question on baptism

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

but the question would be why didn't he mention baptism in acts3:19 when preaching to a different group then acts 2:38??

I already explained that in my previous post. The understanding was that converted included water baptism and the in filling of the Holy Ghost. The times of refreshing, and the restitution of all things are added. Also Peter is not talking to American Pentecostals or Baptists, he was speaking to religious first century Jews, and they understood the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecy concerning Messiah.

John 1:25

"And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?"

The Jews of the first century AD understood that the Messiah would come baptizing, or performing the mikvah of repentence.

To say that water baptism is not an important part of the plan of salvation is to teach another Gospel, don't you agree?

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

Baptism is past of be ye converted!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Repent AND be converted.
Conversion is change that requires death-burial-resurrection.

Exactly what I was saying thank you Elder.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[BrotherEastman]

Originally Posted by PastorDaniel

Please break this down a little further.

If you believe and are baptized you are saved.

If you don't believe then your damned.

Many emphasize the first half of this scripture (believe and be baptized)...many others emphasize the last half (he that believeth not shall be damned)...so if I "believe" then I'm not damned.

Just a thought for some of you theologians to chew on. While your at it...break this passage down too.

Romans 10: 8-13

8But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;

9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
11For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

12For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

I'm not a theologian or a debater...I'm only interested in knowing what each of you think about these passages.

Pastor Daniel: the sacond part of that verse is no good without the first part, the first part must be done no matter how you look at it. Simple really.

[BrotherEastman]

Originally Posted by mfblume

ONCE AGAIN... lol -- The exact same words of Acts 2:38 are found in Jesus' words about how blood is given FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS. And this clearly does not mean BECAUSE remission of sins already occurred. This has been debated for years. That is why Peter made it a command in Acts 10 and says it is part of salvation in 1 Peter 3.

1Pe 3:21 KJV The 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:

It does not save by physically cleaning with H20. But it DOES SAVE by it being an act of a good conscience.


Acts 3? Often, after an initial precedent has been set in writing, as in Acts 2, the aforementioned details are not written, though they were obviously spoken, as in Acts 3. Recall we are READING a historical account in Acts. If the writer Luke were to write every single word ever preached, after having already established the precedent for salvation clearly in Acts 2, the book of Acts would not have been able to have been completed due to lack of time allowed to write! lol The same principle occurs with Romans' references to salvation. The people already knew how to be saved, so Paul did not have to detail every part in Romans 10. Similarly, in Acts 3's case, the reader is already settled by Acts 2 to know what saves.

Act 2:38 KJV 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.

Mat 26:28 KJV For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

THE GREEK IS IDENTICAL AS IS ENGLISH.

And Mark 16:16, as has already been said, shows JESUS saying baptism COMES BEFORE salvation, not after.


Let us not forget that Dan's former allusion to us proposing baptismal regeneration, as is also erringly mentioned in the writing truthseeker quoted, is NOT what we believe. Baptismal regeneration is the teaching that faith is not necessary and that mere water baptism causes one to be regenerated or Spirit filled without faith or even CHOICE, as in the instance of infants!

Amen!

[BrotherEastman]

Originally Posted by mfblume

One will not even bother with baptism if one does not believe. So there is no need to even mention he that believeth not and is not baptized shall be damned.



Lack of necessity of baptism is all due to misunderstanding Romans 6.

Once again, good point or amen.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Yeah ... His isn't enough?

Those are your words and not ours. You and the church you attend believe a name it and claim it salvation. Accept the Lord as your own personal Jesus.
The act of obedience to the Gospel is not required? Repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ, and the promise was unto the Jews and their generation and to all those Gentiles that would accept the call and be obedient to the command to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins. There is no way around the words of Jesus Christ.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Sam]

Originally Posted by bdlooney

Salvation cannot be found in the Gospels beacuse it was not yet revealed. ...

So none of the folks mentioned in the Gospels who believed in Jesus and followed Him were saved? --not even the woman to whom Jesus said, "Your faith has saved you. Go in peace" (Luke 9:50) --the Apostles and other ministers who healed the sick, cleansed the leper, cast out demons, and raised the dead were all just unsaved folks? --And when Jesus mentioned to Nicodemus that He and His disciples were talking about things they had seen and known when they talked about the new birth didn't really mean that?--they hadn't seen anyone born again?--or didn't know anyone who had been born again?

[BrotherEastman]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Bottom line, there are other plausible interpretations of this passage which should be considered.

Mark 16:16 presents no problem again to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, rather than your works-based gospel, for several possible reasons:

1) A person could simply take the position that the end of chapter 16 was not in the original manuscripts as is contended by many. I personally do not lean toward this view but it is certainly one although it is plausible. If we are to reject the adulteration of 1 John 5 ... consistency is at least expected?

2) One could realize that Christ does not say the one who is not baptized will be damned. If this was his intended meaning then there were certainly other ways he could have clearly made this point, but he does not.

3) Just because baptism is mentioned with believing in Christ's statement does not automatically mean baptism is necessary for salvation. You cannot make this assumption. Consider the following like statement: "He that goes through the proper process of legal marriage and wears a wedding ring shall be married, but he that does not go through the proper process of legal marriage shall be considered unwed." It would be wrong to suggest that in order to be wed one MUST wear a wedding ring. While it stands as an outward expression and token of love, the wearing of the wedding ring has no bearing on the marriage status of our hypothetical person.

Similarly, while the believer who is baptized shall be saved, it would be mistaken to jump to the conclusion that the believer who is not baptized would be damned. Christ did not say this at all. He says the one who does not believe is damned..... period. With a proper cultural understanding of baptism as the outward expression of repentance and faith it can be rightfully concluded that the act has nothing to do with salvation before God. While it does stand as a visual token of salvation to the church, it has no bearing on effecting salvation of the soul.

See there, now was that so hard? LOL! You wouldn't even give me the time of day.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

Same ole thing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Calvary-and His resurrection are MORE than enough it is what I do with it. LIKE repentance???????????????????????????????

Is man required to believe and repent since His death-burial-resurrection is enough? Have you joined Crajak?????????????????

Elder Epley, I don't think Dan is an Apostolic Pentecostal. As far as being on the same wavelength as CJ, I would have to say as far as believing that everything that calls itself Christian is saved; they are both on the same page.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

If there is a tie in someones mind between "for" remission or "because" of remission we will allow Yeshua to cast the deciding vote.

16: He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. Mark 16:16

Agreed, the words of JESUS says that those who BELIEVETH which means to continually believe, and go through the water way in Jesus name are saved.
Those who stop believing are damned and will bust hell wide open.