"Works Salvation"

[Pancho Frijoles]

There is no evidence that the Spirit falling ON Cornelius and his household equals salvation. The Spirit fell on Cornelius in the same way He fell on the Apostles on Pentecost. And they were already saved, having the indwelling of the Spirit since John 20:22. On Pentecost the Spirit fell ON (not INTO) the 120 people there giving them tongues and praise, and when He fell on Cornelius He gave them tongues and praise (exactly the same in both cases). Further, if they were saved when the Spirit fell on them, then there would have been no need to baptize them in water. The "sign" of their faith would have already been seen by those who were present. But Peter commanded that they be baptized in water so that their sins would be washed away, the same as He told the Jews on Pentecost (Acts 2:38), and the same that Ananias told Saul in Damascus (Acts 22:16).

Baptism has no power to wash out sins. God’s power to change lives does.
So, you know that Fatimah, your Palestine neighbor and Kindergarden teacher has been given salvation when you witness her renovated life.
Baptism is no more than an external sign, just as circumcision, fasting, Sabbath keeping, participating in the Lord’s Supper, keeping your hair uncut or making a pilgrimage to Mecca.

 

[Jim]

Baptism has no power to wash out sins. God’s power to change lives does.
So, you know that Fatimah, your Palestine neighbor and Kindergarden teacher has been given salvation when you witness her renovated life.
Baptism is no more than an external sign, just as circumcision, fasting, Sabbath keeping, participating in the Lord’s Supper, keeping your hair uncut or making a pilgrimage to Mecca.

It is true that baptism is not the power that washes away sin. But it is the occasion in the life of the repentant believer when God washes away sin. When baptism is spoken of in relation to salvation, baptism always precedes forgiveness, the washing away, of sin. It is the occasion when God forgives the sinner.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

It is true that baptism is not the power that washes away sin. But it is the occasion in the life of the repentant believer when God washes away sin. When baptism is spoken of in relation to salvation, baptism always precedes forgiveness, the washing away, of sin. It is the occasion when God forgives the sinner.

Hi Jim

Baptism requires people to repent sincerely first. And there is no gap between sincere repentance and God’s forgiveness.
If it took a lady say, four hours or four days to find an available apostle to baptize her and a place with enough water to do it, does it mean that God would wait those four hours or four days withholding His forgiveness?

Certianly not, my brother. God would know the intention of the woman, as He knows every heart.
God’s grace does not depend on any material sign or ritual contingency.
Same thing with blood shedding. God’s didn’t need the priest to effectively kill a lamb in the tabernacle or temple, following a specific procedure, to forgive a sinner who had repented sincerely.

All those were exercises that 1) helped the sinner to keep in their memories their commitment 2) help the community to identify such commitment

 

[Jim]

Hi Jim

Baptism requires people to repent sincerely first. And there is no gap between sincere repentance and God’s forgiveness.
If it took a lady say, four hours or four days to find an available apostle to baptize her and a place with enough water to do it, does it mean that God would wait those four hours or four days withholding His forgiveness?

Certianly not, my brother. God would know the intention of the woman, as He knows every heart.
God’s grace does not depend on any material sign or ritual contingency.
Same thing with blood shedding. God’s didn’t need the priest to effectively kill a lamb in the tabernacle or temple, following a specific procedure, to forgive a sinner who had repented sincerely.

All those were exercises that 1) helped the sinner to keep in their memories their commitment 2) help the community to identify such commitment

A couple of comments here. First of all, there is never any value associated with the one doing the baptizing. In fact 1 Corinthians 2 condemns that idea. Second, I personally think that one could in fact self-baptize since the baptizer is of no consequence. Third, I leave those "what ifs" completely up to God in the event that there is a delay or an impossibility in the baptism of the repentant believer. But I would never, intentionally, develop any aspect of doctrine of soteriology on such "what ifs". There is more that can be said in this regard, given God's foreknowledge, but I will leave it there.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

A couple of comments here. First of all, there is never any value associated with the one doing the baptizing. In fact 1 Corinthians 2 condemns that idea. Second, I personally think that one could in fact self-baptize since the baptizer is of no consequence. Third, I leave those "what ifs" completely up to God in the event that there is a delay or an impossibility in the baptism of the repentant believer. But I would never, intentionally, develop any aspect of doctrine of soteriology on such "what ifs". There is more that can be said in this regard, given God's foreknowledge, but I will leave it there.

Those “what ifs” are not speculations for rhetoric purposes… they are daily FACTS.
So, a theology that accounts for the daily facts of existence is indeed a good theology.
Jesus Himself used a lot of daily facts as “what ifs” in his parables.

For example, sinning without the possibility of making the trip to Jerusalem’s Temple to offer a sacrifice was a fact of life for thousands or millions. Not having enough water for immersion was a fact in the lives of many people. That’s why baptism by aspersion became popular, and then, in the sands of Arabian desert, a “baptism of the heart”, so to speak, by uttering words.

 

[Doug Brents]

Baptism has no power to wash out sins. God’s power to change lives does.

100% agreed.

So, you know that Fatimah, your Palestine neighbor and Kindergarden teacher has been given salvation when you witness her renovated life.
Baptism is no more than an external sign, just as circumcision, fasting, Sabbath keeping, participating in the Lord’s Supper, keeping your hair uncut or making a pilgrimage to Mecca.

No, it is not. Mecca is mentioned NOWHERE in Scripture. The muslim religion is nothing more than an offshoot of Judaism from Ismael. They deny Jesus as the Christ, and don't even have the Law of Moses (through which the Christ came). Circumcision, fasting, sabbath keeping, participating in the Lord’s Supper, keeping your hair uncut, etc. are all commandments given under the Law, but none of them are part of the New Covenant of Christ. But none of those commandments result in righteousness being given by God or received by the person.

But baptism is commanded, and said to result in righteousness being received by the person, and righteousness is said to be given by God in baptism.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

100% agreed.

No, it is not. Mecca is mentioned NOWHERE in Scripture. The muslim religion is nothing more than an offshoot of Judaism from Ismael. They deny Jesus as the Christ, and don't even have the Law of Moses (through which the Christ came). Circumcision, fasting, sabbath keeping, participating in the Lord’s Supper, keeping your hair uncut, etc. are all commandments given under the Law, but none of them are part of the New Covenant of Christ. But none of those commandments result in righteousness being given by God or received by the person.

But baptism is commanded, and said to result in righteousness being received by the person, and righteousness is said to be given by God in baptism.

Animal Sacrifices were also commanded, explicitly for the atonement of sins.
So, the fact that some verses in the New Testament refer to baptism in the context of forgiveness of sins (or righteousness, as you say) is no more valid that verses in the Torah that commanded animal sacrifices,
Animal sacrifices could not wash out sins, just as baptism cannot wash out sins.
In both cases, it was God who erased sin by His mercy.

 

[Jim]

Animal Sacrifices were also commanded, explicitly for the atonement of sins.
So, the fact that some verses in the New Testament refer to baptism in the context of forgiveness of sins (or righteousness, as you say) is no more valid that verses in the Torah that commanded animal sacrifices,
Animal sacrifices could not wash out sins, just as baptism cannot wash out sins.
In both cases, it was God who erased sin by His mercy.

Neither the animal sacrifice nor baptism is the agent of forgiveness of sin. However, in both cases, it establishes the occasion, the time in the life of the repentant believer, that God in His mercy forgives the sins. Under the Old Law, such atonement was temporary and needed to be repeated; in the case of Jesus' sacrifice the atonement was perfect, it was complete; it was once and done never to be repeated. Washing away of the sins of any given individual was and is accomplished by God when the repentant believer is baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, i.e., baptized into Christ.

 

[Doug Brents]

Animal Sacrifices were also commanded, explicitly for the atonement of sins.

Animal sacrifice cannot atone for sin. It merely pushes the condemnation for the sin forward until the proper time for something that can atone for sin comes along (Jesus' blood).

So, the fact that some verses in the New Testament refer to baptism in the context of forgiveness of sins (or righteousness, as you say) is no more valid that verses in the Torah that commanded animal sacrifices,

Not true. Scripture says that forgiveness of sin/righteousness is received during water baptism. Righteousness is received/credited because of faith, and the action of faith that is required by God is baptism.

Animal sacrifices could not wash out sins, just as baptism cannot wash out sins.
In both cases, it was God who erased sin by His mercy.

Again, true. But that does not support or advance your agenda. @Jim said it very well in post #3488 above.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Scripture says that forgiveness of sin/righteousness is received during water baptism. Righteousness is received/credited because of faith, and the action of faith that is required by God is baptism.

I see your point... and I also see at least four big problems with taking that literally

1) There is no single shred of evidence in the Torah that priests and sinners believed that animal sacrifices "pushed the condemnation for the sin forward until the proper time for Jesus sacrifice". That's a post-hoc interpretation. God never revealed that when He gave the commandment for animal sacrifices. Atonement of sin through animal sacrifices was mentioned as literally as washing of sins through baptism.
2) The Gospel shows examples of people who were forgiven or granted access to paradise without baptism, even when baptism already existed.
3) There is a time gap between repentance and the execution of the act of baptism
4) If baptism were the occasion in which forgiveness of sin is received, then we would have to get baptized hundreds of times during our life. Indeed, the literal interpretation of baptism as a sin-washing event led some people in early Christianity to wait until death was near to get baptized. Perhaps Constantine is a good example.

 

[Pancho Frijoles]

Neither the animal sacrifice nor baptism is the agent of forgiveness of sin. However, in both cases, it establishes the occasion, the time in the life of the repentant believer, that God in His mercy forgives the sins. Under the Old Law, such atonement was temporary and needed to be repeated; in the case of Jesus' sacrifice the atonement was perfect, it was complete; it was once and done never to be repeated. Washing away of the sins of any given individual was and is accomplished by God when the repentant believer is baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, i.e., baptized into Christ.

Let's be careful when we speak of rituals of symbols... otherwise we run the risk of placing the symbol or ritual above the meaning that God intended... just as Judaizers did when they pressed Gentiles to get circumcised to prove their commitment to God.

In a wedding ceremony, the husband and wife do not start loving each only just after some magical words are pronounced.
In a graduation ceremony, the graduate in Medicine does not suddenly know how to deal with an appendicitis in the moment he or she receives the certificate in paper.
The Holy Spirit does not need someone with authority to lay hands on your head to act on your heart.
The believer does not start remembering Jesus sacrifice after he/she has participated in the Lord's supper.

Spiritual things, including forgiveness of sins, happen independently of the external sign or ritual that testifies of such spiritual thing.

I do value symbols and rituals. I like them. I think they were given for a reason by God to teach us, to help us.
But symbols and rituals are symbols and rituals... not the inner event.