• 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 the Bible doesn't say?

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
From post 26 of this link:
I agree it can definitely go to far. Some are more oriented toward a brisk disagreement than others.

I sometimes wonder why the Holy Spirit omitted the details of that brisk disagreement between Paul and Barnabas.

Good question - Why isn't the Bible more clear on some issues
Baptism:
1) Acts 2:38 can be said that Baptism regeneration is proper
2) Is pouring or sprinkling acceptable - or is immersion the only way
3) If a person cannot be immersion - then what?
Tongues: I Cor 14 gives the 3 rules for the gift of tongues - so it must be okay - if that gift only was to end ....?
Divorce: I Tim 3 says the husband of one wife - does that mean polygamy or divorce --- or both? Should the Bible be more clear
a cappella: Some believe if the Bible does not command - then we should not do so: does that mean no musical instrument?
and of course A vs C! (enoght said)
(what other doctrines can you think)

So why isn't the Bible more clear on these issues
 
Last edited:

Charlie24

Well-Known Member
From post 26 of this link:


Good question - Why isn't the Bible more clear on some issues
Baptism:
1) Acts 2:38 can be said that Baptism regeneration is proper
2) Is pouring or sprinkling acceptable - or is immersion the only way
3) If a person cannot be immersion - then what?
Tongues: I Cor 14 gives the 3 rules for the gift of tongues - so it must be okay - if that gift only was to end ....?
Divorce: I Tim 3 says the husband of one wife - does that mean polygamy or divorce --- or both? Should the Bible be more clear
a cappella: Some believe if the Bible does not command - then we should not do so: does that mean no musical instrument?
and of course A vs C! (enoght said)
(what other doctrines can you think)

So why isn't the Bible more clear on these issues

Thank God correct doctrine is not what He requires for eternal life. None of us would make it if that were the case.

But yet we all can't even agree on how to be saved.

I believe the answer to all your questions here are found in the Scripture, I'm certainly not saying that I have all the correct answers.

But the one I'm most concerned with and have spent my adult life confirming in heart and soul is my salvation.

I believe everything as far as doctrine will fall in place once that critical decision is made.
 

Charlie24

Well-Known Member
Thank God correct doctrine is not what He requires for eternal life. None of us would make it if that were the case.

But yet we all can't even agree on how to be saved.

I believe the answer to all your questions here are found in the Scripture, I'm certainly not saying that I have all the correct answers.

But the one I'm most concerned with and have spent my adult life confirming in heart and soul is my salvation.

I believe everything as far as doctrine will fall in place once that critical decision is made.

When I say "we can't agree" I mean the members as a whole here on the forum.
 

Salty

20,000 Posts Club
Administrator
Wanted to point out that I am not asking for answer to these questions only - rather just a sample of how Christians disagree on dozens of issues.
 

Charlie24

Well-Known Member
Wanted to point out that I am not asking for answer to these questions only - rather just a sample of how Christians disagree on dozens of issues.

The Holy Spirit is supposed to be our Teacher, I think we can learn God's word in several ways, but He is the One who confirms truth.

Rom. 8:16

"The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:"

Prov. 1:23

"Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you."

The Spirit will make know to the believer and confirm the truth, but the Holy Spirit is not the Teacher of all who make the claim.
 

NSH

New Member
From post 26 of this link:


Good question - Why isn't the Bible more clear on some issues
Baptism:
1) Acts 2:38 can be said that Baptism regeneration is proper
2) Is pouring or sprinkling acceptable - or is immersion the only way
3) If a person cannot be immersion - then what?
Tongues: I Cor 14 gives the 3 rules for the gift of tongues - so it must be okay - if that gift only was to end ....?
Divorce: I Tim 3 says the husband of one wife - does that mean polygamy or divorce --- or both? Should the Bible be more clear
a cappella: Some believe if the Bible does not command - then we should not do so: does that mean no musical instrument?
and of course A vs C! (enoght said)
(what other doctrines can you think)

So why isn't the Bible more clear on these issues
At the core of God's will for the earth, the spirit of God is mostly concerned with spreading the faith in Jesus, because it is by that faith that we are saved. The Spirit of God has not shown Himself in the scriptures to be very concerned with picking / verifying human doctrines and cultural norms, because these things shift through time and have more do with with the mental aspects of life than of the super-natural and the Spiritual.

