Do you believe Baptism is essential for Salvation? (3) [Archive]

Followers4christ

9th December 2005, 07:36 PM

Stinker

9th December 2005, 08:53 PM

lunalinda

9th December 2005, 10:55 PM

*cringe* A third thread? And I bet it's STILL going around in circles. :doh:

justinstout

10th December 2005, 01:57 AM

If a man gets born-again on his death bed and there's no water around, does he go to hell simply because he couldn't get dunked under water?

When it comes to salvation...

Jesus + something = nothing

Jesus + nothing = everything

lipoftruth

10th December 2005, 08:02 AM

if we are talking water baptism, then no, I don't believe it's essential

if we are talking baptism with God's Holy Spirit, then yes, it is essential

Having said that, there is nothing forbidding water baptism, although it is mearly a symbolic figure of the real thing.

WesWoodell

10th December 2005, 06:42 PM

savedbyfaithinchrist

10th December 2005, 07:36 PM

lipoftruth

10th December 2005, 07:47 PM

Acts 1:8

justinstout

10th December 2005, 10:09 PM

Hey man i got those stickers TY much they rock

That's awesome!

Keep spreading the Good News, man!

Schroeder

12th December 2005, 01:21 PM

DRA, you insist on saying that faith and belief are not "ALL" that is needed yet you have not proven that Gal 3:22 and Eph 1:13 say ONLY exactly just that. your not being able to see the word or meaning of John 3:16 as saying "only" is for a obviouse reason it makes what you believe not correct. why else could you not see the obviouse fact that Christ never spoke about water or never said belief and do a act to prove it. God does not need proof of our belief does he? he should know when we truely believe. Acts 15:8 show that. You mearly add to or assume to the many passages that i have shown you, word for word, that contradict what you keep thinking Acts 2:38 and a few others say. you do not say that they must all say the same thing, because of the passage you keep bringing up that says all scripture is true. if that is so then HOW do you go around what Christ and God say to have faith believe and you are saved. It is even said that in the beggining noah abraham ect BELIEVED and it was accredited to them as righteousness. they did not have to do anything but believe. Rom. talks of this a lot. Again are the jews and gentiles saved differently. because in what you say they are because Acts 2:38 and Acts 10:43-44 show to ways to salvation according to you. even though PETER shows that they were the same in 10:43 and 11:17, both of which would seriously contradict what he was saying to the jews in Acts 2:38. he told the jews a act of water baptism forgives sin, in acts 10 he says belief in christ forgives sin, he tells the jews that water baptism gives them the Spirit, in acts 11 he tells us we get it when we believe. please explain his thinking or misunderstanding. was he right in acts 2:38 or in Acts 10-11.

bannaboat101

12th December 2005, 01:24 PM

To tell you the truth the I believe that we do need water babtism because it shows that are spirit has been reborn again with God and that we are ready to hed in his path

jmacvols

12th December 2005, 02:30 PM

If a man gets born-again on his death bed and there's no water around, does he go to hell simply because he couldn't get dunked under water?

But one is not born again until they have been water baptized.
What if one is laying on his death bed and dies before he believes, will he lose his soul?

- DRA -

12th December 2005, 03:18 PM

Acts 11:15-17"As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them as he had come on us at the beginning.Then I remembered what the Lord had said: 'John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.'So if God gave them the same gift as he gave us, who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to think that I could oppose God?"

The Gentiles indeed received the Holy Spirit in Acts 10:44. However, I find Peter's conclusion in verse 47 being overlooked when we try to determine what this event meant. Peter's only conclusion was that the no one could forbid the Gentiles from being baptized in water in the name of the Lord. Then he commanded them to be baptized ... just like in Acts 2:38 and Acts 22:16 .. and for the same reason. Therefore, the conclusion is that the Holy Spirit came upon the Gentiles to show that they could receive the salvation that comes through Jesus Christ.

How Are we saved?

Romans 10:9"That if you confess with your mouth Jesus is lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead you will be saved.

What about Romans 6:3-11? And, have you considered Acts 8:35-39? It shows how belief, confession, and baptism all work together.

Acts 2:21"And everyone who calls on the name of the lord will be saved."

Why stop with this verse? Following the conclusion of the Peter's teaching (verse 36), he tells the Jews that believe the message what to do call on the name of the Lord to be saved in verse 38. Why shouldn't we also consider this verse? It's a part of the story.

Romans 10:12"For there is no difference between jew and gentile the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on Him for everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."

Acts 22:16 adds a little something to what it means to call on the name of the Lord. Consider Acts 2:38 and Acts 10:47-48. Isn't this the way both Jews and Gentiles called on Him?

John 5:24"I tell you the truth ,whoever hears my word and believes Him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned he has crossed over from death to life."

Consider Acts 8:12 (NKJV) - "When they believed ... both men and women were baptized." The belief/faith that pleases God is the type that is coupled with obedience i.e. James 2:21-24.

Romans 10:17"Consequently,faith comes hearing the message,and the message is heard through the word of Christ."

Agreed. Acts 16:30-34 shows how this works. Most people seem to want to stop reading at verse 31. However, if we do that, we erroneously conclude that the jailer was saved before he even heard the word (verse 32) and obeyed it (verse 33).

John 3:16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son,that Whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.For God did not send his son into the world to condemn the world,but to save the world through him."

What about John 3:3,5? Let's not forget that one has to be born again. Specifically, born of water and the Spirit. The examples of conversions in the book of Acts show how this was done. Baptism in water was a part of this process i.e. Acts 2:38, Acts 10:47-48, Acts 8:35-39.

Romans 3:22"This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe.There is no difference,for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus."

See also Romans 6:23. Then, go back and read the whole chapter. It helps to put things in context. It shows how we receive the free gift.

Galatians 5:24"Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires."

See also Galatians 3:26-27.

1 John 1:9"If we confess our sins,He is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness."

See also Acts 8:18-24.

Romans 6:23"For the wages of sin is death,but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord."

Previously commented on this verse. The context really should be considered.

1 Corinthians 15:55-58"Where,O death,is your victory? Where,O death, is your sting? The sting of death is sin,and the power of sin is the law.But thanks be to God! He gives us victory through our Lord Jesus Christ."

See Acts 18:8. It discusses the conversion of the Corinthians to Christ.

2 Corinthians 5:17"Therefore,if anyone is in Christ,he is a new creation the old has gone the new has come."God Bless :)

This passage prompts a question: How does one get "in Christ" to become a new creation? Answer: Galatians 3:27 -- "For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ." (NASV)

- DRA -

12th December 2005, 03:26 PM

We all know that our soul is baptized into a body where it reaches Christ's blood. The question is, must our physical body be baptized in water in order for our soul to be baptized (transferred Col.1:13) by the Holy Spirit into the Spiritual body of Christ?

The materialists put water in the place of baptism where the Holy Spirit Himself (alone) is doing the baptizing. (Rom.6:3-5), (Gal.3:27), etc.,

If materialists teach the necessity of baptism in water, then the apostle Peter and Philip were materialists (see Acts 2:38, Acts 10:47-48, and Acts 8:35-39. And, since these men were being guided by the Holy Spirit, then that would also make Him a materialist (see John 16:13, Acts 2:1-4, and Acts 8:29). Care to explain?

- DRA -

12th December 2005, 04:20 PM

If a man gets born-again on his death bed and there's no water around, does he go to hell simply because he couldn't get dunked under water?

Colossians 2:12-13 offers a concise version of the new birth, and Romans 6:3-11 offers a detailed description. Based on what these verses say, I view baptism as more than just being dunked under water. It's really about faith in the working of God.

When it comes to salvation...

Jesus + something = nothing

Please harmonize with Acts 2:38 and Acts 22:16.

Jesus + nothing = everything

Please harmonize with 1 Peter 1:22.

- DRA -

12th December 2005, 04:25 PM

if we are talking water baptism, then no, I don't believe it's essential

Why not? Do you think a person can be saved while still in their sins (see Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, Romans 6:7, Colossians 2:13)?

if we are talking baptism with God's Holy Spirit, then yes, it is essential

Which Scripture(s) teach us that the baptism with the Holy Spirit is essential?

Having said that, there is nothing forbidding water baptism, although it is mearly a symbolic figure of the real thing.

Actually, the water of the flood was the symbol or type, and baptism is the real thing or antitype (see 1 Pet. 3:20-21).

eldermike

12th December 2005, 04:33 PM

Why not? Do you think a person can be saved while still in their sins (see Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, Romans 6:7, Colossians 2:13)?

Romans 5:8

- DRA -

12th December 2005, 04:34 PM

I'm seeing a lot of "will be saved" phrases in these Scriptures I'm looking at, and no "are saved" phrases.

Could it be that we're all a bunch of loonies for arguing about this?

Should you believe? Yes. Should you confess your faith in Christ? Yes. Should you be baptized in water like the Bible says to? Yes.
Should we stop playing God and acting like we have things all figured out? I'll leave that up to you. :)

Welcome back to the discussion. :wave:

There seems to be a reluctance to accept ALL the N.T. shows us about becoming a Christian. Without realizing it, many are fulfilling the words of the Lord in Matthew 7:21-23 by calling on Him without doing God's will.

- DRA -

12th December 2005, 04:58 PM

Originally Posted by: - DRA -

Why not? Do you think a person can be saved while still in their sins (see Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, Romans 6:7, Colossians 2:13)?

Romans 5:8

Explain, please. How do you see Romans 5:8 answering the question? Consider what I see. Jesus died upon the cross. Then, some 52 days later, the Jews in Acts 2 are told what to do to have their sins taken away (see Acts 2:38). Wouldn't that mean that Jesus' sacrifice on the cross doesn't automatically take away our sins? Rather, wouldn't it mean that He paid the price for our sins (1 Peter 1:18-19), but we still have to obey the truth to purify our souls (verse 22)?

eldermike

12th December 2005, 04:59 PM

Welcome back to the discussion. :wave:

There seems to be a reluctance to accept ALL the N.T. shows us about becoming a Christian. Without realizing it, many are fulfilling the words of the Lord in Matthew 7:21-23 by calling on Him without doing God's will.
I don't see anyone saying we should disobey God. The only argument I see is having the formula on it's head. 1John 2 is about the proper order. It says you know you have come to know Him when you obey Him.

It's interesting reading and would be helpful in this discussion. The formula simply reads this way: The unregenerate heart can't obey God. 1 John chapter one says that God is light, there is no darkness in in God at all!.
John really knew God, He walked with Him and in his old age He wrote about Him. You can't obey God, you have to let go, and let God obey God.

It's about God, the whole NT, it's not about us. Church is not about us, salvation is not only not in our hands it's not even for our good. It's about God, His glory. God glorifies Himself, it's His purpose. If you miss this basic step in Theology the rest is not going to fit together.

Man in not in a partnership with God, even the law's purpose was to point us to Christ. You see doing commands as the key to knowing God. I see knowing God as the key to doing His commands. Since God can't be in my heart until I let Him, any act of obediance follows salvation.

eldermike

12th December 2005, 05:01 PM

No brother, if a person could be saved without being saved while sinning then why would the price need to be paid? Originally Posted by: - DRA -

Why not? Do you think a person can be saved while still in their sins (see Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, Romans 6:7, Colossians 2:13)?

Explain, please. How do you see Romans 5:8 answering the question? Consider what I see. Jesus died upon the cross. Then, some 52 days later, the Jews in Acts 2 are told what to do to have their sins taken away (see Acts 2:38). Wouldn't that mean that Jesus' sacrifice on the cross doesn't automatically take away our sins? Rather, wouldn't it mean that He paid the price for our sins (1 Peter 1:18-19), but we still have to obey the truth to purify our souls (verse 22)?

- DRA -

12th December 2005, 06:27 PM

Originally Posted by: - DRA -

Welcome back to the discussion. :wave:

There seems to be a reluctance to accept ALL the N.T. shows us about becoming a Christian. Without realizing it, many are fulfilling the words of the Lord in Matthew 7:21-23 by calling on Him without doing God's will.

I don't see anyone saying we should disobey God. The only argument I see is having the formula on it's head. 1John 2 is about the proper order. It says you know you have come to know Him when you obey Him.

Exactly. It also means that if we don't obey Him -- we don't know Him. This fits exactly with Matthew 7:21-23. Jesus is describing people who think they are saved and serving Him, but are NOT. Why not? They didn't do the Father's will i.e. obey the Lord (Luke 6:46).

It's interesting reading and would be helpful in this discussion. The formula simply reads this way: The unregenerate heart can't obey God. 1 John chapter one says that God is light, there is no darkness in in God at all!.
John really knew God, He walked with Him and in his old age He wrote about Him. You can't obey God, you have to let go, and let God obey God.

Uh, that part about "letting God obey God" doesn't seem to harmonize at all with any of the conversions in the book of Acts e.g. Acts 2:38, Acts 10:47-48, Acts 16:31, Acts 22:16. Not to be offensive, but your reasoning seems to be pure Calvinism. It makes us out to be programmed clones that have no choice in our eternal destiny. We just do as we are programmed. Frankly, I don't buy into that reasoning at all.

It's about God, the whole NT, it's not about us. Church is not about us, salvation is not only not in our hands it's not even for our good. It's about God, His glory. God glorifies Himself, it's His purpose. If you miss this basic step in Theology the rest is not going to fit together.

In one respect, salvation is indeed in our hands i.e. Philippians 2:12, 1 Peter 1:22. Obedience is our responsibility -- NOT God's. We are held accountable for our lack of odedience to the gospel of Christ i.e. 2 Thessalonians 1:8.

Man in not in a partnership with God, even the law's purpose was to point us to Christ. You see doing commands as the key to knowing God. I see knowing God as the key to doing His commands. Since God can't be in my heart until I let Him, any act of obediance follows salvation.

Those who have obeyed the gospel of Christ are in a covenant with God i.e. Hebrews 8:6-13. The implication is that those who don't obey the gospel aren't in that covenant relationship with God. Therefore, if we say we know God and don't obey Him, we end up fulfilling Jesus' words in Matthew 7:21-23.

The Jews were pierced in the heart in Acts 2:37. Therefore, by your reasoning, they were saved at that point. However, we are NOT given that impression in verse 38. It seems they still had NOT been forgiven of their sins. Care to explain?

- DRA -

12th December 2005, 06:46 PM

No brother, if a person could be saved without being saved while sinning then why would the price need to be paid?

Can you rephrase your response, please? I'm not sure what you are asking.

- DRA -

12th December 2005, 06:58 PM

Acts 1:8

says, "But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth" (NASV).

The "you" refers to the apostles (see verse 2).

The apostles were given the command to take the gospel to all the world i.e. Mark 16:14-15, Matthew 28:16-19.

The Holy Spirit was given to the apostles ... just as Jesus promised (Acts 2:1-4, Acts 1:4-5 and Luke 24:49).

And, they completed their mission i.e. Colossians 1:23.

Now, what was your point about Acts 1:8?

eldermike

12th December 2005, 08:12 PM

Can you rephrase your response, please? I'm not sure what you are asking.

It's a statement, not a question. But I will rephrase it. Jesus came to save what was lost IOW Jesus saves people that sin.

eldermike

12th December 2005, 08:16 PM

Exactly. It also means that if we don't obey Him -- we don't know Him. This fits exactly with Matthew 7:21-23. Jesus is describing people who think they are saved and serving Him, but are NOT. Why not? They didn't do the Father's will i.e. obey the Lord (Luke 6:46).

This is the whole matter. That is not what it says at all. You can't turn this around. Jesus did not describe people who thought they knew him, He said HE did not know them. The order of things is important. You can't know God by obeying God, you know God when HE knows you first.

Stinker

13th December 2005, 12:06 AM

Originally Posted by: Stinker http://www3.christianforums.com/images/quotes/quot-by-right.gifhttp://www3.christianforums.com/images/quotes/quot-top-right-10.gifWe all know that our soul is baptized into a body where it reaches Christ's blood. The question is, must our physical body be baptized in water in order for our soul to be baptized (transferred Col.1:13) by the Holy Spirit into the Spiritual body of Christ?

The materialists put water in the place of baptism where the Holy Spirit Himself (alone) is doing the baptizing. (Rom.6:3-5), (Gal.3:27), etc.,

If materialists teach the necessity of baptism in water, then the apostle Peter and Philip were materialists (see Acts 2:38, Acts 10:47-48, and Acts 8:35-39. And, since these men were being guided by the Holy Spirit, then that would also make Him a materialist (see John 16:13, Acts 2:1-4, and Acts 8:29). Care to explain?

The New Testament preachers of the 1st century were not materialists. They never taught that one's physical body had to be baptized in water so that at that time the Holy Spirit could baptize the person's soul into the Spiritual body of Christ.

- DRA -

13th December 2005, 05:45 AM

Originally Posted by: - DRA -

Exactly. It also means that if we don't obey Him -- we don't know Him. This fits exactly with Matthew 7:21-23. Jesus is describing people who think they are saved and serving Him, but are NOT. Why not? They didn't do the Father's will i.e. obey the Lord (Luke 6:46).

This is the whole matter. That is not what it says at all. You can't turn this around. Jesus did not describe people who thought they knew him, He said HE did not know them. The order of things is important. You can't know God by obeying God, you know God when HE knows you first.

Matthew 7:21-23 says (NASV),
7:21
"Not everyone who says to Me, `Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.
7:22
"Many will say to Me on that day, `Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?'
7:23
"And then I will declare to them, `I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'

Nothing is being twisted around. The people Jesus describe did think they were saved and following Him. Why else would they respond as they did in verse 22? Were they saved and really serving the Lord? Nope. Why not, after all, they were saying, "Lord, Lord"? Because they didn't do the Father's will. As a result, Jesus responds, "I never knew you." That tells us these people didn't understand the Father's will about what is necessary to be saved from their sins and accepted by God.

Applying this to Acts 2:38-41, what separated the 3,000 from the other Jews that heard Jesus' proclaimed to be both Lord and Christ (verse 36)? I see the 3,000 doing the Father's will to be saved from their sins. What do you see?

- DRA -

13th December 2005, 06:00 AM

Originally Posted by: - DRA -

If materialists teach the necessity of baptism in water, then the apostle Peter and Philip were materialists (see Acts 2:38, Acts 10:47-48, and Acts 8:35-39. And, since these men were being guided by the Holy Spirit, then that would also make Him a materialist (see John 16:13, Acts 2:1-4, and Acts 8:29). Care to explain?

The New Testament preachers of the 1st century were not materialists.

Good. We stand on common ground.

They never taught that one's physical body had to be baptized in water so that at that time the Holy Spirit could baptize the person's soul into the Spiritual body of Christ.

Agreed. This was NOT the purpose of baptism in water in the name of the Lord. Acts 2:38 tells why this baptism was commanded. Acts 22:16 tells us why this baptism was commanded. Romans 6:7 harmonizes with these verses, as does Colossians 2:13.

I have asked you numerous times in the past to harmonize your understanding of 1 Cor. 12:13 with Acts 2:38,41,47. There is a reason you can't ... or won't ... do this. Isn't it about time to acknowledge that you have no real Scriptural basis for this baptism that you claim the Holy Spirit does to us to make us a member of the Lord's church. In short, whatever interpretation or meaning that you want to use for 1 Cor. 12:13 must harmonize with other Scriptures. That, my friend, is a basic rule of Bible interpretation. But, don't take my word for it. Check it out. Matthew 4:5-7 and Matthew 22:23-33. When the truth is obtained, Scriptures will harmonize.

- DRA -

13th December 2005, 06:07 AM

It's a statement, not a question. But I will rephrase it. Jesus came to save what was lost IOW Jesus saves people that sin.

Uh, are you trying to confuse me?

Here's what you asked:
"No brother, if a person could be saved without being saved while sinning then why would the price need to be paid?"

By all appearances and the way I understand English, this sure looked (and still looks) like a question to me.

Anyway, I agree with your conclusion. Jesus saves people that sin ... if they obey Him i.e. Hebrews 5:9, Luke 6:46. Agreed?

- DRA -

13th December 2005, 06:13 AM

To tell you the truth the I believe that we do need water babtism because it shows that are spirit has been reborn again with God and that we are ready to hed in his path

Romans 6:3-11 offers a detailed description of what occurs in baptism -- being born again.

Stan53

13th December 2005, 08:03 AM

eldermike

13th December 2005, 10:25 AM

By all appearances and the way I understand English, this sure looked (and still looks) like a question to me.

Questions are often used to make a statement. I assure you, I am not trying to confuse you.

Anyway, I agree with your conclusion. Jesus saves people that sin ... if they obey Him i.e. Hebrews 5:9, Luke 6:46. Agreed?

Nope, Jesus saves people that sin, period end. Obediance comes from God, just as faith is a gift we can't take credit for obediance. The heart of a man is against God, it is God that changes us. You (a man) are not capable of obediance to God. Not to mention that obediance requires perfection by God's own standard. It's God that gets the glory for you and me.

Again: let go and let God.

CrazyforYeshua

13th December 2005, 10:41 AM

The short answer is no. Your salvation does not depend up what you do. It depends entirely on what Christ did (past tense). It has all been done and there is no more to add.
You get baptised purely as an act of obedience. It is your testimony to what Christ has done in you.
In Christ,
Stan

I wholeheartedly agree-if water baptism is necessary for salvation, then you're looking at what we do, not what He did.
Jesus put it this way: John 3:3 "Unless one is born again, he cannot ever see the Kingdom of God".
That's it-nothing can be added to that. If water baptism were a necessity, wouldn't He have said it then?

- DRA -

13th December 2005, 12:02 PM

Originally Posted by: - DRA -

Anyway, I agree with your conclusion. Jesus saves people that sin ... if they obey Him i.e. Hebrews 5:9, Luke 6:46. Agreed?

Nope, Jesus saves people that sin, period end. Obediance comes from God, just as faith is a gift we can't take credit for obediance. The heart of a man is against God, it is God that changes us. You (a man) are not capable of obediance to God. Not to mention that obediance requires perfection by God's own standard. It's God that gets the glory for you and me.

Again: let go and let God.

Nope, Jesus' sacrifice is NOT all there is to it. Jesus saves sinners. Agreed. However, all will NOT be saved i.e. Matthew 7:13-14, 21-23, even though His grace is extended to all (Titus 2:11). The Scriptures show us that our obedience plays a part. Consider the Jews in Acts 2. Some received the message that was preached and obeyed God. Their obedience separated them (the 3,000 in verse 41) from those that didn't obey (see 2 Thessalonians 1:8). It wasn't about the way God cloned/programmed them i.e. Calvinism, but about whether or not they received God's word and obeyed Him. It is true that God gets the glory -- but how can He get any glory if His will isn't obeyed? For instance, baptism was a part of the command in Acts 2:38. The 3,000 obeyed it. Did they do wrong, or did they do right? I understand they did the right thing. How do you see it?

- DRA -

13th December 2005, 12:05 PM

I wholeheartedly agree-if water baptism is necessary for salvation, then you're looking at what we do, not what He did.
Jesus put it this way: John 3:3 "Unless one is born again, he cannot ever see the Kingdom of God".
That's it-nothing can be added to that. If water baptism were a necessity, wouldn't He have said it then?

Baptism is really about what Jesus did for us (see Colossians 2:12-13 and Romans 6:3-11). If you will read the verses, you will see how one is born again. No one has to guess or speculate about what it means to be born again -- just let God's word show you.

- DRA -

13th December 2005, 12:10 PM

The short answer is no. Your salvation does not depend up what you do. It depends entirely on what Christ did (past tense). It has all been done and there is no more to add.
You get baptised purely as an act of obedience. It is your testimony to what Christ has done in you.
In Christ,
Stan

Would you mind commenting on Luke 17:10, 1 Peter 1:22, and Hebrews 5:9. I understand that we are to obey God in response to what Jesus did for us. If it is true that our salvation is solely based on what Jesus did, then everyone should be saved, right? After all, He died for the whole world i.e. John 3:16, Titus 2:11. So, everyone automatically gets saved, right? If this is your reasoning, please explain Matt. 7:13-14, 21-23, because it seems that everyone doesn't get saved.

CrazyforYeshua

13th December 2005, 01:10 PM

I don't think anyone is saying everyone will be saved, we know they won't. The scripture about the narrow gate shows that, not all will choose Christ. What Stan and I are agreeing on, is water baptism is not NECSSARY for salvation. Jesus told the thief "Today you will be with me in Paradise". If water baptism was necessary, he wouldn't have said that.
It is all about what Yeshua did, we can't add anything to His work, whether it's baptism or anything else.
As far as the scriptures, they don't say that we need it. Col. says we are raised thru faith in the working of God (not us), who raised Christ from the dead, and we are alive with Him.
In Romans it says pretty much the same thing.Romans 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?Romans 6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
That's the purpose of baptism, to bury the old man, and walk in the new. Nowhere does it say it is essential to salvation.

eldermike

13th December 2005, 01:54 PM

In John 17 Jesus prays three prayers, in the second one (I think, from memory) He thanks the Father for giving Him the ones already saved and the ones that will be saved in the future.

I believe Jesus saves who He saves and I also believe it's His desire that none will be lost even though some will be lost. To prevent taking this to a TULIP discussion, I will have to leave it there.

Originally Posted by: - DRA -

Anyway, I agree with your conclusion. Jesus saves people that sin ... if they obey Him i.e. Hebrews 5:9, Luke 6:46. Agreed?

Nope, Jesus' sacrifice is NOT all there is to it. Jesus saves sinners. Agreed. However, all will NOT be saved i.e. Matthew 7:13-14, 21-23, even though His grace is extended to all (Titus 2:11). The Scriptures show us that our obedience plays a part. Consider the Jews in Acts 2. Some received the message that was preached and obeyed God. Their obedience separated them (the 3,000 in verse 41) from those that didn't obey (see 2 Thessalonians 1:8). It wasn't about the way God cloned/programmed them i.e. Calvinism, but about whether or not they received God's word and obeyed Him. It is true that God gets the glory -- but how can He get any glory if His will isn't obeyed? For instance, baptism was a part of the command in Acts 2:38. The 3,000 obeyed it. Did they do wrong, or did they do right? I understand they did the right thing. How do you see it?

- DRA -

13th December 2005, 02:49 PM

I don't think anyone is saying everyone will be saved, we know they won't.

Good. We are in agreement. The issue before us why everyone won't be saved. If salvation is totally a work of God, then the implication is that God picks and chooses who gets saved and who doesn't. This, my friend, reeks of Calvinism.

The scripture about the narrow gate shows that, not all will choose Christ.

Matthew 7:13-14 contrasts the narrow gate with the wide gate and the numbers that will enter through each. It is showing us that the majority of people are headed for destruction. I would use John 14:6 to show the connection between Jesus and the narrow gate.

What Stan and I are agreeing on, is water baptism is not NECSSARY for salvation. Jesus told the thief "Today you will be with me in Paradise". If water baptism was necessary, he wouldn't have said that.

A couple of things to consider. First, the thief lived and died under the law of Moses. Second, Jesus' testament/will went into effect after He died i.e. Hebrews 9:15-17. In fact, using the reasoning of that particular text, we can view Acts 2 as the reading of Jesus' will. Under His will, baptism in the name of the Lord (identified in Acts 10:47-48 as being in water) was commanded to have sins taken away.

It is all about what Yeshua did, we can't add anything to His work, whether it's baptism or anything else.

Baptism is not about adding to Jesus' work. Romans 6:3-11 shows it is how we are united with Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection. It shows our acceptance of His sacrifice and our willingness to be united with Him.

As far as the scriptures, they don't say that we need it.

If we need to be freed from sins, we need to be baptized i.e. Romans 6:7. And, if we need to be forgiven of our transgression or sins, we need to be baptized i.e. Colossians 2:13. Do you think we can be saved while still in our sins?

Col. says we are raised thru faith in the working of God (not us), who raised Christ from the dead, and we are alive with Him.
In Romans it says pretty much the same thing.Romans 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?Romans 6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
That's the purpose of baptism, to bury the old man, and walk in the new. Nowhere does it say it is essential to salvation.

I believe you are overlooking something in both Colossians 2:12-13 and Romans 6:3-11. When considering the blessings that are enjoyed in baptism, think about one's spiritual condition before baptism. For instance, in the passages in Colossians, in baptism we are buried with Him, raised with Him, dead in sin, made alive together with Him, and forgiven of our sins. This would mean that before baptism we were NOT buried with Christ, NOR raised with Him, dead in sin, but NOT made alive together with Him, NOR forgiven of our sins. Consider the blessings in Romans 6 in the same way. They occur DURING baptism, not BEFORE.

CrazyforYeshua

13th December 2005, 03:10 PM

So,you're saying we are not redeemed without baptism? I don't see that. The Bible doesn't teach that. What I read elsewhere in Romans is this:

Romans 3:21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;Romans 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;Romans 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:Romans 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;Romans 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.Romans 3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.Romans 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

He might be talking of the law in his main point, but the other point is made-faith and redemption thru Yeshua ONLY, and redeemed by the blood. When we are covered by the blood of Yeshua, we have been cleansed of sin, we are justified in the sight of God.

- DRA -

13th December 2005, 04:37 PM

- DRA -

13th December 2005, 05:03 PM

So,you're saying we are not redeemed without baptism? I don't see that. The Bible doesn't teach that. What I read elsewhere in Romans is this:

I simply pointed out what Colossians 2:13 and Romans 6:7 say about baptism. We are redeemed by the blood of Christ i.e. 1 Peter 1:18-19. However, we should continue reading because we also find that obedience is a factor in the purifying of the soul (verse 22). Baptism was commanded in Acts 2:38 and Acts 22:16. Three thousands Jews obeyed in Acts 2, and Saul (later called Paul) obeyed in Acts 22. Therefore, they were united with Jesus just as described in Col. 2 and Rom. 6. Compare "for the remission of sins" in Acts 2:38 with the same expression (both in English and in Koine Greek) in Matthew 26:28. It necessarily infers that there is a link between the blood of Christ and baptism. This explains how baptism "washes away sins" (Acts 22:16). It brings on into contact with the blood of Christ. How? By faith in the working of God (Col. 2:12-13).

Romans 3:21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;Romans 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;Romans 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:Romans 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;Romans 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.Romans 3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.Romans 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

He might be talking of the law in his main point, but the other point is made-faith and redemption thru Yeshua ONLY, and redeemed by the blood. When we are covered by the blood of Yeshua, we have been cleansed of sin, we are justified in the sight of God.

Romans 3 is contrasting the grace that came through Jesus with the blessings offered under the law of Moses.

I agree that we are cleansed of sin when we are covered by the blood of Christ. The issue at hand is WHEN this occurs. I see a command given in Acts 2:38 to take sin away, obedience rendered in verse 41, and an inspired commentary in verse 47 that shows us that those who obeyed were saved. That implies that what was commanded in verse 38 took sin away by the cleansing power of the blood of Christ. How? By uniting us with Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection where we die to sins, are freed from them, and become alive to God (which, once again, is explained in detail in Romans 6:3-11).

jckstraw72

13th December 2005, 05:17 PM

eldermike

13th December 2005, 05:18 PM

There is no Theology that I know of that fits this description. I agree that this is a discussion for another time and another place. Obviously, I have a problem with the TULIP reasoning (Calvinism) from a Scriptural perspective. From the perspective of our discussion on this thread, I think it is rather clear that those who obeyed the Lord are the ones that received the blessing(s) promised e.g. Acts 2:38,41,47; Hebrews 5:9. Personally, I think that individual predestination shifts the responsibility from the disobedient person back to God -- who supposedly cloned or programmed them to be that way.

CrazyforYeshua

13th December 2005, 05:58 PM

Well, all I know is we don't see eye-to-eye on this subject, and that's fine, we don't have to. I know I am redeemed by the blood of the Lamb, water baptized, Spirit-filled, and when my life is over, I will spend eternity with Lord Yeshua, and that is all that matters.

God bless you, DRA

- DRA -

13th December 2005, 07:27 PM

scripture flat out says be baptized for the remisison of sins,a nd those who beleive and are baptized will be saved. I agree also, that baptism is our own burial and resurrection with Christ...its being born again just as Jesus says in John 3. If baptism does not make us anew and impart grace then whats the point of it?

Good question. The point is that baptism does exactly what the Scriptures say it does, and we need to be baptized for the reason the N.T. says we should.

Note Ephesians 2:5-6a. Compare the things described in that text to Colossians 2:12-13. It shows us that the blessings obtained in baptism are based on God's grace. :clap:

Stinker

13th December 2005, 10:29 PM

Good question. The point is that baptism does exactly what the Scriptures say it does, and we need to be baptized for the reason the N.T. says we should.

Note Ephesians 2:5-6a. Compare the things described in that text to Colossians 2:12-13. It shows us that the blessings obtained in baptism are based on God's grace. :clap:

And by Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the corrupt nature of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. (Col.2:11-12)

.....in the removal of the corrupt nature of the flesh...

The KJV reads: .....in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh...

It still means the removal of the nature that can only thrive in spiritual darkness.

This passage of scripture and others similar to it such as (Rom.6:3-6), etc, do not describe a condition that can only be reversed by the final act of one's coming up out of the water. In other words, it does not describe that they have the 'corrupt nature' clear up till the point till they rise from the water of baptism.

What this, and other scriptures such as (Rom.6:3-6) do describe is the miraculous operation of the Holy Spirit weilding His sword upon the intellect & the will of an unbeliever who becomes a believer, and in that instant he/she is baptized by the Holy Spirit into the Spiritual body of Christ where we reach His blood (Eph.1:7) and enjoy all spiritual blessings. (Eph.1:3)

- DRA -

14th December 2005, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by: - DRA -

I agree that this is a discussion for another time and another place. Obviously, I have a problem with the TULIP reasoning (Calvinism) from a Scriptural perspective. From the perspective of our discussion on this thread, I think it is rather clear that those who obeyed the Lord are the ones that received the blessing(s) promised e.g. Acts 2:38,41,47; Hebrews 5:9. Personally, I think that individual predestination shifts the responsibility from the disobedient person back to God -- who supposedly cloned or programmed them to be that way.

There is no Theology that I know of that fits this description.

The "theology" is based on the principle taught in 1 Corinthians 15:12-19. It is called accepting where your reasoning takes you. Obviously, the Corinthians who believed there was no resurrection from the dead had failed to consider the implications of that reasoning. The same is true for Calvinism and the mindset it carries about obeying God's commands to be saved.

- DRA -

14th December 2005, 12:27 PM

And by Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the corrupt nature of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. (Col.2:11-12)

.....in the removal of the corrupt nature of the flesh...

The KJV reads: .....in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh...

It still means the removal of the nature that can only thrive in spiritual darkness.

This passage of scripture and others similar to it such as (Rom.6:3-6), etc, do not describe a condition that can only be reversed by the final act of one's coming up out of the water. In other words, it does not describe that they have the 'corrupt nature' clear up till the point till they rise from the water of baptism.

What this, and other scriptures such as (Rom.6:3-6) do describe is the miraculous operation of the Holy Spirit weilding His sword upon the intellect & the will of an unbeliever who becomes a believer, and in that instant he/she is baptized by the Holy Spirit into the Spiritual body of Christ where we reach His blood (Eph.1:7) and enjoy all spiritual blessings. (Eph.1:3)

Your whole premise is based on your inability or unwillingness to harmonize Acts 2:38,41,47 with 1 Corinthians 12:13. And, don't forget to throw Acts 18:8 and 1 Corinthians 1:14-16. Clearly, Paul taught baptism and even baptized some of the Corinthians. Do you contend that Paul baptized them with the baptism by the Holy Spirit?

The Holy Spirit used the sword on the Jews in Acts 2 when He convicted them of killing Jesus -- who God declared to be both Lord and Christ. What baptism did He command in Acts 2:38? Wasn't it the one in the name of Jesus Christ -- the one identified in Acts 10:47-48 as being in WATER?

Schroeder

14th December 2005, 12:56 PM

Good. We are in agreement. The issue before us why everyone won't be saved. If salvation is totally a work of God, then the implication is that God picks and chooses who gets saved and who doesn't. This, my friend, reeks of Calvinism. i see you ignoring me again. It does not mean that at all. it is his work, jesus even said no one comes to the father unless he draws him to me. How would you explain that. God saves us he draws us to his son. we in sin would NEVER do it on our own. it is his work just as the flood and water there was ALL his work, sympolising the SPirit that cleanses us now. Jesus told us the ONLY work reguired from God for us to do was to believe on his son. you yet told me why Christ told us a lie here or half truth at best. have you read the passage about Godly sorrow that brings repentance which brings salvation.

Matthew 7:13-14 contrasts the narrow gate with the wide gate and the numbers that will enter through each. It is showing us that the majority of people are headed for destruction. I would use John 14:6 to show the connection between Jesus and the narrow gate. must be because they forgot to assume the passages in scripture which speak nothing of water baptism and get water baptised. or maybe it was because they just never truely believed, as Mark 16:16 and john 3:18 say.

A couple of things to consider. First, the thief lived and died under the law of Moses. Second, Jesus' testament/will went into effect after He died i.e. Hebrews 9:15-17. In fact, using the reasoning of that particular text, we can view Acts 2 as the reading of Jesus' will. Under His will, baptism in the name of the Lord (identified in Acts 10:47-48 as being in water) was commanded to have sins taken away. He never commanded this at all. Math 28 and mark 16 is NOT water baptism. HE NEVER spoke about water baptism and it is clear the one who did, and said it was for forgiveness of sins said that his would decreae and Christ baptism which would do the same as his would increase, or that his would be for now and christ would take over, because his was GREATER.

Baptism is not about adding to Jesus' work. Romans 6:3-11 shows it is how we are united with Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection. It shows our acceptance of His sacrifice and our willingness to be united with Him. it is to, did Christ not say it was finished when he died. His work for our sins was through, done , finished, no need to add to it. Why would not truely believing this be enough for God who know the heart of man. This rom 6 is not scriptual or makes since in the llight of what so many say it is talking about. For one, there is know scripture to show it is saying water baptism unites us to his death. NONE. there is no scripture that says doing a acxt of water baptism is accepting to God to forgive our sins, and PETER says belief in christ forgives sin, scripture says Christ blood forgives sin(his work). this does not HARMONIZE does it. Scripture does say we are joined to him by the Spirit, it says we ARE with him in Spirit likethe Spirit was when he was raised. BUT it NEVER NEVER NEVER says anything about water baptism doing anything. what does Acts 15:8 say, he accepted them when they believed, what did they believe they believe what Peter taught them about Christ and his work. read Acts 10. nothing in those passages about water baptism up to when they were given the Spirit.

If we need to be freed from sins, we need to be baptized i.e. Romans 6:7. And, if we need to be forgiven of our transgression or sins, we need to be baptized i.e. Colossians 2:13. Do you think we can be saved while still in our sins?
we are NOT freed from sin. our sins are covered by his Blood. you dont quite get that do you. We are freed from the death of sin that is all. But yet we still die, which shows or tells us it is all about the Spirit not the Flesh the flesh counts for NOTHING, as Jesus tells us. silly guestion you believed we are saved in our sins because you think we can do the will of God while we are not saved. scripture says we can not please God out side of salvation yet yuou seem to think we can please him by getting water baptised.

I believe you are overlooking something in both Colossians 2:12-13 and Romans 6:3-11. When considering the blessings that are enjoyed in baptism, think about one's spiritual condition before baptism. For instance, in the passages in Colossians, in baptism we are buried with Him, raised with Him, dead in sin, made alive together with Him, and forgiven of our sins. This would mean that before baptism we were NOT buried with Christ, NOR raised with Him, dead in sin, but NOT made alive together with Him, NOR forgiven of our sins. Consider the blessings in Romans 6 in the same way. They occur DURING baptism, not BEFORE.blessing's of the Spirit baptism. again you say we are buried and raised through water baptism when scripture says we are raises by the Spirit. they occur when we truely believe. read they passages i keep given you in Gal 3:22 and Eph. 1:13 which you ignore, that show what happens when we believe just as Acts 10:44 shows and PETER says as well in Acts 11:17.

Schroeder

14th December 2005, 01:03 PM

Your whole premise is based on your inability or unwillingness to harmonize Acts 2:38,41,47 with 1 Corinthians 12:13. And, don't forget to throw Acts 18:8 and 1 Corinthians 1:14-16. Clearly, Paul taught baptism and even baptized some of the Corinthians. Do you contend that Paul baptized them with the baptism by the Holy Spirit? you still insist on using that word HARMONIZE when i have show you do not come CLOSE to doing it yourself. As fact he did impart the Spirit on some people. but how do you harmonize 1 Cor 12:13 with all you say. they do not fit at all. in Acts 2:38 it say "for" you read any commentary or study of it and you will see it saying one of two things "For the purpose of" or "because of" since scripture is CLEAR that CHRIST and GOD said to believe on him and be saved it is clear what the word "for" is meaning. seeing how no scripture or passages is given to explain why his Work on the Cross was not enough to please God. and why Paul said he taught NOTHING but the cross in 1 cor. did he NOT say this.

The Holy Spirit used the sword on the Jews in Acts 2 when He convicted them of killing Jesus -- who God declared to be both Lord and Christ. What baptism did He command in Acts 2:38? Wasn't it the one in the name of Jesus Christ -- the one identified in Acts 10:47-48 as being in WATER? if it was the Spirit and the Spirit is Christ then why would he say to be water baptized when John the baptist said he would baptise with the Spirit. hence the saying through christ we are saved. Christ is what know in the SPIRIT.

- DRA -

14th December 2005, 02:16 PM

DRA, you insist on saying that faith and belief are not "ALL" that is needed yet you have not proven that Gal 3:22 and Eph 1:13 say ONLY exactly just that.

Sorry, but the word "all" isn't in Gal. 3:22 or Eph. 1:13.

