Axe and two 38's

[Doug Brents]

I see, so you live with these people 24/7, so you observe them praying all the time and reading Scripture all the time. You're right, you're not jumping to conclusions, you're lying.

I feel completely honored and validated by your accusation. You twist my words the same way you twist Scripture, so I feel that I am in great company.

No one can say that about another person, unless they're married to them. Try being honest in your "arguments". At least then we can take you more seriously.

I never said that I was with these people 24/7. That is not possible or even reasonable. You expect to be understood when you use idioms and figures of speech, but you take other's idioms as literal?

If someone is living a homosexual lifestyle, I would guess, not claiming to know like you, that the time they spend praying and reading the Scripture would be next to zero. And if they're going to a church that condemns homosexuality, I doubt that they're spending much time there either.

Bless your little, naive, sheltered heart.

John 3 is about Jesus likening natural birth with the new birth. Once again, you conveniently skip John 3:4, where Nicodemus does indeed speak of childbirth, as if childbirth is not even mentioned in that chapter.

No, I do not skip over that. It is irrelevant. JESUS is not talking about natural birth. Nicodemus, like yourself, misunderstands (possibly intentionally, as you do) what Jesus is saying. Jesus is talking about the REBIRTH of the soul. He is talking about Heavenly things, not Earthly, not physical.

Also in John 3:3, yes, Jesus is speaking of spiritual birth but he is using the term "born" deliberately, likening spiritual birth to natural birth. If you can't admit that, you're blind.

Sure He is likening spiritual birth to natural birth, in that both are referring to the genesis, the birth, of something new. But rebirth is, in most other places, referred to as resurrection. It is the bringing back to life of the dead soul, and making that soul new.

When a man hears the word "born", there is only one thing that comes to his mind - natural birth - childbirth. Which is why in verse 4, Nicodemus is speaking of childbirth, albeit unnatural childbirth- that is entering into his mother's womb a second time.

Obviously, Nicodemus is confused about what Jesus is actually saying.

So do you think that Jesus, in verse 5, is going to throw in a different subject, baptism, which would confuse Nicodemus even further? If Jesus had meant baptism, He could easily have said "baptism". Nicodemus knew what baptism was. He knew about John the Baptist baptizing probably hundreds, maybe thousands of people. John even baptized Jesus.

No, Jesus meets Nicodemus at his point of understanding, natural childbirth - which is being born of water - that is, coming from the water in the womb. He's telling Nicodemus that just like he was born from his mother's womb, so he must be born from heaven above. Jesus calls that being born of the Spirit.

Believe what you will, but know that only Nicodemus was referring to natural childbirth. Jesus was talking about spiritual rebirth/resurrection through water and the Spirit.

Then in verse 6, Jesus gives even further explanation and confirmation of what He is talking about:

"That which is born of the flesh (once again, childbirth) is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit."

And His WHOLE point is bout Spiritual rebirth (which occurs through water and the Spirit). You want Him to be talking about natural childbirth (water) and spiritual rebirth (spirit). But He is not talking about two things at the same time. He is ONLY talking about spiritual rebirth through both water AND the Spirit.

Baptism has two actions in it, and both are facilitated by another person who is not being baptized. 1. One person lowers another person under water and 2. Then the first person lifts the other person up and out of the water.

Childbirth has only one primary action in it, that is the baby coming out of the womb, not by human intervention -rather that action is initiated by God. He decides when a child is to be born and He is the One who, through the God-given instincts of the woman - to push - causes the child to be "born of water", that is, to come out of the womb.

Likewise, only the Holy Spirit initiates someone being born of the Spirit - and He needs no human hands to do that work for Him, just as God initiates childbirth - and He created it.

Baptism, on the other hand is initiated and carried out totally by human hands laid on another person.

Unlike baptism, in childbirth there is no comparable first part of lowering the baby under the water. Also, unlike baptism, childbirth has one general action - the baby coming out of the womb, and only God initiates that process, and helps the woman through it.

So we see clearly that Jesus is NOT speaking of baptism anywhere in John 3. It is not even comparable.

That is why Jesus is not referring to natural childbirth in this passage. Rebirth is more like being buried and resurrected, as Lazarus was and as Jesus was. The body is laid, by others, into a grave and then called out of the grave by someone with the power and authority to bring life back to the dead. That is the picture painted by Rom 6:1-7. We are dead to God through our sin. But when we are buried with Him IN BAPTISM, the Holy Spirit give us life again through the power of Jesus' blood.

 

[dwight92070]

Why is it that when people who believe as you do quote Acts 2:38, they ALWAYS leave out the middle half of the verse? The verse does not say "Repent… for the forgiveness of sins”. It says, "repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of sins." You cannot leave out baptism and still receive the blessing offered.

Again, all the parts of Scripture must be true and correct at the same time. You cannot take just repentance from Scripture and have it lead to salvation without making many other passages into a lie. For example, Rom 10:9-10 says nothing about repentance. It only mentions belief and the verbal confession of Jesus as Lord, and that these two result in receiving salvation. If ONLY repentance is necessary, then you make Rom 10:9-10 into a lie. Similarly, Act 2:38 says both repentance and baptism are required. You MUST include every passage that speaks about what is required to receive salvation for you to have an accurate doctrine on salvation.

We don't leave anything out, rather we emphasize the truth, which is made clear in most all of Scripture. It's just a few verses like this one, and your other go-to verses, where the universal truth is not as clear. Indeed a couple of your go-to verses seem to be saying just the opposite of the universal truth, which cannot be. On the one hand, you can't have most all of the New Testament saying that we are saved by faith alone in Christ alone, and then on the other hand, a few verses which say, "No, you need to add to your faith, confession with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and baptism to be saved." They can't both be true.

You guys hold on to the few go-to verses. We, on the other hand, hold on to the truth of the majority of Scripture - and at the same time we do not ignore those other scriptures, but we recognize that they must be interpreted correctly. If not, then they will reach a different conclusion which contradicts the whole of Scripture, that we are saved by faith.

For example Acts 2:38 cannot mean that baptism brings forgiveness of sins because we know that repentance (which is the first word that Peter uses) and faith brings forgiveness of sins.

1 Peter 3:21 cannot mean that baptism saves anyone (except figuratively or symbolically) because we know that repentance and faith are what saves.

By the way, when someone encounters Christ, their faith or belief in Him reveals their repentance. You can't believe in and accept Jesus and at the same time, not repent. The reverse of that is also true. You can't repent of your sins and at the same time, not have faith/belief in Jesus.

 

[dwight92070]

John 6:28-29:

"What shall we do, so that we may work the works of God?"

Jesus answered, "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent."

Did you notice, the people were thinking in terms of plural works - probably like keeping the Law, performing rituals, or (today) confessing Jesus or baptism, or other external and visible things - all things that they, themselves, initiate.

But notice how Jesus answers them, "This is the work (singular) of God, ..." He said that there was only one thing, only one work of God. Not faith plus confession plus baptism. And what was that one thing? "that you believe in Him whom He sent." - and God initiates this. Jesus said that "no one can come to Me unless the Father draws Him." John 6:44

Then when men are drawn to Him by the Father, they must choose to respond in faith or to reject Him.

The work of God is one thing: faith, nothing else.

 

[Doug Brents]

We don't leave anything out, rather we emphasize the truth, which is made clear in most all of Scripture.

"Most all of Scripture"? LOL, no, the Truth is in ALL of Scripture. And you must accept all of Scripture in order to have all Truth.

It's just a few verses like this one, and your other go-to verses, where the universal truth is not as clear.

No dwight, it is you, who have created your own truth that does not agree with ALL of Scripture, that find the Truth in these verses contradicts your false doctrine.

Indeed a couple of your go-to verses seem to be saying just the opposite of the universal truth, which cannot be. On the one hand, you can't have most all of the New Testament saying that we are saved by faith alone in Christ alone, and then on the other hand, a few verses which say, "No, you need to add to your faith, confession with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and baptism to be saved." They can't both be true.

They certainly can, if "faith" is not just an intellectual assent (as you seem to think it is), but is actually putting complete trust and action behind that assent and DOING what God commands. As has been pointed out, Matt 10:32-33 is very explicit that it is our actions which precede God giving us salvation.

For example Acts 2:38 cannot mean that baptism brings forgiveness of sins because we know that repentance (which is the first word that Peter uses) and faith brings forgiveness of sins.

1 Peter 3:21 cannot mean that baptism saves anyone (except figuratively or symbolically) because we know that repentance and faith are what saves.

So what you are saying is that if we only read from Mark 15:26, the charge against Jesus read, "King of the Jews". And we can ignore what John wrote, "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews" (and it was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin). That doesn't really mean that it had Jesus' name on the charge, or that it was written in three languages, because Mark doesn't tell us that. Anything more than what Mark tells us is irrelevant information, because if it was important, then it would be written everywhere that the charge against Him was mentioned.

By the way, when someone encounters Christ, their faith or belief in Him reveals their repentance. You can't believe in and accept Jesus and at the same time, not repent. The reverse of that is also true. You can't repent of your sins and at the same time, not have faith/belief in Jesus.

That is not true at all. Read John 12:42-43 again. These leaders believed in Jesus, but they weren't willing to confess Him, or repent of their unbelief. They loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.
And I have personally known many who came to believe in Jesus, but refused to give up their sin in order to follow Him. Belief in Jesus doesn't mean you have turned from your sin (repented). And I have known many who have repented of a lifestyle of sin because of a traumatic event. But they didn't turn to God, they turned to some other human religion. They weren't saved any more than Judas was, but they attempted to repent of their sins.

 

[dwight92070]

"Most all of Scripture"? LOL, no, the Truth is in ALL of Scripture. And you must accept all of Scripture in order to have all Truth.

You don't listen, do you? I said that the truth is quite clear in most of Scripture, but it is not so clear in your go-to verses. And of course, like all false teachings, they seize on scriptures that aren't quite so clear.

No dwight, it is you, who have created your own truth that does not agree with ALL of Scripture, that find the Truth in these verses contradicts your false doctrine.

So you're saying that Jesus, telling us "whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life." is false doctrine?

They certainly can, if "faith" is not just an intellectual assent (as you seem to think it is), but is actually putting complete trust and action behind that assent and DOING what God commands. As has been pointed out, Matt 10:32-33 is very explicit that it is our actions which precede God giving us salvation.

You say that the new birth and forgiveness of sins occurs at baptism. We say, no, they happen before baptism. Please explain how both of these views can be true. You say that a person cannot be saved unless they confess Jesus and are baptized. We say, no, confessing Jesus and being baptized occur after salvation. How can both of those be true?

So what you are saying is that if we only read from Mark 15:26, the charge against Jesus read, "King of the Jews". And we can ignore what John wrote, "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews" (and it was written in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin). That doesn't really mean that it had Jesus' name on the charge, or that it was written in three languages, because Mark doesn't tell us that. Anything more than what Mark tells us is irrelevant information, because if it was important, then it would be written everywhere that the charge against Him was mentioned.

No, that's what YOU are saying. We don't ignore ANY Scripture. Rather we understand those unclear verses in light of all clear verses. You, on the other hand, have created a false doctrine out of all unclear verses - and you also twist verses that are very clear, like John 3.

That is not true at all. Read John 12:42-43 again. These leaders believed in Jesus, but they weren't willing to confess Him, or repent of their unbelief. They loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.

We know that Christians sin, and can be forgiven. But if they persist in sin (and we have no idea whether these leaders did or not), they will eventually be lost. But anyone, after encountering Jesus and His teaching - if he continues to believe, he will repent. Those leaders, if they continue to believe Jesus, they will repent - look at Peter. He did exactly that. Yes, they must first confess their sins. And if they repent of their sins, it will be because they continue to believe Jesus. So what I said is absolutely true.

And I have personally known many who came to believe in Jesus, but refused to give up their sin in order to follow Him. Belief in Jesus doesn't mean you have turned from your sin (repented). And I have known many who have repented of a lifestyle of sin because of a traumatic event. But they didn't turn to God, they turned to some other human religion. They weren't saved any more than Judas was, but they attempted to repent of their sins.

If they refuse to give up their sin - i.e. repent, then they were not really saved - i.e. they didn't believe, or they have fallen from the faith - that means they no longer believe. Either way, my words remain true.

It's one thing to change your lifestyle from sin, but if you don't repent before God, then that's not the repentance the Bible is speaking of, which means also there was no faith.

You can't repent before God, without believing God, nor can you believe God, if you don't repent.

You know as well as I do, that when people give up their faith, they will also give up repenting of their sins.
Or when people give up repenting of their sins, they have already given up their faith.

This is why it has been correctly said that repentance and faith are two sides of one coin. You can't have one side without the other.

 

[Doug Brents]

You don't listen, do you? I said that the truth is quite clear in most of Scripture, but it is not so clear in your go-to verses. And of course, like all false teachings, they seize on scriptures that aren't quite so clear.

What is more clear than, "baptism now saves us" (1 Pet 3:21)? What is more clear than, "repent and be baptized in order to receive forgiveness of sin" (Acts 2:38). These verses are not unclear. But they don't agree with your interpretation, so you try to make them seem unclear.

So you're saying that Jesus, telling us "whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life." is false doctrine?

Not at all. But "believe" in that verse is NOT just intellectual assent. The Greek word is "pistis" which means "faith". And faith requires action. Faith is an action word. If it doesn't have action with it, then it is dead, worthless, and incapable of bringing life from God to us.

You say that the new birth and forgiveness of sins occurs at baptism. We say, no, they happen before baptism. Please explain how both of these views can be true. You say that a person cannot be saved unless they confess Jesus and are baptized. We say, no, confessing Jesus and being baptized occur after salvation. How can both of those be true?

They are not both true. They are diametrically opposed to each other. Salvation does not occur both before and after the same event. It is either one or the other.
So what does Scripture say?
Rom 6:1-7 and Col 2:11-14 say that sins are forgiven, we are resurrected with Christ IN BAPTISM.
1 Pet 3:21 says that baptism saves us.
Gal 3:26-27 says that we are clothed with Christ and adopted into His family through baptism.
These verses are not ambiguous, or hard to understand. They are very clear in the language and context.
Yes, there are other verses that do not mention baptism, or confession. That doesn't mean that these actions are unimportant. It simply means that they were not written down in those sections of Scripture.

We know that Christians sin, and can be forgiven. But if they persist in sin (and we have no idea whether these leaders did or not), they will eventually be lost. But anyone, after encountering Jesus and His teaching - if he continues to believe, he will repent. Those leaders, if they continue to believe Jesus, they will repent - look at Peter. He did exactly that. Yes, they must first confess their sins. And if they repent of their sins, it will be because they continue to believe Jesus. So what I said is absolutely true.

No, dwight, it is not. Let go of your pride and accept the truth. Many people do repent because they have accepted who Jesus is. But there are many who don't. They see the truth, they understand who Jesus is and what He offers, but they choose to remain in their sin.
Also, there are many who give up sinful life and turn to other religions, living truly and honestly according to those religions, attempting to abstain from sin. But these are no more saved than those who live in sin.

If they refuse to give up their sin - i.e. repent, then they were not really saved - i.e. they didn't believe, or they have fallen from the faith - that means they no longer believe. Either way, my words remain true.

Again, no. They were not saved because the "believed", any more than the religious leaders who "believed" but refused to confess Jesus were saved in John 12.

It's one thing to change your lifestyle from sin, but if you don't repent before God, then that's not the repentance the Bible is speaking of, which means also there was no faith.

Very good. There is a difference between repentance that saves and repentance to some other religion or idea. But still, it is not repentance that saves (although it is a step in the right direction). Just turning around (repenting) and walking out of a mud pit does not get you clean. You are still covered in mud when you walk out of the mud pit. And that mud cannot be washed off by human hands. It can only be washed off by being buried with Jesus, washed in His blood, and resurrected by the Spirit to a new life.

 

[dwight92070]

What is more clear than, "baptism now saves us" (1 Pet 3:21)? What is more clear than, "repent and be baptized in order to receive forgiveness of sin" (Acts 2:38). These verses are not unclear. But they don't agree with your interpretation, so you try to make them seem unclear.

No actually they don't agree with the rest of Scripture, so it is obvious that you are misinterpreting them. That's what you can't seem to get out of your head.

Not at all. But "believe" in that verse is NOT just intellectual assent. The Greek word is "pistis" which means "faith". And faith requires action. Faith is an action word. If it doesn't have action with it, then it is dead, worthless, and incapable of bringing life from God to us.

Here again, you are misinterpreting James 2 to fit your baptismal regeneration heresy. For someone who is already saved, like Abraham and Rahab were, and myself, for example, our faith without works is dead. So we will continue to do the works that "God prepared beforehand, that we would walk in them" Ephesians 2:10, demonstrating our faith as did Abraham and Rahab.

But for anyone who is not saved, but wishes to be saved, there is only one work that God accepts and that is to "believe in Him whom He has sent." John 6:29 Jesus said, "This is the work (singular) of God." Besides faith, there are no additional works (plural) (like confession and baptism) required to be saved.

The Jews also thought that more works (plural) were necessary, when they asked Jesus, "What shall we do, so that we may work the works (plural) of God?" Jesus told them there was only one work that is "the work of God" -believing "in Him whom He sent". So God Himself has instituted the one requirement necessary for salvation - faith in Jesus.

Notice Jesus called it "the work of God". God initiates this work. Jesus said "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him." John 6:44 When God draws an unsaved person, it is their responsibility and choice to respond and to believe in Jesus and be saved.

They are not both true. They are diametrically opposed to each other. Salvation does not occur both before and after the same event. It is either one or the other.
So what does Scripture say?
Rom 6:1-7 and Col 2:11-14 say that sins are forgiven, we are resurrected with Christ IN BAPTISM.
1 Pet 3:21 says that baptism saves us.
Gal 3:26-27 says that we are clothed with Christ and adopted into His family through baptism.
These verses are not ambiguous, or hard to understand. They are very clear in the language and context.

2 Peter 3:15-16 - "... just as our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of Scriptures, to their own destruction."

I also find that 1 Peter 3:21 falls into that category.

Even Peter admitted that some things that Paul wrote are hard to understand. I acknowledge that. I said that most of your go-to verses are not real clear. Because of that, I will always admit that I could be wrong. But by God's grace and through prayer and according to the ability that He has given me, and other teachers that I listen to, I have come to what I believe to be correct interpretations in those verses.

But apparently you have no trouble understanding those verses. They are not ambiguous and are very clear in the language and context, according to you. Yet Biblical scholars have debated all of those specific verses for centuries.

You tell me to let go of my pride and accept the truth. How about you? Will you admit that you could be wrong? Will you admit the truth, that these verses have indeed been debated for centuries, and they are not really easy to understand?

Yes, there are other verses that do not mention baptism, or confession. That doesn't mean that these actions are unimportant. It simply means that they were not written down in those sections of Scripture.

No, dwight, it is not. Let go of your pride and accept the truth. Many people do repent because they have accepted who Jesus is. But there are many who don't. They see the truth, they understand who Jesus is and what He offers, but they choose to remain in their sin.
Also, there are many who give up sinful life and turn to other religions, living truly and honestly according to those religions, attempting to abstain from sin. But these are no more saved than those who live in sin.

Again, no. They were not saved because the "believed", any more than the religious leaders who "believed" but refused to confess Jesus were saved in John 12.

Very good. There is a difference between repentance that saves and repentance to some other religion or idea. But still, it is not repentance that saves (although it is a step in the right direction). Just turning around (repenting) and walking out of a mud pit does not get you clean. You are still covered in mud when you walk out of the mud pit. And that mud cannot be washed off by human hands. It can only be washed off by being buried with Jesus, washed in His blood, and resurrected by the Spirit to a new life.

Wrong again. Peter tells us in Acts 15:8-9 how we are cleansed from our sins: "And God, who knows the heart, testified to them (Cornelius and household) giving them the Holy Spirit (before they were baptized), just as He also did to us; and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith.

Then Peter goes on to tell us how he was saved in verse 11: "But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus in the same way as they also are.

So Peter agrees with Paul that we are cleansed of our sins and saved by grace through faith, not of works.

 

[Doug Brents]

No actually they don't agree with the rest of Scripture, so it is obvious that you are misinterpreting them. That's what you can't seem to get out of your head.

Is the Bible the Word of God? Is God full of, or the author of, confusion? Is God full of error? Is there error or contradiction in God's Word?
All of the verses I have cited and quoted agree with the rest of Scripture. They just don't agree with your mistaken interpretation of Scripture. The error is in your interpretation, not in the Scripture. The bolded type above demonstrates your error. All Scripture agrees with All Scripture. All Scripture comes from the breath of God, and because it is perfect as He is perfect it is able to give us doctrine, and teaching, and correction, and to help us live a proper life.

Here again, you are misinterpreting James 2 to fit your baptismal regeneration heresy. For someone who is already saved, like Abraham and Rahab were, and myself, for example, our faith without works is dead. So we will continue to do the works that "God prepared beforehand, that we would walk in them" Ephesians 2:10, demonstrating our faith as did Abraham and Rahab.

Is there a different faith for someone before they are saved than after? Does the meaning of faith suddenly change once we are saved? NO!!!
Faith is the same before, during, and after salvation is received. And faith MUST be present BEFORE salvation is received, because it is the conduit through which salvation is received (Eph 2:8-9, by grace THROUGH faith). And faith must have/include/produce action or it is not real, not alive, not effective.

But for anyone who is not saved, but wishes to be saved, there is only one work that God accepts and that is to "believe in Him whom He has sent." John 6:29 Jesus said, "This is the work (singular) of God." Besides faith, there are no additional works (plural) (like confession and baptism) required to be saved.

