2 Timothy 4:2 - Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. 3 - For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4 - And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
Could it be that the Romans Road theology that Protestants and Trinitarian Pentecostals practice is heresy? An examination of Romans 10:9-10 is certainly in order. First and foremost, it is not my intention to diminish anyones relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ. Real love is not only accepting someone for who they are or who they can be, but being bold enough to tell the truth. As you read, please have your Bible ready to look up referenced scriptures. Not doing could strongly reflect how you value the importance of Gods truths.
Why Romans 10:9-10 is not the plan of salvation:
1. Paul was writing to the Roman Christians who already were born-again persons. He was not explaining to unbelievers how to be born again. He knew he could briefly summarize the gospels message by referring to these two fundamental principles without being too vague or being misunderstood.
2. In the context, The Romans epistle explains that Gods rejection of Israel was due to Israels unbelief. For Israel to be saved, the fundamental issue was confession of and belief in Jesus. Paul did not confront the Jews over water baptism or the Holy Spirit baptism. Simple logic ought to tell you that the Jews had to resolve a more basic issue first: accepting Jesus as Messiah, Lord, and Savior. Thats why Paul wrote what he wrote in Romans 10:9-10! If they would only do this, all else would follow and then they shall be saved, providing they obey the gospel first preached at Jerusalem according to the doctrine in Acts 2:38. Thats the doctrine that delivered the Romans as Romans 6:17 explains.
3. Romans 10:9 says, If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. Shalt be saved are the keywords here, meaning salvation is the near future providing if the believer goes on to repent, be baptized in Jesus name for the remission of sin, and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost as Acts consistently tells it (Acts 2:38-41, 8:16-17, 10:44-48, 19:2-6). Keep in mind in those instances that those people already were believers, but not born of water and Spirit as of yet, which is necessary to enter into heaven (John 3:5). Remember Cornelius? He was a devout man that feared God, gave much alms, and always prayed. However, he was not saved! Jesus rewarded the diligently seeker, came to him as an angel, and told him to send men to Joppa to get Peter so he can tell Cornelius what he ought to do. (Acts 10:1-6). What he had to do was to be born again and he did (Acts 10:44-48)!
4. Romans 10:10 says, For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. This is where a lot of people get confused. The word unto in this scenario implies to be led to salvation, not actual righteousness or salvation itself. Furthermore, the word unto used in Romans 10:10 means eis in Greek. Eis literally means for the purpose of. To make this clear, Romans 10:10 could be restated like so: For with the heart man believeth for the purpose of righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made for the purpose of salvation. As you can see now, believing is for the purpose of righteousness, not righteousness itself. Likewise, confession is made for the purpose of salvation and not salvation itself.
Remember in point number two I made that Paul was talking about the Jews who had not yet accepted Jesus as Messiah. The issue at hand was first to have them to believe and confess that Jesus is indeed the Lord. How then can the majority of professing Christians claim to be born again? Colossians 2:8 may hold the answer, but lets stay focused.
Am I implying you are not saved? No. The apostles doctrine provides the checklist that ought to tell you if you are. Have you repented? Have you been baptized (full-immersion) with the name of Jesus invoked over your baptism (see footnote #1)? Have you received the gift of the Holy Ghost (see footnote #2)? If so, youre saved because the Word of God judges you so, not because I judged.
Have you real assurance of your salvation? Do you still feel theres more? Is there a whisper in your heart telling you something is not there that needs to be? Do you object to what scripture says about original apostolic salvation? I can imagine some concerns you may have, which I have provided answers for in the footnotes that immediately follow the closing of this letter. If you would like, let us have a bible study in person or through e-mail. Acts 2:39 tells us the Holy Ghost is a promise for you and to your children. Will you accept Gods promise?
