On the right hand of God

[Adino]

Originally Posted by mfblume

As I said I can accept that. However, the reference to blotting out our sins, which is synonymous with remission of sins, is fully causal in that verse. This means it is not out of the way to say Acts 2:38 is using EIS as causal as well. This would mean Acts 2:38 is causal and is saying that the historic healing of the conscience of God is accepted by the believer when the believer's conscience is healed.

I would agree that the believer's conscience is healed when he accepts the historic healing of the conscience of God.

Yet, as I stated in my last post, I don't see how the EIS can be causal in Acts 2:38 when the 'historic healing of the conscience of God' is accepted at the heart's conversion prior to baptism. The moment faith comes into being, the heart should be at rest.

As in my previous analogy....

Upon hearing the 'good news' of his father's forgiveness and reconciliation the son chooses to place his trust in its reality. This results in a healing of his soul and a cleansing of his conscience of sin. The son moves forward attempting to live a life which would have been pleasing to his loving father.

How long had the son been forgiven? Ever since his father forgave him.

Though forgiven for many years, had the son experienced his father's forgiveness? NO, he did not experience the forgiveness of his father until he learned of it and came to rest in the reality of the historic forgiveness. The word of his father's reconciliation brought healing and a purging of conscience just as the word of our Father's reconciliation brings healing and a purging of our conscience of sin (2Corinthians 5:18-19). Our conscience of sin is made perfect / purged / purified by faith in the finished work of the Cross (Hebrews 9:9; Hebrews 9:14; Hebrews 10:2; Hebrews 10:22; Acts 15:9).

Though God's conscience of our sin was appeased historically on the Cross, our personal conscience of sin can only be purged when we come to learn of the work of the Cross through the hearing of the Gospel. The forgiveness God enacted 2000 years ago is experienced by us today when we hear and accept by faith the Good News of His historic forgiveness.

Mfblume, the great majority of those who call themselves Christians would say their conscience of sin was set at ease when they trusted in Christ as Lord and Savior. What do you say of those whose conscience of sin was 'healed' by faith alone prior to baptism?

[Adino]

Originally Posted by Falla39

Bump

Let's hope he's not wearing cleats while he's standing on God's right hand.....

[Falla39]

Originally Posted by Adino

Let's hope he's not wearing cleats while he's standing on God's right hand.....

A Spirit does not have a literal hand. God's right hand would be a place of
power or prominance. I believe Stephen saw a revelation of who Jesus was.
He saw the Glorified Christ.
"Would it be fair to say that Jesus was God's "right hand man" was just a
play on words. But think about it! God did in and through the man, Christ
Jesus, what He could not do as Spirit. The Father (Spirit) depended greatly
on the Son (humanity). The Father was IN the Son. GOD came, visited the
earth in the Son. The Son finished the work the Father sent him to do, HE did
the work in and through the Son. The Father was glorified in the Son. The
Word speaks of when HE comes to be glorifed in the saints.


Just some thoughts.

Falla39

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Adino

Sorry, everyone.... I've been back to work. Thanks to all who have shared thoughts on this thread thus far. I do want to address some of the posts I've missed. I'll begin with Pressing-On....
Pressing, I would say that trusting in the Cross IS obeying the Gospel. God gives the Spirit to those who obey him (Acts 5:32). God gives the Spirit to those who place their faith in the Gospel.

God, who knows the heart, bore witness to the belief of the Gentiles by giving them the Spirit (Acts 15:7-9). God bore witness to the 'pre-baptism' obedience to the Gospel of the Gentiles by giving them the Spirit. Faith itself IS obedience (Romans 16:26).

Trusting and faith are not obedience alone. There is an active obedience that involves more than mental assent.

Take Abraham for instance. His belief was accounted to him for righteousness. (Galatians 3:6)

But, God, gave him a "covenant of circumcision" that he also needed to obey. "And he gave him the covenant of circumcision: and so Abraham begat Isaac, and circumcised him the eighth day; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat the twelve patriarchs." (Acts 7:8)

What would have happened if Abraham had not obeyed the command to be circumcised? "And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant." (Genesis 17:15)

The Bible is equating the importance of baptism in the same way.

"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: 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. " (Colossians 2:11-12)

So, really, we can talk about when our sins are forgiven, but if we have broken covenant, it's all rather moot at that point.

Justification by faith is not compatible with a failure to obey. We are commanded to repent and be baptized. Cornelius was commanded to be baptized. If he had not obeyed, he would have broken covenant. His belief caused him to obey.

