Water and Blood

[DHK]

Originally posted by mman:

#1. Salvation is of grace, not of baptism. It is of grace not of obedience. It is of the free gift of God. That is what grace is. The very fact that salvation is of grace automatically excludes any kind of acts of obedience, otherwise it wouldn't be grace. That would negate the definition of grace. Grace is all from God, nothing from man.
Paul puts it this way.

Romans 11:6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.
--With that definition it would be impossible to include baptism in the plan of salvation. For salvation is by grace. It is all of the grace of God. Baptism is not grace.

[QB]

#1 - Titus 2:11 says the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all - By your logic, all men will be saved.

I never said that, neither implied that, nor does the Bible say that. Don't teach heresy or especially accuse me of doing so. False accusations are unacceptable on this board. If you can find where I made such a statement then quote me.

Also by your logic, the act of confession is unessential. The act of repentance is unessential. With that definition it would be impossible to include confession or repentance in the plan of salvation. For salvation is by grace.

The Church of Christ's error is to package up every theological concept into little boxes and name them all as works: work #1 is faith; work #2 is confession; work #3 is repentance, etc. Of course all that is heresy. The only correct statement that you said in the above is "Salvation is by grace." Corroborate that with Rom.11:6. If it is all of grace, then it is not of works. That defeats your whole theology. And salvation is all of grace--the grace of God. There is nothing man can do--not baptism, church membership, confirmation, the Lord's Supper, speaking in tongues, etc. There is no religious rite, baptism included, that has a part in salvation. For salvation is ALL of the grace of God. No human merit will do. Baptism is man's effort, man's work. To say that baptism is a part of salvation is the equivalent of spitting in the face of God; for it is saying that God was unable to atone for your sins on the cross; he had to have your help in baptism. How arrogant!!

It is all of the grace of God. Confession and repentace are not grace. By your very definition, faith is also excluded since ,"Grace is all from God, nothing from man." You are in direct contradiction with God's word. Luke 13:3, Matt 10:32, Rom 10:10, Heb 11:6 and other places).

The work of salvation is all of the grace of God. It is a free gift to man, that is, to every man who will receive that gift The work is the work that Christ paid on the cross when he shed his blood for sins of the world. It was by the grace of God that Christ came from the glories of Heaven to this sinful world to die for our sins. He was not obligated to. It was out of love that he did so. It was his free gift to mankind. That is grace. Giving that (His Son) to us, who are so unworthy of his love. It is all of grace--His grace.

By your faulty logic and definition, you have excluded confession, repentance and Calling on the name of the Lord. I will substitue Confession where you had baptism.

First, all of the above have nothing to do with grace of God. Salvation is provided to mankind freely by the grace of God. It is God's grace, that cannot be bought, paid for, or worked for, not even with baptism.
If you will accept the Scriputres, salvation is by faith, faith alone. I exhort you to study this Scripture that I have expounded for you (Eph.2:8,9). It is impossible for you to reconcile its teachings with yours. Again you have bottled up "confession, repentance, calling on the name of the Lord," all as separate acts or works. You believe in a heretical works salvation.

#1. Salvation is of grace, not of confession. It is of grace not of obedience. It is of the free gift of God. That is what grace is. The very fact that salvation is of grace automatically excludes any kind of acts of obedience, otherwise it wouldn't be grace. That would negate the definition of grace. Grace is all from God, nothing from man.
Paul puts it this way.

Romans 11:6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

--With that definition it would be impossible to include confession in the plan of salvation. For salvation is by grace. It is all of the grace of God. Confession is not grace.

That is right. Christ provided salvation by grace--His grace. Confession does not provide salvation. Christ provides salvation. The Bible says If we call upon the name of the Lord we shall be saved. That assumes that we call on him in faith. It is the faith that saves. But the faith is on our part. Faith is not a work that we do. Faith is trust. That is why an infant can trust his parents without work. An infant has no capability to work, but it does have the capability to trust. Jesus said you must be as little childrent to enter the kingdom of Heaven.

#2. "ye are saved through faith" It doesn't say faith alone, it implies it. One is saved by faith and faith alone. There are no works involved in faith. Faith is the one thing that is not a work. It is belief or trust. That is not a work. It is the confidence that you put in an individual. It is not a work. We are saved by the faith that we put in the sacfificial work of Jesus Christ that he provided for us by the grace of God. Salvation is the work, the only work. It is accomplished all by Christ on the cross, and all by His grace.

#2 - It does not imply faith alone. THis whole paragraph is in direct conflict with what James said. It is in direct conflict with Heb 11.

OK, It doesn't imply faith alone. It says it outright. Salvation is through faith, and not by works. That means faith alone. To any English speaking person it has no other persosn. I hope you understand English. You say the passage is in direct conflict with with James and Hebrews 11. However, the Bible doesn't contradict itself. That just means one thing. You have forced your theology into these verses, and they contradict each other because of your heretical theology doesn't harmonize with the rest of the Bible.

Using your definition of faith YOU CANNOT explain how "by faith the walls of Jericho fell"? You say faith is belief or trust and it is the one thing that is not a work.

This is a red herring and has nothing to do with salvation. By faith they trusted in the promises of Godas believers. As believers they obeyed God. Just like in the New Testament, believers obey God in baptism. Baptism is not part of salvation. Neither was the conquering of Jericho. They were already God's people before they even reached the promised land.

John 6:29, "Jesus answered and said to them, "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent."

The funny thing is, I can show you where belief is a work, yet you say it isn't, and I can show you where baptism is a part of faith, and you call it a "work", yet have NO SCRIPTURE TO BACK UP THIS STATEMENT.

This was a play on words. Salvation is not of works. The Bible plainly says that in Eph.2:9. The Bible does not contradict itself, and neither does Christ. What Christ said is that the only "work" that could get a person to heaven was faith. That, by default, excluded baptism and all other works. Obviously baptism could not fit into this paradigm if faith is the only work whereby one can get to Heaven. Reread the verse and understand it.

By your definition, confession is a work, because it is something an individual must do. It takes effort to perform. By your logic, you think you are earning or working your way to heaven by making a confession.
"This is the work of God that you believe" This is the ONLY work of God that you BELIEVE. The plain statement here is that salvation is by faith and faith alone. That teaching by Christ is very plain.
DHK

 

[DHK]

#3. "And that not of yourselves" This makes it even more emphatic that baptism could not possibly involved in salvation. Salvation is a work of man. Man does it; man receives. It is of "yourself." Every work you do is "of yourself." Salvarion is not of yourself; it is all of God. Christ said on the cross "It is finished." (John 19:30) There is nothing man can do. YOU cannot do anything. Christ paid the entire penalty. It is not of yourself. It is of the grace of God.

# 3 - Using your faulty logic, confession, repentance, or calling on the name of the Lord is unessential. You could plug any of these into your statement.

There you go again, bottling up theological concepts into packages of works: #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, etc. How many works do you have to do to enter into heaven? The Bible mentions faith, and faith alone. However faith is not a work.

"And that not of yourselves" This makes it even more emphatic that confession could not possibly involved in salvation. Salvation(I think you meant baptism, so insert confession here) is a work of man. Man does it; man receives it (confession is before men). It is of "yourself." Every work you do is "of yourself." Salvation is not of yourself; it is all of God. Christ said on the cross "It is finished." (John 19:30) There is nothing man can do. YOU cannot do anything. Christ paid the entire penalty. It is not of yourself. It is of the grace of God

First, confession and baptism have nothing to do with one another. Why you substitute one for another is beyond me. You accuse me of faulty logic, when you have only proved yourself to have the faulty logic. Baptism is symbolic. It is not necessarily a confession of anything. Yes, salvation is all of God, all of grace. There is nothing you can do but accept that gift by faith, and faith alone.

#4. "it is a gift of God" A gift is something that is given; nothing that is worked for. You cannot work for a gift. A gift is never earned. Baptism is not a gift. Baptism is a work. Salvation is a gift already provided for by Christ. Like any gift one only has to receive it by faith. You don't have to do anything for it (like being baptized.) That is a work. All that is needed for salvation, like any other gift, is to reach out and take it. You do that by faith. One receives a gift by faith.

#4. Again, with your faulty logic, you could say the same about confession, repentance, Calling on the name of the Lord, thus making them unessental.

No, one cannot say the same about confession and repentance, etc. Salvation is by grace through faith (Eph.2:8,9) What is wrong? Don't you believe the Bible? It is plain that baptism is a work, but salvation is "not of works" as verse 9 plainly says. Your arguement with God, not with me.

Again, by your faulty definition and logic, you've just excluded confession, repentance, and calling on the name of the Lord. Let use confession again.

Are you hung up on accusing people of "faulty logic" when you cannot harmonize the Scripture for yourself? The Bible says that salvation is by faith. Why do you deny this? Why do you reject the teaching of Eph.2:8,9? Repentance and calling on the name of the Lord, are all included in true Biblical faith. This is what you fail to understand. When Paul had called on the name of the Lord, at the same time he had repented and put his faith in Christ. What was the result of his salvation experience that took place on the road to Damascus. He obeyed the Lord, as a believer in Christ, and was later baptized, and then testified of Christ. He was obedient to Christ. Obedience didn't earn him salvation. Putting his faith in Christ gave him salvation. It was a gift of God.