God bless you,
Stephen
Footnote #1 - Invoking in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Matt. 28:19) is not a formula Jesus gave for us to baptize people in, but rather is a teaching that the one name He wanted us to be baptized in reveals the identity of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. To make this more clear, if not already, the parallel account of the Great Commission given in Luke 24 can explain. Verse 47 in Luke 24 shows us that Jesus taught His apostles that remission of sins should be preached in His name: Jesus name! If you recall, Peter (with the other apostles with him) preached that remission of sins is given through baptism in the only name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved ... JESUS (Acts 2:38, 4:12)! Only were they baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus (Acts 8:16), Peter commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord (Acts 10:48), John the Baptists disciples were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus (Acts 19:5), the Roman Christians were baptized into Jesus Christ (Romans 6:3), Ananias told Paul to be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord (Acts 22:16), and Paul told the Galatians for as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ (Galatians 3:27). All in all, invoking in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is not a valid baptism and one must be rebaptized in the only saving name (Acts 4:12) for true biblical salvation. Remember, baptism also saves us (1 Peter 3:21). Its not only a public confession of our repentance, but it is for the remission (or forgiveness) of sins (Acts 2:38, 22:16). That is quite essential, dont you think? If you are curious to know, the Roman Catholic Church is responsible for changing the baptismal formula to what Matt 28:19 says and for trinitarian theology altogether.
Footnote #2 - One does not speak with other tongues to get the Holy Ghost. One needs to be filled with the Holy Ghost as part of their salvation. Once the Holy Ghost fills the believer, immediately then does the initial evidence of receiving the Spirit rebirth occurs: the Spirit gives the believer utterance to speak with other tongues. That is the only initial evidence the Bible gives for people who received the Holy Ghost. The 120 believers in Acts 2:4 spoke with tongues, so did Cornelius (Acts 10:46), and so did John the Baptists disciples (Acts 19:6). Peter knew Cornelius and company received the Holy Ghost because for they heard them speak with tongues (Acts 10:46). The Samaritans received the Holy Ghost in Acts 8:17. Simon the Sorcerer saw that through on of the apostles hands the Holy Ghost was given (Acts 8:18). What did Simon see? He had seen some evidence apparently. As the other instances in Acts show, the visible evidence of the Holy Ghost baptism is speaking with other tongues. Jesus says His believers shall speak with new tongues (Mark 16:17), not maybe or just a few. This tongue is the sign or evidence of receiving the Holy Ghost.. This tongue is not the gift of tongues as Paul speaks of 1 Corinthians 12:10,30, nor does one receive the gift of tongues when receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost. The gift of tongues is a gift from the Holy Spirit that God may or may not give you after you receive the Holy Ghost. The gift of tongues is always to be interpreted for edification of the church. No interpreter was present or needed when someone received the Holy Spirit in scripture, proving that it is not the gift of tongues that was poured out. 1 Corinthians 13:8-10 tells us tongues will fail when the perfect comes, but thankfully the Lord has not returned yet, so you can rest assure knowing the experience is for you, regardless of nay-sayers.
Footnote #3 - Its no coincidence the apostles doctrine covers both repentance and the need to be born again of water and Spirit. No where does scripture teach that people were saved first with believing and confession alone, then the Holy Ghost and baptism as optional. No where does scripture show one is saved and then the Spirit and baptism are also part of continuing salvation. Its either youre saved or you arent. The apostles doctrine is the keys to the kingdom of heaven Jesus gave Peter to preach in Matthew 16:19. In other words, Jesus gave Peter the authority to tell people how to go to heaven. Peter did just that. After receiving the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:4, Peter preached to the Jews who crucified Jesus. The Jews were pricked in their heart according to Acts 2:37 as a result of the sermon. Were they saved because they finally accepted Jesus as Lord? No. They asked what they should do. Peter told them what to do in Acts 2:38. Acts 2:41 tells us they gladly received his word and that 3,000 souls were added unto them that same day. They continued steadfastly in the apostles doctrine according to Acts 2:42 and the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved (or those who were being saved as NIV tells it).
Footnote #4 - Speaking of the NIV, that version of the Bible is alright, but its translation of Romans 10:9-10 is misleading. It tells the reader he or she is saved after confession, when in fact the original Greek writings used eis, which means for the purpose of as discussed earlier.
