He that believes and is not water baptised is saved

[dwight92070]

That doesn't answer the question. I didn't ask about John 3:16, I asked about Rom 10:9-10. But I will ask a second question, please answer both this time: Is John 3:16 more important, more God's Word, more authoritative than Rom 10:9-10?

Please answer this, is the true interpretation of Romans 10:9-10 more important, more God's Word, more authoritative than the wrong interpretation of Romans 10:9-10?

Romans 10:9-10 was written by Paul in the mid 50's A.D., or about 25 years after the Day of Pentecost, which was about 30 A.D. If the correct interpretation of these verses is that you must confess Jesus as Lord before you can be saved, then many, if not all who became new believers in, and disciples of Jesus, between 30 A.D. and about 55 A.D. may have never actually been saved. Why would I say this? Because we never see this supposedly true teaching (that confession of Jesus as Lord is required before one can be saved) in the New Testament before 55 A.D., and therefore those new believers did not know that confessing Jesus as Lord was a requirement before they could be saved.

In fact, it is very likely that many Christians had not even read Paul's letter to the Romans until many years after 55 A.D., and therefore did not know this supposedly true teaching that confession of Jesus as Lord was necessary for their salvation.

Doug has mocked me for making this point in the past, but he can't show me one other place in the New Testament, where this erroneous teaching was taught or written BEFORE about 55 A.D. - all the way back to 30 A.D.

If these verses mean what Doug and his ilk say that they mean, then a much more clear teaching of that meaning would be all over the New Testament - but its not.

On the contrary, the teaching that is all over the New Testament is that we are saved by grace through faith, not by confession, not by baptism. or any other works.

Doug also continually misinterprets James 2:24, even though I and many others here have told him that James is not referring to salvation here, but to the faith of someone who is already saved. Even the reference to Abraham in James 2:23, where God reckoned righteousness to him, because of his faith - Was this the point at which Abraham was saved? No, he was already a believer in God before in Genesis 12, when called first called him, at the age of 75. So for Doug to interpret this as the point at which Abram was saved, is obviously a misinterpretation.

I believe Paul is doing the exact same thing in Romans 10:9-10, as James is in James 2:24- i.e. he is referring to the affirmation of one who is already a believer.

 

[Truther]

This proves my point exactly. Those that hold to baptismal regeneration say that you're not saved and you're not reading the bible right If you don't believe like they believe.

Only they can comprehend God's word and only they can be saved. Then if you don't fall into line the degrading, mocking and ridiculing starts in earnest.

We’re not talking about baptism. You have to take a sinner to the gospels, make them pass through Acts to be saved, then they are qualified to read and apply the Epistles. You guys skip Acts and take sinners straight to the epistles. That is mail theft from the saints.
You guys have no idea the order that your New Testament of the Bible was placed in. You can take a sinner straight to the book of Rev and tell them the first three chapters are for them for all that you folks are concerned. You guys are not even qualified to read the Bible if you don’t follow the order of it.

 

[Truther]

Question for all of you theology professionals… Was Romans written to sinners or Saints?

 

[dwight92070]

We’re not talking about baptism. You have to take a sinner to the gospels, make them pass through Acts to be saved, then they are qualified to read and apply the Epistles. You guys skip Acts and take sinners straight to the epistles. That is mail theft from the saints.
You guys have no idea the order that your New Testament of the Bible was placed in. You can take a sinner straight to the book of Rev and tell them the first three chapters are for them for all that you folks are concerned. You guys are not even qualified to read the Bible if you don’t follow the order of it.

Can you believe that? If I understand Truther correctly here, the gospels by themselves are not sufficient for salvation. Jesus' teachings, by themselves, are not sufficient for salvation??? The hundreds, possibly thousands of people who were saved under Jesus' teachings alone, disproves such a fallacious statement, which clearly displays the "bad fruit" from a "bad tree"- i.e. false teaching.

 

[Truther]

Can you believe that? If I understand Truther correctly here, the gospels by themselves are not sufficient for salvation. Jesus' teachings, by themselves, are not sufficient for salvation??? The hundreds, possibly thousands of people who were saved under Jesus' teachings alone, disproves such a fallacious statement, which clearly displays the "bad fruit" from a "bad tree"- i.e. false teaching.

The gospels were written so sinners could believe in Jesus. The book of Acts(2:37-38) begins with what shall we do? from the sinners.
Romans to Revelation was written to those that previously obeyed the book of Acts.

Those that obey, the book of Acts are called Saints.

How in the world do Christians not see this? They don’t even have a foundation or any working knowledge at all of their Bible.

This is exactly why Christendom is splintered into 1000 directions.

 

[Truther]

Also, you have just proved that you are an Acts skipper. You think the gospels alone teach us about the New Testament Church. That means you are not interested nor believe in the book of Acts as relevant .

 

[Truther]

If you cannot explain the order of the New Testament like I did in that video you are not qualified to teach the Bible at all. That’s a fact. That’s the minimum you have to know as a teacher.

 

[Truther]

Seriously, you guys desperately need to see this. You’re not even reading the Bible right unless you comprehend how it is arranged…
Lesson 5- Page 1

This video

 

[TomL]

The eunuch had been worshipping in Jerusalem as a proselyte of the Jews’ religion. He was not an unregenerate man, but born again, yet needed a conversion to the truth more perfectly!

Born again apart from Christ?

Not possible

John 6:53 (NASB 2020) — 53 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves.

John 5:40 (NASB 2020) — 40 and yet you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.

Ephesians 1:3 (NASB 2020) — 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ,

 

[Red Baker]

Greetings Samson,

Let us look at Acts 8:26-39~some wonderful scriptures teachings us some great truths~I do not disagree with what you said, I would just modify it a little based on the overall teachings of God's word.

Acts 8:26-39~"And the angel of the Lord spake unto Philip, saying, Arise, and go toward the south unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, which is desert. And he arose and went: and, behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of great authority under Candace queen of the Ethiopians, who had the charge of all her treasure, and had come to Jerusalem for to worship, Was returning, and sitting in his chariot read Esaias the prophet. Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot. And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest? And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him. The place of the scripture which he read was this, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter; and like a lamb dumb before his shearer, so opened he not his mouth: In his humiliation his judgment was taken away: and who shall declare his generation? for his life is taken from the earth. And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man? Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing."

When one is not married to a religious' system, or a cult, you have freedom to teach the whole counsel of God. Praise be to the Lord, we are his freeman.

Philip meets a great eunuch of Ethiopia prepared by the Holy Ghost for conversion (Acts 8:26-34).

The Lord directs Philip to the desert, which direction we need for godly conversions. This man was an important government official, but he was a black, castrated Gentile.

The eunuch had been worshipping in Jerusalem as a proselyte of the Jews’ religion. He was not an unregenerate man, but born again, yet needed a conversion to the truth more perfectly!

While in Jerusalem, he secured a copy of part of the Old Testament and read Isaiah. With Divine prompting, Philip joins himself to this man’s chariot prepared by God.

The Lord had taken care of details, he was reading Isaiah 53 without understanding. With the heart of a righteous man, the eunuch desires Philip to teach him the Scripture.

The Lord set Philip up perfectly. The eunuch wanted to know the Subject of Isaiah 53. Philip preaches Christ Jesus to the noble eunuch and baptizes him in the desert (Acts 8:35-38).

What a passage to preach Christ Jesus! The Lord had prepared the eunuch perfectly. After hearing about baptism, the eunuch spies some water and seeks his own baptism. When God is in the matter, you will not need to use natural means to push conversion.

The eunuch asks a perfect question about baptism – what is the necessary condition?

Baby-sprinkling heretics wish there was no answer to this important question. So they deleted Acts 8:37 from most every version of the Bible but the KJV.

Baptists hold to “believers’ baptism” because of this and other similar verses. Baptism is the answer of a good conscience (I Pet 3:21), which rejects babies.

The eunuch also chose water deep enough to baptize Scripturally – by immersion. As John baptized in Aenon for the much water there (John 3:23), so Philip. Both Philip and the eunuch had to go down into the water for a godly baptism. Both Philip and the eunuch had to come up out of the water after the baptism. In this important passage, we condemn infant baptism and any mode but immersion.

The eunuch, having obeyed Jesus Christ, goes on his way to Ethiopia rejoicing.

Baptism does not put one into a local church, for the eunuch had none. Baptism is strictly between God and the one being baptized giving God an answer of a good conscience.

There is a salvation in baptism that those who are not baptized enjoy. But it is practical only in having a true understanding concerning the cross of Jesus Christ that those who have never been baptized have. Mark 16:16. Selah.

Is there no one who desires to address this post?

 

[Red Baker]

Born again apart from Christ?

Not possible

John 6:53 (NASB 2020) — 53 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves.

John 5:40 (NASB 2020) — 40 and yet you are unwilling to come to Me so that you may have life.

Ephesians 1:3 (NASB 2020) — 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ,

Tom. prove the my post wrong instead of posting the same scriptures that have been addressed.

Born again apart from Christ?

Not possible

Really? There will be multitudes of folks that will inherit eternal life that have never heard of Jesus Christ, multitudes!

How about the godly OT folks? About the heathrens? About infants and the feeble minded folks that have lived in this world? About folks who never had a bible in the tongues? There are no exceptions, one must be created in the image of Jesus Christ, in order to inherit eternal life~which will be seen in the fruits of the Spirit, even though imperfect ~which will be based upon the opportunity of hearing the word of God preached, etc.

Regeneration and conversion are two doctrines totally different, that folks have emerged into one.

 

[TomL]

Tom. prove the my post wrong instead of posting the same scriptures that have been addressed.


Really? There will be multitudes of folks that will inherit eternal life that have never heard of Jesus Christ, multitudes!

Yes really

The claim was you cannot be born again apart from Christ

Ephesians 1:3 (KJV 1900) — 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

John 6:53 (KJV 1900) — 53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

please address the scriptures

 

[Doug Brents]

I'm sure you have plenty of experience with that.


So works salvation in your opinion is okay because it's one of Satan's attacks.

No, your reluctance to accept that there are things that we must do is the result of Satan's attack. In Scripture there are clearly actions that man MUST take in order to receive salvation, but Satan has so many people (like you) so wrapped up in the idea that there is nothing we have to do that you cannot see what God has told you.

Third sentence there where you're asking me to submit to what scripture say. What you're really saying is you want me to submit what "you think" scriptures say.

No. Read the Scripture for yourself. What does Rom 10:9-10 says? If it says that salvation results in us confessing Jesus as Lord, then believe that. But it doesn't, does it? It says that confessing Jesus as Lord "with the mouth" results in salvation. You have to conform your doctrine to what Scripture says, not conform what you want Scripture to say to what you already believe.

That's what all false teachers try to do. The good news is you're not my teacher.

If you are comfortable listening to false teachers who tickle your ears with what you already want to believe, then I hope you are comfortable in Hell. But I pray that you would let the Scriptures change your understanding and lead you to the truth before you have to experience the comfort that will not be there. I pray that you come to an acceptance of the truth before the end.

 

[TomL]

No. Read the Scripture for yourself. What does Rom 10:9-10 says? If it says that salvation results in us confessing Jesus as Lord, then believe that. But it doesn't, does it? It says that confessing Jesus as Lord "with the mouth" results in salvation. You have to conform your doctrine to what Scripture says, not conform what you want Scripture to say to what you already believe.

No water there

 

[Doug Brents]

Please answer this, is the true interpretation of Romans 10:9-10 more important, more God's Word, more authoritative than the wrong interpretation of Romans 10:9-10?

Romans 10:9-10 was written by Paul in the mid 50's A.D., or about 25 years after the Day of Pentecost, which was about 30 A.D. If the correct interpretation of these verses is that you must confess Jesus as Lord before you can be saved, then many, if not all who became new believers in, and disciples of Jesus, between 30 A.D. and about 55 A.D. may have never actually been saved.

Edited by admin. You think that just because it wasn't written down that no one knew it? You think that just because it wasn't written down that it was not being taught by the Apostles and other leaders of the Church?

Why would I say this? Because we never see this supposedly true teaching (that confession of Jesus as Lord is required before one can be saved) in the New Testament before 55 A.D., and therefore those new believers did not know that confessing Jesus as Lord was a requirement before they could be saved.

Obviously you do think that. Just wow. I am blown away.

In fact, it is very likely that many Christians had not even read Paul's letter to the Romans until many years after 55 A.D., and therefore did not know this supposedly true teaching that confession of Jesus as Lord was necessary for their salvation.

Doug has mocked me for making this point in the past, but he can't show me one other place in the New Testament, where this erroneous teaching was taught or written BEFORE about 55 A.D. - all the way back to 30 A.D.

Wrong. Luke records that in the very first sermon preached in the new Kingdom of God on Pentecost, Peter commanded that the Jews present, the men who had been there calling for the blood of Jesus, be baptized in His name (calling on His name and making Him Lord over them)(Acts 2:36-38).

If these verses mean what Doug and his ilk say that they mean, then a much more clear teaching of that meaning would be all over the New Testament - but its not.

On the contrary, the teaching that is all over the New Testament is that we are saved by grace through faith, not by confession, not by baptism. or any other works.

All of Scripture is equal. That means that if something is said even once, it has the same authority as if it were said a thousand times. There is no error, omission, or stray word in Scripture (in the original texts, translation errors do occur). So the fact that the original Greek, and there are no English translation the contradicts this, says that confession leads to salvation, that is God's command, and His instruction, and if we claim to be His servants, then we MUST accept His word as truth.

Doug also continually misinterprets James 2:24, even though I and many others here have told him that James is not referring to salvation here, but to the faith of someone who is already saved. Even the reference to Abraham in James 2:23, where God reckoned righteousness to him, because of his faith - Was this the point at which Abraham was saved? No, he was already a believer in God before in Genesis 12, when called first called him, at the age of 75. So for Doug to interpret this as the point at which Abram was saved, is obviously a misinterpretation.

I have said repeatedly that you are not representing me accurately here. Abraham was saved because of his faith, and his faith began when he first obeyed God's voice and left his home in Ur. He trusted God, and his trust (evidenced by his obedience to God's instruction) was credited to him as righteousness.

I believe Paul is doing the exact same thing in Romans 10:9-10, as James is in James 2:24- i.e. he is referring to the affirmation of one who is already a believer.

So I ask again, which does Scripture say leads to the other? Does confession result in salvation? Or does salvation result in confession? Which does SCRIPTURE say is accurate?
"that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation."
Yes, Paul is talking to people who have already been saved. But he is referring back to before they were saved, when they were still lost and without hope. Notice that in verse 14 he is talking about others, those who the disciples are supposed to be bringing in as new disciples, and they must hear the word in order to believe the word in order to call on His name in order to be saved.

 

[Doug Brents]

No water there

Tom, Rom 10:9-10 is not about baptism at all, so of course there is no water there.

 

[TomL]

Tom, Rom 10:9-10 is not about baptism at all, so of course there is no water there.

But it does speak of salvation and does not include water baptism

 

[Truther]

No, your reluctance to accept that there are things that we must do is the result of Satan's attack. In Scripture there are clearly actions that man MUST take in order to receive salvation, but Satan has so many people (like you) so wrapped up in the idea that there is nothing we have to do that you cannot see what God has told you.

No. Read the Scripture for yourself. What does Rom 10:9-10 says? If it says that salvation results in us confessing Jesus as Lord, then believe that. But it doesn't, does it? It says that confessing Jesus as Lord "with the mouth" results in salvation. You have to conform your doctrine to what Scripture says, not conform what you want Scripture to say to what you already believe.

If you are comfortable listening to false teachers who tickle your ears with what you already want to believe, then I hope you are comfortable in Hell. But I pray that you would let the Scriptures change your understanding and lead you to the truth before you have to experience the comfort that will not be there. I pray that you come to an acceptance of the truth before the end.

If I may, Romans 10:9 is written to the Saints to affirm their faith.

 

[Doug Brents]

But it does speak of salvation and does not include water baptism

Yes, it speaks of salvation being received based on an action that we take. And this is not the only passage that speaks of salvation being received based on an action that we take. And because there are no mistakes or contradictions in Scripture, if two things are both said to result in salvation, then both must be true, not one or the other but both.

 

[Doug Brents]

If I may, Romans 10:9 is written to the Saints to affirm their faith.

Yes, it was written to the saints, looking back at a time before they were saints.