Baptismal regeneration....

[Darron Steele]

Darron,

Certainly faith and repentance are necessary. (I apologize if I gave you the impression that they are not.)

Oh, I know that you never doubted this. Also, repentance is a part of biblical faith.

The necessity of baptism for salvation is cited by the early Christians:

Tertullian, On Baptism
Justin Martyr, Apology (16)
Hippolytus, Discourse on the Holy Theophany (8)

The necessity of baptism for salvation is reiterated at the Reformation:

Martin Luther. On Baptism, in Sermons on the Catechism 1528
John Calvin. Instututes of the Christian Religion, Book IV, Chapter XV

By your copious references you have amply demonstrated that people can come up with alternate meanings to the texts cited. The constant testimony of the Christian community for 2000 years, however, is in favor of baptismal regeneration.

CA

Perhaps for the past 1900 years or so some have believed that. I have shown that the New Testament does not contradict itself and does not allow this teaching.

 

[mman]

Mman, I was not originally going to post this, but I will. A post like the one that I quoted is more likely to irritate opponents and insult potential `win-overs' than get anyone to change their mind.

AAA gave all of us relevant Scriptures that show that we are saved by faith, and not a result of works. The only thing your Scriptures will do, which you believe oppose this and "trump" those passages, is create apparent contradictions in Scripture.

In December of 1998, such activities caused me to doubt whether or not I could trust Scripture in teaching me how to be saved. Fortunately, I studied for myself; I learned learned how passages teaching salvation by faith, and passages that link baptism to salvation, work together.

I have explained with great detail how passages that link baptism to salvation do not contradict Ephesians 2:8-10. Ephesians 2:8-9 was pointed out in the opening post, which you replied to with heat, but with no discussion of any part of Ephesians 2:8-10. Please explain why Ephesians 2:8-10 does not mean what it appears to say, and that regardless of faith, we are not saved until we have completed the work of getting ourselves baptized.

On the other hand, if debating whether or not to obey the Lord in baptizing in water becomes a bigger point of contention here, I request an immediate cease-fire in advance to free-up anyone to oppose such a dangerous teaching. However, based upon a poll I took a while back, I doubt that this will be necessary; I know that most people here like to stick to obeying what Scripture says to do.

I do not create any type of contradiction. One passage cannot trump another. That is EXACTLY my point. Yet many hold only to Eph 2:8-9 while ignoring the simple words of Jesus in Mark 16:16.

Eph 2:8-9 does not negate what Jesus said. It is in perfect harmony. Long ago, the wise man Solomon wrote, "It is good that you grasp one thing and also not let go of the other; for the one who fears God comes forth with both of them" (Ecc 7:18) and the Psalmist wrote, "The sum of Your word is truth (Ps 119:160).

If you would have carefully read my post, you would see that I did allude to Eph 2:8-9, though not specifically referencing it.

For by grace we are saved through faith, not of works, that is without question. I believe and teach that 100%. I do not earn one iota of my salvation. I cannot. If I could, then it would be by works and not grace. That is the basis of Christianity.

Baptism is not a work of merit. How ridiculous that thought is. Of what meritorious value is baptism? If it were meritorious in and of itself, then everyone who went swimming or was submerged beneath the water would be "owed" something from God. However, baptism is not a work of merit. It is done in faith.

When Naaman was told to dip in the Jordan river, what merit was there in that? Did he "earn" his cure? Certainly NOT! If he did, then every leper could perform those same actions and God would "owe" them a cure. No, the power was in God, not the water.

The same it true of baptism. It is not work of merit, it is done in faith. Again, do you believe Jesus when he said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved" (Mark 16:16)?

You either believe that or you don't. It's that simple. Jesus either meant what He said, was just kidding, or was lying. Which is it? Words so simple a 3rd grader can understand them. Words so simple, that quite literally, you have to have help to MISUNDERSTAND it.

If you understand Gal 3:26-27, then you can plainly see there is no conflict between Mark 16:16 and Eph 2:8-9.

Gal 3:26-27, "for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ."

Salvation is only found in Christ (II Tim 2:10).

Here is your challenge. Show me how to get INTO Christ using the scriptures. For any who don't want to take on that challenge, I'll give you the only two scriptures that tell us how we can get INTO Christ. One is listed above in Gal 3 and the other is found in Rom 6:3-4. Both say we are baptized INTO Christ. Exactly what you would expect if you believe Jesus' words, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved".

 

[mman]

Part 8

I believe that I have addressed all of your passages.

Now, I have a passage for you:
Ephesians 2:8-10 “for by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may |boast hym selfe. For |in Christ Jesus, God made us new people| for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them” (ESV|BishB|ICB|ESV).

It seems clear to me: salvation without works by faith, and then works.

If salvation is `through faith by baptism’ and a baptizee has the same faith
1) before baptism that motivates confirmation of that faith by baptism, and
2) which s/he is acknowledged to have after completed baptism,
then s/he would not be saved because of the faith but rather because of the baptism. Such a teaching would contradict the cited passage.

Acts 16:30-4. At Acts 16:30 a Philippian jailer asked Paul and Silas “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” (ASV) upon which they replied at Acts 16:31 solely “Believe on the Lord Jesus|, and you will be saved, you and all your household” (ASV|NASB). Then the jailer’s family was preached to with words unspecified at Acts 16:32. After this, he washed their wounds, and after that he was baptized at Acts 16:33 “And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, him and all his, immediately” (ASV). The matter of baptism was not of such urgency that it precluded medical treatment; the wounds of Paul and Silas were washed which would have been a matter of mortal health, and then baptism was done. All would have had a perspective on the eternal life of the soul which certainly would have been viewed as a more weighty matter than physical health, yet medical treatment was done before baptism. It is evident that immediate baptism here was not viewed as a matter of eternal urgency. Therefore, it is evident that completed baptism was not viewed as the deciding factor of eternity -- the belief specified was.

I agree with you that water baptism is of high priority, because it was taken care of before comfort convenience. It was only at Acts 16:34 that anyone ate, and I am sure that Paul and Silas were hungry after their ordeal. However, I cannot ascribe to it the status that Scripture gives faith.

If I may intrude, for a minute. I addressed Eph 2:8-9 in another post, and I would like to discuss the jailer.

The washing of the stripes shows his repentance. Repentance is a prerequisite for baptism (Acts 2:38).

Notice again Acts 16:34, "And he brought them into his house and set food before them, and rejoiced greatly, having believed in God with his whole household."

When does the scripture say he rejoiced "having believed in God"? Remember, he was told to believe and he would be saved and here he is rejoicing, having believed. What takes place in between? He is taught, he repents and is baptized. Then, and only then, does he rejoice having believed in God. It's no wonder that "immediately he and all his family were baptized", which is contrary to the practice of many today. Obviously, they placed more importance on baptism than most do today. Many today will put it off for weeks or months and some will even put it off for multiple years!

 

[Eliyahu]

"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved".

Would you clarify your stance further?

What if one believed in Jesus and died without having the chance of Baptism?

 

[Darron Steele]

I do not create any type of contradiction. One passage cannot trump another. That is EXACTLY my point. Yet many hold only to Eph 2:8-9 while ignoring the simple words of Jesus in Mark 16:16.

Eph 2:8-9 does not negate what Jesus said. It is in perfect harmony. Long ago, the wise man Solomon wrote, "It is good that you grasp one thing and also not let go of the other; for the one who fears God comes forth with both of them" (Ecc 7:18) and the Psalmist wrote, "The sum of Your word is truth (Ps 119:160).

If you would have carefully read my post, you would see that I did allude to Eph 2:8-9, though not specifically referencing it.

For by grace we are saved through faith, not of works, that is without question. I believe and teach that 100%....

Actually, you do not.

Is baptism faith? No. Is baptism something subsequent to faith? Yes. Is getting ourselves baptized something that we do subsequent to faith? Yes.

Hence, you do not teach what you say you teach.

I do not earn one iota of my salvation. I cannot....

I am glad that you know this.

However, the passage does not say `not of meritorious works' -- it says "not a result of works" (ESV) -- period.

Again, do you believe Jesus when he said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved" (Mark 16:16)?

I actually go with the ancient evidence and know that Jesus did not say that. If you read any modern Bible translation, you would notice that there are notes indicating that ancient manuscripts do not have anything after Mark 16:8.

Modern Bible translations include "Mark 16:9-20" due to tradition. The ancient evidence indicates that Mark originally ended at Mark 16:8.

I hate to treat a forgery like Scripture, but I guess I will indulge you. I notice Church of Christ people like to cut Bible passages off in mid-sentence. I will finish "Mark 16:16" for you: "but he that believeth not shall be |condemned" (KJV|Douay-Rheims).

Gal 3:26-27, "for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ."

I have already shown how Galatians 3:24-7 does not teach works-salvation.
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=38252&page=6 #53

Rom 6:3-4. ....

I have already addressed Romans 6:2-11.
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=38252&page=6 #56.

Now, it really is as simple as you say it is. If salvation is `through faith by baptism’ and a baptizee has the same faith
1) before baptism that motivates confirmation of that faith by baptism, and
2) which s/he is acknowledged to have after completed baptism,
then s/he would not be saved because of the faith but rather because of the baptism.

As I knew in December 1998, if this was so, then either 1) Ephesians 2:8-10 is false, 2) the ways salvation-by-baptism people interpreted some passages were wrong, or 3) Scripture was self-contradictory and could not be trusted on salvation. With study, I found #2 to be correct.

 

[Darron Steele]

About Acts 16:30-4

..."immediately he and all his family were baptized", which is contrary to the practice of many today. Obviously, they placed more importance on baptism than most do today. Many today will put it off for weeks or months and some will even put it off for multiple years!

Sadly, Mman, some congregations do not allow converts to be immediately baptized.

My congregation did it because they wanted to avoid accidentally "baptizing" a non-Christian. They liked to see if the convert would show the change of life Christian conversion should cause. Then and only then would they baptize.

I disagree with that procedure. I believe that delayed baptism should be avoided when feasible, as patterned by this approved example. Medical attention was the only thing between conversion and baptism. No one even ate until the baptism were done.

 

[Eliyahu]

Actually, you do not.


I actually go with the ancient evidence and know that Jesus did not say that. If you read any modern Bible translation, you would notice that there are notes indicating that ancient manuscripts do not have anything after Mark 16:8.

Modern Bible translations include "Mark 16:9-20" due to tradition. The ancient evidence indicates that Mark originally ended at Mark 16:8.

I hate to treat a forgery like Scripture, but I guess I will indulge you. I notice Church of Christ people like to cut Bible passages off in mid-sentence. I will finish "Mark 16:16" for you: "but he that believeth not shall be |condemned" (KJV|Douay-Rheims).

I don't want to hijack the thread as this matter belongs to Bible Translation and Versions. Gospel Mark has 620 manuscripts as bases, and 619 mss have ch 16 of Mark. Among them only Vaticanus and Sinaiticus don't have it but have the space sufficient for Longer Ending, while remaining 617 mss have the longer ending. Most of the 617 mss are later than Vaticanus an Sinaiticus but Alexandrianus and Codex Ephraemi dating back to 5c. have it. If MV's believe that the longer ending is not the part of genuine Bible but included it in the Bible, they are acting against their conscience and against the truth. Such people are not qualified for Bible translators. I have no doubt that Mark 16:9-20 is the part of the true Bible.

Mark 16:16 itself disproves Baptismal Regeneration.

16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Why doesn't Bible say that He that believeth and be baptizeth not shall be damned?

 

[CarpentersApprentice]

... Perhaps for the past 1900 years or so some have believed that. I have shown that the New Testament does not contradict itself and does not allow this teaching.

Darron,

Which Ante-Nicene or Post-Nicene Christians support your position, or believe that the significance of baptism is something else other than baptismal regeneration?

CA

 

[Darron Steele]

Darron,

Which Ante-Nicene or Post-Nicene Christians support your position, or believe that the significance of baptism is something else other than baptismal regeneration?

CA

It looks like you have now retreated off the pages of Scripture = written Word of God, and into the writings of men.

Since I am only interested in what GOD wills, I will not follow you there.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

mman:

"Here is your challenge. Show me how to get INTO Christ using the scriptures. For any who don't want to take on that challenge, I'll give you the only two scriptures that tell us how we can get INTO Christ. One is listed above in Gal 3 and the other is found in Rom 6:3-4. Both say we are baptized INTO Christ. Exactly what you would expect if you believe Jesus' words, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved"."

