RE: Are you saved but not baptized?

RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Salvation Issues

Message

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/15/2008 7:47:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kelman To take the action, or make the decision, to be water baptized is generally in response to faith. And, if one has faith, he is already spiritually baptized/born from above/regenerated. I agree that the decision to be baptized is in response to faith. In fact I believe it has to be or the person is just getting wet. However, I see nowhere in Scripture that says that we are spiritually baptized/born from above/regenerated on the basis of faith alone. quote: Jesus was baptized with the Holy Spirit and fire(Luke 3:16). The fire, that is, the burnt offering Jesus was to become as He endured the wrath of God on our behalf, would provide the cleansing. The Holy Spirit applies the cleansing to those who would be saved. I completely agree. quote: We see what "washes" us in Rev 1:5 "washed us from our sins in his own blood." and again in 1John 1:7 "the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." This is the "only" cleansing and it is appropriated for us when we are spiritually baptized/born from above/regenerated. Again, I completely agree. quote: I don't see anything in Scripture that would lead to the understanding that this spiritual cleansing takes place when "we" take an action. Likewise, I don't see anything in Scripture that would lead to the understanding that spiritual cleansing takes place when we make a decision to have faith.

kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/16/2008 2:21:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman Where do we find anything indicating people believed water baptism was simply for the purpose of taking a bath? Perhaps you could support that idea with something from Scripture? We don't find anything indicating people believed water baptism was simply for the purpose of taking a bath. That's the whole point!! If that is the "whole point" why did you say, and I quote: "His point is precisely that water baptism is never intended to simply clean the body."? Peter wouldn't seek to clarify an issue where there wasn't one. quote: The water does nothing to us physically except make us wet. It's God's spiritual cleansing during water baptism that saves us. Since we have scriptural evidence that people are spiritually cleansed and regenerated prior to water baptism, your premise appears to lack validity.

kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/16/2008 2:24:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman To take the action, or make the decision, to be water baptized is generally in response to faith. And, if one has faith, he is already spiritually baptized/born from above/regenerated. I agree that the decision to be baptized is in response to faith. In fact I believe it has to be or the person is just getting wet. However, I see nowhere in Scripture that says that we are spiritually baptized/born from above/regenerated on the basis of faith alone. I agree, no one is regenerated on the basis of faith. Regeneration is an action completely taken by God alone. A result of this regeneration is faith and repentance. When God does sovereignly quicken (regenerate) an individual, he will respond to the Gospel in repentance and faith and be saved (Eph. 2:1-10). And, if he has not already been water baptized, he will do so, in obedience to God. quote: quote: I don't see anything in Scripture that would lead to the understanding that this spiritual cleansing takes place when "we" take an action. Likewise, I don't see anything in Scripture that would lead to the understanding that spiritual cleansing takes place when we make a decision to have faith. Oops...and here all along I thought we were discussing becoming "spiritually" baptized when the action of water baptism was taken. Seems a reasonable enough assumption, though, since I've never said having faith leads to spiritual baptism.

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/16/2008 8:58:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kelman If that is the "whole point" why did you say, and I quote: "His point is precisely that water baptism is never intended to simply clean the body."? Peter wouldn't seek to clarify an issue where there wasn't one. I'm not so sure that Peter is trying to "clarify an issue" as much as he is telling his readers that in the same way that Noah and his family were saved though water, so, in baptism we are saved through water. I believe what he's saying is that its not the physical act of baptism (i.e., the removal of dirt from the body) that saves, but what happens during baptism (i.e., an appeal to God for a good conscience) that saves.

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/16/2008 9:03:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kelman Since we have scriptural evidence that people are spiritually cleansed and regenerated prior to water baptism, your premise appears to lack validity. I don't know of any people subsequent to Pentecost that the Scripture says were spiritually cleansed and regenerated prior to water baptism. Therefore, I believe I have a valid premise.

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/16/2008 9:06:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kelman Oops...and here all along I thought we were discussing becoming "spiritually" baptized when the action of water baptism was taken. Seems a reasonable enough assumption, though, since I've never said having faith leads to spiritual baptism. My bad. I assumed that if you didn't believe salvation took place at baptism then you believed it took place at the decision to have faith. Just goes to show you that it's never a good practice to make assumptions. [:)]

kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/18/2008 2:22:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman If that is the "whole point" why did you say, and I quote: "His point is precisely that water baptism is never intended to simply clean the body."? Peter wouldn't seek to clarify an issue where there wasn't one. I'm not so sure that Peter is trying to "clarify an issue" as much as he is telling his readers that in the same way that Noah and his family were saved though water, so, in baptism we are saved through water. I believe what he's saying is that its not the physical act of baptism (i.e., the removal of dirt from the body) that saves, but what happens during baptism (i.e., an appeal to God for a good conscience) that saves. The very reason we get water baptized is because it typifies spiritual baptism or regeneration. And, there is nothing to suggest this happens at the time of water baptism.

kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/18/2008 2:23:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman Since we have scriptural evidence that people are spiritually cleansed and regenerated prior to water baptism, your premise appears to lack validity. I don't know of any people subsequent to Pentecost that the Scripture says were spiritually cleansed and regenerated prior to water baptism. Therefore, I believe I have a valid premise. Cornelius, for one.

kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/18/2008 2:27:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman Oops...and here all along I thought we were discussing becoming "spiritually" baptized when the action of water baptism was taken. Seems a reasonable enough assumption, though, since I've never said having faith leads to spiritual baptism. My bad. I assumed that if you didn't believe salvation took place at baptism then you believed it took place at the decision to have faith. Just goes to show you that it's never a good practice to make assumptions. [:)] No problem. It's something I keep learning...again and again and... :)

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/18/2008 8:08:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kelman The very reason we get water baptized is because it typifies spiritual baptism or regeneration. And, there is nothing to suggest this happens at the time of water baptism. You know, I used to believe that too, but verses like Matthew 28:19-20, Acts 2:38-39, Romans 6:3-4, 1Corinthians 12:13, and yes even 1 Peter 3:21 bugged me. I couldn't get adequate explanations of those verses from my "faith only" teachers and that's why I believe what I believe now.

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/18/2008 8:11:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kelman quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman Since we have scriptural evidence that people are spiritually cleansed and regenerated prior to water baptism, your premise appears to lack validity. I don't know of any people subsequent to Pentecost that the Scripture says were spiritually cleansed and regenerated prior to water baptism. Therefore, I believe I have a valid premise. Cornelius, for one. Well, I guess if you equate "the Holy Spirit fell on" with being spiritually cleansed and regenerated, you have a point. However, I don't believe that "the Holy Spirit fell on" is equal to spiritual cleansing and regeneration.

FreeGrace -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/18/2008 12:21:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman Since we have scriptural evidence that people are spiritually cleansed and regenerated prior to water baptism, your premise appears to lack validity. I don't know of any people subsequent to Pentecost that the Scripture says were spiritually cleansed and regenerated prior to water baptism. Therefore, I believe I have a valid premise. Cornelius, for one. Well, I guess if you equate "the Holy Spirit fell on" with being spiritually cleansed and regenerated, you have a point. However, I don't believe that "the Holy Spirit fell on" is equal to spiritual cleansing and regeneration. Why not?

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/18/2008 10:40:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FreeGrace quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman Since we have scriptural evidence that people are spiritually cleansed and regenerated prior to water baptism, your premise appears to lack validity. I don't know of any people subsequent to Pentecost that the Scripture says were spiritually cleansed and regenerated prior to water baptism. Therefore, I believe I have a valid premise. Cornelius, for one. Well, I guess if you equate "the Holy Spirit fell on" with being spiritually cleansed and regenerated, you have a point. However, I don't believe that "the Holy Spirit fell on" is equal to spiritual cleansing and regeneration. Why not? Because there are examples of the Holy Spirit falling on people who were not spiritually cleansed nor regenerated. King Saul, for example. I think spiritual cleansing and regeneration take place with the Holy Spirit permanently enters into a person, not when he "falls on" or is "poured out" on someone.

kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/19/2008 4:48:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman The very reason we get water baptized is because it typifies spiritual baptism or regeneration. And, there is nothing to suggest this happens at the time of water baptism. You know, I used to believe that too, but verses like Matthew 28:19-20, Acts 2:38-39, Romans 6:3-4, 1Corinthians 12:13, and yes even 1 Peter 3:21 bugged me. I couldn't get adequate explanations of those verses from my "faith only" teachers and that's why I believe what I believe now. Perhaps the problem is an "either or" situation....salvation by "my" act of water baptism or salvation by "my" act of faith. Who knows maybe I'd think differently if I thought that "my" faith saved me.

kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/19/2008 4:50:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman Since we have scriptural evidence that people are spiritually cleansed and regenerated prior to water baptism, your premise appears to lack validity. I don't know of any people subsequent to Pentecost that the Scripture says were spiritually cleansed and regenerated prior to water baptism. Therefore, I believe I have a valid premise. Cornelius, for one. Well, I guess if you equate "the Holy Spirit fell on" with being spiritually cleansed and regenerated, you have a point. However, I don't believe that "the Holy Spirit fell on" is equal to spiritual cleansing and regeneration. The point about "the Holy Spirit fell on" or being "poured out" in Acts 10 is that it is synonymous with becoming saved. Additional proof of this is in Acts 11:17 where Peter says: "Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?" In the case of Cornelius, it appears his speaking in tongues was the evidence of being saved. The Apostles, et al, obviously were already saved at Pentecost when they were "filled with the Holy Spirit" and the same phenomena occurred. This was the beginning of God "pouring out" the Holy Spirit on all His servants as Peter refers to the prophecy of Joel in Acts 2. When the Bible speaks of being "filled with the Holy Spirit", it is expressing that the one being "filled" is about to prophesy or in the case of John the Baptist will prophesy. We see this is in: Luke 1:15; 1:41; 1:67; Acts 2:4; 4:8; 4:31; 13:9. And, of course, since Pentecost all believers are "filled with the Holy Spirit" and qualified to "prophesy" - to declare the Word of God. I really don't see it in the realm of possibility to suggest that the "pouring out" of the Holy Spirit is not synonymous with salvation.

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/19/2008 7:54:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kelman The point about "the Holy Spirit fell on" or being "poured out" in Acts 10 is that it is synonymous with becoming saved. Additional proof of this is in Acts 11:17 where Peter says: "Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?" I see Acts 11:17 in much the same way as I view Acts 10. I don't think "the Holy Spirit fell on" or being "poured out on" in Acts 10 as synonymous with becoming saved nor do I see "who believed on" in Acts 11:17 as synonymous with becoming saved either.

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/19/2008 8:02:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kelman In the case of Cornelius, it appears his speaking in tongues was the evidence of being saved. The Apostles, et al, obviously were already saved at Pentecost when they were "filled with the Holy Spirit" and the same phenomena occurred. This was the beginning of God "pouring out" the Holy Spirit on all His servants as Peter refers to the prophecy of Joel in Acts 2. If Cornelius' speaking tongues was the evidence of his being saved then why did Peter command that he baptized in water? I mean, if water baptism is supposed to be evidence of salvation, was his speaking in tongues, then, not enough evidence, or what? I maintain that Cornelius' speaking in tongues was evidence to the Jews present that God intended for Gentiles to be a part of the church and nothing more. If it were evidence of Cornelius' salvation, then baptism in water, as the evidence of salvation, would have been totally irrelevant and unnecessary.

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/19/2008 8:29:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kelman When the Bible speaks of being "filled with the Holy Spirit", it is expressing that the one being "filled" is about to prophesy or in the case of John the Baptist will prophesy. We see this is in: Luke 1:15; 1:41; 1:67; Acts 2:4; 4:8; 4:31; 13:9. And, of course, since Pentecost all believers are "filled with the Holy Spirit" and qualified to "prophesy" - to declare the Word of God. I think the phrase "filled with the Holy Spirit" is indicative of the Holy Spirit filling someone for a special purpose (i.e., to prophesy, as you said). However, I don't think that's when spiritual cleansing and regeneration took place in the lives of the people in the verses you cited. Otherwise, how do you explain Acts 2:4 "And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and begain to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance." and Acts 4:8 "And Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, 'Rulers of the people and elders." Surely Peter was among those in Acts 2:4 who were filled with the Holy Spirit. Why was it necessary that he be filled with the Holy Spirit again in Acts 4:8? And wasn't Peter also one of those filled with the Holy Spirit in Acts 4:31? That's at least three instances when Peter was filled with the Holy Spirit. Apparently being filled with the Holy Spirit is not synonymous with spiritual cleansing and regeneration. As for Acts 13:9, "But Saul, who was also called Paul, filled with the Holy Spirit, looked intently at him., does that mean the prior to this incident Paul was not filled with the Holy Spirit? Based on the experiences of Peter and Paul, in the cases you cited, I think the filling of the Holy Spirit is for a specific purpose and not intended to be thought of as bringing about spiritual cleansing and regeneration.

FreeGrace -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/19/2008 1:39:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: FreeGrace quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman Since we have scriptural evidence that people are spiritually cleansed and regenerated prior to water baptism, your premise appears to lack validity. I don't know of any people subsequent to Pentecost that the Scripture says were spiritually cleansed and regenerated prior to water baptism. Therefore, I believe I have a valid premise. Cornelius, for one. Well, I guess if you equate "the Holy Spirit fell on" with being spiritually cleansed and regenerated, you have a point. However, I don't believe that "the Holy Spirit fell on" is equal to spiritual cleansing and regeneration. Why not? Because there are examples of the Holy Spirit falling on people who were not spiritually cleansed nor regenerated. King Saul, for example. Well, I disagree. The Bible tells us that "he was changed into another man", a very clear description of regeneration. He was saved. quote: I think spiritual cleansing and regeneration take place with the Holy Spirit permanently enters into a person, not when he "falls on" or is "poured out" on someone. There was no "universal" indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the OT. Recall that David prayed that God would not take the Holy Spirit from him. That is not a valid prayer for the NT.

FreeGrace -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/19/2008 1:43:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman In the case of Cornelius, it appears his speaking in tongues was the evidence of being saved. The Apostles, et al, obviously were already saved at Pentecost when they were "filled with the Holy Spirit" and the same phenomena occurred. This was the beginning of God "pouring out" the Holy Spirit on all His servants as Peter refers to the prophecy of Joel in Acts 2. If Cornelius' speaking tongues was the evidence of his being saved then why did Peter command that he baptized in water? I mean, if water baptism is supposed to be evidence of salvation, was his speaking in tongues, then, not enough evidence, or what? I maintain that Cornelius' speaking in tongues was evidence to the Jews present that God intended for Gentiles to be a part of the church and nothing more. If it were evidence of Cornelius' salvation, then baptism in water, as the evidence of salvation, would have been totally irrelevant and unnecessary. Maybe I missed something a while back, but whatever do you mean by water baptism being an "evidence of salvation"? I don't think it is any more an evidence than taking communion is. The evidence of our salvation is the fruit produced by the Holy Spirit through us. Water baptism is an illustration of our salvation, not an evidence of it.

SureHope -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/19/2008 2:39:48 PM)
FG, quote: Water baptism is an illustration of our salvation, not an evidence of it. I agree with you here. Water baptism is in obedience to Christ Jesus the Lord. On the other hand, anyone (believers and unbelievers) can be baptized in water, thus showing that water baptism is no evidence of saving grace.

kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/19/2008 5:53:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman The point about "the Holy Spirit fell on" or being "poured out" in Acts 10 is that it is synonymous with becoming saved. Additional proof of this is in Acts 11:17 where Peter says: "Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?" I see Acts 11:17 in much the same way as I view Acts 10. I don't think "the Holy Spirit fell on" or being "poured out on" in Acts 10 as synonymous with becoming saved nor do I see "who believed on" in Acts 11:17 as synonymous with becoming saved either. Are you suggesting those who believe are not saved? This would include Peter in these verses. Can you cite one source who agrees that "those who believe on" are not saved? I must admit I've never heard such a theological statement as this before. "the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ" -Acts 11:17

kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/19/2008 5:56:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman In the case of Cornelius, it appears his speaking in tongues was the evidence of being saved. The Apostles, et al, obviously were already saved at Pentecost when they were "filled with the Holy Spirit" and the same phenomena occurred. This was the beginning of God "pouring out" the Holy Spirit on all His servants as Peter refers to the prophecy of Joel in Acts 2. If Cornelius' speaking tongues was the evidence of his being saved then why did Peter command that he baptized in water? Because that is what a believer is commanded to do. quote: I mean, if water baptism is supposed to be evidence of salvation, was his speaking in tongues, then, not enough evidence, or what? I never said water baptism is an evidence of salvation, it certainly is not. Peter is saying in Acts 10 and 11 that insofar as Cornelius is giving evidence of salvation he could not forbid him water baptism. IOW, this is the proof that water baptism should follow salvation/faith in an adult. quote: I maintain that Cornelius' speaking in tongues was evidence to the Jews present that God intended for Gentiles to be a part of the church and nothing more. Yet, Peter says something different in not one but two chapters of the Bible. Peter says Cornelius believed as we do. The only justification for saying this is not referring to salvation is if you don't think Peter is saved at this point in his life. Do you? quote: If it were evidence of Cornelius' salvation, then baptism in water, as the evidence of salvation, would have been totally irrelevant and unnecessary. Again, water baptism is never the evidence of salvation. Nor, is it "totally irrelevant and unnecessary" because it is a sign which God commands to be put upon believers. Very similar to the command to circumcise in the OT. Circumcision was the sign that the male was of the household of God - Ancient Israel.

kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/19/2008 6:10:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman When the Bible speaks of being "filled with the Holy Spirit", it is expressing that the one being "filled" is about to prophesy or in the case of John the Baptist will prophesy. We see this is in: Luke 1:15; 1:41; 1:67; Acts 2:4; 4:8; 4:31; 13:9. And, of course, since Pentecost all believers are "filled with the Holy Spirit" and qualified to "prophesy" - to declare the Word of God. I think the phrase "filled with the Holy Spirit" is indicative of the Holy Spirit filling someone for a special purpose (i.e., to prophesy, as you said). However, I don't think that's when spiritual cleansing and regeneration took place in the lives of the people in the verses you cited. I agree, it doesn't mean these people were regenerated at this precise time. But, it does mean these people were regenerated before they were "filled with the Holy Spirit". Although, I haven't done so, I think we could go through each passage and its context to see this. And after Pentecost, all who believe are qualified to bring the Word of God, to be witnesses to the Gospel, as declared by Peter in Acts 2. quote: Otherwise, how do you explain Acts 2:4 "And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and begain to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance." and Acts 4:8 "And Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, 'Rulers of the people and elders." Surely Peter was among those in Acts 2:4 who were filled with the Holy Spirit. Exactly. This is where Peter stood up and preached the Word and prophesied - the meaning of the phrase "filled with the Holy Spirit". Starting at Pentecost, the extent of God's salvation plan was greatly multiplied. Now, all who believe are qualified. quote: Why was it necessary that he be filled with the Holy Spirit again in Acts 4:8? It doesn't say Peter was filled "again". It simply says he "was" filled with the Holy Spirit "Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost," quote: And wasn't Peter also one of those filled with the Holy Spirit in Acts 4:31? That's at least three instances when Peter was filled with the Holy Spirit. Apparently being filled with the Holy Spirit is not synonymous with spiritual cleansing and regeneration. Actually, it is; unless, you don't think that believers are saved. Do you? Acts 10 and 11 say they "believed" which is the evidence of salvation. And again, in Acts 4:31, it says those who were "all filled with the Holy Spirit and they spake the word of God with boldness" were the believers of Acts 4:32 *"And the multitude of them that believed* were of one heart and of one soul:..."** quote: Based on the experiences of Peter and Paul, in the cases you cited, I think the filling of the Holy Spirit is for a specific purpose and not intended to be thought of as bringing about spiritual cleansing and regeneration. I agree. Yet, it is an indication those who are "filled" have already been saved or baptized in the Holy Spirit.

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/19/2008 10:14:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FreeGrace There was no "universal" indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the OT. Recall that David prayed that God would not take the Holy Spirit from him. That is not a valid prayer for the NT. This is quite correct!! [:)]

Page: << < prev 18 19 [20] 21 22 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI