IS IT ESSENTIAL TO BE BAPTIZED TO BE SAVED?

Beware ........this question is only answered by the inspired words of God.

Depending on the modern Bible versions or even man's commentary can trick you.

Here is a case in point taken from a Bible review by Dr. Bill Crump.

.........Probably no doctrinal issue has posed a more controversial subject than baptism. In Mark 16:16, Jesus states, ?He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.? But the editors comment that, "Only faith, not baptism, is essential for salvation, as the omission of baptism from the last clause shows." This liberal interpretation overrules Jesus and implies that we cannot take Him literally at His Word here. Had Jesus intended to downplay baptism, He would have dropped it from verse 16a and simply said, ?He that believeth shall be saved.? That Jesus ADDS baptism makes it an equally essential act with belief. Jesus omits baptism from verse 16b simply because the subject is pointless with unbelievers. The editors likewise overrule the Apostle Peter in Acts 2:38 and Ananias in Acts 22:16 by rearranging the wording to suit their purpose. They further cite certain ?salvation? passages which do not specifically mention baptism. We must consider the full context in such cases. One example is the case of the Philippian jailer in Acts 16:31, where the Apostle Paul states, ?Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved?? If baptism is unnecessary for salvation, why in verse 33 is the believing jailer baptized ?straightway? (immediately), and in the middle of the night at that? If baptism is merely an outward sign of belief, and if the jailer was already saved, as the editors imply, why didn?t the jailer seek a more convenient time to be baptized? The answer lies in verse 32: ?And they [Paul and Silas] spake unto him the word of the Lord,? which would include the necessity of baptism. That the jailer does not wait for a more convenient time implies an urgency to fulfill a most necessary act. Other examples of New Testament believers who were baptized immediately upon their conversion include Saul of Tarsus and the Ethiopian eunuch.

It is unfortunate that New Age theology has infiltrated such a time-honored book as the King James Bible. The editorial comments cited above and others that I have examined convince me that a ready supply of liberal theology exists in this edition. Suffice it to say that whenever any commentary appears to contradict the Word, it is much safer to let the pure Word speak for Himself.......

***************************


Do not be misled by: "All versions contain what is necessary for salvation".

Read Romans 10:10 in your NIV and tell me if you are convinced that baptism is no longer necessary. Then read the same verse in the KJB and make note of the fact that it says " --- unto salvation." Look up the word "unto". My dictionary says "unto" means "to". "To" means "toward or in the direction of". The process is not complete upon believing and confessing.

Now go to Acts 2:38 in your NIV. In the NIV your sins are not forgiven until you repent and are baptized. Is this not a contradiction within the pages of the NIV? You do not have the truth in the modern versions in both Romans 10:10 and Acts 2:38. Tests like these prove which version is the true Bible.

I can give you many other salvation compromises. If you now believe that salvation is suddenly achievable, today, by faith only or by believing and confessing without baptism then your friends have won you over.

You do know the NIV and most other modern versions have removed Acts 8:37. This is the only verse in the entire Bible that shows that someone was baptized directly after confessing the name of Jesus Christ. Now I ask, "Do these verses in these modern versions contain what is necessary for salvation or do they support denominationalism and false teaching?"

Always be prepared to defend the truth.

2 Timothy 4 (KJB)
2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.

Keep the faith brother.

Bobby M. Johnson

VOTE
Is Baptism Essential For Salvation?
http://www.concernedmembers.com/polls.htm#20020912>

This forum has been edited by a moderator at ConcernedMembers.com
that logged in from one of the below forums. These forums are not part of, approved by or affiliated with any Church.

Baptism is essential for salvation.
We must get out and teach it to the people.
The church is in the mess it is in because we have quit evanglizing. We have become at ease in Zion.
We have become materialistic.
May God help us to do His will.
It is good to care for one another in the body. that is a command, but in many churches, the lost of the world is forgotten because we are so busy doing things that are unnecessary ...feeding our stomachs.One preacher said " we are potluckin'it to death "
Lets get back to our mission. We will be taken care of by God . Let the song "You never mentioned Him to Me" ring in our ears .
God bless,

I am a Church of Christ member and my children will be baptized when they are ready, however, I do not and will not condemn or judge someone who has not been baptized nor do I feel that baptism "saves" us and I will give several references in the Bible where it says simply believe and you will be saved. They far outnumber the passages where baptism and belief are linked.

My personal stance and interpretation is that we are baptized BECAUSE we believe and do that in obedience, not because in doinit we "earn" our salvation. Paul says that it is a FREE gift from God and that we even get our faith from Him to believe in Him as well.

Anyway, on to the references:

Jn 20:31: But these are written so that you may BELIEVE that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in Him you will have eternal life.

Acts 15:11 - We BELIEVE that we are all saved in the same way, by the SPECIAL FAVOR of the Lord Jesus.

Acts 16:31 - BELIEVE on the Lord Jesus and you will be saved, along with your entire household (notice the 5 steps are not listed here)

Rom 3:25 - We are made right with God when we BELIEVE that Jesus shed His blood, sacrificing His life for us.

Rom 3:26 - And He is entirely fair and just in this present time when He declares sinners to be right in His sight because they BELIEVE in Jesus.

Rom 4:24 - It was for us, too, assuring us that God will also declare us to be righteous if we BELIEVE in God...

Rom 10:4 - All who BELIEVE in Him are made right with God.

Rom 10:9 - For if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and BELIEVE in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved (I am not sure how it can be more clear)

Rom 10:14 - But how can they call on Him to save them unless they BELIEVE in Him?

1Cor 1:21 - Since God in His wisdom saw to it that the world would never find Him through human wisdom, he has used our foolish preaching to save all who BELIEVE.

1 Cor 15:2 - And it is this Good News that saves you if you firmly BELIEVE it...

Gal 3:22 - but the scriptures have declared that we are all prisoners of sin, so the only way to receive God's promise is to BELIEVE in Jesus Christ.

1 Tim 1:16 - But that is why God had mercy on me, so that Christ Jesus could use me as a prime example of His great patience with even the worst sinners. Then others will realize that they, too, can BELIEVE in Him and receive eternal life.

Heb 4:3 - For only we who BELIEVE can enter His place of rest...

1Jn 3:23 - And this is His COMMANDMENT: We must BELIEVE in the name of His Son, Jesus Christ, and LOVE ONE ANOTHER, just as He commanded us.

1Jn 5:5 - And the ones who will win this battle against the world are the ones who BELIEVE that Jesus is the Son of God.

1Jn 5:13 - I write this to you who BELIEVE in the Son of God, so that you may know you have eternal life.

Now, I ask anyone in all good conscience, if Baptism were ABSOLUTELY necessary, don't you think that all of the inspried writings abve would include baptism with the word believe? Would not God want that to be unequivocally true if it was required for His Grace to be bestowed on us? Yes it would. And He did not because it is not required.

We are saved BY GRACE through FAITH (that He gives us!) It is FREE! Praise God for His awesome gift! And I praise Him that it is Free and unending!

I am not esposing the position that people should not be baptized. I believe it is a command and that it is a SIN if you do not follow God's teaching in this area.

Maybe it is all semantics, but this is what I believe to be true.

Grace and Peace.

Jeff

Jeffy believes that ALL of those faith passages TRUMPS the DIRECT COMMANDMENT of Jesus as defended by Peter and Paul who is TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT to pervert the truth as Peter warned him. Because he speaks as an AUTHORITY and is a MINISTER I feel no softness in saying that he needs to return to Christ and His Word and disavow being a Zwinglian. One "grape at a time" Jeff.

Jeff MISQUOTES--

Rom 10:4 - All who BELIEVE in Him are made right with God.

Paul was that OLD fellow who has been superceded by ACUs.

---For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. Rom 10:4

You have made a Zwinglian Cult mistake. Righteousness or Justification does not explain all of the process. If Jesus speaks to us and we say, "I believe that" then we are justified in His eyes because He asked no more. When Moses was told to do anything he was justified EVERY TIME when he obeyed God's commandment EVERY TIME. BUT, regeneration is not justification

--- For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them. Rom 10: 5
--- But the righteousness which is of faith speaketh on this wise, Say not in thine heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above:) Rom 10: 6
--- Or, Who shall descend into the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.) Rom 10: 7
--- But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; Rom 10: 8

Jeff, you truly need to understand that Paul here and in 1 Cor 10 is speaking of feasting with DEMONS. That was the MUSICAL IDOLATRY at Mount Sinai where they repudiated God's BOOK OF THE COVENANT which was a covenant of grace.

Oops, Jeff: not faith only but:

--- That if thou shalt CONFESS with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. Rom 10: 9

---FOR (another cycle) with the heart man believeth UNTO righteousness; and with the mouth CONFESSION is made UNTO salvation. Rom 10: 10

-------For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. Rom 10: 11

So, you see, verse 11 defines BELIEVETH as including CONFESSION to remove the SHAME.

The MESSAGE is not to repudiate BAPTISM but to show that both Jew and Gentile are justified by faith WHEN they CONFESS.

--- For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. Rom 10: 12

Oops! Jeff, now we must CALL ON THE NAME of Jesus which is not "Father, Son and Holy Spirit."

--- For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord Rom 10: 13

Ooops! here goes the Zwinglian FAITH ONLY which makes sense only to those who believe that they are PREDESTINATED and cannot tolerate any mention of baptism:

--- How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? Rom 10: 14

And, Jeff, a preacher does not FILL A PULPIT: he is a HERALD or public crier, a publisher of the GOOD NEWS to those who have not heard GOOD NEWS.

Now, consistent with Paul's other statements related to GETTING INTO CHRIST, we need baptism here BUT Paul didn't mention baptism. But, don't get smug just yet.

Baptism existed in many forms but it meant to TAKE THE NAME of your MASTER TEACHER. You called on the name of Tentmaker Paul and took his name or he WOULD NOT teach you the secrets. In the same way, you must call on the name of Jesus (not Father, Son and Spirit) before He will give you A holy spirit or a clear conscience by sprinkling your HEART free of sins and sinfulness.

When Paul was commissioned as a DISCIPLE of the Lord identified as "Jesus of Nazareth whom thou persecutest" he had to call on His Name:

----And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and WASH away thy SINS, CALLING on the NAME of the LORD. Acts 22:16

So we have an inspired apostle writing that baptism is the time and place where Christ WASHES AWAY YOUR SINS before you can be enrolled even as a tentmaker apprentice. The same Paul who wrote Romans, you understand.

The same Peter who put repentance and baptism PRIOR to the forgiveness of sins and receiving A holy spirit also wrote about CALLING ON THE NAME OF THE LORD:

-----Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 1 Peter 3:21RSV

-----(That, by the way, is what baptism pictures for us: In baptism we show that we have been saved from death and doom by the resurrection of Christ; not because our bodies are washed clean by the water but because in being baptized we are turning to God and ASKING HIM to CLEANSE our HEARTS from SIN.) 1 Peter 3:21LIV

The word "answer" in the KJV means to inquire or demand, seek or ask for.

Now, Jeff, too bad that you have TURNED TO ZWINGLI and TURNED AWAY from Jesus, Peter, Paul and 1500 years of church history. The arrogance of being predestinated is EXACTLY what Paul is speaking about in Romans 10: "Father Abraham stands by the gates of hell and will not let ANY JEW go in."

Surprise, both the arrogantly-presumed predestinated Jews and the nature worshiping Gentiles (music teams) are now under A SYSTEM OF FAITH which is contrasted with A SYSTEM OF LAW (music as the MARK, predestination, tithing).

Peter says that Pentecost fulfilled Joel who prophesied:

And everyone who calls on the name of the LORD will be saved; for on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there will be deliverance, as the LORD has said, among the survivors whom the LORD calls. Joel 2:32

When the believers at Pentecost asked what must we do, Peter fulfilled Joel and told them to call upon the name of the Lord in baptism.

Jeff, what you quoted isn't even FAITHFUL to the NIV:

----Rom 10:4 - All who BELIEVE in Him are made right with God.

THE HOLY SPIRIT WORD READS:

---For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. Rom 10:4

That is true, believers come out from UNDER the law as a MEANS of gaining God's remission of sins and a right relationship. But we have shown that Paul recycles the process and includes confession and calling on the Name of the Lord which any Jewish schoolboy would understand as meaning Baptism. And so say Paul and Peter.

You have no AUTHORITY to be a "minister" and tell people something which flatly contradicts the prophecy of baptism, the DIRECT COMMAND of Jesus Christ, the command of Peter, the practice of Peter and the definition of Paul that baptism is the time and place where we ASK GOD for the gift of A holy spirit. I just don't see how one can be so sure of some kind of Holy Spirit Baptism. But, not for me to say but one DIRECT COMMAND of Lord Jesus TRUMPS Jeff and all of the "picked out of the book" passages which speak of faith.

You have a perfect right to believe what you believe but if you are a "minister" (slave) and repudiate the Bible and history based views of the church of Christ then I am warning you by the authority of the name of Jesus Christ that you are a "hidden or slinking one" which Jesus defined as the child of their father the Devil who was defined as a liar because "he speaks on his own."

Ken Sublett

I thought I might have gotten away from your long expositorys, but I guess I did not.

First of all I am not a "minister" and my views are mine only. Don't berate me by assuming I am and have influence over others with my opinion. I do not.

Secondly, my point was that I do not believe that baptism is the work that saves us. Our faith, and yes it does have to be confessed, OBVIOUSLY, how else would it be known, is what we are saved by.

Thirdly, I said in my post that I do believe that we need to be baptized because Jesus commanded it.

Again, I have a differing opinion from you. Educated me if you wish, but do not call me names. I did not call any names in my post. I merely posted my opinion. Why don't you practice a little love for others rather than just "telling off" those that disagree with you. You will NEVER be able to be heard by those you disagree with if you tell them they are a "hidden or slinking one", a "shild of the Devil" and a "liar".

Also, Ken, I am not claiming "authority" as you apparatly do. I am just stating my humble opinion.

Grace and Peace.

Jeff

Jeff Wrote: I thought I might have gotten away from your long expositorys, but I guess I did not. First of all I am not a "minister" and my views are mine only. Don't berate me by assuming I am and have influence over others with my opinion. I do not.

Ken Thought that Jeff was a "missionary" was the Prayer Minister and Men's Minister. Must have misread the Broadway Billing. Sorry about that.

Jeff wrote: Secondly, my point was that I do not believe that baptism is the work that saves us. Our faith, and yes it does have to be confessed, OBVIOUSLY, how else would it be known, is what we are saved by.

Ken thought: that no one in history ever thought that baptism was A WORK WHICH SAVES US.

Jeff Wrote: I am a Church of Christ member and my children will be baptized when they are ready, however, I do not and will not condemn or judge someone who has not been baptized.

---------NOR DO I FEEL that baptism "saves" us
---------and I will give several references in the Bible where it says simply believe and you will be saved. They far outnumber the passages where baptism and belief are linked.

Ken thought: that this is identical to the BAPTIST view and is neither Biblical nor historical. What saves us is whatever Lord Jesus says saves us: If He had put salvation in barnyard water I would jump in. The Invisible Deity had the power to put HIS SPIRIT NATURE AND POWER in a humble, poor man Who would be condemned as a criminal. Who, then am I or Zwingli to DENY Jesus the power to put salvation in a human act which IS NOT A WORK.

Jeff wrote: My personal stance and interpretation is that we are baptized BECAUSE we believe and do that in obedience,

Ken thought: that Baptists teach that we are baptized BECAUSE we believe; that baptism DOES NOT save us as Jeff believes and that FAITH ONLY passages prove it to Jeff and to Baptists.

Jeff wrote: not because in doinit we "earn" our salvation. Paul says that it is a FREE gift from God and that we even get our faith from Him to believe in Him as well.

Ken thought: that Baptists teach that because it is a FREE gift baptism has nothing to do with it. All Calvinists believe that WE GET OUR FAITH FROM HIM TO BELIEVE IN HIM AS WELL. Calvin taught that it was evil to STUDY THE WORD in order to gain faith but Paul said that faith comes from hearing the Words of Christ. Baptist believe that IF you believe it is because God has PUT THE FAITH into you. Therefore, Baptist FAITH ONLY is not a one-step plan of salvation: rather, faith is the free gift from God which ENABLES you to believe which ENABLES the predestinated to be saved and DISABLES others.

Jeff wrote: Thirdly, I said in my post that I do believe that we need to be baptized because Jesus commanded it.

Jesus Commanded and Peter taught: that we are baptized to BE SAVED or to HAVE OUR SINS REMITTED. Peter says that BAPTISM SAVES because it is the time and place where we REQUEST a sprinkled conscience or consciousness or A holified (purified) human spirit.

Paul thought identically to Peter and Jesus: Heb.10:22 Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.

Heb.12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

Since our HEARTS or SPIRITS cannot be washed, Jesus commanded that to be part of the NEW COVENANT (Faith or Grace) HE must personally baptize or sprinkle our consciousness from sin. When we minimize water baptism which WASHES THE BODY we simply repudiate His appointment to cleanse us internally.

Sorry, Jeff, but you sound like the new Baptists filling the pulpits of most mega-churches. I would hope that you would refer to your ORGANIZATIONAL CHART and not get mean when people try to define the Biblical and almost uniquely church of Christ faithfulness to the teachings of the New Testament which have to be EXPLAINED AWAY by Zwinglians. At the end-times it is quite logical that what looks like a prophecy-fulfilling band of locusts have set the goal of taking pay from churches of Christ but acting as "hidden ones who slink away" and fly under false colors. I am glad that you are not one of those.

Ken Sublett

First of all, please don't refute me with the "that is how the Baptists think" line. It is tiresome and boring. I am not a "Baptist" or "Church of Christ" for that matter, I am a member of the Body of Christ. I guess calling me a "Baptist" for your purposes is another attempt to "slap me in the face" with your opinion.

But to higher ground.

You still have not answered my main question: If Baptism was ESSENTIAL for salvation as you say, then why is it not mentioned in all the "believe then saved" contexts in the Bible?

And I will quote you another scripture from Hebrews 10, Verse 39: ...But we are not like those who turn their backs on God and seal their fate. We have FAITH that ASSURES our SALVATION.

Basically, you are saying that Baptism is a condition for salvation, if you do not do it, then you are not saved....right? Of course it includes the other 4 steps. You certainly have to follow them ALL.

How do you reconcile that with Ephesians 2:8 - God saved you by His special favor when you BELIEVED. And you can't take credit for this; it is a GIFT from God.

And verse 9 - Salvation is not a reward for the good things we have done, so none of us can BOAST about it.

And verse 10 - For we are God's masterpiece. He has created us anew in Christ Jesus, so that we can do the good things He has planned for us long ago.

GOD saves us when we BELIEVE, Salvation is a GIFT from Him, not a merited thing.

ok. your turn.

Grace and Peace.

P.S. If we can stick to the discussion of the scripture please....Don't throw in references to Swinglian or Swings or Baptists please....just text if you don't mind. I, unfortunately am not a great student of History and am not bound by it or what anyone else has done in History. Just the Facts Ken.

Jeff: You still have not answered my main question: If Baptism was ESSENTIAL for salvation as you say, then why is it not mentioned in all the "believe then saved" contexts in the Bible?

Ken answers: It is CONTEXT, Jeff. The Greek Sozo means to deliver, protect, heal, preserve, save yourself, do well, be made whole. If Paul says "stay with the ship" and you will be saved he is not speaking of REGENERATION.

FAITH is not defined in most passages in connection with REMISSION OF SINS. "Save yourselves from THIS crooked generation" is not the COMMAND to REGENERATE your SPIRIT or MIND.

However, Jesus made BEING SAVED the result of BELIEF and BAPTISM. Peter, carried out that ABSOLUTE DEMAND and defined SOZO to those who had FAITH on the day of Pentecost as THE REMISSION OF SINS.

Jeff's Passage;

------Ephesians 2:8 - God saved you by His special favor when you BELIEVED. And you can't take credit for this; it is a GIFT from God.

Ken asks: Jeff WHERE do you get those proof-texts? The KJV reads:

-----Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye SAVED through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the GIFT of God.

The SUBJECT is SAVED and the fact is that IT IS A GIFT. The subject is NOT faith. Remember that the SAME WRITER said that "faith comes by hearing the WORD." Sure, the Word is a gift but Christ isn't interested in you if you don't JUSTIFY HIM by believing that He speaks as God.

Further, SALVATION is not something you can DO by works because then God would OWE you salvation as a WAGE for your WORKS of which you could BOAST:

------Ephesians 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

I have never heard anyone say that they could EXPEND ENERGY and EARN their salvation as a WAGE of which they could BOAST. I have read MANY Calvinists who BOAST that they are predestinated and are baptized as a CONFESSION of that. Their almost cocky "if you died this moment...." is their BOAST when Paul was always buffeting his body to keep it from overpowering HIS spirit.

The GENTILES as the SUBJECT of this passage (and not regeneration) were once WITHOUT God in the world. Paul is not telling alien sinners what to do to be saved. These people are ALREADY IN Christ and the same Paul says that they were baptized INTO Christ as the meaning of the Spirit promise made TO Abraham by the Spirit of Christ (1 Peter 1:11).

Therefore, Paul is speaking of RECONCILING those who are ALREADY IN THE BODY of Christ. In almost all or perhaps all of your "faith" passages Paul is speaking to BAPTIZED BELIEVERS who must nevertheless be justified and saved or made whole on a daily basis based on their FAITH rather than their nature to be hostile racially or by how many PRAISE SONGS they could sing. Scripture never answers the question "What must I do to be saved" by telling them to just have faith.

Paul preached the gospel to include those FAR AWAY as the Gentiles who were far away geographically and alienated from the Jews. Peter, Paul and others took the gospel to those FAR AWAY and baptized them to make ALL NEAR to God by being IN Christ.

--- Ephesians 2:13 But now, IN Christ Jesus, ye who sometimes were far off are MADE NIGH by the blood of Christ.

Now, why not stop there? Why not say that they were MADE NIGH the instant Christ shed His blood? But, that would be changing the SUBJECT and stopping Paul before he finished speaking.

--- Ephesians 2:14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
--- Ephesians 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the ENMITY, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
--- Ephesians 2:16 And that he might RECONCILE both unto God IN one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:

Why not stop there? Why not insist that we WERE reconciled UNTO GOD by being IN one body simply by being crucified? Don't stop paul!

--- Ephesians 2:17 And came and preached peace to you which were AFAR OFF, and to them that were nigh.
--- Ephesians 2:18 For THROUGH him we both have ACCESS by one Spirit unto the Father

Remember all of the symbolism: we receive A holy spirit, we ask God for a Clear Consciousness or co-perception. Paul now implicates what CHRIST THE SPIRIT does as the CIRCUMCISION OF THE HEART so that BOTH Jew and Gentile can be One IN Christ and Paul said that we are BAPTIZED INTO CHRIST as the meaning of FAITH in Gal 3:26, 27.

--- Col 2:11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made WITHOUT HANDS, in putting off the body of the SINS of the flesh BY the CIRCUMCISION of Christ:
------------Col 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through THE FAITH of the OPERATION of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

This does not speak of FAITH ONLY but baptism means that we have faith in the OPERATION OF GOD who CUTS OFF the old body of sin WHEN we obey "that form of doctrine" which identifies with when God raised Jesus from the dead. Faith in Faith has no value unless we have faith that God can wash us, sprinkle us, cleanse our UNHOLY spirit and give us a HOLY spirit or give us a clear conscience or co-perception. There simply is NO FAITH passage which is said to do those things.

If Jesus says "jump off the building" then we are JUSTIFIED when we jump by faith. When we are REGENERATED by GOD ONLY and have been saved 20 years, if we hear Christ speaking to us in the Bible and telling us to help the poor then we are "saved by faith" or "made whole" or given good spiritual health WHEN our faith obeys. Being married 45 years does not mean that I am NOT justified or APPROVED by my wife WHEN I do what pleases her or prove my trust in her. However, we were MARRIED and became FAMILY at one point in time. Sure it was based on faith but faith didn't make us married.

So, stack up all of the "faith" passages you wish but the FOUNDATION teaching of Jesus confirmed by Peter and Paul is that those who do not have faith are damned already. However, those who are saved MUST believe and be baptized. If you try to CUT THE GROUND out from under baptism then you cut the ground from under that FOUNDATION DEMAND and your faith is just "I believe because I believe."

I don't judge and you MUST not judge others, but Jesus said of John's baptism that the elite "rejected the counsel of God for their lives in NOT being baptized." Therefore, NOT BEING BAPTIZED is not what damns you: what damsn you is REJECTING the direct commands of Lord Jesus Christ.

If we say "I don't believe baptism saves or remits sins" when Jesus said that it did, this means that you have to TAKE THE PUNISHMENT for others because you have PASSED JUDGMENT based on your own urge to NOT want to believe that God pokes out eyes, plugs up ears and that "Little Jesus meek and mild" will come like a Lamb but with a rod of iron." There is nothing more evil in God's eyes than repudiating His clear statements of divine truth.

If I just tell you what the Bible says and DO NOT swoop in and pluck up seed like a raven then I rest on Jesus Who said:

---Jn.12:47 And if any man hear my words, and BELIEVE NOT, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to SAVE the world.
-------Jn.12:48 He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my WORDS, hath one that judgeth him: THE WORD that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

The Words of Jesus the Son which He repeated directly from the FATHER said that salvation follows BELIEVETH AND BAPTISM. Peter understood that to mean that SAVED means REMISSION OF SINS. The words FAITH or SAVED throughout the epistles DOES NOT connect with REMISSION OF SINS unless specificied

Now, you should not use the out of context and OFF THE SUBJECT words of Paul to tell Jesus that YOU JUST CANNOT MEAN WHAT YOU SAY.

Ken Sublett

Francia and Jeff,

If we are not saved by works, then we are not saved by faith.

Jhn 6:28 Then said they unto him, What shall we
do, that we might work the works of God?

Jhn 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them,
This is the work of God, that ye believe on him
whom he hath sent.

Faith is a work. A work of God.

Yes, baptism is a work, but it is a work of God, not man.

Prayerfully Onward,

Kevin

Jeff Wrote: I am a Church of Christ member and my children will be baptized when they are ready, however, I do not and will not condemn or judge someone who has not been baptized.
---------NOR DO I FEEL that baptism "saves" us
---------and I will give several references in the Bible where it says
---------simply believe and you will be saved.
---------They far outnumber the passages where baptism and belief are linked.

Jeff's Proof Text also used by Baptists:

--------Gal 3:22 - but the scriptures have declared that we are all prisoners of sin, so the only way to receive God's promise is to BELIEVE in Jesus Christ.

Ken Blathers: Jeff, you just MADE THAT VERSE UP. The NIV is closer:

--------Gal 3:22 But the Scripture declares that the whole WORLD is a prisoner of sin, so that WHAT was PROMISED, being given THROUGH faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to THOSE WHO BELIEVE.

The CHURCH as the visible Kingdom of God which IS WITHIN YOU is the spiritual fulfillment of the COVENANT OF GRACE made with Abraham.

--Gen 26:4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;
--26:5 Because that
-----Abraham obeyed my voice,
-----and kept my charge,
-----my commandments,
-----my statutes,
-----and my laws.

THIS is what Paul meant when he claims that Abraham was justified by FAITH. But Paul's context was that people are justified by FAITH which obeys BEFORE and AFTER the LAW OF MOSES. Therefore, Levitical musicians, presiding priests in the holy place, performed prayers and tithing ARE NOT BY FAITH but based on LAW.

Believing is just as much a work as baptism.
--- Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. Rom 3:20
--- But now the righteousness of God WITHOUT the LAW is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Rom 3:21
--- Even the righteousness of God which is by faith OF JESUS Christ unto all and upon all them that believe;
--- for there is no difference: Rom 3:22

Baptism is not according to THE LAW OF MOSES. Rather, baptism is an act of FAITH because LAW cannot give life.

--- For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Rom 3:23

So, you see the subject is not FAITH ONLY but a system of Faith.

Since the Gentiles were never under the Law, and the Law could not justify, both Jew and Gentile are under Grace. However, grace is the power to obey God's will.

--- "being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is IN Christ Jesus;" Rom. 3:24

FAITH is not personal belief without obedience: rather, FAITH is a SYSTEM OF FAITH as opposed to A SYSTEM OF LAW:

--- But after that FAITH IS COME, we are no longer under a schoolmaster. Rom 3:25

FAITH ONLY is never said to put one INTO Christ where redemption is found.

--- FOR ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. Gal 3:26

--- FOR as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have PUT ON Christ. Gal 3:27

You CANNOT put on Christ by FAITH ONLY.

Baptists interject ANOTHER COVENANT between Law and the "PAULINE GOSPEL." Therefore, they insist that Jesus didn't MEAN all nations were to be baptized as the JEWS were on Pentecost. However, Paul declared that one of the meanings of being IN CHRIST is

--- Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one IN Christ Jesus.

And the PROMISE OF THE SPIRIT was not the Plunkett "baptism of the Holy Spirit." Remembering that Paul and John both proclaimed that the testimony of the prophets was the SPIRIT OF CHRIST.

--- GAL 3:29 And if ye be Christs, THEN are ye ABRAHAMS seed (children), and heirs according to THE PROMISE.

--26:5 Because that
-----ABRAHAM obeyed my voice,
-----and kept my charge,
-----my commandments,
-----my statutes,
-----and my laws

Sorry about that Jeff, but when someone puts ONE DROP of black ink into a glass of WHITE milk it takes a chemist and hours of labor to get it back out. I simply don't know how to tell you that being a raven picking seed can do great damage when it can swoop into Romans 10:4 or Galatians 3:22 without getting "wet" by the baptism word. I know that the preachers TAUGHT you how to do that but in all kindness it is wrong, wrong, wrong to take isolated parts of the Scriptural DNA and cut and splice it make ANOTHER JESUS AND ANOTHER GOSPEL.

While the Pulpit fillers of mega-temples LUST to be God-like and lay hands on Baptists and save them, the Baptist view is almost as LATTER DAY as Mormonism. Their ADDED COVENANT which does not apply to you and their ZWINGLIAN repudiation of the clear teachings of the New Testament means that you simply cannot MERGE with them or Catholics. And indeed, the only way YOU will ever merge with BAPTISTS is that you become a Baptist in spirit (Re: Max Lucado's confession) but get paid by ASLEEP church of Christ PAYING MEMBERS until YOU conform to THEIR pattern. No Baptist is ever going to go ECUMENICAL with you except on THEIR TERMS. In that, they are better served by their dogmaticians where MINIMAL LOYALTY AND HONESTY is that you defend those who HIRE you.

The only authority that I have hopes that I will never use as proof text the phrase: "I believe" or "I think." I CAN be a prophet if I quote the WHOLE truth of Christ and am able to say: "Thus Saith The Lord." That is the meaning of prophesing which Paul insisted replace singing self-compositions out of THEIR OWN Spirit.

Ken Sublett

Ken.

First of all, I did not make the verse up. I was quoting from the New Living translation which I am sure you can rail about, but for the sake of succinctness, please do not. It is saying the same thing.

Secondly, I will say once again: I am a layperson at my church, I do not get PAID by my church ONE PENNY. In fact, I spend an inordinate amount of my time serving the Church in various capacities i.e.: worship ministry, men's ministry (of which I am not the ministry leader, was but not is), and the prayer ministry of which I am the ministry chairman. I am not WASTING God's or anyone elses money in this regard. So, albiet we agree to disagree, i am not "sowing discord" at my church and getting paid for it. My mission trip to Peru was paid for by ME.

On to more pertenant items.

I understand your predicament. I have none. Baptism is a work where as accepting Jesus as my Savior is not.

How, with your rational, do you justify God saving Cornelius before he was baptized? I am sure, because it is an age old question, that you have an answer for that one.

But, in your last post you did not have a reply for Ephesians 2:8-10. That was my main point in that post. Please answer mym response i my previous post with regard to that scripture. It seems pretty plain to me what God means there, but I know you have a different idea.....I am certain of it.

Grace and Peace.

jeff

You do have an insurmountable problem unless Plunkett is right and you HAVE been baptized by the Holy Spirit "person."

Baptism has the direct command of Lord Jesus Christ backing it and if you reject His words you reject God. All of your WORKS-ORIENTED effort to SHUT THE MOUTH OF THE INCARNATE GOD OF THE UNIVERSE can never wipe away the FOUNDATION PRINCIPLE and ONLY principle upon which Jesus said that your sins would be washed in His blood of which baptism is 'that form of doctrine.'

Your probleam is that you don't have a CLUE except from
the Baptists about:

"Accepting Jesus as your personal savior." Just fabricated.

FAITH means that you don't try to twist and turn: you just BECOME A DOER of what you BELIEVE. No, Baptism is NOT A WORK of the Law of Moses, of human merit: it takes more energy (ergs) to believe than to be baptized: if the baptistry is HOT and others BAPTIZE YOU you might actually get ERGS or energy from the process. You have already spent a hundred times as much WORK telling Jesus He isn't the final authority than it took me in that drinkable creek in Alabama 60 years ago.

Your Jesus is NOT my Jesus: your religion is NOT my religion: your problem with trying to degrade the direct command of Jesus and replace it with "Just accepting Jesus" is deep spiritual doodoo.
==============================================

----Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool. Isaiah 1:18

----If ye be (1) willing AND (2) obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land: Isaiah 1:19

----But if ye REFUSE and REBEL (disobey), ye shall be devoured with the sword: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it (Heb: Dabar; Greek: Logos). Isaiah 1:20
=====================================================

The same Spirit of Christ who inspired Isaiah showed how this would be fulfilled:

Mark 16:16 He that believeth AND is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be DAMNED.

The prophecy was WILLING and OBEDIENT
Jesus defined this as BELIEVING and BAPTIZED

Being DEVOURED BY THE SWORD is BEING DAMNED.

Your are in deep danger because:

----THE MOUTH OF THE LORD HATH SPOKEN IT.
----AND My Words (not Jeff's) will Judge you.

You have absolutely declared that Isaiah, Jesus, Peter and Paul MUST abandon their position in favor of YOUR faith in your faith.
===============================================


---And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the FIRST BEGOTTEN of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and WASHED us from our sins in his own blood, Re.1:5

WE HAVE SEEN THIS AS:
------Salvation
------Remission of Sins
------Spirit sprinkled from an evil conscience
------Spiritual circumcision of God.

"Accepting Jesus" whatever that nonsesense means does NOT WASH away your sins in His own blood.

----And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen. Re 1:6
============================================

Just ACCEPTING Jesus as your PERSONAL Savior is PRIDE just refusing to accept the Will of the Lord and believing that your just-made-up PATTERN is BETTER than the one Jesus died to give you.

Accepting or believing or twisting and turning HAS NOT gotten you washed in the blood, I fear.

============================================

Say goodbye, Jeff, I have days and nights, seven days a week of teaching backed up: I have told you what Jesus told you. The GOSPEL has been preached and I must dust off and move out into the world--for free.

Ken

Cornelius was a GODFEARER and already a worshipper of God and God heard his prayers. Therefore, FAITH ONLY did not excuse him from being baptized for the remission of sin and getting INTO Christ.

----"THERE was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of the band called the Italian band, Acts 10:1

----"A devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway. Acts 10:2

Eusebes (g2152) yoo-seb-ace'; from 2095 and 4576; well- reverent, i.e. pious: - devout, godly.

----"He lodgeth with one Simon a tanner, whose house is by the sea side: he shall tell thee WHAT THU OUGHTEST TO DO. Acts 10:6

When Peter was called to go tell him what HE MUST DO,

----"Immediately therefore I sent to thee; and thou hast well done that thou art come. Now therefore are we all here present before God, to hear all things that are COMMANDED THEE OF GOD. Acts 10:33

Peter noted that the SUPERNATURAL APPEARANCE was only to chosen WITNESSES. This witness was never to wash away sins. Rather, tongues were always SIGNS of the supernatural power of the one PREACHING and not God's approval of the participant. No man ever spoke in tongues outside of the reach or touch of an apostle: therefore Cornelius is too late as authority for the claimed BAPTISM OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. We have no real evidence that ANY WOMAN ever spoke in tongues anywhere unless it was at Corinth and Paul said: "Stop it." Therefore, Cornelius does not NEGATE the direct command of Lord Jesus Christ Who put the total authority of the Godhead IN HIS NAME to have sins remitted at baptism.

----"Not to all the people, but unto WITNESSES chosen before of God, even to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead. Acts 10:41

----"And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that IT IS HE which was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead. Acts 10:42

----"To him give all the prophets witness, that THROUGH HIS NAME [Through means "the channel of an act."]
------whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. Acts 10:43

----"While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. Acts 10:44

While Peter was still speaking the Holy Ghost fell on all who heard the word. Those of the circumcision were astonished. Why? Why, because the Italian Band probably spoke Latin but the VERY CRITICAL Jews heard them praise God. Remember, that AT THE FIRST the Jews spoke KNOWN LANGUAGES and the pilgrims recognized THEIR OWN LANGUAGE. One suspects that the Jews were astonished because they heard Italians praising God in Hebrew or Aramaic.

Whatever the SIGN to the Jews who doubted that Gentiles should be baptized, Peter had not yet told Cornelius WHAT HE MUST DO. Therefore, being convinced that the Gentiles were not considered by God to be unclean, Peter was forced to relent and tell Cornelius what he told those on the day of Pentecost:

----"Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? Acts 10:47

----"And he commanded them to be baptized IN THE NAME OF THE LORD. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days. Acts 10:48

FLASH BACK TO ACTS 10:43

To him give all the prophets witness, that THROUGH HIS NAME [Through means "the channel of an act."]
------whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. Acts 10:43

THE PREMISES RESTATED:
================================================================
Peter would tell Cornelius WHAT HE MUST DO.

Those who BELIEVED would receive remission of sins THROUGH HIS NAME.

Peter told them to be baptized IN THE NAME OF THE LORD.

This is identical to Pentecost: there, the evidence was a broken or pricked heart and Peter told them what they must do: repent and be baptized IN THE NAME OF JESUS.

Therefore, as the SUPERNATURAL WITNESS to Peter about unclean animals was to convince him that he should preach to the Gentiles; the Italians PRAISING GOD probably in Hebrew absolutely convinced him that Gentiles could have THEIR SINS REMITTED.

The CHANNEL of remission was not FAITH ONLY but THROUGH HIS NAME. The NAME OF JESUS is invoked ONLY AT BAPTISM.

Some mighty things also happened to Paul also but in the end he was told that WASHING AWAY OF SINS was THROUGH THE CHANNEL of the NAME of the Lord AT baptism:

----"And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, CALLING ON THE NAME OF THE LORD. Acts 22:16

No one who has been saved in the sense of HAVING THEIR SINS REMITTED has done so by FAITH ONLY but by Calling on the Name of the Lord which is only at BAPTISM.

Ken Sublett

Mark 16:16---Yes, it's still there!

I would be careful basing anything in my faith on the last 11 verses of Mark 16. Most ancient manuscripts do not contain those verses, and the opinion of most scholars is that they were added to the book after the book was finished. If you want to say Baptism is essential for salvation, you can find other verses, in more sure passages of Scripture to back that up.

Spurly

There are three synoptic gospel accounts and John did a summary to refute some of the prevailing views. There was a reason for three synoptic accounts: so that truth deniers could not GET AWAY with distortion.

The BAPTISM issue is covered by other letters. Here is what PRESENT TRANSLATORS BELIEVE so don't try to INFILTRATE AND DIVERT:

---"And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. Mk 16:15

---"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. Mk 16:16

THE MATTHEW PARALLEL

---"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Matt 28:19

---"Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen. Matt 28:20

The NAME of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is Jesus or as prophesied, Jehovah- Saved. Peter heard Jesus issue the Great Commission and HE did not agree with KEVIN that this was a debatable issue.

THE LUKE PARALLEL: Luke carefully researched what he did not know. So, apparently THERE WERE NO Kevin's throwing fire.

---"And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved (necessary and binding) Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: Luke 24:46

---"And that repentance and REMISSION of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. Luke 24:47

THE ACTS FULFILLMENT

Paul preached REPENTANCE and the same REMISSION of Sins:

---"Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Acts 2:37

---"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be BAPTIZED every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the REMISSION of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. Acts 2:38

The Bible uses many terms related to salvation but NONE of these are accomplished by FAITH ONLY or without baptism.

The church believed and taught this (generally) until Zwingli in about 1500. John Smyth who called his group "the church of Christ" rejected BAPTISMAL REGENERATION because the Catholics baptized infants and FAITH was not required. Even so, later BAPTISTS took the idea that no one should be baptized WITHOUT FAITH and made it mean that Baptism was not important.

Kevin you have teetered over into heresy by encouraging people to NOT believe what Jesus commanded, the Apostles heard, the Apostles including Paul practiced and the world believed until CALVINISM and ZWINGLISM who was perverted by Baptists into BELIEVER'S BAPTISM which is identical to PAGAN BAPTISMS.

You should understand that the GREAT AMERICAN AWAKENING out of Witchcraft and George Whitefield's THEATRICALLY TRAINED preaching ARTIFICIALLY PRODUCED charismatic fits which earlier would have gotten you burned, to convince people that the Spirit was jiving aroung inside. All groups were divided and presently there are 146 ORGANIZED BAPTIST DENOMINATIONS because they were alert to PICK UP THE PIECES then and later at Caneridge.

FAITH ONLY is defended with a vengeance because it is THEIR sign of spiritual superiority and the ability, therefore, to repudiate Jesus and get by with it--just like the music and tithing blasphemy.

But we have heard this before somewhere: "Hath God truly said..."?

Kevin, did you follow the PURPOSE DRIVEN CULT which says that it is ok to infiltrate, divert and even lie to SABOTAGE the POLLS to commit a truly SATANIC LIE?

Ken Sublett

All I was saying when I pointed out that Mark 16:9-20 is a passage of Scripture that is not universally accepted as part of the canon was that there are other passages of scripture on baptism that will accomplish the same goal of showing that baptism is important in the salvation process.

You helped me make my point by pointing out the other verses. I was not dissing baptism, I was just encourageing caution when it comes to basing any doctrine on the last part of Mark.

Thanks for your help,

Kevin

Hey, it does look like someone really hit the polls hard the other night. (I just checked them for the first time in a couple of days).

Mr. Moderator, do you know how it happened? Is there anything you can do to keep it from happening in the future?

Kevin

Spurly, I was unfair: what my main point is that Mark 16 is the passage Baptists reject and thereby PROVE that there is no PENALTY for not being baptized.

The universal message I get in the mail is that "Jesus didn't say thou shalt be damned IF thou ARE NOT baptized." Their dogma which rejects the rest of the Bible and church history RESTS on Mark 16 not being in the TRUE BIBLE.

Of course, if one is not saved or have their sins remitted they are damned already.

If they can throw away Mark 16:15-16 then they can make baptism a way to get INITIATED into THEIR church with nothing to do with SAVING you.

I'll try to read better the next time.

Ken Sublett

Hey Ken,

Thanks a lot. I should have read the next post before responding.

Kevin

It is only disputed by those who seek to corrupt the Word of God.

Do you know what the more reliable texts are that they refer to?

The Vaticanus is used by the modernists to dispute Mark 16:9 thru 16:20. Did you know that there is a space after Mark 16:8 and before the Book of Luke that is just the right amount of room for Mark 16:9 thru 16:20 to fit? Have you heard of the Chester Beatty manuscript? Did you know that it predates the Vaticanus and the Sanaiticus? Did you know that the Chester Beatty manuscript does not agree with the Vaticanus and Sanaiticus? Although the Chester Beatty manuscript has many fragments missing and does not include Mark 16, it does agree substantially with other manuscripts that do include it.

The overwhelming evidence points to the fact that Mark 16:9-20 are indeed authentic. Don't let anyone convince you otherwise.

Prayerfully Onward,

Kevin

Many people actually believe that the last twelve verses of Mark's Gospel (Mark 16:9-20, which also links baptism with salvation) are spurious and really do not belong in the Bible. People arrive at this conclusion, because most modern Bible translations either put these verses in brackets, reduce them to footnotes, or omit them altogether. To account for setting these verses apart, modern Bible editors state that "most ancient manuscripts" do not contain these verses. This is a ruse.

Modern Bible editors will not acknowledge that the majority of ancient New Testament Greek manuscripts actually DO contain these last verses. Dean John W. Burgon, a 19th-century Anglican theologian, proved beyond the shadow of a doubt the authenticity of these verses in his book entitled "The Last Twelve Verses of Mark." Burgon's extraordinary research was based on a review of thousands of ancient Greek NT mansucripts, the writings of early Church Fathers, early Bible versions, early lexicons, and other sources.

Burgon did find that two particular manuscripts, termed "Codex Sinaiticus" and "Codex Vaticanus," omitted Mark 16:9-20, among other passages as well. His research further showed that these two manuscripts were so monstrously flawed that, "It is easier to find two consecutive verses in which the two
MSS. [manuscripts] differ, the one from the other, than two consecutive verses in which they entirely agree." (For further comments on Burgon, see my review of his book at Amazon.com). From these two manuscripts then, modern Bible editors erroneously assert that "most ancient manuscripts" omit the last twelve verses of Mark. Either these editors are totally ignorant of Burgon's research or they choose to reject it.

What's worse, it's a fact that most modern NT Bible versions are based primarily on translations of Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, such as those made by Westcott and Hort in their revised Greek text of 1881 or a Greek text later sponsored by the United Bible Society. Modern NT Bible translations are not based on the Greek Received Text or Textus Receptus, as was the King James Bible.

It should be kept in mind that most modern Bible editors today are liberal scholars, many of whom are well-known skeptics who doubt the authenticity of the Bible as the infallible Word of God. Therefore, any comments that they make about ANY passage of Scripture must be taken with a grain of salt. (Recommended video: David Cloud's "The Errors of Modern Textual Criticism," available for rent in Room C).

Mention the subject of salvation, and Christians usually divide into two camps -- those who maintain that only faith is necessary and those who feel that baptism is also required. Both camps can quote Scripture to prove their points. After some biblical research, I was able to recall from my long-past childhood Sunday school days that the New Testament actually requires FOUR steps toward salvation, and they should be taken in the following order: Faith, Repentance, Confession, and Baptism. By making points from a few verses taken out of context, we can misrepresent the Truth. By taking the New Testament as a whole, we get the big picture and will not fall into error. Here are some illustrative verses from the KJV, which should make clear those requirements for salvation:

Matt. 10:32-33. "Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I also confess before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven." Christ demands a public confession from believers before He will confess them (accept them, save them) before God.

Mark 16:16. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." Alone, this verse commands faith and baptism for salvation.

Luke 13:3. "I tell you, Nay: but except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish." This verse commands that repentance leads to salvation.

John 3:16. "For God so loved the world…that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." Alone, this verse commands only faith for salvation.

Acts 2:38. "…Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." Alone, this verse commands repentance and baptism for salvation.

Acts 16:31. "And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house." Alone, this verse commands only faith for salvation.

Romans 10:9. "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." Alone, this verse commands faith and confession for salvation.

1 Peter 3:21. "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ." The verse implies that baptism saves by imitating Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection.

What proves problematic for some is that not all requirements for salvation are present in every verse that deals with salvation, as we’ve just seen. ALL the New Testament must be studied, as I said above. There are large numbers of New Testament passages that mention only faith, which naturally leads to the conclusion that only faith is required for salvation. But none of these verses can prove that baptism is not essential. Without faith, of course, all the other requirements above are worthless, for faith is the first step. In reality, these alleged “salvation-by-faith-only” passages are forms of SYNECDOCHE, a figure of speech in which a part is used to represent the whole. Much of the New Testament is concerned with the difficult task of getting people to believe on Jesus as Lord in the first place. Once that’s accomplished, it’s much easier for the believer to follow through with the remaining steps toward salvation. Thus John 3:16 is a synecdoche in that he who takes the first step toward salvation by believing in Jesus will believe the whole Gospel and its remaining requirements for salvation. Another synecdoche is Acts 16:31 above which concerns the Philippian jailer’s baptism (see the first essay in this forum for the complete discussion).

