How important is knowledge in getting saved?

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Eliyahu:
"These types of Repentence and meditation may have been formed in the minds of the saved people in their daily lives even before they actually found their Lord."

GE:

Before they actually found their Lord, they were found by HIM!

 

[Eliyahu]

Eliyahu:
"These types of Repentence and meditation may have been formed in the minds of the saved people in their daily lives even before they actually found their Lord."

GE:

Before they actually found their Lord, they were found by HIM!

True! from another view point.

 

[Eliyahu]

Eliyahu,

bmerr here. I agree. One needs to know what those in Peter's audience knew:

1. Jesus had been shown to be the Son of God by many miracles, and by His having been raised from the dead.

2. Their actions were responsible for the death of the Messiah.

3. Having believed the gospel message, they needed to know how to call on the name of the Lord and be saved, which caused them to ask, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" They were commanded to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.

I wouldn't say that's a lot of deep theological knowledge, would you?



Well, we can't be sure how much they knew about Jesus and the prophecies concerning the Messiah when Jesus called them to follow Him. Maybe they knew a lot, maybe they didn't. There's just no way to be sure.

Additionally, before Jesus' death, the Old Testament, the Mosaic Law, was still in effect, and Jesus could save anyone under whatever conditions He chose (John 5:26). Life was His to give to whomever He wanted, however He chose.

Since the death of Christ, and the establishment of the church/kingdom in Acts 2, the New Testament has been in effect, and all men since that time till the end of time are amenable to the conditions of it.

Using OT conversions to make a point bout NT conversions doesn't work.



Was Paul saved on the road to Damascus? If he was, he was saved while still in his sins, never having heard what he "must do" (Acts 9:6).

If we look at the account of Paul's conversion in Acts 9, we will not find where he is told to "do" anything, as Christ said he would be (9:6). But if we look in Paul's retelling of the occasion in Acts 22:16, we see that he was told to "Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord".

This is three days after he had believed in the risen Christ and repented of going about killing Christians (Acts 9:9).

Paul wasn't saved on the road to Damascus, Eli.



Brokenhearted, meek-minded, humble people will obey the commands of their King, and receive the associated blessings.



I'm sorry if you think I'm being snooty. I'm not trying to be. But it is one's knowledge of the truth that will set him free (John 8:32). We are commanded to study (2 tim 2:15), and we are supposed to grow in knowledge (2 Pet 3:18).

In Christ,

bmerr

It is too late in the night. I would shortly comment on this.
When Anania said " wash away thy sins" , it doesn't mean that the sins of Paul was not forgiven yet, his sins were forgiven. Our sins are not forgiven by baptism. Otherwise, the Robber at the Cross couldn't go to the heaven as he had no chance of baptism.
Paul's sins were forgiven and he was saved already, but he needed the baptism to declare such fact which was done already, because the baptism means the declaration of what was believed already.
Read carefully ch 26:13-18 of Acts. If Paul was not saved at that time Jesus would have not ordered him to preach the gospel.
Jesus could not save Paul and therefore sent him to Ananias?
I notice there is a lot of misunderstanding by you, on the salvation and baptism.

Do you have such a faith to give up your occupation and follow Him for more than 3 years as Peter did? Have you read that Peter was introduced to Jesus by Andrew ?
Gospel is simple and easy for everybody who sincerely seeks after the Truth.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Eliyahu:

"Do you have such a faith to give up your occupation and follow Him for more than 3 years as Peter did? "

GE:

Some, after Peter, may have such faith, but never such authority - mandated authority, Apostolic Authority, exclusive authority - as Peter RECEIVED and was DESTINED to.

 

[Eliyahu]

Eliyahu:

"Do you have such a faith to give up your occupation and follow Him for more than 3 years as Peter did? "

GE:

Some, after Peter, may have such faith, but never such authority - mandated authority, Apostolic Authority, exclusive authority - as Peter RECEIVED and was DESTINED to.

The reason why I mentioned it was because I believe Peter didn't have much knowledge until he followed Jesus. In other words, such a faith which made Peter desert even his occupation didn't come after he acquire a lot of knowledge, but came immediately upon the calling by Jesus, " Follow Me" So, the salvation is not the matter of knowledge, but of faith and trust in Him.

 

[Eliyahu]

bmerr,

Another reference:

Matthew 9:1-8
1 And he entered into a ship, and passed over, and came into his own city. 2 And, behold, they brought to him a man sick of the palsy, lying on a bed: and Jesus seeing their faith said unto the sick of the palsy; Son, be of good cheer; thy sins be forgiven thee. 3 And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This man blasphemeth. 4 And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts? 5 For whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and walk? 6 But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house. 7 And he arose, and departed to his house. 8 But when the multitudes saw it, they marvelled, and glorified God, which had given such power unto men

Did the man have a lot of knowledge?

 

[Tazman]

It is too late in the night. I would shortly comment on this.
When Anania said " wash away thy sins" , it doesn't mean that the sins of Paul was not forgiven yet, his sins were forgiven. Our sins are not forgiven by baptism. Otherwise, the Robber at the Cross couldn't go to the heaven as he had no chance of baptism..[/quote]

First of all if you would just read previous post on this thread, you will have a very solid answer for th above. Specifically posted by Bmerr and/or myself.

Paul's sins were forgiven and he was saved already, but he needed the baptism to declare such fact which was done already, because the baptism means the declaration of what was believed already.

This is deeply opinionated! Show solid scripture that says, not imply, but says anything you stated above. You won't find it. So let deal with facts:

Read carefully ch 26:13-18 of Acts. If Paul was not saved at that time Jesus would have not ordered him to preach the gospel.

Bad assumption. Just because Christ humbles some one does not mean that are saved. God command ALL not just would be believers. Think about it. That why there is no support for your statement. False primise.

Jesus could not save Paul and therefore sent him to Ananias?
I notice there is a lot of misunderstanding by you, on the salvation and baptism.

This is no misunderstanding on my part, but it seems that you've been fed too many one liners.

Do you really want a debate on baptism on this thread?

 

[Tazman]

It is a simple mesage that Christ died, and was buried and rose again for the penalty of your sins. Why? Because you are a sinner in need a Saviour, and Christ paid the penalty for that sin through his death and resurrection.
It is a simple message, not a message of works which you are making it out to be by adding conditions of discipleship to salvation.

Who's talking about "works"? Not me.

I'm talking about a heart and mind change.

Tell me, is there a difference by Jesus in having faith and obeying him?

 

[Eliyahu]

To both Tazman and bmerr here,

I had a time to read thru all the posts on this thread.
I didn't deny we need to know about the truth, and the person Jesus. But it shouldn't be much, and the Gospel is simple and easy for everyone to accept. In that aspect, it seems that bmerr may not have much difference in his belief, compared to mine. Bmerr seems to be concerned about the chaffs in the church who are not actually born again but misunderstand about themselves believing that they are born again, though they are not. However, we should not make the Gospel too difficult just because of the chaffs.

On the other hand, I notice Tazman seems to be confused between Salvation and Discipleship and Sanctification after the Salvation. He tries to send his kid to the grade 4 first, if the kid wouldn't go to grade 4 class, He wouldn't send his kid to the school.
Even in case of bmerr, I notice several problems with the higher bar for the salvation. Let's see the issues one by one, and I cannot cover all the points by one post and therefore will divide them into several posts in the following.

1. John 8:32
And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

The word here is the ginosko, which means " knowing", not the knowledge.
When such word, know comes, we must remember how the bible use it.
Joseph didn't know Mary until she begot the firstborn son ( Mt 1:25)
Does't this mean Joseph could not recognize his wife Mary? Was Joseph sick of Altzheimer? Nope!
Often " Know" means a close relationship as we read John17:3. The eternal life is to know the only and true God, thee, and Jesus Christ whom thou has sent.
Does Jesus say that the people should have a lot of knowledge in order to have the eternal life?
I know G Bush, I can study a lot about him at the library. But it doesn't mean that I can say I know G BUsh.
If I meet him and speak with him in person, and know each other, then I can say, I know G Bush, the president of USA.
Such a relationship is mentioned in John 17:3.
So, knowing is different from knowledge accumulation.
Otherwise, Ephesians 2:8 should be written as :
For by grace are ye saved by faith and knowledge.
You are trying to add " knowledge " to every process of the salvation, or trying to replace " by faith" with " by knowledge"
If the Holy spirit believed " Faith" = "knowledge", He would have stated Ye are saved by knowledge somewhere in the Bible, but He didn't do so.

2. As for Acts 9 about Paul's salvation, I will write tomorrow in detail ( or later), but shortly comment as follows:

Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins ( Acts 22:16).

Do you baptize the unbelievers who are not saved yet, then they become saved?
Baptism doesn't bring the Salvation, but the Saved persons are to be baptized. I was saved first, thereafter I was baptised in a river.
Were you baptised while you were sinners, then thereafter your sins were forgiven? That's absolutlely wrong, wrong, and wrong again, belief.

The sins of Paul were already forgiven, he just needed an official declaration of it by Baptism, which was mentioned as " wash away thy sins", which is well mentioned in 1 Pet 3:21, putting away of the filth of the flesh.

I expect you bring Acts 2:38, but please read carefully the Greek bible of it. Sometimes Bible doesn't mention the commandments in the sequence of time.
I mentioned 2-3 times you should read Acts 26:13-18 in order to understand how Paul was saved.
Paul was saved already when he was calling Jesus as Lord, You are saying that " what must I do" indicates the action for the salvation. Howver, in order to get saved, what must we do else than believing in what Jesus did? YOu are trying to say that one must have a lot of knowledge plus baptism to get saved, aren't you?

Sinners are dead in sins, then could Paul understand the commandments by Jesus if he had not been saved by then? How could he understand what Jesus commanded to him, while the bystanders couldn't hear the voice of Jesus?
If the Holy Spirit starts to dwell in a person, he is saved, right?
As soon as Paul could recognize Jesus and called him as Lord and was ready to accept the commandments, was he not saved yet?
Are you trying to say that Paul was saved while he was praying and fasting? Then you are preaching the Gospel based on Grace+Works.

YOu cannot and should not make the Gospel too difficult just because of the chaffs, though they are grievous problems and we should every effort to screen out them.

I know you will come with more arguement about Paul.
But please read again, " Sirs, what should I do to be saved?" ( Acts 16:30)
You are trying to deliver a lengthy address to them instead of saying simply " Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, then you will be saved, and your household too" ( Acts 16"31)
You may be saying " you must know that Jesus is the Son of God, He was born of Mary as a human being, he was sinless, He is acually God, because Son of God is God while son of man is man, son of dog is dog, son of monkey is monkey, He performed a lot of miracle as you noticed, he was crucified at the Cross, you need to fast at least three days as I did at the time of my salvation, You need to pray a lot until no more prayer is possible to the extreme end of your effort because God doesn't work until human effort is finished, then the Holy Spirit will come into your heart.
Tonight it is too late, because you need a continuous prayer for the salvation and need some fasting, and read the scriptures as they tell you the salvation, then after couple of days I will come again. In the meantime you need to sell your stuff to follow Jesus because Jesus commanded so.
It may take another months to preach the gospel to his children.
But Paul and sila made the simple statement " Believe on Lord Jesus Christ, then you will be saved, and your house"
I repeat here: Wash away doesn't mean that Paul's sins were not forgiven by that time. His sins were already forgiven, Baptism doesn't mean the forgiveness, but is a confirmation and declaration of what the person has already believed.
Jesus doesn't speak to the sinner ( UNbeliever) and Paul was responding to the Lord, which means he was already saved by then.
Jesus commanded the great commandment of missionary to Paul, adn he obeyed Him, that's why he went to Anania's. Does unbeliever obey Jesus like that?
Don't make the Gospel too difficult! Gospel is so simple for everybody that no one can excuse that he or she could not understand it.

 

[bmerr]

When Anania said " wash away thy sins" , it doesn't mean that the sins of Paul was not forgiven yet, his sins were forgiven. Our sins are not forgiven by baptism. Otherwise, the Robber at the Cross couldn't go to the heaven as he had no chance of baptism.

Eliyahu,

bmerr here. If Paul's sins were already washed away, why did Ananias say what he said?

The forgiveness of the sins of the world was purchased by Christ's death on the cross, this is true. However, the terms of the gospel must be met before an individual can claim the benefits of Christ's death. Paul had not yet met these conditions, so he was not yet saved.

Something often overlooked concerning the thief on the cross is the fact that Jesus was still alive when He promised Paradise to the thief. This being the case, the New Testament was not yet in effect, nor were it's conditions of salvation (Heb 9:16, 17)

Paul's sins were forgiven and he was saved already, but he needed the baptism to declare such fact which was done already, because the baptism means the declaration of what was believed already.

Can you please provide the Scripture that says that baptism is a "declaration of what was believed already"? I've not found such a verse, and therefore cannot have faith in that statement (Rom 10:17).

Read carefully ch 26:13-18 of Acts. If Paul was not saved at that time Jesus would have not ordered him to preach the gospel.
Jesus could not save Paul and therefore sent him to Ananias?
I notice there is a lot of misunderstanding by you, on the salvation and baptism.

Jesus' words in Acts 26:13-18 are part of His discourse to Paul in which He told him to "Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do." Again, let me point out that the only thing Paul was told to do, in Acts 9, 22, and 26, was "Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord."

Is there something I missed? Eli, I'm not making this up, I'm just showing it to you.

In Christ,

bmerr

 

[bmerr]

You are trying to add " knowledge " to every process of the salvation, or trying to replace " by faith" with " by knowledge"
If the Holy spirit believed " Faith" = "knowledge", He would have stated Ye are saved by knowledge somewhere in the Bible, but He didn't do so.

Eliyahu,

bmerr here. For one to have true, Biblical faith, he must know God's word, for "...faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" (Rom 10:17). If one does not know God's word, he cannot know or do God's will. Only those who do the will of the Father will inherit the kingdom (Matt 7:21).

If a person wants to be saved, he needs to know what God has said a person needs to do to be saved.

In the case of Paul, he was only told to be baptized, since he had already believed in the risen Christ, repented of sins, and confessed Christ as Lord.

In the case of the Pentecostians, they were told to "repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins", since they had already believed Peter's preaching of the gospel.

In the case of the Phillipian jailor, he was told to "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ", since he had not yet been presented with the gospel. If we read on past verse 31, we see that the word of the Lord was spoken to him, that he demonstrated repentance by washing Paul and Silas' stripes, and that he was baptized.

Do you baptize the unbelievers who are not saved yet, then they become saved?

I have never baptized an unbeliever. What would be the point? I have baptized believers who wanted to be saved, though.

Do you bury live men, or dead men? It is only when we are risen with Christ in baptism that we walk in newness of life (Rom 6:3-5).

Baptism doesn't bring the Salvation, but the Saved persons are to be baptized. I was saved first, thereafter I was baptised in a river.

Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved..." in Mark 16:16. It would be hard to find a more easy to understand statement in all of the Bible. Jesus says that baptism comes before salvation. You say you were saved, and then baptized.

1 Pet 3:21 says, "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us..." You said, "Baptism doesn't bring the salvation". You are at odds with the Scriptures.

Were you baptised while you were sinners, then thereafter your sins were forgiven? That's absolutlely wrong, wrong, and wrong again, belief.

The Bible says that baptism is for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38), to wash away sins (Acts 22:16), where one is buried and risen with Christ (Col 2:12), where one puts on Christ (Gal 3:27), is how one gets into Christ (Rom 6:3-5), and that it "...doth also now save us..."

Would you say that it is a "wrong, wrong, and wrong again, belief" for me to believe all of these things?

I expect you bring Acts 2:38, but please read carefully the Greek bible of it. Sometimes Bible doesn't mention the commandments in the sequence of time.
I mentioned 2-3 times you should read Acts 26:13-18 in order to understand how Paul was saved.

Acts 26:13-18 doesn't say anything about how or when Paul was saved.

Paul was saved already when he was calling Jesus as Lord, You are saying that " what must I do" indicates the action for the salvation. YOu are trying to say that one must have a lot of knowledge plus baptism to get saved, aren't you?

What would you say Paul was asking when he asked, "Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?"

I have not said that one must have a lot of knowledge plus baptism to be saved.

As soon as Paul could recognize Jesus and called him as Lord and was ready to accept the commandments, was he not saved yet?

No, he wasn't. That's why he asked what he was to do.

Are you trying to say that Paul was saved while he was praying and fasting? Then you are preaching the Gospel based on Grace+Works.

I have never indicated that Paul was saved while he was praying and fasting.

YOu cannot and should not make the Gospel too difficult just because of the chaffs, though they are grievous problems and we should every effort to screen out them.

I'm not making the gospel difficult. What is so hard about belief, repentance, confession, and baptism? All of these things are plainly set forth in the NT.

I know you will come with more arguement about Paul.
But please read again, " Sirs, what should I do to be saved?" ( Acts 16:30)
You are trying to deliver a lengthy address to them instead of saying simply " Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, then you will be saved, and your household too" ( Acts 16"31)

I'm just saying we should keep reading past 16:31 to see what happened next.

But Paul and sila made the simple statement " Believe on Lord Jesus Christ, then you will be saved, and your house"

Go back to 16:12 where Paul and Silas come to Phillipi, reading through to 16:23, where we first find the jailor. As you read through the encounter from there, see if you can determine how much of the gospel the jailor knew at the point where he asked how to be saved.

I repeat here: Wash away doesn't mean that Paul's sins were not forgiven by that time. His sins were already forgiven, Baptism doesn't mean the forgiveness, but is a confirmation and declaration of what the person has already believed.

Where's the Scripture?

Jesus doesn't speak to the sinner ( UNbeliever) and Paul was responding to the Lord, which means he was already saved by then.

Jesus spoke to the Pharisees, Sadducees, and many others, yet not all of these were saved. His speaking to Paul on the road to Damascus does not mean that Paul was saved.

In Christ,

bmerr

 

[Darron Steele]

...
For one to have true, Biblical faith, he must know God's word, for "...faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" (Rom 10:17). If one does not know God's word, he cannot know or do God's will. Only those who do the will of the Father will inherit the kingdom (Matt 7:21).

If a person wants to be saved, he needs to know what God has said a person needs to do to be saved.

In the case of Paul, he was only told to be baptized, since he had already believed in the risen Christ, repented of sins, and confessed Christ as Lord.

In the case of the Pentecostians, they were told to "repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins", since they had already believed Peter's preaching of the gospel.

In the case of the Phillipian jailor, he was told to "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ", since he had not yet been presented with the gospel. If we read on past verse 31, we see that the word of the Lord was spoken to him, that he demonstrated repentance by washing Paul and Silas' stripes, and that he was baptized.



I have never baptized an unbeliever. What would be the point? I have baptized believers who wanted to be saved, though.

Do you bury live men, or dead men? It is only when we are risen with Christ in baptism that we walk in newness of life (Rom 6:3-5).



Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved..." in Mark 16:16. It would be hard to find a more easy to understand statement in all of the Bible. Jesus says that baptism comes before salvation. You say you were saved, and then baptized.

1 Pet 3:21 says, "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us..." You said, "Baptism doesn't bring the salvation". You are at odds with the Scriptures.



The Bible says that baptism is for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38), to wash away sins (Acts 22:16), where one is buried and risen with Christ (Col 2:12), where one puts on Christ (Gal 3:27), is how one gets into Christ (Rom 6:3-5), and that it "...doth also now save us..."

Would you say that it is a "wrong, wrong, and wrong again, belief" for me to believe all of these things?...

Because a lot of this is error in understanding Scripture.

First, remember that the New Testament was not written in English. Second, remember that the New Testament was not written in American culture. Third, the New Testament was not given to us versified; sometimes we have to read beyond a few words to understand it right.

Acts 16:31a “‘Believe on the Lord Jesus|, and you will be saved’” (ASV|NASB). That is what it says -- period. It does not say `Believe on the Lord Jesus, and after you have done this, that, and the other, you will be saved.' It says "Believe," with result "you will be saved."

After this event, the Philippian jailer showed that he really believed Jesus was Lord by doing what the Lord called for -- washing wounds, and being baptized.

"Mark" 16:16 -- read the margin notes of most modern translations. The archaeological evidence indicates that Mark ended at 16:8. After the New Testament period, someone forged the additional ending. Of course, if you read the rest of this forgery, you would find "he that believeth not shall be |condemned" (KJV|NKJV). It does not say `he that believeth and is baptized not shall be condemned.'

Romans 6:3-5. Romans 6:3-5 is part of a passage explaining a picture representation of how Christians are to relate to sin: Romans 6:2b “We are those who have died to sin” (TNIV). This is obviously a picture because reality is that Christians still face the sin problem per 1 John 1:8-10. Romans 6:6 has figurative “our old self was crucified” (TNIV) in likeness to Christ’s death. Romans 6:2 is figurative, and 6:6 is figurative, so I conclude 6:3-5 is also figurative. Romans 6:11 closes “reckon ye also yourselves to be dead unto sin” (ASV). Sadly, some focus so narrowly on Romans 6:3-5 that they neglect the point of 6:2-11 – that we should view ourselves as dead to sinful living.

1 Peter 3:21 is my most hated mishandling of Scripture. One has to read beyond six words for this. The whole verse: “which also after a true likeness doth now save you, even baptism,| not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a |clear conscience,| by the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (ASV|NASB|RSV 1952|KJV).

It is a `necessary inference' that Peter is denying that the water bath is what is meant by baptism here. Peter is saying that the repentance that baptism represents is what saves us. It irritates me that not only do many refuse to accept what is beyond a few favorite words, but they also revile those who do.

Acts 2:38. The KJV really messed this one up, but English does not have the tools to handle this verse as well as some foreign languages do. The Spanish Reina-Valera 1909 has "Arrepentíos, y bautícese cada uno de vosotros para perdón de pecados" = "You-people-must-repent-you, and let-s/he-get-self-baptized each one of you in-order-for pardon of sins."

The strong imperative is used for equivalent to KJV "Repent," and the obligatory subjunctive is used for equivalent to KJV "be baptized." Why? The Greek verb tenses are not the same. The stronger Greek verb tense is on what the KJV translates "Repent."* The repentance is what secures "remission of sins." Baptism is an obligation from such repentance.
*in Zodhiates, Complete WordStudy New Testament, page 397.

Acts 22:16 before the KJV, in the 1568 Bishops' Bible: "And nowe why taryest thou? aryse, & be baptized, & wasshe away thy sinnes, in calling on the name of the Lorde” (BishB).

As translated today in a literal Spanish translation: “Y ahora, ¿por qué te detienes? Levánte y sé bautizado, y lava tus pecados invocando su nombre” (LBLA) = “And now, for what to-you you-detain? Let-you-rise and you-be baptized, and wash your sins invoking His name.”

This is an allusion to Joel 2:32 quoted in Romans 10:13 “for, Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved” (ASV). Paul was washing away his sins by "calling on the name of the Lorde."

Colossians 2:11-12, well, is baptism done "without hands"? No, it is not. The "circumcision without hands" is "faith in the |poder = power| of God" (NBV|DA ERA and translated |NBV). Faith is "without hands." Also, as in Romans 6:2-11 discussed earlier, baptism as a burial and resurrection is pictorial.

I think I will add here that ancient Jews had their own conversion baptisms. They viewed conversion baptisms as symbolically making baptizees new people by `washing away’ earlier life.* This picture is used as a supporting point to a larger point in Acts 22:16, Romans 6:2-11, and Colossians 2:11-12. Also, the Talmud at Yebamoth 47 a-b indicates that only after Jewish convert baptism was one “considered” a Jew** even though Scripture indicates “circumcision” (ASV) made one a Jew, such as Acts 10:45 and Galatians. The point for Colossians is that faith replaces circumcision, and baptism is to follow it.
*So That’s Why! Bible, page 1287.
**Sandmel, Judaism and Christian Beginnings, page 233.

Galatians 3:27. What the KJV translates "into" is also translated "em" (DA ERA and ERC) = "in," giving us "baptized in Christ." This is similar to 1 Corinthians 10:2 where the Israelites of the Exodus were described as “batizados em Moisés” (DA ERC) = “baptized in Moses.” Thereafter they recognized the Judaic Law delivered by Moses to be their authority about God. Returning to Galatians, at 3:24 the Judaic Law is called “our tutor to Christ” (NASBmg), and then in 3:25 Paul writes “But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor” (NASB). Galatians 3:26b “ye are all |children| of God, through faith, in Christ Jesus” (ASV|ICB|ASV). In Roman society, a youth who became an adult put aside childhood clothes for new clothing to signify move into adulthood,* and a person’s clothing was also considered representative of the person’s self.** Galatians 3:24-7 teaches that we are to be saved by biblical faith, and by identifying oneself with Christ via baptism in His name, one abandons the tutor = the Mosaic Law, “puts on Christ” signifying spiritual maturity – and very importantly is to be `wearing’ the attributes that Jesus Christ valued.
*Life Application Bible, page 2121.
**Children’s Resource Ministry Bible, page 458.

Now, there is nothing in any passage you cited that nullifies Romans 4:5 and Ephesians 2:8-10. Oh, let me anticipate an expected objection: these passages do not set aside duty to obey. I believe that you will accuse me of `explaining away' passages, but I am only following how New Testament churches understood them. There can be no contradiction in Scripture -- if we are saved only upon completed baptism, then we are not saved by faith, and we are saved by a work. However, after careful study, there is no contradiction.

I genuinely respect people who take the passages the way you take them. It is perfectly understandable that someone would take these passages this way.

However, what I do object to is when such people go around claiming -- either explicitly or by insinuation often denied later -- that others are not following Scripture. Things are not as `cut and dried' as many in the Churches of Christ prefer to believe. I think you ought to be more careful before you make the accusation that any fundamentalist is denying Scripture.

I have never baptized an unbeliever. What would be the point? I have baptized believers who wanted to be saved, though.

Interesting point. I am unaware of any Scripture that specifies an unsaved believer. Therefore, I reject this. On biblical faith, one gets saved, and when properly informed, seeks baptism.

 

[Eliyahu]

Bmerr,
I had a cold in the meantime. In my view you are quite persistent in adding one more condition ( knowledge) to Sola Fide, and I wonder whether it is the common or official stance of your church group. Roman Catholic values Baptism as Salvation. Now let's see your points:

Eliyahu,

bmerr here. For one to have true, Biblical faith, he must know God's word, for "...faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" (Rom 10:17). If one does not know God's word, he cannot know or do God's will. Only those who do the will of the Father will inherit the kingdom (Matt 7:21).

Faith comes by hearing, this is what I wanted to address to you.
Now you are obsessed by replacing it with Knowledge. If you said simply from the beginning" Hearing the Gospel" there would have been no argument. But you are persistantly replacing Hearing with Knowledge.
Hearing means actually Acceptance or Obedience.

If a person wants to be saved, he needs to know what God has said a person needs to do to be saved.

Yes, it doesn't mean that one need to study any theology!

In the case of Paul, he was only told to be baptized, since he had already believed in the risen Christ, repented of sins, and confessed Christ as Lord.

Yes, when did it happen? When did Paul call Jesus " Lord"?

In the case of the Pentecostians, they were told to "repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins", since they had already believed Peter's preaching of the gospel.

In their cases, they were the people who refused to believe Jesus as Messiah before, and therefore Peter preached in detail, and thereafter they believed the Gospel.

In the case of the Phillipian jailor, he was told to "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ", since he had not yet been presented with the gospel. If we read on past verse 31, we see that the word of the Lord was spoken to him, that he demonstrated repentance by washing Paul and Silas' stripes, and that he was baptized.

So, still are you claiming that Paul and Sila told him " Learn about Jesus Christ, Study about him with us at the class, thereafter you can believe, then you will be saved" ?
You sound like Salvation came from the good works of washing the wounds of Paul and Silas. Bible doesn't always say how the sinners believed. But in the meantime the jailor must have believed or confessed that he believed in Jesus. The others were the results of the faith.

I have never baptized an unbeliever. What would be the point? I have baptized believers who wanted to be saved, though.

In other words, you are confessing, that the people had become already believers, before you baptized them ! their oldmen died and newperson became alive, before Baptism.
Becoming a believer has nothing to do with Baptism, right?

Do you bury live men, or dead men? It is only when we are risen with Christ in baptism that we walk in newness of life (Rom 6:3-5).

You are right on this. We were already dead, before Baptism!

Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved..." in Mark 16:16. It would be hard to find a more easy to understand statement in all of the Bible. Jesus says that baptism comes before salvation. You say you were saved, and then baptized.

What if someone believed in Jesus but was not baptised, then will he not be saved?
The Robber at the Cross believed in Jesus, but was not baptized, then he was not saved?

1 Pet 3:21 says, "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us..." You said, "Baptism doesn't bring the salvation". You are at odds with the Scriptures.

I don't think Peter was focussing on the water baptism there. If someone was baptized without the spiritual conversion ( Baptism by Holy Spirit), it is meaningless as daily swiming or diving into water doesn't change one's spiritual status.
What Peter said there is apparently Spiritual Baptim by Holy Spirit or Spiritual Baptism by Holy Spirit plus Water Baptism. So, your argument is refuted.

The Bible says that baptism is for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38), to wash away sins (Acts 22:16), where one is buried and risen with Christ (Col 2:12), where one puts on Christ (Gal 3:27), is how one gets into Christ (Rom 6:3-5), and that it "...doth also now save us..."

I already told you to read Acts 2:38 in Greek Text because there can be some misunderstanding.
Unto the forgiveness of sins, repent and let everyone of you be baptized, and you will receive the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

There is no rule that eis apesin hamartiown should be bound with repent only.

You already confessed that Paul must have believed before " baptize" was mentioned in Acts 22:16. Otherwise, was Anania commanding Paul to be baptized while he was not believing yet? Anania must have noticed that Paul was believing and had a faith already! Wash away thy sins, means that thy sins were forgiven already and therefore so that it may be officially declared as being washed away, you must be baptized and wash away thy sins!

Would you say that it is a "wrong, wrong, and wrong again, belief" for me to believe all of these things?

If you look at the Christian history, you can hardly find anyone who claim that one need a knowledge for the salvation, or that Salvation by Knowledge+ Faith.

What about the children in Matthew 18? Why did Jesus say that Kingdom of Heaven belongs to the people like kids? Becoming like children means gaining a lot of knowledge?

Acts 26:13-18 doesn't say anything about how or when Paul was saved.

16 But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee; ... 18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me. 19 Whereupon, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision:

As I said, Paul called Jesus "Lord" ( 9:6)

What would you say Paul was asking when he asked, "Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?"

Do you know all of what you should do in the future?
I ask God everyday to guide me for the daily life. That's is the typical way of obedience by the true believers!
Are you ready to commit yourself to the great missionary immediately ? or would you say that I have to take care of my family and therefore I have to earn some money from a denomination and therefore I have to go to a college of theology or need a doctor degree first ?

I have not said that one must have a lot of knowledge plus baptism to be saved.

Good! I hope you will lift the ban of knowledge eventually.

No, he wasn't. That's why he asked what he was to do.

I have never indicated that Paul was saved while he was praying and fasting.

I'm not making the gospel difficult. What is so hard about belief, repentance, confession, and baptism? All of these things are plainly set forth in the NT.

Gospel is very simple and easy for everybody. Problem is that human beings always try to invent some way to make it difficult.

I'm just saying we should keep reading past 16:31 to see what happened next.

I am sure that Paul and Sila didn't add much knowledge, but what the Jailor saw( v 26, earthquake), which was the miracle, changed his mind already and believed immediately.

Go back to 16:12 where Paul and Silas come to Phillipi, reading through to 16:23, where we first find the jailor. As you read through the encounter from there, see if you can determine how much of the gospel the jailor knew at the point where he asked how to be saved.

you are working very hard to invent a new religion! based on Knowledge!

Where's the Scripture?

Scripture always said " Sola Fide, (Rom 1:17, Eph 2:8....)
Hear and Believe! ( Rom 10:17)

Jesus spoke to the Pharisees, Sadducees, and many others, yet not all of these were saved. His speaking to Paul on the road to Damascus does not mean that Paul was saved.

In Christ,
bmerr

I hoped you know better than distinguishing the difference between His ministry on earth and His ministry after the resurrection in vision.
Did Jesus ever reveal Himself to Pharisees, Saduccees, Pilates on the road of Jerusalem after His resurrection and ascension?
Did Jesus appear to KIng Herod in vision? How many believers have seen Jesus in vision or on the road, while others could notice there is some strange event happening?

Jesus spoke to Paul and Paul called Him Lord ( before he was led to Damascus), and obeyed Him, his reaction was Trembling and Astonished. The people surrounding him could not hear the voice but Paul heard the Lord saying to him ( 22:9). Also, Anania recognized Paul as a believer already as he calls him " Brother Saul" even though it may apply to the typical Jewish bortherhood as well.

I already pointed out Mark 2:3-
5 When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee.

Did Palsy have a lot of Knowledge? Did he know Trinity? Was he already baptized?

What about this verse?
Mt 9:22 But Jesus turned him about, and when he saw her, he said, Daughter, be of good comfort; thy faith hath made thee whole. And the woman was made whole from that hour.


You may want to add this way : Thy faith and lots of knowledge made thee whole!

 

[Tazman]

Do you baptize the unbelievers who are not saved yet, then they become saved?.

You have a definition problem: If you mean do I baptize people who do not put their faith in Jesus, then they would be an unbeliever, so no. If you are talking about people who know about Jesus and know to say He's Lord, but don't want to make Him lord of their life, then No.

