Nicene Creed & Baptist beliefs

(1 Pet 3:21 KJV) The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us * by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

*=(not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,)

What's the point? Baptism saves because it is where we are united with Christ's resurrection (Romans 6) and Jesus "was raised again for our justification." (Romans 4:25)

No matter what, you CANNOT deny that baptism saves without denying both Christ and the power of His resurrection.

 

Are we speaking of water baptism?

There is not a drop of water in Romans Chapter 6.

To say that water Baptism saves someone is saying that water with no intrinsic holiness can do what the sinless and holy blood of Christ cannot.

Salvation then becomes dispensed by the works of man and not the grace of God.

Hebrews 10:29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

[ August 07, 2002, 08:17 PM: Message edited by: HankD ]

 

Your position is not a new phenomena with the Church of Rome.

So say you.

While I personally dont appreciate the term "sola scriptura" but prefer Final Authority of the Scripture, in the piece by Steve Ray for which you gave the URL, there is a statement there that there is a new movement afoot among Protestant apologists (and anti-Catholics) to imply that the Fathers in the early Church held to the doctrine of sola Scriptura. He also goes on to say that Unfortunately, these individuals only prove it is as easy to misinterpret and twist the Fathers as it is the Scriptures.

Judge for yourselves…

"Take away, indeed, from the heretics the wisdom which they share with the heathen, and let them support their inquiries from the Scriptures alone: they will then be unable to keep their ground."

Roberts, A. (1997). The Ante-Nicene Fathers Vol. III : Translations of the writings of the Fathers down to A.D. 325. Latin Christianity: Its Founder, Tertullian. (ECF 1.3.1.16.0.3).

Here is an example of a set of the Church of Rome "Tradition" dogma universally rejected by Baptists in the light of the test of the Final Authority of Scripture vs. Tradition.
(by their proper RCC names).

Binding (must be believed upon pain of excommunication):
The Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Virgin Mary
The Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Awaiting promulgation: Mary, the Mediatrix of all Graces.

Examples of how far astray one may go when the Final Authority of the Scriptures is rejected as Tertullian has given witness.

HankD

[ August 07, 2002, 10:56 PM: Message edited by: HankD ]

 

There's a whole flood in 1 Peter 3:21.

Read 1 Peter 3:21 - Water baptism saves because it unites us with Christ's resurrection not because the water has any magical power - that's exactly what Peter is saying there.

Water baptism is a grace. That is, it's a free gift. I don't have to pay to get dunked under water and be united with Christ's death, burial and resurrection! God gives me that right FREE OF CHARGE!!! Hallelujah!! Praise the LORD!

[ August 08, 2002, 12:00 AM: Message edited by: SolaScriptura ]

 

Dear SS,

I'm sure many on the BB have explained this verse for you.
Anyway here is what you said…

How do you know that’s what he is saying?
Who told you that?
And BTW there is no mention of water in verse 21.
There is greater baptism than water baptism.
A conscience can not be cleansed with water.

Might it be saying that baptism is a figure?
A picture of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
That your conscience has been cleansed by faith in His resurrection and that you are publicly portraying this though the symbolism of baptism?

There is a greater baptism than water baptism.

Matthew 3
11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:

Jesus said He would build His Church, He also baptizes all the members.
The baptism that saves is the spiritual baptism into the Body of Christ.

You may indeed have to pay. At very least it is a work which you have said (or appear to be saying) is necessary to be saved.
What if the man who baptized you turns out to be lost?

HankD

 

Verse numbering is an invention of man. You can't really separate 20 and 21 - verse 21 would make no sense by itself. Verse 21 in the New American Standar starts "Corresponding to that..." How could that sentence make sense without verse 20 to tell us what "that" is? And if we read verse 20 we see that "that" is the flood of water.

No! There is absolutely no way! Notice the following translations of verse 21 which make it quite plain that the "figure" is the flood of Noah's day and not baptism:

NASB "Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you--..."

BBE "And baptism, of which this is an image, now gives you salvation,..."

NIV "and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also--..."

NRSV "And baptism, which this prefigured, now saves you--..."

It is clear that the flood is an image of baptism. The flood prefigured baptism, etc. The flood is the figure and baptism is the FULFILMENT.

The connection to the flood makes it quite obvious that it's water baptism.

NOW HE SAYS BATPISM IS AN ANSWER. Who's answer? OURS. To whom does it answer? TO GOD.

We answer God in baptism. Can we control the baptism of the Holy Spirit? No! How then can it be an answer? It can't! What does that mean? That means he is talking about WATER BAPTISM because it IS an answer - we have control over it. Of course verse 20's "eight persons, were saved by water" tells us that.

No I don't! I don't do anything but stand there and let God unite me with Christ's resurrection.

Are you telling me that not doing anything is a work? You don't do anything at all in baptism! I guess by your definition of work, I'm working when I go to sleep in my easy chair. Man, I'm glad I don't live back in the day when men had to keep the Sabbath and that your not a scribe because you'd stone me for lying still and not doing anyting!!!!

The efficacy of baptism does not depend on the guy who adminsters it, but on the RESURRECTION OF CHRIST - Christ's resurrection is where the power comes from!

[ August 08, 2002, 02:48 AM: Message edited by: SolaScriptura ]

 

Hi Everyone,

The New Testament contains the words of Jesus, the writings of the apostles, and a history of the early church. In its pages God describes Himself and the wonderful new covenant He has instituted with man. And, on a practical level, the New Testament has good suggestions for holy living.

