Actscelerate.com Forum Index Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
r/Actscelerate

Hate to do it guys, but I need to talk about Baptism!
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
   Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Hot Discussions Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Message Author
Post Hate to do it guys, but I need to talk about Baptism! BlessedinMsTn
Ok, first of all everyone knows that I baptize in the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ, that's no secret... I hope by now you also know that I am not dogmatic about it, I rarely if ever mention it in my preaching nor do I think anyone else if lost that hasn't been baptized that way.

For the last several years you all know that I have turned away from my UPC upbringing in the fact that I no longer preach that baptism saves a person, this of course puts me at odds with my UPC friends and family..

This is not to open an argument about baptism, I seek a clear and definite theological explanation for this scripture in I Peter: The like figure whereunto [even] baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

I seek this answer because this is the only scripture that keeps kicking me in the shin when it comes to the necessity of baptism.. God Bless
_________________
www.thevaughnfamily.org
The Remnant are Returning. Foundations are being Restored. All Breaches are being Repaired. The Body of Christ is Rising!
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6126
5/12/06 1:17 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Re: Hate to do it guys, but I need to talk about Baptism! Link
Baptism is the answer of a good conscience toward God. When someone believes the Gospel, he is supposed to respond by being baptized and be saved.

Peter also believed in baptism for the remission of sin. So did Ananias, who baptized Saul of Tarsus, telling him to arise and be baptized, and calling upon the name of the Lord, wash away his sin.
_________________
Link
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11845
5/12/06 11:36 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Are you proposing water baptism is necessary for salvation BlessedinMsTn
Are you proposing water baptism is necessary for salvation
_________________
www.thevaughnfamily.org
The Remnant are Returning. Foundations are being Restored. All Breaches are being Repaired. The Body of Christ is Rising!
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6126
5/13/06 12:03 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post TheoloJohn
Baptism is not necessary for salvation; a good conscience is. And a person with a good conscience before God (as a result of repentance and faith in the blood of Jesus to forgive, cleanse, and save them) will desire to be baptized in water, unless he has been taught wrongly.
_________________
"Of course we are concerned about people voting if they are dead," George Stanton, chief information officer for the New York State Board of Elections. Poughkeepsie Journal, October 29, 2006
Golf Cart Mafia Associate
Posts: 2160
5/13/06 1:32 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Are you proposing water baptism is necessary for salvati Link
BlessedinMsTn wrote:
Are you proposing water baptism is necessary for salvation


I am saying I believe in baptism for the remission of sins.
_________________
Link
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11845
5/13/06 8:51 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Let me also kick you in the shins The strict Constructionis
"He that believes AND is baptized shall be saved, he that believeth not shall be damned." Mark 16:16

This verse cannot be interpreted to say anything other than what is being written.

There is a work of grace that God chooses to do in the waters of baptism through the blood of Christ based on a persons repentance and faith in the gospel, NOT through any effort of their own.

Paul made it clear in Romans 6 that baptism is when our old, sinful man is buried with Christ. It's not the water, it's not the ritual, but it IS what God does when we are baptized.

Now if anyone insists that this somehow violates Eph. 2:8-9 then they need to take it up with God.

Do we preach baptism? Is Acts 2:38 the "gospel" as UPC teaches? NO! We preach Christ and Him crucified as Peter did on the day of Pentecost and as Paul did in his epistles. When the sinner is "pricked in his heart" and asks, "men and brethren, what shall we do?", we then tell them HOW to exercise their faith in the message they just heard and that is to "repent and be baptized every one of you in the Name of Jesus Christ FOR THE REMISSION of sins, and you shall receive the GIFT of the Holy Ghost."

Now of course the first thing some will ask is, "what if a person accepts Christ but dies as they were walking to the baptismal pool?"

That's very simple. Though God chooses to do an act of grace in the waters of baptism, He does not need to, nor does He have to limit His grace to that particular point in time. Certainly those people go to heaven.


