Remitted on the Cross or not?

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Adino

1Peter 3:21 says baptism is the response of a good conscience toward God.

Baptism is the response of someone who already has a good conscience concerning his sin toward God. Can you deal with the fact that a good conscience toward God must exist prior to a person being baptized for us?

Thanks.

I think in baptism clears the conscience of the penitent. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved."

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by Adino

Who's that? FELICITY! Wonderful to see you! God bless you and your family.

God bless you too! It's always great to have you involved in discussion.

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

I agree with that completely.

Bro. Epley! I love it when you agree with moi! It happens every now and then. Hehe.

[Adino]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

I agree with that completely.

Remitted at Calvary AND at baptism? Then Calvary's remission wasn't an adequate remission?

I think in baptism clears the conscience of the penitent.

But wait, Steve. Baptism is the response of a good conscience. How can baptism be a good conscience's response and also be the thing that makes it good? Baptism follows the good conscience, it does not create it. Please explain your contradictory answer further. Thanks.

"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved."

True. It's also true he that believeth and is baptized and goes to church and sings in the choir and prays a bunch shall be saved.... BUT he that believeth not shall be damned. Just because baptism declares your salvation before your peers does not mean it effects it before God.

Again, how can baptism create a good conscience when it is the response of a good conscience?

[Felicity]

Originally Posted by Adino

Remitted at Calvary AND at baptism? Then Calvary's remission wasn't an adequate remission?

Well that was my question too, but I figure Bro. Epley believes that that remittance is not effective until we're baptized.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Adino

Remitted at Calvary AND at baptism? Then Calvary's remission wasn't an adequate remission?

But wait, Steve. Baptism is the response of a good conscience. How can baptism be a good conscience's response and also be the thing that makes it good? Baptism follows the good conscience, it does not create it. Please explain your contradictory answer further. Thanks.

True. It's also true he that believeth and is baptized and goes to church and sings in the choir and prays a bunch shall be saved.... BUT he that believeth not shall be damned. Just because baptism declares your salvation before your peers does not mean it effects it before God.

Again, how can baptism create a good conscience when it is the response of a good conscience?

Again Adino your bias keeps you from perceiving your own dilema. Yes our sins were remitted by Calvary's blood however we as sinners recieve that PERSONALLY in our own lives at some juncture. Yours is faith alone or mental assent it takes place in a moment of time THIS side of Calvary by faith. I just believe what Jesus promised*(Luke24:47) and Peter preached (Acts 2:38) that the penitent have experience PERSONALLY remission of sins when they are baptized in Jesus Name. Again a point in time this side of Calvary. Calvary's blood forgives and remits all the sins of all men but as sinful man we have to accept his free gift by obeying the gospel which is in His blood.
Baptism clears the conscience because ONLY in that act in the NT are past sins remitted. Our conscience is sprinkled when our bodies are washed.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Felicity

Well that was my question too, but I figure Bro. Epley believes that that remittance is not effective until we're baptized.

Remission of sins is effective for all mankind however the penitent recieve this gift when they are immersed in Jesus Name and then and ONLY then is remission of sins conferred.

[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?

[StMark]

Originally Posted by Adino

Remitted at Calvary AND at baptism? Then Calvary's remission wasn't an adequate remission?

But wait, Steve. Baptism is the response of a good conscience. How can baptism be a good conscience's response and also be the thing that makes it good? Baptism follows the good conscience, it does not create it. Please explain your contradictory answer further. Thanks.

True. It's also true he that believeth and is baptized and goes to church and sings in the choir and prays a bunch shall be saved.... BUT he that believeth not shall be damned. Just because baptism declares your salvation before your peers does not mean it effects it before God.

Again, how can baptism create a good conscience when it is the response of a good conscience?

So all a person has to have is a good conscience?????

[Adino]

Originally Posted by StMark

So all a person has to have is a good conscience?????

The sinner only receives a good conscience toward God when he accepts that his sin has been remitted/forgiven. His conscience is made good upon his recognition of the forgiveness of the Cross. Leave the phrase in context, Bro.

And, DUDE, has anyone ever told you your avatar looks like Harold Lloyd? (and I don't imply that that's a bad thing)