what the word "grace" will never alter.

  • 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.
R

Ralph-

Guest
The thing is Ralph I don't believe that everyone that knows and loves the Lord is 100% obedient each and every day.
I don't believe that either.

Obedience is living for God and having the blood of Christ cover us when we fall short. It's really that simple. The problem is some want to use grace to disguise what is actually a disobedient life.

Not being able to be 100% perfect is hardly a reason to think one does not have to obey Christ in getting water baptized.


I was baptized as a infant as a Catholic but I guess that don't count.
...At least not toward what Christ had in mind when he commanded water baptism.


Also, if you were sprinkled with water but not immersed that don't count either.
Although sprinkling with water is Biblical, if I'm not mistaken the word baptism literally means to be immersed in.


Or if the wrong church or denomination did the baptizing that doesn't count either.
And so this man made nonsense makes it so we don't have to be water baptized at all? I hope that's not what you're saying.


Yeah, I find the concept to be legalistic.
What you have found is man's concept of it to be legalistic.
True to our nature, we can't just simply follow what Jesus commands and have to frustrate and ruin things with our carnal reasoning.


Funny thing though, even though Jesus was baptized He himself baptized no one. Maybe He belonged to the wrong church or wasn't authorized to do baptize do to legalistic restraints.
And that makes it so we don't have to be water baptized? I hope that's not what you're saying.
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,042
13,047
113
58
There's a dozen translations that use this wording and none that that say "because of". What translation is your eternity placed in?
Will you ever learn? :rolleyes:

In Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical.

Greek scholar A. T. Robertson comments on Acts 2:38 - he shows how the grammar of this verse can be used to support more than one interpretation of this text. He then reaches this conclusion: "One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. So I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received." The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the Koin, generally (Robertson, Grammar, page 592).

*Also compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 - the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:47).

In Acts 10:43 we read ..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. Again, these Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Spirit - Acts 10:45 - when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ - Acts 11:17 - (compare with Acts 16:31 - Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved) BEFORE water baptism - Acts 10:47. This is referred to as repentance unto life - Acts 11:18.

So the only logical conclusion *when properly harmonizing scripture with scripture* is that faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,042
13,047
113
58
I suppose a person can construe his ideas about law and Gospel to mean that he believes in faith plus works but it is not explicitly said in that quote.

And I surely do not follow what he is trying to say about gospel, 10 commandments, and law????? Of course I was not in on the whole discussion . . .
the Gospel is the Law to follow and obey.
Are we getting warmer? ;)
 
R

Ralph-

Guest
Will you ever learn? :rolleyes:

In Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical.
It wasn't parenthetical during John's ministry, so there's no reason to think it was during Peter's. Water baptism from the start was about the forgiveness of sins.


"John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins."-Mark 1:4

38Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."-Acts 2:38


The person who walked away from either sermon without getting water baptized would have had no claim to having the forgiveness of God. Faith without corresponding action is dead. You know this.

Ideally, your first act of repentance is to be water baptized.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,042
13,047
113
58
It wasn't parenthetical during John's ministry, so there's no reason to think it was during Peter's. Water baptism from the start was about the forgiveness of sins.

"John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins."-Mark 1:4

38Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."-Acts 2:38

The person who walked away from either sermon without getting water baptized would have had no claim to having the forgiveness of God. Faith without corresponding action is dead. You know this.

Ideally, your first act of repentance is to be water baptized.
Was John's baptism of repentance "for" (in order to obtain remission of sins) or was it "for" (in regards to/on the basis of) remission of sins received upon repentance?

In Matthew 3:11, we read - "I baptize you with water "for" repentance.. Now was this baptism "for" (in order to obtain) repentance or "for" (in regards to/on the basis of) repentance? In order to obtain repentance makes no sense at all and repentance precedes baptism. It's the same in Acts 2:38, which is in perfect harmony with Luke 24:47; Acts 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18.

Luke 7:29 - And when all the people heard Him, even the tax collectors (who were believers) justified God/acknowledged God's justice, (signified by) having been baptized with the baptism of John. 30 But the Pharisees and lawyers (who were unbelievers) rejected the will of God for themselves, (signified by) not having been baptized by him.

Faith without corresponding action demonstrates that it's dead. If someone has genuinely received Christ through faith, then why on earth would they refuse to be water baptized? There are a handful of verses in the Bible that works salvationists try to use as proof texts to prove that water baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation, yet a careful examination of each of these texts in context will show that none of them prove that baptism is absolutely required for salvation, though they do prove that baptism was an assumed initiatory response to the gospel of salvation. In other words, these texts prove only that baptism is regularly associated with conversion and salvation, rather than absolutely required for salvation.