Could it be that the Romans Road theology that Protestants and Trinitarian Pentecostals practice is heresy? An examination of Romans 10:9-10 is certainly in order. First and foremost, it is not my intention to diminish anyones relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ. Real love is not only accepting someone for who they are or who they can be, but being bold enough to tell the truth. As you read, please have your Bible ready to look up referenced scriptures. Not doing could strongly reflect how you value the importance of Gods truths.
Why Romans 10:9-10 is not the plan of salvation:
1. Paul was writing to the Roman Christians who already were born-again persons. He was not explaining to unbelievers how to be born again. He knew he could briefly summarize the gospels message by referring to these two fundamental principles without being too vague or being misunderstood.
2. In the context, The Romans epistle explains that Gods rejection of Israel was due to Israels unbelief. For Israel to be saved, the fundamental issue was confession of and belief in Jesus. Paul did not confront the Jews over water baptism or the Holy Spirit baptism. Simple logic ought to tell you that the Jews had to resolve a more basic issue first: accepting Jesus as Messiah, Lord, and Savior. Thats why Paul wrote what he wrote in Romans 10:9-10! If they would only do this, all else would follow and then they shall be saved, providing they obey the gospel first preached at Jerusalem according to the doctrine in Acts 2:38. Thats the doctrine that delivered the Romans as Romans 6:17 explains.
3. Romans 10:9 says, If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. Shalt be saved are the keywords here, meaning salvation is the near future providing if the believer goes on to repent, be baptized in Jesus name for the remission of sin, and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost as Acts consistently tells it (Acts 2:38-41, 8:16-17, 10:44-48, 19:2-6). Keep in mind in those instances that those people already were believers, but not born of water and Spirit as of yet, which is necessary to enter into heaven (John 3:5). Remember Cornelius? He was a devout man that feared God, gave much alms, and always prayed. However, he was not saved! Jesus rewarded the diligently seeker, came to him as an angel, and told him to send men to Joppa to get Peter so he can tell Cornelius what he ought to do. (Acts 10:1-6). What he had to do was to be born again and he did (Acts 10:44-48)!
4. Romans 10:10 says, For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. This is where a lot of people get confused. The word unto in this scenario implies to be led to salvation, not actual righteousness or salvation itself. Furthermore, the word unto used in Romans 10:10 means eis in Greek. Eis literally means for the purpose of. To make this clear, Romans 10:10 could be restated like so: For with the heart man believeth for the purpose of righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made for the purpose of salvation. As you can see now, believing is for the purpose of righteousness, not righteousness itself. Likewise, confession is made for the purpose of salvation and not salvation itself.
Remember in point number two I made that Paul was talking about the Jews who had not yet accepted Jesus as Messiah. The issue at hand was first to have them to believe and confess that Jesus is indeed the Lord. How then can the majority of professing Christians claim to be born again? Colossians 2:8 may hold the answer, but lets stay focused.
Am I implying you are not saved? No. The apostles doctrine provides the checklist that ought to tell you if you are. Have you repented? Have you been baptized (full-immersion) with the name of Jesus invoked over your baptism (see footnote #1)? Have you received the gift of the Holy Ghost (see footnote #2)? If so, youre saved because the Word of God judges you so, not because I judged.
Have you real assurance of your salvation? Do you still feel theres more? Is there a whisper in your heart telling you something is not there that needs to be? Do you object to what scripture says about original apostolic salvation? I can imagine some concerns you may have, which I have provided answers for in the footnotes that immediately follow the closing of this letter. If you would like, let us have a bible study in person or through e-mail. Acts 2:39 tells us the Holy Ghost is a promise for you and to your children. Will you accept Gods promise?
