-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
What must one do to be saved???
- Thread starter hph
- Start date
The reason we are baptized into His burial is because we are baptized into His death. Which would mean rather than buring the old adam the old adam is slain in baptism. Which would mean drowning the old adam in baptism is an apt illustration.
BTW you still haven't proven conclusively that βαπτισω can only be translated as immersion and you never will because there is too much lexical evidence to cast doubt on your conclusion.
BTW you still haven't proven conclusively that βαπτισω can only be translated as immersion and you never will because there is too much lexical evidence to cast doubt on your conclusion.
It really doesn't matter how much evidence I give you. A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. Much evidence has already been presented, but you have simply turned a blind eye to the fact that the primary meaning of baptidzo is immersion. You choose a secondary meaning, and somehow try to make this word mean sprinkle to fit into your theology. Very bad theology, very bad.
Baptize: from Strong's Concordance 907 baptizo bap-tid'-zo from a derivative of 911; to immerse, submerge; to make whelmed (i.e. fully wet); used only (in the New Testament) of ceremonial ablution, especially (technically) of the ordinance of Christian baptism:--Baptist, baptize, wash.
From Thayers, "A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Joseph Henry Thayer, D.D., Fourth Edition, 1901 Baptidzo: I. 1. Properly to dip repeatedly, to immerge, submerge. 2. To cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water; in the mid. And the 1 aor. Pass. To wash one's self, bathe; 3. Metaphorically: to overwhelm.
II. In the N.T. it is used particularly of the rite of sacred ablution, first instituted by John the Baptist, afterwards by Christ's command received by Christians and adjusted to the contents and nature of their religion, viz. An immersion in water, performed as a sign of the removal of sin, and administered to those who impelled by a desire for salvation, sought admission to the benefits of the Messiah's kingdom. A. The word is used absolutely, to administer the rite of ablution, to baptize: Mk.1:4; Jn.1:25, etc.; with the cognate noun "to baptisma," Acts 19:4; "o baptidwn," substantively i.q. "o baptistays," Mk.6:14. Passive in a reflex sense, to allow one's self to be initiated by baptism, to receive baptism Lk.3:7,12. With the cognate noun "to baptisma" added, Lk.7:29, 1Aor. Mid. 1Cor.10:2 B. with prepositions; eis, to mark the element into which the immersion is made.
Baptisma: a word peculiar to N.T. and ecccl writ., immersion, submersion.
From G. Abbott-Smith, D.D. D.C.L., "A Manual Greek Lexicon of the New Testament," Second Edition, 1923.
Baptidzo from bapto: to dip, immerse, sink.
1. Generally (in Polyb., iii, 72, of soldiers wading breast deep; in i, 51, of the sinking of ships); Metaph., to overwhelm; c. cogn. Acc., baptisma b., Mk.10:38,39; Lk.12:50.
2. To perform ablutions, wash oneself, bathe: Mk.7:4; aor. Pass. In same sense, Lk.11:38.
3. Of ablution, immersion, as a religious rite, to baptize; Mk.6:14,24; Jn.1:25,26,28, etc.
Green, Thomas Sheldon. "A Greek-English Lexicon to the New Testament" Zondervan, 1970
Baptidzo
1. To dip, immerse; to cleanse or purify by washing; to administer the rite of baptism, to baptize.
DHK
ED:
No,I would not make a good pharisee. The pharisees practiced and taught that which was contrary to the will of God.( cf Mat. 23:13). I teach and practice that which is lawful. ( Mat. 28: 18-20). I prefer to be a Christian, no more no less.( Acts 11:26). Have a good day.
Frank
No,I would not make a good pharisee. The pharisees practiced and taught that which was contrary to the will of God.( cf Mat. 23:13). I teach and practice that which is lawful. ( Mat. 28: 18-20). I prefer to be a Christian, no more no less.( Acts 11:26). Have a good day.
Frank
Ed:
The New Testament is a book of law. Please read the following: James 1:25, Gal. 6:2,Romans 3:27,James 2:8, Romans 8:2, ICor. 9:21). The failure to be lawful results in sin.( I Jn. 3:4, James 4:17, Gal. 6:10).We are to make every attempt to live lawfully.( I Tim. 1:8). One will not get to heaven wihtout living lawfully.( II Tim.2:5). Failure to do so results in being a castaway.( I Cor. 9:24-27).
Frank
The New Testament is a book of law. Please read the following: James 1:25, Gal. 6:2,Romans 3:27,James 2:8, Romans 8:2, ICor. 9:21). The failure to be lawful results in sin.( I Jn. 3:4, James 4:17, Gal. 6:10).We are to make every attempt to live lawfully.( I Tim. 1:8). One will not get to heaven wihtout living lawfully.( II Tim.2:5). Failure to do so results in being a castaway.( I Cor. 9:24-27).
Frank
Frank, if you are going to be such a legalistic Pharisee, at least get the verses right.
You said:
You said:
Peace be with you.
[ June 12, 2002, 12:27 PM: Message edited by: Sir Ed ]
You said:
You sir are a classic example of someone seeing the trees, but missing the forest.
You said:
What it actually says is:
Its not our success in living lawfully, its our striving to live lawfully as Jesus told us.
Peace be with you.
[ June 12, 2002, 12:27 PM: Message edited by: Sir Ed ]
Geez are you blind DHK, I have never claimed that βαπτισω means to sprinkle, I have claimed that it means to wash ritually.
This is why you fail to see the light, and are hung up on legalisms. You look at the NT and see nothing but a new law. You have managed to completely miss the point of the New Testament.
"One will not get to heaven without living lawfully.( II Tim.2:5)." Good luck getting in on your own merits
ED:
I got the verse right. In I Jn. 5:16,17, the Bible says, " If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death, There is a sin unto death: I do not say he shall pray for it. ALL unrighteousness is sin and there is not a sin unto death."
God defines sin as Lawlessness.(I Jn. 3:4, ITim.1: 8-10). The failure to live or strive within the law of God will result in him losing his soul. The Bible says , in James 5:20," Let him know , that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins." James says by inspiration of God, " Then when lust hath conceived it bringeth forth sin: and sins when it is finished , bringeth forth death." The inspired conclusion about violating law and sinning, do not ERR my beloved brethren." James 1:16.
Ed, grace that saves is not without conditions. In Titus 2:11, the Bible says," For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared unto all men teaching us that denying ungodliness and worldly lust we should live soberly, righteously and godly in this present world."
Ed, the grace that brings salvation also requires lawfulness(righteousness).ALL God's commandments are righteousness.( Psalms 119:172).
Good luck getting into heaven without living lawfully. Have a good day.
Frank
I got the verse right. In I Jn. 5:16,17, the Bible says, " If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death, There is a sin unto death: I do not say he shall pray for it. ALL unrighteousness is sin and there is not a sin unto death."
God defines sin as Lawlessness.(I Jn. 3:4, ITim.1: 8-10). The failure to live or strive within the law of God will result in him losing his soul. The Bible says , in James 5:20," Let him know , that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins." James says by inspiration of God, " Then when lust hath conceived it bringeth forth sin: and sins when it is finished , bringeth forth death." The inspired conclusion about violating law and sinning, do not ERR my beloved brethren." James 1:16.
Ed, grace that saves is not without conditions. In Titus 2:11, the Bible says," For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared unto all men teaching us that denying ungodliness and worldly lust we should live soberly, righteously and godly in this present world."
Ed, the grace that brings salvation also requires lawfulness(righteousness).ALL God's commandments are righteousness.( Psalms 119:172).
Good luck getting into heaven without living lawfully. Have a good day.
Frank
Just about as many times as lexicons say to wash or wash ritually. Tell me why if βαπτιζω just means immersion why is it translated as to "pour out" in Acts 1:5(which corresponds to Acts 2:17-18), "wash" in Mk 7:4, and Hb 9:10.
