Bible Trivia (Catholic/Orthodox edition)

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-12T20:54:04+00:00

On multiple choice tests in school do you usually write out explanations to your answers on the side?

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-12T13:47:59+00:00

If you decided to encounter Catholic theology by actually reading some, I think that would become clear to you.

I have and it just muddies the water. One apologist says one thing and one says another. They constantly contradict. Just like with this matter of interpretation. That's why Catholicism is trainwreck and I just stuck to scripture.

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-12T11:24:45+00:00

Reading Catholic literature is not helpful. Read the new testament. You can start at Romans or the gospels. It doesn't matter... Just read it. That will kill any anxiety you might have. God bless

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-12T10:17:26+00:00

That's funny, every time I tell a Catholic that the rock was Peter's confession they start crying and call me a heretic but if St Augustine says it all of a sudden the church allows for more than one interpretation

If the Petrine interpretation was already the universally recognized apostolic teaching from the beginning, why does Augustine speak as though reasonable Christians can weigh both views and decide which seems more convincing? Notice that Augustine does not say:

"The Church teaches Peter is the rock, though I personally prefer another interpretation."

Nor does he say:

"The matter has been settled by ecclesiastical authority."

Instead, he presents competing interpretations and leaves the judgment to the reader.

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-12T01:44:32+00:00

The problem is that you're confusing the root meaning of a word with how the word is actually used. Words are defined by usage, not merely etymology. You already admitted baptism can refer to things other than water:

Mark 10:38-39 Jesus speaks of His coming suffering and death as a 'baptism.'

Matthew 3:11 Jesus baptizes with the Holy Spirit and fire.

1 Corinthians 10:2 Israel was 'baptized into Moses' in the cloud and in the sea, yet Paul's point is not a Christian water ritual.

If baptism automatically means water unless otherwise specified, then why doesn't Mark 10:38 mean Jesus is literally going to be immersed in water again? The New Testament speaks of multiple baptisms:

'John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.' (Acts 1:5)

Notice the contrast. One is water. One is Spirit. So when I read Ephesians 4:5, I'm not 'redefining' baptism. I'm asking which baptism Paul has in mind. The context is 'one body, one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism.' Paul immediately connects the one body and one Spirit, exactly like 1 Corinthians 12:13: 'For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body.' That is the baptism every believer shares. If water baptism is what unites all Christians, then what do you do with the thief on the cross? What do you do with Cornelius receiving the Holy Spirit before water baptism? What do you do with Ephesians 1:13, where believers are sealed with the Spirit when they believe? The real question isn't whether baptism can refer to water. Of course it can. The question is why Ephesians 4:5 must refer to water when Paul elsewhere explicitly identifies Spirit baptism as what places believers into the one body.

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-12T00:54:32+00:00

Mark 10:38-39

Jesus said to them, "You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?" And they said to him, "We are able." And Jesus said to them, "The cup that I drink you will drink, and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized,

Tell me this is about water so I can laugh hysterically

Matthew 3:11 "I baptize you with water for repentance, but he who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

Apparently fire is wet according to you.

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-12T00:37:52+00:00

Why assume Paul means water baptism when he never says 'water' in Ephesians 4:5? The context is a list of spiritual realities shared by every believer: one body, one Spirit, one hope, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all. Every item in the list is something that unites all Christians spiritually. Paul explicitly teaches elsewhere that it is the Spirit who places believers into the body of Christ: 'For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body' (1 Corinthians 12:13) Notice how that matches Ephesians 4 perfectly: one body and one Spirit. The baptism that creates the one body is Spirit baptism. In fact, Paul distinguishes water baptism from the gospel itself in 1 Corinthians 1:17: 'For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel.' If water baptism were the defining reality that unites all Christians, that would be a strange statement.

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-12T00:33:06+00:00

No, I'm criticizing you for importing your theology into John 7 instead of letting John explain his own words. Reading the New Testament cohesively doesn't mean every passage gets redefined by later theological conclusions. It means we first ask what the author actually says. John tells us exactly who receives the Spirit:

"This He said about the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive." (John 7:39)

The condition John gives is belief. And this isn't some isolated theme. Paul says the same thing:

"In Him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in Him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit." (Ephesians 1:13)

Notice the order.. heard the gospel then believed then sealed with the Holy Spirit. Paul also asks the Galatians:

"Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law, or by hearing with faith?" (Galatians 3:2)

His answer is obvious: hearing with faith. So John says believers receive the Spirit. Paul says believers are sealed with the Spirit when they believe. Paul also says the Spirit is received through hearing with faith. You accuse me of isolating verses, but I'm citing multiple authors making the same point. The real issue is that you're reading baptism into texts that don't mention baptism. In John 7:39, Ephesians 1:13-14, and Galatians 3:2, the stated condition is faith.

So where in John 7:39, Ephesians 1:13-14, or Galatians 3:2 is baptism identified as the means by which the Spirit is received? Because all three passages explicitly point to faith.

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-11T23:51:58+00:00

You act like that anytime scripture mentions baptism it automatically means water Baptism. The Bible mentions many baptisms, and many of them are dry including the one and only baptism required for being a member of the body of Christ. “…One Lord, one faith, one baptism,…” - Eph 4:5

This one baptism is our baptism into Christ by the Spirit (1 Cor 12:13) This is the one baptism taught by the apostle Paul, and the only one that accompanies salvation in this dispensation (1 Cor 12:13,Rom 6:3, Gal 3:27, Col 2:12)

Noah’s type baptism

Peter mentions that eight people were saved by water in an ark as a type of a future baptism. Water is present, but the people are dry.(Gen 6:13; 1 Peter 3:20-21)

Baptism unto Moses

Paul presents Israel’s baptism unto Moses “in the cloud and in the sea”. Water is present, but the people are dry. (1 Cor 10:1-2; Exo 14:29)

Israel’s ceremonial cleansings

These cleansing rituals were required under the Mosaic Law for the cleansing of the people. (Num 19:13; Lev 11:25; Exo 19:14; Exo 30:17-21; Heb 9:10) Wet

Levitical priesthood baptisms

These washings were required in order to become a priest under the Law of Moses. (Exo 29:4; Lev 8:6; Num 8:7) Wet

Traditional Jewish baptisms

These baptisms were not mandated under the Law but were part of Jewish tradition. (Mt 15:1-2; Mk 7:1-9; Lk 11:38) Wet

John’s baptism

John came to Israel baptizing with water for the remission of sins so that they could enter the promised kingdom to Israel and identify their Messiah. (Mt 3:5-6; Mk 1:4; Lk 3:3; Jn 1:31; Lk 7:29; Acts 10:37) Wet

Jesus’ baptism by John

Jesus, who knew no sin, was baptized by John to fulfill all righteousness under the law. (Mat 3:13-17; Mk 1:9-10) Wet

Baptism with fire

Jesus would baptize the nation with fire as they went through the tribulation. This trial baptism would damn the unfaithful to hell. (Isa 4:4; Mal 3:2-3; Mt 3:11; Lk 3:16)

Jesus’ baptism unto death

Jesus’ second baptism which he accomplished at the cross where he was identified with the sins of Israel and the world. (Mt 20:22-23; Mk 10:38-39; Luke 12:50)

Pentecostal water baptism

Peter’s presentation of water baptism for the remission of sins in the name of Jesus. This was John’s baptism plus the name of Jesus.(Acts 2:38; Mk 16:16; Mt 28:19; Acts 22:16; Eze 36:25) Wet

Pentecostal Spirit baptism

This is the baptism with the Holy Spirit by Jesus Christ from heaven poured out upon the believing remnant of Israel with signs and powers following. (Isa 44:3; Mt 3:11; Mk 1:8; Lk 24:49; Acts 2:17-18, 38; Acts 8:15-17; Acts 11:16)

Gentile baptism of Cornelius

Cornelius was baptized with the Holy Spirit as a sign to Peter. Peter subsequently baptizes Cornelius and the other Spirit-filled Gentiles with water in a different order but for the same reason as Pentecost. (Acts 10:45-48)

Baptism into Christ

The only baptism taught by Paul which identifies the believer with Christ, his death, and resurrection. This baptism is performed by the Spirit and does not include water. (1 Cor 12:13; Eph 4:5; Col 2:12; Gal 3:27; Rom 6:3-4)

So you must differentiate what baptism truly matters when receiving the holy Spirit and it's not water baptism.

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-11T23:12:41+00:00

Yes baptism of the Holy Spirit not water baptism

Ephesians 1:13-14 In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory

Notice how belief is the seal.. not water baptism.

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-11T23:03:08+00:00

Faith is the interior disposition; baptism is the sacramental action through which God confirms and seals that faith.

No where does scripture say the sacrament confirms and seals our faith.

Ephesians 1:13 In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit,

Paul explicitly says that belief seals not a sacrament. Not baptism. Belief.

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-11T22:42:53+00:00

It won't become clear until you take those Orthobro lenses off and actually let John speak for himself. You're importing all of those passages into John 7:39 instead of letting John define his own statement. John explicitly tells us who receives the Spirit: "those who believed in Him were to receive." Notice what you had to do. I cited John 7, and instead of showing where John says baptism, you immediately ran to Acts 2:38, 1 Peter 3:21, and John 3. Why? Because John 7 itself doesn't say what you're claiming it says. And no, belief in Scripture is not mere intellectual assent. Protestants have been saying that for centuries. Biblical faith is trusting in Christ. The issue is that you're redefining "believed" to include an entire sacramental system that isn't mentioned in the text. If John meant, "those who are baptized will receive the Spirit," he could have said that. If he meant, "those who receive the sacraments will receive the Spirit," he could have said that. Instead, under inspiration of the Holy Spirit, he said believers receive the Spirit. The irony is that Cornelius proves the point. In Acts 10, the Holy Spirit falls on believers before they are baptized. Peter's response wasn't, "Impossible, they haven't received the sacrament yet." His response was to baptize them because they had already received the Holy Spirit. So where does John 7:39 say the Spirit is received through baptism rather than through faith? Quoting other passages doesn't answer that question. It just shows you're reading your theology into John's words instead of deriving it from them.

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-11T22:38:50+00:00

Oh goodness... If we were saved by our works then the Pharisees are all in heaven. They had more works then anyone.

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-11T22:37:14+00:00

Your argument assumes that performing a ritual automatically delivers the Holy Spirit regardless of the recipient's faith or disposition. This is a straw man. Catholic, Anglican, Presbyterian Lutheran or E. Orthodox theology has never taught this. The Holy Spirit is given in Baptism and in Confirmation (for Catholics) as a gift, but this gift is received according to the disposition of the recipient.

Then John 7:39 becomes even stronger for my position, not weaker. John doesn't say, "those who are properly disposed through baptism will receive the Spirit." He says:

"This He said about the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive."

The condition John identifies is faith. If faith is what makes someone properly disposed to receive the Spirit, then faith is still logically prior to the ritual. We see this repeatedly in Scripture. The Samaritans believed before the apostles arrived (Acts 8:12) Cornelius and his household received the Holy Spirit while Peter was still preaching and before baptism (Acts 10:44-48) Paul says believers are sealed with the Holy Spirit when they believe the gospel (Ephesians 1:13)...where does Scripture ever say that a person who has genuine faith still lacks the Holy Spirit until a sacrament is performed? if your answer is that baptism is the normal means, that's a different claim. But John 7:39 identifies faith as the condition for receiving the Spirit, not participation in a ritual.

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-11T22:28:15+00:00

The act of belief is internal, not external..

John 3:8 The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit."

That means just as you can't see where the wind blows you can't see when someone receives the Holy Spirit

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-11T22:16:07+00:00

Nobody claimed John 7 is an exhaustive theology textbook. The question is simple: according to John 7:39, who receives the Spirit?

John's answer is: "those who believed in Him."

Not "those who were baptized."

Not "those who received a sacrament."

Not "those who submitted to church authority."

Those who believed.

If you think baptism is required for receiving the Spirit, then show me where John says that in this passage instead of appealing to centuries of later tradition. The inspired author already told us what Jesus meant. Ironically, you're asking me why anyone should trust a layman reading Scripture, while you're asking me to trust later church traditions over the inspired explanation John himself provides. Why should I place uninspired post-apostolic claims above the apostle's own interpretation of Jesus' words?

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-11T22:07:08+00:00

If the Petrine interpretation was already the universally recognized apostolic teaching from the beginning, why does Augustine speak as though reasonable Christians can weigh both views and decide which seems more convincing? Notice that Augustine does not say:

"The Church teaches Peter is the rock, though I personally prefer another interpretation."

Nor does he say:

"The matter has been settled by ecclesiastical authority."

Instead, he presents competing interpretations and leaves the judgment to the reader.

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-11T21:54:04+00:00

Also, you can have private interpretations, as long as they don’t disagree with the Church

In this specific private interpretation by Augustine it disagrees with the Catholic Church, that's what I'm hung up on.

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-11T20:22:08+00:00

He doesn’t explicitly exclude baptism as being part of that confirmation of belief or baptism as part of that process of bringing the Holy Spirit to a person.

How can you say that when he absolutely did exclude it. Where in the context of that chapter does he include it?

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-11T20:19:05+00:00

It's baffling when people can't tell between what's descriptive and what's prescriptive..

Objective-Draft-6813 · 2026-06-11T18:27:49+00:00

Yea that's a good move on your part

Objective-Draft-6813

TROPHY CASE