God bless you,
Stephen
Footnote #1 - Invoking in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Matt. 28:19) is not a formula Jesus gave for us to baptize people in, but rather is a teaching that the one name He wanted us to be baptized in reveals the identity of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. To make this more clear, if not already, the parallel account of the Great Commission given in Luke 24 can explain. Verse 47 in Luke 24 shows us that Jesus taught His apostles that remission of sins should be preached in His name: Jesus name! If you recall, Peter (with the other apostles with him) preached that remission of sins is given through baptism in the only name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved ... JESUS (Acts 2:38, 4:12)! Only were they baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus (Acts 8:16), Peter commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord (Acts 10:48), John the Baptists disciples were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus (Acts 19:5), the Roman Christians were baptized into Jesus Christ (Romans 6:3), Ananias told Paul to be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord (Acts 22:16), and Paul told the Galatians for as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ (Galatians 3:27). All in all, invoking in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is not a valid baptism and one must be rebaptized in the only saving name (Acts 4:12) for true biblical salvation. Remember, baptism also saves us (1 Peter 3:21). Its not only a public confession of our repentance, but it is for the remission (or forgiveness) of sins (Acts 2:38, 22:16). That is quite essential, dont you think? If you are curious to know, the Roman Catholic Church is responsible for changing the baptismal formula to what Matt 28:19 says and for trinitarian theology altogether.
Footnote #2 - One does not speak with other tongues to get the Holy Ghost. One needs to be filled with the Holy Ghost as part of their salvation. Once the Holy Ghost fills the believer, immediately then does the initial evidence of receiving the Spirit rebirth occurs: the Spirit gives the believer utterance to speak with other tongues. That is the only initial evidence the Bible gives for people who received the Holy Ghost. The 120 believers in Acts 2:4 spoke with tongues, so did Cornelius (Acts 10:46), and so did John the Baptists disciples (Acts 19:6). Peter knew Cornelius and company received the Holy Ghost because for they heard them speak with tongues (Acts 10:46). The Samaritans received the Holy Ghost in Acts 8:17. Simon the Sorcerer saw that through on of the apostles hands the Holy Ghost was given (Acts 8:18). What did Simon see? He had seen some evidence apparently. As the other instances in Acts show, the visible evidence of the Holy Ghost baptism is speaking with other tongues. Jesus says His believers shall speak with new tongues (Mark 16:17), not maybe or just a few. This tongue is the sign or evidence of receiving the Holy Ghost.. This tongue is not the gift of tongues as Paul speaks of 1 Corinthians 12:10,30, nor does one receive the gift of tongues when receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost. The gift of tongues is a gift from the Holy Spirit that God may or may not give you after you receive the Holy Ghost. The gift of tongues is always to be interpreted for edification of the church. No interpreter was present or needed when someone received the Holy Spirit in scripture, proving that it is not the gift of tongues that was poured out. 1 Corinthians 13:8-10 tells us tongues will fail when the perfect comes, but thankfully the Lord has not returned yet, so you can rest assure knowing the experience is for you, regardless of nay-sayers.
Footnote #3 - Its no coincidence the apostles doctrine covers both repentance and the need to be born again of water and Spirit. No where does scripture teach that people were saved first with believing and confession alone, then the Holy Ghost and baptism as optional. No where does scripture show one is saved and then the Spirit and baptism are also part of continuing salvation. Its either youre saved or you arent. The apostles doctrine is the keys to the kingdom of heaven Jesus gave Peter to preach in Matthew 16:19. In other words, Jesus gave Peter the authority to tell people how to go to heaven. Peter did just that. After receiving the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:4, Peter preached to the Jews who crucified Jesus. The Jews were pricked in their heart according to Acts 2:37 as a result of the sermon. Were they saved because they finally accepted Jesus as Lord? No. They asked what they should do. Peter told them what to do in Acts 2:38. Acts 2:41 tells us they gladly received his word and that 3,000 souls were added unto them that same day. They continued steadfastly in the apostles doctrine according to Acts 2:42 and the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved (or those who were being saved as NIV tells it).
Footnote #4 - Speaking of the NIV, that version of the Bible is alright, but its translation of Romans 10:9-10 is misleading. It tells the reader he or she is saved after confession, when in fact the original Greek writings used eis, which means for the purpose of as discussed earlier.
