Shining Light on 1 Corinthians Chapter 15
- Thread starter Wansvic
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
My point was the born again believers in question believed that their own water baptism was essential to God's granting them repentance unto life. And, they hoped that being water baptized for those already deceased might make a difference concerning where they would spend eternity. They were wrong. Obedience to water baptism is required of each individual prior to their death.
-
1
- Show all
B
Jesus saves, yes indeed. He saves by his grace, by the faith he gives, and he gives living water, and he does it through natural water. Just as he is God, and God is Spirit but he came to save as a natural man born of a natural woman. By the Holy Spirit and a woman's womb, God came to us a man in real flesh.
Did you ever consider that God provided Peter with evidence that the Gentiles could be recipients of repentance unto life through water baptism by filling them with His Spirit? God knows man's heart and would have clearly known that Cornelius and the group would freely obey Peter's command to be water baptized.
so if proxy-baptism-for-the-dead is an example of bad doctrine and wrong practice among born-again-believers why would i think it's based on right doctrine about baptism?
if we agree that baptism-for-the-dead is groundless, then what Paul seems to be using it for, in the context, is to show that even these people who were clueless about baptism were right about resurrection.
i just have the impression that whoever those people were ((mormons, apparently lol)) they did not understand baptism -- so this isn't a verse to get good doctrine about baptism from; it's a verse to get wrong doctrine about baptism. like asking a flat-earther to help you with your physics homework.
if they reached false conclusions i have no reason to suspect they got there from anything but false foundations.
if we agree that baptism-for-the-dead is groundless, then what Paul seems to be using it for, in the context, is to show that even these people who were clueless about baptism were right about resurrection.
i just have the impression that whoever those people were ((mormons, apparently lol)) they did not understand baptism -- so this isn't a verse to get good doctrine about baptism from; it's a verse to get wrong doctrine about baptism. like asking a flat-earther to help you with your physics homework.
if they reached false conclusions i have no reason to suspect they got there from anything but false foundations.
John indeed baptized with water; but YE shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.
John was preparing the way ..To IDENTIFY with John's message that Jesus is the only proper basis for the remission of sins .
Notice here what John was pointing to here . Rom 3 :
25Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are passed., through the forbearance of God;
John was preparing the way ..To IDENTIFY with John's message that Jesus is the only proper basis for the remission of sins .
Notice here what John was pointing to here . Rom 3 :
25Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are passed., through the forbearance of God;
Naaman is a really good example. particularly what his servants told him -- if the man of God had asked something hard, wouldn't you have done it? how much more then, the simple thing he says to you, wash and be clean?
IMO forget trying to correlate H2O with spiritual regeneration and forgiveness of sins.
God asks us to do this; do it.
Naaman is the only example in scripture of anyone being cured of leprosy until Christ came and healed thousands of lepers. Christ did not require that they be first sprinkled with the water of the ashes of the red heifer before their leprosy left them.
put with this, then, that after lepers were healed through their faith in Jesus, He told them to go show themselves to the priests so that they could be ceremonially clean in the eyes of the law.
what advantage, regarding their affliction, did cured lepers have in going to the temple and showing themselves to the priests? they were already healed. so here's where we are -- and where they were in Acts 10 -- God saves us through faith in Christ. having received Him, are we not going to go and do what is fitting?
who in the world receives salvation and then refuses H2O baptism?
who in the world thinks that H2O is what washes away sins?
both of those are evil, IMO
IMO forget trying to correlate H2O with spiritual regeneration and forgiveness of sins.
God asks us to do this; do it.
Naaman is the only example in scripture of anyone being cured of leprosy until Christ came and healed thousands of lepers. Christ did not require that they be first sprinkled with the water of the ashes of the red heifer before their leprosy left them.
put with this, then, that after lepers were healed through their faith in Jesus, He told them to go show themselves to the priests so that they could be ceremonially clean in the eyes of the law.
what advantage, regarding their affliction, did cured lepers have in going to the temple and showing themselves to the priests? they were already healed. so here's where we are -- and where they were in Acts 10 -- God saves us through faith in Christ. having received Him, are we not going to go and do what is fitting?
who in the world receives salvation and then refuses H2O baptism?
who in the world thinks that H2O is what washes away sins?
both of those are evil, IMO
-
1
- Show all
S
When one reads the scriptures you posted you see that Peter knew they were as saved as he was because he heard them speak in tongues. Then he commanded them to be baptized. Therefore it is logical to conclude that this baptism in water would have not been allowed if they suspected that they were not saved. Wouldn't you agree?
-
1
-
1
- Show all
The word contradicts your understanding. It states faith without works is dead. By works faith is made perfect. The following scripture pertains specifically to Abraham:
James 2:20-24
But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
James 2:20-24
But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.