Oneness Pentecostals and The Blood Of The Lamb

[seekerman]

Originally Posted by Esaias

A person may have been redeemed 2000 years ago but until they are in Christ they have no basis for believing they are one of the redeemed.

Is there a verse which says 'all humans were redeemed'?

What's your view on redeemed newborns, children? When are they redeemed?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by seekerman

What's your view on redeemed newborns, children? When are they redeemed?

Who says they are redeemed?

In any event, I believe 'redemption' is a technical term relating to Israel being sold, and then 'bought back', and refers to the work of Christ in 'redeeming' Israel. I think we focus too much on individual or 'personal' salvation and we fail to see the corporate aspect of salvation is actually more prominent in scripture.

e.g. - Galatians 4:5

Other than that, 'redemption' may be used in a general sense of 'deliverance'.

Therefore, I don't really think of redemption as primarily having to do with 'who goes to heaven'. I don't see that emphasis in scripture. I do see Israel being redeemed as being one of the primary concepts or themes in the Bible.

[seekerman]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Who says they are redeemed?

In any event, I believe 'redemption' is a technical term relating to Israel being sold, and then 'bought back', and refers to the work of Christ in 'redeeming' Israel. I think we focus too much on individual or 'personal' salvation and we fail to see the corporate aspect of salvation is actually more prominent in scripture.

e.g. - Galatians 4:5

Other than that, 'redemption' may be used in a general sense of 'deliverance'.

Therefore, I don't really think of redemption as primarily having to do with 'who goes to heaven'. I don't see that emphasis in scripture. I do see Israel being redeemed as being one of the primary concepts or themes in the Bible.

I disagree that redemption wasn't on a personal basis, I believe it was. But blood was shed and imputed and this blood was for redemption, be it individual or corporate.

Do you believe that God possesses all individuals at birth?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by seekerman

I disagree that redemption wasn't on a personal basis, I believe it was. But blood was shed and imputed and this blood was for redemption, be it individual or corporate.

Do you believe that God possesses all individuals at birth?

The blood was imputed or Righteousness is imputed?

[seekerman]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

The blood was imputed or Righteousness is imputed?

I think the blood was the imputed currency of purchase. Scripture compares it to other currencies such as silver and gold.....

1Pe 1:18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; 19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by seekerman

I think the blood was the imputed currency of purchase.

What does that mean? Imputed to what?

Scripture compares it to other currencies such as silver and gold.....

1Pe 1:18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; 19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:

Yes He paid our debt.

Do you believe in the imputed righteousness of Christ?

[seekerman]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

What does that mean? Imputed to what?

Us. A who, not a what.

Yes He paid our debt.

He actually purchased us.

Do you believe in the imputed righteousness of Christ?

Yes.

Do you believe that newborns are redeemed?

[Sabby]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Well redemption is not about ownership. It's about being in prison and the price paid to set that person free. Jesus satisfied our penalty for sin

[Sabby]

I have to remind Seekerman that in CWTC, Fudge explained that there were two very different apostolic views to the verse. Both views preached Repentance, baptism and HG baptism, but the minority group that has all but disappeared from the mother ship believed that water baptism was done in obedience to Peter's exhortation and because someone's sins are forgiven at the Cross. In that case, the blood is applied at the Cross in repentance and faith towards God. Water baptism then does not apply the "blood"
The blood and subsequent purchasing/forgiveness/redemption occurs when applied in repentant faith at the foot of the Cross.
There is a "starting point" in our repentance towards God, but there is a life of continual repentance each of us are appointed to carry. It is an Old and New Testament doctrine...its thread goes from Genesis to Revelation. The prophets, John the Baptist, Jesus Christ, the NT writers. It's the common soteriological theme in the Bible.
That's my position for the purpose of debate about when the "blood" is applied. Prior to and after 1945 there were many apostolics that taught this position. They were arm and arm "brethren" until a series of doctrinal divisions occurred over the years.
Love you guys.

Haven't this been discussed once or twice before?

[seekerman]

Originally Posted by Sabby

I have to remind Seekerman that in CWTC, Fudge explained that there were two very different apostolic views to the verse. Both views preached Repentance, baptism and HG baptism, but the minority group that has all but disappeared from the mother ship believed that water baptism was done in obedience to Peter's exhortation and because someone's sins are forgiven at the Cross. In that case, the blood is applied at the Cross in repentance and faith towards God. Water baptism then does not apply the "blood"
The blood and subsequent purchasing/forgiveness/redemption occurs when applied in repentant faith at the foot of the Cross.
There is a "starting point" in our repentance towards God, but there is a life of continual repentance each of us are appointed to carry. It is an Old and New Testament doctrine...its thread goes from Genesis to Revelation. The prophets, John the Baptist, Jesus Christ, the NT writers. It's the common soteriological theme in the Bible.
That's my position for the purpose of debate about when the "blood" is applied. Prior to and after 1945 there were many apostolics that taught this position. They were arm and arm "brethren" until a series of doctrinal divisions occurred over the years.
Love you guys.

Haven't this been discussed once or twice before?

Thanks for your comments and yes the view, within oneness pentecostalism at least, is dependent upon looking at the issue from a one stepper or three stepper view. And yes, I think this has been discussed, at least in part.

I seem to be having a problem getting an answer on how and when an infant is redeemed though.