Exactly right.
-
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!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
If one believes that baptisim is essential for salvation, is he damned
- Thread starter Stanedglass
- Start date
Exactly right.
For statements such as these (which is pure Calvinism) an entire forum was closed (Cal/Arm). I believe it to be entirely unbiblical, and would use a much stronger word if allowable. This is not what the Scriptures teach and cannot be supported by the Bible. Eph.1:3 is written to Christians, about the Christian life, about Christian blessings, entirely about Christian blessings received after salvation. To read into that verse anything that happens before salvation is eisegesis, not exegesis. It is the equivalent of the RCC proving infant baptism because there must have been infants in the jailer's household. "Rightly dividing the word" doesn't work that way; neither does applying good hermeneutical principles.Regeneration gets you to heaven, conversion does not.
Infant baptism is presented based on the Abrahamic covenant and not the Jailer's family. It is based on circumcision in proper Calvinistic theology, but not the Calvinist doctrines of Baptists, which adhere to Baptism as a symbol and not an act of grace.
Also, the acts of regeneration, conversion and even repentance are divine acts. We may even view them as one act of grace, but as theologians, we like to break them down as different acts. There is a definite order in the decrees, but they all culminate in the born again person. So we may also say one is unsaved or saved, period.
Cheers,
Jim
Also, the acts of regeneration, conversion and even repentance are divine acts. We may even view them as one act of grace, but as theologians, we like to break them down as different acts. There is a definite order in the decrees, but they all culminate in the born again person. So we may also say one is unsaved or saved, period.
Cheers,
Jim
Eph.1:3 is written to Christians, about the Christian life, about Christian blessings, entirely about Christian blessings received after salvation.
To whom was the Epistle to the Romans written?
That's not why the forum was closed down, friend.For statements such as these (which is pure Calvinism) an entire forum was closed (Cal/Arm).
"Entirely unbiblical" is a bit strong. Most Calvinists would agree that conversion is necessary and inevitable because of regeneration.I believe it to be entirely unbiblical, and would use a much stronger word if allowable.
It was probably shut down because down because of heated arguments which led to unnecessary innuendos, name-calling, etc., which could not be controlled by the moderators, but were no doubt based on statements on this which were hotly disputed by others.That's not why the forum was closed down, friend.
RAdams clear statement in post #4 is"Entirely unbiblical" is a bit strong. Most Calvinists would agree that conversion is necessary and inevitable because of regeneration.
"He gives you the faith to believe."
Faith is a spiritual gift, like the gift of preaching, of an evangelist, of prophesying, or even in Biblical times--the gift of an apostle. God does not give gifts to unregenerated men; he never has. This is totally against Scripture. Do we have spiritually-gifted pastors, evangelists, etc., in our pulpits today? Perhaps you may agree with that, but I do not. Spiritual gifts (and that is what faith is), is given only to saved individuals.
Also:
Galatians 5:22-23 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.
--It is a fruit of the Spirit. God does not give the fruit of the Spirit before salvation. You are putting the cart before the horse. Such thinking is way off base.
How are we saved:
Titus 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
--We are saved and regenerated at the same time.
Paul may have said "We are saved by the power of his blood," another statement just as true, and the construction just the same. The two happen simultaneously. There is no evidence that there is a two step process of salvation.
It is the statement that RAdam made that has been discussed throughout this thread. Calvinism, per se, was not meant to brought into this thread--Only whether faith was possible to come from God before salvation or came only after salvation. I believe the latter and have given my reasons why.
The namecalling was a factor, but as much or moreso was people making accusations about what others believed. In this case, agree or disagree, RAdams was stating his own belief. He should be allowed to do so.It was probably shut down because down because of heated arguments which led to unnecessary innuendos, name-calling, etc., which could not be controlled by the moderators, but were no doubt based on statements on this which were hotly disputed by others.
I saw that and started to respond, but was staying out of it. But, to the point, Phil 1:29 declares that faith is a gift of God. That should end the discussion. The spiritual gift of faith is not the same as saving faith.RAdams clear statement in post #4 is
"He gives you the faith to believe."
Faith is a spiritual gift, like the gift of preaching, of an evangelist, of prophesying, or even in Biblical times--the gift of an apostle. God does not give gifts to unregenerated men; he never has. This is totally against Scripture. Do we have spiritually-gifted pastors, evangelists, etc., in our pulpits today? Perhaps you may agree with that, but I do not. Spiritual gifts (and that is what faith is), is given only to saved individuals.
Again, that's a bit simplistic, and doesn't deal with the full range of biblical data.--It is a fruit of the Spirit. God does not give the fruit of the Spirit before salvation. You are putting the cart before the horse. Such thinking is way off base.
Again, simplistic. Scripture uses the word saved (and its cognates) in various ways, past, present, and future. Furthermore, in teh doctrine of soteriology, "saved" is used to describe the whole process, while regeneration describes one part of it. These are common distinctions in theological literature based on the need to account for all the Bible's teaching.--We are saved and regenerated at the same time.
Again, simply two simplistic. Calvinists speak of "steps" as logical, not chronological. Calvinists typically don't believe that a person is regenerated and then later (minutes or hours or days) comes to faith and repentance. It is a logical order ... what causes the other. Disagree if you like, but at least recognize what Calvinists are saying.The two happen simultaneously. There is no evidence that there is a two step process of salvation.
Which is fine. And others have given their view as well. I think the biblical evidence rules out your view. You think it rules out mine. That's fine.Only whether faith was possible to come from God before salvation or came only after salvation. I believe the latter and have given my reasons why.
One of my topics of study in college was Reformed Theology. The concept of salvation based on faith alone is an essential in reformed theology, which includes mainline Calvinism. Hypercalvinists, though, often reject the concept, based on their extremist predestination position.Most Calvinists would agree that conversion is necessary and inevitable because of regeneration.
Yes, exactly right. Calvinistm doesn't view salvation as an action-reaction process which takes place on a linear timeline.Again, simply two simplistic. Calvinists speak of "steps" as logical, not chronological.
Last edited by a moderator:
Does it matter? Context gives meaning to words.To whom was the Epistle to the Romans written?
Stanedglass
New Member
Water baptism is a command, but is not a prerequisite for salvation. The is evidenced by the numerous biblical accounts of people accepting Christ without the benefit of, or prior to, water baptism.
Just think of all those people who accepted Christ as their Savior, but didn't get baptized until months, or sometimes years, later. Your assertion is that they are hellbound until they get dunked. That's inconistent with scripture.
Give us those accounts!
Stanedglass
New Member
Matt 19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
Jesus told him to sell everything he had and follow him, but the rich man could not b/c he had many possissions. It wasn't that the Rich man did not believe in Jesus, (he did or he would not of asked him how) that kept him from salvation but it was his lack of obedience to Christ!
DHK, I'm intrested to hear your responce on this verse or anyone else who would like to!
DHK, I'm intrested to hear your responce on this verse or anyone else who would like to!
Matt 19:16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
Jesus told him to sell everything he had and follow him, but the rich man could not b/c he had many possissions. It wasn't that the Rich man did not believe in Jesus, (he did or he would not of asked him how) that kept him from salvation but it was his lack of obedience to Christ!
1. The rich young addressed Jesus as "Good Master."
Jesus rebuked him--not because he was wrong, but because he needed to know who he was talking to.
If Christ was good then he was God.
If he was not good then he was not God. Only God is good. (Rom.3:10-12)
2. Jesus told him to keep the law, and then listed some of them.
The young man said: "All these have I kept from my youth up."
This was a lie. No man can keep the law. We break the law every day.
James 2:10; Gal.3:10; 1John 3:4; 1John 1:8,10; Rom.3:4; Rom.3:23
--Jesus proceeds to show how wrong this man is.
3. First note he loves him. "Beholding him, he loved him, and said:"
Then he said to sell all that he had, give to the poor and come and follow him.
The reason for the command was to show how he broke the law, not how to be saved. In other words a man must be shown that he is a sinner before he can be shown that he needs a Saviour. One of the 10 Commandments is "Thou Shalt Not Covet." He coveted his riches more than he coveted ("desired") Christ.
Therefore, he chose his riches over Christ, and went away sorrowful "for he had many riches." He made the decision. He chose his material possessions and rejected Christ. His own covetousness won out. He would rather have riches than Christ.
JOHNNY WROTE
Show me a passage from the Book of Acts or any conversion after the Day of Penecost who waited months, and years to be baptized.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSM17
Water baptism is a command, which makes it essential for salvation.
Water baptism is a command, but is not a prerequisite for salvation. The is evidenced by the numerous biblical accounts of people accepting Christ without the benefit of, or prior to, water baptism.
Just think of all those people who accepted Christ as their Savior, but didn't get baptized until months, or sometimes years, later. Your assertion is that they are hellbound until they get dunked. That's inconistent with scripture.
Show me a passage from the Book of Acts or any conversion after the Day of Penecost who waited months, and years to be baptized.
DARRON STEELE WROTE:
I was not disagreeing with you that baptism is a privilege, I was just pointing out that it is a command, which makes it essential.
Some commands are directly pointed at Christ's followers as being required.
I did not mean to suggest what you are saying that I have suggested. I do not think that silmply understanding and obeying baptism falls in the realm life long drudgery (sp?) trying to merit God's blessings.
Are we not striving for Holiness through God?
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSM17
Darron Steele:
Water baptism in the Name of Jesus Christ is a privilege.
Water baptism is a command, which makes it essential for salvation.
Hi JSM17: evidently you dispute that it is a privilege, but a command instead.
Sorry you feel that way.
Personally, I think it is both.
However, if you think that every command given to us is essential to salvation, you better be running through your New Testament with a pen and checking off every directive we are given. I guess if you miss one, you will not be saved.
By the way, I know of no one in the Churches of Christ who believe that every single command in the New Testament to us must be D-O-N-E to total and utter completion to secure salvation. Your view would be very radical if you really hold what you are suggesting.
All I have to say is that you better hope your salvation is not contingent on that. Those are a lot of directives.
What seems strange to me is that in the Bible, people were saved the same day they truly desired salvation. What you are suggesting would take a lot longer than that.
The directives we are given are to be followed because we are loyal to Jesus Christ. The idea that we ought to be dragging ourselves through living as Christians to get salvation for ourselves is not what I see in Scripture. We should do what Christians should do because we WANT to please the Lord. Doing what we should do as Christians ought to be done for the Lord, not for ourselves.
I was not disagreeing with you that baptism is a privilege, I was just pointing out that it is a command, which makes it essential.
Some commands are directly pointed at Christ's followers as being required.
I did not mean to suggest what you are saying that I have suggested. I do not think that silmply understanding and obeying baptism falls in the realm life long drudgery (sp?) trying to merit God's blessings.
Are we not striving for Holiness through God?
"Look, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?"JOHNNY WROTE
Show me a passage from the Book of Acts or any conversion after the Day of Penecost who waited months, and years to be baptized.
"If thou believeth will all thine heart thou mayest."
And he said: "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."
The last statement is only a reaffirmation of what he already believed. Who knows how many "hours" before this time Philip had already led him to the Lord. No doubt he had already believed a few hours before this time. Now he sees water. Knowing the command to be baptized was the first command for a believer after salvation he asks Philip if there is anything now prohibiting him from being baptized. Philip reassures him that no, as long as he believes in his heart, he may. The simple statement by Philip "believe with all thine heart," without further defining what he should believe in, suggests that the gospel had been fully explained and that the Eunuch had already been saved. How long previous to that we don't know--5 minutes or 5 hours--the account doesn't say.
It was precisely that he didn't believe in Jesus ... He didn't believe eternal life in Jesus was more valuable than his riches. Jesus was pointing out the nature of saving faith ... that it is total trust in Jesus, not trust in other things as well.It wasn't that the Rich man did not believe in Jesus, (he did or he would not of asked him how) that kept him from salvation but it was his lack of obedience to Christ!
Stanedglass
New Member
"Look, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?"
"If thou believeth will all thine heart thou mayest."
And he said: "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."
The last statement is only a reaffirmation of what he already believed. Who knows how many "hours" before this time Philip had already led him to the Lord. No doubt he had already believed a few hours before this time. Now he sees water. Knowing the command to be baptized was the first command for a believer after salvation he asks Philip if there is anything now prohibiting him from being baptized. Philip reassures him that no, as long as he believes in his heart, he may. The simple statement by Philip "believe with all thine heart," without further defining what he should believe in, suggests that the gospel had been fully explained and that the Eunuch had already been saved. How long previous to that we don't know--5 minutes or 5 hours--the account doesn't say.
DHK, this may not be directed to you, but someone else made the comment that baptism was an outward profession of your faith. If baptism is an outward professin, who was he professing too? Phillip?
Stanedglass
New Member
It was precisely that he didn't believe in Jesus ... He didn't believe eternal life in Jesus was more valuable than his riches. Jesus was pointing out the nature of saving faith ... that it is total trust in Jesus, not trust in other things as well.
Exactly, If he trusted in Jesus, he would have been obedient. TheLACK of obedience was the evidence that he did not trust God!
Read Mat.28:19,20DHK, this may not be directed to you, but someone else made the comment that baptism was an outward profession of your faith. If baptism is an outward professin, who was he professing too? Phillip?
We are baptized because we are commanded to be baptized to.
What it represents is secondary.