It only makes sense to baptize people with true faith in Jesus. Baptism without faith is not how it works. Baptism without heart change is not how it works either.

Do you tell someone to ask for forgiveness who does not believe in Jesus?

Baptism doesn't bring the Salvation, but the Saved persons are to be baptized.

Who, within scripture, EVER explain it the way that you Just did? NNE. It's an opinion that NO person who pick up the bible for the 1st time will EVER come to. THINK ABOUT IT!

The bible NEVER tells you to baptize "SAVED" people. EVER.

I was saved first, thereafter I was baptised in a river.

Of course you were......:sleeping_2:

Were you baptised while you were sinners, then thereafter your sins were forgiven? That's absolutlely wrong, wrong, and wrong again, belief.

You stand against very fundamental teachings of Christ. Get on the right side.

The sins of Paul were already forgiven, he just needed an official declaration of it by Baptism

Again, YOUR OPINION. Think, please. You are trying to imply something that does not fit in scriputer. I will tell you why you are doing this later.

I expect you bring Acts 2:38, but please read carefully the Greek bible of it. Sometimes Bible doesn't mention the commandments in the sequence of time.
I mentioned 2-3 times you should read Acts 26:13-18 in order to understand how Paul was saved.
Paul was saved already when he was calling Jesus as Lord

Ok Eli if it will make you happy, lets read together (and please keep your responses short and simple. You give the impression sometimes that you cannot just use simple scripture to agree with your opinions):

Acts 26:13-18 (New International Version)

13About noon, O king, as I was on the road, I saw a light from heaven, brighter than the sun, blazing around me and my companions. 14We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic,[a] 'Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.'


15"Then I asked, 'Who are you, Lord?' " 'I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,' the Lord replied. 16'Now get up and stand on your feet. I have appeared to you to appoint you as a servant and as a witness of what you have seen of me and what I will show you. 17I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them 18to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.


"We all fell"? Why weren't he fellow travelers converted as well?

"Who are you, Lord?" He knows out of respect to say Lord to the person that knocked him on his but, however, the "Who" would indicate a lack of knoweledge as to whome he is addressing. True or Not? Simple yes or no please

"I have appeared to you to appoint you" Does this mean that Paul was saved before he knew the Lord? Yes or No?

Now Eli, I'm sure you would like to read this in context:

So why is Paul sharing his conversion (compact style)? To persuade his hearers to believe in Jesus, not to Tell them HOW TO BE SAVED.

IF you want to HOW Paul was saved you should read his conversion as it actually happened outside of him now sharing his faith, so.....

READ ACTS 9:3-19

3As he neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. 4He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?"

5"Who are you, Lord?" Saul asked.
"I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting," he replied. 6"Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do."
7The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone. 8Saul got up from the ground, but when he opened his eyes he could see nothing. So they led him by the hand into Damascus. 9For three days he was blind, and did not eat or drink anything.
10In Damascus there was a disciple named Ananias. The Lord called to him in a vision, "Ananias!"
"Yes, Lord," he answered.
11The Lord told him, "Go to the house of Judas on Straight Street and ask for a man from Tarsus named Saul, for he is praying. 12In a vision he has seen a man named Ananias come and place his hands on him to restore his sight."

15But the Lord said to Ananias, "Go! This man is my chosen instrument to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel. 16I will show him how much he must suffer for my name." 17Then Ananias went to the house and entered it. Placing his hands on Saul, he said, "Brother Saul, the Lord—Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you were coming here—has sent me so that you may see again and be filled with the Holy Spirit." 18Immediately, something like scales fell from Saul's eyes, and he could see again. He got up and was baptized, 19and after taking some food, he regained his strength.

Pauls earlier testamony to his Jewish brothers he shared other words given by Ananias:
Acts 22: 14 "Then he said: 'The God of our fathers has chosen you to know his will and to see the Righteous One and to hear words from his mouth. 15You will be his witness to all men of what you have seen and heard. 16And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.


Eli - take everything in red and make your point, because I just don't see it.

This is your problem with approaching scripture:

1. out of context
2. elevating experience over commands
3. using one scripture against another to make it null or void.

Its easier just to accept the scriptures in plain sight as it is given.

 

[Eliyahu]

Eli - take everything in red and make your point, because I just don't see it.

This is your problem with approaching scripture:

1. out of context
2. elevating experience over commands
3. using one scripture against another to make it null or void.

Its easier just to accept the scriptures in plain sight as it is given.

1. I am tired of your logic. It seems that I have encountered a strange religion! Please clarify on this first.

Are you saying
-Sins are forgiven by Baptism? or
-Sins were forgiven before Baptism?

In case of Paul, were his sins forgiven before he heard from Ananias? or His sins were not forgiven yet by that time?
Remember that Anania told Paul " be baptized"

You have to clarify your stance.

2. You are explaining your logic based on NIV, which I understand contains thousands of mistakes or errors or omissions.

You never read Paul is calling Jesus as Lord after Jesus revealed His Identification in ch 9. NIV doesn't have such phrase in chapter 9:5-6.
However, even NIV has such statement and confession by Paul, in ch 22:10. " What shall I do Lord?" I asked (NIV). If Paul was not obeying Jesus, could he say so?. Also, doesn't he follow the instruction by Jesus afterwards ?
If Paul was not changed yet, and was still the oldman Paul attempting to kill the believers, could Anania call Paul " Brother Saul" ? ( your favorite NIV ACts 22:13)

3. If you take KJV on the doctrinal issues, it is much clearer. In this case, even in ch 9:5-6, the symptom of the converted person is clear.

NIV translated Jesus spoke in Aramaic, in Acts 26:14, and it replaced Hebrew with Aramaic in John 5:2, John 19:20, and it says Paul spoke in Aramaic in Acts 21:40, 22:2, which are totally ignorant replacement. NIV may excuse that Hebrew and Aramaic are the same. That's more ridiculous. Aramaic and Hebrew are the separate, independent language. Today Syrian language is different from Hebrew, Chaldean language or Peshitta Aramaic are different from Hebrew, they have separate alphabet ( Alephbet). In Aramaic, there is Jot mentioned by Jesus (Mt 5:18), but Aramaic Jot is much bigger than Hebrew Jot, and there is no tittle in Aramaic. Apparently Jesus was talking about Hebrew Bible. Someone may excuse that the two languages were more similar each other in ancient times before they were diverged in modern days. However, there is one witness here:

2 Kings 18:26-28
26 Then Eliakim son of Hilkiah, and Shebna and Joah said to the field commander, "Please speak to your servants in Aramaic, since we understand it. Don't speak to us in Hebrew in the hearing of the people on the wall." 27 But the commander replied, "Was it only to your master and you that my master sent me to say these things, and not to the men sitting on the wall--who, like you, will have to eat their own filth and drink their own urine?" 28 Then the commander stood and called out in Hebrew:

In other words, Laypeople speak Hebrew only, but couldn't understand Aramaic! In Acts 26:14 you can find no manuscripts having Aramaic.

NIV omited 24 entire verses in 13 spots, omited thousands of words in NT, and one can hardly debate the crucial points of doctrines based on NIV.

You said I exalt the experience over the commandment, No! Spiritual experience comes after one obey His commandments. We, I and my church obey NT teachings faithfully, such as Discerning the Salvation by hearing the testimony, Baptism by immersion, Weekly Bread and Wine Taking, Women's Head Covering, Calling Brothers and Sisters, No clergy system, Sovereignty of Holy Spirit for the Pulpit, etc.

I think I have covered enough, and if you don't want to accept the truth as it is, but stuborn to add one more condition, " knowledge" or whatever you want, it is up to you. The Gospel that I received from the Lord is very simple and easy to accept.
Jesus Christ has paid all the price for our sins at the Cross when He shed he blood and died Once For All.
If you hear it, and accept it and believe it, you are saved! It is very simple. The change of your life conforming to Christ will start from thence.
However, we know that, there are some people, who accepted such truth and so-called " believed but their lives are not changed as we read Titus 1:16 or 2 Cor 13:5. But because of such people we cannot change the basic principle, that Salvation comes by faith, the faith by hearing the Gospel, and the Gospel is very simple and easy to believe. We are sinners and need a Savior, and Jesus died for us, and thereby we can go to the heaven.
If you add extra conditions other than what God demanded, you won't get the souls.

 

[Tazman]

It seems that I have encountered a strange religion!

Yes! It is called Christianity!

I'll pray that you be humble and hopefully you can read through again and actually answer the very few questions asked of you.

You have not responded to any of the simple yes or no question.

You're just throwing up smoke.

I would appreciate this conversation a little more if you would respond to the question asked, but it is very obvious that you cannot.:sleeping_2:

 

[Eliyahu]

Yes! It is called Christianity!

I'll pray that you be humble and hopefully you can read through again and actually answer the very few questions asked of you.

You have not responded to any of the simple yes or no question.

You're just throwing up smoke.

I would appreciate this conversation a little more if you would respond to the question asked, but it is very obvious that you cannot.:sleeping_2:

Your religion may be called Christianity, but in reality its contents is the religion based on Faith+Knowledge, faith plus human works.

My statements and beliefs were the same as the mostly wellknown christians such as JN Darby, CH McINtosh, George Muller, David Livingstone, Hudson Taylor, Eric Sauer, Harry Ironside, William McDonald, who are the famous, co-called Plymouth Brethren.
Salvation is very simple, which you make complicated and difficult as all the pagan religion try to make all the time.
You are spiritually dumb and deaf because you cannot read what I wrote down, you cannot understand I taught you, which is a great pity.

 

[DHK]

The simple knowledge of the gospel is all that is required to be saved.
To Tazman and Bmerr, I would like to pose a personal question:
When I trusted Jesus Christ as my Saviour I was born again by the Spirit of God. At that time I knew that my sins were forgiven, and I had an assurance of salvation. However, I was not baptized until two years after that.

During that intervening time, between the time I trusted Christ and the time that I was baptized, If I had suddenly died, would I have gone to heaven or hell?

 

[Tazman]

When I trusted Jesus Christ as my Saviour I was born again by the Spirit of God. At that time I knew that my sins were forgiven, and I had an assurance of salvation.

1. When I trusted in Jesus, I was born again (Based on what covenant?)
2. At that time I knew that my sins were forgiven (Based on your trust in your covenant?)
3. I had assurance of salvation (based on your trust in your covenant?)

How do you expect an answer to a question based on an old covenant (sort of), or flawed reasoning?

[DHK, please understand that I am not doubting your experience, I'm just questioning your level of reasoning with scripture]

Tell you what, if you can get your friend Eli to actually answer the very few questions I asked him, then I will gladly continue this discussion. I'm concerned that a real conversation will never take place if this continues.

 

[Eliyahu]

1. When I trusted in Jesus, I was born again (Based on what covenant?)
2. At that time I knew that my sins were forgiven (Based on your trust in your covenant?)
3. I had assurance of salvation (based on your trust in your covenant?)

How do you expect an answer to a question based on an old covenant (sort of), or flawed reasoning?

[DHK, please understand that I am not doubting your experience, I'm just questioning your level of reasoning with scripture]

Tell you what, if you can get your friend Eli to actually answer the very few questions I asked him, then I will gladly continue this discussion. I'm concerned that a real conversation will never take place if this continues.

Tazman, I started to doubt about your strange religion, even your salvation based on such religion!