I think I will place my trust in God rather than in my own works. Eph 2:8-9, Hebrews, Jn 3:16, Gal 2:15-21. If you plan to have salvation by your works of the law think again "For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it" Jas 2:10.
Before you thow James 2:17 at Ed and I, read a little bit further and you will see that works only demonstrate an active faith on the horizontal or if you will before other men.
[ June 12, 2002, 05:01 PM: Message edited by: Chemnitz ]
Ed:
Living lawfully or righteously before God does not mean perfection but faithfulness. Zacharias and Elizabeth walked in all the commandments of the Lord blameless. ( Luke 1: 6).They lived righteously or lawfully before God. Noah did all that God asked of him.( Gen. 6:22). Yet, Noah was saved by grace and was not a perfect man. He lived righteously or lawfully. Yet, he was not perfect. Faithful and perfect are not the same, neither is lawfully and perfect. These two examples should suffice. I understand what lawful and righteous mean. They both imply faithfulness. You obviously think lawfully means perfection. The Bible does not teach this.
Frank
Living lawfully or righteously before God does not mean perfection but faithfulness. Zacharias and Elizabeth walked in all the commandments of the Lord blameless. ( Luke 1: 6).They lived righteously or lawfully before God. Noah did all that God asked of him.( Gen. 6:22). Yet, Noah was saved by grace and was not a perfect man. He lived righteously or lawfully. Yet, he was not perfect. Faithful and perfect are not the same, neither is lawfully and perfect. These two examples should suffice. I understand what lawful and righteous mean. They both imply faithfulness. You obviously think lawfully means perfection. The Bible does not teach this.
Frank
Bump
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And with all the lexical evidence posted, how many times does it say that the meaning of Baptidzo is to "wash ritually," and how many times does it say that the meaning is to immerse (or an equivalent synonym thereof)?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just about as many times as lexicons say to wash or wash ritually. Tell me why if βαπτιζω just means immersion why is it translated as to "pour out" in Acts 1:5(which corresponds to Acts 2:17-18), "wash" in Mk 7:4, and Hb 9:10.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And with all the lexical evidence posted, how many times does it say that the meaning of Baptidzo is to "wash ritually," and how many times does it say that the meaning is to immerse (or an equivalent synonym thereof)?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Just about as many times as lexicons say to wash or wash ritually. Tell me why if βαπτιζω just means immersion why is it translated as to "pour out" in Acts 1:5(which corresponds to Acts 2:17-18), "wash" in Mk 7:4, and Hb 9:10.
I have found another thread where arguments abound from those who teach a false grace to those who teach what is scriptural but are called "legalists."
Those who teach this false grace teaches that you can live anyway you want to live. Do anything you want to do because they believe Jesus set them free from obeying commandments though the New Testament is full of scriptures teaching us that we are to obey commandments.
The whole argument is that people who read Paul's teachings cannot understand that Paul was talking about ceremonial law not moral law and mainly he was debating these things because of the issue of circumcision.
The argument is that living right does away with the sacrifice of Jesus. That if we have to live right then Jesus died in vain.
You see there is not one perfect person on Earth so we can never earn Heaven because we cannot overcome sin on our own. It took the blood of Jesus to cleanse our sins. To cover them, past, present and future. So no, living right cannot effect the blood atonement of Christ. This is faulty teaching by people who want to live the way they want to live and to tell God you cannot make us follow commandments because that hurts the doctrine of grace.
It is grace that God will allow anyone to live with him in Heaven. It is grace that he has not cast all of us into Hell. We deserve it but Jesus' sacrifice paid the price.
The one who people says taught this doctrine of Grace made it very clear that we are not to keep on sinning. That we are to strive to overcome.
Paul in his writings gave commandments just like Jesus did and Peter and John and other NT writers but those who propogate this doctrine of false grace ignores these scriptures because it effects their faulty thinking.
