E
I was more speaking of your way of reacting now and then. Let us see if our beliefs on the nature of water baptism differs slighty or 180 degrees and, if so, when and where.
They are not "dependent" upon it. However, you will go through water baptism because if you are saved (or a child of at least a saved parent) it is the normative thing to do.
They are not "dependent" upon it. However, you will go through water baptism because if you are saved (or a child of at least a saved parent) it is the normative thing to do.
I am not so sure that it is a "work" in the sense you put it. Personally I believe none of the sacraments are any "works" in that sense at all. I believe your literalism and apparent linear thinking and scripture reading takes the term "work" at too far an edge here and thus the conclusion gets oversimplified.
Even if it is not for salvation, it is still called a work. Only in this case, it is a work which is a fruit of our repentance and faith.
In greek the verb for baptism used in NT is baptizo (Βαπτιζω and it's used almost entirely in the passive voice. In english it would be translated something like “be baptized”. It is about something done to you and not something you do to yourself. That is an argument that baptism is not a work, by Pauline standard. Another argument is that the mindset at hand here does not indicate that it is a work to earn something. There is nothing meritorious about baptism at all. Those who yet think it is are off base.
When we are baptized we do not believe that the water is sufficient to earn our salvation. Baptism does not pay the price for our sins. Christ alone did that. So, we don’t pay the price for our sins and earn salvation through submitting to baptism. It is done to us in faith as a response and in recognition of salvation as God’s gift. For those who are saved it functions like a "receipt" that the price has been paid. For those who are not saved but plants it avails nothing. Do you see this?
See reply above.
See reply above.
again, this is what I have been saying all along. so I fail to see your point.
As shown above water baptism is no such "work". But I do get what you are saying about Spirit baptism. However, I wish not to contradict Spirit baptism with water baptism to the nigh exclusion of the latter. They are intertwined here and the Spirit IS at work in water baptism. To believe anything else do tend to downplay the role of water baptism. I wish no-one would go there.
Yet this is where we run into problems. Scripture says spirit baptism and water baptism are separate events. It is an error to think spirit baptism and water baptism are intertwined as to happen at the same time. for this holds the work of God in check until man does a work himself.
Good that we agree that it is a commandment and that it should be obeyed by all christians. The question I have is what role do water baptism play for you more than being a commandment that is to be obeyed?
OK. Do you see any other function/role of baptism beyond this?
Again, water baptism is not such a "work". But I agree that regardless of how one views baptism, the idea that one bases his salvation on baptism in and by itself is in grave error.
lol. I like ho you added the words "in and by itself" If salvation is based on ones water baptism at all, even if it is not totally on the baptism (ie in and of itself) is in error. and using it as a work to save him.
I guess we differ here. I do not see water baptism only as a commandment. With Calvin I say that the sacraments have the same office as the Word of God: to offer and set forth Christ to us, and in him the treasures of heavenly grace.
I see grace like this. Any day I wake up and I am not in hell, I have been given grace. Any time I sin and am still living after that sin, I have been given grace. Any time I recieve anything good from my father, I have been given grace. An unbeliever is given grace by the mere fact he is still alive and still able to repent. Anything we recieve, whether good or bad, is by grace, because we all deserve on thing, and that is an eternity apart from God.
now if you wanted to reword that and say it allows God to bless us, instead of chasten us, i can see that, because any time we do not do the command of God we are in sin, and deserving of chastening. we will not be blessed if we are being chastened. One who will not even do Gods first command would be in chastening mode, and not grow in christ, and is missing out on many blessings.
Not sure what exactly you are saying here? "LONG before"? Meaning that God has to wait for a certain "time" to bestow His gifts/graces to His children?
what do you mean here, you used gifts and graces in plural.
if we do not get the one gift, there will be no other gift.
again, even an unbeliever recives grace, I think your stuck on the catholic traditional meaning of the word grace and not the literal meaning. which is undeserved favor.
as far as what I meant. The moment we repent and place our faith in Christ, we are saved, whihc means we have been washed by the blood of Christ, and been justified in him. This is immediate and not conditioned on anything. God did all the work (including the HS, who baptised us and through this baptism cleansed us)
For those who say water baptism is a requirement at any level for one to be saved, they say that this does not happen immediately after true repentnance and faith, but there is a time laps between the time a person repents, and has saving faith, and the time they get immersed in water. which could be days, even weeks in some circumstances.
The question I have for those who believe in baptismal regeneration, is what if the person dies inbetween, is the person lost because he did not have a chance to be baptised in water yet? or is he saved, and how could he be saved if he did not get baptised yet?
That is one way of seeing it. I would say both failed to investigate and study what the Saints of old believed and taught. Instead they evolved their own traditions.
Correct. But we are the ones who have the responsibility to study and research and to discern what is a tenable interpretation. There are many around who say "we believe only the Bible". We have to prove what is said, we need to make a judgment of what is right and wrong. Of course we can learn much from the fathers in this wise, who met much of the same challenges as do we.
Correct. But we are the ones who have the responsibility to study and research and to discern what is a tenable interpretation. There are many around who say "we believe only the Bible". We have to prove what is said, we need to make a judgment of what is right and wrong. Of course we can learn much from the fathers in this wise, who met much of the same challenges as do we.