If faith/belief is "all" that is necessary to be saved, then why didn't the Holy Spirit speaking through the apostle Peter say so in Acts 2:38? Why didn't Ananias say, "Saul, you already believe, therefore your sins are washed away," in Acts 22:16? Clearly, your reasoning does NOT harmonize with the conversions in the book of Acts.

Previously, you suggested that I cut the book of Acts out and then reinsert it at some later point. Now, I have a suggestion for you. Treat the book as if it is a part of Scripture just as much as any other book, and realize that it is an inspired commentary on passages such as John 3:16 and Galatians 3:22. BTW, why not continue reading just a few more verses in Galatians 3 ... like through the end of the Christ? Then, come back and we can discuss what those do who have a real faith in the Lord.

your not being able to see the word or meaning of John 3:16 as saying "only" is for a obviouse reason it makes what you believe not correct. why else could you not see the obviouse fact that Christ never spoke about water or never said belief and do a act to prove it.

Here's the way I look at it. The word "only" is NOT in John 3:16. Because it is NOT there, then I can't act like it is there to disregard, discredit, or undermine other passages that also discuss being saved under the gospel of Christ. On the other hand, you want to insert the word "only" into the passage as a basis to justify salvation by faith/belief only. Bottom line. If this were true, the conversions in the book of Acts would show this to be so. They don't. End of story for those with an open mind.

God does not need proof of our belief does he? he should know when we truely believe. Acts 15:8 show that.

Are you sure about this? Of course you are, or you wouldn't have said what you said. But, you really should consider Genesis 22:12, which says, "He said, "Do not stretch out your hand against the lad, and do nothing to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me." James 2:21-24 also sheds some light about how Abraham's faith worked ... and how ours is supposed to work.

You mearly add to or assume to the many passages that i have shown you, word for word, that contradict what you keep thinking Acts 2:38 and a few others say.

I am NOT the one that has been adding words into passages. That has been you, my friend. You are in denial.

What you have shown us is that you are NOT willing to accept ALL that God says about salvation under the gospel of Christ.

you do not say that they must all say the same thing, because of the passage you keep bringing up that says all scripture is true. if that is so then HOW do you go around what Christ and God say to have faith believe and you are saved.

I don't have a problem acknowledging that those who believe in the Lord will be saved -- if, and I say if, their belief is the sort that prompts them to do what God says to do to be saved e.g. Acts 2:38,41,47; Acts 16:30-34; James 2:14-26.

It is even said that in the beggining noah abraham ect BELIEVED and it was accredited to them as righteousness. they did not have to do anything but believe. Rom. talks of this a lot.

The passage you are alluding to is Genesis 15:6. James 2:23 declares that Gen. 15:6 was fulfilled when Abraham obeyed God.

Note also Gen. 12:1-4a. Abraham did as God told him. That is how faith -- true faith -- works.

Noah is commended for his faith in Hebrews 11:7, which says, "By faith Noah, being warned by God about things not yet seen, in reverence prepared an ark for the salvation of his household, by which he condemned the world, and became an heir of the righteousness which is according to faith" (NASV). See that part about Noah preparing the ark? It shows us that his faith prompted him to do what God told him. Which, once again, is how faith is supposed to work.

Again are the jews and gentiles saved differently. because in what you say they are because Acts 2:38 and Acts 10:43-44 show to ways to salvation according to you. even though PETER shows that they were the same in 10:43 and 11:17, both of which would seriously contradict what he was saying to the jews in Acts 2:38. he told the jews a act of water baptism forgives sin, in acts 10 he says belief in christ forgives sin, he tells the jews that water baptism gives them the Spirit, in acts 11 he tells us we get it when we believe. please explain his thinking or misunderstanding. was he right in acts 2:38 or in Acts 10-11.

Good questions. Glad you asked. I'll try to help you. Peter told the Jews in Acts 2:38 what was necessary for them to have their sins forgiven. Notice that faith or belief is not mentioned? Why not? Because they already believed. That is shown by their response in verse 37. Three thousand Jews obeyed in verse 41, and were saved and added to the church in verse 47, as were others who did likewise.

Acts 10 shows us the conversion of the first Gentiles. Jews had been separated from the Gentiles by the law of Moses some 1500 years. Now was the time to bridge that gap. First, God prepared Peter for what was about to happen by a vision i.e. verses 9-17. Later, Peter seemed to understand what the vision meant (verse 28). Then, he preached Jesus to the Gentiles. While he spoke, the Holy Spirit came upon the Gentiles (verse 44). Did that mean they were saved at that point? Let's see if this is what Peter (who was being guided by the Holy Spirit) decides. Peter tells us his conclusion of this matter in verse 47. No one (that is, the Jews who were with him) could now forbid these Gentiles from being baptized in water (verse 47). Therefore, he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord -- just as he did the Jews in Acts 2:38. Consequently, if we can determine why the Jews were baptized in Acts 2:38, then we will know why the Gentiles were baptized (with the very same baptism) in Acts 10:47-48. Acts 2:38 says it was "for the remission of sins." So, we have our answer. The Gentiles were baptized just as the Jews to have their sins taken away. What about Acts 10:43? The belief that God accepts is the type that prompts one to do what He says i.e. James 2:21-24. Is this the type that the Gentiles had? It is if they obeyed what they were told to do -- just like the 3,000 Jews in Acts 2:41. If they didn't, they would be just like all the Jews in Jerusalem in Acts 2 that did NOT obey the command given in verse 38 -- still in their sins.

Concisely stated, the Holy Spirit coming upon the Gentiles in Acts 10 was simply to show that they could obey the gospel of Christ just like the Jews (i.e. Acts 2:38,41,47; Acts 8:12-13; Acts 8:35-39; Acts 9:18) and would receive the same blessings.

eldermike

14th December 2005, 03:17 PM

WAB

14th December 2005, 03:41 PM

This thread was split automatically after 1000 replies and this thread has been automatically created.
The old thread automatically closed is here: "Do you believe Baptism is essential for Salvation? (2)" (http://www.christianforums.com/t1240984)

Absolutely! However... most of what I have read on these posts confuses water baptism with Spirit baptism. 1 Corinthians 12:13 makes the disrinction very clear... "For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body-- whether Jews or Greeks (Gentiles, same Grk. word), whether slaves or free-- and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.

Also, Romans 8:9b applies... "...if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His." How more essential to one's salvation could Spirit baptism be?

jckstraw72

14th December 2005, 04:28 PM

Absolutely! However... most of what I have read on these posts confuses water baptism with Spirit baptism. 1 Corinthians 12:13 makes the disrinction very clear... "For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body-- whether Jews or Greeks (Gentiles, same Grk. word), whether slaves or free-- and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.

Also, Romans 8:9b applies... "...if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His." How more essential to one's salvation could Spirit baptism be?

everyone is missing the point...that the Spirit is IN THE WATER! If the Holy Spirit can descend on a human and bring about Christ as the product, then the Spirit can descend on water and make us new creatures in Christ. These passages have always been understood as water baptism, and theres no reason to separate water from Spirit. They have only been reinterpreted post-Reformation to validate the lack of sacraments.

- DRA -

14th December 2005, 04:29 PM

Acts 2:38 does not contain the word "water". Also in this verse it's talking about an outward expression of what has already taken place. It's about being identified as a Christian. Another word used this way is "circumcise". To be "part of the circumcision" was another one of these tricky word things. It's also about identity and not about an operation.

You are correct. Acts 2:38 does not say "water." Acts 10:47-48 says "water." And, since both passages are discussing the baptism in the name of the Lord, we should see the necessary inference -- the baptism in Acts 2:38 is in water.

As far as the "tricky word thing" is concerned, "for the remission of sins" shouldn't be one of those. I don't know of anyone that seems to have a problem understanding what it means in Matthew 26:28. And, I really don't think anyone has a problem with understanding what it means in Acts 2:38. The problem comes about because of its connection with baptism. That is where the real problem lies.

The connection between circumcision and baptism is made in Colossians 2:11-12. The connection is between the removal of the flesh in circumcision and the removal of the body of flesh in baptism (i.e. Romans 6:6).

- DRA -

14th December 2005, 04:37 PM

Absolutely! However... most of what I have read on these posts confuses water baptism with Spirit baptism. 1 Corinthians 12:13 makes the disrinction very clear... "For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body-- whether Jews or Greeks (Gentiles, same Grk. word), whether slaves or free-- and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.

Also, Romans 8:9b applies... "...if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His." How more essential to one's salvation could Spirit baptism be?

It seems that your understanding of 1 Cor. 12:13 has failed to consider Acts 18:8 and 1 Cor. 1:14-16. Paul taught baptism and he even baptized some of the Corinthians. Do you think he baptized them with the Holy Spirit baptism?

The Spirit's role in conversions seemed to be totally overlooked. In Acts 2, the Holy Spirit was directly influencing the teaching of the apostle Peter. Baptism in water was commanded (verse 38). We see the same thing in Acts 8:29. The Spirit was leading Philip. And, Philip taught about the need to be baptized in water (verses 35-39). No way around it. And, the Spirit was directing the teaching.

- DRA -

14th December 2005, 04:42 PM

everyone is missing the point...that the Spirit is IN THE WATER! If the Holy Spirit can descend on a human and bring about Christ as the product, then the Spirit can descend on water and make us new creatures in Christ. These passages have always been understood as water baptism, and theres no reason to separate water from Spirit. They have only been reinterpreted post-Reformation to validate the lack of sacraments.

I don't know of any Scriptural basis to say the Spirit is in the water. I only find that baptism in water is the means that God designed for us to be united with Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection. Rather than the Spirit working in the water, baptism is based on faith in the working of God, by whose grace we can be united with His Son.

jckstraw72

14th December 2005, 04:45 PM

well if you agree theres baptismal regeneration, then it has to be more than just water.

eldermike

14th December 2005, 05:30 PM

This is tricky of you. You take the one that leaves out salvation and add it to the one that leaves out water. Come on now, that's not how harmony works.You are correct. Acts 2:38 does not say "water." Acts 10:47-48 says "water." And, since both passages are discussing the baptism in the name of the Lord, we should see the necessary inference -- the baptism in Acts 2:38 is in water.

As far as the "tricky word thing" is concerned, "for the remission of sins" shouldn't be one of those. I don't know of anyone that seems to have a problem understanding what it means in Matthew 26:28. And, I really don't think anyone has a problem with understanding what it means in Acts 2:38. The problem comes about because of its connection with baptism. That is where the real problem lies.

The connection between circumcision and baptism is made in Colossians 2:11-12. The connection is between the removal of the flesh in circumcision and the removal of the body of flesh in baptism (i.e. Romans 6:6).