Some study Bibles or Bible commentaries distort the Truth about baptism through denominational bias. The Thomas Nelson King James Study Bible is one such publication that emphatically denies that baptism has anything at all to do with salvation, that it is neither efficacious nor regenerative. Lengthy comments to that effect accompany each applicable verse. Specifically concerning Acts 2:38 above, this Bible’s editors further imply that Peter’s phraseology is misleading, so they reword it in a footnote to minimize baptism. That’s understandable, because of their doctrinal bias, but this bias unfortunately overrules Scripture. Clinging to the faith-only tenet, they see baptism as merely an outward sign of belief or a “statement of faith” and nothing more. Such a Bible may convince some people to refuse baptism entirely, because they’re “saved” without it, so why bother.

In conclusion, it’s important to consider everything that the Word says about any doctrine, baptism or otherwise. We cannot in all good conscience hold up isolated verses as a means to satisfy a personal doctrinal agenda. Be honest. The Scriptures require faith, repentance, confession, and baptism for salvation.

That's the fact, Dr. Crump

However, probably most of the mega-pulpits are filled by men who love to be seen of men but don't love the truth. Therefore, they define the logical steps as LEGALISTIC PATTERNISM. They insist that the God-given PATTERN is like a dress pattern: we can all pick our own fabric, colors and make modifications to fit our bodies. They will take your cloak also.

But, if I have heart surgery I would kinda like the Dr. to follow the pattern. Not because he is LEGALISTIC but because putting me to sleep BEFORE surgery seems more logical than doing it AFTER surgery. One cannot fail to see that FAITH in the Great Physician logically leads to OBEDIENCE. And those who FIGHT OBEDIENCE simply have no faith except in themselves or a false teacher.

Your "PART FOR THE WHOLE" is also important or little words which encompass GREAT THEMES would have no meaning and Paul would have to REPEAT his entire Colossian letter to the Laodiceans. Now, the SAME Paul who wrote that FAITH ONLY passage in Ephesians 2:8 upon which ZWINGLIANS rest, also wrote to the Colossians. Note the identical message:

COLOSSIANS:

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. Col 2:8

For in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. Col 2:9

And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power: Col 2:10

In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Col 2:11

Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. Col 2:12

And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh,

hath he QUICKENED together with him,

having forgiven you all trespasses; Col 2:13

Quicken is: Suzoopoieo (g4806) sood-zo-op-oy- eh'-o; from 4862 and 2227; to reanimate conjointly with (fig.): - quicken together with.

This same teaching occurs in Ephesians:

But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Ephesians 2:4

Even when we were dead in sins, hath QUICKENED us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) Ephesians 2:5

And hath raised us up together, and

made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: Ephesians 2:6

That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace, in his kindness toward us, through Christ Jesus Ephesians 2:7

For BY grace are ye saved THROUGH faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Ephesians 2:8

We are saved by GRACE but THROUGH FAITH but not faith in our faith. Rather, Our faith is in THE OPERATION OF GOD. Faith only has faith in their own faith and their miseducation comes out of the pulpits filled by BAPTIST stalking horses. They always use others to pull out their chestnuts and NEVER expose their teachings by CONFRONTING. That is why they hide, slink and "pull away" because they know that they have USURPED THE AUTHORITY OF THE BODY by invading the Holy Place and placing their angels with flaming swords to keep the LAITY out: that means that they are NICO - LAITANES: Hireling NIKE gods defeating the people.

It is FACT that they have CONSPIRED to NEVER ANSWER because THEY have become NIKE gods in the pulpits and "workshops of evil" but, in these end times God has removed His candlesticks from most churches and given the INTERNET to the lay-fishermen which is the ONLY way to WITNESS to the world before the end. Their validating MARK on their head (minds) is that they quote the Word and in their hands (Palm) which is not OPEN for the GRAFT OF GREED called the TITHE peddled by MARKING the mind with music.

Baptism sorts out HUMAN PRIDE from FAITH in God's power and promise to WASH our souls or we CANNOT be part of His kingdom and under HIS blood covenant.

Ken Sublett

Jeff,

This might be a good time to compare verses in your version of the Bible to the King James Version:

Yours:

Jn 20:31: But these are written so that you may BELIEVE that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in Him you will have eternal life.

KJV:

Jn 20:31: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

Yours:

Acts 15:11 - We BELIEVE that we are all saved in the same way, by the SPECIAL FAVOR of the Lord Jesus.

KJV:

Acts 15:11: But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

Yours:

Acts 16:31 - BELIEVE on the Lord Jesus and you will be saved, along with your entire household (notice the 5 steps are not listed here)

KJV:

Acts 16:31: And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

Yours:

Rom 3:25 - We are made right with God when we BELIEVE that Jesus shed His blood, sacrificing His life for us.

KJV:

Rom 3:25: Whom God hath set forth [to be] a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

Yours:

Rom 3:26 - And He is entirely fair and just in this present time when He declares sinners to be right in His sight because they BELIEVE in Jesus.

KJV:

Rom 3:26: To declare, [I say], at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

Yours:

Rom 4:24 - It was for us, too, assuring us that God will also declare us to be righteous if we BELIEVE in God...

KJV:

Rom 4:24: But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;

Yours:

Rom 10:4 - All who BELIEVE in Him are made right with God.

KJV:

Rom 10:4: For Christ [is] the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.

Yours:

Rom 10:9 - For if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and BELIEVE in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved (I am not sure how it can be more clear)

KJV:

Rom 10:9: That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Yours:

Rom 10:14 - But how can they call on Him to save them unless they BELIEVE in Him?

KJV:

Rom 10:14: How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

Yours:

1Cor 1:21 - Since God in His wisdom saw to it that the world would never find Him through human wisdom, he has used our foolish preaching to save all who BELIEVE.

KJV:

1Cor 1:21: For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

Yours:

1 Cor 15:2 - And it is this Good News that saves you if you firmly BELIEVE it...

KJV:

1Cor 15:2: By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.

Yours:

Gal 3:22 - but the scriptures have declared that we are all prisoners of sin, so the only way to receive God's promise is to BELIEVE in Jesus Christ.

KJV:

Gal 3:22: But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.

Gal 3:23: But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.

Gal 3:24: Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster [to bring us] unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

Gal 3:25: But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

Gal 3:26: For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

Gal 3:27: For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
(had to include 23-27, must have the whole counsel of God here)

Yours:

1 Tim 1:16 - But that is why God had mercy on me, so that Christ Jesus could use me as a prime example of His great patience with even the worst sinners. Then others will realize that they, too, can BELIEVE in Him and receive eternal life.

KJV:

1 Tim 1:16: Howbeit for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might shew forth all longsuffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting.

Yours:

Heb 4:3 - For only we who BELIEVE can enter His place of rest...

KJV:

Heb 4:3: For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.

Yours:

1Jn 3:23 - And this is His COMMANDMENT: We must BELIEVE in the name of His Son, Jesus Christ, and LOVE ONE ANOTHER, just as He commanded us.

KJV:

1Jn 3:23: And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.

Yours:

1Jn 5:5 - And the ones who will win this battle against the world are the ones who BELIEVE that Jesus is the Son of God.

KJV:

1Jn 5:5: Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?

1Jn 5:6: This is he that came by water and blood, [even] Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.
(included 5:6, again the whole counsel of God)

Yours:

1Jn 5:13 - I write this to you who BELIEVE in the Son of God, so that you may know you have eternal life.

KJV:

1Jn 5:13: These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

Prayerfully Onward,

Kevin

Jeff, after years of study and asking God to allow His Spirit to lead me and teach me (since the Word was inspired by the Holy Spirit), I have come to the same conclusion. Another thing that backs the "believers" baptism is that in Hebrews when it states that baptism doeth now also save us....it goes on to say "not the putting away of the filth of the flesh (sins) but rather the answer of a "good" conscience towards God. How can a "still" sinner have a good conscience? No, baptism is an obedience (as it was for Christ). We hear, believe, repent (at which point we are saved) and then are baptized as an obedience to God. Baptism represents the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. It is strictly symbolism. The Blood that saves us is NOT in the baptistry. Actually, Christ's blood is represented by the fruit of the vine (which we memorialize in communion). By the way, speaking of fruit of the vine. In ancient times they had no refrigeration to preserve their grape pressings. Therefore, new wine was used. From that seems to spin the theory that the wine was not alcoholic. So now, my question would be: Why did the people on the day of Pentecost (when the Holy Spirit rained down as fire on the apostles)think that the apostles were "drunk" on new wine. We get so caught up in "proving" ourselves to be the Perfect church that we want to spin the scriptures to conform to our preset beliefs.
Thank God for the freedom we can have in Christ!

Francia Engle

Jeff, after years of study and asking God to allow His Spirit to lead me and teach me (since the Word was inspired by the Holy Spirit), I have come to the same conclusion.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hay, Francia. I would like to put my ten dollars worth in right here.

The word SPIRIT in both Hebrew and Greek may be used to prove that God is pure or "wholly" Spirit rather than flesh and bones.

However, both languages define one's spirit as one's "mental disposition" as in the spirit of our mind. The spirit is the condition or disposition of our MIND.

None of the 'brethren' can bring themselves to quote verse 18 of John 14: the ANOTHER COMFORTER means a fuller of the same kind. In verse 18 Jesus said "I will come to you."

Jesus commanded baptism in the NAME (singular) of Father, Son and Spirit. The name is singular and was prophesied to be Jesus or Joshua which is Jehovah- Saved.

And when the Spirit Lord appeared to Paul He said that His name was "Jesus of Nazareth."

Paul told the Corinthians (1 Cor 2) that the Holy Spirit is the Mind of Christ to us.

Paul told the Corinthian Jews still blind to SPIRIT that Jesus was that SPIRIT in the wilderness. (2 Cor 3) and Jesus was the ROCK, Water, Manna, Pillar, etc as SPIRIT.

Peter said that the prophets were informed by the SPIRIT OF CHRIST (1 Pe 1:11)

And John said that the Testimony of Jesus is the SPIRIT of prophecy (Rev 19:10).

Paul never speaks of a THIRD MEMBER of the God family.

Therefore, Jesus said MY words are SPIRIT and LIFE. John 6:63. Therefore, if you are not getting information form the inspired Word then you had better watch out and test the spirits.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Francia: Another thing that backs the "believers" baptism is that in Hebrews when it states that baptism doeth now also save us....it goes on to say "not the putting away of the filth of the flesh (sins) but rather the answer of a "good" conscience towards God. How can a "still" sinner have a good conscience?

Ken: Peter in Acts 2:38 put things in order for those WHO ALREADY BELIEVED. He said REPENT (not yet saved) AND be baptized (not yet) FOR or IN ORDER to the remission of sins because we ASK for a clear conscience or holy spirit. Now, as a result of that God gives you a NEW or HOLY spirit in place of your old UNholy spirit filled with sin.

In Acts 3:19 after sins are blotted out you have a REFRESHING from the Lord.

Refreshing means a "man of victory" and not some supernatural sign. You have a new or A holy spirit and therefore you are a new man or woman.

Next, in 1 Peter 3:21 Peter used a word which could be "answer" in older languages but is NOW translated TO ASK FOR because the word is.

Eperotema (g1906) ep-er-o'-tay-mah; from 1905; an inquiry: - answer.

Eperotao (g1905) ep-er-o-tah'-o; from 1909 and 2065; to ask for, i.e. inquire, seek: - ask (after, questions), demand, desire, question.

Therefore, at baptism we ASK God for A holy spirit or clear conscience since we assuredly do not have a clear conscience AFTER faith but before REPENTING.

Next, a CLEAR CONSCIENCE means what A holy spirit means.

Until you have a CLEAR CONSCIENCE you cannot have a CLEAR CONSCIOUSNESS which means in the Greek:

Suneidesis (g4893) soon-i'-day-sis; from a prol. form of 4894; co- perception, i.e. moral consciousness; - conscience.

Suneido (g4894) soon-i'-do; from 4862 and 1492; to SEE COMPLETELY; used (like its prim.) only in two past tenses, respectively mean. to UNDERSTAND or become aware, and to be conscious or CLANDESTINELY INFORMED OF consider, know, be privy, be ware of.

In 2 Cor 3 Paul said that they were still BLIND and DEAF until they TURNED to Christ. He said that Christ WAS that Spirit they rejected. Therefore, A holy spirit is a clear CONSCIOUSNESS or the co-perception to be able to understand the deep things of Christ.

No one is promised this WITHOUT asking for it in water baptism which washes the body.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Francia: No, baptism is an obedience (as it was for Christ). We hear, believe, repent (at which point we are saved) and then are baptized as an obedience to God.

But Jesus said: He that believes AND is baptized SHALL be Saved.

And Peter understood this to mean that those who ALREADY BELIEVED must repent AND be baptized in order (Eis does not mean BECAUSE OF) the remission of sins.

Now, Peter understood Jesus to say one thing but Zwingli understood something totally and radically new in the theological world: 1500 years too late to be guided by the Spirit.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Francia: Baptism represents the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. It is strictly symbolism.

A check made out for a million dollars is JUST A SYMBOL. But before you cash it you have to sign it.

Paul said that BAPTISM is A symbol of the literal. But Jesus as God Incarnate said that WE don't have to shed our blood by being literally IMPALED on a pole or buried in a tomb. He said that He would give us a SYMBOL so that IF we just obey THAT FORM OF DOCTRINE by faith without trying to wiggle out of it then HE would consider that HIS blood would cover OUR sins. FAITH ONLY is never said to do that.

Romans 6:17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.

FAITH ONLY is not a FORM of the baptism of Jesus in which JUSTIFIED means that he 'PREACHED FULLY' baptism by being baptized.

We cease being SLAVES of sin ONLY when we obey the FORM of the facts. This FORM made us free from sins:

Rom 6:18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.

Earlier, Paul had explained how our baptism is that FORM where we get into the grave with Jesus.

Rom 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized INTO his death?

6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by BAPTISM into death: that LIKE (FORM) as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in NEWNESS of life.

That NEWNESS is a form of the word we used above showing that we are NEW MEN.

6:5 For if we have been PLANTED together in the LIKENESS (form) of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:

6:6 Knowing this, that our OLD MAN is crucified (IMPALED) with him, that the body of SIN might be DESTROYED, that henceforth we should not serve sin.

FAITH ONLY is not the FORM and FAITH ONLY does not crucify, impale or destroy SIN.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Francia: The Blood that saves us is NOT in the baptistery.

We noted that BAPTISM includes crucifixion or being IMPALED with Christ. Christ shed HIS blood on the cross as a result of being IMPALED. If we obey the FORM we are IMPALED along with Him. This is where the LITERAL BLOOD taken into the Most Holy Place rests for our salvation.

In baptism, we are BURIED or hidden from view WITH HIM where OUR dead body RESTS with Jesus Christ. We are resurrected as He was resurrected to a SPIRITUAL life since the old body IS DEAD.

FAITH ONLY does not impale us or bury us or resurrect us or give us a NEW HOLY SPIRIT.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Francia: Actually, Christ's blood is represented by the fruit of the vine (which we memorialize in communion).

That is a fact: the literal blood offering was replaced by WINE which might or might not be fermented. However the DRINK OFFERING was POURED OUT on the Altar and never consumed. Why? Why because it contained LEAVEN and that would be polluting to offer a leaven sacrifice.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Francia: By the way, speaking of fruit of the vine. In ancient times they had no refrigeration to preserve their grape pressings.

My mom had no refrigeration and she could store fresh juice all year: fumigate the grapes or apples with sulfur, seal them with wax and my mother could keep fresh apples all year.

ANCIENTS does not mean IGNORANTS. There were several ways of preserving FRESH grape juice all year: once it began to ferment it turned to vinegar if not careful and WINE (juice) was FOOD PRODUCT. Even today, the Jews consume very little alcohol. Even drinking low alcohol wine diluted with water made one a TIPPLER or winebibber. The faithful Jews rejected any produce of fermentation during Passover.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Francia: Therefore, new wine was used. From that seems to spin the theory that the wine was not alcoholic. So now, my question would be: Why did the people on the day of Pentecost (when the Holy Spirit rained down as fire on the apostles)think that the apostles were "drunk" on new wine.

If you get some of your RESPECTABLE preachers to get out in front of the national capital and PREACH in NON-SACRED Hebrew language and have everyone understand then you would think that they were DRUNK also. They called Jesus a winebibber and he said in effect "you are liars" and they said that Paul the outdoors preacher was MAD or insane.

Wine can mean a grape on the cluster, a dried grape or raisin, unfermented juice, fermented juice, grape cakes, instant wine which could be a non-fermentable syrup or even powder. STOMACH WINE was a thick syrup which one could USE a little for medicine by not drinking water ONLY. So, it they WERE drunk on new wine it would be fermented. The just bubbling juice could kill you if you stuck your head in the vat: people were always tumbling into the vat poisoned by Carbon Dioxide.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Francia: We get so caught up in "proving" ourselves to be the Perfect church that we want to spin the scriptures to conform to our preset beliefs.

Fran, my beliefs about baptism is just from reading the BIBLE and all of church history before Zwingli gave birth to the latter BELIEVER'S BAPTISM which is defined identically to ancient pagan baptism. EVERYONE defends their own church so it is not very honest when people point the finger at churches of Christ. Why would any one practice and support a religion they didn't believe was SUPERIOR to the one down the street? Baptists are probably the most judgmental in defining the church of Christ as a CULT for practicing what was fact until someone got a new SPIRIT revelation 1500 years too late.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Francia, Thank God for the freedom we can have in Christ!

Amen, Francia but we don't get liberty to decide how God is going to INCLUDE US IN CHRIST? Paul said that saved by FAITH and Grace meant BAPTIZED INTO Christ. So, those not included in the kingdom by Christ at baptism are NOT IN CHRIST unless he changed the rules about 1500.

All it takes is FAITH IN THE OPERATION OF GOD to have our sins remitted so that we can DISCERN spiritual things. That OPERATION is attaching us to the cross and the tomb simply by OUR following HIS SYMBOL for us. If we belittle that OPERATION OF GOD then we assuredly do not have FAITH which includes acting on what we believe.

However, it takes FAITH in Zwingli and others who have to ARGUE around and around that JESUS DIDN'T MEAN WHAT HE SAID and the Apostles practiced and the church believed for 1500 years. Isn't there lots more liberty in faithfully trusting the WORDS of Jesus than the words of latter day theologians who wrestle mightily to try to KEEP people from the liberty which is ONLY in Christ and we are BAPTIZED INTO Christ by faith but not faith in our faith.

Ken Sublett

Fran, apparently I have been writing over your head and this is apparently evil and unloving.

I didn't know that Chris was your friend and that you were disabled and not able to read the Bible for yourself.

Your post sounded like you were both a reader and writer about the Bible. I assumed that you were literate and able to read and decide whether you agreed or not. You certainly sound like your thinking machinery is perfectly normal.

Maybe you should tell your friend Chris that he should not belittle your comprehension level in public. In the meantime if quoting Scripture offends you as it offends Chris just let me know. However, I just want you to know that most people believed what Jesus told them in the beginning for about 1500 years.

If you believe in faith only then the loving thing to do is tell you that I disagree: among the mature that is perfectly normal. Hope that I didn't offend you as I apparently did X.

Ken Sublett

Grapes ferment naturally when crushed because the skin of the grage contains a form of yeast. The instant the grape is crushed the juice begins to ferment.

All "churches" in this country used (fermented) wine until the early 19th century when a young methodist discovered that by boiling fresh grape juice it would not ferment and it's shelf life was greatly extended. Can you guess the young methodists name?

Wrong, Bill

It takes lots of skill to make wine instead of rot. I have experimented with several fruit and it all rots unless you have the skill.

Bacchus or Orpheus is credited with learning and teaching how to make wine. The Jews used WINE as a food product all winter.

In Plutus, Hermes defines a new type of "wine":

"Formerly, from earliest dawn, I was offered all sorts of good things in the wine-shops, -- wine-cakes, honey, dried figs, in short, dishes worthy of Hermes. Now, I lie the livelong day on my back, with my legs in the air, famishing.

Hermes then defines a tippler:

Oh! the delicious tipple, HALF-wine, half-water!

A tippler might even mix his wine up to 20 to 1 as they did when I was a kid probably because they couldn't grasp the meaning of "fruit of the vine" deliberately used rather than "wine."

They accused Jesus with being a wine DRINKER and he in effect called them liars.

The Living Bible puts it this way:

"And I, the Messiah, feast and drink, and you complain that I am 'a glutton and a drinking man, and hang around with the worst sort of sinners!' But brilliant men like you can justify your every inconsistency!" Matt 11:19LIV

"Strong drink was "unmixed wine." At this time it would be 3-11%. Those who drank undiluted wine, drank strong drink and were considered Barbaric. Distillation produces modern wine from 9-11%. From Pastor Rick Rogers

"By winter fire-light, shaping with keen blade
The torches to a point; his wife the while,
Her tedious labour soothing with a song,
Speeds the shrill comb along the warp, or else
With Vulcan's aid BOILS the sweet MUST-JUICE down,
And skims with leaves the quivering cauldron's wave. (Virgil, Georgics 1:370).

"And rose-leaves dried, or MUST to THICKNESS boiled
By a fierce fire, or juice of RAISIN-grapes
From Psithian vine, and with its bitter smell Virgil Georgics 4.347

[Fresh Juice was defined as rehydrated RAISIN]

"Superior honey comes from fresh comb, and from young shoots; the red honey is inferior, and owes its inferiority to the comb in which it is deposited,
just as wine is apt to be spoiled by its cask;
consequently, one should have it looked to and DRIED. Aristotle History of Animals 626b.1

"The ancients FILTERED their wines repeatedly before they could have fermented, and thus the (leaven) which nourish the strength of the wine being taken away, they rendered the wine itself more liquid, weaker, lighter, and more PLEASANT to drink." (Delphian commentary on Horace, Book 1, Ode 17).

"The Jews do not, in their feasts for sacred purposes, including the MARRIAGE FEAST, ever use any kind of FERMENTED drinks..." (Dr. S. M. Issacs, a Jewish rabbi of the last century, quoted by Patton, p. 83).

"The great mass of the Jews have ever understood this PROHIBITION as extending to FERMENTED wine, or strong drink, as well as to bread. The word is essentially the same which designates the fermentation of bread and that of liquors." (Dr. S. M. Issacs, a Jewish rabbi of the last century, quoted by Patton, p. 83).

JEWS DIDN'T DRINK THE DRINK OFFERING IF FERMENTED: THEY POURED IT OUT AT THE ALTAR:

"Leaven was forbidden in ALL offerings to the Lord by fire, (Lev. 2:11; 6:17). Being bred of CORRUPTION and spreading through the mass of that in which it is mixed, and therefore symbolizing the pervasive character of EVIL,

"LEAVEN was utterly inconsistent in offerings which typified the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ." (Vine's on Leaven, p. 667).

Faithful Jews will not even use baking powder at Passover because it is the product of fermentation.

No. The jews could filter juice, boil it to dehydrate, fumigate it and the new wineskin with fumes of sulphur, seal it in tar-lined jars, sink it in cool water and on and on.

----"And Hannah answered and said, No, my lord, I am a woman of a sorrowful spirit: I have drunk neither wine NOT strong drink, but have poured out my soul before the Lord. 1 Sam 1:15

---------"Count not thine handmaid for a daughter of BELIAL: for out of the abundance of my complaint and grief have I spoken hitherto. 1 Sam 1:16

The early churches claimed to have used wine and water.

Jesus is the VINE and not the VAT.

Ken Sublett

Dear sir:

Are you saying that the early church used wine and water? we use water. The scripture says in 1Corinth.11.25,"This cup is the N.T. IN MY BLOOD! IN HIS BLOOD WAS WATER, AS OUR BLOOD IS MADE UP OF WATER, NOT GRAPE JUICE OR FERMENTED WINE. 1Jo.5.6 says,"This is he that came by WATER AND BLOOD" In St.Jo.19.34, one of the soldiers pierced him in the side and forwith came BLOOD & WATER! Some people take fermented wine and that would be as leaven also. I reiterate,WHAT DID YOU MEAN BY THE EARLY CHURCH TOOK - WINE AND WATER? jEUSE SAID, I am the true vine as He spoke about him being the rock in 1 Cor.4.10 , They drank of that spiritual Rock which was Jesus. Out of him came forth water and blood.

[email protected]

Now, I think I have heard it all. A Church of Christ member saying that they don't think that Baptism is necesssary for Salavation. Now that takes the cake.

Jeff made the comment about that. I dont think anyone thinks that Baptism alone Saves.I dont know where you got this idea that Baptism is not necessary for salvation but it is clearly not a teaching of Bible.
Jim

Jim. Yes I said that and yes I go to a Church of Christ. Why does that "take the cake" for you? Christ is the only one that saves us. Nothing that we DO saves us at all. Paul tells us in one of hism letters that Salvation is a gift. I have never seen or heard of a gift that requires the receiver to do anything but receive it. There is no work involved.

ONCE AGAIN...I am not saying that we should not be baptized as an act of obedience to God. (Read that twice so that I am not misunderstood again)

Baptism is merely an act of obedience. I have been baptized and my children will be also, but not because that is what saves them. The release of our will and acceptance of Christ alone as our Savior is what saves us.

Grace and Peace.

Jeff

You obviously do not know what BELIEVE means.

Reply To Jeff (and others) on Baptism Necessary For Salvation or Necessary Obedience?
I will not attempt to answer each argument you or any of the others set forth. Some of them may very well have some merit but I want to set forth some thoughts that I hope will give the perspective from which I approach not only this subject but others as well. I am convinced that all our attempts to reach a consensus is futile unless we start from the same place. If I start from the wrong point of reference, then my conclusion will be false. I ask only that these thoughts be given fair consideration.
Jeff, first let me say, I am not the judge. God Himself will make the final judgment in ALL things, not just this matter of baptism. Our responsibility is not to judge but to first of all obey whatever God has ask us to do and to teach other to do the same. To what extent each person understands and responds is between him/her and God alone. When we tell people what God says in His Word, we are not judging them one way or the other. I do believe that if they are serious about obeying Him they will be convicted by that Word. If a person is not serious about it they will find some way to rationalize it and justify themselves for not obeying.
Another point I fell needs to be clarified in order to have this discussion. That is we need to come to a common understanding of what SAVED means. Believe it or not, all people do not mean the same thing when they use that term. Perhaps not you Jeff or the others who have posted but some people who read this site may very well not agree with our definition of the word SAVED.
The term saved is used in different ways in the Scripture. The Israelites were “saved” from the Egyptians when God delivered them by the hand of Moses. (Ex.14:30). Daniel was “saved” from the Lion’s den (Dan.6:19-22).. The three Hebrew boys were “saved” from the fiery furnace.(Dan.3:19-30). Shamgar “saved” Israel from the Philistines with an oxgoad (Judges 3:31). In Luke 7:36-50 The sinful woman who washed the feet of Jesus with her tears and wiped them with her hair was told by Jesus “your sins are forgiven.” And then He said to her “your faith has saved you: go in peace.” The term saved is used here in relation to “forgiveness of sins.” This is the definition of saved we are interested in for this discussion. We are not talking about some feeling which comes over an individual which is better felt than told. Many people relate a feeling of peace which came over them after some experience they had as “being saved”. This is why people will relate all kinds of experiences and say this is when or how they were saved. Salvation is not something mysterious. It is very simple. This is one of the things that “RELIGION” has done, it has mysterousized the process of salvation. We are talking about when a person stands guilty before God of transgressing His holy law and God pronounces Him “Innocent”. “Not guilty”. “Forgiven”.
Forgiveness (salvation) is an act which takes place in the mind of God and is received (accepted) by the sinner. It is something God does. Man does not cause it to happen. Man can only accept it or reject it. That needs to be understood once and for all.
If we are not on the same page here, we will certainly not be on the same page later.
I trust we can agree that there is only one way God can forgive sins (mans transgression of His law). That is, by the blood sacrifice of His Only Son of a kind, Jesus. Many people seem to think that God can just say to the sinner “I forgive you, go on your way and don’t worry about it”. But God is Holy & Just, He cannot just wink at sin as if it were nothing. If He did, He would be unjust. Read Rom.3:21-26 it will show this very clear, God wanted to forgive sinners but in order to remain just there had to be “a sacrifice of atonement”. He sacrificed His Son to demonstrate His justice..so as to be just”... “The blood of bulls and goats could not accomplish it” (Heb.10:4).
In light of these and many other Scriptures that could be noted, let me make this statement: “All the sins of all the people that have ever lived and that will ever live were forgiven when God sacrificed His Son upon that cross.” In the mind of God that was it. The price was paid in FULL. There will never be anything done by either God or man to add to that once and for all sacrifice. END OF DISCUSSION...

However, that is only God’s part. Man does have a part. Unless he does there was not much use in giving a large amount of the Bible. The thing we need to understand is that everything on man’s part has to do with his receiving what God has already made available, paid for in full. Whatever part man may play, it cannot in any way add to that payment in FULL which God has already made at Calvary. Obedience to any command (baptism, belief, repentance or any other) can add nothing to that full payment that God has already made. END OF DISCUSSION........


So, where then does baptism fit in? Or where does any command for that reason fit in? There is no difference in this command and any other command as far as this is concerned.
First, let me say this about baptism: Baptism is not an ordinance of the church. It is not something that the church got together and decided by majority vote that it would be a nice thing to practice. It is not something invented by the “Church of Christ”. Baptism was ordained by God. Jesus said, “go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature, he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.” Friends, let me just say here. It make no difference whether we believe it or not. It make no difference whether we preach it or not. We can live to be a hundred and tell men it don’t matter. Another generation can come along for another hundred years and tell men it don’t matter. But remember one thing, when all are dead and gone, the words of Jesus will still be there. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved"...“My word shall not pass away”, Jesus said.

Someone may ask, “How can we be sure just what He meant when He made that statement?” That’s a good question, for unless we know what is meant, how can we obey? How can we know if we have obeyed or not?
I think we could all agree that those disciples who were with Him and heard Him were in the best position to know what He meant. So we ask, “How did they understand His commission here?
Follow them to the first Pentecost after the resurrection recorded in Acts 2:.. After they had received the baptism of the Holy Spirit and had delivered that first gospel message to the Jews assembled there from every nation throughout the Roman Empire. And the people were cut to the heart and asked “men and brethren what shall we do?” Keep in mind, these men had been with Jesus. They had heard Him teach on many occasions, had witnessed His miracles, were even witnesses of His resurrection and have just been “filled with the Holy Spirit”. I believe we can place complete confidence in the answer which they gave that day, don’t you? They answered, “repent and be baptized for the remission of your sins and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit”.... they went on to say, “the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.”
Why would any man living twenty centuries this side of that time assume that he or she knows more about what Jesus meant than those men? To do so would be the height of folly.
Yes, in one way what ever we do is because God has already paid for our sins at Calvary, but from another standpoint we do not receive it till we do whatever God ask us to do. Keep in mind that what we do was never intended and could never cause us to save yourself or in any way add to or take away from what God has done. Again this would be presumptuous on man’s part.
There is no miraculous power in baptism as an act. Just As there is no miraculous power in faith as an act. Some have seemingly attributed such to faith and discarded baptism altogether. However, both are simple acts which anyone of responsible intelligence can do. They are not reserved for an elite class of people but the masses of the human race can believe that simple message and turn away from their wicked ways and be baptized in water and raised to a new life in Christ. It is "in Christ" that we receive the benefits of what God bought and paid for at Calvary two thousand years ago. Eph.1:7.

ONE ILLUSTRATION WHICH I HOPE WILL HELP

My wife is a diabetic, she has to take two shots of two different kinds of insulin each day. Without the insulin she would die probably within twenty four hours. All the POWER IS IN THE INSULIN. However, she must use a needle and syringe to deliver the insulin into her system so as to be distributed through her blood stream and make her body function. There is absolutely no power in the needle or syringe. But they are both absolutely necessary. Without the needle and syringe to deliver that insulin she would be dead within twenty four hours, You ask me which is necessary and my answer is, the needle, syringe and insulin. If you ask me which saves her from the diabetes? I will tell you without any hesitation, it is in the INSULIN!!. There are times when my wife would like to by-pass the needle but that is not possible.

If God chose baptism as a means where-by the saving blood of Jesus can be applied to man’s soul, then friend I dare not tell anyone they can get by without it.
Again, I am not the final judge. My responsibility ends when I have told people the good news of Jesus and what Jesus ask them to do to receive it. To what extent they comprehend it and respond to it is for them to ultimately decide and each one will be judged by God. For me to judge one way is as bad as another. Remember, I have no right to say they are save or not saved either way. Sometimes those who would judge them to be lost are condemned for judging and those who judge them to be saved are even complimented for their “good judgment”. Brothers, both are wrong. When we judge people to be saved when they have not done what Jesus said, we are just as presumptuous as if we judged the other way. WE ARE NOT THE JUDGE!!!! THAT’S FINAL!!!!

Certainly there are verses which do not mention baptism. I ask a preacher the question one time about this very thing and you would not believe his answer. His answer was “baptism is only mentioned 98 times in Scripture”. My only response was, “how many times would God have to say it for you to believe it?’

Perhaps we really do need a serious study or re-study of what the right relationship of all these commands are to our Salvation. I would welcome a re-study of any of these. There is nothing to fear from a honest search for truth by honest men. God bless all who are honestly searching for TRUTH... Ray Pippin – Madison Church of Christ Feel free to respond outside this forum.

Mr. Pippin. WOW! What an excellent response. I appreciate your sincerety and the fact that you did not ridicule me for my previous comments or put me down in your response.

I think you are saying the same things that I have said....I will reiterate - I do not think that the ACT of baptism saves us. Only the BLOOD of CHRIST does that. I believe that the command of baptism should be adheared to. I have done it, my wife has also, and my children will. I DO believe that it is a command and should be followed as all of God's commands for His children should be.

My main complaint is that we to quickly USE baptism and our (right as it may be) understanding of it to PERSECUTE people and JUDGE people of faith that do not have the same understanding of it as we do. I think our main objective should be to love them as fellow believers saved through the blood of Christ, and educate them as best we can on our understanding of the scripture. I do not, as you do not, believe that we have ANY PLACE to condemn them as "not full-fledged Christians" because they have not been immersed. As you say, THAT IS NOT OUR PLACE NOR EVER WILL BE!!!

Anything we DO is as FILTHY RAGS compared to what Christ did for us and we are in NO position to judge others from our position of fallenness. Only ALMIGHTY GOD can and will do that.

Thank you for your response. It was most eloquent and I will have to codgitate on it for a while. You have given me a lot to study, pray and await Father's answer on.

Grace and Peace.

Jeff

Ray,

People hear what they want to hear.

Prayerfully Onward,

Kevin

I seems to me that you are using selective scripture to support the fact that you don't want to believe that baptism is necessary. In the list you give you leave out Romans 6:1-7. These verses specifically say that we must be baptized into Jesus death so that we might raise in a new life. Paul here tells us that baptism is what causes our old sinful self to die that we might be free from sin. Also in I Peter 3:21 says "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:" This vesre states that baptism saves us by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Please read the following:

Mark 16:16
"He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned."

Sounds pretty essential, at least Jesus said so. If you believe and you are baptized you will be saved, but if you do not believe, then you have no reason to be baptized (because you don't believe any of it anyway).

Acts 2:38
"Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall recieve the gift of the Holy Spirit."

What Peter says, is a command, not a suggestion.

After reading just these two Scriptures, I do not know how you can possibly not believe that baptism saves you.

Olivia

Jesus said to Nicodemus that to enter in to the kingdom of God is two fold. Being born of water and born of the Spirit. John 3:8

Is baptism essential for salvation ? People familiar with with the Bible think back to what Jesus told Nicodemus. Jesus said in John 3:3 "Except a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God." Jesus said " born again". It is a new birth, a new life, a new beginning. Old things have passed away. Then Jesus told Nicodemus in John 3:5 < HOW to> be " born again". " Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter----into the kingdom of God."

Notice, Jesus did not tell Nicodemus that by believing in his heart and confessing with mouth he would be born again. Jesus said , You have to be born of water and of the Spirit to be born again. Being almost right is always wrong. Being born again is twofold. Being born again is born of water and born of the Spirit. No one that is living was ever half born. Nothing half done is ever finished.
Born of water

To be born again, is to be born of water and of the Spirit and not just a mere confession, according to the scriptures. To be "born of the water" is to be baptized.
Jesus said to be able to enter into the kingdom of God we have to be born again of water. How are we born again of water? Mark 1:8 "I indeed have baptized you with water-"--- Mark 1:4 says "John did baptize in the wilderness,----and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins." Acts 3:19 says Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out----- Repentance and baptism.

John states that Baptism of repentance is for the remission of sins. John also said---" the Kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel. " Just in these few scriptures they tell us to-----

1 .Believe the gospel
2. Repent
3. And to --Be baptized -- -born of water



In Mark 16:16 " He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved-----. It is not enough just to believe or to confess. Without believing baptism does no good and without baptism believing does no good.

The Bible says "He that believeth -and is- baptized shall be saved---" It takes both believing and being baptized. To be "born of the water" is to be baptized. In Acts 2 :38 Peter preached salvation on the day of Pentecost. When Peter finished, those that were convicted of their sins said----"what must we do?" Peter repeated what John the Baptist said--"Repent and be baptized---for the remission of your sins. Born of water.

What Peter preached is not pleasing to everyone nor does everyone believe or accept what Peter preached. This being baptized is not readily accepted by some. Luke 7:30 states that " the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel (or warning) of God against themselves,"---by not being baptized. The only way scripturally to be born of water, is to be baptized.
Then Peter said in verse 40 "Save yourselves from this untoward (perverted) generation." "Then they that gladly received his word ---were baptized----verse 41. To be born of water is to be baptized.

In Acts 10 an angel came to Cornelius and told him to send for Simon Peter. The Bible says that Cornelius was fasting when the angel came to him----The Bible also states in verse 2 that Cornelius was---
1. a just man
2. he feared God
3. he gave much alms --was not selfish
4. prayed always-- had a consistent prayer life. But, Was he " born again? " Was he born of water?

In Acts 10 :22 Cornelius was " warned (why?) from God by an angel" to send for the Apostle Peter, to hear words from him. Cornelius said in verse 33 " we are all here present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God." In other words Cornelius said, Peter, tell us what God has commanded you to
tell us.
Being God's man of the hour Peter began to preach the gospel just as he did on the day of Pentecost. Peter preached Jesus. Peter preached the death and crucifixion of Jesus in verse 39, the resurrection in verse 41. In verse 43 Peter preached " whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins." Does verse 43 mean that just believing is all that is necessary? Certainly not.!! Peter did not crawfish, he preached water baptism for remission of sins, in order to be born again. Peter preached the same message to Cornelius as he did to those on the day of Pentecost. Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins. Acts 2:38
It is interesting that Acts 11 is a rehash of what happened in chapter 10." Peter rehearsed the matter from the beginning---" Acts 11:4

In the eleventh chapter of Acts Peter is telling the brethren at Jerusalem about the events that happened to Cornelius in chapter 10. When you read chapter 11 you can see this is so. In chapter 11 and verse 13, Peter is retelling how Cornelius saw an angel. Peter is speaking. " And he (Cornelius) shewed us how he had seen an angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter." The angel told Cornelius to send for Simon Peter, "Who shall tell thee words whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved." Acts 11:14 They had to be born of water.



"And he (Peter) commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord." Acts 10:48. Why did Peter command them to be baptized? To be baptized is to be born of water is to be reborn. It is a new birth, a new life, a new beginning. Old things have passed away. A newness of life. Paul said in Romans 6:4. " Therefore we are buried with him by baptism ( born of water) into death : that like as Christ was raise up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in the--- newness of life." To be able to walk in newness' of life we have to be born of water, to be baptized.

Romans 6:5 For is we have been planted (born of water--baptized) together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also be in the likeness of his resurrection.

Johnny, thanks for reviewing the biblical passages that command baptism as an essential part of the salvation process. Although I was raised in the Church of Christ, over the years, I went astray and became an organist for a Southern Baptist congregation in Nashville, TN. After coming to my senses, I left that denomination, citing in my letter of resignation those problems I had with Baptist doctrine, which included (among other concerns) their take on baptism; that is, Baptists (and some other denominations) mistakenly believe that only faith, not baptism, is essential for salvation. To them (at least in this particular congregation), baptism was merely an outward sign of belief that’s done once someone has been “saved.” Moreover, it’s optional, for there were members of that congregation who claimed to be Christians but who had never been baptized.

It seems that many “no-salvation-in-baptism” denominations have a grave misconception about those of us who believe that baptism is essential; that, allegedly according to us, salvation is achieved entirely through the physical act of baptism, that baptism is thus physically efficacious and regenerative in removing sins. These denominations fail to realize that it is our willing and complete OBEDIENCE to Jesus’ command in Mark 16:16 and His command through the apostle Peter in Acts 2:38, along with total FAITH, that completes the salvation process. Some have argued that since the “act” of baptism is a “work,” salvation cannot come by this or any other work but through faith alone. Such an argument again ignores Mark 16:16, in which Jesus joins faith with baptism as essential elements for salvation.

Another favorite argument claims that, because Jesus omits baptism in the last half of Mark 16:16 while clearly including it in the first half, baptism is thus not essential. This argument not only implies that we cannot take Jesus at His word, but it also selectively blots out Scripture in order to negate baptism. In reality, Jesus omits baptism in Mark 16:16b simply because the subject is pointless with the unbelievers to whom He refers.

Still determined to downplay baptism, other arguments perpetuate the myth that the entire passage of Mark 16:9-20 is spurious, that, because it was neither inspired nor a part of the original Gospels, its doctrine regarding baptism is unreliable. Furthermore, most modern Bible translations either isolate this passage in brackets, banish it to footnotes, or omit it altogether. There may be some comments inserted about the absence of this passage in “the most ancient manuscripts.” These translations fail to mention that the “manuscripts” in question are principally the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus, two manuscripts dating to circa the 4th century. Both have been proven to be so monstrously flawed that the 19th-century English theologian, John Burgon, noted that, “It is easier to find two consecutive verses in which the two [manuscripts] differ, the one from the other, than two consecutive verses in which they entirely agree.” Burgon discusses these two manuscripts, among many others, and proves beyond the shadow of a doubt the authenticity of Mark 16:9-20 in his book, “The Last Twelve Verses of Mark.”

Lastly, an argument playing the numbers game downplays baptism simply because the number of New Testament verses mentioning only faith far surpasses those which include baptism. This argument would transform the Bible into a “democratic process” or a “majority rules” book. This argument fails to acknowledge that each and every command in the New Testament is of equal importance and should be faithfully obeyed, whether it occurs only once or a million times.

No matter how many arguments attempt to bash baptism as essential for salvation, the Bible always has the upper hand.

Jeff I read your post and it would appear you are only reading part of the Scriptures, I would question you as to what are you Baptized into and then would request that you read John 14:6.

In Christ Steve

Steve. Maybe you should take care of your own life (or plank) before you tangle with my speck. I was not aware that we had to have it all figured out when we were baptized. If that is the case then that should not happen to anyone before they are almost dead...and maybe not even then. If becoming a Christian means that you have to have all of the "doctrine" straight then there are going to be alot of people, me and you included, that will go to hell.

JD

I could not see in Steve's post where he was judging your heart. From what you had said earlier, it appears that he was questioning your understanding of immersion.

You are correct in saying that we are saved by the blood of Christ. But how do we access the blood of Christ? Is it obtained by merely praying for it or doing good works? No... when we are immersed in water for the forgiveness of sin we are also immersed into the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ (Romans 6). No one is saying that we have to "have it all figured out" either when we are immersed or after. But we do have to know and acknowledge how to accept God's grace, which can only be done through repentance and immersion.

You were correct about another thing, there will be alot of souls in hell. Throughout history, we can read of the remnant that makes up the faithful. Only a few of the Israelites remained faithful to God during the wilderness wanderings... how many men who were over the age of 20 at the crossing of the Red Sea were allowed to enter the promised land? Only three men refused to worship the king's idol and faced the furnance of fire. To put the matter beyond debate, Jesus said that few would enter into heaven in Matthew 7. We should not be concerned with how few will enter heaven but do all we can to be sure that we are among those few. We can't "lower the bar" to "get more people in" as some public schools have lowered the standards in order to pass more students. God's conditions are set and it is up to each individual to accept them or reject them.

Mark Waggoner

Jesus said GO teach! Not, go rent (or buy) a common building, place Yellow page ads and hope people show up. So much of our time is spent spinning our wheels that we can't GO teach!

Kind of sounds like a plot.......

I totally agree.

Jesus didn't say "go make worshipers" or pew fillers but DISCIPLES.

If the evangelist sees himself as a hireling nursing a flock then he is not an evangelist just as there CANNOT BE a "located travelling salesman."

Paul didn't count bodies but went out preaching. In this way the Burden which belongs to God does not rest on the evangelist. He can do his work and then move on so that evangelists were called Bishops not having provincial authority but because he saw his EVANGELIZING role as the total county or state.

When you stop to build temples then Satan will come and take them away from it and that's the way it is supposed to be.

Evangelists are TRUTH ANGELS or heralds and there can be no LOCATED Paul Reveres. Break the law and Satan breaks your back and God snuffs out your Menorah.

Ken Sublett

Jeff-

1 Peter 3:20-21

v. 20 "Who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water.

v.21 "There is also an antitype WHICH NOW SAVES US--BAPTISM (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

Review that, esp. v.21.

I use the English Standard virsion of the Bible, and it has less errors in it than the King James Bible.
Would you like for me to point out several errors in your King James Bible? If I get an answer, I bet I get a No.

Jerry Willis

======================
Message From he Moderator

Jerry;
This thread is about Baptism. If your Bible differences are on Baptism then let us have it. If you are a King James Attacker, then go to "Defending The King James" thread.

Since I didn't see a post on the Defending the KJV thread, I'll answer your post here.

Yes, you can try.

Only if you want to be a ChristIAN or obedient to His direct command. If you make Jesus and Peter into liars you CANNOT be a Christian.

The FOUNDATION PRINCIPLE of the Gospel of Christ and the DIRECT COMMANDMENT as close to the last message to mankind is that those who believe in Him AND are baptized SHALL BE SAVED. Baptists do a horrid dance to twist Jesus's GRAND COMMISSION. Peter said that sins are remitted AS A RESULT of baptism which "does not rejected the counsel of God." He said in Acts 2:38 that the gift of A holy spirit FOLLOWS baptism.

All statements about FAITH ONLY must be and can easily be reconciled to the ONLY words we are going to receive from God Incarnate. We always live under a SYSTEM OF FAITH which is contrasted with a SYSTEM OF LAW clearly identified by charismatic music as a sign of legalistic lostness and tithing.

No one is said to receive a personal HOLY or consecrated spirit or mind by FAITH ONLY. Peter said that baptism is the time and place where WE REQUEST of God a clean conscience which is a clear consciousness or A holy spirit or a CO-PERCEPTION of the Word.

This was the understanding PRIOR to Calvinism which "gagged Calvin."
----Faith Only arose in about 1500 and rejects all previous understanding about Christ's plan of salvation. The FATHER was Zwingli who was trying to explain the fate of the pious un baptized. However, ZWINGLI made the same tragic mistake made by ZWINGLISM flying the flag of the church of Christ. John Smyth whose church was called the church of Christ was the founder of a radically NEW form of religion which REPUDIATES the foundation statement of Lord Jesus Christ.

Zwinglism is based SOLELY on original sin and predestination.

This is why BELIEVER'S BAPTISM, like the Catholic Eucharist, is a form of PAGAN BAPTISM. It insists that Christ was crucified for JEWS ONLY. A Baptist must have Christ do it for them personally TODAY to be effective. One must LIVE UNDER Law: that is why the rise of the Levitical sacrificial musicians and tithing is consistent with being PERSONALLY convicted by the LAW.

The protestant, Alistair McGrath, justification and regeneration Iustitia Dei, Vol. 1 makes it clear that FAITH ONLY did not exist for 1500 years. The simplistic lack of minimal reading of the Bible resulted in making JUSTIFICATION the definition for all words related to Christianity.