Last edited by The strict Constructionis on 5/13/06 11:34 pm; edited 1 time in total
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4295
5/13/06 11:22 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Let me also kick you in the shins TheoloJohn
The strict Constructionis wrote:
"He that believes AND is baptized shall be saves, he that believeth not shall be damned." Mark 16:16

This verse cannot be interpreted to say anything other than what is being written.


Yes, that is true. The problematic issue for the Oneness position is that Mk. 16:16 doesn't say "He that is not baptized (in Jesus' name, of course) shall be damned."
_________________
"Of course we are concerned about people voting if they are dead," George Stanton, chief information officer for the New York State Board of Elections. Poughkeepsie Journal, October 29, 2006
Golf Cart Mafia Associate
Posts: 2160
5/13/06 9:37 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post It dosen't have to say that,John. The strict Constructionis
I've heard that argument over and over.

No one who has not believed would even consider being baptized anyway.

The fact is, Jesus said in Mark 16:16 that there are TWO things that He requires you to do to be saved, believe AND be baptized. However, he said there is only ONE thing that you have to do to be damned, BELIEVE NOT.

I could say to a starving man, "If you come inside my house and sit at my table, you will be fed. But if you don't come inside, you will starve". Now by your theory someone could argue, "Well, you didn't say that if he didn't come inside your house AND sit at your table, he will starve". But that would be a silly argument because if he never comes in my house, of course he's not going to sit at my table. Jesus did not need to repeat Himself in the second part of the verse in order to validate the first part. Anyone with an honest heart will accept what I'm saying.
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4295
5/13/06 11:33 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post TheoloJohn
Resorting to calling me somehow dishonest really does nothing to prove anything except that you're being a jerk about this.
_________________
"Of course we are concerned about people voting if they are dead," George Stanton, chief information officer for the New York State Board of Elections. Poughkeepsie Journal, October 29, 2006
Golf Cart Mafia Associate
Posts: 2160
5/13/06 11:37 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Poimen
Well, it seems to me there are two baptisms so to speak that the Apostle has in mind here -- that are interrelated of course.

1.There is the act of baptism in water, or as Peter puts it "the putting away of the filth of the flesh" itself.
2. Then there is the spiritual baptism (if you will) whereby one is crucified and buried with Christ and raised to newness of life -- that inner work whereby one dies to sin and is made alive to God in Christ. Conversion.

That (conversion itself) is what I feel Peter identifies as "the answer of a good conscience towards God."

I see a strong similarity in the framing of this argument by Peter to that of the Apostle Paul in Romans 6:1-8.


We acknowledge that one can go through the act of water baptism and not be converted. Right? So then it is evident that Peter has in mind what water baptism (outwardly) signifies (inwardly), ones entrance into and acceptance of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ -- specifically, our justification, sanctification, and regeneration. These things are what allow us to have a good and clear conscience before God. No ???
_________________
Poimen
Bro. Christopher

Singing: "Let us then be true and faithful -- trusting, serving, everyday. Just one glimpse of Him in glory will the toils of life repay."
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5657
5/13/06 11:59 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Reply with quote
Post for the other guys and there semi-tangent Poimen
P.S.

The reference in Acts to the household of Cornelius receiving the Spirit's baptism was prior to their being baptized in water. This was seen as proof that God had granted them eternal life (conversion/salvation) already. And they cold not see how anyone could refuse baptism to them as Gentiles seeing they were born again and Spirit filled already -- prior to there being baptized in water.

See Acts 10:46-48
_________________
Poimen
Bro. Christopher

Singing: "Let us then be true and faithful -- trusting, serving, everyday. Just one glimpse of Him in glory will the toils of life repay."
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5657
5/14/06 12:06 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Reply with quote
Post What are you talking about, John? The strict Constructionis
I was in no way calling you dishonest or even referring to you at all!

All I was saying that anyone who is honest with themselves at all will have to admit that the second part of Mark 16:16 does not negate the first part.

