• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

What about Baptism?

Discussion in 'Christianity and World Religion' started by cougan, Oct 6, 2002.

  1. Ben johnson

    Ben johnson Legend Supporter

    +374
    Christian
    Hi, EV. The boldest passage that contradicts this, is Acts 10. As I understand Cougan and TBIR, they contend that those were FILLED WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT beFORE they were saved! (This based partly on chapter 11's recounting of "Peter just BEGINNING to tell them the Gospel"---so the reasoning is how COULD they be saved they have not yet HEARD. But Peter plainly says, "THey received the HS just as WE had received Him! (11:15) God gave them the same gift as He gave to us also after believing in the Lord Jesus Christ".

    They believed, they received the Holy Spirit---but they were not saved? Oh yes they were. Either Peter got out ENOUGH words, or they had heard it before---but they undeniably believed, and as Eph1:13 says, "Having believed, they were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise." I would like some kind of Scriptural backing that says "The Holy Spirit WILL indwell ANYONE before belief, BEFORE salvation!
     
  2. Evangelion

    Evangelion <b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

    +0
    Ben -

    Hi. :)

    Contradicts what? Contradicts the words of the Apostle Paul in Romans 6? How can Scripture contradict Scripture, pray tell? What is your hermeneutic, Ben?

    How so?

    Well, I agree that they received the Holy Spirit before they were saved. Salvation only comes at the Judgement Seat. It does not occur at any time prior to this event - no, not even at baptism. So I think it is your view of "salvation" that is at fault here.

    The mere fact that they had received the Holy Spirit, does not mean that they were saved. And in any case, Peter still insists that they should be baptised, even after receiving the Holy Spirit!

    So we see that the common claim of water baptism being "replaced" by "Spirit baptism", is patently false. No such replacement occurred. :)

    Yep.

    Not yet. Not until the Judgement.

    How do you intend to prove this?

    Incredible as this may sound, the word "sealed" is not synonymous with the word "saved."

    I sealed the edge of my shower last week, with a silicon gun. Does this mean that my shower is "saved"? ;)

    Well you're wasting your time, because I don't believe that the Holy Spirit comes upon anyone who doesn't belive, and I don't think that this is what cougan has argued, either.

    As for "before salvation" - of course it's before salvation!

    Salvation only occurs at the Judgement Seat - and at no time before this. :cool:
     
  3. &nbsp;

    Here's a question to Ben and Scott,&nbsp; What do you know and understand about the Holy Spirit of God?
     
  4. Ben johnson

    Ben johnson Legend Supporter

    +374
    Christian
    "BAPTIZE" means "to IMMERSE". Sometimes it's in WATER, sometimes it's NOT. Read Matt3:11-12 and you will see 3 distinct and separate baptisms:

    1. Water (repentance)
    2. Holy Spirit (nowater)
    3. Fire for sinners ("burn the chaff"---obviously, HELL; nowater)

    Romans 6 is also nowater---it is "IMMERSION INTO CHRIST

    Gal 3:27 "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." BAPTIZED-INTO-CHRIST = PUT-ON-CHRIST --- it has nothing to do with water. See Gal2:20

    "One Lord, one faith, ONE BAPTISM" (Eph4)---it is the IMMERSION INTO CHRIST that is the "one baptism". Nowater.
    "And all of the circumcised beievers ...were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out upon the Gentiles also. For they were ...speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter said, 'Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized, who have received the Holy Spirit JUST AS WE DID, can he?" They BELIEVED, they were SAVED---they received the Holy Spirit---Acts11:17

    "WATERBAPTISM=salvation" is refuted.

    ...except for those who claim "The HOly Spirit INDWELLS THE UNSAVED!" He does not...
    Don't have to---Peter stated it very clearly. "Received the Holy Spirit JUST AS WE DID---God gave to them the same gift as He gave to us also, after believing in the Lord Jesus Christ." Belief is all that gains salvation.

    "For with the heart man BELIEVES, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation". Salvation is always TWO THINGS---God's grace, our faith. "GOD-RAISED-HIM-FROM-THE-DEAD"---grace, "BELIEVE-IN-YOUR-HEART"---faith. Rm10:9-10 Nowater.
    Yes it is.
    Show me "SHOWER-SEALING" in the Scripture.

    Meanwhile (while you are looking that up)---"having BELIEVED, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of Promise---sealed unTO (not "unTIL") the day of redemption." Eph1:13,4:30
    Apparently it IS what he argued---by saying, "Peter had only BEGUN to talk, so they couldn't KNOW the Gospel"---he contends that they had not yet believed! If they BELIEVED, then the Holy Spirit indwelt them consequential to their SALVATION! There is not a hoop large enough to jump through to twist this into conforming to, "waterbaptism = salvation".
    Okaaaayyy.... Please tell me your understanding of 1Jn5:12-13: "He who HAS the Son HAS THE LIFE, he who has not the Son of God has not the life; I write this that you who BELIEVE in the name of the Son of God, that you may KNOW YOU HAVE ETERNAL LIFE." While it is true that the INHERITANCE is reserved in Heaven for us (1Pet1:4), salvation is IN CHRIST---he who HAS CHRIST, is SAVED. He who PERSEVERES in Christ, until the END, is given eternal life. Col1:23, Heb10:36, Luke 21:19.
    The Holy Spirit is the second person of the one God...
     
  5. cougan

    cougan Senior Member

    766
    +6
    Christian
    Ok&nbsp;I want to finish up my previous post by talking about John 3:5 and 1Cort 12:13. I want to show that these verse along with some others are talking about water baptism and not HS baptism. I was orginally going to comment on these verses in my own words but I am felling lazy and I have found an article that expresses my sentiments exactly.&nbsp; By the way I will refrain from posting articles in the future as they tend to be to long but I find this one very well written and I hope you take the time to read it.

    Nicodemas, a Pharisaical leader of the Hebrew people, once sought a night-time interview with Jesus. He had been impressed with the Lord, hence declared: “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that you do, except God be with him.”

    Christ never acknowledged the compliment; rather, he went right to the heart of the matter and admonished the Jewish dignitary: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except one be born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (Jn. 3:3). Nicodemas did not understand the nature of the Lord’s symbolic language, and so inquired: “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb, and be born?” Jesus pointed out that the birth of which he spoke was of a spiritual nature. He announced: “Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God” (3:5).

    Within the world of “Christendom” it is generally conceded that one must experience the new birth if he is to be saved. Our Lord certainly left no doubt about it when he emphasized: “You [plural] must be born anew” (3:7).

    The matter of controversy is focused upon what constitutes the new birth. This point will be considered in this article.

    There are three important phases connected with a birth experienceó a begetting, a bringing forth, and the state into which one enters as a result of that process. In the human arrangement, for example, there is the implantation of seed by the father, a bringing forth (delivery) from the mother, and a family relationship subsequently enjoyed (with inheritance privileges).

    Within this context Christ suggests each of these components. There is mention of:


    The Spirit;
    water; and,
    the kingdom.
    We confidently argue that the Lord here affirms that one:

    Must be begotten by the Spirit, and that such is effected by the Word of God as the sacred message produces belief in a sincere heart.

    That penitent faith, generated by the gospel, will lead one to obey the New Testament command to be immersed in water, thus identifying with Jesus in his “birth” from the dead (Col. 1:18; Rev. 1:5).

    All who yield to this divine plan become citizens of the kingdom of Christ (Col. 1:13), or members of his church (Mt. 16:18-19).
    Let’s address each of these matters.


    The role of the Holy Spirit
    The New Testament makes it clear that the Holy Spirit, operating through the medium of the Word of God, “begets” (in a manner of speaking) the individual who gladly receives that truth. For example, James declares: “Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of first-fruits of his creatures” (1:18). Further, note Peter’s comment: “...[H]aving been begotten again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, through the word of God, which lives and abides” (1 Pet. 1:23). In one of his epistles to Corinth, Paul observes: “For though you have ten thousand tutors in Christ, yet have you not many fathers; for in Christ Jesus I begat you through the gospel” (1Cor. 4:15).

    To these plain passages add this fact: The Scriptures clearly affirm that the Holy Spirit uses the Word of truth as his instrument of operation upon the human heart (cf. Eph. 6:17). It thus becomes apparent that the term “Spirit” in John 3:5 is an allusion to the source of the spiritual seed that impacts the human heart by means of the gospel. This represents the initial phase of the conversion process.

    [Note: An accurate analysis of John 3:3ff will not allow the view, becoming increasing popular with some, that “Spirit” in John 3:5 refers to a kind of “baptism in the Holy Spirit” (cf. Robert Leon Gibson, Christian, You Were Baptized in Water and Spirit, Fort Worth: Star Publications, 1988). The birth from the water is distinct from the implantation of the seed.]


    The water of the new birth
    To what does the word “water” refer in John 3:5? For many centuries following the apostolic age, there was no controversy concerning the significance of “water” in this passage. The “church fathers” clearly understood it to denote baptism. The testimony of Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Cyprian, etc., could be cited to establish this point.

    In his monumental work, History of Infant Baptism, William Wall, a leading scholar in the Church of England, asserted that not a single writer of antiquity denied the identification of the “water” of John 3:5 with baptism. He suggested that John Calvin was the first to disassociate the two items, and that Calvin even conceded that his interpretation was “new” (Oxford, 1862, Vol. I, p. 443).

    It is interesting to reflect upon some of the bizarre speculations that have been offered in order to eliminate water baptism from this context. A few of the novel ideas which attempt to identify the “water” as something other than baptism are as follows.


    Some have suggested that “water” is but a symbol for the Spirit himself (cf. Ben Bogard, Hardeman-Bogard Debate Nashville: Gospel Advocate, 1938, p. 138). That would hardly be the case, since the Spirit is already mentioned in the passage. The Lord was not arguing that unless one “be born of Spirit and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”

    Others have contended that “water” is a figure for the blood of Christ (cf. B.H. Carroll, An Interpretation of the English Bible, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978, Vol. 4, p. 292). There is no basis for such a theory. The apostle John, in one of his later writings, clearly distinguishes between water and blood (cf. 1 Jn. 5:8).

    Occasionally, it is asserted that the “water” of John 3:5 is a reference to the amniotic fluid that flows from the mother’s body prior to birth. Such a wild view is easily refuted by the fact that whatever the new birth process was, the Jewish ruler had not yet experienced it; obviously, however, he had been born of his mother already! Moreover, such a theory would suggest that anyone delivered by Caesarean section (no water in that procedure) would be ineligible to enter the kingdom of God!

