Is baptism necessary to be saved?

[Philo]

So then you do attend the Church of Christ. I posted a post and you have yet to respond to it. I will wait for your reply.

A better way to ask this question would be "Does your Church building where you congregate have a sign with the words "Church of Christ" on it."

Oh, and welcome back, WesKen. Missed ya.

Buckets of Fun and Laughter, Seasoned with a bit of Sardonic Salutation,

The one (but not only),

Right Pinky Fingernail of the Body,

Philo

 

[Philo]

These are not just my thoughts. They are remarks based on Scripture... &c.

Do you believe that someone with faith will act out his or her faith (and indeed, be justified before men by the acrions)?

This is the key.

And on another note, do you carry a bias against us quaint Restorationists? Man, it's a shame, if Denny were here we'd have near a half dozen, right in one thread. It's a regular gospel meeting here at CF.

Stonite, Campbellian, Garrettite, Ketchersidian, 100% Pure Christian (lol),

Feeloh

 

[western kentucky]

Suzie,

Just to keep it simple, I would like to address only one point.....

You quoted Rom. 10:9: "that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."

I notice a few pages back, you mentioned that a person is saved when he believes in his heart. Rom. 10:9 says that a person is saved after confession and belief. Do you believe a person is saved after belief, or after confession and belief?

Rom. 10:9 is very clear... It plainly states that person is saved after confession and belief! But before I come to a final conclusion of the meaning of the passage, I must harmonize the verse with the rest of the bible (Acts 2:38, Mark. 16:16, Rom. 10:17, Acts 8:37, Eph. 2:8, Rom. 4:5, James 2:14-26). After considering everything, I conclude that one must believe, repent, confess, and be baptized. These are not works that one can boast in, but merely acts of obedience through which one can recieve the grace of God. What are your thoughts?

Hey Aggie! I'm doing great. It's good to be back on here!

 

[suzie]

Rom. 10:9 is very clear... It plainly states that person is saved after confession and belief!

That is not at all what this verse says kentucky. It says if we confess Jesus is Lord ...

It goes on to again state that in v13 "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."

 

[western kentucky]

Originally Posted by: Western Kentucky

Suzie,

Just to keep it simple, I would like to address only one point.....

You quoted Rom. 10:9: "that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."

I notice a few pages back, you mentioned that a person is saved when he believes in his heart. Rom. 10:9 says that a person is saved after confession and belief. Do you believe a person is saved after belief, or after confession and belief?

Rom. 10:9 is very clear... It plainly states that person is saved after confession and belief! But before I come to a final conclusion of the meaning of the passage, I must harmonize the verse with the rest of the bible (Acts 2:38, Mark. 16:16, Rom. 10:17, Acts 8:37, Eph. 2:8, Rom. 4:5, James 2:14-26). After considering everything, I conclude that one must believe, repent, confess, and be baptized. These are not works that one can boast in, but merely acts of obedience through which one can recieve the grace of God. What are your thoughts?

Hey Aggie! I'm doing great. It's good to be back on here!

That is not at all what this verse says kentucky. It says if we confess Jesus is Lord ....

I am confused... Rom. 10:9 says, "that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." This would mean (confession + belief = salvation). Is this not what it says? So is one saved by belief, or by confession and belief?

It goes on to again state that in v13 "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."

Rom. 10:13: "for whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved." ]

Before I come to a final conclusion of the meaning of the passage, I must harmonize this verse with the rest of the bible. How does this verse fit in with Acts 2:38, Mark 16:16, Acts 8:37, Rom. 10:9, etc..... After considering them all, I conclude that "calling on the name of the Lord" is an act of obedience to God's commands.

 

[Philo]

Suzie,

Just to keep it simple, I would like to address only one point.....

These are not works that one can boast in, but merely acts... through which one can recieve the grace of God. What are your thoughts?

Hey Aggie! I'm doing great. It's good to be back on here!

"Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness...(Romans 4:4, 5)"

"But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace. (Romans 11:6)"

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

So, faith is creditted as righteousness before God, right? And grace is not grace if it is on the basis of works, right? And eternal life is a free gift, right? And yet, somehow your exegesis contradicts these three (internally harmonius) points? To paraphrase what you said, we have to do acts to gain grace, grace being on the basis of our performance of these acts, and our eternal life contigent on these acts.

