Saved by faith alone?

[Everlasting-Grace]

You're not saved by faith alone, but faith is a necessary part of salvation, but also not in and of itself. Faith is cuppleled with belief, and confession of belief is necessary as is repentance and baptism. All are necessary to be saved.

no one is saved because they were baptized in water anymore than anyone was saved because they were circumcised.

as the jews were called anathema because they attempted to add circumcision. I believe the gentile is anathema because they add water baptism

its interesting that both circumcision and baptism represent cleansing.. which can only be done by the hand of God.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

No, one becomes holy and righteous because of God, His grace working in us. Not dead faith alone. This is not accomplished by self determination alone, but the love of God working in us.

Ephesians 5
[1] Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children;
[2] And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour.
[3] But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;
[4] Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.
[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.

there is no such thing as faith alone. A dead faith is not faith, it is as most mere belief.

 

[07-07-07]

Abraham was saved BEFORE he obeyed him.

Perhaps, but his obedience is what kept him saved.

Abraham also sinned many grave sins after he was saved.

Abraham had no Law to observe, so please explain his grave sins.

If you say we are saved by grace plus works. you are in error..

Walking in God's holiness and righteousness, the requirements to enter God's kingdom, are not "works".

Ephesians 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.
[6] Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.

 

[Ted01]

No, one becomes holy and righteous because of God, His grace working in us. Not dead faith alone. This is not accomplished by self determination alone, but the love of God working in us.

Ephesians 5
[1] Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children;
[2] And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour.
[3] But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;
[4] Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.
[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.

But if one becomes "Holy and Righteous because of God", that must be after they've been Saved by Grace through Faith, right?

 

[07-07-07]

there is no such thing as faith alone. A dead faith is not faith, it is as most mere belief.

Agreed. So, if one's faith is not dead, then it will be alive in the obdeience of God's conditions of holiness and righteousness to inherit eternal life.

 

[07-07-07]

But if one becomes "Holy and Righteous because of God", that must be after they've been Saved by Grace through Faith, right?

Yes, the initial "saving by Grace" is just the beginning of Salvation.

 

[HeIsHere]

there is no such thing as faith alone. A dead faith is not faith, it is as most mere belief.

Dead faith is not mere belief.

Lest anyone be persuaded.

 

[Lamar]

the two criminals on the cross weren't baptized, unless you mean holy spirit baptism.

And you know this how?

 

[DJT_47]

the two criminals on the cross weren't baptized, unless you mean holy spirit baptism.

Here's your answer to that which most people don't realize. This is a repost which has been posted many times.

The thief on the cross misconceptions
Post #1
Post Thu Oct 20, 2022 5:10 pm

I continually encounter people trying to justify that baptism is not an absolute necessity for one's salvation by use (erroneously) of the thief on the cross as justification, as he was not baptized but yet saved by the Lord, which is true! BUT, the error in this is the lack of understanding of the scriptures. You must read and understand Hebrews 9:15-17 which clarifies why the thief on the cross was saved by Jesus without being baptized. Christ was still alive when this occurred meaning it was done while the old testament or covenant was still in effect; the new testament had not yet been established because Christ had not yet died. And since the Lord was still alive no one could possibly be baptized into Christ under NT salvation criteria. Baptism did not become a requirement as part of salvation until the new testament began which was after the death of Christ. Jesus forgave the thief on the cross no different than he forgave others during his earthly ministry, such as the woman caught in the act of adultery as recorded in John 8. Baptism should not even be an issue when discussing the thief on the cross, but unfortunately always is, but in error.

Hebrews 9:15-17

15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

 

[DJT_47]

no one is saved because they were baptized in water anymore than anyone was saved because they were circumcised.

as the jews were called anathema because they attempted to add circumcision. I believe the gentile is anathema because they add water baptism

its interesting that both circumcision and baptism represent cleansing.. which can only be done by the hand of God.

Funny that Peter says baptism saves us. Who's right, you or Peter?

1Peter 3:21

21The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

 

[mailmandan]

Funny that Peter says baptism saves us. Who's right, you or Peter?

1Peter 3:21

21The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

In 1 Peter 3:21, Peter tells us that baptism now saves you, yet when Peter uses this phrase, he continues in the same sentence to explain exactly what he means by it. He said that baptism now saves you-not the removal of dirt from the flesh (that is, not as an outward, physical act which washes dirt from the body--that is not what saves you), "but an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (that is, as an inward, spiritual transaction between God and the individual, a transaction that is symbolized by the outward ceremony of water baptism).

Just as the eight people in the ark were "saved THROUGH water" as they were IN THE ARK. They were not literally saved "by" the water. Hebrews 11:7 is clear on this point (..built an ARK for the SAVING of his household). *NOTE: The context reveals that ONLY the righteous (Noah and his family) were DRY and therefore SAFE. In contrast, ONLY the wicked in Noah's day came in contact with the water and they all perished.

 

[mailmandan]

the two criminals on the cross weren't baptized, unless you mean holy spirit baptism.

A common argument used by water-salvationists in an attempt to "get around" the thief on the cross being saved through faith "apart from water baptism" is, "the thief was not subject to baptism because he died under the Old Testament mandate. (Others may argue how do we know he was not already water baptized). I've heard it all.

So let's see, after the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, in Acts 2:38, we read - "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.." and before the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, in Mark 1:4 and Luke 3:3, we read - John came baptizing in the wilderness and preaching a "baptism of repentance for the remission of sins."

So, in Mark 1:4 and Luke 3:3, was this baptism of repentance FOR (in order to obtain) the remission of sins or was it or FOR (in regards to/on the basis of) the remission of sins received upon repentance? It would have to be the latter in order to agree with the Old Testament mandate argument from water-salvationists. In Matthew 3:11, we read: I baptize you with water FOR repentance.. If translated "in order to obtain" the verse does not make sense. I baptize you with water FOR (in order to obtain) repentance? or I baptize you with water FOR (in regards to/on the basis of) repentance? Obviously, the latter.

Whatever baptism is "for" in Acts 2:38, it's "for" in Mark 1:4 and Luke 3:3. Water baptism is "in regard to" remission of sins received upon repentance. So the water baptism is not necessary for salvation under the Old Testament mandate but is necessary for salvation under the New Testament mandate argument doesn't hold water.

Before AND after Pentecost, salvation is through belief/faith "apart from water baptism" (Luke 7:50; 8:12; John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 6:40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43-47; 11:17-18; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4:2-6; 5:1; 1 Corinthians 1:21; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:8,9; Philippians 3:9; 2 Timothy 3:15; 1 John 5:13 etc..).

In Matthew 27:39-44, we see that those who passed by, along with the chief priests scribes and elders blasphemed, mocked and shook their heads at Jesus and EVEN THE ROBBERS WHO WERE CRUCIFIED WITH HIM REVILED HIM WITH THE SAME THING. I certainly don't see being crucified as a thief, blaspheming, mocking and shaking your head at Jesus as being the fruit of repentance/faith. Yet, moments later, we see that the thief had a "change of mind" (repentance) placed his faith in Christ for salvation and was saved (Luke 23:40-43). Of course, he died before having the opportunity to be water baptized afterwards.

 

[timemeddler]

Here's your answer to that which most people don't realize. This is a repost which has been posted many times.

The thief on the cross misconceptions
Post #1
Post Thu Oct 20, 2022 5:10 pm

I continually encounter people trying to justify that baptism is not an absolute necessity for one's salvation by use (erroneously) of the thief on the cross as justification, as he was not baptized but yet saved by the Lord, which is true! BUT, the error in this is the lack of understanding of the scriptures. You must read and understand Hebrews 9:15-17 which clarifies why the thief on the cross was saved by Jesus without being baptized. Christ was still alive when this occurred meaning it was done while the old testament or covenant was still in effect; the new testament had not yet been established because Christ had not yet died. And since the Lord was still alive no one could possibly be baptized into Christ under NT salvation criteria. Baptism did not become a requirement as part of salvation until the new testament began which was after the death of Christ. Jesus forgave the thief on the cross no different than he forgave others during his earthly ministry, such as the woman caught in the act of adultery as recorded in John 8. Baptism should not even be an issue when discussing the thief on the cross, but unfortunately always is, but in error.

Hebrews 9:15-17

15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

I have heard that, but isn't that a bit of a stretch though? Yes it apears to say it depends on when someone dies, but the rest of the chapter speaks of the spirit and blood, nothing directly about baptism, he redeems them from the sins of the old covenant? I'm just not 100% convinced. After all, the command was given while Christ was alive as an order for Christians, is there anything that say the rules for salvation changed after pentecost?
Also, though admittedly weak evidence, the idea of water baptism as an absolute requirement doesn't seem to fit well with passages like romans 10:13 "for, Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved," since it would cut out anyone who made just accepted Christ, and wasn't physically able to be baptized.

 

[DJT_47]

I have heard that, but isn't that a bit of a stretch though? Yes it apears to say it depends on when someone dies, but the rest of the chapter speaks of the spirit and blood, nothing directly about baptism, he redeems them from the sins of the old covenant? I'm just not 100% convinced. After all, the command was given while Christ was alive as an order for Christians, is there anything that say the rules for salvation changed after pentecost?
Also, though admittedly weak evidence, the idea of water baptism as an absolute requirement doesn't seem to fit well with passages like romans 10:13 "for, Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved," since it would cut out anyone who made just accepted Christ, and wasn't physically able to be baptized.

It's simple. Jesus forgave people's sins while he was alive during his earthly ministry. This included the thief. All done under the old covenant. The NT didn't begin until Jesus was dead. The criteria for salvation under the NT also wasn't in effect until after Jesus death. You could not be baptized into Christ or his death if he was alive. Very straightforward, common sense and explained clearly by Hebrews.

 

[John146]

No, one becomes holy and righteous because of God, His grace working in us. Not dead faith alone. This is not accomplished by self determination alone, but the love of God working in us.

Ephesians 5
[1] Be ye therefore followers of God, as dear children;
[2] And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour.
[3] But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints;
[4] Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks.
[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.

Inheritance is at stake...not entrance. Walk after the flesh and the believer loses rewards.

 

[timemeddler]

A common argument used by water-salvationists in an attempt to "get around" the thief on the cross being saved through faith "apart from water baptism" is, "the thief was not subject to baptism because he died under the Old Testament mandate. (Others may argue how do we know he was not already water baptized). I've heard it all.

So let's see, after the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, in Acts 2:38, we read - "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.." and before the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, in Mark 1:4 and Luke 3:3, we read - John came baptizing in the wilderness and preaching a "baptism of repentance for the remission of sins."

So, in Mark 1:4 and Luke 3:3, was this baptism of repentance FOR (in order to obtain) the remission of sins or was it or FOR (in regards to/on the basis of) the remission of sins received upon repentance? It would have to be the latter in order to agree with the Old Testament mandate argument from water-salvationists. In Matthew 3:11, we read: I baptize you with water FOR repentance.. If translated "in order to obtain" the verse does not make sense. I baptize you with water FOR (in order to obtain) repentance? or I baptize you with water FOR (in regards to/on the basis of) repentance? Obviously, the latter.

Whatever baptism is "for" in Acts 2:38, it's "for" in Mark 1:4 and Luke 3:3. Water baptism is "in regard to" remission of sins received upon repentance. So the water baptism is not necessary for salvation under the Old Testament mandate but is necessary for salvation under the New Testament mandate argument doesn't hold water.

Before AND after Pentecost, salvation is through belief/faith "apart from water baptism" (Luke 7:50; 8:12; John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 6:40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43-47; 11:17-18; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4:2-6; 5:1; 1 Corinthians 1:21; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:8,9; Philippians 3:9; 2 Timothy 3:15; 1 John 5:13 etc..).

In Matthew 27:39-44, we see that those who passed by, along with the chief priests scribes and elders blasphemed, mocked and shook their heads at Jesus and EVEN THE ROBBERS WHO WERE CRUCIFIED WITH HIM REVILED HIM WITH THE SAME THING. I certainly don't see being crucified as a thief, blaspheming, mocking and shaking your head at Jesus as being the fruit of repentance/faith. Yet, moments later, we see that the thief had a "change of mind" (repentance) placed his faith in Christ for salvation and was saved (Luke 23:40-43). Of course, he died before having the opportunity to be water baptized afterwards.

Thanks, neat points.

 

[07-07-07]

Inheritance is at stake...not entrance. Walk after the flesh and the believer loses rewards.

No, that's not what the Scriptures teach.

Galatians 5
[19] Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
[20] Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
[21] Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

 

[GRACE_ambassador]

the command was given while Christ was alive as an order for Christians, is there anything that say the rules for salvation changed after pentecost?

Water baptism was for Judaism, not for Christians although some were
water baptized during God's Transition from law Over To Grace, where it
Was Replaced By ONE ( Spiritual ) Baptism - see below:

that baptism is not an absolute necessity for one's salvation by use (erroneously) of the thief on the cross as justification, as he was not baptized but yet saved by the Lord, which is true! BUT, the error in this is the lack of understanding of the scriptures.

Or, is it 'lack of understanding' of The Word Of Truth, Rightly Divided? i.e:

1) Is "water baptism an absolute necessity for salvation," In
Prophecy/Covenants/Law ( Previous dispensation ) for ISRAEL?
What Saith The Scriptures:

​

water, For remission of sins/induction into Israeli "priesthood!":​

Mar 1:4 "John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach​

the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins."​

​

Luke 7:29-30 "And all the people that heard him, and the​

publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism​

of John. But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel ​

of God against themselves, being not baptized of him."​

​

Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved;​

but he that believeth not shall be damned."​

​

Acts 2:38 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."​

(Matthew_3:5-6; Mark_1:4; Luke_3:3; John_1:31; Luke 7:29-30; Acts_10:37)​

(Matthew_28:19; Mark_16:16; Acts_2:38, 22:16; Ezekiel_36:25)​

Absolutely Necessary, Correct? In God's Context Of: Prophecy/Covenants/Law

Rightly Divided (2 Timothy 2:15) From “Things That DIFFER!” {online}:

(2) In God's Other "Context ( Is king"? or, so I'm told Repeatedly ) Of:

Mystery/GRACE! = our "apostle to the Gentiles" for The Body Of CHRIST:

►►► Paul Was Not Sent to {water} baptize! Why Not?: ◄◄◄

Today: Only ONE Baptism = "BY" The ONE Spirit = God's OPERATION,
Spiritually Identifying members In (The ONE Body Of) CHRIST!!
(Ephesians_4:5; Colossians_2:12; Galatians_3:27;
Romans_6:3-4; ►►► 1 Corinthians 12:13 KJB ◄◄◄)

How then, Under Grace, is water baptism "a Necessity At All" When:

Where Is God's Approval For bad math teaching Two baptisms,
Under "Grace Through faith" Alone For God's Eternal Salvation?
----------------
FULL study of God's ONE ( Spiritual ) Baptism for today's Dispensation of Grace...

Additional study:

UnScriptural or UNdispensational?

Amen.

 

[NightTwister]

We are saved by Grace alone, through Faith alone, in Christ alone.

 

[DJT_47]

We are save by Grace alone, through Faith alone, in Christ alone.

Except we are required to be obedient which includes confession of belief (Romans 10:9), repentance, and baptism (Acts 2:38)