husband is being tyrannical, then they should disciple this man in how to be a godly husband. *(I concede there could possibly be a situation where a husband's request was legitimate.) I was a controlling husband in the early years of my marriage. I controlled things about my wife that were not sinful, but were tyrannical. I thank God that my wife continued to exhibit a spirit of submission but reached out to men to help disciple me. I also thank God that I wasn't sitting under teachers whose interpretation of Eph 5:22-23 would have served to reinforce my views that it was her job simply to obey me without recourse. Furthermore, I'm glad that neither of us were sitting under someone who undermined male headship. I was discipled by men who taught me how to exercise male headship in a way that led my wife in the same way Jesus would lead her. I have spoken with Joel and shared with him these concerns. Yes, I need to be careful that I don't embolden feminists by how I address my concerns. And Joel needs to be careful that he doesn't embolden tyrants by how he addresses his concerns. Here I stand!

@BiblicalBeauty @freebarbarian They believe they are Abraham’s sons, but also that they need to be secretly raptured so God can deal with Abraham’s “actual” sons. So, no they actually don’t believe they are Abraham’s sons and heirs according to the promise.

@freebarbarian They believe the church does not replace Israel. They do not deny the clear Scriptural teaching of Galatians 3:7.

Learning the song "Father Abraham" in a dispensational church was the most ironic part of my life so far

@abidingbranch @StormThomasV Lol. Dispys think they are Abraham’s sons, but also that they need to be raptured so God can deal with Abraham’s sons. Make it make sense.

@StormThomasV Dispensationalists don’t have a problem with this concept (Galatians 3:7). It’s the conclusion you draw from the principle that believers are all Abraham’s offspring (Galatians 3:29) that we disagree with replacement theology.

@ferrismattic @_cooleb @StormThomasV And are heirs according to the promise, correct? Heirs to say land promises? A child is an heir, but dispys fundamentally reject that because they deny much of the gentile inheritance. That’s why it’s silly for a dispy to sing the song, because they don’t really believe it.

@_cooleb @StormThomasV It need not be one or the other. Dispensationalists affirm that all who believe in Christ are sons of Abraham.

@Brian_Sauve Go get checked out. A sudden change in reaction to alcohol is a common symptom of Lymphoma.

Something happened between age 32 and 33 that made me feel TERRIBLE if I consume almost any amount of alcohol. I've cut back to almost zero outside of weekly communion. To be honest, I don't miss it that much.

@jonahmsaller I believe that too, but is it not both? Don’t you believe God will refine the Earth with fire and then resurrect it?

@JB_Durham80 Are you decidedly Baptist? Issues like this is why polity is so important. Clement of Rome wrote to the Corinthians in the 1st century for firing their pastors wrongly, saying they had NO right to remove the pastor appointed to them. Immature laity shouldn’t have such power.

I was fired this week, as pastor of a local SBC church. My preaching offended the Youth Pastor's wife, so they campaigned to have me terminated. My response: youtu.be/qiOWKgvogno

@EliasDogma @thisisfoster This proves OP’s point. You’re looking at “chapter and verse” examples of baptism, rather than starting at the most logical approach by asking, “What is baptism”? Once you’ve defined what it is, then you have better starting point for determining who are the proper candidates.

Good and necessary consequences: 1. Every biblical baptism required a large body of water (Acts 8:36–38. Note how both the eunuch and Philip "both went down into the water.") 2. Every biblical baptism is depicted as submersion—this is good and necessary by the Greek verb (βαπτίζω), biblical texts describing baptism, and the illustration of Rom 6:4 which connect baptism with "burial [with Christ]." 3. You cannot find a single infant baptized in scripture. It is "good and necessary" that baptisms were administered to volitional individuals that comprehended the gospel. 🙋‍♂️ <-- Credobaptist that does not reject "good and necessary consequences."

This is helpful, actually. Most credobaptists are credobaptists because of a “chapter & verse” hermeneutic that functionally rejects “good and necessary consequences.”

@TPruitt67 Show me where someone from the CN crowd said they don’t think abortion is wrong when an enemy does it.

@Alecforman @ferrismattic Before you go and try and start a new movement of churches, I’d recommend reading the early church fathers, like St. Ignatius/Clement, who were disciples of Peter and John, to see how they approached this scripturally. They were trained by the Apostles and we have their writings.

@ferrismattic Never thought of it this way. Question, for someone praying and thinking about church planting with the vision of multiple campuses, should we just plant church’s instead?

Unpopular opinion: A multi-site church with a preaching pastor and campus pastors at each satellite is in fact an archbishop with bishops under him.

@cyntiajr @redeemed_zoomer Missing the joke, like a true papist.

@redeemed_zoomer Lol. Cherry picking like a true prot.

@chopchopcda_ @ImprecatoryOne Ecclesiology, the worst crisis of all. Came through it an Anglican though.

You think it’s over?? 😂😂

@Darth__Weaver @FaithWithMase Paul says that it’s a sign of the righteousness you have through faith, not the faith itself. Probably because Baptism is something God does to us, not what we do for God.

@FaithWithMase It's a terrific sign of faith but having faith in Christ alone is what saves

@MBurtwrites @IanBurkePerry @irishnick23 @marshalldukat @WannabeAnglican Don’t run away now. You’ve gone against the consensus of the universal church, accused the fathers of rejecting women/the apostles’ teachings due to sexism, and you proselytize your view on every other tweet, while yet to prove your view as anything but a novelty for feminism.

@redroost32 @IanBurkePerry @irishnick23 @marshalldukat @WannabeAnglican Super uninterested in being given assignments. You are ofc welcome to think my stance is a bad one.

So Steve Wood will be the new Archbishop of #ACNA. This is disappointing. I know little about Wood personally, but he's been Bishop of the Diocese of the Carolinas for 12 years & that is not a very good diocese. There were several better choices. I don't understand this.

@MBurtwrites @IanBurkePerry @irishnick23 @marshalldukat @WannabeAnglican Paul’s focus changes to teaching doctrine to specific groups, rather than giving qualifications for an office. Paul often changes subjects quickly. Please show me where someone before second-wave feminism had the same interpretation as yours.

@redroost32 @IanBurkePerry @irishnick23 @marshalldukat @WannabeAnglican I think it’s all one unified letter and flow of thought. Structurally and grammatically, it’s certainly consistent. Even Paul’s word choices overlap. Also worth noting these were very small communities. The idea of multiple layers of leadership is a modern notion