Now that the Baptism issue is settled, can we get back to saving lost souls?

[ydouxist]

:idea:

We see them every day.

[daverain]

.


Sounds good to me.


.

[New_Wineskin]

It does seem that one side has "won" - doesn't it ? ;)

[Jim Woodell]

It does seem that one side has "won" - doesn't it ? ;)

Hey! Let's take our marbles and sweet spirit and run.

We won't be through with this discussion until we die or Jesus comes. I hope and pray for the latter of these, but God's will WILL be done.

[daverain]

Hey! Let's take our marbles and sweet spirit and run.

We won't be through with this discussion until we die or Jesus comes.


Amen.


(lol)




.

[- DRA -]

Now that the Baptism issue is settled, can we get back to saving lost souls?

We see them every day.

Sure we can . . . just as soon as we figure out a way to save them without telling them how they can die to sin, be freed from it, and be made alive to God (see Rom. 6:3-11).

Got an :idea: how to do that?

[perfectlyok2]

:idea:

Now that the baptism issue is settled...

Who settled the baptism issue? That is your opinion, and most of the other individuals on the thread. But you all can say whatever you wish but it does'nt change what Jesus said.

"He that believeth and is baptized will be saved..."

As far as I can tell, that is pretty clear and I will not dispute the Creator.

[daverain]

.


-I- feel that...

Jesus HAS settled the 'baptism-issue' -once and for all.


"It is finished."

-Jesus


.

[daverain]

.



Who settled the baptism issue? That is your opinion, and most of the other individuals on the thread. But you all can say whatever you wish but it does'nt change what Jesus said.

"He that believeth and is baptized will be saved..."

As far as I can tell, that is pretty clear and I will not dispute the Creator.





Hmmm,

-To me, THIS appears to be 'flaming' the originator of this thread:


THIS WOULD violate the rules of this forum.

While perhaps one day these rules may change...
Please obey the current rules of this forum.

(Otherwise: One MIGHT find oneself in a little
'hot-water', shall we say.)




.: Forum Rule 1 :.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule No. 1 - No "Flaming"
1.1 You will not post any messages that harass, insult, BELITTLE, threaten or flame another member or guest.
1.2 You may discuss another member's beliefs but there will be no personal (ad hominem) attacks on the member himself or herself.
1.3 You will not misquote another member regardless of context.
1.4 You will not directly state or otherwise imply that another member is not a Christian.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------



It SEEMS you have BELITTLED someone, by IMPLYING they are 'disputing the creator'.



Peace in Christ.


.

[perfectlyok2]

I was not flaming anyone. That is a rediculous accusation, as I was only saying what I read. And in my opinion teaching any thing other than "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.." is disputing the Creator.

thanks

[daverain]

I was not flaming anyone. That is a rediculous accusation, as I was only saying what I read. And in my opinion teaching any thing other than "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.." is disputing the Creator.

thanks




To me, if one IMPLYS another is 'disputing the Creator'.

A FLAME has been done (according to the rules of this forum).



(How would YOU feel IF one implied that YOU were disputing the Creator?)

(Would you NOT feel insulted?)




.: Forum Rule 1 :.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule No. 1 - No "Flaming"
1.1 You will not post any messages that harass, INSULT, belittle, threaten or flame another member or guest.
1.2 You may discuss another member's beliefs but there will be no personal (ad hominem) attacks on the member himself or herself.
1.3 You will not misquote another member regardless of context.
1.4 You will not directly state or otherwise imply that another member is not a Christian.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Peace in Christ.

[perfectlyok2]

No flame intended, just calling it like I read it.

[Qoheleth]

Kind of a biased beginning of a thread here wouldnt you say :P


Q

[perfectlyok2]

Kind of a biased beginning of a thread here wouldnt you say :P


Q

Seriously

[Stinker]

Maybe the underlying opposition to 'baptism unto the remission of sins' and that it being essential to salvation, is the fact that if it is true............................

then so is repentance (Acts 17:30) and worst of all...............church attendance. (Heb.10:25)

[- DRA -]

Jesus said, "He who believes and is baptized will be saved" (Mark 16:16a).

John 1:3 presents Jesus as the Creator.

Thus, those who oppose or deny what the Lord said need to think about their actions (see 2 Cor. 5:10).

Furthermore, the apostle Paul said the things that he taught came directly from the Lord (Gal. 1:11-12). That includes passages such as Rom. 6:3-11, Gal. 3:26-27, and Col. 2:12. So, these passages should also be considered.

And, don't forget about Acts 22:16 -- the words of Ananias to Saul. Jesus sent Ananias to Saul (see Acts 9:10-11).

Just thought that you should know that Mark 16:16 is not the only thing the Lord said about baptism.

[ydouxist]

Lord help us. :cry:

[daverain]

.






Lord help us. :cry:










AMEN.

"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and THOU SHALT BE SAVED."


It is my opinion (only because it's true), that MANKIND needs to add

their own-works ON TOP OF CHRIST'S -PERFECT- SACRIFICE.


This -endless- teaching (in my opinion) says that Christ's sacrifice is not good enough,

and... 'One must EARN one's own salvation.'


(Sadly, this teaching ALWAYS appears to be EVERYWHERE.)



.

[perfectlyok2]

.






AMEN.

"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and THOU SHALT BE SAVED."


It is my opinion (only because it's true), that MANKIND needs to add

their own-works ON TOP OF CHRIST'S -PERFECT- SACRIFICE.


This -endless- teaching (in my opinion) says that Christ's sacrifice is not good enough,

and... 'One must EARN one's own salvation.'


(Sadly, this teaching ALWAYS appears to be EVERYWHERE.)



.

Who said Christ's sacrifice wasnt good enough? Nobody said we must EARN salvation.

Jesus says, "He that believeth and is baptized will be saved..."

Thats good enough for me.

[daverain]

.



Who said Christ's sacrifice wasnt good enough? Nobody said we must EARN salvation.

Jesus says, "He that believeth and is baptized will be saved..."

Thats good enough for me.



Q.)


By baptised, could Jesus possibly mean...

'baptised by: The Holy Spirit'?



(lol)



.

[perfectlyok2]

.: Forum Rule 1 :.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule No. 1 - No "Flaming"
1.1 You will not post any messages that harass, INSULT, belittle, threaten or flame another member or guest.
1.2 You may discuss another member's beliefs but there will be no personal (ad hominem) attacks on the member himself or herself.
1.3 You will not misquote another member regardless of context.
1.4 You will not directly state or otherwise imply that another member is not a Christian.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


By baptised, could Jesus possibly mean...

'Baptised by: The Holy Spirit?'

(lol)



I know you feel like you have Biblical interpretation down to a science but, shouldnt you follow your own rules?

[daverain]

.



I know you feel like you have Biblical interpretation down to a science but, shouldnt you follow your own rules?


Yes, I should and MUST.


(It needs to be known that whenever I speak towards common-teachings, speaking negatively IS allowed. Speaking negatively against ONE-INDIVIDUAL is NOT. THAT is a flame.)



-Peace in Christ.



.

[perfectlyok2]

.






Yes, I should and MUST.


(It needs to be known that whenever I speak towards common-teachings, speaking negatively IS allowed. Speaking negatively against ONE-INDIVIDUAL is NOT. THAT is a falme.)



-Peace in Christ.



.

So apparently you were laughing at the plain speech of Christ. The apostles knew exactly what baptism Jesus referred to and followed his instructions perfectly (Acts 2:38 & so forth).

[daverain]

.



So apparently you were laughing at the plain speech of Christ. The apostles knew exactly what baptism Jesus referred to and followed his instructions perfectly (Acts 2:38 & so forth).

I was NOT laughing at the plain speech of Christ.

I take that as an insult, and again politely ask you to 'cease from flaming':

.: Forum Rule 1 :.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule No. 1 - No "Flaming"
1.1 You will not post any messages that harass, INSULT, belittle, threaten or flame another member or guest.
1.2 You may discuss another member's beliefs but there will be no personal (ad hominem) attacks on the member himself or herself.
1.3 You will not misquote another member regardless of context.
1.4 You will not directly state or otherwise imply that another member is not a Christian.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I was merely laughing at The Teachings Of Many, who don't see (in the words of John the baptist):

"I baptise with water, but...One will come who will... baptise with The Holy Spirit..."




Peace in Christ.



.

[perfectlyok2]

So after the apostles received the Great Commission did they not baptize in water? Is that not what Jesus told them to do?

[daverain]

.



So after the apostles received the Great Commission did they not baptize in water? Is that not what Jesus told them to do?

YES.

They DID baptise in water.


However...
----------

Telling someone to do something is one thing:

(and of course, lets do that =
let's be baptised in water)

(let's ALSO go ye into all the nations)

(let's ALSO visit prisoners)

(let's ALSO clothe, and feed the poor.)

(let's ALSO receive a slap on the other cheek as well)

(let's ALSO give to those who ask, and NOT expect it back)

(etc. , etc. , etc., to infinity.)


Saying it (baptism in water) is REQUIRED for salvation, is QUITE another thing ALL-TOGETHER.


(this is my opinion, only because it's true)


-Peace in Christ.


.

[perfectlyok2]

.


(this is my opinion, only because it's true)


-Peace in Christ.


.

Thats a mighty high opinion you have of your opinion. :)

All those other things are good things to do but Jesus says belief in Him and Baptism in His name is the way to salvation. Those other things will follow you if you love the Lord, because you will be a light to the world.

"He that believeth and is baptized will be saved..."

[daverain]

.






"He that believeth and is baptized will be saved..."



Yes.

The bible ALSO says that: (paraphprased) He that believeth IS saved already.



So...

Let's find the 'lowest common denominator:



Please consider:
---------------
One who believes UPON the shed blood of the Lord Jesus Christ (and believes INTO Him), IS THUS SAVED FOREVER.



Praise God!!!






(And I'd also bet 'for fun' (not money), that said person would be 'dunked' as well.)




Peace in Christ.


.

[perfectlyok2]

.






Yes.

The bible ALSO says that: (paraphprased) He that believeth IS saved already.



So...

Let's find the 'lowest common denominator:



Please consider:
---------------
One who believes UPON the shed blood of the Lord Jesus Christ (and believes INTO Him), IS THUS SAVED FOREVER.



Praise God!!!






(And I'd also bet 'for fun' (not money), that said person would be 'dunked' as well.)




Peace in Christ.


.

I have never read "He that believeth is saved already...", nor have I read anything as such.

However, Christ does Himself say, "He that believeth and is baptized wil be saved..."

So, that being said, we must believe in Christ to be saved. You are absolutly correct. And we must be baptized to be saved. Not because I said so, but because Christ did.

For you to call our birth into Christ through baptism (Romans 6) being "Dunked" is disrespectful and shows that you choose to ignore that aspect of Christs commandments and count it as irrelevant.

God would never contradict himself, why would He say we could be saved through belief alone and also say we must believe and be baptized? It does not make sense. We must follow His instructions as a whole and never in-part.

[Highland Watchman]

*shakes head* I usually would not post anything on a thread like this, when both sides are not only adamantly arguing their own points and refusing to listen to the other side... not to mention that there seems to be flaming going on from both sides of the debate. I may not be a Mod here, but even I can see when things begin to become disrespectful between individuals, and thus, when the rules are being bent or broken.

The fact is, Baptism is something that they have been arguing about since the Reformation, and perhaps even earlier. It will not be solved here, as there are various viewpoints on what Baptism entails. Should we baptise infants, or only adults? Does Baptism have any salvific qualities of its own, or is it merely a public testimony of what has already happened in our hearts (even though it is expected that we be baptized, in most denominations, with the exception of Salvation Army and one or two others)? Finally, are we to dunk, pour, or sprinkle? See, this debate could go on until our children are old and gray. Stating our beliefs, and the reasons for our beliefs, is a great thing. We need the discussion and the decided truth in order to be fully sharpened for the Spiritual battle that we face every day... Thus, the truth should not be taken for granted.

However, mud slinging and personal attacks, also known as flaming on these forums, is not good for the building up of the body of believers, as it causes insult, hurt feelings, and it makes the general atmosphere of the forum to be a not-so-pleasant place.

Now that I've got that out of the way, I can say that I see the points to both sides of the debate. For me, personally, though, and how I read and interpret Scripture, is that Baptism is merely a sign of what has already happened, just like circumcision was a sign. I believe that it is to be a public testimony and celebration of what has already happened when we have chosen God through Jesus Christ. However, I also see where it is commanded as well, and I also see how the disciples baptised the people, so I say that it is still to remain a part of our Christian life... But as a sign and declaration that the person has already chosen to follow Christ.

But even in saying that, I do accept the faith of the Lutherans and Presbyterians who baptize infants as a sign of the New Covenant, as it very much resembles the "baby dedication" that we have in the more "conservative" churches... Their Catechism and Confession when the person raised in the church comes of age has the same effect as our mature baptism, as it pretty much has the same effect, in my opinion. It is the person declaring that Jesus is Lord in their life. It's just the interpretation of the Scripture on this issue that is different... (which, because there is so much debate on the subject, we know it is not a concluded issue of orthodoxy.)

Someone mentioned earlier about the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. Personally, I believe that happens at Salvation, when the person receives the Holy Spirit by becoming a true believer and follower of Jesus Christ. It does not mean that the person starts yammering in tongues, as not all people possess that gift (myself included), and I do not believe that it is THE evidence of a person having the Holy Spirit. Instead, I believe that if the person truly has the Holy Spirit, their CHARACTER will show the evidence... namely the development of the Fruit of the Spirit. But this is a side issue...

I hope and pray that what I said here is helpful to someone, and that this discussion will continue, but in a civil and Spirit-filled way. Shallom.

[Stinker]

Highland Watchman: On another thread in this forum there is another thread about the Holy Spirit. Who is He and what does He do, and there was a quote; Romans 8:11 "But if the Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by the Spirit that dwelleth in you."
Those that do not think they have to study very hard with all honesty, get caught in terrible contradictions, especially on the subject of the Holy Spirit.
Highland Watchman.....do you see the contradiction in your post?
It implies that only Christians are to be resurrected! Do you believe that?

[Highland Watchman]

Stinker:

No, I do not see the contradiction in my post. So are you saying that all people, whether Christians or non-Christians possess the Holy Spirit (who is the Counsellor and Companion promised by Jesus to his disciples...)?

See, if you want proof of my studies, I can give that proof. I am a graduate from Bible College, and I graduated with a 3.75 GPA on a 4.0 point scale (meaning an A- average); I am also a pastor and a preacher, thus indicating that theology and the study of Scripture should be my area of expertise. I can do much boasting to show my own credentials, but what would be the point? I know that I am still learning in a LOT of ways, and I in no way claim to be an expert at anything, save for an expert of my own life...

See, the thing about this forum is that there are many threads on numerous subjects, across the various denominations and groups. I have seen probably close to 50 debating the existance (and pre-Eminance) of the gift of tongues, even more debating the timing of the Rapture and which political leader most resembles the anti-Christ, and even a few in the Full-time Ministry area condemning homosexuals, divorced people, and girls who have had abortions, and blaming the struggling pastors for the rise in the apostacy in our culture (which are all started by the same person...).

To be honest, I am willing to learn whatever God would happen to teach me, and I also ask that God would endow on me whatever gifts and ministries that He has determined that I should undertake. And as I study Scripture, I do not find anywhere that tongues is THE evidence of a person having the Holy Spirit, but rather someone who lives according to the Law of the Spirit, as opposed to the Law of the Flesh... as you will find Paul writes about in his letter to the Galatians (in the 5th chapter, to be more exact).

But this thread is not about the place of tongues in the life of the Christian. It is in discussing Baptism, which is another subject that learned men of God from across the denominations have studied... but because there is no specific order or law written down in Scripture (as in, "this is when you are to baptize..." or "when you Baptize, you should..."), you can see that there are more than just one understanding on the place of Baptism in the life of the believer, and in the life of the church.

