Featured The Baptism With the Holy Ghost

Yes you have or else you don't know the meaning of "saved" in relationship to the problem in Eden????? Salvation is the solution that must be capable of resolving the problem. The problem is sin and spiritual separaton and you do not believe Old Testament saints are "saved" at all but continued in the problem of spiritual separation. Where there is remission of sins there is no spiritual separation from God, but your Old Testament gospel has no solution to the problem.

No one who exists in spiritual separation from God is secure or saved. That is a pure fantasy of imagination. If one is spiritually separated from God they are WITHOUT LIFE, WITHOUT LIGHT and WITHOUT HOLINESS and no man without those things is saved or safe.

You could not be more wrong. Where there is no new birth there is no subjective salvation at all. Job said it well, and in the context of the product of the natural birth, can anyone bring a clean thing from an unclean thing? NOT ONE - including God. "the flesh" cannot be saved but must be destroyed. The sin cursed earth cannot be saved but destroyed by fire and creation of a new heaven and earth. The new birth is a necessity for every fallen man (Jn. 3:3-6) without which there can be no subjective salvation at all for any fallen man at anytime. You simply don't understand what the new birth is or you would not say such things.

You are shooting yourself in the foot by quoting these texts. Of course the substance is better than the "shadow" because the shadow could NEVER take away sin nor was ever provided as a means to remove or deal with literal sin. What LITERALLY removed sin between Eden and Acts 2:1 is the very same thing that LITERALLY removed sin for us - JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH. The ONLY difference is they looked forward by faith and received remission of sins (Acts 10:43) not by sacrifices but by faith in Christ and we look back to its fulfillment. Romans 3:25-26 declares that the provision justified God for actually justifying them by faith before the provision occurred.

Of course after the type was fulfilled, the type ceased, but the type NEVER literally removed sin or dealt with sin.

Oh but I do understand it, I wish you only did too! You don't understand they received full salvation by faith IN THE PROMISE as God's promise was as good as fulfilled (Rom. 4:16-17). We receive it because the promise has been fulfilled. YOu don't understand that it is "the blood of the EVERLASTING covenant" and therefor is not limited to time, but God who is outside of time treats it as already accomplished and applies it as such to all the elect regardless when they live before or after the cross.

 

The meaning of baptism doesn't hinge on the preposition. It hinges on the word baptism. Whether I'm washed with the Holy Spirit or in the Holy Spirit makes no difference in the meaning to me.

 

OK Aaron, many believe as you do, I am a stickler for the original languages and perhaps overreach at times.
But yes, we can both rejoice in the cleansing of the Holy Spirit even as we see Him in different metaphorical backgrounds.

HankD

 

You can't be serious??? In my view of salvation neither Old or New Testament saints are yet glorified (Heb. 11:39-40).

Again, you have shot yourself in the foot! There never was, never can be, never will be any kind of salvation "under the law" because the law can only condemn fallen man NEVER justify, NEVER a means to obtain life, NEVER save. That is the crux of your problem you believe in "salvation under the law" which Christ and the apostles repudiated. You reject the omni-dispensational role model for justification by grace through faith WITHOUT WORKS and WITHOUT JUSTIFICATION UNDER THE LAW or BY THE LAW - Abraham. You are teaching Roman Catholic sacramentalism before the cross as you keep claiming that literal animal sacrifices were literal means to deal with literal sins which every New Testament writer repudiates. You can't discern between "shadow" (figure) and reality.

 

Again, you are incapable of discerning between TYPE and Antitype. What do you think John meant when he said "the lamb slain FROM THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD"? What do you think Paul meant when he said "the blood of the EVERLASTING COVENANT." What do you think John the Baptist meant when he said "Behold THE LAMB OF GOD which taketh away the sin of the world." The animal sacrifice by God (from which the skins were procurred" were DECLARATIVE types of the gospel while Genesis 3:15 was the gospel preached by God to Adam and Eve in "seed" form.

By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speake.th. - Heb. 11:4

Notice Paul did NOT say "by which he obtained remission of sins" but "by which he obtained WITNESS that he WAS righteous." He offered it "by faith", what kind of faith, faith in the promised seed at what point he was imputed the righteousness of Christ, was justified, his sins remitted literally, and then as an expression of that faith he offered up the appropriate TYPE which merely provided a SYMBOLIC declarative witness that he had already been saved. Just as we do in baptism.

However, your Roman Catholic sacramentalism leads you to believe that he offered up the sacrifice IN ORDER TBTAIN remission of sins, in order to be justified.The sacrifice instituted by God in the garden of Eden has NEVER been sacramental - a means to deal with literal sins IN ANY DISPENSATION. Apostate Judaism is what made the TYPE into a SACRAMENT.

You have no clue about the Law, about justification, about regeneration or the baptism in the Spirit because your view perverts the gospel of Jesus Christ into a works salvation "under the law."

 

Justification is reconciliation and Abraham was justified by grace not by law, not by works of the law, not by his own works before the Law. Justification reconciles the sinner to God by remitting sins, and imputing righteousness, a righteousness not of the law (as the Law of Moses did not even exist). Abraham is the role model for "ALL WHO ARE OF FAITH" with regard to justification. Regeneration reconciles those SPIRITUALLY SEPARATED from God. Spiritual separation from God means fallen man is WITHOUT LIFE and that is why regeneration is called "quickening" or being made alive. Spiritual separation means fallen man is WITHOUT LIGHT and that is why regeneration is described as REVELATION of Jesus Christ in the darkened soul of man (2 Cor. 4:6) just as God spoke light into existence. Spiritual separation means fallen man is without HOLINESS and that is why regeneration is described first as an internal cleansing of the spirit of man from sin (Tit. 3:5) and positively as the creative act of God that restores righteousnesss and true holiness within man restoring the image of God (Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10).

You have no concept of the Biblical problem and that is why you have no concept of the Biblical solution. The problem is ONE and universal for all mankind and that is why the solution can only be ONE and UNIVERSAL for all the elect of God from Adam to Revelation and that is why Abraham is OMNI-dispensation with regard to how man is reconciled to God WITHOUT WORKS, and WITHOUT THE LAW.

The problem is you can't discern between the "promise" of the gospel which involves present tense personal salvation as demonstrated in the omni-dispensational case of Abraham for "all who are of faith" in all dispensations, AND the "promise" of the gospel that refers to the culminative END of salvation or new bodies and the new heaven and earth. Hebrews 11:12-17 plainly and clearly tells you that the "promise" for which Abraham and all the Old Testament saints WHO WERE ALREADY JUSTIFIED still "by faith" looked for a new heaven and a new earth. That "promise" will not be fulfilled "without us" as the resurrection will be inclusive of all the dead saints and the new heaven and earth will be inclusive of all the saints in all age (Heb. 11:39-40).

So you simply need to read more carefully and discern between the immediate promise of the gospel which Abraham is the example that all Old Testament saints beginning with Adam and Eve received and were reconciled unto God, and the future culiminative promise of the Gospel which NONE of them or of US have yet to receive nor will receive until we all recieve it together.

1. Christ argued it::

Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me? - Jn. 7:19

He didn't say "some of you" but "none of you" the whole Jewish nation.


2. Paul Argued it

Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. - Rom. 3:19

Ro 4:13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

Ac 13:39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

Why don't you beleive and apply what you just said above??? Hence, the law was not given to justify, save, redeem, atone, reconcile man to God!!!!!! It was given to define sin. For the saved obedience under the law was DECLARATIVE of their salvation, reconciliation, justification, new birth, etc. not a means to procure it. The law is still useful for the same purpose it was given - to define sin.The "work" of the law written upon man's conscience before Moses served the very same end to define sin. The law has NOTHING TO DO WITH SALVATION just as the baptism in the Spirit has NOTHING TO DO WITH SALVATION. Wake up and smell the roses!

You say on one hand it cannot save but then say on the other hand the sacrifices served as a LITERAL MEANS to procure remission of sins. Don't you realize the contradiction in your position. Abraham's example contradicts your position and he is the example for ALL WHO ARE OF FAITH from Adam to all living today. Divine ordinances were not LITERAL MEANS to secure remission of sins for Abraham (Rom. 4:9-11) and neither were they for Adam and Eve or Abel or anyone living "under the Law" of Moses. Living "under" the Law does not change the ONE WAY illustrated in Abaham. Living "under the Law" was designed for an UNREGENERATE NATION to reveal their unregenerate condition as a nation. All flesh is under the PRINCIPLES of that same law or else THEY COULD NOT BE CONDEMNED AS SINNERS.

 

You are the one that says remission of sins were obtained through sacrifices "under the Law" not I. I consistently view them as Baptists do baptism and the Lord's Supper - GOSPEL TYPES. You are the one repudiating Peter who said the gospel was preached to them and remission of sins was literally obtained by faith in the gospel (Acts 10:43) and repudiate Paul who said the SAME gospel was preached unto them (Heb. 4:2) and repudiate Paul who sets forth Abraham as one justified by faith as were all the Old Testament and New Testament saints or "all who are of faith". You are the one that has TWO SYSTEMS of salvation not I, or the apostles.

Apparently you either didn't read my response or can't understand it. The LITERAL manna can only sustaint LITERAL PHYSICAL LIFE and can't prevent PHYSICAL DEATH. Christ was preached and received as SPIRITUAL LIFE from Genesis 3:15 forward and believed upon whereby remission of sins and imputed righteousness were OBTAINED thus reconciling them to God:

"To HIM give ALL the prophets witness, that whosoever believeth upon his name shall receive remission of sins"- Acts 10:43

The future tense "shall" refers to the point of faith as proclaimed by the prophets and that is proven in the case of Abraham as he was "justified" rather than some future time after his life (Rom. 4:6-9) and thus he was "the blessed" man having obtained remission of sins as was David.

Another false argument. No on disputes the necessity of the provision. But Abraham proves that God APPLIED the benefits of the provision and no one can dispute that Justification which consists of remission of sins, and imputed righteousness (not by the law) are the benefits of the cross. God applied them based upon his own promise to make that provision and therefore dealt with them as thought the provision had already occurred (Rom. 4:24-26) he called things that had not yet occurred as though they had (Rom.4:16-17).

Why not be honest and admit animals sacrifices did not accomplish ANYTHING LITERALLY! But you can't do that can you because you believe they did literally accomplish TEMPORARY remission of sins don't you? Campbellites and Catholics believe the very same thing with regard to baptism don't they? The fact is these sacrifces ACCOMPLISHED NOTHING LITERALLY but were only FIGURES of what true believers already possessed BEFORE offering up the type just as in the case with baptism they were already JUSTIFIED BY FAITH as Abel BEFORE offering the sacrifice. If you don't undersand justification it IS the remission of sins and it IS imputed righeousness to the "ungodly" without works,and without the works of the Law.

 

I have already quoted you several times claiming that literal sacrifices were the means "under the Law" to deal with their literal sins. Are you now going to deny that? Abraham is set forth as the omni-dispensational example that your position is false, that external ordinances NEVER dealt with literal sins but such was LITERALLY remitted by faith or JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH which includes actual literal remission of sins and actual literal imputed righteousness at the POINT of faith BEFORE obedience to any SYMBOLIC ordinances that only provide a FIGURATIVE remission of sins just as in the case of baptism and that "under the Law."