If Not For Grace

14th December 2005, 05:32 PM

By Faith and Grace are you saved. Anything else is just a perk.

- DRA -

14th December 2005, 06:00 PM

This is tricky of you. You take the one that leaves out salvation and add it to the one that leaves out water. Come on now, that's not how harmony works.

Not tricky at all, my friend. It is how Bible harmony works.

I didn't add anything at all. Acts 2 is discussing the baptism in the name of Jesus Christ, which is synonymous with the baptism in the name of the Lord (Jesus Christ) in Acts 10. Therefore, both texts must be combined to get a complete picture of what this baptism involves.

Consider Judas. Matthew 27:5. Judas hung himself. Now, consider Acts 1:18. It says that Judas fell, burst open, and his intestines came out. So, which account do we accept? First, I consider whether or not the same person is under consideration in both accounts. It is. Then, I accept what both accounts say happened. Therefore, I conclude that Judas hung himself, and his body fell and burst open. In short, I harmonize the verses. Just like Acts 2:38 and Acts 10:47-48.

:idea:

eldermike

14th December 2005, 06:05 PM

In this case you are simply working out a presupposition, in your example below you are looking for further supporting evidence of a complete thought. They are different processes. But, I can't make you see that.Not tricky at all, my friend. It is how Bible harmony works.

I didn't add anything at all. Acts 2 is discussing the baptism in the name of Jesus Christ, which is synonymous with the baptism in the name of the Lord (Jesus Christ) in Acts 10. Therefore, both texts must be combined to get a complete picture of what this baptism involves.

Consider Judas. Matthew 27:5. Judas hung himself. Now, consider Acts 1:18. It says that Judas fell, burst open, and his intestines came out. So, which account do we accept? First, I consider whether or not the same person is under consideration in both accounts. It it. Then, I accept what both accounts says happened. Therefore, I conclude that Judas hung himself, and his body fell and burst open. In short, I harmonize the verses. Just like Acts 2:38 and Acts 10:47-48.

:idea:

- DRA -

14th December 2005, 06:10 PM

By Faith and Grace are you saved. Anything else is just a perk.

Before jumping to any rash conclusion, have you fully considered the context of Ephesians 2:8, the passage you are alluding to? If not, you really should. Why? Go back just a few verses. Note the things described in verses 5-6a (especially the part in parentheses). Now compare the text with Colossians 2:12-13. Hmmm. It's apparent that the blessings that occur in baptism are being discussed in Ephesians 2:5-6a. That means that baptism is connected with God's grace -- not separate and apart from it as we are sometimes told.

Consider the conversion of the Ephesians in Acts 19:1-6. They were baptized in the name of the Lord. That baptism is in water (see Acts 10:47-48). Think about it. The Ephesians were baptized in water, which is what we see described in 2:5-6a.

- DRA -

14th December 2005, 06:16 PM

In this case you are simply working out a presupposition, in your example below you are looking for further supporting evidence of a complete thought. They are different processes. But, I can't make you see that.

You are correct. I really can't relate to what you are suggesting without some Scriptural basis for it i.e. 1 Peter 4:11a.

It seems to me that the one who draws a conclusion without considering all the Scriptural evidence is the one that has already predetermined what they are going to believe.

:sigh:

eldermike

14th December 2005, 06:26 PM

Since scriptures meaning is revealed, it's always possible that both of us are equally guilty. But even this statement further supports salvation as a true gift without strings attached, otherwise a perfect process of obtaining knowledge would even be more required than water baptisim.You are correct. I really can't relate to what you are suggesting without some Scriptural basis for it i.e. 1 Peter 4:11a.

It seems to me that the one who draws a conclusion without considering all the Scriptural evidence is the one that has already predetermined what they are going to believe.

:sigh:

Stinker

15th December 2005, 12:11 AM

Schroeder

15th December 2005, 04:57 PM

Sorry, but the word "all" isn't in Gal. 3:22 or Eph. 1:13.

If faith/belief is "all" that is necessary to be saved, then why didn't the Holy Spirit speaking through the apostle Peter say so in Acts 2:38? Why didn't Ananias say, "Saul, you already believe, therefore your sins are washed away," in Acts 22:16? Clearly, your reasoning does NOT harmonize with the conversions in the book of Acts. neither is water baptism in them so why do you assume it MUST go with it. because Peter said it right you interprete it wrong. again read what i said about the word "for" it is meaning "because of" why because Peter says belief in christ forgives sin and that we get the Spirit when we believe just as they did. two passages you keep avoiding. Did he not say this to them. as for ananais could have been speaking of the Spirit because of what Titus 3:5 and john 4,7:38 say. you simply always say the word baptise MUST be water instead of the ONE baptism being Christ. why would J0hn the baptist say such a thing if it was not the one baptism. these are what you ignore.

Previously, you suggested that I cut the book of Acts out and then reinsert it at some later point. Now, I have a suggestion for you. Treat the book as if it is a part of Scripture just as much as any other book, and realize that it is an inspired commentary on passages such as John 3:16 and Galatians 3:22. BTW, why not continue reading just a few more verses in Galatians 3 ... like through the end of the Christ? Then, come back and we can discuss what those do who have a real faith in the Lord. i do my problem as NEVER been the book of Acts it has been your interpratation of it. mainly the word baptise. if they have Faith in what is taught them of Christ they believe. that is what Faith they are talking about, when they speak of salvation. there is a faith after and before. faith before is faith in the message of Christ. faith before is faith in the Spirit in you to guide you and to believe what God promised, everlasting life.

Here's the way I look at it. The word "only" is NOT in John 3:16. Because it is NOT there, then I can't act like it is there to disregard, discredit, or undermine other passages that also discuss being saved under the gospel of Christ. On the other hand, you want to insert the word "only" into the passage as a basis to justify salvation by faith/belief only. Bottom line. If this were true, the conversions in the book of Acts would show this to be so. They don't. End of story for those with an open mind. the word water is not any where but Acts 10:47 yet you insert it in a awfull lot of places dont you. and they do show this. read Acts 10:43 and 11:17 gal 3:22 eph 1:13 and many others. AGAIN why should i not if i dont he(christ) is not speaking the whole truth. that would be lieing. and if it was the Spirit speaking why would he do such a thing. you dont seem to care about that simple logic. youy see peter told them what saved them before he spoke 2:38. so this passage has NOTHING to do with what saves them. Christ saved them. they just need to believe it. again we MUST believe Christ and what he did FIRST do we not. yes, well God showed us in Acts 15:8 that he did NOT need them to prove it by doing anything but believe. why because many passages say this. John 3:16 gal 3:22 eph 1:13 rom 10:9 John 6 and quite a few others. Peter even said it.

Are you sure about this? Of course you are, or you wouldn't have said what you said. But, you really should consider Genesis 22:12, which says, "He said, "Do not stretch out your hand against the lad, and do nothing to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me." James 2:21-24 also sheds some light about how Abraham's faith worked ... and how ours is supposed to work. So you are saying we are saved the same way. read scripture that says they were saved because of there belief, not belief plus. read john 6 AGAIN

I
am NOT the one that has been adding words into passages. That has been you, my friend. You are in denial.

What you have shown us is that you are NOT willing to accept ALL that God says about salvation under the gospel of Christ.
you add water all the time when it is VERY clear there are TWO baptisms spoke about. one with actuall water JOHNS and one without that JOHN said would replace is that Christ would do to ALL. if that is so then who do you think is refered to in eph 4. the one which is greater. all God EVER said and it is cleasr in scripture because it always refers or says this is what God disires, what does he say to believe on his Son. Read John 6, 1 john 5:10 All God EVER asked anyone was to BELIEVE. scripture ios clear what happenes when we do.

I don't have a problem acknowledging that those who believe in the Lord will be saved -- if, and I say if, their belief is the sort that prompts them to do what God says to do to be saved e.g. Acts 2:38,41,47; Acts 16:30-34; James 2:14-26. God AGAIN tells us what the WORK that he reguires is. to believe on his son. or again the he lies to us. if what Christ told them in john 6 is not the WHOLE truth he is a lier.

The passage you are alluding to is Genesis 15:6. James 2:23 declares that Gen. 15:6 was fulfilled when Abraham obeyed God.

Note also Gen. 12:1-4a. Abraham did as God told him. That is how faith -- true faith -- works.
true faith when we are already saved, does it say he must do this to be saved to prove he believed, and or that it was meant for ALL people to do the same. it was for abraham alone. read rom 10:8 this is the FAITH we proclaim

Noah is commended for his faith in Hebrews 11:7, which says, "By faith Noah, being warned by God about things not yet seen, in reverence prepared an ark for the salvation of his household, by which he condemned the world, and became an heir of the righteousness which is according to faith" (NASV). See that part about Noah preparing the ark? It shows us that his faith prompted him to do what God told him. Which, once again, is how faith is supposed to work. yes he did what God asked of him he did the work God reguired to be saved. to builed the ark, the "water" was HIs work. it represents the Spirit baptism now that washes our sins away. you see the water then literale cleansed just as the Spirit now does cleans us. and we read in John 6 what WORK he asked us to do so he can do his part afterwards. which again Gal 3:22 and eph 1:13 and John 3:16 all say. we believe he saves us through Christ(the Spirit)

Good questions. Glad you asked. I'll try to help you. Peter told the Jews in Acts 2:38 what was necessary for them to have their sins forgiven. Notice that faith or belief is not mentioned? Why not? Because they already believed. That is shown by their response in verse 37. Three thousand Jews obeyed in verse 41, and were saved and added to the church in verse 47, as were others who did likewise. i do not read where they ask what they must do to have there sins forgiven. they said what must we do. he said REPENT. read later on when he says that he said for them to repent and have there sins washed away. nothing here about water baptism but i bet you will insert that in. Titus 3:5 shows that the Spirit does this as well as John 7:38. 1 cor 12:13 is clear on what unites us into the Body. it is not water baptism is it. or will you insert that in this passage as well.