-----p. 184 "The significance of the Protestant distinction between JUSTIFICATION and REGENERATION is that a fundamental DISCONTINUITY has been introduced into the western theological tradition where none had existed before. [That means a BREAK with both Christian teaching and 1500 years of Christian practice]

---A FUNDAMENTAL DISCONTINUITY WAS INTRODUCED INTO THE WESTERN THEOLOGICAL TRADITION WHERE NONE HAD EVER EXISTED, OR EVER BEEN CONTEMPLATED BEFORE. The Reformation understanding of the nature of justification - as opposed to its mode - must be regarded as a genuine theological NOVUM." Therefore, Baptist or pagan baptism or Zwinglism is a sect 1500 years too late to be CHRISTIANITY.

Sola Fide is Luther's term But modern faith only people DO NOT GRASP EITHER LUTHER OR ZWINGLI who stated about what Thomas Campbell stated: faith must have an object.

Righteousness in Hebrew does not mean remission of sins or salvation or being IN Christ or regeneration of a new birth:

Paul did not teach justification by FAITH ONLY. Genesis 26:5 defines justification by faith as keeping God's commandments each and every time.

FAITH ONLY does not RECONCILE.

No one receives the ATONEMENT by FAITH ONLY.

Faith Only does not make us DEAD to SIN but makes us aware of sin. This awareness gives us the access to God because He approves our faith in Him.

Faith only never SUBMITS to that "form of doctrine" but insists on being RESURRECTED prior to BURIAL.

Faith only is not a LIKENESS of being PLANTED in the waters of baptism.

Therefore, faith only does not show FAITH in the death of Christ.

No one is promised a resurrection like that of Christ by FAITH ONLY.

No one is promised a crucifixion with Christ by faith only.

No one is promised that the old BODY OF SIN will be destroyed by faith only.

Faith only is never said to SLAY the old man of sin.

FAITH ONLY does not answer to the Ark and Red Sea as FIGURES.

FAITH in God meant faith inside of the ARK and it was not FAITH ONLY.

So, you see the subject is not FAITH ONLY but a system of Faith.

Faith Only is never said to put one INTO Christ where redemption is found.

Faith only never gives one A holy spirit o a co-perception with Christ.

No one is every said to get INTO Christ by FAITH ONLY. And if you are not BAPTIZED INTO Christ then you CANNOT get into GOD.

If you teach others based on your URGE TO SAVE THE WORLD then you are not, cannot be a CHRISTIAN which means a disciple of Christ: Christ's fundamental method for remitting sin and being added to HIS body was water baptism. HUMAN PRIDE--the sin of Satan--claims perfection BEFORE submitting to Lord Jesus Christ.

We do not GET INTO GOD BY GETTING INTO CHRIST BY FAITH ONLY.

No one prior to Zwingli told you that you could get IN Christ by Faith Only. When the coin of harsh judgmentalism turns to UNIVERSALISM then God blinds your eyes. Universalism is the same URGE to play God and declare U OK, I OK. But FAITH means believing and teaching "that which has been taught." James, Paul and the entire Bible proves that FAITH is never faith only but means BEING A DOER of whatever Christ commands us to do.

Latter Day Baptists collecting the tithe from the church of Christ is robbery. Minimal honesty demands that you do not STEAL the church house of widows but go down the street and become a ZWINGLIAN by submitting to the LAW OF MOSES until God signals that you are ONE OF THE FEW, THE SELECT, the RIGHTEOUS who will go to heaven. All Zwinglians believe and teach that anyone who is not PREDESTINATED will burn in hell. And only after God has TESTIFIED TO YOU and satisfied YOU that you are saved from eternity past THEN you are baptized BECAUSE you are ALREADY SAVED. Baptists clearly claim that the church of Christ is a CULT for teaching what the Bible and 1500 years of church history taught. They absolutely insist that one cannot be saved and still INSIST on following the FINAL COMMANDMENTS of Jesus christ to all who have faith.

THEN they use the HEGLIAN or HITLER scheme of accusing YOU of being judgmental because you REPEAT what Lord Jesus Christ taught, the Apostles practiced and the world believed before ZWINGLIAN PAGAN BAPTISM raised its ugly head. They will let you know that IF you follow JESUS whose gospel was REPLACED by the Pauline Gospel and teach the NECESSITY of baptism then YOU are the guilty party. This is both evil and ignorant. It is the sin of Satan because it says: "I will judge you by what I believe." That is human pride just hating with a purple passion to let the WORDS of Jesus get out of their mouth.

The NIV teaches the ZWINGLISM that baptism is just a PLEDGE of an already clear conscience. That's a lie and I don't know how to say it like the pseudo jesus which will not SAVE you from your sins of holding a false doctrine and HIDING your views.

If I could play Satan I would be a Zwinglian and fill all of the unlawful pulpit jobs with people who refute the direct command of Jesus. That would be as honest as working for the CIA and promoting TERRORISM. If you want some other proof,

http://www.piney.com/FaithOnly.html

There is no more RADICAL DISCONTINUITY between the "old" Christianity of the Bible and the new postmodern placing of ME on the throne. Therefore, we don't have a remote urge to judge which means to pronoucne and execute a sentence of those who repudiate the clearest direct command in Christianity. However, this radical break, 1500 years too late to be CHRISTIANITY can never be FORCED onto people who preach ZWINGLI but get paid as a so-called preacher of the church of Christ. It is evil, it is dishonest, it is Biblically ignorant.

Nevertheless, that is the FOUNDING EVIL of the small band of merry men who have wiggled their way into church of Christ pulpits just because they are DOCTORS OF THE LAW when everyone knows that Jesus fired them. But fools love to be fooled and God has no compunction about poking out your eyes and filling your ears with garbage when you TURN from Him by turning from His Word.

Ken Sublett

Ken,

I can see that you are a avid student of scripture. I'm so glad to see someone so dedicated to seeking the truth of God's word. I would try to be a little more forgiving in conveying your thoughts though. Not everyone is as far along in their study and views of Biblical truth and you don't seem to have a Christ-like attitude in encouraging others as they work out their understanding of scripture through the Holy Spirit.

I have a question for you also. How do you explain some of the examples in scripture of those who were saved and were not baptized?

Chris

You guys seem HARSHLY judgmental every time someone states a BIBLICAL FACT. Why is that? Didn't you get anything out of reading the BIBLICAL FACTS? No.

Would you feel me LESS jugmental if I charged you a thousand bucks for enough material to make 4 sermons? Yes.

I am gloriously happy that I DON'T HAVE TO EXPLAIN anyone's condition with God. I just don't have anyone on the tip of my forked mind just now who is said to have been SAVED without baptism. Oh! Yes. The thief on the cross. Well, Jesus promised him that they would be together in the realm of the dead. I don't know that he was not baptized by John or one of Jesus' disciples.

I do know for a fact that when you are about to die there simply is NO POINT of being baptized into DISCIPLESHIP with Jesus. Whenever, it is Jesus who forgives sins so He could do what he wanted to do but I am not God. And I know that as long as I am alive I can spend my money my way (on my kids). After I die and my will is probated then my kids can spend my money based on how I write my will. I can leave it to my Lab or punkey the cat.

I do know for a positive fact that he DID NOT live AFTER the resurrection when Christian baptism for the same forgiveness was preached with the added value of the gift of A holy spirit or clear consiousness. That baptism was for the LIVING for a discipleship to the Spirit Jesus speaking through His Word. The thief on the cross doesn't need that. His was a physical relationship like the churches from Babel.

Cornelius? No, his SIGN did not save him: God told Cornelius that Peter would tell him WHAT TO DO. After Peter and the Jews were convinced by this supernatural SIGN which never saves but validates God's messenger, Peter told Cornelius what He must do: he was baptized and the Jews could no longer forbid it.

Well, your time. I can't remember any more. But if Jesus wants to save people by Max Lucado's plan of just "calling Him Father" then that is ok with me but max flies around the sky too much for me to beleive that he has sueprceded Jesus.

I don't grasp the motive of JUDGMENTALIZING people to squash the teaching of the facts: if they want LOVE then they need to go to church tomorrow and lust after the TEAMS. Disputing the almost final command of Lord Jesus Christ doesn't seem very loving to me.

Why not tell us that you believe in FAITH ONLY and the best way to teach it is to marginalize me and suggest an ALTERNATIVE without any facts. I don't call that very loving or honest.

Ken

Ken,

I think you've missed the point of the new testament if you say that you, as a Christian, are not responsible to show love to others. For you to say "if they want LOVE then they need to go to church tomorrow". Didn't Christ Himself say that loving others was the greatest commandment behind loving God?

You are presenting the word of God, not in love, but in judgement and just plain coldness. You seem to berate everyone who posts when they are just Christians, flawed sinners, seeking God's truth just as you are.

There are a few things that I know beyond a shadow of doubt. God exists. Jesus Christ is the way to eternal life and fellowship with God, and I am a sinner saved by the grace of God. Beyond that I read my Bible and talk to fellow Christians and listen to the Holy Spirit and pray for God to reveal to me His truth.

Remember, this is how the world will know Christ's followers, that we love one another. Don't miss the forest for the trees.

Study Links About Baptism. A courtesy of www.ChristianCourier.com

Translating “Bapto”
In most modern versions of the New Testament, the Greek word baptizo is not translated at all; rather, it is anglicized, i.e., it is brought from the Greek language into English, almost letter-for-letter. Why do you suppose this non-translating procedure has been followed?
http://www.christiancourier.com/notes/translatingBaptizo.htm

Why Does Romans 10:9-10 Not Mention Baptism?
http://www.christiancourier.com/questions/faithAnalogyQuestion.htm

“All Good People Go To Heaven – No Matter What”
http://www.christiancourier.com/penpoints/goodPeople.htm

Was Cornelius Saved Before Being Baptized?
http://www.christiancourier.com/notes/corneliusBaptism.htm

Is Baptism A “Gospel” Obligation?
http://www.christiancourier.com/questions/gospelBaptismQuestion.htm

What About the Baptism of Young Children?
http://www.christiancourier.com/questions/semiInfantQuestion.htm

Carroll Osburn and "for the remission of sins"
http://www.christiancourier.com/notes/osbornEis.htm

New Testament Baptism: In Water or the Spirit?
http://www.christiancourier.com/questions/waterSpiritQuestion.htm

Does Ezekiel 36:25 Prophesy Sprinkling?
http://www.christiancourier.com/questions/ezekielSprinklingQuestion.htm

Misconceptions Regarding Baptism - Part 1
http://www.christiancourier.com/audio/miscBaptism_1.htm

Misconceptions Regarding Baptism - Part 2
http://www.christiancourier.com/audio/miscBaptism_2.htm

Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist as an example to us Christians. It is an act of obedience as we are humbly confessing our sins and being washed clean. If we understand the Bible and believe what it says - we have to believe baptism is essential. If our Lord and Savior who never knew sin did it we as sinners should not question it.

Dana. I understand what you are saying, but you say it is an act of obedience. Please reconcile that with the following verses:

Ephesians 2:8 - God saved you by His special favor when you BELIEVED. And you can't take credit for this; it is a GIFT from God.

And verse 9 - Salvation is not a reward for the good things we have done, so none of us can BOAST about it.

And verse 10 - For we are God's masterpiece. He has created us anew in Christ Jesus, so that we can do the good things He has planned for us long ago.

GOD saves us when we BELIEVE, Salvation is a GIFT from Him, not a merited thing.

If Baptism is an ACT then it is something we "do" for our salvation. Jesus "did" everything on the cross. He died and killed the old law which was based upon doing meritorious acts in order to be reconciled to Him.

I AM NOT SAYING that we should not be baptized as some here would indicate, I am simply saying what you are, that baptism is an act of obedience.

Tell me where in the Bible it indicates that ALL of the diciples were baptized. I have not found it and I am curious as to where it is.

Thanks for your post.

Grace and Peace.

Jeff

Without getting into the obvious translation errors/commentary in the text you are quoting, please indulge me and try to think about grace and baptism this way...

If you will, imagine yourself treading water in the middle of the ocean. No matter how good of a swimmer you are, eventually, you will drown. However, by grace, a boat comes your way and a life preserver is thrown to you. Are you saved? No, not yet. What must you do? You must respond to the offer of grace and grab the life preserver - repent and be immersed for the forgiveness of sin. Did grace save you? Yes. Did baptism save you? Yes. Did the mere belief that you would be saved if you grabbed the life preserver save you? NO!

Grace is God's step toward man, obedience is man's step toward God. By the way, we must also hang onto the life preserver of grace throughout our lives. We can let go and turn away even after immersion.

I know that this example is "old" and maybe you have even heard it before. However, the scriptures plainly teach (as shown previously in this forum) that baptism/immersion is necessary for salvation. Don't bet your eternity on Calvinistic theory or post-modern philosophy. Those life preservers can't and won't carry the weight of your soul!

Baptismal Regeneration?
Christ commanded His original disciples to go into all the world and preach the gospel (Mk 16:15). Those of every nation who believed in Christ as their Savior were to be baptized "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" (Mt 28:19). These new disciples were to preach the gospel everywhere and to baptize those who believed (v 20) through their testimony as Christianity spread worldwide.

Baptism in the early church was by immersion: "they went down both into the water....[W]hen they were come up out of the water" (Acts 8:38-39), etc. Why? Because baptism symbolizes the believer's identification with Christ in His death, burial and resurrection: "we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead...we also should walk in newness of life" (Rom 6:4).

Unfortunately, various innovations and heresies were gradually introduced regarding baptism: that one must be baptized to be saved; indeed, that baptism itself saves the soul even when administered to infants. These heresies became known as the doctrine of baptismal regeneration. Most Protestants holding these beliefs today are not aware that they originated with the Roman Catholic Church in the Middle Ages.

The Council of Trent (1545-63) stated that while Christ "merited for us justification by His most holy passion...the instrumental cause [of justification/regeneration] is the sacrament of baptism....If anyone says that baptism is...not necessary for salvation, let him be anathema."1 Vatican II (1962-65) reconfirms all of Trent2 and reiterates the necessity of baptism for salvation,3 as does the universal Catechism of the Catholic Church released by the Vatican in 1993: "Baptism is necessary for salvation...the Church does not know of any [other] means...that assures entry into eternal beatitude...." 4

Trent anathematizes all who deny that "the merit of Jesus Christ is applied...to infants by the sacrament of baptism" or who deny that by baptism "the guilt of original sin is remitted...." 5 Today's Code of Canon Law (Canon 849) declares that those baptized are thereby "freed from their sins, are reborn as children of God and...incorporated in the Church." Canon 204 states: "The Christian faithful are those who...have been incorporated in Christ through baptism" and are thereby members of the one, true Catholic Church.6

For centuries before the Reformation, baptismal regeneration was rejected by Bible-believing Christians, whom the Roman Catholic Church therefore persecuted, tortured and slaughtered by the millions. Non-Catholics taught from Scripture that baptism was only for those who had believed the gospel: "teach all nations...baptizing them [who have believed]" (Mt 28:19); "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized" (Acts 2:41); "[W]hat doth hinder me to be baptized?...If thou believest [in Christ] with all thine heart, thou mayest" (Acts 8:35-37). Infants can't believe in Christ.

Consider Cornelius's household: they heard the gospel, believed it and were baptized. That there were no infants baptized is also clear, for they had all gathered "to hear all things that are commanded thee of God" (Acts 10:33). "[T]he Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard [and, obviously, understood and believed] the word" (v 44); and they spoke with tongues (v 46). That they had "received the Holy Ghost" (v 47) convinced Peter that they were saved. Therefore, he baptized them (v 48).

Nor can infant baptism be supported from the case of the Philippian jailor who "was baptized, he and all his" (Acts 16:33). Again there were no infants present because Paul and Silas preached the gospel "to all that were in his house," (v 32) and "all his house" believed (v 34) and were then baptized.

The early Reformers such as Martin Luther were Catholics who, unfortunately, retained some Catholic dogmas, among them baptismal regeneration and infant baptism. These heresies are still held by some Protestant denominations today. The issue is a serious one. If baptism is essential for salvation, then to reject that gospel is to be damned. But if salvation is through faith in Christ alone, then to add baptism as a condition for salvation is to reject the true gospel and thus to be eternally lost. The Bible declares that it is wrong to teach salvation by faith in Christ plus anything else, such as keeping the Jewish law (Acts 15:24). Paul cursed (anathematized) those who taught this false gospel that damns the soul (Gal 1:8-9). A gospel of salvation through Christ plus baptism is equally false.

The essentials of the gospel
When Paul reminded the Corinthians of the essential ingredients of the gospel which he preached and by which they had been saved, he made no mention of baptism (1 Cor 15:1-4). In fact, he distinguished between the gospel and baptism: "Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel..." (1 Cor 1:17). He hadn't baptized most of the Corinthians, couldn't remember whom he had baptized, and was thankful that it had been very few (1 Cor 1:14-16)—a strange attitude if baptism is essential to salvation! Yet without baptizing them, Paul declared that he was their father in the faith: "in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel" (1 Cor 4:15).

Then what about Mark 16:16: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved"? All who believe the gospel are saved, so of course all who believe and are baptized are saved; but that does not say that baptism saves or that it is essential for salvation. Scores of verses declare, with no mention of baptism, that salvation comes by believing the gospel: "[I]t pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe" (1 Cor 1:21; see also Jn 3:16, 18, 36, 5:24; Acts 10:43, 13:38-39, 16:31; Rom 1:16, 3:28, 4:24, 5:1; 1 Cor 15:1-4; Eph 2:8, etc.). Not one verse, however, says that baptism saves.

Numerous verses declare that whosoever does not believe is lost, but not one verse declares that whosoever is not baptized is lost. Surely the Bible would make it clear that believing in Christ without being baptized cannot save if that were the case, yet it never says so! Instead, we have examples of those who believed and were saved without being baptized, such as the thief on the cross and the Old Testament saints (Enoch, Abraham, Joseph, Daniel, et al.), to whom Christian baptism was unknown.

It is essential to realize that some baptismal texts do not refer to Christian water baptism, but to one of the seven other baptisms in Scripture. There was the baptism of the Israelites "unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea" (1 Cor 10:2); the "baptism of John" (Mt 21:25; Mk 11:30; Acts 19:3, etc.), which was a baptism "of repentance" (Mk 1:4; Lk 3:3; Acts 19:4, etc.); the baptism attributed to Christ before the cross_"Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples" did the baptizing (Jn 4:1-2; 3:22); the baptism Christ had to endure of suffering and death_"I have a baptism to be baptized with" (Lk 12:50; Mt 20:22; Mk 10:38, etc.); the baptism Christ now performs on His own "with the Holy Ghost and with fire" (Mt 3:11; Mk 1:8; Lk 3:16; Jn 1:33; Acts 1:5, 11:16); the baptism by the Holy Spirit "into Jesus Christ" (Rom 6:3; Gal 3:27) and thereby "into his death" (Rom 6:4; Col 2:12); and the baptism by the Holy Spirit into the church, the one body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13).

Then why does the Bible say, "There is...one baptism" (Eph 4:4-5)? The explanation is simple but carries profound consequences: Baptism of any kind occurs only once and is never repeated. In that sense, then, there is only one baptism. Whether one believes that baptism itself saves, or that it symbolizes salvation through identification with Christ in His death and resurrection, the fact that it cannot recur proves that one's salvation can never be lost. For if one must get saved again as a result of losing one's salvation, then baptism must be repeated each time—but there is only one baptism.

The dogma of "falling away," like baptismal regeneration, also comes from Roman Catholicism. No Catholic can be certain he is saved; for salvation, which in Catholicism is by works, could be forfeited at any time by failure to continue to perform the works prescribed. Trent declares, "If anyone says that in order to obtain the remission of sins it is necessary... to believe with certainty...that his sins are forgiven him, let him be anathema....If anyone says that he will for certain...have that great gift of perseverance [in the faith] even to the end...let him be anathema."7 While rebaptism is not practiced in Catholicism, the sacraments of penance and the Mass are said to restore saving grace and are thus repeated endlessly.

Understanding the meaning
Yes, but Romans 6:4 states, "[W]e are buried with [Christ] by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead...even so we also should walk in newness of life." That Paul is not speaking of water baptism, however, but of the spiritual reality it symbolizes, is clear, for he says that through baptism "our old man [sinful nature] is crucified with him [Christ], that the body of sin might be destroyed." As a consequence, he urges believers to "reckon" themselves "to be dead indeed unto sin....[l]et not sin therefore reign in your mortal body" (vv 6-13).

Paul uses similar language concerning himself when he says, "I am crucified with Christ" (Gal 2:20). He is obviously speaking of that same spiritual "baptism" by which we have been placed in Christ and have thus passed with Him through death into resurrection life. If we were literally dead to sin, then we wouldn't need to "reckon" it true or live the new life by faith; we would automatically never sin again. That a Christian may sin shows that water baptism doesn't effect a literal crucifixion with Christ. It portrays a spiritual baptism into Christ which the believer must live by faith.

In that context, then, we can understand Peter's declaration, "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us...by the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Pt 3:21). He is no more saying that the physical act of baptism literally saves us than Paul is saying that it literally makes us dead to sin. The few difficult isolated verses such as these cannot contradict the overwhelming number of other Scriptures which are crystal clear. Water baptism, says Peter, is a "figure" or symbolization of a spiritual baptism into Christ effected by the Holy Spirit and which is settled forever in heaven but which must be lived out by faith while we are here upon earth.

Significantly, though Paul baptized a few, Christ never baptized anyone (Jn 4:2)—very odd if baptism saves. The Savior of the world must have deliberately avoided baptizing to make it clear that baptism has no part in salvation. Yes, Christ said we must be "born [again] of water and of the Spirit" to be saved (Jn 3:5), but it is unwarranted to assume that "water" here means baptism. To do so would contradict the wealth of Scripture we have seen which proves salvation is not by baptism.

Jesus was speaking to Nicodemus, a rabbi to whom "water" would not mean baptism (which was unknown in Jewish law) but the ceremonial cleansing of someone who had been defiled (Ex 30, 40; Lv 13, 15, etc.). And that is what Christ meant. His death would make it possible to "sanctify and cleanse [His church] with the washing of water by the word [of the gospel] (Eph 5:25-27). Christ said, "Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken" (Jn 15:3). Like Christ, Paul put water and the Spirit together, referring to the "washing of regeneration" and linking it with the "renewing of the Holy Ghost" (Ti 3:5). We are born again by the Holy Spirit and by the Word or gospel of God, which is sometimes called "water" because of its cleansing power. As Peter said, we are "born again...by the word of God" (1 Pt 1:23).

It was obviously this figure of Old Testament ceremonial cleansing which Peter communicated to his Jewish audience in his Pentecost sermon: "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins" (Acts 2:38). It is clear from the many other scriptures we've given that Peter wasn't saying that baptism saves, but that it offered a ceremonial cleansing uniquely applicable to his Jewish hearers. To be baptized was to be identified before the fanatical Jews of Jerusalem with this hated Jesus Christ as one's personal Savior. Baptism cost family and friends and endangered one's life, as it still does in Israel and Muslim countries. Those who are afraid to take this public stand in such cultures are even today considered not to be true believers. Thus for a Jew to be publicly baptized at that time in that culture was, in a sense, to "wash away [his] sins" (Acts 22:16), as Ananias told Saul.

"[T]he gospel of Christ...is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth [it]" (Rom 1:16). That gospel as Paul preached it required faith in Christ's blood poured out in death for one's sins on the cross and said nothing about baptism. To preach baptismal regeneration is to preach a false gospel that cannot save, which is why Paul cursed those who did so. The difference between faith in Christ alone and faith in Christ plus baptism has eternal consequences. Let us stand firmly for and preach the true gospel that saves.

Dave Hunt

H.J. Schroeder, trans., The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent (Tan Books, 1978), 33, 53.

Vatican Council II, The Conciliar and Post Conciliar Documents, Austin Flannery, O.P., General Editor (Costello Publishing Company, 1988 rev. ed.), 412.

Ibid, 365.

Catechism of the Catholic Church (The Wanderer Press, 1994), 224, 320.

Trent, op. cit., 22, 23, 54.

Code of Canon Law (Paulist Press, 1985), 122, 614.

Trent, op. cit., 44.

JoAnn: Unfortunately, various innovations and HERESIES were gradually introduced regarding baptism: that one MUST be baptized to be SAVED; indeed, that baptism ITSELF saves the soul even when administered to infants. These HERESIES became known as the doctrine of baptismal regeneration. Most Protestants holding these beliefs today are not aware that they originated with the Roman Catholic Church in the Middle Ages.

Ken: JoAnn you make some leaps of faith which you cannot prove. Baptismal Regeneration is ONLY related to INFANTS and derives from Catholic and Baptist forms of Calvinism and his earlier mentors. Your target is obviously those of this site so let's get specific. Churches of Christ have never believed or taught BAPTISMAL REGENERATION. That is, that dipping in water saves you. Baptism for or IN ORDER to the remission of sins is the ultimate picture of GRACE. Those who believe in Jesus Christ, repent and CONFESS Him in water baptism do not go through the legalism (maybe diminishing) of Believer's Baptism administered ONLY after one can prove or have certified that they are SAVED BY FAITH ONLY.

To believe in salvation by FAITH ONLY may sound more "SPIRITUAL" but Scripture says that you have to HEAR THE WORD to have faith. But, as Calvinists, you say, NO. God GIVES faith to those who are PREDESTINATED -- a historically arrogant position only those who believe ONLY WE will be saved could arrive at. Calvin said that the gagged on Calvinism.

Believer's baptism was invented by Christians as late as AD 1525 by Zwingli who was searching for a way to say that infants are not lost and need no water regeneration.

Zwingli acknowledges that HE invented Believer's Baptism (1525) but we can trace it back to many forms of PAGAN BAPTISM. This is the Baptist Calvinist view that God HAND PICKS some and predestines other to burn in hell (not an inch long) to prove how powerful God is.

We have fully covered Zwingli above.

JoAnn: Paul uses similar language concerning himself when he says, "I am crucified with Christ" (Gal 2:20). He is obviously speaking of that same spiritual "baptism" by which we have been placed in Christ and have thus passed with Him through death into resurrection life. If we were literally dead to sin, then we wouldn't need to "reckon" it true or live the new life by faith; we would automatically never sin again. That a Christian may sin shows that water baptism doesn't effect a literal crucifixion with Christ. It portrays a spiritual baptism into Christ which the believer must live by faith.
--"And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power: Col 2:10

Now, read verse 11 and note the colon at the end. That, and the form of parallelism Paul uses means that verse 12 is a fuller explanation of verse11:

----In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Col 2:11

Which means INSTEAD of literal CIRCUMCISION or DEATH ON THE CROSS TO "CUT OFF SIN" we are:

----BURIED with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of THE OPERATION OF GOD, who hath raised him from the dead. Col 2:12

You see, it is not PERSONAL BELIEF that has the power but the faith in THE OPERATION OF GOD.

--And you, being dead IN your sins and the uncircumcision of YOUR flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; Col 2:13

Faith only does not remit sins.

Being quickened means that we have a NEW or A holy spirit.

JoAnn: In that context, then, we can understand Peter's declaration, "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us...by the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Pt 3:21). He is no more saying that the physical act of baptism literally saves us than Paul is saying that it literally makes us dead to sin. The few difficult isolated verses such as these cannot contradict the overwhelming number of other Scriptures which are crystal clear.

-Water baptism, says Peter, is a "figure" or symbolization of a spiritual baptism into Christ effected by the Holy Spirit and which is settled forever in heaven but which must be lived out by faith while we are here upon earth.

--"The like FIGURE whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: 1 Peter 3:21

Ken: The death of animals was a TYPE or figure: the Death of Jesus Christ is the ANTI-TYPE. Are we to say that BOTH the animals AND the sacrifice of Jesus Christ are just 'FIGURES"? No, I know that you would be horrified by that. But you are saying the same thing about BAPTISM being a substitute or INSTEAD OF.

There is NO remission without some SACRIFICE. Do we want to live on a TYPE ark with all of those animals? Or had we rather participate in its ANTI-TYPE where FIGURE means the fulfillment or reality in a spiritual sense. Baptism is an INSTEAD of ride on an ark. Baptism is an INSTEAD OF literal death by being stuck or empaled on a tree. The elite rejected the COUNSEL OF GOD FOR THEIR LIVES. Do you suppose they were saved? Doesn't say. Jesus said you can PARTICIPATE just by being baptized: do you want to remove HIS authority and say, "No, I will just believe and I won't have to CONFESS that I need a substitute because I am hand picked."

The FIGURE is not a just a symbol but the REAL "INSTEAD OF" dying on the cross: I call that heavy loaded GRACE. By analogy, a rich uncle's will leaves you a million dollars and the CHECK is the symbol or INSTEAD OF the ready cash. But, don't spend it until you endorse it.

---Antitupon (g499) an-teet'-oo-pon; neut. of a comp. of 473 and 5179; corresponding ["antitype"], i.e. a representative, counterpart: - (like) figure (whereunto).

FAITH ONLY is doing an end-run to say that FAITH ONLY is the FIGURE or BAPTISM which is a FIGURE of the Ark. BUT, Noah had to get in the COFFIN and trust God

---Anti (g473) an-tee'; a prim. particle; opposite, i.e. INSTEAD or because of (rarely in addition to): - for, in the room of. Often used in composition to denote contrast, requital, substitution, correspondence, etc.

---Tupos (g5179) too'-pos; from 5180; a MARK or DIE (as struck), i.e. (by impl.) a STAMP or scar; by anal. a shape, i.e. a statue, (fig.) style or resemblance; spec. a sampler ("type"), i.e. a model (for imitation) or instance (for warning): - en- (ex-) ample, fashion, figure, form, manner, pattern, print.

WATER BAPTISM IS AN INSTEAD OF real death. Jesus said that

Faith + (kai) Baptism gives salvation (why question Jesus)

FAITH + REPENTANCE + BAPTISM GIVES REMISSION OF SINS

A person who actively disbelieves does not have to reject baptism because he is damned already.

BUT I DON'T HAVE TO! If Jesus says that baptism of the faithful remits sin then literacy 101a does not have to hear god say: "I shall not remit the sins or save or give A holy Spirit or create a new heart, or give refreshing to one who IS NOT BAPTIZED." Doesn't have to.

He that COMES TO THE WINDOW + WITH GIFT CHECK IN HAND = shall be paid.

He that DOES NOT come to the window WILL NOT be paid

Doesn't have to say:

He that does not HAVE FREE GIFT CHECK IN HAND shall NOT BE paid.

Did you notice that you had to EXPLAIN AWAY all of those passages? John MacArthur noted: "It might be that Acts 2:38 means what it says."

Ken

JoAnn: The early Reformers such as Martin Luther were Catholics who, unfortunately, retained some Catholic dogmas, among them BAPTISMAL REGENERATION and infant baptism. These HERESIES are still held by some Protestant denominations today.

Ken: This is the typical BAPTIST heresy which began in 1525: too late to be a CHRISTIAN view. Joanne should do an exegesis of ONE OF her PROOF TEXTS and not just toss out a lot of HISTORICAL stuff which she does not defend with citations. Furthermore, I can cite these people and passages to prove that this is BAPTIST DOGMA and not CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE.

But, Martin Luther REFUTES. While we might reject some of His premise, we post this to prove that people had always believed that GOD worked through the Water just as He could live in a body, 75% Water. Luther believed that the work was GOD'S. Furthermore, FAITH ONLY is acknowledged to be from NEW SPIRITS and he meant Zwingli. Therefore, Luther endorses the fact that Zwingli is UNIQUE in inventing the Baptist's form of baptism. Luther,

. "For to be baptized in the name of God is to be baptized not by men, but by God Himself. Therefore although it is performed by human hands,

. it is nevertheless truly God's own work.

. "From this fact every one may himself readily infer that it is a far higher work than any work performed by a man or a saint. For what work greater than the work of God can we do?

. "But here the DEVIL is busy to DELUDES us with false appearances, and lead us AWAY from the work of God to our OWN works.

. For there is a much more splendid appearance when a Carthusian does many great and difficult works and we all think much more of that which we do and merit ourselves.

. "But the Scriptures teach thus: Even though we collect in one mass the works of all the monks, however splendidly they may shine, they would not be as noble and good as if God should pick up a straw.

. Why? Because the person is nobler and better. Here, then, we must not estimate the person according to the works, but the works according to the person, from whom they must derive their nobility.

. "But INSANE reason will not regard this, and

. "because Baptism DOES NOT SHINE like the works which WE do, it is to be esteemed as nothing.

. "Therefore it is pure wickedness and blasphemy of the DEVIL that now our NEW SPIRIT, to MOCK at Baptism, OMIT from it God's Word and institution...

Zwingli INVENTED faith only and Luther admits it.

. "Aye, my friend, who does not know that water is water if tearing things asunder is what we are after? But how dare you thus INTERFERE with God's order, and tear away the most precious treasure with which God has connected and enclosed it, and which He will not have separated?

. For the kernel in the water is God's Word or command and the name of God which is a treasure greater and nobler than heaven and earth.

. Comprehend the difference, then, that Baptism is quite another thing than all other water; not on account of the natural quality,

. but because something more noble is here added;

. for God Himself stakes His honor His power and might on it. Therefore it is not only natural water, but a divine, heavenly, holy, and blessed water, and in whatever other terms we can praise it,

. all on account of the WORD, which is a heavenly, holy WORD, that no one can sufficiently extol, for it has, and is able to do, all that God is and can do [since it has all the virtue and power of God comprised in it].

The faith which saves is in THE OPERATION OF GOD. When the Pharisees rejected John's baptism they failed to accept His counsel and therefore MALIGNED HIS POWER:

. "And all the people that heard him, and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John. Luke 7:29

. "But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being NOT baptized of him. Luke 7:30

Those who have FAITH will be baptized: those who are not baptized are DAMNED ALREADY because they in effect called God a liar.

Like all emerging Catholics, infant baptism continued. However, Luther spoke of people able to have FAITH, but FAITH ONLY to him included FAITH IN THE WORD OF GOD.

. "In the second place, since we know now what Baptism is, and how it is to be regarded, we must also learn

. "why and for what purpose it is instituted; that is, what it profits, gives and works. And this also we cannot discern better than from the words of Christ above quoted:

. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.

. "Therefore state it most simply thus, that the power, work, profit, fruit, and end of Baptism is this, namely, to SAVE. For no one is baptized in order that he may become a PRINCE, but, as the words declare, that he be saved. But to be saved, we know, is nothing else than to be delivered from SIN, death, and the devil, and

. "to enter into the kingdom of Christ, and to live with Him forever.

. "Here you see again how highly and precious we should esteem Baptism, because in it we obtain such an unspeakable treasure, which also indicates sufficiently that it cannot be ordinary mere water.

. "For mere WATER could not do such a thing,

. "but the WORD does it, and (as said above)

. "the fact that the NAME of God is comprehended therein.

. "But where the name of God is, there must be also life and salvation, that it may indeed be called a divine, blessed, fruitful, and gracious water; for by the WORD such power is imparted to Baptism that it is a laver of regeneration, as St. Paul also calls it, Titus 3, 5.

. NOT by works of RIGHTEOUSNESS which we have done, but according to his mercy

. HE SAVED us,
. by the WASHING (baptism) of REGENERATION,
. and RENEWING of the HOLY SPIRIT; Titus 3:5

FAITH ONLY tells Jesus: "No, YOU will not WASH ME." Fine, says Jesus: "Then YOU will not get a NEW SPIRIT or A holy Spirit or A clear conscience, and YOU will have no part of me." FAITH ONLY does not WASH us or give us A holy spirit. Of faith only, Martin Luther continued:

. "But as our would-be wise, NEW spirits assert that faith alone saves, and that works and external things avail nothing, we answer:

. It is true, indeed, that nothing in us is of any avail but FAITH, as we shall hear still further. But these BLIND GUIDES are unwilling to see this, namely,

. that faith must have something which it BELIEVES, that is, of which it takes hold, and upon which it stands and rests.

. Thus faith clings to the water, and believes that it is Baptism, in which there is pure salvation and life;

. NOT through the water (as we have sufficiently stated), but through the fact that it is embodied in the Word and institution of God, and the NAME of God inheres in it.

Of those capable of believing Luther spoke for most scholars prior to ZWINGLI who confessed that HE invented BELIEVER'S BAPTISM or FAITH ONLY. So, it is probably fruitless to look for scholars who will support the Baptist latter- day 1525 view.

. "Now, if I believe this, what else is it than BELIEVING in God as in Him who has given and planted His WORD into this ordinance, and PROPOSES to us this EXTERNAL thing wherein we may apprehend such a treasure?

. "Now, they are so MAD as to separate FAITH and that to which faith CLINGS and is bound though it be something external. Yea, it shall and must be something external,

. that it may be apprehended by the senses, and understood and thereby be brought into the heart,
. as indeed the entire Gospel is an EXTERNAL, VERBAL preaching. In short, what God does and works in us He proposes to work through such EXTERNAL ORDINANCES.

. "Wherever, therefore, He speaks, yea, in whichever direction or by whatever means He speaks, thither FAITH MUST LOOK, and to that it must hold. Now here we have the words: He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. To what else do they refer than to Baptism, that is, to the water comprehended in God's ordinance?

. "Hence it follows that whoever rejects Baptism rejects the Word of God, faith, and Christ, who directs us thither and binds us to Baptism."

Baptism is the TIME and PLACE where our bodies are washed as a REQUEST to God to give us A holy spirit or A clear conscience. FAITH ONLY fails because it DOES NOT REQUEST a clear conscience or a "sprinkling of the heart" at the time and place of water baptism.

No one prior to you Baptist's Zwingli who INVENTED the idea of FAITH ONLY and claimed that He did. Martin Luther agreed that Zwingl invented the heresy. 1525 is TOO LATE to be Biblically FAITHFUL.

Ken

Dana
The Mikveh was the scripturual type of baptism. Jesus was baptised by John the Baptist because John the Baptist was the legal High Priest at the time, but they (the religious leaders of the time)killed his father (I believe his mother also) and he escaped to live in the desert.
Baptism is a easy subject to answer if you have a true heart, a lover of the truth. Use your concordance and look up and read all the verses in context concerning baptism.

To God be the Glory
Joe McKnight

This post has been edited! It was a copy of a document
that was taken out of context. Credit was not given to
it's origin.

We did locate the entire document, and the below link is
provided should you like to read it.

http://www.bible.acu.edu/stone-campbell/Etexts/lun16.html


Thank You

Joe,

John was from the tribe of Levi on both his mother and father’s lineage. His father was not High Priest. Some make the mistake because they see his father from the Abijah lineage. That was split into 24 courses with Abijah the 8th in line to serve because of the proliferation of the priestly tribe during the time of David. Each served for a week at a time.

The man killed in 2Chron died centuries before this man was born. Time warp Joe.

On the subject of Baptism for salvation, what happens if one dies between the confession of Christ as Savior and the trip into the water? Can one such as this go to Heaven? What if one drowns in the Baptistry and does not return from the dipping? I know these seem extreme but I feel that Baptism is an act of obedience immediately following salvation. The first act of obedience.

What does Joe say?

Henry

Hank, maybe YOU winked out for a moment.

I don't know much about the lineage of the High Priesthood, but if I am not mistaken the Abijah in 2 Chronicles was a king and not a high priest. And I don't see any high priests ending their reign in 2 Chronicles.

Lu.1:5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of ABIA: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.

During the inter testament period and at the time of John the Baptist, the HIGH PRIESTHOOD was purchased as the highest bidder. Since there was no legitimate high priest, Jesus as God saw John the Baptist as the only one suitable for HIM to select to wash Him. For instance Josephus informs us of this fact as well as the evil of the SEEKER SYSTEM of Aggrippa:

http://www.piney.com/Ant-20.html

--------"3. Herod also, the brother of the deceased Agrippa, who was then possessed of the royal authority over Chalcis, petitioned Claudius Caesar for the authority OVER the TEMPLE, and the MONEY of the sacred treasure, and the CHOICE of the high priests, and obtained all that he petitioned for. So that after that time this authority continued among all his descendants till the end of the war (1) Accordingly, Herod removed the last high priest, called Cimtheras, and bestowed that dignity on his successor Joseph, the son of Cantos."

The place of sacrifice and the LAVER was in the inner court: this was not the temple. Zechariah being chosen as the incense priest had to go into the HOLY PLACE. Therefore, he would be WASHED before he could come closer to the presence of God thought to be in the Most Holy Place. The Holy Place is the fleshly TYPE of the church of Christ as the spiritual fulfillment. Therefore NO Levitical noise maker (not music) could enter into the type of the church of Christ; no one could enter into the type of the church of Christ who was not of the lineage of Levi and then Aaron.

Therefore, Jesus (who may have had Gentile blood) established a NEW PRIESTHOOD where both Jew and Gentile can be THEIR OWN incense priest--where no musician can go without being CUT OFF. Those who demand the tithe based on being Levitical priests or Levitical musicians REPUDIATE the blood of Christ and the NEW Priesthood where ALL OF THE BILLS are paid. They ARE NOT and can NEVER BE priests after Melchizedek TO whom the priesthood TITHED. This is why Paul insists that the PREACHERCRAFT must work with his own hands to support the weak and RELIEVE the Christian Priesthood of its burden. If you TAKE tithes then you TAKE the people and Paul would label you as a ROBBER.

Furthermore, in the church as Holy Place one must accept the sacrifice of Jesus as replacing the animals with "noise" and one must be WASHED IN THE LAVER. The sacrifices were dissected and therefore WASHED completely inside and outside. Since we don't want Jesus to die for us as in Believer's Baptism, we allow someone to wash the OUTSIDE and REQUEST God to sprinkle, wash, circumcise the INSIDE or SPIRIT.

In the church or Holy Place God ONLY ADDED those who accept His death to replace our death, let HIM wash of Sin: not because of FAITH ONLY but Faith in the OPERATION OF GOD. Those added to the church of Christ were baptized INTO Christ AFTER He was allowed to WASH them in the spirit.

All of the symbolism in the Old Testament, the direct command of Jesus, the practice of Peter, the writings of Paul and the history of the church prior to about 1500 agrees with JESUS: that baptism of believers is what make Him remit our sins. BELIEVING takes evidence and there is no evidence that the numerous things connected to baptism is ever attributed to FAITH which does not obey. So, what saves: look at the BOAT story by Mark Waggoner and you can agree that it is uninformed to pick out our favorite part of the process.

Jesus said that those who BELIEVED but refused to be baptized REJECTED THE COUNSEL OF GOD. So, how can a believer who refused to obey the GOD OF THE UNIVERSE and who insists that Jesus, Peter, Paul and church history is just FLAT WRONG.

How about the infant in the jungle who WOULD have believed when he heard the gospel. If they young boy went to Preacher's school he would have become a missionary: and he went to school. But on the way across the Pacific his plane crashed. But he was picked up by a boat and delivered to the edge of the jungle and went on his way to preach to the lost. However, on the way a tiger ate him. So, what happens to the soul of the boy who would have believed if he had heard if the missionary had not died on the way? Just leave those cases to God.

There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING you can dream up which will change one jot or tittle of the DIRECT COMMAND OF JESUS. So, to me, it is a LACK OF SAVING FAITH to try to make the words of Jesus of none effect.

Jesus bas baptized to FULFILL ALL RIGHTEOUSNESS: He was baptized by one who COULD have been a CARNAL high priest. Fulfill all righteousness means to "fully preach baptism."

The totality of the New Testament says that if you don't submit your external body to the washing of water AS A REQUEST fo the Spiritual High Priest to wash your spirit so that it is A holy spirit, then HE does not allow you into the body of Christ where NO MUSICIAN DARED TO GO EVEN IN THE VILEST OF PAGANISM. And you have to be in the Holy Place to approach the incense altar and go INTO the Most Holy Place as the ONLY place God is worshiped in utter silence and darkness: Jesus said that God meets you ONLY in your now-holy spirit or mind.

When the Levitical musicians (noise makers) try to ESCORT you into the Holy Place (church of Christ) and play while you are eating the bread and praying and then want to go into the Most Holy place with you they are terminally evil or terminally ignorant. I say it lovingly for those needing to flee while the Locusts separate people by their MARK.

The "god" of music and burning babies in the Old Testament was SATURN: the number of his name in the original Chaldee is 666. After the Jews were cursed with the law to protect against LAWLESSNESS, the old people died in the wilderness and the children were CARRIED INTO CANAAN land many of whom were sacrificed to Saturn under various names as the MUSICAL TEAMS played their noisy "music." The musical taking the kids to CANAAN LAND'S god with music MARKED them with music hoping to get a BETTER MESSAGE from their Satan.

And the TITHE was added because of this same MUSICAL IDOLATRY at Mount Sinai where God sentenced the NATION to worship the starry host: and they almost always did.

But not even the VILEST ever went into the Holy Place until the FOREIGNERS AND THEI WIVES took their music and idols right into the Holy places.

SHE was to rise again in the end time and His/Her MARK is 666 and she MARKS the forehead (mind) and hands (tithing, ministries, busy work) with MUSIC: the same device Satan (Lucifer, Zoe) used to MARK in the garden of Eden.

"To CANAAN Land your own your way / where the souls of man EVER diee."

Ken Sublett

I have no problem with baptism being part of a believer’s life and walk. I do have problems with exactly where it fits in to the walk and baptism’s role. We see unquestionable evidence that baptism is part of the preaching process.

Act 8:35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same Scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.
Act 8:36 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?
Act 8:37 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.
Act 8:38 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.
Act 8:39 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.

Back to my original question for Joe McKnight. I have the same access to resources as Kenny Boy. It would be better if he used the KJV in his last response.


Luk 1:5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abijah: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.

Mat 23:35 That's why you will be held guilty for the murder of every good person, beginning with the good man Abel. This also includes Barachiah's son Zechariah, the man you murdered between the temple and the altar.


Luk 3:2 Annas and Caiaphas were the Jewish high priests. At that time God spoke to Zechariah's son John, who was living in the desert.

Zacharias, son of Barachias - It is not certainly known who this was. Some have thought that it was the Zecharias whose death is recorded in 2Ch_24:20-21. He is there called the son of Jehoiada; but it is known that it was common among the Jews to have two names, as Matthew is called Levi; Lebbeus, Thaddeus; and Simon, Cephas. Others have thought that Jesus referred to Zecharias the prophet, who might have been massacred by the Jews, though no account of his death is recorded. It might have been known by tradition.

Luk 1:5 -
In the days of Herod - See the notes at Mat_2:1.
Of the course of Abia - When the priests became so numerous that they could not at once minister at the altar, David divided them into 24 classes or courses, each one of which officiated for a week, 1 Chr. 24. The class or course (shift) of Abia was the “eighth” in order, 1Ch_24:10. Compare 2Ch_8:14. The word “course” means the same as “class,” or order. The Greek-based word “Abia” is the same as the Hebrew-based word “Abijah.”
His wife was of the daughters of Aaron - A descendant of Aaron, the first high priest of the Jews; so that “John the Baptist” was descended, on the father’s and the mother’s side, from priests. Our Saviour was not on either side. John would have been legally entitled to a place among the priests; our Saviour, being of the tribe of Judah, would not.

Joe, can one be saved that just doesn’t make it to the dipping? If the answer is yes, than it must be the first act of obedience.

Affectionately
Hank

The KJV reads:

Luke 1:5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.

1:6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.

The rotating priesthood meant that a priest may get to be the incense priest only once in his life. The Bible says that he was of the course of Abia or Abijah, he was offering incense, and that Jesus PICKED the prophesied John to baptize him. Therefore, if you can SUPPOSE SO that John's ancestor was slain, most men have more than one child. This is surely a charitable way to help Jesus keep from just making up the story.

The Spirit of Christ is very bright: He could just as easily say: "Go preach. He that believes shall be saved and his first act of obedience shall be baptism." But, he did not. For entering into the incense altar, washing of the body was an act of obedience but it is the same OBEDIENCE which gives meaning to the faith without which NO PERSON can be a priest in the Holy Place WITHOUT being washed inside and outside. Without the preparation the incense priest COULD NOT enter into the temple.

This is called Sunday School in Exile. Now, the Bible does not say anything about PREACHING in church: the word is DIALOG. So, I don't ask permission to speak.

So true, Hank, all that I know I leaned from THEM OLD REFERENCE books. It helps to read the historical church Fathers none of which agree that the magic is in the water but most agree that Baptism in order the forgiveness of sins (yes, an act of obedience)is the meaning of the WORDS of Jesus. Squirming around trying to minimize the power of God to put HIS POWER in an act of obedience MIGHT question God's power to put HIS POWER, Fatherhood and Spirit into a MORTAL man who would die as a criminal.