How does that make me a jerk?

You're usually pretty cool. Why did you take that so personally?

I'm sorry if I offended you, but that WAS NOT my intention.
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4295
5/14/06 10:42 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post TheoloJohn
Hi Strict,

When you say: "Anyone with an honest heart will accept what I'm saying" it is difficult to know how that doesn't mean you are saying I'm not being honest, since I don't accept what you're saying on this point.

Blessings,

John
_________________
"Of course we are concerned about people voting if they are dead," George Stanton, chief information officer for the New York State Board of Elections. Poughkeepsie Journal, October 29, 2006
Golf Cart Mafia Associate
Posts: 2160
5/14/06 4:49 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Baptismal Regeneration Is Not Taught In Scripture COGLite
Although not specifically stated in the Articles of Faith of the United Pentecostal Church, baptismal regeneration is believed and preached by its ministers. S. R. Hanby, in his pamphlet The Apostles' Doctrine (pp. 4, 5), which is widely circulated among Oneness churches, writes: "Water baptism is an essential part of the New Testament salvation: and not, as some teach, "just an outward form of an inward cleansing.' Without proper baptism it is impossible to enter the Kingdom of God (God's true Church, the Bride of Christ)." By "proper baptism" he means immersion in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. "Without this Name, water baptism is void!"

Without exception, there is great stress laid upon those Scriptures which apparently teach baptismal regeneration (Acts 2:39; 22:16; Romans 6:3; 1 Peter 3:21). "Born of water" (John 3:5) is interpreted as water baptism, without which one cannot enter the kingdom of God. And, of course, if the formula, "in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ," is not used, the baptized one experiences no remission of sins.

Consistency demands that, if the references to water baptism are to be taken so literally, certainly, a similar interpretation should be given to the passages concerning the bread and the wine: "This is my body....this is my blood...except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you" (Matthew 26:26,2828; John 6:53).

Even God-given ritual, when substituted for the spiritual reality, becomes a curse. The brazen serpent unto which the children of Israel were commanded to look and live (Numbers 21:8,9) was destroyed when it ceased to be a symbol and became an idol, unto which "the children of Israel did burn incense." 2 Ki 18:4 He removed the high places, and brake the images, and cut down the groves, and brake in pieces the brazen serpent that Moses had made: for unto those days the children of Israel did burn incense to it: and he called it Nehushtan.

Notice the following conversation between Phillip and the eunuch:

Acts 8:36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

Compare the preceding with what John said about believing and being born again.

1 John 5:1 Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.

Phillip wouldn't baptize the eunuch unless he believed with all his heart and then John says, "Everyone who believes is born of God."

I don't know how much clearer it could be than that. Believing brings the new birth and baptism follows. John says, "Everyone who believes". That includes baptized believers and believers who have not yet been baptized. They are all born of God.

Surely one cannot receive the baptism with the Holy Ghost while still a child of the devil. Yet in Scripture we find people receiving the Holy Ghost without having been baptized in water.

Acts 10:45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as
came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy
Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have
received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

If baptism saves, then these folks received the Holy Ghost before they were even saved. You need to notice what Jesus said about who could receive the Holy Ghost.

John 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

According to Jesus, only saved people can received the Holy Ghost. Those who are still in the world cannot receive Him.

Those who teach baptismal regeneration seize upon certain proof texts, which on the surface, seem to teach that water baptism is the saving element. The apparent identification of water baptism with regeneration in these passages does not mean that we are to interpret them in a manner which is contrary to explicit statements elsewhere in the Word, or in a manner completely out of harmony with the general teaching of the Word.

Let us examine several of these texts.

Mark 16:16

Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

It is important to note that the word "believeth" is used twice in this passage and the word "baptized" is used only once. Note that the absence of believing is what brings damnation. Faith, then, is the essential element in our salvation in this verse and many others that do not even mention baptism. (John 3:15, 16, 36; 5:24; 11: 25; 12:46; 20:31; Acts 16:31; Romans 10:9,10; Ephesians 2:8,9)

If baptism were as important as the Oneness adherents claim, then the Lord would have specified: "He that believeth but is not baptized shall be damned."