GE:

Show me how to get INTO Christ using the scriptures. You have quoted the relevant Scriptures yourself! It says, "put on Christ" which is spiritually to be put into Christ. He that believeth and is baptised is baptised spiritually, that is, into Christ; and that's why and how that person believes at all. Neither faith nor baptism are the prerequisite for being saved; being saved is the prerequisite for both being baptised and faith. It only is different angles from from which the same thing is considered. Water does not come into the picture at all from wherever that angle may be taken. To automatically assume that water must be supposed when the word baptism is used, must be ascribed to nothing but the way we were brought up. Take the gross total of the instances the word baptism is used in the NT, and I guess in 99% of the instances, it is used in spiritual sense.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Eliyahu:

"What if one believed in Jesus and died without having the chance of Baptism?"

GE:

What if one died without having undergone the Baptism of Christ? He would not have believed unto redemption at any moment of his life, and would have to suffer eternal damnation for it.

 

[Darron Steele]

I don't want to hijack the thread as this matter belongs to Bible Translation and Versions. Gospel Mark has 620 manuscripts as bases, and 619 mss have ch 16 of Mark. Among them only Vaticanus and Sinaiticus don't have it but have the space sufficient for Longer Ending, ...

I am going to create a thread for this in this area of the board.

For now, I will point out that THREE manuscripts lack the traditional embellishment.

Codex Vaticanus's scribe at the end of Mark no doubt knew of the insertion and left room in case someone else wanted to add it in. However, the manuscript he was copying evidently did not have it.

Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Regius do not have the traditional embellishment. Codex Regius has a shorter embellishment instead.

Codices Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are the very two oldest manuscripts to have a transition between Mark and another Bible book.

 

[Oasis]

CarpentersAprentice

Quote:
In Acts 22:16 Paul is repeating the thought of his experience on the Damascus road when he says, "Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name." In this verse the phrase "wash your sins away" is connected to "calling on his name." If connected with "be baptized," the Greek participle "epikalesamenos (calling) would have no antecedent. Paul's sins were washed away by calling on His name.


CA-What does the word "and" mean?

Hi CA,

Now, this isn't going to be one of those "define is" situations is it?:laugh: It would make for pretty boring reading without the word "and". There would be a lot of periods.
If you look up the word "and" in the dictionary, you will find that it is a conjunction used to grammatically coordinate words, phrases, or clauses. There is nothing in it's definition to suggest that it's usage is for connecting thoughts contextually.
I'll give you a couple of examples:
"Kab goes to work at 7:30 am and cats have nine lives.
Those two thoughts have nothing in common contextually.

Here's an example that might help you with this particular verse:
"I believe in justification and sanctification."
I am expressing two thoughts that are tied together as part of a Christian's life, but they differ in context and action. In the overall picture, justification and sanctification are tied together, but individually they play distinctly different roles in a Christian's life.






CarperntersAprentice

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oasis
In Acts 2:38 Aside from some proselytes, Peter was speaking to the nation of Israel. Not only had Paul not yet been designated as the first Apostle to the Gentiles, Gentiles were never under the law.


CA-Are you saying that there are parts of the NT that I can disregard?

Ignore parts of Scripture? Certainly not.
Ok. What does 2 Timothy 3:16-17 say?
"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." NIV
I don't see in there where it says that "all Scripture is to be doctrinally followed no matter who the writing is to".

Who is the Old Testament written to?
Who are the Gospels written to?
Who are the different books of the New Testament written to?

There was a 15th century theologin that gave good some good advice on Scripture study:
"It shall greatly help you to understand scripture if you mark not only what is spoken or written, but as of whom and to whom, with what words, at what time, where, to what intent, with what circumstances, considering what goes before and what comes after."-Miles Coverdale

Ok, now take that thought and go back and read Acts 2:22 for the answer on Acts 2:38. What does it say?
"Men of Israel..."
Five times in verses 22-24 Peter identifies who he is speaking to.

Let's go a step further. Go back and read Jesus' words to his disciples, including Peter, in Matthew 10:5-6.
"These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: 'Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel." NIV

CA, the Bible was written for all of us, but not to all of us.

 

[mman]

Would you clarify your stance further?

What if one believed in Jesus and died without having the chance of Baptism?