What I am saying in my previous post is that the issue of Baptism is not solved, as the OP claimed... but also that certain members should remember that a proper discussion, even a debate, has certain rules of decorum. And those rules include, no flaming. So really, my message was an attempt to return the attention of the debate away from the personal arguing over who was flaming who (and also the flames that were happening as a result of that) and return it to a study of th subject of Baptism - which is what this thread is about - but with both dignity and humility.

Regarding the passage you are quoting to me, I am pleased that you have quoted it. Now, I must ask you to read the verses before and after it in order to get Paul's line of argument and the CONTEXT of what he is saying. For one verse alone doesn't do anything for me unless I know why he is saying that. It's kind of like me quoting Jeremiah 29:11 on its own, without realizing why Jeremiah is writing it, who he's writing it to, and what he's actually saying. Without the context, we can make anything mean absolutely anything.

So please, what did I say in my post that was so contradictory, and also... what is the context of that verse that you just quoted to me? (Just so everyone knows, I am looking it up myself... but I want to know if you, Stinker, are aware of what it is saying...)

[daverain]

.






.....do you see the contradiction in your post?

It implies that only Christians are to be resurrected!

Do you believe that?




Dearest Stinker,

I -feel- that 'depending on HOW one looks at things', one COULD say that ONLY Christians are to be resurrected.


What I mean by this:
--------------------

The bible speaks of TWO-RESURRECTIONS:

1.) The Resurrection to LIFE,

("...I Am the way, the truth, and THE LIFE."

-Jesus.)

and


2.) The Resurrection unto (everlasting) DESTRUCTION.

(=everlasting torment)


So...


Although none CEASE to exist...

I SAY: Only Christians are raised to LIFE:

as in: The same Spirit which raised Christ from the dead will also raise us (to LIFE)

(and He ALSO gives us NEW LIFE NOW.)

(=Christians)



.

[daverain]

.






I have never read "He that believeth is saved already...", nor have I read anything as such.

being "Dunked" is disrespectful and shows that you choose to ignore that aspect of Christs commandments and count it as irrelevant.



1.)

"Whoever eats THIS bread WILL live forever."

(I told you, that it was 'PARAPHRASED'.)

2.) I HAVE been "Dunked"

(=Clarifying that I have been baptised without being "sprinkled", NOT that THAT would seperate one from Jesus, it WOULDN'T)

By SAYING DIRECTLY, that ((I)) "...choose to ignore an aspect of Christ's commandments and count it as irrelevant.",

You (='perfectlyok2') have INSULTED me (=an individual).

You (='perfectlyok2') have FLAMED me (which is a VIOLATION., of the current forums rules here.)


Ahem:
------




It has been brought to my attention,
that you have violated the rules of this forum.
While perhaps one day these rules may change...
Please obey the current rules of this forum.

(Otherwise: One MIGHT find oneself in a little
'hot-water', shall we say.)



.: Forum Rule 1 :.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule No. 1 - No "Flaming"
1.1 You will not post any messages that harass, INSULT, belittle, threaten or flame another member or guest.
1.2 You may discuss another member's beliefs but there will be no personal (ad hominem) attacks on the member himself or herself.
1.3 You will not misquote another member regardless of context.
1.4 You will not directly state or otherwise imply that another member is not a Christian.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I politely request that you please refrain from 'flaming'.


-Peace in Christ.



.

[daverain]

.



QUOTE=Qoheleth]


Kind of a biased beginning of a thread here wouldnt you say :P

[/QUOTE]


Yes, but HOW?


A -stranger- to the begginning of this thread MIGHT think:
--------------------------------------------------------

"Ah, they've settle that baptism is REQUIRED for salvation.",


-OR-

"Ah, they've settle that baptism is NOT REQUIRED for salvation.",

-------------------------------------------------------------


However...


I feel that AFTER one has read the entire-thread, the answer is clear, as to HOW it's been settled.

;)


-Peace in Christ.



.