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

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Salvation Issues



Message

FreeGrace -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (3/31/2008 8:04:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
The word "baptism" is being used figuratively when referring to the Jews who were baptized into Moses. What happened to them was literal of course, but the use of the word "baptism" is figurative. The word "baptism" in its Greek form was around long before the baptism of the Holy Spirit ever occurred. It always meant immersing something in water.

To be complete, the purpose or reason for immersing something in water, was for dyeing something. The item was immersed in a dye (liquid) for the purpose of changing the item. Again, it points to identification.

quote:

And the fact that Jesus distinguished between John's baptism of water and the baptism of the Holy Spirit has nothing to do with whether there's water in Christian baptism or not.

You and I disagree on this.

quote:

What we experience as Christians when we are baptized in water is not John's baptism.

I agree. Never said otherwise. When we are baptized in water as a beliver, we are being identified with Christ in His death, burial and resurrection. That's all.



FreeGrace -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (3/31/2008 8:08:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

quote:

ORIGINAL: FreeGrace

For unbelievers to believe in Christ actually IS a change of mind, which is what repentance means. While John didn't use the word repentance, the concept is the same as believing. So your point is not taken about water baptism for eternal life. If water baptism was required, John failed.

You think John failed? Just because he didn't mentioned baptism doesn't mean that he didn't believe it.[/qutoe]
Of course I don't think John failed. But if you were correct, he did fail. To emphasize how to receive eternal life and to leave out something required means failure on his part. So, your pov logically means that John failed. Since baptism isn't required for salvation, he didn't fail at all. It is your view that considers him to have failed.

quote:

I think John was an eminent success in what he set out to do in writing his gospel. Obviously baptism didn't fit the purpose of why he wrote it.

That simply makes no sense. Your view is that baptism is a requirement for salvation, and John's purpose in writing his gospel was so that people would have eternal life. Yet, he NEVER mentioned that baptism was required. Your view simply doesn't work.

quote:

That doesn't mean that by leaving baptism out John was failing or trying to imply that baptism wasn't necessary. See, even though John didn't mention repentence, since there are those who believe it's necessary, they canspin it so that it's not important that John didn't mention it.

I've already addressed the issue repentance/believing. They are synonymous. He left baptism out because is is not required, plain and simple.

If it is required, he failed to mention it.



FreeGrace -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (3/31/2008 8:10:24 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ps103

quote:

I have the feeling that in our heavenly home, you 'Greatdivide46' and you 'FreeGrace' will be roommates!


Warn a body before you say something like that! [:D]

Yeah, like, will there be running water? [:D]



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (3/31/2008 11:43:10 PM)

No matter what you may think I think, I do not think that John failed in getting the gospel message of salvation across in his gospel. As I said, the fact that it didn't mention baptism says no more about baptism than the fact that he didn't mention repentance says anything about repentance. I know those who believe repentence is necessary for salvation can spin John's gospel in such a way as to make it appear that he was implying it or that the fact that he didn't mention it is insignificant. I'm sure John recognized the importance of repentance, and just because he didn't mention it does not deny that fact. And I believe exactly the same thing about baptism. John emphatically did not fail at what he set out to accomplish by writing his gospel.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (3/31/2008 11:47:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FreeGrace

To be complete, the purpose or reason for immersing something in water, was for dyeing something. The item was immersed in a dye (liquid) for the purpose of changing the item. Again, it points to identification.
What a perfect picture of what actually happens in baptism! We go into the waters of baptism the color of the world and come out dyed with the blood of Jesus Christ. A complete change. Thanks for that insight!! I'm sure I'll use that again somewhere [:)]



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (3/31/2008 11:54:51 PM)

Jesus did say that we would be baptized in the Holy Spirit and he contrasted that with John's baptism. So, the only difference between John's baptism in water for repentance and the forgiveness of sins, and Christian baptism, is the promise of the gift of the Holy Spirit. John's baptism didn't promise the gift of the Holy Spirit. Christian baptism does (see Acts 2:38).



kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/1/2008 2:28:40 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman

The verse means to bring the Gospel to all nations so that some of those who hear will be "baptized" - by the Holy Spirit - the only baptism that saves.
The problem with that assertion is that the verse can't possibly mean that. Jesus is telling is disciples to go make disciples and the first thing he tells them to do in order to make disciples is to baptize them. It has to mean baptism in water, because I have yet to see or read about a mortal man baptizing another mortal man in the Holy Spirit. It just doesn't happen.
In Mat 28:19, Christ tells them to "..go...teach...baptizing". In vs 20, Christ again tells them to teach "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you:"

How else does God save/baptize except by the use of "mortal man"?