Acts 10 shows us the conversion of the first Gentiles. Jews had been separated from the Gentiles by the law of Moses some 1500 years. Now was the time to bridge that gap. First, God prepared Peter for what was about to happen by a vision i.e. verses 9-17. Later, Peter seemed to understand what the vision meant (verse 28). Then, he preached Jesus to the Gentiles. While he spoke, the Holy Spirit came upon the Gentiles (verse 44). Did that mean they were saved at that point? Let's see if this is what Peter (who was being guided by the Holy Spirit) decides. Peter tells us his conclusion of this matter in verse 47. No one (that is, the Jews who were with him) could now forbid these Gentiles from being baptized in water (verse 47). Therefore, he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord -- just as he did the Jews in Acts 2:38. Consequently, if we can determine why the Jews were baptized in Acts 2:38, then we will know why the Gentiles were baptized (with the very same baptism) in Acts 10:47-48. Acts 2:38 says it was "for the remission of sins." So, we have our answer. The Gentiles were baptized just as the Jews to have their sins taken away. What about Acts 10:43? The belief that God accepts is the type that prompts one to do what He says i.e. James 2:21-24. Is this the type that the Gentiles had? It is if they obeyed what they were told to do -- just like the 3,000 Jews in Acts 2:41. If they didn't, they would be just like all the Jews in Jerusalem in Acts 2 that did NOT obey the command given in verse 38 -- still in their sins.

Concisely stated, the Holy Spirit coming upon the Gentiles in Acts 10 was simply to show that they could obey the gospel of Christ just like the Jews (i.e. Acts 2:38,41,47; Acts 8:12-13; Acts 8:35-39; Acts 9:18) and would receive the same blessings. you are adding to what is said AGAIN. there is NO indication of what you say at all. he said in verse 43 belief in Christ forgives sin he said in 11:17 they got the Spirit when they believed. both fit all the passages i have given you, word for word, by the way. so you are saying he said one thing but meant another, even though he doesnt say that at all, just your assumption. you are saying God accepted them in sin and jumped the gun on Peter before he spoke what was truely the truth. that belief did not really forgive sin. God is rather clumsy isnt he. if this command was SO important why doesnt any of scripture make it know the great problem if we do not follow it. they just hope we have the ability to assume as good as you. No the GIFT of the Spirit, speaking in tongues, showed them they were not excluded. scripture is clear on this, why do you keep saying otherwise. there is NOTHING ABOUT IT BEING DONE TO SHOW THEM THEY(GENTILES) COULD NOW DO WHAT WAS COMMANDED. that was there problem to begin with, they want the gentiles to do what they commanded of them to do before they could get saved.

jmacvols

15th December 2005, 07:11 PM

This is tricky of you. You take the one that leaves out salvation and add it to the one that leaves out water. Come on now, that's not how harmony works.

Look how these verses hamonize:

1 Cor 12:13----Holy Spirit------baptized========>body
John 3:5 ------Holy Spirit------water==========>kingdom
Titus 3:5 ------Holy Ghost------washing========>saved
Eph 5:26-------Word-----------water==========>cleansed

Water is the equivalent of baptism.

eldermike

15th December 2005, 08:22 PM

- DRA -

15th December 2005, 08:57 PM

Originally Posted by: Stinker

http://www3.christianforums.com/images/quotes/quot-by-right.gifhttp://www3.christianforums.com/images/quotes/quot-top-right-10.gifAnd by Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the corrupt nature of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. (Col.2:11-12)

.....in the removal of the corrupt nature of the flesh...

The KJV reads: .....in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh...

It still means the removal of the nature that can only thrive in spiritual darkness.

This passage of scripture and others similar to it such as (Rom.6:3-6), etc, do not describe a condition that can only be reversed by the final act of one's coming up out of the water. In other words, it does not describe that they have the 'corrupt nature' clear up till the point till they rise from the water of baptism.

What this, and other scriptures such as (Rom.6:3-6) do describe is the miraculous operation of the Holy Spirit weilding His sword upon the intellect & the will of an unbeliever who becomes a believer, and in that instant he/she is baptized by the Holy Spirit into the Spiritual body of Christ where we reach His blood (Eph.1:7) and enjoy all spiritual blessings. (Eph.1:3) [/QUOTE]

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

Originally Posted by: - DRA -

Before jumping to any rash conclusion, have you fully considered the context of Ephesians 2:8, the passage you are alluding to? If not, you really should. Why? Go back just a few verses. Note the things described in verses 5-6a (especially the part in parentheses). Now compare the text with Colossians 2:12-13. Hmmm. It's apparent that the blessings that occur in baptism are being discussed in Ephesians 2:5-6a. That means that baptism is connected with God's grace -- not separate and apart from it as we are sometimes told.

Consider the conversion of the Ephesians in Acts 19:1-6. They were baptized in the name of the Lord. That baptism is in water (see Acts 10:47-48). Think about it. The Ephesians were baptized in water, which is what we see described in 2:5-6a.

Instead of just repeating a few of the same scriptures over and over and over again, why don't we try to learn (in depth) what they each mean DRA. Here is one of your often quoted scriptures and since it is evident that you didn't learn what Col.2:11-12 teaches earlier....here it is again. Notice it does not teach what you think it does!

Sorry, but I feel compelled to keep using the same passages until I get folks such as yourself to deal with them.

Am I up to an indepth discussion of passages such as Colossians 2:12-13 and Romans 6:3-11? Yes, I believe I am. Now I have a question for you. Are you ever going to attempt in any way, shape, or form to harmonize your understanding of 1 Cor. 12:13 with Acts 2:38,41,47? It's not like this is the first time I've asked you now, is it? The passages in Acts clearly show us that baptism in the name of the Lord (which was in WATER) was required to have sins forgiven, and when sins were forgiven a person was saved and added to the church. Thus, it shows us which baptism resulted in a sinner being added to the church (the called out of God). Now, can you show us how this passage agrees with your understanding of 1 Cor. 12:13? By harmonizing this passage with Acts 2:38, I conclude that the baptism under discussion in 1 Cor. 12:13 is the baptism in the name of the Lord. Furthermore, this conclusion is supported by Acts 18:8 and 1 Cor. 1:14-16 -- which show us that Paul clearly taught about baptism and even baptized some of the Corinthians. So, why not explain to us how Paul baptized them "by the Holy Spirit" (1 Cor. 12:13) which you say the Holy Spirit does, or explain how there are really two baptisms applicable today i.e. Eph. 4:5? Take your pick. Either way, I would like to hear the indepth explanation.

Concerning Colossians 2:11, which says in the NASV, "And in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ." The word for body is the Koine Greek word "soma." I think you need to explain how you determined that the word means "nature." It doesn't. The NASV translators translate it 11x as "bodies," 128x as "body," 1x as "personal," 1x as "slaves," and 1x as "substance." Your reasoning gives me the impression that you are confusing this word with the word "nature" or "natural" (phusikos) in Romans 1:26-27. However, returning to Col. 2:11, it seems that you totally missed the imagery. The comparison is between circumcision and baptism. You know, I may be mistaken, but I believe there is a difference before circumcision and after circumcision. The same is true of baptism. In circumcision flesh is removed, in baptism the "body of the flesh" is removed. How? The explanation follows -- which takes us to verses 12-13 -- the same ole verses that have been posted repeatedly. Removing the body of flesh occurs when we are buried with Christ in baptism, from which we rise with Christ. The result? We go from being dead in transgressions to being made alive by having our transgressions forgiven.

As far as Romans 6 is concerned, I ask that you focus your attention on verse 7. See that part about being freed from sins? It is synonymous with the "remission of sins" in Acts 2:38 (and Matthew 26:28). So, if we can determine what baptism what commanded in that passage, then we know for certainty which baptism is under discussion in Romans 6. I see that baptism of the name of Jesus Christ as clearly being identified as the baptism in water in Acts 10:47-48. Now, can you show us how it is identifed with the "baptism by the Holy Spirit" based on your understanding of 1 Cor. 12:13?

All spiritual blessings are indeed in Christ (Eph. 1:3,7). The issue is how one gets into Christ to enjoy these blessings. Galatians 3:27 says that baptism puts one "into Christ." Therefore, we need to determine how the Ephesians were baptized into Christ. Was it with the baptism by the Holy Spirit, as you suggest? If so, please give us an indepth explanation of exactly how you made this determination. I am not convinced that this was the case for two reasons. The first is that I have NO reason to believe there is such a thing. And, the second reason is that Acts 19:5 tells us that the Ephesians were baptized in the name of the Lord -- which takes us back to Acts 10:47-48 and water.

Question for thought:
If baptism is indeed based on faith in the working of God (Col. 2:12), what would one see who had NO faith? Wouldn't they only see water? Think of it this way: the eunuch saw water and desired to be baptized. After he was baptized he "went on his way rejoicing" (see Acts 8:35-39). Why was he rejoicing? Because he saw the water? Or, was it because his faith allowed him to see much more? Think about it.

:idea:

Stan53

15th December 2005, 11:21 PM

For me it is almost impossible to follow this thread due to work comitments. One really needs to be able to get to it almost hourly to keep up. I am happy to comment further.
DRA wrote "Would you mind commenting on Luke 17:10, 1 Peter 1:22, and Hebrews 5:9. I understand that we are to obey God in response to what Jesus did for us. If it is true that our salvation is solely based on what Jesus did, then everyone should be saved, right? After all, He died for the whole world i.e. John 3:16, Titus 2:11. So, everyone automatically gets saved, right? If this is your reasoning, please explain Matt. 7:13-14, 21-23, because it seems that everyone doesn't get saved." in response to my post on this matter.
I am going to stand by my ealier statement.
http://www3.christianforums.com/images/quotes/quot-top-left.gifQuotehttp://www3.christianforums.com/images/quotes/quot-top-right.gif http://www3.christianforums.com/images/quotes/quot-by-left.gifOriginally Posted by: Stan53 http://www3.christianforums.com/images/quotes/quot-by-right.gifhttp://www3.christianforums.com/images/quotes/quot-top-right-10.gifThe short answer is no. Your salvation does not depend up what you do. It depends entirely on what Christ did (past tense). It has all been done and there is no more to add.
You get baptised purely as an act of obedience. It is your testimony to what Christ has done in you.
In Christ,
Stan
To those who would disagree with me I would respectfully request that they pray and seek the Lord Jesus Christ about this. I would also prayerfully request that they consider Martin Luther. He stood firm on the matter of salvation by works.
I am happy to comment further about this but not through here simply because I am finding it very difficult to keep up.
So many posts on a very divisive subject.
In Christ,
Stan

jmacvols

15th December 2005, 11:58 PM

Are you telling me that a person must "harmonize" (whatever that means) 1 Cr, John, Titus, Eph to then come up with water being required for salvation?

har-mo-ny - a systematic arrangement of parallel literary passages for the purpose of showing agreement. Each verse on its own shows the necessity of water baptism. We know the Bible does not contradict itself. Therefore none of the four verses contradict each other, meaning baptism is equated to water/washing. You're not suggesting the four verses contradict each other?

The bible says "keep not the little Children from me"............but, we must be picking a doctrine out of a biblical chord made up from a presupposition that was born from the harmony of 4 books all written with different context and purposes? Think about it.

I was showing how four verses harmonize by teaching the same thing. All four verses have the same context and purpose, they are in agreement, each shows that it takes Spirit + water baptism = salvation.

Salvation = born again
How I was born the first time and how I was born the second time was not my doing.

born again = Spirit + water
One chooses to be water baptized. The eunuch told Philip, see, here is water, what doth hinder me to be baptized. Being water baptized was requested by the eunuch, it was not forced upon him. Those that refused John's baptism was said to have 'rejected the counsel of God'. What can be said of those that reject Christ's command to be water baptized?

jckstraw72

16th December 2005, 05:49 AM

why would the Church believe baptism is a necessary part of Christ's plan for salvation if it had nothing to do with it? Why as Christ baptised if were not to be? Christ is our example. Christ was baptized. Youd better be baptized...and in a Church that understands it in its true sacramental form--Orthodox preferably.

Schroeder

16th December 2005, 12:17 PM

Look how these verses hamonize:

1 Cor 12:13----Holy Spirit------baptized========>body
John 3:5 ------Holy Spirit------water==========>kingdom
Titus 3:5 ------Holy Ghost------washing========>saved
Eph 5:26-------Word-----------water==========>cleansed

Water is the equivalent of baptism. you are very selective in your thinking. read John 7:38. he speaks of water here yet it clearly says it is refering to christ spirit baptism. in Luke 12:50 Christ speaks of having to be BAPTIZED, but guess what he was refering to His sacrifice. well guess what rom 6 says. if Christ refered to his baptism as his sacrifice what do you think he means when he speaks of us doing the same. which is why John the baptist said his would be by the Spirit. as for John 3:5 why wont you read the next verse which tells you what he is speaking of. what else would he be refering to when he says flesh gives birth to flesh. Titus says washing why would this mean water baptism, there is no other place in scripoture that tells us it does(see that is how you harmonize), not making up stuff to fit your ideology. and water as we see can represent the Spirit and does on most every ocassion it is used in the new testement. So they do harmonize, they speak of the work of GOD only through Christ in the Spirit.

Stinker

16th December 2005, 12:54 PM

Concerning Colossians 2:11, which says in the NASV, "And in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ." The word for body is the Koine Greek word "soma." I think you need to explain how you determined that the word means "nature." It doesn't. The NASV translators translate it 11x as "bodies," 128x as "body," 1x as "personal," 1x as "slaves," and 1x as "substance." Your reasoning gives me the impression that you are confusing this word with the word "nature" or "natural" (phusikos) in Romans 1:26-27. However, returning to Col. 2:11, it seems that you totally missed the imagery. The comparison is between circumcision and baptism. You know, I may be mistaken, but I believe there is a difference before circumcision and after circumcision. The same is true of baptism. In circumcision flesh is removed, in baptism the "body of the flesh" is removed. How? The explanation follows -- which takes us to verses 12-13 -- the same ole verses that have been posted repeatedly. Removing the body of flesh occurs when we are buried with Christ in baptism, from which we rise with Christ. The result? We go from being dead in transgressions to being made alive by having our transgressions forgiven. [DRA post #73]

Well DRA, it appears that you are saying that physical circumcision is the removal of phyisical flesh, and you would be correct here. Now what you appear to be saying next is that this body of the sins of the flesh is the sins alone. In other words; these sins were not really cut off, but washed away in the water of baptism. That without water baptism, one is uncircumcised in the flesh. (Col.2:13) Doesn't look like Colossians supports your line of reasoning DRA.

Do you now understand what circumcision of the flesh is?

Circumcision of the flesh cannot mean only 'removal of our sins' and yet still harmonize with these Colossian passages.

Schroeder

16th December 2005, 12:54 PM

Sorry, but I feel compelled to keep using the same passages until I get folks such as yourself to deal with them. of course you wont deal with anything we show you.

Am I up to an indepth discussion of passages such as Colossians 2:12-13 and Romans 6:3-11? Yes, I believe I am. Now I have a question for you. Are you ever going to attempt in any way, shape, or form to harmonize your understanding of 1 Cor. 12:13 with Acts 2:38,41,47? It's not like this is the first time I've asked you now, is it? The passages in Acts clearly show us that baptism in the name of the Lord (which was in WATER) was required to have sins forgiven, and when sins were forgiven a person was saved and added to the church. Thus, it shows us which baptism resulted in a sinner being added to the church (the called out of God). Now, can you show us how this passage agrees with your understanding of 1 Cor. 12:13? By harmonizing this passage with Acts 2:38, I conclude that the baptism under discussion in 1 Cor. 12:13 is the baptism in the name of the Lord. abosolutly unreal and obviouse you refuse to see the obvious FACT. it clearly without a doubt does not say anything what so ever about water baptism and clearly say we are baptized by the SPIRIT. so the baptism under discussion is VERY CLEAR. it is the one John the baptist spoke about. how does it harmonize with Acts 3:38. easy Peter is not saying water baptism forgives sin AT ALL. he says to do it BECAUSE OF. if you read or look at interpretatioins of this GREEK wording it shows this as a probable interpretation and if you HARMOMNIZE it wiht what is spoke of forgiveness of sins by PETER HIMSELF it seems to be the correct why to interprate it. seeing how PETER himself said belief in christ forgives sin in Acts 10:43 and that we receive the Spirit when we believe as well. seems you can fit these two passages into your ideology. Furthermore, this conclusion is supported by Acts 18:8 and 1 Cor. 1:14-16 -- which show us that Paul clearly taught about baptism and even baptized some of the Corinthians. So, why not explain to us how Paul baptized them "by the Holy Spirit" (1 Cor. 12:13) which you say the Holy Spirit does, or explain how there are really two baptisms applicable today i.e. Eph. 4:5? Take your pick. Either way, I would like to hear the indepth explanation. doesnt matter how he did it, it doesnt say why does it he NEVER says water baptism does anything and is glad he didnt, strong words to speak if it was such a important teaching and was rather essential for salvation, it would suggest he really didnt care if they got saved. and seeing how he said he only taught about Christ and the cross and that was ALL.

Concerning Colossians 2:11, which says in the NASV, "And in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ." The word for body is the Koine Greek word "soma." I think you need to explain how you determined that the word means "nature." It doesn't. The NASV translators translate it 11x as "bodies," 128x as "body," 1x as "personal," 1x as "slaves," and 1x as "substance." Your reasoning gives me the impression that you are confusing this word with the word "nature" or "natural" (phusikos) in Romans 1:26-27. However, returning to Col. 2:11, it seems that you totally missed the imagery. The comparison is between circumcision and baptism. You know, I may be mistaken, but I believe there is a difference before circumcision and after circumcision. The same is true of baptism. In circumcision flesh is removed, in baptism the "body of the flesh" is removed. How? The explanation follows -- which takes us to verses 12-13 -- the same ole verses that have been posted repeatedly. Removing the body of flesh occurs when we are buried with Christ in baptism, from which we rise with Christ. The result? We go from being dead in transgressions to being made alive by having our transgressions forgiven.
of course this doesnt harmonize with Acts 2:38 which speaks nothing of water baptism doing this. it merely says it forgives sin and gives us the Spirit. two things i have already shown isnt true. Liuke 12:50 says that christ wass to be baptized, refering to his sacrifice, scripture tells us God was with him in the SPirit so why when speaking of baptism is it not refering to this use of baptism. there is NO scripture that tells us or explains to us that water baptism unites us into his death, we no it doesnt unite us into his ressurection because of what Rom 8 says. its your ASSUMPTION again.

As far as Romans 6 is concerned, I ask that you focus your attention on verse 7. See that part about being freed from sins? It is synonymous with the "remission of sins" in Acts 2:38 (and Matthew 26:28). So, if we can determine what baptism what commanded in that passage, then we know for certainty which baptism is under discussion in Romans 6. I see that baptism of the name of Jesus Christ as clearly being identified as the baptism in water in Acts 10:47-48. Now, can you show us how it is identifed with the "baptism by the Holy Spirit" based on your understanding of 1 Cor. 12:13?
WRONG we are NEVER freed from sin only from the cause of sin being DEATH. since we physically die we now it is the SPirit in us that NEVER dies or is in sin. so there is NOTHING synonymous with it and Acts 2:38. we know rom 6 is speaking of because of what Acts 15:8 says and Gal 3:22 and eph 1:13. luke 12:50, rom 8 rom 5 its quite clear. we knoiw it is the WORK of GOd here not us.
All spiritual blessings are indeed in Christ (Eph. 1:3,7). The issue is how one gets into Christ to enjoy these blessings. Galatians 3:27 says that baptism puts one "into Christ." Therefore, we need to determine how the Ephesians were baptized into Christ. Was it with the baptism by the Holy Spirit, as you suggest? If so, please give us an indepth explanation of exactly how you made this determination. I am not convinced that this was the case for two reasons. The first is that I have NO reason to believe there is such a thing. And, the second reason is that Acts 19:5 tells us that the Ephesians were baptized in the name of the Lord -- which takes us back to Acts 10:47-48 and water. that is obviously the question. How can you say such a thing. 1 cor 12:13 is clear in saying we are baptized by the Spirit. john the baptist made it clear Christ baptism would be of the Spirit. gal3:22 and eph 1:14 acts 11:16-17 make it even clearer. So explain How you believe there is no such thing as the baptism of the SPirit. thats what we call grieving the SPirit. almost blasphamy. but none of them say the reason they were. they did it mearly to associate themselves with being a christian. that was the customary way of showing who you stood with. the closet thing in scripture which clearly tell us how we are joined or brought "INTO" christ is 1 cor 12:13.

Question for thought:
If baptism is indeed based on faith in the working of God (Col. 2:12), what would one see who had NO faith? Wouldn't they only see water? Think of it this way: the eunuch saw water and desired to be baptized. After he was baptized he "went on his way rejoicing" (see Acts 8:35-39). Why was he rejoicing? Because he saw the water? Or, was it because his faith allowed him to see much more? Think about it.
if they had no faith they would never do it in the first place. you do not understand the use of the word Faith that is spoke about before our salvation. Faith is Christ. beliving in the gospel message of what he taught and did. rom 10:8-11 then there is Faith after salvation which is different. it is faith that he will always be there and we will receive the reward of following him. question for you. why did John the baptist say christ would baptise us with the Spirit? why did PEter says belief in christ forgives sin and that they received the Spirit just as they did when they believed contrary to what you think he said in Acts 2:38? Do you think you will lose your salvation if you change your thinking since you have covered all hte bases? though covering the bases doesnt secure your spot in heaven does it. now only God can determine if you are saved truelly, do you think he needs to see our hearts to know this or see us do a act to prove it?