What about Baptism?

cougan · Dec 8, 2002

They are not entirely different. I would say that less than 5% of doctrine is different.

So then the HS guiding all these people is only 95% correct with a 5% tolerance of error.

I just wanted to make that one comment I am experimenting in this post right now. I will add more post latter.

belive
repent
confess
baptism

WOW!

[line]

[move]Past sins removed at the point of baptism.[/move]

[updown]We are not saved by faith alone.[/updown]

[pong]It takes faith, repenting, confessing, and baptisms to be saved.[/pong]

Evangelion · Dec 8, 2002

Wow, you've really done the business on your sig. line, Cougan. :clap:

Looks great.

ScottEmerson · Dec 8, 2002

Originally posted by cougan
So then the HS guiding all these people is only 95% correct with a 5% tolerance of error.

I just wanted to make that one comment I am experimenting in this post right now. I will add more post latter.

Don't blame the Spirit. Blame humans.

Ben johnson · Dec 8, 2002

Is it? But you changed your mind halfway through the debate! First you said it was instant, then you said it was a promise! Now you're saying that it's instant again!

So we're changing the "BAPTISM THREAD" into a "SALVATION THREAD"?

I have not changed my mind. Salvation is instant. Salvation is RECEIVING CHRIST---plainly stated in John1:12. ETERNAL LIFE is the promise. How do "SALVATION" and "ETERNAL LIFE" differ? Salvation is "ABIDING IN CHRIST"---Jesus said in John15, "any branch that does NOT abide in Me is cast off ...and thrown into the fire." John further says in 2:1:7-9, "many deceivers have gone into the word... this is the deceiver and the antichrist; WATCH YOURSELVES that you do not lose what you have accomplished. ANYONE who goes too far (goes on ahead and does not abide in the teachings of Christ, HAS NOT GOD!" Salvation and the Promise are connected with verses like Heb10:36 "you have need of endurance, so that when you have done the will of God you may receive the promise."

The word, "saved", can have two meanings. In Matt24:13, "saved" means "eternal life". Yet in Luke 7:50, Jesus says "your faith HAS SAVED you." This is instant. So is Acts16:31---the ony qualification is BELIEVE---no 'confess", no "repent', no 'be waterbaptized";---all the other things are consequential to TRUE BELIEF and are implied. But salvation is by BELIEF---belief that causes all the others.

Scripture says that we are saved by calling on the name of the Lord.

Ooops! Sorry, I'm wrong. Scripture actually says that we are saved by hearing the words that another will speak to us.

Belief/faith-to-salvation comes from hearing---"calling on His name" and "BELIEF" are identical and interchangeable.

Ooops! Sorry, I'm wrong. Scripture actually says that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Ooops! Sorry, I'm wrong. Scripture actually says that we are saved by Christ's life.

Ooops! Sorry, I'm wrong. Scripture actually says that we are saved by fire.

No, we are not saved through grace. We are saved BY grace THROUGH FAITH.

We are saved by Christ's life, as in: "therefore we have been buried with Him through immersion-into-death (our old selves crucified with Him---not water), in order that as Christ was raised from the dead ...so we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have become united with Him in the liikeness of His death ("IMMERSED" into His death---not a reference to water), certainly we shall aso be united with Him in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing that our old self was crucified with Him that our body of sin might be done away with (our old selves die, "immersed into His death"---not a reference to water), that we should no longer be slaves to sin. For he who has died is freed (acquitted) from sin. Now if we have died with Christ, we beieve that we shall aso live with Him, knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead is never to die again; death no longer is master over Him. For the death He died, He died to sin, once for all; but the LIFE He lives He lives to God. So consider yourselves dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus" Rm6:4-11 THIS is how "we are saved by His life"...

We are saved by fire, in 1Cor3:13-15, identically as Peter says in 1:1:7, "proof of your faith, being more precious than gold, even though tested by fire..." And James 1:2-3, 12. Testing (fire) produces endurance.

Ooops! Sorry, I'm wrong. Scripture actually says that women are saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety, which means that there must be some other way of salvation for men. (Well, there's plenty of options, as you can see - so take your pick!)

Ooops! Sorry, I'm wrong. Scripture actually says that there's an exception to this rule, because Noah and his family were saved by water.

Ooops! Sorry, I'm wrong. Scripture actually says that we are saved by baptism, and by the resurrection of Christ.

Ooops! Sorry, I'm wrong. Scripture actually says that we are saved by hope.

Ooops! Sorry, I'm wrong. Scripture actually says that we are saved by believing.

Ooops! Sorry, I'm wrong. Scripture actually says that we are saved by confessing.

Ooops! Sorry, I'm wrong. Scripture actually says that we are saved by repenting.

Where are you misunderstanding? Salvation is by belief alone---but it is the TRUE BELIEF that causes all these things---causes confession, repentance, hope, waterbaptism, abiding, enduring, persevering. Crystal clear to me---no contradictions. Clear to you?

What nonsense! I have repeatedly dragged you guys back to the Scriptures, and what do I get for my troubles? I get superficial arguments, constant evasions, fallies of equivocation, and (in Scott's case) plain insults. Neither of you have made any attempt to reconcile your proof texts with the others that I have presented.

Vice-versa---we demonstrate some who were SAVED but not yet baptized---we even refuted the claim that "the SPIRIT indwelt them BEFORE they believed"---we showed that they DID believe ("God gave to them the SAME GIFT as He gave to us also AFTER BELIEVING"---11:17)---but the responses have been to ignore these refutations, and to cling to unscriptural dogma.

Balderdash! I correctly defined your flawed hermeneutic, and I showed you why it is wrong.

Read this post carefully---and see if you now understand my exegesis.

Nowhere does the Bible say that "salvation is by belief alone." That was the whole point of my most recent argument on this topic.

"For by grace through faith have you been saved". Grace is from God, faith is the only thing from us.

"If you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord (faith), and believe in your heart God raised Him from the dead (receive His grace), you---will---be---SAVED. Grace, faith, NOTHING ELSE. Only belief saves us---receiving Christ as LORD. I do hold to "Lordship Salvation"---reflecting Gal2:20.

Faith saves us---faith that receives Christ as LORD AND MASTER; faith that compells us to repent, to confess, to DIE TO OURSELVES and live to Him; faith that causes us to be baptized.

The Gospel is crystal clear.

cougan · Dec 11, 2002

Even though you were thoroughly refuted that Mark 16:16 isn't even in the original document (you dropped the argument), so it's really a moot point.

Just for the record I wasnt througly refuted nor did I drop the arguement. I gave much stronger evidence that the ending belonged there than what you brought up.

1. out of the 5 oldest CODEX manuscripts only 2 did not have them in it.
2. the majorty of the minuscule writting have the ending.
3. the church fathers quoted the verses in Mark 16: 9-20 which were earlier writting than the 4th and 5th century writings of those CODEX manuscripts.
4. It just does'nt make sense for the writter to end the book of mark with the laidies being afraid.
5. verse 8 in the Greek ends is gar which is an introductary word and this is not the how they would end their sentence.
6. Mark 16:18 talking about serpents was done by Paul in Acts 28:3-6.

The evidence is overwhelming and I stand firmly on what I presented on this and have not droped it as you say.

And note that Simon was believed and was baptized, but not saved - his salvation was only secure when the Holy Spirit came upon them. Now, honestly, what does that tell you? "Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done." If water baptism is necessary for salvation, why wasn't he saved? If Holy Spirit baptism is necessary for salvation, then this text makes perfect sense. Thanks for adding this - I'd missed it!

Where in the world did you get this thought from. Simon belived and was baptised and was saved just like Mark 16:16 says.

So the water saved Noah? Hmm... It seems that it was the ARK that saved him and his family.

20 who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. 21 And corresponding to that, baptism now saves younot the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

The above translation in verse 21 from the NASB is a good translation. "and corresponding to that, baptism now saves you." The key word in this section is the Greek antitupon. It means "copy," "type," "corresponding to," "a thing resembling another," "its counterpart," etc. It is what the NIV translates as "symbolizes," the NASB as "corresponding to that," and the KJV as "like figure." Baptism, then, is a representation, a copy, a type of something else.

It is a representation of the resurrection of Jesus Christ - it is that which saves us, not water baptism. Interesting, huh?

1 Pet. 3:21 -- Having affirmed that salvation in the days of Noah was through the water of the flood, Peter now draws a comparison with the water of baptism: "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." The ASV says that this is "a true likeness." Salvation offered through water in the days of Noah is exactly parallel to salvation offered through water baptism. Baptism is the antitype of the waters of the great flood.

The water itself had no saving power in the flood, nor does it have any saving power today. The saving power for Noah was his obedience to God's Word. Eight souls obeyed God and prepared an ark, and God saved them through water. Today people obey the gospel plan of salvation culminating in water baptism, and God likewise saves them through water. The power of salvation is in God, rather than in the water.

The likenesses are seen in the similitude of the salvation through water in the days of Noah and water baptism in the Christian age. The waters of the flood bore the ark up and thus separated those in the ark from those outside the ark. Those in the ark were saved, and those outside perished. The flood also purged Noah's world of the sin that had been so prevalent and so deadly.

Water baptism in like fashion provides salvation through water to those inside the church, which is the spiritual ark of God today. Baptism separates the godly from the ungodly, because those who are Scripturally baptized kill off the old man of sin and bury it in the waters of baptism, to be resurrected a new man who no longer serves sin (Rom. 6:3-4). Thus, the old man is purged from sin never to serve sin again.

In order to insure that there are no misunderstandings concerning Peter's meaning of water baptism, he makes it clear in this verse that he is not talking about washing dirt from the physical body.

The baptism Peter is discussing in this verse is an interrogation of a good conscience. The word interrogate means "to inquire seriously or question." Baptism is not some outward, meaningless act. Baptism involves honestly and sincerely coming to God on His terms, seeking to be reconciled to God. A good conscience helps in the process of bringing one to Christ in gospel obedience. When one hears the Word of God, a person who has a good (properly functioning) conscience will be convicted of sin. The conscience convicts of sin, and thus leads a person to repent of sin and to be baptized for the remission of sin, first confessing Jesus Christ as the Son of God.

Our salvation upon being baptized is "through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." Without the resurrection of Christ the gospel plan of salvation and everything connected to it would be meaningless. There would be no means by which we could be saved! Baptism saves now only because Christ not only died on the cross for our sins, but also because He was resurrected on the third day.

When people were baptized into John the Baptist's baptism of repentance, it wasn't the baptism that granted them repentance or made repentance real. Repentance is something that happens internally and is the work of God (2 Tim. 2:25). To participate in John's baptism was to publicly proclaim that the person being baptized was accepting John's message or repentance. Hence, it was called a baptism of repentance. It wasn't the baptism that brought repentance; rather, baptism was the result of repentance.

Just for the record notice the following verses.

Mark 1:4 John came, who baptized in the wilderness and preached the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins.
Luke 3:3 And he came into all the region round about the Jordan, reaching the baptism of repentance unto remission of sins;

Just wanted to point out that Johns baptism was a baptism of repentence unto the remmision of sins.

cougan · Dec 11, 2002

Now I will begin answering all those questions Scott asked me. However I am going to answer them in the following words. This is going to be long but it is as short as I could make it consisdering the questions you asked.

The Purpose of Miracles

Miracles in the first century had a purpose. When a biblical miracle was done it was almost always something that could be seen and it happened instantly. In fact the longest indication we have of a biblical healing miracle taking effect was in that same hour. Mat 8:13 and 15:28 are a couple of examples of this. This is quite different from the so-called Miracles and healings of today. The supposed healings today that they catch on TV are always some internal healing that cannot be seen. You cannot confirm or deny these peoples internal problems. I have never seen one single visible miracle caught on tape. Just imagine if someone caught a visible miracle on tape like that of Jesus making a withered hand whole Mat 3:5. If someone did this there would be no denying miracles today just like the Jews couldn't deny the notable miracle done by Peter. Acts 4:15-16. If such a video existed they would play it on the news and talk about it in the media. I personally watched a video of a person supposedly being raised from the dead in Africa. The strange thing is they never proved the guy was dead. I had a friend that went to a miracle services where they were going to raise a dead man but my friend beat the preacher to it. He jabbed the "dead" guy with a needle and he came to life really quick.

Now lets us look at the purpose of the miracles. We see the Holy Spirit all through out the bible and when he indwelled someone like a prophet they had the ability to do miracles to prove that what they were saying was coming from God. Could you image the children of Israel following Moses if had not shown signs and miracles to proof that he was a man of God? You always see the Holy Spirit working in a miraculous way when he indwells someone. When we move to the NT we see the miraculous gifts confirmed the preaching of the word (Mark 16:20; Heb. 2:1-4); gave confidence to new converts (Acts 5:1-11); and supplied edification for the early church until the New Testament was completed. Both the Old Testament prophecy's and NT apostles and prophets purpose was to be witness of the Messiah (Heb 2:1-4). Once the message was fully revealed there was no longer a need for the revealed word to be confirmed my miracles any longer. The HS works through the word Eph 6:17. Notice the following verses.

John 20: 30 And truly Jesus did many other "signs" in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

We have all the signs and miracles that we need today in the written word.

Acts 20:32 "So now, brethren, I commend you to God and to the word of His grace, which is able to build you up and give you an inheritance among all those who are sanctified.

The word is able to build us up.

Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek.

The word that we have is the power of God to salvation.

James 1:21 Therefore lay aside all filthiness and overflow of wickedness, and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls.

The word if we receive it tells us what we need to do to save our souls.

Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

With the fully revealed word we have everything we need to be complete, we are thoroughly equipped for every good work. So you see we have the fully revealed word and their no longer remains a need for it to be reconfirmed all over again. You must understand that what the apostles and prophets were teaching was not written anywhere. They were speaking the new revealed word of God by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. How many people would believe them with their new words from God if it had not been confirmed with miracles and signs?

cougan · Dec 11, 2002

There are only 2 instances in which the HS was poured directly from heaven, that is HS baptism. Once on the day of Pentecost, which was done to fulfill part of Joel's prophecy and the very words of Jesus. Lk 24:49 Acts 1:8. This ushered in the kingdom/church that day. The other was on Cornelius household which was done to fulfill part of Joel's prophecy and to confirm that Gentiles could now become Christians as well. The only way anyone else was able to receive the gift of the HS was through the laying on of hands of the apostles. You can see a good a example of this in Acts 8 when Philip (not an apostle) could work miracles but he could not pass the gift of the HS on to the people of Samaria. Instead Peter and John (apostles) had to come lay hands on them before they could receive the HS. Please note the following:

The Holy Spirit, through the pen of the inspired writer, refuted the false doctrine that all obedient believers are baptized in the Holy Spirit.  Let us note two sections of Scripture.  "Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the Word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John" (Acts 8:14).  Note, "Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost" (Acts 8:15).  This passage forever repudiates, answers, and exposes the argument that when one becomes a Christian he is baptized in the Holy Spirit.  The Samaritans were saved, for Jesus had said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved" (Mark 16:16), but the Samaritans heard the gospel, "But when they believed Philip preaching good tidings concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women" (Acts 8:12).  Therefore, since they heard, believed, and were baptized, they were saved; however, let us carefully note that, even though they were saved, they had not as yet received the Holy Spirit in any miraculous way.  "For as yet it was fallen upon none of them: only they had been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus" (Acts 8:16).  This passage refutes the false doctrine that we are baptized in the Holy Spirit, for they had already received the Word, but of the Holy Spirit, the writer says, "For as yet it was fallen upon none of them: only they had been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus."  They in fact had received no miraculous operation of the Holy Spirit, for we read, "Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost" (not directly from God at baptism.). "And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money" (Acts 8:17-18).