Perhaps confession, repentence, baptism, &c are coincident with salvation? This is something worth considering, since unlike a great number in the world, we are under no pressure by our "church" to cling to the party line. In fact, scholasticising these issues as to make ourselves seem intellectually blameless and doctrinally sure in fact makes us seem intellectually dishonest and doctrinally sectarian. Most of the current division within churches with "Church of Christ" on the sign outside comes from eac individual group's belief that there is only on correct reading of scripture, and all others are sinful. What if there is only one correct reading of scripture (the one that dictates that Christ died for our sins and rose on the third day) and infinite numbers of largely inconsequencial but culturally significant readings that shape each congregation's corporate practices? Again, worth considering, since belief in Jesus saves us and not belief in the Bible.

Oh snap I'm postmodern like that,

|>|-||10

[PS

Reading the Bible a verse at a time (without deference to context), or relentlessly scouring it for prooftexts, is akin to eating a banana peel... Slowly. Reading and understanding big chunks of the bible is infinitely more edible. Also, when harmonizing the Bible with itself, we don't harmonize verses. We harmonize ideas. Otherwise, the Bible would instantly disqualify itself from being true solely on the basis of James 2 and Romans 4, which contain sentences which are exact, necessary contradictions to one another if read alone.]

 

[aggie03]

So you never have to do anything to receive a gift?

 

[Philo]

So you never have to do anything to receive a gift?

If it's a gift, then no. If you have to do something to receive something, it isn't a gift. It's wages. (Paul's definitions, not mine )

 

[suzie]

Romans 10:9 does not say you have to make a confession --it says to "confess" with your mouth that Jesus is Lord.

Look to the prior verse "The word is near you . It is in your mouth and in your heart, that is the word of faith we are proclaiming...."

The Greek verb for this is "homologeo" which means "to declare openly by speaking out freely, such confession being the effect of deep conviction of facts" (Vine's A-1c). Confession is not a private act. When one confesses Jesus one verbalizes publicly belief in Jesus as the Son of God

 

[western kentucky]

"Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness...(Romans 4:4, 5)"

"But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace. (Romans 11:6)"

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

So, faith is creditted as righteousness before God, right? And grace is not grace if it is on the basis of works, right? And eternal life is a free gift, right? And yet, somehow your exegesis contradicts these three (internally harmonius) points? To paraphrase what you said, we have to do acts to gain grace, grace being on the basis of our performance of these acts, and our eternal life contigent on these acts.

Perhaps confession, repentence, baptism, &c are coincident with salvation? This is something worth considering, since unlike a great number in the world, we are under no pressure by our "church" to cling to the party line. In fact, scholasticising these issues as to make ourselves seem intellectually blameless and doctrinally sure in fact makes us seem intellectually dishonest and doctrinally sectarian. Most of the current division within churches with "Church of Christ" on the sign outside comes from eac individual group's belief that there is only on correct reading of scripture, and all others are sinful. What if there is only one correct reading of scripture (the one that dictates that Christ died for our sins and rose on the third day) and infinite numbers of largely inconsequencial but culturally significant readings that shape each congregation's corporate practices? Again, worth considering, since belief in Jesus saves us and not belief in the Bible.

Oh snap I'm postmodern like that,

|>|-||10

[PS

Reading the Bible a verse at a time (without deference to context), or relentlessly scouring it for prooftexts, is akin to eating a banana peel... Slowly. Reading and understanding big chunks of the bible is infinitely more edible. Also, when harmonizing the Bible with itself, we don't harmonize verses. We harmonize ideas. Otherwise, the Bible would instantly disqualify itself from being true solely on the basis of James 2 and Romans 4, which contain sentences which are exact, necessary contradictions to one another if read alone.]

Here's the way I view it....

If your understanding of grace, faith, and works are correct, then both faith and baptism are not necessary. In Titus 2:11, one can understand that God's grace is offered to all men. In Matt. 7:13-14, one can also understand that all men will not be saved.... So, it is reasonable to consider that there is more to consider than God's grace.

What does Jesus teach is necessary for salvation in Mark 16:16? How about in Acts 2:38? What does Jesus say a person's mindset should be after obeying the commandments of God? Have they earned salvation or nullified God's grace?

