What Constitutes a Work?

[TCGreek]

Sky, thanks for your reply!

TC, do you have anything to add?

I think what we need to discuss here is the fact of what these early believers did to fulfill the New Birth.

Acts 8: They believed but did that automatically save them? There’s something there that the bible says that should cause us to think!

1. Phillip preached Christ to them. (Acts 8:5)
2. They believed Phillip (Acts 8:12)
3. They received the Word of God (Acts 8:14)
4. They were baptized (Acts 8:12)
5. They were still not filled with the Spirit of God (Acts 8:16)
6. Peter & Jon prayed for them & they received the Holy Ghost (Acts 8:17)

Were these believers born of the “Water & the Spirit”? What factors hinder us from believing that the “Water” equals Baptism? What factors support that the “Water” equals amniotic fluid?

Acts 19: These followers were believers of Jesus Christ but were they automatically saved?

1. Paul asked “Have you received the Holy Ghost since ye
Believed?” (Acts 19:2)
2. “We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost” (Acts 19:2)
3. Paul asked “How were you baptized?” They said “By John.” (Acts 19:3)
4. They were re-baptized (Acts 19:5)
5. Then they received the Holy Ghost (Acts 19:6)

Now, me being the Sinner that I am, if I followed after these examples, would I truly be born again? Again, what negates the “Water” from meaning baptism? And if the Water equals Baptism then baptism should not be constituted as a work, correct?

God Bless

Precisely because they were able to believe and repent mean that they were born again. Don't forget, the Lord opened the heart of Lydia to respond (Acts 16:14).

 

[Pickettman]

Precisely because they were able to believe and repent mean that they were born again. Don't forget, the Lord opened the heart of Lydia to respond (Acts 16:14).

Did you care to respond to the other questions?

 

[TCGreek]

Did you care to respond to the other questions?

Pickettman,

1. I'm sorry that I haven't answered all your questions. There really is no need to go down the list, if they all point to the same thing. And that is what I saw there.

2. If you believe that baptism is the point at which a person is saved and is born again, then you are going to understand those Scriptures that way.

3. But I encourage you not to build your doctrine of baptism on the book of Acts, since there are so many anomalies. Rather, try the more doctrinally laden books, like Romans and so on.

 

[Pickettman]

Pickettman,

1. I'm sorry that I haven't answered all your questions. There really is no need to go down the list, if they all point to the same thing. And that is what I saw there.

2. If you believe that baptism is the point at which a person is saved and is born again, then you are going to understand those Scriptures that way.

3. But I encourage you not to build your doctrine of baptism on the book of Acts, since there are so many anomalies. Rather, try the more doctrinally laden books, like Romans and so on.

No problem I understand!

I do not believe that baptism is the point at which a person is saved. But I do believe that it is part of the New Birth Experience!

I believe any doctrine that we are going to follow needs to line up with the Apostles Doctrine! (Acts 2:42)

And we find that Doctrine and the examples there of in the book of Acts. The book of Romans is a letter to the Roman Church which was established in the Book of Acts. They already did exactly what you and I are discussing.

Now what I am not doing is discrediting the Epistles, so please do not misunderstand me there. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: (2 Tim 3:16)

But, if we find scripture that may seem to be a little uneasy to understand or if we discover a subject (i.e. Faith/Works) then we need to go back to the beginning and look at the foundation that was prepared for us by the ones who actually heard it first hand, obeyed it and left us examples.

God Bless

 

[TCGreek]

No problem I understand!

I do not believe that baptism is the point at which a person is saved. But I do believe that it is part of the New Birth Experience!

1. Then a person does not experience the New Birth until Baptism. Correct?

I believe any doctrine that we are going to follow needs to line up with the Apostles Doctrine! (Acts 2:42)

2. We all do! But how do we ascertain it?

And we find that Doctrine and the examples there of in the book of Acts. The book of Romans is a letter to the Roman Church which was established in the Book of Acts. They already did exactly what you and I are discussing.

3. But Romans lays out the gospel and man's sinful condition and a need for the Savior. I suggest you take a better look at Romans. Paul systematically lays out the gospel though he was writing to a NT church. Rather, you need to ask, Why did Paul take such systematic approach?

4. Acts is a book of anomalies in a transitional period in the life of the church. Cornelius received the outpouring of the Holy Spirit without the laying on a apostolic hands, the Samaritans even after believing and was baptized didn't receive the Spirit, until the apostles laid hands on them. This is clearly a book of anomalities because of the nature of the book.

It wasn't design to teach systematic theology.

 

[Pickettman]

1. Then a person does not experience the New Birth until Baptism. Correct?

Not fully!

2. We all do! But how do we ascertain it?

With Scripture after Scripture after Scripture.

God Bless

FYI just wanted to let you know that it will be tomorrow before i will be able to post any replys, God bless