I think my stance is clear since I know that it is impossible for God to lie. I believe God's when He says, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved".

After the new covenant became effective, this message was preached first on Pentecost and is a perpetual command (Matt 28:18-20).

What if............ you can "what if" it to death, but do you believe God or not? Can a person be saved outside of Christ?

What if a person died just before they believed?

 

[mman]

Actually, you do not.

Is baptism faith? No. Is baptism something subsequent to faith? Yes. Is getting ourselves baptized something that we do subsequent to faith? Yes.

Hence, you do not teach what you say you teach.

I am glad that you know this.

However, the passage does not say `not of meritorious works' -- it says "not a result of works" (ESV) -- period.


I actually go with the ancient evidence and know that Jesus did not say that. If you read any modern Bible translation, you would notice that there are notes indicating that ancient manuscripts do not have anything after Mark 16:8.

Modern Bible translations include "Mark 16:9-20" due to tradition. The ancient evidence indicates that Mark originally ended at Mark 16:8.

I hate to treat a forgery like Scripture, but I guess I will indulge you. I notice Church of Christ people like to cut Bible passages off in mid-sentence. I will finish "Mark 16:16" for you: "but he that believeth not shall be |condemned" (KJV|Douay-Rheims).


I have already shown how Galatians 3:24-7 does not teach works-salvation.
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=38252&page=6 #53


I have already addressed Romans 6:2-11.
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=38252&page=6 #56.

Now, it really is as simple as you say it is. If salvation is `through faith by baptism’ and a baptizee has the same faith
1) before baptism that motivates confirmation of that faith by baptism, and
2) which s/he is acknowledged to have after completed baptism,
then s/he would not be saved because of the faith but rather because of the baptism.

As I knew in December 1998, if this was so, then either 1) Ephesians 2:8-10 is false, 2) the ways salvation-by-baptism people interpreted some passages were wrong, or 3) Scripture was self-contradictory and could not be trusted on salvation. With study, I found #2 to be correct.

You could not be more wrong.

I do teach and believe the same thing. Just because you can't understand it, doesn't change the truth.

Do you really think the end of Mark 16 is a forgery? We can debate this and I would win!

However, it does not help or hurt my position, because of the numerous other passages that state the necessity of baptism. Even the OT types and shadows further validate my position.

What about the water and the blood that flowed from Jesus side?

Baptism in no more a work than confession!!!!!!

In fact, if you will read the scriptures, the only time work is associated with baptism is in reference to the work that God does!

Let's talk about faith. Read Heb 11 and you will understand that biblical faith is not defined as belief!

Heb 11:30 "By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they were encircled for seven days."

By your definition, they fell because they believed without any action on their part.

By God's definition, they fell when they did what God told them to do. That is biblical faith, not the counterfeit faith that you describe.

Read again, "For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ." - Gal 3:26-27

How could it be made any clearer? You are sons of God through faith for you were baptized INTO Christ.

Sir, I request that in the future you refrain from telling me what I believe and what I don't believe, because obviously, you don't understand!

 

[Darron Steele]

I think my stance is clear since I know that it is impossible for God to lie. I believe God's when He says, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved".

After the new covenant became effective, this message was preached first on Pentecost and is a perpetual command (Matt 28:18-20).

What if............ you can "what if" it to death, but do you believe God or not? Can a person be saved outside of Christ?

What if a person died just before they believed?

He would be condemned.

The difference is that baptism does not determine salvation. Faith does.

To finish what you cut off: "but he that believeth not shall be |condemned" (KJV|Douay-Rheims).

I believe you will find that in the disputed text after Mark 16:8. Most of those familiar with the textual transmission of the New Testament consider this a forgery, as do I. A thread was created yesterday to lay out the evidence.

Returning to Scripture, we turn to Ephesians 2:8-10 “for by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may |boast hym selfe. For |in Christ Jesus, God made us new people| for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them” (ESV|BishB|ICB|ESV).

It is really very simple as I see it. If salvation is `through faith by baptism’ and a baptizee has the same faith
1) before baptism that motivates confirmation of that faith by baptism, and
2) which s/he is acknowledged to have after completed baptism,
then s/he would not be saved because of the faith but rather because of the baptism.

