Originally posted by cougan
They are allowing women to be Elders and Deacons,
having musical instruments in the worship service,
and changing the Lord Supper to a monthly, quaterly, or one a year.
Now lets get this thread back on track. Why is it that everyone is avoiding my posts and not answer my questions?
I have spelled out some very clear and logical points that no one has touched with a 10 foot pole.
Originally posted by Auntie
FluviusNeckar, you certainly have a way of twisting things around!
The CoC preachers are doing the condemning, I'm only quoting their words!
If you have a problem with what the CoC preaches, then take it up with the CoC preachers, please!
From Matt3:11ff, "I baptize you with water; but He who comes after me baptizes with the HOLY SPIRIT, and with FIRE"---the explanation is correlated to GRAIN/CHAFF; thus FIRE is undeniably HELL, and conversely baptism of the Holy Spirit is SALVATION.Ben I have told you over and over again that water baptism and holy spirit baptism are 2 entirely different things, yet you keep makeing statements like I have never said that or that I deny that.
From Matt3:11, Johnthebaptist asserts only TWO OPTIONS---baptism of the Holy Spirit, which is THE BAPTISM JESUS IS TO COME WITH, and FIRE/HELL for SINNERS; Thus, "Holy-Spirit-Baptism", and "HELL". Salvation, and reprobation.HS baptism is not stated in the bible as being salvation that is does not say something like " you are saved by HS baptism"
WATERBAPTISM is, as Peter writes, "an appeal to God for a clear conscience"---symbolic of the washing away of the old man/woman; but as you say, the water is not magic, the REAL washing is through BELIEF, through the BLOOD of their RECEIVED SAVIOR...1. Why would Philip only water baptise these people then leave them lost? Again, since water baptism is suppose to be something you do after your saved showing that you are associating yourself with Jesus death burial and resurection why in the world was Philip water baptizing these lost people before they were HS baptized?
I don't know why the "laying-on-of-hands" was required---but it is clear, the SPIRIT is received by BELIEVING. Cornelius family/friends BELIEVED, and RECEIVED THE SPIRIT (Acts11:17)---they were SAVED BEFORE BEING DIPPED.2. Why is all the accounts except in the case of Corneilius when someone got the word taught to them and they received they would be immediately be water baptized then they would receive the HS by the laying on of hands by the apostles after their baptism?
I think Jesus answered this, in Jn15: "Greater love hath no man than to lay down his life for his friends. And YOU are My friends, if you do what I command you".3. Hebrews 5:9 and having been made perfect, he became unto all them that obey him the author of eternal salvation; Why does this verse say that salvation comes by OBEDIENCE yet HS baptism is a promise and CANNOT BE OBEY but, WATER BAPTISM IS A COMMAND and can be obeyed?
Yes it does. You see, there are TWO WAYS to receive Christ---truly, and untruly. James demonstrates the UNTRUE reception, the "faith" that PRODUCES no good works---that faith is DEAD, USELESS, UNSAVED---it is not really faith at all. TRUE faith DOES God's will, IS waterbaptized---if possible. But one who can NOT be dipped, but still has the saved-heart-that-WOULD-be-dipped if he COULD, IS SAVEDJust because you accepted Christ and were saved today does not give a free pass into heaven.
Me too---and we have shown you that SALVATION is "patnership with Heavenly-Calling, partnership with Holy Spirit, partnership with Christ---and nothing in Scripture assigns ANY OF THESE to waterbaptism. That CONNECTION is EXTERNAL to Scripture.It saddens me to see people hold to their traditions even if the bible shows that tradition to be wrong.
Peter writes, "...the Holy Spirit fell on them JUST AS HE DID UPON US AT THE BEGINNING"; "God therefore gave them the SAME GIFT as He gave to us ALSO AFTER BELIEVING in the Lord Jesus Christ"---there is NO connection between "waterbaptism" and "salvation".Cornelius family/friends BELIEVED, and RECEIVED THE SPIRIT (Acts11:17)---they were SAVED BEFORE BEING DIPPED.
Originally posted by Ben johnson
Cornelius' family and friends might be perhaps the "STRAW the BREAKS THE CAMEL'S BACK". They BELIEVED, they RECEIVED THE HOLY SPIRIT; your contention that "receiving the Holy Spirit can occor OUTSIDE of salvation", has been refuted. Peter ASSERTED that they believed (11:17), chapter 10 records ALL THE WORDS THAT THEY HEARD---they heard, more than enough, they had KNOWN Jesus and had HEARD Him, they BELIEVED, they were SAVED, they received the HOLY SPIRIT...
...and they were waterbaptized later...
Peter said, "Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized WHO HAVE RECEIVED THE HOLY SPIRIT JUST AS WE DID?"Not quite. Not quite qualifies as a lie whether intentional or not. They were baptized immediately not later.
"Ananias dearted and entered the house, and after laying hands on him said, 'Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who apeared to you on the road, ...has sent me that you may regain your sight, and be filled with the Holy Spirit'. And immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he regained his sight, and he arose and was baptized; and took food and was strengthened." Is there anything here that proposes, that Saul/Paul, was waterbaptized BEFORE salvation/believing"? No.Paul believed and he was told to arise and wash away his sins.
I just invested a vast amount of time in posts---was it worthwhile? Will our esteemed "debating partners" consider those posts, or will those posts be ignored?
Originally posted by cougan
1 CORINTHIANS 1:12-17
This passage proves beyond doubt that baptism is necessary in order to be saved. It has often been overlooked, however, as a key to proving its necessity.
In verse 13 Paul set down an undeniable truth. He mentions two things that are necessary to belong to Paul, Cephas, Apollos, or Christ. (1) That person must have been crucified for you; (2) you must have been baptized in the name of that person.
Paul said, "Was Paul crucified for you?" In other words, was Paul crucified so you could be forgiven of your sins? Secondly, "Were you baptized in the name of Paul?" "In the name of" in this passage means that a person baptized in someone's name assigns them to that person. Thus, if any were baptized in the name of Paul they were assigned the name of Paul. They would become "of Paul." This is where the proof resides. In order to be assigned to Christ, a person must be baptized "in the name of" Christ. Gal. 3:27 makes it clear that "As many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ." If a person belongs to Christ, Christ was crucified for him, and he must also have been baptized into Him.
Notice further that Paul was thankful that he didn't baptize many people. The reason was because he feared that some may say they had been baptized in his own name. Again, this overwhelmingly affirms that one must be baptized in the name of Christ to be "of Christ!"
Some will argue that Paul was saying that baptism wasn't important when he said, "For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel..." (V17). This simply is not true. Again, Paul was thankful he did not baptize many because of his fear that some would say they were "of" him.
Paul would have been disregarding Christs' clear command to "Go and teach all nations, baptizing them ...." (Mat. 28:19). Paul was either disregarding this explicit instruction given by Jesus, or he must have not meant that baptism was not important. Further, if "Christ sent me not to baptize" means that Paul was forbidden to baptize, then he disobeyed Jesus, because he says that he did baptize Crispus and Gaius.
The word "sent" (Greek, APESTALEV) involves the meaning of "made me an apostle." Jesus made Paul an apostle primarily to preach. Anyone can baptize, but only a select few had the privilege to be an apostle of Christ.
It would be impossible for Paul to mean that baptism was not important. He was baptized himself (Ac. 22:16). He emphasized that baptism was a burial; (Rom. 6:3-5; Col. 2:12); he said that it cloths a person with Christ (Gal. 3:27); and that it put's a person into the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:13).
Some try to put the gospel at opposite ends with baptism. In other words, some say that baptism is not a part of the gospel of Christ. Jesus said, however, "Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel, he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved..." (Mk. 16:16). Clearly Jesus said that baptism is a part of the gospel. If baptism is not a part of the gospel then Peter, John, Paul, and Phillip were all preaching something other than what Jesus commanded them to preach. Phillip "preached unto him Jesus" (Ac. 8:35) yet the Eunuch somehow learned that he needed to be baptized. Peter cried, "Repent and be baptized..." in response to the Jews question, "What shall we do?" (Ac. 2:37-38). Clearly baptism is a part of the gospel of Christ. And this being so, those who don't obey the gospel will have vengeance taken upon them at Christs' second coming (2 Thess. 1:7-9).
If you would like read an article on this section of scripture here you go. http://www.christiancourier.com/questions/gospelBaptismQuestion.htm
Originally posted by Thaddaeus
TWo theories about that verse:
THe book is not the inspired word of God
THe second is that that chapter is refering to people after they are saved, what they should do.
But i can promise you it is salvation by grace through faith, for their are man references to that.