We're Baptists

[AJB4]

Biblical Authority
The Bible is the final authority in all matters of belief and practice because the Bible is inspired by God and bears the absolute authority of God Himself. Whatever the Bible affirms, Baptists accept as true. No human opinion or decree of any church group can override the Bible. Even creeds and confessions of faith, which attempt to articulate the theology of Scripture, do not carry Scripture's inherent authority.

2 Timothy 3:15-17; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Peter 1:20, 21


Autonomy of the Local Church
The local church is an independent body accountable to the Lord Jesus Christ, the head of the church. All human authority for governing the local church resides within the local church itself. Thus the church is autonomous, or self-governing. No religious hierarchy outside the local church may dictate a church's beliefs or practices. Autonomy does not mean isolation. A Baptist church may fellowship with other churches around mutual interests and in an associational tie, but a Baptist church cannot be a "member" of any other body.

Colossians 1:18; 2 Corinthians 8:1-5, 19, 23


Priesthood of the Believer
"Priest" is defined as "one authorized to perform the sacred rites of a religion, especially as a mediatory agent between humans and God." Every believer today is a priest of God and may enter into His presence in prayer directly through our Great High Priest, Jesus Christ. No other mediator is needed between God and people. As priests, we can study God's Word, pray for others, and offer spiritual worship to God. We all have equal access to God--whether we are a preacher or not.

1 Peter 2:5, 9; Revelation 5:9, 10


Two Ordinances
The local church should practice two ordinances: (1) baptism of believers by immersion in water, identifying the individual with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection, and (2) the Lord's Supper, or communion, commemorating His death for our sins.

Matthew 28:19, 20; 1 Corinthians 11:23-32


Individual Soul Liberty
Every individual, whether a believer or an unbeliever, has the liberty to choose what he believes is right in the religious realm. No one should be forced to assent to any belief against his will. Baptists have always opposed religious persecution. However, this liberty does not exempt one from responsibility to the Word of God or from accountability to God Himself.

Romans 14:5, 12; 2 Corinthians 4:2; Titus 1:9


Saved, Baptized Church Membership
Local church membership is restricted to individuals who give a believable testimony of personal faith in Christ and have publicly identified themselves with Him in believer's baptism. When the members of a local church are believers, a oneness in Christ exists, and the members can endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.

Acts 2:41-47; 1 Corinthians 12:12; 2 Corinthians 6:14; Ephesians 4:3


Two Offices
The Bible mandates only two offices in the church--pastor and deacon. The three terms--"pastor," "elder," and "bishop," or "overseer"--all refer to the same office. The two offices of pastor and deacon exist within the local church, not as a hierarchy outside or over the local church.

1 Timothy 3:1-13; Acts 20:17-38; Philippians 1:1


Separation of Church and State
God established both the church and the civil government, and He gave each its own distinct sphere of operation. The government's purposes are outlined in Romans 13:1-7 and the church's purposes in Matthew 28:19 and 20. Neither should control the other, nor should there be an alliance between the two. Christians in a free society can properly influence government toward righteousness, which is not the same as a denomination or group of churches controlling the government.

Matthew 22:15-22; Acts 15:17-29

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

That's US. To a tee.

[HeyHomie]

There are a couple of minute differences in there that are different from how most RM congregations I've attended practice, but nothing to get uptight over.

[crawfish]

There are a few differences. The biggest, I think, is that in the Restoration churches they baptize for the forgiveness of sins; I don't believe they do that in most Baptist churches.

I do agree, though, there aren't a ton of differences, and most are pretty small.

[WesWoodell]

There are a few differences. The biggest, I think, is that in the Restoration churches they baptize for the forgiveness of sins; I don't believe they do that in most Baptist churches.

I do agree, though, there aren't a ton of differences, and most are pretty small.


Missionary Baptists do.

[JDIBe]

Primitive Baptists are very close to Church of Christ except they practice foot washing before the Lord's Supper.

But being "Christian only" has a certain appeal to me.

[Splayd]

I've had a great deal to do with the Baptists in Australia and I agree that there really isn't any significant difference. We even share a major bible college here.

[crawfish]

I'm always amazed at the animosity that Baptists & CofCers tend to have against each other in some parts of the country. My grandmother, a die-hard CofCer in Arkansas, spent her life with a bookmark with "20 verses to use when arguing with Baptists" in her Bible. A friend, born into a family of Baptists, told me that half of his family stopped speaking to him when he married a CofC woman 25 years ago (again in Arkansas).

Very amazing and sad, considering how close the two groups tend to be philosophically.

[constance]

Having been brought up non-creedal Baptist, I totally agree.

The DoC almost merged with the American Baptist Church in the early 20th century.

[- DRA -]

Biblical Authority
The Bible is the final authority in all matters of belief and practice because the Bible is inspired by God and bears the absolute authority of God Himself. Whatever the Bible affirms, Baptists accept as true. No human opinion or decree of any church group can override the Bible. Even creeds and confessions of faith, which attempt to articulate the theology of Scripture, do not carry Scripture's inherent authority.

2 Timothy 3:15-17; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Peter 1:20, 21


Autonomy of the Local Church
The local church is an independent body accountable to the Lord Jesus Christ, the head of the church. All human authority for governing the local church resides within the local church itself. Thus the church is autonomous, or self-governing. No religious hierarchy outside the local church may dictate a church's beliefs or practices. Autonomy does not mean isolation. A Baptist church may fellowship with other churches around mutual interests and in an associational tie, but a Baptist church cannot be a "member" of any other body.

Colossians 1:18; 2 Corinthians 8:1-5, 19, 23


Priesthood of the Believer
"Priest" is defined as "one authorized to perform the sacred rites of a religion, especially as a mediatory agent between humans and God." Every believer today is a priest of God and may enter into His presence in prayer directly through our Great High Priest, Jesus Christ. No other mediator is needed between God and people. As priests, we can study God's Word, pray for others, and offer spiritual worship to God. We all have equal access to God--whether we are a preacher or not.

1 Peter 2:5, 9; Revelation 5:9, 10


Two Ordinances
The local church should practice two ordinances: (1) baptism of believers by immersion in water, identifying the individual with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection, and (2) the Lord's Supper, or communion, commemorating His death for our sins.

Matthew 28:19, 20; 1 Corinthians 11:23-32


Individual Soul Liberty
Every individual, whether a believer or an unbeliever, has the liberty to choose what he believes is right in the religious realm. No one should be forced to assent to any belief against his will. Baptists have always opposed religious persecution. However, this liberty does not exempt one from responsibility to the Word of God or from accountability to God Himself.

Romans 14:5, 12; 2 Corinthians 4:2; Titus 1:9


Saved, Baptized Church Membership
Local church membership is restricted to individuals who give a believable testimony of personal faith in Christ and have publicly identified themselves with Him in believer's baptism. When the members of a local church are believers, a oneness in Christ exists, and the members can endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.

Acts 2:41-47; 1 Corinthians 12:12; 2 Corinthians 6:14; Ephesians 4:3


Two Offices
The Bible mandates only two offices in the church--pastor and deacon. The three terms--"pastor," "elder," and "bishop," or "overseer"--all refer to the same office. The two offices of pastor and deacon exist within the local church, not as a hierarchy outside or over the local church.

1 Timothy 3:1-13; Acts 20:17-38; Philippians 1:1


Separation of Church and State
God established both the church and the civil government, and He gave each its own distinct sphere of operation. The government's purposes are outlined in Romans 13:1-7 and the church's purposes in Matthew 28:19 and 20. Neither should control the other, nor should there be an alliance between the two. Christians in a free society can properly influence government toward righteousness, which is not the same as a denomination or group of churches controlling the government.

Matthew 22:15-22; Acts 15:17-29

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

That's US. To a tee.


Just a few questions:

1.) When does the Lord add the saved to His church according to Acts 2:47? It is when they are saved. When is one saved according to the Baptist church? Isn't it at the point of faith (alone)? According to the Baptists, a person is saved -- and later becomes a member of the Baptist church after they are baptized. Acts 2:47 reveals to us a person who is saved is added by the Lord to His church. Isn't that evidence that the Baptist church is not the church we read about in the New Testament?

