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? (5/19/2008 10:16:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FreeGrace Well, I disagree. The Bible tells us that "he was changed into another man", a very clear description of regeneration. He was saved. I just reread the story of Cornelius in Acts 10 & 11 and I didn't see the phrase "he was changed into another man." Would you mind telling me where the Bible tells us that? Thanks! [:)]

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/19/2008 10:20:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FreeGrace 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. It's not that I believe that baptism is an evidence of salvation, but when I was sitting under "faith only" teachers they drummed into me that baptism was "and outward evidence of an inward change." That's where I got that from. [:)] Personally, I don't think it's an evidence of salvation, either. [:)]

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/19/2008 10:25:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kelman 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. No, I'm not suggesting that those who believe are not saved. What I am suggesting, however, is the belief alone does not cause spiritual cleansing and regeneration. Certainly belief is required and people who believe are certainly saved, but not people who only believe and nothing else.

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/19/2008 10:29:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kelman I agree. Yet, it is an indication those who are "filled" have already been saved or baptized in the Holy Spirit. If that's true, then I don't see why they had to be filled again. Aren't people filled with the Holy Spirit when they are saved? Why, then, was it necessary for Peter and Paul to be refilled with the Holy Spirit, in Peter's case, more than once?

JesKlu -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/20/2008 12:31:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kelman 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. Hello Kelman! I am going to have to disagree with you. What about all those incidents in scripture where whole households were baptized. Oh, and not only that, Cornelius's household was one of the households that was baptized! It wasn't just Cornelius who was baptized, but his whole household. Acts 10:1-2, 44-48 1At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion of what was known as the Italian Cohort, 2a devout man who feared God with all his household, gave alms generously to the people, and prayed continually to God. 44While Peter was still saying these things, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word. 45And the believers from among the circumcised who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out even on the Gentiles. 46For they were hearing them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter declared, 47 "Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" 48And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days. (ESV) All of Cornelius's household was baptized, and that would include young children. Your sister in Christ Jesus, Jessica

kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/20/2008 4:18:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman 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. No, I'm not suggesting that those who believe are not saved. What I am suggesting, however, is the belief alone does not cause spiritual cleansing and regeneration. Certainly belief is required and people who believe are certainly saved, but not people who only believe and nothing else. Peter was quite insistent that Cornelius believed(Acts 10; 11), therefore, he was saved before he was water baptized.

kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/20/2008 4:35:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman I agree. Yet, it is an indication those who are "filled" have already been saved or baptized in the Holy Spirit. If that's true, then I don't see why they had to be filled again. Aren't people filled with the Holy Spirit when they are saved? Why, then, was it necessary for Peter and Paul to be refilled with the Holy Spirit, in Peter's case, more than once? If you read all the place "filled with the Holy Spirit" are used, you will see it was for the purpose of prophesying or preaching the Gospel. And, Scripture doesn't indicate Peter was "refilled" simply that he was "filled". Before Pentecost, very few believers were called prophets only Abraham, Noah, David, Jeremiah, etc. Prophets were mandated to prophesy the Word given them by God. Because it was not God's plan to evangelize the world until Pentecost the average believer was not mandated to be a prophet. At Pentecost, every believer received the mandate to be a prophet. We see this as Peter spoke in Acts 2:17-18. Actually, we don't even see the Apostles being "filled with the Spirit" prior to Pentecost. They, and the others, were "officially" assigned the task of bringing the Gospel when on that day in Acts 2:4 "they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak..."

kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/20/2008 4:38:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JesKlu quote: ORIGINAL: kelman 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. Hello Kelman! I am going to have to disagree with you. What about all those incidents in scripture where whole households were baptized. Oh, and not only that, Cornelius's household was one of the households that was baptized! It wasn't just Cornelius who was baptized, but his whole household. Hi, Jessica. Actually, I'm glad we're not going to disagree, at least on this one :) I absolutely agree with you. There is no reason to think that children were not baptized. As you said whole households were. I bolded and underscored what you quoted from me. I said that because Cornelius gave evidence of being saved before he was water baptized, it is proof that water baptism follows salvation in an adult. We see water baptism of adults in the NT because obviously unless the parents are believers they wouldn't baptize their children. The Gospel was just beginning to spread and it needed to be preached to adults. In an adult, water baptism is the sign that points to the washing away of the sins of the one who became saved - just as it did with Cornelius. He became saved and then he was water baptized. Or, in the case of water baptizing chldren, and even some adults, it points to the hope that some time in the future of that individual they may become saved. This is why many churches baptize children.

