So what happened to the thief on the Cross when he died?
He went to heaven on the word of Jesus alone, do you doubt that this could not happen?
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
So what happened to the thief on the Cross when he died?
That one example proves saved by Grace alone, thru faith alone!
He went to heaven on the word of Jesus alone, do you doubt that this could not happen?
(note: bold my emphasis)Good grief. We have the Lord himself sending the thief to heaven, so it is no wonder that a water baptism was not needed for this particular individual to enter paradise. Not so for the rest of us as the scriptures are pretty clear that baptism is a requirement, not just a suggestion.
No it does not. It proves that Jesus can waive any requirement at any time - he could pardon Hitler if he wanted to.
(note: bold my emphasis)
Okay lets us the Thief on the Cross with an example in this current age:
A man has been sentenced to the Electric char - has be in prison waiting on his execution.
Moments before he is to be led to chair - the chaplain spends a few moment with him.
The convict accepts the Lord has his Savior, and now has been assured of his salvation.
No time is allowed for baptism. Ten minutes the switch has been pulled. - Does this man
go to Heaven - or does lack of baptism - send him to Hell.
A simple "Heaven" or "Hell" should suffice!
Scripture please?
Do you doubt that Jesus Christ could do anything he wants at any time? I don't.
Good grief. We have the Lord himself sending the thief to heaven, so it is no wonder that a water baptism was not needed for this particular individual to enter paradise. Not so for the rest of us as the scriptures are pretty clear that baptism is a requirement, not just a suggestion.
Well, here is the answer that BR's will give - "The Thief on the Cross was saved before the Death and Resurrection of Christ." Thus
they say, we were not yet under the New Covenant yet.
God is the finial authority in all truth.
Jesus argued against the Devil, citing the Law, Deuteronomy 8:3, as found in Matthew 4:4, ". . . Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."
Now the Apostle Paul wrote Timothy regarding Holy Scripture, 2 Timothy 3:15-17, ". . . given by inspiration of God [literally God breahed], and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."
So unless there are other writings which are God breathed, the 66 books, recongized as such, are the sole written authroity. And any other arguments are foolishness.
It is because the true Bible is that that is not mixed with idolatries and sorceries added by demons in the Lord's book through horrible and fictious figures to confuse the people and mislead them by the enchantment of the old Serpent, the Devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world.The Protestants would say the Protestant Bible, but why is it better or more authoritative than the Catholic or Orthodox Bibles?
Not even God could not do that by just declaring it to happen, as all saved by God have to have the atonement of Christ applied towards them! That is done by grace alone, thru faith alone!No it does not. It proves that Jesus can waive any requirement at any time - he could pardon Hitler if he wanted to.
We know that Jesus and the Pharisees agreed upon the OT canon, was already fixed, and the NT books were all agreed upon and in use by end of first century, early second century!What about books such as the Shepherd of Hermas? It was widely read in the early church and almost considered scripture, but ultimately not included. And on what basis do you only include the 66 books? What about the Catholic and Orthodox Bibles, also which disagree with each other on the canon, I might add? Who is correct, and how do you determine who is correct, or, might I say, who determines who is correct?
No other books were ever received as inspired by Apostolic authority, at least not until added much later on by Rome!God is the finial authority in all truth.
Jesus argued against the Devil, citing the Law, Deuteronomy 8:3, as found in Matthew 4:4, ". . . Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."
Now the Apostle Paul wrote Timothy regarding Holy Scripture, 2 Timothy 3:15-17, ". . . given by inspiration of God [literally God breahed], and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."
So unless there are other writings which are God breathed, the 66 books, recongized as such, are the sole written authroity. And any other arguments are foolishness.
The RCC has no real Apostolic authority. So we agree our NT is the sole Apostolic Christian faith authority handed down to us.No other books were ever received as inspired by Apostolic authority, at least not until added much later on by Rome!
Rome was forced to add bogus scriptures, as the inspired ones did not have their theology in them!The RCC has no real Apostolic authority. So we agree our NT is the sole Apostolic Christian faith authority handed down to us.
Rome was forced to add bogus scriptures, as the inspired ones did not have their theology in them!