Results 521 - 540 of 567
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: disciplerami Ordered by Date |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
521 | Isn't Baptism neccessary for salvation?? | Rom 10:9 | disciplerami | 73309 | ||
You write: "So the Mosaic law, stating that we should have no other gods besides Yahweh, that we should not murder or steal or commit adultery, has no value for the "New Testament" Christian? Are we no longer to love God wholeheartedly (Deuteronomy 6:5) or to love our neighbor as ourselves (Leviticus 19:18)?" I didn't say you can now be IMMORAL because the Old Law ended. Moral issues remain the same. I will state it again. The particulars of how faith is demonstrated are different. Israelites had to be circumcised, go to three yearly feasts, etc. Abraham had to do the things God called him to do, and he had to do them by faith [i.e. he did not trust that his works saved him]. The New Testament offers a new set of particulars. Baptism is unique, in that it is directly related to the salvation moment. God saves at the point of being baptized in faith. "You are sons of God through faith, for all of you who are baptized into Christ, have clothed yourselves with Christ." Hence, a different set of particulars, but the same faith throughout all human history. But morality hasn't changed. It has always been sinful to murder, to dishonor parents, to bow to idols, etc. I don't think the two things you mentioned can be separated. The two things are intersecting in baptism. Titus' statement, "by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit" is showing that the outward "having our bodies washed with pure water" is met with the internal sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit. The formula you mention has a glaring inconsistency, I think. faith/repentance is no different than saying faith/works. Baptism, when properly received, is not a WORK in the negative sense. It is a work of faith. The apostle Paul said he was made an apostle to "bring about the OBEDIENCE OF FAITH" (Rom.1:5; 16:26). The apostle praised the Thessalonians "work of faith" (1 Thess 1:3). James says "faith without works is dead." Peter was telling the listeners on the day of repentance to repent and be baptized, i.e. turn away from sin and get immersed into Christ. The response of faith was seen by 3,000 or so when they got baptized. Their salvation moment was right then, "and 3,000 were added that day."' Good day. |
||||||
522 | Isn't Baptism neccessary for salvation?? | Rom 10:9 | disciplerami | 73262 | ||
Right, everyone today is saved by faith, just as Abraham and others were. But the particulars of how to demonstrate faith HAVE CHANGED. Though we don't have a record of God's message to Cain and Abel, somehow Abel knew to offer a blood sacrifice. It is logical to conclude that God told them his wishes. Cain was a transgressor because he transgressed the pre-mosaic law. Good day. |
||||||
523 | Isn't Baptism neccessary for salvation?? | Rom 10:9 | disciplerami | 73204 | ||
Dear Inquisitor, I am a Christian. Good day. |
||||||
524 | Isn't Baptism neccessary for salvation?? | Rom 10:9 | disciplerami | 73203 | ||
Hank, Thanks for the powerful exegesis. Questions Jesus asked. But foolish nonsense he did not. If you do not know that the thief was baptized, then why bring him up? Humm? You seem to be the old sage here. Why don't you use your skills by sticking to the facts and help these young fellas out? "One" is right, that the thief was not baptized is irrelevant to our discussion. Good day. |
||||||
525 | Isn't Baptism neccessary for salvation?? | Rom 10:9 | disciplerami | 73202 | ||
Hi Tim, The thief still died before the command of baptism was issued many days later. Where there is no law, there is no transgression. Good day. |
||||||
526 | Isn't Baptism neccessary for salvation?? | Rom 10:9 | disciplerami | 73201 | ||
Greetings, This is what I've been trying to get across. If someone is going to discount the necessity of baptism, they have to do it on some other grounds. They can TRY to prove that EIS ['for' in Acts 2:38 means 'because'], they can TRY to make the baptism of Acts 2:38 Holy Spirit baptism, they can try a lot of things, but they can't deny it on the basis of something that happened before the cross. Thanks. | ||||||
527 | Isn't Baptism neccessary for salvation?? | Rom 10:9 | disciplerami | 73200 | ||
Water baptism won't fly because of the thief on the cross? Ok, everyone together, are the legs crossed, hands extended out, laying on the knees, thumbs and middle finger touching. Close your eyes everyone and repeat the following in a monotone voice, 'baptism isn't necessary because the thief on the cross wasn't baptized.' Say it a few thousand times and maybe it will be true. Think 'timeline.' Jesus and the thief are on the cross. They both die and go to paradise [today you'll be with me in paradise]. Jesus returns on the third day. Resurrected and walking on the earth for about 40 days. Just before disappearing into the clouds, he tells the disciples to 'make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, etc. The thief on the cross did not have to be baptized because Jesus' baptism wasn't commanded yet. The thief on the cross is different and irrelevant to the discussion because he lived before the cross and before the command. Discounting the necessity of baptism because the thief didn't have to be baptized makes as much sense as a Jew in Moses day denying the necessity of keeping the Passover because Abraham didn't have to. Abraham didn't have to because it wasn't instituted yet. The thief on the cross didn't have to because the baptism Jesus commanded in Matthew 28:18-20 wasn't instituted yet. It's always a dead end, you say. I don't doubt that you are right as long as you guys keep up mantra: "baptism isn't necessary because the thief on the cross didn't have to." Good day. |
||||||
528 | Isn't Baptism neccessary for salvation?? | Rom 10:9 | disciplerami | 73182 | ||
I simply say to you 'dear one', that a baptism that isn't necessary is a command that has no purpose. If God commanded that we all wear green pants on Wednesday, but didn't hold anyone to it, then the command is pointless. You PROVED that you and I and all of our friends DON'T have to be baptized. Whew! The Liberal says: "Oh, but let me qualify that negation of God's command by saying that I affirm the importance of baptism." Very confusing! Good day. |
||||||
529 | Isn't Baptism neccessary for salvation?? | Rom 10:9 | disciplerami | 73180 | ||
Dear Tim, I disagree with a couple of things you said. You said, 'baptism is our response to salvation.' Peter says that Baptism saves through the resurrection of Christ. I agree that it is Christ atoning work that saves, but without the baptism you could not appropriate the grace. Noah was brought safely through water. The antitype of Noah's water is Christian baptism. In other words, the flood waters were a foreshadowing of water immersion. God provided the means of salvation, but man had to build the ark by faith. God has provided baptism as the means to achieving His salvation. I doubt that Noah walked out on dry ground and praised himself for the new life. But he still had to build the ark. Likewise, the person who is baptized doesn't pat himself on the back for being a good boy, his faith must rest solely in Christ. On the parenthetical phrase, you are right, it is there to correct misconceptions. But the verse is showing that in baptism, one is calling on God to save his soul. The power of God is working mightily in baptism. That why Paul says, "in which [baptism] you are raised by faith in the WORKING/energeias of God" (Col 2:12). This is what Ananias said to Paul. Paul was not saved on the road to Damascus, he couldn't have been for he was still in his sin. Ananias healed him and then said, "now why do you delay, arise and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, CALLING ON HIS NAME" (Acts 22:16). And Paul got baptized and the rest is history. Good day. |
||||||
530 | Isn't Baptism neccessary for salvation?? | Rom 10:9 | disciplerami | 73179 | ||
Thank you, You are right, but there is more. "For if we have been united with Him in the likeness of his death, certainly we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection." (Romans 6). John's baptism was 'for the forgiveness of sins.' New Testament baptism is too (Acts 2:38). A couple of verses later shows that when you receive the word, you get baptzed, and then are ADDED to the body of the saved, the church. |
||||||
531 | Isn't Baptism neccessary for salvation?? | Rom 10:9 | disciplerami | 73178 | ||
Oh Hank, what intellectual depths you will go to. Everyone is howling with laughter. We are all in indebted to you! I'm happy to see your real spirit revealed. Let me take you by the hand and lead you to the correct answer. First, it is your side that says, 'baptism isn't necessary for salvation because the thief on the cross wasn't baptized.' I simply asked, how do you know he wasn't baptized? I wasn't being sarcastic, I simply want to know how you people know so much about this man's life leading up to the cross? The disciples WERE baptizing, so his being baptized by them is not outside the realm of possibility. YOU CANNOT SAY WITH 100 percent CERTAINTY THAT THE THIEF WAS NOT BAPTIZED! Please answer my question, how do you KNOW the thief was not baptized? Also, Do you know what Jesus' and John's baptisms had in common? Good day. |
||||||
532 | Isn't Baptism neccessary for salvation?? | Rom 10:9 | disciplerami | 73177 | ||
Greetings, I disagree with you that the one that counts is not even wet. The only one we are commanded to receive is wet. The 'fire baptism' you mention has nothing to do with salvation, but fiery judgment. I don't think I'll be calling on God to give me 'fire baptism.' Baptism of the Holy Spirit and Fire Baptism are two different things. John goes on to say that 'fire' is for the trees that are cut down and thrown into the fire. The only one that Acts 2 mentions is Holy Spirit baptism, which was poured out on the Apostles [see the antecendent of Acts 2:1 to see that the Apostles alone received this, just as Christ promised them, see John 14-16]. As a minister, I can make disciples of all the nations and I can baptize them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. I cannot baptized them into Holy Spirit. Man has no control over that. The one that matters is in water and very wet. Good day. |
||||||
533 | Isn't Baptism neccessary for salvation?? | Rom 10:9 | disciplerami | 73174 | ||
Hello, You write: "I never used these terms in my post. Why do you attribute them to me? I fully believe that baptism does SOMETHING. I disagree that we are justified by baptism." I respond by saying that a person IS NOT justified by baptism [only faith in the blood can do that], but we are justified AT baptism. The God-given purpose is to unite you with Christ. Paul said we are sons of God THROUGH faith. He then goes to tell us when: "for all of you have been baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ." (Gal.3:26,27). Paul also connected baptism and faith in Colossians 2:12. Please, do not misunderstand me. My faith is not in works of the flesh, my faith is in God's free gift. Anyone who places his faith in water, or a baptizER, or any other word is misguided. You only have to be baptized once, if it is done right. Acts 19 shows when people need to be re-baptized. "For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body." This is correct. Titus and John show that the grace of God is first attained when baptized. A man must be born of water and Spirit (Jn 3:3,5). We are saved, not on the basis of deeds done in the flesh,...by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit." Outwardly, and in faith, we get in the water. Because of our faith, the Holy Spirit cleanes the soul with the blood of Christ. "By one Spirit we were all baptized" Joe, baptism is very important. It is important because God commanded it and assigned it a purpose. Think, why did the jailer get baptized the same night, after midnight? Why 3,000 in one day. The pattern suggest urgency. "Look, water, what prevents me from being baptized?" - the Eunuch. A person who is taught the Gospel, is taught baptism. Understanding the purpose of baptism, the person requests to be baptized. His faith is in God and it is seen in the act of faith. Also, I'm sorry to have assigned something to you that you didn't say. I was just offering general responses that people give for being baptized. If someone wants to be saved, why not say to them what Ananias said to Paul, "now why do you delay, arise and be baptized, washing away thy sins, calling on His name." Your debate with me is not over WHAT justifies: I believe fully that we are saved by grace through faith. Our debate has to do with the MOMENT that one is saved. Some say at the moment of belief, some say at confession, some say at repentance, some say at baptism. Now, if I said that baptism is the point in time at which a little newborn baby was saved, then you could charge me with believing in works salvation. A baby cannot have his own faith, and the 'baptism' [not really an immersion]is just a work of man. When there is no faith, there is no grace [This explains why the majority of people will be lost. The potential for salvation exist for them since Jesus died to taste death for ALL men, and because God desires ALL men be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth, but their faith is in the carnal world]. No, I believe in salvation by grace at the point one is baptized in faith. Good day. |
||||||
534 | Isn't Baptism neccessary for salvation?? | Rom 10:9 | disciplerami | 73087 | ||
Greetings, I have a question for you if you would take the time. Where does the Bible say that Baptism is a "symbolic act of faith?" Why do you say baptism is not necessary to be saved? Peter said that "Baptism now saves you", 1 Peter 3:21. How do you know the criminal wasn't baptized? The disciples of John and Jesus were baptizing many people. Do you know for sure that the thief was not baptized? And why do you say that baptism "is a very special time in a Christian's life? How do you know that Baptism is supposed to be special unless you know the purpose given it by God? I agree with you that we are saved by faith, but without the "fruits in keeping with repentance", the faith is a "dead faith." Good day. |
||||||
535 | church discipline | Matt 18:17 | disciplerami | 73086 | ||
You write: "No one came out of the situation without deep grief. My self included! There was no other way to resolve this, and it cost the church it's reputation, and growth was stopped for two years, friends were hurt and ministry was hampered. The man simply went 20 miles away to another SBC church and joined with no problems. As I look back some 22 years later the price the church paid was indeed very high emotionally and spiritually. The man never repented and died with sever mental illness. There were no winners," Although I don't know much about the situation you went through, I can say that if leaven is removed from the local church, the local church is better for it. The SBC that was 20 miles away accepted the leaven. For them to be so careless, they were probably already in spiritual trouble. The process is painful and it takes courage, but it is worth it if done right,in the right spirit. Good day. |
||||||
536 | church discipline | Matt 18:17 | disciplerami | 73011 | ||
"Matt 18:20 is about church discipline" Thanks for pointing this out. I've had people take this out of context making it a justification for skipping worship for a fishing outing. Good day. |
||||||
537 | church discipline | Matt 18:17 | disciplerami | 73010 | ||
Jesus says, 'tell it to the church.' There isn't much wiggle room there. Do you tell the church that the man/woman is in a sin [which shall go unnamed] and will not repent of it, or do you tell the church the exact sin being committed? The latter sounds extreme, but the exact sin may already be known. The sin will have to be told to someone, the 'two or three witnesses?' How else will the sinning brother 'listen to the church' that doesn't know about his sin? If the church doesn't know the man's sin, how would the church know if or when the sinning brother had repented? Maybe a few people know about the specific sin and the rest know that the brother is unrepentent of some unnamed sin. The upshot is that some people are going to know of the specific sin. "The persons reputation" is not harmed by the church, it is he who soiled his own reputation. It is up to him now to be humble, confess and repent. The church will welcome him back in open arms. "Wherefore I urge you to reaffirm your love for him" (2 Cor. 2:8). Paul publicly rebuked Peter in Galatians 2. He didn't hurt Peter's reputation, Peter hurt his own and 'stood condemend' unless he repented (which he obviously did). Paul didn't mind mentioning Hymenaeus and Alexander when they went astray, shipwrecking their faith (1 Timothy 1:19,20). Sometimes, confrontation can't be avoided. But it must be done with the right spirit (this is the hardest part for me). :) Good day. |
||||||
538 | "Hand this man over to Satan" | Matt 18:17 | disciplerami | 73008 | ||
Greetings, The Apostle Paul is speaking of church discipline. He goes on to them to have nothing to do with this man or any 'so-called brother.' The second epistle to the Corinthians indicates that the church did disfellowsip the man [who had his father's wife] which caused the man to repent. "Sufficient for such a one is this punishment which was inflicted by the majority" (2 Cor. 2:6). Other passages that speak of the same thing: Matthew 18:15-18; 1 Timothy 1:19,20. My Bible's footnote says on this verse: "Paul had excluded these two men from the church, which was considered a sanctuary from Satan's power. Out in the world, away from the fellowship and care of the church, they would be 'taught' [the word means basically 'to discipline'] not to blaspheme." Titus says, "reject a factious man after a first and second warning, knowing that such a man is perverted and is sinning, being self-condemned" (3:10,11) Peter said to Simon who had just become a Christian, "you have no part or portion in this matter, for your heart is not right before God. Therefore repent of this wickedness of yours, and pray the Lord that, if possible, the intention of your heart may be forgiven you" (Acts 8:21,22). Good day. |
||||||
539 | Isn't Baptism neccessary for salvation?? | Rom 10:9 | disciplerami | 72972 | ||
You write: "In reference to Paul’s statement in 1 Cor. 1, you quote, "He baptized some, and would have baptized more, but that his and the apostles' peculiar work was to preach the Gospel..." Taleb, this statement was a quote from JFB, the commentary. Paul's statement does not diminish baptism. It wasn't necessary for the one preaching Christ to be the same individual who went down into the water. If it does, then it diminishes the serving of tables and makes such works unnecessary. Because the Apostles would not serve tables in Acts 6 didn't mean the work wasn't necessary (see Acts 6). Paul often had disciples with him, so it would not be strange for them to do the baptizing. You write: "Interesting theology, but we had better stick with what God says" There is no contradiction in what I said. It is an 'all or nothing package', but that doesn't require that Paul be the individual going down into the water. I'm very certain that Paul taught everyone the Gospel, and that included getting baptized. If he was not the person who baptized them, others could do it. I think you missed the point. Good day. |
||||||
540 | Isn't Baptism neccessary for salvation?? | Rom 10:9 | disciplerami | 72970 | ||
Greetings, It would be entirely wrong to conclude that the Corinthians weren't baptized because of Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 1. Because they were baptized by somebody. Paul didn't mind teaching them and having someone else baptize them if that would help them understand 'it's not WHO baptizes that matters.' What matters is Christ, being baptized into Christ. The point of this chapter is unity and Paul was glad that more could not glory is being baptized by him. That doesn't diminish the necessity and purpose of baptism. You write: "Is it the 'ultimate step in being justified." I wouldn't say so. It is just the starting place. The repentant life, walking in the light, is extremely important. But every journey starts with a first step: the washed and sanctified life starts in baptism. Why were you baptized, just curious? This is an important question because no where does it say 'baptism is an outward sign of an inward grace that has already occured'. Nowhere does it say that baptism is intended to be a public testimony that you are a Christian. Those 'purposes' have been invented by men. Peter gives the reason in Acts 2:38. God bless. |
||||||
Result pages: << First < Prev [ 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 ] Next > Last [29] >> |