Chapabel wrote: Claire wrote:
Chapabel wrote:There’s no such thing as being born again of water.
Jesus speaks of being born again of water and the Holy Spirit (Jn 3:5)
You have completely screwed this up. Jesus says nothing about being born again of water and the Spirit. John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God
. Being born again refers only to the spiritual birth since every person has already experienced the physical birth. You fail to see how misinformed you are concerning the doctrine of salvation.
As I said, Jesus speaks of being born again of water and the Holy Spirit: "Jesus answered: Amen, amen I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." (John 3:5). Your translation leaves out the word "again", but even so, how can you read that verse, and decide it has nothing to do with being born again in a spiritual sense? And, you comment on physical birth...but does that verse have anything to do with physical birth in your opinion? I cannot help but think you're horribly confused.
Chapabel wrote: Claire wrote:
Chapabel wrote:Having a child-like faith can lead to saving faith in Christ. However, having only a child-like faith does not mean you’re saved, it means you’re gullible.
Jesus speaks of being born again of water and the Holy Spirit (Jn 3:5), and that unless one becomes as a child in faith, they cannot enter the kingdom of God (Mt. 18:3). Sincere faith (trust) in the LORD breeds good works, revealing one born of God (1 Jn 4:7). If you think it's gullible to have childlike faith in the LORD, so be it, for it leads souls to Heaven.
It's not gullible to have child-like faith in Christ. Go back and read exactly what I wrote. For crying out loud. Again, I don't know if you're trying to be cute or you really are this stupid.
I did read what you said and I knew you'd say this. But, Chap, why would you mention gullibility, when it should be obvious I used "childlike faith" in context of having faith in Jesus? I knew you would respond exactly as you did, because you cannot help but be contradictory, and if you can't criticize directly, you will still try to indirectly. You could not resist and it's made you predictable.
Chapabel wrote:This is another example of either your deception or stupidity. You originally claimed Jesus wants all His children under one shepherd in reference to the Pope. I said I was under one Shepherd, Christ. Then you started your little rant about me hanging up my robes. You have twisted this conversation into something ridicules. I don't condemn the use of the word "shepherd". I just refuse to allow the Pope be my shepherd because Jesus already is. This is why people find it so frustrating dealing with you. You twist, distort and manipulate posts.
Jesus spoke of one fold, under one shepherd, and He is the good shepherd, who also became the lamb led to the slaughter. And, before His ascension to Heaven, He chose Peter to be first among equals in shepherdship over one fold, one Church. He was the top "under-shepherd" on Earth, as are his successors, but Jesus is the the divine Head of the Church. Due to your misconception Catholics have "allegiance" to the Pope over Jesus, that's why I asked if you'll hang up your pastoral robes, because if you think the Pope should not be followed as a shepherd, then why should anyone follow YOU as their shepherd? It does not matter if you put "under" or any other of prefix before the word "shepherd", you're still a type of shepherd. But, of course you won't hang up your robes, it's been established in the Bible.