I understnd what you are saying my simple friend. however, this is not a discussion on Faith and reason, it is a biblical discussion in a comparative religion thread on what constitutes fellowship. One can discuss what is involved in faith from a bilical perspective, without getting into a discussion about whether faith involves reason. I most certaily believe faith involves reason, but what faith is from a Biblical perspective can and is often differnt from that topic I wll be more than happ to disuss faith and reason at some other point. lets stay with one thing at a time
Ok I'll take another approach.
We have no hcoice but to use logic to analyse a biblical text. Even if we have no basis in logic, we will still be doing it uncounsciously. Now since we have no choice, the question then becomes are we using correct logic ? We must do everything in our capabilities to analyze a text the most truthfully possible, and this requires us to have correct logic and be able to avoid logical fallacies.
What I was saying is that Marc 16:16 cannot be used to prove that baptism is required for salavation, because doing so involves Denying the antecedent, a fallacy. This makes it a bad interpretation of the text.
What I'm trying to say, is that Marc 16-16 by it's logical structure is not conclusive enough to prove the statement ''baptism is required for salvation''.
With all due respect it is clear you are not paying attention. If you were you should have seen that I gave detailed discription and explanation to ICANT as to why the thief did not rquuire baptism. Please refer to that post
See next post
AbE I'll have to come back to this later.
Besides this. you write to jaywill, the above statement. If there are two conditions, what is your further contention????
Maybe I miss the correct terminology in english, but I used conditions in the sense that they are the two parts of a conditional statement ''if p&r, then q''. Not in the sense ''only if P&R, then Q'' which would be required for your affirmation to hold true.
Edited by slevesque, : No reason given.