Again your faulty logic and definitions have excluded confession, repentance, and calling on the name of the Lord.

"faulty logic" You really need a bigger vocabulary!
"ave excluded confession, repentance, and calling on the name of the Lord."
This redundancy is getting boring. I have already explained this, I don't know how many times now.

To believe that salvation is by confession is a pagan supersition. Confession doesn't wash away sins. It simply gets you hoarse.

And baptism just gets you wet! That is why neither one gets you to heaven. By grace are ye saved through faith and that not of yourselves. It is faith in the saving grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. You still don't believe Eph.2:8,9 do you? When will you start believing the Bible?

All your baptism may have made you was wet, but mine was for the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38), washed my sins away (Acts 22:16), put me into the death of Christ and put me INTO Christ (Rom 6:3-4, Gal 3:27), added me to the Church of which Christ is savior (Acts 2:41,47, I Cor 12:13) and was by faith (Gal 3:26-27, Col 2:12).

What you think happened and what actually happened, according to the Bible, are two completely different things. The water that you were baptized in got you wet. It did no more good for you than the waters of the Ganges River did for the Hindus in India. Your faith is misplaced and I feel sorry for you, that you have such a misplaced misguided pagan belief. Others have misled you into a non-Biblical doctrine--the doctrine of a cult. The only thing that washes away sin is the blood of Christ.

1 John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

Hebrews 9:22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

1 Peter 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:

1 Peter 1:18-19 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers;
19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
DHK

 

[mman]

Since God’s grace has appeared to all men and it is all from God and nothing from man, then all men would be saved, if this were really true. I presume from you comments that neither you nor I believe that, so something IS required from man, else all men would be saved.

The question is, what is required from man.

“To say that baptism is a part of salvation is the equivalent of spitting in the face of God; for it is saying that God was unable to atone for your sins on the cross; he had to have your help in baptism. How arrogant!!”

I am only repeating what God said through his word. Why do you not believe Jesus when he said, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, and he that believeth not, shall be condemned.”? Again, you could substitute, confession, repentance, or calling on the name of the Lord where you wrote baptism.

“If you will accept the Scriputres, salvation is by faith, faith alone. I exhort you to study this Scripture that I have expounded for you (Eph.2:8,9). It is impossible for you to reconcile its teachings with yours.”[QUOTE/]

I have already done that time and time again. What you cannot reconcile is your definition of faith and James’. What you describe as “faith”, James describes as dead, useless, and incomplete. Even the demons believe, according to James. More on this later.

“Confession does not provide salvation. Christ provides salvation. The Bible says If we call upon the name of the Lord we shall be saved. That assumes that we call on him in faith.”

The bible also says “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.” That assumes that we are baptized in faith. Your definition of a work is something man does. By your very definition, “Calling on the name of the Lord” is also something man does, but you say that is done in faith. God says baptism is something we do in faith, according to Gal 3:26-27, Col 2:12.

“OK, It doesn't imply faith alone. It says it outright. Salvation is through faith, and not by works. That means faith alone. To any English speaking person it has no other persosn. I hope you understand English. You say the passage is in direct conflict with with James and Hebrews 11. However, the Bible doesn't contradict itself. That just means one thing. You have forced your theology into these verses, and they contradict each other because of your heretical theology doesn't harmonize with the rest of the Bible.” AND DHK said” This is a red herring and has nothing to do with salvation. By faith they trusted in the promises of Godas believers. As believers they obeyed God. Just like in the New Testament, believers obey God in baptism. Baptism is not part of salvation. Neither was the conquering of Jericho. They were already God's people before they even reached the promised land. “

I understand English, but I don’t understand the word “persosn”??? Let me get this straight, because your definition of faith is in direct conflict with Heb 11 and James 2, I have forced my theology?

My understanding of faith fits perfectly with Heb 11 and James 2. My understanding of faith is believing, trusting and doing what God said. Correct me if I’m wrong, and I’m sure you will, but your understanding of faith if belief and trust, but no work is involved.

The walls of Jericho falling by faith is not a red herring and here’s why. In the same chapter, all of which deals with what biblical faith is, it is said that without faith it is IMPOSSIBLE to please God. What kind of faith? There is example after example of biblical faith in Heb 11. I could have chosen any number of them because they show the biblical definition of faith, believing, trusting and doing what God has said. I chose by faith the walls of Jericho fell. Was any action required? YES. Did they “work”? Yes, by your definition. Did they earn it? No. Did that action “cause” the walls to fall. No. By your definition of faith, the walls would still be standing. By God’s definition, the wall of Jericho fell.

Yes, God had given them the city along will all the land of Canaan. Yet, sadly they did not obey God and conquer all the land.

I agree with you 100 percent when you say, “By faith they trusted in the promises of God as believers. As believers they obeyed God. Just like in the New Testament, believers obey God in baptism.” That is the difference between obedient believers and those who were not obedient that we read about in John 12:42 “Nevertheless many even of the rulers believed in Him, but because of the Pharisees they were not confessing Him, for fear that they would be put out of the synagogue;” John 1:12 states, “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:” Notice he DID NOT say those who received him ARE the sons of God but gave them power to BECOME sons of God. What has God done for the believers who trust him according to this verse? He gave them the power to BECOME sons of God. (Read Gal 3:26-27).

Now on to James, 2, You believe … Even the demons believe… that faith without works is dead? … Abraham our father justified by works when he offered … faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? 23And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." … 24You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.

Whose definition of faith fits here, your “faith only” , belief and trust and no works or my belief, trust, and obedience? You have described a dead faith, I have described a “perfect” faith or complete faith.

You said Eph 2:8-9 not only implied faith only, it says it outright? Really, where? James 2:24 is the only place in the New Testament that says outright “faith only” and it says a man is justified by works, and NOT by faith only? Does this mean we earn it? NO WAY!!! Impossible!!! WE CANNOT EARN OUR SALVATION, NOT EVEN ONE OUNCE OF IT!!! If I could earn it, then I could boast, but I cannot, therefore I have no reason to boast.

My understanding of biblical faith fits in perfect harmony with Eph 2:8-9, Heb 11, and James 2.

“Repentance and calling on the name of the Lord, are all included in true Biblical faith. This is what you fail to understand. When Paul had called on the name of the Lord, at the same time he had repented and put his faith in Christ. What was the result of his salvation experience that took place on the road to Damascus. He obeyed the Lord, as a believer in Christ, and was later baptized, and then testified of Christ. He was obedient to Christ.”

Repentance and calling on the name of the Lord are included in true biblical faith and baptism isn’t? Gal 3:26-27 says it is, and I know you believe the bible. Calling on the name of the Lord is something you do. It takes effort. God does not do it for you. How can this be part of faith and baptism isn’t. You said Paul called on the name of the Lord on the road to Damascus, yet Acts 22:16 says he called on the name of the Lord 3 days later in the city of Damascus. You said his salvation occurred on the road to Damascus, yet his sins had not been washed away some 3 days later according to Acts 22:16. He was told to go into the city and it would be told to him what he MUST do (Acts 9:6). The first thing Ananias told him to do was “Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.”

“What you think happened and what actually happened, according to the Bible, are two completely different things. The water that you were baptized in got you wet.”

Oh really. Would you mind using the passages dealing with baptism to explain what happens in baptism, how the bible says that all the water did was “got you wet”. You are not going to discover the purpose of baptism by going to passages where it's not mentioned. You'll have to go to what the Bible says about baptism to determine the Bible doctrine of baptism.

Thank you.

 

[BobRyan]

#3 - Baptism is only for believers. This is made clear in Acts 8:36-37. Baptism for the wrong reason is invalid. Acts 19:1-6 shows that. Out of curiousity, when do you think these people in Acts 19 were saved? What about Saul as recorded in Acts 22:16? When were his sins washed away?

In Acts 11 it is on the UNBAPTIZED person that the Holy Spirit falls AND GIFTS are given.

In 1John 1:9 it is when we CONFESS that we are forgiven.

In Romans 10 it is when we BELIEVE with the heart and CONFESS with the mouth that we are "saved".

The point is clear in scripture - Baptism is the act of the saved, repentant, born-again believer in following Christ - in obedience.

It is an outward sign of an already existing - inward change.

It is evidence that the NEW CREATION (2Cor 5) already exists - and that having already been "justified" you HAVE "peace with God" Romans 5 and in that fellowship you are choosing to follow in obedience and undergo Baptism.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[mman]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />#3 - Baptism is only for believers. This is made clear in Acts 8:36-37. Baptism for the wrong reason is invalid. Acts 19:1-6 shows that. Out of curiousity, when do you think these people in Acts 19 were saved? What about Saul as recorded in Acts 22:16? When were his sins washed away?

In Acts 11 it is on the UNBAPTIZED person that the Holy Spirit falls AND GIFTS are given.

In 1John 1:9 it is when we CONFESS that we are forgiven.

In Romans 10 it is when we BELIEVE with the heart and CONFESS with the mouth that we are "saved".

The point is clear in scripture - Baptism is the act of the saved, repentant, born-again believer in following Christ - in obedience.

It is an outward sign of an already existing - inward change.

It is evidence that the NEW CREATION (2Cor 5) already exists - and that having already been "justified" you HAVE "peace with God" Romans 5 and in that fellowship you are choosing to follow in obedience and undergo Baptism.

In Christ,

Bob </font>[/QUOTE]Bob - I am still curious at what point were the people in Acts 19 saved? What was their purpose of being re-baptized?

Also, at what point did the people on the day of Pentecost (as only recorded in Acts 2)receive remission of sins?

Finally, when did Saul of Tarsus have his sins washed away (Acts 9, Act 22, Act 26)?

I John 1:9 is for those who are already in the light, not those in darkness trying to get into the light.

In Romans 10 it is when we BELIEVE with the heart and CONFESS with the mouth that we are "saved". - This is not all that God has said on this subject. If it were, I would agree 100 percent with you. For example, Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." Was Jesus giving conflicting instructions? No. Was Jesus kidding? No. Was Jesus mistaken? No. The truth never contradicts itself. These passages are in complete harmony with each other.

I appreciate your kind attitude and sincerity, attributes that we all need.

As I asked DHK, would you mind using the passages dealing with baptism to explain what happens in baptism. You are not going to discover the purpose of baptism by going to passages where it's not mentioned. You'll have to go to what the Bible says about baptism to determine the Bible doctrine of baptism. I have done this and nowhere is it described as an outward sign of an already existing inward change.

When I list them, there is no explaination necessary.

To list a few:

Mark 16:16 -He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. (No commentary necessary)

Acts 2:38 - Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
(No commentary necessary).

Rom 6:3-4 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? 4Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. (No commentary necessary)

Gal 3:26For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. (No commentary necessary)

Acts 22:16And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.' (No commentary necessary)

Col 2:12 buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. (No commentary necessary)

I Pet 3:21 There is also an antitype which now saves us--baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, (no commentary necessary)

Acts 16:30 And he brought them out and said, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" 31 So they said, " Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved , you and your household." 32Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. 33And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their stripes. And immediately he and all his family were baptized. 34Now when he had brought them into his house, he set food before them; and he rejoiced, having believed in God with all his household. (No commentary necessary)

Any other verse that deals with salvation does not negate these verses, it only compliments them. No doubt we are children of God through faith. That is exactly what the bible teaches in Gal 3:26-27, listed above.

 

[Eric B]

You talk of two baptism. Eph 4:5 says there is just one. Yes, there have been many, but there is now just one? Which one?

I encourage you to study I Cor 12:13 with Acts 2. Are you saying these people entered the church in two different ways?

Today, there is just one baptism. Accept one and reject the other.

And I explained this somewhere already. "Baptism INTO Christ" is a SPIRITUAL concept with a PHYSICAL application to show the spiritual. So it is ONE baptism, not TWO. You are confusing two different MODES for separate acts called baptism. They were originally to be the same. But you still have to separate the spiritual aspect from the physical in dealing with what actually saves us. "REJECT" the "other"? You seem to make it all about the water, in which case a person could just be dunked without the ["second" baptism of] the spirit, and they would still be in Christ.

Acts 19:1-7. When did these men receive what you call "spiritual baptism".

When they received the Spirit (v.6). Many had heard of Jesus, and "believed" what they heard, but still were not yet born again (note the Jews in John 8, who "believed"; yet He goes on to call them children of the devil). Especially now, that the Holy Spirit was first starting to be given out to people.

Baptism is a greek word transliterated into english. It means to dip or plunge. Acts 8 says that Philip preached Jesus and the next thing out of the Eunuch mouth is "Here is water, what doth hinder me from being baptized". We know baptism is in water from this and other passages (I Pet 3:20-21, John 3:5, Eph 5:26).
New Testament baptism always means in water, unless otherwise clarified by the text or context.

We're also "immersed" into the Body of Christ.

BY one Spirit means something totally different than WITH one Spirit.

We discussd that already too. IT is both BY the Spirit, and WITH the Spirit. The Spirit is both initiator of spiritual baptism, as well as agent.

Once we are in the light, the blood of Jesus keeps on cleansing us. The question is how do we get into the light or into Christ or come in contact with his blood?

Through faith.

Baptism is not a work. How would that obligate God to save me? Frankly, it makes no sense to me how going into the water and coming out of it will wash away my sins. By faith, I accept what God has said on the subject. By faith I obey (Read all of Heb 11 for God's definition and examples of faith - without which it is IMPOSSIBLE to please him (Heb 11:6)).

By faith I am a child of God because I have been baptized (Gal 3:26-27).

I challenge anyone to show how baptism is a work when the bible calls it faith.

This "it makes no sense to me but I believe it by faith" proves nothing. You're having faith in the wrong thing, and it does seem to make a lot of sense to you (all the examples you have given that you think prove your view). It makes A LOT of sense to man that "I do this, and then God gives me that (salvation)". That is one of man's lifelong problems, as we see in the Israelistes, and many cults and religions today.
What makes no sense to you is how baptism is spiritual and the water ceremony is a public sign of it that does not in itself save, but this is what the NT teaches, and you should believe in by faith.

Once again, the examples you gave, including from Heb.11 are all from the OT, which was more works oriented (because part of it was that God was writing the lesson in history that works were not what saves; though some --and only relatively a few-- were faithful). You even try to deny that there was any "earning" involved in those examples, but the way God set those things up, they were still in a sense earning something, and this is CONTRASTED with faith for today!
Just look at what is the point Heb.11 is making for us: how this "faith" translates to us, ther eaders. v3: "through faith, we UNDERSTAND (believe) the worlds were framed by the Word of God). Then, carrying on in the next chapter, we are told how all of this is to motivate us to "run the race" set before us, looking to Jesus. Nothing about baptism. While running the race would be manifest in works, still, it is faith that is the subject here; not the individual works that may manifest it, like those in the OT examples. We could never do works consistently enough to measure your definition of "faith", and thus salvation by. IT is faith that justifies WHEN (not even if) we fail.

John 1:12 states, “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:” Notice he DID NOT say those who received him ARE the sons of God but gave them power to BECOME sons of God. What has God done for the believers who trust him according to this verse? He gave them the power to BECOME sons of God. (Read Gal 3:26-27).

You're interpreting "become" mechanically, to mean that He gives us some "power" that enables us to work our way to becoming a Son of God. But once again, do you do everything perfectly? Yes, this would make sense, if we saw people who actually became literally perfect (NEVER committing a single sin again, and this includes false doctrine!) through some power. But actually, "power" is misinterpreted as well, as the Greek word really means "privilege". Becoming declared a son of God is a right that is given to a person instantly upon faith, not some title we work our way up to.

 

[mman]

Originally posted by Eric B:
And I explained this somewhere already. "Baptism INTO Christ" is a SPIRITUAL concept with a PHYSICAL application to show the spiritual. So it is ONE baptism, not TWO. You are confusing two different MODES for separate acts called baptism. They were originally to be the same.

Wow, talk about mental gymnastics. 2 different modes of the same baptism? They were originally to be the same? What happened? Are they the same or different? Baptism of the Holy Spirit was a promise from Jesus, not a command. Water baptism was instructed to be carried out by man for the remission of sins.

In Acts 8:12But when they believed Philip as he preached the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, both men and women were baptized. 13Then Simon himself also believed; and when he was baptized he continued with Philip, and was amazed, seeing the miracles and signs which were done. 14Now when the apostles who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them, 15who, when they had come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit. 16For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.

What was the purpose of water baptism in this case?

Acts 19:1-7. When did these men receive what you call "spiritual baptism". When they received the Spirit (v.6). Many had heard of Jesus, and "believed" what they heard, but still were not yet born again (note the Jews in John 8, who "believed"; yet He goes on to call them children of the devil). Especially now, that the Holy Spirit was first starting to be given out to people.

So they received water baptism first then spriritual baptism? 2 Modes of the same baptism? Do you have any scripture to back up what you think concerning this? Right now, I am just trying to understand your position.

We're also "immersed" into the Body of Christ.

No arguements here. The scripture does teach this. I Cor 12:13, Acts 2:38, 41, 47.

We discussd that already too. IT is both BY the Spirit, and WITH the Spirit. The Spirit is both initiator of spiritual baptism, as well as agent.

Interesting concept. Any scriptures? When did this occur in Acts 2? How about Acts 8? How about Acts 16? When does this occur? When you accept Christ? Before water baptism? After Water baptism? Again, I am trying to understand what your position.

The question is how do we get into the light or into Christ or come in contact with his blood? Your answer was, "Through faith." I have laid out how the scriptures say we come in contact with the blood. I accept your answer based on God's definition of faith, doing what he said.

This "it makes no sense to me but I believe it by faith" proves nothing. You're having faith in the wrong thing, and it does seem to make a lot of sense to you (all the examples you have given that you think prove your view). It makes A LOT of sense to man that "I do this, and then God gives me that (salvation)". That is one of man's lifelong problems, as we see in the Israelistes, and many cults and religions today.

