Just a part of the stroy, just like people who just get a part of being reborn.
What happen after Paul told the jailer that?
Did you notice the word SHALT???
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.
Just a part of the stroy, just like people who just get a part of being reborn.
What happen after Paul told the jailer that?
Did you notice the word SHALT???
If we’re being honest, that equation rewrites the gospel.
Scripture never says faith = obedience or that obedience is part of the cause of salvation. The consistent order is:
Faith --> Justification --> Obedience (fruit of salvation)
Romans 4:5 KJV makes it unmistakable:
“To him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.”
If faith and obedience were identical or inseparable causes, Paul wouldn’t contrast them so clearly.
Obedience flows from faith (Romans 1:5 KJV; James 2:18 KJV) — it doesn’t create faith or complete justification.
When someone makes “faith = obedience,” they collapse grace into law.
Faith receives salvation as a gift; obedience demonstrates it.
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.”
Well if we can't look at HIS word, read it in its context and believe it says what it says then we have NO FOUNDATION.
I do not have the ability to deal with two sets of rules yours and JESUS.
You statement about GOD'S words are LIES.
Do you know where LIARS GO?
Best of luck.
What you wrote was heavy on accusation, light on exegesis.
Friend, no one’s “telling a story.” I’m quoting the very words of Scripture in context.
When Jesus said, “It is finished” (John 19:30 KJV), He declared the full payment for sin complete — not pending. That’s why Hebrews 10:14 says, “By one offering He hath perfected forever them that are sanctified.”
The resurrection did not add to the atonement — it confirmed that the Father accepted it. Romans 4:25 KJV explains that clearly:
“He was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.”
That’s not opinion; that’s Paul’s own explanation of the sequence.
As for 1 Peter 3:21 KJV, Peter himself uses the word antitypos (figure, symbol) — that’s not my label, it’s inspired Scripture. Baptism represents the saving work of Christ; it does not perform it. Paul explicitly separates faith from any act when he writes,
“To him that worketh not, but believeth…” (Romans 4:5 KJV)
Faith receives the finished work — obedience displays it.Grace and peace.
When someone can’t refute Scripture, they often resort to attacking motives. But our standard isn’t emotion — it’s the Word rightly handled.
I’ve shown that eis aphesin hamartiōn (“for the remission of sins”) in Acts 2:38 can mean with reference to forgiveness, exactly as it does in Matthew 12:41 — and that Peter himself clarifies salvation is “by grace through faith” (Ephesians 2:8–9 KJV).
Name-calling doesn’t change what the text actually says. Truth doesn’t fear examination — that’s why the Bereans were called noble (Acts 17:11 KJV).
Grace and peace.
Good point — God certainly relates to us personally and reveals Himself using relational terms like Father and Son. But when Scripture says we’re made in His image, it’s speaking primarily of His spiritual and moral attributes — reason, will, righteousness — not physical form.
John 4:24 reminds us, “God is a Spirit,” and spirit isn’t limited to material personhood. So, yes, He’s personal, but not a “person” in the human sense — His nature is divine, not creaturely.
Grace and peace.
Sorry for the typo earlier — the correct Scripture reference is Ephesians 1:7, not the one I listed before.
Ephesians 1:7 (KJV)
7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
Post #443 and the texts showing obedience appositional to, equivalent and inseparable with genuine faith (Rom1:5; Rom16:26; Rom10:16; Heb3:18–19; Heb5:9; 2Thes1:8; 1Pet4:17; 1John3:23) remain unaddressed.
Equivalent does not mean identical, so your repeated assertions misrepresent what I've said; Scripture presents obedience as appositional to, equivalent to, and inseparable from genuine faith.
Rom4:5 contrasts faith with meritorious works, not the obedience intrinsic to pistis. Your category error is to make a obedience a work.
Hebrews 3–4 for example shows that faith and obedience are appositionally and functionally united: the Israelites failed because they did not unite God’s Word with faith inseparable from obedience.
The silly, manufactured “root/fruit” slogan misrepresents the text.
You’re missing the distinction Paul himself makes. Equivalence in effect is not identity in nature. Faith and obedience are inseparable in sequence and result, but Scripture still defines them differently in cause and essence.
“To him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.” — Romans 4:5 KJV
Paul explicitly separates faith (pistis) from obedience (ergon). If obedience were intrinsic to pistis, then “worketh not” would lose all meaning. You can’t contrast faith with works if faith is a work.
Your “appositional equivalence” collapses the same categories Paul builds walls between. Hebrews 3–4 doesn’t say the Israelites failed for lack of “faith-obedience unity”; it says they failed because they “believed not.” (Hebrews 3:19 KJV) Their disobedience proved unbelief — it didn’t define it.
James makes the same point: obedience is the evidence of living faith, not its definition (James 2:18 KJV). Fruit and root aren’t interchangeable metaphors — Jesus used both intentionally. The tree is justified by its fruit, but the fruit doesn’t make the tree alive.
So no, it’s not a “manufactured slogan.” It’s the biblical sequence:
Faith >>> Justification >>> Obedience (as fruit).
Grace and peace.
You continue to ignore and avoid discussing post #443 re: genuine pistis.
You've rewritten the required response to the Gospel by redefining genuine faith as it's taught in the Text. IMO it's actually quite tragic how your system points unbelievers away from understanding that entrance into Christ requires obedience as part of genuine faith.
It's quite simple and post #443 that you're going to great lengths to avoid helps clarify it - no obedience <> no genuine faith - they are inseparable no matter how hard you must try to separate and recategorize them to fit your system. I thought @TrustandObey did a nice job in brief and very succinctly in a recent post stating this truth about obedience to you.
I defined in parenthesis the "=" sign for you in an earlier post. You misrepresent my use of “=” as alleged literal identity, when I clearly defined it to mean faith and obedience are equivalent and inseparable.
You conflate equivalence with identity and then attack that misrepresentation. This is a basic strawman through equivocation fallacy. Your theology necessitates your use of these tactics at some point.
You're clearly either not geared up on good reasoning, or willing to use fallacy to protect your system. You're going to need some reasoning to go through post #443, so maybe this is part of why you're so purposefully avoiding it.
BTW, did you ever amend your canned responses to remove your nearly complete misrepresentation concerning references about eis?
I’ve already addressed the core of post #443 — your claim that obedience and faith are grammatically or functionally equivalent.
Romans 4:5, Hebrews 11, and Ephesians 2:8–9 KJV all show that obedience flows from faith, not that they’re the same cause of justification.
If you redefine “equivalence” so that faith and obedience are inseparable causes, you’ve effectively made obedience a co-cause of justification — no amount of grammatical softening changes that. That’s precisely what Paul rejects in Romans 4:5 KJV.
“To him that worketh not, but believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.” — Romans 4:5 KJV
That’s not a strawman — that’s Scripture directly distinguishing the two categories.
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.”
"no one’s “telling a story.” I’m quoting the very words of Scripture in context.
When Jesus said, “It is finished” (John 19:30 KJV), He declared the full payment for sin complete — not pending. That’s why Hebrews 10:14 says, “By one offering He hath perfected forever them that are sanctified.”
John 19:30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
WHERE DOES JESUS SAY, "He declared the full payment for sin complete" HIS JOB WAS NOT DONE UNTIL HE ROSE AND PUT HIS BLOOD ON THE MERCY SEAT SO NO WAY DOES IT SAY WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IT SAYS.
He sure died for our sins, but he gave us SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS on how to get rid of them so NO WAY IS THAT WHAT YOU SAY IT IS.
STORY TIME!!!
As for 1 Peter 3:21 KJV, Peter himself uses the word antitypos (figure, symbol) — that’s not my label, it’s inspired Scripture. Baptism represents the saving work of Christ; it does not perform it. Paul explicitly separates faith from any act when he writes,
STORY TIME, figure means symbol!!!
There really is no need for you to continue your storying trying to explain what HIS word says, your stories ARE NOT TRUE NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES YOU TELL THEM.
There’s no “story” here — just Scripture in context.
When Jesus said “It is finished” (John 19:30 KJV), the word is τετέλεσται (tetelestai) — “paid in full” or “completed.”
That’s why Hebrews 10:14 KJV says,
“By one offering He hath perfected forever them that are sanctified.”
The cross wasn’t a down payment waiting on something else; it was the full satisfaction of divine justice.
The resurrection proved that payment was accepted — Romans 4:25 KJV:
“Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.”
Scripture itself interprets Scripture. The atonement was finished at Calvary; the resurrection declared it complete.
As for 1 Peter 3:21 KJV, Peter calls baptism a “figure” (Greek antitupos) — a representation, not the instrument.
A figure points to the reality; it doesn’t produce it.
If we let the text speak for itself, there’s no “story,” just truth plainly stated in the Word.
Grace and peace
Scripture is clear, I'M REBUKING YOU.
In Acts 2:38, Peter isn’t teaching that baptism causes forgiveness, but that baptism follows repentance as the outward confession of faith. The Greek phrase “eis aphesin hamartiōn” (“for the remission of sins”) can mean because of or with reference to forgiveness — the same phrasing used in Matthew 12:41 KJV, where people repented “at [eis] the preaching of Jonah” (not in order to cause Jonah’s preaching).
STORY TIME, Yes Peter does sayk, 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.
He didn't say, baptism follows repentance as an outward confession of faith.
Now do you understand why I called you a liar?
And Acts 22:16 is equally clear when read in full context:
“Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.”
The phrase “calling on the name of the Lord” explains how the washing occurs — through faith, not water. Compare Romans 10:13: “Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.”
STORY TIME, "calling on the name of the Lord” explains how the washing occurs"
I will help you with the word "SHALL"
shall
/SHal/
verb
1.
(in the first person) expressing the future tense.
"this time next week I shall be in Scotland"
2.
expressing a strong assertion or intention.
NOTICE ITS NOT NOW!!!!
NOW
/nou/
adverb
1.
at the present time or moment.
So in Romans there is something coming IF YOU OBEY.
Calling upon the name is not a phrase, when we are baptized we use HIS name that is calling upon HIM.
John 14,
13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
14 If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.
I'm not calling you names, I called you a liar that is not a name it explains your character.
You lie about HIS word and you like to tell stories that are not true.
Sorry, but there is time to repent.
This is another classic Ouch response that proves he’s not reasoning exegetically but emotionally.
Rebuke only has authority when it rests on the Word rightly divided — not on emotion or accusation.
The term “shall be saved” in Romans 10:13 KJV (Greek sōthēsetai) isn’t about delay or future possibility. It’s a divine passive, expressing the certainty of God’s action toward the one who calls in faith — a promise, not a postponement! Geezzzz
“Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” — Romans 10:13 KJV
“For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness.” — Romans 10:10 KJV
That “calling” is the expression of faith, not the ritual of baptism.
When Peter quoted Joel 2:32 KJV at Pentecost, he declared the same truth — that salvation rests on the Lord’s name and power, not on human ceremony.
Scripture never equates “calling on His name” with “entering water.”
If it did, Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 1:17 would make no sense:
“Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel.”
The gospel saves; baptism bears witness to the salvation already received.
Grace precedes obedience, or else it ceases to be grace (Romans 11:6 KJV).
Grace and peace.
@Ouch
I’m waiting, Ouch — go ahead and pound that keyboard and cook up some more theological claptrap.
You’ve been consistent at least… consistently wrong, but consistent nonetheless.
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.”
I’m waiting, Ouch — go ahead and pound that keyboard and cook up some more theological claptrap.
You’ve been consistent at least… consistently wrong, but consistent nonetheless.
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.”
These two notions are not the same.
The first is a general statement about works of the law not being needed for salvation and the second is a direct contradiction of James 2:24.
Anytime you add a definitive into a phrase such as only or alone you have altered the verse into an all-encompassing concept. This was not the intention of Paul in your selected passages. How do we know, because he simply did not use such verbiage.
You are trying to pull the “James vs. Paul” card while sneaking in that “faith alone” isn’t biblical.
Actually, Lamar, there’s no contradiction — just context.
Paul and James are addressing two entirely different issues:
- Paul (Romans 4:5 KJV; Ephesians 2:8–9 KJV) speaks of justification before God — how a sinner is made righteous apart from works.
- James (James 2:24 KJV) speaks of justification before men — how genuine faith is proven by works.
So when Paul says “faith apart from works,” he’s describing the root of salvation.
When James says “faith without works is dead,” he’s describing the fruit of salvation.
They’re not rivals — they’re complementary.
When we rightly divide the Word of Truth, we don’t tear Scripture apart — we let it harmonize as one consistent revelation from God.
2 Timothy 2:15 (KJV): “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”
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.”