Acts 2:38

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

This verse must be harmonized with other passages that mention repentance such as the following.

Luke 24:47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

Acts 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord;

These specify repentance with no mention of baptism in connection remission. In the Acts 2:38 passage the key is found in the word "for". "Be baptized....for the remission of sins." The Greek word for "for" is "eis" and is sometimes translated in the sense of "because of". In the following passage Jesus tells a leper He has just healed to offer a sacrifice because of his cleansing.

Luke 5:12-14 And it came to pass, when he was in a certain city, behold a man full of leprosy: who seeing Jesus fell on his face, and besought him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean.
And he put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will: be thou clean. And immediately the leprosy departed from him.
And he charged him to tell no man: but go, and show thyself to the priest, and offer for thy cleansing, according as Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them.

Notice that the man was cleansed of leprosy. Leprosy was a type of sin in the Old Testament and is never spoken of as being healed but cleansed. In our text Jesus had already cleansed him when He told him to "offer for thy cleansing". He was not to offer in order to be cleansed but because of the cleansing that had already taken place.

In Acts 2:38 in keeping with the other passages about repentance and remission Peter told them to "repent and be baptized because of the remission of sins."

Acts 22:16

Acts 22:16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

The verb translated "wash" here is a participle and literally says, "having washed away thy sins." It makes a vast difference if you read the verse, "And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, having washed away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord."

If "wash away thy sins" refers to the effect of water baptism, it is strange indeed that Paul does not speak glowingly of baptism as the means of his cleansing. Not once does Paul speak of baptism, but on the contrary, informs the Corinthians that he was not sent to baptize, having baptized only a few Corinthian believers. Think of it! Paul thanked God that he had deliberately refused to administer unto many of them that which some literalists insist washes away sins.

What is it that washes away sins?

1 John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

How is it done?

1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

Notice in the Acts 22:16 passage Ananias instructed Paul to do the calling on the name of the Lord. This is not the one doing the baptizing, calling upon the name of the Lord. According to what Paul tells us in Romans, it is the calling that does the saving.

Rom 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Sin is not an outward filth that can be washed away by water. It is inward and can only be cleansed by the blood of Jesus that is applied by faith.

1 Peter 3:21

1 Pet 3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

You have to read verse 21 in the light of verse 20. Verse 20 sheds a great deal of light on the subject. We read that "eight souls were saved by water". Let me ask you if it was the water that actually saved them? Or was it the ark that saved them? In a figurative sense, the waters of baptism save us, but it is our being in the true Ark, the Lord Jesus Christ, that actually saves us. In verse 20 the only people who were saved were high and dry in the ark.

Baptism is a "figure," a symbol, a type - it is not the reality itself. In order to be a "figure," baptism cannot possibly be that of which it is the figure. It is not written, "Thou shall call it baptism for it shall save his people from their sins," but, "Thou shall call his name Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins!"

It is Jesus that saves! Peter writes that baptism is the "answer of a good conscience toward God."

Romans 6:3

Rom 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?

It should be obvious that we cannot be literally baptized into Christ, just as we cannot be literally baptized into His death. Can water baptism transport us back through the centuries, and actually nail us to the cross with Christ, or bury us with Christ in the tomb? Certainly not. Neither can water baptism transport us through the skies and place us, in a physical sense, into the Christ who is seated at the right hand of the Father.

Baptism is more than a vivid picture of our identification with the historical Christ in His death and resurrection. It is also a symbol of a spiritual baptism.

1 Cor 12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

John 3:5

John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

According to Oneness teaching, "born of water" refers to water baptism, and "born of the Spirit" refers to the baptism or infilling with the Holy Ghost. Let us consider first the "water."

The subject of the verse is the new birth. The new birth is the impartation of the divine nature that makes us new creatures. It is the accepted belief of the overwhelming majority of believers that John 3:5 is but one of the frequent Scriptures which reveal that it is the Word, spoken of here as "the water," and the Holy Spirit that are the two divine agents which combine to effect this glorious miracle called the new birth.

Water is a scriptural symbol for the Word.

Eph 5:26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,

Psa 119:9 Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to thy word.

John 15:3 Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.

There is not one verse of Scripture anywhere which states clearly that we are born again by water baptism, while there are a number of passages which attribute the new birth to the Word.

James 1:18 Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.

1 Pet 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

2 Pet 1:4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

"But w-a-t-e-r spells water," protests the Oneness teacher, "and therefore, born of water must refer to the literal water of baptism." Not necessarily. What about the promise: "He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and fire". (Matthew 3:11)? F-i-r-e spells fire, but does this mean that we must accept the promise as a reference to literal fire?

Jesus could have just as easily said, "Except a man be baptized in water, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." But He didn't. B-o-r-n doesn't spell baptize and w-a-t-e-r doesn't necessarily refer to literal water.

If water baptism is necessary for salvation then the thief on the cross is in hell today. If water baptism is essential for salvation you couldn't be saved by yourself. You would need someone else to baptize you. You couldn't be saved if you were dying in the middle of the desert or in the frozen arctic. Hundreds of people who are too sick to take out and baptize would have no way to be saved. Men and women on death row could not be saved for they allow no baptism there. Thank God, all it takes to be saved is saving faith in the finished work of Calvary.

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Friendly Face
Posts: 276
5/14/06 6:32 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post COG Lite The strict Constructionis
You said of Mark 16:16:

"It is important to note that the word "believeth" is used twice in this passage and the word "baptized" is used only once. Note that the absence of believing is what brings damnation. Faith, then, is the essential element in our salvation in this verse and many others that do not even mention baptism. (John 3:15, 16, 36; 5:24; 11: 25; 12:46; 20:31; Acts 16:31; Romans 10:9,10; Ephesians 2:8,9) "


I'll tell you what I told John. The last part of Mark 16:16 does not negate the first part. You like to focus on the ONE thing that Jesus said takes to be damned, "believing not". But no one wants to focus on the TWO THINGS Jesus said it takes to be saved, Believing AND Baptism.

Therefore, since Jesus laid the foundation, we should carry His words out as He commanded, and that is exactly what Peter did in Acts 2:38.

WE must harmonize all the other scriptures around the very words of Christ, not the other way around.

I love it how some people love to harp about the "very words of Christ" when it comes to Mathew 28:19, but you twist the "very words of Christ" in Mark 16:16.

It is not "baptismal regeneration". We are not regenerated BY baptism, but part of the regeneration process does take place IN baptism when you bury that old man with Christ.

I just don't understand how anyone can say this is "salvation by works". Nothing is being said about "earning salvation because you carried out some ritual" or "water washing away sin". What we are talking about is a supernatural act GOD does through His Spirit and Blood when we, by faith , bury our old man with Christ.
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4295
5/14/06 9:17 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Again John, I apologize. The strict Constructionis
No offense was intended. Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4295
5/14/06 9:21 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post The thief on the cross The strict Constructionis
You wrote:

"If water baptism is necessary for salvation then the thief on the cross is in hell today. If water baptism is essential for salvation you couldn't be saved by yourself. You would need someone else to baptize you. You couldn't be saved if you were dying in the middle of the desert or in the frozen arctic. Hundreds of people who are too sick to take out and baptize would have no way to be saved. Men and women on death row could not be saved for they allow no baptism there. Thank God, all it takes to be saved is saving faith in the finished work of Calvary."


The thief on the cross was still under the old covenant. Therefore, he went to the the lower parts of the earth with all the other righteous Jews. The gospel is the "death, burial, and Resurrection of Christ". But here, the thief was talking to a living, breathing Christ.

Since there was no death, burial, and Resurrection of Christ at that point, there was no New Testament new birth experience. Baptism is part of the New Testament new birth and was therefore also unavailable to the thief. That is why it was not necessary for him to be baptized.

Context here is the key.

As for "people on death row" and those "living in the frozen tundra", my question is this; why dwell on all the exceptions to the rules? Instead, why not dwell on the RULE? We've made it VERY clear that God does not NEED water to regenerate someone, even though he CHOOSES to do a supernatural work in the life of a person in the waters of baptism, based on their faith in the gospel. In cases like you've mentioned, God can and does save them without water.

However, those are the rare exceptions and why dwell on them?
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4295
5/14/06 9:42 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Mark 16:16 Is Abolutely True COGLite
Strict wrote, "The last part of Mark 16:16 does not negate the first part."

Who said the last part negates the first part? I certainly did not. The first part is absolutely true! "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved."

Let me make several other true statements.

He that believes and pays tithes shall be saved.
He that believes and joins the Church of God shall be saved.
He that believes and wins souls shall be saved.

While each of the above statements is true, the only requirement for salvation is to believe.

According to "rule" of Jesus the only thing that will keep one out of heaven is if one, "believeth not".

Strict talks about "exceptions to the rule". There are no exceptions to God's rules. Strict just made that up. The requirements for salvation are the same for all mankind. “And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved….” Acts 16:30-32

Please show us the exceptions you refer to. Can you find a verse that says you must be baptized to be saved unless there is no water handy or unless you can't find another person around to baptize you?
Friendly Face
Posts: 276
5/15/06 6:58 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Geesh, CoGLite The strict Constructionis
I love ya man, but that is some poor hermeneutics.

You said,

"He that believes and pays tithes shall be saved.
He that believes and joins the Church of God shall be saved.
He that believes and wins souls shall be saved."


Here we have the clear words of Christ telling us how to be saved. Yet you somehow can't just take him at his word without doing some kind of play on words to prove that he really wasn't saying baptism is necessary to be born again.

If tithing,church membership,and soul winning were requirements for salvation, then Jesus would have included those in Mark 16;16.
None of those things you mentioned are part of the new birth experience. All of the them are post new birth experiences that DO NOT save us.

Baptism on the other hand is a vital part of the new birth experience itself. Paul said in Romans 6 that it is in baptism that we are 'buried with Him". If we are not buried with Him, then we are not saved, except in those rare cases you mentioned earlier. God does something supernatural in the waters of baptism based on our faith in the gospel.

Paul did not say that we are "buried with Him through tithing, soul winning , and church membership", he said we are buried with him through BAPTISM.

Look at Acts 16:31,

"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved".

Now if "believing" meant what you say it means, then the rest of the chapter would not have had to have been written. But look at what the next two verses say,

32 "And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.


33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed [their] stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway. '


HE SPAKE UNTO THEM THE WORD OF THE LORD. He explained to them just what it meant to believe on the Lord, and obviously baptism was linked to believing , as in being saved.
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4295
5/15/06 1:12 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post My Hermeneutics Are Fine COGLite
Your understanding of my plain English needs a little work. Please read my post again. I never said or implied that paying tithes, joining the Church of God or that winning souls were requirements for salvation. You missed my point altogether. I was merely pointing out that it is true that one who believes and pays tithes, joins the church and wins souls would be saved. The paying tithes, joining the church and winning souls however have nothing to do with salvation.

It is faith in Jesus that does the saving.

Although it is also true that he that believes and is baptized shall be saved it is the believing not the baptism that saves.

I noticed that you did not respond to all the other scriptures I gave in my earlier post.
Friendly Face
Posts: 276
5/21/06 8:27 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Hot Discussions Post new topic   Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Acts-celerate Terms of Use | Acts-celerate Policy
Contact the Administrator.


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group :: Spelling by SpellingCow.