What about Baptism?

[Ben johnson]

Forgot to comment----it is interesting that you must define a separate dispensation for the believers in Acts 10, so they won't violate your preconception of "water-salvation". To me, it seems clear that the world had not "the Helper who Jesus said was to be SENT" (Jn14:26)---until the day of Pentecost. This is the instant when "the Holy Spirit was poured onto the world" (Acts2:33). Yet you believe there were TWO Spirit-events, or maybe one long one; I submit that there was only one. In Acts 10, they believed, they were saved; they were then water-baptized.

...just as we do today...

 

[edpobre]

Originally posted by Ben johnson
I don't think anyone has ever answered the question---"If a dozen people attend a revival and ALL of them receive Jesus and believe, but then the building's boiler blows up and everyone dies---before they are baptized---will any of the twelve go to Heaven?"

Simple question. What's the answer?

NO! NOT one of the twelve  will go to heaven even if they were BAPTIZED by the Evangelist. That's  because NOT one of these twelve is a MEMBER of the TRUE body of Christ or TRUE Church of Christ which is the IGLESIA NI CRISTO.

Christ is the SAVIOR of the church, his BODY (Eph. 5:23). It is the church, his BODY that Christ GAVE his life for (Eph. 5:25). It is the church, his BODY that Christ PURCHASED with his own blood (Acts 20:28 Lamsa). That CHURCH is the IGLESIA NI CRISTO.

Ed

 

[Gabriel]

Originally posted by edpobre
NO! NOT one of the twelve  will go to heaven even if they were BAPTIZED by the Evangelist. That's  because NOT one of these twelve is a MEMBER of the TRUE body of Christ or TRUE Church of Christ which is the IGLESIA NI CRISTO.

Christ is the SAVIOR of the church, his BODY (Eph. 5:23). It is the church, his BODY that Christ GAVE his life for (Eph. 5:25). It is the church, his BODY that Christ PURCHASED with his own blood (Acts 20:28 Lamsa). That CHURCH is the IGLESIA NI CRISTO.

Ed

  So we are all going to Hell unless we are a member of a certain church?

 

[Ben johnson]

NO! NOT one of the twelve will go to heaven even if they were BAPTIZED by the Evangelist. That's because NOT one of these twelve is a MEMBER of the TRUE body of Christ or TRUE Church of Christ which is the IGLESIA NI CRISTO.

MMmmm, hmmm. I fully accept that there are Christans in every denomination; there are saved Baptists, saved Presbyterians, saved Methodists, saved Pentecostals, saved Catholics; wonder how you believe that only those in one-certain-church are saved? What is "SAVED"? I would say, "believing in Christ, receiving Him, BORN AGAIN, indwelt by Christ and filled with the Spirit, new creations, died-to-sin & walking-in-Him, righteous, forgiven, repentant, humble, doing God's will, mature, abiding in Him, all of that..."

And I would say there are many in each denomination who fit that description. What would you say, Ed? They fit the description but are not saved? You really willin' to say that? Or do you believe they are false, only APPEARING to fit the description but are really only whitewashed sepulchers?

When ONE CHURCH claims to be the ONLY TRUTH, seems ta' me that should send up dozens of red flags...

Know what ah' mean, Vern?

 

[The Bible is Right]

Originally posted by Ben johnson
Baptism is the natural consequence of one who has been saved. That they refused the baptism is consistent with them "not-believing". The refusal of the baptism alone is not why they were not saved.

Acts 2:38 says, "repent and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins;" I ask you---is it the WATER that remits sin, or is it THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST? To answer, I submit to you Acts 22:16: "Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name."

It is HIS NAME that remits sins. If it was the WATER ITSELF, how then do you deal with Acts 10:44-48? Are you prepared to say that "those Gentiles who were speaking with tongues and exalting God were NOT SAVED? Are you?

They had NOT YET BEEN BAPTIZED!

Because water-baptism is the natural consequence of all who believe, then everyone who believes and is baptized is saved---it becomes a non-issue. Yet, for one who thinks the water ITSELF remits sins, I do not think he/she has a complete understanding of salvation. This is why I have persisted in this discussion---it causes me concern when one does not grasp the essence of salvation.

He who believes will be saved. He who is saved will be baptized. Thus, he who believes and is baptised is saved. But he who disbelieves is not saved. An unsaved-one will likely not be baptized. But it is not the water that saves, nor is it the "dry" that condemns---it is belief that saves, it is unbelief that condemns. It is no more complicated than that.

The Gentiles of Acts 10 had not been water-baptized---but were SAVED. Were they NOT?

 

Ben,Ben,Ben

You are getting closer to understanding that belief without baptism equal lost, and that baptism without belief equal lost, that's why Acts 10:44-48 is very important as you pointed out.  Let's take a minute and look at what took place, (note, I made this point on another forum) That is (all who believed were baptized in the same hour), but today "Pastors and Preachers" don't notice this point, that it is an urgent thing, therefore a necessary thing in the eyes of Jesus and God the Father.  This is why Peter commanded them to be baptized, and if he bound it on earth it is bound in heaven Matt.16:19.  So when the question come's up, "What must I or we do?" to be saved we are obligated to answer exactly like Peter did in Acts 2:38 "Repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.

Why "water"?  Is there anything in the "water" that can heal the sin sick soul?  Can God accomplish his will with "water?"  I'll let you do some resreach on what God can do with "water" before you answer.  Remember, it's not us who can save it is God through His Son Jesus Christ.  Here's one last question before I go, John 19:34 "But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately "blood and water" came out".  What is the significance of this event?

 

[The Bible is Right]

Originally posted by Ben johnson
Baptism is the natural consequence of one who has been saved. That they refused the baptism is consistent with them "not-believing". The refusal of the baptism alone is not why they were not saved.

Acts 2:38 says, "repent and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins;" I ask you---is it the WATER that remits sin, or is it THE NAME OF JESUS CHRIST? To answer, I submit to you Acts 22:16: "Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name."

It is HIS NAME that remits sins. If it was the WATER ITSELF, how then do you deal with Acts 10:44-48? Are you prepared to say that "those Gentiles who were speaking with tongues and exalting God were NOT SAVED? Are you?

They had NOT YET BEEN BAPTIZED!

Because water-baptism is the natural consequence of all who believe, then everyone who believes and is baptized is saved---it becomes a non-issue. Yet, for one who thinks the water ITSELF remits sins, I do not think he/she has a complete understanding of salvation. This is why I have persisted in this discussion---it causes me concern when one does not grasp the essence of salvation.

He who believes will be saved. He who is saved will be baptized. Thus, he who believes and is baptised is saved. But he who disbelieves is not saved. An unsaved-one will likely not be baptized. But it is not the water that saves, nor is it the "dry" that condemns---it is belief that saves, it is unbelief that condemns. It is no more complicated than that.

The Gentiles of Acts 10 had not been water-baptized---but were SAVED. Were they NOT?

In your first point you finally answered the Mark 16:16b question.  But you still are not making the total connection, "That they refused the baptism is consistent with them "not-believing" ".  Then you made this statement "The refusal of the baptism alone is not why they were not saved" but the text says that they rejected the counsel of God against themselves, by not being baptized of John, when one rejects what God tells them to do is the same as "not believing" like you said in your first statement.  Remember you made that statement!  They are one and the same. 

 

[Ben johnson]

when one rejects what God tells them to do is the same as "not believing"...

Oooooooo----it does sound like we're in agreement!

When one refuses to be baptized, then he/she is rejecting God, and is therefore not saved; yet when one believes, and is saved, that very belief causes them to be water-baptized!



(Why is it called "dodgerblue" anyway???)

 

[The Bible is Right]

Originally posted by Ben johnson
Oooooooo----it does sound like we're in agreement!

When one refuses to be baptized, then he/she is rejecting God, and is therefore not saved; yet when one believes, and is saved, that very belief causes them to be water-baptized!



(Why is it called "dodgerblue" anyway???)

Belief and baptism go's hand and hand, one is no good without the other.  That's why Mark 16:16 says He that believeth And is baptized shall be saved.  Notice Jesus connected the two with the word AND.  So belief plus baptism equals salvation.

Salvation comes after one complete the obediance, in being baptized in water.

Did you get a chance to resreach why God choose water baptism?  Or to find out what is the signifiance of water in God's plan of salvation?

 

[Ben johnson]

I guess our only remaining dispute is over the interpretation---you read Mk16:16 as: "he who believes and is baptized TO BE saved", while I read it as: "He who believes and is baptized _IS_ saved".

The second understanding does not preclude the ability for belief alone to equate to salvation.

It is the existence of all the other Scriptures that, in my humble opinion, slam the scales completely over to "faith alone", rather than "faith/belief + water". Romans 10:9-10 says, "If you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart God raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved. For with the heart man believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses resulting in salvation." Or do you s'pose Paul just forgot to include water-baptism? (And Paul forgot to include it in many other places too?)

 

[cougan]

Here let me help you out Ben.

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



ASV Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that disbelieveth shall be condemned.



RSV Mark 16:16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.



NRS Mark 16:16 The one who believes and is baptized will be saved; but the one who does not believe will be condemned.



NKJ Mark 16:16 "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.



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



DBY Mark 16:16 He that believes and is baptised shall be saved, and he that disbelieves shall be condemned.



YLT Mark 16:16 he who hath believed, and hath been baptized, shall be saved; and he who hath not believed, shall be condemned.

Do you understand it better now Ben. It is very simple to see as all the version show that belief AND baptism = saved. Notice it says "will be" or "shall be" saved. It does not say in any way or form that you are saved by belived then you are baptized because you are saved. This is ungetoverable Ben and you know it. You are still so confused because you keep on flip floping. By your arguement you belive that this passage is talking about water baptism. I also got you to confess that mat 28:19 is talking about water baptism. Here are 2 passages that DO NOT mention the word water at all yet you know from the context and the rest of the bible that these 2 passages are talking about water baptism. You would also have to agree that Acts 2:38 is talking about water baptism. You do agree with this don't you? Then you come to a very clear passage in 1peter 3:20-21

1 Peter 3:20 who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while <I>the </I>ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water.
21 There is also an antitype which now saves us -- baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

You say this is not water baptism. Where is the logic with this. Verse 20 clearly says they were saved through water and verse 21 compares how they were saved by water to how we are now saved by water in baptism. And no I am not saying water by itself. Just like Noah had faith and was obedient and built the ark he did'nt receive his blessing from God until he had finished the boat and they got it and were saved from the wicked world by water. You compare that to us today. We belive in God and our obedient to the faith by repenting and confessing Jesus as Lord and are baptized in water then we receive our blessing of salvation.

1 Peter 1:22 Since you have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit in sincere love of the brethren, love one another fervently with a pure heart,

Hebrews 5:9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

You have already said yourself that our faith in god is a working faith and not just belief only. I wish you would let go of your tradition and open your eyes to what the word of God plainly says. You seem to think that rom 10 just completly proves your view but it does not. You are taking one verse and trying to stand on it. You know as well as I do that you must go by the whole council of God and not just one verse. I can show you many verses that say you are saved by faith but you will never ever find a verse that says you are saved by FAITH ALONE.&nbsp;Did you notice in this verse that it does not mention repentence? You know as well as I do that you must repent in order to be saved. Using your tactics I could point you once again to 1Peter 3:21 and say that all you have to do is be baptized to be saved. There is no metion of faith, repentence, or confession in these verses.

Ben&nbsp;I think you need to reconsisder how confused you are and figure out why you can say some verses are talking about water baptism even when the word water is not used and then turn around and say other veres are not. You think about how difficult you make the word of God. Keep studying Ben because the truth will set you free.

Cougan

&nbsp;

 

[Ben johnson]

Do you understand it better now Ben.

Nope, 'fraid not. It does not give the conditional "smoking gun", TO BE saved. It uses the "future-passive-indicative", merely stating the fact: "He who believes and is water-baptized, is saved". What I'm wanting you to find is the conditional---that predicates salvation on the CONDITION of baptism. I can give you PLENTY of verses predicating salvation on the condition of BELIEF---can you give me ONE on WATER-BAPTISM?

It is PROBABLY speaking of "water-baptism"---that's just what they did to new converts...

I also got you to admit that mat 28:19 is talking about water baptism.

Again, water-baptism is what they did with new believers---those who BELIEVED, were SAVED, were then water-baptized...

You say this is not water baptism.

No, I don't think I said "1Pet3" was not about water baptism---it definitely is. But it says, "now saves you as an appeal to God for a clear conscience"---and I submitted that it was BELIEF and REPENTANCE, of which the WATER was a SYMBOL; but the BELIEF, and REPENTANCE (appealing for clear conscience) is what saves you...

I don't buy the argument that "those in Acts 10 were under a different, or special dispensation, so THEY were saved BEFORE dipping"---they were under the SAME COVENANT as WE are---and they were SAVED before they were DIPPED!

Ben I think you need to reconsisder how confused you are and figure out why you can say some verses are talking about water baptism even when the word water is not used and then turn around and say other veres are not.

Okaaayyyy----tell me----turn to Matt3:11---

...is the "I baptize you with water", speaking of water baptism? (hint: YES!)

...is the, "HE will baptize you with the SPIRIT", speaking of water baptism?

...is the, "He will baptize sinners with fire, chaff burned with unquenchable fire", is THAT speaking of water baptism?

So you see, the word simply means "TO IMMERSE"---and they understood it to mean, "in WATER", and they also understood it to mean, "in SOMETHING ELSE".

So that in Rom6, it simply means, "to IMMERSE in JESUS (death, old self dies, resurrection, new is born again)"...

I can show you many verses that say you are saved by faith but you will never ever find a verse that says you are saved by FAITH ALONE

Yes---and I can show you were "salvation is by BELIEF" (Jn3:16), but NOT BELIEF (Jms2:19). As you eloquently said, we must read the text as a whole---Mark 16:16 says "he who BELIEVES and is water baptized (likely) IS/WILL-BE/SHALL-BE saved; it does NOT say "TO be saved, does it? Now tell me, is it reasonable, if Mark wanted to convey water baptism as PART of salvation, is it REASONABLE that he said "...but he who does NOT believe is condemned" (withOUT saying "...NOT believe AND NOT WATER-BAPTIZED"? Why do you s'pose Mark forgot to include water baptism in the disqaulifier???

Mark only said, "UNBELIEF disqualifies you"---show me a verse, Cougan, that says "non-water-baptism disqualifies you"???

 

[cougan]

Nope, 'fraid not. It does not give the conditional "smoking gun", TO BE saved. It uses the "future-passive-indicative", merely stating the fact: "He who believes and is water-baptized, is saved". What I'm wanting you to find is the conditional---that predicates salvation on the CONDITION of baptism. I can give you PLENTY of verses predicating salvation on the condition of BELIEF---can you give me ONE on WATER-BAPTISM?

Oh I see now your a greek scholar. The verse says "shall be saved" or "will be saved". Now look at the Greek my friend and will clearly see that "belief" and "baptized" are tied together with the coordinating conjuntion (coordinating conjunctions join or unite elements of equal rank)&nbsp;"and". These 2 conditions are necessary for the person to be saved. Let me parse the phrase "will be saved" which is the greek word "sozo". verb ind fut pass 3rd per sing. It is verb and is indicative Mood which means that this is a state of fact from the writters perspective. It is in the Passive voice which means that the He of the sentence is the subject and is the recipient of the action of being saved if he belived and was baptized. Most important of all is that this word is in the future tense. This means you will not be saved until you belive and are baptized. Surely you can understand the future tense. In order for it to say what you want it to say it would have to completly change the Greek grammer and the tenses. You even said it yourself that is was in the future tense. You can keep on trying to dodge the truth if you want to but I think you know you can not and will not be able to get around this.
I have already explained the last part of that verse that you seem to think proves something. You even wonder why Mark did'nt say belive and baptism condems you. Since he was inspired by the HS to write what he did I would imagine that he thought it would be easy enough for someone to understand it with out writing like a jane and dick book. "See spot run. See spot jump." After affirming that one must belive and be baptized to be saved all he had to say was if you dont belive you will be condemend. If a person is not going to belive they surely wont do anything else they are suppose to know will they? If I were a judge and told you if you will confess your crime and promise you wont do it again you will be set free. If you dont confess you will be condemend. If I told you this would you think that you could just simply confess your crime and you would be set free without making the promise? If you are being honest you know that you must confess and promise in order to be set free.

You seem to want some word for word passage that says if you are not water baptized you will be lost. If you were standing on a railroad crossing where a train was coming and I told you to run and you will be saved. In this same sentence I am telling you if you do not run you will die even though I did not specifically say that word for word. This is called common sense and good old fashion reasoning. So when you see the bible say that baptism saves you it to is saying if you are not baptised you are lost. Surely a person of your inteligence can see the clairity in this.

No, I don't think I said "1Pet3" was not about water baptism---it definitely is. But it says, "now saves you as an appeal to God for a clear conscience"---and I submitted that it was BELIEF and REPENTANCE, of which the WATER was a SYMBOL; but the BELIEF, and REPENTANCE (appealing for clear conscience) is what saves you...

I don't buy the argument that "those in Acts 10 were under a different, or special dispensation, so THEY were saved BEFORE dipping"---they were under the SAME COVENANT as WE are---and they were SAVED before they were DIPPED!

Well this is getting intersting now. So now you belive that Math 28:19, Mark 16:16 and 1 Peter 3:21 are water baptism. Please clairify for me the next passages. Is Acts 2:38 and Acts 22:16 water baptism? I am also pretty sure that you would agree that Philip did water baptism in Acts 8 to the Samarians and the Enuch. You would also have to agree that the baptism that Peter commanded in Acts 10 was water baptism. Ben have you ever noticed that baptism is a commandment but the baptism of the HS was a promise that Jesus was going to do? Did you know that he only made that promise to his apostles which they received on the day of Pentacost. This is why Peter had to remember back to the time the HS was poured out directly from heaven because this is the only time it had happened. If it had been happening all the time he could of recalled a much closer event to the present time in Acts 10and 11 because it had been about 7 years since the day of Pentacost. These gentiles had the HS poured out on them in a like manner that is it was from heaven. It was not the same as the apostles as in giving them the same power as to be able to bind and lose or pass on the gift of the HS by laying on of hands. There is not a record anywhere that shows other than apostles being able to pass on the HS through laying on of hands. This was indeed a wonderful event to show that the gentiles were now able to be baptized into Christ and be fellow heirs with the Jews. That is why Peter commanded them to be water baptized so they could be saved and become part of the one body/church. He was fullfilling the great commision in Mat 28:19 "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. This is what is suppose to be done until the end of time. This is the command that is to be followed and is to be done by disciples as opposed to the HS Baptism which is done without any human doing it because HS baptism came directly from Heaven.
Going back to 1Peter 3:21 the reason why it is expounded that water baptism is not the removal of flesh was to clearly show that water baptism was not some Jewish cleansing ritual but was cleasing of the soul having yoru sins washed away by your faith in the power of God. You can not have that clear conscience until you have been water baptized because you are still in your sin until you are water baptized.

Well I guess it will be interesting to see what new twist you will come up with this time. I wonder if you will actually answer all my questions this time. I still want you to show me a verse that says Faith ALONE or faith by itself saves you. You will not find it my friend and I think you know the truth but you just want to cling onto your man made tradition.

 

[Gabriel]

Originally posted by cougan
I still want you to show me a verse that says Faith ALONE or faith by itself saves you. You will not find it my friend and I think you know the truth but you just want to cling onto your man made tradition.

Ephesians 2:8 "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast."

John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever should believe in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

Romans 5:21 "so that as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

Jonah 2:9 ".........Salvation is of the Lord"

Isaiah 45:22&nbsp; "Look to Me and be saved, All you the ends of the earth. For I am God and there is no other."&nbsp;

Granted, these don't say, "faith alone" but they are clear in that Christ is our salvation, Christ alone, not works (like baptism).&nbsp; Baptism is a sign, an important one, for sure, but it is not a deal breaker by any means.&nbsp; Christ says that "Those given to Him by the Father cannot be snatched out of His hand".&nbsp; Period.&nbsp; Baptism does not complete the process, salvation is about God's work in you, not your works in the world.&nbsp;

 

[The Bible is Right]

Originally posted by Ben johnson
Nope, 'fraid not. It does not give the conditional "smoking gun", TO BE saved. It uses the "future-passive-indicative", merely stating the fact: "He who believes and is water-baptized, is saved". What I'm wanting you to find is the conditional---that predicates salvation on the CONDITION of baptism. I can give you PLENTY of verses predicating salvation on the condition of BELIEF---can you give me ONE on WATER-BAPTISM?Again, water-baptism is what they did with new believers---those who BELIEVED, were SAVED, were then water-baptized...
No, I don't think I said "1Pet3" was not about water baptism---it definitely is. But it says, "now saves you as an appeal to God for a clear conscience"---and I submitted that it was BELIEF and REPENTANCE, of which the WATER was a SYMBOL; but the BELIEF, and REPENTANCE (appealing for clear conscience) is what saves you...

I don't buy the argument that "those in Acts 10 were under a different, or special dispensation, so THEY were saved BEFORE dipping"---they were under the SAME COVENANT as WE are---and they were SAVED before they were DIPPED!
Okaaayyyy----tell me----turn to Matt3:11---

...is the "I baptize you with water", speaking of water baptism? (hint: YES!)

...is the, "HE will baptize you with the SPIRIT", speaking of water baptism?

...is the, "He will baptize sinners with fire, chaff burned with unquenchable fire", is THAT speaking of water baptism?

So you see, the word simply means "TO IMMERSE"---and they understood it to mean, "in WATER", and they also understood it to mean, "in SOMETHING ELSE".

So that in Rom6, it simply means, "to IMMERSE in JESUS (death, old self dies, resurrection, new is born again)"...
Yes---and I can show you were "salvation is by BELIEF" (Jn3:16), but NOT BELIEF (Jms2:19). As you eloquently said, we must read the text as a whole---Mark 16:16 says "he who BELIEVES and is water baptized (likely) IS/WILL-BE/SHALL-BE saved; it does NOT say "TO be saved, does it? Now tell me, is it reasonable, if Mark wanted to convey water baptism as PART of salvation, is it REASONABLE that he said "...but he who does NOT believe is condemned" (withOUT saying "...NOT believe AND NOT WATER-BAPTIZED"? Why do you s'pose Mark forgot to include water baptism in the disqaulifier???

Mark only said, "UNBELIEF disqualifies you"---show me a verse, Cougan, that says "non-water-baptism disqualifies you"???

&nbsp;

Cougan has show you this already and I have to, the bible says belief plus baptism= salvation.&nbsp; Look at Luke 7:30

 

[The Bible is Right]

For one to have his/her sins washed away we were told in Acts 22:16 "And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord." When we are in the belief stage, we still are in sins, but once we through faith are baptized in water for the remission of sins then and only then are we in the saved state. If you would stop and think about what Jesus is saying in Mark 16:16 when he uses the word "believeth" the "eth" means that one must follow through on his/her belief to baptism to reach the saved state. Whereas the believeth "not" there is no follow through to be baptized because of unbelief, Luke 7:29-31 is the an example of how this process works out. "And all the people that heard him, and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John. 30 But the Pharisees and Lawyers REJECTED THE COUNSEL OF GOD AGAINST THEMSELVES, BEING "NOT" BAPTIZED OF HIM" If you would notice the "NOT" in this passage is the same "NOT" in Mark 16:16 "He that believeth "NOT" shall be condemned. So the result of unbelief will never produce a positive follow through i.e. saved state... Just like the Pharisees and Lawyers, did "NOT" believe John so they would not be baptized for the remission of sins.
Here's a question, according to Acts 22:16 did Paul have his sins washed away when he was baptized?

 

[Ben johnson]

It is verb and is indicative Mood which means that this is a state of fact from the writters perspective. It is in the Passive voice which means that the He of the sentence is the subject and is the recipient of the action of being saved if he believed and was baptized.

Yes, "state-of-fact".
"He who has believed and has been baptized is saved".
"He who has believed and received the gift of tongues is saved"
"He who has believed and prophecies, is saved."

Which one is true? ALL of them are. Which one is double-conditional to salvation? NONE of them. They are simply, as you eloquently said, statements of fact...

Most important of all is that this word is in the future tense. This means you will not be saved until you believe and are baptized. Surely you can understand the future tense.

Hmmm---maybe you don't understand the future tense? According to the verse, they have NOT YET BEEN SAVED; this would seem to be more along the lines of, "he who endures to the end shall be saved".

ON THE OTHER HAND, in Acts 10:44-48, they HAD THE HOLY SPIRIT, they had BELIEVED, but had NOT YET BEEN WATER-BAPTIZED---were they NOT YET SAVED? Can an unsaved person have the Holy Spirit? Or is there a special dispensation apart from Jesus' NEW COVENANT that provided extra-water-baptismal-salvation? Yes-or-no-question: were they different in their salvatorial approach from us or not?

For one to have his/her sins washed away we were told in Acts 22:16 "And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord."

"KAI", TBIR. Kai. "Having arisen, be baptized AND! ("Kai") wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord"

Be baptized
AND
wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord...

Two events---be water-baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

Two events, TBIR---it is the calling on the name of the Lord that actually washes away our sins---for they are not washed away by water---no, they were washed away by his BLOOD! We are covered by His blood when we call on His name! Rm10:13

 

[cougan]

oops double post.

 

[cougan]

Yes, "state-of-fact".
"He who has believed and has been baptized is saved".
"He who has believed and received the gift of tongues is saved"
"He who has believed and prophecies, is saved."

Which one is true? ALL of them are. Which one is double-conditional to salvation? NONE of them. They are simply, as you eloquently said, statements of fact...

Only the top one is true. To the best of my memory I don't recall the last 2 statements you made being in the bible. If I am remembering wrong please show me the verses that state these last 2 statements.

Hmmm---maybe you don't understand the future tense? According to the verse, they have NOT YET BEEN SAVED; this would seem to be more along the lines of, "he who endures to the end shall be saved".

Ben you can try and deny the obivious if you want to but this verse in the english or the Greek total destroys your view. Let me show you yet another ungetoverable arguement from the greek on these verse. When you look at the words belive and baptized you will see that they are aorist, Particples and the main verb in this sentence is shall be saved. The Greek rule is that a aorist participle never indicates action which is subsequent to the main verb. In other words one must beleive and be baptized before they can be saved. It is imposible to make this verse teach that one is saved before he belives or is baptized. You join this with the fact that the phrase "shall be saved" is in the future tense you should be able to clearly see the same results. One is not saved until he believes AND is baptized. You can say I don't understand the future tense all day long but I just proved that you are the one in error my friend. Here let me show you another verse that uses the phrase "will be saved" in the same future tense. John 10:9 "I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be
saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. Using your arguement a person is saved before he enters by Jesus. I think you can even see the clairity here that one must enter by Jesus to be saved.

Ben there is absoultly no way around this arguement because it is the truth. You should'nt try and make a arguement from the Greek when you don't know anything about the Greek.