2.) If the Baptists indeed accept the Bible as being inspired of God and the final matter on all matters of belief and practice, where is the Bible authority for Christians to call themselves Baptists?

3.) Do you agree with this part of Baptist doctrine: "The three terms--'pastor,' 'elder,' and 'bishop,' or 'overseer'--all refer to the same office?" Previously, you have posted that "bishop" referred to a separate office. So, do you stand united with the Baptists, or not?

4.) Previously, you tried to use a broad definition from an online dictionary to give the impression that the church Jesus established in the New Testament is a denomination. Now, you are trying it from a little different angle. I'm not sure how far you want to go with things, but here's one for you to consider: Whether folks admit it or not, everyone has something (someone, etc.) they worship. Even the atheists e.g. their knowledge, jobs, money, etc. Therefore, they are like Christians, right? :sigh:

[AJB4]

2) You seem to be the type that would ask of a Baptist:

"Are you a Baptist or a Christian?"

Here's (http://www.christianforums.com/f364-baptists.html) the link to the Baptists forum if you want to go and ask them that. ;)

3) I was wrong about that, I admit, even though, at the time, I think that I had good reason to believe that it was a separate office. I asked even the Catholic and Orthodox and they both said that they are all the same office.

4) I wasn't trying to do anything, not this time anyway. I admit also that I was wrong about the denomination thing. Although I wasn't saying that the church Jesus built was a denomination, rather, I was questioning if the Restoration Movement Church of Christ was one. If it's any consolation, I voted that the CoC was not a denomination.


Whether folks admit it or not, everyone has something (someone, etc.) they worship. Even the atheists e.g. their knowledge, jobs, money, etc. Therefore, they are like Christians, right? :sigh:

Not exactly, no. The thing is, Christians consciously choose to worship Jesus. That's what a Christian is. An Atheist who worships knowledge, jobs, or money consciously chooses to worship knowledge, jobs, or money. So, no, they are not like Christians.

[Splayd]

When is one saved according to the Baptist church? Isn't it at the point of faith (alone)?
I've often heard you use reasoning like this to arrive at conclusions like this:
Isn't that evidence that the Baptist church is not the church we read about in the New Testament?
BUT I see 2 problems with your reasoning:

1) Truth is truth is truth. Baptists, Orthodoxy, Presbyterians, You, Me or the Pope... DON'T make it, we simply endeavour to recognise and express it. Some expressions are better than others. Some are more wrong than others... BUT the actuality of the truth remains despite our inadequacy at expressing it. The actual truth of Salvation remains the same for the Baptist as it does for you or I. They don't have a rival salvation... they just have a rival understanding.

2) For all of the posts I've noted where you've acknowledged problems in other's understanding of salvation (ie: faith alone, faith + works etc...) you've (unwittingly?) implied your own addition to these formulae: the notion that one's salvation is dependant on one's ability to present a complete and error-free expression of truth. I'd suggest that if that's entirely correct, we're all in trouble.

Peace

[- DRA -]

I've often heard you use reasoning like this to arrive at conclusions like this:

BUT I see 2 problems with your reasoning:

1) Truth is truth is truth. Baptists, Orthodoxy, Presbyterians, You, Me or the Pope... DON'T make it, we simply endeavour to recognise and express it. Some expressions are better than others. Some are more wrong than others... BUT the actuality of the truth remains despite our inadequacy at expressing it. The actual truth of Salvation remains the same for the Baptist as it does for you or I. They don't have a rival salvation... they just have a rival understanding.

2) For all of the posts I've noted where you've acknowledged problems in other's understanding of salvation (ie: faith alone, faith + works etc...) you've (unwittingly?) implied your own addition to these formulae: the notion that one's salvation is dependant on one's ability to present a complete and error-free expression of truth. I'd suggest that if that's entirely correct, we're all in trouble.

Peace

Please explain what you mean by, "Some expressions are better than others. Some are more wrong than others...". Please apply your thinking to the topic at hand i.e. salvation.

Please explain what you mean by, "You've (unwittingly?) implied your own addition to these formulae ...". Perhaps you can cite an example where I've done this so I can see exactly what you are accusing me of.