And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! -Romans 10:15

That is how one comes to faith - through the Word of God - never by water. And when one does become saved - that is the Baptism of the Holy Spirit - the only baptism that can save. That is why it says there is only one baptism.

Water baptism is simply a sign the same as circumcision was. And just as physical circumcision did nothing to save, neither does water baptism do anything to save. This is the same mistake the Jews made; they too thought salvation was of the physical sign.

quote:

BTW, baptism in fire may be spiritual, but it is also physical, don't you think?
Not for any of us, I hope. Christ suffered baptism by fire on behalf of those He came to save. Believers never physically suffer this baptism - Christ did this in their place.

quote:

Is there anywhere in scripture that says that Christian baptism is spiritual as opposed to physical?
Sure, to begin with everywhere it speaks of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. This isn't "opposed" to water baptism, though, it is the only baptism a person must have to be saved.

In Col 2:11-12, we see the necessary circumcision is the one "made without hands", iow, not a physical circumcision. Then Paul goes on to speak of being "buried in baptism".

Buried signifies death not water which is perfectly compatible with the rest of the verse as it goes on to speak of Christ's resurrection from the dead. Again we have the spiritual baptism being referred to just as the circumcision "made without hands" is spiritual.



FreeGrace -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/1/2008 7:47:32 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

No matter what you may think I think, I do not think that John failed in getting the gospel message of salvation across in his gospel. As I said, the fact that it didn't mention baptism says no more about baptism than the fact that he didn't mention repentance says anything about repentance. I know those who believe repentence is necessary for salvation can spin John's gospel in such a way as to make it appear that he was implying it or that the fact that he didn't mention it is insignificant. I'm sure John recognized the importance of repentance, and just because he didn't mention it does not deny that fact. And I believe exactly the same thing about baptism. John emphatically did not fail at what he set out to accomplish by writing his gospel.

Let me be clear about John. I do not think he failed at all. But, I do believe that your view on water baptism being required for salvation means he failed, since he didn't mention it AND his sole purpose in writing was evangelistic.

Apparently your understanding of "repentance" is different than mine. The basic meaning is change of mind, which must happen when one comes to faith in Christ. They must change their thinking on what or whom they are relying on to get to heaven.

John didn't need to say the word "repent" since it is synonymous with believe. However, actually leaving out of the gospel any requirement for salvation is highly negligent, imho.

So, your view makes John a failure. Your argument about repentance simply doesn't "wash". Pardon the pun. [:)]



FreeGrace -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/1/2008 7:52:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

quote:

ORIGINAL: FreeGrace

To be complete, the purpose or reason for immersing something in water, was for dyeing something. The item was immersed in a dye (liquid) for the purpose of changing the item. Again, it points to identification.
What a perfect picture of what actually happens in baptism! We go into the waters of baptism the color of the world and come out dyed with the blood of Jesus Christ. A complete change. Thanks for that insight!! I'm sure I'll use that again somewhere [:)]

Your post reveals your error. We don't, as you think, go into the waters of baptism the color of the world, since the one going in has already believed and been saved. You really do think that your participation in baptism (willingness and actually going through it) results in your salvation. How sad, since salvation is wholly from God. He needs nothing of your participation.

What you are rejecting is that Jesus made very clear that eternal life is given to those who believe, period. That's the gospel truth.



FreeGrace -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/1/2008 8:00:38 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

Jesus did say that we would be baptized in the Holy Spirit and he contrasted that with John's baptism.

Yes, and the contrast was between "water" and the "Holy Spirit". iow, John baptized with water, but Jesus said He would baptize with the Holy Spirit. He was differentiating a wet baptism (John's) with His dry baptism, unless you consider the Holy Spirit to somehow be wet.

When Jesus said He would "baptize with the Holy Spirit", He was saying all believers would receive the Holy Spirit as Comforter and such indwelling would be an identification as His.

quote:

So, the only difference between John's baptism in water for repentance and the forgiveness of sins,

This is error. No one was forgiven by John's baptism. Where do you think that is taught? Check out Acts 10:43 for how everyone in the OT was forgiven.

quote:

John's baptism didn't promise the gift of the Holy Spirit. Christian baptism does (see Acts 2:38).

It's very dangerous to use a verse in the very early stages of the Church to form a doctrine. There is no support that water baptism is the mode of receiving the Holy Spirit. The apostles and disciples received the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost with no water in sight (none mentioned, at least).



Odeliya -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/1/2008 8:27:33 AM)

quote:

..If someone gets saved, minutes before death, then I'm sure that God will take them to heaven. But regardless of these exteme (hypothetical) circumstances, baptism is still required for salvation. While it may not be an absolute requirement like faith, it is, nevertheless a requirement under normal circumstances.

I would surely remove the word "Hypothetical" from your statement. There are multitudes of people that are getting saved without WB. If we talk to any Christian emergency worker, ER nurse,elderly facility or hospice doctor,a soldier, policeman, etc.. or Pastor with any experience - they all know many cases in which people get saved but never get a chance to get baptized.
Plus there are people that don’t believe in WB, as some here.

I see contradiction in your position, GD:
You do agree that without spiritual regeneration water baptism is just a bath.
You also agree that spiritual reg, ( thus salvation)does occur and happen without water .Then what else “salvific” is there left to get? What other role does the water has other then symbolic? you cant have it both ways ;)

quote:

We are saved in water baptism, because that is the baptism of the Holy Spirit.


I don’t dare to suggest that you think all the brethren here on the thread who don’t believe WB is needed can not be possibly saved just because they reject water baptism ?
It surely sounds that way, if you try to be consistent with your theory. Your efforts to be nice and polite are very commandable, so please, do clarify...



Odeliya -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/1/2008 8:49:26 AM)

quote:

There's no use trying to argue when you're outnumbered


You want some cheese with your whine, Bro dear?

Just for you, I checked the entire thread- this is the summary:
You are not outnumbered at all. I found only 3 posters – catholic, orthodox and greatdivide ( doctrinal affiliation is unknown to me ) that are trying to say that water baptism is something more then just a symbol , or work done in obedience.
But even they, if cornered, admit that salvation happens without water - so regardless what they say after that clearly makes a point that WB is not an absolute requirement for salvation.
and people are, and do get saved without water baptism.

Most opinions here vary in terms of how desirable and important WB is but nobody says that without WB one can’t get saved.


quote:

so-called brethren


Pot, kettle, black.
that “so-called” clearly implies that someone might not be saved just because they dislike another’s opinion . If you willing to question other’s salvation, don’t complain whne someone questions yours …But..( taking a long look in the mirror) nobody’s perfect.....



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/1/2008 12:05:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman

In Mat 28:19, Christ tells them to "..go...teach...baptizing". In vs 20, Christ again tells them to teach "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you:"
Yes, and don't you think it's significant that Jesus mentions baptism separately from teaching?

quote:

How else does God save/baptize except by the use of "mortal man"?
My point exactly. That's why the baptism that Jesus commanded His disciples to do had to be water baptism. Surely Jesus would not command His disciples to do something that was impossible for them to do, i.e., baptize someone in the Holy Spirit.

quote:

And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! -Romans 10:15
Amen, excellent verse! [:)]

quote:

That is how one comes to faith - through the Word of God - never by water. And when one does become saved - that is the Baptism of the Holy Spirit - the only baptism that can save. That is why it says there is only one baptism.
Certainly one comes to faith through the Word of God and never by water. My apologies if I have seemed to say that water baptism causes faith to occur. I most emphatically do not believe that. But I do believe that God has chosen the act of water baptism as the time that he sends His Holy Spirit to indwell us. Therefore, I agree with you that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is the only baptism that can save.

quote:

Water baptism is simply a sign the same as circumcision was. And just as physical circumcision did nothing to save, neither does water baptism do anything to save. This is the same mistake the Jews made; they too thought salvation was of the physical sign.
While I think that baptism is necessary for salvation, I do not believe that salvation is of baptism. Salvation is of God. It is what God does for us in baptism that saves, not the baptism itself.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/1/2008 12:21:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FreeGrace

Your post reveals your error. We don't, as you think, go into the waters of baptism the color of the world, since the one going in has already believed and been saved. You really do think that your participation in baptism (willingness and actually going through it) results in your salvation. How sad, since salvation is wholly from God. He needs nothing of your participation.
Certainly the one who wishes to be baptized would be a believer. But being a believer doesn't save you anymore than believing a piece of cloth is a different color actually makes it that color. You have to do something, i.e, dye it, to make it a different color. And the cloth's participation in that dying is the same as our participation in baptism. The cloth certainly did no work in getting to be a different color. So, no, it's not my participation in baptism that results in my salvation. It's what God does in baptism that results in salvation, not the baptism itself. I quite agree with you that salvation is wholly from God. And it may be that He doesn't need our participation, but I believe that He desires it. Besides I'm still not convinced that even our belief is not a participation of sorts. Certainly God wouldn't save someone who didn't believe in Him.

quote:

What you are rejecting is that Jesus made very clear that eternal life is given to those who believe, period. That's the gospel truth.
I'm not rejecting that Jesus made it very clear that eternal life is given to those who believe. I believe that myself. However, I am rejecting your "period." [:)]



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/1/2008 12:33:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FreeGrace

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

Jesus did say that we would be baptized in the Holy Spirit and he contrasted that with John's baptism.

Yes, and the contrast was between "water" and the "Holy Spirit". iow, John baptized with water, but Jesus said He would baptize with the Holy Spirit. He was differentiating a wet baptism (John's) with His dry baptism, unless you consider the Holy Spirit to somehow be wet.
LOL [:)] No, I don't consider the Holy Spirit to somehow be wet. But I do think Jesus was contrasting a baptism without the Holy Spirit, John's baptism, with one that would have the Holy Spirit, Christian baptism. I don't believe He was constrasting wet and dry.

quote:

When Jesus said He would "baptize with the Holy Spirit", He was saying all believers would receive the Holy Spirit as Comforter and such indwelling would be an identification as His.
Absolutely.

quote:

quote:

So, the only difference between John's baptism in water for repentance and the forgiveness of sins,

This is error. No one was forgiven by John's baptism. Where do you think that is taught?
Well, I was kinda lookin' at Mark 1:4 when I made the above statement. John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. Based on this verse I don't think I was in error.

quote:

quote:

John's baptism didn't promise the gift of the Holy Spirit. Christian baptism does (see Acts 2:38).

It's very dangerous to use a verse in the very early stages of the Church to form a doctrine. There is no support that water baptism is the mode of receiving the Holy Spirit. The apostles and disciples received the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost with no water in sight (none mentioned, at least).
Don't you think that the apostles receiving the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost was a special occasion? You know, the birth of the church and all?



JimboFletch -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/1/2008 1:20:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
quote:

It's very dangerous to use a verse in the very early stages of the Church to form a doctrine. There is no support that water baptism is the mode of receiving the Holy Spirit. The apostles and disciples received the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost with no water in sight (none mentioned, at least).
Don't you think that the apostles receiving the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost was a special occasion? You know, the birth of the church and all?

Nice avoidance strategy, GD.
[:D]



FreeGrace -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/1/2008 1:34:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

quote:

ORIGINAL: FreeGrace

Your post reveals your error. We don't, as you think, go into the waters of baptism the color of the world, since the one going in has already believed and been saved. You really do think that your participation in baptism (willingness and actually going through it) results in your salvation. How sad, since salvation is wholly from God. He needs nothing of your participation.
Certainly the one who wishes to be baptized would be a believer. But being a believer doesn't save you anymore than believing a piece of cloth is a different color actually makes it that color.

Here is where we differ sharply. Being a believer means you are saved. Our believing doesn't save us, as I know you believe. It is God who saves, and He saves believers, not baptizees.