ON THE OTHER HAND, in Acts 10:44-48, they HAD THE HOLY SPIRIT, they had BELIEVED, but had NOT YET BEEN WATER-BAPTIZED---were they NOT YET SAVED? Can an unsaved person have the Holy Spirit? Or is there a special dispensation apart from Jesus' NEW COVENANT that provided extra-water-baptismal-salvation? Yes-or-no-question: were they different in their salvatorial approach from us or not?

I have delt with this time and time again Ben. Do you hope that I am going to change my answer or give some answer that you might be able to respond to? I asked you to show me where it says they were saved by being filled by the Holy Spirit? Did you do this, no. In fact why don't you show me one verse anywhere that says someone is saved by being baptized in the HS. I already pointed out that Peter went to them to tell them WORDS by which they were to be saved. Acts 11:14. Then in verse 15 you see that Peter had just began to speak these words when the HS fell on them. He did'nt get to tell them all the words they needed to hear yet. The HS came on them in this special time to show that Gentiles now have repentence unto life 11:18. Just think about the main purpose of the HS is to reveal and prove things are from God. Here was the sign the proof the revealed to the Jews that the Gentiles could become Christians and could be taught the word of God so they could obey and be baptized haveing their sins washed away. This was now being revealed just like Jesus was talking about in John 10:16 where he said he was going to make one flock. You ask yourself the question how could these Gentiles of been saved under the new covenant if they had not yet even heard all the words they needed to hear to be saved? You never answered the question why was Peter 1st thoughts after this happened water baptism? He was asking can anyone FORBID WATER that these gentiles should not be baptized who have been filled with the HS like us on the day of Pentacost. No one was going forbid it after they seen that God had accepted them and they could also be baptized for the remission of sin. This is why Peter proudly commanded them to be water baptized just like Jesus commanded in Mat 28:19. Maybe this will sink in this time Ben.

I still want you to answer the following question Ben.

I know you agree that the following verse are water baptism. Mat 28:19, Mark 16:16, Acts 8, and 1Peter 3:21. I want to know if you think following verses are water baptism or not.
Acts 2:38, John 3:5, Acts 22:16, Acts 2:41, Acts 9:18, Acts 10:47, Acts 16:15, acts 16:33, Acts 18:8, Acts 19:5, 1cor 12:13, gal 3:27.

Please let me know so I can see which verse you deem water baptism and which ones you deem HS baptism/immersion in Christ as you say.

 

[cougan]

Originally posted by Gabriel
Ephesians 2:8 "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast."

John 3:16 "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever should believe in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

Romans 5:21 "so that as sin reigned in death, even so grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."

Jonah 2:9 ".........Salvation is of the Lord"

Isaiah 45:22&nbsp; "Look to Me and be saved, All you the ends of the earth. For I am God and there is no other."&nbsp;

Granted, these don't say, "faith alone" but they are clear in that Christ is our salvation, Christ alone, not works (like baptism).&nbsp; Baptism is a sign, an important one, for sure, but it is not a deal breaker by any means.&nbsp; Christ says that "Those given to Him by the Father cannot be snatched out of His hand".&nbsp; Period.&nbsp; Baptism does not complete the process, salvation is about God's work in you, not your works in the world.&nbsp;

I am sorry I skipped over you Gabriel. You see there is not one single verse that says faith alone saves you. Even in the verse Eph 2:8 show 2 different things FAITH and GRACE. Grace alone does'nt save you just like Faith alone does'nt save you. But, I can say with all confidence that you are saved by faith and you are saved by grace just not alone. I completly agree that Chirist is our salvation and Christ alone and that we can not be saved by works of merit. But my friend baptism is not a work of merit it is a work of God and we submit to it out of obedience.

Colossians 2:12 buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with <I>Him </I>through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.

You would have to call faith in Jesus a work of merit&nbsp;with your view.
John 6:28 Then they said to Him, "What shall we do, that we may work the works of God?"29 Jesus answered and said to them, "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent."

Do you think repentence and confession are works of merit as well? I have already posted verses showing how we are to be obedient but let me post a few of them again.

1Peter 1:22 Since you have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit in sincere love of the brethren, love one another fervently with a pure heart,

Hebrews 5:9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

Matthew 7:21 " Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.

Romans 1:5 By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:

Romans 6:17 But God be thanked that <I>though </I>you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered.

