So, once again, did Jesus not save the thief on the cross ?
-
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 would you do?
- Thread starter SovereignGrace
- Start date
- Status
What method of hermeneutics do you use?
The same way Paul stated in Colossians 2 which I already posted.
Here is a highlighted section:
6Therefore, just as you have received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to walk in Him, 7rooted and built up in Him, established in the faith as you were taught, and overflowing with thankfulness.
8See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, which are based on human tradition and the spiritual forces of the world rather than on Christ. 9For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity dwells in bodily form.10And you have been made complete in Christ, who is the head over every ruler and authority.
11In Him you were also circumcised in the putting off of your sinful nature, with the circumcision performed by Christ and not by human hands. 12And having been buried with Him in baptism, you were raised with Him through your faith in the power of God, who raised Him from the dead.
13When you were dead in your trespasses and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our trespasses,14having canceled the debt ascribed to us in the decrees that stood against us. He took it away, nailing it to the cross! 15And having disarmed the powers and authorities, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.
The word “baptism” in this passage has NO “water” associated with it. 8See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, which are based on human tradition and the spiritual forces of the world rather than on Christ. 9For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity dwells in bodily form.10And you have been made complete in Christ, who is the head over every ruler and authority.
11In Him you were also circumcised in the putting off of your sinful nature, with the circumcision performed by Christ and not by human hands. 12And having been buried with Him in baptism, you were raised with Him through your faith in the power of God, who raised Him from the dead.
13When you were dead in your trespasses and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ. He forgave us all our trespasses,14having canceled the debt ascribed to us in the decrees that stood against us. He took it away, nailing it to the cross! 15And having disarmed the powers and authorities, He made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.
I do not know what that preacher in the OP used for his view, but what I am saying is that he may not have been wrong IF he was referring to baptism as Paul used the term for example in Colossians.
Why does this confuse you and 37818?
37818
Well-Known Member
In the instance of the use of the term meaning "immersion" translated "baptism" water is generally to be understood. There is the teaching of baptisms, Hebrews 6:2; Matthew 3:11-12. When other than water is meant, it is either explicit, Acts 1:5 or it can be deduced to mean other than water, Luke 12:50. In the case of Colossians 2:12, I wanted understand your Biblical exegesis why it cannot mean water. [Other references I use in my understanding Colossians 2:12. Romans 6:3-4; (1 Corinthians 10:2; ) 1 Peter 3:21.]
I thought so.
One of the basic problem when using hermeneutics is getting rid of preconceptions / assumptions.
That is, if “water immersion” is in some places then “water immersion” must be carried into other places unless “explicitly” different.
Your focus was on “water” but not upon “immersion.”
The word for baptism means “immersion” not “water immersion.”
The context of each passage that uses the word baptism (immersion) must be used to tell the mode or type of “immersion” but the hermeneutics does not carry “water” to each but rather “immersion” is carried.
As I mentioned earlier, using hermeneutics is a tool, one with many problems if not used correctly, and reason why there are a great number of hermeneutic techniques. Techniques that also try to blend (imo) philosophy, social aspects, cultural aspects ... into interpretation to the point such can distort the basic text as much as leaving it out.
Totally in my opinion, the late Howard Hendricks (DTS) was extremely helpful to students of the Bible. He was able to cut through much of the clutter and clamor of the court of hermeneutics to bring sensible consistency to the table that every believer can use. He is greatly missed.
37818
Well-Known Member
That is a nonsense statement. Everyone has persuppositions with preconceptions / assumptions. It is certainly important, where possible to know and understand what they are.
Last edited:
True, but in the Bible it commonly refers to immersion in water, and to find a different meaning we should expect something in the context to point us in that direction.
That was my whole point! One is saved & baptized in the Holy Spirit BEFORE baptism in water, which is basically one's public proclamation of salvation before other people.
Now, you won't hear me argue against THAT kind of baptism whatseover, but water baptism is something every new believer should undergo ASAP, if at all possible.
Several churches in my 'hood, including my own, conduct water baptisms only in warm weather for obvious reasons, as they have no indoor natatoriums, but if a new believer should die before he/she can be baptized, that person is still saved.
37818
Well-Known Member
Yes, but not in every case. Mark 16:16. Acts of the Apostles 8:12-18.
You must certainly be aware of your own, However, it is also important to tease out the presuppositions and preconception views / assumptions of others as much as possible in what is written by them.
It is not just your own, but in reading of commentaries and even on this board, one must attempt to understand so that misinformation is corrected.
For example. Post B has a long history of posting that which is sound. Then suddenly posts that which isn't. Perhaps the fingers didn't keep up with the brain (not uncommon), or someone else is typing a response because their login was hacked, or perhaps as may or may not be in the case of the OP there is a change actually been made.
It is important, certainly, however when it comes to hermeneutics, the goal is to get past personal issues and discern the truth.
I have taught a great number of people who were so unaware of their own self, and as a result faced certain problems in hermeneutics.
This is why (imo) the work of H. G. Hendricks on this topic is very helpful.
Tools are generally good. In the hands of one skilled in the use of tools they pick that necessary for the job, and keep their tools in good order.
Okay Brethern, you have strayed off the intent of the OP. Please get back to it. Thanks bunches.
Moderator note:
These types of concersations have a natual way of drifting (@Squire Robertsson has called this "thread drift"). By the time we get to the third page this really can't be helped. Sometimes it's caused by someone hijacking the thread but most often it is because a tangent seems to some more interesting than the OP....if the OP has played out.
It's like Yeat's falcon distancing itself from the falconer.
Perhaps continuing with the topic of the OP will bring the thread back to its center. In summary, what is your assessment of the replies to the actual topic of the OP that have been offered?
Was Yeat the falconer, or the owner of the falcon watching the falcon distancing itself from the handler who was the falconer for Yeat’s falcon?
Was the distancing successful, is there Scriptural support for validation?
What was the origin of the falcon - free born or cage raised?
Is Yeat the Master or the servant? Does he have total authority over the falcon, or only the release?
enough?
Do you think the preacher was using baptism as Paul used it in Colossians?
Not pertaining to water, but that done by Christ for salvation?
Yeats was the observerWas Yeat the falconer, or the owner of the falcon watching the falcon distancing itself from the handler who was the falconer for Yeat’s falcon?
Was the distancing successful, is there Scriptural support for validation?
What was the origin of the falcon - free born or cage raised?
Is Yeat the Master or the servant? Does he have total authority over the falcon, or only the release?
enough?
If history has taught us anything it's that "things fall apart" and become something other than its original.
To my knowledge Scripture does not mention the nature of these things but is concerned with more presding matters - things of eternal significance.
Yeats was the observer
If history has taught us anything it's that "things fall apart" and become something other than its original.
Agreed.
How is it that dust puffs itself up to be something other then dust?
However, When we fall apart, we return to the original - dust.
Come in under the shadow of this red rock....see, things fall apart.
They never really tackled it after the first few posts. I agree that he should have been sat down immediately.
Here's how this came about. May 1(my 48th B-Day) myself and my F-I-L baptized my wife. She was saved in our bed the Sunday morning before that in our bed around 5:00 AM. The guy in the OP came to witness this glorious event. The Pastor of that church stated during the service that Wednesday evening(we had a small service before going downstairs to the baptistery) if something had happened before my wife was baptized, she would have still been saved. Later that night, or the next evening, that guy in the OP called my F-I-L(they're really good friends, and we love him too) and said what that pastor said was wrong. If my wife had died before she was baptized, she'd died lost. That's CoC doctrine!! My F-I-L told him he disagreed with him. Later on, my F-I-L went to church and that was the night he got up and preached on water baptism. It was like he was trying to shove his belief down my F-I-L's throat.
I wasn't there, so I can't rightly say. I was told he preached on water baptism. I answered this more indepth in a reply to a @JonC post.
While the belief is wrong the motive is right. A pastor is responsible for the doctrines taught in the pulpit. It sounds as if the pastor, not your friend, dropped the ball.
BTW, You share birthday with my son.
- Status