That diagram is portraying what the language of Acts2:38 says. You should probably move to another section of Scripture to try to establish your point and stop importing your desires back to Acts2:38.
Acts 2:38 Comparison: Evangelical vs. Oneness / Baptismal-Regeneration View
- Thread starter LightBearer316
- 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.
That diagram is portraying what the language of Acts2:38 says. You should probably move to another section of Scripture to try to establish your point and stop importing your desires back to Acts2:38.
The issue really is how you equate obedience to works when the Scripture shows it being equivalent to faith.
When you responded to this post, you ignored much of the Scripture which shows this equivalence. We can go through each verse if you'd like.
This is one of the major problems with the errant form of faith-alone theology. It has to isolate faith from everything the Bible makes equivalent to it or else there is no "faith-alone". Then it has to tack on the equivalent facets like obedience and make it after the fact fruit. So, it has one deficient definition for pistis pre-salvation saying the equivalencies are works and then defines it differently with it's equivalent facets after being saved.
This simply is not what the Text explains as genuine faith. God commands men to believe in and into His Son. There's no such thing as having faith in Jesus Christ without obeying God. It's really just basic logic according to Scripture.
The error here is category confusion — you are conflating faith’s nature with faith’s expression. You’re redefining faith rather than explaining it biblically.
Scripture never says obedience = faith; it says faith results in obedience (Romans 1:5 KJV; Hebrews 11KJV).
If they were equivalent, Paul couldn’t contrast them so plainly:
“To him that worketh not, but believeth…” (Romans 4:5 KJV).
Faith precedes and produces obedience — that’s why Abraham was justified before offering Isaac (Romans 4:9–10 KJV; James 2:21–23 KJV). His obedience proved faith; it didn’t become it.
You can’t collapse all the fruits of faith back into the root itself without destroying grace.
Faith alone justifies because it unites us to Christ — and that union inevitably transforms the believer into one who obeys.
That’s the consistent order of Scripture: Faith --> Salvation --> Obedience, not Faith = Obedience.
Grace and peace.
Acts 17:11 (KJV)
“These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”
That’s a textbook case of assertion without demonstration because you are making theological claims (“faith equals obedience”) but offering no textual proof, just reasoning that sounds logical to you. That’s the issue right there — you’re asserting equivalence without providing a single verse where Scripture defines faith as obedience.
When the Bible speaks of faith, it always distinguishes it from works:
“To him that worketh not, but believeth…” (Romans 4:5 KJV).
“By grace are ye saved through faith… not of works.” (Ephesians 2:8–9 KJV).
Faith produces obedience, but the two are not identical.
Otherwise Paul’s entire contrast between justification by faith and works collapses.
If you’re going to claim the Bible equates them, show where the text actually does — not just logic or paraphrase.
Grace and peace.
Acts 17:11 (KJV)
“These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”
IMO this juxtaposition of in and into encapsulate being reconciled though belief in his death and being saved by believing into his life.
Yep, my reponce was for that.
You think only following parts of HIS word is a good practice.
We can't get reborn without getting rid of our sins!!!
We have to do it in JESUS name!!
ALL BIBLE, anything else is not true so it's POISON to our souls. "poisoning the well logical fallacy"
If we didn't need to get rid of our sins JESUS would not have died for us.
If we didn't need to do EVERYTHING in JESUS name HE would not have told us we have to.
SO WHO DO YOU FOLLOW?
IF WHAT IS SAY IS NOT TRUE, PROVE IT WITH HIS WORD.
What you posted is really just wordplay dressed up as insight. It sounds deep (“in and into”), but there’s no textual basis or exegetical support behind it. The Bible doesn’t build any doctrine on a supposed contrast between believing in and believing into.
Grace and Peace
This is a really good example of emotional rhetoric with no exegesis — lots of passion, but no Scripture used responsibly.
You are asserting conclusions (“We can’t get reborn without getting rid of our sins,” “We have to do it in Jesus’ name”) without defining how those statements align with the gospel.
I agree — the standard must be God’s Word, not emotion or assertion.
So let’s hold to what Scripture actually says:
“To him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.” (Romans 4:5 KJV)
“By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.” (Ephesians 2:8–9 KJV)
We’re not reborn by getting rid of our sins — we’re reborn because Christ bore them.
Then, having been made new, we walk in obedience because of what He’s already done (Romans 6:4 KJV).
If we make repentance or works the cause of rebirth instead of the fruit of it, we reverse the entire order of the gospel.
The Word makes it clear: salvation is by grace through faith — in Jesus’ name, not by our effort in His name.
Grace and peace.
Acts 17:11 (KJV)
“These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”
Ok, so you aren't going to look it up. Here, let me help you. The "poisoning the well" fallacy is when you dismiss an argument simply because of the reputation of the person who made it, not based on whether the argument is valid or not.
Do with that information what you will. You have no critical thinking skills, so future discussions with you is pointless.
Grace and Peace.
Keep it up. You're destroying any credibility you might ever have with your persistent and automatic knee-jerk dogmatic dismissals of anything contradicting the agenda you're pushing with your toolkit of practiced catchy slogans and specious phrasings.
There actually is scriptural support for what I said, (which you could have asked for, but didn't because you're not interested in learning or edifying anyone, but rather dictating what everyone must believe), but it may be saying the opposite of what I said. We are reconciled (justified) through Christ's death, meaning we move out of the 1st Adam through the water of death into the last Adam, in whom we are saved in his life
For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved in his life. Romans 5:10
Agreed but faith alone regeneration theology most certainly is.
True faith walks around Jericho in order to receive the blessing and does not second guess the motive for the need for obedience.
Obedience to God is never optional regardless of grace.
I am willing to state my belief in baptismal regeneration theology, for it is the point and time of the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Are you willing to state your belief in faith alone regeneration theology as the same?
This is a really good example of emotional rhetoric with no exegesis — lots of passion, but no Scripture used responsibly.
You are asserting conclusions (“We can’t get reborn without getting rid of our sins,” “We have to do it in Jesus’ name”) without defining how those statements align with the gospel.
I agree — the standard must be God’s Word, not emotion or assertion.
So let’s hold to what Scripture actually says:
“To him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.” (Romans 4:5 KJV)“By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.” (Ephesians 2:8–9 KJV)
We’re not reborn by getting rid of our sins — we’re reborn because Christ bore them.
Then, having been made new, we walk in obedience because of what He’s already done (Romans 6:4 KJV).
If we make repentance or works the cause of rebirth instead of the fruit of it, we reverse the entire order of the gospel.
The Word makes it clear: salvation is by grace through faith — in Jesus’ name, not by our effort in His name.
Grace and peace.
Acts 17:11 (KJV)
“These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”
It's all bible, why add scripture when you don't follow it anyway?
I don't argue with anyone, I let HIS word do the talking.
I didn't die for you.
Are you dismissing my statement.
This post shows you trying to retrofit a verse (Romans 5:10 KJV) to back up a claim that wasn’t in the text.
Romans 5:10 KJV doesn’t say anything about “moving through the water of death.”
Paul’s point is strictly positional and redemptive, not ritual.
We’re “reconciled to God through the death of His Son” — that’s the finished work of the cross, not something mediated through baptism or symbol.
The verse contrasts past reconciliation (through His death) with ongoing life in Him (through His resurrection).
Reading “water” into the passage adds an element that simply isn’t in Paul’s argument.
The text says reconciliation is accomplished by Christ’s death, and salvation is lived out through His risen life — not through any rite.
Grace and peace.
Acts 17:11 (KJV)
“These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”
Thank you for clarifying that — because that’s precisely where our disagreement lies.
Biblical regeneration is the work of the Spirit through faith, not the product of a ritual.
“After that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise.” (Ephesians 1:13 KJV)
“Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.” (Titus 3:5 KJV)
Notice: the washing there is defined as the renewing of the Holy Ghost — not the act of water baptism.
The New Testament always places faith before baptism (Acts 10:43–48 KJV; Romans 10:9–10 KJV).
When faith is replaced with ritual as the saving act, grace is no longer grace (Romans 11:6 KJV).
So yes — I gladly affirm regeneration by faith alone through the Spirit of God.
The moment a person believes, God cleanses the heart by faith (Acts 15:9 KJV), and baptism follows as the outward testimony — not the inward cause.
Grace and peace.
LightBearer316 said:
This is a really good example of emotional rhetoric with no exegesis — lots of passion, but no Scripture used responsibly.
You are asserting conclusions (“We can’t get reborn without getting rid of our sins,” “We have to do it in Jesus’ name”) without defining how those statements align with the gospel.
I agree — the standard must be God’s Word, not emotion or assertion.
So let’s hold to what Scripture actually says:
“To him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.” (Romans 4:5 KJV)
“By grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.” (Ephesians 2:8–9 KJV)
We’re not reborn by getting rid of our sins — we’re reborn because Christ bore them.
Then, having been made new, we walk in obedience because of what He’s already done (Romans 6:4 KJV).
If we make repentance or works the cause of rebirth instead of the fruit of it, we reverse the entire order of the gospel.
The Word makes it clear: salvation is by grace through faith — in Jesus’ name, not by our effort in His name.
Grace and peace.
Acts 17:11 (KJV)
“These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.”
That reply from you (“It’s all Bible, why add Scripture when you don’t follow it anyway?”) is a classic dismissive jab — it dodges my argument by attacking my sincerity instead of addressing the Scriptures I cited. It’s an ad hominem and red herring rolled into one.
If we actually believe it’s “all Bible,” then we should be willing to let Scripture interpret Scripture — not dismiss it when it contradicts our position.
I’m quoting those verses precisely because they show what following Scripture looks like:
- Salvation is “by grace through faith” (Ephesians 2:8–9 KJV), not by ritual effort.
- Faith is “counted for righteousness” to the one who “worketh not” (Romans 4:5 KJV).
Ignoring that order isn’t “following Scripture” — it’s rewriting it.
Grace and peace.
That’s another example of deflection disguised as piety. “I let His Word do the talking” sounds spiritual but is really a way to avoid accountability for interpretation. Everyone quotes Scripture — the issue is how it’s handled and whether it’s applied correctly.
Saying “I let His Word do the talking” is only meaningful if what’s being said actually reflects what His Word teaches.
Even the devil quoted Scripture (Matthew 4:6 KJV), but he twisted its meaning — which shows that merely quoting verses isn’t the same as rightly handling them. When Paul told Timothy to “rightly divide the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15 KJV), he wasn’t talking about tearing passages apart to fit a system — he meant handling the Word with accuracy, letting every verse harmonize with the rest of God’s revelation.
True study doesn’t pit one text against another; it seeks unity and consistency in what God has spoken.
No one’s dismissing your statement — we’re testing it by the Word itself. If our conclusions differ, the only fair way forward is to compare our handling of Scripture, not retreat behind slogans.
Grace and peace.