    Then, let us note a second illustration, which has been recorded for us by the pen of inspiration.  Paul came to Ephesus, and as he conversed with some men, he asked them, "Did ye receive the Holy Spirit when ye believed?" (Acts 19:2).  Their reply was, "Nay, we did not so much as hear whether the Holy Spirit was given" (Acts 19:2).  He then asked, "Into what then were ye baptized?"  (Acts 19:3).  They said, "Into John's baptism" (Acts 19:3). Then, Paul explains the difference between John's baptism and the baptism of Jesus Christ.  They understood Paul's explanation, which was, of course, inspired by the Holy Spirit, for the record says, "And when they heard this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus" (Acts 19:5). They have now been baptized; they are saved.  Have they been baptized in the Holy Spirit?  A thousand times no!  In fact they have not received any miraculous manifestation of the Spirit, not even the miraculous gift that came "through the laying on of the apostles' hands" (Acts 8:18).

    Now, let us observe the absolute, perfect unity between Acts 8:14-17 and Acts 19:1-9.  In both cases the people were baptized and thus saved before they received miraculous power of the Holy Spirit, which came "through the laying on of the apostles' hands" (Acts 8:18).  As brother N. B. Hardeman used to say, "That's not nearly it; that's it!"  These passages fully, completely, and clearly repudiate the error that is taught by others, that the Holy Spirit enters a person the moment that he is baptized for the remission of Sins.  The argument set out in Acts 8:14-17 and Acts 19:1-9 is not mine, but it was directed by the Holy Spirit himself through three apostles, Peter, John, and Paul.

cougan · Dec 11, 2002

Another point to make here is the fact that there was an unruly element within the church in Corinth that denied Paul's apostleship. This was a very illogical position, for that church possessed spiritual gifts 1Cor 12-14, and they had received them from none other than Paul. Therefore, the "signs of an apostle" had been wrought among them 2Cor 12:12, and Paul could forcefully say: 1 Corinthians 9:2 If I am not an apostle to others, yet doubtless I am to you. For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord. The Corinthian church (with its spiritual gifts) was, therefore a "seal" (divine documentation) of Paul's apostleship, and accordingly, indirect evidence that such gifts were received only from an apostle!

Paul urged Timothy to "stir up the gift if God," which was in him, which says he, "is in you through (dia - denoting the instrument or agency by means of which the gift was imparted Arndt, 179) the laying on my hands. 2Tim 1:6. Now considering the following:

1. Spiritual gifts came only through the hands of an apostle.
2. The distribution of gifts through the hands of an apostle was like the other powers of an apostle.
3. The distribution of gifts through the hands of an apostle confirmed his apostleship and the gospel he preached
4. The gospel revealed through the apostles has been completed and confirmed.

It must follow that the claim of any miraculous power, particularly healing and tongues, is a false claim and must be rejected. Now this just dealt with the purpose of the Holy Spirit and miracles mainly and I will show in my next post where the bible shows that the miracles would cease. I have already showed that they were limited because they fulfilled their purpose and the fact that the apostles are not among us anymore it becomes impossible for us to have them lay their hands on us today. Then I pointed out how the word of God that we have today gives us all that we need to know. Notice this summary:

1. The Scriptures were written to be understood, that one might:
   a. Know the certainty of what happened - Lk 1:1-4
   b. Believe in Jesus, and have life in His name - Jn 20:30-31
   c. Have an apostle's understanding of the "mystery of Christ"  - Ep 3:3-5
   e. Know they have eternal life - 1 Jn 5:13
2. The Scriptures are an all-sufficient guide for our salvation
   a. The whole counsel of God has been preached - cf. Ac 20:27
   c. The Word can save us, and help us grow - Ja 1:21; 1 Pe 2:2
   e. It has been revealed once for all - Ju 3
   f. Not even angels or modern apostles have anything new to add - Ga 1:8,9 See Also Rev 22:18 Det 4:2;12:32
-- The Scriptures are able to make the man of God "complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work" - 2 Ti 3:16-17 Yes in fact we are to study the word of God to be able to rightly divide the word of truth. 2Tim 2:15

The HS convicts, leads, directs and edifies only through the word today. In fact I would say that if one is lead directly by the Spirit apart from the truth, then he does not need the Bible, nor indeed can he be expected to follow the Bible. The HS revealed new truth which would mean that the bible just isn't complete today because if people today have this indwelling of the HS (which always is followed by some miraculous manifestation) then they could add new revelation today and follow it up by miracles and signs. This would contradict what the bible clearly says in 2Tim 3:16-17. 

There are a couple different views my brethren hold on the indwelling of the HS. There's the view the HS does indeed indwell a person in a non-miraculous way. I hold the view that the HS does not literally indwell the Christian today. But there is one common bond between these 2 views. With either view we do not believe that the HS works directly on the person but indirectly through the word. Mainly the difference in view comes from how Acts 2:38-39 is viewed. I offer the following article for consideration on Acts 2:38-39. www.ardmoreweb.com/christ/Receiving%20the%20Spirit.htm .

What does the Indwelling of the Holy Spirit do today?

1. It cannot give faith for faith comes by the word of God (Romans 10:17)
2. It cannot give love to God for the gospel is the motive for love to God (I John 4:8).
3. It cannot make us love one another for gratitude in response to the love of God and the gospel is the basis of love among brethren (John 13:34?35). Even the miraculous indwelling did not produce love in the church at Corinth (I Corinthians 13).
4. It cannot produce the spirit of sonship, as the contents of the gospel produces the spirit of sonship, rather than the spirit of bondage that characterized the law (Romans 8:15).
5. It cannot give knowledge for knowledge comes from the Word itself.
6. It cannot give strength for it is faith based on the Word of God that gives strength for living. (Read the entire eleventh chapter of Hebrews.)
7. It cannot empower to overcome sin for we overcome through the blood and the Word (Revelation 12:11).
8. It cannot produce spirituality for the gospel makes one spiritual. Even the miraculous indwelling in the Corinthians did not make them spiritual (I Corinthians 3:1?3).
9. It cannot give growth for we grow by the Word of God (I Peter 2:2).
10. It would not make one unselfish. The church at Corinth had miraculous gifts, but these gifts did not make the Corinthians liberal. (II Corinthians, Chapters 8 and 9.),
11. It would not keep one from sinning. Even the baptism of the Holy Spirit did not keep Peter from sin (Galatians 2:11). Surely, non?miraculous indwelling would not accomplish more than the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
12. The Holy Spirit does not work miracles today, as the miracles are now written (John 20:30?31).
13. The Holy Spirit does not give revelation today as revelation is completed (Jude verse 3).
14. The Holy Spirit does not work miracles of confirmation, as confirmation ended when revelation ended (Mark 16:16?20).

What does the Holy Spirit do today that He does not do by the Word?

cougan · Dec 11, 2002

Have the Miracles ceased.

First off 1Cor 12,13.14 go together. In chapter 12 Paul talks about the different gifts then ends saying he is going to show them a more excellent way. In chapter 13 Paul starts talking about love. The Corinth church was lacking greatly in love and Paul basically tell them they better get ready to start relying on love because the gifts are not always going to be there. Now I think that most people agree that verses 8-10 teach that the miracles will cease. The place where the view changes is when they will cease. People look at verse 10 and see the word perfect and think well there is only one thing that is perfect that is Jesus so this is talking about Jesus second coming. Let us take another look at the context here.

8 Love never fails. But whether there are prophecies, they
will fail; whether there are tongues, they will cease; whether
there is knowledge, it will vanish away.