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/20/2008 8:19:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kelman Peter was quite insistent that Cornelius believed(Acts 10; 11), therefore, he was saved before he was water baptized. Ok. So, I guess he was saved before he spoke in tongues too, which makes me wonder why Peter even came to him at all, since he already believed (cf. Acts 10:2) and apparently that is what saved him.

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/20/2008 8:25:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kelman If you read all the place "filled with the Holy Spirit" are used, you will see it was for the purpose of prophesying or preaching the Gospel. And, Scripture doesn't indicate Peter was "refilled" simply that he was "filled". Come now!! How can you be "filled" if you're already "full"? In order for Peter and Paul to be filled with the Spirit on more that one occasion wouldn't they have to be emptied out in between those occasions? quote: Actually, we don't even see the Apostles being "filled with the Spirit" prior to Pentecost. They, and the others, were "officially" assigned the task of bringing the Gospel when on that day in Acts 2:4 "they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak..." Are you saying that being "filled with the Spirit" is different than "receiving the Spirit." Because it appears that the Apostles "received the Spirit" directly from Jesus prior to Pentecost (cf. John 20:23).

FreeGrace -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/20/2008 8:57:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: FreeGrace Well, I disagree. The Bible tells us that "he was changed into another man", a very clear description of regeneration. He was saved. I just reread the story of Cornelius in Acts 10 & 11 and I didn't see the phrase "he was changed into another man." Would you mind telling me where the Bible tells us that? Thanks! [:)] My pleasure, gd! 1 Sam 10:13.

FreeGrace -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/20/2008 9:00:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman Peter was quite insistent that Cornelius believed(Acts 10; 11), therefore, he was saved before he was water baptized. Ok. So, I guess he was saved before he spoke in tongues too, which makes me wonder why Peter even came to him at all, since he already believed (cf. Acts 10:2) and apparently that is what saved him. Cornelius didn't believe until Peter came and preached the Word. Acts 11:14 is Peter's recounting of what Cornelius told him when he arrived. It is clear he was NOT saved until Peter preached the Word.

Odeliya -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/20/2008 9:27:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 How can you be "filled" if you're already "full"? never enough of a good thing :)) you havent visited a fraternity house in a while , GD! boys get so full they cant speak or move, then somone brings in another pizza.. watch out everybody grabbing a slice .. [:D] I was quite confident i understood your position but in the light of the latest debate of yours, gents, would you mind kindly helping with the following: If you agree that water baptism doesnt mean one is saved yet, basically what i am sayng - every weekend there are tons of people getting baptised, some coming out of the water just wet and just as sinners, and unjustified, as they were when they were dry. Look at them right before dunking - they look the same, they profess the same. What does a saved baptised by water person has that wet sinner doesnt ?What makes a difference ?

Odeliya -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/20/2008 9:30:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman 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. No, I'm not suggesting that those who believe are not saved. What I am suggesting, however, is the belief alone does not cause spiritual cleansing and regeneration. Certainly belief is required and people who believe are certainly saved, but not people who only believe and nothing else. You do agree though that people that dont get water baptism for, lets say they had not time, there were no water, etc. - are not obtaining "substandard" salvation? God gives them the same cleansing and regeneration as he gives the people who got baptised by water.

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/20/2008 11:27:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FreeGrace quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: FreeGrace Well, I disagree. The Bible tells us that "he was changed into another man", a very clear description of regeneration. He was saved. I just reread the story of Cornelius in Acts 10 & 11 and I didn't see the phrase "he was changed into another man." Would you mind telling me where the Bible tells us that? Thanks! [:)] My pleasure, gd! 1 Sam 10:13. When he had finished prophesying, he came to the high place (1 Sam 10:13). I've gotta admit you've really lost me on this one. I don't see anything at all here about Cornelius, much less that "he was changed into another man."

JesKlu -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/20/2008 11:28:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kelman Actually, I'm glad we're not going to disagree, at least on this one :) I absolutely agree with you. There is no reason to think that children were not baptized. As you said whole households were. I bolded and underscored what you quoted from me. I said that because Cornelius gave evidence of being saved before he was water baptized, it is proof that water baptism follows salvation in an adult. We see water baptism of adults in the NT because obviously unless the parents are believers they wouldn't baptize their children. The Gospel was just beginning to spread and it needed to be preached to adults. In an adult, water baptism is the sign that points to the washing away of the sins of the one who became saved - just as it did with Cornelius. He became saved and then he was water baptized. Or, in the case of water baptizing chldren, and even some adults, it points to the hope that some time in the future of that individual they may become saved. This is why many churches baptize children. Hello Kelman! Well, in this case I would have to be relieved. Not to point finger at anyone, but there are so many Pentecostals/Baptists who would not even LISTEN when I would say that whole households, in scripture, were baptized. I would get into bad disagreements with them over the baptism of children. I believe children can/should be baptized because, what I believe, is that the Holy Spirit indwells you at baptism, so faith is created in the child at baptism, and then it is the parents job to nurture that faith or that faith will die. And it is those parents, who do not raise their children in the faith, who will be held accountable before God. We see this happen a LOT in the Roman Catholic Churches I also hold to what Jesus said in the Gospels Mark 10:13-16 13 And they were bringing children to him that he might touch them, and the disciples rebuked them. 14But when Jesus saw it, he was indignant and said to them, "Let the children come to me; do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of God. 15 Truly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it." 16And he took them in his arms and blessed them, laying his hands on them.(ESV) If Jesus loves children so much that He has a special place in His Heart for them, why can't they be baptized? I would say that to so many people, and they would flat out refuse to baptize their children because of what their pastor teaches. I now give up, I don't even mention this topic to those kinds of Christians anymore. At least not for now. Well, at least you confess that children were baptized. There are people who will not confess that. Your sister in Christ Jesus, Jessica

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/20/2008 11:38:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FreeGrace Cornelius didn't believe until Peter came and preached the Word. Acts 11:14 is Peter's recounting of what Cornelius told him when he arrived. It is clear he was NOT saved until Peter preached the Word. I agree with you, FreeGrace, as far as Cornelius not being saved until Peter preached the Word, however, a devout man who feared God with all his household, gave alms generously to the people, and prayed continually to God (Acts 10:2) doesn't sound like an unbeliever to me.

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/20/2008 11:52:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Odeliya Look at them right before dunking - they look the same, they profess the same. What does a saved baptised by water person has that wet sinner doesnt ?What makes a difference ? I think what makes the difference is belief. A person who believes that Jesus is the Christ the Son of the Living God will come out of the baptistry a saved person. A person who comes out of the baptistry a wet, unsaved, sinner obviously didn't believe before going in. Just my thoughts on the matter. [:)]

FreeGrace -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/20/2008 3:43:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: FreeGrace quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: FreeGrace Well, I disagree. The Bible tells us that "he was changed into another man", a very clear description of regeneration. He was saved. I just reread the story of Cornelius in Acts 10 & 11 and I didn't see the phrase "he was changed into another man." Would you mind telling me where the Bible tells us that? Thanks! [:)] My pleasure, gd! 1 Sam 10:13. When he had finished prophesying, he came to the high place (1 Sam 10:13). I've gotta admit you've really lost me on this one. I don't see anything at all here about Cornelius, much less that "he was changed into another man." Oh, dear, was I not paying attention again? I thought you had a question about Saul not being saved. I believe 1 Sam 10:13 indicates that he was.

FreeGrace -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/20/2008 3:45:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: FreeGrace Cornelius didn't believe until Peter came and preached the Word. Acts 11:14 is Peter's recounting of what Cornelius told him when he arrived. It is clear he was NOT saved until Peter preached the Word. I agree with you, FreeGrace, as far as Cornelius not being saved until Peter preached the Word, however, a devout man who feared God with all his household, gave alms generously to the people, and prayed continually to God (Acts 10:2) doesn't sound like an unbeliever to me. Only believers are saved, gd. Cornelius wasn't saved until Peter preached. That's when he believed. What does Acts 10:43 say about being forgiven (saved) in the OT. "through faith in His Name".

greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/20/2008 5:48:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FreeGrace Only believers are saved, gd. Cornelius wasn't saved until Peter preached. That's when he believed. What does Acts 10:43 say about being forgiven (saved) in the OT. "through faith in His Name". I agree that only believers are saved. But I find it very difficult to believe that an unbeliever can be described as a devout man who feared God with all his household, gave alms generously to the people, and prayed continually to God (Acts 10:2).

kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/21/2008 3:37:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman Peter was quite insistent that Cornelius believed(Acts 10; 11), therefore, he was saved before he was water baptized. Ok. So, I guess he was saved before he spoke in tongues too, which makes me wonder why Peter even came to him at all, since he already believed (cf. Acts 10:2) and apparently that is what saved him. Cornelius wasn't saved in Acts 10:2, Scripture is very clear on this point. Being �devout� and charitable doesn�t translate into being saved. Paul, before Damascus, was quite a devout Pharisee and he was not saved. Peter was sent to him to hear the preaching of the Gospel which is necessary for salvation: vs 43 "To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins." Peter recounted the story again in Acts 11. It is here we are told that Cornelius was not saved until Peter preached to him: vs 13-14 "...and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter; 14 Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved."

kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/21/2008 3:46:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: greatdivide46 quote: ORIGINAL: kelman If you read all the place "filled with the Holy Spirit" are used, you will see it was for the purpose of prophesying or preaching the Gospel. And, Scripture doesn't indicate Peter was "refilled" simply that he was "filled". Come now!! How can you be "filled" if you're already "full"? In order for Peter and Paul to be filled with the Spirit on more that one occasion wouldn't they have to be emptied out in between those occasions? No, the words "filled with the Spirit" is simply indicating they are about to preach the Word of God. It's not saying they're being "refilled"...lol I�m not sure how God could make it any more clear what �filled with the Holy Spirit� actually means. Look at each and every usage of the phrase. I�ve already given the particular citations. In every passage we find the one who was filled was about to prophesy/preach the Word of God. quote: quote: Actually, we don't even see the Apostles being "filled with the Spirit" prior to Pentecost. They, and the others, were "officially" assigned the task of bringing the Gospel when on that day in Acts 2:4 "they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak..." Are you saying that being "filled with the Spirit" is different than "receiving the Spirit." Because it appears that the Apostles "received the Spirit" directly from Jesus prior to Pentecost (cf. John 20:23). Yes, that is exactly what I'm saying....prior to Pentecost.....that was the case. After Pentecost, all believers "receive the Spirit" are "filled with the Spirit" are "indwelled by the Spirit" at the point of salvation. And, because they are "filled with the Spirit" at the point of salvation, they are qualified and mandated by God to bring the Gospel to the world. Even in John 20:23 when Christ said to the ten Apostles �receive ye the Holy Ghost�, He commissioned them to be the beginning of the NT church. But God would not officially begin the NT church until Pentecost at which time the Apostles were �filled with the Holy Spirit�.

kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/21/2008 4:00:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Odeliya If you agree that water baptism doesnt mean one is saved yet, basically what i am sayng - every weekend there are tons of people getting baptised, some coming out of the water just wet and just as sinners, and unjustified, as they were when they were dry. Look at them right before dunking - they look the same, they profess the same. What does a saved baptised by water person has that wet sinner doesnt ?What makes a difference ? There is no difference, since water baptism can never save. It is the sign or shadow of the "substance" that does save - the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. Just as for Ancient Israel the physical act of circumcision availed them nothing. It, too, was simply the sign or shadow of salvation. It identified them with a believing home. God told them HE must circumcise their heart(Deut 30:6). The promises of both Covenants are identical. We read this in Gen 17:7 and in the NT in Acts 2:39. People are told - make your decision - only believe - only confess. And, if you do, you can be saved right now. Only problem is that God saves in His own good time as He teaches in John 3 - not when people decide it's time to become saved or water baptized.

kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (5/21/2008 4:06:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JesKlu Well, in this case I would have to be relieved. Not to point finger at anyone, but there are so many Pentecostals/Baptists who would not even LISTEN when I would say that whole households, in scripture, were baptized. I would get into bad disagreements with them over the baptism of children. It is because they hold to what is called "believer's baptism" and because we don't find a specific statement that children were baptized. They will maintain this even in the face of a number of passages which say that entire "households" were water baptized. People are sometimes so indoctrinated into their belief system they cannot see what Scripture clearly presents to the contrary. Oftentimes people are not interested in learning "all" that the Bible presents concerning a subject especially when it conflicts with what they hold dear. Instead, it's safer not to look any further than their favorite passages which seemingly support their position. This is applicable to many biblical doctrines not just water baptism. quote: I believe children can/should be baptized because, what I believe, is that the Holy Spirit indwells you at baptism, so faith is created in the child at baptism, and then it is the parents job to nurture that faith or that faith will die. I'm afraid here I must totally disagree with your belief as outlined. The Holy Spirit does not indwell the individual, whether an adult or a child, at water baptism. This is well proven in the case of Cornelius. There is no physical act we can perform that can ever give substance to our salvation. The whole action of salvation is entirely God's action and man cannot make any contribution to it. Water baptism can never remove even one sin nor can it instill faith. Faith and repentance is the evidence that the individual has been saved. While Scripture teaches that children, even those in the womb, can be saved, it is not by the work of water baptism. As John 3 teaches, the Holy Spirit goes where and when He pleases as He does the work of regeneration in the individual - making them "born from above". quote: And it is those parents, who do not raise their children in the faith, who will be held accountable before God. We see this happen a LOT in the Roman Catholic Churches Concerning their children believers are commanded to "but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord." And, if they are believers, they will.

Page: << < prev 19 20 [21] 22 23 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI