The penitent have a good consience if not they would not have repented. Repentance sets the heart TOWARD God and is NOT the finished product.
Right. Being penitent is only the first step. Next, one must spell the name of God by stepping on the right stones in order, and finally: the leap of faith. Indiana Jones was a 3-stepper! (Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.)
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
The law brought man to a consciousness of his sin (Romans 3:20; 7:7). The law was the schoolmaster bringing us to Christ as the remedy for that conscience of sin (Galatians 3:24-25). The conscience of sin of those who come to Christ's sacrifice in faith is made perfect and purged (Hebrews 9:9; 10:2). They receive/accept/enter into the remission of the cross by faith alone and are justified of all things (Acts 10:43; 13:38-39). Those who have a perfect, purged, GOOD conscience toward God concerning sin respond by being baptized (1Peter 3:21).
The heart's purification takes place BEFORE baptism. Baptism is the SUBSEQUENT response of the conscience already made good. Our hearts are purified by faith (Acts 15:9) before baptism. Peter understood that the heart of Cornelius was purified by faith alone. Once he realized this reality, baptism was offered. Cornelius responded in baptism only AFTER his conscience was made good/purified/purged before God. The baptism of Cornelius was the response of his good conscience toward God.
Come on, Mizpeh.... down deep you've got to know this is true.
The law brought man to a consciousness of his sin (Romans 3:20; 7:7). The law was the schoolmaster bringing us to Christ as the remedy for that conscience of sin (Galatians 3:24-25). The conscience of sin of those who come to Christ's sacrifice in faith is made perfect and purged (Hebrews 9:9; 10:2). They receive/accept/enter into the remission of the cross by faith alone and are justified of all things (Acts 10:43; 13:38-39). Those who have a perfect, purged, GOOD conscience toward God concerning sin respond by being baptized (1Peter 3:21).
The heart's purification takes place BEFORE baptism. Baptism is the SUBSEQUENT response of the conscience already made good. Our hearts are purified by faith (Acts 15:9) before baptism. Peter understood that the heart of Cornelius was purified by faith alone. Once he realized this reality, baptism was offered. Cornelius responded in baptism only AFTER his conscience was made good/purified/purged before God. The baptism of Cornelius was the response of his good conscience toward God.
Come on, Mizpeh.... down deep you've got to know this is true.
Adino,
I believe faith is a means to salvation and not the sole reason we are saved. Faith is the vehicle BY which we are born again. The new birth consists of water and Spirit....not faith alone. Faith alone is not the new birth.
Faith in Christ is the means BY which we repent. Without faith we would not repent. Faith is the means BY which we receive the Holy Spirit and all the promises of God. BY faith the elders obtained a good report.
In a similar fashion God BY wisdom and understanding created: Pr 3:19 The LORD BY wisdom hath founded the earth; BY understanding hath he established the heavens. Yet we know it was when He spoke things came into being. His speaking was directed by His wisdom and understanding.
Faith is the conduit that brings us to salvation. Faith alone does not save us. Faith alone is dead. BY faith we obey the gospel which saves us.
Acts 15:9....their hearts were purified in the waters of baptism BY faith. James even quotes from a verse which connects the name of the Lord which is called over them (vs 17). Faith is a means not the end.
I understand what you are saying. And you are stating your case very well but it doesn't harmonize scripture in my opinion.
__________________
His banner over me is LOVE.... My soul followeth hard after thee....Love one another with a pure heart fervently. Jesus saith unto her, Said I not unto thee, that, if thou wouldest believe, thou shouldest see the glory of God?
To be a servant of God, it will cost us our total commitment to God, and God alone. His burden must be our burden... Sis Alvear
Baptism is a witness that we have been associated with the death, burial, resurrection of Christ. It is not our partaking in His sacrifice, but a witness that we have:
1. Taken His name in covenant relationship.
2. Had our sins remitted through our faith, repentance, and confessing of our sins.
3. Been partakers in His death burial resurrection.
Baptism is not us taking part, but a witness of the fact that we already have taken part. It is the answer of a good conscience because we have given public witness to the fact that we have had our sins remitted at Calvary. If baptism washed our sins away, then Calvary has no effect and His blood is secondary to the water.
Poor Apostle Peter he was always a day late and a dollar short..... why didn't he realize that baptism (Acts 2:38) was not needed -- he even stated that it was "for the remission of sins." (not because they were already remitted - as SOME would like to have us believe). Poor Peter...... he just wasted a lot of Bible space telling us .......... (yeah right).
Poor Apostle Peter he was always a day late and a dollar short..... why didn't he realize that baptism (Acts 2:38) was not needed -- he even stated that it was "for the remission of sins." (not because they were already remitted - as SOME would like to have us believe). Poor Peter...... he just wasted a lot of Bible space telling us .......... (yeah right).
If your interpretation of Acts 2:38 is correct then, yes. Since I realize the grammar of Acts 2:38 does not necessitate one to believe in baptismal sin remission I can say that Peter knew precisely what he was talking about and that the passage is certainly not a waste of space, as you have suggested.
In fact, I would suggest I believe Acts 2:38 more than someone of the water/spirit position because I believe that ALL who repent and receive baptism SHALL receive the gift of life. I know the evidence does not show that ALL who have repented and been baptized have spoken in tongues, so again, I hold to the text even moreso than others.
If your interpretation of Acts 2:38 is correct then, yes. Since I realize the grammar of Acts 2:38 does not necessitate one to believe in baptismal sin remission I can say that Peter knew precisely what he was talking about and that the passage is certainly not a waste of space, as you have suggested.
In fact, I would suggest I believe Acts 2:38 more than someone of the water/spirit position because I believe that ALL who repent and receive baptism SHALL to receive the gift of life. I know the evidence does not show that ALL who have repented and been baptized have spoken in tongues, so again, I hold to the text even moreso than others.
I didn't suggest it...... I say your scenario calls Peter's message a waste...... (yeah I know you will say that Peter meant something else than what he said....... that's how all false doctrines start).
I didn't suggest it...... I say your scenario calls Peter's message a waste...... (yeah I know you will say that Peter meant something else than what he said....... that's how all false doctrines start).
Need we get into the discussion over the word eis in the phrase "for (eis) the remission of sins" and the controversy over this issue in the formation of the UPC? Shall we get into the possibility that remission is grammatically connected to repentance and not to baptism in this passage? Maybe another time. God bless, friend.
Poor Apostle Peter he was always a day late and a dollar short..... why didn't he realize that baptism (Acts 2:38) was not needed -- he even stated that it was "for the remission of sins." (not because they were already remitted - as SOME would like to have us believe). Poor Peter...... he just wasted a lot of Bible space telling us .......... (yeah right).
Peter was not wrong in what he said. Many preachers have been wrong and continue to be wrong in their interpretation of his words.