    Equally absurd is the recent view advocated by D.A. Carson, which theorizes that the “water” of this passage is a reference to “male semen” (Exegetical Fallacies, Grand Rapids: Baker, l984, pp. 41-42). This would have the Lord suggesting that unless one is conceived he cannot enter the kingdom. Is there any un-conceived person on earth? It scarcely needs to be pointed out that such a ridiculous statement would be unworthy of the Son of God.
    The simple truth of the matter is thisó the “water” alluded to in this context is a reference to the water of baptism, which is a necessary act of obedience for those who aspire to enter into the kingdom of heaven. This fact is evidenced by the following considerations:


    It is a recognized principle of biblical exegesis that words are to be viewed literally unless there are demands within the immediate or remote context which call for a figurative meaning. There is nothing here or elsewhere that would require a symbolic interpretation of “water” in this passage. Hence, there is no necessity to attach an unusual meaning to the term in John 3:5.

    The expression “born of water” is certainly consistent with language employed of baptism in other portions of the New Testament. For example, just as Christ’s resurrection from the dead is declared to be a birth from death (cf. Col. 1:18; Rev. 1:5), even so, when one is born of water he is “raised” to walk in newness of life (cf. Rom. 6:4; Col. 2:12).
     
  6. cougan

    cougan Senior Member

    766
    +6
    Christian
    The kingdom – Christ’s body
    According to the Lord's declaration in John 3, the goal of the new birth is entrance into the kingdom. That this relates to salvation is apparent from the following irresistable logic:


    The new birth introduces one into the kingdom (Jn. 3:5).
    But the kingdom is the church (Mt. 16:18-19).
    Therefore, the new birth introduces one into the church.

    The new birth introduces one into the church (conclusion above).
    But the church is the body (Eph. 1:22-23; Col. 1:18, 24).
    Thus, the new birth introduces one into the body.

    The new birth introduces one into the body (above).
    But the body is the saved (Eph. 5:23).
    Therefore, the new birth introduces one into the realm of salvation.
    Without the new birth, therefore, one cannot be in the kingdom, the church, the body, or the state of salvation.

    Some Summary Considerations

    Let’s now begin to tie our related passages together - with a return to a consideration of the “water” of John 3:5 as the equivalent of baptism.

    A comparison of John 3:5 with a parallel passage, 1 Corinthians 12:13, makes it certain that the water of the former verse is equivalent to the “baptism” of the latter.


    Jn. 3:5 I Cor. 12:13
    ...Except one be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God! For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body...

    First, note that both passages mention the role of the Holy Spirit in the conversion process. Second, observe that both verses state the same result that occurs with the completion of the new birth. John records that the goal is entrance into kingdom, while Paul affirms that the convert is introduced into the one body.

    That the “kingdom” and the “body” refer to the same entity is demonstrated by the following logical argument:


    The body of Christ is the church (Col.1:18, 24).
    But, the church is the kingdom (Mt. 16:18-19).
    Thus, the body of Christ is the kingdom.
    In the remaining portion of the equation, we need only compare the word “water” in John 3:5, with Paul’s use of “baptism” in the Corinthian passage. Note, therefore, how the verses line up:


    Jn. 3:5&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Spirit water&nbsp;&nbsp; kingdom
    I Cor. 12:13 Spirit baptism body

    Plainly, “water,” in John 3:5, refers to baptism.

    Moreover, a comparison of two other New Testament passages will reveal additional interesting similarities. In Ephesians 5:26 Paul writes:


    “Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself up for it; that he might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the washing of water with the word.”
    Note these three elements:

    The Word;
    the washing of water;
    cleansed.
    Observe how these correspond with the two verses just considered.


    Jn. 3:5&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Spirit water&nbsp;&nbsp; kingdom
    I Cor. 12:13 Spirit baptism body
    Eph. 5:26&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Word&nbsp; water&nbsp;&nbsp; cleansed


    In the first column, it is revealed how the Spirit operates in conversionó through the Word (cf. Eph. 6:17). In the second column, the water is identified as baptism. Then, in the third column, it is demonstrated that those cleansed by their obedience have entered into the body, the kingdom.

    Finally, there is yet another passage which complements this study. In Titus 3:5, the apostle Paul declares:


    “...according to his mercy he saved us, through the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Spirit.”
    Again, there is mention of:

    The Spirit;
    the washing of regeneration; and,
    saved.
    Observe now how the columns line up.


    Jn. 3:5&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Spirit&nbsp; water&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;kingdom
    I Cor. 12:13 Spirit&nbsp;&nbsp; baptism&nbsp;body
    Eph. 5:26&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Word&nbsp;&nbsp; water&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;cleansed
    Titus 3:5 Holy Spirit washing saved


    Clearly these various biblical passages wonderfully explain one another.

    The sincere person, who believes the testimony of the Holy Spirit, as conveyed through the Word of God, will yield to the Lord’s command to be baptized for the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 22:16). He thus will be cleansed (or saved) from his past transgressions, and subsequently translated into the kingdom of Christ (Col. 1:13), which is the body, or the church (Col. 1:18, 24).

    There is no difficulty in understanding the clear teaching of scripture when such is distanced from the biased speculations of men.

    &nbsp;
     
  7. cougan

    cougan Senior Member

    766
    +6
    Christian
    I really dont think you could bring up more notable scholars than I could that show my view. In fact I listed around 17 notable scholars and the source they came from in regards to the greek word eis. The best I remember you only came up with 2. I showed where AT Robertson said him self that his interptation of eis gave way to his theolgy. I dont recall ever hearing of that other one you mentioned. Then on the tenses in Acts 2:38 I once again stated my sources and sometimes page numbers and once again had some very well know scholars that refuted your tense arguement. That tense arguement was pure invention with no basis in sound scholarship. The earliest I can trace this tense arguement back to is 1938 by a man named Ben N. Bogard. Regardless of all that I really dont have anything new or different I could add on this arguement because we have both expounded our view in great detail so agree we should let those that read the post to decide which they agree with.

    Scott I want you to simply put these in order without explanation and please insert the word "saved" when a person becomes saved or has their sins removed.

    Love, Faith, HS baptism, water baptism, repent, confess.

    You have laid before me questions dealing with the indweling of the HS and previously if I think miracles/healings are gone today. This is kind of off the topic but at the same time a part of it. I will start showing my view on these topics in my next post. I will try and keep it as short as I can but it will take time show all these things from the bible that you have asked me. I think it will be a couple of days before I can begin because I am going to be very busy the next few days.
     
  8. Ben johnson

    Ben johnson Legend Supporter

    +374
    Christian
    We're not going BACK to John3:5, are we? I thought we had established that? Ok, let's review:

    But rather than referring to "ancient writings" or "connecting other texts", let's first just deal with the verse itself, IN CONTEXT---shall we?
    "Truly I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God." What is "WATER"? From Strong's Greek concordance, "HUDOR"---1d) of water as the primary element, out of and through which the world that was before the deluge, arose and was compacted.

    How does this fit with CONTEXT? Jesus and Nick are talkin' of only TWO THINGS---Jesus says "you must be born ANEW". A SECOND BIRTH. This confuses Nick---"How can a man re-enter his mother's womb and be born a second time???"

    Two things, Cougan, two births---being fleshly born, and being spiritually born. Verse 6 says, "That which is born of FLESH is FLESH, that which is born of SPIRIT is SPIRIT.

    Now let's connect verses 5 and 6 (because Jesus SAID THEM CONNECTIVELY) :

    "Unless one is born of HUDOR and the Spirit..."
    ........................................^......................^
    .........................................|.......................|
    .........................................v......................v
    "That which is born of FLESH, that born SPIRIT"

    Only TWO ITEMS IN THE TOPIC---not three, not four, not one. TWO BIRTHS. Born of man, born of the Spirit. TWO BIRTHS.

    You cannot lift verses from context. Verses 5 and 6 are connected. It's called, "Repetitive Narrative". Told once, repeated for clarification. It's irrelevant what this-one or that-one thought---the Scripture speaks for itself. TWO BIRTHS.

    Unless one is born of FLESH/WATER AND born of the Spirit---he is not saved.

    Jesus did NOT insert a WATERBAPTISM CLAUSE! Only TWO THINGS---two births. Water-baptism would be a THIRD THING!

    1. Born of flesh
    2. Born of water
    3. Born of the Spirit

    NO---only TWO:
    1. Born of flesh/water
    2. Born of the Spirit


    It's silly to discuss "amniotic fluid" or "whaddever", all we hafta do is read the GREEK---"HUDOR---water as the FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENT"---meaning, WORLDLY-BIRTH.

    "What?! Can a man enter his mother's womb and be born again?" Jesus ANSWERED saying, "unless one is born of water AND the Spirit..."

    ANSWERED, Cougan. Nick said "a second FLESH BIRTH?" Jesus ANSWERED, "there is a SECOND BIRTH. A man is born ONCE (of water/flesh), then he must be born TWICE! (of the Spirit).

    There is nothing in any theology that can support THREE ITEMS IN THE TOPIC---there are only TWO---two BIRTHS.

    Jn. 3:5 water-flesh Spirit kingdom

    I Cor. 12:13 Spirit baptism body
    Let's talk about this one---in Mat3:11, John says "I baptize with WATER, but HE will baptize with the SPIRIT"---do you understand that BAPTIZE WITH THE SPIRIT, is APART FROM WATER? (You DO agree that "baptism of hellfire for sinners" is apart from water???)

    1Cor12:13 says, For by one Spirit6 we were al baptized into one body, ...we were made to drink of one Spirit." Guess what??? This is HOLY-SPIRIT baptism, not WATERBAPTISM!

    Eph. 5:26 Word water symbolically-cleansed
    Titus 3:5 Holy Spirit washing saved
    OK, Titus 3:5: "He saved us, ...by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit"---this verse speaks for itsef---washing OF REGENERATION---not WASHING-OF-WATER. Regeneration, Cougan---nowater. Holy Spirit baptism---renewal of the man, "a new creation" (2Cor5:17), a "second birth" (of the Spirit)---it has NOTHING to do with water.

    "And such WERE some of you---but you were WASHED, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God." Do you understand now? It is not the WATER that washed them---it was believing in Jesus' NAME, it was the Holy Spirit---they were WASHED, in that they did not do those deeds anymore!

    Context, always context. Not everywhere it says "WASHED" does it mean "WATER"; likewise, not everywhere it says "BAPTIZED" does it mean "WATER". Romans 6, "baptism into Christ"---it clearly says, "immersion into Christ"---happens on BELIEF---not on "dipping".

    Speaking of which---in Acts 10:43-48, they had the Holy Spirit, were speaking in tongues, they were exalting God. Yes or no question: WERE THEY SAVED WHEN THEY HAD THE SPIRIT AND WERE TONGUING AND EXALTING GOD?

    Peter says in Acts 11:17, "God gvae to them the SAME GIFT as He gave to us also after BELIEVING in Jesus!"

    I just realized---unconsciously, I was making the same argument as Peter---Peter differentiates the WATERBAPTISM from the SPIRIT-BAPTISM in verse 16!!! Peter absolutely supports the theology, that the "ONE LORD, ONE FAITH, ONE BAPTISM"---is speaking of the SPIRIT-BAPTISM, not WATER! Just as Jesus said! "You must be born of the SPIRIT!"

    John-the-Baptist said "Spirit-baptism is NOT OF WATER!" Peter quoted John and affirmed "Spirit-baptism is NOT OF WATER!" Can you still disagree with them?

    You can't ignore the question about Acts 10---answer, yes or no? Does the Holy Spirit indwell one who is NOT YET SAVED???
     
  9. Evangelion

    Evangelion <b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

    +0
    I'm busy right now, but I'll be back later.

    Keep up the good work, cougan. You're romping home. :cool:
     
  10. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson I Like Traffic Lights

    366
    +0
    Christian


    You call Handbooks notable scholars? Come on, now!

    How about, Luther, Calvin, Arminius, Edwards, Griesbach, Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Alford, Fritzsche, Credner, Reuss, Wieseler, Holtzmann, Keim, Scholten, Klostermann, Ewald, Meyer, Weiss, Norton, Davidson, Bonhoeffer, Barth, and on and on. Do you honestly think that if your position was held by the majority of scholars, exegetes and theologians, that it wouldn't be such a minority among the Christian people?

    You have more now.

    His direct quote: "One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission" He presents both sides to the topic, not being unscholarly as you imply.

    I thought I've already done that....


    Faith (of which a subset is confession and repentence), salvation, HS baptism, Love. (Water Baptism is not a necessary before before or after salvation, although it is a command.)

    Again, I repeat these questions:

    1. Does the Holy Spirit indwell a believer? When does he do so?
    2. What is the proof of such an indwelling? Fruits of the spirit?
    3. Is an indwelling of the Spirit evidence of salvation?
    4. If it can be shown that the Spirit is indwelling a man because of the necessary fruits of salvation, would a person be saved?
    5. What if that person was not baptized, as there are millions of people all over the world both now and in the past who were not baptized, yet showed the fruits of the Spirit? Would he still be saved?
    6. Are there still spiritual gifts, or did those cease after the Pentecost and the HS coming down on the Gentiles?
     
  11. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson I Like Traffic Lights

    366
    +0
    Christian


    This is circular reasoning. It is a logical fallacy, cougan. You're using Galatians 3:27 to prove Galatians 3:27. You can't do that.

    Do you see the problem with what you have written? I have very clearly pointed out that the baptism whichever it may be must take place in order to get into Christ. Watch this Scott. You say that it is possible that some of them had not been baptized and if it is refering to water here that the church could exist without water baptism. Do you know what else you are saying here Scott? Using your same thinking here you would have to say that the church could exist without HS baptism.

    The rest of your post suffers from another logical fallacy! Your position seems to be that all baptisms are exactly the same. There is clearly a difference between water baptism and Holy Spirit baptism. If a person can be baptized into the Holy Spirit yet not baptized in water, then my point can still stand. Acts 10 shows evidence of that. Therefore, my point still stands.
     
  12. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson I Like Traffic Lights

    366
    +0
    Christian


    That's a HUGE step and one that cannot be shown. Simply because a Greek word has an article in front of it does not make it mean what you say it means.

    New International Version
    New American Standard Bible
    Amplified Bible
    New Living Translation
    King James Version
    English Standard Version
    Contemporary English Version
    New King James Version
    21st Century King James Version
    American Standard Version
    Worldwide English (New Testament)
    Darby Translation
    Wycliffe New Testament
    New International Version - UK

    Not a one of these translates the verse the way you are trying to make it say. I'm not sure what your references are trying to back up, either. Jude 1:3 merely states that we are of the same salvation. I don't see faith here. The other two have faith in a different tense - the is there for English purposes, not Greek.

    Again, gospel plan is nowhere to be mentioned. "en" is defined as a primary preposition denoting (fixed) position (in place, time
    or state), and (by implication) instrumentality (medially or
    constructively). In Christ means that Christ is the instrument for our faith. Christo is in the nominitive case. Jesus is in the genitive case. Here's a basic Greek grammar thing that may help you out - http://www.ee.vt.edu/~christos/GreekClasses/les4.html - just so you can see for yourself. By having the conviction that Christ is Lord, a person becomes a child of God.

    Noel Meredith is a Church of Christ scholar (just for the record). "Put on Christ" is a first aorist middle indicative which does not denote time, but a punctiliar action. The difference in tenses merely means that being a child of God has happened and is continuing to happen. A person is baptized into Christ at one point.

     
  13. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson I Like Traffic Lights

    366
    +0
    Christian
    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.

    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!

    Logical fallacy. Just because it is recorded twice does not mean that it happened twice. John notes at the end of his gospel that there were many things that he did not have room to mention, so we assume that Christ did more miracles, taught more things, and so on. Why could this not apply to the workings of the Spirit?

    No, the Spirit's mission was to convict the world of sin. Jesus clearly said so at the Last Supper.

    So no miracles of the Holy Spirit occure any more? There is tons of evidence to the contrary! Are you blatantly ignoring them? Your idea of the HS is ignoring tons of Scripture. Read what Christ said about the Comforter in John at the Last Supper!

    Already saved.

    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 you—not 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?



    His sins were washed away by callign upon the name of the Lord, not by baptism. Interestingly enough, Ananias tells Paul to "get himelf baptized." (middle tense) Interesting side note. It is possible, as in 2:38, to take these words as teaching baptismal remission or salvation by means of baptism, but to do so is in my opinion a complete subversion of Paul's vivid and picturesque language. As in Ro 6:4-6 where baptism is the picture of death, burial and resurrection, so here baptism pictures the change that had already taken place when Paul surrendered to Jesus on the way (verse 10). Baptism here pictures the washing away of sins by the blood of Christ.

    The phrase "baptized into" occurs five times in the NT in four verses as found in the KJV and the NASB..

    Rom. 6:3, "Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death?"

    1 Cor. 10:2, "and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea."

    1 Cor. 12:13, "For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit."

    Gal. 3:27, "For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ."

    To be baptized "into Christ," "into His death," "into Moses," and "into one body" is to be publicly identified with the thing you are being baptized into. The focus is not the baptism itself, but on the thing the baptism represents. In the case of Rom. 6:3-5, being baptized into Christ is a public identification with Christ's death, burial, and resurrection which is said to be the gospel that saves in 1 Cor. 15:1-4. Baptism, then is a public statement proclaiming that the person is trusting in the sacrifice of Christ.

    Baptism by immersion is a perfect symbol for this work of Christ with which the Christian is identifying himself. As Christ died and was raised to a new life, so to the Christian, in Christ, is said to have died (Rom. 6:11; Col. 3:3) and has a new life. This new life of regeneration is by faith, the internal work. Baptism, is the external work of identification with Christ. This is why the reference to baptism in the Bible is dealing more with "our union and identification with Christ than to our water baptism."

    Baptism is being identified as a disciple (Matt. 28:18-9).

    Baptism is compared to Jesus' death and resurrection (Rom. 6:3-5).

    Baptism is compared to Israel's Exodus and passing through the Red Sea (1 Cor. 10:2).

    Baptism is compared to Noah's escaping the flood waters by entering the ark (1 Pet. 3:21).

    In each of the references above, baptism is an identification with something. 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. The person had to first decide to repent, and then become baptized as a proclamation of his decision. Likewise, the Christian must first decide to repent, to receive Christ (John 1:12), to rely on the sacrifice of Christ, by faith, and then participate in the public proclamation of identifying with Christ's work.
    It is an identification with the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ that baptism represents. Jesus' shed blood is what cleanses us from our sins (Heb. 9:22), not being washed with water. It is Christ's death that is the payment for sin. Jesus' burial is the proof that He, in fact, died. Jesus' resurrection is the proof of God the Father's acceptance of the sacrifice of Christ and that death is conquered. Again, for a Christian to be baptized is to make a public proclamation that he is trusting in Christ's work, that he is naming himself with Christ and trusting what Christ has done. This is why it says in Rom. 6:11, "Even so consider yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus" (NASB). Why? Because "I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and delivered Himself up for me," (Gal. 2:20). It is on the cross that Jesus paid for our sins, not in His baptism and not in our baptism. It is our identification with Him, being counted "in Christ" that allows us to say we have been crucified with Christ so that we can say we are dead to sin. We are not dead to sin by our baptism. Rather, we are dead to sin, by faith, in what Jesus did in His sacrifice.
     
  14. cougan

    cougan Senior Member

    766
    +6
    Christian
    Thanks Scott for answering this question. I was'nt completly clear of you order of things before but now it seems very clear.

    This is what you are stateing my friend. You are saying that a person must Belive and confess (a command) and repent (a command) and that these go hand and hand. 2nd you list salvation. So it is at the point a person belives, confesses, and repents that they are saved. So it would be as follows.

    A person that belives&nbsp;but doesnt repent or confess in not&nbsp;saved.
    A person that belives and repents but does not confess&nbsp;is not saved.
    A person that belives and confesses but does not repent is not saved.

    In your view as laid out above by your order of events you must do the 3 elements, Faith, confess, repent before salvation occurs.

    Then it gets really interesting. You show Holy Spirit baptism and love coming after salvation. Then you state that water Baptism is not necessarry before or after salvation but it is a command.

    Scott I must say you have me baffled. When you answered the question of "what puts you into Christ HS baptism or water baptism" you said HS baptism. You have put yourself once again into a perdictment. You plainly state above that you are saved, hence put into Christ by Faith, confession, and repentence. Then you say that HS baptism puts you into Christ which you have listed after salvation in the above. This would mean that a person could be saved before he is in Christ. Now I could only conclude that maybe you view being put into Christ and being saved as 2 different things. But then the plot thickens because said the following in post 159.

    Saving baptism is baptism of the Holy Spirit (that does NOT mean "tongues"

    This seem pretty clear to me that you are saying that HS baptism is saving baptism which contridicts you putting HS baptism after salvation in the above. I would seem to me at least that from post 159 that you agree that one must be baptized to be saved. You say its HS baptism and I say it water baptism. But know I am not sure what you belive because you are contridicting yourself now.

    Both repent and confess are commands and they both save you coupled with Faith. Now baptism is also a command and is said to save you 1Peter 3:21. What is the difference between making confessing and repenting necessary before salvation but leaving baptism out? Baptism has the same qualities as repenting and confessing. They are all commands and say they save you. Where is the logic in excluding baptism?

    Another big problem&nbsp;I have with you order of events is that you put love after salvation. This is stateing that one can be saved with out love.

    &nbsp;

    &nbsp;

    Did you even make a single point here Scott? I don't think that you did. You just spouted of that I was in error but offered no explanation why. You try and portray that I used Gal 3:27 to prove Gal 3:27. This simply is not true. I did spend a lot of time on those verses because that is what I was expounding on.

    Then when I pointed out that your arguement you were using trying to show that it might be possible some had not been baptised therefore water baptism would not be necessary for the church to exist. I put right back at you showed that this would also mean that HS baptism would not be necessary for the church to exist. You could'nt just explain this away so you did'nt even deal with it because you see the pinch this puts you into. You say I am viewing the baptism all the same but you know that I do not. When I stated that there is one baptism that saves you and it is either HS baptism or water Baptism.&nbsp;That should show you within itself that I know that their are different kinds of baptisms. But there is only one that saves. That one is water baptism. You say to me prove that Gal 3:27 is water baptism. Well I think that I already did that. But, Scott you agree that its talking about water. Just look at the last post you made in #193 in the last section.

    It appears you posted an article and you did not read it before you posted it. It is talking about how water baptism indentifies us with Christ and is talking about the term baptized into. It is quite interesting that you or this article list some of the very verses that you have been claiming as HS baptism and it associates them with water baptism as identifing one with Christ. Rom 6:3, 1Cort 12:13, and yes Gal 3:27. I am glad to see you agree that Gal 3:27 was water baptism that put them into Christ and that water baptism is what puts one into the body/church 1Cor 12:13. This post you made makes your&nbsp;postion even more difficult&nbsp;since&nbsp;it says that water baptism is in rom 6:3.

    3 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?

    Being water baptiszed puts you into Christ death.

    4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

    We are buried in the water with him into his death.

    5 For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be <I>in the likeness </I>of <I>His </I>resurrection,

    Notice the if statement here. If we have been united with Jeus in this water baptism THEN we also shall be in the likeness of his resurrection.

    6 knowing this, that our old man was crucified with <I>Him, </I>that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin.

    It was at the point of water baptism that our old man is crucifed with him that is when are sins are washed away.

    7 For he who has died has been freed from sin.

    Notice what this says. This is saying he who has been water baptized into christ death has been freed from sin. The context demands it and makes it very clear how it is we died.

    8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him,

    We see it again in the verse. If we died with Christ that is being buried with him in the watery grave of baptism Then we belive that we shall also live with him. How much clearer can it get.

    Even if you try and come back and deny this is talking about water baptism here you can not deny that this is saying that baptism is necessary for salvation. If you try and say its HS baptism&nbsp; you will contridict yourself since you show HS baptism after salvation.

    I hope you can see what you have gotten yourself into Scott and I hope that the others reading this thread can see it as well. I do apologize for not getting to your questions yet but I deemed it more important to deal with this first. But, I will get to them my friend I promise.
     
  15. Ben johnson

    Ben johnson Legend Supporter

    +374
    Christian
    Not that I can speak for Scott----but it seems his and my beliefs are identical. So---if I may comment? ( :wave: @ Scott)

    John records in chapter3 that "belief is required for salvation", and only unbelief condemns; but Jesus throws up CONDITIONS---it is not just ANY belief that saves us, it is a special KIND of belief. It is belief that causes:

    &#149 us doing the will of the Father (Matt7:21)
    &#149 us to be repentant (Luke 13:3)
    &#149 us to be humbled as children (Matt18:3-4)
    &#149 us to be BORN AGAIN (on which all the others are founded John3:3)

    Each of these CONDITIONS, is written as: "UNLESS ____, you will PERISH!"

    So when you say, "Believes but doesn't confess or repent", it's not really true belief, is it? True belief receives Christ---BORN AGAIN. Crucified with Him, raised with Him; no longer US who live but CHRIST lives in us. Do you see that the TOTAL-SURRENDER-BELIEF, is what CAUSES confession? And what CAUSES repentence?

    Thus we are saved by BELIEF, Not "HEAD-KNOWLEDGE-BELIEF" (James2:19), but only TRUE-BELIEF-THAT-PRODUCES-GOOD-WORKS (James2:14-17).

    Jesus said, in Matt7, "NO good tree produces bad fruit, no bad tree produces good fruit; therefore you will KNOW THEM BY THEIR FRUIT!" Each is saying the exact same thing---a saved heart, WILL have good works. WILL have repentence. WILL confess sins.



    ...WILL be water-baptized...

    ;)
     
  16. Evangelion

    Evangelion <b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

    +0
    Hi guys. Sorry it's taken me so long to get back to this debate. I've been busy with other threads.

    Ben, you wrote:

    Agreed.

    When it's performed as a Christian rite, it's always water.

    Fine. Now what?

    Um... and just how do you think we are "immersed into Christ", Ben? How does this take place? What ritual accompanies this transition, do you think?

    Yep, that's true. It's essential to be baptised. That's how we're baptised into Christ.

    On what basis do you conclude that this is not water baptism, Ben? What process is being described here, do you think? What is this "baptism", if it's not water baptism?

    But what is this "immersion into Christ", if it's not water baptism?

    Well, that's a proof text that I use to show that water baptism is essential. You see, even after they had received the Holy Spirit, Peter insisted that they should be baptised! So as far as Peter is concerned, when he says "baptism", he means water baptism. He is certainly not thinking of anything else.

    Correct.

    Nope. Nowhere are we told that they were saved at this point in time.

    Yep, they received the Holy Spirit. And then they were baptised in water.

    Obviously water baptism had not been replaced by the Holy Spirit.

    *snip*

    Straw man. I do not claim that water baptism=salvation.

    No, we're not told that the Holy Spirit is available to everybody, regardless of when and where they live. The Holy Spirit (and its miraculous gifts) was granted for a specific purpose, during a specfic period of early Christian history. It is not available today - and even if it was, its availability would have nothing to do with salvation.

    No, that's not what the Bible says.

    What version is this, please?

    *snip*

    No, that's a gross oversimplification. I've seen some pretty bad examples of prooftexting in my time, but I'll be hornswaggled if this don't beat all. :rolleyes:

    I don't have to. All I need to do is ask you to prove that the word "sealed" is synonymous with "saved and guaranteed salvation."

    But again, you're oversimplifying. Not only are you ignoring the context, but you're also ignoring every other passage which addresses the topic of salvation in a more sophisticated way.

    He means that they had not yet believed upon Christ, because Christ had not been preached to them yet. They had definitely believed in God, so they were definitely believers. When I refer to people who "don't believe", I refer to people who don't even believe in God. That is what I meant.


    Straw man. I do not claim that water baptism=salvation.

    *snip*

    Well, it's obviously not literal, is it? Because if it was literal, the earth would currently be filled with immmortals! Are you immortal Ben? Do you genuinely possess immortal life? Would you like to prove this by walking into the streets of Detroit at rush hour, and ignoring the traffic?

    The words here are clearly made in the context of a future promise. It does not mean that we have immortal life right here and now. Please think carefully about this before responding.

    Bingo! You've just refuted your previous argument and vindicated my own! You had said that people are saved instantly, upon their belief and subsequent confession. But now you present a proof text which categorically denies this, by asserting that only he who perseveres in Christ until the end, is given eternal life. :cool:
     
  17. Evangelion

    Evangelion <b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

    +0
    Let's examine the age-old fallacy of equivocation to which the Sola Fide proponents so frequently resort.

    Most of them claim that all we have to do in order to be saved, is believe. Others contradict this view, arguing that all we have to do in order to be saved, is confess. Still others (hedging their bets with a middle-of-the-road position) argue that all we have to do in order to be saved, is believe and confess.

    All of these positions are based on a sloppy approach to Scripture; taking one proof text out of context, and ignoring any other passage of the Bible that might modify, elaborate upon, or otherwise qualify the verse in question. The rationale is hopelessly simplistic, and we can prove it false by testing it ourselves.

    Watch closely:

    • Acts 2:21.
      And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.
    This verse says that all we have to do in order to be saved, is "call on the name of the Lord." It does not say that we have to believe. It does not say that we have to repent. It does not say that we have to confess. It does not say that we have to have faith. It does not say that we have to be baptised.

    So, according to Ben's rationale, this verse means exactly what it says - that salvation is automatically granted as soon as we call on the name of the Lord. Nothing else is necessary.

    Now let's test it.

    "Lord Jesus, I call upon your name!"

    There. I am now saved, according to Ben's rationale. :cool:
     
  18. Evangelion

    Evangelion <b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

    +0
    Let's continue our investigation of "What we have to do in order to be saved." As before, I shall employ Ben's rationale.

    Watch carefully:

    • Acts 11:14
      Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.
    This verse contradicts the previous proof text. It says that all we have to do in order to be saved, is hear the words that another will speak to us. (Presumably, that "other" is a Christian.) It does not say that we have to believe. It does not say that we have to repent. It does not say that we have to confess. It does not say that we have to have faith. It does not say that we have to be baptised.

    So, according to Ben's rationale, this verse contradicts the previous proof text, and means exactly what it says - that salvation is automatically granted as soon as we hear the gospel message. Nothing else is necessary.

    Now let's test it.

    I'd like some kind Christian to post a message on this thread, in which the gospel message is briefly outlined and explained.

    As soon as I have read this post, I will be saved - according to Ben's rationale. :cool:
     
  19. Evangelion

    Evangelion <b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

    +0
    Let's continue our investigation of "What we have to do in order to be saved." As before, I shall employ Ben's rationale.

    Watch carefully:

    • Acts 15:11.
      But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.
    This verse contradicts the previous proof texts. It says that we are automatically saved "through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ." It does not say that we have to believe. It does not say that we have to repent. It does not say that we have to confess. It does not say that we have to have faith. It does not say that we have to be baptised.

    So, according to Ben's rationale, this verse contradicts the previous proof texts, and means exactly what it says - that salvation is automatically granted regardless of our circumstances, and without any requirements whatsoever; not even belief, faith, confession, or anything of the kind. Absolutely nothing is necessary, according to this proof text. We are automaticall saved, through the grace of Christ. (Heck, this means that we don't even have to be Christians! How convenient!)

    Now let's test it.

    Well, it doesn't really need any testing, because the verse says that I will be saved through the grace of Christ, so it must mean that I am already!

    According to Ben's rationale. :cool:
     
  20. Evangelion

    Evangelion <b><font size="2">δυνατός</b></font>

    +0
    Let's continue our investigation of "What we have to do in order to be saved." As before, I shall employ Ben's rationale.

    Watch carefully:

    • Romans 5:10.
      For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.
    This verse contradicts the previous proof texts. It says that we are automatically saved "by his [Christ's] life." It does not say that we have to believe. It does not say that we have to repent. It does not say that we have to confess. It does not say that we have to have faith. It does not say that we have to be baptised. Furthermore, it contradicts the other passages of Scripture which insist that we were saved by the death of Christ! (Wow!)

    So, according to Ben's rationale, this verse contradicts the previous proof texts, and means exactly what it says - that salvation is automatically granted regardless of our circumstances, and without any requirements whatsoever; not even belief, faith, confession, or anything of the kind. Absolutely nothing is necessary, according to this proof text. We are automaticall saved, through the grace of Christ. (Heck, this means that we don't even have to be Christians! How convenient!)

    Now let's test it.

    Well, it doesn't really need any testing, because the verse says that I will be saved through by Christ's life, so it must mean that I am already!

    According to Ben's rationale. :cool:
     
Loading...