@USAFreedomReform Totally agree! And John defined who the "we" is. It is they who are walking in the light as He is in the light; not those who are walking in darkness, or even those who "claim" to have fellowship with God. It is very dangerous to take a single passage out of context in order to prove a point, whether you have good intentions or not. Please read 1 John 1:6-10 to see if it reads this way to you also. Thanks!
If I may make a comment about the thief on the cross. Even if he would've been baptized, it wouldn't have been into Jesus Christ. Romans 6 says we're baptized into Christ's death. The thief would've taken John's baptism which was for repentance and that which was to come. Only Jesus can save someone from sin, and He chose to forgive the thief on the cross as He forgives those of us who have faith in Him.
Baptism is a directive to those who ARE SAVED, NOT A CONDITION FOR BEING SAVED (Matt. 28:18-20). It is believers who are commanded to be baptized. Baptism is an act of obedience to Christ's command. The order is is belief (faith, involving repentance) that brings salvation, followed by an outward confession and obedience in baptism. Outward confession and baptism are the later acts of one who is ALLREADY SAVED and is acting in obdience to Christ. Baptism ALWAYS follow salvation...nuff said
How did the thief on the cross get saved?Are you telling me that Jesus had two ways of salvation? One for the thief on the cross (which was faith) and another for us today? (baptism)? Why didn’t He say, well, let’s get you down off this cross and baptize you so you can be saved. Luke 23:42-43 How did he get saved? Was Jesus lying when He said that he would be with Him in paradise? If Baptism saves, then you would have to say that Jesus is lying here, would you not?
@pretribrapture This will be my last post to you, as you have consistently demonstrated eyes that choose to remain in the dark. And that is foolish, my friend. It is not enough to disagree, you must speak slanderously. You need a new heart before you will see the wise counsel of God, for it evades you.
"Leave the presence of a fool, Or you will not discern words of knowledge." (Prov. 14:7)
"A fool does not delight in understanding, But only in revealing his own mind." (Prov. 18:2)
@pretribrapture The thief on the cross was saved because Jesus had power on earth to save. After He died, Jesus' covenant came into force, and no one has the right today to demand to be saved in the same way as was the thief. Read Heb. 9:15-17 for a clearer picture on this. Why did not one of the apostles ever teach a "sinner's prayer?" Not one!! Yet you teach a sinner's prayer method of salvation? Repentance and baptism are commanded of God, for you and me today.
@Full4God Yes, the convenant was made in His blood. So what's your point? It's His blood that gives saving power, not water baptism.....sinners prayer? Show me in the Bible where Trinity or rapture is mentioned. The point is, the concepts are taught regardless of how you want to label them. The concept of a sinner's prayer is taught because one has to repent, confess, and believe to be saved. This encompasses the sinner's prayer. Baptism is commanded BUT NOT FOR SALVATION!!!!!!!!!!!
@Full4God Oh so Jesus does not have power to save since He is on the throne in heaven and omnipresent? wow mental redardation happens every five minutes!
@Full4God Please read Hebrews 9 in context! learn to do some exegesis please! Kindly read (if you can read) verse 14 which states "How much more then will the BLOOD OF CHRIST (NOT BAPTISM) who through the eternal spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God! NOTHING ABOUT BAPTISM!
your preschool elementary attempt at armchair theology has become very plaguey and your comments are a linchpin that has not proven to be theologically accurate, thus you are not very issuable and have ossified your heart. Go to a good seminary. Read my friend...study read
@pretribrapture Armchair theology, eh. Ironic that Ankerberg gave Lewis a piece of his mind during the breaks because Jerry Jones was eating him for lunch. And Lewis went to a good seminary, but it was not enough to counter truth.
@Full4God where's the proof of this? Jerry Jones is an idiot that needs learn how to interepret the Scriptures correctly. I would eat his lunch if he debated me. So would any other scholar....
@pretribrapture Repentance that leads to life is just that: repentance that LEADS to life. A non-repentent person will not follow God's path that leads to life. That's why Peter said repent AND be baptized for the forgiveness of your sins. I am going to stick with what Peter said. Do you think he is playing two sides of a fence? What he told the Jews on Pentecost is consistent with what Cornelius and his household did. They obeyed God.
@pretribrapture It means that only when a person changes, and turns to God will he find life. For if one continues to walk the godless path, he will never find God. It is the repentance that LEADS to life.
Wait, you implied before that you believe that baptism is a part of salavation. So, now are you agreeing with me that its not. Then we agree. You are saved then are baptized. Thats what Ive been saying. Did you change your mind?
@pretribrapture Again, for the umpteenth time, Jesus said, "He who has believed AND has been baptized shall be saved." There is no way in the world to slip salvation in between belief and baptism, unless you come to it with your bias in hand. I will stick with what Jesus said here and deny what you have claimed. Just tell people what Jesus said and that should be enough. Anything else is a man-made doctrine.
@Full4God you are not listening. Again, IF BAPTISM SAVES, THEN WHY DOESNT THE TEXT SAY, HE THAT DOES NOT BE BAPTIZED WILL BE CONDEMED...PLAIN AND SIMPLE....IF BAPTISM SAVES, WHY DIDN'T JESUS BATIZE ANYONE? HOW IS IT THAT ABRAHAM BELIEVED AND IT WAS ACCOUNTED HIM RIGHTEOUS? What about 1 Cor. 1:17? According to this verse, if the gospel saves, and if Paul draws a clear distinction between the gospel and baptism, doesn’t that mean that baptism has no part in salvation?
@pretribrapture I'll take on your questions, if I may. If baptism saves, then why doesn't the text say, "he that does not be baptized will be condemed?" I think this is quite simple. Mark 16:16 says this, "He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned." The text says that those who believe and are baptized shall be saved. If I say "the sky is blue" do I really need to tell you all the colors the sky isn't?
@Concatenate A very weak analogy. The colors of the sky are not always blue. Sometimes its black, sometimes its cloudy...but God's word does not change. You just committed another logical fallacy; it's called a Red Herring which means that you are introducing a topic that is not related to the one at hand e.g. talking about the sky insead of dealing with the text. IT IS CLEAR THAT THOSE WHO DONT BELIEVE WILL BE CONDEMED, NOT THOSE WHO HAVE NOT BEEN BAPTIZED! Read the text!
@pretribrapture Perhaps the analogy was weak, but the point remains. When the word of God says something, it does not have to show the opposing perspective. You tell me to read the text, I think we all need to read what the text says. To me, it reads that whoever believes and is baptized shall be saved. So knowing that, where does baptism fit in the plan of redemption?
@Concatenate It doesn't matter what it means to you or me, what matters it he authors intended meaning. For the last time, Baptism does not save. It is sybmbolic of redemtion. If the water is part of salvation, what you are saying is that water (a creation of God saves)...heresy! Redemtion is totally through placing your faith in Christ before any water baptism or even taking the Lord's supper.
@pretribrapture Well, you told me to read the text, and that's what I'm doing. The text in 1 Peter 3:21 says "baptism now saves you." The text in Mark 16:16 says that whoever believes and is baptized shall be saved. The text in Galatians 3:27 says that those who are baptized clothe themselves with Christ. However, you're telling me that salvation takes place prior to baptism, but from reading those texts it seems that God is requiring it.
@pretribrapture Second one. If baptism saves, why didn't Jesus baptize anyone? I think this is a simple one as well, because it wasn't the Father's will for His Son to baptize.
@Concatenate Where does the Bible ever say that it wasn't? It was His will to baptize with fire and the Holy Spirit and it the disciples baptized with water AS A SYMBOL OF THIS. Enough said...next...
@pretribrapture Third. How is it that Abraham believed and it was accounted him righteous. Well, first of all, Abraham believed AND obeyed, don't let that fact get lost on you. If you read Genesis, you'll see Abraham obeying God's commands, it was in that obedience combined with his belief that made him righteous. Paul's point in Romans 3 and 4 has to do with the fact that no "law" (man made or Law of Moses) can make anyone "good." Only Christ can do that.
@Concatenate He only obeyed After He believed. He has to FIRST be saved and then obey. You can first obey God without being saved and born into His family. You are confusing works with salvation. You just poked a whole in your own argument by usying Romans 3 and 4. That's what Ive been trying to tell you. It is CHrist alone and HIS work that saves plus nothing else. We don't have good works to get saved, we have good works after we are saved.
@pretribrapture Of course someone must first believe, I'm not disputing that, but I am saying that belief and obedience MUST go together. This is not a faith "versus" works thing, the Bible advocates both. There is no work that can save, but works must accompany faith in order to be complete. Imagine if Noah just believed and didn't build the ark. In this case, Noah was "saved" the during and after flood, after believing and obeying God. Abraham also believed and obeyed.
@pretribrapture Fourth. What about 1 Corinthians 1:17? "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void." Paul's letter to the Corinthians was essentially a scathing rebuke. Here he's criticizing them for being divided by the person that baptized them. Paul was sent to preach, not to run around baptizing everyone. But, he did preach baptism, that cannot be denied. Baptism is part of gospel.