You have yet to show that this passage allows what you are teaching. Passages that you believe are contrary to this passage actually are not, as I have already explained in numerous posts.

You challenge us to explain how we get into Christ. Very well. Your Romans 6 and Galatians 3 extracts have already been addressed within the passages they were extracted from. So, let us discuss how we actually get into Christ.

Look at the above passage. Notice that it says "in Christ Jesus, God made us new people for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them." Now, salvation is "through faith" and is "not a result of works" per this passage. Yet, we are in Christ when we are created anew. Afterward, we do the "works which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them" -- baptism is definitely such a work prepared by God. Therefore, we must be placed in Christ upon faith, and before we do anything God calls us to do.

Notice something else: "in Christ Jesus, God made us new people for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them." Per Titus 2:14b Christ died “that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a people for his own possession, zealous of good works” (ASV). I submit that if a person has to be threatened into the baptismal pool by threat of eternal barbecue, this is only a symptom. The person must be urged to convert to genuine biblical faith in Jesus Christ as Lord, not just some meaningless intellectual assent.

 

[Darron Steele]

...
Let's talk about faith. Read Heb 11 and you will understand that biblical faith is not defined as belief!

I already know this. On my posts over Acts 2:38a and 1 Peter 3:21, I made it clear that any person who genuinely believes the Gospel is obligated to be baptized. Stop pretending like I only mean some intellectual assent.

Even the OT types and shadows further validate my position.
...
Heb 11:30 "By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they were encircled for seven days."

You want to talk about Old Testament stuff. Fine. Hebrews 11 demonstrates faith in action. Agreed.

Now, what about faith in salvation contexts. To James 2 we go! James 2:14-26 explains this, culminating with “faith apart from works is dead” (ESV). However, we must take notice of one of the examples of how faith must be active: the sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham mentioned at James 2:21-3, narrated at Genesis 22. When we turn to the end of the narration, we notice at Genesis 22:9 “They arrived at the place where God had told him” (JPS 1985), then 22:10 says “And Abraham picked up the knife to slay his son” (JPS 1985) -- but at 22:12 God says to Abraham “`Do not raise your hand against the boy, or do anything to him. For now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son from me’” (JPS 1985), and then at 25:8-9 “And Abraham breathed his last, dying at a good ripe age, old and contented; and he was gathered to his kin. His sons Isaac and Ishmael buried him” (JPS 1985). It is necessary to conclude that the sacrifice of Isaac was NOT COMPLETED, yet James 2:14-26 considered it a positive example of a faith that did work.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

For by grace we are saved through faith, not of works, that is without question. I believe and teach that 100%....

Actually, you do not....

You could not be more wrong.

I do teach and believe the same thing
...

Sir, I request that in the future you refrain from telling me what I believe and what I don't believe...

I believe you honestly think you believe/teach said proposition. However, from what I have seen, you do not -- but you do not see it.

I have already explained it. Is baptism faith? No. Is baptism something subsequent to faith? Yes. Is getting ourselves baptized something that we do subsequent to faith? Yes. If salvation is dependent upon that doing = work subsequent to that faith, salvation was not by the faith but rather by the work.

 

[Darron Steele]

...
Baptism in no more a work than confession!!!!!!...

I like it. Let us discuss it.

I read the gospels, and I see frequent concern for those who cannot speak, KJV "dumb." They cannot speak. Yet Scripture says at Revelation 22:17 that “whosoever wishes” (ICB) could partake of eternal life -- including those who cannot speak.

Romans 10:9 “That if you might confess in| your mouth Jesus as Lord, and |might trust| in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.”
Romans 10:10b “And we |in mouth| say what we believe, and so we are saved.”

--McReynolds, Word Study Greek-English New Testament, page 576| NASB | McReynolds, Word Study Greek-English New Testament, page 576| NASB, NBV;
ICB | McReynolds, Word Study Greek-English New Testament, page 576 | ICB.

In ancient times and medieval times, confession was commonly considered belief or sentiment; Paul himself used this terminology at Acts 23:8 “For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, nor an angel, nor a spirit, but the Pharisees |confess| them all” (NASB|ASV|NASB).

Hence, because anyone can be saved, this means that even the mute can be saved. Therefore, completed confession is not required for salvation -- rather, the faith that would motivate such confession is what saves. We are saved by what we confess -- our faith.

In the Churches of Christ, a multi-step plan is required for completion to be saved. Let me quote a passage to you:

Romans 8:2b-8:

“through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit who gives life has set you free from the law of sin and death. For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful humanity to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in human flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit. Those who live according to the sinful nature have their minds set on what that nature desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires. The mind controlled by the sinful nature is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace. The sinful mind is hostile to God|. He refuses to obey God’s law. And really he is not able to obey God’s law. Those people who are ruled by their sinful selves cannot please God” (TNIV|ICB).​

Note that while in the sinful self we cannot please God.

That is a very significant fact. If we are unregenerate, we cannot please God. If we are not saved, we cannot please God. Only after new life can we please God. There is no such thing as pre-regenerate righteousness.

If one is not regenerate until after completed baptism, confession cannot please God. He will not reward the confession before baptism with `notch' toward salvation. He will not positively regard it in any way. If we reverse the order, the baptism before confession would not please God -- He would not reward it with a `notch' toward salvation or positively regard it in any way. Either way you do it, the prior action would not be regarded positively by God.

There can only be ONE step in regeneration, as John 6:28-9 specifies “The people asked Jesus, `What are the works God wants us to do?’ Jesus answered `The work God wants you to do is this: to believe |on him whom he hath sent” (ICB|ASV emphases mine) -- notice the plural/singular contrast. The faith motivating baptism and confession must regenerate us beforehand.

 

[mman]

I don't want to hijack the thread as this matter belongs to Bible Translation and Versions. Gospel Mark has 620 manuscripts as bases, and 619 mss have ch 16 of Mark. Among them only Vaticanus and Sinaiticus don't have it but have the space sufficient for Longer Ending, while remaining 617 mss have the longer ending. Most of the 617 mss are later than Vaticanus an Sinaiticus but Alexandrianus and Codex Ephraemi dating back to 5c. have it. If MV's believe that the longer ending is not the part of genuine Bible but included it in the Bible, they are acting against their conscience and against the truth. Such people are not qualified for Bible translators. I have no doubt that Mark 16:9-20 is the part of the true Bible.

Mark 16:16 itself disproves Baptismal Regeneration.

16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Why doesn't Bible say that He that believeth and be baptizeth not shall be damned?

This is so easy to understand. First not believing is enough to condemn (Jn 3:18). One would be no further condemned by not being baptized.

Certainly, you could understand that if I said, "He who has access to a computer and emails me their address will receive 1 million dollars, but he who does not does not have access to a computer shall remain poor".

Would it really take me adding the words "and does not email me" for you to understand? You cannot email without a computer. Neither can you be biblically baptized without belief. We just call that swimming.

What is necessary to receive the promise? Would you earn the money? No, there is nothing of value in the action requested, though it is still a required action. It would be because you believed me and acted on that belief and because of my grace, you would receive the money.

mman 2:8-9, For by my grace are you made millionairs, through your faith, and that not of yourselves, it is my gift to you, not of works, lest you should boast.

Then you could be included in my great people of faith, mman 11:30, "By faith, you received 1 million dollars after you sent me an email." (See Heb 11:30 -By faith the walls of Jericho fell down after they were encircled for seven days.)

Would you argue that emailing is optional? For you to remain consistent, you would have to. Therefore, you would agrue that everyone who has access to a computer will receive 1 million dollars.

I do not like man made analogies, and usually refrain from bringing them up, especially, when the language is so clear as to , "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned."

Again, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE for a non-believer to be biblically baptized, therefore illogical to include it such as "but he who does not believe and is not baptized will be condemned".

I do appreciate your defense of the ending of Mark 16.

 

[Darron Steele]

This is so easy to understand. First not believing is enough to condemn (Jn 3:18). One would be no further condemned by not being baptized....

John 3:18. Thank you for bringing that up.

John 3:16-8
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God sent not the Son into the world to judge the world; but that the world should be saved through him. He that believeth on him is not judged: he that believeth not hath been judged already, because he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God" (ASV).

Notice it says "He that believeth on him is not judged." Let me put it in a third grade reading level: "He who believes in God's Son is not judged guilty" (ICB).

Thank you.