In Acts 10:43-47; 11:17, we see that these Gentiles had received the gift of the Holy Spirit when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ (compare with Acts 16:31) PRIOR TO RECEIVING WATER BAPTISM. In your opinion, were these Gentile believers (who received the gift of the Holy Spirit which is only for the body of Christ - 1 Corinthians 12) still lost in their sins prior to receiving water baptism?
 
Last edited:
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Okay, here is DJ.

I do not believe in any shape or form that the act of physically being water baptized causes salvation to happen. I do not believe in anyway that water baptism into itself can take away sins. I am plainly stating that water baptism is the required point of the remission of sins as stated in scripture. The remission of sins does not happen before or after water baptism but at water baptism.
Talk about contradicting yourself.

That's like saying you do not believe pushing the gas pedal has nothing to do with youyr car moving. Putting the car in gear has nothing to do with your car moving. Its just when you do those things is the POINT in wich you car moves.

If your going to have a belief, at least have the courage to stick up for what you believe. Don’t keep watering it down and saying your nbot teaching something you are..

Coy responses about death bed conversions and astronauts in space proving water baptism is not needed are childish. We are to follow the word of God, our own sensibilities be damned.
childish remark again.

What is childish is saying you do not believe something, then point blank contradicting what you said, by admitting you believ it.

Saying remission of sins HAPPENS at the point of salvation, is saying that the physical act of baptism is required. And at the very least. Is PARTY of what causes us to be saved.

Wake up.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
There's a dozen translations that use this wording and none that that say "because of". What translation is your eternity placed in?

I do not care what TRANSLATIONS say, Translations are translations, not to mention, the english language (which is a flawed language) What we need to care about is what the GREEK says.

the greek, as well as most english translations, say unto or for.

Both words in BOTH languages can be interpreted

On account of

In order to obtain.

so BOTH interpretations are logical. Which means the ONLY way to find the CORRECT interpretation is to use the rest of scripture. And use context.

Which you havce FAILED to do. You interpret it in a way to fit your belief, no matter what. Well thats on you.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Was John's baptism of repentance "for" (in order to obtain remission of sins) or was it "for" (in regards to/on the basis of) remission of sins received upon repentance?

In Matthew 3:11, we read - "I baptize you with water "for" repentance.. Now was this baptism "for" (in order to obtain) repentance or "for" (in regards to/on the basis of) repentance? In order to obtain repentance makes no sense at all and repentance precedes baptism. It's the same in Acts 2:38, which is in perfect harmony with Luke 24:47; Acts 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18.

Luke 7:29 - And when all the people heard Him, even the tax collectors (who were believers) justified God/acknowledged God's justice, (signified by) having been baptized with the baptism of John. 30 But the Pharisees and lawyers (who were unbelievers) rejected the will of God for themselves, (signified by) not having been baptized by him.

Faith without corresponding action demonstrates that it's dead. If someone has genuinely received Christ through faith, then why on earth would they refuse to be water baptized? There are a handful of verses in the Bible that works salvationists try to use as proof texts to prove that water baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation, yet a careful examination of each of these texts in context will show that none of them prove that baptism is absolutely required for salvation, though they do prove that baptism was an assumed initiatory response to the gospel of salvation. In other words, these texts prove only that baptism is regularly associated with conversion and salvation, rather than absolutely required for salvation.

In Acts 10:43-47; 11:17, we see that these Gentiles had received the gift of the Holy Spirit when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ (compare with Acts 16:31) PRIOR TO RECEIVING WATER BAPTISM. In your opinion, were these Gentile believers (who received the gift of the Holy Spirit which is only for the body of Christ - 1 Corinthians 12) still lost in their sins prior to receiving water baptism?

I think the fact when the pharisees came, John demanded they show proof they had already recieved remission of sin before he would baptised them is ample enough evidence to prove your point.
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,042
13,047
113
58
Both words in BOTH languages can be interpreted

On account of

In order to obtain.

so BOTH interpretations are logical. Which means the ONLY way to find the CORRECT interpretation is to use the rest of scripture. And use context.

Which you havce FAILED to do. You interpret it in a way to fit your belief, no matter what. Well thats on you.
You hit the nail on the head! Greek scholar A. T. Robertson comments on Acts 2:38 - he shows how the grammar of this verse can be used to support more than one interpretation of this text. He then reaches this conclusion: "One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. So I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received." The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the Koin, generally (Robertson, Grammar, page 592).

That's in perfect harmony with (Luke 24:47; Acts 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). :)
 
Jun 1, 2016
5,032
121
0
Who is THEY? Hostility is a two way street in here. Man is saved by grace through faith and not by works (Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9) yet genuine faith is evidenced, substantiated, confirmed by works (James 2:14-26).

so can i ask you what the Bible says of someone who says " I have faith" yet they also argue against Good works being needed? you are saying that works are needed you just are saying it differently.


what happens if there are no works? is that still faith? because you are saying faith is not genuine, without works. because the works are evidence of the faith, and its authenticity. but its confusing because you are saying faith saves us, and there is no work....yet Genuine faith will do works, ........


often you have good things to say, but its like you are going in circles to explain the same things you are speaking against.


if someone says " faith without works, is dead and a man is saved by the works Faith produces so faith alone without the deeds is no profit. its a seed that has the potential to produce fruit, when we sow into that seed and act upon it. faith comes alive. often you are explaining details of How something takes Place, and i see alot of value but its almost like

One says " we need to do the things Jesus says we Need to do to be saved"

and then the response is not " Amen yes thats a clear understanding we all should accept" and then some of the things you are saying would have good value to explain How a person goes from unable, to able by Faith to do the things the Bible says we have to do. but i may be off here, but it seems like you are always using that to explain why no one needs to do anything. but really you are saying " real faith will always have works, thats what actually shows it to be real"

so i often lose track not of what you are saying, and like i said its often really good scripture, and really good points, i think if you would see that if your saying "Good works are the evidence of genuine faith" thats a Good clear Point that many places in scripture supports. but that isnt a truth to be applied to why we dont need to do anyhting, or that the warnings dont apply. you are actually sayng works are necassary, your just saying " those works are accomplished By Faith" wich i think everyone agrees with who studies the Bible much.


then you have to see that you are also saying in different words " faith without works is dead, what doth it profet?"

then im sure the same thing you would say " Love is the reason we act in Love toward others" and that also is biblically sound. but it doesnt make the position " nothing needs to be done" if a person Has Gods Love in them they will be blessed to do as amany good things for others as they are able to do is the truth, it will actually improve the quality of many peoples Lives and fill us with that Joy of thr Lord so many of us hear of and cant quite feel .....that comes when we get our boots on the ground and apply faith into action putting those talents to work for Jesus who Gave His blood to Give us Life. to spread the goodness He gave us and His name along with the goodness we do and are for others .


i sincerely think if you would focus your understandings more toward " why we do the things we do" and not make it the argument for why we need to do nothing. it would really help alot of people. anyways i hope you and dc and some others understand man, discussion in a forum, is discussion, and really we should not let it get personal because were all Christians. i hope u guys take it the same way, discussion can be frustrating and i Know at least i , run short with patience bacause of the 2 years of the same circles. but its never personal for me, i feel like everyone should speak freely without worrying so much about offending others, and everyone should try to not take personal offense when others have debate and opposing ideas.


God bless....anyways. just tryin to let u personally know mmd, i actually appreciate alot of the things you say, i just think you misapply them to a faulty idea at some main points . you definately along with dc are both articulate and pretty well thought out people and probably Good Guys and all. i joke around alot trying to lighten the mood sometimes and then later i read and it doesnt come out that way in text so i apologize if i seemed to be laughing at you, or anything. those lols are usually because what ive written seems comical in my hed. never meant at you or anyone else.
 

MarcR

Senior Member
Feb 12, 2015
5,486
183
63
The NT uses the term 'grace' and the OT uses the term 'mercy', 'What is the difference?'
Mercy is withholding punishment deserved. Grace is giving good things undeserved.
 

MarcR

Senior Member
Feb 12, 2015
5,486
183
63
Our works DO MATTER! However they do NOT effect our Salvation.

When a believer persists in sin, he/she brings chastening on him/herself. If he/she persists in sin after chastening; compromising his/her testimony, he/she will die early and likely unpleasantly. While believers do NOT face the White Throne judgement, we will face the bema judgement where we will be rewarded or unrewarded for how we lived in faith.
 

Johnny_B

Senior Member
Mar 18, 2017
1,954
64
48
You hit the nail on the head! Greek scholar A. T. Robertson comments on Acts 2:38 - he shows how the grammar of this verse can be used to support more than one interpretation of this text. He then reaches this conclusion: "One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. So I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received." The illustrations of both usages are numerous in the N.T. and the Koin, generally (Robertson, Grammar, page 592).

That's in perfect harmony with (Luke 24:47; Acts 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). :)

The Acts 2:38 believers use a hard translation of the word "for" as if it can only mean to receieve, when it is being used in the same way we say, "take two asprin for a headache" taking the two asprin does not give you the headache, you take the asprin because you already have the headache. If those same people read past Acts 2:38 and put as much weight into where Peter says to believe, have faith and repent for the remission of sin they would have more Scriptural evidence for their doctrine.

But for thos that hold this one verse as the way of salvation here's is what the apostle taught after chapter 2 up chapter 8 if you red there is more Scripture about believing/faith and repentance that brought increase to the disciples.

Acts 3:18-20 “But what God foretold by the mouth of all the prophets, that his Christ would suffer, he thus fulfilled. 19 Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out, 20 that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus,”

Acts 4:4 “But many of those who had heard the word believed, and the number of the men came to about five thousand.”

Acts 5:12-15 “Now many signs and wonders were regularly done among the people by the hands of the apostles. And they were all together in Solomon's Portico.13 None of the rest dared join them, but the people held them in high esteem.14 And more than ever believers were added to the Lord, multitudes of both men and women,15 so that they even carried out the sick into the streets and laid them on cots and mats, that as Peter came by at least his shadow might fall on some of them.”

Acts 5:29-32 “But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men.30 The God of our fathers raised Jesus, whom you killed by hanging him on a tree.31 God exalted him at his right hand as Leader and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins.32 And we are witnesses to these things, and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey him.”

Peter and the apostles told the council what they were preaching with no mention of baptism.

Acts 6:7 “And the word of God continued to increase, and the number of the disciples multiplied greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests became obedient to the faith.”

The number of disciples multiplied greatly and no mention of baptism.

Acts 8:9-13 “But there was a man named Simon, who had previously practiced magic in the city and amazed the people of Samaria, saying that he himself was somebody great.10 They all paid attention to him, from the least to the greatest, saying, “This man is the power of God that is called Great.”11 And they paid attention to him because for a long time he had amazed them with his magic.12 But when they believed Philip as he preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.13 Even Simon himself believed, and after being baptized he continued with Philip. And seeing signs and great miracles performed, he was amazed.”

The first mention of baptism since Acts 2:38, but no mention of being baptized in Jesus name, only that the good news about the kingdom and the name of Jesus and the result they were baptized and Simon believed and was baptized, no mention of baptism being the cause of remission of sins.

Acts 8:16 “for he had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.”


The first mention of baptism in Jesus name but it is not associated with the remission of sin with it.


Acts 8:35-37 “Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him.36 Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?”
37 Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”
And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”


If baptism was for the remission of sins, why did Philip ask the eunch before he was baptized, “if you believe with all your heart” Believing is the matter for repentance, baptism is not repentance for remission of sin. If that is what Peter was teach with the 119 standing with him, they would of taught the same. Keep reading the book of Acts and there is no mention of baptism for the remission of sins.
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,042
13,047
113
58
so can i ask you what the Bible says of someone who says " I have faith" yet they also argue against Good works being needed? you are saying that works are needed you just are saying it differently.

what happens if there are no works? is that still faith? because you are saying faith is not genuine, without works. because the works are evidence of the faith, and its authenticity. but its confusing because you are saying faith saves us, and there is no work....yet Genuine faith will do works,........
In James 2:14, we read of one who says/claims he has faith but has no works (to validate his claim). Where is the fruit? That is not genuine faith, but a bare profession of faith. So when James asks, "Can that faith save him?" he is saying nothing against genuine faith, but only against an empty profession of faith/dead faith. *So James does not teach that we are saved "by" works. His concern is to show the reality of the faith professed by the individual (James 2:18) and demonstrate that the faith claimed (James 2:14) by the individual is genuine. Faith is the root of salvation and works are the fruit. No fruit at all demonstrates there is no root. ALL genuine Christians/Believers are fruitful, but not all are equally fruitful (Matthew 13:23).


often you have good things to say, but its like you are going in circles to explain the same things you are speaking against.
I try to explain things clearly.

if someone says " faith without works, is dead and a man is saved by the works. Faith produces so faith alone without the deeds is no profit. its a seed that has the potential to produce fruit, when we sow into that seed and act upon it. faith comes alive. often you are explaining details of How something takes Place, and i see alot of value but its almost like

One says " we need to do the things Jesus says we Need to do to be saved"
Faith that remains alone "barren of works" is not genuine faith, but a dead faith. Our faith is made alive in Christ (by grace we have been saved through faith, not by works - Ephesians 2:5-9). Saying that works cause dead faith to come alive is like saying that fruit causes a dead tree to come alive. It takes a living faith to produce works, just as it takes a living tree to produce fruit. The source of life in faith produces works and not the other way around. Life flows through the root (faith) and produces the works (fruit). What did Jesus say we needed to do to be saved? BELIEVE - (John 3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26). Not to be confused with things Jesus said to do AFTER we have been saved (Matthew 5:16; 44-46; 6:19-21; 33; 14:15; 28:19-20 etc..).

and then the response is not " Amen yes thats a clear understanding we all should accept" and then some of the things you are saying would have good value to explain How a person goes from unable, to able by Faith to do the things the Bible says we have to do. but i may be off here, but it seems like you are always using that to explain why no one needs to do anything. but really you are saying " real faith will always have works, thats what actually shows it to be real"
Obedience is not forced or legalistic for genuine believers. It's not about get saved then do nothing, but it's also not about, now that we are saved, here is a check list of things that we must do (or else!) to help Jesus keep us saved.

so i often lose track not of what you are saying, and like i said its often really good scripture, and really good points, i think if you would see that if your saying "Good works are the evidence of genuine faith" thats a Good clear Point that many places in scripture supports. but that isnt a truth to be applied to why we dont need to do anyhting, or that the warnings dont apply. you are actually sayng works are necassary, your just saying " those works are accomplished By Faith" wich i think everyone agrees with who studies the Bible much.
Good works are the evidence of genuine faith and there are certainly warnings in the Bible.

then you have to see that you are also saying in different words " faith without works is dead, what doth it profet?"
Again, "faith without works is dead" does not mean that faith is dead until it produces works and then it becomes a living faith or that works are the source of life in faith. That's like saying a tree is dead until it produces fruit and then it becomes a living tree and the fruit is the source of life in the tree. James is simply saying faith that is not accompanied by evidential works is dead. If someone says-claims he has faith but lacks resulting evidential works, then he has an empty profession of faith/dead faith and not authentic faith. We must not put the cart before the horse.

then im sure the same thing you would say " Love is the reason we act in Love toward others" and that also is biblically sound. but it doesnt make the position "nothing needs to be done" if a person Has Gods Love in them they will be blessed to do as amany good things for others as they are able to do is the truth, it will actually improve the quality of many peoples Lives and fill us with that Joy of thr Lord so many of us hear of and cant quite feel .....that comes when we get our boots on the ground and apply faith into action putting those talents to work for Jesus who Gave His blood to Give us Life. to spread the goodness He gave us and His name along with the goodness we do and are for others.
Paul speaks of the importance of love in 1 Corinthians chapter 13. We also see that faith works through love (Galatians 5:6). The love of God has been poured out in the hearts of believers through the Holy Spirit who was given to us (Romans 5:5). We love Him because He first loved us (1 John 4:19). I'm not saying nothing needs to be done now that we are Christians. Just sit back and do nothing. Not at all! There are plenty of things we can be doing for the Lord, yet there is no amount of good works that we could accomplish and add as a supplement to Christ's finished work of redemption in order to help Him save us. Big difference.

i sincerely think if you would focus your understandings more toward " why we do the things we do" and not make it the argument for why we need to do nothing. it would really help alot of people. anyways i hope you and dc and some others understand man, discussion in a forum, is discussion, and really we should not let it get personal because were all Christians. i hope u guys take it the same way, discussion can be frustrating and i Know at least i , run short with patience bacause of the 2 years of the same circles. but its never personal for me, i feel like everyone should speak freely without worrying so much about offending others, and everyone should try to not take personal offense when others have debate and opposing ideas.
When people are very passionate about what they believe, it's inevitable that sooner or later someone will become frustrated or angry, especially when there is a disagreement on something as critical as how we are saved. Now there is nothing we can do to help Jesus save us (His finished work of redemption is sufficient and complete to save believers/no supplements needed - Romans 3:24-26) yet we are exhorted to present our bodies as a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is our reasonable service (Romans 12:1). In 1 Thessalonians 5:14-18, we are exhorted to warn those who are unruly, comfort the fainthearted, uphold the weak, be patient with all. See that no one renders evil for evil to anyone, but always pursue what is good both for yourselves and for all. Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, in everything give thanks; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you. *Not to be confused with God's will for us to become saved (John 6:40). I hear too many people implying that we are saved based on our performance or at least that's the way it comes across.

God bless....anyways. just tryin to let u personally know mmd, i actually appreciate alot of the things you say, i just think you misapply them to a faulty idea at some main points . you definately along with dc are both articulate and pretty well thought out people and probably Good Guys and all. i joke around alot trying to lighten the mood sometimes and then later i read and it doesnt come out that way in text so i apologize if i seemed to be laughing at you, or anything. those lols are usually because what ive written seems comical in my hed. never meant at you or anyone else.
I appreciate your up front honesty and God bless you! Also don't forget. I'm not a bad guy. I'm just misunderstood. :eek:
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
so can i ask you what the Bible says of someone who says " I have faith" yet they also argue against Good works being needed? you are saying that works are needed you just are saying it differently.
Who is saying that? Except for licentious people. Whose life never changed, they continue to act and live just like they did before they “claimed they had faith”

Were they saved then lost their salvation?

Or based on the fact that never had true living faith, they were never saved to begin with?

You tell us?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
R

Ralph-

Guest
In your opinion, were these Gentile believers (who received the gift of the Holy Spirit which is only for the body of Christ - 1 Corinthians 12) still lost in their sins prior to receiving water baptism?
No, Cornelius and his family were not still lost in their sins prior to receiving water baptism. They would be lost if they did not then seek to walk in the commandments of God, starting with water baptism.

You won't be able to grasp this, or even consider it, because you already have the immovable, preconceived idea that one can not lose their salvation. All your thinking and reasoning stops at just the suggestion that salvation can be lost. It makes it so you can not even examine the possibility. Your mind is already made up. No further discussion is possible. That is how it is with virtually every once saved always saved person I've ever talked to. They can't even discuss the subject. They are hardened walls.

It's a spirit at work in the church. It came in with the reformation and brought us to the point now where grace means you do not even have to continue to believe to be saved when Jesus comes back. Grace was not given to us so we can skip baptism, go back to unbelief and our old lives of sin and still be saved. Grace will never alter the necessity to obey and grow up in Christ.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,042
13,047
113
58
No, Cornelius and his family were not still lost in their sins prior to receiving water baptism.
Amen! I rest my case. :)

They would be lost if they did not then seek to walk in the commandments of God, starting with water baptism.
Walking in the commandments of God is what we are saved FOR and NOT BY, starting with water baptism.
 
R

Ralph-

Guest
Amen! I rest my case. :)
Yo say this because you are unable to hear the argument being made. You are only able to hear the necessity for water baptism as meaning it literally saves you. That's what the once saved always saved indoctrination does to a person. I see this over and over and over again. It's a spirit at work in the kingdom of God.


Walking in the commandments of God is what we are saved FOR and NOT BY, starting with water baptism.
See? You don't even realize no one is making the argument that obedience literally saves a person. You are incapable of seeing beyond your own predetermined doctrine. It causes you to be unable to properly hear opposition to your doctrine.
 
R

Ralph-

Guest

Were they saved then lost their salvation?

Or based on the fact that never had true living faith, they were never saved to begin with?

You tell us?
What does it matter? They are lost either way.

You're peddling a meaningless argument. It only has meaning to those who have accepted the defeat of sin as the normal way of life for the Christian.

Once saved always saved makes it so people don't even stop to see if they are saved in the first place. It's a spirit at work in the kingdom of God. It gives false assurance to people who aren't even saved to begin with. And causes saved people to fall into the thinking that grace is their license to not do anything and wallow in sin.
 
R

Ralph-

Guest
When a believer persists in sin, he/she brings chastening on him/herself. If he/she persists in sin after chastening; compromising his/her testimony, he/she will die early and likely unpleasantly.
Keep telling yourself that. Meanwhile, John says this person is not born again. Their life being the evidence of their unsaved status.

Note that the immoral fellow at Corinthian had to die to the flesh IN ORDER TO BE SAVED WHEN JESUS COMES BACK. If he was already saved, why did he have to die physically in order to be saved in the day of Christ?

You people can skip water baptism, and skip all the other commandments God has given his people, thinking that grace makes it so you can do that. But don't expect to be saved when Jesus comes back.
 
Last edited by a moderator: