- Status
Actually, it's you that's missing the point. (BTW, I was baptized over 25 years ago, so I'm not disobeying God in that aspect. I did it as an outward sign of a decision to follow Jesus.) But you are saying that there are 2 things that must be done to be saved. 1) Repent and believe on Him 2) be baptized It's "normal" for someone to disobey in all of the other imperatives, but that those 2 are the only ones that really matter? That puts them on an "even standing". Or are you saying that they are the same ordinance?
This isn't so much about us. I have yet to find anyone here, who if given the truth of God's word would not act upon it. It is about teaching and saving souls. Do you know how many pastors/teachers/preachers who will completely ignore the subject without even giving someone the truth and allowing the person to be saved to make an informed decision? Why would they do that? To keep from making someone uncomfortable. Lisa was talking earlier about the universalists not teaching God's word. Why not? Because the subject of obedience to God makes people uncomfortable and when people get uncomfortable the dollars stop flowing. This topic is something that needs to be at the forefront of our thinking because it is that serious of a matter. I thank God for eHuman for being a part of this debate. If you have learned nothing else, you have seen the argument presented. It offers great potential for further study and exercise. The question that we will never answer is the one that we are boiled down to now. At what point is one saved and does God make provision for the penitent but still disobedient heart? Are you saved when you believe & repent or must you humbly submit to God's will before you are saved? I will continue to teach, preach and ascribe to the latter. I have hundreds who listen to my teaching weekly and I greatly prefer not to take any chances. If I am in error let it be on the side of caution rather than recklessness.
Acts 2:38 has been covered in it's entirety.
No one said anything about disobeying anything. A relationship with God is not about how much or what one can get away with.
Last edited:
Also from Acts (chapter 10)
Peter "ordered" them to be baptized AFTER they received the Holy Spirit. It's obvious that they wouldn't have baptized those people had they not been given the sign of the Holy Spirit to "prove" that they had been saved. Those that were with Peter who were circumcised thought that the Messiah was only for the Jews. Without the evidence that they were already saved, they would have refused to do it.
Peter "ordered" them to be baptized AFTER they received the Holy Spirit. It's obvious that they wouldn't have baptized those people had they not been given the sign of the Holy Spirit to "prove" that they had been saved. Those that were with Peter who were circumcised thought that the Messiah was only for the Jews. Without the evidence that they were already saved, they would have refused to do it.
I have respect for you not holding anything back as far as teaching about the importance of baptism and our need to walk in the Word...my concern is that while you are erring on the side of caution, you are walking in fear instead of faith...fear that because we don't immediately get baptized that God snubs His nose at the faith He produced in us and we are damned because He has no grace in the matter...faith says I accept that there is no good in me. God made a way to walk in freedom from sin, Jesus died so that I might have life, I ask forgiveness, accept what Jesus did for me, my heart is changed and I have now become a new creature. This is by faith alone that what Jesus did is sufficient. Of course the next step would be to make a public proclaimation of the wonderful work of our Savior and fully experience dying to sin and being raised to new life in Him...it is an incredible experience and obedience to the One who calls us. Now..do you truly believe in your heart that the person you just led to the Lord, while driving him to the church for baptism, dies from a heart attack...and is still condemned in his sin simply because he missed the ceremony? Oh, if only he could have been baptized sooner...oh well...no mercy or grace for you bud...
Then every failure you have of following a command you are in danger of losing the gift that God gave you, even if it took some time for you to realize it was sin and you hadn't repented before you died...we're back on the slippery slope of law here and frankly neither you or I will ever be good enough, faithful enough and we will always walk in fear of our failures and not in faith in the One who is able to save me from the law of sin and death.
It also smacks of self righteousness to think it even possible to be saved by anything or anyone other than Jesus and His righteousness. Paul did quite a bit of teaching on the subject.
My dear brother, you are carrying a burden that you were not created to carry. The salvation of ones soul is ultimately up to God...we are the messengers of His good news and we do have responsibility to tell them the truth as revealed by God, but His love, righteousness, sovereignty and will, Will be accomplished with or without us...because He is God.
Chimney, I applaud your parting comment. All spot on but sadly has been offered before already and categorically rejected. I should have bowed out a while back but I just don't know when to, you never know when something you say might actually be what causes that crystal clear moment of recognition in your audience.
I think what disappoints me the most about the country pastor and why I'll bow out at least for a while over this point; Instead of taking the opportunity to teach (as he has stated is his purpose) and handling refuting evidence by explaining what it really means, he "closes his eyes like a child" and keeps pointing back to his own flawed conclusions screaming that everyone is wrong.
There never has been a debate, he's not used to an inferior questioning his conclusions. Meanwhile coming off very similar to an arrogant, legalistic Pharisee. I know Christ is there but it has become difficult to see Him.
It is a good thing to go beyond reading the Bible and studying it in depth. There are things that open up by looking at the original language that just bring a fuller picture than can't be seen in the best of English translations. It blesses you. It is helpful to examine the parsing codes and compare all of the other places that a given word was used, how and why. To look at lexicon's explanation of a word and how and why it is used. But if you don't put that magnifying glass aside once in a while it will blur your vision. It's so big and close that you can only see two letters at a time at best and context becomes an impossible foreign concept.
There needs to be a balance between in depth study, and a time to just read and allow the water of the Word to wash over you. With knowledge comes pride, and pride precedes chastisement and correction from God if we belong to Him.
My comments on "the Spirit" of scripture are not from emotion or feelings. They are the life and truth and point of scripture and there are many in audience who understand the terminology and reasoning behind it. It is "Do not sleep with your neighbor's wife" vs "Do not lust in your heart for her to begin with".
There is a depth to the scriptures that cannot be found with a magnifying glass if you have an ear to hear it.
Disagreement over God's word has a good side to it if it is used. It gets you into the Word seeking. But I have probably let my hackles get raised and tried to reason beyond what was productive. I recognized many posts ago that there was no debate or comparing notes.
I think what disappoints me the most about the country pastor and why I'll bow out at least for a while over this point; Instead of taking the opportunity to teach (as he has stated is his purpose) and handling refuting evidence by explaining what it really means, he "closes his eyes like a child" and keeps pointing back to his own flawed conclusions screaming that everyone is wrong.
There never has been a debate, he's not used to an inferior questioning his conclusions. Meanwhile coming off very similar to an arrogant, legalistic Pharisee. I know Christ is there but it has become difficult to see Him.
It is a good thing to go beyond reading the Bible and studying it in depth. There are things that open up by looking at the original language that just bring a fuller picture than can't be seen in the best of English translations. It blesses you. It is helpful to examine the parsing codes and compare all of the other places that a given word was used, how and why. To look at lexicon's explanation of a word and how and why it is used. But if you don't put that magnifying glass aside once in a while it will blur your vision. It's so big and close that you can only see two letters at a time at best and context becomes an impossible foreign concept.
There needs to be a balance between in depth study, and a time to just read and allow the water of the Word to wash over you. With knowledge comes pride, and pride precedes chastisement and correction from God if we belong to Him.
My comments on "the Spirit" of scripture are not from emotion or feelings. They are the life and truth and point of scripture and there are many in audience who understand the terminology and reasoning behind it. It is "Do not sleep with your neighbor's wife" vs "Do not lust in your heart for her to begin with".
There is a depth to the scriptures that cannot be found with a magnifying glass if you have an ear to hear it.
An interesting read on Baptizmal Regeneration I found this morning. Who started it and why. Oddly enough some examples that I attempted to lay out are done there better. Though I think that the good pastor is not claiming to adhere to the letter of Baptismal Regeneration, the points that he does refute are found there too.
Baptismal Regeneration
Random thought: (If baptism is not symbolic) Then why if we are baptised unto the remission of sin do we continue to sin?
It is a proclamation and pledge.
And this link debunks the misinterpretation of Acts 2:38
http://www.gotquestions.org/baptism-Acts-2-38.html
And I so love John 5:24
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.
Has passed (past tense), indicative mood (simple statement of fact).
Baptismal Regeneration
Random thought: (If baptism is not symbolic) Then why if we are baptised unto the remission of sin do we continue to sin?
It is a proclamation and pledge.
And this link debunks the misinterpretation of Acts 2:38
http://www.gotquestions.org/baptism-Acts-2-38.html
And I so love John 5:24
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.
Has passed (past tense), indicative mood (simple statement of fact).