Ken Sublett

Hank:
Your statements show you have done a little studying of the Word, but you are a lot like I was; In that I offend bought off at face value what was taught me by Church leaders. This was a very big mistake that I have repeated of and will not do again.
Like me answer your last Question first, this way those that just want to argue can move on to find another subject to argue over.
My answer” I’m not the One that makes the decision as to who’s in and who’s out”.

Now about the murder of John the Baptist’s father.
In Luke 11:51 Jesus tell us that Zacharias was killed between the Altar and the Temple.
In II Chronicles 24:20- 21 Zechariah was stoned in the court of the house of the LORD.

Zacharias and Zechariah are not the same person.
Also remember that at the time of Zacharias murder the government was killing two year old and younger male babies, trying to killing the King of the Jews. So when Zacharias: not Zechariah, would not tell where his son was at, they killed him.

Hank Thank you for the opportunity to help clear this up.

To God be the Glory
Joe McKnight

Joe,

Thanks for your response about baptism….you are so right…it’s not our decision who’s in or who’s out. I know what God has shown me through His word and by the character of His Son. I don’t use a checklist regarding salvation…it’s by His grace!

When I look back at the reference you made to Luke 11:51 I find the following:

These are the words of Jesus. He’s talking about the “prophets” not “priests” in these verses. Compare the same message elsewhere in the scriptures. Look at Mt 23:35 which shares the same events. (A-Z in the shedding of blood…beginning of scripture in Genesis to last of OT prophets… Zechariah)


Mat 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zechariah son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

Compare to Zec 1:1 and see He is speaking of the prophet.

Zec 1:1 In the eighth month, in the second year of Darius, came the word of the LORD unto Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, the son of Iddo the prophet, saying...etc.


Luk 11:46 And he said, Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers.
Luk 11:47 Woe unto you! for ye build the sepulchers of the prophets, and your fathers killed them.
Luk 11:48 Truly ye bear witness that ye allow the deeds of your fathers: for they indeed killed them, and ye build their sepulchers.
Luk 11:49 Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute:
Luk 11:50 That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation;
Luk 11:51 From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation.
Luk 11:52 Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.

Joe, I don’t see the murder of JTB’s dad in Luke at all. I do see his prophecy of JTB’s ministry:

Luk 1:67 And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying,
Luk 1:68 Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people,
Luk 1:69 And hath raised up a horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David;
Luk 1:70 As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began:
Luk 1:71 That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us;
Luk 1:72 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant;
Luk 1:73 The oath which he swore to our father Abraham,
Luk 1:74 That he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear,
Luk 1:75 In holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life.
Luk 1:76 And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways;
Luk 1:77 To give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins,
Luk 1:78 Through the tender mercy of our God; whereby the dayspring from on high hath visited us,
Luk 1:79 To give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way of peace.
Luk 1:80 And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of his showing unto Israel.

Thanks for prompting me to clarify the position. I was sure that JTB’s dad was not high priest. I just needed to look a little deeper.

======================================

Kenny,

I appreciate your doing Joe’s “light work” for him. Thanks for agreeing with me that there is no power in the water. I agree there is power in obedience to God. I’m not trying to split hairs here, but the point is a stumbling block for both sides of the baptism issue. I personally feel that both sides should agree with the act of baptism being that first act of obedience. Its timing regarding the acceptance of Christ appears to be of major importance in the Word. If it wasn’t how can one explain the following:

Act 8:34 And the eunuch answered Philip, and said, I pray thee, of whom speaketh the prophet this? of himself, or of some other man?
Act 8:35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same Scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.
Act 8:36 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?
Act 8:37 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.
Act 8:38 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.
Act 8:39 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.

It’s obvious to me that if Philip “preached Jesus to him” and he came away with baptism as part of the message; Philip shared with him how baptism immediately follows belief and acceptance of the gift of God. We have his exact words in order with his actions. “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” Immersion followed immediately.

My opinion as to why this story is included in scripture is to answer the question about baptism. The chain of events are not able to be disputed.

Heeyyyy!! (thumbs up!!)

Hank

Yes, there is no power in the water any more than there is power in the paper of a check for a million dollars.

Therefore, I just THROW AWAY the paper? NOT!

8:36 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?

---You see lack of FAITH stands between you and BAPTISM. Lack of faith does not stand between you and REMISSION OF SINS. Since SPIRITUAL means LOGICAL, you don't go to step C without going through step D. This is not legalistic but just common sense: you won't jump when I YELL "Copper Head" unless you believe there is a copper head under your feet. As long as you continue to PROTEST against the Word then the SPIRIT is not speaking to you. Sorry about that.

8:37 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.

Based on the DIRECT COMMAND of Jesus, the understanding and preaching of PETER who HEARD Jesus and the history of the early church, Peter did not see FAITH (not simple belief) as producing SALVATION or REMISSION of SINS.

RATHER, lack of faith is ALWAYS a legal barrier to true baptism because they who do not believe are CONDEMNED ALREADY. Men like Zwingli began by saying that you CANNOT baptize infants because they lack FAITH. This easily led to minimizing BAPTISM but he minimized baptism without FAITH.

Peter did not say at Pentecost: You are NOW saved and your sins have been WASHED AWAY. He would have contradicted Jesus, his own belief, his own preaching and his own practice.

Philip did not say: You are now saved because SALVATION gives you the RIGHT to be baptized. NO, believing gives you the right to be BAPTIZED and baptism is where God takes out the OLD MAN of dead bones AND fills you with a NEW MAN with spiritual life. Faith in bathing does not make you clean: faith in bathing permits you to get into the shower.

The Eunoch did not REJOICE and cry out: I am saved.

Act 8:39 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.

In the place of BAPTISM, Acts 3:19 says:

Acts 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and be CONVERTED, that your sins may be BLOTTED OUT, when the times of REFRESHING shall come from the presence of the Lord;

Refreshing means that you are a NEW MAN. Andronikos: a man of VICTORY.

You cannot get to the SOAP'S cleansing power without the WATER. The same Peter who promised the gift of A holy spirit, refreshing or a new man, or a spirit of rejoicing said that it is AT BAPTISM which doesn't wash internally that we REQUEST from God A clear conscience or clear consciousness: a co-perception or the HOLY SPIRIT as the ONLY thing that makes us NEW MEN and even remotely able to COMPREHEND the deeper things of God.

As for prophets or priests, my point is that WHOMEVER died it did not keep John from being BORN and being the descendant of Levi and of the priestly line. Get it?

Joe's point is that Jesus needed to DIE, He needed to FULFILL ALL RIGHTEOUSNESS and fulfill the TYPES of being baptized (washed) by a priest before He could take His blood into the holy precincts which are in heaven. Fulfill all righteousness means to FULLY PREACH BAPTISM. If all of John's priestly ancestors died then John was just a GHOST.

Mankind has an outside which the Jews washed and an inside which they refused to have God wash. This is why they were full of dead men's bones. In other words they had old dead men living inside. When we allow our body to be washed in connection with that of Jesus then He as HIGH PRIEST washes our insides and we become Andronikos: a new man. That never happens by FAITH ONLY.

When Jesus was baptized, the DOVE which belonged to the feminist MOTHER GODDESSES where her emasculated priests and whose DAUGHTER was the true LOGOS (Jesus) and forced the 'minor jehovah' to form a musical worship team to worship HER, instead rested on the SON who is pronounced by the DOVE speaking the word as FATHER. If you don't comprehend the Old Testament and the paganizm which it REFUTED then you don't grasp that this act ended the MATRIARCHAL religion sweeping the "sisterhood" with the emasculated priests honoring the female goddesses.

Among the Greeks, the pagans never sang to Zeus or the male "gods." They only made music to his female counterpart. The end time religion is Babylonian Whorish with music.

In Isaiah 11:1-4 that SPIRIT OF GOD is the Spirit of knowledge, etc. Therefore, at the time and placing of the washing of Jesus the dove rested on the BRANCH to teach that the Holy Spirit speaks God's supernatural knowledge to us so that we know the Mind of Christ as the Spirit of God. If you can't grasp that then the only way Scripture says that you will ever see it is that if you have FAITH you die and cannot WRESTLE with the Spirit of God trying to convince Him that Jesus didn't know what He was commanding.

Only when you have that faith, like the Eunuch who wants to leap into the water will God give you that Holy Spirit or power to CO-PERCEIVE the Mind of God when you COME OUT OF THE WATER possessing a NEW MAN in place of the old dead rotted body in a human tomb.

He that believes AND is batized will be saved, have their sins washed way, become a new man as a REFRESHED person, receive A holy spirit fitted to communicate with The HOLY SPIRIT Who lives in the holy place of our mind--a type of the Most Holy Place where no musical performer would dare to go unless still filled with dead men's bones.

If you don't believe that then you CANNOT be baptized and washed by Jesus Christ our High Priest: only if we let Him wash us concurrent with the washing of our outside will He translate you into that Holy Place in heaven.

No one is said to have been saved or washed who argued with the Infinite God of the Universe. I shudder!

Ken Sublett

Kenny,

You confuse me with your comments. How can you even compare money with God’s grace? How do know anything about my faith? I don’t have faith in baptism; I have faith in God and the promises He has made to me. My God doesn’t lie or have a series of hoops to jump through. He does require my obedience if I truly love Him and value His gift of salvation. If my memory serves me well He was tested by none less than an attorney. One may gather him to be a “legalist.” He was trying to justify himself. Kenny, that’s what your comments to me and others say to me…you seem to be trying to justify yourself. I don’t question your knowledge…just your use of it.

Jesus said it best of all when tested. I’m using the LITV (literal translation) bible for simplicity.

Luk 10:25 And behold, a certain lawyer stood up, testing Him and saying, Teacher, What shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?
Luk 10:26 And He said to him, What has been written in the Law? How do you read it?
Luk 10:27 And answering, he said, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength," and with all your mind, and "your neighbor as yourself." Deut. 6:5; Lev. 19:18
Luk 10:28 And He said to him, You have answered rightly; do this, and you shall live.

I know this precedes the cross; Jesus is the fulfillment of the law, not the replacement; and there is no way to love God without obedience. You can obey God without loving Him. That’s where legalism comes in again. Faith does not produce salvation. Salvation doesn’t give you any rights either.

Kenny, we are talking about a “GIFT” from God. Would you agree that “SALVATION” and “ETERNAL LIFE in HEAVEN with GOD” are one and the same? Could I get a “yes or no” on this question?

Is it possible for me to love Him with “ALL” my heart, soul, strength and mind, as well as my neighbor, and not accept the “GIFTS” that He has for me? (Y or N please)

If you answered “Y” to the first and “N” to the second then we agree on the “SALVATION” process. I still maintain that baptism is the first act of obedience to my GOD upon receipt of that GIFT through my SAVIOR and LORD.

I “RECEIVE” the gift and “SUBMIT”(obey) to the baptism. I choose to be a slave like Jesus in Phil 2:7-8 and “OBEDIENT” to the point of any kind of death He deems appropriate.

Thanks for the study!

Henry

Not talking about Kenny or Henny: talking about the WORD of God.

But motives must somehow figure in when you cannot just take the almost last words of Jesus at face value.

Here is the MONEY thing: Legalism is WORKING to EARN a WAGE of which you can BOAST. Believer's Baptism teaches that you have to ENDURE the burden of the Law until you are personally BROKEN DOWN and yell for help.

Legalism was the BURDEN LADED on the backs of people used like pack animals by PREACHERS who just made up the FAITH ONLY scheme. Their burden is defined by Jesus as:

Phortizo (g5412) for-tid'-zo; to load up (as a vessel or animal), figurative: to overburden with ceremony or spiritual ANXIETY: - lade, be heavy laden. (Lots of "invoices")

YOU will always be anxious until you are able to just submit to Jesus by faith without the LEGALISM of trying to repudiate the words of Jesus, the words and practice of Peter, the words of Paul and church history before the Baptists arose. Burden in Hebrew is:

Massa (h4853) mas-saw'; from 5375; a burden; spec. tribute, or (abstr.) porterage; fig. an utterance, chiefly a doom, espec. singing; mental, desire: - burden, carry away, prophecy, * they set, SONGg, tribute.

The "burden" of Jesus is not being a "pack animal" for the ceremonial legalistic performers but just going along with Jesus and allowing Him to carry the burden AND let you carry the INVOICE which,in Greek, is:

Phortion (g5413) for-tee'-on; dimin. of 5414; an invoice (as part of freight), i.e. (fig.) a task or service: - burden.

Therefore, God Incarnate used a term which is like a check for a million dollars. Instead of you having to work for it or to CARRY THE BURDEN laded by clergy "taking away the key to knowledge" Jesus said that YOU can just carry the INVOICE which is like a check or letter of credit.

BELIEVER'S BAPTISM teaches that Jesus has to die all over for those SUPERNATURALLY chosen. Therefore, you must BEAR THE BURDEN of the law until you get the HIGH FIVE that you are a superior one.

Baptism is the ASSURANCE or the MARK that you are part of the ELECT because you have chosen to follow the ELECT PATTERN established by Jesus. I have seen a basket containing a million silver dollars: you could not carry it. However, by GRACE someone gives you a check and you carry the INVOICE. This is a concept used by Jesus so I won't accept the rebuke for using it.

In the bible a PERSON OF FAITH has no burden: they just want to jump into the water without asking:"do i haaavvvTa"? You will ALWAYS question whether your FAITH is GOOD ENOUGH but I will just carry the INVOICE and know that BAPTISM was when the Spirit MARKED me as being faithful. No one truly understands baptism at first but they know that their faith LEADS them directly to baptism as a simple act of faith. Faith- only has to PERFECT its faith or as one man claims: "progressive justification by faith."

Accepting Baptism for most of use put no trust in our FAITH or our OBEDIENCE: we had FAITH IN THE OPERATION OF GOD. You will have to WOBBLE with your faith forever knowing that YOUR FAITH is built on REPUDIATING the direct command of Jesus and WORKING LEGALISTICALLY to rationalize that "maybe Peter didn't mean what he said."

Baptism is the MARK of whether one is resting on human pride or THEIR FAITH rather than on the promise of God. Listening is obedience, believing is obedience, confessing is obedience, repenting is obedience, baptism is obedience. And after your SINS ARE REMITTED you are still SAVED BY FAITH which obeys for the rest of your life. You want your ONCE FAITH to purchase your salvation, but Paul meant that FAITH OBEYS the commands of God. Faith UNTIL THE END is the faith which saves.

But the Spirit of God is not going to speak to one without A holy spirit or clear conscience which is ONLY promised at baptism. Be baptized and carry the "check" or repudiate it and carry the burden all alone. Faith Only is built on Law and a PERSONAL death of Christ just like the Catholic Mass. Baptism by faith only is built on Grace.

Ken Sublett

Mr. Sublett,

I use the term out of respect for your discourse and defense of baptism as part of the salvation process. Until this point I have not been able to identify the unquestionable answer. My eyes have been opened by this particular part of your discourse.

[“Baptism is the MARK of whether one is resting on human pride or THEIR FAITH rather than on the promise of God. Listening is obedience, believing is obedience, confessing is obedience, repenting is obedience, baptism is obedience. And after your SINS ARE REMITTED you are still SAVED BY FAITH which obeys for the rest of your life. You want your ONCE FAITH to purchase your salvation, but Paul meant that FAITH OBEYS the commands of God. Faith UNTIL THE END is the faith which saves.”]

This takes the “cheapness” out of the gospel presented in most places by most people.

Erik

Thanks very much.

Most of us don't understand baptism and this, I believe,is why the most important word in the church is DIALOG. Wrestling with one another and even poking fun is not evil but rather helps all of us try to focus our mind on the Word.

My mind is focused every time I discuss this issue and those tender hearted souls need to jump into the dialog and help us all focus.

I have seen things on baptism and music I have never seen before simply because I have to arm wrestle. That, I believe, is the meaning of church as "school of the Bible."

Ken sublett

Mr. Sublett,

You are most welcome. I am truly grateful for the study. My prayer is that others will take the time to study and grow in God’s grace. Focusing on the Word is where growth is since our Savior is literally the Word made flesh.

Could I ask you a couple personal questions? I have no other agenda than to better understand you as a brother in Christ; one considerably more versed in all areas than I.

How much time do you spend percentage wise between prayer and reading the Word? For simplicity’s sake add up all the time you spend in the Word plus other text regarding church history, concordance, commentary etc. That’s one number. Prayer the other. What is the proportion of theses two? What is the proportion of these two added together compared to your total waking hours?

This forum seems to have been founded to discuss the biblical structure of worship for the first century church and the current church of Christ practices. I understand all of the human and spiritual forces at work today to replace what Jesus died for with a counterfeit. I understand from Paul’s letters that it was happening shortly after the birth of the church. Do you ever personally just close your eyes and wonder what Heaven will be like? Do you ever wonder what it will be like to meet Jesus face to face?

I may be showing my immaturity now but I do those things from time to time. It’s almost like a child’s fantasy. Recently there has been a song published that does just this. It’s called “I Can Only Imagine.” I know there is no place for entertainment in worship, but I wonder what God will really be like as we relate to Him for eternity. Please take the time to read the words that were penned by Bart Millard, but first understand his mindset in writing the song.

Behind the Music: I Can Only Imagine

When my father died of cancer in 1991, he left me with the assurance that he was headed to a better place. He used to always tell me that I was getting the raw end of the deal because I had to stick around here. For several years following his death, I would find myself writing the phrase, I can only imagine, on anything I could find. That simple phrase would give me a peace and a hope thinking about what my dad was finally experiencing.
Years later, in 1999, MercyMe was writing songs for an independent project. I remember coming home from a show and being wide awake on our bus at 2 o'clock in the morning. I was trying to write lyrics in an old notebook of mine, when all of a sudden, I stumbled across that phrase. About ten minutes later, the song was written. Some people say it's amazing that it was written in ten minutes, when really it had been on my heart for almost ten years.
As a worship leader I am constantly wondering if the most precious times of worship here on earth, are even close to what we will experience in the Kingdom of God. I personally believe we are merely scraping the heavens here. I grew up in church and was taught to worship a certain way, but even still I wonder how I might react when the day comes and I physically lay eyes on Jesus. I bet there will be a lot of Southern Baptists that can't sit still, and a lot of Charismatics that are speechless.

I can only imagine what it will be like
When I walk by Your side
I can only imagine what my eyes will see
When Your face is before me
I can only imagine

chorus:
Surrounded by Your glory
What will my heart feel
Will I dance for You, Jesus
Or in awe of You be still
Will I stand in Your presence
Or to my knees will I fall
Will I sing hallelujah
Will I be able to speak at all
I can only imagine
I can only imagine

I can only imagine when that day comes
And I find myself standing in the Son
I can only imagine when all I will do
Is forever, forever worship You
I can only imagine
I can only imagine

(chorus)

I can only imagine
When all I will do
Is forever, forever worship You
I can only imagine


I look forward to your response.

Erik

I don't count prayer time. Most of my WORKING hours from about seven in the morning until 10 or 11 at night (time out for a nap or two) is devoted to the Word: Paul's only WORSHIP word means to SEEK GOD by GIVING HEED TO HIS WORD. I think about heaven all of the time and go to sleep thinking about it. However, prayer most honors God when we ALLOW Him to speak to us through His Word. As CHURCH we absolutely insist that He doesn't get a microsecond to BUT IN. We will not be heard from "much praying" out of our own spirit.

Men like David, the Hittite Old Women and the American Indian wrote a song as their own personal property. Only after death was the Hittite songs put into the CATALOG and were available to use worshiping the COMPOSER. Therefore, the talent to write poetry is a valuable skill but it simply has no role to play in worship which is ONE AT A TIME as you think about God and His Word. The Psalms are metrical versions of Jewish history: their object was to teach the Word and not to "worship."

Erik, I have drawn a quick sketch to show the essential features of the Temple in Jerusalem. You should remember that when Israel fell back into musical idolatry at Mount Sinai, God turned them over to the worship of the starry hosts which they had worshiped in Egypt and their ancestors had worshiped in Babylonia. The key Wandering Star was Saturn whose number is 666.

When they fired God and demanded a king "like the nations" it was so that they could worship like the Babylonian-influenced nations. God picked their leaders or "gave them kings in my anger and took them away in my anger."

The temple as part of the curse added to the Law of Moses was a CARNAL type which God would replace as the BODY of Christ. The sacrifice was fulfilled by the sacrifice of Christ and the GREAT NOISE created by the Levites was, in all nations, exorcism and not worship. It drove away the evil spirits and "called" their god into his temple. Solomon's "music grove" or Topheth, named after the tambourine, was where Molech (Saturn, Satan, 666) was worshiped by the same musicians.

In the New Testament the military musicians fulfilled the type and the prophecy of Psalm 41 with musical mocking. After that, they had no role to play.

However, not even in the vilest of pagan temples could the musicians enter. Like the Jewish musicians their role was NEVER in the type of the church of Christ. Therefore, to attempt to use musical talent to "lead them into the presence of God" has no historical precedent as far as I can determine. Sounds like the end time to me!

The Laver was typified by Baptism. The Holy Place was a type of the church or Body of Christ. The symbols in the Holy Place typified learning, communion and personal prayer. This was always available to the common Jews in the synagogue and was available to all of us as the church. The church was not a pagan WORSHIP institution and no musicians or "worship leaders" could enter.

Jesus said that the PLACES of secular worship had been replaced by the human spirit or mind. This is typified by the Most Holy Place where the throne of grace existed as the symbolic presence of God. God as pure or holy Spirit dwells in our heart and this is the ONLY place spiritual (rational) worship can take place.

Sorry, but the concept of WORSHIP LEADER utterly fails to grasp the meaning of CHURCH as school of the Bible (T. Campbell said "school of Christ") and confuses it with a pagan or Catholic "worship center" having restored the temple, sacrifice (mass), priests and what they confess as Levitical Singers.

http://www.piney.com/Temple-Body.html

Ken Sublett

Mr. Sublett,

I appreciate your honesty in answering my question about time and prayer.

I disagree with your statement:
“However, prayer most honors God when we ALLOW Him to speak to us through His Word.”[KS]

I believe prayer most honors GOD when we lay the desires of our heart for others on the ALTAR covered with the BLOOD of the WORD made FLESH.

Selfless prayer appears to me to be an important act of OBEDIENCE like the rest you referred to in the sequence of FAITH unto SALVATION.

Our model for prayer is our LORD and SAVIOR. Should we not be OBEDIENT to HIS MODEL?

There are scores of references(at least 90) to prayer in just the 4 gospels.I firmly believe you are correct about spending time in the WORD and placing it in our hearts.

I believe BALANCE between PRAYER and WORD is critical. If the scales leaned in one direction over the other, I would choose PRAYER.

Consider: 1Th 5:17 Pray without ceasing.

Respectfully,

Erik

Mr. Sublett,

I am disappointed at how you treated my post “I can Only Imagine” by taking a section out of context. When I read your response I was amazed at how you passed over “prayer” to go directly back to the “Word.” I responded to that immediately. I didn’t have a chance to reference your website until this morning. That’s when I noticed how you took the songwriter’s explanation of how the song came to be, out of context. You made it seem like someone sent an email advocating music in worship. I was only trying to communicate the circumstances that lead up to the words being penned for a song. I never referred to the song being part of worship or any type of musical inference. I never made a statement about worship styles or their scriptural and historical correctness.

The point I was trying to make was this:

Some who are still and quiet in worship here on Earth may be dancing and vocal in Heaven. Some who are loud and physically active in worship here on Earth may be still at the feet of the Savior.

The purpose of the post was to determine what thoughts you may have of what Heaven will be like as we worship our Creator, Savior, Counselor, Comforter, Protector, Healer, Provider etc. for eternity.

I can only imagine!

Erik

Erik,

I believe you need to deal with, first of all, your designated (by whom?) role as a WORSHIP LEADER (you know … he/she is that someone who “calls” the entire congregation of believers “to worship” … ahhhh … like a mediator or a high priest). And let’s not get that confused with someone who leads or starts a song or who leads a prayer. Then, Kenneth Sublett might [just might] consider discussing the subject of prayer, which probably would make a good and separate thread.

Erik, you are no different from all the other “WORSHIP” LEADERS who have posted and argued and are very good at diverting from the issues at hand. Although what follows is probably not coming from a “worship leader,” I’ll give you a good example of diversion. I was responding to a post entitled, “Elders are elected by the congregation?” by Kevin, September 4 2002. Guess what? Kevin responded with: “Donnie, should you be submitting to the elders?” on October 4, 2002. Kevin’s post said:

========================================
[“Donnie, I have a question for you. We as Christians are supposed to honor our leaders and submit to them. Have you been doing that at Madison? If not, why not? If you haven't been doing that, then whose leadership are you submitting to? Do you have any authority over you in Christ? Just curious…”]
========================================

Well, just in case you are interested in my response from God’s word, please link to the Madison forum under the thread of: "D O ......E L D E R S ......R U L E ?"

Now, Erik, please vocalize and listen to your own “personal” questions to Kenneth as follows:
========================================
[“Could I ask you a couple personal questions? I have no other agenda than to better understand you as a brother in Christ; one considerably more versed in all areas than I. How much time do you spend percentage wise between prayer and reading the Word? For simplicity’s sake add up all the time you spend in the Word plus other text regarding church history, concordance, commentary etc. That’s one number. Prayer the other. What is the proportion of theses two? What is the proportion of these two added together compared to your total waking hours?”]
========================================

Not now, but WOW! “Personal” questions, what personal questions? I really liked the way Kenneth responded to your “personal” questions. How? Back to God’s word! What God’s word has to say about the kind of “worship” it is under your leadership and others. The type of worship, right or wrong, that has divided the brotherhood. Let me emphasize the fact that it has caused and is causing division in the church. Is it really worth it from the way God looks at this crisis in the church?

Erik, please link to: "What's Your Opinion Of Changing the Worship Format at Madison to one thats more entertaining?" and note the last two paragraphs:

==================================================
QUOTE OF THE DAY: BOOK OF ISAIAH, CHAPTER 1
==================================================

Since you are a WORSHIP LEADER, you must read this one. It illustrates the whole worship scenario, just as it says, in “contemporary” language.
==================================================
PARALLEL QUOTE: WHAT IF THE BOOK OF ISAIAH, CHAPTER 1, STATED THE FOLLOWING IN “CONTEMPORARY” LANGUAGE (THAT WE UNDERSTAND)…
==================================================

So, next time I would urge you to challenge Kenneth Sublett to deeper discussions of relevant issues at hand, instead of diverting. He is a scholar, and it will probably take several of you and me a long, long time to catch up to his wealth of knowledge. In other words, do not bore him with similar questions next time. And forget about dancing and being vocal in heaven. Don’t insult him with your diversion by asking him about his personal prayer life (he probably hides in the closet and doesn’t want anybody to know) or his faith or what he thinks of heaven (the reason why he persists on teaching others the truth so that they, too, can think of heaven and making it to heaven when that time comes).
==================================================
Donnie Cruz

My Dear Mr. Cruz,

I appreciate your zeal for your mentor, Mr. Sublett. When I posted “Disappointed” it was for the purpose of clarification. It is obvious that I did not succeed! Allow me to correct my error by giving you and Mr. Sublett (and maybe others) the wrong impression. I will try to better communicate this time.

I am not a “worship leader” or any other role in any congregation. Where you seem to have been misled is when I referenced the “songwriter’s” circumstance in penning the words to the song “I Can Only Imagine.” These are “his (the songwriter’s words)

================================

“When my father died of cancer in 1991, he left me with the assurance that he was headed to a better place. He used to always tell me that I was getting the raw end of the deal because I had to stick around here. For several years following his death, I would find myself writing the phrase, I can only imagine, on anything I could find. That simple phrase would give me a peace and a hope thinking about what my dad was finally experiencing.
Years later, in 1999, MercyMe was writing songs for an independent project. I remember coming home from a show and being wide awake on our bus at 2 o'clock in the morning. I was trying to write lyrics in an old notebook of mine, when all of a sudden, I stumbled across that phrase. About ten minutes later, the song was written. Some people say it's amazing that it was written in ten minutes, when really it had been on my heart for almost ten years.
As a worship leader I am constantly wondering if the most precious times of worship here on earth, are even close to what we will experience in the Kingdom of God. I personally believe we are merely scraping the heavens here. I grew up in church and was taught to worship a certain way, but even still I wonder how I might react when the day comes and I physically lay eyes on Jesus. I bet there will be a lot of Southern Baptists that can't sit still, and a lot of Charismatics that are speechless.

===============================

Words to the song:

I can only imagine what it will be like
When I walk by Your side
I can only imagine what my eyes will see
When Your face is before me
I can only imagine

chorus:
Surrounded by Your glory
What will my heart feel
Will I dance for You, Jesus
Or in awe of You be still
Will I stand in Your presence
Or to my knees will I fall
Will I sing hallelujah
Will I be able to speak at all
I can only imagine
I can only imagine

I can only imagine when that day comes
And I find myself standing in the Son
I can only imagine when all I will do
Is forever, forever worship You
I can only imagine
I can only imagine

(chorus)

I can only imagine
When all I will do
Is forever, forever worship You
I can only imagine

======================

I thought Mr. Sublett would have picked up on that by virtue of my 2 posts back to back. I expressed the point I was trying to make very clearly, I thought. Apparently, I need to restate that also. This is my point to the original, and subsequent, messages:

=====================

Some who are still and quiet in worship here on Earth may be dancing and vocal in Heaven. Some who are loud and physically active in worship here on Earth may be still at the feet of the Savior.

The purpose of the post was to determine what thoughts you may have of what Heaven will be like as we worship our Creator, Savior, Counselor, Comforter, Protector, Healer, Provider etc. for eternity.

I can only imagine!

======================

Mr. Cruz, you speak of diversion. You are the one that has diverted the communication, albeit by not understanding what was truly being communicated. It probably happened because you thought I was a “worship leader.” I see that really strikes a painful chord with you. I assure you I am not. Again, I apologize for the failure in communication. I will take issue with you, if I may, on the subject of “…relevant issues at hand, instead of diverting” (your words in quotes).

=====================

Is it not true that the purpose of our life is to glorify God with Heaven as our reward? Worship is only one way in which we do that.

Heaven is mentioned no less than 256 times in just the New Testament, with 56 of those in just the book of Revelation.

Worship is mentioned 43 times in the NT with 15 of these in Revelation. (Worship seems significant in the “prophetic” future of the NT)

Prayer(s)/pray is mentioned 121 times in the NT with 3 in the book of Revelation. (Prayer seems more significant now than in the “prophetic” future)

I will make no statistical analysis, but will plead the importance of “prayer” in relation to “heaven.” I believe that makes them “very relevant.”

======================

Mr. Cruz, I am not trying to challenge anyone, I was merely in dialogue with Mr. Sublett.

I pray that this post finds both of you well and clarifies my questions. By the way Mr. Cruz, feel free to share your feelings about prayer and heaven also. I would invite others to respond to these important areas of life, both here and into eternity.

Maranatha!

Erik

Sorry, Erik.

It still seems to say that you are a worship leader but apparently you are quoting someone else.

I see prayer as (1) requesting something to happen in my life which I believe would not happen without that prayer. I believe that happens in answers more construcive than we could imagine. I might think of that as a "miracle" but the Bible seems to distinguish an answered prayer from "a mighty work of God as a supernatural sign." This SIGN is most often to prove the authority of Christ or the Prophets and Apostles. He made the Jews mad by stating that there were few miracles in the Old Testament so they tried to throw them off THEIR hill. Elijah's widow saw the miracles as PROVING that Elijah spoke the WORDS of God. She could think of many ways to convince herself that the food was by some other agency.

(2) I see prayer as involving communicaiton. I have given up on the notion of LEADING others in prayer or even listening to rote prayers. Therefore, Donnie as my mentor most often, does not speak for me but for Jesus who commanded that our prayers be in private or in the "pantry" which was the innermost, dark, silent and safe place to protect your valuables and food from others. Since that isn't always possible, modern Jews praying at the WALL cover their head with their little portable CLOSET on their head. If women are righteous they can "lift up holy hands" where Jesus commanded that it be done and probably where most males did it. But, I seriously doubt that an ASSEMBLY will ever watch me LEAD prayer again. I drew the picture to prove that no performing priest or musical performer DARED enter even into the most pagan sacred places with any more SANITY than they can drag their TEAM into my private PANTRY to MOVE ME INTO THE PRESENCE OF GOD. I truly believe that such presumption while claiming to speak for God is beyond redemption if the WORD has any meaning.

Peter says it twice and Paul confirms that the GIFT at baptism is A holy spirit or A clear conscience or consiousness. That means "co-perception or clandestine understanding" or grasp of the SPIRIT which Jesus said was in His WORDS but not in MY words. However, as Joe informs us as Paul informed the Jews in 2 Cor 3, the VEIL is not opened to our understanding of the Word until we TURN TO CHRIST rather than turn to new pseudo- priests or Levite singers. The MOCKING just confirms the Word and prophecy of end time MOCKERS.

That gets to MY prayer and explains the answer I gave very poorly: I spend many hours every day of the week SEEKING Christ by GIVING HEED to His words and I have no inclination to SING to Him. Sometimes (often) I wake up in the night with the RIGHT QUESTIONS and sometimes the answer. However, God has never brought to my memory anything which He has not put there as I LABOR at the Word and Doctrine. He just never reminds you of what He has never told you and He does not speak to me with anything I have not POKED into my spirit or mind.

That is why it is absolutely a terminal insult to poke the minds of church members full of sentimentality or with that which does not relate to a clear Biblical teaching. That is why the ABSOLUTE demand of Paul in three places (related to singing) insisted that we speak "that which is written, the Spirit or the Word."

Praying is alsy HYMNING. If you look at the recorded prayers in the Bible you will see them made up of passages of Scripture. To that end, the Synagogue leaders did not just make up words because they "were on the program" but read or recited the Biblical text. The Rabbi prohibited allegorizing or APPLICATING the word just as Peter explained by saying that the REVEALED prophecies or words of God are not subject to "private interpretation" which means "further expounding."

Summary: I most often ask God to open the veil behind which Jesus said most of the Bible was hidden from exploiters. (Matthew 13, Isaiah 48). He ANSWERS THAT PRAYER through His Word. Other than that I dont' have a clue to what heaven will look like: the Jews didn't have a clue to the first advent even though it was fully revealed. You may want to sing and dance: I want a guided trip through history, to walk around in the middle of a BLACK HOLE or learn how easy it is to create something out of nothing. I would be quite happy with "turkey hollow" with all pain and anxiety removed. Jesus took away the BURDEN of spiritual anxiety created by religious ritualists: I invite Him to rest beside Piney Creek under the water falls having removed or tamed all of the ticks and chiggars.

So, there. Ken Sublett

Dear Mr. Sublett,

Thanks for your response regarding prayer and heaven. I enjoyed your comment about answers coming from “poking.” I agree totally. Seek and find, I believe is how He put it. He has obviously removed the “veil” for you repeatedly. I respect your command and understanding of His Word.

As far as Heaven goes, I can truly say you have a humble spirit. Is there a chance that I could visit you in “turkey hollow” before the ticks and chiggers are tamed? I have a feeling it would be a good preview of what Heaven will be like.

Looking forward to the invitation,

Erik

I see Donnie and I agreeing on many things because we are reading from the same source. If anything could come out of this forum it would be to take the oversight of your own learning and that of your family and friends if they will listen. I don't worry about disagreeing with those who have obviously looked at the evidence and reached a conclusion. The owner of the forum has opened dialog which will never be permitted in most modern churches (too much of a threat). So, whatever one's conclusions the opportunity to dialog should and will be praised by anyone looking for more insight.

Now, David and Bobby have threatened to visit several times. My health truly discourages me away for long. However, I would invite anyone who is willing to come visit and have lunch at the local steak house or "moms" better food. I have given my home address to one of the TEAM who gets direct revelations and has leveled some heavy threats so I am not hiding. So, check around and we will set up a date.

Ken Sublett

Dear Mr. Frantz,

I’m glad you have identified Mr. Sublett as my mentor. I’ve learned much from this man of God just by reading many of his articles. Hopefully, you have also. Both you and I can benefit very much from his mentoring, don’t you agree?

You have clarified your status as being not a “music leader.” Thank you. Nonetheless, it was totally unnecessary for you to quote your “I Can Only Imagine” post all over again. By removing the quote from the songwriter, as well as his song, your latest post amounted to very little in relation to what this thread is all about. I have no other idea as to why the “Discourse on Baptism” of October 7 2002 turned into “I Can Only Imagine” except that you went off tangent. That was my point on your diversion. May I suggest that you submit the topic of “prayer” next time around and restate the importance of prayer in Christian living? I’m sure “prayer” will make an excellent “Sunday School in Exile” topic.

Just so you would NOT think that I value a prayerful life as insignificant and to make you happy as well, let me deal with the subject of prayer briefly. In response to your personal question to Mr. Sublett about prayer, he honestly said, “I don’t count prayer time.” Excellent answer! But since he “disappointed” you with that unexpected response, I gather that it’s the kind of time you spend much on besides praying: counting prayer time. I probably disappointed you, too, with my response that Mr. Sublett probably hides in the closet for “PRIVATE” prayer and that he doesn’t want anyone to KNOW. On the other hand, it appears that you like bragging about your own prayer life. Let me just quote what is said in the Scripture about prayer attitude – I am sure that you are very familiar with it:

Matthew 6: “[1] Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven. [2] Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. [3] But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth: [4] That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly. [5] And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward. [6] But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly. [7] But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. [8] Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Donnie Cruz

Dear Mr. Cruz,

I’ll leave the “prayer thread” to you. I’ll be at the “preview.”

GOD (and Mr. Sublett) willing,

Erik

Heny
Your question is a entrapment question that at one time I would have fell for, but after falling into that trap many times I have been taught the answer.

My parable of the older brother

Let me try to help us understand where I am at with a parable of my own.
There is a family of brothers all with several years between them. The older brother learns that his next younger brother is visiting bars. See how he had traveled that path, he knows the dangers and the cost of bar hopping. He goes to warn his brother that he is messing up, and tries to explain to his younger brother the cost of his decisions and actions. The younger will not listen to the older experience brother, and continues his sinful ways. The older brother starts to appeal to the younger brother by explain the effect of his decisions and actions on the ones in his life that he is responsible for, that he is an ensample too, his family. This has no effect in turning his brother either. The older brother knows from experience that if his younger brother continues in his behavior, that death is the ultimate end. The older brother decides that physically restraining his younger brother is justifiable, because of the cost his brother is about to experience. The older brother is arrested, for breaking the law. While he sets in jail, he can only pray that his younger brother will live through this experience so too warn, and protect their younger brothers. You see the older brother meant well, and was trying to help, protect, and save his younger brother, but fell himself. He found himself a victim and a student. The older brother learned that he has no legal right to force good on anyone, not even his brother.

We can only try to persuade people to see the truth. We can not force the truth on them, It is ultimately up to each one of us to excerise our option to ask the Holy Spirit to show us the truth; that is His job, but you most ask. For God Himself does not force Himself on us.

To God be the Glory
Joe McKnight

Joe,

I like your parable. I don't see how anything I said to you would be entrapment. Could you explain, please?

Henry

With all the commandments to BE baptized, in the bible, why would I NOT think its necessary for salvation?Faith is ongoing. Baptism is only once. Who am I to think I DON'T have to do it? Yet if I do it without faith it IS an empty gesture.I do it because I have faith in what Christ did and His teachings. I do it BECAUSE I believe and repent.It doesn't have to be included every verse that mentions faith for it to be what we are to do. If baptism only appeared ONCE as what believers were to do, and the New Testament Christians were decribed as having done it or were to do it, I am going to DO it. Nuff said.Its not up to me to say that just because it is not mentioned everywhere faith is mentioned,its not part of what is necessary for salvation.I would be very afraid to NOT do it just because I don't want to, or I don't think its necessary.Who has the authority to decide this kind of thing about God's plan? No human that I ever heard of. We simply don't have the authority to decide for ourselves whether or not to do something the Lord told us to do.He said do it, so we do it.

Luke 23:43 When was the thief Baptized ?

Did the thief live and die under the Law of Moses or the Law of Christ?

The thief lived under the law. He died before the death of Jesus but the kingdom or church would not begin until Christ "preached to those in prison" and took His blood into the heavenly tabernacle and returned as the "Another Comforter." There was no way that the thief could have been a baptized believer any more than others.

Here is the thief's "prayer": He didn't ask to be saved.

And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy KINGDOM. Luke 23:42

The kingdom now is the church or body of Christ. A kingdom is a place of rulership. The thief did not ask to be saved and Christian baptism was not in effect.

Jesus didn't answer the thief's request. He had a different answer:

And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in PARADISE. Luke 23:43

If the prayer was answered it would be this day in paradise at the same time Christ the Spirit preached to gospel to those who were dead.

Paradise does not mean either church or kingdom or realm of the CONVERTED:

Paradeisos (g3857) par-ad'-i-sos; of Oriental or. [comp. 6508]; a park, i.e. (spec.) an Eden (place of future happiness, "paradise"): - paradise.

Pardec (h6508) par-dace'; of for. or.; a park: - forest, orchard.

Christ would not ascend into heaven until after the resurrection which would not be "this day." Furthermore, Paradise is simply the realm of the dead:

"At that point in time paradise was located inside the earth in Hades which was divided into two primary parts as seen in Luke 16. The righteous went to the side called paradise (Abraham's bosom) the unrighteous went to Gehenna (hell)

"Paradise in this verse (Lk 23:43) about the thief on the cross (if interpreted literally) is not even referring to heaven, and indeed could not, since Jesus was not yet in heaven on that day ("today . . ."). He was crucified on Friday and didn't rise from the dead until Sunday. In fact, He didn't ascend to heaven until forty days after that (Acts 1:3,9-11; cf. Jn 20:17)!

"Paradise in Lk 23:43 is referring to Sheol, not heaven. The conclusion is inescapable from cross-scriptural exegesis. E.g., Kittel's Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (an impeccable and standard Protestant linguistic source) holds to this view, which is not just Catholic belief, but that of conservative Protestants as well (see also the reputable Protestant reference New Bible Dictionary, ed. J.D. Douglas, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1962 ed., p.935).

In a legal sense since the WILL of Christ had not been executed, Jesus cold dispense His mercy and grace as He saw fit. Furthermore, baptism isn't a free pass into heaven: it is baptism INTO discipleship to Jesus Christ. Since the thief had no time to DISCIPLE to Jesus there was no need to disciple. If Jesus said that He SAVED ten thousand people prior to the day of Pentecost it would not change the grammar and message of Acts 2:38.

For those who think that the Jews lived under one gospel plan and Paul preached a gospel of faith only I would direct you to a review I made by request to prove that Jesus had only ONE gospel plan and it demanded baptism as the time and place where we CALL UPON God and ask Him to cleanse our spirit or conscience. Christ gives us A holy spirit and does not make us God Incarnate by having the Spirit Deity literally live in our bodies.

http://wow.piney.com/James-Melton-Acts2-38.html

Ken

Brevity is the key to effective communication. Some of you should learn that.

Is baptism essential? Yes.

See?

I felt the same way about the KJV until studying about the text itself, realizing it has many obsolete word, was overseen by a Monarch, was translated by Church of England scholar's who believed in Infant Baptism and also was the state church and had beliefs and practices the exact same as the Catholic Church. They "Catholic's" even take credit for it.

If the Catholic Church penned another text today would you be so inspired to say it is the only reliable text.

The original manuscripts penned by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit are infallible. But, they are the only perfectly inspired scripture.

The KJV is just another translation not the original texts. it was done in 1611 by an individual Church, and a State Church at that who preached salvation by infant Baptism.

There are many meanings changed and many obsolete words, not to mention some bias to the Church of England built in. Its a GOOD translation but not the only one, and probably not the best one for our current English language. That is just the fact.

Men of our time can diligently compare and translate as well as they could in 1611, and they can even translate it into our current language.

I like the original 1973 NIV. I like the original KJV and the NKJV.

What I cant do is say one version is the only authorized text because, only the original manuscripts can be called that.

Would anyone like to explain this:
39Then one of the criminals who were hanged blasphemed Him, saying, "If You are the Christ,[10] save Yourself and us."
40But the other, answering, rebuked him, saying, "Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation? 41And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong." 42Then he said to Jesus, "Lord,[11] remember me when You come into Your kingdom."
43And Jesus said to him, "Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise."

Obviously being in paradise is salvation.....there is no mention of the criminal getting baptized. I know what I believe so I'm not arguing with anyone this is just something for all the "baptism essential for salvation" believers to think about.

Your text is taken from Luke 23:39-43. For the record, Matthew describes Jesus as being crucified between two "thieves" (KJV). This “thief on the cross” argument is one of several that are commonly used against baptism as a requirement for salvation. Certainly, while the thief was on the cross, he couldn’t very well have come down for baptism and returned to his execution. Of course, Jesus had the power to save those whom He chose without baptism, yet one of the last commands that Jesus established after His resurrection and just prior to His ascension was to link faith and baptism together as requirements for salvation, as found in Mark 16:16: “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” If salvation from that moment on required only faith and not baptism, Jesus would have omitted the reference to baptism altogether and said, “He that only believeth shall be saved…” Thus, Jesus requires faith AND baptism before He will grant salvation to anyone.

Unfortunately, many overlook or refuse to accept this simple command and try every way in the world to work around it. Ignoring Jesus’ clear reference to baptism in verse 16a, many focus on verse 16b, arguing that, because Jesus omits baptism there, baptism is unnecessary for salvation. This reasoning implies that we cannot take Jesus at His own Word. Not to waste words, Jesus omits baptism in verse 16b simply because the subject is pointless with unbelievers.

Be not fooled by some modern Bible translations which falsely claim that the last twelve verses of Mark (16:9-20) are “spurious” or “not inspired” and should not be heeded. Such translations either place these verses in brackets, banish them to footnotes, or delete them completely. Research published in “The Last Twelve Verses of Mark,” a study by the 19th-century English theologian John Burgon, proves that these verses are quite genuine and their doctrine most sound.

Another argument poses that, because a large number of New Testament passages mention faith but not baptism for salvation, then baptism must not be necessary. Again, this reasoning ignores Mark 16:16 as well as other "baptism" passages like Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, and others (see below). A “majority rules” concept does not apply to the New Testament. Every passage of Scripture is just as important and binding as the next, whether it occurs just once or a million times.

Other arguments hold that baptism, being merely a physical act or a “work,” cannot in itself save. Those who heed Mark 16:16 are often misunderstood as believing that baptism in and of itself is regenerative or efficacious in removing sin. These arguments arise from a failure to appreciate that it is not the physical ACT of baptism which saves, but it is the willingness to SUBMIT, to OBEY Jesus’ command to be baptized that saves.

Lastly, do not overlook Acts 16:25-33 (KJV), the account of the Philippian jailer who was baptized around midnight, "straightway" (immediately) after Paul and Silas "spake unto him the word of the Lord." He believed and was immediately baptized. Why at the inconvenient hour of midnight if baptism was not necessary for salvation? This passage illustrates how vital it is to be baptized. Also do not overlook 1 Peter 3:21 (KJV) which most definitely states that baptism saves us, not by washing “filth” from our bodies but the answer of a good conscience toward God by virtue of the fact that Jesus rose from the dead.

That people will do anything to avoid doing what they have been told. The simplicity of worship now includes eye and ear "candy". How great it would be to just sit in front of one of these early teachers without the pomp and circumstance.

How hard is it really to be baptized? Besides a few minutes of physical uncomfort, there is no pain involved. Unless you count the spiritual pain involved in crucifying the flesh and putting on a new mind. I have a 4 year old that loves to play with play doh. I am not a big fan. Even after the talk we have about cleaning up afterwards, he will spend 10 times more energy why he doesn't have to. We see the same attributes in grown adults. If anyone has owned or managed a business you know what I am talking about.

It should not be astounding to see what risks others will take with their souls. Better safe than sorry? Yes. Boring? Probably. But I sleep so much better.

Wil