Again dwight, "believe" in John 6:29 is the Greek word "pistis" which means "faith". This is NOT just an intellectual assent that the English word "believe" engenders.

The Jews also thought that more works (plural) were necessary, when they asked Jesus, "What shall we do, so that we may work the works (plural) of God?" Jesus told them there was only one work that is "the work of God" -believing "in Him whom He sent". So God Himself has instituted the one requirement necessary for salvation - faith in Jesus.

Another meaning of "faith" is "trust". If someone asks you to "trust them", what are they asking you to do? If you are in a building and I tell you it is going to fall down, and you need to trust me. What am I asking you to do? If you do trust me, but you don't move from the building, did you really trust me? If the building does fall down on you and you remained in the building, were you saved from being squished? Or were you lost because you didn't take action on what you "believed"?

2 Peter 3:15-16 - "... just as our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of Scriptures, to their own destruction."

You point out your own failings, being untaught (or potentially taught by false teachers as many "pastors" have been today) or unstable so that you distort what Scripture means.

I also find that 1 Peter 3:21 falls into that category.

Even Peter admitted that some things that Paul wrote are hard to understand. I acknowledge that. I said that most of your go-to verses are not real clear. Because of that, I will always admit that I could be wrong. But by God's grace and through prayer and according to the ability that He has given me, and other teachers that I listen to, I have come to what I believe to be correct interpretations in those verses.

But apparently you have no trouble understanding those verses. They are not ambiguous and are very clear in the language and context, according to you. Yet Biblical scholars have debated all of those specific verses for centuries.

Why have they been debated? Because Satan knows that the best way to keep people from actually being saved is to make them debate the thing that actually brings people into a point of salvation. Satan doesn't care if you stop sinning, as long as He has had you sin once. Satan doesn't care because once you are his, once you are dead in sin and helpless, you are incapable of saving yourself. And then if you do hear the Gospel, and do believe it, and do want to trust in God and receive salvation, if Satan can keep you from taking the one step that puts you in connection with the blood of Christ, he still gets to keep you.

Satan knows that he cannot keep the Gospel from being preached, but if he can make preachers like yourself teach a watered down, ineffectual version of it, then he can keep a lot of souls that otherwise would be lost to him.

You tell me to let go of my pride and accept the truth. How about you? Will you admit that you could be wrong? Will you admit the truth, that these verses have indeed been debated for centuries, and they are not really easy to understand?

They have been debated for years, that is obvious. But no, these verses are not really hard to understand. When you understand the concept that not every verse explains all of what occurred in an event (like the charge against Jesus on the cross), then you can understand that passages that only mention faith are not in opposition to passages that mention specific acts of faith like confession or baptism.
Yes, this is a hard concept to believe, especially when you have been steeped in the false doctrine of "belief only" as you have been. But it is not contrary to the overall message of Scripture.

 

[dwight92070]

Is the Bible the Word of God? Is God full of, or the author of, confusion? Is God full of error? Is there error or contradiction in God's Word?
All of the verses I have cited and quoted agree with the rest of Scripture. They just don't agree with your mistaken interpretation of Scripture. The error is in your interpretation, not in the Scripture. The bolded type above demonstrates your error. All Scripture agrees with All Scripture. All Scripture comes from the breath of God, and because it is perfect as He is perfect it is able to give us doctrine, and teaching, and correction, and to help us live a proper life.

You're blind and brain-washed in error. When you take a few words from 1 Peter 3:21, totally out of context - i.e. "baptism now saves you" and take them literally, instead of the way Peter meant it, and you don't even acknowledge that the majority of Scripture tells us God is our Savior, and Jesus is our Savior, not baptism and not confession. Baptism never saved anyone. Confession never saved anyone.
Again, your words, I never said that the Bible is full of error, much less that God Himself is the author of confusion and is full of error. Those are your evil attacks against me, because you don't want to hear the truth of my words.

Is there a different faith for someone before they are saved than after? Does the meaning of faith suddenly change once we are saved? NO!!!
Faith is the same before, during, and after salvation is received. And faith MUST be present BEFORE salvation is received, because it is the conduit through which salvation is received (Eph 2:8-9, by grace THROUGH faith). And faith must have/include/produce action or it is not real,

Those are your words, not mine. I never said that the meaning of faith changes - you are sinfully accusing me of saying that. What changes is the person. You may have heard the song, I once was lost, but now I'm found. The person changes, obviously, after salvation. There's no change in faith. What changes is you now have the fruit of the Spirit flowing from you, by faith, not the deeds of the flesh, through sin and unbelief.

When you're lost, God doesn't want your action or your works, he wants your faith in Jesus. All your works are dead works, just like you are - dead in sin. Before you're saved your confession and your baptism are dead works - as well as any other works that you think will save you.
When you're found - saved- the Holy Spirit indwelling you, now leads you to express the fruit of the Spirit - these are called good deeds or good works.

not alive, not effective.

Again dwight, "believe" in John 6:29 is the Greek word "pistis" which means "faith". This is NOT just an intellectual assent that the English word

You have an obsession with the words "intellectual assent", which are nowhere to be found in the Bible. But then, you're obsessed with your false doctrine as well.

"believe" engenders.

Another meaning of "faith" is "trust". If someone asks you to "trust them", what are they asking you to do? If you are in a building and I tell you it is going to fall down, and you need to trust me. What am I asking you to do? If you do trust me, but you don't move from the building, did you really trust me? If the building does fall down on you and you remained in the building, were you saved from being squished? Or were you lost because you didn't take action on what you "believed"?

If you are an unbeliever and lost and I tell you that you're headed for eternal destruction, but you can escape that by believing in and putting your trust in Jesus - but you refuse to do that and end up in hell. If you remained in your unbelief, were you saved from hell? Or were you lost because you refused to believe?

You point out your own failings, being untaught (or potentially taught by false teachers as many "pastors" have been today) or unstable so that you distort what Scripture means.

Why have they been debated? Because Satan knows that the best way to keep people from actually being saved is to make them debate the thing that actually brings people into a point of salvation. Satan doesn't care if you stop sinning, as long as He has had you sin once. Satan doesn't care because once you are his, once you are dead in sin and helpless, you are incapable of saving yourself. And then if you do hear the Gospel, and do believe it, and do want to trust in God and receive salvation, if Satan can keep you from taking the one step that puts you in connection with the blood of Christ, he still gets to keep you.

Your words are an example of the darkness that is in heretical teaching and unfortunately, in your life.

Satan knows that he cannot keep the Gospel from being preached, but if he can make preachers like yourself teach a watered down, ineffectual version of it, then he can keep a lot of souls that otherwise would be lost to him.

Your teaching is beyond "watered down" - it is a different gospel that Paul warns against in Galatians 1:6-10

They have been debated for years, that is obvious. But no, these verses are not really hard to understand. When you understand the concept that not every verse explains all of what occurred in an event (like the charge against Jesus on the cross), then you can understand that passages that only mention faith are not in opposition to passages that mention specific acts of faith like confession or baptism.
Yes, this is a hard concept to believe, especially when you have been steeped in the false doctrine of "belief only" as you have been.

That approaches blasphemy - calling belief in Jesus "only", a false doctrine - calling the work of the Holy Spirit the work of the devil.

But it is not contrary to the overall message of Scripture.

It most certainly is. So now will you humble yourself and admit that you could be wrong.? Or will you not let go of your pride?

 

[Doug Brents]

You're blind and brain-washed in error. When you take a few words from 1 Peter 3:21, totally out of context - i.e. "baptism now saves you" and take them literally, instead of the way Peter meant it, and you don't even acknowledge that the majority of Scripture tells us God is our Savior, and Jesus is our Savior, not baptism and not confession. Baptism never saved anyone. Confession never saved anyone.

I have addressed the full context of 1 Pet 3:21 many times. It is not taking that phrase out of context to say that it means exactly what it says. Noah was saved by the flood, through his faith in God to build the Ark. We are saved today by baptism, through faith in Jesus. And this is not our "work", but the work of the Holy Spirit who removes our sin by the power of the blood of Jesus.

Again, your words, I never said that the Bible is full of error, much less that God Himself is the author of confusion and is full of error. Those are your evil attacks against me, because you don't want to hear the truth of my words.

There is no truth in your words. I did not attack you. I asked questions about the authenticity, correctness, and trustworthiness of Scripture. If you accept that there is no error in Scripture, then you must be mistaken in your statement that, "actually they don't agree with the rest of Scripture".

Those are your words, not mine. I never said that the meaning of faith changes - you are sinfully accusing me of saying that.

Again, I did not accuse you of anything. I asked a question. If faith doesn't change, then the faith required after salvation is the same faith required before salvation is received: a living, active, obedient faith.

What changes is the person. You may have heard the song, I once was lost, but now I'm found. The person changes, obviously, after salvation. There's no change in faith. What changes is you now have the fruit of the Spirit flowing from you, by faith, not the deeds of the flesh, through sin and unbelief.

Absolutely. But that is not what we are discussing. Our topic of conversation is what it takes to receive salvation in the first place. You keep wanting to confuse that with the actions of faith that follow receiving salvation.
Again, going back to Naaman, his act of giving gifts to God through the prophet (or attempting to give them) was a fruit of his healing; it flowed from having received healing from God. But the actions that were required of him to receive that healing were completely different.

When you're lost, God doesn't want your action or your works, he wants your faith in Jesus.

Which requires your actions.

All your works are dead works, just like you are - dead in sin. Before you're saved your confession and your baptism are dead works - as well as any other works that you think will save you.
When you're found - saved- the Holy Spirit indwelling you, now leads you to express the fruit of the Spirit - these are called good deeds or good works.

Where in the Fruit of the Spirit does it list repentance, or confession, or baptism? Hmmm? Can you please point out where those are described as Fruit of the Spirit? That verse seems to not be in any Bible I can find online, in print, or in any other resource to which I have access.

You have an obsession with the words "intellectual assent", which are nowhere to be found in the Bible. But then, you're obsessed with your false doctrine as well.

Nope. I just use those words to point out to you the error in your understanding of what "belief" is.

If you are an unbeliever and lost and I tell you that you're headed for eternal destruction, but you can escape that by believing in and putting your trust in Jesus - but you refuse to do that and end up in hell. If you remained in your unbelief, were you saved from hell? Or were you lost because you refused to believe?

That doesn't relate to the questions I asked you at all. Sure if I don't believe then I am not saved. I remain in sin (in the building about to fall down). But if I do "believe" but I don't do anything, I still end up in Hell (with the building crashing down upon me). Salvation is in TRUSTING in Jesus, and that requires us to be IN HIM, and we enter into Jesus THROUGH BAPTISM (Gal 3:26-27).

That approaches blasphemy - calling belief in Jesus "only", a false doctrine - calling the work of the Holy Spirit the work of the devil.

I feel honored by you, that you misread my statements the same way you misread Scripture. That places me in good company.

It most certainly is. So now will you humble yourself and admit that you could be wrong.? Or will you not let go of your pride?

I am human, of course I could be wrong. Scripture is not human, and Scripture is NEVER wrong.
"Repent and be baptized in order to receive forgiveness of sin". You cannot get around this simple statement that completely disagrees with your doctrine. If you believe in the Bible, then you MUST accept that baptism results in receiving salvation from God.
"For you are all sons and daughters of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ." You cannot get around this simple statement that completely disagrees with your doctrine. If you believe in the Bible, then you MUST accept that baptism results in being clothed with Christ and becoming His child.
I could keep going, but I won't waste my breath (as it were). You are deeply rooted in your disbelief of Truth. I pray that this changes before you die, and that those you have taught will be rescued from their error.

 

[dwight92070]

I have addressed the full context of 1 Pet 3:21 many times. It is not taking that phrase out of context to say that it means exactly what it says. Noah was saved by the flood, through his faith in God to build the Ark. We are saved today by baptism, through faith in Jesus. And this is not our "work", but the work of the Holy Spirit who removes our sin by the power of the blood of Jesus.

Obviously you don't even understand this verse, but you pretend to.
The ark was specifically designed to withstand the flood's conditions.
It provided a safe space for Noah, his family, and the animals.
The water itself was a destructive force, not a savior.
The ark's construction was guided by divine instruction.
Noah's faith and obedience were crucial in building the ark.
Ultimately, it was the ark that preserved life during the flood.
God closed the door behind them and sealed it with pitch.
So it was God saved who saved them. The ark was a type of Christ.

There is no truth in your words. I did not attack you. I asked questions about the authenticity, correctness, and trustworthiness of Scripture. If you accept that there is no error in Scripture, then you must be mistaken in your statement that, "actually they don't agree with the rest of Scripture".

I should have said that they don't appear, at first glance to agree with the rest of Scripture. But when correctly translated, they do. But I think you knew what I meant.

Again, I did not accuse you of anything. I asked a question. If faith doesn't change, then the faith required after salvation is the same faith required before salvation is received: a living, active, obedient faith.

Absolutely. But that is not what we are discussing. Our topic of conversation is what it takes to receive salvation in the first place. You keep wanting to confuse that with the actions of faith that follow receiving salvation.

No, you do that. You're the one who keeps referencing faith without works is dead, from James 2. As I said, James 2 is about actions that follow salvation, not initial salvation. James 2 has nothing to do with initial salvation.

Again, going back to Naaman, his act of giving gifts to God through the prophet (or attempting to give them) was a fruit of his healing; it flowed from having received healing from God. But the actions that were required of him to receive that healing were completely different.

Which requires your actions.

Where in the Fruit of the Spirit does it list repentance, or confession, or baptism?

While repentance is not specifically stated in that list in Galatians 5, the Holy Spirit is definitely active in drawing people to Jesus, which leads to repentance. The Father draws men to Jesus. Jesus Himself draws men to Himself. The Holy Spirit is not standing idly by. He works with the Father and the Son in drawing men to Jesus. Jesus said the Holy Spirit "will convict the world concerning sin (like unbelief in Jesus), righteousness (revealed in Jesus), and judgment (Jesus will be judging all men). So in that sense, repentance is a "fruit" coming from the Holy Spirit.
On the other hand, confession and baptism are actions led by the Holy Spirit after one is saved. They are not listed specifically in the fruit of the Spirit list, just as thousands of other works of the Spirit that people are led to do are not listed specifically

I am human, of course I could be wrong. Scripture is not human, and Scripture is NEVER wrong.
"Repent and be baptized in order to receive forgiveness of sin". You cannot get around this simple statement that completely disagrees with your doctrine. If you believe in the Bible, then you MUST accept that baptism results in receiving salvation from God.
"For you are all sons and daughters of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ." You cannot get around this simple statement that completely disagrees with your doctrine. If you believe in the Bible, then you MUST accept that baptism results in being clothed with Christ and becoming His child.
I could keep going, but I won't waste my breath (as it were). You are deeply rooted in your disbelief of Truth. I pray that this changes before you die, and that those you have taught will be rescued from their error.

Repent and be baptized "with a view to" (eis) or "for" the forgiveness of your sins. Nestle's Greek Interlinear.
Here we go with eis again. (Romans 10:10) You translate it "in order", because that seems to make your point. But it can also be translated the way I did. Then you take it even further and unjustifiably use the words "baptism results in salvation from God". Those words are not even in that verse but you act as if they are. Now you have left the words of the Scripture altogether - making it say what it cannot mean.

Any thinking student of the Bible knows that repentance before God leads to forgiveness of sin. And baptism does not.

The sentence structure is very similar to Mark 16:16
"He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.
But it doesn't say that He who has believed and has not been baptized shall not be saved.
But that's your false message.
Condemnation does not come from not being baptized - it comes from not believing.

The same is true here:
"Repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of your sins."
But it doesn't say, Repent, but if you don't get baptized, your sins will not be forgiven.
Again that's your false message.
Not having your sins forgiven comes from not repenting, not from not being baptized.

Being baptized into Christ Jesus is what happens in 1 Corinthians 12:13:
"For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body ..." the body of Christ Jesus.
It does not say baptized into water, which is what baptism is. This is a spiritual baptism, being saved.

 

[dwight92070]

I have addressed the full context of 1 Pet 3:21 many times. It is not taking that phrase out of context to say that it means exactly what it says. Noah was saved by the flood, through his faith in God to build the Ark. We are saved today by baptism, through faith in Jesus. And this is not our "work", but the work of the Holy Spirit who removes our sin by the power of the blood of Jesus.

Obviously you don't even understand this verse, but you pretend to.
The ark was specifically designed to withstand the flood's conditions.
It provided a safe space for Noah, his family, and the animals.
The water itself was a destructive force, not a savior.
The ark's construction was guided by divine instruction.
Noah's faith and obedience were crucial in building the ark.
Ultimately, it was the ark that preserved life during the flood.
God closed the door behind them and sealed it with pitch.
So it was God saved who saved them. The ark was a type of Christ.

There is no truth in your words. I did not attack you. I asked questions about the authenticity, correctness, and trustworthiness of Scripture. If you accept that there is no error in Scripture, then you must be mistaken in your statement that, "actually they don't agree with the rest of Scripture".

I should have said that they don't appear, at first glance to agree with the rest of Scripture. But when correctly translated, they do. But I think you knew what I meant.

Again, I did not accuse you of anything. I asked a question. If faith doesn't change, then the faith required after salvation is the same faith required before salvation is received: a living, active, obedient faith.

Absolutely. But that is not what we are discussing. Our topic of conversation is what it takes to receive salvation in the first place. You keep wanting to confuse that with the actions of faith that follow receiving salvation.

No you do that. You're the one who keeps referencing faith without works is dead, from James 2. As I said, James 2 is about actions that follow salvation, not initial salvation. James 2 has nothing to do with initial salvation.

Again, going back to Naaman, his act of giving gifts to God through the prophet (or attempting to give them) was a fruit of his healing; it flowed from having received healing from God. But the actions that were required of him to receive that healing were completely different.

Which requires your actions.

Where in the Fruit of the Spirit does it list repentance, or confession, or baptism?

While repentance is not specifically stated in that list in Galatians 5, the Holy Spirit is definitely active in drawing people to Jesus, which leads to repentance. The Father draws men to Jesus. Jesus Himself draws men to Himself. The Holy Spirit is not standing idly by. He works with the Father and the Son in drawing men to Jesus. Jesus said the Holy Spirit "will convict the world concerning sin (like unbelief in Jesus), righteousness (revealed in Jesus), and judgment (Jesus will be judging all men). So in that sense, repentance is a "fruit" coming from the Holy Spirit.
On the other hand, confession and baptism are actions led by the Holy Spirit after one is saved. They are not listed specifically in the fruit of the Spirit list, just as thousands of other works of the Spirit that people are led to do are not listed specifically

I am human, of course I could be wrong. Scripture is not human, and Scripture is NEVER wrong.
"Repent and be baptized in order to receive forgiveness of sin". You cannot get around this simple statement that completely disagrees with your doctrine. If you believe in the Bible, then you MUST accept that baptism results in receiving salvation from God.
"For you are all sons and daughters of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ." You cannot get around this simple statement that completely disagrees with your doctrine. If you believe in the Bible, then you MUST accept that baptism results in being clothed with Christ and becoming His child.
I could keep going, but I won't waste my breath (as it were). You are deeply rooted in your disbelief of Truth. I pray that this changes before you die, and that those you have taught will be rescued from their error.

 

[Doug Brents]

Obviously you don't even understand this verse, but you pretend to.
The ark was specifically designed to withstand the flood's conditions.
It provided a safe space for Noah, his family, and the animals.
The water itself was a destructive force, not a savior.
The ark's construction was guided by divine instruction.
Noah's faith and obedience were crucial in building the ark.
Ultimately, it was the ark that preserved life during the flood.
God closed the door behind them and sealed it with pitch.
So it was God saved who saved them. The ark was a type of Christ.

Very good. In our case, God built our "Ark" in the life of Jesus. But we must be "in Christ" in order to be saved with Him. The only way to be in Christ is to die with Him in baptism, and for the Holy Spirit to raise us to new life.

I should have said that they don't appear, at first glance to agree with the rest of Scripture. But when correctly translated, they do. But I think you knew what I meant.

I cannot read your mind. So I cannot know what you meant if it is different from what you wrote.
But the verses ARE correctly translated. This can be verified through review of the MANY, MANY translations that all say the same thing. It is not that they are poorly translated, but that you don't like, or agree, with what they actually say. So you want to change them so that they fit with what you want to believe.

No, you do that. You're the one who keeps referencing faith without works is dead, from James 2. As I said, James 2 is about actions that follow salvation, not initial salvation. James 2 has nothing to do with initial salvation.

James 2 is about faith. Faith is the same before initial salvation as it is after salvation is received. Faith doesn't change. And without action, there is no faith to begin with.

While repentance is not specifically stated in that list in Galatians 5, the Holy Spirit is definitely active in drawing people to Jesus, which leads to repentance. The Father draws men to Jesus. Jesus Himself draws men to Himself. The Holy Spirit is not standing idly by. He works with the Father and the Son in drawing men to Jesus. Jesus said the Holy Spirit "will convict the world concerning sin (like unbelief in Jesus), righteousness (revealed in Jesus), and judgment (Jesus will be judging all men). So in that sense, repentance is a "fruit" coming from the Holy Spirit.
On the other hand, confession and baptism are actions led by the Holy Spirit after one is saved. They are not listed specifically in the fruit of the Spirit list, just as thousands of other works of the Spirit that people are led to do are not listed specifically

Repentance, confession of Jesus, and baptism are not listed in the fruit of the Spirit because they are not fruit. They are part of the faith that leads to receiving salvation in the first place.

Repent and be baptized "with a view to" (eis) or "for" the forgiveness of your sins. Nestle's Greek Interlinear.
Here we go with eis again. (Romans 10:10) You translate it "in order", because that seems to make your point. But it can also be translated the way I did. Then you take it even further and unjustifiably use the words "baptism results in salvation from God". Those words are not even in that verse but you act as if they are. Now you have left the words of the Scripture altogether - making it say what it cannot mean.

smh, dwight, why can you not understand this simple truth? "For" (eis) can indeed mean either "in order to" or "because you have". But it cannot mean both in the same usage. Acts 2:38 cannot mean 'repent in order to be, and be baptized because you have been forgiven' (even though that is what you want it to say). It is either 'repent and be baptized in order to be forgiven' or 'repent and be baptized because you have been forgiven'. And we know from Acts 3:19 that repentance must be done in order to be forgiven. So the ONLY OPTION we can accept given the things we know from Scripture is 'repent and be baptized in order to be forgiven'; both repent and be baptized must be "in order to".

The sentence structure is very similar to Mark 16:16
"He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.
But it doesn't say that He who has believed and has not been baptized shall not be saved.
But that's your false message.
Condemnation does not come from not being baptized - it comes from not believing.

Condemnation comes from sin (Rom 5:18, 6:23). We are already condemned because of our sin. But we have an opportunity to receive salvation if we come to Christ the way He says we must come to Him, through belief in Christ and baptism in His name.

The same is true here:
"Repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of your sins."
But it doesn't say, Repent, but if you don't get baptized, your sins will not be forgiven.
Again that's your false message.
Not having your sins forgiven comes from not repenting, not from not being baptized.

Are you going to quibble over the meaning of the word "and"? Are you going to pull a Bill Clinton here? "And" means both things are equally relevant and important.
If you don't believe in Jesus, baptism only gets you wet. But if you only believe in Jesus but don't obey Him, then you really don't believe in Him at all.

Being baptized into Christ Jesus is what happens in 1 Corinthians 12:13:
"For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body ..." the body of Christ Jesus.
It does not say baptized into water, which is what baptism is. This is a spiritual baptism, being saved.

Spiritual baptism occurs during water baptism, just as Rom 6:1-7, Col 2:11-14, and 1 Pet 3:21 portray. What 1 Cor 12:13 is talking about happens during water baptism. The Spirit's actions during baptism bring us into the Body of Christ.

 

[dwight92070]

Just about every time that I mention "faith to be saved", you feel compelled to "define" faith, or to show us how it functions -with your errant spiel, saying that James 2 is where we see how faith for salvation requires works.

When Paul mentions faith, he doesn't do that. He assumes, and rightly so, that his readers know what faith is. Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter and Jude - none of them do that either. Even James himself does not do that. In James 2, he is teaching that believers should have works that follow their salvation. So none of the New Testament writers feel compelled to say that certain works are required to even get salvation.

Here's an example of Paul speaking of the righteousness that all believers have:
"and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the law (or from confession and baptism), but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith," Philippians 3:9

Then in Philippians 4:9, Paul tells us:
"The things you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, practice these things, and the God of peace will be with you."

Nowhere in the New Testament does Paul advocate confession and baptism in order to be saved. So neither should we. Nor does he feel compelled, when he mentions faith, to continually reference that "faith without works is dead" and then go on to falsely interpret that, as Doug and others do. Anyone who does that is preaching a different gospel.

I have previously said that when anyone's message doesn't sound like the message of the authors of the New Testament - in this case, Paul - then you know that you're dealing with a different gospel. This is exactly what the baptismal regeneration message is.

 

[Doug Brents]

Just about every time that I mention "faith to be saved", you feel compelled to "define" faith, or to show us how it functions

That is because you seem to have an errant understanding of what faith really is. It is essential that we are talking about the same thing, and that that understanding matches the Scriptural understanding of that thing in order to get to the truth of that thing.

-with your errant spiel, saying that James 2 is where we see how faith for salvation requires works.

When Paul mentions faith, he doesn't do that. He assumes, and rightly so, that his readers know what faith is. Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter and Jude - none of them do that either. Even James himself does not do that. In James 2, he is teaching that believers should have works that follow their salvation. So none of the New Testament writers feel compelled to say that certain works are required to even get salvation.

They didn't feel the need to define faith, because people in their time understood what faith is, what it means to have faith; most people today don't. Most people today think that faith is purely a mental thing, that faith is something you can do in your sleep, or sitting in a chair. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Here's an example of Paul speaking of the righteousness that all believers have:
"and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the law (or from confession and baptism), but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith," Philippians 3:9

Again, righteousness comes THROUGH FAITH and ON THE BASIS OF FAITH. But when you misunderstand what faith is, you become confused and add phrases like "(or from confession and baptism)" into the text. Paul is talking about the Jewish belief that they could acquire righteousness through the keeping of the Law of Moses. But the Law of Moses does not bring righteousness, it demonstrates what sin is (Rom 3:20).

Then in Philippians 4:9, Paul tells us:
"The things you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, practice these things, and the God of peace will be with you."

Nowhere in the New Testament does Paul advocate confession and baptism in order to be saved.

So you are saying that Paul didn't write Rom 10:9-10? Or is it that Rom 10:9-10 are not part of the New Testament?

I have previously said that when anyone's message doesn't sound like the message of the authors of the New Testament - in this case, Paul - then you know that you're dealing with a different gospel. This is exactly what the baptismal regeneration message is.

Wrong dwight. It is your message of "belief only"ism that does not sound like the message of the authors of the NT, or of God. You have been shown over and over where Scripture, not me or anyone else here who believes the truth, where Scripture says that there are things we must do in order to receive the gift of salvation from God. It is free, but it is not given to just anyone who says the name "Jesus" (Matt 7:21).

 

[dwight92070]

That is because you seem to have an errant understanding of what faith really is. It is essential that we are talking about the same thing, and that that understanding matches the Scriptural understanding of that thing in order to get to the truth of that thing.

"Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." Hebrews 11:1 It is you who are mistaken in understanding what faith is. Right here in the Biblical definition of faith, do you see any mention of confessing with your mouth Jesus as Lord, or any mention of baptism? Of course not, this true definition shows us that faith is internal, invisible, a matter of the heart - not what you claim it is.

Now look at Hebrews 11:6 "And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him." Again, there's no external, visible action here, is there?

You're preaching a different gospel.

They didn't feel the need to define faith, because people in their time understood what faith is, what it means to have faith; most people today don't.

For the most part, yes, I believe they did understand what faith was, an internal, invisible, assurance and conviction of the heart - yet God graciously gave them and us the Biblical definition in Hebrews 11:1 and 6. There's no mention of any external, visible action, is there?

Most people today think that faith is purely a mental thing, that faith is something you can do in your sleep, or sitting in a chair. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Actually that's pretty close to the Hebrews definition - we only need to add one more thing - it is mental, but it is also spiritual, invisible and internal, not external and visible.

Again, righteousness comes THROUGH FAITH and ON THE BASIS OF FAITH. But when you misunderstand what faith is,

No you reject the Bible definition in favor of your baptismal regeneration heresy, which is not surprising - false teachers do reject much of what the Bible teaches.

you become confused and add phrases like "(or from confession and baptism)" into the text. Paul is talking about the Jewish belief that they could acquire righteousness through the keeping of the Law of Moses. But the Law of Moses does not bring righteousness, it demonstrates what sin is (Rom 3:20).

So you are saying that Paul didn't write Rom 10:9-10?

That's very much like a false teachers, to put words in my mouth, which I never said.

Or is it that Rom 10:9-10 are not part of the New Testament?

Nor did I say this, but you imply that I did anyway.
Romans 10:9-10 are very much like James 2. They both speak of those who were already saved, like Abraham and Rahab were.

Wrong dwight. It is your message of "belief only"ism that does not sound like the message of the authors of the NT, or of God. You have been shown over and over where Scripture, not me or anyone else here who believes the truth, where Scripture says that there are things we must do in order to receive the gift of salvation from God.

"This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent." No external, visible things are required to be saved.

It is free, but it is not given to just anyone who says the name "Jesus" (Matt 7:21).

Yes, just speaking His name doesn't cut it. It requires believing in Him, from the heart.

 

[Doug Brents]

"Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen." Hebrews 11:1

That is an improper translation. "Faith is the SUBSTANCE of things hoped for, and the EVIDENCE of things not seen." is the better translation.

It is you who are mistaken in understanding what faith is. Right here in the Biblical definition of faith, do you see any mention of confessing with your mouth Jesus as Lord, or any mention of baptism?

Yes, repentance, confession, and baptism are the evidence of the trust (something that cannot be seen). They are the substance of the salvation that is hoped for.

Of course not, this true definition shows us that faith is internal, invisible, a matter of the heart - not what you claim it is.

That is because the people who translate the versions of the Bible this way have a false understanding of what faith is.

Now look at Hebrews 11:6 "And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him." Again, there's no external, visible action here, is there?

Seeking Him is not a physical action? Hmmm?

You're preaching a different gospel.

No, I am not. That is your accusation because you don't want to accept the truth of what Scripture actually says.

For the most part, yes, I believe they did understand what faith was, an internal, invisible, assurance and conviction of the heart - yet God graciously gave them and us the Biblical definition in Hebrews 11:1 and 6. There's no mention of any external, visible action, is there?

Yes, there is

Actually that's pretty close to the Hebrews definition - we only need to add one more thing - it is mental, but it is also spiritual, invisible and internal, not external and visible.

No, that is NOT what faith is. Faith without action is dead. It is lifeless. It is meaningless. James 2 is not just about faith AFTER you have been saved. It does not say that faith "after salvation is received" is dead if it does not produce works. It says "faith without works is dead". This means any faith, at any time, under any circumstances, that does not produce actions consistent with righteousness is dead.

No you reject the Bible definition in favor of your baptismal regeneration heresy, which is not surprising - false teachers do reject much of what the Bible teaches.

What does Eph 2:8 say? "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God".
The gift (grace) of God (salvation) comes THROUGH faith. This (salvation) is not of yourselves, it (salvation) is the gift of God. But it still requires faith, which includes the actions that God says result in receiving His gift.

That's very much like a false teachers, to put words in my mouth, which I never said.

You said that nowhere in Scripture does Paul advocate confession and baptism as leading to salvation. Yet in Rom 10:9-10 he does exactly that. And I didn't go on to mention Rom 6:1-7, or Col 2:11-14, or Gal 3:26-27, or Eph 5:26-27 where he does so also.

Nor did I say this, but you imply that I did anyway.
Romans 10:9-10 are very much like James 2. They both speak of those who were already saved, like Abraham and Rahab were.

No. They speak of what it takes to become saved in the first place.

"This is the work of God, that you believe

HAVE FAITH

in Him whom He has sent." No external, visible things are required to be saved.

Yes, faith requires external, visible actions that demonstrate its existence.

Yes, just speaking His name doesn't cut it. It requires believing in Him, from the heart.

And belief in Him, from the heart, requires that there be actions in accordance with that belief. If there are no actions, then there is no real belief. You can say you believe all day long, but until you take action on that belief, then you don't really, truly believe.

 

[dwight92070]

That is an improper translation. "Faith is the SUBSTANCE of things hoped for, and the EVIDENCE of things not seen." is the better translation.

No, it is not. Strong's says (5287) "a support, substance, steadiness, hence assurance". And (1650) says "a proof, test, conviction" Why are you lying about this?

Yes, repentance, confession, and baptism are the evidence of the trust (something that cannot be seen). They are the substance of the salvation that is hoped for.

Wrong. Repentance and believing are the requirements for salvation. They are the assurance of sins forgiven, and the conviction of being born again.

That is because the people who translate the versions of the Bible this way have a false understanding of what faith is.

So you know more about correct translations than the translators?

Seeking Him is not a physical action? Hmmm?

We must seek Him on His terms, not ours. It starts with repentance and faith. Neither are physical actions.

No, I am not. That is your accusation because you don't want to accept the truth of what Scripture actually says.

I accept the truth of Scripture, not your perversion of it.

Yes, there is

No, that is NOT what faith is. Faith without action is dead. It is lifeless. It is meaningless. James 2 is not just about faith AFTER you have been saved.

Yes, as a matter of fact, it is. Abraham and Rahab were both already saved, when they did good works. Christians who have no works - their faith is dead/

It does not say that faith "after salvation is received" is dead if it does not produce works.

That's exactly what it says. James is addressed to Christians - i.e. they already have salvation.

It says "faith without works is dead". This means any faith, at any time, under any circumstances, that does not produce actions consistent with righteousness is dead.

That's your perversion.

What does Eph 2:8 say? "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God".
The gift (grace) of God (salvation) comes THROUGH faith. This (salvation) is not of yourselves, it (salvation) is the gift of God. But it still requires faith, which includes the actions that God says result in receiving His gift.

You forgot "not of works lest anyone should boast." Confession and baptism are not prerequisites to salvation. They follow salvation.

You said that nowhere in Scripture does Paul advocate confession and baptism as leading to salvation. Yet in Rom 10:9-10 he does exactly that.

Wrong. Those verses say nothing about baptism. Confession is the fruit of those already saved.

And I didn't go on to mention Rom 6:1-7, or Col 2:11-14, or Gal 3:26-27, or Eph 5:26-27 where he does so also.

All misinterpreted to fit into your heresy.

No. They speak of what it takes to become saved in the first place.

HAVE FAITH

Yes, faith requires external, visible actions that demonstrate its existence.

Not for salvation it doesn't. After salvation, then it does.

And belief in Him, from the heart, requires that there be actions in accordance with that belief.

Not for salvation it doesn't.

If there are no actions, then there is no real belief.

For someone already saved, that is true.

You can say you believe all day long, but until you take action on that belief, then you don't really, truly believe.

For someone already saved, that is true.

 

[dwight92070]

Has anyone noticed that Israel being delivered from Egypt and slavery is a type of our being saved from the bondage of sin. They saw a cloud-like pillar by day and a fire-like pillar at night guiding them in the way they should go. This is a type of being baptized with the Holy Spirit and fire. And then many days later - we don't exactly know how many, but not long after they left Egypt, God led them through the Red Sea. This is a type of baptism which occurs after salvation.

Also when Noah and his family entered the ark, which God Himself closed behind them, this is another type of entering into the body of Christ or salvation - where the ark is a type of Christ. God Himself sealed the door, which is a type of the the seal of the Holy Spirit. Seven days later, the flood gates of the sky were opened and all the fountains of the great deep burst open. This too is a type of baptism, again occurring after salvation.

You have to do a lot of juggling of the facts to get the Bible to say that baptism is required in order to be saved.