Not only John, but even Jesus would have been grossly misleading in John 3:15,16, 5:24, 6:40, 47, 11:25-27 if baptism were necessary for eternal life. But neither were misleading.

quote:

You have to do something, i.e, dye it, to make it a different color. And the cloth's participation in that dying is the same as our participation in baptism. The cloth certainly did no work in getting to be a different color. So, no, it's not my participation in baptism that results in my salvation. It's what God does in baptism that results in salvation, not the baptism itself.

I think you misunderstand Scripture severely. For a person to submit to the act and fact of baptism makes it a work, deed, or effort, and none of these have anything to do with salvation.

quote:

I quite agree with you that salvation is wholly from God. And it may be that He doesn't need our participation, but I believe that He desires it.

Interesting that you say "it may be that He doesn't need our participation". The truth is quite clear: He absolutely does not need nor does He require our participation. For to do that, means that salvation would be in part, some of our doing. Do you really want to believe that?

That you think that God "desires" that we be baptized is clear from Scripture. That's why the commands to be baptized are there. But to link baptism with our salvation removes God's grace and makes man's participation in his own salvation necessary. I'm sorry you fail to understand this.

quote:

Besides I'm still not convinced that even our belief is not a participation of sorts. Certainly God wouldn't save someone who didn't believe in Him.

You are right; God won't save anyone who doesn't believe. Why? Because the Bible has very clearly stated that fact.

Your lack of being convinced that our belief is not a participation "of sorts" isn't relevant. The Bible has made very clear that works, deeds, efforts cannot save, yet God saves those who believe. So it is clear that believing cannot be a work, deed, or effort.

Rom 4:4,5 demonstrates the difference between works and faith. In works, a wage is earned, whereas in simply believing something, there is no wage earned.

Can you imagine paying someone for simply thinking? In the first place, not being omniscient, you couldn't know if they actually did think what you wanted them to think. But God IS omniscient and does know everything.

Even if you were omniscient, what benefit is there to you how another person thinks? The point is that there is no benefit to you. It is actions (you know, deeds, works, effort) that are things that can benefit you, and upon which you would "owe" a wage to someone if they did them. But not so with faith.

So when God saves anyone who believes, it is totally of grace, since man has in no way earned anything.

quote:

quote:

What you are rejecting is that Jesus made very clear that eternal life is given to those who believe, period. That's the gospel truth.
I'm not rejecting that Jesus made it very clear that eternal life is given to those who believe. I believe that myself. However, I am rejecting your "period." [:)]

What do you find at the end of every statement that Jesus made about how to have eternal life? hint: a period. [:)]



FreeGrace -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/1/2008 1:40:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

quote:

ORIGINAL: FreeGrace

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

Jesus did say that we would be baptized in the Holy Spirit and he contrasted that with John's baptism.

Yes, and the contrast was between "water" and the "Holy Spirit". iow, John baptized with water, but Jesus said He would baptize with the Holy Spirit. He was differentiating a wet baptism (John's) with His dry baptism, unless you consider the Holy Spirit to somehow be wet.
LOL [:)] No, I don't consider the Holy Spirit to somehow be wet. But I do think Jesus was contrasting a baptism without the Holy Spirit, John's baptism, with one that would have the Holy Spirit, Christian baptism. I don't believe He was constrasting wet and dry.

He was contrasting that John baptized with water whereas He would baptize with the Holy Spirit. Where do you see any water in the baptism that Jesus promised? It's not there.

quote:

quote:

quote:

So, the only difference between John's baptism in water for repentance and the forgiveness of sins,

This is error. No one was forgiven by John's baptism. Where do you think that is taught?
Well, I was kinda lookin' at Mark 1:4 when I made the above statement. John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. Based on this verse I don't think I was in error.

You may believe that "going under" in John's baptism provided forgiveness of sins. But just know this. Believing that makes mush out of Acts 10:43, plus the very work of Christ on the Cross. We are forgiven on the basis of the fact that He died for us. There is no way John's baptism provided any forgiveness of sins.

quote:

Don't you think that the apostles receiving the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost was a special occasion? You know, the birth of the church and all?

What does that have to do with anything? There are a lot of holes in your theology, imho.