I suspect we are indeed in trouble when we start undermining or dismissing passages that discuss salvation from sins or the church that Jesus established because none of us are completely error free. Let's see now ... we can also toss out 2 John 9-11, Ephesians 5:11, Romans 6:17-18, 2 Thessalonians 3:14, etc. After all, no one is perfect, right? Who are we to try to expect others to obey God, right? Even though He says, "Since you have purified your souls in obeying the truth ... (1 Peter 1:22a - NKJV).

[- DRA -]

After additional thought ... enough is enough.

I have given Scriptures to support what I have said. In return ... personal attacks.

My time is better spent elsewhere. :wave:

[Splayd]

I'm not sure whether I'm still expected to respond or whether DRA has actually gone. Did anybody else want clarification of my statements?

DRA - If you've felt that I've attacked you personally, I offer my sincerest apology. I confess that I have become frustrated by your posts at times, but that still doesn't warrant personal attacks and I'd feel terrible if you've perceived any. Please PM me if there's anything we need to resolve.

As an aside: I'm confused as to why'd you'd highlight the sections you did? If the apparent contrasting terms "heard" and "see" need clarifying, I'm happy to oblige : Auditory learners tend to say things like "I hear what you're saying" (even in posts) while Visual learners tend to say things like "I see what you're getting at" (even when referring to things they've heard). As an educator (and a lateral thinker) I tend to apply both out of habit, in an attempt to appeal to larger audience.

Peace :)

[hopperace]

http://www1.christianforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=93926&stc=1&thumb=1&d=1169414520 (http://www1.christianforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=93926&d=1169414520)
Well, I have a bit of a dilemma. I count myself a restorationist, and I think Splayd has indicated that many members of God's Church, in all it's wondrous diversities, may certainly be looking to Scripture, and especially the New Testament, for God's guidance on just how to be restored. I do this as a conservative Presbyterian pastor, rather than as a CC, CoC, DoC, or any traditional RMer. My present restoration tendencies actually align me more toward Messianic Judaism in certain respects. Now, having said that, that restricts me somewhat from posting my views here amidst the gatherings of more appropriately designated RM members, of whom I am respectful as to our fellowship in the one Body of Christ.

My dilemma is that I post here as your servant, and the only moderator listed in the Moderator queue for the Restoration Movement forum. I don't want to post this as a Mod-Hat post, because my previous posts of this sort have seemed to end the discussion, and this is not my intent.

The OP brings up the topic(s) of:
Biblical Authority
Autonomy of the Local Church
Priesthood of the Believer
Two Ordinances
Individual Soul Liberty
Saved, Baptized Church Membership
Two Offices
Separation of Church and State
And I appreciate the clever acronym associating and/or questioning RM affiliations, tendencies, and comparisons with the Baptists. Some of you have noted these, and Constance particularly has brought up some of the common histories certain RMs share with Baptists. Much of the early Campbellite movement was forged in Baptist circles, and I personally think this has a lot to do with both the shared affliliations and animosities between Rms and Baptists.

As for the animosities between members of the thread, that's perhaps another issue, and perhaps not. I think - DRA -has tried to vigorously engage the original post in post #9 (http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=32452011&postcount=9), has tried to make clear some distinctions between Baptists and RMers, and made the issue a bit personal with the OP author - not that there's anything wrong with that.
However, due to some history between these wonderful people, I think the OP author may have been a little offended, and admirably apologetic over the matter.

I think Splayd has tried to emphasize a distinction between the one theological truth at the core of Christian belief, and whatever expressions any of us, or groups of us may make of our limited understanding of that one truth - Frankly, some of us get it wrong, and some of us get it right, regardless of what we call ourselves, and our individual expressions of "salvation" do not alter the facts regarding salvation, even if we differ in our expressions of what "salvation" means or how it is processed. He may have unduely stepped on some toes, but I think his intent was to point out that it is not our individual citeria or expression that determines the truthfulness of the following part of the OP, but that truth is independent of our limited expessions of it:

"Saved, Baptized Church Membership
Local church membership is restricted to individuals who give a believable testimony of personal faith in Christ and have publicly identified themselves with Him in believer's baptism. When the members of a local church are believers, a oneness in Christ exists, and the members can endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.

Acts 2:41-47; 1 Corinthians 12:12; 2 Corinthians 6:14; Ephesians 4:3"

- DRA -is right to look to and reference Scripture as a reflection of authority in these matters, and to rely on it as a reference for how God would have us understand and practice "truth".

I hope we can separate out our personal inclinations to view one another in some form of error or in some manner of being of personal fault, from worthy discussions of the OP, even in our differnces over the substance of the OP. Again, I find the OP to be quite a clever and worhty topic for RM discussion. Please don't let it end with my post.

- kib, unworthy RM moderator

[Iconoclast85]

It is Spirit baptism that saves, not water baptism.
Water baptism does not save.Jesus saves. 1cor12:13

[annie1speed]

Did the Ethiopian eunich ask 'Here is SPIRIT. What hindereth me from being baptized?' When we are 'buried with Him in baptism', are we covered with the Spirit or with water? There are many other verses that come to mind that indicate that wet water is the medium of baptism. Baptism is an act of obedience we render unto God for the remission of sins.


Annie

[annie1speed]

Baptism for the remission of sins is the main difference between Baptist and CoC, but it is not the only one. I was raised Baptist. Missionary Baptist, actually. If Missionary Baptists baptize for the remission of sins, someone forgot to tell the preacher at the church in the very rural area that I grew up in.

When I was young, I responded to the invitation one night saying I wanted to be saved. So we knelt in prayer and I asked God to forgive me of my sins. When we stood up, the preacher asked me, do you want to join the church? I saw no reason to do so. He had just gotten through preaching about all you have to do ... ask God to forgive you of your sins, ask Jesus to come into your heart, you know. I guess I always was a strange little child, but I thought I had taken care of my going to heaven business, why would I want to join the church. So I said no, and he told me to go back to my seat. No baptism, no right hand of Christian fellowship, no y'all come up here and hug her neck, no nothing. But that was ok. One man walked up to me and said he was proud of me for my decision to become a Christian. That was it.

Few years later and I'm a teenager, and I decide to joine the church. Such excitement. Everybody had to come up and welcome me into the church. Someone nominated or made a motion to accept me, someone seconded, allin favor say aye, all opposed and of course no one did. Baptized three weeks later in the river down below the dam at Butler's Mill. (Told y'all I was country ;) ) It was November and it was cold, too! Right hand of Christian fellowship, Right hand of church fellowship. Y'all get the picture? I saw a lot more excitement when I joined the Baptist Church than when I got saved.

I thought about this a lot while growing up. Had questions about baptism and what its real purpose was.

Few years later I'm in college. A good friend and fellow student is a member of the Church of Christ. Boy they all seem like good people, but where the piano? :D Just had to through that in. (Another difference.)

Anyway, I tell him I am secure in my faith. Well ok, says he. Were you baptized for the remission of your sins? he asks. Uhhhhh. :scratch: You know, I had to say no. After some serious study it was plain. All those questions about baptism and joining the church. The answers had been there all along. I do believe that baptism is for the remission of sins and it is a necessary component of our salvation.

I was baptized for the remission of my sins and have been a member of the Church of Christ ever since. Also, that very good friend and I have been married for over twenty years.

So ... that's my story.

Annie

[annie1speed]

Another thought. We are also looking forward to Christ's return. That makes us Adventists too, doesn't it. ;)

[Splayd]

Hey annie :wave:

Your experience with the Baptists isn't really all that different from what you might experience in a Church of Christ in Australia.

Peace

[Loveaboveall]

Baptism is an act of obedience we render unto God for the remission of sins.


So are you suggesting that we are saved by our obedience?:)

When we are 'buried with Him in baptism', are we covered with the Spirit or with water?

I would have to say we are covered with Jesus;)

[annie1speed]

Can you be a child of God, can your soul be saved without obedience?

Naaman dipped in the Jordan River seven times and was cleansed of his leprosy. What saved him, the water or the Lord? If he had not obeyed the Lord would he still have had leprosy? :confused: I believe he would have, yes.

Naaman acted in obedience to God's instructions. He also acted in faith.

Jesus said that if we love Him we would keep His commandments. ;)

Annie

[crawfish]

So are you suggesting that we are saved by our obedience?:)


Hey! No Calvinism in the RM forum!

;)

[Loveaboveall]

Jesus said that if we love Him we would keep His commandments. ;)



You are absolutely right, BUT.... Are we saved by our obedience, or are we obedient because we are saved? Without the power of the Holy Spirit can we be obedient? See Romans 8:4

[annie1speed]

Well .... was Naaman cleansed of his leprosy because he dipped in the Jordan seven times, or was he cleansed of his leprosy because he obeyed?

[Loveaboveall]

Was Naaman saved or was he healed?

Do you obey God so you will be saved?
or
Do you obey God because you love Him so much for saving you that you would rather die yourself than bring dishonor to His name?

Whats your motivation?

By the way I am not promoting a calvinist line of thinking, just trying to get people to think about why they do the things they do. I am not saying we don't have a choice, we do, but choosing is not the same thing as acting, is it?

[RefrusRevlis]

So are you suggesting that we are saved by our obedience?:)

Yes we are, in a manner of speaking:

"Having purified your souls by your obedience to the truth..." 1 Peter 1:22 ESV

Though this does not mean we earn salvation, it just means we acccept the free gift through obedience to the gospel plan of salvation.
Refrus

[RefrusRevlis]

Correct me if I'm wrong, don't Baptists believe their baptism is a continuation of the baptism of John, or that the church was around at the time of John the Baptist or something like that? (I can't say I've talked to too many) If they are attempting to continue John's Baptism, Acts 19:3-5 seems to deal with this. It tells of Paul coming across some disciples who were only baptised into John's baptism, they were baptised in the name of the Lord Jesus on hearing Paul's teaching.

I would say we are definitely not Baptists, the church nowhere is called that, nor do the doctrines of the Baptists line up with the Bible (so far as the purpose of baptism is concerned).
refrus

[Loveaboveall]

1 Peter 1:22, "Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, [see that ye] love one another with a pure heart fervently:"

When does one receive the power of the Holy Spirit? Is it not manifested after baptism as in the case of Cornelius? I don't see how this verse could apply to baptism. Maybe you could explain further

[RefrusRevlis]

When does one receive the power of the Holy Spirit? Is it not manifested after baptism as in the case of Cornelius? I don't see how this verse could apply to baptism. Maybe you could explain further

I'm not sure what you mean "the power of the Holy Spirit", so it's a little hard to answer this...

However...
the gospel is the "power of God for salvation" (Romans 1:16). Salvation is what matters, so when we submit to the gospel, we receive the power of God for salvation.

The baptism of the Holy Spirit, as described in Acts 2 and the house of Cornelius were signs of the opening of the kingdom so to speak, it was immediately after the miraculous signs in Acts 2, that Peter gives his first sermon, declaring the terms of admission to the kingdom (Acts 2:38 - repent and be baptised). It was later in Acts 10 that we read of the next "baptism of the Holy Spirit" account - this time for the opening of the kingdom to the Gentiles (who previously had not been admitted into the kingdom). After the miraculous events - Paul asks, "can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" (10:47)" Cornelius and his household were then baptised.

We don't read of the Holy Spirit baptism anywhere else in the NT.

The fact that Cornelius received the Baptism of the Holy Spirit does not mean he was therefore saved, the fact that Paul commanded him and his family to be baptised immediately indicates the urgency - why the urgency?

The gospel is the truth, in obeying the gospel we obey the truth. This is how we receive the gift of the Holy Spirit - which is salvation (read Acts 2:21, the main point of the prophecy of Joel is not on the miraculous gifts- but that "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved".

So in short, baptism is part of obedience of the truth, that is why 1 Peter 1:22 is relevant to this discussion.
Refrus

[Loveaboveall]

I'm not sure what you mean "the power of the Holy Spirit", so it's a little hard to answer this...

Let me give you a few verses to ponder

Romans 8:4-5 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

Phillipians 2:13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of [his] good pleasure.

Are we able to do good works without God's power in the form of the Holy Spirit?

Romans 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but [how] to perform that which is good I find not.

To me 1 Peter 1:22 is speaking of the good works God worketh in those who have chosen to allow God to work through them... thus the love for one another. Is this not after baptism, or does God work through people to do good works before they are saved?