The Bible is a collection of writings that were inspired for specific purposes. This is the reason that as a whole, the collection is not a de-facto rulebook for life. Of course, it guides and protects us, but it does that by bringing us to living faith in the Lord, not in a prescribed method for life (in terms of laws), it's a path to living with God, not for deciding the outcomes of various issues on earth.

Then there is also the issue of interpretation. I think the psalms clearly encourage us to use instruments in many places. But not everyone interprets the texts in the same way. So the various divisions I see have more to do with specific interpretations that include or leave out something in order to create a specific hard rule.
 

Ben1445

Well-Known Member
1) Acts 2:38 can be said that Baptism regeneration is proper
Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Baptism for the remission of sin.
Aspirin for a headache.
Bandage for a cut.

Conclusion- don’t take aspirin and you won’t get a headache.
Don’t get a bandage and you won’t get cut.
 

Alan Dale Gross

Active Member
and of course A vs C! (enoght said)
There is no debate. There is an inability of the natural man (still, no matter how many times that is said and ignored) or flat-out denial of Total Depravity, despite volumes of teachings on dry bones and Lazerath, etc., and everything else.

Volumes. That understanding of them being Totally Depraved must come first, before a lost person can become an expert on How God Saves Souls.

Is it ever possible for a lost person to not have learned what a sinner is, yet?

Those who take their place before God as a wicked, putrefying worm need a Savior.

NOT TELL GOD TO MOVE OVER, BECAUSE THEY DECIDED THEY'RE GOING TO HEAVEN.

Jesus came to Save sinners. You have to be lost before you can be Saved.

So why isn't the Bible more clear on these issues
For the same reason, God Chose some lost souls to spend Eternity with Him in Everlasting Companionship and did not Choose "the rest".

That is what He was Pleased to do.

3 "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in Heavenly places in Christ:

4 "According as He hath Chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be Holy and without blame before Him in love:

5 "Having Predestinated us unto the Adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself,
according to the Good Pleasure of His Will."


"So, why isn't the Bible more clear on these issues?"

"Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank Thee, O Father, Lord of Heaven and Earth, that Thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight." Luke 10:21.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
From post 26 of this link:


Good question - Why isn't the Bible more clear on some issues
Baptism:
1) Acts 2:38 can be said that Baptism regeneration is proper
2) Is pouring or sprinkling acceptable - or is immersion the only way
3) If a person cannot be immersion - then what?
Tongues: I Cor 14 gives the 3 rules for the gift of tongues - so it must be okay - if that gift only was to end ....?
Divorce: I Tim 3 says the husband of one wife - does that mean polygamy or divorce --- or both? Should the Bible be more clear
a cappella: Some believe if the Bible does not command - then we should not do so: does that mean no musical instrument?
and of course A vs C! (enoght said)
(what other doctrines can you think)

So why isn't the Bible more clear on these issues
I think a lot was dependent in how those things would have been understood by the audience. There would be no baptismal regeneration or sprinkling (those ideas were added later, so it adds to our disagreement). Same with tongues (the gift ending is an assumption). They used musical instruments when avaliable. Same with married to one woman being against polygamy (we apply what is found elsewhere).
 

Alan Dale Gross

Active Member
1) Acts 2:38 can be said that Baptism regeneration is proper
"for the remission of sins"

Have you ever gone to the store for a loaf of bread?

Were you expecting to arrive at the store and then have the loaf of bread
appear from nowhere, as if it were spontaneously Brought into Reality by Fiat Creation?

Is that what you went to the store 'for'?

Or, rationally, was it that you really went to the store 'for' a loaf of bread
'because' there was already a loaf of bread there to buy?

So, you must have gone to the store 'because' they already had a loaf of bread to buy
went to the store 'for' a loaf of bread

Then, when someone is saved, it is O.K. for them
to be baptized 'because' that pictures the fact that they have experienced salvation.

To base our salvation on the misinterpretation of a preposition εἰς, "for the"
and think we can say:
Baptism regeneration is proper
would be an Eternally Fatal mistake.

Granted, "because of" is not the most usual translation of the Greek preposition "εἰς".

However, the Good ENGLISH BISHOPS, whose creed teaches 'baptismal regeneration',
avoided the translation "because of", but it fits excellently in several passages.

THREE TIMES in Matthew 10:41,42 eis, "εἰς", is rendered "in", "in the name". Obviously, this means "because of the name" of Jesus. In Matthew 12:41 and Matthew 14:31, the Ninevites "repented" at "εἰς" (because of) the preaching of Jonah, and actually "...Wherefore", didst thou doubt?", has eis ti, which could be literally, "Because of what?"

So it is evident that "because of" is a legitimate translation of "eis" if it can be justified from context, and the New Testament context makes this just as good of a possible translation in Acts 2:38.
 

Alan Dale Gross

Active Member
And so begins the debate.
Either a lost person or a saved person is the one reading the Bible.

But, then again, are you even reading the Bible at all, or did your Total Depravity exhibit itself first by just dreaming up something you would like to believe, with no fear of God before your eyes.

Prove every word in the book is not true, and then we'll debate the most fundamental issue facing mankind; otherwise, you are just plain old ignorant in my book, and conversing with you comfortably would not be feasible. You're a lost cause. The Total Depravity of Man by A. W. Pink

Origin of Total Depravity.

"That something is radically wrong with the world of mankind requires no labored argument to demonstrate. That such has been the case in all generations is plain from the annals of history. This is only another way of saying that something is radically wrong with man himself, for the world is but the aggregate of all the individual members of our race. Since the whole of anything cannot be superior to the parts comprising it, it necessarily follows that the course of the world will be determined by the characters of those who comprise it. But when we come to inquire exactly what is wrong with man, and how he came to be in such a condition, unless we turn to God’s inspired Word, no convincing answers are forthcoming. Apart from that, Divine Revelation, no sure and satisfactory reply can be made to such questions as these: What is the source of the unmistakable imperfections of human nature? What will furnish an adequate explanation of all the evils which infest man’s present state? Why is it that none can keep God’s law perfectly or do anything acceptable to Him while in a state of nature?

"Universal Malady"

"To ascertain how sin, which involves all men, came into the world is a matter of no little importance. To discover why it is that all men universally and continually are unrighteous and ailing creatures supplies the key to many a problem. Look at human nature as it now is: depraved, wretched, subject to death. Ask philosophy to account for this, and it cannot do so. None can deny the fact that men are what they ought not to be, but how they became so, human wisdom is unable to tell us. To attribute our troubles to heredity and environment is an evasion, for it leaves unanswered the question How did it come about that our original ancestors and environment were such as to produce what now exists? Look not only at our prisons, hospitals, and cemeteries, but also at the antipathy between the righteous and the wicked, between those who fear God and those who do not fear Him. The antagonism between Cain and Abel, Ishmael and Isaac, Esau and Jacob, is repeatedly duplicated in every age and area, but the Bible alone traces that antagonism to its fountainhead."

The reception of the Doctrine of Total Depravity necessitates Divine Revelation.

Then, you got it and can understand by the Holy Spirit's Unction man's need of a Savior.

Otherwise, you're just Pagan. Whether you're saved or not.

The Bible Doctrine of Total Depravity is one of the most fundament tenats of the Christian Faith. There is not one single 'Arminian' verse in the Bible. Every 'Arminian' teaching are simply extra-Biblical denials of the word of God, in hatred of God and His Word.

There is no debate.
 

Ben1445

Well-Known Member
Either a lost person or a saved person is the one reading the Bible.

But, then again, are you even reading the Bible at all, or did your Total Depravity exhibit itself first by just dreaming up something you would like to believe, with no fear of God before your eyes.

Prove every word in the book is not true, and then we'll debate the most fundamental issue facing mankind; otherwise, you are just plain old ignorant in my book, and conversing with you comfortably would not be feasible. You're a lost cause. The Total Depravity of Man by A. W. Pink

Origin of Total Depravity.

"That something is radically wrong with the world of mankind requires no labored argument to demonstrate. That such has been the case in all generations is plain from the annals of history. This is only another way of saying that something is radically wrong with man himself, for the world is but the aggregate of all the individual members of our race. Since the whole of anything cannot be superior to the parts comprising it, it necessarily follows that the course of the world will be determined by the characters of those who comprise it. But when we come to inquire exactly what is wrong with man, and how he came to be in such a condition, unless we turn to God’s inspired Word, no convincing answers are forthcoming. Apart from that, Divine Revelation, no sure and satisfactory reply can be made to such questions as these: What is the source of the unmistakable imperfections of human nature? What will furnish an adequate explanation of all the evils which infest man’s present state? Why is it that none can keep God’s law perfectly or do anything acceptable to Him while in a state of nature?

"Universal Malady"

"To ascertain how sin, which involves all men, came into the world is a matter of no little importance. To discover why it is that all men universally and continually are unrighteous and ailing creatures supplies the key to many a problem. Look at human nature as it now is: depraved, wretched, subject to death. Ask philosophy to account for this, and it cannot do so. None can deny the fact that men are what they ought not to be, but how they became so, human wisdom is unable to tell us. To attribute our troubles to heredity and environment is an evasion, for it leaves unanswered the question How did it come about that our original ancestors and environment were such as to produce what now exists? Look not only at our prisons, hospitals, and cemeteries, but also at the antipathy between the righteous and the wicked, between those who fear God and those who do not fear Him. The antagonism between Cain and Abel, Ishmael and Isaac, Esau and Jacob, is repeatedly duplicated in every age and area, but the Bible alone traces that antagonism to its fountainhead."

The reception of the Doctrine of Total Depravity necessitates Divine Revelation.

Then, you got it and can understand by the Holy Spirit's Unction man's need of a Savior.

Otherwise, you're just Pagan. Whether you're saved or not.

The Bible Doctrine of Total Depravity is one of the most fundament tenats of the Christian Faith. There is not one single 'Arminian' verse in the Bible. Every 'Arminian' teaching are simply extra-Biblical denials of the word of God, in hatred of God and His Word.

There is no debate.
Summarizing what you said, “You don’t believe what I believe so you are a heretic pagan.”

You continue to debate me and I have not said anything in the thread that you disagree with except that there is debate.
You are in denial. What that means is that you have closed your mind to discussion and you can proceed no further.
The fact that C&A debate has so many facets should help someone to be a bit more gracious than running around like Constantine verbally abusing everyone into submission of your beliefs, else labeling them pagan.
You should know as an utter determinist that no one has any choice in life as to there position and should be more gracious. Since you probably don’t claim to be an utter determinist, you should be gracious enough to understand that there are people who are more deterministic than you and some less than you. How long must you forbear to belittle your fellow Christian?
Ephesians 4:13
Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

And how do you appear with all your wonderful knowledge and words?

1 Corinthians 13:1
Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
1 Corinthians 13:2
And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

It is beyond my comprehension that Jesus Christ reached out to mankind, gave His life, and still the Calvinist says, “It is not enough. He must do more.”
 

Alan Dale Gross

Active Member
You are in denial. What that means is that you have closed your mind to discussion and you can proceed no further.
The debate needs to be about man's Depravity, not C vs A.

To put A in a competition with C, it is as if it has any reason to be considered as a valid choice,
which is unfortunate.

Try to think of what I'm doing like this: Debating someone who is not solid and sound in the Bible Doctrine of Total Depravity regarding various issues is counterproductive.

On the other hand, if someone understands that lost people are utterly lost, blind, and can't discern 'Spiritual' things, then there is an Eternally significant debate; however, it is not over someone basing their Eternal Life on a Preposition.

The Debate would be considering whether or not someone has been Blessed to understand what God wants them to understand, from His Love-Letter from HOME. (What an utterly astounding Reality it is to have our Maker COMMUNICATE DIRECTLY WITH US, IN WRITING!!!)

What God wants people to understand is that He Gave His Son to Die that horrifying death by Crucifixion, for Him to Purchase those souls that God Gave Him, and Jesus Christ did Accomplish exactly that; "Jesus died for the sins of His people" (ref; Matthew 1:21).

If someone wants to believe in their heart and soul that something else had to do with it, I say that they have never, or embarrassingly and inexcusably don't understand that those extra things don't have anything to do with How God Saves People.

If they are lost and that belief of being dipped down in some water or counting their rosaries is SOMETHING THEY ACTUALLY NEED TO WITH, INCLUDING THEM AS THEIR SAVIOR, THAT IS AN ETERNALLY FATAL MISTAKE.

I point people to Jesus, and that includes instructing them to think about what they are doing by rewriting the Bible, and them being also illiterate.

There is nothing wrong with believing a sentence that is teaching us that the people Peter WAS COMMANDING TO BE BAPTIZED, WHERE DOING SO FOR A DISPLAY OF HAVING BEEN SAVED.
 

Ben1445

Well-Known Member
The debate needs to be about man's Depravity, not C vs A.
It is only a topic and very general at that. We are so far away from what the original discussion was that we need new names for it. But you can’t gather up so many different beliefs into just two names without being gracious. For th record, I don’t think I have ever met a real Arminian. I have met hyper Calvinists. I prefer to stay out of both ditches.
To put A in a competition with C, it is as if it has any reason to be considered as a valid choice,
which is unfortunate.
C vs A is only a forum title. It is a category of discussion. As I said before, there are too many facets in the conversation to be so rigid about it. But if you continue to push people into the A side of the argument when they are not there, you can expect to be pushed into areas of C that you don’t agree with.

Try to think of what I'm doing like this: Debating someone who is not solid and sound in the Bible Doctrine of Total Depravity regarding various issues is counterproductive.
You have already determined that you have a perfect understanding and you may not be praised as the Bereans because you don’t actually test your knowledge against Scripture when you hear it. You test each Scripture given to you against your knowledge.

On the other hand, if someone understands that lost people are utterly lost, blind, and can't discern 'Spiritual' things, then there is an Eternally significant debate; however, it is not over someone basing their Eternal Life on a Preposition.
You have fused baptism and total depravity in this statement. I don’t know how to answer you because I don’t know how you will understand what I say.
The Debate would be considering whether or not someone has been Blessed to understand what God wants them to understand, from His Love-Letter from HOME. (What an utterly astounding Reality it is to have our Maker COMMUNICATE DIRECTLY WITH US, IN WRITING!!!)

What God wants people to understand is that He Gave His Son to Die that horrifying death by Crucifixion, for Him to Purchase those souls that God Gave Him, and Jesus Christ did Accomplish exactly that; "Jesus died for the sins of His people" (ref; Matthew 1:21).

If someone wants to believe in their heart and soul that something else had to do with it, I say that they have never, or embarrassingly and inexcusably don't understand that those extra things don't have anything to do with How God Saves People.

If they are lost and that belief of being dipped down in some water or counting their rosaries is SOMETHING THEY ACTUALLY NEED TO WITH, INCLUDING THEM AS THEIR SAVIOR, THAT IS AN ETERNALLY FATAL MISTAKE.
I don’t disagree with you here.

I point people to Jesus, and that includes instructing them to think about what they are doing by rewriting the Bible, and them being also illiterate.


There is nothing wrong with believing a sentence that is teaching us that the people Peter WAS COMMANDING TO BE BAPTIZED, WHERE DOING SO FOR A DISPLAY OF HAVING BEEN SAVED.
That is not an argument between us. If you read my first post, it said something similar to your post that after mine.
 

Alan Dale Gross

Active Member
I said this.
There is no debate.
Then, you said this:

Are you telling me that you didn't just slap me in the face with your glove and pull your sword out?
And so begins the debate.
I answered with this again, with language indicating just what kind of believer we were talking about. You're right, I jumped into some personal slaps of my own. I got too personal. There is enough Bible to study that I don't need to be doing that.
There is no debate.
I really know the results of debating C vs A don't exactly convince anyone to believe differently.
Therefore, I do a background check. If they don't know the Lord, then we need to talk about that, instead of an ameba named after George Bush. If they are saved, why don't they have a teachable Spirit?

Either way, if they don't know what a sinner is, then they haven't learned about the Savior from sin. like they have absorbed a bunch of junk from school and elsewhere, so every once in a while I'll ask them, "Do you believe you came from a monkey"? That usually stops them in their tracks.

We have one on here that instead of saying "you're right after all", who just closes up shop and announces "evolutionists don't concern themselves with that" or something similar.

They'll just try to slip away, while a bird lays two eggs that contain a lizard in each one, one male lizard and the other egg has a female lizard in it. They don't have to prove ot, "it just really happened that way." Then, the two lizards ate the bird, of course. What else do lizards do?

That's the kind of theory they have. It's called "The Hopeful Lizard".

"Let me ask you something, " I say.

Then I ask them if they think Jesus is Coming Back TODAY?

What about it? Daah. Are they ready? Or, are they a Darwinite that always have faith everything is like he said, when at the end of writing his stupid book, he said to him self that the whole mess depends on, "we may presume that". And that it was a "hopeless muddle".

Where is he today, man?

I'll ask them, "ARE YOU READY TO GO?" Or, are you going to tell me, "I hope so", like every other Arminian who has zero assurance of their 'salvation'? Same with the Primitive Baptists.
And whatever kyredneck is, etc., etc., etc.

He's Coming Back soon. That's for certain. We're near The End of Time.

You continue to debate me and I have not said anything in the thread that you disagree with except that there is debate.
Yep. C vs A has its entire dependence based on what someone thinks about what sin is.

And, once they know enough about sin that God uses to "prick their heart", then they may have not only learned what sin is, but also what to do about it.

The Sovereign God of the Universe vs the sinner.

They'd better bow before Him and find out what He actually says.
 
Top