Sinful union? - Page 6

Adino · #51 08-07-2007, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Adino,

I'm will be coming back to this thread but in answer to this post. NT water baptism is done where there is water "Look here is water, what doth hinder me to be baptized" Enough water to be immersed. I was baptized in a bathtub and came out feeling clean on the inside.

The Mikvah is an interesting ritual but not scriptural. I've never read about it in the Bible. So it must be a tradition of man and not a law of God. Therefore all the requirements of the Mikvah aren't necessary.

Sorry, mizpeh, I must have misunderstood your previous post. You were making points concerning water baptism and then posted an article on the Jewish mikvahs which most scholars will agree were most likely used to baptize those on the day of Pentecost. I thought you were using the article to support your views on water baptism.

I agree that the requirements of Mikvah are not necessary for salvation, in fact, I would take it further and say NONE of the requirements of the Mikvah are required.... because baptism itself is not required.

Remember that baptisms in the NT were baptisms unto repentance for the remission of sins. It can be strongly argued that Peter's baptism in Acts 2:38 was the same, it was a baptism of "repentance for the remission of sins." The ritual of baptism outwardly declared a remission of sins which came in repentance.

As I said before concerning Acts 2:38

Quote:

....one can realize baptism was the outward expression of "repentance for the remission of sins" (Luke 3:3; Mark 1:4). Thus, one was to repent and let his baptism (of repentance for the remission of sins - Lk3:3; Mk1:4) be in the name of Jesus Christ to declare that the repentant heart had trusted in Jesus Christ for deliverance from sin.

Sorry for the misunderstanding

Adino · #52 08-12-2007, 01:53 PM

Since the core passages used to determine the water/spirit position on the new birth each have very plausible, if not more probable, alternative interpretations.....

Since it is historically supported that the water/spirit position was developed by those in early 20th century American Oneness Pentecostalism who readily admitted they were teaching something newly revealed from heaven......

Since there is absolutely no historical evidence that the position existed prior to these men......

..... how can we, in all good conscience and integrity of heart, hold to the doctrine?

SDG · #53 09-02-2007, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adino

Since the core passages used to determine the water/spirit position on the new birth each have very plausible, if not more probable, alternative interpretations.....

Since it is historically supported that the water/spirit position was developed by those in early 20th century American Oneness Pentecostalism who readily admitted they were teaching something newly revealed from heaven......

Since there is absolutely no historical evidence that the position existed prior to these men......

..... how can we, in all good conscience and integrity of heart, hold to the doctrine?

The WS doctrine is poor understanding and harmonizing of scripture. I'm befuddled when theologians and saints of God see as much as a puddle in Scripture and they believe it must mean water baptism.

I am also troubled with a prevailing movement that believes that a series of works activate the grace of God and the inward work of His Spirit

mizpeh · #54 09-09-2007, 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

The WS doctrine is poor understanding and harmonizing of scripture. I'm befuddled when theologians and saints of God see as much as a puddle in Scripture and they believe it must mean water baptism.

I am also troubled with a prevailing movement that believes that a series of works activate the grace of God and the inward work of His Spirit

Dan, I haven't forgotten about this thread but I wanted to finish my inductive study of Romans before coming back to this thread. I'm not close to finishing. I'm stuck on chap 6.

1)The one doing the work of remitting sin in water baptism is the Holy Spirit. It is not a work of righteousness which we have done. That is made clear in Titus.

2) If our sins were cleansed at faith and repentance so we could receive the Holy Spirit, what happens when we sin after we are saved? Does the Spirit leave and then come back again after we confess our sin and repent? And how does this Spirit infilling upon faith and repentance harmonize with the Spirit baptisms experienced in Acts 8 and Acts 19? Do you believe in a second work of grace?

SDG · #55 12-11-2007, 08:35 AM

Bump for my 3 step brethren.

Adino · #56 02-28-2008, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Dan, I haven't forgotten about this thread but I wanted to finish my inductive study of Romans before coming back to this thread. I'm not close to finishing. I'm stuck on chap 6.

1)The one doing the work of remitting sin in water baptism is the Holy Spirit. It is not a work of righteousness which we have done. That is made clear in Titus.

2) If our sins were cleansed at faith and repentance so we could receive the Holy Spirit, what happens when we sin after we are saved? Does the Spirit leave and then come back again after we confess our sin and repent? And how does this Spirit infilling upon faith and repentance harmonize with the Spirit baptisms experienced in Acts 8 and Acts 19? Do you believe in a second work of grace?

Diggity! Have you not read anything I've posted to this point? How can these two questions be asked when they have been so clearly answered? I directly addressed Titus and the believer who stumbles into sin. Hmmm.....

mizpeh · #57 02-28-2008, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adino

Diggity! Have you not read anything I've posted to this point? How can these two questions be asked when they have been so clearly answered? I directly addressed Titus and the believer who stumbles into sin. Hmmm.....

I never finished reading this thread. I can't even remember where I left off. Forgive me. I'll give this thread a fresh look. I'm working a couple of night shifts and hope to have some time to respond to your thoughts.

As for a believer sinning after receiving the Holy Spirit, I read what you wrote and disagreed with it in my mind. You cannot have it one way and not the other. Why would a holy God fill someone with His Spirit before their sins are remitted in water baptism even though they have repented and yet the same holy God will remain in a vessel who stumbles into sin? Sin is sin and God is always holy.

Adino · #58 02-28-2008, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mizpeh

I never finished reading this thread. I can't even remember where I left off. Forgive me. I'll give this thread a fresh look. I'm working a couple of night shifts and hope to have some time to respond to your thoughts.

As for a believer sinning after receiving the Holy Spirit, I read what you wrote and disagreed with it in my mind. You cannot have it one way and not the other. Why would a holy God fill someone with His Spirit before their sins are remitted in water baptism even though they have repented and yet the same holy God will remain in a vessel who stumbles into sin? Sin is sin and God is always holy.

I was looking at this old thread and thought I'd give it a bump.

"Why would a holy God fill someone with His Spirit before their sins are remitted in water baptism even though they have repented and yet the same holy God will remain in a vessel who stumbles into sin?"

Because the "believing" vessel who stumbles into sin has already accepted that the sin he stumbled into was forgiven on the cross. Because the believer realizes his right standing before God is not based on what he does or does not do, but on what Christ already DID. Until we fully realize that we CANNOT fall out of his hands through an act of stupidity, we will never have entered into His rest. As long as we rely on our faithful conduct to perpetuate our right standing before God we simply do not fully rely on Christ.

The believer finds himself forgiven and alive in Christ. It's who he is... he is the forgiven, he is the just, he is the temple of the living God. The unbeliever who has not yet accepted the forgiveness of the cross has not passed from death unto life because he is not yet considered right standing in God's eyes until he believes the record God gave of his Son (1John 5:11). The unbeliever remains in his sins, unjust, and spiritually dead because his soul has not been quickened to life..... because he has not believed.

The heart which passes into belief is the heart which passes into life. We are quickened by His life having been forgiven by His act of Grace on the Cross. We as enemies, were reconciled/forgiven by His act of Grace and being reconciled (being forgiven) we are saved by his Spirit of life (Romans 5:10).

I have written the following phrase and posted the following verses for many years now without a single response. He that believeth is passed from death unto life (John 3:15-16, 36; 5:24; 6:40,47; 11:25,26). The man who has faith in the forgiveness of the Cross is spiritually alive. Can you not see?

Lord, open the heart of Mizpeh to understand this simple truth. Let her truly find rest in your finished work.

Joelel · #59 02-29-2008, 03:05 PM

To make this simple.We are spirit soul and flesh,our spirit come from God.When we die and are saved our spirit soul goes to God and waites the resurrection,if we are not saved our spirit soul goes to an other place to wait.Bodies of both are in the grave.At the resurrection our spirits of both are judged.If saved we are given a new body,if not saved,the spirit is put in the lake of fire that is the second death for the unsaved.Their spirit dies in the lake of fire.

Adino · #60 02-29-2008, 06:39 PM

A spirit separated from God is a dead spirit. This thread deals with the reuniting of the spirit of man with the Spirit of God prior to physical death.

Joelel, when do you believe man's spiritually dead soul is quickened to spiritual life? When is the dead spirit of man born into new life by the Spirit of God?