We must, however, keep the New Testament in its proper perspective. Apart from the revelation of the Holy Spirit, the words written in it cannot be understood correctly. The Holy Spirit, not the New Testament, is the Revealer of Truth.

Jesus didn't say he would have some guys write a few letters ... and ... 300+ years later these letters would be collected into a book ... and ... well, for a thousand years or so there wouldn't be any printing presses ... but what the heck, sooner or later he'd get this book to us and speak to us through its pages. At least to those who can read, that is. And ... oh by the way ... you won't know for sure which ancient manuscripts are accurate ... and your Greek scholars will disagree on the translation of certain verb tenses.

No, Jesus didn't say that.

Jesus did say,

"The Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you."

"When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come."

Paul said,

"(Our covenant is) not in a written code but in the Spirit; for the written code kills, but the Spirit gives life." or religious activity kills but there is life in the Spirit.

Our covenant is in the Spirit. Not the old written code; not any written code. God's Spirit has joined Himself to our spirit. Our entire relationship with God occurs within, where God and man are one. The external things --- what we see, hear, and read --- facilitate but never replace what is happening within.

With the introduction of a new covenant, God changed the way He interacts with man. In the old covenant, God and His truths were external. In the new covenant, God and His truths are internal.

"This is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord, I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people."

"For we are the temple of the Living God; as God said, 'I will live in them and move among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.'"

So we don't look to men or books or organizations to tell us what is true. We don't blindly accept the determination of a council held 1500+ years ago. Instead, we depend solely upon the Holy Spirit within us to explain and illuminate spiritual truths --- whether found in the New Testament, in other inspired writings, or in nature itself. When He does, revelation occurs --- we hear --- and we know.

As an example, consider the resurrection of Jesus Christ. We read about it in the New Testament or heard it preached, but it wasn't until the Spirit of God revealed this fact to us that we had knowing. The revelation came to us within. We know that God raised Jesus Christ from the dead, and if every book on the face of this planet were destroyed tomorrow, it wouldn't change our knowing.

Down throughout history, every believer in Jesus Christ has received the gospel exactly the same way that Paul did. By revelation,

"For I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ."

How do we know that the writings of the New Testament were inspired by God? How do we know that the words of Jesus are true? How do we know that Paul received a revelation of Jesus Christ?

We know, because the Spirit of God bears witness to our spirit. There can be no other way.

Peace and blessings, Diane

 

Then you don't need the water.

HankD

 

Dear TC,

Opposites: IMO, the RCC is guilty of saying the opposite of what the Scriptures plainly teach.

For instance as a lad I was taught to kneel before an image of a saint and pray to the saint.
The Scripture plainly says not even to bow before an image. I know about the apologetic of "hyperdulia" vs "latria" and the supposed difference, Perhaps this is an illustration of what Jesus meant when he said "Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition." I know your own conscience is clear and I am not judging you personally. Baptists, generally could not practice "adoration" with a clear conscience because of the Scripture.

There are indeed other ramifications (we are not under the Law, etc). The RCC however teaches that adoration is proper even according to the requirements of the Law

That is not to say that non-Catholics are free from this double-speak BTW.
The RCC is renown for their apologetics and the ability to say that white is not white it is black, prayer to a saint is not worship it is adoration, bread is flesh, wine is blood, etc. It took Steve Ray 10 pages (about 8000) words and a three-legged stool to give the impression that "searched the scriptures" does not mean what it plainly says (or so we are told).

Indeed we all are in the final analysis.
Each time you go to mass you reconfirm that you have made a choice "this is the truth".

You have examined the "evidence" and made your choice, you have decided that the Church of Rome is the Final Authority. I have chosen the Scripture as the Final Authority.

HankD

 

Dear T2,

You are correct concerning the proliferation of "Christian" sects.

First it is my contention that whatever legitimacy the Church of Rome might have had with God She lost when she married the world via Charlemagne (800AD) and became know as the Holy Roman Empire.
We all know the bloodbath(s) of innocents that followed.

That you have a man which states that he is the Vicar of Christ on earth claiming to have a direct line down to Peter even if true does not purge that innocent blood from the robes of the RCC hierarchy.

Besides the test of Scripture, there is the test of common sense.
Or, to make it a test of Scripture, Baptists cannot find in the Scripture where Christ instruct the disciples or apostles to burn someone at the stake for not accepting Him in the way that the Church dictates.

You may say that times were different then and the Church is not that way anymore, but was the Pope the Vicar of Christ on earth and was the Church of Rome His Church (as you say) when the flames of the Inquisition burned? Did the infallible Church and Pope not know that Christ would disapprove of this strategy?

Secondly the Roman Church is no stranger to splinter groups. (IMO) there is little difference in the culti called "orders" (Dominicans, Franciscans, etc) and Protestant "denominations".
I am a former Catholic and have relatives in different orders. There is often, bitter disputations between them even concerning dogma. It is neither Catholic or Protestant but a human trait.
The only real difference is that you have them all under the one roof.
Many of which give the required acknowledgement to the Pope. I know for a fact that a lot of it is what we separatists call "lip service".

Third, the 15th century was when the world at large finally got tired of the slaughter and began rebelling (even as you say) against the unspeakable horrors of the various persecutions and slaughters of both political and religious dissenters and their families by the Church of Rome.

They intuitively knew that it cannot be so that this institution is being true to its Founder who said "Love one another"

And many of us wonder , what would she do if she ascended to power again?

Re Acts 11:17

Maybe, but for now ,this one will do fine

HankD