Requirements of Salvation

  • 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.

crossnote

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2012
30,769
3,678
113
That was what Paul felt, I agree with you. He wanted to win both Jews and Gentiles to Christ.

But if you claim that James felt the same way as Paul, that is reading into the scripture. As you have already stated, James was known as James the Just, he was very zealous for the Law of Moses. He already stated in his letter to the 12 tribes that faith without works is dead.
Just off the cuff, going back to John and speaking of James, they both bring up the concept of born again. John 3.3 and James 1.18. Do you really believe that is limited to Jewish believers?
Then turning to Paul, he mentions Jesus Christ to the Churches. Now Christ is a Greek word for a Jewish ceremonial act of consecration. The word being Mesach (Messiah) or annointing. Why would Paul be using Hebrew concepts with Gentile Christians?
 
Oct 25, 2018
2,377
1,198
113
Don't contradict yourself again.

If that is what you are saying, then you are also saying "the moment Jesus starting preaching in Mark, none of the Jews needed to sacrifice animals, be circumcised, and follow the Law of Moses at all".

Either Exodus 19:4-6 held for the Jews during the 4 Gospels, or it doesn't.
Understand, then, that those who have faith are children of Abraham. Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you.” So those who rely on faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.[Gal. 3:7-9]


Notice the man Abraham is called the man of faith. Later on in this same chapter, Paul wrote For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse, as it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” Clearly no one who relies on the law is justified before God, because “the righteous will live by faith.” The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, it says, “The person who does these things will live by them.”[Gal. 3:10-12]

So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good, [Rom. 7:12] yet no man could keep it. All of this pointed out their failures to themselves and also pointed them to Him.
 

Wansvic

Well-known member
Nov 27, 2018
5,256
1,110
113
Yes, but you obviously ignore certain instructions because you know they are not directed to you correct?
Peter instructed the Jewish people of their responsibility to repent, and get water baptized in Jesus' name for the remission of sins. And told them God would give the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 2:38) He went on to say that this promise was for "...as many as the Lord thy God shall call." (verse 39) I would agree with your assessment that these instructions only applied to the Jews if the biblical record attested to that. It does not.

THIS RECORD PROVES SAMARITANS HAD TO COMPLY WITH THE SAME INSTRUCTIONS GIVEN FIRST TO THE JEWS.
The same instructions were given to the Samaritans by Philip. (Acts 8:12-17) After they believed Philip concerning the kingdom of God AND the name of Jesus, the people were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Afterward, Peter and John came and laid hands upon them and God filled them with Holy Ghost.

THIS RECORD PROVES GENTILES HAD TO COMPLY WITH THE SAME INSTRUCTIONS AS THE JEWS.Again, God uses Peter to go and instruct the Gentiles what they must do to be saved. (Acts 11:14) Peter relays the gospel and tells them that through Jesus' name whosoever believes in Him will receive remission of sin. (Acts 10:37-43) Immediately the Holy Ghost fell on them and they spoke in tongues. This resulted is their repentance and obedience in submitting to water baptism in the name of the Lord.
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,786
2,959
113
“The 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:” 1 Peter 3:21 (KJV 1900)
This is a great verse! But I had to go to Biblegateway.com and put the verse into modern English, to understand what it was saying. Instead of using archaic KJV, why not use modern English? When people cannot understand the language, they are not going to rejoice over a good verse! Here it is in today's English:

"and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ," 1 Peter 3:21 NIV

And here it is in Greek, which is more accurate and easier to read than the KJV:

"ὃ καὶ ὑμᾶς ἀντίτυπον νῦν σῴζει βάπτισμα, οὐ σαρκὸς ἀπόθεσις ῥύπου ἀλλὰ συνειδήσεως ἀγαθῆς ἐπερώτημα εἰς θεόν, δι’ ἀναστάσεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ," 1 Peter 3:21 SNL Greek NT
 
Jan 17, 2020
4,792
736
113
This is a great verse! But I had to go to Biblegateway.com and put the verse into modern English, to understand what it was saying. Instead of using archaic KJV, why not use modern English? When people cannot understand the language, they are not going to rejoice over a good verse! Here it is in today's English:

"and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ," 1 Peter 3:21 NIV

And here it is in Greek, which is more accurate and easier to read than the KJV:

"ὃ καὶ ὑμᾶς ἀντίτυπον νῦν σῴζει βάπτισμα, οὐ σαρκὸς ἀπόθεσις ῥύπου ἀλλὰ συνειδήσεως ἀγαθῆς ἐπερώτημα εἰς θεόν, δι’ ἀναστάσεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ," 1 Peter 3:21 SNL Greek NT
It comes back to having a clear conscience, apart from which you cannot have faith through which salvation channels.
 

Wansvic

Well-known member
Nov 27, 2018
5,256
1,110
113
well, of COURSE it's pertinent, but it does not establish how the process works. This one time event was an anomaly. You cannot claim that's how it will work for everyone, because this was a singular, special purpose event.
If true, why would Paul insist Ephesus disciples be water baptized prior to laying hands upon them to receive the Holy Ghost. (Acts 19:2-6) If receiving the Holy Ghost was all that was necessary there would have been no need to re-baptize the disciples in the name of the Lord Jesus. Paul's interaction with the disciples seems to have taken place over 20 years after the first instructions were given at Pentecost.

Also, for what reason did Philip water baptize the eunuch as recorded in Acts 8:36-38?
 
Apr 9, 2020
136
30
28
If it was that easy to be saved from hell then we wouldn't have scriptures such as Matthew 7:13-14 that warn us that few people will be saved.

James 2:19 KJB
"Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. "

James 2:13-26 KJB
"13 For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment.
14 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?
15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,
16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.
19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.
20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
25 Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?
26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also."

Matthew 7:13-14 KJB
"13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it."
I guess salvation would be a hard thing for most to achieve, but I know that God is almighty so He can do anything. I would disagree with you that salvation is not easy, I know that it's actually impossible for a man to save himself. This is why God came into the world to do it for us, so yeah it's very simple to receive the prize on a silver platter.
Jesus never said "you have to do xy&z, all he said was "believe and ye shall be saved" and that's good enough for me. I know that some try to add works to Christ's finished work, but He said "it is finished" and that's good enough for me.
Our best works are as filthy rags in God's sight, so I wouldn't dare add them to Christs spotless garment.
 

Wansvic

Well-known member
Nov 27, 2018
5,256
1,110
113
I guess salvation would be a hard thing for most to achieve, but I know that God is almighty so He can do anything. I would disagree with you that salvation is not easy, I know that it's actually impossible for a man to save himself. This is why God came into the world to do it for us, so yeah it's very simple to receive the prize on a silver platter.
Jesus never said "you have to do xy&z, all he said was "believe and ye shall be saved" and that's good enough for me. I know that some try to add works to Christ's finished work, but He said "it is finished" and that's good enough for me.
Our best works are as filthy rags in God's sight, so I wouldn't dare add them to Christs spotless garment.
Jesus also said, the contents of the Word is what everyone will be judged by. That would include Jesus words recorded in Mark, "he who believes and is baptized shall be saved." (Mark 16:16) Faith without works is dead. (James 2)
 

EternalFire

Well-known member
Jan 3, 2019
659
352
63
When you read verses like 1 Corinthians 6:11 it certainly sounds like it.

1 Corinthians 6:11 ESV

And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

In the phrase “by the Spirit of our God,” by is the Greek word en which means in. So is this by the Spirit or in the Spirit?

Mark 1:8 ESV

I have baptized you with water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.

With here is also the Greek work en or in.

Ephesians 1:13-14 ESV

In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.

In this case believers are sealed in him with the Holy Spirit.

These verses show that the Holy Sprit is certainly involved, but John 3:8 also tells us that we can’t fully understand everything involving the Spirit.

John 3:8 ESV

“The wind/pneuma blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit/Pneumatos.”
I certainly understand why there is confusion surrounding the topic of baptism. That’s why we have to clearly define each baptism referenced in the Bible, most especially the ones for a believer in our Lord Jesus Christ. Let’s start with water baptism. I’m sure we can agree, on the most basic level, that this is a human being here on earth baptizing another human being in water, e.g. John baptizing a person in the river Jordan (Mt 3:4-6). Yes?
 

JBTN

Active member
Feb 11, 2020
220
79
28
I certainly understand why there is confusion surrounding the topic of baptism. That’s why we have to clearly define each baptism referenced in the Bible, most especially the ones for a believer in our Lord Jesus Christ. Let’s start with water baptism. I’m sure we can agree, on the most basic level, that this is a human being here on earth baptizing another human being in water, e.g. John baptizing a person in the river Jordan (Mt 3:4-6). Yes?
John’s baptism was in water.

Matthew 3:6 ESV

and they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.

ebaptizonto en to lordane potamo = were being immersed in the Jordan River.



Jesus’s baptism

Mark 1:9 ESV

In those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan.

ebaptisthe eis ton lordanen = was immersed into the Jordan
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,786
2,959
113
Jesus also said, the contents of the Word is what everyone will be judged by. That would include Jesus words recorded in Mark, "he who believes and is baptized shall be saved." (Mark 16:16) Faith without works is dead. (James 2)
Since the longer ending of Mark is accepted as spurious by modern scholars, you should stop quoting it as a proof text. In fact, Mark 16:16 conflicts with every other verse about baptism, which proves the longer ending is wrong. Certainly the theology, the vocabulary, the high Christology differs considerably from the rest of Mark, and from the rest of the NT, it is simply not appropriate to constantly quote something which Mark never wrote.

While Mark does seem to have lost its ending, (using gar, or "for" as the last word) the verses following, either the longer or shorter endings are simply not authentic. The longer ending does appear in 2nd century manuscripts, but there are too many factors which are not Markian to use the longer ending.

Further, even if you could somehow show that the longer ending was not spurious, then you would have to make a doctrine out of one verse, which is very poor hermeneutics indeed. A strong doctrine should show up all over Scripture, this "believe AND be baptized" implying that baptism is necessary for salvation, cannot be supported anywhere in the Bible, except a spurious text.

If you want some more solid reasons why the longer ending is spurious, I can give you a list. Just ask!
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,786
2,959
113
John’s baptism was in water.

Matthew 3:6 ESV

and they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins.

ebaptizonto en to lordane potamo = were being immersed in the Jordan River.



Jesus’s baptism

Mark 1:9 ESV

In those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan.

ebaptisthe eis ton lordanen = was immersed into the Jordan
Just a personal request for you- when you quote Greek, also add the Greek in original letters, preferably the SBL Greek translation because it has all of the markings on top the letters. You can put the transliterated letters, if you want, but for those of us who read Greek, it is so much easier to read the original letters, rather than using tedious English letters. Plus, in the example above, it is hard to tell if you used an i or an l for the starting letter of Jordan. Of course the l is wrong. Using the Greek letters helps so much!

Thanks in advance!
 

Wansvic

Well-known member
Nov 27, 2018
5,256
1,110
113
Since the longer ending of Mark is accepted as spurious by modern scholars, you should stop quoting it as a proof text. In fact, Mark 16:16 conflicts with every other verse about baptism, which proves the longer ending is wrong. Certainly the theology, the vocabulary, the high Christology differs considerably from the rest of Mark, and from the rest of the NT, it is simply not appropriate to constantly quote something which Mark never wrote.

While Mark does seem to have lost its ending, (using gar, or "for" as the last word) the verses following, either the longer or shorter endings are simply not authentic. The longer ending does appear in 2nd century manuscripts, but there are too many factors which are not Markian to use the longer ending.

Further, even if you could somehow show that the longer ending was not spurious, then you would have to make a doctrine out of one verse, which is very poor hermeneutics indeed. A strong doctrine should show up all over Scripture, this "believe AND be baptized" implying that baptism is necessary for salvation, cannot be supported anywhere in the Bible, except a spurious text.

If you want some more solid reasons why the longer ending is spurious, I can give you a list. Just ask!
The biblical record confirms the need for water baptism as I have pointed out over and over. Jesus stated that the word will be the judge. Refusing to accept scriptures as authentic will not be an acceptable defense.
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,786
2,959
113
The biblical record confirms the need for water baptism as I have pointed out over and over. Jesus stated that the word will be the judge. Refusing to accept scriptures as authentic will not be an acceptable defense.
You have in no way confirmed water baptism is necessary. You take a translation made from seven 15th century corrupted manuscripts, with an accumulated mistakes, especially additions, and use that instead of early manuscripts which do not include the longer ending of Mark, and use it as an inspired version.

Won't you have egg on your face on a Judgment Day when you meet Jesus, and he tells you how you caused many to stumble with your poor reading and interpretation of the Bible, and how wrong you were to say others would lose their salvation because of translation errors, or because they weren't baptized.

By the way, I was immersion baptized 2 years after I was saved in a double baptismal tank with my husband. I wanted to be baptized the day I was saved. My husband had been saved about 6 years longer than me, and still felt unready to be baptized, (something to do with unbiblical Arminianism!)

I felt the peace of the Holy Spirit reassure me in the dressing room, and so did my husband in the men's dressing room. We were baptized in God's timing, and here we are, nearly 40 years later still following Jesus.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,951
13,615
113
Did you ever read Acts 21:20-25 to see what James felt about the difference between Jewish and Gentile believers, wrt the Law of Moses?
this is what James was doing, even what was prophesied in the very same chapter:

And as we stayed many days, a certain prophet named Agabus came down from Judea. When he had come to us, he took Paul’s belt, bound his own hands and feet, and said, “Thus says the Holy Spirit, ‘So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man who owns this belt, and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.’ ”
(Acts 21:10-11)
notice who the Spirit of Prophecy said would bind Paul: the Jews.
notice how: with his own belt, hands and feet.

read on:

the people ran together, seized Paul, and dragged him out of the temple; and immediately the doors were shut. Now as they were seeking to kill him, news came to the commander of the garrison that all Jerusalem was in an uproar. He immediately took soldiers and centurions, and ran down to them. And when they saw the commander and the soldiers, they stopped beating Paul. Then the commander came near and took him, and commanded him to be bound with two chains; and he asked who he was and what he had done.
(Acts 21:30-33)
notice that the Jews did not physically bind Paul hand and foot.
the Romans did. with chains, not with Paul's belt.
Paul was not physically bound until the commander of the garrison came and ordered his soldiers to do so.

so the binding Paul was to be subjected to that the LORD God spoke through Agabus was not the shackling of his hands and feet by physical fetters.
the binding that God determined Paul to experience was something the Jews did to Paul.

consider James, the Jew, speaking to Paul on behalf of the believing Pharisees.
consider what was Paul's belt. consider how his hands and feet were restricted. consider how they delivered Paul.




maybe if i keep pointing this out to you one day you will comprehend it :)
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
37,951
13,615
113
If that is what you are saying, then you are also saying "the moment Jesus starting preaching in Mark, none of the Jews needed to sacrifice animals, be circumcised, and follow the Law of Moses at all".
i'll say it.
no one needed circumcision or sacrifice to be saved, when Salvation Himself was walking among them. no one was saved by scrupulously keeping the ministration of death, when Life Himself came to seek out and save the lost. do we not understand how He said '
take heart, your sins are forgiven' ? this is the same One who looked down at the mercy seat and saw the blood, and overlooked sin, who said He desired mercy, not sacrifice. Who lamented because of their unbelief. Who was raised up exactly like the brazen serpent, that all who look to Him may have life.
no, in His presence, when He came to call not the righteous, but sinners - the sick and the lost - you didn't need to have the righteousness which is found in the law in order to receive life.
 

JBTN

Active member
Feb 11, 2020
220
79
28
Just a personal request for you- when you quote Greek, also add the Greek in original letters, preferably the SBL Greek translation because it has all of the markings on top the letters. You can put the transliterated letters, if you want, but for those of us who read Greek, it is so much easier to read the original letters, rather than using tedious English letters. Plus, in the example above, it is hard to tell if you used an i or an l for the starting letter of Jordan. Of course the l is wrong. Using the Greek letters helps so much!

Thanks in advance!
I am trying to learn for exactly the reasons you gave in post #334. Already feel like there is so much that you cannot understand from the English translations.
 

Angela53510

Senior Member
Jan 24, 2011
11,786
2,959
113
I am trying to learn for exactly the reasons you gave in post #334. Already feel like there is so much that you cannot understand from the English translations.
I can give you the names of some Greek profs who are offering online courses. You will be amazed at how much the Greek enriched your Bible studies, and be able to determine yourself simple errors in translations. These are some of the top Greek scholars in the world.
 

JBTN

Active member
Feb 11, 2020
220
79
28
I can give you the names of some Greek profs who are offering online courses. You will be amazed at how much the Greek enriched your Bible studies, and be able to determine yourself simple errors in translations. These are some of the top Greek scholars in the world.
Please do. I would appreciate that.