Saved by faith and the sinner's prayer

[Ed Edwards]

Amen, Brother DeafPosttrib - Preach it RIGHT ON!

I've be a counselor to those coming forward for, well
lots of years. I first remember doing it in 1968
for a Billy Graham film. In my current church i've
been a decision counselor (trained several times) for 31 years.
One has to be guided by the Holy Spirt to know what
is going on.

Once my pastor's 8-year-old son came forward. A year
earlier That pastor had talked with my Daughter
(7-years old) about her salvation. So he said something
like "is it a real decision?" Well, as far as i can tell
it was 'read'. The 'real' of being saved is if the change
and stay saved. When the kid was like 22 (his dad moved
to Lousiana and the guy moved with dad), he came for
a week-end revival with his father. He personally thanked
me for explaining what salvation and baptism was all about.

(Basically, saved persons get baptized; baptism doesn't
save anybody /no matter how deep the pastor dunks you/)
Jesus saves, baptism doesn't save.

[ October 06, 2005, 09:07 PM: Message edited by: Ed Edwards ]

 

[Craigbythesea]

DeafPosttrib wrote,

Criag,

You saying, in your point that you believe water baptism is sacrament by through the grace of God.

You have misunderstood my words. I do NOT believe that water baptism is a sacrament. Please read my post more carefully.

Pleases notice especially these words,

“My point is that the belief that water Baptism is a Sacrament through which the grace of God is bestowed upon the believer through faith is not a “work” and, therefore, it can not be lightly dismissed by simply calling it a “work” and tossing in the words “Roman Catholic.” And there is very much evidence from both the Bible and extra-Biblical sources that the normative manner of the bestowal of grace upon the believer in New Testament times was through water baptism. Is that to say that it must be the normative manner today? No, it is not.”

 

[Snitzelhoff]

Craig, does God bestow grace by a different method now than He did then? Did He bestow it differently then than He did in the days of Abraham? Do God's methods change? If they do, what is the point of attempting to discern how to be saved based on the Bible? If God's methods do not change, then please explain:

And there is very much evidence from both the Bible and extra-Biblical sources that the normative manner of the bestowal of grace upon the believer in New Testament times was through water baptism. Is that to say that it must be the normative manner today? No, it is not.

Michael

 

[Craigbythesea]

Snizelhoff wrote,

Craig, does God bestow grace by a different method now than He did then?

It is not so much a matter as then and now, but a matter of God working within theological systems established by men. God is flexible. For example, the Holy Spirit works very differently in a liturgical church service than He does in a Pentecostal church service.

 

[Snitzelhoff]

So do you think men were saved by grace bestowed through baptism in the first century? Is it biblical to be saved thus? If it is biblical and men were saved like that then, who established that manner of salvation?

I see your point about the Spirit working in liturgical churches and Pentecostal churches differently, but that is an altogether different discussion. The Scriptures do not tell us absolutely how the Spirit must be moving in our worship services; they DO tell us absolutely how we must be saved.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Snitzelhoff wrote,

they DO tell us absolutely how we must be saved.

?

 

[Snitzelhoff]

"Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas, and brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house."--Acts 16:30-31

The question was directly asked. It was directly answered. There are a host of other passages that say much the same thing, but I consider that passage sufficient for the fact that the question was directly asked and directly answered.

You didn't answer my questions at the beginning of that post. I'll repeat them.

Do you think men were saved by grace bestowed through baptism in the first century? Is it biblical to be saved thus? If it is biblical and men were saved like that then, who established that manner of salvation?

Michael

 

[ituttut]

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
Personally, I am not a Reformed or Calvinistic Baptist, although there are many of them—and a number of them right here on this message board. And I do NOT hold to either the Westminster or the Augsburg Confession of Faith. My point is that the belief that water Baptism is a Sacrament through which the grace of God is bestowed upon the believer through faith is not a “work” and, therefore, it can not be lightly dismissed by simply calling it a “work” and tossing in the words “Roman Catholic.” And there is very much evidence from both the Bible and extra-Biblical sources that the normative manner of the bestowal of grace upon the believer in New Testament times was through water baptism. Is that to say that it must be the normative manner today? No, it is not. But before we dismiss the views of others as being incorrect, we need to study their views and the Biblical and historical basis of their views. I am a Baptist because my personal views are closer to the views of many other Baptists than they are to the views of Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, Lutherans, or Methodists. Does this necessarily mean that the views of Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, Lutherans, or Methodists are incorrect? No, it does not. It simply means that we differ in our personal beliefs, largely due to our upbringing and early experiences as a Christian.

Regardless of what you (or they) may call it, I believe to them it is a work for they Must do the work. When a ritual is required, it becomes a work demanded. One can go through life as a Christian without being water baptized, or taking the Lord’s Supper. A Sacrament in the Catholic church is made mandatory as it is in other churches. These are works to these people that are necessary in their faith concerning their salvation.

You say, Quote “Does this necessarily mean that the views of Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, Lutherans, or Methodists are incorrect? No, it does not. It simply means that we differ in our personal beliefs, largely due to our upbringing and early experiences as a Christian.” Unquote. I don't agree with you on this matter. Roman Catholics are not Presbyterians; Presbyterians are not Lutherans; Lutherans are not Methodists, and none of them to be sure are not Baptist. This is for a reason. They believe they are right and we are wrong. I feel the same way about them.

You are mostly correct about “upbringing and early experiences”. But I believe differently than most Baptist’s, about some issues that I was taught early on. If I am not mistaken all of the above mentioned churches believe on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation. They are the same as we in that Most Important criterion of Salvation. But the Baptist is set-apart from the others as to their stance on Baptism. The Baptist church emphasizes Water Baptism is not required to enter into the Body of Christ.

So it is settled in my mind that I am correct and they are wrong. I (we) am in a different part of Christ. If the Baptist denomination did not require Water Baptism to join their church, would you be Water Baptized? I wouldn’t for the one spiritual baptism of salvation (I Corinthians 12:13) is into One Body. Christian faith, ituttut

 

[Craigbythesea]

Snitzelhoff wrote,

"Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas, and brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house."--Acts 16:30-31

The question was directly asked. It was directly answered. There are a host of other passages that say much the same thing, but I consider that passage sufficient for the fact that the question was directly asked and directly answered.

I see that you very conveniently stopped quoting the passage at verse. 31. When we continue reading the passage, we find that this very same man, and his household, were immediately Baptized (and there is no mention of the manner of baptism, but submersion in this context appears to be VERY unlikely in the minds of most scholars today).

Acts 16:29. And he called for lights and rushed in, and trembling with fear he fell down before Paul and Silas,
30. and after he brought them out, he said, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"
The Jailer Converted
31. They said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household."
32. And they spoke the word of the Lord to him together with all who were in his house.
33. And he took them that very hour of the night and washed their wounds, and immediately he was baptized, he and all his household.
34. And he brought them into his house and set food before them, and rejoiced greatly, having believed in God with his whole household.

Indeed, in the New Testament Church and in the Church for the next 300 years, belief in Christ as Lord and Savior, water baptism, and being baptized into the body of Christ are very closely connected and the three are often seen as being inseparable. Indeed, in the New Testament itself we read,

Mark16:16. "He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.”

Act 2:37. Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brethren, what shall we do?"
38. Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
39. "For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself."

Rom. 6:1. What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase?
2. May it never be! How shall we who died to sin still live in it?
3. Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death?
4. Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.
5. For if we have become united with Him in the likeness of His death, certainly we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection,
6. knowing this, that our old self was crucified with Him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin;
7. for he who has died is freed from sin.
8. Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him,
9. knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, is never to die again; death no longer is master over Him.
10. For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God.
11. Even so consider yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus.

1 Pet. 3:18. For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit;
19. in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison,
20. who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water.
21. Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you--not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
22. who is at the right hand of God, having gone into heaven, after angels and authorities and powers had been subjected to Him.

 

[Craigbythesea]

ituttut wrote,

Regardless of what you (or they) may call it, I believe to them it is a work for
they Must do the work. When a ritual is required, it becomes a work demanded. One can go through life as a Christian without being water baptized, or taking the Lord’s Supper. A Sacrament in the Catholic church is made mandatory as it is in other churches. These are works to these people that are necessary in their faith concerning their salvation.

Sacraments are NOT “works” to anybody but some misinformed Baptists and other misinformed Christians. Sacraments are rites of the Church and are taught to be channels through which the grace God is conferred from God to the believer.

Canon VI On the Sacraments in General (Decrees of the Council of Trent, 1547) reads,

CANON VI.-If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law do not contain the grace which they signify; or, that they do not confer that grace on those who do not place an obstacle thereunto; as though they were merely outward signs of grace or justice received through faith, and certain marks of the Christian profession, whereby believers are distinguished amongst men from unbelievers; let him be anathema.

But even the Decrees of the Council of Trent did NOT degree that actual participation in the sacraments, not even the sacrament of water baptism, was necessary for salvation, but that the “desire thereof” was sufficient,
CANON IV.-If any one saith, that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary unto salvation, but superfluous; and that, without them, or without the desire thereof, men obtain of God, through faith alone, the grace of justification;-though all (the sacraments) are not indeed necessary for every individual; let him be anathema.

Hence today we have the Romans Catholic doctrine of Baptism by Desire.

 

[Craigbythesea]

You say, Quote “Does this necessarily mean that the views of Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, Lutherans, or Methodists are incorrect? No, it does not. It simply means that we differ in our personal beliefs, largely due to our upbringing and early experiences as a Christian.” Unquote. I don't agree with you on this matter. Roman Catholics are not Presbyterians; Presbyterians are not Lutherans; Lutherans are not Methodists, and none of them to be sure are not Baptist. This is for a reason. They believe they are right and we are wrong. I feel the same way about them.

I have no doubt that many intolerant Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, Lutherans, and Methodists feel that way, but I know for a fact that they do not all feel that way, and especially not those who are well educated, and I most certainly do not feel that way. I am a Baptist because my personal beliefs are shared by other (but certainly not all) Baptists. And I understand very well that if I was raised in a God fearing Lutheran home and graduated from a Lutheran seminary that I would in all likelihood be a Lutheran today rather than a Baptist. Are the Lutherans wrong? Are the Baptists right? I don’t know, but I choose to be a Baptist. Does it really matter? I don’t think so. My Lutheran friends are just as Christian is my Baptist friends. My personal observation is that God is much more concerned about our love and faithfulness to Him and our love and faithfulness to others than He is concerned about the difference between sacraments and ordinances.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Ituttut wrote,

You are mostly correct about “upbringing and early experiences”. But I believe differently than most Baptist’s, about some issues that I was taught early on. If I am not mistaken all of the above mentioned churches believe on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation. They are the same as we in that Most Important criterion of Salvation. But the Baptist is set-apart from the others as to their stance on Baptism. The Baptist church emphasizes Water Baptism is not required to enter into the Body of Christ.

Agreed.

So it is settled in my mind that I am correct and they are wrong. I (we) am in a different part of Christ. If the Baptist denomination did not require Water Baptism to join their church, would you be Water Baptized? I wouldn’t for the one spiritual baptism of salvation (I Corinthians 12:13) is into One Body. Christian faith, ituttut

I was baptized in an Assemblies of God church, and my local Baptist church recognizes that baptism. Had I been baptized instead in a Lutheran church as a baby, that would not be an issue in my local Baptist church unless I sought ordination by that church (that is, if it occurred to them to ask me about it before ordaining me ).

 

[Snitzelhoff]

I see in Acts 16 passage, perhaps not immersion defined, but believer's baptism. Since you insisted on continuing the passage, notice that verse 31 says that they spoke the word of the Lord to all that were in the house. Notice, also, that verse 34 indicates that all that were in the house believed God. There is no hint in this passage (or any other) of infant baptism, since all who were in the house had to hear and understand the Word. Furthermore, though baptism was obviously considered important, notice how it was specifically detached from the question, "What must I do to be saved?"

Mark 16:16 is about faith. Remember Romans 10:9 which deals with faith and confession. If you think confessing Christ as Lord is necessary for salvation, then you haven't read I Corinthians 12:3, that no man can say that Jesus is Lord but by the Holy Ghost. However, if you take Mark 16:16 to make baptism necessary for salvation, then you must take Romans 10:9 to mean that confession is necessary for salvation. Obviously neither one is true; baptism and confession are results of salvation, not requirements for salvation.

Acts 2:38, in the Greek, connects repentance and not baptism with remission of sins. It shows very well that baptism is separated from remission of sins.

Romans 6 does a wonderful job explaining the symbolism behind baptism. It should, however, be noticed that water is not once mentioned. That, at first glance, seems to be insignificant, until you turn over to I Corinthians 12:13 which says that by one Spirit we were baptized into one body. Thus, being "baptized into Christ" has nothing to do with water baptism, except that water baptism reflects that reality.

I Peter 3:21 proves that baptism and salvation from sin are two completely different things. Peter knew that in saying, "baptism doth also now save us," he would be making a statement shocking enough to need clarification, so he continued, "not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ." Thus, baptism DOES save, but not by "putting away the filth of the flesh"--not in the way the blood of Christ does. Furthermore, look at his analogy of Noah. Noah was safe inside the ark when the waters which "saved" him came. We are already in Christ when we reach the waters which "save" us. Peter, apparently, didn't think baptism a neccessary part of salvation.

Now, will you please answer my questions? Here they are again:

Do you think men were saved by grace bestowed through baptism in the first century? Is it biblical to be saved thus? If it is biblical and men were saved like that then, who established that manner of salvation?


Michael

 

[Craigbythesea]

Snitzelhoff wrote,

Acts 2:38, in the Greek, connects repentance and not baptism with remission of sins. It shows very well that baptism is separated from remission of sins.

These statements are absolutely false! Apparently you are not able to read Greek and you are mistaken in your understanding of what you have heard or read about Act 2:38.

 

[Snitzelhoff]

True, I cannot read Greek, but what I have read from those who can says that "repent" is in the second person plural, and it agrees in number and person with "the remission of sins," whereas "be baptized" is in the third person singular, disconnected from the other two. One Church of Christ article I read ("Baptism and the Remission of Sins" by Dr. Richard Koffarnus) acknowledges that, but chalks it up to an idiomatic construction to get around that fact. If you would like sources for what I have read, I will provide them for you. Meanwhile, will you please answer the questions I have asked three times now? I will repeat them for the fourth time. Please don't ignore them this time.

Do you think men were saved by grace bestowed through baptism in the first century? Is it biblical to be saved thus? If it is biblical and men were saved like that then, who established that manner of salvation?

Michael

 

[Craigbythesea]

Snitzelhoff wrote,

True, I cannot read Greek, but what I have read from those who can says that "repent" is in the second person plural, and it agrees in number and person with "the remission of sins," whereas "be baptized" is in the third person singular, disconnected from the other two. One Church of Christ article I read ("Baptism and the Remission of Sins" by Dr. Richard Koffarnus) acknowledges that, but chalks it up to an idiomatic construction to get around that fact.

You have apparently misunderstood those whom you have read. If you have not, they are mistaken. The Greek verb translated “Repent” is in the imperative mood, aorist tense, active voice, second person plural. The significance of the aorist tense here is that the action is punctiliar rather than continuous. A paraphrase, bringing out the grammatical points more clearly, would be, “Repent, once for all, you guys, every one of you!”

The Greek verb translated “be baptized” is in the imperative mood, the aorist tense, passive voice, third person singular. The significance of the aorist tense here is the same as with the verb translated “Repent.” A paraphrase, bringing out the grammatical points more clearly, would be, “and let each one of you be baptized.”

The Greek noun translated “remission” is in the accusative case, and is feminine in gender, and singular in person. The significance of the accusative case here is that the noun is the direct object of the verb. A paraphrase, bringing out the grammatical points more clearly, would be, “and let each one of you be baptized . . . for the remission of your sins.”

There is no “disconnection” here. They all need to repent (once for all—not continuously), and each (every) one of them (the distributive singular) needs to be baptized for the remission (singular) of their sins.

The NASB reads here,

38. Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

If you force the grammar to teach that repentance and water Baptism are two entirely separate and unrelated acts, you then have sins being remitted through water baptism rather than on the basis of repentance. Are you sure that you want to go there?

 

[Craigbythesea]

Snitzelhoff asked,

Do you think men were saved by grace bestowed through baptism in the first century? Is it biblical to be saved thus? If it is biblical and men were saved like that then, who established that manner of salvation?

I have hitherto not directly answered these questions because I do not believe that you have the necessary background in soteriology for me to answer the questions in a manner that you would accurately understand my answers. I did not want to express this to you, because I did not want to offend you, but you have been very insistent that I give you my answer. Furthermore, my personal beliefs on these issues are not nearly as important as what the Bible teaches and how the Bible has been understood by the Church during the past 2,000 years.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, Lutherans, Methodists, Baptists and all other Christian denominations and groups believe that we are saved by grace through faith. We disagree, however, on the nature of grace and the manner and means whereby it is conferred upon the believer. I believe that we need to be very careful to remember that God is God and that He has the right and authority to confer His grace upon whom He chooses in the manner that He chooses using the means that He chooses.

 

[blackbird]

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
Snitzelhoff asked,

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Do you think men were saved by grace bestowed through baptism in the first century? Is it biblical to be saved thus? If it is biblical and men were saved like that then, who established that manner of salvation?

I have hitherto not directly answered these questions because I do not believe that you have the necessary background in soteriology for me to answer the questions in a manner that you would accurately understand my answers. I did not want to express this to you, because I did not want to offend you, but you have been very insistent that I give you my answer. Furthermore, my personal beliefs on these issues are not nearly as important as what the Bible teaches and how the Bible has been understood by the Church during the past 2,000 years.

</font>[/QUOTE]Does Romans 12:16 mean anything to you??

"Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low estate. Be not wise in your own conceits."

I find the post in poor taste!!!

 

[Snitzelhoff]

I do not have the neccessary background in soteriology? Perhaps you're right, but neither would some guy asking you how to be saved; nor did the Philippian jailor in Acts 16; nor, by your apparent standards, would most Christians in the world today. So enlighten me. My questions were simple and required only simple answers. Were men saved at and through baptism in the first century? Is that biblical? Who established it? Answer me, and we'll see whether I can understand your answer.

Concerning my "background in soteriology," are you implying that I am not equipped to tell the hypothetical person who wants to come to Christ how to be saved? That, after all, is the heart of the whole discussion.

Furthermore, my personal beliefs on these issues are not nearly as important as what the Bible teaches and how the Bible has been understood by the Church during the past 2,000 years

Your view on what the Bible teaches is exactly what I want you to tell me.

Concerning Acts 2:38, separating baptism and repentance by no means makes salvation (remission of sins) through baptism. Instead, the plural "your" of "remission of your sins" connects it to repentance, separating it from baptism, at least the way the NASB reads. However, if you lump them together as conditions for forgiveness of sins, then you make salvation come through baptism qualified by repentance.

I believe that we need to be very careful to remember that God is God and that He has the right and authority to confer His grace upon whom He chooses in the manner that He chooses using the means that He chooses.

Absolutely. Our discussion is not about whether He has that right and authority; we agree that He does. Rather, it is about whether He has chosen to exercise grace by means of baptism, or apart from any physical act.

Please, directly answer the questions I've now asked five times. If I have your answers, then we can work on my understanding or lack thereof.

Michael