So, just because the day was "special" and all, God chose to forego the water? Is that what you are saying here?



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/1/2008 5:11:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Odeliya
There are multitudes of people that are getting saved without WB. If we talk to any Christian emergency worker, ER nurse,elderly facility or hospice doctor,a soldier, policeman, etc.. or Pastor with any experience - they all know many cases in which people get saved but never get a chance to get baptized.
Agreed and we'll probably see those folks in heaven.

quote:

Plus there are people that don’t believe in WB, as some here.
Which I think is a serious error. Even more serious than believing that water baptism is merely an identification with Christ.

quote:

I see contradiction in your position, GD:
You do agree that without spiritual regeneration water baptism is just a bath. You also agree that spiritual reg, ( thus salvation)does occur and happen without water .Then what else “salvific” is there left to get? What other role does the water has other then symbolic? you cant have it both ways ;)
I'm not even sure the water in water baptism is what's symbolic about baptism. I think the action of being immersed in and then raised out of the water is more symbolic than the actual water itself. So, while regeneration is not dependent on the water, I think it is dependent on what God accomplishes while we are in the water.

quote:

I don’t dare to suggest that you think all the brethren here on the thread who don’t believe WB is needed can not be possibly saved just because they reject water baptism ?
I wouldn't say they couldn't possibly be saved, but I would seriously doubt their salvation, since they reject such an obvious part of God's Word.

In the final analysis I can't decide who's saved and who isn't. I can only teach what God has taught me through His word. There may be those, more strident than I, who would say they're lost, but I ain't one of 'em. Shoot, I even believe that FreeGrace is saved. We are gonna be neighbors in heaven, you know [:D]



FreeGrace -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/1/2008 6:17:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
So, while regeneration is not dependent on the water, I think it is dependent on what God accomplishes while we are in the water.

Your view has God being "dependent" upon the person actually getting into the water. You have man cooperating in his own salvation, which is against Scripture.

quote:

In the final analysis I can't decide who's saved and who isn't.

Scripture tells us clearly that those who believe in Christ have eternal life.

quote:

Shoot, I even believe that FreeGrace is saved. We are gonna be neighbors in heaven, you know [:D]

Will there be running water? [:D]



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/1/2008 10:14:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FreeGrace

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
So, while regeneration is not dependent on the water, I think it is dependent on what God accomplishes while we are in the water.

Your view has God being "dependent" upon the person actually getting into the water. You have man cooperating in his own salvation, which is against Scripture.
No, my view does not have God being "dependent" on anything.

quote:

quote:

In the final analysis I can't decide who's saved and who isn't.

Scripture tells us clearly that those who believe in Christ have eternal life.
Amen, brother!! [:)]

quote:

quote:

Shoot, I even believe that FreeGrace is saved. We are gonna be neighbors in heaven, you know [:D]

Will there be running water? [:D]
I guess I must be dense or something. I didn't understand your reference to running water the first time you used it and I still don't get it.



kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/2/2008 2:54:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman
In Mat 28:19, Christ tells them to "..go...teach...baptizing". In vs 20, Christ again tells them to teach "Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you:"
Yes, and don't you think it's significant that Jesus mentions baptism separately from teaching?
If we compare this verse to its parallel of Mark 16:15-16 below, I think it becomes more clear. We see that Mat 28:19 effectively declares that we are to teach the Word of God so that through the Word there will be those who will be baptized - that is, their sins will be washed away.

And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. -Mark 16:15-16

Here it says the teaching and the preaching are to take place worldwide so that as many as possible will hear the Gospel. Of those who hear, there will be some who will believe and be baptized. The fact that they have believed and the fact that they were baptized(their sins were washed away), are the result of the action of God working in their lives.

quote:

quote:

How else does God save/baptize except by the use of "mortal man"?
My point exactly. That's why the baptism that Jesus commanded His disciples to do had to be water baptism.
Can't be "exactly" since your conclusion is different from mine :) I'm sure I continued on to say that it is through man's preaching that people become saved: "So then faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God".

quote:

Surely Jesus would not command His disciples to do something that was impossible for them to do, i.e., baptize someone in the Holy Spirit.
We cannot become saved/born again/sins washed away/baptized by the Holy Spirit unless we hear the Gospel, this is why Christ told the apostles to go into all the world. The Baptism of the Holy Spirit = the washing away of our sins = salvation.

quote:

quote:

That is how one comes to faith - through the Word of God - never by water. And when one does become saved - that is the Baptism of the Holy Spirit - the only baptism that can save. That is why it says there is only one baptism.
Certainly one comes to faith through the Word of God and never by water. My apologies if I have seemed to say that water baptism causes faith to occur. I most emphatically do not believe that. But I do believe that God has chosen the act of water baptism as the time that he sends His Holy Spirit to indwell us. Therefore, I agree with you that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is the only baptism that can save.
If man is displaying salvific faith before he is water baptized, this is the evidence of salvation, the evidence of the indwelling and baptism of the Holy Spirit. All of which is occurring before water baptism.

quote:

quote:

Water baptism is simply a sign the same as circumcision was. And just as physical circumcision did nothing to save, neither does water baptism do anything to save. This is the same mistake the Jews made; they too thought salvation was of the physical sign.
While I think that baptism is necessary for salvation, I do not believe that salvation is of baptism. Salvation is of God. It is what God does for us in baptism that saves, not the baptism itself.
It seems to me you are splitting an extraordinarily fine hair. I understand you don’t think the “water” saves. Still, effectively you are saying that salvation is of baptism since this is when salvation occurs –this is when God does the saving.

quote:

But being a believer doesn't save you anymore than believing a piece of cloth is a different color actually makes it that color.
The Bible says that faith is the "evidence" of salvation. And this faith is spoken about in the preceding chapter. The faith by which we live - a true salvific faith - not a mere intellectual assent of the mind. Therefore, if one truly believes, it means he has become a "new creature". This person doesn't change the color of his cloth - he gets a brand spanking new cloth - the robe of Christ's righteousness!

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. -Hebrews 11:1

quote:

Besides I'm still not convinced that even our belief is not a participation of sorts. Certainly God wouldn't save someone who didn't believe in Him.
I agree, it is a participation – a work - if this faith is not the gift given by God. If not the gift of God, it is simply man’s effort – his work.



greatdivide46 -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/2/2008 8:34:58 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman

If man is displaying salvific faith before he is water baptized, this is the evidence of salvation, the evidence of the indwelling and baptism of the Holy Spirit. All of which is occurring before water baptism.
So how do you know if someone is displaying salvific faith before he is water baptized? How do you know all of this is occuring prior to water baptism?



FreeGrace -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/2/2008 1:52:38 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

quote:

ORIGINAL: FreeGrace

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46
So, while regeneration is not dependent on the water, I think it is dependent on what God accomplishes while we are in the water.

Your view has God being "dependent" upon the person actually getting into the water. You have man cooperating in his own salvation, which is against Scripture.
No, my view does not have God being "dependent" on anything.

Yes, you insistence that man undergo the act of baptism makes it so.

quote:

quote:

quote:

Shoot, I even believe that FreeGrace is saved. We are gonna be neighbors in heaven, you know [:D]

Will there be running water? [:D]
I guess I must be dense or something. I didn't understand your reference to running water the first time you used it and I still don't get it.

Since someone has suggested that we are going to be neighbors in heaven, I was just wondering if we'll have running water. I've heard there are some accomodations that don't have running water. [:)]



kelman -> RE: Are you saved but not baptized? (4/3/2008 2:21:01 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: greatdivide46

quote:

ORIGINAL: kelman

If man is displaying salvific faith before he is water baptized, this is the evidence of salvation, the evidence of the indwelling and baptism of the Holy Spirit. All of which is occurring before water baptism.
So how do you know if someone is displaying salvific faith before he is water baptized?
The same way you’d know after water baptism – if, in fact, it can be known at all.

quote:

How do you know all of this is occuring prior to water baptism?
Obviously, no one knows for an absolute certainty about another person's salvation. And, neither is it our business except, of course, for those who have the spiritual leadership in a church. But, if in fact, there is this evidence of faith then we would be foolhardy to suggest someone is not saved before water baptism.



Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI