i'll start with don's:
don said "Perhaps because the very next verse in Mark 16 specifically leaves out baptism (those that believe not are damned)."
don,..........well what about the verse after that and the verse after that and the verse after that. water baptism is not mentioned in every scripture in the bible.............why would Jesus make a statement like this anyway......"he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not and is baptized not shall be damned"........WHEN THE ONLY THING IT TAKES TO DAMN A MAN IS A LACK OF FAITH...........WHAT SENSE WOULD THERE BE IN SAYING THE LATTER PART OF THAT???????PLEASE TELL ME!!!!!!!
let me put it another way. the latter part of the verse says this. "he that believeth not shall be damned"............FIRST OF ALL I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT THE PERSON WHO IS DAMNED, I WANT TO KNOW ABOUT THE SAVED PERSON (IN MARK 16:16).......NOW ACCORDING TO MK 16:16 IT TAKES TWO THINGS TO SAVE A MAN, BUT ONLY ONE THING TO DAMN HIM. (REMEMBER IN ROMANS 10:9 IT HAS CONFESSION AND BELIEF) AND YOU LIST BOTH OF THOSE CONDITIONS.........BUT ALL OF A SUDDEN, OVER IN MARK 16:16 BOTH OF THESE CONDITIONS ARE CONNECTED WITH "AND" AND YOU THROW BAPTISM OUT
(don says) While the conjunction is a valid point, a reading of the entire context places the emphasis on belief, not on belief AND baptism.
(what emphasis does Mark 16:16 place on it???????????? "he that BELIEVETH AND IS BAPTIZED SHALL BE SAVED, he that believeth not shall be damned"........................oh, by the way, answer this: on the arguement about the latter part of mark 16:16----you say, well the verse doesn't say "he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not and is baptized not shall be damned"................WHY WOULD A PERSON WHO DOESN'T BELIEVE GO AND BE BAPTIZED????????????????THE ONLY ELIGIBLE CANDIDATE FOR BAPTISM IS A BELIEVER..................AND THE ONLY THING IT TAKES TO SEND A MAN TO HELL IS THE FACT THAT HE DOESN'T BELIEVE............................STAY WITH ME ON THIS AND ANSWER IT!
(SWAIMJ says)Then why doesn't Mark 16:16 say he who does not believe and is not baptized will be condemned? It merely says he who does not believe will be condemned.
i have already talked about this. but we will say it again. Why would Jesus make a statement like this? "he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth and is baptized not shall be damned"...........over in John 3:18 it says "he that believeth not on me is condemned already"......the only thing it takes to damn a man is a lack of faith, so WHY WOULD JESUS SAY THAT IT TAKES TWO THINGS TO CONDEMN HIM??????????AGAIN, THE ONLY ELIGIBLE CANDITATE FOR BAPTISM IS THE BELIEVER. WHY WOULD A PERSON BE BAPTIZED WHO DID NOT BELIEVE??????????
SO TO GET RIGHT TO THE POINT AND TO MAKE IT CRYSTAL CLEAR, THE REASON MARK 16:16 SAYS EXACTLY WHAT IT SAYS AND NOT "HE THAT BELIEVETH NOT AND IS BAPTIZED NOT SHALL BE DAMNED"IS THE FACT THAT THE ONLY THING IT TAKES TO DAMN HIM IS A LACK OF FAITH, AND THE ONLY ELIGIBLE CANDITATE FOR BAPTISM IS THE BELIEVER........................ALSO, I CAN ASK YOU THE QUESTION ABOUT MARK 16:16, WE KNOW WHO THE PERSON WHO IS DAMNED, BUT WHO IS THE SAVED PERSON IN THIS SCRIPTURE????????????????
(MR CASSIDY SAYS)He who boardeth the bus, and sitteth down, shall ride into town. He who boardeth not shall be left behind.
Seems pretty simple to me. What is it that gets you to town? The boarding or the sitting?............mr cassidy, i wonder if you are going to stay with this line of reasoning?.........i could make up any scenerio i wanted to, like for example the bus trip that you have made up in the above example and i could list 2 items connected with "and" and i could make one of them have absolutely nothing to do with my bus trip. (ie).......lets say my destination was dallas texas and my way of traveling was an airplane.............i could say this: "he that boardeth the airplane and combs his hair shall arrive in dallas texas, now which one is necessary to the arrival in dallas texas, the boarding or the combing of the hair?????????????? in your example you have made the implication that a person that wants to go to town has to board the bus but he/she does not necessarily have to sit down to arrive at their destination. here again i could make another one up. he that boardeth the bus and brushes his/her teeth shall go to town............but what would brushing your teeth have to do with arriving at your destination......SO I RAISE THE QUESTION IN YOUR "MADE UP" EXAMPLE, WHAT DOES SITTING DOWN HAVE TO DO WITH ARRIVING AT YOUR DESTINATION???????? (I GUESS IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHOSE BUS YOU ARE RIDING, BECAUSE IF YOU ARE RIDING THE BUS I USED TO RIDE TO GO TO SCHOOL, THEN YES YOU WOULD HAVE TO BOARD THE BUS AND SIT DOWN TO ARRIVE AT YOUR DESTINATION, BECAUSE THE BUS DRIVER WOULD NOT ALLOW ANYONE STANDING!!!!!!!!!!)....NOW ON THE FLIP SIDE OF THIS, I JUST SHOWED YOU TWO EXAMPLES THAT I COULD HAVE MADE UP USING ONE ITEM THAT IS REVELANT TO ARRIVING AT YOUR DESTINATION AND THEN ANOTHER ITEM THAT IS TOTALLY IRREVELANT TO ARRIVING AT YOUR DESTINATION.................................................................NOW LETS LOOK AT THE OTHER SIDE. I WANT TO SHOW AN EXAMPLE WHERE BOTH ITEMS ARE REVELANT.
"HE THAT EATS HIS FOOD AND DIGESTS HIS FOOD SHALL LIVE", YOU SEE, BOTH ITEMS ARE REVELANT TO LIFE, (CAN YOU DIGEST WITHOUT EATING OR CAN YOU EAT WITHOUT DIGESTING?)...............NOW I WANT TO ASK YOU SOMETHING.............WHAT SENSE WOULD THERE BE IN SAYING THIS "HE THAT EATS HIS FOOD AND DIGESTS HIS FOOD SHALL LIVE, BUT HE THAT EATETH NOT AND DIGESTETH NOT SHALL DIE"?????????????????????? (THE ONLY THING I WOULD NEED TO SAY IN THE ABOVE EXAMPLE IS THIS......."HE THAT EATS HIS FOOD AND DIGESTS HIS FOOD SHALL LIVE, BUT HE THAT EATETH NOT SHALL DIE"................YOU SEE, IT GOES HAND IN HAND, THE PERSON WHO DOES NOT EAT CANNOT POSSIBLY DIGEST!..................AND COMPARING MARK 16:16 "HE THAT BELIEVETH AND IS BAPTIZED SHALL BE SAVED, BUT HE THAT BELIEVETH NOT SHALL BE DAMNED"..........IT GOES HAND IN HAND ALSO THE PERSON WHO DOES NOT BELIEVE CANNOT POSSIBLY BE SCRIPTURALLY BAPTIZED........................so mr cassidy, arguments like you have made in the above example with the bus and sitting down and your destination, is not worth much when you have chosen one of your "conditions" as being totally irrevalant to your arrival at your destination.........and i just showed a person could make this sound either way, just by the conditions he/she chooses to put into their example.
DANNY SAYS
IF WE ADD ANYTHING TO GOD'S WORD................................BE CAREFUL BECAUSE THE EXACT SAME WARNING FOR THOSE WHO ADD TO HIS WORD IS EXTENDED TO THOSE WHO TAKE AWAY FROM HIS WORD........WHAT ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO TAKE THESE VERSES OUT OF THE BIBLE????????? (MARK 16:16, ACTS 2:38, I PETER 3:21, ACTS 22:16)