2 Thessalonians 1:8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

I am growing tired of sounding like a broken record. But God provides the free Gift man has faith in God and is obedient and obeys those things he needs to do to obtain the free gift. When man obey and follows throgh then God brings on the blessing and the free gift is theres. If you want me to I can show example after example of this in the OT and the NT.&nbsp; I am not expressing some view I dreamed up or was indoctrinated with. I am simply saying what the bible says and I have given book, chapter, and verse to back up everthing I say. So please study your bibles more and use it for your authority and not what your preacher said or some other man said.

God Bless you all, Cougan

 

[Ben johnson]

When you look at the words believe and baptized you will see that they are aorist, Particples and the main verb in this sentence is "shall be saved".

"Aorist" exists outside of time---that is, it does not indicate past present or future---it just exists. Yet the translations say, "He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved." Which is identical to, "he who has believed and has been baptized, is saved"---it is simply a statment of fact. This verb construction does not present salvation as "conditional upon either belief or baptism"---it is simply presenting their situation. They believed, they were baptized, they were saved. It us just as important to read the next verse. You understand water baptism as being PART of SALVATION; but Mark just asserted that "believers and baptized are saved"---if Mark had your understanding, there is no way he would have omitted water baptism from the DISQUALIFICATION: He who DOES NOT BELIEVE is CONDEMNED. Mark states that only DISBELIEF condemns; to say that it is "disbelief AND/OR unbaptism", is to REWRITE MARK'S WORDS!!!

Here let me show you another verse that uses the phrase "will be saved" in the same future tense. John 10:9 "I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. Using your arguement a person is saved before he enters by Jesus. I think you can even see the clarity here that one must enter by Jesus to be saved.

Oops---you blew your argument. "He who believes and is baptized will be saved" (subsequently). "He who enters will be saved" (subsequently, not precedingly)...

Then in verse 15 you see that Peter had just began to speak these words when the HS fell on them. He didn't get to tell them all the words they needed to hear yet.

You're nailing Peter to a point he didn't make. You think Peter only got out a few words, NOT EVEN THE BASICS OF THE GOSPEL---tell me, Cougan, do you actually believe the Holy Spirit filled them BEFORE THEY BELIEVED?!?!

Do you really think the Holy Spirit ever indwells unbelievers?

Let's look at what Peter REALLY said: "Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did?" Acts10:47

"If God gave the same gift as He gave to us also after believing, in the Lord Jesus Christ..." Acts11:17

Do you see your error? You assumed they had not heard the Gospel, and had not really believed (how could they believe before they heard?)---but Peter, VERY CLEARLY said that they believed, and AFTER BELIEVING had received the Holy Spirit just as the Apostles had!!! I think Peter has overturned your argument, and endorsed what I was saying---it is BELIEF that saves us, GRACE through FAITH, PERIOD; no water. Water is the CONSEQUENCE of salvation. The only disqualification, as Mark ALSO endorsed, is UNBELIEF.

They believed, they received the Holy Spirit, they were saved; just as the other apostles & brethren had; they were THEN baptized. No "special dispensation", no "separate clause", no "one-time-allowance-because-of-the-gospel's-newness (or whaddever)---they were saved by believing, JUST AS THE APOSTLES HAD BEEN!!!

In fact why don't you show me one verse anywhere that says someone is saved by being baptized in the HS.

I can't. But I can show you where they are saved by BELIEVING, which CAUSES them to be filled with the Holy Spirit. Can you show me ANYWHERE that the Spirit indwells one before he believes?

John3:5 undeniably refers to "water=flesh", not water baptism. This is one (of many) examples of "double narrative", "twice-told-tale".

Truly, unless one is born of water, and the Spirit...
That ...born of flesh is flesh, that born of Spirit is spirit.

In this verse, WATER, ("Hudor", water-as-the-fundamental-element), means "FLESH".

1Cor12:13 is "baptism into one body"---identical to "one Lord, one faith, one baptism". Tell me, Cougan---does 1Cor12:13, say "baptized into water", or "baptized into the body"? Same with Gal3:27.

Tell me something---John-the-baptist made the distinction between WATER, and SPIRIT and FIRE (in Matt3). You are forced to admit that "baptism-of-fire-for-sinners" (which is HELL) has NOTHING to do with water-baptism, undeniably "baptism with the Spirit ALSO has nothing to do with water-baptism"; why is it that you cannot simply understand John's words? John baptized with water, Jesus baptized with the Spirit. Which is salvation. (The water-baptism then FOLLOWED the spirit-baptism...)

Why can't you understand John-the-baptist's words? Why can't you accept that not everywhere the word, "BAPTISM", appears, does it mean "WATER"?

I submit that we are saved, in the exact same way as the Apostles, which is the exact same way as those in Acts 10:44-48. We believe, which is to receive Christ, we are baptized into His death and raised new creations---BORN AGAIN. We are then water-baptized...