@Concatenate So what? the point is that Paul is making a clear distinction between baptism and the gospel. Baptism IS NOT and never has been part of the gospel. The gospel saves 1 Cor. 15:2. First, faith and FAITH ALONE is the only condition for salvation. Just as Luther discorved "The just shall live by faith" (Rom. 1:17; 4:-5; Acts 16:31; Titus 3:5-7) In John's gospel only faith is listed as a condition for salvation.
@pretribrapture John's gospel only faith is listed as a condition for salvation. Third, Jesus called baptism a work of righteousness (Matt 3:15). The Bible rejects ANY work of righteousness as a condition for salvation (Eph. 2:8-9; Titus 3:5). Faith is an inward act in the heart, not an outward work. If water baptism (something we do, not God) is needed for salvation, it is not the work of God but ours. Baptism is a work that flows from the faith that alone brings salavtion through the gospel.
@pretribrapture I believe you're reading 1 Corinthians 1:17 totally wrong. Paul is not intending to draw a line between gospel and baptism, he's drawing a line between preaching and laboring to baptize individuals who accept the word. The gospel does save, and the Bible says that baptism now saves us (1 Peter 3:21) so it definitely is part of the gospel. The only place in the entire Bible that says "faith alone" is James 2:24, check that one out.
@Concatenate I believe it is you reading the text wrong. You don't have a working knowledge of Biblical exegesis. The words "now saves you" are taken out of context. For one thing, the persons being baptized are no more saved by water baptism than Noah was through the flood. He was saved through faith. He acted on his faith in obedience to God, but his salvation came through his faith, not as a result of his obedience in building the ark.
@pretribrapture So now I'm taking the words "now saves you" out of context? So what exactly do those words mean if not "now saves you?" I'm glad you bring up Noah, Hebrews 11:7 says that Noah prepared the ark "by faith." It was faith combined with his obedience that saved him. There's really no getting around that. Either Noah was saved by faith only, or he was saved by faith in God where he acts on it and saves his family from destruction. Which one is it?
@Concatenate The salvation spoken of in 1 Peter is not from the penalty of sin but from a soiled conscience. All those not baptized are living with a bad conscience. Being obedient to God in baptism will save them from the knowledge of a wrong conscience.
Read the John...a whole book of salvation by faith! Infact, over 200 verses in the NT mention coming to Christ by faith!
@pretribrapture So you're saying you can be saved with a bad conscience? That's what I get out of what you're saying since you believe one is saved before baptism. Also, I don't believe 1 Peter 3:21 is about saving someone from their conscience, I believe it is about appealing to God through baptism in order to have a good conscience that you've partaken of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ (Romans 6:3-8).
@pretribrapture I hope I have provided sufficient answers to your questions. If not, I am happy to provide more clarification/explanation. As for the debate in this video, I believe Dr. Jones did an exceptional job defending Biblical doctrine. There are times I cringe with some of his word usage, but overall I feel like he preached the truth. I happen to believe a certain thing and I'm not a prideful man, so I am genuinely trying to help you understand my position in all of this. Cheers.
@pretribrapture I think we all have battles with ignorance, willful or accidental, I pray that the truth reveals itself to me in His word so that I may worship in spirit and in truth.
@pretribrapture Because "...he who does not believe has been judged already..." (John 3:18) It would be foolish for Jesus to have to say, "he who has not believed, and has not been baptized, and has not repented of his sins, and refuses to confess Me before men, and murders, and steals, and swears, and dishonors his father and mother, and covets, and lusts, and lies, and kicks the dog, etc., etc., etc. Where do you think the list should end? Jesus ended it with a simple "disbelief."
@pretribrapture also, since Plagious and Augustine taught this, this also led to the heresy that taught that the sacraments of the Catholic church were necessary to preserve the individual from additional guilt. This in turn led to those that God predestined to be saved. This was a contradiction because baptism would have little effect in attempting to accomplish the same thing. Over the years, this was passed down to Willam Cambell who founded the church of Christ. This ALL manmade NOT Bible!
Sixth, since Scripture cannot contradict itself, and sine for example, baptism clearly follows salvation in Acts 10:47, an unclear passage (Acts 3:38) should be interpreted in the light of the clear one rather than the reverse.
@pretribrapture We agree that Scripture does not contradict itself; it is God's word. And I also agree with you that we should interpret more difficult passages with clear passages. But I disagree that "baptism clearly follows salvation in Acts 10:47." Cornelius was told that Peter "will speak words to you by which you will be saved, you and all your household. And as I BEGAN TO SPEAK [emphasis mine], the Holy Spirit fell upon them...." (Acts 11:14, 15) (cont...)
@pretribrapture (cont.) The purpose for which the Holy Spirit fell upon Cornelius et al, was for the same reason that He fell upon the twelve apostles on Pentecost: to teach something to unbelieving Jews. Here's what is said about these Jews who learned about God's grace upon the Gentiles, "When they heard this, they quieted down and glorified God, saying, 'Well then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life." (Acts 11:18) Not to save Cornelius.
Third, this may be a command for the Jews whose baptism was necessary for the national restoration of Israel, something that John the Baptist told them earlier (Matt. 3:1-8). Fourth, even if it does apply to everyone, the baptism was not before the converts were saved but after: Acts 2:41. It is the acceptance of God's word that brings salvation Rom. 10:17. Fifth, the text doesn't say that those who were not baptized were not saved.
@pretribrapture This was not a command for the Jews only. Note what Jesus commanded, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of ALL THE NATIONS [emphasis mine], baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit..." (Matt. 28:18, 19) So the command for disciples to baptize was NOT for the Jews only. Your suggestion is a stretch in order to "εις" support your presupposition, which is wrong.
@pretribrapture Yes, I think so. The command was to be taken to all nations, and all nations are to be baptized. I went back and re-read it, and it is there in plain sight. If I go back and read it right now, I am sure it will still be there. Matt. 28:20 and Mark 16:16 both indicate that Jesus' command was to take the gospel to all nations or to all creation. One gospel for all. Jesus has ALL authority, and you speak counter to Jesus. Are you an antiChrist?
@Full4God No, bit you are a babbling idiot that is living cloud-cuckoo-land if you continue to believe that water has any saving power. Good luck at getting into heaven. You are in grave doctrinal error and follow the teachings of a cult. Are you even aware that this is a Catholic view and it considered a sacrament? In A.D. 431, Pelagius a British monk was condemed a the council of Ephesus beacuse he taught that infant baptism is what washed away original sin from babies, along with Augustine.
@pretribrapture According to Paul's letter to the saints in Rome, there was to be no restoration of physical Israel. Paul says, "For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; nor are they all children because they are Abraham's descendants, but: 'THROUGH ISAAC YOUR DESCENDANTS WILL BE NAMED.' That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants." (Rom. 9:6b-8) Christians are spiritual Israel today.
@pretribrapture Jesus said, "He who has believed [past tense] and "και" has been baptized [past tense] shall be saved [future tense]. Much of Christendom instead says, "He who has believed and repeats the sinner's prayer is saved, and then He should be baptized because Jesus was baptized. But baptism has nothing to do with salvation." Where in the Bible is this? It is NOWHERE in the Bible. This is a deception of Satan--don't fall for it. Just do what Jesus commanded and come to Him.
A response to Acts 2:38 (Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology, p. 499).
First, the word for (Gk: eis) often does connote "to" or "toward," it can also mean "because of" or "in accordance with," in which case forgiveness would come before baptism Second, eis does not necessitate that baptism come before forgiveness in Acts 2:38, since the view may be backward (to already being saved) instead of forward (to being saved through baptism). more.....
@pretribrapture If you translate the Greek "εις" as "because of" in this text, then the conjunction "και" (and) means that not only were the 3,000 saved before being baptized, they were also saved before repenting, and I don't think you want to hold onto this proposition. Peter commanded both repentance AND (και) baptism "in order to" (εις) receive forgiveness of sins, not "because" their sins had already been forgiven. No one receives forgiveness without repenting--surely we agree on this.
@Full4God forgivness and repentance go together. Ive allready proven that. You have committed one logical fallacy: it's called a red herring. When you say that Isreal is the church. This is a red herring, an attempt to get off the suject at hand. Please stick with the subject. When I am done proving wrong about baptism, I WILL PROVE THAT ISREAL IS NOT THE CHURCH. THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT ELECT GROUPS!
Paul was saved on the road to Damascus because he called Jesus Lord Acts 9. He also referred to his salvation experience in Acts chapters 22 and 26. Regarding Acts 22:16, These words do not prove that he was saved. He was allready saved.His baptism was an act of an obedient Christian, not an act by which he became a Christian. The washing away of sins is ceremonial NOT actual. Sins are to be taken away through faith in Christ's fininshed work Eph 2:1, Acts 13:38-39. Anymore questions?????
@pretribrapture Paul was NOT saved on the road to Damascus, not until he obeyed Ananias' command to be "baptized, and wash away your sins." Ceremonial cleansing was an old covenant ritual. Jesus made that first covenant obsolete (Heb. 8:13) because it was replaced by a covenant, inaugurated in His blood, under which we could receive forgiveness of sins. (Jer. 31:31-34) You did not learn your doctrine by studying the Bible; rather, by heeding man's doctrines, and they are vain. (Matt. 15:9)
notice that in chapter 3 in matthew says that when Jesus was baptized by John the Holy Spirit came to him like a dove after he was baptized not before,
@3emperorsproduction So, are you saying that we do not receive the Holy Spirit until AFTER we are baptized? I agree. Read Acts 19:1-8 to see this for yourself.
@Full4God It is obvious he is talking about baptized in the spirit. Same senario as Acts 10 where Cornelius was baptized by the Holy Spirit BEFORE he was baptized with water. Please don't twist someone's words to prove your point. All it does is make you look bad.
@smoores57 The Holy Spirit did not "fall upon" Cornelius and his household in order to save them, or because they were already saved. Rather, it was to teach the Jews, including Peter, that God had welcomed "the man who fears God and does what is right in all nations." (Acts 10:34-35) And here's the proof: "When they [the Jews] heard this, they quieted down and glorified God, saying, "Well then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life." (Acts 11:18)
@Full4God So God gave the HS to children of the devil. I don't think so. He would not give His HS to unregenerated people. The HS did not save them. Their belief in the finished work of Jesus Christ saved them. God knew this and poured out His HS on them. Peter recognized this and told them they ought to be baptized out of obedience to Christ's doctrine. We are declared righteous by God when we believe the gospel. Then we are sanctified by obedience to the scriptures.
@smoores57 You completely misunderstand the purpose for which the Holy Spirit fell upon Cornelius and his household. It was NOT for the purpose of saving them, but to teach the Jews that God had accepted the Gentiles. Stop hanging onto a select few verses and understand the plan of salvation in its entirety.
@Full4God This is heresy. Read 1 Cor. 12:13, "for by one spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one spirit." This is the spiritual baptism that takes places at salvation before water baptism. Also see Eph. 1:3, Gal. 3:2-5,4:6, How do you explain the fact that Cornelius was a recipient of the Holy Spirit (which means he got saved) prior to his baptism? Acts 10:44-48
@pretribrapture The Greek is translated "in, with or by," and means "instrumentality." It is by the direction of the Holy Spirit that we are baptized into Christ. And God's Holy Spirit-inspired word tells us how to be saved. Paul says there is "one baptism," and you think it's Holy Spirit baptism? Then Peter was wrong when he mentioned water baptism; Philip was wrong when he baptized the eunuch in water. I don't think so. The disciples were commanded to baptize in water.
@Full4God Being a scholar and a student of the Greek text, Im quite aware of how it is transalted. The baptism is one that you are talking about, in the text, but so what? it doesn't prove that it saves you. Holy Spirit baptism took place at pentecost. It was promised by Jesus when He said you shall be baptized with fire and the Holy Ghost. This has nothing to do with being baptized in water my friend. I never said Peter, Philip or anyone else that mentioned baptism was wrong. It does not save
@pretribrapture in 1 Peter 3:20, 21 Peter connects Noah and his family's salvation in, with, or by water to baptism "which now saves you." However, it saves us only "through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." I never claimed that the water is that which saves us--it doesn't. However, I cannot be saved if I do not obey Jesus (John 3:36), so the question, then, is: Is water baptism a command that we must obey before Jesus will save us--today? Peter seemed to think so. God bless the seekers.
@Full4God Paul was saved before he was baptized: Acts 10:47, 11:16-18. The order is clear. They were saved and then baptized. Baptism is a directive to those who are saved (Matt. 28:18-20). It was always believers that were commanded to be baptized. The order is belief that brings salvation.
@pretribrapture Rectify, then, how Saul was saved BEFORE he was baptized with Ananias' command for Paul to "Arise and be baptized and wash away your sins." And this was after Saul had met Jesus, obeyed Jesus by going into the city, fasted for 3 days and was found praying. Do you believe that "wash away your sins" means that Jesus had not yet forgiven Saul during their meeting on the road?
Surely you and I agree that it is God who removes our sins through the blood of His Son.
@Full4God Yes, we do agree that the blood of Jesus removes out sins. What we don't agree on is HOW. I can't make it anymore simple for you....the blood of Jesus is met through faith and repentance and NOT water baptism.
Faith alone is required only; Rom. 1:17;4:4-5;Acts 16:31;Titus 3:5-7. In John's gospel, only faith is required for salvation; 3:16, 18, 36, 5:24; 20:31. Baptism is not part of the gospel 1 Cor. 1:14, Rom 1:16. I will answer your question about Paul in the next post.
@Full4God Paul was saved before he was baptized: Acts 9 and later was baptized by Ananias Acts 22,26. The order is clear. They were saved and then baptized. Baptism is a directive to those who are saved (Matt. 28:18-20). It was always believers that were commanded to be baptized. The order is belief that brings salvation. Peter confirmed that Cornelius was saved before he was baptized Acts 10:47.
@smoores57 You cannot win the race set before you though if you are running on a different path. The point that was made about the debate simply meant that the Baptist fellow had no Scriptural foundation on which he stood. Notice how an audience member asked both men to "use the Bible" to address an issue. Lewis simply gave his personal dissertation, but had no biblical foundation to back it up. On what issue do you pray that God would open our eyes? That was ambiguous...please expound.
@Full4God Ambiguous? It is very clear where your eyes need to be opened if this doctrine is what you base your salvation on. I was also deceived by the same doctrine you are now deceived by. I preached it, lived it and am very thankful that no one as far as I know was ever "converted" to it by my word or deeds. Thank you Lord! We have now been disfellowshipped using scriptures out of context. Thank God I have not been disfellowshipped by Him. That is all that counts anyway.
@smoores57 There are many older men who have realized the error they have preached and have written much to prove such. Cecil Hook is one example. 40 years is a long time to preach something and then realize you have been wrong and have the guts to change. I challenge you to read his material with an open mind instead of labeling him "in error" as most COC people do. If he and I are right, it is you who is on the "other path" you mention. Still praying that your eyes are opened.
@smoores57 Sorry, but I will read the Bible with an open mind; not some article written by a man. That's where these strange doctrines have come from. You did not learn these strange doctrines from God's word, but, rather, from man. Show us all in Scripture from which your doctrine stands. All you have provided is man's philosophy. Run from it!!
@Full4God Oh I get it...I should only read the Bible with an open mind and not consider what you have to say about it since you refuse to consider what someone else has to say about it unless you know before hand that you are in complete agreement with them. That sounds like a open mind to me. What are you afraid of? I was counseled not to read or listen to anything that was not preapproved by a senior member. That makes it so any decision I make is not really my decision but someone else.
@smoores57 You are one sarcastic individual. You do not even demonstrate a spirit of gentleness. As such, you are revealing where your heart truly is. You are an arguer, and not a seeker of the truth. And so I will not waste any more time with you. You know, the pearl before swine thing. I pray that you will continue reading the entire New Testament to work out your own salvation, and stop listening to man made doctrines that cannot save.
@Full4God I am simply pointing out that a true truth seeker will look at all the facts which you have refused to do. You have not answered what you are afraid of. I must ask...did Jesus demonstrate a spirit of gentleness when he rebuked Peter "Get thee behind me satan?" Did He demonstrate a spirit of gentleness when he called the scribes and pharisees hypocrits and vipers? He presented the gospel and people either accepted or rejected it. You have rejected His gospel of grace for a false gospel.
@Full4God Also, I have dealt with these false teachings for over 3 years now and am getting quite tired of the the same pat answers and the refusal to consider that you might be wrong. I'm tired of dealing with self righteous, arrogant unteachable spirits. So maybe I am a little sarcastic at times. I've finally shown my son the error of this and am working on my daughter and son-in-law. Maybe something I say will spark something in someone. Just sowin a little seed friend.
@smoores57 I trust Christ only for my salvation. Here is the world's rewrite of Mark 16:16: "He who has believed is saved and then he should be baptized to follow Jesus' example, but baptism has nothing to do with salvation." Notice how different this is compared to what Jesus actually said: "He who has believe and has been baptized shall be saved." I choose to follow Jesus simple command, though I do not put my faith in the actual water or the act itself. My faith is in Jesus Who saves.
Very interesting about the "do over" debate. Allen and Jones did do a fantastic job against Kingdon and Bjorstadt, and I haven't even seen the entire debate from start to finish. You'll notice that Ankerberg interjects his own commentary spliced between parts of that debate, which is really is his prerogative, but still. It's one-sided to the brothers from the church because they're only standing on scripture and not the dealings of man. Thanks for posting this debate.
@Concatenate Jones himself shared with me that during the commercial breaks Ankerberg would take Gordon Lewis backstage and give him the what for, charging, "You had better step up to the plate because Jones is eating you alive." That's why the Jones-Lewis debate was not aired. Ankerberg shared with Jones, "I cannot air this debate because it may hurt my ratings." As God is my Judge, this is what Jones shared with me personally. Now, who is really interested in truth?
Notice the order in Acts 2:38 Repent and be baptized. Notice the order repentance and THEN baptism. You are saved then baptized as an outward sign of an inward work. Why do you think that the Bible says that John baptized with water, and Jesus batizes with the Holy Spirit. When you are saved you are baptized spiritually brought into union with Christ and then water baptized as an outward testimony.
@pretribrapture Also notice the little Greek conjunction (καὶ), which is translated "and." What is on the left of "and" is as equally important as what's on the right. Both are included. We have been taught that baptism represents the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. This is not correct. Baptism symbolizes the burial and the resurrection. It's the tomb and the womb. Repentance is where we die to self, but we haven't been resurrected yet--until baptism. We don't bury live people.
@pretribrapture as Mark 16:16 says that you are saved after believing and being baptized, how can you then be saved before being baptized in Acts 2:38?
@3emperorsproduction You are taking the verse out of context. This is called isogesis (reading a meaning into the text that's not there). Read the verse again. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; BUT HE THAT BELIEVETH NOT SHALL BE DAMNED. If baptism saves, the text would have read but he that is not baptized shall be damned. It is clear that BELIEF is the key, NOT baptism.
@3emperorsproduction You are taking the verse out of context. This is called isogesis (reading a meaning into the text that's not there). Read the verse again. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; BUT HE THAT BELIEVETH NOT SHALL BE DAMNED. If baptism saves, the text would have read but he that is not baptized shall be damned. It is clear that BELIEF is the key, NOT baptism.
A cult is defined as a group of people that depart from the orthodox fundamentals of the Christian faith. The CofC has done this by teaching that water has power to saved, heresy! Nowhere do you see Jesus baptizing anyone for salvation. Infact, in over 200 verses, you see him saying "your FAITH has made you whole" Not baptism making you whole!
@pretribrapture The church of Christ does NOT teach that water has power to save--far from the truth. When Naaman the leper dipped in the Jordan River, was it the water that cleansed him of his leprosy? Absolutely not. However, had Naaman washed in the waters of the Pharpar River, he would have disobeyed God, and he would have retained his leprosy. It's about obedience, not merit. Baptism into Christ was first taught on Pentecost, after Jesus died.
@Full4God Actually in the original COC movement it was taught as baptismal regenration. The error of that has now been seen. Why not see the whole truth and admit that water baptism does not save anybody. It is a sacrament. You do teach that the waters of baptism are where one contacts the Blood of Christ. Care to show me chapter and verse? Sorry, it isn't there.
@smoores57 It is Jesus' blood from His sacrificial death that saves us; not any act that man may do. Now for the text: "Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life." (Rom. 6:3, 4) We are buried and raised "new" with Christ in baptism.
@Full4God Sorry...no blood is mentioned in this passage. You require chapter and verse for every single thing that someone believes yet you cannot provide one for this. Strike one.
@smoores57 It's a good thing you are not the one doing the striking ;-) It wasn't just His blood, but the blood that was shed in his sacrificial death, correct? Paul tells us that we are "buried with Christ by baptism into death." That's where you will contact His saving blood--in His death. And water baptism is God's command for all nations. Peter knew it, Ananias knew it, Paul knew it, Philip knew it. Why is it so hard for you to know it?
@Full4God I can't "know" it because it isn't true. You still have not shown me where the Bible says that we contact the blood of Jesus when one is baptized. You are adding to the scripture to prove a false teaching. You are reading into the scripture what isn't there. Sorry, I won't believe or teach a doctrine that is not in the Bible. Galatians tells me that I am accursed if I do so.
@smoores57 I agree with you my brother...they can't show you where the blood of Jesus brings you into contact with the blood, because it is not there! This is heresy! They also cannot explain how the thief on the cross was saved hmmmmm...still waiting for them to explain this one...
@pretribrapture Several years ago I ask the question..are we saved by faith or are we saved by faith and works or are we saved by faith that produces works. Their answer was faith that produces works. I agreed. Now the answer is saved by faith and works. When I proved to them that we are saved by faith apart from works they twisted scripture around to say that even faith is a work using John 6:29. How sad that they even take our Saviors own words and twist them. Keep praying that their eyes open
@pretribrapture I agree with you. Faith is the critical ingredient, for without faith it is impossible to please God. Doing an action without faith results in nothing beneficial. Therefore, when Peter told the 3,000+ on Pentecost to "repent and be baptized," what was the ONLY way these Jews could have expressed their faith in order to receive forgiveness of their sins? They repented of their sins and were baptized into the name of Jesus Christ. That's how I know they had faith--they obeyed.
@Full4God Herein lies one of your problems. It doesn't matter whether you know someone has faith. But, it does matter if God knows they have faith. God looks on the heart, man looks at the flesh. "With the heart man believeth unto righteousness and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation." James speaks mostly of what man sees. Paul speaks mostly about what God see. Baptism is a sacrament just like partaking of the Lord's Supper is. It is obedience but not for salvation.
@smoores57 Jesus does not agree with that: "He who has believed AND has been baptized SHALL BE SAVED." See that last part? Read before that to see what Jesus says in order for the "SHALL BE SAVED" to happen. You choose only the first part because you have listened to man instead of Jesus. You surely did not get this doctrine from Scripture. "The SUM of Thy word is truth." Read and obey it all, not just what you choose to obey.
@pretribrapture If the church of Christ is a cult, then Jesus died for a cult. But I don't believe He died for a cult. The fact is, according to Jesus Himself, MOST people who have walked the earth will not be in heaven. They have chosen the wide path because they listen to and obey the teachings of man. God's truth is narrow, and it leads us down such a narrow path that many will choose not to follow it. Christians are "narrow minded" because they walk a narrow path. But it's God's path.
@idcsanfernando John Ankerberg *claims* to be a Christian. However, a Christian walks toward the light and embraces it when he finds it. What Ankerberg did for money proves otherwise.
@Full4God If Ankerberg said and did what you say then he is wrong. However, we all make mistakes. You are attacking his characture which proves nothing.
@idcsanfernando You are welcome. I will see Jerry in July and I will pass on your appreciation to him. The only reason this debate was not aired, according to Jones, is because Ankerberg was concerned about his television ratings. This showed Ankerberg's true colors; he is not interested in truth, just the dollar.
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
1 John 5:7,8
USAFreedomReform 1 month ago
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
1 John 5:7,8
USAFreedomReform 1 month ago
1John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us [our] sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
USAFreedomReform 1 month ago
@USAFreedomReform Totally agree! And John defined who the "we" is. It is they who are walking in the light as He is in the light; not those who are walking in darkness, or even those who "claim" to have fellowship with God. It is very dangerous to take a single passage out of context in order to prove a point, whether you have good intentions or not. Please read 1 John 1:6-10 to see if it reads this way to you also. Thanks!
Full4God 1 month ago
Churches of Christ in Russian Siberia greets you. Greetings to all of churches of Christ.
Russkiy1976 6 months ago
If I may make a comment about the thief on the cross. Even if he would've been baptized, it wouldn't have been into Jesus Christ. Romans 6 says we're baptized into Christ's death. The thief would've taken John's baptism which was for repentance and that which was to come. Only Jesus can save someone from sin, and He chose to forgive the thief on the cross as He forgives those of us who have faith in Him.
Concatenate 9 months ago
Baptism is a directive to those who ARE SAVED, NOT A CONDITION FOR BEING SAVED (Matt. 28:18-20). It is believers who are commanded to be baptized. Baptism is an act of obedience to Christ's command. The order is is belief (faith, involving repentance) that brings salvation, followed by an outward confession and obedience in baptism. Outward confession and baptism are the later acts of one who is ALLREADY SAVED and is acting in obdience to Christ. Baptism ALWAYS follow salvation...nuff said
pretribrapture 9 months ago
How did the thief on the cross get saved?Are you telling me that Jesus had two ways of salvation? One for the thief on the cross (which was faith) and another for us today? (baptism)? Why didn’t He say, well, let’s get you down off this cross and baptize you so you can be saved. Luke 23:42-43 How did he get saved? Was Jesus lying when He said that he would be with Him in paradise? If Baptism saves, then you would have to say that Jesus is lying here, would you not?
pretribrapture 10 months ago
@pretribrapture Some people in this world will never understand because the eyes of their heart are darkened.
Full4God 9 months ago
@Full4God wow,so you finally admit that you are wrong. Good for you my friend.
pretribrapture 9 months ago
@pretribrapture This will be my last post to you, as you have consistently demonstrated eyes that choose to remain in the dark. And that is foolish, my friend. It is not enough to disagree, you must speak slanderously. You need a new heart before you will see the wise counsel of God, for it evades you.
"Leave the presence of a fool, Or you will not discern words of knowledge." (Prov. 14:7)
"A fool does not delight in understanding, But only in revealing his own mind." (Prov. 18:2)
Full4God 9 months ago
@pretribrapture The thief on the cross was saved because Jesus had power on earth to save. After He died, Jesus' covenant came into force, and no one has the right today to demand to be saved in the same way as was the thief. Read Heb. 9:15-17 for a clearer picture on this. Why did not one of the apostles ever teach a "sinner's prayer?" Not one!! Yet you teach a sinner's prayer method of salvation? Repentance and baptism are commanded of God, for you and me today.
Full4God 9 months ago
@Full4God Yes, the convenant was made in His blood. So what's your point? It's His blood that gives saving power, not water baptism.....sinners prayer? Show me in the Bible where Trinity or rapture is mentioned. The point is, the concepts are taught regardless of how you want to label them. The concept of a sinner's prayer is taught because one has to repent, confess, and believe to be saved. This encompasses the sinner's prayer. Baptism is commanded BUT NOT FOR SALVATION!!!!!!!!!!!
pretribrapture 9 months ago
@Full4God Oh so Jesus does not have power to save since He is on the throne in heaven and omnipresent? wow mental redardation happens every five minutes!
pretribrapture 9 months ago
@Full4God Please read Hebrews 9 in context! learn to do some exegesis please! Kindly read (if you can read) verse 14 which states "How much more then will the BLOOD OF CHRIST (NOT BAPTISM) who through the eternal spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God! NOTHING ABOUT BAPTISM!
pretribrapture 9 months ago
@pretribrapture
Wonder if the Confession of the thief on the cross beside Jesus, could be considered a "DEATH BED CONFESSION"?
USAFreedomReform 1 month ago
your preschool elementary attempt at armchair theology has become very plaguey and your comments are a linchpin that has not proven to be theologically accurate, thus you are not very issuable and have ossified your heart. Go to a good seminary. Read my friend...study read
pretribrapture 10 months ago
@pretribrapture Armchair theology, eh. Ironic that Ankerberg gave Lewis a piece of his mind during the breaks because Jerry Jones was eating him for lunch. And Lewis went to a good seminary, but it was not enough to counter truth.
Full4God 10 months ago
@Full4God where's the proof of this? Jerry Jones is an idiot that needs learn how to interepret the Scriptures correctly. I would eat his lunch if he debated me. So would any other scholar....
pretribrapture 10 months ago
What do you think, repentance that leads to life means? it means that Corenelius was saved? duh
pretribrapture 10 months ago
@pretribrapture Repentance that leads to life is just that: repentance that LEADS to life. A non-repentent person will not follow God's path that leads to life. That's why Peter said repent AND be baptized for the forgiveness of your sins. I am going to stick with what Peter said. Do you think he is playing two sides of a fence? What he told the Jews on Pentecost is consistent with what Cornelius and his household did. They obeyed God.
Full4God 10 months ago
@pretribrapture It means that only when a person changes, and turns to God will he find life. For if one continues to walk the godless path, he will never find God. It is the repentance that LEADS to life.
Full4God 9 months ago
Wait, you implied before that you believe that baptism is a part of salavation. So, now are you agreeing with me that its not. Then we agree. You are saved then are baptized. Thats what Ive been saying. Did you change your mind?
pretribrapture 10 months ago
@pretribrapture Again, for the umpteenth time, Jesus said, "He who has believed AND has been baptized shall be saved." There is no way in the world to slip salvation in between belief and baptism, unless you come to it with your bias in hand. I will stick with what Jesus said here and deny what you have claimed. Just tell people what Jesus said and that should be enough. Anything else is a man-made doctrine.
Full4God 10 months ago
@Full4God you are not listening. Again, IF BAPTISM SAVES, THEN WHY DOESNT THE TEXT SAY, HE THAT DOES NOT BE BAPTIZED WILL BE CONDEMED...PLAIN AND SIMPLE....IF BAPTISM SAVES, WHY DIDN'T JESUS BATIZE ANYONE? HOW IS IT THAT ABRAHAM BELIEVED AND IT WAS ACCOUNTED HIM RIGHTEOUS? What about 1 Cor. 1:17? According to this verse, if the gospel saves, and if Paul draws a clear distinction between the gospel and baptism, doesn’t that mean that baptism has no part in salvation?
SS?
pretribrapture 10 months ago
@pretribrapture I'll take on your questions, if I may. If baptism saves, then why doesn't the text say, "he that does not be baptized will be condemed?" I think this is quite simple. Mark 16:16 says this, "He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned." The text says that those who believe and are baptized shall be saved. If I say "the sky is blue" do I really need to tell you all the colors the sky isn't?
Concatenate 9 months ago
@Concatenate A very weak analogy. The colors of the sky are not always blue. Sometimes its black, sometimes its cloudy...but God's word does not change. You just committed another logical fallacy; it's called a Red Herring which means that you are introducing a topic that is not related to the one at hand e.g. talking about the sky insead of dealing with the text. IT IS CLEAR THAT THOSE WHO DONT BELIEVE WILL BE CONDEMED, NOT THOSE WHO HAVE NOT BEEN BAPTIZED! Read the text!
pretribrapture 9 months ago
@pretribrapture Perhaps the analogy was weak, but the point remains. When the word of God says something, it does not have to show the opposing perspective. You tell me to read the text, I think we all need to read what the text says. To me, it reads that whoever believes and is baptized shall be saved. So knowing that, where does baptism fit in the plan of redemption?
Concatenate 9 months ago
@Concatenate It doesn't matter what it means to you or me, what matters it he authors intended meaning. For the last time, Baptism does not save. It is sybmbolic of redemtion. If the water is part of salvation, what you are saying is that water (a creation of God saves)...heresy! Redemtion is totally through placing your faith in Christ before any water baptism or even taking the Lord's supper.
pretribrapture 9 months ago
@pretribrapture Well, you told me to read the text, and that's what I'm doing. The text in 1 Peter 3:21 says "baptism now saves you." The text in Mark 16:16 says that whoever believes and is baptized shall be saved. The text in Galatians 3:27 says that those who are baptized clothe themselves with Christ. However, you're telling me that salvation takes place prior to baptism, but from reading those texts it seems that God is requiring it.
Concatenate 9 months ago
@pretribrapture Second one. If baptism saves, why didn't Jesus baptize anyone? I think this is a simple one as well, because it wasn't the Father's will for His Son to baptize.
Concatenate 9 months ago
@Concatenate Where does the Bible ever say that it wasn't? It was His will to baptize with fire and the Holy Spirit and it the disciples baptized with water AS A SYMBOL OF THIS. Enough said...next...
pretribrapture 9 months ago
@pretribrapture I don't understand your point here. The disciples baptized with water as a symbol of what exactly?
Concatenate 9 months ago
@pretribrapture Third. How is it that Abraham believed and it was accounted him righteous. Well, first of all, Abraham believed AND obeyed, don't let that fact get lost on you. If you read Genesis, you'll see Abraham obeying God's commands, it was in that obedience combined with his belief that made him righteous. Paul's point in Romans 3 and 4 has to do with the fact that no "law" (man made or Law of Moses) can make anyone "good." Only Christ can do that.
Concatenate 9 months ago
@Concatenate He only obeyed After He believed. He has to FIRST be saved and then obey. You can first obey God without being saved and born into His family. You are confusing works with salvation. You just poked a whole in your own argument by usying Romans 3 and 4. That's what Ive been trying to tell you. It is CHrist alone and HIS work that saves plus nothing else. We don't have good works to get saved, we have good works after we are saved.
pretribrapture 9 months ago
@pretribrapture Of course someone must first believe, I'm not disputing that, but I am saying that belief and obedience MUST go together. This is not a faith "versus" works thing, the Bible advocates both. There is no work that can save, but works must accompany faith in order to be complete. Imagine if Noah just believed and didn't build the ark. In this case, Noah was "saved" the during and after flood, after believing and obeying God. Abraham also believed and obeyed.
Concatenate 9 months ago
@pretribrapture Fourth. What about 1 Corinthians 1:17? "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void." Paul's letter to the Corinthians was essentially a scathing rebuke. Here he's criticizing them for being divided by the person that baptized them. Paul was sent to preach, not to run around baptizing everyone. But, he did preach baptism, that cannot be denied. Baptism is part of gospel.
Concatenate 9 months ago
@Concatenate So what? the point is that Paul is making a clear distinction between baptism and the gospel. Baptism IS NOT and never has been part of the gospel. The gospel saves 1 Cor. 15:2. First, faith and FAITH ALONE is the only condition for salvation. Just as Luther discorved "The just shall live by faith" (Rom. 1:17; 4:-5; Acts 16:31; Titus 3:5-7) In John's gospel only faith is listed as a condition for salvation.
pretribrapture 9 months ago
@pretribrapture John's gospel only faith is listed as a condition for salvation. Third, Jesus called baptism a work of righteousness (Matt 3:15). The Bible rejects ANY work of righteousness as a condition for salvation (Eph. 2:8-9; Titus 3:5). Faith is an inward act in the heart, not an outward work. If water baptism (something we do, not God) is needed for salvation, it is not the work of God but ours. Baptism is a work that flows from the faith that alone brings salavtion through the gospel.
pretribrapture 9 months ago
@pretribrapture I believe you're reading 1 Corinthians 1:17 totally wrong. Paul is not intending to draw a line between gospel and baptism, he's drawing a line between preaching and laboring to baptize individuals who accept the word. The gospel does save, and the Bible says that baptism now saves us (1 Peter 3:21) so it definitely is part of the gospel. The only place in the entire Bible that says "faith alone" is James 2:24, check that one out.
Concatenate 9 months ago
@Concatenate I believe it is you reading the text wrong. You don't have a working knowledge of Biblical exegesis. The words "now saves you" are taken out of context. For one thing, the persons being baptized are no more saved by water baptism than Noah was through the flood. He was saved through faith. He acted on his faith in obedience to God, but his salvation came through his faith, not as a result of his obedience in building the ark.
pretribrapture 9 months ago
@pretribrapture So now I'm taking the words "now saves you" out of context? So what exactly do those words mean if not "now saves you?" I'm glad you bring up Noah, Hebrews 11:7 says that Noah prepared the ark "by faith." It was faith combined with his obedience that saved him. There's really no getting around that. Either Noah was saved by faith only, or he was saved by faith in God where he acts on it and saves his family from destruction. Which one is it?
Concatenate 9 months ago
@Concatenate The salvation spoken of in 1 Peter is not from the penalty of sin but from a soiled conscience. All those not baptized are living with a bad conscience. Being obedient to God in baptism will save them from the knowledge of a wrong conscience.
Read the John...a whole book of salvation by faith! Infact, over 200 verses in the NT mention coming to Christ by faith!
pretribrapture 9 months ago
@pretribrapture So you're saying you can be saved with a bad conscience? That's what I get out of what you're saying since you believe one is saved before baptism. Also, I don't believe 1 Peter 3:21 is about saving someone from their conscience, I believe it is about appealing to God through baptism in order to have a good conscience that you've partaken of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ (Romans 6:3-8).
Concatenate 9 months ago
@pretribrapture I hope I have provided sufficient answers to your questions. If not, I am happy to provide more clarification/explanation. As for the debate in this video, I believe Dr. Jones did an exceptional job defending Biblical doctrine. There are times I cringe with some of his word usage, but overall I feel like he preached the truth. I happen to believe a certain thing and I'm not a prideful man, so I am genuinely trying to help you understand my position in all of this. Cheers.
Concatenate 9 months ago
@Concatenate you are not prideful, but if I may bluntly say..ignorant of theology
pretribrapture 9 months ago
@pretribrapture I think we all have battles with ignorance, willful or accidental, I pray that the truth reveals itself to me in His word so that I may worship in spirit and in truth.
Concatenate 9 months ago
@pretribrapture Because "...he who does not believe has been judged already..." (John 3:18) It would be foolish for Jesus to have to say, "he who has not believed, and has not been baptized, and has not repented of his sins, and refuses to confess Me before men, and murders, and steals, and swears, and dishonors his father and mother, and covets, and lusts, and lies, and kicks the dog, etc., etc., etc. Where do you think the list should end? Jesus ended it with a simple "disbelief."
Full4God 9 months ago
@Full4God baptism not mentioned in this verse!!!!!!
pretribrapture 9 months ago
@pretribrapture also, since Plagious and Augustine taught this, this also led to the heresy that taught that the sacraments of the Catholic church were necessary to preserve the individual from additional guilt. This in turn led to those that God predestined to be saved. This was a contradiction because baptism would have little effect in attempting to accomplish the same thing. Over the years, this was passed down to Willam Cambell who founded the church of Christ. This ALL manmade NOT Bible!
pretribrapture 10 months ago
Sixth, since Scripture cannot contradict itself, and sine for example, baptism clearly follows salvation in Acts 10:47, an unclear passage (Acts 3:38) should be interpreted in the light of the clear one rather than the reverse.
pretribrapture 10 months ago
@pretribrapture We agree that Scripture does not contradict itself; it is God's word. And I also agree with you that we should interpret more difficult passages with clear passages. But I disagree that "baptism clearly follows salvation in Acts 10:47." Cornelius was told that Peter "will speak words to you by which you will be saved, you and all your household. And as I BEGAN TO SPEAK [emphasis mine], the Holy Spirit fell upon them...." (Acts 11:14, 15) (cont...)
Full4God 10 months ago
@pretribrapture (cont.) The purpose for which the Holy Spirit fell upon Cornelius et al, was for the same reason that He fell upon the twelve apostles on Pentecost: to teach something to unbelieving Jews. Here's what is said about these Jews who learned about God's grace upon the Gentiles, "When they heard this, they quieted down and glorified God, saying, 'Well then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life." (Acts 11:18) Not to save Cornelius.
Full4God 10 months ago
Third, this may be a command for the Jews whose baptism was necessary for the national restoration of Israel, something that John the Baptist told them earlier (Matt. 3:1-8). Fourth, even if it does apply to everyone, the baptism was not before the converts were saved but after: Acts 2:41. It is the acceptance of God's word that brings salvation Rom. 10:17. Fifth, the text doesn't say that those who were not baptized were not saved.
pretribrapture 10 months ago
@pretribrapture This was not a command for the Jews only. Note what Jesus commanded, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of ALL THE NATIONS [emphasis mine], baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit..." (Matt. 28:18, 19) So the command for disciples to baptize was NOT for the Jews only. Your suggestion is a stretch in order to "εις" support your presupposition, which is wrong.
Full4God 10 months ago
@Full4God nope dont think so my friend..read it again..
pretribrapture 10 months ago
@pretribrapture Yes, I think so. The command was to be taken to all nations, and all nations are to be baptized. I went back and re-read it, and it is there in plain sight. If I go back and read it right now, I am sure it will still be there. Matt. 28:20 and Mark 16:16 both indicate that Jesus' command was to take the gospel to all nations or to all creation. One gospel for all. Jesus has ALL authority, and you speak counter to Jesus. Are you an antiChrist?
Full4God 10 months ago
@Full4God No, bit you are a babbling idiot that is living cloud-cuckoo-land if you continue to believe that water has any saving power. Good luck at getting into heaven. You are in grave doctrinal error and follow the teachings of a cult. Are you even aware that this is a Catholic view and it considered a sacrament? In A.D. 431, Pelagius a British monk was condemed a the council of Ephesus beacuse he taught that infant baptism is what washed away original sin from babies, along with Augustine.
pretribrapture 10 months ago
@pretribrapture According to Paul's letter to the saints in Rome, there was to be no restoration of physical Israel. Paul says, "For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; nor are they all children because they are Abraham's descendants, but: 'THROUGH ISAAC YOUR DESCENDANTS WILL BE NAMED.' That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants." (Rom. 9:6b-8) Christians are spiritual Israel today.
Full4God 10 months ago
@pretribrapture Jesus said, "He who has believed [past tense] and "και" has been baptized [past tense] shall be saved [future tense]. Much of Christendom instead says, "He who has believed and repeats the sinner's prayer is saved, and then He should be baptized because Jesus was baptized. But baptism has nothing to do with salvation." Where in the Bible is this? It is NOWHERE in the Bible. This is a deception of Satan--don't fall for it. Just do what Jesus commanded and come to Him.
Full4God 10 months ago
A response to Acts 2:38 (Norman Geisler, Systematic Theology, p. 499).
First, the word for (Gk: eis) often does connote "to" or "toward," it can also mean "because of" or "in accordance with," in which case forgiveness would come before baptism Second, eis does not necessitate that baptism come before forgiveness in Acts 2:38, since the view may be backward (to already being saved) instead of forward (to being saved through baptism). more.....
pretribrapture 10 months ago
@pretribrapture If you translate the Greek "εις" as "because of" in this text, then the conjunction "και" (and) means that not only were the 3,000 saved before being baptized, they were also saved before repenting, and I don't think you want to hold onto this proposition. Peter commanded both repentance AND (και) baptism "in order to" (εις) receive forgiveness of sins, not "because" their sins had already been forgiven. No one receives forgiveness without repenting--surely we agree on this.
Full4God 10 months ago
@Full4God forgivness and repentance go together. Ive allready proven that. You have committed one logical fallacy: it's called a red herring. When you say that Isreal is the church. This is a red herring, an attempt to get off the suject at hand. Please stick with the subject. When I am done proving wrong about baptism, I WILL PROVE THAT ISREAL IS NOT THE CHURCH. THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT ELECT GROUPS!
pretribrapture 10 months ago
Paul was saved on the road to Damascus because he called Jesus Lord Acts 9. He also referred to his salvation experience in Acts chapters 22 and 26. Regarding Acts 22:16, These words do not prove that he was saved. He was allready saved.His baptism was an act of an obedient Christian, not an act by which he became a Christian. The washing away of sins is ceremonial NOT actual. Sins are to be taken away through faith in Christ's fininshed work Eph 2:1, Acts 13:38-39. Anymore questions?????
pretribrapture 10 months ago
@pretribrapture Paul was NOT saved on the road to Damascus, not until he obeyed Ananias' command to be "baptized, and wash away your sins." Ceremonial cleansing was an old covenant ritual. Jesus made that first covenant obsolete (Heb. 8:13) because it was replaced by a covenant, inaugurated in His blood, under which we could receive forgiveness of sins. (Jer. 31:31-34) You did not learn your doctrine by studying the Bible; rather, by heeding man's doctrines, and they are vain. (Matt. 15:9)
Full4God 10 months ago
notice that in chapter 3 in matthew says that when Jesus was baptized by John the Holy Spirit came to him like a dove after he was baptized not before,
3emperorsproduction 10 months ago
@3emperorsproduction So, are you saying that we do not receive the Holy Spirit until AFTER we are baptized? I agree. Read Acts 19:1-8 to see this for yourself.
Full4God 10 months ago
@Full4God It is obvious he is talking about baptized in the spirit. Same senario as Acts 10 where Cornelius was baptized by the Holy Spirit BEFORE he was baptized with water. Please don't twist someone's words to prove your point. All it does is make you look bad.
smoores57 10 months ago
@smoores57 The Holy Spirit did not "fall upon" Cornelius and his household in order to save them, or because they were already saved. Rather, it was to teach the Jews, including Peter, that God had welcomed "the man who fears God and does what is right in all nations." (Acts 10:34-35) And here's the proof: "When they [the Jews] heard this, they quieted down and glorified God, saying, "Well then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life." (Acts 11:18)
Full4God 10 months ago
@Full4God So God gave the HS to children of the devil. I don't think so. He would not give His HS to unregenerated people. The HS did not save them. Their belief in the finished work of Jesus Christ saved them. God knew this and poured out His HS on them. Peter recognized this and told them they ought to be baptized out of obedience to Christ's doctrine. We are declared righteous by God when we believe the gospel. Then we are sanctified by obedience to the scriptures.
smoores57 10 months ago
@smoores57 You completely misunderstand the purpose for which the Holy Spirit fell upon Cornelius and his household. It was NOT for the purpose of saving them, but to teach the Jews that God had accepted the Gentiles. Stop hanging onto a select few verses and understand the plan of salvation in its entirety.
Full4God 10 months ago
@Full4God This is heresy. Read 1 Cor. 12:13, "for by one spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one spirit." This is the spiritual baptism that takes places at salvation before water baptism. Also see Eph. 1:3, Gal. 3:2-5,4:6, How do you explain the fact that Cornelius was a recipient of the Holy Spirit (which means he got saved) prior to his baptism? Acts 10:44-48
pretribrapture 10 months ago
@pretribrapture The Greek is translated "in, with or by," and means "instrumentality." It is by the direction of the Holy Spirit that we are baptized into Christ. And God's Holy Spirit-inspired word tells us how to be saved. Paul says there is "one baptism," and you think it's Holy Spirit baptism? Then Peter was wrong when he mentioned water baptism; Philip was wrong when he baptized the eunuch in water. I don't think so. The disciples were commanded to baptize in water.
Full4God 10 months ago
@Full4God Being a scholar and a student of the Greek text, Im quite aware of how it is transalted. The baptism is one that you are talking about, in the text, but so what? it doesn't prove that it saves you. Holy Spirit baptism took place at pentecost. It was promised by Jesus when He said you shall be baptized with fire and the Holy Ghost. This has nothing to do with being baptized in water my friend. I never said Peter, Philip or anyone else that mentioned baptism was wrong. It does not save
pretribrapture 10 months ago
@pretribrapture in 1 Peter 3:20, 21 Peter connects Noah and his family's salvation in, with, or by water to baptism "which now saves you." However, it saves us only "through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." I never claimed that the water is that which saves us--it doesn't. However, I cannot be saved if I do not obey Jesus (John 3:36), so the question, then, is: Is water baptism a command that we must obey before Jesus will save us--today? Peter seemed to think so. God bless the seekers.
Full4God 10 months ago
@Full4God Paul was saved before he was baptized: Acts 10:47, 11:16-18. The order is clear. They were saved and then baptized. Baptism is a directive to those who are saved (Matt. 28:18-20). It was always believers that were commanded to be baptized. The order is belief that brings salvation.
pretribrapture 10 months ago
@pretribrapture Rectify, then, how Saul was saved BEFORE he was baptized with Ananias' command for Paul to "Arise and be baptized and wash away your sins." And this was after Saul had met Jesus, obeyed Jesus by going into the city, fasted for 3 days and was found praying. Do you believe that "wash away your sins" means that Jesus had not yet forgiven Saul during their meeting on the road?
Surely you and I agree that it is God who removes our sins through the blood of His Son.
Full4God 10 months ago
@Full4God Yes, we do agree that the blood of Jesus removes out sins. What we don't agree on is HOW. I can't make it anymore simple for you....the blood of Jesus is met through faith and repentance and NOT water baptism.
Faith alone is required only; Rom. 1:17;4:4-5;Acts 16:31;Titus 3:5-7. In John's gospel, only faith is required for salvation; 3:16, 18, 36, 5:24; 20:31. Baptism is not part of the gospel 1 Cor. 1:14, Rom 1:16. I will answer your question about Paul in the next post.
pretribrapture 10 months ago
@Full4God Paul was saved before he was baptized: Acts 9 and later was baptized by Ananias Acts 22,26. The order is clear. They were saved and then baptized. Baptism is a directive to those who are saved (Matt. 28:18-20). It was always believers that were commanded to be baptized. The order is belief that brings salvation. Peter confirmed that Cornelius was saved before he was baptized Acts 10:47.
pretribrapture 10 months ago
Winning a debate is not the issue. Winning the race set before us is. Praying that God opens your eyes before it is too late.
smoores57 10 months ago
@smoores57 You cannot win the race set before you though if you are running on a different path. The point that was made about the debate simply meant that the Baptist fellow had no Scriptural foundation on which he stood. Notice how an audience member asked both men to "use the Bible" to address an issue. Lewis simply gave his personal dissertation, but had no biblical foundation to back it up. On what issue do you pray that God would open our eyes? That was ambiguous...please expound.
Full4God 10 months ago
@Full4God Ambiguous? It is very clear where your eyes need to be opened if this doctrine is what you base your salvation on. I was also deceived by the same doctrine you are now deceived by. I preached it, lived it and am very thankful that no one as far as I know was ever "converted" to it by my word or deeds. Thank you Lord! We have now been disfellowshipped using scriptures out of context. Thank God I have not been disfellowshipped by Him. That is all that counts anyway.
smoores57 10 months ago
@smoores57 There are many older men who have realized the error they have preached and have written much to prove such. Cecil Hook is one example. 40 years is a long time to preach something and then realize you have been wrong and have the guts to change. I challenge you to read his material with an open mind instead of labeling him "in error" as most COC people do. If he and I are right, it is you who is on the "other path" you mention. Still praying that your eyes are opened.
smoores57 10 months ago
@smoores57 Sorry, but I will read the Bible with an open mind; not some article written by a man. That's where these strange doctrines have come from. You did not learn these strange doctrines from God's word, but, rather, from man. Show us all in Scripture from which your doctrine stands. All you have provided is man's philosophy. Run from it!!
Full4God 10 months ago
@Full4God Oh I get it...I should only read the Bible with an open mind and not consider what you have to say about it since you refuse to consider what someone else has to say about it unless you know before hand that you are in complete agreement with them. That sounds like a open mind to me. What are you afraid of? I was counseled not to read or listen to anything that was not preapproved by a senior member. That makes it so any decision I make is not really my decision but someone else.
smoores57 10 months ago
@smoores57 You are one sarcastic individual. You do not even demonstrate a spirit of gentleness. As such, you are revealing where your heart truly is. You are an arguer, and not a seeker of the truth. And so I will not waste any more time with you. You know, the pearl before swine thing. I pray that you will continue reading the entire New Testament to work out your own salvation, and stop listening to man made doctrines that cannot save.
Full4God 10 months ago
@Full4God I am simply pointing out that a true truth seeker will look at all the facts which you have refused to do. You have not answered what you are afraid of. I must ask...did Jesus demonstrate a spirit of gentleness when he rebuked Peter "Get thee behind me satan?" Did He demonstrate a spirit of gentleness when he called the scribes and pharisees hypocrits and vipers? He presented the gospel and people either accepted or rejected it. You have rejected His gospel of grace for a false gospel.
smoores57 10 months ago
@Full4God Also, I have dealt with these false teachings for over 3 years now and am getting quite tired of the the same pat answers and the refusal to consider that you might be wrong. I'm tired of dealing with self righteous, arrogant unteachable spirits. So maybe I am a little sarcastic at times. I've finally shown my son the error of this and am working on my daughter and son-in-law. Maybe something I say will spark something in someone. Just sowin a little seed friend.
smoores57 10 months ago
@smoores57 I trust Christ only for my salvation. Here is the world's rewrite of Mark 16:16: "He who has believed is saved and then he should be baptized to follow Jesus' example, but baptism has nothing to do with salvation." Notice how different this is compared to what Jesus actually said: "He who has believe and has been baptized shall be saved." I choose to follow Jesus simple command, though I do not put my faith in the actual water or the act itself. My faith is in Jesus Who saves.
Full4God 10 months ago
The church of Christ won this debate fair and square, and single-handedly.
nixon64966 1 year ago
Very interesting about the "do over" debate. Allen and Jones did do a fantastic job against Kingdon and Bjorstadt, and I haven't even seen the entire debate from start to finish. You'll notice that Ankerberg interjects his own commentary spliced between parts of that debate, which is really is his prerogative, but still. It's one-sided to the brothers from the church because they're only standing on scripture and not the dealings of man. Thanks for posting this debate.
Concatenate 1 year ago
@Concatenate Jones himself shared with me that during the commercial breaks Ankerberg would take Gordon Lewis backstage and give him the what for, charging, "You had better step up to the plate because Jones is eating you alive." That's why the Jones-Lewis debate was not aired. Ankerberg shared with Jones, "I cannot air this debate because it may hurt my ratings." As God is my Judge, this is what Jones shared with me personally. Now, who is really interested in truth?
Full4God 10 months ago
Notice the order in Acts 2:38 Repent and be baptized. Notice the order repentance and THEN baptism. You are saved then baptized as an outward sign of an inward work. Why do you think that the Bible says that John baptized with water, and Jesus batizes with the Holy Spirit. When you are saved you are baptized spiritually brought into union with Christ and then water baptized as an outward testimony.
pretribrapture 1 year ago
@pretribrapture Also notice the little Greek conjunction (καὶ), which is translated "and." What is on the left of "and" is as equally important as what's on the right. Both are included. We have been taught that baptism represents the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. This is not correct. Baptism symbolizes the burial and the resurrection. It's the tomb and the womb. Repentance is where we die to self, but we haven't been resurrected yet--until baptism. We don't bury live people.
Full4God 1 year ago
@pretribrapture as Mark 16:16 says that you are saved after believing and being baptized, how can you then be saved before being baptized in Acts 2:38?
3emperorsproduction 10 months ago
@3emperorsproduction You are taking the verse out of context. This is called isogesis (reading a meaning into the text that's not there). Read the verse again. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; BUT HE THAT BELIEVETH NOT SHALL BE DAMNED. If baptism saves, the text would have read but he that is not baptized shall be damned. It is clear that BELIEF is the key, NOT baptism.
pretribrapture 10 months ago
@pretribrapture Why is this spam. It is simply using scripture to argue you point.
smoores57 10 months ago
@smoores57 by the way, you left out the u in your....
pretribrapture 10 months ago
@3emperorsproduction You are taking the verse out of context. This is called isogesis (reading a meaning into the text that's not there). Read the verse again. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; BUT HE THAT BELIEVETH NOT SHALL BE DAMNED. If baptism saves, the text would have read but he that is not baptized shall be damned. It is clear that BELIEF is the key, NOT baptism.
pretribrapture 10 months ago
A cult is defined as a group of people that depart from the orthodox fundamentals of the Christian faith. The CofC has done this by teaching that water has power to saved, heresy! Nowhere do you see Jesus baptizing anyone for salvation. Infact, in over 200 verses, you see him saying "your FAITH has made you whole" Not baptism making you whole!
pretribrapture 1 year ago
@pretribrapture The church of Christ does NOT teach that water has power to save--far from the truth. When Naaman the leper dipped in the Jordan River, was it the water that cleansed him of his leprosy? Absolutely not. However, had Naaman washed in the waters of the Pharpar River, he would have disobeyed God, and he would have retained his leprosy. It's about obedience, not merit. Baptism into Christ was first taught on Pentecost, after Jesus died.
Full4God 1 year ago
@Full4God Actually in the original COC movement it was taught as baptismal regenration. The error of that has now been seen. Why not see the whole truth and admit that water baptism does not save anybody. It is a sacrament. You do teach that the waters of baptism are where one contacts the Blood of Christ. Care to show me chapter and verse? Sorry, it isn't there.
smoores57 10 months ago
@smoores57 It is Jesus' blood from His sacrificial death that saves us; not any act that man may do. Now for the text: "Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life." (Rom. 6:3, 4) We are buried and raised "new" with Christ in baptism.
Full4God 10 months ago
@Full4God Sorry...no blood is mentioned in this passage. You require chapter and verse for every single thing that someone believes yet you cannot provide one for this. Strike one.
smoores57 10 months ago
@smoores57 It's a good thing you are not the one doing the striking ;-) It wasn't just His blood, but the blood that was shed in his sacrificial death, correct? Paul tells us that we are "buried with Christ by baptism into death." That's where you will contact His saving blood--in His death. And water baptism is God's command for all nations. Peter knew it, Ananias knew it, Paul knew it, Philip knew it. Why is it so hard for you to know it?
Full4God 10 months ago
Comment removed
smoores57 10 months ago
@Full4God I can't "know" it because it isn't true. You still have not shown me where the Bible says that we contact the blood of Jesus when one is baptized. You are adding to the scripture to prove a false teaching. You are reading into the scripture what isn't there. Sorry, I won't believe or teach a doctrine that is not in the Bible. Galatians tells me that I am accursed if I do so.
smoores57 10 months ago
@smoores57 I agree with you my brother...they can't show you where the blood of Jesus brings you into contact with the blood, because it is not there! This is heresy! They also cannot explain how the thief on the cross was saved hmmmmm...still waiting for them to explain this one...
pretribrapture 10 months ago
@pretribrapture Several years ago I ask the question..are we saved by faith or are we saved by faith and works or are we saved by faith that produces works. Their answer was faith that produces works. I agreed. Now the answer is saved by faith and works. When I proved to them that we are saved by faith apart from works they twisted scripture around to say that even faith is a work using John 6:29. How sad that they even take our Saviors own words and twist them. Keep praying that their eyes open
smoores57 10 months ago
@pretribrapture I agree with you. Faith is the critical ingredient, for without faith it is impossible to please God. Doing an action without faith results in nothing beneficial. Therefore, when Peter told the 3,000+ on Pentecost to "repent and be baptized," what was the ONLY way these Jews could have expressed their faith in order to receive forgiveness of their sins? They repented of their sins and were baptized into the name of Jesus Christ. That's how I know they had faith--they obeyed.
Full4God 1 year ago
@Full4God Herein lies one of your problems. It doesn't matter whether you know someone has faith. But, it does matter if God knows they have faith. God looks on the heart, man looks at the flesh. "With the heart man believeth unto righteousness and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation." James speaks mostly of what man sees. Paul speaks mostly about what God see. Baptism is a sacrament just like partaking of the Lord's Supper is. It is obedience but not for salvation.
smoores57 10 months ago
@smoores57 Jesus does not agree with that: "He who has believed AND has been baptized SHALL BE SAVED." See that last part? Read before that to see what Jesus says in order for the "SHALL BE SAVED" to happen. You choose only the first part because you have listened to man instead of Jesus. You surely did not get this doctrine from Scripture. "The SUM of Thy word is truth." Read and obey it all, not just what you choose to obey.
Full4God 10 months ago
The church of Christ is a cult!
pretribrapture 1 year ago
@pretribrapture In what sense do you believe the church of Christ to be a cult?
Full4God 1 year ago
@pretribrapture If the church of Christ is a cult, then Jesus died for a cult. But I don't believe He died for a cult. The fact is, according to Jesus Himself, MOST people who have walked the earth will not be in heaven. They have chosen the wide path because they listen to and obey the teachings of man. God's truth is narrow, and it leads us down such a narrow path that many will choose not to follow it. Christians are "narrow minded" because they walk a narrow path. But it's God's path.
Full4God 10 months ago
@Full4God Jesus did not die for a cult but the people in that cult.
pretribrapture 10 months ago
again, thank you very much for this debate.
about two years a go i saw the other debate, here on youtube, and right now I'm surprised that that was the second.
the San Fernando Church of Christ, Salute you.
idcsanfernando 1 year ago
@idcsanfernando John Ankerberg *claims* to be a Christian. However, a Christian walks toward the light and embraces it when he finds it. What Ankerberg did for money proves otherwise.
Full4God 1 year ago
@Full4God If Ankerberg said and did what you say then he is wrong. However, we all make mistakes. You are attacking his characture which proves nothing.
smoores57 10 months ago
@idcsanfernando You are welcome. I will see Jerry in July and I will pass on your appreciation to him. The only reason this debate was not aired, according to Jones, is because Ankerberg was concerned about his television ratings. This showed Ankerberg's true colors; he is not interested in truth, just the dollar.
Full4God 10 months ago