This is exactly why these individuals cling to Once Saved Always Saved. In their minds it allows them to keep living in sin. I have heard the arguments that this is not true but I see it in everyday life. I have watched those who believe OSAS and they live more worldly and more in sin then many sinners do. Then I watch those who believe they will be held accountable for their unrepentant sin if they do not ask forgiveness and if they do not try to overcome it. They seem to live a cleaner, moral life than others. These are the individuals that true unbelievers will believe are Christian.
Everytime there is a thread like this one someone says "Do you think if a guy lied then got hit by a truck he would be lost or go to Hell" You see what they don't want to remember is that we all have a conscience and unless that conscience is seared with a hot iron that individual was pricked in his conscience and yes it is up to him to immediately ask for forgiveness. I know when I slip and make mistakes my conscience immediately pricks my mind and I repent right then.
The argument then turns to that he did not have time to repent. How long do you think it takes to say Please forgive me?" It is a vain argument to teach something that is not taught.
I have heard every scripture given on grace and OSAS and I have never been convinced we can live any way we want to nor has anyone convinced me a person cannot totally turn away from God and be lost. The argument is God won't take salvation away and that is true. He won't and he does not but we can decide to not live for him. This is our free will. Those who believe in OSAS tries to take away from man free will but try as they want the truth is God gave us a free will.
Even when presented with the words of Jesus concerning Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost they still stubbornly hold on to a doctrine that is not found in the Bible.
When they cannot stand in the face of scriptures light then they will say that the person who fell away never was a Christian in the first place.
They take a scripture where John said some people were never among them as proof yet John was addressing those who had not even professed salvation. Others try to say that some of the things being written was not to believers but to the Jews or unbelievers but all the Epistles were written for our reproof and correction and to believers.
To those who call us legalist or Pharisees, our Lord Jesus told the Jews to listen and obey what the Pharisees told them but not to use them as examples. In other words Jesus did not condemn them for teaching you must obey commandments, Jesus condemned them for adding to the law and making it ridiculous. Jesus condemned them because they were hypocrites. Telling people how to live and what to do and not do but not living it themselves. Jesus said<"If you love me you will obey my COMMANDMENTS" John wrote to us this also that if we love God we will obey his commandments.
Those who teach this false grace teaches that you can live anyway you want to live. Do anything you want to do because they believe Jesus set them free from obeying commandments though the New Testament is full of scriptures teaching us that we are to obey commandments.
The whole argument is that people who read Paul's teachings cannot understand that Paul was talking about ceremonial law not moral law and mainly he was debating these things because of the issue of circumcision.
The argument is that living right does away with the sacrifice of Jesus. That if we have to live right then Jesus died in vain.
You see there is not one perfect person on Earth so we can never earn Heaven because we cannot overcome sin on our own. It took the blood of Jesus to cleanse our sins. To cover them, past, present and future. So no, living right cannot effect the blood atonement of Christ. This is faulty teaching by people who want to live the way they want to live and to tell God you cannot make us follow commandments because that hurts the doctrine of grace.
It is grace that God will allow anyone to live with him in Heaven. It is grace that he has not cast all of us into Hell. We deserve it but Jesus' sacrifice paid the price.
The one who people says taught this doctrine of Grace made it very clear that we are not to keep on sinning. That we are to strive to overcome.
Paul in his writings gave commandments just like Jesus did and Peter and John and other NT writers but those who propogate this doctrine of false grace ignores these scriptures because it effects their faulty thinking.
This is exactly why these individuals cling to Once Saved Always Saved. In their minds it allows them to keep living in sin. I have heard the arguments that this is not true but I see it in everyday life. I have watched those who believe OSAS and they live more worldly and more in sin then many sinners do. Then I watch those who believe they will be held accountable for their unrepentant sin if they do not ask forgiveness and if they do not try to overcome it. They seem to live a cleaner, moral life than others. These are the individuals that true unbelievers will believe are Christian.
Everytime there is a thread like this one someone says "Do you think if a guy lied then got hit by a truck he would be lost or go to Hell" You see what they don't want to remember is that we all have a conscience and unless that conscience is seared with a hot iron that individual was pricked in his conscience and yes it is up to him to immediately ask for forgiveness. I know when I slip and make mistakes my conscience immediately pricks my mind and I repent right then.
The argument then turns to that he did not have time to repent. How long do you think it takes to say Please forgive me?" It is a vain argument to teach something that is not taught.
I have heard every scripture given on grace and OSAS and I have never been convinced we can live any way we want to nor has anyone convinced me a person cannot totally turn away from God and be lost. The argument is God won't take salvation away and that is true. He won't and he does not but we can decide to not live for him. This is our free will. Those who believe in OSAS tries to take away from man free will but try as they want the truth is God gave us a free will.
Even when presented with the words of Jesus concerning Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost they still stubbornly hold on to a doctrine that is not found in the Bible.
When they cannot stand in the face of scriptures light then they will say that the person who fell away never was a Christian in the first place.
They take a scripture where John said some people were never among them as proof yet John was addressing those who had not even professed salvation. Others try to say that some of the things being written was not to believers but to the Jews or unbelievers but all the Epistles were written for our reproof and correction and to believers.
To those who call us legalist or Pharisees, our Lord Jesus told the Jews to listen and obey what the Pharisees told them but not to use them as examples. In other words Jesus did not condemn them for teaching you must obey commandments, Jesus condemned them for adding to the law and making it ridiculous. Jesus condemned them because they were hypocrites. Telling people how to live and what to do and not do but not living it themselves. Jesus said<"If you love me you will obey my COMMANDMENTS" John wrote to us this also that if we love God we will obey his commandments.
Look at it this way. A farmer will put up a fence around his cesspool to keep the pigs out not the sheep.
Can a sheep end up in the cesspool? Yes, he can fall in, but he is miserable until he is rescued.
Also, he remains a sheep.
Unregenerate sinners love their sin. Regenerate sinners hate their sin.
If a so-called "sheep" loves to wallow in the mire, guess what he really is.
HankD
Can a sheep end up in the cesspool? Yes, he can fall in, but he is miserable until he is rescued.
Also, he remains a sheep.
Unregenerate sinners love their sin. Regenerate sinners hate their sin.
If a so-called "sheep" loves to wallow in the mire, guess what he really is.
HankD
I don't know about all this unregenerate sheep talk. I'm just a simpleton from the south. But one thing I do know is that one denomination is vehemently opposed to baptism as being essential. While other denoms may teach error, one is especially adamant. I won't name them but I will say they like to add plenty of adjectives on the signs out in front of their church. I saw one pride filled sign that stated, Landmark, Independent, Missionary... I'm surprised it didn't say "dyed in the wool".. LOL..
anyway.. while I don't agree with much of what John Calvin said, there is one quote you should read:
anyway.. while I don't agree with much of what John Calvin said, there is one quote you should read:
Perry
jerrybrooke
New Member
I know of another denomination which contains many who push baptism ahead of Jesus.
Let us focus on Jesus and do what he said because that is where saving faith leads us. Let us focus on Him rather than if one is affiliated with the "baptist" denomination or the "non-instrumental church of christ" denomination.
Let us focus on Jesus and do what he said because that is where saving faith leads us. Let us focus on Him rather than if one is affiliated with the "baptist" denomination or the "non-instrumental church of christ" denomination.
jerrybrooke
New Member
I see nowhere in the bible where one must believe baptism is for the literal remission of sins or that baptism is necessary for salvation, in order that their baptism be valid.
Why can't those in the COC accept people as Christians who have honestly been baptized because they want to follow Jesus?
I believe members of the one true church are members because of their trust in Jesus Christ and the fact that Jesus himself added them. I do not believe that members of this one true church are members because of physical attendance. The baptist church and the non-instrumental COC are institutions for fellowship, not the end all of Christianity.
Why can't those in the COC accept people as Christians who have honestly been baptized because they want to follow Jesus?
I believe members of the one true church are members because of their trust in Jesus Christ and the fact that Jesus himself added them. I do not believe that members of this one true church are members because of physical attendance. The baptist church and the non-instrumental COC are institutions for fellowship, not the end all of Christianity.