[Adino]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Trusting and faith are not obedience alone. There is an active obedience that involves more than mental assent.

Take Abraham for instance. His belief was accounted to him for righteousness. (Galatians 3:6)

But, God, gave him a "covenant of circumcision" that he also needed to obey. "And he gave him the covenant of circumcision: and so Abraham begat Isaac, and circumcised him the eighth day; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat the twelve patriarchs." (Acts 7:8)

What would have happened if Abraham had not obeyed the command to be circumcised? "And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant." (Genesis 17:15)

The Bible is equating the importance of baptism in the same way.

"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: 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. " (Colossians 2:11-12)

So, really, we can talk about when our sins are forgiven, but if we have broken covenant, it's all rather moot at that point.

Justification by faith is not compatible with a failure to obey. We are commanded to repent and be baptized. Cornelius was commanded to be baptized. If he had not obeyed, he would have broken covenant. His belief caused him to obey.

Yes, and the person who does not have a heart circumcised by faith will ultimately be forever separated from God. Baptism pictures the circumcision, it is not the circumcision. Baptism pictures a cutting away of the old and a putting on of the new. Baptism pictures a burial of the old and resurrection to new life. That which took place within the confines of the heart is well dramatized in the act of baptism.

Since God gives the Spirit only to those who obey, we must ask if faith alone in the Gospel message is 'obedience enough' to result in Spirit reception. The account of Cornelius proves that it is. The heart of Cornelius was purified by faith prior to water baptism. God gave him the Spirit prior to baptism. His heart was 'circumcised' prior to baptism. Baptism pictures the purification of conscience, the internal circumcision of heart, and spiritual resurrection beautifully.

[Adino]

Originally Posted by Falla39

A Spirit does not have a literal hand.

Then I guess a spirit can't play blackjack.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Adino

Yes, and the person who does not have a heart circumcised by faith will ultimately be forever separated from God. Baptism pictures the circumcision, it is not the circumcision. Baptism pictures a cutting away of the old and a putting on of the new. Baptism pictures a burial of the old and resurrection to new life. That which took place within the confines of the heart is well dramatized in the act of baptism.

Since God gives the Spirit only to those who obey, we must ask if faith alone in the Gospel message is 'obedience enough' to result in Spirit reception. The account of Cornelius proves that it is. The heart of Cornelius was purified by faith prior to water baptism. God gave him the Spirit prior to baptism. His heart was 'circumcised' prior to baptism. Baptism pictures the purification of conscience, the internal circumcision of heart, and spiritual resurrection beautifully.

Adino,
It still goes back to Abraham being circumcised. His faith was accounted to him as righteousness, but he still had to obey the covenant of circumcision.

Cornelius did believe the Gospel and he did receive the Holy Ghost, BUT Peter in Acts 10:48 commands them to be baptized. So, apparently, faith only in the Gospel is not obedience enough. If baptism was not a necessary part of the message of salvation, Peter wouldn't have made a "command".

Peter, in verse 47 says, "Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?"

Obviously, Peter feels that being filled with the Holy Ghost is not complete without baptism. He had already repented. After all, Peter is the one that preached the message - Acts 2:38 - "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."

[Adino]

Baptism has its purpose, but the believer is spiritually purged and alive in Christ prior to the act. Cornelius had justification and eternal life prior to baptism.... what more do you want?

Cornelius was saved prior to being baptized. True?

Do you believe baptism KEPT him saved?

[Adino]

Pressing, the heart of Cornelius was 'circumcised' before he was baptized.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Adino

Baptism has its purpose, but the believer is spiritually purged and alive in Christ prior to the act. Cornelius had justification and eternal life prior to baptism.... what more do you want?

What more do I want? I want to know why Peter wanted more. He "commanded" them to be baptized.

Cornelius was saved prior to being baptized. True?

If he was already saved, why does Peter command him to then be baptized? If Peter was satisfied that he was Holy Ghost filled, why the command to be baptized?

It appears to me that Peter was true to his message in Acts 2:38 - Repentance, baptism and Holy Ghost infilling. No matter the order, he wanted all to be a complete part of the salvation plan in a person's life.

Do you believe baptism KEPT him saved?

I don't believe anything keeps us saved, except, our hearts desire to stay saved.

Now, I'm walking out the door and I will be out of pocket for quite a while. I have a busy month ahead, which starts this morning. Enjoyed the conversation. Merry Christmas!