Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Can God save us the way HE WANTS TOO? | Acts 2:38 | Grace and Truth | 50433 | ||
1. had been foretold by the prophet Joel, this declaration was made: “And it shall be, that whosoever, shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Acts 2:21). To what does “calling” on the name of the Lord refer? Surely not merely verbalizing the expression, “Lord, lord,” for Christ plainly denounced those who do nothing more than that (cf. Mt. 7:21; Lk. 6:46). It is clear that a comparison of verse 21, with the information provided subsequently in this same chapter, demands that “call” be assigned a comprehensive sense. Note this question: Is the “saved” of verse 21 equivalent with “remission of sins” in verse 38? Yes it is; the blessing is identical. Since there are not alternate plans of salvation for the lost sinner (cf. Jude 3), it becomes obvious that the “call” (v. 21) encompasses the “repent and be immersed” of the later passage (v. 38). To suggest, therefore, that the term “call” somehow negates the specific commands to repent and be baptized in order to enjoy remission of sins, is a serious error. What about Zaccheus and the thief on the cross? Our friendly critic continues: “Jesus announced to all gathered at Zaccheus’ house that ‘This day is salvation come’ (Lk. 19:9); no mention is made of baptism. And as Jesus hung on the cross, the thief crucified next to him recognized His power and majesty; Jesus rewarded the thief’s faith with the memorable promise, ‘Today shalt thou be with me in paradise’ (Luke 23:43). While one could, I suppose, speculate that Zaccheus and his house were somehow baptized in an unrecorded interim, there can be no doubt about what happened on the cross.” 1. Neither Zaccheus nor the crucified thief was explicitly instructed to “repent.” Will it be argued that repentance is a matter of no consequence? One ought to reflect upon the logical extension of an argument before making it. |
||||||
2 | Can God save us the way HE WANTS TOO? | Acts 2:38 | Grace and Truth | 50434 | ||
* At the time of their encounters with the Savior, neither Zaccheus nor the thief were under the commission which was inaugurated later – on the day of Pentecost. They both lived during a transition period when the law of Moses was still operative (thus providing forgiveness by means of animal sacrifice), and yet the ministry of John the Baptizer had begun also (Lk. 16:16). It was a very unique time. Further, John baptized “for the remission of sins” (Mk. 1:4), and vast multitudes were immersed by him (Mt. 3:5-6). It cannot be established whether or not either of these gentlemen had been exposed to John’s preaching, or whether or not they had, at some point, obeyed his message relative to baptism. They might very well have, and then, one or the other of them could have lapsed into his old ways again. One thing we do know is this: those who heard John’s preaching, and who ignored his baptism, were rejecting the counsel of God (Lk. 7:30). Here is an interesting question: if refusing John’s baptism was a rejection of God, what would be the case with reference to one who refuses the baptism commissioned by Him whose shoes John was unworthy to bear? * During the days of His public ministry, Christ had the power to personally forgive sins, independent of the rite of baptism (cf. Mk. 2:5). When the Lord died, however, his will was subsequently expressed in the written record of the new covenant (Heb. 9:15-17). The Savior’s “will” is now mandated by means of a written code. That ratified will (cf. Mt. 26:28) requires immersion “for the forgiveness of sins” (Acts 2:38). No one has the right to argue that forgiveness may be bestowed in some other fashion. |
||||||
3 | Can God save us the way HE WANTS TOO? | Acts 2:38 | Grace and Truth | 50435 | ||
1. There is not a solitary example in the book of Acts of a “conversion” independent of baptism. The cases of Zaccheus and the thief, therefore, prove nothing relative to immersion. Why was Jesus baptized? “Our Savior himself was baptized; surely he didn’t do so in order to ensure salvation. Rather, His baptism is proof positive of the symbolic nature of the act, as opposed to its efficacy.” 1. Our Savior never repented; are we to assume then that repentance is unnecessary? Again, our friend should carefully calculate the consequences of his argument before he makes it. 2. Jesus was baptized in order to “fulfill all righteousness” (Mt. 3:15). This expression has to do with doing “whatever has been appointed by God to be acknowledged and obeyed by man” (Vine, 684). Again, it is here used “in the sense of fulfilling the divine statutes” (Arndt, 195). The point is, for whatever reason he was immersed, Christ obeyed. If, therefore, one is instructed to be immersed today in order to have his sins washed away (Acts 22:16), if he follows the Lord’s example, he will obey. Moreover, he will not attempt to argue a contrary position. 3. If our baptism is somehow parallel to Christ’s baptism, and we are baptized in order to demonstrate “symbolically” a salvation we have received already, would that not suggest that Jesus was immersed to “demonstrate a salvation already received”? And if that logic follows, from what was Jesus saved? 1. Clearly, the baptism of Jesus was in a different class than ours, and his case provides no argument to invalidate baptism “for the remission of sins” today. Those who don’t believe are condemned “You frequently cite Mark 16:16, in which Jesus states that ‘he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved . . . .’ However, the second clause in that sentence, ‘but he that believeth not shall be damned’ states unequivocally that belief (faith) is the key element to salvation.” 1. While faith may be described as “a key element,” in the salvation process, because it is the motive out of which additional acts of obedience arise, it is not correct to suggest that it is the only element in salvation. Again we stress, such reasoning would exclude repentance. May one be saved without sorrow for sin and a corresponding reformation of life? Surely our friend will not so contend. 2. When Christ affirmed that one who disbelieves will be condemned, it was entirely unnecessary to add further acts of rebellion in order to make the case. The unbeliever is condemned at that point. It is superfluous to extrapolate the disobedience. |
||||||
4 | Can God save us the way HE WANTS TOO? | Acts 2:38 | Grace and Truth | 50436 | ||
1. Suppose we say: “He who eats and digests his food shall live, but he who eats not shall die.” Would it be sensible to say: “He who eats and digests his food shall live, but he who eats not, and does not digest, shall die.”? Can one digest what he does not eat? Is it even necessary to discuss baptism with one who is in a state of disbelief? 2. The plain truth of the matter is this: Jesus “unequivocally” stated that “he who believes and is baptized shall be saved.” The terms “believes” and “is baptized” are, in the Greek Testament, compound participles in the aorist tense. In Greek grammar this reflects a format which indicates an action that takes place prior to that of the leading verb (Machen, 116-117), which, in this case, is “shall be saved.” This means that both actions occur before that suggested by the verb. In other words, salvation does not occur until the believer has been baptized. This is as plain as language can be. 3. J.W. Willmarth, a noted Baptist editor and writer, once conceded: “. . . our Saviour said, just before he ascended the heavens: He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. We shall hardly dare to tamper with his royal word and make it run, He that believeth and is saved shall be baptized (306). Jesus didn’t baptize “Finally, if baptism is essential to salvation, does it not seem odd that the scriptures specifically state that our Saviour Himself did not baptize (Jn. 4:2).” 1. That is not exactly correct. The text actually says that “Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John . . . .” This clearly indicates that Jesus did not view the rite as a trivial matter. Professor Alvah Hovey, an eminent Baptist scholar, noted that “it is a maxim that ‘what one does by another, he does himself’ . . . .” Accordingly, he says, this is “rather an explanation of the manner in which Jesus baptized. . .” (110); it does not reflect a minimizing of immersion. 2. This text merely declares that Jesus did not personally administer the immersion. And there is a very good reason for that. There almost certainly would have been a problem in that those who were immersed directly by Christ would have tended to develop an inordinate pride and claimed some superiority over those who were baptized merely by one of the disciples. There is absolutely nothing in this context to suggest that baptism is not essential. |
||||||
5 | Can God save us the way HE WANTS TOO? | Acts 2:38 | Grace and Truth | 50441 | ||
Disobedience doesn’t condemn In conclusion our critic says this: “I suggest that the believer is indeed being disobedient if,when he does not get baptized. But to suggest that not getting baptized is a sin unto damnation, as you do, is troubling doctrine, not to mention unscriptural.” 1. Note the logic in our friend’s conclusion. One who refuses to be baptized is disobedient. But refusing to submit to baptism is not a damning act. Thus, one is forced to conclude that disobedience is not a damning activity. How very opposite to the affirmation of an inspired writer who affirmed that Christ is the author of eternal salvation to those who obey (Heb. 5:9). Is there a solitary line in the New Testament that promises salvation to the disobedient? 2. We must again press this point. Those who refused John’s baptism (cf. Mk. 1:4), “rejected the counsel of God” (Lk. 7:30). “Counsel” denotes “the purpose of God respecting salvation” (Thayer, 104). May one repudiate God’s saving plan, and still be saved? If such a judgment hung over those who rejected John’s baptism, what of those who reject the baptism commissioned by Jesus (Mt. 28:19; Mk. 16:16)? 3. Those who submitted to John’s baptism, “justified God” (Lk. 7:29), “declared God to be righteous, i.e., by receiving the baptism declared that it had been prescribed by God rightly” (Thayer, 150). If accepting baptism “justifies” God, would not rejecting baptism “condemn” God? Is it possible that one can so act as to “condemn” God, and yet not be held responsible for that rebellion? We would respectfully suggest, therefore, that our corespondent’s position, namely that one may be disobedient and reject baptism, and yet still please God and receive salvation, is the dogma that is both “troubling” and “unscriptural.” It is our devout hope that he will reconsider his point of view. SOURCES Arndt, William and Gingrich, F.W. (1967), A Greek,English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago). Hovey, Alvah (1885), Commentary on the Gospel of John (Philadelphia: American Baptist Publication Society). Machen, J. Gresham (1951), New Testament Greek For Beginners (New York: Macmillan). Terry, M.S. (1890), Biblical Hermenuetics (New York: Eaton and Mains). Thayer, J.H. (1958), A Greek,English Lexicon of the New Testament (Edinburgh: T.,T. Clark). Vine, W.E. (1991), Vine’s Amplified Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (Iowa Falls: World Bible Publishers). Willmarth, J.W. (1877), “Baptism and Remission,” Baptist Quarterly, Philadelphia, July. Comment on this article. www.christiancourier.com,images,juniorAd.gif WHAT OTHERS ARE SAYING “I was searching on the internet and started hitting different sites to see how much truth I could find. Thanks for your site. Keep putting the truth out there for others to find.” “You have a great Web page. It is easy to use and uncluttered.” “Thank you for your work, I find it to be very beneficial to me in my ‘Christian walk.’” “I believe your website to be one of the most sound informational sites in existence. I browse daily to await new articles ... I encourage all my brethren to go to this site to view all the material that you have made available. May God continue to bless you all in this worthy effort.” “I was pleased to find this web site with such positive and informative articles. Keep up the good work.” “Your website is a wonderful piece of work.” “Thanks for the rich source for sermons, sermon ideas, |
||||||