Featured What Is Your Interpretation Of Believing On Jesus For Salvation

Yep..., that's sufficient for salvation! Consider that one thief on the cross. He didn't walk the isle; wasn't baptized; didn't go on visitation; didn't attend an new convert class; didn't say a magic little prayer; and everything he did say was probably understood by all those in attendance.

...and some people will tell you there's no such thing as a "death bed" confession.

 

One doesn't need to ascribe to a list of proper theological positions, nor provided a detailed laundry list of sins they are repenting of...the earliest confession of Jesus that accompanies a heart felt belief in Him is all that is needed for salvation when we say "Jesus Christ is Lord."

While right theology, and the pursuit of growing holiness are marks of a saved individual, they are not required for salvation.

 

If we believe it is due to Him gifting us that faith wherein we believe His Gospel, His resurrection, that He saved us from our sins, and is saving us, and that He is Lord. This true faith is qualified in Scripture in didactic teachings of the epistles and in the Gospel accounts.

 

Consider that he was an erring child of God when he was caught thieving and committed 'sin unto death'.

 

Saving faith is understanding that you are a sinner, turning from sin to Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour, and trusting in His blood shed upon the cross to save you.

 

A very large number will regret that it is not that simple. As per scripture one must, with all their heart and soul believe what they say. Jesus explained this to us and He explained that if we, truly love Hi, we will do His Commands.

The problem, universally, is "real belief." Now, of course, Satan believes, so, what do I mean by Real Belief? People must come to grips with the scriptures, the Bible Jesus taught from, the first 39 books of the Christian Bible Versions and come to understand the final 27 are the only God inspired Life Application Commentaries on the Bible. That, of course becomes a little bit tough to grasp if one is not indwelt with the Holy Spirit but it does remain true that the Bible is of one, single, context from "In the beginning... through the very end of Revelation 22:19.

So,even the Devil believes but he ain't saved.

 

The devil hasn't repented so far as I know (Mark 1:15 etc.).

 

I would have never considered that. But I have said that he would have been taught the scriptures from his earliest childhood - being Jewish and all.

Good stuff, man. Food for thought

 

Those men in Acts 2 were already justified. They weren't looking to be saved from hell, they were looking for the promised Holy Spirit, who had not been given. The living Water spoken of in John 4 & John 7

That's why baptism was required of them - believer's baptism

 

Okay and relevance?

 

I'm sorry, I do not follow this thought at all.

 

I'm not surprised.

SaltzerMtn referred to Acts 2:37 and 16:31 in the same context. However, the message was different and the "response" was different.

Why is it that the Philippian jailor was told to believe, while Peter said to be baptized?

First, those in Acts were "devout" Jews (2:5). The Greek word there was used only 4 times, every other instance was a believer.

They were believing Jews who were observing the feasts from Deuteronomy 16.

Second, compare Acts 2 to O.T. believing Jews, and what was preached in Acts 3 to unbelieving Jews. The former were talked to as though they should have known better, while those in ch 3 he said acted out of ignorance (like Paul said in Athens cf Acts 17). In ch 2 they were promised thw Holy Spirit, in ch 3 they were promised their sins would be blotted out.

There's more, too...

 

No salvation without repentance (Matt. 4:17; Luke 13:3; Acts 26:19-20 etc., etc.).

 

No evidence for this at all. The Pharisees were 'devout' (Luke 18:11-12).

 

No evidence....at all, huh?

I gave evidence already. You either can't read and comprehend, or are intentionally ignoring it...
"the Greek word there"

And your response is an English word? You ought to be ashamed of yourself.....really, you should

Eulabes - inward piety
Not eusebes - outward devotion

It's built into the Greek word, slick.Doesn't show up in our English translations

Luke 2:25 Simeon, who was waiting for the consolation of Israel.
Acts 8:2 the men who carried Stephen's body away
Acts 22:12 Annanias, who laid hands on Saul to receive his sight

And then in Acts 2:5

And the worst part is that without any attempt to discover, no effort to understand, you quickly "disagree" and dismiss. If that's how you "learn" I hope nobody ever reads your blog. You aren't fit to teach anything if you knee-jerk reject everything you've never heard before

 

Okay, thanks.

 

eulabes

I need to correct what I said before. There is plenty of evidence and I'm afraid it is conclusively against you.

First of all, I think you will struggle to find a difference between eulabes and eusebes in their NT usages.

Eulabes is found in Luke 2:25; Acts 2:5; Acts 8:2, and 22:12 (C.T.).
Eusebes is found in Acts 10:2, 7; 22:12 (T.R.), and 2 Peter 2:9. Check them out.

More importantly, it is an egregious error to think one knows the meaning of the word without first looking at the context. However 'devout' these men may have been, they needed more that an outward ordinance. Peter accuses them of the murder of the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 2:36). Since they did not actually hammer the nails into His hands and feet, many of them must have been amongst the crowd who shouted, 'Crucify! Crucify!' and 'Not this man, but Barabbas!' If they weren't in the crowd, they must nonetheless have approved of our Lord's death. When Peter accuses them, they do not say, "Oh no! That wasn't us! We loved Jesus!" On the contrary, 'They were cut to the heart.' The Holy Spirit convicted them of their terrible sin. Therefore Peter urges them to 'repent.'

No matter how eulabes one might be, 'Unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.'

Don't worry about apologizing for your arrogance and rudeness. I never take any notice of such things.

 

You'll only struggle to find a diffetence if you're hell-bent on keeping your feet planted in the ground. I'll not backtrack from my supposed rudeness, because your knee-jerk reaction was to reject it. Then it appears you may have called a couple of your cohorts on the phone to inform them that they should go and rate it negatively. Then you guys probably all met at Denny's and high-fived each other.

And word meanings aren't determined by first looking at context, because you can't have a context until you have some words there.

All the words in the context have to be determined by some sort of criteria before you can even begin to have a context.

And you seem to think that every believer for all time knew Jesus' Name...???
Really?

Are you even familiar with the context of Acts 2?
7 weeks after Jesus died on the cross. A week and a half after His acsension.
These pious Jews coming from other countries. It's not like they'd seen Him for 3 years.

They were believers BEFORE Jesus died, like Simeon. They were justified by faith in the same way Abraham was. OLD TESTAMENT believers.

What do you suppose happened to anyone who was justified by faith before Jesus died? Did they all collapse dead in front of the cross?