Quote:
Originally Posted by mizpeh
Does that mean Jesus' death on the cross and the blood He shed for us was without effect as well without the resurrection?
|
How can you possibly take that from what I said?
I said:
The effects of the cross were benficial and accounted even before Calvary.
You then ask:
Are you saying the cross has no benefit at all?
Either you're not paying attention or you're deliberately attributing the exact opposite to what I say.
I deeply resent what appears to be a deliberate attempt to undermine my preaching of the Gospel.
I said:
The cross perhaps has a greater benefit than what we've considered.
You respond by saying:
"Pelathais says the cross has no benefit at all?"
No hard feelings intended here, but I just can't escape feelings of resentment over such a gloss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizpeh
1Cor 15:13-17 .....and if Christ be not raised, your faith is in vain, ye are yet in your sins.
Romans 4:25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.
The fact that Christ rose from the dead doesn't take away from the salvific nature of water baptism but reinforces it!
|
I never said "the resurrection take[s] away from the salvific nature of water baptism..." I quoted the very words of Peter himself when I said "
that baptism doth now save us... through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." That's what the Book says (
1 Peter 3:20-21).
Since the discussion involved the "salvation" sought for and apparently found by the Thief on the Cross, and the fact that this Thief was never baptized caused me to look for similarities between those who are "saved" and baptized and those who are "saved" and
not baptized in the Bible. One similarity that leaps from the pages of the Bible is the hope for and faith in the resurrection of the Savior.
Add to this the fact that no one has even attempted to disprove my assertion that John's baptism was "for the remission of sins..." and that this "remission of sins" was accounted
before the cross. The only response I get from that point is "Nuh-uh." No one has even attempted to address
Mark 1:4;
Luke 1:77; and
Luke 3:3.
The people who responded to John's preaching received "the remission of sins"
before the cross. And those are Mark's and Luke's words, not mine. The whole purpose of John's ministry was
"To give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins..." Those were the words that Luke attributes to the Holy Spirit speaking through the priest Zacharius, John's father.
Q: When did the people receive this "knowledge of salvation?"
A: When they heard John's preaching -
before the cross.
Q:When did the people receive "
remission of sins?"
A: When they came to John, confessed their sins and were baptized by John and his disciples and later by the disciples of Jesus Christ Himself (
John 4:1-2)
before the cross.
Q: Why is this important?
A: Because by looking at baptism both before and after the events at Calvary we can compare and contrast the different time periods and see what was "different" about
after the cross.
Essentially, the "only" thing that was "different" was that Jesus had completed the promised work for our salvation.
AND NOTE: I put the word "only" in the scary "
QUOTE" marks to emphasize the fact that this event was
a pretty big deal in my opinion. However, the "only" difference remains one of timing.
Those born and saved before the cross were no less fortunate than ourselves, except they didn't have power lawn mowers. But when it comes to salvation- they were saved by the same means and with the same hope that we today possess.
Threaded Mode
