How To Get To Heaven When You Die

[DHK]

Yes it was a brief answer. Firstly I find 1 John 5:20 ambiguous to my mind. Who is the “his” in the phrase “in his Son Jesus Christ”, and is this the same person as “him” in “know him that is true” and “we are in him that is true”? So I can take the “his” and first “him” as being God the Father, but the second “him” is qualified by the phrase “even in his Son Jesus Christ”. I have not had time to consider other translations, or possible Trinitarian Commentaries (as these sometimes explain such inconsistencies better than a biased anti-Trinitarian Commentary). If you really want me to pursue a thorough explanation I will attempt this.

My original answer was based on my belief from many other Scriptures that there is One God the Father, and that our Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God. But even here in 1 John 5:20 we encounter the phrase “in his Son Jesus Christ” and this teaches that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, my original answer.

Kind regards
Trevor

1Jn 5:20 And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.

Here is what Jamieson, Faucett and Brown say on this verse:

Summary of our Christian privileges.
is come — is present, having come. “HE IS HERE - all is full of Him - His incarnation, work, and abiding presence, is to us a living fact” [Alford].

given us an understanding — Christ’s, office is to give the inner spiritual understanding to discern the things of God.

that we may know — Some oldest manuscripts read, “(so) that we know.”

him that is true — God, as opposed to every kind of idol or false god (1Jo_5:21). Jesus, by virtue of His oneness with God, is also “He that is true” (Rev_3:7).

even - “we are in the true” God, by virtue of being “in His Son Jesus Christ.”

This is the true God — “This Jesus Christ (the last-named Person) is the true God” (identifying Him thus with the Father in His attribute, “the only true God,” Joh_17:3, primarily attributed to the Father).

and eternal life — predicated of the Son of God; Alford wrongly says, He was the life, but not eternal life. The Father is indeed eternal life as its source, but the Son also is that eternal life manifested, as the very passage (1Jo_1:2) which Alford quotes, proves against him. Compare also 1Jo_5:11, 1Jo_5:13. Plainly it is as the Mediator of ETERNAL LIFE to us that Christ is here contemplated. The Greek is, “The true God and eternal life is this” Jesus Christ, that is, In believing in Him we believe in the true God, and have eternal life. The Son is called “He that is TRUE,” Rev_3:7, as here. This naturally prepares the way for warning against false gods (1Jo_5:21).
Jesus Christ is the only “express image of God’s person” which is sanctioned, the only true visible manifestation of God. All other representations of God are forbidden as idols. Thus the Epistle closes as it began (1Jo_1:1, 1Jo_1:2).

 

[Yeshua1]

Greetings again steaver and DHK, I appreciate the clarification of your statement that I used, perhaps incorrectly. Yes I do not claim to have had a Holy Spirit type regeneration experience, but a gradual change of direction and the slow transforming effect of the word of God in my heart and mind. But I do feel strongly and with strong conviction as to the truth of the things that I have believed, and this conviction covers prophecy, aspects of the Kingdom and aspects of the Name.

In my imagination I wanted to fully discuss John 12 with you as it has gradually made a deep impression upon me in more recent years. I wanted to highlight the various characters surrounding Jesus’ statements, the two Greeks, the Apostles, the Pharisees, and the general crowd or audience. But especially I wanted to draw attention to Jesus’ words, partly in response to the Greeks, but also in response to the Jews who would not commit themselves to Jesus, despite his words and miracles. Especially also what he says is universal, and important for us to meditate upon. And then finally, Jesus’ words at the end concerning judgement. I also like the link given by John to Isaiah 6 and 53, two favourite chapters. I will leave it at that, and unless you want to expand on this in discussion, I will leave you to simply to browse this remarkable section of Scripture.

Yes it was a brief answer. Firstly I find 1 John 5:20 ambiguous to my mind. Who is the “his” in the phrase “in his Son Jesus Christ”, and is this the same person as “him” in “know him that is true” and “we are in him that is true”? So I can take the “his” and first “him” as being God the Father, but the second “him” is qualified by the phrase “even in his Son Jesus Christ”. I have not had time to consider other translations, or possible Trinitarian Commentaries (as these sometimes explain such inconsistencies better than a biased anti-Trinitarian Commentary). If you really want me to pursue a thorough explanation I will attempt this.

My original answer was based on my belief from many other Scriptures that there is One God the Father, and that our Lord Jesus Christ is the Son of God. But even here in 1 John 5:20 we encounter the phrase “in his Son Jesus Christ” and this teaches that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, my original answer.

Kind regards
Trevor

Is Jesus God in the exact same sense that the Father is?

 

[steaver]

Yes I do not claim to have had a Holy Spirit type regeneration experience, but a gradual change of direction and the slow transforming effect of the word of God in my heart and mind. But I do feel strongly and with strong conviction as to the truth of the things that I have believed, and this conviction covers prophecy, aspects of the Kingdom and aspects of the Name.


Kind regards
Trevor

As do JW's, Mormons, and rogue churches such as Jerimiah Wright's church also feel strongly and with strong conviction as to the truth of the things that they have believed. Unless such conviction comes from the Holy Spirit, it is nothing more than carnal conviction which anyone can strongly experience. Look at the JW's and Mormons, how convinced and committed they are to their beliefs which are anti-christ.

Jesus said ye must be born again. You say you have never experienced any such rebirth.

The scripture defines what this rebirth is. You reject the scripture teaching on the rebirth and make up your own.

Romans 8 is crystal clear concerning this rebirth..."But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."...God dwelling IN you, Christ dwelling IN you. Scripture states Christ and God as One in the same Spirit.

2Cor13:5..."Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates"...You declare you have not had any experience of Jesus Christ being IN you.

Col1:27..."To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory."...by your own admission, this is still a mystery to you.

Here is the mystery you reject...

John 17:21-23...."That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one. I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me". Plus further evidence of Christ and the Father stated as One God.

It is the mystery Nicodemus could not comprehend...

John3:4...
Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God...

Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again...

...The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit".

...Trevor answered and said unto him, How can these things be?

Romans 8:11...But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you...

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.

The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God...

You Trevor, claim you have not experienced any receiving of the Spirit. I have and is why I can say....

"How can one stop believing in that which they have personal knowledge of is an absolute truth?"

The Scripture is perfectly clear concerning having the Spirit of God, the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Christ IN YOU. The Scripture effortlessly blends these three as One as God speaks through His holy prophets and Apostles. You can choose to stay in denial, I pray God has not already turned you over to blindness, I don't believe He has, but I do believe you are twisting the plain reading of the text. What I am not sure of is WHY??? What gain could be had to deny the obvious and reject Jesus Christ as LORD??? Only you can answer that for yourself........

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again DHK, Yeshua1 and steaver,

I appreciate your responses. I will have a closer look at JFB on 1 John 5:20, but so far I am happy with this verse as it does say “we know that the Son of God is come” and this fits like a glove my understanding of this subject. I think I have answered your question, Yeshua1, and the rest of my posts explain some aspects of my view.

Jesus said ye must be born again. You say you have never experienced any such rebirth.

The scripture defines what this rebirth is. You reject the scripture teaching on the rebirth and make up your own.

I was born again at my baptism. I appreciate your exposition, steaver, but my view of Christ within is an affectionate belief of the gospel.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[steaver]

I was born again at my baptism. I appreciate your exposition, steaver, but my view of Christ within is an affectionate belief of the gospel.

Kind regards
Trevor

And it is just that...your view. The Scripture is clear and I provided only a small portion. Christ in you is NOT an affectionate belief of the gospel. It is the Spirit of Christ in you...it is the Spirit of God in you...Romans 8.

Trevor, get wet doesn't make you born-again. Read this very, very carefully and pray God to give you eyes to see and ears to hear....

But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

 

[Yeshua1]

Greetings again DHK, Yeshua1 and steaver,

I appreciate your responses. I will have a closer look at JFB on 1 John 5:20, but so far I am happy with this verse as it does say “we know that the Son of God is come” and this fits like a glove my understanding of this subject. I think I have answered your question, Yeshua1, and the rest of my posts explain some aspects of my view.
I was born again at my baptism. I appreciate your exposition, steaver, but my view of Christ within is an affectionate belief of the gospel.

Kind regards
Trevor

So one can be given eternal life in the water Baptism, apart from faith in jesus as GOD?

 

[DHK]

I was born again at my baptism. I appreciate your exposition, steaver, but my view of Christ within is an affectionate belief of the gospel.

Kind regards
Trevor

Water simply gets you wet. It cannot save. There is nothing that H2O can do; two atoms of Hydrogen put together with one atom of Oxygen has no saving power. Even Jeremiah knew that and mocked at the very suggestion of it.

Jeremiah 2:22 For though thou wash thee with nitre, and take thee much soap, yet thine iniquity is marked before me, saith the Lord GOD.
--Water cannot wash away sins. Add soap, Jeremiah said. It still won't wash away sin. Only the blood of Christ can wash away your sin.

Your belief is not much different than the Hindus. They go each year to the polluted waters of the Ganges. There they "baptize" themselves, going into the waters believing those polluted waters thinking the holy waters of the Ganges will purify them of all their sins.
Your belief is no different.

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again steaver, Yeshua1 and DHK,

We believe that the true gospel when affectionately believed leads to baptism, for example the Samaritans and the Ethiopian Eunuch Acts 8. This is the appointed means of a believer identifyng with the crucifixion, death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. We also remember the death and resurrection of Jesus each week as suggested by Jesus by partaking of the bread and wine. Do the Baptists partake of the bread and wine? These are similar in simplicity to water H2O, actual real bread and wine, but full of meaning to a believer

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[BobRyan]

I was born again at my baptism. I appreciate your exposition, steaver, but my view of Christ within is an affectionate belief of the gospel.

Kind regards
Trevor

I am not entirely sure what you intend by that statement - but here is a Biblical perspective on Baptism.

In 1 Peter 3 - Peter denies that sacrament of baptism in the way that some have promoted it. He claims there that there is no such thing as being born again by the "magic touch of sacramental waters to the flesh" - rather Peter claims that what saves is "the appeal to God for a clean conscience". An appeal to God not made at all by infants... an appeal to God made only by the "believer".

But with the "sacramental waters of baptism" idea - even infants are born-again when baptized, because they can make no "appeal to God for a clean conscience" and must rely on the "magic powers" of the sacramental "waters touching the flesh" alone.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Getting it Right]

So one can be given eternal life in the water Baptism, apart from faith in jesus as GOD?

No.

By Grace you are saved through Faith, the GIFT.

:applause::applause::applause:

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again Bob,

I am not entirely sure what you intend by that statement - but here is a Biblical perspective on Baptism.

In 1 Peter 3 - Peter denies that sacrament of baptism in the way that some have promoted it. He claims there that there is no such thing as being born again by the "magic touch of sacramental waters to the flesh" - rather Peter claims that what saves is "the appeal to God for a clean conscience". An appeal to God not made at all by infants... an appeal to God made only by the "believer".

But with the "sacramental waters of baptism" idea - even infants are born-again when baptized, because they can make no "appeal to God for a clean conscience" and must rely on the "magic powers" of the sacramental "waters touching the flesh" alone.

I appreciate your thoughts on baptism. I think that I endorse all that you have said above. I am not sure if you read my previous Post, but I was answering the idea that baptism is not effectual, partly because it involves water. I hold that baptism is only effectual if it has been as a result of the true meaning of the death and resurrection of Jesus, and that the baptism has been motivated by true faith. I do not believe there is any sanctification of the water in which a person is baptised. We often baptise in Lake Macquarie, but it is not the place or the particular water, but the meaning of being identified with the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus by being buried and raised again out of the water. We do not accept pouring.

I am also very much in sympathy with the early “Swiss brethren”, some of whom were called “Anabaptists”, who were baptised and then suffered persecution from Catholics and Protestants because of their rejection of infant sprinkling.

I am interested if you have a response to my two replies to you in Posts #90 and #91.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[BobRyan]

Greetings again Bob,
I appreciate your thoughts on baptism. I think that I endorse all that you have said above. I am not sure if you read my previous Post, but I was answering the idea that baptism is not effectual, partly because it involves water. I hold that baptism is only effectual if it has been as a result of the true meaning of the death and resurrection of Jesus, and that the baptism has been motivated by true faith. I do not believe there is any sanctification of the water in which a person is baptised. We often baptise in Lake Macquarie, but it is not the place or the particular water, but the meaning of being identified with the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus by being buried and raised again out of the water. We do not accept pouring.

I am also very much in sympathy with the early “Swiss brethren”, some of whom were called “Anabaptists”, who were baptised and then suffered persecution from Catholics and Protestants because of their rejection of infant sprinkling.

I am interested if you have a response to my two replies to you in Posts #90 and #91.

Kind regards
Trevor

Thank you for your thoughtful reply - I did not see the posts 90 and 91 but I will go back and read them and post a response.

Blessings,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

The OT and Zechariah the father of John the baptizer predicts a glorious future for Israel that does not reject the Messiah.

As we all know they did reject Christ - and Christ is not coming back to do the first coming all over again as Heb 9 states clearly - so they missed that boat.

Yet the promises are fulfilled as Romans 9 states - in the church in the future.

But having free will - Israel chose to reject the Messiah instead of that wonderful outcome - they fall. That good scenario is depicted in the two texts you provide above.

Romans 9 says that these promises will not simply be utterly wiped out - but rather will be fulfilled in the church age - and indeed in this case after the 1000 years.

God will still setup the New Jerusalem on earth after the 1000 years as Rev 21 points out. And He will reign on earth - first raising all the wicked in the Rev 20 second resurrection - destroying them in the lake of Fire then making the New Heavens and New Earth of Rev 21.

All of these describe the ultimate scenario where God's kingdom is established on earth after the 1000 years.

Matt 24 "immediately AFTER the great tribulation .. He will send forth His angels to gather His saints from the four winds of heaven"

Rev 20:4-5 "the FIRST resurrection" is the one that starts the 1000 year clock.

1Thess 4 "the DEAD in Christ rise FIRST" --- and that happens at the FIRST resurrection.

And as Rev 19 points out - "the rest were slain" - at that great 2nd coming event where the "dead in Christ rise FIRST" - all the wicked are slain and the righteous living, and the righteous dead are raise and raptured to heaven (1Thess 4).

The saints and Christ are in heaven for that entire 1000 years.

And as the OT points out - the earth is entirely desolate for that 1000 years - no wicked, no living human. "I looked and behold I saw no man".

Greetings again Bob,
I appreciate your responses. We have a different view of the two prophecies, Isaiah 2:1-4 and Micah 4:1-8. Isaiah 2 speaks of “the Last Days”, and this is a prophecy that is firstly speaking to us, and needs to be understood in today’s context – we are in the Last Days. The term the “Last Days” does not fit the SDA view of a time after 1000 years in Heaven. Will there still be “swords” that are left over from 1000 years ago? Are the saints to be divided into nations, when they return from heaven according to the SDA view? Will these nations then go up to Jerusalem to learn God’s ways after being instructed in heaven for the previous 1000 years? The SDA view does not fit the detail. Jesus is coming to judge, to cleanse, to restore, to heal, and not to destroy. We are approaching the 70th Anniversary of the inscription of Isaiah 2 in the UN building. Only God will achieve this peace in the Last Days, as we see the ME spiraling out of control.

Yes, it is true that Israel rejected their Messiah and their present return to the Land is in unbelief of Jesus as their Messiah. But Isaiah 2 speaks of events that will soon happen, where judgement will come on Israel and the nations, including the earthquake mentioned in Isaiah 2. The outcome will be the conversion of a large remnant of the Jews from the nation of Israel and the overthrow of the armies of the nations that invaded Israel. There will be the conversion of the instruments of war into agricultural instruments, butter not guns, and the beginning of the Kingdom of God, with Christ reigning on the throne of David in Jerusalem. There are many parallel prophecies Ezekiel 38, Joel 3, Daniel 11:40-45, Zechariah 14, Revelation 16:12-16 and others that all speak of the same events, giving additional information. The very language of Isaiah 2 and Micah 4 anticipate this scene of judgement and purging, not utter destruction and burning.

There is no "promise" or "blessing" in the Bible that is of the form - getting cursed by God for being in rebellion. Such predictions are talking about a possible future but are not a promise or joy to be had irrevocably. curses in the Bible are always to be avoided.

1. Isaiah and Ezekiel write about the upcoming release from Babylon.

2. They also write about the coming Messiah and the blessing that would normally follow had Israel not rejected the Messiah.

3. They also write about end time events after the 1000 years such as the New Heavens and New Earth in Is 66 as well as the lake of Fire also found in Is 66.

4. they write about the lake of fire death of Lucifer in Is 14 and Ezek 28.

There is no way to funnel all of it into this age.

Clearly these prophets were not telling Israel that they were "doomed" to reject the Messiah. No Jews of Christ day expected that - neither did John the baptizer expect such a thing.

The Messiah was predicted to suffer but it did not have to happen as a result of the Jews rejecting the Messiah - they jumped off that cliff all by themselves.

John 1:11 "He came to His OWN and His own received Him not".

In Romans 9 Paul deals with the fall of the Jews and the fact that the promises are no longer possible for the literal Jewish nation -and Paul says they will be fulfilled in the Church.

I think this is a problem for the view you are describing.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Greetings again Bob and steaver,

Bob, I have not responded to your 4 Posts in the other active thread, partly time constraints, but also because of other responsibilities and interests. I recognise that this is the SDA position, but I disagree as I believe that the Kingdom of God will soon be set up on earth at Christ’s return.
Isaiah 2:1-4 (KJV): 1 The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem. 2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD’S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. 3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.

The text is easily fulfilled in the future - post millennial kingdom of Rev 21.

I don't know that anyone sees anything there that cannot be fulfilled in that future scenario.

4 And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

I agree that this is a prediction for a future that is prior to the 2nd coming - but it is not the blessing of "beating swords" nor the blessing of "rebuking many people" that is irrevocable. having no more war and God as King even in a perfect world would be the higher order fulfillment.

Having a perfectly obedient Israel prior to the cross - and the fulfillment of John and Zachariah's prophecy would easily have allowed for that text -- but the Jews rejected it.



in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Daniel 2:35 (KJV): Then was the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together, and became like the chaff of the summer threshingfloors; and the wind carried them away, that no place was found for them: and the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, and filled the whole earth.
Daniel 2:44 (KJV): And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.

Dan 2, 7, 8 all describe the same scenario where the 2nd coming happens sometime after the break up of the pagan Roman empire and the time of the 1260 years of the dark ages (as Daniel 7 points out).

Christ's kingdom destroys all others at His coming - just as Dan 2 predicts.

I don't see how this helps your case.

Micah 4:1-8 (KJV): 1 But in the last days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of the house of the LORD shall be established in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; and people shall flow unto it. 2 And many nations shall come, and say, Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, and to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for the law shall go forth of Zion, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.

Here again we have a future prophecy that easily fits into the future for the church as Paul describes it in Romans 9.

3 And he shall judge among many people, and rebuke strong nations afar off; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more. 4 But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree; and none shall make them afraid: for the mouth of the LORD of hosts hath spoken it. 5 For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of the LORD our God for ever and ever. 6 In that day, saith the LORD, will I assemble her that halteth, and I will gather her that is driven out, and her that I have afflicted; 7 And I will make her that halted a remnant, and her that was cast far off a strong nation: and the LORD shall reign over them in mount Zion from henceforth, even for ever. 8 And thou, O tower of the flock, the strong hold of the daughter of Zion, unto thee shall it come, even the first dominion; the kingdom shall come to the daughter of Jerusalem.

1. You have a future in Rev 21 where God rules over all mankind on earth - that is certain in all models.

2. and you have a "possible future" where Israel does not reject the Messiah and becomes a great kingdom on earth from which God's Law goes out - a future that the Jews rejected.


The first two scenarios are common in all models.
3. You have God rulling over a still-wicked still-rebellious mankind during the 1000 years that some have tried to put into this picture - but I think it is impossible to carve out a space for that given what we know about the 2nd coming.


in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

2 Timothy 4:1 (KJV):1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the living and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;

1 Corinthians 15:20-28 (KJV): 20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. 21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming. 24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. 25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. 27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.
The elements underlined above exclude the SDA position.

The above description shows that all nations of the earth are brought under dominion of Christ at His Coming - and yet in Rev 20 after the 1000 years, after the wicked are raised to life in the 2nd resurrection -- they still choose to surround the New Jerusalem and attack it - and are destroyed in the Lake of Fire.


in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

My attempt here is to look at each group of texts rather than trying to evaluate all texts in a single post.

 

[steaver]

Greetings again Bob,
I appreciate your thoughts on baptism. I think that I endorse all that you have said above. I am not sure if you read my previous Post, but I was answering the idea that baptism is not effectual, partly because it involves water. I hold that baptism is only effectual if it has been as a result of the true meaning of the death and resurrection of Jesus, and that the baptism has been motivated by true faith. I do not believe there is any sanctification of the water in which a person is baptised. We often baptise in Lake Macquarie, but it is not the place or the particular water, but the meaning of being identified with the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus by being buried and raised again out of the water. We do not accept pouring.


Kind regards
Trevor

What led us to a discussion on baptism was your comment which you stated you were born-again when you got baptized.

Why don't you show us from the Scriptures where they say being born again is when you have an affectionate love for the true gospel? And please explain what is the "true" gospel you speak of?

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again steaver,

What led us to a discussion on baptism was your comment which you stated you were born-again when you got baptized.

Why don't you show us from the Scriptures where they say being born again is when you have an affectionate love for the true gospel? And please explain what is the "true" gospel you speak of?

I suppose the term “affectionate belief” has been used within our community for many years to extend the meaning of the word “belief” to represent the full range of the Scriptural teaching. Another parallel word or complementary word is “trust”, and this conveys a resignation to God and Jesus. If I said belief of the Gospel combined with a self-resignation and trust in God, then I could equate this with the term “affectionate belief” of the true gospel.

I have already given the examples of the Samaritans and the Eunuch in Acts 8. They were baptised when they believed, and this appears to be cause and effect. The Eunuch expresses his desire to be baptised after Philip preached to him. It was not a response to a command, but a response to his belief of the gospel:
Acts 8:36-37 (KJV): 36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? 37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
Note in the above, Philip states “If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest”. Surely this is another definition of an affectionate belief.

As far as the need to believe the true gospel, I do not see why you question this. The Eunuch believed that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Also I have mentioned previously the summary of the gospel mentioned in the following:
Acts 8:5,12 (KJV): 5 Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them. 12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
Thus to properly preach the true gospel is to preach Christ, and this preaching can be summarised as “the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ”.

It is the gospel preached and believed that brings the new birth:
1 Peter 1:23-25 (KJV): 23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. 24 For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: 25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.
I also connect this with being “born of water” in John 3. Note the connection of the above passage with Isaiah 40, and this enlarges the subject of what true water baptism is really teaching, and even why Jesus submitted to water baptism and his statement concerning his own baptism.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[steaver]

deleted.....