 

[western kentucky]

sorry... posted the same thing twice

 

[Existential1]

I read your post, and as I have said before, you didn't use any verses from the Bible. I have asked you to do this for two reasons:

1. I would like to see your reasoning and thinking process that you have used to arrive at your conclusions.

2. I am not interested in opinions. What I think, what you think, what anyone else here thinks is not important. What God has said is important. You will do far more in convincing me that what you believe is what God intended if you use His words and not your own (at least referencing them is what I really mean ).

As it stands now, I really can't respond to what you're written because I have no idea how you've reached those conclusions, and I don't know how you believe that the sum of God's word teaches what you believe. Honestly, I really have no where to go because we have, as of yet, not talked about the word of God but only what you think. As I stated earlier, and I mean no disrespect, I am not interested in opinions. I spent a lot of time before I became a Christian listening to what people thought, and that never really got me anywhere.

I like what a03 says.

But, while what is described here, is legitimate ground for the witness of a03: what is described here, if taken as exclusive, as all that there is for Christian communion; also gives us what has become a stumbling block to much.

I.

What is promised in I.

A03 is of the faith opinion, that literal absorption in the verses of the Bible is some exclusive and sufficient discipline and way.
While this is undeniably legitimate as a discipline and way: is it legitimate when it extends to saying it is the way, is the only way; where a03 can say, "I am not interested in opinions. What I think, what you think, what anyone else here thinks is not important."

I wonder: and I wonder because of living word; and I wonder because of Jesus.

I am that I am: if I correctly understand this as some self characterisation of God; seems to hold deep mystery and import.
I is not ruled out, not consigned to some reductive outer darkness.
Jesus fulfills the law, and does so by breaking the mould of some orthodox conclusion: for me there is I here; the I of Jesus.

Yes Jesus can be allowed as perfect, in the manner that a03 might wish for, in harmoniously fulfilling all of Bilically mediated truth, all of the time: but, for me, there is also I in this; some agency that is human scaled and fulcrummed, that is Jesus, that looks all this in the face, and knows.
In Jesus there is a bearer of this knowledge. And I can see no other way, but to understand I, the I of Jesus, as centrally implicated in this bearing.

No: I cannot point to verses as can others; they have their gifts of retention of concrete detail, I only have my dyslexic gifts where I retain my gained truth and instantly forget what concretises it.

I am interested in opinions. They are the clothes of the other, the doors and windows to their revelation and witness. I embrace their opinions, and always, as of God: my Christian work is to see the God in this stranger's face, now including a03; where I come to so see, by dieing to the self that cannot so see, and being reborn in the God that in grounding them reveals as also grounding me; and in that cross moment of so dieing, the I that I have partakes of the Christ that Jesus indicates.

All such partaking of Christ, the agency of redemption in God, is necessarily baptism, re-entry to living water.
If work is the earthside moment of following Jesus into Christ, then baptism is the Godside moment of this following into Christ.

Baptism is of grace, as being in God sees us again enter living water: is Grace because God finds us, as we know that from falleness we cannot plan and contrive such indwelling.

 

[Philo]

Here's the way I view it....

If your understanding of grace, faith, and works are correct, then both faith and baptism are not necessary. In Titus 2:11, one can understand that God's grace is offered to all men. In Matt. 7:13-14, one can also understand that all men will not be saved.... So, it is reasonable to consider that there is more to consider than God's grace.

What does Jesus teach is necessary for salvation in Mark 16:16? How about in Acts 2:38? What does Jesus say a person's mindset should be after obeying the commandments of God? Have they earned salvation or nullified God's grace?

Well, the Bible (and my post) were rather specific about faith being necessary. But let's be clear on something here... Faith is not a work. Faith is a state of mind. If someone showed you a picture of Mount Rushmore and said "this is what Mount Rushmore looks like" and you believed him, was that a work?

The same applies to Jesus. We are given the testimony of credible witnesses. If we are cut to the heart by its truth, we believe. If that belief is faith, we will have no choice but to act. You can't not act upon faith any more than you can try and walk through a wall with the full knowledge and conviction that the wall is a solid thing that you can't walk through.

Now, we could believe but not have faith... But that simply means that although we reguard the gospel as true, probably true, historically accurate or whatever, we can't let go of ourselves. We still have faith: Faith in our own self-sufficiency.

I hope that clears things up a bit.

<3,

Philo

 

[western kentucky]

Romans 10:9 does not say you have to make a confession --it says to "confess" with your mouth that Jesus is Lord.

Look to the prior verse "The word is near you . It is in your mouth and in your heart, that is the word of faith we are proclaiming...."

The Greek verb for this is "homologeo" which means "to declare openly by speaking out freely, such confession being the effect of deep conviction of facts" (Vine's A-1c). Confession is not a private act. When one confesses Jesus one verbalizes publicly belief in Jesus as the Son of God

Suzie,

Romans 10:9 states that one must confess AND believe.... The "AND" is a coordinating conjuction connecting two equal parts - (confession) and (belief). Confessing with your mouth and believing in your heart are two separate actions - - They cannot be combined into one act. Consider John 12:42-43

 

[western kentucky]

Well, the Bible (and my post) were rather specific about faith being necessary. But let's be clear on something here... Faith is not a work. Faith is a state of mind. If someone showed you a picture of Mount Rushmore and said "this is what Mount Rushmore looks like" and you believed him, was that a work?

The same applies to Jesus. We are given the testimony of credible witnesses. If we are cut to the heart by its truth, we believe. If that belief is faith, we will have no choice but to act. You can't not act upon faith any more than you can try and walk through a wall with the full knowledge and conviction that the wall is a solid thing that you can't walk through.

Now, we could believe but not have faith... But that simply means that although we reguard the gospel as true, probably true, historically accurate or whatever, we can't let go of ourselves. We still have faith: Faith in our own self-sufficiency.

I hope that clears things up a bit.

<3,

Philo

Jesus tells us that "faith" or "belief" is a work.... Consider John 6:26-29.

You believe that "faith" is not a work, and that "baptism" is a work! How did you come that conclusion? From my point of view, baptism is an act of faith where God does the real work (Col. 2:12).

 

[Philo]

Jesus tells us that "faith" or "belief" is a work.... Consider John 6:26-29.

You believe that "faith" is not a work, and that "baptism" is a work! How did you come that conclusion? From my point of view, baptism is an act of faith where God does the real work (Col. 2:12).

I think that John 6:26-29 is more about the people's coming to Jesus because they were hungry and they wanted a bite to eat. That it uses the word "work" is incidental. Faith simply cannot be a work. You can't will yourself to have faith, because you've already failed if you have to convince yourself of something that you don't believe. And if you don't have to convince yourself of it, then where's the work?

 

[deadlydentures]

"I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me will come one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not fit to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire. 12His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor, gathering his wheat into the barn and burning up the chaff with unquenchable fire."

quoted from Mathew 3:11, said by John the Baptist

 

[western kentucky]

I think that John 6:26-29 is more about the people's coming to Jesus because they were hungry and they wanted a bite to eat. That it uses the word "work" is incidental. Faith simply cannot be a work. You can't will yourself to have faith, because you've already failed if you have to convince yourself of something that you don't believe. And if you don't have to convince yourself of it, then where's the work?

John 6:26-29 says that faith is a work..... "Faith" is a determination that one must choose. Consider Acts 16:30-31.

Also consider Mark 16:16 - "He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned."

The "And" is a coordinating conjunction connecting two equal parts. With your reasoning -- If "faith" is not a work, then "baptism" is not a work.

 

[aggie03]

If it's a gift, then no. If you have to do something to receive something, it isn't a gift. It's wages. (Paul's definitions, not mine )

Isn't "receiving" something that you have to do?

 

[Philo]

John 6:26-29 says that faith is a work..... "Faith" is a determination that one must choose. Consider Acts 16:30-31.

Also consider Mark 16:16 - "He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned."

The "And" is a coordinating conjunction connecting two equal parts. With your reasoning -- If "faith" is not a work, then "baptism" is not a work.

You didn't address my reasoning... How can it be a work to believe in something you already believe in? How can belief that you have to work for be called belief and not self-deception?

And for what it's worth, that semicolon in Mark 16:16 speaks louder than the "and".

The C-Notch in the Truck of Life,

Philo