Acts 22:16 Paul's salvation

[dwight92070]

Acts 22:16 "Acts 22:16 — The New King James Version (NKJV) 16 And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.’

Paul tells us that he did not receive or hear the gospel from Ananias, but rather he heard it directly from Christ:

Gal. 1:11-12 " ... the gospel ... I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ." So we know that Paul heard and believed in Christ on the road to Damascus, even before Ananias came to him. That was indeed a revelation of Jesus Christ. But listen to Paul's own account on his way to Damacus:
"I saw on the way a light from heaven ... and I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew dialect, 'Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.' And I said, 'Who are You, Lord?' And the Lord said, 'I am Jesus whom you are persecuting. But get up and stand on your feet; for this purpose I have appeared to you, to appoint you as a servant and a witness not only to the things in which you have seen Me, but also to the things in which I will appear to you, rescuing you from the Jewish people and from the Gentiles, to whom I am sending you, to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Me." Acts 26:13-18

So if Jesus was sending Paul to both Jewish and Gentile people "to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Him,

then what are the chances that Paul himself did not have:

1. his eyes opened (spiritually) so that he turned from darkness to light and that
2. he had not been rescued from the power of Satan to God,
3. and that he did not receive forgiveness of sins,
4. and that he did not receive an inheritance among those who had been sanctified by faith in Him?

Answer: The chances are slim to zero. Jesus would not send Paul to facilitate all these things in others, if He had not first accomplished all these things in Paul himself.

So on the road to Damascus, Paul had his eyes opened (spiritually) and he turned from darkness to light, and he was rescued from the power of Satan to God, and his sins were forgiven, and he received an inheritance among those who had been sanctified (saved) by faith in Him.

Paul was saved, delivered, forgiven, given an inheritance with those who were saved by faith (not baptism), and indwelt by the Holy Spirit - all on the road to Damascus, before Ananias even came to him.

How do we know that he received the indwelling Holy Spirit on that road (which happens to every person who gets saved)? Didn't Paul receive the indwelling Holy Spirit three days later, when Ananias laid hands on him?
Actually no, he was already indwelt by the Holy Spirit when he believed, on the road to Damascus. When Ananias laid hands on him, he was filled with the Holy Spirit, just like the 120 people in the upper room. They were already indwelt by the Holy Spirit, but on the Day of Pentecost, they were filled with the Holy Spirit, or baptized in the Holy Spirit, as Jesus promised in Acts 1:5. When one is saved they are immediately indwelt by the Holy Spirit. Later they may receive the baptism in the Holy Spirit, if they desire it - many do not, for whatever reason they don't want it.

So really, the only things that happened when Ananias laid hands on Paul was 1. he regained his sight and 2. he was baptized and 3. Ananias encouraged him.

No salvation or forgiveness of sins or indwelling of the Holy Spirit occurred when Ananias baptized him. They had already happened three days before.

 

[civic]

Acts 22:16 "Acts 22:16 — The New King James Version (NKJV) 16 And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.’

Paul tells us that he did not receive or hear the gospel from Ananias, but rather he heard it directly from Christ:

Gal. 1:11-12 " ... the gospel ... I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ." So we know that Paul heard and believed in Christ on the road to Damascus, even before Ananias came to him. That was indeed a revelation of Jesus Christ. But listen to Paul's own account on his way to Damacus:
"I saw on the way a light from heaven ... and I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew dialect, 'Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.' And I said, 'Who are You, Lord?' And the Lord said, 'I am Jesus whom you are persecuting. But get up and stand on your feet; for this purpose I have appeared to you, to appoint you as a servant and a witness not only to the things in which you have seen Me, but also to the things in which I will appear to you, rescuing you from the Jewish people and from the Gentiles, to whom I am sending you, to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Me." Acts 26:13-18

So if Jesus was sending Paul to both Jewish and Gentile people "to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Him,

then what are the chances that Paul himself did not have:

1. his eyes opened (spiritually) so that he turned from darkness to light and that
2. he had not been rescued from the power of Satan to God,
3. and that he did not receive forgiveness of sins,
4. and that he did not receive an inheritance among those who had been sanctified by faith in Him?

Answer: The chances are slim to zero. Jesus would not send Paul to facilitate all these things in others, if He had not first accomplished all these things in Paul himself.

So on the road to Damascus, Paul had his eyes opened (spiritually) and he turned from darkness to light, and he was rescued from the power of Satan to God, and his sins were forgiven, and he received an inheritance among those who had been sanctified (saved) by faith in Him.

Paul was saved, delivered, forgiven, given an inheritance with those who were saved by faith (not baptism), and indwelt by the Holy Spirit - all on the road to Damascus, before Ananias even came to him.

How do we know that he received the indwelling Holy Spirit on that road (which happens to every person who gets saved)? Didn't Paul receive the indwelling Holy Spirit three days later, when Ananias laid hands on him?
Actually no, he was already indwelt by the Holy Spirit when he believed, on the road to Damascus. When Ananias laid hands on him, he was filled with the Holy Spirit, just like the 120 people in the upper room. They were already indwelt by the Holy Spirit, but on the Day of Pentecost, they were filled with the Holy Spirit, or baptized in the Holy Spirit, as Jesus promised in Acts 1:5. When one is saved they are immediately indwelt by the Holy Spirit. Later they may receive the baptism in the Holy Spirit, if they desire it - many do not, for whatever reason they don't want it.

So really, the only things that happened when Ananias laid hands on Paul was 1. he regained his sight and 2. he was baptized and 3. Ananias encouraged him.

No salvation or forgiveness of sins or indwelling of the Holy Spirit occurred when Ananias baptized him. They had already happened three days before.

are you saying 120 already were born again before Pentecost ?

 

[dwight92070]

That's a good question. Well I think the 12 apostles definitely were. They received the indwelling Holy Spirit in John 20:22, so on the Day of Pentecost, apparently something different happened to them. They were baptized in the Holy Spirit, or it is also called being filled with the Holy Spirit. Did all of Jesus' disciples receive the Holy Spirit before the Day of Pentecost? Well, I can't prove that, but I believe they did - after Jesus rose from the dead. He breathed on the 12. It's possible He breathed on all His disciples.
In fact, Jesus first spoke of being born again long before He was crucified. Why would He speak of it, if is wasn't possible to receive the 2nd birth at that time? Where does the Bible say that a person must be indwelt by the Holy Spirit, in order to be born again? I don't think it does. I think that it was possible to be born again just by having the Holy Spirit with them. Remember Jesus told His disciples that the Holy Spirit was with them, but that He would be in them. So I think it must have been possible to be born again, even when Jesus first spoke of it - not with the indwelling Spirit, but apparently with the Holy Spirit being with them.
Also, many speak of the baptism of the Holy Spirit as synonymous with the new birth, but the Bible differentiates the two, even though, as on the Day of Pentecost, many people can receive both simultaneously. This also happened with Cornelius and his family and others. It is my understanding that when we are born again, it is the Holy Spirit "baptizing" us into the body of Christ. When we are baptized in or with the Holy Spirit, it is Jesus Himself who is baptizing us. Matthew 3:11

 

[Doug Brents]

Acts 22:16 "Acts 22:16 — The New King James Version (NKJV) 16 And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.’

Paul tells us that he did not receive or hear the gospel from Ananias, but rather he heard it directly from Christ:

Gal. 1:11-12 " ... the gospel ... I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ." So we know that Paul heard and believed in Christ on the road to Damascus, even before Ananias came to him. That was indeed a revelation of Jesus Christ. But listen to Paul's own account on his way to Damacus:
"I saw on the way a light from heaven ... and I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew dialect, 'Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.' And I said, 'Who are You, Lord?' And the Lord said, 'I am Jesus whom you are persecuting. But get up and stand on your feet; for this purpose I have appeared to you, to appoint you as a servant and a witness not only to the things in which you have seen Me, but also to the things in which I will appear to you, rescuing you from the Jewish people and from the Gentiles, to whom I am sending you, to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Me." Acts 26:13-18

You have placed Paul's instruction in the Gospel in the wrong place. Gal 1:11-12 does indeed tell us that he learned the Gospel directly from Jesus, not from man. But that was not on the road to Damascus. This occurred during the three years he spent in Arabia and Damascus after his baptism (Gal 1:11-20).

So if Jesus was sending Paul to both Jewish and Gentile people "to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Him,

then what are the chances that Paul himself did not have:

1. his eyes opened (spiritually) so that he turned from darkness to light and that
2. he had not been rescued from the power of Satan to God,
3. and that he did not receive forgiveness of sins,
4. and that he did not receive an inheritance among those who had been sanctified by faith in Him?

Answer: The chances are slim to zero. Jesus would not send Paul to facilitate all these things in others, if He had not first accomplished all these things in Paul himself.

Just because Jesus was sending Paul to the lost does not mean that at the time he told him He was going to send him he was already saved.

So on the road to Damascus, Paul had his eyes opened (spiritually) and he turned from darkness to light, and he was rescued from the power of Satan to God, and his sins were forgiven, and he received an inheritance among those who had been sanctified (saved) by faith in Him.

Paul was saved, delivered, forgiven, given an inheritance with those who were saved by faith (not baptism), and indwelt by the Holy Spirit - all on the road to Damascus, before Ananias even came to him.

One out of five, that is a terrible track record. Yes, his eyes were opened to who Jesus really is. But he was not turned from darkness to light, he was not yet rescued from the power of Satan, his sins were not forgiven, and he had not yet received an inheritance. If these things had already happened he would not have been sitting there still in sin three days later.

How do we know that he received the indwelling Holy Spirit on that road (which happens to every person who gets saved)? Didn't Paul receive the indwelling Holy Spirit three days later, when Ananias laid hands on him?
Actually no, he was already indwelt by the Holy Spirit when he believed, on the road to Damascus. When Ananias laid hands on him, he was filled with the Holy Spirit, just like the 120 people in the upper room. They were already indwelt by the Holy Spirit, but on the Day of Pentecost, they were filled with the Holy Spirit, or baptized in the Holy Spirit, as Jesus promised in Acts 1:5. When one is saved they are immediately indwelt by the Holy Spirit. Later they may receive the baptism in the Holy Spirit, if they desire it - many do not, for whatever reason they don't want it.

Yes, the 120 in the upper room already had the indwelling of the Spirit and were already saved. But Paul was not yet saved when Ananias came to him three days after Jesus appeared to him on the Road. Paul was not saved because he was still in sin. You cannot be saved and still in sin; those are complete opposites.

So really, the only things that happened when Ananias laid hands on Paul was 1. he regained his sight and 2. he was baptized and 3. Ananias encouraged him.

No salvation or forgiveness of sins or indwelling of the Holy Spirit occurred when Ananias baptized him. They had already happened three days before.

Look back at Acts 22:16 which you quoted above.
"And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord."
Ananias' instruction was to wash away his sins. If he had already been forgiven, then there would be no sin to wash away. Yes, he received his sight, and yes, he was encouraged. But his baptism was not just dipping in water for the fun of it. It was where his sins were washed away by the Holy Spirit cutting them from him.

 

[mailmandan]

In regard to Acts 22:16, baptism pictures the washing away of sins by the blood of Christ, but it does not literally wash away our sins. Only the blood of Christ can literally wash away our sins. When Jesus took the bread and said, "This is my body." (Matthew 26:26) The bread was only the emblem of His body. Baptism is the emblem of the washing away of sins by the blood of Christ. Every time a believer is immersed he washes away his sins in the same SENSE Paul did: not literally, but ceremonially, pointing to the blood of Christ by which sins are actually washed away. (1 John 1:7; Revelation 1:5)

Jamison, Fausset, and Brown Commentary makes not of the importance of the Greek in Ananias' statement. When Ananias tells Paul to "arise, be baptized, wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord," the tense of the last command is literally "having called" (aorist middle participle). "Calling on [epikalesamenos] --- 'having (that is, after having) called on,' referring the confession of Christ which preceded baptism." [Jamison, Fausset, and Brown Commentary, vol. 3 pg. 160]. Kenneth Wuest picks up on this Greek nuance and translates the verse as follows: "And now, why are you delaying? Having arisen, be baptized and wash away your sins, having previously called upon His Name." (Acts 22:16, Wuest's Expanded NT).

In Acts 10:43, receiving remission of sins is connected with "believes in Him" and not with baptism (Acts 10:43-47). In Acts 9, Jesus told Ananias that Paul "is a chosen vessel unto Me" (vs 15), although the apostle had not yet been water baptized. Before Paul was baptized, Christ had already commissioned him to "bear His name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel" (Acts 9:15) and such a commission is not for one who is still lost in their sins. Before Paul’s baptism, Christ had set him aside as one who would "suffer for His name’s sake" (9:16). Can one who is a child of the devil, as all the lost are (Ephesians 2:1-3, John 8:44), really suffer for Christ’s sake? NO.

So, Paul had already believed in Christ when Ananias came to pray for him to receive his sight (Acts 9:17). It also should be noted that Paul at the time when Ananias prayed for him to receive his sight, he was filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17)--this was BEFORE he was water baptized (Acts 9:18). Verse 17 connects his being filled with the Spirit with the receiving of his sight. We know that he received his sight prior to his baptism.

Excellent article on Acts 22:16 - https://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2015/03/acts-2216-baptism-essential-for.html

It's interesting that when Paul recounted this event again later in Acts (Acts 26:12-18), he did not mention Ananias or what Ananias said to him at all. Verse 18 again would confirm the idea that Paul received Christ as Savior on the road to Damascus since here Christ is telling Paul he will be a messenger for Him concerning forgiveness of sins for Gentiles as they have faith in Him. It would seem unlikely that Christ would commission Paul if Paul had not yet believed in Him and was still lost in his sins.

No scripture is to be interpreted in isolation from the totality of scripture. Practically speaking, a singular and obscure verse is to be subservient to to multiple and clear verses, and not vice versa.

 

[Doug Brents]

In regard to Acts 22:16, baptism pictures the washing away of sins by the blood of Christ, but it does not literally wash away our sins. Only the blood of Christ can literally wash away our sins. When Jesus took the bread and said, "This is my body." (Matthew 26:26) The bread was only the emblem of His body. Baptism is the emblem of the washing away of sins by the blood of Christ. Every time a believer is immersed he washes away his sins in the same SENSE Paul did: not literally, but ceremonially, pointing to the blood of Christ by which sins are actually washed away. (1 John 1:7; Revelation 1:5)

Clearly the water does not actually wash away sin. Water is physical and sin is spiritual, and this is exactly what 1 Pet 3:21 tells us; it is not the physical water washing physical dirt from the body, but the Holy Spirit removing our sin by the power of Jesus' blood because of our faith.

Jamison, Fausset, and Brown Commentary makes not of the importance of the Greek in Ananias' statement. When Ananias tells Paul to "arise, be baptized, wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord," the tense of the last command is literally "having called" (aorist middle participle). "Calling on [epikalesamenos] --- 'having (that is, after having) called on,' referring the confession of Christ which preceded baptism." [Jamison, Fausset, and Brown Commentary, vol. 3 pg. 160]. Kenneth Wuest picks up on this Greek nuance and translates the verse as follows: "And now, why are you delaying? Having arisen, be baptized and wash away your sins, having previously called upon His Name." (Acts 22:16, Wuest's Expanded NT).

In this statement, understanding what you already believe, you are trying to say that Paul was saved before baptism by his belief, because he had already called on the Lord. But that is twisting what the Word says, both here and in other places. 1 Pet 3:21 puts salvation in water baptism. Col 2:11-14 puts salvation during baptism. Rom 6:1-7 puts salvation during baptism. Mark 16:16 puts salvation during baptism. John 3:5 puts salvation in being born of water and the Spirit (both (water and the Spirit) of which are involved in all of these verses).

In Acts 10:43, receiving remission of sins is connected with "believes in Him" and not with baptism (Acts 10:43-47).

"Believes in Him" is really "faith in Him", and faith requires the actions of obedience that He says are required to receive salvation.

In Acts 9, Jesus told Ananias that Paul "is a chosen vessel unto Me" (vs 15), although the apostle had not yet been water baptized. Before Paul was baptized, Christ had already commissioned him to "bear His name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel" (Acts 9:15) and such a commission is not for one who is still lost in their sins. Before Paul’s baptism, Christ had set him aside as one who would "suffer for His name’s sake" (9:16). Can one who is a child of the devil, as all the lost are (Ephesians 2:1-3, John 8:44), really suffer for Christ’s sake? NO.

When was Paul set aside by God? Did God wait until he was on the Road to Damascus? No, he was set aside from before Creation. But Paul was still lost until the point when he came to Christ Jesus. He was set aside before he was saved, but he was not prepared to go, or to be a proper tool until he came to Christ Jesus, was saved, and was educated by Jesus during the three years he spent in Arabia and Damascus before he started his ministry.

So, Paul had already believed in Christ when Ananias came to pray for him to receive his sight (Acts 9:17). It also should be noted that Paul at the time when Ananias prayed for him to receive his sight, he was filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17)--this was BEFORE he was water baptized (Acts 9:18). Verse 17 connects his being filled with the Spirit with the receiving of his sight. We know that he received his sight prior to his baptism.

No, there is no indication of connection between receiving his sight and being filled with the Holy Spirit. Yes, Ananias came to facilitate both. But happened, but not necessarily at the same time. In this case, Paul received his sight and then was baptized during which he received/was filled with the Holy Spirit.

Excellent article on Acts 22:16 - https://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2015/03/acts-2216-baptism-essential-for.html

It's interesting that when Paul recounted this event again later in Acts (Acts 26:12-18), he did not mention Ananias or what Ananias said to him at all. Verse 18 again would confirm the idea that Paul received Christ as Savior on the road to Damascus since here Christ is telling Paul he will be a messenger for Him concerning forgiveness of sins for Gentiles as they have faith in Him. It would seem unlikely that Christ would commission Paul if Paul had not yet believed in Him and was still lost in his sins.

This is even more of a fabrication than your reference to Acts 9. Nothing in Acts 26 even remotely indicates that Paul was saved on the Road. Again, he was still in sin three days later, so unless you are willing to say that he was saved while still in sin, your argument is completely baseless.

No scripture is to be interpreted in isolation from the totality of scripture. Practically speaking, a singular and obscure verse is to be subservient to to multiple and clear verses, and not vice versa.

In this you are absolutely correct. But it is you that are trying to use these unclear, obscure verses (Acts 9 and 26) to change the meaning of the more clear, obvious passages that have been referenced that state that salvation is received contingent on our repentance (Acts 3:19), confession of Jesus as Lord (Rom 10:9-10), and baptism (Acts 2:38, 1 Pet 3:21, Acts 22:16, Rom 6:1-7, Col 2:11-14, John 3:5, Eph 5:26, Gal 3:26-27, etc.).

 

[Doug Brents]

Excellent article on Acts 22:16 - https://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2015/03/acts-2216-baptism-essential-for.html

This article has a few good points, but he makes many errors, and he contradicts himself. He states, "To teach that baptism figuratively takes away sin by representing what really does remove it is consistent with justification by faith alone." Here he admits that baptism is indeed the point at which sins are removed. Obviously it is not the water that removes sin, but the Holy Spirit through the power of the Blood in response to our faith that removes our sin.

Then he contradicts himself when he says, "One who at the moment of faith has had his sins literally removed by the blood of the Christ who died and rose again later represents, testifies, and symbolizes his salvation by baptism." He already said that our sin is taken away in baptism (just as Scripture says), but now he says that sin is removed before baptism, and that baptism comes later to symbolize what has happened. That is not what he already said, nor is it what Scripture says.

"Indeed, the tense of the verb “wash” in Acts 22:16 supports a figurative washing. In the Greek middle voice, it points to the idea that Paul washed his sins away himself in baptism.[iii] In contrast, Revelation 1:5, which states that “Jesus Christ . . . loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,” contains the word “washed” in the active voice." Both of these understandings must be correct, because they are both Scripture. God (the Holy Spirit) is the active remover of our sins, but we also wash our sins away in baptism as he says the Greek middle voice indicates. As Col 2:11-14 states, these two functions happen at the same time. The Holy Spirit removes our sin in baptism, not before.

"The Christian-killer Saul’s sins (cf. Acts 22:4) were literally washed away when he believed in the Lord Jesus on the road to Damascus—those same sins were figuratively washed away, so that believers would no longer need to fear him (Acts 9:26), in baptism." If Saul's sins were washed away on the Road to Damascus, then they would not have still been on him to need washing away three days later when Ananias came to him.

The rest of his article has already been addressed.

 

[TomL]

This article has a few good points, but he makes many errors, and he contradicts himself. He states, "To teach that baptism figuratively takes away sin by representing what really does remove it is consistent with justification by faith alone." Here he admits that baptism is indeed the point at which sins are removed. Obviously it is not the water that removes sin, but the Holy Spirit through the power of the Blood in response to our faith that removes our sin.

Um No

He states it just figuratively (not actually) takes away sins

 

[Doug Brents]

Um No

He states it just figuratively (not actually) takes away sins

The blood of Jesus actually takes away sins, and it does so during the figurative washing in water as many Scriptures say.

 

[mailmandan]

Um No

He states it just figuratively (not actually) takes away sins

Amen! The washing away of sins by the blood of Christ is signified but not procured in the waters of baptism.

 

[TomL]

The blood of Jesus actually takes away sins, and it does so during the figurative washing in water as many Scriptures say.

Not according to the article

One who at the moment of faith has had his sins literally removed by the blood of the Christ who died and rose again later represents, testifies, and symbolizes his salvation by baptism.[ii] Indeed, the tense of the verb “wash” in Acts 22:16 supports a figurative washing.

 

[Doug Brents]

Not according to the article

One who at the moment of faith has had his sins literally removed by the blood of the Christ who died and rose again later represents, testifies, and symbolizes his salvation by baptism.[ii] Indeed, the tense of the verb “wash” in Acts 22:16 supports a figurative washing.

The "moment of faith" is not when one gives intellectual assent to the truth of the Gospel. Faith is not just intellectual assent. It requires actions, and without action it is dead and worthless.
The tense of the verb may support the figurative washing, but it does not change the timing. Sins are washed away by the Holy Spirit during water baptism, not before.

 

[Doug Brents]

Amen! The washing away of sins by the blood of Christ is signified but not procured in the waters of baptism.

The washing away of sin is both signified by AND procured during (not by) water baptism.

 

[TomL]

The "moment of faith" is not when one gives intellectual assent to the truth of the Gospel. Faith is not just intellectual assent. It requires actions, and without action it is dead and worthless.
The tense of the verb may support the figurative washing, but it does not change the timing. Sins are washed away by the Holy Spirit during water baptism, not before.

Clearly the author puts the moment of faith before water baptism

One who at the moment of faith has had his sins literally removed by the blood of the Christ who died and rose again later represents, testifies, and symbolizes his salvation by baptism.[ii] Indeed, the tense of the verb “wash” in Acts 22:16 supports a figurative washing.

 

[Doug Brents]

Clearly the author puts the moment of faith before water baptism

One who at the moment of faith has had his sins literally removed by the blood of the Christ who died and rose again later represents, testifies, and symbolizes his salvation by baptism.[ii] Indeed, the tense of the verb “wash” in Acts 22:16 supports a figurative washing.

Sins are not removed literally or figuratively because of faith alone. We are not justified by faith alone (James 2:24). Sins are removed during baptism (Rom 6:1-7, Col 2:11-14, 1 Pet 3:21). Baptism is not a figurative depiction of what has already happened. It is a figurative demonstration of what is occurring spiritually at the same moment. At the same time as we are submerged beneath the water, the Spirit unites us with Jesus' death and resurrection and removes our sins.

 

[civic]

Sins are not removed literally or figuratively because of faith alone. We are not justified by faith alone (James 2:24). Sins are removed during baptism (Rom 6:1-7, Col 2:11-14, 1 Pet 3:21). Baptism is not a figurative depiction of what has already happened. It is a figurative demonstration of what is occurring spiritually at the same moment. At the same time as we are submerged beneath the water, the Spirit unites us with Jesus' death and resurrection and removes our sins.

This one verse alone makes baptism have nothing to do with salvation of the gospel.

1 Corinthians 1:17, Paul says, “For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel.

 

[Doug Brents]

This one verse alone makes baptism have nothing to do with salvation of the gospel.

1 Corinthians 1:17, Paul says, “For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel.

Does a farmer go into his field in the spring seeking to reap a harvest? No. He goes into the field seeking to plant seeds so that he can come back in the fall and reap a harvest.
God sent Paul to plant the Seed, so that later Apollos, or Peter, or someone else might come back to reap the harvest. Yes, the Seed did sprout to immediate harvest in a couple of patches of soil (ie: Crispus, Gaius and the household of Stephanas), but Paul knew going in that most of the Seed would fall on soil that would need much cultivation before it produced a harvest.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Sins are not removed literally or figuratively because of faith alone. We are not justified by faith alone (James 2:24). Sins are removed during baptism (Rom 6:1-7, Col 2:11-14, 1 Pet 3:21). Baptism is not a figurative depiction of what has already happened. It is a figurative demonstration of what is occurring spiritually at the same moment. At the same time as we are submerged beneath the water, the Spirit unites us with Jesus' death and resurrection and removes our sins.

Hi Doug

Do you think that God put on hold his forgiveness to an ancient Israelite until he presented, weeks or months later, a lamb in the Temple to be slaughtered?
Do you think that Jesus put on hold his forgiveness when He said to the sinner "Your faith has saved you" or "Your sins are forgiven", until the time that person could be baptized by one of his disciples?

 

[Ozias]

In the Old Testament, people were saved by

• Grace alone
• Through faith alone
• In Christ alone (looking ahead to the coming of Christ)
• Trusting in the merciful one true God
• Efficacy of sacrifices offered in faith
• Hope of a future Messiah

 

[Doug Brents]

Hi Doug

Do you think that God put on hold his forgiveness to an ancient Israelite until he presented, weeks or months later, a lamb in the Temple to be slaughtered?

You assume that mankind's default position is forgiveness, that the ancient Israelites deserved forgiveness?
No, up until Jesus' death, the following of the Law lead to salvation for the Israelites through faith in the provision of God. Nothing has changed today except the form our faith must take.

Do you think that Jesus put on hold his forgiveness when He said to the sinner "Your faith has saved you" or "Your sins are forgiven", until the time that person could be baptized by one of his disciples?

Before Jesus' death, no. After His death, He is no longer physically on Earth to say, "Your faith has saved you" or "Your sins are forgiven", so all sins are forgiven today according to God's Word, in baptism where they are washed away by the Holy Spirit as we are told in Col 2:11-14, Acts 22:16, Rom 6:1-7, 1 Pet 3:21, Gal 4:26-27, Eph 5:26-27, John 3:5, and many others.