Saved by faith alone?

  • 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.

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,475
13,419
113
58
It logically follows that we get water baptized after we believe and are saved, yet Jesus clarified the second clause of Mark 16:16 with, "but he who does not believe will be condemned." Nothing there about a lack of baptism causing condemnation.

It's like saying, "he who takes his medication and washes it down with water will be made well." Of course, it's not the washing it down with water part that makes a person well. It's the medication, but if water is not available and the person takes the medication dry (been there, done that) they will still be made well "because of the medication."

Sadly, there have been numerous people over the years who have been water baptized and believe "mental assent" in the existence of Christ and in historical facts about Christ but have not truly believed in Christ unto salvation.
 

Everlasting-Grace

Well-known member
Dec 18, 2021
5,944
1,872
113
again..... if it is mentioned anywhere, it is a part of the process.
The fact that all the parts of the process are not mentioned in EVERY scripture is not evidence they are not needed. Otherwise, nothing would be required except baptism, per 1 Peter 3....
Read again my example of jumping in the river and swimming.
This is backwards thinking

You have jesus mention multiple times how one is born again, or given eternal life. and never mentions baptism

you have one passage where he says and they are baptized

and you automatically assume it must be water baptism and not spirit. and that Jesus meant to mention baptism in all the other passages.

and, scripturally, we receive the Holy Spirit when we are water baptized....
Thats false. i recieved the spirit a year before i was water baptized.. the holy spirit annointed me AFTER he baptized me into christ. longe before I had the opportunity to be baptised in water.


incidentally, how many people do you know that were baptized with fire?
No one has yet. thjat comes in the end when those who were seperated through unbelieve are baptized in the unquenchable fire ie, hellfire

And Paul still participated in, and taught, baptism with water and the Spirit... because that is what Jesus told us to do.
Paul never taught that water baptism saved anyone. Yes he taught water baptism.. Like circumcision of the OT,. they are symbols and commands given to Gods people to help teach what God did to us when we were saved (see colossians 2)
 

hornetguy

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2016
7,114
1,743
113
You have jesus mention multiple times how one is born again, or given eternal life. and never mentions baptism
Obviously Jesus didn't baptize people into his death and resurrection, because it had not happened yet. The only baptism at that time was John's baptism.
AFTER Jesus died and was raised from the dead, he instructed his apostles to go, teach the world, baptizing them into his name.... new kind of baptism.

So you believe that the apostles, the ones that walked with Jesus, and every other Christian scholar for the next many centuries all have been dead wrong on the importance of baptism, and you somehow have figured it out and have it right?

Well, you are going against what the apostles taught.... Acts 2
 

Lamar

Active member
May 21, 2023
949
141
43
This is proven to be in error using the word itself.

In matt 12: 41. the people of ninevah repented at (eis) the preaching of Jonah.

if was on the account of. or because of the preaching of Jonah that the people of Ninevah repented

There are many more examples

even in english, we can prove the same word can be used in different ways

1. I phoned the Doctor for (in order to) some medicine.

2. I phoned the Doctor for (in behalf of) my child.

3. I phoned the Doctor for (on account of) my sickness.

4. I phoned the Doctor for (with respect to) the bill he sent.

so your argument that it ONLY is translated one way is false.
You are still just making this up!!! How wrong can one person be???

The Greek word used in Matt. 12:41 that is translated into because is not "eis", it is the word "hoti"!

They were condemned because (hoti) they did not repent.
What is wrong with you.

Is this grasping at straws the best that faith alone regeneration theology followers have to offer? Are we to accept that all of the bibles ever written are wrong. And as evidence you present Matthew 12:41?

"even in english," This is not a matter of the use of "for" in the English language, this is an issue of the use of "eis" in the Greek.

This is the text:

Acts 2:37-39

37 When the people heard this, they were deeply upset. They asked Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what should we do?”
38 Peter answered them, “All of you must turn to God and change the way you think and act, and each of you must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins will be forgiven. Then you will receive the Holy Spirit as a gift. 39 This promise belongs to you and to your children and to everyone who is far away. It belongs to everyone who worships the Lord our God.”

This is the promise, this is the Gospel.

To deny, alter, malign or ignore these words to fit faith alone regeneration theology is pushing a false gospel.
 

Lamar

Active member
May 21, 2023
949
141
43
This is backwards thinking

You have jesus mention multiple times how one is born again, or given eternal life. and never mentions baptism

you have one passage where he says and they are baptized

and you automatically assume it must be water baptism and not spirit. and that Jesus meant to mention baptism in all the other passages.


Thats false. i recieved the spirit a year before i was water baptized.. the holy spirit annointed me AFTER he baptized me into christ. longe before I had the opportunity to be baptised in water.




No one has yet. thjat comes in the end when those who were seperated through unbelieve are baptized in the unquenchable fire ie, hellfire



Paul never taught that water baptism saved anyone. Yes he taught water baptism.. Like circumcision of the OT,. they are symbols and commands given to Gods people to help teach what God did to us when we were saved (see colossians 2)
Hey Hornet Guy,

Give up.

His statement below is all the evidence you need to know that he feels that he cannot be wrong. No scripture will convince someone who would write such a thing.

"Thats false. i recieved the spirit a year before i was water baptized.. the holy spirit annointed me AFTER he baptized me into christ. longe before I had the opportunity to be baptised in water."

You and I live in a world of reason. Sadly, many of the faith alone regeneration theology live in a world of feelings and of the esoteric. They have no need for reason since God has proven to them that they are right. He thinks you must be "false" because he got "the spirit a year before he was water baptized". And that's all the evidence he needs.

After all, why would God "anoint" me if I was wrong?
 

Everlasting-Grace

Well-known member
Dec 18, 2021
5,944
1,872
113
Obviously Jesus didn't baptize people into his death and resurrection, because it had not happened yet. The only baptism at that time was John's baptism.
John said Jesus would baptise with the HS and fire.

what is your issue with that?

Jesus also spoke of a baptism he was being baptized with (not water)

AFTER Jesus died and was raised from the dead, he instructed his apostles to go, teach the world, baptizing them into his name.... new kind of baptism.
he told the church to make disciples. then baptize them, they were already saved.. Baptizing them would not save them

So you believe that the apostles, the ones that walked with Jesus, and every other Christian scholar for the next many centuries all have been dead wrong on the importance of baptism, and you somehow have figured it out and have it right?
me? I just go by what the word says

I was baptized into Christ
I was baptized into his death
I was baptized into his body
I was baptized with the spiritual baptism which is called the circumcision not by the hand of men but of God

I was baptized in water a year later.


Well, you are going against what the apostles taught.... Acts 2
Acts 2 says repent and you will recieve the gift of the spirit. then you who repented be baptised upon the fact you recieved remission of sin

I find it funny you say it is a different baptism. yet John the baptist taught a baptism of repentance also.. Only he demanded proof that the pharisees received remission before he would baptize them.

No OT jew or Gentile was saved because they were circumcised.

in the same token, no NT Jew or Gentile will be saved because they were immersed in water
 

Everlasting-Grace

Well-known member
Dec 18, 2021
5,944
1,872
113
You are still just making this up!!! How wrong can one person be???

The Greek word used in Matt. 12:41 that is translated into because is not "eis", it is the word "hoti"!

They were condemned because (hoti) they did not repent.
What is wrong with you.
You twist and turn anything to meet your own defenition

I said nothing about they being condemned, I said they would copndemn THIS generation because they repented AT (eis) the preaching of Jonah

What is wrong with me? I study the word. You on the other hand, love sticking your foot in your mouth

see below

1690313930034.png
Is this grasping at straws the best that faith alone regeneration theology followers have to offer? Are we to accept that all of the bibles ever written are wrong. And as evidence you present Matthew 12:41?

"even in english," This is not a matter of the use of "for" in the English language, this is an issue of the use of "eis" in the Greek.

This is the text:

Acts 2:37-39

37 When the people heard this, they were deeply upset. They asked Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what should we do?”
38 Peter answered them, “All of you must turn to God and change the way you think and act, and each of you must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins will be forgiven. Then you will receive the Holy Spirit as a gift. 39 This promise belongs to you and to your children and to everyone who is far away. It belongs to everyone who worships the Lord our God.”

This is the promise, this is the Gospel.

To deny, alter, malign or ignore these words to fit faith alone regeneration theology is pushing a false gospel.
You did not even quote me right and tried to ignore the truth of what I said.

If it is not faith alone, it is faith plus works

feel free to earn your salvation then deny your preaching works. You condemn yourself because you have not repented
 

Everlasting-Grace

Well-known member
Dec 18, 2021
5,944
1,872
113
Hey Hornet Guy,

Give up.

His statement below is all the evidence you need to know that he feels that he cannot be wrong. No scripture will convince someone who would write such a thing.

"Thats false. i recieved the spirit a year before i was water baptized.. the holy spirit annointed me AFTER he baptized me into christ. longe before I had the opportunity to be baptised in water."

You and I live in a world of reason. Sadly, many of the faith alone regeneration theology live in a world of feelings and of the esoteric. They have no need for reason since God has proven to them that they are right. He thinks you must be "false" because he got "the spirit a year before he was water baptized". And that's all the evidence he needs.

After all, why would God "anoint" me if I was wrong?
You live in the world no different than the jew who crucified christ.

he shunned their human good for salvation also.

You reject the cross as the sole means of redemption and justification and seek to establish your own.

I would not worry about listening to me or anyone else. but I pleed you to listen to God
 

Lamar

Active member
May 21, 2023
949
141
43
You twist and turn anything to meet your own defenition

I said nothing about they being condemned, I said they would copndemn THIS generation because they repented AT (eis) the preaching of Jonah

What is wrong with me? I study the word. You on the other hand, love sticking your foot in your mouth

see below

View attachment 254011

You did not even quote me right and tried to ignore the truth of what I said.

If it is not faith alone, it is faith plus works

feel free to earn your salvation then deny your preaching works. You condemn yourself because you have not repented
Look two words to the left, there is the Greek word being used for the English word "for" (hoti). The people of Nineveh were not destroyed "because" they repented.

Acts 2:38 uses "eis" not "hoti".

Matt. 12:41 has nothing to do with the fact that ALL bibles old or new and ALL bibles in All languages never translate the command for water baptism as because of the remission of sins. You are simply attempting to muddy up the waters with this rabbit hole.
 

Everlasting-Grace

Well-known member
Dec 18, 2021
5,944
1,872
113
Look two words to the left, there is the Greek word being used for the English word "for" (hoti). The people of Nineveh were not destroyed "because" they repented.

Acts 2:38 uses "eis" not "hoti".

Matt. 12:41 has nothing to do with the fact that ALL bibles old or new and ALL bibles in All languages never translate the command for water baptism as because of the remission of sins. You are simply attempting to muddy up the waters with this rabbit hole.
I circled the word eis for you.

The repented AT (EIS) the teaching of Jonah

yet you still ignore that and try to bring Hoti into it

They were not condemned FOR (Hoti) they repented AT (EIS) the teaching of Jonah

they were not condemned FOR (because)

they repented AT (On Account of) the teaching of Jonah


Same with acts.. Be baptized FOR (On account of) remission of sin..
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,475
13,419
113
58
Agreed.

If you say baptism is a work, you are in error.
If baptism is not a work then what is it? Just a nothing? So no work at all is accomplished when someone is water baptized? When Jesus was water baptized it was to fulfill all righteousness (Matthew 3:13-15) which makes baptism a work of righteousness.
 

Radius

Senior Member
Feb 11, 2013
1,171
181
63
Lamar do you attend a "Church of Christ" church? They are big into baptism for salvation.
 

Lamar

Active member
May 21, 2023
949
141
43
If baptism is not a work then what is it?
Baptism is what Peter says it is, the moment for those who believe and repent of the remission of sins and the Gift of the Holy Spirit. It is in harmony with the rest of the Bible and should not be denied, maligned, altered, ignored or dismissed.

It does not need to meet our preconceived notions or personal sensibilities.

Nor does it need to be "properly understood" to fit into faith alone regeneration theology.
 

Lamar

Active member
May 21, 2023
949
141
43
When Jesus was water baptized it was to fulfill all righteousness (Matthew 3:13-15) which makes baptism a work of righteousness.
Here is the text:

Then Jesus appeared. He came from Galilee to the Jordan River to be baptized by John. But John tried to stop him and said, “I need to be baptized by you. Why are you coming to me?” Jesus answered him, “This is the way it has to be now. This is the proper way to do everything that God requires of us.” Then John gave in to him.

I do not see works here, obedience yes, works no.

Unless you see they as the same.
 

Lamar

Active member
May 21, 2023
949
141
43
It logically follows that we get water baptized after we believe and are saved, yet Jesus clarified the second clause of Mark 16:16 with, "but he who does not believe will be condemned." Nothing there about a lack of baptism causing condemnation.

It's like saying, "he who takes his medication and washes it down with water will be made well." Of course, it's not the washing it down with water part that makes a person well. It's the medication, but if water is not available and the person takes the medication dry (been there, done that) they will still be made well "because of the medication."

Sadly, there have been numerous people over the years who have been water baptized and believe "mental assent" in the existence of Christ and in historical facts about Christ but have not truly believed in Christ unto salvation.
"It logically follows that we get water baptized after we believe and are saved" "Logically"? If you are already saved why would you care to be baptized? It has no bearing on your future. It would be like knocking on a door after it was opened for you?

yet Jesus clarified the second clause of Mark 16:16 Here is the text:

Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.

You believe that Jesus utters eight words and uses another eight words "clarifying" His first eight words. All of this in one breath. This is the lengths that faith alone regeneration theology followers must go in order to defend their bias. True believers just accept without the need to alter its obvious meaning.

Nothing there about a lack of baptism causing condemnation. Agreed but not relevant. Baptism is about salvation not condemnation.

It's like saying, "he who takes his medication and washes it down with water will be made well. This is such a bizarre scenario. Who would talk this way? There is no need to tell a person to "wash it down with water", that would be pointless. Is this what you think of these words of Jesus, pointless.

Sadly, there have been numerous people over the years who have been water baptized and believe "mental assent" in the existence of Christ and in historical facts about Christ but have not truly believed in Christ unto salvation. Agreed but again not relevant.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
60,156
29,462
113
You believe that Jesus utters eight words and uses another eight words "clarifying" His first eight words.
All of this in one breath. This is the lengths that faith alone regeneration theology followers must go in
order to defend their bias. True believers just accept without the need to alter its obvious meaning.
You are big on telling others to just accept what Scripture says, without adding to it.

Water is not mentioned in that verse. Just sayin'...