God's word is truth. The truth is what makes us free. Whether I accept it or reject it has no bearing on what is truth. Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." Mark 16:16. Regardless of what anyone thinks or believes, this statement is still true. No, this is not all that the bible says about being saved, but it is certainly included. No other verse negates this verse. If you were in the crowd in Acts 2, even asking the question in verse 37, what would you have done to receive the remission of your sins? If asked the question in Acts 2:37, what would your answer be?

What makes no sense to you is how baptism is spiritual and the water ceremony is a public sign of it that does not in itself save, but this is what the NT teaches, and you should believe in by faith.

So what you are saying is that one is spiritually baptized and following that there is a water ceremony as a public sign. Is that correct? Do they occur at the same time or does the spiritual baptism preceed the water baptism. You said, in Acts 19, the spiritual baptism occurred in verse 6. They were baptized in water (for a second time) in verse 5. What was their water baptism a public sign of?

Once again, the examples you gave, including from Heb.11 are all from the OT, which was more works oriented (because part of it was that God was writing the lesson in history that works were not what saves; though some --and only relatively a few-- were faithful). You even try to deny that there was any "earning" involved in those examples, but the way God set those things up, they were still in a sense earning something, and this is CONTRASTED with faith for today!
Just look at what is the point Heb.11 is making for us: how this "faith" translates to us, ther eaders. v3: "through faith, we UNDERSTAND (believe) the worlds were framed by the Word of God). Then, carrying on in the next chapter, we are told how all of this is to motivate us to "run the race" set before us, looking to Jesus. Nothing about baptism. While running the race would be manifest in works, still, it is faith that is the subject here; not the individual works that may manifest it, like those in the OT examples. We could never do works consistently enough to measure your definition of "faith", and thus salvation by. IT is faith that justifies WHEN (not even if) we fail.

First of all, they are not my examples, they are God's. Without faith, it is impossible to please God. What kind of faith? Obedient faith as demonstrated in Heb 11. Yes, God has revealed things and I accept them through faith. In 6 days, the Lord created the heavens and the earth and all that is in them. I accept that by faith. I accept that I have a human spirit, by faith. I also accept his instructions on how to have the remission of my sins. I do this by faith. By faith, I confessed his name (Matt 10:32), by faith I repented of my sins (Acts 17:30, Acts 2:38), by faith I was buried with Christ in baptism, (Col 2:12, Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, Mark 16:16) by By faith I become a child of God, by doing what he said to do. This is clear in Gal 3:26-27. According to the scriptures, I can only find one way INTO Christ. Once I'm a child of God, with my sins washed away by the Savior's blood, I begin my new life (Rom 6:3-4). I walk by faith. Will I walk perfectly? NO! I John 1:7-8. Will I earn any part of my salvaiton? NO!!! Will I sin? Yes. Am I continually covered by the blood as long as I walk in the light? Yes - I Jn 1:7.

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
#3 - Baptism is only for believers. This is made clear in Acts 8:36-37. Baptism for the wrong reason is invalid. Acts 19:1-6 shows that. Out of curiousity, when do you think these people in Acts 19 were saved? What about Saul as recorded in Acts 22:16? When were his sins washed away?

In Acts 11 it is on the UNBAPTIZED person that the Holy Spirit falls AND GIFTS are given.

In 1John 1:9 it is when we CONFESS that we are forgiven.

In Romans 10 it is when we BELIEVE with the heart and CONFESS with the mouth that we are "saved".

The point is clear in scripture - Baptism is the act of the saved, repentant, born-again believer in following Christ - in obedience.

It is an outward sign of an already existing - inward change.

It is evidence that the NEW CREATION (2Cor 5) already exists - and that having already been "justified" you HAVE "peace with God" Romans 5 and in that fellowship you are choosing to follow in obedience and undergo Baptism.

[/QUOTE]

Originally posted by mman:

Bob - I am still curious at what point were the people in Acts 19 saved? What was their purpose of being re-baptized?

They were saved at the same time Christ's OWN disciples were saved - pre-cross when they "believed". They then were "Baptized" just as the Apostles James and John -- by John the baptizer.

But in Acts 19 they "receive the special outpouring" of the Holy Spirit - including the gift of tongues.

So in terms of salvation it is the SAME as the Acts 1l event AND the Romans 10 teaching showing without question - it is at the point of "BELIEF" that one is born-again, justified 'saved'. And then the BELIEVER follows on in the obedience of baptism.

Also, at what point did the people on the day of Pentecost (as only recorded in Acts 2)receive remission of sins?

Here again the instruction is to hear, REPENT and believe - and then be baptized AS a born-again saved believer.

snipping the text out of the Bible to "Stand alone" will not work.

I notice you are avoiding Acts 11.


In Romans 10 it is when we BELIEVE with the heart and CONFESS with the mouth that we are "saved".

- This is not all that God has said on this subject.

Lets take a look "At the details".

Whosoever Believes – is saved.

Romans 10

Rom 10:8 but what does it say? “the word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart”—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching,
9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved;

saved - salvation to those who believe. The fact that one who believes and is saved will continue to read and study and obey - does not abolish the fact of salvation just as stated above - at the time we believe.

10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.
11 for the scripture says, “whoever believes in him will not be disappointed.”

Salvation comes to the one who confesses and believes. Then we go on to follow in the works of obedience – including water Baptism

As I asked DHK, would you mind using the passages dealing with baptism to explain what happens in baptism. You are not going to discover the purpose of baptism by going to passages where it's not mentioned.

In Acts 11 the entire subject is about the validity of Baptism -- for non-Jews.

It can hardly be claimed that "this is not a passage that mentions baptism".

In Romans 10 the entire section is about the subject of "WHEN is a person saved". Ignoring the chapter as if it "had nothing to say about that" is not a valid approach to scripture.

You'll have to go to what the Bible says about baptism to determine the Bible doctrine of baptism. I have done this and nowhere is it described as an outward sign of an already existing inward change.

In Romans 6:1-10 it most certainly IS described as an outward symbol of our being WITH Christ in HIS death and HIS resurrection.

(assuming of course you did not go back in time "literally" at your baptism).

The argument you are using tries to wrap a somewhat myopic view of scripture (selecting some texts while avoiding others) into a wooden definition that is unsupportable. Everyone (at least those who accept believer's baptism) agree to the point that in Baptism we identify with Christ's work on the cross for us - and it is in that work (and our identification in His death and resurrection) that accomplishes the removal of sin.

But you "take it to extremes" claiming that we are not born-again, not justified, not saved, not a new creation, still in the old wicked "flesh" at the time of belief, repentance and baptism.

Nothing could be farther from the truth of scripture.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[chadman]

DHK said

Do you have a problem in believing the Bible?

I never suggested that we are saved through the sinners prayer. Where did you get that idea? We are not saved through the sinner's prayer.

Oh, 'Cmon, Give me a little break here DHK. I could ask you or anybody else the same thing. Wouldn't you agree you are just a tad inflamatory, even to Evangelicals like yourself?

The sinners prayer? It saves those who ask Jesus to save them, calling on His name, just as the Bible teaches. Yes I know ultimately under the theological covers, by Grace through Faith not of works. I know that. It is a rite of passage.

Where did I get that idea? Billy Graham and Bob Ryan,your brother in arms, both say the sinner's prayer (sincere) will save you. Look at Bob's post point number 2. Is Bob Ryan wrong?

you said

Prayer is from the heart. It does not have to heard.

It does not you are correct, but it CAN be, and is Biblical to state the obvious.

No --- the Sinner Prayer, it is not in the Bible explicitly, you know that and we all know that. It is the manifested act of faith that fullfils the offer to 'believe in your heart and confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord', or to 'call upone His name'. See that? Confess with your MOUTH? There is nothing wrong with that, it is Biblical. If you ask Jesus to save you, come into your life, He promises that He will not turn away anyone who comes to Him. So if you call on Jesus, He will save you. You say it so well, I think I'll quote you to yourself now...

"If you care not to believe it you put yourself in direct contradiction to the Bible, and have started to believe a false gospel as well.If you don't believe that, then you are in danger of believing a false gospel. This is why many are not really saved when they think they are."

Is that not an absolutely edifying statement? I know it made ME feel good when you said it.

Anyways, you never answer many of my questions so I had antother one for you that I was personally curious about in agreement with you on, so I'll make another post, so it does not get overlooked.

In fact I have noticed on this board, that maybe 90% of peoples questions are skimmed over, and never addressed? Are we asking each other questions as debate points, or are we actually trying to learn something from each other? I don't get it.

 

[chadman]

Ok, I have not studied the use of 'eis', so I am out on this discussion but found it very interesting. I think MMAN asked the question in response to DHK (I think). Hehe, and this is the one that caught my real attention, but I don't remember a response.

The greeks had a word for because, "hoti". This word was NOT used in Acts 2:38. The greek word "eis" was used which never is translated as "because", since is does not mean "because". Just because our english word "for" can sometimes be used for "because" doesn't mean the greek word "eis" can.

If you can easily understand "eis" in Matt 26:28, why is it so hard to understand in Acts 2:38. Not only is the same word used but the SAME PHRASE. Every example showing how our english word "for" can mean "because" to attempt to show that baptism is because we have remission of sin (Acts 2:38) can also be used in Matt 26:28 to show that Jesus blood was shed because mankind had already received remission of sins. It is a very incosistent position unsupported by the greek language.

I guess this confuses me too. Anyone care to tackle this one? He makes a good point, and a linguist might agree with him here, based on an established pattern of usage and context. Why is this the case? For my own comfort please? The only thing I can think is you have two differnt authors, maybe two different usages?

 

[DHK]

Originally posted by chadman:
DHK said

Do you have a problem in believing the Bible?

I never suggested that we are saved through the sinners prayer. Where did you get that idea? We are not saved through the sinner's prayer.

Oh, 'Cmon, Give me a little break here DHK. I could ask you or anybody else the same thing. Wouldn't you agree you are just a tad inflamatory, even to Evangelicals like yourself?

No, not at all. My reference was to Eph.2:8,9 which mman by his own definition is unable to reconcile with his view of Scripture. Does he believe this passage (the Scripture) or not. I would say that he does not. Salvation is not of works.

The sinners prayer? It saves those who ask Jesus to save them, calling on His name, just as the Bible teaches. Yes I know ultimately under the theological covers, by Grace through Faith not of works. I know that. It is a rite of passage.

Many people may get saved "in spite" of the sinners prayer. That is not the point. It is not the prayer that saves. It is faith in the sacrificial work of Christ that saves. Repetion of words means nothing. If your faith is not expressed from your heart while you are praying that prayer, then that prayer is meaningless to God. There are many false professions for this very reason.

Where did I get that idea? Billy Graham and Bob Ryan,your brother in arms, both say the sinner's prayer (sincere) will save you. Look at Bob's post point number 2. Is Bob Ryan wrong?

I don't know where you got your ideas. I made mine perfectly clear. I have not deviated one iota from the Biblical concept that it is faith that saves--faith in the finished work of Christ. If your prayer is an expression of that faith, then so be it. If your prayer is not an expression of that faith, then you may be damned for all eternity.

Prayer is from the heart. It does not have to heard.

It does not you are correct, but it CAN be, and is Biblical to state the obvious.

No --- the Sinner Prayer, it is not in the Bible explicitly, you know that and we all know that. It is the manifested act of faith that fullfils the offer to 'believe in your heart and confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord', or to 'call upone His name'. See that? Confess with your MOUTH? There is nothing wrong with that, it is Biblical. If you ask Jesus to save you, come into your life, He promises that He will not turn away anyone who comes to Him. So if you call on Jesus, He will save you. You say it so well, I think I'll quote you to yourself now...

I never disagreed with that.

"If you care not to believe it you put yourself in direct contradiction to the Bible, and have started to believe a false gospel as well.If you don't believe that, then you are in danger of believing a false gospel. This is why many are not really saved when they think they are."

Is that not an absolutely edifying statement? I know it made ME feel good when you said it.

Remember that mman, whose post I was anwering is COC, and believes in a works salvation. If he cares not to believe that salvation is by faith, then so be it. He will face the consequences some day. There is only one gospel. The gospel is an offence to many people. It doesn't matter if makes you feel good or not.

Anyways, you never answer many of my questions so I had antother one for you that I was personally curious about in agreement with you on, so I'll make another post, so it does not get overlooked.

In fact I have noticed on this board, that maybe 90% of peoples questions are skimmed over, and never addressed? Are we asking each other questions as debate points, or are we actually trying to learn something from each other? I don't get it.

Sorry, I can't always answer everyone's questions. It is inevitable that some people's posts will get overlooked.
DHK

 

[ituttut]

Originally posted by mman:
ituttut

Paul said there was just one gospel. The same gospel was preached to the Jews first and also to the Greeks (Rom 1:16).

mman, you are right. However you misapply the Word. It is Paul’s gospel you refer to. Who is it that has the gospel of Christ. Israel had the “covenant”, the Law of Moses, and the gospel of John the Baptist, as did Jesus, and the Apostles. The “Gospel of Christ” is from heaven, and He gave that to Paul. Verse 16, ” For I am not ashamed of the “gospel of Christ”: for it is the power of God unto salvation to “every one that believeth”; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.” Paul went to the Jew first, and then to the Gentile’s with the “Gospel of Christ”, that of reconciling the world. Can we agree that God is today reconciling the world unto Himself? It is so, and it had never been so in the past, and will not be after our rapture.

"... It was necessary that the Word of God should FIRST have been spoken
to you..." (Acts 13:46). Scripture tells us why it was necessary for Paul to preach the Grace gospel first to the Jew. The Bible affirms through the ages, the fact that is always the Jew first. Even after Jesus’ resurrection from the dead, and rejecting the Holy Spirit of Pentecost, the house of Israel refused their King. Only then do we find “the gospel of the grace of God” to all is revealed to Paul.

So the one gospel for today is the gospel of Paul, revealed to him by Christ Jesus from Heaven. Find before Damascus Road, where any gospel for Israel was preached to and at a Gentile. So the gospel for the Jew, cannot be for we Gentile’s of today, or for those of the seed of Abraham, for God does not recognize the Jew today. When you dismiss Christ in heaven with His revelation to Paul, you then have no gospel at all, and we are all destined to hell; But not if we believe the gospel of Paul.

Eph 4:5 says there is one faith.

Again you are right for the wrong reason. The Jew is saved by faith, and the Gentile is saved through faith. So today none are being saved by faith for God threw them in again with we Gentiles.

More evidence that the Old gospel way of salvation is no more. Ephesians 2:8-9, ”For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9. Not of works, lest any man should boast.” Prove this was so during the time that Jesus was on this earth, and we will know that God was not telling the truth when He said until Saul/Paul, He (God) had a hidden treasure in His mysteries that He had not told from the beginning of the world.

The Bible is not worth much, if we cannot believe His Word.

Jude 3 says contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.

Jude 1:3, ”Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.” Jude is the gospel of the circumcision. The “common salvation” for Jesus is Israel’s Messiah, their King. The “common” here is those that belonged to community as a whole. We see the “common” in Mark 12:37, for Jesus says He only came for His own. We then see in Acts 2:44, that all that believed the “common salvation” preached by Peter in Acts 2:37-38, had all things in common.

There was no dissension at all in their “common community” for a year of which we have a preview of the kingdom to come of the Jew on the earth. No Gentile was ever preached to until God sent Peter to Cornelius, shortly after Damascus Road. But with the stoning of Steven, that all ended, i.e. the “bliss” of the community. But the “common salvation” of the Jew remained. This is what Jude is referring to in “faith which was once delivered unto the saints". The Jew of the Pentecostal church did not consider a Gentile to be a saint.

Acts 4:32 sums it up nicely. ”And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul: neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. They believe the gospel of John the Baptist, the “common salvation” of the Jew. Those Jews were “all of One Heart”, and had all things in common.

Doesn’t James, Jude’s half brother also “contend for the faith” of the Jew, viz. of works, sacrifices, feasts, and Holy Days? Is that the “faith you contend for”? The Christian “contends for no such thing”.

We also see Jude was saved differently than we Christians. Are you sanctified by God the Father, or sanctified through God the Holy Spirit? Salvation of the Jew is always in relation with “their Father”. The Jew can go directly to “their Father”, witness ”Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name. 10. Thy kingdom come………” We today cannot do that. We come to the Father Through Jesus Christ. He makes intercession for us, and the Holy Spirit reads our heart so God can understand, as we don’t know what to pray for. All those people had to do was "Ask".

I did not preach two gospels, but one gospel. I Cor 15:1-4 tells us that the gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection.

I believe this, but do you? Do you believe in “good Friday”? Was Jesus in the earth for three full days? I say yes. There are not many that agree with Jesus on this. I hope that you do.

I base your preaching on two gospels by what you posted. Quote “”On the day of Pentecost, the spirit was talking though Peter (Acts 2:4). Acts 2:38 Then Peter (Spirit - talking though Peter) said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized (water) in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.”Unquote. This is the gospel of John the Baptist, and not the gospel of Christ Jesus from Heaven. We, the Christians (were based in Antioch, and not Jerusalem) have remission of sins through Jesus Christ when we believe in our hearts that it is He that makes it possible for us to receive remission of sins.

Then after you teach that salvation is by repenting and then being baptized for remission of sins, you close by saying, ”We are saved by grace through faith…”Unquote. That is two separate gospels that you are preaching. You must choose one or the other. Is Christ divided? No! But God is a God of division. God the Father separated out His own nation, Israel. Today it is the kingdom of Christ that we will be in, and not looking for the saint’s to come marching into the kingdom of God. The rapture first, then the kingdom of God.

Rom 6:17 says, "But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered."

Christ appointed Paul the Apostle to the Gentile, and to the Jew. We see here that Paul is addressing both those that were saved under the doctrine of “repent and be baptized for the remission of sins”, and those of Grace Through faith in the name of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Paul says to “that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. The Jew and the Gentile did not have the same “gospel”, or the same “doctrine.

Obeyed what form of doctrine? What he had just told them in Rom 6:3-4. Since we can't literally die, be buried, and raised again for our sins, we obey a form of that in baptism. We are baptized INTO His death (that is where the blood flowed)and buried with him in baptism, raised to walk in a new life.

”Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? 4. Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life” Romans 6:3-4. Again, is this “water baptism” required of the Jew for remission of sins, or the One Spiritual baptism of the Christian? It pertains to both.

I believe Jesus' blood is also in heaven, and today that is where our spitiual baptism takes place into His death, being made dead to the Law of ordinances, and He is the living waters.

Paul was the only one given authority to preach to “both”. The covenant people must in the flesh be water baptized as they all will be a priesthood, and in the “flesh” committed adultery in their idol worship, as taught throughout the Old Testament. Not so with the Christian, for we are Christ’s inheritance, and sons of God, not being of a two way covenant with God.

No longer slaves to sin since you obeyed the gospel.

It is the same gospel preached on the day of Pentecost and through the epistles.

Amen! But, but why do you completely ignore our salvation today that only comes from the gospel of Christ Jesus from heaven, given to us through Paul, Christ’s only heavenly Apostle? How can you equate and unite the Pentecostal gospel of John the Baptist of “repent and be baptized for the remission of sins” to the nation Israel, with “believe on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved,” with the gospel of Paul, reconciling the world unto God?

Again, it is summed up in Gal 3:26-29 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Therefore, everyone that is in Christ got there the same way.

Amen again. This is the Christian message, of which was not known until after Damascus Road. Since God had hidden this information from the beginning until Saul/Paul, how can you justify saying Moses, David, or any of the Law and the prophets came to the Father through faith in Jesus Christ? They didn’t even know His name, and Jesus had not shed His blood, so it was impossible for them to come as we today. Those all had to endure until the end. We today are saved immediately upon believing on name of the Lord Jesus Christ for our salvation.

Our dispensation, or generation from the gospel of Paul is the only one that is not required to do a work. Noah had to do a work; Abraham had to get away from His idol worshipping people, and had to be circumcised as did every male Israelite, and proselyte from then on. They had to live under the law and do as it said, or at least try. And when prophesy picks up where it left off, works will again be required of Gods national Israel, and any that tag along on their coattails.

In this dispensation, why are we not required to do one thing? Jesus Christ did all of the work for us, and offers us the free gift, if we will only take it. The kingdom of Christ must be getting close to what He has been promised by His Father. When it is full, we will be caught up to Him in the air, to be with Him forever, and will be as He, and then will the Jew earnestly and fervently be praying, Our Father, Which Art in Heaven……….give us our daily bread………deliver us from evil.Christian faith, ituttut Galatians 1:11-12

 

[mman]

Reply to ituttut

Jesus said in Mark 16:15-16, "And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. 16He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned."

Notice, it was one gospel. Notice it was to be preached to the whole world (would include Gentiles). Notice, the person who believes and is baptized shall be saved. Notice, those who do not believe will be condemned.

This began on the day of Pentecost. It is the gospel of Christ, not John the Baptist. Where did that come from??? Not from scripture.

Matthew records in Matt 28:18-20, "And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen"

They were to go to all nations (this would include Gentiles) and teach the same thing (teach, baptize, teach) to everyone who then were taught to go and teach what they had been taught (to go teach, baptize, and teach). These instructions began to be carried out on the day of Pentecost, in Acts 2.

In Acts 1:8, Jesus said, "But you shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth." (to the end of the earth would include Gentiles).

Acts 2:38-39 Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call."

This promise was for the Jews and Gentiles.

Paul makes it plain that the law was what seperated the Jews and the Gentiles.

Eph 2:14-18 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 16and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity. 17And He came and preached peace to you who were afar off and to those who were near. 18For through Him we both have access by one Spirit to the Father.

The middle law was put to death, no longer valid, upon the death of Jesus on the Cross. No longer two different ways, but the SAME way to Christ.

Eph 3:3-6 how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (as I have briefly written already, 4by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ), 5which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets: 6that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ through the gospel,

It had been revealed also the the other apostles and prophets how God would make the Gentiles fellow heirs by the same gospel.

Paul then goes on to say in Eph 4:5, "one Lord, one faith, one baptism;" Not two faiths, one for the Jew and one for the Gentiles, not 2 baptisms one for the Jews and one for the Gentiles. Jesus had taken away what separated them when he died on the cross.

Paul also said in Col 1:19 For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell, 20and by Him to reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross. 21And you, who once were alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now He has reconciled 22in the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy, and blameless, and above reproach in His sight-- 23if indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister.

THE gospel was preached to every creature under heaven (Jews and Gentiles). The same gospel. Not two different ways for the Jews and Gentiles to be saved. Jews and Gentiles were reconciled by the blood of His Cross since the law that separated them was removed.

Col 2:12 buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. 13And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, 14having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us. And He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.

Again, the law was taken out of the way at the cross, it was nailed to the cross. Baptism is described as a burial and being raised. Baptism is done through faith, whether Jew or Gentile.

Or as Paul told the Galatians, "22But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe. 23But before faith came, we were kept under guard by the law, kept for the faith which would afterward be revealed. 24Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. 26For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Notice verse 26, that we might be justified by faith. Verse 27, For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. Who are the "we" and the "many" who entered into Chirst? Vs 28, Jews, Greeks, slaves, free, males, females - I think that covers all mankind.

This ties back to Acts 2:38-39 and also compliments Eph 2:8-9.

 

[mman]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
In Acts 11 it is on the UNBAPTIZED person that the Holy Spirit falls AND GIFTS are given.

There is no doubt that the Holy Spirit was given to those in Acts 10 and as retold in Acts 11, prior to their baptism in water. Let's look at the circumstances. I think everyone understands these were the first Gentile converts. Until this point, the gospel had been preached to the Jews.

Notice what God told Cornelius, Acts 11:14 "and he will speak words to you by which you will be saved, you and all your household."

When Peter began to speak (vs 15), the Holy Spirit fell on them. This baptism of the Holy Spirit reminded Peter of what had happened to the Apostles in Acts 2 (verse 16). Does this occur today or was it to let Peter and more importantly those with Peter know for certain that the Gospel was for the Gentiles also (Acts 10:45-47). If water baptism is an outward sign of something inward, why would water baptism be given to those who had outward signs? Surely nobody today recieves the Holy Spirit like Cornelius and his household. Can people today speak in foreign languages that they have not previously known when some start to tell them the gospel? Acts 2 and Acts 10 are the only recorded places that specifically mention people being baptized with the Holy Spirit. The first time, the Jews were added to the Church, the second time, the Gentiles.

Why did those believers in Acts 19 not receive it the same way as Cornelius? If you read Acts 18, Apollos most likely taught them concerning Jesus, but he only knew John's baptism (which was no longer valid). Therefore, these believers were asked if they received the Holy Spirit when they believed (Acts 19:2). What a strange question if it happens automatically. Did the inspired Apostle not understand about baptism of the Holy Spirit? They were baptized again in water, because their first baptism was not valid. Obviously, their baptism was more than just getting wet.

When they answered they had not even heard of the Holy Spirit, Paul asked, "And he said, "Into what then were you baptized?" Notice, he did ask if they were baptized? Paul understood that baptism is part of belief or as he later stated a part of faith (Gal 3:26-27). Their baptism was not an outward "sign" of anything.

Paul then laid hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit, and they began speaking with tongues and prophesying.

it is at the point of "BELIEF" that one is born-again, justified 'saved'....Here again the instruction is to hear, REPENT and believe - and then be baptized AS a born-again saved believer.

The rulers in John 12:42 who believed but would not confess would be saved under the new law, right?

On the day of Pentecost, (Acts 2:37) these people believed. If they didn't believe they would have gone about their business, continuing to think the Apostles were drunk, and paid them no mind. It was obvious from their question that they believed, hence it would have been pointless to tell them to believe.

If they were saved when they believed, why did Peter tell them to do anything? Why didn't he instruct them in the "sinners prayer"? Why do you suppose he gave them instructions to repent and be baptized for the remission of sins if their sins were already remitted? If at the point of belief one is saved, then repentance is not required, because that was instructions given to them past their point of belief. Clearly, their baptism was "for the remission of sins" just the same as Jesus blood being shed for many "for the remission of sins" (Matt 26:28)

Later in Acts 2:44, it describes those who had believed, repented and been baptized, simply as "those who had believed". Now substitute these believers (and what they did that is summed up as believed) into a verse like John 3:16 and John 3:36, "He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him." (NASV)

The same is true for those in Act 16:31 They said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household."
32And they spoke the word of the Lord to him together with all who were in his house.

33And he took them that very hour of the night and washed their wounds, and immediately he was baptized, he and all his household.

34And he brought them into his house and set food before them, and rejoiced greatly, having believed in God with his whole household.

Summary, told to believe, spoke the word of the Lord to them, baptized, rejoiced having believed.

In Romans 10 the entire section is about the subject of "WHEN is a person saved". Ignoring the chapter as if it "had nothing to say about that" is not a valid approach to scripture.

I am not ignoring anything. Romans 10 fits perfectly with everything I have described. When you have the proper understanding of belief and faith, it all fits perfectly. Romans 10 does not negate the conversion examples in Acts, it only compliments them.

If you say a person is saved at the point of belief (mental assent), then that is in direct contradiction with what Jesus said in Mark 16:16, "He that believes and is baptized shall be saved..." Yet if you understand "believed" in Acts 2:44 and Acts 16:34, then it all fits.

But you "take it to extremes" claiming that we are not born-again, not justified, not saved, not a new creation, still in the old wicked "flesh" at the time of belief, repentance and baptism.

Nothing could be farther from the truth of scripture.

I'm not sure I understand what you are accusing me of. The bible teaches that we are a new creation at the time of our belief, repentance and baptism.

II Cor 5:17 says, "Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come."

How do we get into Christ? The waters of baptism. Why are we baptized? Faith.

You can search the bible, cover to cover, and you can only find one way INTO Christ, and that is baptism (Rom 6:3-4, Gal 3:26-27). When do we have newness of life? Romans 6:4 says,"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.

Spirit baptism is not a burial and resurrection, but our baptism in water is. When does the new life begin? When we are raised from our watery grave.

I do not need to repeat that the power is in the blood and not the water. Read my original message for a further discussion on that.

 

[mman]

Originally posted by chadman:
Ok, I have not studied the use of 'eis', so I am out on this discussion but found it very interesting. I think MMAN asked the question in response to DHK (I think). Hehe, and this is the one that caught my real attention, but I don't remember a response.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
The greeks had a word for because, "hoti". This word was NOT used in Acts 2:38. The greek word "eis" was used which never is translated as "because", since is does not mean "because". Just because our english word "for" can sometimes be used for "because" doesn't mean the greek word "eis" can.

If you can easily understand "eis" in Matt 26:28, why is it so hard to understand in Acts 2:38. Not only is the same word used but the SAME PHRASE. Every example showing how our english word "for" can mean "because" to attempt to show that baptism is because we have remission of sin (Acts 2:38) can also be used in Matt 26:28 to show that Jesus blood was shed because mankind had already received remission of sins. It is a very incosistent position unsupported by the greek language.

I guess this confuses me too. Anyone care to tackle this one? He makes a good point, and a linguist might agree with him here, based on an established pattern of usage and context. Why is this the case? For my own comfort please? The only thing I can think is you have two differnt authors, maybe two different usages? </font>[/QUOTE]You are a mystery to me. You are a very intriguing individual.

A question we all need to ask ourselves, is do I study God’s word to get the truth or to prove what I already believe? People should NOT believe what I say, just because I said it. We need to be like the Bereans in Acts 17:11 who, were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

I encourage people to study it for themselves, not to prove what you already believe, but to take God at his word. There is no one passage that is exhaustive, telling all a person must do to be saved. It has to be studied and rightly divided.

Jesus’ statement in Mark 16:16 is so plain a child can understand it, yet it has been twisted and re-arranged by people trying to make it fit everything else they believe. Some will say the same thing about me not believing Eph 2:8-9, which is an outright lie. I have explained time and time again how perfectly this fits together with the rest of the scripture. No, it will not fit if you use your own definitions of faith, but when you use what the scripture has provided, it fits perfectly, no twisting required.

I don’t expect any answer to the Acts 2:38 and Matt 26:28 question. I can assure you, any attempt will require some serious mental gymnastics.

You know, I think baptism is the ultimate act of faith. You look at how much resistance there is to it. People belittle it’s importance, change it’s meaning, say it’s spiritual and not in water, call people names and label them with titles who believe it, accuse them of works salvation, accuse them of believing the power is in the water and not in the blood, and so on.

When done in faith, wash and be clean – what could be simpler?

 

[Eric B]

Wow, talk about mental gymnastics. 2 different modes of the same baptism? They were originally to be the same? What happened? Are they the same or different?

So they received water baptism first then spriritual baptism? 2 Modes of the same baptism? Do you have any scripture to back up what you think concerning this? Right now, I am just trying to understand your position.

"modes" was a bad word. But for lack of better terminoliogy at the moment. Still; there is one spiritual baptism evidenced by water baptism. No "two' baptisms.

Baptism of the Holy Spirit was a promise from Jesus, not a command. Water baptism was instructed to be carried out by man for the remission of sins.

You can argue that that promise was based on a command to keep commandments (John 14:15-17). And Jesus' "spirit baptism was contrasted with John's water baptism. If we are to take your "this is two baptisms logic" then that would show that the one baptism of the NT is spirit only, and water ("for the remission of sins" Mk.1:4) has been superseded. But that is not true; is it? This shows that the two forms are one baptism.

In Acts 8:12But when they believed Philip as he preached the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, both men and women were baptized. 13Then Simon himself also believed; and when he was baptized he continued with Philip, and was amazed, seeing the miracles and signs which were done. 14Now when the apostles who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them, 15who, when they had come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit. 16For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.

What was the purpose of water baptism in this case?

Better yet; what was the purpose of them receiving the Spirit after being baptized; since it's the baptism that puts them in Christ and saves them? I think this makes it pretty clear that baptism is not efficacious in itself.
As you yourself just elaborated, the Holy Spirit was just being given out to gentiles. So they went ahead and obeyed and were baptized, but the spirit still did not come to them until then. Afterwards, the Spirit would comedurung baptism. But we can see here that when they are separated; which one it is that regenerates.

Interesting concept. Any scriptures? When did this [spirit baptism] occur in Acts 2? How about Acts 8? How about Acts 16? When does this occur? When you accept Christ? Before water baptism? After Water baptism? Again, I am trying to understand what your position.

So what you are saying is that one is spiritually baptized and following that there is a water ceremony as a public sign. Is that correct? Do they occur at the same time or does the spiritual baptism preceed the water baptism. You said, in Acts 19, the spiritual baptism occurred in verse 6. They were baptized in water (for a second time) in verse 5. What was their water baptism a public sign of?

2 baptism & repentance at same time

8(mid) as was just said; when the Spirit fell on them after baptism

8(end) baptism & repentance at same time

19 baptism & repentance at same time. It's purpose was because they had only been baptized by John "for remissions of sins". But the ministry of John was only until Christ; just as the animal sacrifices. these things would not be recognized in the NT. So they had to be baptized into Christ; spiritually, and shown through water baptism in Jesus' name (not John's).

16 he was saved when he believed, as Paul said; the he was baptized at the same time as his family, after they were preached to. (IT doesn't say he wasn't saved until then).

So we see in all of these cases; it is not the dunking in water that saves. It was to be done at the same time one preofessed Christ, if possible. But it was clearly faith that saved, and baptism would only be a PART of faith; not the very dfeinition of faith itself, as you have been using it!

The question is how do we get into the light or into Christ or come in contact with his blood? Your answer was, "Through faith." I have laid out how the scriptures say we come in contact with the blood. I accept your answer based on God's definition of faith, doing what he said.

But it's still the faith that saves, not the works done to show tht faith.

God's word is truth. The truth is what makes us free. Whether I accept it or reject it has no bearing on what is truth. Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." Mark 16:16. Regardless of what anyone thinks or believes, this statement is still true. No, this is not all that the bible says about being saved, but it is certainly included. No other verse negates this verse. If you were in the crowd in Acts 2, even asking the question in verse 37, what would you have done to receive the remission of your sins? If asked the question in Acts 2:37, what would your answer be?

They were given a test of faith. If you believe in Jesus now, you must show it somehow. If you don't believe; it doesn't matter what you do. "Believe" is clearly the subject in Mk, not the showing of it. Remember, Jesus said "whoever confesses me before men, him shall the Son of man confess before the angels of God. But whoever denies me before men shall be denied before the angels of God" (Luke 12:8,9)
So for them to refuse baptism would be seen as a denial of Christ "before men". That is why salvation seems so tied to baptism in those passages. But it clearly is not, even as your own example in Acts 8 shows.

First of all, they are not my examples, they are God's.

But you're using them for your argument, and they don't match.

Without faith, it is impossible to please God. What kind of faith? Obedient faith as demonstrated in Heb 11. Yes, God has revealed things and I accept them through faith. In 6 days, the Lord created the heavens and the earth and all that is in them. I accept that by faith. I accept that I have a human spirit, by faith. I also accept his instructions on how to have the remission of my sins. I do this by faith. By faith, I confessed his name (Matt 10:32), by faith I repented of my sins (Acts 17:30, Acts 2:38), by faith I was buried with Christ in baptism, (Col 2:12, Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, Mark 16:16) by By faith I become a child of God, by doing what he said to do. This is clear in Gal 3:26-27. According to the scriptures, I can only find one way INTO Christ. Once I'm a child of God, with my sins washed away by the Savior's blood, I begin my new life (Rom 6:3-4). I walk by faith.

To repeat, baptism is to be apart of faith, not the very definition of "saving faith" itself!

Will I walk perfectly? NO! I John 1:7-8. Will I earn any part of my salvaiton? NO!!! Will I sin? Yes. Am I continually covered by the blood as long as I walk in the light? Yes - I Jn 1:7.

And what is "walking in the light"? Just "trying"? Failing, but God only covers you as long as you "keep trying"? This is what all of you works-righteousness advocates do not understand. Noe of us even walks in the light perfectly. Where does God draw the line? Or do we get to draw it for Him? Just be baptized and join the true Church, and try to live good, then God will overlook your flaws. This is basically what Jews and Muslims believe (minus the baptism; --or is that the only reason they are lost?)

How do we get into Christ? The waters of baptism. Why are we baptized? Faith.

So if faith is "why"; that is WHY we are saved. (and the waters only symbolize whatis going on in the spirit; they do not equal faith or bring salvation or a person into Christ themselves.

You can search the bible, cover to cover, and you can only find one way INTO Christ, and that is baptism (Rom 6:3-4, Gal 3:26-27). When do we have newness of life? Romans 6:4 says,"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.

Spirit baptism is not a burial and resurrection, but our baptism in water is. When does the new life begin? When we are raised from our watery grave.

So we are right back to where we started. This "burial and resurrection" is SPIRITUAL, and only SYMBOLized with water. You claim this makes two baptisms, but that was disproven above.

A question we all need to ask ourselves, is do I study God’s word to get the truth or to prove what I already believe? People should NOT believe what I say, just because I said it. We need to be like the Bereans in Acts 17:11 who, were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

I encourage people to study it for themselves, not to prove what you already believe, but to take God at his word. There is no one passage that is exhaustive, telling all a person must do to be saved. It has to be studied and rightly divided.

Jesus’ statement in Mark 16:16 is so plain a child can understand it, yet it has been twisted and re-arranged by people trying to make it fit everything else they believe. Some will say the same thing about me not believing Eph 2:8-9, which is an outright lie. I have explained time and time again how perfectly this fits together with the rest of the scripture. No, it will not fit if you use your own definitions of faith, but when you use what the scripture has provided, it fits perfectly, no twisting required.

I don’t expect any answer to the Acts 2:38 and Matt 26:28 question. I can assure you, any attempt will require some serious mental gymnastics.

And you're quoting these passage to prove what you believe, and not to get the truth. You start with the assumption that your CofC teaching IS the truth, so how could you do otherwise? Once again, "he who believes and is baptized shall be saved" is based on thepremise that baptism would be a public confession (Lk.12) of Christ. Without belief, it would not matter whether you were baptized or not. There is no twisting on our side. You twist it to make BAPTISM the subject, and means of salvation, but clearly it is not.

You know, I think baptism is the ultimate act of faith. You look at how much resistance there is to it. People belittle it’s importance, change it’s meaning, say it’s spiritual and not in water, call people names and label them with titles who believe it, accuse them of works salvation, accuse them of believing the power is in the water and not in the blood, and so on.

When done in faith, wash and be clean – what could be simpler?

The washing is spiritual, so the agent of the actual washing would be the Spirit! What could be simpler?
Once again, it's not like we all are too lazy to go and be baptized; or we are rationalistic skeptics who think it is some stupid little thing that makes no sense. Most of us here have been baptized. So we have no reason to resist it-- unless it is being made into something that contradicts the Gospel: a work that brings salvation!

 

[chadman]

MMAN you said -

People belittle it’s importance, change it’s meaning, say it’s spiritual and not in water, call people names and label them with titles who believe it, accuse them of works salvation, accuse them of believing the power is in the water and not in the blood, and so on.

Well I agree most people, those on this forum more than normal, break all the pieces of the Bible up to get it to fit the 'gospel' theology they have been taught. I won't disagree here, just read any of these posts carefully.

Here is one sincere observation above all others I have seen on this board.

Many of us Evangelicals simply refuse to believe what our non-evangelical brothers are saying that they believe. Then we pound them with the same ol arguments hoping it will somehow 'sink in' without 'dealing' with what they have told us they really believe. It is simply to traumatic to our frail confidence in our interpretations, to believe that anyobdy could possibly know what we know, and honestly have a different interpretation. A ghastly thought!

This is an objective raw observation that surely others would agree to if they were honest.

Another observation I see here, is a complete arrogance in some, not personally distinguishing or acknowledging between their Interpretation and the Bible as it stands apart from their interpretation. They speak as if their Interpretation IS the Bible.

There is simply, from a educated intellectual standpoint, no credibility to such folks who make these type of assumptions, even if they are blind to them. They come across as hard, inflexible, unreasonable, and frankly inept, hopefully by intentional design, and not by sheer ignorance to the situation. Because unfortunately, if the latter case, then apptitude can be impossible to penetrate with sound reason.

I am really not here to hack on my own brothers in Christ. But folks, there is somewhat of a serious problem here, when we cannot acknowledge even that our own sytematic theologies are based on subjective interpretation. Unless Jesus or the twelve Apostles themselves handed it to us in person and tutored us on every book, then what we have now, is a subjective interpretation. No matter how true or pure that interpretation may be, it is that very thing. An interpretation. Which when coupled with our current splintered versions of what the gospel really is, makes our intpretations ultimately a probablity among many instances of the same.

 

[chadman]

EricB said to mman

So we are right back to where we started. This "burial and resurrection" is SPIRITUAL, and only SYMBOLized with water. You claim this makes two baptisms, but that was disproven above.

Hey Eric, they guy is COC, so is it possible he believes that during the commanded act to be baptized (in his view baptism is not man work but Gods work), Being taken into the water in obedience, that at that moment, and having faith in Christ, that he is spiritually baptized while in the water, the two being perhaps inextricably linked? This would make every verse of baptism, faith, works, and all the texts fit together without trying to use 'eis' in multiple modes in his view.

Just an overservation and thought...Isn't that sort of what Catholics believe?

It has always been hard for me as a Baptist to explain deeply what is happening, but I like the work recapitulation when describing a person recieveing Christ, being reborn. We say it happens in the very midst of a prayer of faith, calling on Jesus in an instant in time.

So then, the COC or RCC, they believe this very same thing happens during the very act of water baptism? This does not seem difficult to comprehend what they are saying they believe. If that is in fact, what they are saying, I don't fully know.

 

[mman]

Originally posted by chadman:
EricB said to mman
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
So we are right back to where we started. This "burial and resurrection" is SPIRITUAL, and only SYMBOLized with water. You claim this makes two baptisms, but that was disproven above.

Hey Eric, they guy is COC, so is it possible he believes that during the commanded act to be baptized (in his view baptism is not man work but Gods work), Being taken into the water in obedience, that at that moment, and having faith in Christ, that he is spiritually baptized while in the water, the two being perhaps inextricably linked? This would make every verse of baptism, faith, works, and all the texts fit together without trying to use 'eis' in multiple modes in his view.

Just an overservation and thought...Isn't that sort of what Catholics believe?

It has always been hard for me as a Baptist to explain deeply what is happening, but I like the work recapitulation when describing a person recieveing Christ, being reborn. We say it happens in the very midst of a prayer of faith, calling on Jesus in an instant in time.

So then, the COC or RCC, they believe this very same thing happens during the very act of water baptism? This does not seem difficult to comprehend what they are saying they believe. If that is in fact, what they are saying, I don't fully know. </font>[/QUOTE]I have no idea what the RCC teaches concerning baptism. I know they baptize infants, who can not believe, repent, or confess which is certainly contrary to examples and instruction in scripture.

Chadman, I would not have used those words, but that is not too far off. For clarificaiton, the power is in the blood, not in the water. Jesus said in John 3:5, "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." Also stated in I Cor 12:13, "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body,". The body is the Church (Eph 1:22-23, Col 1:18).

When we go back to Act 2 to see how people entered the church, lets start with a verse I'm sure everyone is familiar with by now, Acts 2:38 which states, "Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

Verse 41 states, "Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them."

Verse 47 says "praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved."

When looked in total, those that received his word were baptized for the remission of sins and the Lord added the saved to the church.

 

[mman]

Reply to Eric B:

Is there anything I could really say or show you to change your mind?

You say you've proved it was not water baptism. I'm sorry, I have missed the proof.

I Pet 3:21 is clearly water baptism. If it is not water baptism, then his whole example of Noah is meaningless. The last word in verse 20 is water.

I Pet 3:21, "There is also an antitype which now saves us--baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,"

Antitype of what? His example he just gave how Noah was saved through water.

What is an antitype? If you walk in the sand, how does you foot compare to the footprint left in the sand? One is the type, the other is the antitype.

Noah was saved though water (How?, By faith he did what God said and was saved (Heb 11:7)) His was a physical saving. There is an antitype that saves us, immersion. There is no cleansing power of the water itself, it is knowing that you are obeying God.

Rom 6 is talking about immersion also. It is a burial and resurrection. One cannot be buried in the spirit then raised out of the spirit in which they were immersed. In verse 17, they had obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine. What form? As described in vs 3-4, the death burial and resurrection and this was done in baptism.

Acts 8:35, the Philip preached Jesus. In the very next verse, the eunuch was asking about water baptism. Preaching Jesus includes water baptism.

OK, since I will be accused of believing in works salvation, water regeneration, and believing in some ancient Hindu practice, etc. - Let me state, none of these are true. Anyone who would assign beliefs to me that I do not have does not understand what I am saying. I fully believe in Eph 2:8-9. I am a child of God by faith (Gal 3:26-27). Baptism is not a work of merit but an action of faith, the same as confession and repentance, all things you "do".