Bishoph, you may have seen in my past posts that I believe baptism plays an important role in Christian conduct, but not in salvation.
Concerning your question, if the true Gospel is preached and generates a heart converted to faith in Christ, it is of my opinion that that soul is saved regardless of the mistaken way the subject of baptism is handled in his church. Since baptism has nothing to do with saving a man's soul before God it is a separate and distinct issue altogether.
Thank you for a straightforward answer!
Based on the discussion on this thread, it would seem that some believe in baptism only as a point of obedience to a command. (Which I understand) With this viewpoint, however, if one does not obey the commandment (which is not a suggestion but rather a mandate) how is salvation realized?
Bishoph, you may have seen in my past posts that I believe baptism plays an important role in Christian conduct, but not in salvation.
Concerning your question, if the true Gospel is preached and generates a heart converted to faith in Christ, it is of my opinion that that soul is saved regardless of the mistaken way the subject of baptism is handled in his church. Since baptism has nothing to do with saving a man's soul before God it is a separate and distinct issue altogether.
Secondly, I personally believe that Andrew Urshan as well as many of our latter rain forefathers held an evolving theological view.
Bishoph, this is certainly correct. My concern is that the view they ultimately evolved into was a heretical one. There is a huge question begging to be asked when we consider their ultimate conclusions.
On what grounds do we believe their final interpretation of truth was the same truth taught in the first century Church?
Many in the oneness movement begin with the premise that what they have inherited from these men is indeed truth. On what grounds can this be said?
Certainly not on historical grounds because there is absolutely no historical witness of anyone ever in history interpreting the doctrine of salvation as they ultimately did.
If on Scriptural grounds, how is it all other hermeneutically and grammatically plausible interpretations of the core passages normally used as prooftext for the water/spirit position are discarded out of hand without objective consideration? I think you'd agree that one cannot begin with the assumption that the early oneness pioneers discovered TRUTH (especially without historical precedent). One cannot discard alternative views of core passages simply because they do not support their theological conclusions concerning the new birth. Objectivity will have been thoroughly abandoned.
Is it possible for someone within the UPC and/or closely associated organizations to objectively approach the new birth issue or have they forever been tainted by an inherited theological paradigm through which they now view Scripture?
With this viewpoint, however, if one does not obey the commandment (which is not a suggestion but rather a mandate) how is salvation realized?
I guess I missed where ALL commands in the NT were prerequisites for salvation. The Lord also commanded that we partake of the bread and wine in communion (...this do...) but I don't see it as a requirement for salvation either. I guess I could throw in foot washing as another example.
I guess I missed where ALL commands in the NT were prerequisites for salvation. The Lord also commanded that we partake of the bread and wine in communion (...this do...) but I don't see it as a requirement for salvation either. I guess I could throw in foot washing as another example.
Salvation is by grace... realized through faith.
I agree, salvation is by grace through faith!
Let's try an analogy.
You offer (grace) me a beautifully wrapped gift (salvation) which is totally undeserved by me yet, because of your compassion (mercy) for my need you offer it. If you bring the gift to me and I accept it, meaning I take the gift out of your hands and thank you for it, but I have not opened the package at what point do I really possess the gift? If I take the package home and sit it on the mantel and tell everyone that comes to my home "look at the beautiful gift Adino gave me," yet I never open the package have I really accepted the gift? And if you come by a couple of years later and I tell you man that sure is a great gift you gave me, but I have never opened the package, you would be insulted that I accepted the package but never realized the gift because of my inaction.
When God extends grace to me and I through faith accept salvation, it is not merely a verbal or mental acceptance that actuates my salvation, it is the actions produced by faith that identifies me with Christ. Faith without works is dead or non existent, likewise works not produced by faith is nothing more than self righteousness. The scripture states "by grace through faith" the "through faith" indicates to me that faith is a process. JMHO
You offer (grace) me a beautifully wrapped gift (salvation) which is totally undeserved by me yet, because of your compassion (mercy) for my need you offer it. If you bring the gift to me and I accept it, meaning I take the gift out of your hands and thank you for it, but I have not opened the package at what point do I really possess the gift? If I take the package home and sit it on the mantel and tell everyone that comes to my home "look at the beautiful gift Adino gave me," yet I never open the package have I really accepted the gift? And if you come by a couple of years later and I tell you man that sure is a great gift you gave me, but I have never opened the package, you would be insulted that I accepted the package but never realized the gift because of my inaction.
