[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is where you are wrong. You just admitted that you only believe half of this verse as the "second half negates the first half".DAVEH: Now look who is calling the kettle black, Glenn. If you are going to quote me, please quote (and interpret) me accurately......
***********
IMHO, to logically conclude that the second half of that passage negates
the first half........
"He that believeth AND IS BAPTIZED shall be saved;......."
........is seriously risky.......particularly when he has suggested
baptism is necessary elsewhere.
***********
..........Do you understand 'logic' from a mathematical standpoint, Glenn? The fact that the 2 statements: BELIEF + BAPTISM = SALVATION, and NO BELIEF = NO SALVATION does NOT logically mean that FAITH --- (minus) BAPTISM = SALVATION, which is the way you are interpreting the passage. Jesus said belief AND baptism is needed for salvation. He also said that those who do NOT believe, and those who do NOT endure to the end will not receive salvation. Assuming that he was implying that baptism is not necessary for salvation is logically invalid.
I understand why you are a Mormon. OFFICIAL Mormon doctrine teaches I am under the influence of Satan because I follow the current Bible only.DAVEH: I think you have a lot to learn about "Mormon doctrine", Glenn. The problem is that you think you know "Mormon doctrine" from extrapolating your preconceived notions, rather than asking somebody who is intimately familiar with them.
--DAVEH: Then let me quote it....... ".....but he that believeth not shall be damned." Mk 16:16 .........I accept the Lord's comment about this. Those who do not believe won't enjoy the saving grace of baptism. IMHO, to logically conclude that the second half of that passage negates the first half........
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
