Faith is a work.

[mailmandan]

Read the rest of the story. Verse 47&48. Then Peter answered, “Can any one forbid WATER that these should not be baptized?...then he COMMANDED them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Sounds like baptism was necessary to me.

I see that you skipped a critical part of the rest of the story in verse 47. "Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" These Gentiles had already believed, received the gift of the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues (which is a spiritual gift that is ONLY for the body of Christ - 1 Corinthians 12) and were saved BEFORE they received water baptism. (Acts 10:43-47) Baptism wasn't necessary for salvation because they were already saved. It only sounds like baptism was necessary to you because that's what your itching ears want to hear.

This scripture is in complete harmony with the rest of the Bible teaching on faith and baptism.
Matt. 28:18&19. 1 Peter3:21
Mark 16:16. James 2:24
Acts 2:38
Acts 22:16

False and sadly I can see that you have learned absolutely nothing so far in this thread that you started. *Be sure to go back and read posts #23, 24, 65, 129, 146, 147 in this thread in which I thoroughly dealt with these these passages of scripture.

*So the only logical conclusion when properly harmonizing scripture with scripture is that faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*

 

[mailmandan]

The doctrine of Faith only is (James 2:24) one of Satan’s greatest and most successful deceptions.

Salvation is by grace through faith and is not by works (Ephesians 2:8,9) which is not to be confused with what James refers to as "faith only" (James 2:14-24) which is an empty profession of faith/dead faith that merely claims to be genuine, but demonstrates by the lack of evidential works that it's dead. We are saved the moment that we place our faith (belief, trust, reliance) in Jesus Christ "alone" for salvation. We are not saved by placing our faith in "water and works" for salvation.

What better way to get people to believe a lie than to tell them they don’t have to do anything.

Telling people that they must "do something" in order to "help" Jesus save them (as if Christ's finished work of redemption is IN-sufficient to save them - Romans 3:24-28) is a good way to get people to believe a lie because they would then receive merit for obtaining salvation by works and this feeds their PRIDE.

“You don’t have to do anything and you are alright no matter how much you sin!”

Typical straw man argument from someone who trusts in works for salvation and NOT in Christ alone.

It’s a do nothing religion and you can understand why it’s so popular with people. But it is a one of Satan’s tricks. Jesus said broad is the way that leads to destruction and MANY there be that go therein. Don’t be deceived. Read the Bible. Let it speak to you without prejudice.

Genuine believers do not promote a do nothing religion (which is a typical straw man argument by works-salvationists) and our motivation for doing something after we have been saved through faith is LOVE for the Lord (faith works through love - Galatians 5:6) and not pride and expectation that we will be saved based on the merits of how much we do.

Paul said don’t be deceived by the philosophies of men.

You mean men like THOMAS CAMPBELL, ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, WALTER SCOTT, and BARTON W. STONE? Oh the irony.

 

[mailmandan]

The thief on the cross was not subject to water baptism because he lived and died under the law of Moses which did not require baptism. While Jesus was here on earth he could save people anyway he chose. But when he died on the cross his New Will (Testament) came into force. Read Hebrews 9:15-17. And that will and testament of our Lord and Savior left a plan for all of us living now to follow in order to be saved. No one can appeal to the thief on the cross as an Example for us for salvation. He lived under a different law.

I often hear people who attend the church of Christ argue that under the old law, before the cross, baptism was not necessary for salvation but under the new law, after the cross, baptism is necessary for salvation in order to "get around" the thief on the cross being saved through faith "apart from water baptism." Do you believe that Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3 - "baptism of repentance for the remission of sins" teaches that sins are remitted through water baptism? Be careful! This was before the cross while still under the old law.

 

[mailmandan]

That does not answer my question. Is water baptism from man or God?

Water baptism is ordained by God and performed by man.

 

[mailmandan]

Jesus said in Matthew 28:18 ...”baptizing them into the NAME of the Father, The Son and the Holy Ghost. That is how you access the name of Jesus. GALATIONS 3:27- as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. You cannot separate the name of Jesus from. Water baptism.

Do you believe that "baptized into Christ" (Galatians 3:27) means water baptized into the body of Christ? Do you also believe that "baptized into Moses" (1 Corinthians 10:2) means water baptized into the body of Moses?

 

[Beckworth]

Why don't you just figure it out for yourself, do or don't makes no diff to me. I will tell you the following quote make no sense at all. View attachment 201179

Why don't you just figure it out for yourself, do or don't makes no diff to me. I will tell you the following quote make no sense at all. View attachment 201179

Under the Old Testament law of Moses, the Jews and Gentiles were under different laws. The Jews had God’s law given to them at Mt Sinai by Moses. The Gentiles had their own law. They could become Jewish proselytes by accepting Judaism just as anyone today can. But the Jewish law separated the Jew from the gentile. The whole purpose of Christ's coming into the world was to 1) provide salvation to all people and 2) to bring all people into ONE FOLD. John 10:16. Ephesians 2:14 says he made both (Jew and Gentile) one breaking down the middle wall of partition that separated them. That middle law of partition was the Old Jewish law that separated Jew from Gentile. I believe these scriptures are teaching that all people, Jew or gentile, are now under the SAME law, the law of Christ, the gospel. That is the point if Acts 10 and Acts 11 where the Jews said we now understand that God has granted to the gentiles repentance unto life. Several Old Testament prophecies point to this also. See Isaiah 2:2, Jeremiah 3:17. So I disagree that the gentiles have a different law or different plan of salvation than the Jews in James 2.

 

[Beckworth]

Water baptism is ordained by God and performed by man.

If water baptism is ordained by God and commanded by God Matthew 28:18, 19, Acts 10:48, then how can it not be a work of God just as faith is in John 6:29. Faith is something you have to DO also. It is just as much a work as you say baptism is. Faith is performed by man also. A man has to believe that’s DOING something. And is no different than a man being baptized. You know that Mark 16:16 makes them equal in weight and importance.

I think you have mentioned this twice now in your comments. The first time I just let it pass because it seemed too silly to have to explain but since you keep bring it up... let me just say something about Mark 16:16. If I say to you, “ if you put food into your mouth and swallow you will live. But if you don’t put food into your mouth, you will die “ do you think that because I didn’t say “if you don’t swallow ... then that means swallowing is not necessary to live?? Thankfully God credited us with enough sense to know that if a person does NOT Believe, he certainly is not going to be baptized. What makes you think he would? That kind of argumentation is weak and borders on the ridiculous.

 

[Beckworth]

Do you believe that "baptized into Christ" (Galatians 3:27) means water baptized into the body of Christ? Do you also believe that "baptized into Moses" (1 Corinthians 10:2) means water baptized into the body of Moses?

Answer to first question, YES. I BELIEVE THAT BECAUSE THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE VERSE SAYS. From the contex of 1 Cor 10. It says they were under the cloud and in the sea giving a picture of complete immersion or covering. The word Baptize in the Greek means “immersion”. So in that sense they were baptized -covered up, completely immersed by the sea on either side of them and the cloud over them. They never came into contact with the water. They never got wet. So I could not call this “water baptism”. In the same sense that Galations 3 is talking about. I think you are comparing apples to oranges. God never said they were baptized into the “body” of Moses so how can I say? I CAN SAY with confidence that what God said in 1 Cor. 10 in No way changes or nullifys what he said in Galations 3:27. To get into Christ you have to be baptized into his body.

 

[Beckworth]

I believe Matthew 28 that Baptism of water is part of the GC but is is not a part of the Gospel. It is only by the Gospel meaning only Jesus saves through faith. The Gospel btw, is the power of God unto salvation.

Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Mark 16:15&16 - JESUS SAID to go into all the world and preach THE GOSPEL, HE THAT BELIEVES AND IS BAPTIZED WILL BE SAVED. So , I’m sorry, you are wrong. Jesus clearly makes the GOSPEL the subject of the Great Commission. And part of that Gospel is baptism.

You know, if I knew I was speaking to those closest to me on earth for the last time, I would talk about the things that were the most important to me. Wouldn’t you? I mean you wouldn’t waste precious time talking about things that weren’t important. Jesus is talking to his disciples for the last time. These are his last words before he leaves them to go back to heaven. That makes these words in his last moments here on earth very important. And in his parting words he gives the command to be baptized.of all the things he could have mentioned, baptism. Is included in this special moment. If it was that important to him. Shouldn’t it be important to you? Please open your eyes and heart to the scriptures and to what Jesus is telling you. It’s not hard. It’s so simple if you will just let your heart accept what he is really telling you. 🙏🏼🙏🏼

 

[Deade]

Under the Old Testament law of Moses, the Jews and Gentiles were under different laws. The Jews had God’s law given to them at Mt Sinai by Moses. The Gentiles had their own law. They could become Jewish proselytes by accepting Judaism just as anyone today can. But the Jewish law separated the Jew from the gentile. The whole purpose of Christ's coming into the world was to 1) provide salvation to all people and 2) to bring all people into ONE FOLD. John 10:16. Ephesians 2:14 says he made both (Jew and Gentile) one breaking down the middle wall of partition that separated them. That middle law of partition was the Old Jewish law that separated Jew from Gentile. I believe these scriptures are teaching that all people, Jew or gentile, are now under the SAME law, the law of Christ, the gospel. That is the point if Acts 10 and Acts 11 where the Jews said we now understand that God has granted to the gentiles repentance unto life. Several Old Testament prophecies point to this also. See Isaiah 2:2, Jeremiah 3:17. So I disagree that the gentiles have a different law or different plan of salvation than the Jews in James 2.

Beckworth, why are you posting this rebuttal to me? I am on your side. My post was to @Guojing on why his ref. to James 2 and Acts 21 made no sense.

 

[Beckworth]

It is not my place to say. There are many real Christians and many fake Christians. I will have communion only with those that believe by certain guidelines. No water baptism is one very serious one.

Beckworth, why are you posting this rebuttal to me? I am on your side. My post was to @Guojing on why his ref. to James 2 and Acts 21 made no sense. View attachment 201205

I apologize. Maybe I read it wrong. Or perhaps I was answering Guojing. I agree. It makes no sense to me either. I think I was trying to answer him.

 

[Beckworth]

Salvation is by grace through faith and is not by works (Ephesians 2:8,9) which is not to be confused with what James refers to as "faith only" (James 2:14-24) which is an empty profession of faith/dead faith that merely claims to be genuine, but demonstrates by the lack of evidential works that it's dead. We are saved the moment that we place our faith (belief, trust, reliance) in Jesus Christ "alone" for salvation. We are not saved by placing our faith in "water and works" for salvation.

Telling people that they must "do something" in order to "help" Jesus save them (as if Christ's finished work of redemption is IN-sufficient to save them - Romans 3:24-28) is a good way to get people to believe a lie because they would then receive merit for obtaining salvation by works and this feeds their PRIDE.

Typical straw man argument from someone who trusts in works for salvation and NOT in Christ alone.

Genuine believers do not promote a do nothing religion (which is a typical straw man argument by works-salvationists) and our motivation for doing something after we have been saved through faith is LOVE for the Lord (faith works through love - Galatians 5:6) and not pride and expectation that we will be saved based on the merits of how much we do.

You mean men like THOMAS CAMPBELL, ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, WALTER SCOTT, and BARTON W. STONE? Oh the irony.

Have I quoted any of the men you mentioned? Have I used them as any kind of authority? Have I even mentioned them? No I have not. That is because everything I have talked about in any of my post has come straight from the scriptures. I have tried to give book, chapter, and verse for every argument I have made. My faith comes from the Bible, not from these men. Although I don’t know your particular denomination, I would ask that you go to any reference source and look up your denomination and see who started it. In what year did they start it and who was the founder, where was it started? It’s all there. Perhaps it was John Smythe the founder of the baptist church in the year 1609 or maybe Martin Luther, or was it the Wesley brothers? Yes. The men you keep mentioning shared my beliefs but that does not make them the source of my faith nor is the church of which I am a member named after any of them. The only reason I can think of why you keep bringing them up is to prejudice people. Keep it up. You are doing yourself more harm than me. And who knows maybe someone will get curious and look these men up and be impressed by their teachings.

 

[JamOn]

Faith the Roots, Work the Fruits

 

[Beckworth]

I see that you skipped a critical part of the rest of the story in verse 47. "Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" These Gentiles had already believed, received the gift of the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues (which is a spiritual gift that is ONLY for the body of Christ - 1 Corinthians 12) and were saved BEFORE they received water baptism. (Acts 10:43-47) Baptism wasn't necessary for salvation because they were already saved. It only sounds like baptism was necessary to you because that's what your itching ears want to hear.

False and sadly I can see that you have learned absolutely nothing so far in this thread that you started. *Be sure to go back and read posts #23, 24, 65, 129, 146, 147 in this thread in which I thoroughly dealt with these these passages of scripture.

*So the only logical conclusion when properly harmonizing scripture with scripture is that faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*

I’m sorry but the apostle Peter disagrees with you in Acts 2:38, “Repent and be baptized ... FOR the remission of sins and you will receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” That passage does NOT read,

 

[Beckworth]

I’m sorry but the apostle Peter disagrees with you in Acts 2:38, “Repent and be baptized ... FOR the remission of sins and you will receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” That passage does NOT read,

believe for the remission of sins and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost

 

[Beckworth]

believe for the remission of sins and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost

You say the Gentiles were already saved in 1 Cor 10 before baptism? Then why did Peter COMMAND them to be baptized in verse 48? It seems to me that it would have been unnecessary or at least optional- but commanded?? Why would an apostle command baptism if it was not necessary? And if it is necessary ( for whatever reason) then why aren’t you teaching what Peter is teaching- that you MUST BE BAPTIZED. ITS NECESSARY because an apostle commanded it - not to mention Jesus Christ himself in Matthew 28:17&19 and Mark 16:15&16.

 

[Beckworth]

I often hear people who attend the church of Christ argue that under the old law, before the cross, baptism was not necessary for salvation but under the new law, after the cross, baptism is necessary for salvation in order to "get around" the thief on the cross being saved through faith "apart from water baptism." Do you believe that Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3 - "baptism of repentance for the remission of sins" teaches that sins are remitted through water baptism? Be careful! This was before the cross while still under the old law.

I see no problem here with what I believe about baptism. I’m not sure what your point is or what you are trying to prove. This baptism was John’s baptism. John’s mission was to prepare the people for the Christ. His baptism WAS a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. It was temporary and in no way conflicted with the baptism in the name of Jesus. It was used during Jesus’s personal ministry here on earth. It had a specific purpose. Are you saying the thief on the cross was not baptized by John? How do you know that? It says ALL the land of Judah and those from Jerusalem came out and were baptized by John. I don’t know if the thief was or wasn’t baptized by John but there is as good a chance that he was as there is that he wasn’t. It is a “moot” question and makes no difference. While Jesus was here on earth he could save whoever he pleased. Johns teaching and baptism are not to be confused with the baptism in the name of Jesus. In Acts 19:1-5 Paul came across some disciples of Jesus that had only been baptized with the Baptism of John. That baptism was no longer effective and Paul told them they needed to be baptized in the name if Jesus. Wonder why he went to all that trouble since according to you it was totally UNNECESSARY!! And didn’t matter anyway! Paul re-baptized these people in the name of Jesus. So it must have mattered to him even if it doesn’t to you. Jesus could choose to save the thief on the cross with or with out John’s baptism. But the thief on the cross STILL WAS NOT SUBJECT TO THE BAPTISM OF JESUS which was not in force until after his death. This is clearly taught in Hebrews 9.

 

[Beckworth]

I see that you skipped a critical part of the rest of the story in verse 47. "Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" These Gentiles had already believed, received the gift of the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues (which is a spiritual gift that is ONLY for the body of Christ - 1 Corinthians 12) and were saved BEFORE they received water baptism. (Acts 10:43-47) Baptism wasn't necessary for salvation because they were already saved. It only sounds like baptism was necessary to you because that's what your itching ears want to hear.

False and sadly I can see that you have learned absolutely nothing so far in this thread that you started. *Be sure to go back and read posts #23, 24, 65, 129, 146, 147 in this thread in which I thoroughly dealt with these these passages of scripture.

*So the only logical conclusion when properly harmonizing scripture with scripture is that faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*

The Holy Spirit was given to the gentiles in Cornelius’s house as a sign that God had granted them salvation just like he did to the Jews. They were the First gentile converts. Peter says the gentiles received the gift of the Holy Ghost just like we (the Jews) did at the beginning. He was talking about the beginning of the church in Acts 2 where he preached the first gospel sermon and 3000 Jews were baptized and added to the church. The Holy Ghost came upon the apostles at that time and was also a sign to the unbelieving Jews that God is with these people. Acts 11:17&18 clearly shows that the gift of the Holy Spirit was a sign to the Jews that God had accepted the Gentiles also.

Now my question to you is: where is the verse that says this gift of the Holy Spirit SAVED. Them?

 

[PS]

I’m sorry but the apostle Peter disagrees with you in Acts 2:38, “Repent and be baptized ... FOR the remission of sins and you will receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” That passage does NOT read,

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Act 2:38 KJV)

This is wonderful. These people who had crucified Jesus, were being told to be baptised in HIS name, in the name of the one they crucified. If that is not a complete change of heart, I do not know what is. To be baptised in the name of the one they crucified is the outward sign of inner repentance. It is a complete reversal from how they were before, and a sign to the world, of total conversion and total repentance.

It is not the baptism that saved them, it is the change of heart that convicted them of the need to come to Jesus for the remission of their sins. It was the outward evidence of an inner faith. And you know what, they did not have to do any work at all, for Christ did it all, on the cross. God bless.

 

[Beckworth]

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Act 2:38 KJV)

This is wonderful. These people who had crucified Jesus, were being told to be baptised in HIS name, in the name of the one they crucified. If that is not a complete change of heart, I do not know what is. To be baptised in the name of the one they crucified is the outward sign of inner repentance. It is a complete reversal from how they were before, and a sign to the world, of total conversion and total repentance.

It is not the baptism that saved them, it is the change of heart that convicted them of the need to come to Jesus for the remission of their sins. It was the outward evidence of an inner faith. And you know what, they did not have to do any work at all, for Christ did it all, on the cross. God bless.

If what you say is true, then why didnt Peter say “Repent everyone of you for the remission of sins and be baptized”? It would have been just as easy to say it that way. But he didn’t. Because that would have given a whole different meaning to the verse. He said repent and be baptized for the remission of sins because that is what he meant- baptism is for the remission of sins. If yourdoctrine doesn’t fit scripture then you need to change your doctrine - not try to change the scriptures.