When God extends grace to me and I through faith accept salvation, it is not merely a verbal or mental acceptance that actuates my salvation, it is the actions produced by faith that identifies me with Christ. Faith without works is dead or non existent, likewise works not produced by faith is nothing more than self righteousness. The scripture states "by grace through faith" the "through faith" indicates to me that faith is a process. JMHO
I would say the analogy fully breaks down when we realize the gift being offered is spiritual life. The moment the heart is quickened to life is the moment the heart has received the gift of eternal life. Scripture has this transformation from death unto life taking place at the moment one's heart converts to faith. I'll point to my last post to Steve for the Scriptural support.
Our spirit is born again, quickened to new life, by the Spirit of God at the moment the heart converts in faith to Christ. The conversion itself is the awakening of the soul and evidence that the gift of life has been received.
finish the passage Acts 16:32-33
32And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.
33And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.
Yes, finish the passage. Read the context. A text taken from its context can just be a pretext.
The story of the conversion of the jailer takes up several verses in Acts chapter 16. In verse 30 he asks the Apostles Silas and Paul, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" By the way, this is the only place that exact question is found in our New Testament. In verse 31 Paul replies, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved, and thy house." What happened then? Did he make a profession of faith right then? Did he repent right then? We don't know for sure. All we know is what it says in verse 32, "And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house." So it sounds like he took them to his house, woke up the wife and kids and Paul and Silas preached/witnessed to them. Then verse 33 tells us two things that happened. He took them (Paul and Silas) the same hour of the night and washed their stripes. It doesn't say where he took them but it may have been the Gangites River which was nearby and was probably where the women's prayer meeting of verse 13 was held. Also in that verse it says that he and all his were baptized. That would include wife and children I would assume. I am assuming this was at the nearby river and that baptism was by immersion since that was the custom for Jewish mikveh/baptism at that time and Christian baptism was similar to (or maybe the same as) Jewish mikveh. Baptism was evidently important enough that it was done that night. Afterwards, according to verse 34 they returned to the jailers house where they ate. Also, verse 34 says that "all his house" believed. It is my understanding that Paul followed the practice of baptizing only believers like Philip did as recorded in Acts 8:36-38 (Some Bible versions omit part of that passage).
If I remember correctly, there are 23 instances of salvation/conversion in the Book of Acts and almost half of them mention water and/or Spirit baptism.
I would say the analogy fully breaks down when we realize the gift being offered is spiritual life. The moment the heart is quickened to life is the moment the heart has received the gift of eternal life. Scripture has this transformation from death unto life taking place at the moment one's heart converts to faith. I'll point to my last post to Steve for the Scriptural support.
Our spirit is born again, quickened to new life, by the Spirit of God at the moment the heart converts in faith to Christ. The conversion itself is the awakening of the soul and evidence that the gift of life has been received.
I guess I missed where ALL commands in the NT were prerequisites for salvation. The Lord also commanded that we partake of the bread and wine in communion (...this do...) but I don't see it as a requirement for salvation either. I guess I could throw in foot washing as another example.
Salvation is by grace... realized through faith.
Don't get Steve going on that Adino...he does believe it to be salvational.
Good post's BTW...no wonder thaty won't debate you.
__________________
God has lavished his love upon me.
18For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
19By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
20Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
21The 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:
22Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.
If belief alone in a matter is enough... someone should have told Brother James. He missed it somehow. All of them did I guess...
The bottom line for me is this. There are no delayed baptisms in the New Testament... there are no baptisms that were planned ahead and performed in front of entire congregations of people to be a public confession... they were done immediately. If baptism has nothing whatsoever to do with salvation please tell me why they were so urgent about it?
I will stand on the Acts of the Apostles for my pattern any day of the week over the letters that were written to already saved saints and over the ideas that have sprung up in Christiandom over the past centuries.
Carry on your conversation without me. I'll save my breath for my neighbours who are walking toward instead of walking away.
__________________ Mrs. LPW
Psalm 19:14
Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer.
Linear Mode