Last edited:
The form of doctrine they obeyed from the heart is baptism... that baptism saved them from their sins... put them into the body of Christ... outside the body of Christ is no salvation... You state.. baptism did not save you... Jesus Christ did... yes Jesus Christ saved you... when you were baptized... Jesus says, he that believes and is baptized shall be saved... that is... believe + baptism = salvation... and Peter clearly stated baptism does also now save us... why did not Peter just state... Jesus saves us, not baptism? Why? Because to do so is a lie... baptism does save us... it saves us by the resurrection of Jesus Christ... you speak as if baptism is apart from Christ... its not... baptism is central to salvation in Christ... it is the central doctrine one must obey from the heart to have salvation in Christ... the reason you were not questioned on the things you mentioned above when coming to Christ is... they are not issues of what one must believe and do to become saved in Christ... but then the disciples were taught by Jesus to teach the people what they need to do to be saved... then baptize them to make disciples of them... then teach them again... and these items you bring are the things which need to be taught after baptism... it is called, observing whatsoever I have commanded you... and we know what those commands are by reading the word and following what the words say, or what they are silent about... and truly, our fellowship is in the Lord Jesus Christ... in the things he has authorized... those who do not want to abide in the doctrines of Christ, do not have Christ... how then does one have fellowship with them? you take yourself out of fellowship with the obedient when you travel down the road of disobedience... then you blame us for it... not allowing you to have your will worship contrary to the word of God... don't blame it upon us... look to yourself for your ills... I know you will not like most of what I have posted here, and no doubt will argue it day in and day out to have your own way... but you are free to have your own way at any congregation you can get to come to agree with you... but I am not here to win a popularity contest... no doubt I am going to loose any such contest... I am not here to please men... but God... I could flatter you with words... but what would that do for your souls? Nothing... If I was to please men, I would not be the servant of Christ... and what I do, I do it for your benefit, not for your destruction... the path of faith in Christ adheres to the faith of Christ found in his divine word... why use a bible at all if you are not going to stick to what it teaches?
Ok you guys, let's not let this issue cause division or upset among us. Neither of you is going to convince the other one. Just post your scriptural evidence and leave the rest up to the Holy Spirit. 
Personally, I'm out of this discussion. One of the reasons that I'm non-denominational is that I don't like division caused by the interpretation of scriptures in certain passages that give their denomination a "boost above" other Christians.
If you guys want to continue the debate, feel free. As long as there is love and respect, I don't have any problem with it. But I'm afraid that you both are just spinning your wheels and neither side is going to budge
Sometimes a seed is planted, and God waters it later on But, by all means, don't let me stop you if you want to continue with the discussion, I wasn't trying to shut it down.
Sometimes a seed is planted, and God waters it later on
But, by all means, don't let me stop you if you want to continue with the discussion, I wasn't trying to shut it down. I still love you, and appreciate the chance to share and bounce off each other. Two sides are heard not just one, and we serve to cause all interested to look and see for themselves if it is so.
But one last explanation of logic that will show (if from my perspective only) your flaw.
Faith in Christ and baptism = you can be saved.
Faith in Christ and baptism and you live in Texas = you can be saved.
Faith in Christ and baptism and you live in Texas and you drive a grey truck = you can be saved.
All of these statements are true.
The only way to know for sure in these examples which conditions are requirements for salvation is to state the negative condition.
I.E. "But if you don't live in Texas you shall be condemned", or, "But if you don't believe you will be condemned", or, "But if you don't believe and live in Texas you will be condemned".
Example:Mark 16:16
He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.
This verse along with dozens of others identifies the condition that must be met in order to be saved by also identifying the condition of exclusion.
The only possible way that it can be positively known from this scripture that baptism is also a key condition that must be met is to identify it as a condition of exclusion.
As you and I have stated previously, there is not one instance in the Bible that identifies baptism as a condition of exclusion.
There are countless examples that that HAVE been given where the requirements of salvation don't even mention baptism as a condition or requirement.
Faith and belief are the only things identified as conditions of exclusions anywhere.
FURTHERMORE: If it were that important to salvation don't you think that Jesus or Paul would have done something with it?
Christ didn't baptize (John 4:2) and Paul thanked God that he was not sent to baptize but was sent to preach the Gospel.
WHY? Because faith (definite article) ( the condition and requirement for salvation) comes by hearing the word of God.
I.E. Paul knew that is was the preaching of the Word of God that caused saving faith.
You won't listen to the Spirit (your words).
What you see with your eyes fools you so let me appeal to your intellect.
I most humbly submit to you CG that your logic is flawed.
(Don't take my word for it) Take the above example I gave to a secular mathematician or preferably a computer programmer and tell them how you want it to be able to work in the end.
I.E. Faith and baptism both being the required conditions and add one more non required condition that can still be true overall. The code or formula that they give back to you will include a line that God didn't include in the Bible.
Now be honest because this is the point: Also have them do it with only faith being the required condition of the three and that secular programmer will hand you the model that is used in scripture over and over.