Isn't this true love never fails. But then you see that prophecies, tongues, and knowledge (not head knowledge but spiritual knowledge provided directly from the HS. SEE 1Cor 12:8) They will fail and they will cease.

9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part.

They received what we now have in the word of God in parts. They we receive new reavlation creating yet another part of the whole word of God.
Lets look at few definitions of the in part.
"A part, portion, division, of a whole" (perish)
"Part, in contrast to the whole (BAG)
"One of the constituent parts of a whole" Thayer

So verse 9 is talking about these parts of miraculous knowledge that they were receiving.

10 But when that which is perfect has come, then that which
is in part will be done away.

Now the word perfect her simply means that of complete or mature. Lets take a look at some definitions
"Completeness" (Thayer)
"Complete, entire, as opposed to what is partial or limited" (Bagster)
"Complete in all parts" (Berry)
"Complete contrasted to in part or incomplete" (Young)

So you can see very clearly that the parts spoken of in verse 9 are all put together and made complete or made whole this is what verse 10 is talking about. It the fully revealed word. Verse 9 and verse 10 are connected to one another and are not talking about 2 entirely different things that just wouldn't make sense. Let me give you some examples to make this even clearer. If I have all the pieces of an apple and I put them together I get the whole apple or the complete apple. Same thing with a pie. I put all the pieces together I get the whole pie. Now I think you would agree that if I put all the pieces of an apple together that I don't get an orange not I get an apple. It seems very clear that the perfect/complete in verse 10 is all those parts put together in verse 9.
Jesus nor his second coming can be found anywhere in these verses. The word perfect here is NEVER used to describe Jesus 2nd coming.

verses 11-12 basically restates verse 9 and 10 by showing that while they are still getting these parts they are immature but when the parts all come together then the church becomes mature. I will finish up this post with the following article on the last verses of 1cort 13. AN ILLUSTRATION FROM PAUL'S LIFE

In 1 Cor. 13:11 Paul utilizes an analogy (the only illustration in this context) to emphasize the contrast between infancy and maturity. Sometimes proponents of current charismatic activity claim that having spiritual gifts is a mark of Christian maturity. Nothing could be further from the truth. The church in Corinth had more in the way of spiritual gifts than any other as far as we have record. Yet, it was a church plagued by factions, lawsuits, fornication, skepticism and drunkenness at the Lord's table! Paul said they were not spiritual but carnal (1 Cor. 3:1) and told them to quit being "children in mind" (1 Cor. 14:20), a condition aggravated by their inordinate use of tongue-speaking!

Paul's illustration is to point out that just as he left behind childish ways when he grew from infancy to manhood, so also the infant church would discard spiritual gifts when revelation is complete. When Jesus "gave gifts unto men" (Eph. 4:8), it was so that part by part the Word might be correctly set forth through the apostles and other divinely aided teachers (Eph. 4:11) to build up the body (Eph. 4:12) until it arrived at "the unity" (wholeness) of "the faith" (the New Testament content) and the wholeness of the (full) "knowledge" ([@epignosis]) of the Son of God, "unto a full-grown ([@teleios]) man" (Eph. 4:13). Thus, when the revelation became "perfect" ([@teleios] -- 1 Cor. 13:10), the body of Christ also became "full-grown" because Christians were protected from doctrinal "error" (Eph. 4:14) and able to speak "the truth" (Eph. 4:15). When the full revelation was given, the church could then "grow up" (Eph. 4:15) and reach the status of "man" (Eph. 4:13). Being "no longer children" (Eph. 4:14), the body of Christ put away "the things of the child" (literal reading of 1 Cor. 13:11). The formerly infant church discarded the spiritual gifts.

cougan · Dec 11, 2002

MIRROR DARKLY -- FACE TO FACE

Many have misunderstood the meaning of "that which is perfect" because of misunderstanding the "mirror darkly" -- "face to face" contrast of 1 Cor. 13:12. It is not a new illustration,<19> but rather Paul's explanation (in figurative terms) of the illustration he just gave (notice the "for"). So many see the afterlife in this verse, but it is not here. The "then" (when we shall see face to face) is not "at the final end" or "evidently in heaven," as two brethren (and others) have suggested.<20>

To see in a mirror was a figurative expression which meant "to receive revelation from God." "Mirror" in Hebrew is the same word as "vision." In contrast to other prophets who had to depend on the "dark speeches" of a vision or a dream, Moses experienced a mouth-to-mouth (clear) understanding of God's will (Num. 12:6-8). The rabbis of the Midrash said the prophets saw God in clouded mirrors whereas Moses saw him in a clear one. So also Paul says that while revelation is still incomplete "we see in a mirror darkly." The mirror is clouded or obscure -- literally, "in an enigma." But later, when all spiritual knowledge and prophecy were to be finished, the image would be "face to face." It is not necessarily the mirror that is done away but the obscurity.

"Face to face" expresses the clarity of our understanding. Jacob (Gen. 32:20), Moses (Exo. 33:11; Deut. 34:10) and the Israelites (Deut. 5:4-5) were said to have encountered God "face to face." It was not meant literally, for God said, "My face shall not be seen" (Deut. 34:23). So also Paul (1 Cor. 13:12) refers not to seeing the face of God or Jesus in heaven (1 John 3:2; Rev. 22:4), but rather to the here and now as "with unveiled face" we behold "as in a mirror the glory of the Lord" (2 Cor. 3:18). God has revealed himself "to give the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ" (2 Cor. 4:6). And we "receive with meekness the implanted word" (James 1:21) when we look into the "mirror" (James 1:23) of "the perfect law of liberty" (James 1:25). That mirror reflects "face to face" now that God's Word is finished.

KNOW FULLY AS FULLY KNOWN

The second part of 1 Cor. 13:12 is also a commonly misunderstood statement. Here again, some think "then" points to eternity as the time when spiritual gifts will no longer be needed. Others who deny current charismatic activity still see heaven in the statement because they conceive of this as "merely another illustration" that Paul is using.<21> This supposed contrast between earth and heaven has been promoted in response to the Greek construction and to translations later than the King James which insert a word such as "fully" into the statement. So, for example, the American Standard Version reads: "Now I know in part; but then shall I know fully even as also I was fully known." The argument is that this must point to heaven since we can never know fully in this life.

The argument is wrong, but the ASV rendering is valid. Paul used two different Greek words for knowing. The reference to the present uses the ordinary word [@ginosko], whereas the "I shall know" uses the intensified word [@epiginosko]. This latter word means to know "thoroughly ... accurately ... well" or "exactly" or "completely."<22> The word speaks of thorough knowledge but does not imply flawless understanding. There is no warrant to picture here a scene when this world shall have drawn to a close and the faithful are all in heaven receiving full and satisfying answers to all perplexing questions.<23>

Let us notice how the word [@epiginosko] is used in the New Testament for the here and now: We can "know fully" false prophets (Matt. 7:16), the certainty of Bible teaching (Luke 1:3-4), the ordinance of God (Rom. 1:32), the things Paul wrote (1 Cor. 14:37), the grace of God (Col. 1:6), the truth (1 Tim. 4:3), and the way of righteousness (2 Pet. 2:21). And with the noun form of the word we are told that we can have a thorough knowledge of both God and Jesus (2 Pet. 1:2). All of these passages tell us that Christians are able to "know fully" right now in this life!

But someone might say that Paul seems to be saying, "I shall know perfectly as God knows me," or, "I shall recognize God as he knows me." These renderings, by Williams and Knox respectively, are unwarranted translations. Paul said nothing about knowing anything as well as God knew him, much less that he was going to know God that well. Such an idea was the Devil's lie to Eve (Gen. 3:5) but nowhere promised by God!

Paul made no allusion to some greater knowledge to be gained in heaven. He simply wrote in contrast to the era of spiritual gifts when revelation was still incomplete and he only knew "in part." Yet, he looked forward to the day (if he should live that long) when he would know all of God's revealed truth. He would then be able to know it "fully" or "well" just as Paul already was "fully known" or "well known" (same word, [@epiginosko]) by others (1 Cor. 13:12; 2 Cor. 1:14; 6:9). The claim that one cannot "know fully" in this life is without scriptural basis and out of harmony with the usage of that word in the New Testament.

cougan · Dec 11, 2002

FAITH, HOPE AND LOVE REMAIN

When Paul reaches his concluding statement in 1 Cor. 13:13, he draws a contrast between the temporary and the permanent as far as this life is concerned. Whereas spiritual gifts such as prophecies, tongues and knowledge would be done away (1 Cor. 13:8), inner Christian qualities such as faith, hope and love would "abide" (1 Cor. 13:13). Paul does not say how long they will remain. Something might "abide" ([@meno]) an hour (Matt. 26:38,40), a day (Acts 21:7), or perhaps two years (Acts 28:30) or many more. It might be just for a little while (Rev. 17:10) or until Christ returns (John 21:22-23). Paul was going to abide for some time (Phil. 1:25) but later "depart and be with Christ" (Phil. 1:23).

Paul does not say that faith, hope and love will all be eternal, and neither should we. The New English Bible presumes too much when it introduces the verse, "There are three things that last forever." Faith looks forward to fulfillment. It is "the assurance of things hoped for, a conviction of things not seen" (Heb. 11:11. While we live in this world, "we walk by faith, not by sight" (2 Cor. 5:7). Faith is a characteristic of this age. It is "unto the saving of the soul" (Heb. 10:39). Likewise, hope is limited to earthly existence. It involves steadfastness (Rom. 15:4), waiting (Gal. 5:5), expectation (Phil. 1:20), looking (Titus 2:13) and laying hold (Heb. 6:18) "unto the end" (Heb. 3:6; 6:11). But it will not exist in heaven because "hope that is seen is not hope" (Rom. 8:24). So now "we hope for that which we see not" (Rom. 8:25).

Since faith and hope have a "temporary character" and are "ascribed by Paul to this present era,"<24> there is no contrast here between earth and heaven. The contrast has to do with the temporary and the permanent during the Christian age. Spiritual gifts were to be abolished, whereas faith, hope and love continue on to the end. Finally, love alone of these three qualities goes on into eternity, for "God is love" (1 John 4:16) and "love never faileth" (1 Cor. 13:8). Nothing, including death, "shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Rom. 8:39).
CONCLUSION

The purpose of miracles was to dispense God's revelation to man and to confirm it as genuine (Heb. 2:3-4). As certain men "spake from God, being moved by the Holy Spirit" (2 Pet. 1:21), they were also "clothed with power from on high" (Luke 24:49). Therefore, they went forth and preached, "the Lord working with them and confirming the word by the signs that followed" (Mark 16:20). As long as inspiration continued, so did the "signs and wonders" (Acts 14:3). But when one was finished, so was the other. If spiritual gifts are still with us, revelation is not yet complete. But it was foretold that as a result of the cross (the fountain opened for sin -- Zech. 13:1), both prophets and demons would pass away (Zech. 13:2). However, false miracles would still be performed as "lies" designed "to deceive" (Zech. 13:3-4), causing Christians to be led astray (Matt. 24:24).

cougan · Dec 11, 2002

TO WHAT DOES THE "UNITY OF THE FAITH" REFER? (Eph. 4:13)

The context reads as follows:

"And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ..." (Eph. 4:11-13).

As we begin our consideration of the question pertaining to this passage, it is imperative that we be reminded of some clear Bible principles that attach to this subject. In this text mention is made of gifts, unity, the faith, knowledge, edification, and spiritual maturity. Scripture has much to say on all of these subjects, including the following:

1. "The faith" has been once for all revealed to man (Jude 1:3).

2. Miraculous gifts, listed in 1 Cor. 12, have ceased, vanished away, and been done away, replaced by "the perfect," complete revelation of God's will (i.e., "the faith)" to man (1 Cor. 13). The miraculous aspects of the gifts mentioned in the present context have also served their purpose and have ceased to exist.

3. All truth has been revealed, having been originally given to the apostles (John 16:13) and by inspiration written down and made known to all men (2 Pet. 1:20-21). Therefore, no new "truth" from God is available for man to hear or for God to reveal.

4. Scripture is the product of inspiration by the Holy Spirit, and is all-sufficient for "doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works" (2 Tim. 3:16-17). A need for the miraculous gifts, as listed in 1 Cor. 12 and Eph. 4, does not exist today.

5. There was, at the time of the writing of Ephesians (even as there is now), but "one faith" (Eph 4:5), and its needs are met when we "keep" (or guard) and proclaim that one faith.

Therefore, whatever the nature and purpose of the gifts mentioned in Eph. 4:11-16 may have been, their use and significance will be made known in this context. Note some things about this immediate context:

1. Certain specific gifts were given and enumerated in Eph. 4:11 -- "And he gave some apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers."

2. Three purposes of the gifts are listed in Eph. 4:12 -- "For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ."

a. "Perfecting" is from [@katartismos], defined by Rienecker as "... equipping. The word was a medical technical term for the `setting of a bone.' The noun describes the dynamic act by which persons or things are properly conditioned."<7>

b. "Work of the ministry" is from [@eis] [@ergon] [@diakonias], having to do with preparing and motivating God's children for their services to be rendered unto one another.

c. "Edifying of the body of Christ" is from [@oikodoman] [@tou] [@somatos] [@tou] [@Christou], meaning the building up of the church, Christ's body.

3. These purposes are then followed by an element intended to indicate duration or time; "till we all come in the unity of the faith, and the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ". Therefore:

a. The gifts were for a purpose.

b. They had a duration or time limit.

c. They would result in spiritual maturity and unity.

With the preceding facts before us, let us consider the significance and current application of "till we all come in the unity of the faith." In Eph. 4:3 Paul spoke of the need of keeping "the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace." Here in Eph. 4:13 is the statement saying that the gifts which had been given to men would endure until the time that the "unity of the faith" was attained. "Unity of the Spirit" (Eph. 4:3) is different from "unity of the faith" in that the former is in the ablative case, indicating the unity which is caused by the Spirit (or, as Vincent states, "wrought by the Spirit".<8> But the latter is in the genitive case, indicating the unity which belongs to the faith. The gifts earlier enumerated were to endure until we all:

1. Attain unto the unity that belongs to the faith (Eph. 4:13).

2. Attain unto the unity that belongs to the knowledge of the son of God (Eph. 4:13).

3. Attain unto a perfect (full grown) man (Eph. 4:13).

4. Attain unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ (Eph. 4:13).

5. Have the means by which to develop beyond spiritual "childhood," characterized by doctrinal instability, and by which to "grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ" (Eph. 4:14-15).

In the Nichols-Weaver Debate, Gus Nichols used this context to prove that gifts of a miraculous origin and nature were to cease and have ceased. Referring to Eph. 4:13 he said:

"`The faith' is here put for the truth of the New covenant. Paul preached `The faith which once he destroyed' (Gal. 1:23). `Earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints' (Jude 1:3). `Till' the unity of the faith means till all parts of the faith or new covenant could be revealed. Then miraculously-endowed men ceased ... Miraculously-gifted men were to continue "till" the "unity of the faith" was reached, and all parts of "the faith" had come from God."<9>

David Lipscomb commented as follows on this context:

"When the completed instruction was given, it was collected in the New Testament, as the perfected will of God, and the gifts of the Spirit vanished. The same thing is taught in the following exhortation given by Paul to the Corinthian church (then he quotes 1 Cor. 12:31 and 1 Cor. 13:8-10, C.B.G.)."<10>

cougan · Dec 11, 2002

If asked whether we currently have evangelists, pastors, and teachers, we respond in the affirmative. We do have such individuals as part of the Lord's church even today, but these individuals are not "miraculously-endowed" men today as those listed in this context were. It may be worthy of note that there is no reason to believe that the only evangelists, pastors, and teachers in the first century were those who were miraculously endowed by some means of direct inspiration. "Therefore, they that were scattered abroad went everywhere preaching the word" (Acts 8:4). The prophets and those who spoke in tongues had the benefit of miraculous information and ability, which was also true of the apostles. But once an individual with a good heart (even though not miraculously endowed) learned the truth of the gospel and obeyed it, many did exactly as Priscilla and Aquila had done, teaching many others. Doubtless many of those initial three thousand who were baptized in Jerusalem (Acts 2:37-41) returned to their homes from that first Pentecost after Jesus' resurrection bursting with the zeal that accompanied their obedience to the gospel. They told anyone who would listen about God's plan for redeeming man through Jesus Christ.

The plea for Hebrew Christians to "call to remembrance the former days," may allude to those who in their earliest days as Christians taught their neighbors and their families, only to face "a great fight of afflictions" (Heb. 10:32-34). They did not need miraculous endowment to tell others what they had heard and what they had done when they obeyed the gospel.

While this context is not exactly parallel to 1 Cor. 13, it has some similar qualities. It speaks of miraculous gifts that were for a specific purpose, gifts that had a limited duration, gifts that could cause Christians to mature and grow up in Christ, gifts that would eventuate in their being unaffected by "every wind of doctrine," but would enable them to "speak the truth in love." "The unity of the faith" is a reference to that time when the revelation of the gospel was completed and the gifts ceased.
I want you to notice that it does not say "till we all come in the unity of faith" No it says "till we all come in the unity of THE FAITH" The "unity of THE FAITH" does not refer to the time when all religious people will be united in one faith.  It refers to the gospel, the truth, the complete revelation of God's will to men. "...And a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith" (Acts 6:7).  Paul preached, "...the faith which once he destroyed" (Gal. 1:23). Christians are "... to earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints" (Jude 1:3). 

I want to post this small article to go with this section.
In 1 Cor. 13:11 Paul utilizes an analogy (the only illustration in this context) to emphasize the contrast between infancy and maturity.  Sometimes proponents of current charismatic activity claim that having spiritual gifts is a mark of Christian maturity.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  The church in Corinth had more in the way of spiritual gifts than any other as far as we have record.  Yet, it was a church plagued by factions, lawsuits, fornication, skepticism and drunkenness at the Lord's table!  Paul said they were not spiritual but carnal (1 Cor. 3:1) and told them to quit being "children in mind" (1 Cor. 14:20), a condition aggravated by their inordinate use of tongue-speaking!

    Paul's illustration is to point out that just as he left behind childish ways when he grew from infancy to manhood, so also the infant church would discard spiritual gifts when revelation is complete.  When Jesus "gave gifts unto men" (Eph. 4:8), it was so that part by part the Word might be correctly set forth through the apostles and other divinely aided teachers (Eph. 4:11) to build up the body (Eph. 4:12) until it arrived at "the unity" (wholeness) of "the faith" (the New Testament content) and the wholeness of the (full) "knowledge" ([@epignosis]) of the Son of God, "unto a full-grown ([@teleios]) man" (Eph. 4:13).  Thus, when the revelation became "perfect" ([@teleios] -- 1 Cor. 13:10), the body of Christ also became "full-grown" because Christians were protected from doctrinal "error" (Eph. 4:14) and able to speak "the truth" (Eph. 4:15). When the full revelation was given, the church could then "grow up" (Eph. 4:15) and reach the status of "man" (Eph. 4:13).  Being "no longer children" (Eph. 4:14), the body of Christ put away "the things of the child" (literal reading of 1 Cor. 13:11).  The formerly infant church discarded the spiritual gifts.

Eph. 4:13 -- The gifts were limited in duration.  They were until "we attain unto the unity of the faith" -- not the "unity of faith," but the unity or completion of the faith, that is, the New Testament itself.  This is parallel to "that which is perfect" in 1 Cor. 13: the perfect or compete revelation contrasted with the partial knowledge and partial prophecy of the spiritual gifts.  Such will result in a full-grown man and "the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ."  The gifts of the first century did for them what the completed New Testament does for us today, and the New Testament does for us today what the spiritual gifts did for those of the first century.

    Eph. 4:14: Eph. 4:13 and Eph. 4:14 are parallel to 1 Cor. 13:11 -- "When I was a child, I spake as a child, I felt as a child, I thought as a child: now that I am become a man, I have put away childish things."  The spiritual gifts belonged to the childhood of the church, and would be put away as it matured.  Paul's statement in Ephesians that as children, they were subject to being "tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, in craftiness, after the wiles of error" is parallel to 1 Cor. 13:12: "For now we see in a mirror, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know fully even as also I was fully known."

    Eph. 4:15-17 -- Paul speaks of the results of the perfect revelation, the "unity of the faith," and closes this discussion of the spiritual gifts by once more referring to "that which every joint supplieth, according to the working in due measure of each several part."  Every member, Jew or Gentile, had his part to contribute to the building up of the body in love.

Now think about this. If the unity of the faith is not limited to the completion of the revealed word then you would have to contend that there are still apostles today. I'm not talking about term apostle used in the general sense as one sent out. I'm talking about a qualified apostle as found in Acts 1:20-23. They had to be a eyewitness of Jesus, and yes Paul was also an eyewitness of Jesus an apostle born out of due season. 1cor 9:1; 1cor 15:8.  I want you to notice that Paul states in 1cor 15:8 that he was the LAST TO SEE JESUS making him the last apostle. So unless one of these eyewitnesses of Christ is still living today, it becomes abundantly clear that the unity of the faith came when the word was fully revealed.

The second problem comes if you try and say that the unity of the faith will not occur until Jesus 2nd coming and when we are in heaven. First of all we will not have faith when we get into heaven because faith is hope in things not seen. When we get to heaven we will see it and be there it will be a reality. The next problem with this view is found in verse 14. If we do not achieve this unity of the faith until we get to heaven then this teaches that there will be evil people in heaven trying to deceive us. This also means that we will not have spiritual maturity needed to withstand such evil doers until we get to heaven. Even if you hold the view that you don't know when the unity of faith will be then you are stating that we can not tell if someone is tricking us or not that we can be tossed to and fro because we don't have the unity of the faith yet. Again it is very clear that the unity of the faith is the completion of the revealed word.

cougan · Dec 11, 2002

I think you also misunderstand that there a several differennt uses of the word spirit (pneuma) throughout the bible.

1. There is the Holy Spirit himself.

2. It is used as Breath or WInd. 2 Thess 2:8, Jn 3:8

3. Its used as the spirit of man. Lk 8:55, James 2:26

4. Evil Spirits Lk 9:39

5 That which is non-physical Jn 4:24, Heb 1:14

6. A disposition, will, emotion, or desire 2Cor 12:18, Gal 6:1 Lk 1:17.

You have to determine what spirit refers to based of the context. So don't assume evertime you see the word Spirit that it means Holy Spirit.

 

Evangelion · Dec 11, 2002

Ben -

So we're changing the "BAPTISM THREAD" into a "SALVATION THREAD"?

Cougan and I maintain that the two are basically inseparable. So yes, it's necessary to discuss salvation within this context.

I have not changed my mind. Salvation is instant.

It's either a promise of something in the future, or an instant event right here and now. It can't be both. You have vacillated between these two positions.

Which will you choose?

Salvation is RECEIVING CHRIST---plainly stated in John1:12.

*snip*

I have already demolished this argument. It relies on a facile appeal to superficial proof texts, in the absence of a wider Scriptural context. It is intellectually dishonest, and theologically untanable.

The word, "saved", can have two meanings. In Matt24:13, "saved" means "eternal life". Yet in Luke 7:50, Jesus says "your faith HAS SAVED you." This is instant.

On what basis do you claim that it was instant? Simply because he said "Your faith has saved you"? But that is not sufficient, Ben. In John 17, Jesus makes a number of references to events which have not yet occurred, as if they had! And Paul himself says that we "...have been raised to heavenly places in Christ Jesus." This is the language of the past tense; but it clearly does not refer to a literal reality.

The Jews frequently spoke in this way. You will find many examples in the Bible.

So is Acts16:31---

*snip*

I refer you to my previous observations on this logically bankrupt hermeneutic.

We are saved BY grace THROUGH FAITH.

*snip*

But this contradicts your previous assertion; to whit, "Salvation is RECEIVING CHRIST---plainly stated in John1:12."

So which is it, Ben? You can have one or the other; you can't have both.

("IMMERSED" into His death---not a reference to water)

*snip*

But Paul doesn't say "You are immersed into his death" (whatever that's supposed to mean.) He says we are buried by baptism into Christ. "Baptism" means "immersion in water"; ergo, in order to be "in Christ", we must first submit to baptism.

It's very clear.

We are saved by fire, in 1Cor3:13-15

*snip*

But this also contradicts your previous assertion; to whit, "Salvation is RECEIVING CHRIST---plainly stated in John1:12."

So which is it, Ben? You can have one or the other; you can't have both.

we demonstrate some who were SAVED but not yet baptized

*snip*

But you have not yet proved that they were saved before baptism.

Please do so.

Evangelion · Dec 11, 2002

Ben - let's take a closer look at Romans 6:

3-5. So many of us as were baptized into Christ, etc.
The fact that every follower of Christ has died to sin is shown by his baptism. All its symbolism points to death. To be baptized into Christ means to enter into a vital union with him, so as to be found in him (Gal. 3:27). But this baptism into Christ implies death, for it is a baptism into the death of Christ. That the subjects of baptism are partakers of his death is shown by the form of baptism. It is a burial.

4. We are buried (Revision) through baptism into death.
The argument is that a burial implies death. Baptism is a burial, therefore its subject has died. As Christ died through sin, we die to sin; as the Crucified Christ was buried, we who have died to sin through the gospel are buried with him. As death and burial separate from the natural life, so death to sin and burial into Christ should completely sever our relation to sin. That like as Christ was raised up from the dead. The glorious power of the Father lifted up Christ from the tomb. So we, too, rise from the watery burial, with death and burial between us and the old life of sin, in order to walk in newness of life.

"This passage cannot be understood unless it is borne in mind that the primitive baptism was by immersion."
--Conybeare and Howson.

"That the custom of baptism by immersion is alluded to is generally admitted, but the emersion is as significant as the immersion."
--Dr. Philip Schaff.

"It seems to us very probable that the apostle alludes to the external form of the baptismal rite in the primitive church."
--Godet.

"The apostle alludes to the ancient manner of baptizing by immersion."
--John Wesley.

5. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death.
As the seed, planted, buried out of sight, rises again in a new life, so we are planted in the likeness of Christ's death when we are buried in baptism, and rise in the likeness of his resurrection, when we are lifted out of the water, and are found henceforth to have a new life. Compare Col. 2:12: "Buried by baptism, wherein ye are also risen with him."

Johnson, B. W. (1891), The People's New Testament.

We can defend Johnson's interpretation by an appeal to Reformed scholars:

J. P. Lange (Lutheran), Commentary on Romans 6.4:
Buried in death, an oxymoron, according to which burial precedes and death follows, as is illustrated in the immersion into the bath of baptism.
William Sanday (Episcopalian), International Critical Commentary:
Baptism has a double function. (I) It brings the Christian into personal contact with Christ, (2) It expresses symbolically a series of acts corresponding to the redeeming acts of Christ:

Immersion = Death.
Submersion = Burial (ratification of Death.)
Emergence = Resurrection.

That plunge beneath the running waters was like a death; the moment's pause while they swept overhead was like a burial; the standing erect once more in air and sunlight was a species of resurrection.
J. B. Lightfoot (Episcopalian), Commentary on Colossians 2:12:
Baptism is the grave of the old man, and the birth of the new. As he sinks beneath the baptismal waters, the believer buries there all his corrupt affections and past sins; as he emerges thence, he rises regenerate, quickened to new hopes and a new life.
A. S. Peake (Methodist), The Expositor's Greek Testament:
The rite of baptism in which the person baptized was first buried beneath the water, and then raised from it, typified to Paul the burial and resurrection of the believer with Christ.

If the passage did not refer to water baptism, Paul's precise use of symbolism (by which he draws a correlation between water baptism and our literal death and resurrection) would be rendered totally useless.

Observe:

Romans 6:3-4.
Or are ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?
We were buried therefore with him through baptism unto death: that like as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life.

This is a clear reference to water baptism. "Spirit baptism" (or whatever you people call it these days) is not the "baptism" referred to here.

How do we know? There are several clues:

Paul has used the Greek word baptizo, meaning "to dip or plunge." You tell me is water something that you can "dip or plunge" people into? How are we expected to "dip or plunge" somebody into the Holy Spirit, pray tell?
We've already seen that baptism involves dipping or plunging - which means you need a literal liquid. (Water.) Can you "dip or plunge" someone into the Holy Spirit? No, you cannot. The Holy Spirit is "poured". That makes it an "annointing". If this was what Jesus had meant, he would have said "annoint them in the name of... etc." But he doesn't. He says "dip or plunge." So we need a liquid - and that liquid is water.
Paul says that the baptism of which he speaks, is symbolic of death and resurrection. Only water baptism can fulfil this typology.

The point I am making is that only water baptism can truly represent the death, burial and resurrection of a believer.

Observe:

You descend into the water (death.)
You remain under the water for a moment (burial.)
You rise from the water (resurrection.)

None of this occurs in so-called "Spirit baptism", and that is why the only baptism by which we can be "buried with Christ", is water baptism. So for those who advocate "Spirit baptism" over water baptism - how can "Spirit baptism" fulfil the necessary symbolism of death, burial and resurrection?

Perhaps it's time to ask a few questions. I'll present the "water baptism" side, and I invite you to fill in the blanks on your side:

Are there three stages to "Spirit baptism"? (There are with water baptism.)
Is there a stage in which death is represented? (There is with water baptism.)
Is there a stage in which burial is represented? (There is with water baptism.)
Is there a stage in which resurrection is represented? (There is with water baptism.)

Identification with Christ - his death, burial and resurrection - is made possible by the two simple rituals that he instituted. One of these was the partaking of the memorial emblems - bread and wine. The other was water baptism in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit for the remission of sins.

Ben johnson · Dec 11, 2002

1. It cannot give faith for faith comes by the word of God (Romans 10:17)

Faith does not come from the word of God---faith comes from our own HEARTS---from HEARING the Word of God...

"For with the HEART man believes (has faith-to-salvation)..."

13. The Holy Spirit does not give revelation today as revelation is completed (Jude verse 3).

Jude says "the FAITH was delivered once for all"---it doesn't say that there are no prophesies today...

12. The Holy Spirit does not work miracles today, as the miracles are now written (John 20:30?31).

That's not what it says at all! Did you even READ this Scripture?

14. The Holy Spirit does not work miracles of confirmation, as confirmation ended when revelation ended (Mark 16:16?20).

Again you must not have READ it---nothing here that says "end". While we are "not to put the Lord God to the test" (Matt3:7,Deut6:16), Paul was BITTEN by a snake and nothing happened to him... Acts 28:3

Isn't this true love never fails. But then you see that prophecies, tongues, and knowledge (not head knowledge but spiritual knowledge provided directly from the HS. SEE 1Cor 12:8) They will fail and they will cease.

WHEN? When the PERFECT COMES. (1Cor3:10) Hasn't happened yet. THAT will happen when JESUS returns. You are correct that 1Cor14:20 is a rebuke against immature tongue-speaking (thinking they were HOT because they TONGUED), but Paul also says, "do not FORBID". And Paul says, "earnestly desire the higher gifts, especially that you may prophesy"...

It's either a promise of something in the future, or an instant event right here and now. It can't be both. You have vacillated between these two positions.

No it's not, no I haven't. Salvation is "IN CHRIST"---"he who HAS the Son has the life---I write this that you may KNOW you have eternal life". Eternal life is the goal, the promise, the inheritance, the reward (Col3:24). Salvation is our GRASP of that inheritance. Thus, "he who endures to the end is saved"---meaning, "he who remains saved to the end, is saved"---displaying the SECOND meaning of saved, "saved-to-the-end", "eternal life".

Eternal life is the goal, saved is HAVING CHRIST---having the eternal life. If we REMAIN IN CHRIST, remaining saved, then we will be SAVED-ETERNALLY.

"Saved" has two meanings---saved now, and saved finally.

What does *snip* mean?

I have already demolished this argument. It relies on a facile appeal to superficial proof texts, in the absence of a wider Scriptural context. It is intellectually dishonest, and theologically untanable.

"As many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name". RECEIVING CHRIST, is identical to BELIEVING. "As you have RECEIVED CHRIST, so walk IN Him." "He who HAS the Son, HAS the (eternal) life." We HAVE Jesus by RECEIVING Him, as LORD and SAVIOR. Which am I to believe---you, or Scripture?

But this contradicts your previous assertion; to wit, "Salvation is RECEIVING CHRIST---plainly stated in John1:12."

Apparently you're not understanding the essence of salvation---salvation is IN CHRIST. Those in Acts 10:44-48 BELIEVED, RECEIVED CHRIST---and they were saved, filled with the Spirit, spoke with tongues. ...and they were NOT YET WATERBAPTIZED...

But this also contradicts your previous assertion; to wit, "Salvation is RECEIVING CHRIST---plainly stated in John1:12."

Let's see what salvation is---it is ONE THING, with SEVERAL DESCRIPTIONS!

1. Believing (John3:16)
2. Doing the will of God (Matt7:21)
3. Humbled as a child (Matt18:3-4)
4. Born-Again (John3:3)
5. Receiving Christ (John1:12)
6. Abiding in Christ (John15:1-7, 1Jn4:15-16)
7. Walking in the Spirit, walking in Christ (Rm8:12-13, Col2:6---As you have RECEIVED CHRIST, so walk IN Him"
8. Immersed in Christ (not water), old crucified/dead, new born (Rm6:4-11, Gal2:20, 2Cor5:17)
9. Baptized in the Holy Spirit (different from water) (Matt3:11)
10. Righteous, godly (1Jn3:4-12)Jms1:2-4,12)
11. Saved through fire of trials ("Every tree that bears fruit, He will PRUNE that it may bear more fruit"---John15:2) (1Cor3:15,1Pet1:7, Jms1:2-4,12)

Do you understand now? One SALVATION, many descriptions---all equally valid, all identical---all referring to the ONE SALVATION

He says we are buried by baptism into Christ. "Baptism" means "immersion in water"; ergo, in order to be "in Christ", we must first submit to baptism.

Baptism does NOT mean "immersed-into-water", it means "IMMERSED". Haven't you been looking up the verses we've been throwing at you? Since you are disinclined to look them up, then I'll quote Matt3:11: "I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who comes after me ...WILL BAPTIZE YOU WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT"

The Greek, means "immerse". Let's use the ACTUAL meaning in the verse:
"I immerse you in water, but He will immerse you in the Holy Spirit".
Christ will immerse with the Holy Spirit, not water. Is it finally clear? Or will you contend that John means "immersion-in-the-Holy-Spirit-THROUGH-WATER"? Be careful---if you take THAT path, then you ALSO MUST contend that sinners are immersed in Hell-fire THROUGH WATER!!! Are you prepared to argue that Hell is through WATERBAPTISM???

Matt3:12 explains that the FIRE in 3:11, is for the CHAFF, IE Hell.
BECAUSE Holy Spirit baptism is SEPARATE AND DISTINCT from waterbaptism, then the "IMMERSION INTO CHRIST" of Rom6, which is equivalent to IMMERSION IN THE HOLY SPIRIT (both refer to SALVATION), Rom6 is ALSO not speaking of waterbaptism!!! It is IMMERSION INTO CHRIST! Both, "IMMERSION ITO CHRIST", and "IMMERSION INTO THE HOLY SPIRIT" happen at SALVATION---and NEITHER means WATER!

But you have not yet proven that they were saved before baptism.

The burden of proof is left to the accuser---if you REALLY BELIEVE that they were "filled wiith the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues, but were NOT SAVED, then please, PLEASE show me the Scripture where the Holy Spirit INDWELLS THE UNSAVED!

Does Hellfire come through WATERBAPTISM? If you answer "NO", then you are FORCED to admit that HOLY-SPIRIT-IMMERSION is DIFFERENT AND SEPARATE from waterbaptism.

If you admit that the Holy Spirit WILL NOT indwell unbelievers, if you will simply read Paul's words in Acts 11:17, "God gave the same gift as He gave to us AFTER BELIEVING", then you have NO CHOICE but to accept that they BELIEVED---and they RECEIVED THE HOLY SPIRIT THROUGH that belief---and they were SAVED!
...but they were NOT WATERBAPTIZED!!!

Ben johnson · Dec 11, 2002

We've already seen that baptism involves dipping or plunging - which means you need a literal liquid. (Water.) Can you "dip or plunge" someone into the Holy Spirit? No, you cannot. The Holy Spirit is "poured". That makes it an "annointing". If this was what Jesus had meant, he would have said "annoint them in the name of... etc." But he doesn't. He says "dip or plunge." So we need a liquid - and that liquid is water.

Circular reasoning---the premise proved by the premise itself. The word merely means, "IMMERSE"---if it refers to WATER, then it means waterbaptism---but clearly in Matt3:11-12, it means WATER, and SPIRIT, and FIRE. The SPIRIT baptism (which has nothing to do with water), is tantamount to SALVATION. Which includes "immersion into Christ" (which also has nothing to do with water)...

ScottEmerson · Dec 11, 2002

I don't have time to say much, but it is interesting that the exact same people of the early church who believed in the validity of baptism for salvation believed in tongues.

Irenaeus (A.D. 115 to 202) a pupil of Polycarp (A.D. 70-155), who was himself a disciple of the Apostle John, wrote: "in like manner do we also hear many brethren in the Church who possess prophetic gifts, and who through the Spirit speak all kinds of languages, and bring to light for the general benefit the hidden things of men and declare the mysteries of God, whom also the apostle terms 'spiritual', they being spiritual because they partake of the Spirit".

Justin Martyr (A.D.. 100-165) wrote that in his time the gifts of the Spirit were active and operating in the Church.

Tertullian (A.D. 160-220), according to Smith' dictionary of the Bible, speaks in his writings of the gifts of the Spirit, including speaking with tongues, as being manifested in his day.

Oregon (A.D. 186-253) and Cyprian (A.D. 200-258), his contemporaries, give the same testimony.

Ben johnson · Dec 13, 2002

The tennis raquet begins to dip; Ben is puzzled---it was a good serve---where are they? He puts his hand over his eyes and peers into the darkness. Have they dropped the ball? Are they still on the court? He strains and strains, but can't quite see...

Ben's suspense mounts...

Hey Scott---how did your finals go???

What about Baptism?

Senior Member

<b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

I Like Traffic Lights

Legend

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

<b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

<b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

Legend

Legend

I Like Traffic Lights

Legend

Similar threads