|
Tab Menu 1
Fellowship Hall The place to go for Fellowship & Fun! |
|
|
02-23-2008, 09:38 AM
|
|
but made himself of no reputation
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: middle Atlantic region
Posts: 2,091
|
|
Re: Remitted on the Cross or not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adino
Steve, you must be ignoring my posts. Repeat after me...... to the "faith alone" advocate mere mental assent is not faith....mere mental assent is not faith.... mere mental assent is not faith. Knowledge + mental assent + TRUST = faith. It is dishonest of you to keep implying I believe faith is nothing but mere mental assent.
Now before we continue with the remission issue, we have to clear up your faulty view of baptism's relation to a clear conscience.
You continually try to say that "baptism clears the conscience" when 1Peter 3:21 says that baptism is "the answer [or response] of a good [clear] conscience". Why do you say baptism clears the conscience when Scripture says baptism is the response of one who already has a clear conscience?
You've avoided this point in several posts now. Please, address this.
Why do you say baptism clears the conscience when Scripture says baptism is the response of one who already has a clear conscience?
|
adino,
I am very hesitant to consider you speak for the entire 'soa fida' crowd, but I am confident you speak for yourself so.....
you are advancing a POV that says "faith = knowledge + mental assent + trust.
How does someone trust expect by HOW THEY ACT OUT their receipt of their mentally assended knowledge?
Come on, trust is not special form of mental assent that resides in some distinct compartment of the mental faculty of a human, its the invisible motive behind visible actions.
I read that faith is the experience I have from within the unseen realm that will be revealed in the seen realm. We are led by the spirit to something other than endless assended thoughts about acquired knowledge. We are being led to destinations and opportunities that transform us; a new birth where the old man passes away, a newness of life in which the old man is crucified and buried tio enable the new man to be risen up for a journey to completeness (maturity) in Christ.
__________________
Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath [James 1:19]
|
02-23-2008, 09:51 AM
|
|
Not riding the train
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 48,544
|
|
Re: Remitted on the Cross or not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbpew
adino,
I am very hesitant to consider you speak for the entire 'soa fida' crowd, but I am confident you speak for yourself so.....
you are advancing a POV that says "faith = knowledge + mental assent + trust.
How does someone trust expect by HOW THEY ACT OUT their receipt of their mentally assended knowledge?
Come on, trust is not special form of mental assent that resides in some distinct compartment of the mental faculty of a human, its the invisible motive behind visible actions.
I read that faith is the experience I have from within the unseen realm that will be revealed in the seen realm. We are led by the spirit to something other than endless assended thoughts about acquired knowledge. We are being led to destinations and opportunities that transform us; a new birth where the old man passes away, a newness of life in which the old man is crucified and buried tio enable the new man to be risen up for a journey to completeness (maturity) in Christ.
|
Excellent, tbpew!!!!! Best thoughts I've read in a long time!!
__________________
|
02-23-2008, 05:52 PM
|
|
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,099
|
|
Re: Remitted on the Cross or not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizpeh
I understand what you've written. You are saying a good conscience constitutes one that has been washed in the blood of Christ before baptism. Heb 9:14, Heb 10:22 because it is an "answer" or a response of obedience from a conscience that has already been made good.
The NASV and ESV are worded contrary to what you are saying.
3:21 Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you--not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, NASV
3:21 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 good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, ESV
What do you think of these translations?
|
Mizpeh, it took long enough for someone to bring up the "appeal" point. Thank you.
To tell you the truth, there are two other ways, apart from the way I've already offered, 1Peter 3:21 can be understood to remain consistent with other Scripture:
1) It can be understood that baptism is not a reference to water baptism at all but to Spirit baptism (some have taken this position). I, personally, do not lean toward this position, but it is plausible.
2) It can be realized that Peter uses a word "eperotema" which is nowhere else used in Scripture. (This word is translated "answer" in the KJV which would point to a response. This interpretation is extremely plausible and would suggest what I have already posted, that the act of baptism is a response of a believer who understands his conscience has already been purged concerning sin. This interpretation shows that sin remission is prior to baptism and I believe Scripture wholly supports this view.)
That the word "eperotema" is used nowhere else in Scripture is of interest because it is very likely Peter purposely uses the word to get a common known meaning across. While the word is found only here in Scripture, it does have usage in other writings of that time. I understand it was used in a court setting when a witness was about to take the stand to testify. They were "inquired" as to whether they were about to tell the truth (the whole truth and nothing but the truth ;-) ). This "inquiry" concerning the testimony was called the eperotema.
With this common usage of the word "eperotema" in mind, baptism becomes the time at which all men were questioned concerning their faith in the finished work of Christ. Baptism was the time of public confession. It was the time a believer being welcomed into the Church community was questioned concerning his conscience of sin before God.
Only those who had a good conscience concerning sin, i.e., only those who trusted in the finished work of the Cross, were to be baptized. This point returns to my original point that the good conscience concerning sin existed PRIOR to the act of baptism. The act of baptism itself did not effect the good conscience, it only bore witness to the good conscience and those thus confessing Christ were to be welcomed into the Church as having been saved.
I believe my initial suggested interpretation and this latter interpretation are the most probable. I lean toward the latter because of 1st century usage of the word "eperotema."
|
02-23-2008, 06:26 PM
|
|
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,099
|
|
Re: Remitted on the Cross or not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbpew
you are advancing a POV that says "faith = knowledge + mental assent + trust.
|
Yes, I am.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbpew
How does someone trust expect by HOW THEY ACT OUT their receipt of their mentally assended knowledge?
|
You are about to contradict yourself. Watch closely...
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbpew
Come on, trust is not special form of mental assent that resides in some distinct compartment of the mental faculty of a human, its the invisible motive behind visible actions.
|
And here's your contradiction. You first tell me that TRUST is not something residing in the [invisible] mental faculty. You go on to say TRUST is an "invisible motive." Which is it?
I would suggest you do not make "acts of faith" faith. Faith engenders the act of faith. The underlying point is that the just live by faith. Those who are in right standing with God live by faith. This right standing is neither engendered nor perpetuated by faithful action. It engendered and perpetuated by an initial and continued faith in the work of the Cross.
Faithful actions are engendered by the fact we are the just, i.e., that we are in a right standing status with God. We are the just who are to live by faith. Nowhere is it said we become right standing before God because of our acts of faith. We are not just because of our acts of faith. This, justification by works theology is the theology others are presenting here. The only justification we receive from our faithful conduct is from our peers. If we are justified by our faithful conduct we have whereof to glory, but not before God ( Romans 4:2).
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbpew
I read that faith is the experience I have from within the unseen realm that will be revealed in the seen realm.
|
I agree. Faith in the heart will manifest itself, but our justification before God rests only in our trust in his finished work of the Cross. We are created unto good works, but we are first and foremost... newly created ( Ephesians 2:10). The good works are only indicative of the new creation, they are not conducive to it. We are to allow our salvation to become manifest in our lives with fear and trembling ( Philippians 2:12).
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbpew
We are led by the spirit to something other than endless assended thoughts about acquired knowledge. We are being led to destinations and opportunities that transform us; a new birth....
|
The heart which passes from knowledge and mental assent into trust in Christ is the heart born of God. It is the heart quickened to faith. He that believeth is passed from death unto life ( John 3:15-16, 36; 5:24; 6:40,47; 11:25,26).
The transformation of the heart from unbelief to belief is the miracle of being born from above. The spirit is born of the Spirit of God. A regenerative work of God has taken place. That which was spiritually dead had become quickened to new life. It has been born from the dead into life. The practical transformation of our lifestyles after this internal miracle is only indicative of the saving work of God. Again, the faithful conduct which follows is indicative of those who are justified not conducive to our justification before God.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbpew
...where the old man passes away, a newness of life in which the old man is crucified and buried tio enable the new man to be risen up for a journey to completeness (maturity) in Christ.
|
Do not confuse the fruitful outcroppings of a soul having passed from death unto life with the spiritual transformation itself.
Only those who rest in the finished work of the Cross are to be baptized. Only those who have been quickened to life from spiritual death are to be baptized. Only those who are newly created in Christ are to be baptized. Only those who realize their conscience is purged of sin because of a trust in the work of the Cross are to be baptized. Those who believe are to be baptized. Water baptism testifies to the internal regeneration of the soul which has already taken place in the spiritual realm of the heart.
|
02-23-2008, 06:50 PM
|
|
Traveling the Road of Infraction ......
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 454
|
|
Re: Remitted on the Cross or not?
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).
|
02-23-2008, 07:03 PM
|
|
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,099
|
|
Re: Remitted on the Cross or not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhymis
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.
|
02-23-2008, 07:08 PM
|
Holy Unto The Lord
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,838
|
|
Re: Remitted on the Cross or not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhymis
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.
|
02-23-2008, 07:09 PM
|
|
Traveling the Road of Infraction ......
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 454
|
|
Re: Remitted on the Cross or not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adino
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).
|
02-23-2008, 07:11 PM
|
|
Traveling the Road of Infraction ......
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 454
|
|
Re: Remitted on the Cross or not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brother Price
Peter was not wrong in what he said. Many preachers have been wrong and continue to be wrong in their interpretation of his words.
|
So NOW. .YOU are claiming that Acts 2:38 IS NOT a salvational message..... (WHY am I not surprised?)
|
02-23-2008, 07:13 PM
|
|
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,099
|
|
Re: Remitted on the Cross or not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhymis
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.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:39 PM.
| |