God is not a God of confusion, but sometimes we get confused anyways. God made it clear you just don't see it yet brother but I have faith that you will.
If you are so strong in your position then do what I ask, you've got nothing to lose, you only stand to gain.
Trying to teach Salvation by Faith in Jesus + adding any works of man is another gospel.
Paul says let that man be an anathema.
Brother I can tell that being right about what you teach is important to you, and not for the sake of being right, but for the sake of handling and presenting the word of God with honor and respect. True faith comes by hearing the true Word of God.
I understand that you have formed your view from countless hours of study. In light of just how bad I know you want to handle God's word correctly, on the one in a million chance that you are wrong on this brother, seriously look into what I've presented to you. Do what I've asked before categorically discounting it because I will guarantee you one thing: If you are wrong about this you will never allow yourself to even consider the possibility after these discussions, they tire you. This may be the only opportunity you will give yourself.
Now I have exhausted all that I know to reason and leave it in God's capable hands.
Regardless this is just one area that we (currently) disagree on. I consider it an honor to have been able to wrestle with someone who considers the word as importantly as I do.
But one last explanation of logic that will show (if from my perspective only) your flaw.
Faith in Christ and baptism = you can be saved.
Faith in Christ and baptism and you live in Texas = you can be saved.
Faith in Christ and baptism and you live in Texas and you drive a grey truck = you can be saved.
All of these statements are true.
The only way to know for sure in these examples which conditions are requirements for salvation is to state the negative condition.
I.E. "But if you don't live in Texas you shall be condemned", or, "But if you don't believe you will be condemned", or, "But if you don't believe and live in Texas you will be condemned".
Example:Mark 16:16
He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.
This verse along with dozens of others identifies the condition that must be met in order to be saved by also identifying the condition of exclusion.
The only possible way that it can be positively known from this scripture that baptism is also a key condition that must be met is to identify it as a condition of exclusion.
As you and I have stated previously, there is not one instance in the Bible that identifies baptism as a condition of exclusion.
There are countless examples that that HAVE been given where the requirements of salvation don't even mention baptism as a condition or requirement.
Faith and belief are the only things identified as conditions of exclusions anywhere.
FURTHERMORE: If it were that important to salvation don't you think that Jesus or Paul would have done something with it?
Christ didn't baptize (John 4:2) and Paul thanked God that he was not sent to baptize but was sent to preach the Gospel.
WHY? Because faith (definite article) ( the condition and requirement for salvation) comes by hearing the word of God.
I.E. Paul knew that is was the preaching of the Word of God that caused saving faith.
You won't listen to the Spirit (your words).
What you see with your eyes fools you so let me appeal to your intellect.
I most humbly submit to you CG that your logic is flawed.
(Don't take my word for it) Take the above example I gave to a secular mathematician or preferably a computer programmer and tell them how you want it to be able to work in the end.
I.E. Faith and baptism both being the required conditions and add one more non required condition that can still be true overall. The code or formula that they give back to you will include a line that God didn't include in the Bible.
Now be honest because this is the point: Also have them do it with only faith being the required condition of the three and that secular programmer will hand you the model that is used in scripture over and over.
God is not a God of confusion, but sometimes we get confused anyways. God made it clear you just don't see it yet brother but I have faith that you will.
If you are so strong in your position then do what I ask, you've got nothing to lose, you only stand to gain.
Trying to teach Salvation by Faith in Jesus + adding any works of man is another gospel.
Paul says let that man be an anathema.
Brother I can tell that being right about what you teach is important to you, and not for the sake of being right, but for the sake of handling and presenting the word of God with honor and respect. True faith comes by hearing the true Word of God.
I understand that you have formed your view from countless hours of study. In light of just how bad I know you want to handle God's word correctly, on the one in a million chance that you are wrong on this brother, seriously look into what I've presented to you. Do what I've asked before categorically discounting it because I will guarantee you one thing: If you are wrong about this you will never allow yourself to even consider the possibility after these discussions, they tire you. This may be the only opportunity you will give yourself.
Now I have exhausted all that I know to reason and leave it in God's capable hands.
Regardless this is just one area that we (currently) disagree on. I consider it an honor to have been able to wrestle with someone who considers the word as importantly as I do.
Did Jesus die for faith? And yet men must believe or die in their sins.
Did Jesus die for repentance? And yet men must repent or perish
Did Jesus die for salvation? And yet men must be baptized for the remission of sin
Indeed the apostle Peter must be both a liar and a fool.
Did Jesus die for repentance? And yet men must repent or perish
Did Jesus die for salvation? And yet men must be baptized for the remission of sin
Indeed the apostle Peter must be both a liar and a fool.
from what i gather, baptism is best understood as an outward, visible sign of what has happened in your heart. people have been saved without it, but when resources are available i imagine it's best to do it, for a variety of reasons. being baptized as a Jehovah's witness is not nessicarily invalid, but rather different. Their core belief system is different enough that most Christians regard them as a fringe belief system. i don't mean an ounce of disrespect. getting batised again, would not conflict with previous baptisms, i would imagine, since now indeed you have left that group and come to a more proper understanding of the scriptures (no disrespect intended for any Jehovah's witnesses reading this either), that you would, be baptized for the first time as a Christian. shoot i know fine Christians who have been baptized a couple of times, the idea here is not to let it be blown out of proportion and get in the way or your relationship with Christ. among denominational separations, it's regarded, generally, as a side line issue to some of the more core (but no less important) issues, such as the virgin birth, the ressurection, and other issues of the kind. i guess what im saying is, go ahead and be baptized. show the world that you believe in the Son of God, as your Lord, and Redeemer, but realize, that if u died on the way to the pool that God would love you anyway, and you would be just as forgiven on your way to heaven.
getting batised again, would not conflict with previous baptisms, i would imagine, since now indeed you have left that group and come to a more proper understanding of the scriptures (no disrespect intended for any Jehovah's witnesses reading this either), that you would, be baptized for the first time as a Christian. shoot i know fine Christians who have been baptized a couple of times, the idea here is not to let it be blown out of proportion and get in the way or your relationship with Christ. among denominational separations, it's regarded, generally, as a side line issue to some of the more core (but no less important) issues, such as the virgin birth, the ressurection, and other issues of the kind. i guess what im saying is, go ahead and be baptized. show the world that you believe in the Son of God, as your Lord, and Redeemer, but realize, that if u died on the way to the pool that God would love you anyway, and you would be just as forgiven on your way to heaven. from what i gather, baptism is best understood as an outward, visible sign of what has happened in your heart. people have been saved without it, but when resources are available i imagine it's best to do it, for a variety of reasons. being baptized as a Jehovah's witness is not nessicarily invalid, but rather different. Their core belief system is different enough that most Christians regard them as a fringe belief system. i don't mean an ounce of disrespect.
I know you wrote that out of love and concern for me, and I really do appreciate it. I love you too!
But, I wasn't baptized a Jehovah's Witness, I was baptized a Christian. The Watchtower Society did not wash away my sins, and they didn't die on the cross. I am saved out of grace and the gift of salvation through Jesus's sacrifice. The watchtower had nothing to do with that, they just dunked me under the water for God.
I know probably most everyone here will disagree with me when I say this, but Jehovah's Witnesses are in fact Christians. I know, I was one for 7 years. They are wonderful people with a very strong faith. The only problem with them is that they allow the Watchtower Society to dictate their beliefs, their lives, their friends.......just about everything is under control of the Governing Body of the Society. Some is scriptural, some is questionable, and some isn't scriptural as far as I'm concerned.
But, that does not mean that they are not Christians because in fact they are. They really aren't much different from other controlling sects of christianity like the mormons and others.
But one baptism is good enough for God, so it's good enough for me. Jesus didn't die on the cross twice just to make sure........lol. I have faith that He knows me and that's good enough.
I hope my passion for the topic and truth didn't leave too many with a bad taste. Appologies if it did. That was a frustrating excersise, I thought it might make a difference in the short term. I hope it does in the long term.
At the end of the day, there is one thing that we all have in common, our deep love for our Lord and savior Jesus Christ. That is the love that binds us together as a family, God's children.
In any family, all brothers and sisters spat and disagree sometimes, but we can agree to disagree and still have great affection and appreciation for eachother because love is the most important thing.
1 Corinthians 13:13 "And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love."
I believe what Christ said
Verily,Verily I say unto you, he that believeth in me hath everlasting life.
I am the ressurection and he that believeth in me, though were dead, yet shall live.
Also - For God so loved the world he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life.
Believe, repent and be saved. If you can you should be baptized. It is not a requirement for your name to be written in the book of life.
Verily,Verily I say unto you, he that believeth in me hath everlasting life.
I am the ressurection and he that believeth in me, though were dead, yet shall live.
Also - For God so loved the world he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life.
Believe, repent and be saved. If you can you should be baptized. It is not a requirement for your name to be written in the book of life.
- Status
Similar threads
