Gospel Confusion...

[hornetguy]

Paul taught that WB is not essential by not teaching that it IS essential, and Jesus did the same.

Proving a negative with a lack of a positive.... funny how we humans can twist things around, isn't it.

There absolutely MUST be alien life around us, because Jesus and Paul never said there was NOT any. SMH

 

[DeanM]

Why do you obfuscate and change the subject? Why not just answer the questions posed?

Get ready for more walls of text. Over and over.

 

[Cameron143]

Get ready for more walls of text. Over and over.

He seems more interested in labeling people than actually doing the necessary work to help them. How could someone who believes someone to be unsaved stop ministering and move on? While his discernment and judgment are poor, his zeal for the lost, at least those he believes are lost, seems even poorer still.

 

[DeanM]

He seems more interested in labeling people than actually doing the necessary work to help them. How could someone who believes someone to be unsaved stop ministering and move on? While his discernment and judgment are poor, his zeal for the lost, at least those he believes are lost, seems even poorer still.

He puts more faith in baptism than he does in the blood of Jesus Christ. Ive stop paying attention to him.

 

[GWH]

Proving a negative with a lack of a positive.... funny how we humans can twist things around, isn't it.

There absolutely MUST be alien life around us, because Jesus and Paul never said there was NOT any. SMH

Apples and oranges.
It is obvious that Jesus and Paul would have stressed that WB is required for baptism, if it were.
Sad how some deny the obvious.

 

[hornetguy]

Mark 16: And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

um.... you left out the part about playing with deadly serpents and drinking poison... do you do that?

Speaking in tongues is not required. It is a gift given by the Spirit, to whomever the Spirit decides.

4 Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit. 5 And there are varieties of ministries, and the same Lord. 6 There are varieties of effects, but the same God who works all things in all persons. 7 But to each one is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. 8 For to one is given the word of wisdom through the Spirit, and to another the word of knowledge according to the same Spirit; 9 to another faith [f]by the same Spirit, and to another gifts of [g]healing [h]by the one Spirit, 10 and to another the [i]effecting of [j]miracles, and to another prophecy, and to another the [k]distinguishing of spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, and to another the interpretation of tongues. 11 But one and the same Spirit works all these things, distributing to each one individually just as He [l]wills.

29 All are not apostles, are they? All are not prophets, are they? All are not teachers, are they? All are not workers of [w]miracles, are they? 30 All do not have gifts of healings, do they? All do not speak with tongues, do they? All do not interpret, do they? 31 But earnestly desire the greater gifts.

 

[hornetguy]

Sad how some deny the obvious.

we agree on that.

 

[hornetguy]

It is obvious that Jesus and Paul would have stressed that WB is required for baptism, if it were.

The last words of Jesus to his apostles.....

18 And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me. 19 [g]Go, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to [h]follow all that I commanded you; and behold, I am with you [i]always, to the end of the age.”

Paul understood the necessity of it, apparently....

17 So Ananias departed and entered the house, and after laying his hands on him said, “Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road by which you were coming, has sent me so that you may regain your sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit.” 18 And immediately something like fish scales fell from his eyes, and he regained his sight, and he got up and was baptized; 19 and he took food and was strengthened.

Peter saw, and taught the necessity of it....

Then Peter responded, 47 “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?” 48 And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.

But, you keep on parsing words until you get what you want.... I'll just go by what the word says....

 

[PaulThomson]

Well said, and the very point that goes missing because of assumptions made that Paul, at the beginning of his ministry, continued the practice of water baptism for a very small few, with no real memory as to if he had ever baptized any others. It's an incontrovertible fact that, had water baptism been of such great importance FOR salvation, he would not have neglected that being a part of his Gospel command. Instead, we're met with the absolute silence on the matter.

1 Corinthians 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

To say that baptism was/is an integral part for the bestowment of salvation upon any individual under the Gospel of Grace, in the face of so much evidence to the contrary in Paul's ministry and writings, with him knowing his writings were on the level of scripture, that is the height of arrogance today and historically for all who say what is an actual indictment against Paul for being a bumbling fool. He was no such type.

Even Peter confirmed the events of bestowment of salvation BEFORE anyone was ever water baptized:

Acts 10:46-47
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

They were filled with Holy Spirit and exercising the gifts BEFORE they were dunked in water, which lends absolute evidence they were saved BEFORE water baptism, with Peter not saying one word for its requirement in any sense of the word. It was strictly symbolic, and symbolism saves nobody! More people need to get this right. Allegorizing tendencies has far too many people taking that practice to the extreme of transplanting over into the dispensation of Grace a requirement that was laid down only BEFORE Grace was manifest.

Who in their right mind thinks unbelievers were ever filled with Holy Spirit? They had Holy Spirit, and were sealed by Holy Spirit, BEFORE getting wet.

Acts 16:30-33
30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?
31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.
32 And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.
33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.

That was NOT Peter's Gospel of the Kingdom BEFORE Paul had received the revelation of the mystery hidden in God from the foundation of the world, that had the princes of this world (demons and Satan) they would NOT have crucified the Lord of Glory. The ignorance of these facts is astounding to behold. Peter, under the Kingdom Gospel, laid down the requirement for salvation water baptism unto the remission of sins, which bath then, was necessary for salvation. Who could disagree with that and not realize how ignorant they are? But, instead, we see the practice of, "This is what I believe, and it doesn't matter what evidence there is to the contrary, I will continue believing it."

Wow...

MM

You seem to be assuming that salvation is a momentary event, like passing through a door from a dark room into a light room, and the door gets locked once you pass through it so you are trapped in the light, trapped in salvation. But maybe salvation includes a door at it's beginning, but is a way one needs to travel and remain on, and one can depart from it further along the path, Maybe water baptism is a way-station along the path that one needs to pass through to remain on the most direct and equipped path to the celestial city. And maybe circumventing this way-station leaves one less equipped for the journey ahead.

Abraham was justified by his faith when he believed God's promises, but if He had refused to receive circumcision as a seal of his commitment to the covenant God had cut with him, would he have remained God's chosen, or would God have passed over Him and looked for another? Moses failed to seal his participation in the Abrahamic covenant by leaving his son uncircumcised, and God was about to kill him and maybe choose Aaron instead, until Moses wife circumcised the boy,

Maybe it is because you have boarded the bandwagon of some some prideful gnosis that you insist that you are excused from receiving and administering water baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ aka in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

 

[PaulThomson]

Colossians 2:10-15
10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:
11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:
12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.
13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

None of the eleven preached this. Only Paul. You saw where James wrote to Israel that they were not justified by faith since their faith was required to be coupled with works. Paul, on the other hand laid down no such requirement because the truth that applies to us today did not apply to them back then. The fall of Israel through the stoning of Stephen brought about this dispensation of grace for Gentiles.

Act 13:38 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins:
Act 13:39 And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.

Peter preached deliverance from the law.

Eph 5:3 But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;
Eph 5:4 Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.
Eph 5:5 For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.
Eph 5:6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience
Eph 5:7 Be not ye therefore partakers with them.
Eph 5:8 For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light:

And Paul preached works effect one's salvation.

 

[PaulThomson]

1 Corinthians 15:1 - Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. (without cause or without effect, to no purpose) 3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures.

The gospel is the "good news" of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ (1 Corinthians 15:1-4) and is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that BELIEVES.. (Romans 1:16) To "believe" the gospel is to trust in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ as the ALL-sufficient means of our salvation.

The gospel is a message of grace that is to be received through faith. The gospel is not a set of rituals to perform, a code of laws to be obeyed or a check list of good works (including water baptism) to accomplish as a prerequisite for salvation.

Do you need to reduce the amount that you deliberately steal, lie, commit adultery, fornicate, slander, despise others, display malice, and gossip in order to partake of the first resurrection from the dead?

 

[PaulThomson]

Nowhere in the passage in John 3 is baptism mentioned. To link the passage to baptism has no foundation.
The reference to water is actually a reference to the gospel. See 1 Peter 1:23...being born again by the word of God.

Jhn 3:22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.
Jhn 3:23 And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized.

Jhn 3:26 And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him.

 

[PaulThomson]

Again, you're pointing at Paul's earlier ministry where, even then, not one statement was ever made by Paul that water baptism was a precursor to salvation.

You are again assuming salvation is an instantaneous irrevocable completed done deal that happens when one first puts faith in Christ. Baptism is not a precursor to instant complete salvation. It is a step in the process of a lifestyle of salvation.

 

[Cameron143]

Jhn 3:22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.
Jhn 3:23 And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized.

Jhn 3:26 And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him.

You believe these verses to be referring back to the dialog between Jesus and Nicodemus?

 

[PaulThomson]

You believe these verses to be referring back to the dialog between Jesus and Nicodemus?

The claim was that the passage in John 3 does not mention baptism. It does. The original book was one story without chapters and verses. The context of the story of Nicodemus clearly includes the idea of water baptism a few verses later. I am not dogmatic as to whether John intended to imply to his readers that "birth from water" was water baptism or physical birth from amniotic fluid or believing the word. Just pointing out that the blanket dismissal of the possibility it was water baptism based on claims of context are not credible. What in the context points to it being an allusion to being born of the incorruptible seed of the word?

 

[Cameron143]

The claim was that the passage in John 3 does not mention baptism. It does. The original book was one story without chapters and verses. The context of the story of Nicodemus clearly includes the idea of water baptism a few verses later. I am not dogmatic as to whether John intended to imply to his readers that "birth from water" was water baptism or physical birth from amniotic fluid or believing the word. Just pointing out that the blanket dismissal of the possibility it was water baptism based on claims of context are not credible. What in the context points to it being an allusion to being born of the incorruptible seed of the word?

The passage being referred to was the conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus. Do the verses you shared find their antecedent in the earlier passage?

 

[PaulThomson]

The passage being referred to was the conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus. Do the verses you shared find their antecedent in the earlier passage?

You are assuming a first century eastern Jewish writer would structure his work like a 21st century western writer would. I'm just saying that the meaning of "born of water" when considered in the context of the whole Bible is inconclusive.

 

[Cameron143]

You are assuming a first century eastern Jewish writer would structure his work like a 21st century western writer would. I'm just saying that the meaning of "born of water" when considered in the context of the whole Bible is inconclusive.

Born of water doesn't mean born through baptism or born physically. The passage is dealing with being born from above. That is spiritual birth.

 

[PaulThomson]

Born of water doesn't mean born through baptism or born physically. The passage is dealing with being born from above. That is spiritual birth.

Where in the context of John 3 is the phrase "born from above' ?

 

[Cameron143]

Where in the context of John 3 is the phrase "born from above' ?

Verses 5-8, 12