You are not saved by faith alone

You need both works and faith to be saved, protestant-anons.
James 2:14-18
>14 What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them?
>15 Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food.
>16 If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.
>18 But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.” Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds.
>19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.
Even demons believe in God, as the passage says, and they certainly aren't saved.

Many protestants like to quote Galatians 2:16("know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ.") but this refers to the Jewish Law of the Old Testament that Jesus Christ fulfilled. This just means you don't have to get circumcised and you can eat pork, etc. This letter was sent in the context that many Jewish converts to Christianity believed that the Gentile converts should be circumcised and follow Jewish law.

Other protestants quote Ephesians 2:8(“For by grace you have been saved THROUGH THE FAITH [διὰ τῆς πίστεως]. And this is not from yourselves; it is the gift of God.”) but this verse actually refers to baptism. This is evident when you compare this verse to Colossians 2:12(“… having been buried with him in BAPTISM, BY WHICH you were also raised with him THROUGH THE FAITH [διὰ τῆς πίστεως]…”)

Other urls found in this thread:

catholic.org/news/hf/faith/story.php?id=51077
kingjamesbibleonline.org/Philippians-Chapter-4/#8
kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-5/#28
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Ephesians 2:8&9

Dead faith is not salvation related

ofc, you have to also be catholic to obtain salvation

Ephesians 2:8 refers to baptism. Compare:
>Ephesians 2:8 "For by grace you have been saved THROUGH THE FAITH [διὰ τῆς πίστεως]. And this is not from yourselves; it is the gift of God."
with
>Colossians 2:12 “… having been buried with him in BAPTISM, BY WHICH you were also raised with him THROUGH THE FAITH [διὰ τῆς πίστεως]…"

Colossians makes it incredibly clear that the grace referred to in Ephesians is the grace granted by Baptism, that of being born again and having the original sin cleaned from you. You still need to maintain your faith in Christ and living by his example to go to Heaven.

Mere faith is not enough. James 2:19 makes this incredibly clear. Even DEMONS believe in God. Even Satan believes God is real, he originally resided in Heaven after all. But faith is not enough. You have to follow the laws of God. Unrepentant murderers and the like cannot get into Heaven just by being Christian.

I quoted that in my post you retard. It refers to Baptism. See:

this

Romans 4 debunks the idea that James 2 is referring to justification before God.

>For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory, BUT NOT BEFORE GOD.

James 2 is referring to being justified in the eyes of man. This is easily proven by the fact that both Paul and James are referring to the exact same story of Abraham being justified by works... except Paul explicitly adds, "but not before God". Only in man's eyes.

It's also proven from within James 2 itself, because within James 2 there's a story of a lady who knocks on a door of a Christian man with faith, and she asks him for bread. Instead of giving her bread, the Christian man just tells her "Good luck and I hope you find some bread, bye bye". And he asks, "Who does it profit?" Well, faith without works profit no one except yourself. The example is clear, because the person who is not being profited is the woman. The man who refuses to give the bread is still a saved Christian, but without works he's not profiting anyone else, and no one can see that he's saved.

Very likely this.

This is probably the only time I've seen a Catholic actually quote the Bible. But being a Catholic he hasn't read the whole thing, so he doesn't understand the context, and misunderstands what James is saying.

>Even DEMONS believe in God. Even Satan believes God is real, he originally resided in Heaven after all. But faith is not enough.
Of course they know that God is real, they just deny that gospel and the Lord Jesus Christ. Satan isn't saved just because he's aware of God's existence. He needs to accept the gospel, which he does not. The Bible even mentions how people can "taste the truth" and "have knowledge of the truth" but still reject it, and be unsaved. If I give you the gospel and you have 100% understand it, but still reject it, you're not saved.

>hurr durr I should ignore the interpretations of the people who actually compiled the Bible and go off some hick who doesn't even know Greek's misinterpretation

There is no such thing as faith without works, idiot.

Thanks for the confirmation.

>hurr durr mistranslate the greek when writing the latin bible and keep it anyway

Colossians 2:12 "In which (baptism) you were also raised with him THROUGH YOUR FAITH"
The faith is what raises here, baptism being a work unrelated to salvation

Acts 16:31 “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved"
John 3:16 "whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life"

And if you don't follow Jesus' examples and teachings and do good work then you are rejecting the Gospels. Believing that Jesus is God and believing that the Gospels are true is not enough, you must take them to heart and truly follow them with your life to be saved. There are tons of Christians out there who lie and steal and fornicate and know it's wrong, but never try to change their ways or repent. Those people will not go to Heaven unless they change their ways.

Martin Luther believed that there was, and that one could go to Heaven just by believing in God even if they had no works.

Afterlife talks belong to Fuck off my board religionfag.

in hoc signo vinces

>Colossians 2:12 "In which (baptism) you were also raised with him THROUGH YOUR FAITH"
You completely pulled that translation out of your arse. Even your pic clearly contradicts what you wrote. Colossians states that baptism is the means by which you are raised through the faith.

lmao don't you have street kneelers shitting up your country baguette

Not according to contradictory catholic doctrine in the catechism

You aren't qualified to interpret the Bible unless you AT LEAST know Greek. Most Protestant misinterpretations are based off the English text and are easily cleared up by reading the original Greek text.

What mistranslations? Also most Catholic theologians study the Bible in Greek.

>Martin Luther believed that there was
Well, there was also Jesus. But I guess he's a secondary character in the Catholic church seeing how what he said is mostly ignored.

>Martin Luther believed that there was, and that one could go to Heaven just by believing in God even if they had no works.
Explicit source? If your position necessitates believing your opponent is stupid enough to simply ignore "Faith without works is dead," you should consider the possibility that you are the one who holds the nonsensical position, which presumably started when you put your faith in the church instead of the Holy Spirit.

only God knows who is saved is whate they are saying

google sola fide

That was the NASB

Sounds like we're in contention on "by" versus "in"
εν is normally translated "in"

Are you fucking retarded? This whole thread was about refuting the Lutheran doctrine that one can go to Heaven without works. I don't care if you say "you need faith and works" or "you need faith, and works are part of faith". Both positions require good works. It's people who think that you can go to Heaven merely through belief while living a life of unrepentant sin who are wrong.

>which presumably started when you put your faith in the church instead of the Holy Spirit.
Your errors presumably started when you decided that you understood the Bible better than the people who compiled it, despite you not knowing a word of Greek.

>This just means you don't have to get circumcised and you can eat pork, etc. This letter was sent in the context that many Jewish converts to Christianity believed that the Gentile converts should be circumcised and follow Jewish law.

That's not what it means. Paul is specifically referring to the entire law itself, not just the ceremonial law that Christians shouldn't follow whatsoever. This is explained in detail in Hebrews 9 and 10, where Paul tells us that the Jewish laws of animal sacrifices and carnal ordinances were always meant to be "symbolic" of Christ's sacrifice and "a figure for the time now present". Keep in mind that Paul still wants us to follow the Old Testament law, he just underlines that following the law can't save you. Salvation is through faith only. When confronted by Catholic "logic" Paul even goes out of his way to explain what he means:

>AND IF IT BE BY GRACE, IT IS NO MORE OF WORKS: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work (Romans 11:6).

Do you understand now? Do you know the meaning of "grace"?

>Other protestants quote Ephesians 2:8. but this verse actually refers to baptism. This is evident when you compare this verse to Colossians 2:12.

I don't really understand where you get the idea that Ephesians 2 is referring to Colossians 2, but either way, Colossians 2 isn't even implying that baptism is a requirement for salvation, just that baptism should come as a result of being saved. Just look at the sentence: "Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him THROUGH THE FAITH of the operation of God". We know from clear Scripture that you should get baptized as a result of faith, because when the man comes to the water and asks, "What doth hinder me to be baptized", the answer is, "If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."

Jesus didn't die to save fallen angels / demons. Ofcourse believing in Jesus doesn't matter for them, but for mankind it does

That's not what they're saying at all, they're simultaneously saying: "you must be catholic to be saved" and "those who do not know the (catholic) church but seek God may achieve salvation"

>believes in life
>thinks an "afterlife" is absurd
Sup Forums is and has always been a Christian board, you stupid newfaggot redditor. Get the fuck off my website, delusional atheshit.
Already have. Thanks for the non-answer.

you mistranslated it as "THROUGH YOUR FAITH" when even your picture showed it's "THROUGH THE FAITH".
The text is: "having been buried with him in BAPTISM, BY WHICH you were also raised with him THROUGH THE FAITH".
So it clearly states that Baptism is the means by which you are raised through the faith. Baptism is the gift from God by which you gained grace mentioned in Ephesians 2:8.

Lutherans view baptism as a necessary sacrament for salvation

>And if you don't follow Jesus' examples and teachings and do good work then you are rejecting the Gospels.
Doing what Jesus says is not the gospel. The gospel is defined within the Bible as believing in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Either way, I debunked your entire false argument from James 2 in this post, which you chose to conveniently ignore:

...

nobody takes protestants seriously, they have schisms over fashion

>better than the people who compiled it
How is this not denial of the Holy Spirit?

John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

Catholics are retarded.

Matthew 5:17-18

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets

He's referring to the Law of Moses. The Law of God(10 Commandments) remained and you must follow them. See pic related. You're right about the Law of Moses, but the distinction is important.

>I don't really understand where you get the idea that Ephesians 2 is referring to Colossians 2
They both say THROUGH THE FAITH, whereas in the rest of the NT faith has no article. They're clearly referring to the same thing. Ephesians tells you that you received the gift of grace THROUGH THE FAITH, and Colossians tells you that you were raised THROUGH THE FAITH by Baptism. Nowhere does it say that Baptism is a result of grace, it says Baptism is the means BY WHICH you were raised through the faith.

See Ephesians. Faith is what truly matters. Works don't hurt. But am atheist who does good works.... Sorry bud...

Matthew 5:17-18

There isn't a definite article in greek, why do you believe "the" is the correct translation? That doesn't impact interpretation very much anyway. The question is, "what role does baptism play in salvation"?

To view baptism as necessary for salvation, you must believe either:
>salvation is a result of works
>baptism doesn't count as a work

Colossians 2 isn't sufficient evidence in argument against this fact, even if you read it as "raised by baptism" instead of "raised in baptism", in context of the whole NT this clearly can't contradict salvation being a result of works

What it says is that those with invincible ignorance, i.e those who never even heard of the Catholic Faith at all(say a Native American pre-1492) may be saved despite not being Catholic.

Of course this is a heretical Vatican 2 Doctrine that I don't agree with. I'm a sedevacantist.

I quoted and explained that in my OP illiterate retard.

>"know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ."
Doesn't this mean that between a person who applies divine law without faith and one who applies divine law with faith, only the latter is "justified", i.e. in the right?

I don't get why exegetic interpretations are so convoluted as to give people a reason to ignore divine law while it precisely makes a difference between applying good without faith (which amounts to nothing) and applying good with faith (which is righteous).

Anyone care to elaborate without using "muh majority interpretation"?

The memes write themselves

You need Baptism to receive grace, as Baptism washes away the original sin. After that you need faith and works. You need Baptism to go to Heaven, but being baptised doesn't guarantee you go to Heaven.

t. Gnostic antitheist, wrong guess. Assumptions are just that and silence is more valuable than talking nonsence.
Your superstitions and literal understandings are cringy af, muslim tier.
Also for a christian you fail to live by your principles which will lead you to your hell.

It's the Protestants making the convoluted explanations making distinctions between "dead" and living faith, and saying that faith includes works, etc. etc.

The Catholic position is simple. You need to believe in God and follow his teachings(i.e doing good works) to go to Heaven. The Bible makes it clear you need both.

>You need Baptism to receive grace
Wrong.
Baptism is simply an ancient practice done by the Egyptians and probably the Sumerians before them to chain brainlets to a belief system.

A heretic cannot be a Pope as Catholic dogma makes clear. In the 1958 Election, they announced the election of a Pope AND THEN CANCELLED IT, before eventually electing a different Pope instead(thanks Jews!). This "Pope" John XIII, was a formal heretic and the one who called Vatican II. As a formal heretic he was not a valid Pope and therefore his council was invalid.

>Colossians 2:12: “… having been buried with him in BAPTISM, BY WHICH you were also raised with him THROUGH THE FAITH [διὰ τῆς πίστεως]…”

You don't have strong reading comprehension

Exactly what I am saying.

>Matthew 7:21-23- “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.”

That wasn't the point. I was criticizing this:
>This just means you don't have to get circumcised and you can eat pork, etc.
in the light of its context:
>This letter was sent in the context that many Jewish converts to Christianity believed that the Gentile converts should be circumcised and follow Jewish law.

Am i the only one who interprets this as "ok jews, you don't believe in your messiah anyway, so don't speak of what is righteous and what isn't", instead of "fuck jews and their laws, we're absolved of them"? What would make your interpretation more valid than mine, for example?

So you’re admitting God regularly allows people to be born in locations where knowing the existence of Christ is impossible. Why would he do that?

Matthew 7:21-23- “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.”

explain this faggot

There either isn't any such thing as a gnostic position, or all positions are gnostic and thus "gnostic antitheist" is irrelevant. I am fed up with the misuse of these words mainly by "atheists" who gargle the semen of a handful of famous, loudmouthed new-atheists. I am not an antitheist or you are using "t." wrongly.
>Your superstitions and literal understandings are cringy af, muslim tier.
The only thing cringy here is that you seem to think proclaiming how you feel constitutes an argument.

redundant* not "irrelevant"

What about your current pope?
>Pope Francis says atheists can do good and go to heaven too!
>catholic.org/news/hf/faith/story.php?id=51077

John 14:6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

It's like Catholics deliberately go against everything Jesus said.

Fuck god. No, buttfuck god and its alleged supporters

...

That doesn't answer my question.

Proddies are just Jews in disguise

yes, that is correct.

By Gnostic antitheist I mean that I don't believe in a true religion because there is no absolute truth since reality is a lie constructed by the limits of human experience. But have seen the light and can't stray from it.
> t. Brainlet
Lurk some more.

...

The apostles and the other disciples of Christ still saw themselves as Jewish, and kept following Jewish Law for a while after his death and resurrection. They just saw themselves as a sect of Judaism rather than Christians(that term only came later). When gentiles started to convert to Christianity, there was controversy over whether gentiles should have to be circumcised and follow the Laws of Moses. Paul believed that shouldn't be, and he sent that letter saying that you don't need the Laws of Moses to be saved.

Google what "by which" means you faggot. it says "BAPTISM, by which" so which clearly refers to Baptism. and it goes on "by which [Baptism] you were also raised with him THROUGH THE FAITH"

making it clear you are raised through the faith by baptism, you fucking illiterate piece of shit.

Guess what, you're not saved by Jewish mythology either.

None of this is real. You're literal Jewish pawns and their weapons of societal destruction.

Hmm. It doesn't seem fair that we have to have faith in God despite no modern verifiable deeds, but he doesn't have to have faith in us and requires deeds.

sola fide is incoherent because it says works does not matter. So all one need is just to believe and he can sin all he wants. There is no excuse because saying true faith have works means works are a must and now factor into salvation, otherwise it is something that is controlling the one who believes and so no free will.

So Sola Fide can either mean there is no free will, or it is inconsistent

Sorry I quoted the wrong post. It isn't a denial of the Holy Spirit. It's just history. The Church]'s decision was guided by the Holy Spirit, and the Church Christ founded on Peter cannot teach in error as Christ promised in the New Testament.

But if you're just gonna say that the Bible fell out of the sky one day you're a retard denying well-documented history.

Francis is a manifest heretic and an anti-Pope.

This verse is contrary to works-based salvation. When you meet Jesus face to face, what will you say as one who believes your works will save you?

>Matthew 7:21-23

You'll notice it doesn't say you're not saved without deeds.

>Paul believed that shouldn't be, and he sent that letter saying that you don't need the Laws of Moses to be saved.
So Paul advertently modified what may very well be divine law because he didn't believe it was correct? Why wouldn't he assume Jesus would object if his followers weren't doing things right and thus singlehandedly modify traditional customs based on scriptures?

>I will make those who are of the synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars--I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you.
The Bible literally calls the Talmudic "Jews" of today Satanists.

Except Matthew had a whole parable of Sheeps and goats and of the virgins and the lamps both indicating the need for works in some way. So that over there makes Matthew inconsistent, or it means other shit

Are you fucking retarded? That verse says "Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven" meaning not all who believe in God will go to Heaven.

Then it goes on to say "but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven." meaning you have to follow the will of the Father as well as believing in him.

The "workers of lawlessness" are retards like you telling people to ignore Jesus' teachings and laws because you think they don't matter.

Read the pic in that other post i quoted. The Law of Moses was no longer necessary. It wasn't a decision Paul made, he was just clarifying it to a congregation.

It means that anyone professing their works, like you, will be denied having ever been known by Jesus. When you meet Jesus you will plead with Him saying how much good you have done, how many people who have helped, and he will deny knowing you.

What is "the will of the father"? The Bible tells us.

>John 6:40 KJV

And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

The "will of the father" is belief on Christ, not works.

>16 If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.
>18 But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.” Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds.

How do I display my faith in my deeds? Aside from not masturbating and giving my change to charity, what can I do? Because;

>Even demons believe in God, as the passage says, and they certainly aren't saved

I've had non-penetrative gay sex, and I really, really regret it. I'm basically that demon.

Isn't homosexuality unrepentable? Don't these deeds pollute me forever? At the very least, everyone in Heaven will know I commited sodomy, right?

Also - I know life action porn is adultery, but what about images like pic related? In the Bible it says;

>kingjamesbibleonline.org/Philippians-Chapter-4/#8
>8 Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.

Or is it bad because it might induce lust, in other words adultery in my heart as Jesus says;

>kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-5/#28
>28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Giving up these images to avoid adultery in my heart would be faith through deeds, correct - faith that god will reward me in Heaven for not indulging in adultery on Earth, correct?

I ask because they aren't real women, and I want to be like them - cute, honest, pure, fantastic. Heaven people. They're lovely, and doesn't that mean we can think of them?

If we than engage in NoFap, aren't we then proving that we aren't in fact interested in sex?

Matthew 7:24-27- “Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock… And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, AND DOETH THEM NOT, shall be likened unto a FOOLISH MAN, which built his house upon the sand: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and IT FELL: and great was the fall of it.”

Protestants believe that you can just ignore Jesus' teachings because all you need is faith.

Where is the part about not receiving salvation?

>It means that anyone professing their works, like you, will be denied having ever been known by Jesus
Yeah buddy. I'm sure Jesus will say "People who believed in me AND lived their lives by my example are going straight to hell, but the people who believed in me and lived sinful lives contary to my example are going straight to Heaven."

we still believe in Jesus retard, we just aren't so arrogrant as to ignore his example.

such as when he foretold what's happen to people like you:
Matthew 7:24-27- “Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock… And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, AND DOETH THEM NOT, shall be likened unto a FOOLISH MAN, which built his house upon the sand: And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and IT FELL: and great was the fall of it.”

Faith means belief plus actualization. That is, you believe AND you act. But action does not mean "works" in the sense that is under dispute. The "works" referred to means ritual actions. The pharisees focused on ceremonies and ritual acts, and believed that proper performance of these would mean salvation. They were wrong. Works, in the sense of rites, ritual actions, and ceremonies, is useless.

So if you believe, and act in your life in accordance with that belief, then you have faith. Thus faith alone is sufficient. Belief without action is not sufficient. Belief plus action, that is, the actualization of belief in daily life, is faith.

Example: someone who dies for their belief, is actually performing an action, and thus demonstrating faith.

Fair enough, still dubious as to why Jesus wasn't being specific about this though.

Ephesians 2:8-9
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

It's a metaphor buddy. He isn't actually talking about houses. If you don't follow his teachings and examples, you are a fool who will fall into damnation as did the devil.

I explained that in the OP, read it.

The metaphor is that if you do not act in a way that the bible instructs will bring you closer to Jesus, you will suffer because of it.
It doesn't say you will not receive salvation.

>Belief without action is not sufficient. Belief plus action, that is, the actualization of belief in daily life, is faith.
Then we're in agreement. It's some protestants who believe that "death faith" as they call it, belief without actions, still go to Heaven. You cannot go to Heaven as an unrepentant sinner.

Living their lives by example is not what you are proposing.

You are saying that Jesus' death was not enough to save a single soul from Hell and that works are also needed to save them.

You say you aren't arrogant, yet say "Sorry Jesus, you weren't enough, look at all the wonderful things I did so I could get to Heaven" and as a result, He will deny ever knowing you.

I'm fully aware of the distinction between the law of Moses and the law of God, but you're implying that we aren't supposed to follow anything except the 10 commandments, which simply is not true. We as Christians should absolutely follow every part of the law. The only part of the law that has been finished with Christ are the ceremonial law, the ordinances, the animal sacrifices, burnt offering, holidays, and so on. Paul makes no distinction between the 10 commandments written by God's finger, and Moses' laws -- they are all commandments of God that we as Christians should follow. But Paul does make numerous references to the specific Jewish laws that are done away with, and he specifically calls those "the carnal ordinances", even in Colossians 2, he says "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross". He's not referring to every single thing written and taught by Moses, he's referring solely to the carnal ordinances made for the Jews to be symbolic of the first coming of Christ.

>They both say THROUGH THE FAITH, whereas in the rest of the NT faith has no article
First of all, Ephesians 2:8 doesn't say "the faith", only "faith". Second of all, that's still irrelevant to the context and understanding of the verse. Just because he says "the faith" doesn't mean that it's specifically referring to a particular verse in another book. Even if you somehow magically manage to link Colossians 2:12 and Ephesians 2:8 together, Colossians 2:12 isn't even implying that baptism is a requirement for salvation.

You just claimed that "nowhere does it say that Baptism is a result of grace", but I specifically mentioned to you Acts 8:37 where a man SPECIFICALLY ASKS what's hindering him from being baptized, and Philip answers that "If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest".

checked

t. newfag misusing memes and telling me to lurk moar* for no apparent reason other than to be a twat
>there is no absolute truth since reality is a lie constructed by the limits of human experience.
t. underage b&
This is a converse fallacy, i.e. it implies that experience implying reality, implies reality implies experience and thus that they are equivalent. It doesn't and they aren't, necessarily. If you would equivocate subjective and objective reality, it is also a reduction fallacy, i.e. it would imply that experience implying reality, implies only experience implies reality. It doesn't. Learn to think and stop guzzling the philosophies of other people just because you happen to like their views.

I've spent my entire life trying to wake you dumb motherfuckers up to the evil all around us. I am happy with my works.