A new member with 4 posts to their name in this thread. And they're insisting, surprise, baptism saves.Matthew 28:19-20 Go and make disciples of all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and the Holy Spirit. Teaching them to obey all that I have commandmented you and I will be with you to thend of all ages. ( Gods word can never change.)
WrongIf we were saved by Salvation both Jesus and Paul would have set poor examples in delivering God's good news.
Because Jesus baptized no one
And Paul said he did not come to baptize.
Lastly, you claim the apostles were told to baptize in the name of the father,son, holy spirit. Those aren't names.
What was that name?
The apostles never baptized anyone in those three names.Because they aren't names.
What occurs in obedience to water baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus is not symbolic. A spiritual reality occurs. As Paul said those who have been baptized into Jesus Christ are baptized into His death. As such, having been crucified with Him is when the body of sin is destroyed. Remember, the words of Paul are those inspired by God.Actually, it is you who is saying Jesus is wrong.
Jesus is the water of life. We who drink of him shall NEVER thirst.
You can take a giant gulp of the liquid water you believe will save you as you are immersed beneath it. And if you're thirsty in that moment your thirst may be quenched.
But when you rise out of that water you're not in Salvation.
You're just wet.
Your Catholic church is wrong and corrupt in denying grace and faith alone save.
We are saved by grace through faith. And those are gifts from God.
Works do not save. Thinking you have to add liquid water immersion to God's free irrevocable gift of salvation by grace and faith is a work of man, to secure the grace of God to be saved.
And that's a lie! That calls the Gospel false.
All those verses you pasted don't prove works save.
They prove you don't understand.
Acts 10:44-48
All in that passage were saved already.
We can be baptized after we have come into faith by God's grace. We're then symbolically burying the old "I am'' who was without Christ and his indwelling holy spirit. And when we arise from that water ''I am'' reborn in Christ. It's a symbolic rite that imitates Jesus death and resurrection.
He was laid in the tomb having taken the sins of the world upon himself on the cross. And he resurrected in a glorified body.
Jesus was and is the water of life. Perfect and sinless.
What you and those like you can't seem to understand is everyone who is baptized has accepted Christ as savior first! They believe! By grace they are saved! First!
Baptism comes, if it comes, afterward.
Baptism does not save.
We are saved the moment we believe.
God ordained that an eternal irrevocable fact.
And your works doctrine will never change that.
That you don't realize faith comes before Baptism and people are saved by faith is quite frankly mind boggling. It's basic gospel 101.
Yet you insist you don't know that with every post where you argue baptism is mandatory to save us.
You don't know. And we see that, post after post by you and all who are like you.
Those who insist without liquid water immersion salvation does not exist in that person who has faith in Christ.
That's not just wrong. It's dead wrong.
"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:"Ephesians 2:8-9
Jesus accomplished his purpose on earth as we know when before he gave up his life and from the cross said, it is accomplished.What occurs in obedience to water baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus is not symbolic. A spiritual reality occurs. As Paul said those who have been baptized into Jesus Christ are baptized into His death. As such, having been crucified with Him is when the body of sin is destroyed. Remember, the words of Paul are those inspired by God.
Rom 6:3-6
Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
You avoided the question. What Bible version informs your debating here?Are you Anglican? All but one of the translators of the KJV were church of England or Anglican.
Hope you don't mind my replying with a description given by someone else that explains what I believe scripture reflects as well:Genuine question for those who believe that we are only saved if we are baptised in the name of Jesus only.
Do you believe in the Trinity?
I'm not trying to trip you up.
Just asking.
He made an insulting conjecture and did not ask any question.You avoided the question. What Bible version informs your debating here?
We're of course wasting our time posting to the works by Baptism is the only means of salvation crowd here.I learned long, long ago that those trusting in water to save them will never see the truth.
A waste of time to try and show them the truth.
They cannot trust in Jesus alone, they must do their part, and then bring in a third person to dunk them under the water.
My salvation is between me and Jesus, not me, Jesus and who ever I can find to dunk me.
Jesus' sacrifice is what makes one's spiritual rebirth possible. And what Paul said about baptism still holds true, and will continue until Jesus returns. Please pay close attention to what Paul actually said, keeping in mind that only those who have had their sins destroyed will gain entrance into the kingdom of God:Jesus accomplished his purpose on earth as we know when before he gave up his life and from the cross said, it is accomplished.
Jesus baptized no one. Paul said he did not come to baptize.
Your hypothesis does not survive those facts reported in scripture.
Actually being obedient to the command to be water baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus is the result of trusting in God. For it was He who instituted the NT command along with it's purpose.I learned long, long ago that those trusting in water to save them will never see the truth.
A waste of time to try and show them the truth.
They cannot trust in Jesus alone, they must do their part, and then bring in a third person to dunk them under the water.
My salvation is between me and Jesus, not me, Jesus and who ever I can find to dunk me.
About 90% of the KJV Bible and 75% of the revised standard version was taken from the Biblical Scholar, Linguist, and Protestant Reformer William Tyndale translation.Are you Anglican? All but one of the translators of the KJV were church of England or Anglican.
More over not a work of man, but a work of God. I mean do we say because a man preach and another believe that it is a work of man? Certainly not. So why would we say if two men enter the water and proclaim the Gospel and the Words of Jesus that it is a work of man. Every man bathes in water yet this is not baptism.Actually being obedient to the command to be water baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus is the result of trusting in God. For it was He who instituted the NT command along with it's purpose.
Not true. Otherwise Jesus,who baptized no one, did not example that purpose you wrongly add as a work of man to assist God's grace that saves through faith.Actually being obedient to the command to be water baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus is the result of trusting in God. For it was He who instituted the NT command along with it's purpose.
The men who did the translating the 47 or what number it was were all but one Anglican priests, bishops, scholars.About 90% of the KJV Bible and 75% of the revised standard version was taken from the Biblical Scholar, Linguist, and Protestant Reformer William Tyndale translation.
https://www.gotquestions.org/William-Tyndale.html
''For his work on the English Bible, Tyndale drew the ire of the Anglican Church, the Roman Catholic Church, and other powerful entities. The established church taught that they alone were the conservators and interpreters of God’s Word and that the laity had no business reading it for themselves. Tyndale worked tirelessly to make the Bible accessible to all, even if the church opposed him. Tyndale famously said, “I defy the Pope and all his laws. If God spare my life ere many years, I will cause the boy that drives the plow to know more of the scriptures than you!” ''
Yes, I read your other post that stated the same thing. I'm informing you of where those translators gained their materials. That is 90% of which was from the work of William Tyndale.The men who did the translating the 47 pr what ot was were all but one Anglican priests, bishops, scholars.
"Sons of God" are always believers. Human believers. They are defined as such in John 1:12 and at least 2 other places in the NT by saying things like "we"(believers) are the "sons of God" and "they"(believers) are the "sons of God" . There is none such passage which equates "sons of God" with "angels" or any other being besides believers, none, zero.Sons of God? Those aren't human. They're what are described in Genesis 6.