The Role of Faith in Justification by D. Segraves

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by Nitehawk013

Just as an aside, using the last verses of Mark 16 are questionable to say the least. There is a lot of debate as to whether those verses, including vs 16 which I really like, even belong in scripture as it seems fair to say they were added much later.

You don't need Mark 16:16 to prove the necessity of baptism for salvation. The Epistles do a fine job of showing that the ONLY way we get IN Christ is Baptism.

It might or might not and as you said it really doesn't matter anyway as it only bears witness of what is clear in scripture already. If it stood alone.... It doesn't though. How people even attempt to negate baptism in that scripture is sad. Context and thought process is pretty clear.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Nitehawk013

Just as an aside, using the last verses of Mark 16 are questionable to say the least. There is a lot of debate as to whether those verses, including vs 16 which I really like, even belong in scripture as it seems fair to say they were added much later.

You don't need Mark 16:16 to prove the necessity of baptism for salvation. The Epistles do a fine job of showing that the ONLY way we get IN Christ is Baptism.

Ok lets look into this debate over Mark 16.

The NU Text, the favored type for modern Bibles tells us that verses 9-20 are not original.

Ok let us then end the gospel of Mark accordingly. These according to the NU Text reads thus:

Mark 16:8

16:8 They went out,* and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had come on them. They said nothing to anyone; for they were afraid.

Yes there it is. The "best and most reliable manuscripts" end the gospel story with the disciples of Jesus trembling, afraid, telling nothing to any man!

Do YOU accept THAT as the ending of Marks gospel? NOT!

They wish to cut out the glorious words that followed leaving a fearful confused band of disciples.

16:9-20

16:9 Now when he had risen early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons. 16:10 She went and told those who had been with him, as they mourned and wept. 16:11 When they heard that he was alive, and had been seen by her, they disbelieved. 16:12 After these things he was revealed in another form to two of them, as they walked, on their way into the country. 16:13 They went away and told it to the rest. They didn’t believe them, either.

16:14 Afterward he was revealed to the eleven themselves as they sat at the table, and he rebuked them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they didn’t believe those who had seen him after he had risen. 16:15 He said to them, “Go into all the world, and preach the Good News to the whole creation. 16:16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who disbelieves will be condemned. 16:17 These signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new languages; 16:18 they will take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it will in no way hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

16:19 So then the Lord*, after he had spoken to them, was received up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God. 16:20 They went out, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word by the signs that followed. Amen.

The evidence for the KJV ending is powerful shown by the fact that Peter and all the apostles climaxed your first sermon saying, Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins and you shall receive the Holy Ghost.

So baptism as part of the plan of God was of the last things spolken by Christ and the first things preached by the Apostles.

The devil does not like the ending of Mark. It was never far from the minds of the Apostles as they preached this everywhere.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

Ok lets look into this debate over Mark 16.

The NU Text, the favored type for modern Bibles tells us that verses 9-20 are not original.

Ok let us then end the gospel of Mark accordingly. These according to the NU Text reads thus:

Mark 16:8

16:8 They went out,* and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had come on them. They said nothing to anyone; for they were afraid.

Yes there it is. The "best and most reliable manuscripts" end the gospel story with the disciples of Jesus trembling, afraid, telling nothing to any man!

Do YOU accept THAT as the ending of Marks gospel? NOT!

They wish to cut out the glorious words that followed leaving a fearful confused band of disciples.

16:9-20

16:9 Now when he had risen early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons. 16:10 She went and told those who had been with him, as they mourned and wept. 16:11 When they heard that he was alive, and had been seen by her, they disbelieved. 16:12 After these things he was revealed in another form to two of them, as they walked, on their way into the country. 16:13 They went away and told it to the rest. They didn’t believe them, either.

16:14 Afterward he was revealed to the eleven themselves as they sat at the table, and he rebuked them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they didn’t believe those who had seen him after he had risen. 16:15 He said to them, “Go into all the world, and preach the Good News to the whole creation. 16:16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who disbelieves will be condemned. 16:17 These signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new languages; 16:18 they will take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it will in no way hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

16:19 So then the Lord*, after he had spoken to them, was received up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God. 16:20 They went out, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word by the signs that followed. Amen.

The evidence for the KJV ending is powerful shown by the fact that Peter and all the apostles climaxed your first sermon saying, Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins and you shall receive the Holy Ghost.

So baptism as part of the plan of God was of the last things spolken by Christ and the first things preached by the Apostles.

The devil does not like the ending of Mark. It was never far from the minds of the Apostles as they preached this everywhere.

I agree. The ending of Mark would be rather stupid considering it was written many years later. it is not like... tune in next week everyone for the ending of Mark and the show got canceled. LOL

[Hesetmefree238]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

So then Seagraves feels that water baptism is not essential to being born again? Holy Spirit baptism is not essential to being born again?

A shame if thats true. It would just prove again that Bible College theologians dont necessarily know more than an average saint who seeks God. Thats not some deep teaching its just plain old false doctrine.

Oneness Pentecostals are in a huge slide. They have hardly any teachers to look up to.

That's not what he said. He said, justification happens because of our faith in Christ when we repent. He also stated that justification is not regeneration and that regeneration is still obviously necessary.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by Hesetmefree238

That's not what he said. He said, justification happens because of our faith in Christ when we repent. He also stated that justification is not regeneration and that regeneration is still obviously necessary.

If you attach the blood to "justification" as in removal of penalty of sin at initial agreement and acknowledgment of the D,B,R then that is a false theology. justification is God doing justice toward the response of a person to the knowledge they are given. It does not mean directly salvation but God seeing a person is just concerning a matter to whatever degree in time they are responsible to respond to. A person is not "justified" concerning remission of sin UNTIL they are baptized. Is a person "just" in their action before being baptized if their heart is turned toward God desiring baptism etc.? Yes but that however is not God having done justice YET toward them concerning of the penalty of sin. Baptism is the time and place in which our faith meets the reality of covenant of his promise. Baptism is the response of having faith IN that God will do what he said he would do and where our TURNING meets his message to be united in his death.

A person cannot think God will except their petition at baptism unless it is a true righteous reponse from the heart. Just as a sacrifice offering would not have any value to God unless a man went a reconciled first to the person offended THEN came and offered his sacrifice. We lay down our lives in sacrifice at baptism and partake in his death. That is the point of covenent. We are not our own now. We die to one life to partake of another.

[Charnock]

All of this parsing makes me tired.

Here's my issue.

When is a person forgiven?

Oneness Pentecostals struggle with is question.

Some say that a person is forgiven when they repent of their sins but this cannot be true because they go on to say that the penalty for sins is not removed until baptism.

However, even those who are baptized are not truly forgiven unless they speak in tongues because most OP's believe that a person must complete all three steps (repentance, baptism & tongues) to obtain salvation.

If this is the case there is no such thing as justification by faith (notice how absent faith is from the OP message?), or baptismal remission.

Instead, everything culminates with tongues.

This is problematical because many people speak in tongues who are never baptized. Are they justified without baptism?

It's all very confusing, especially when we add a fourth component. Many Oneness preachers, like Steve Epley, believe that even those who complete all three steps will be lost without sinless perfection.

That belief disqualifies most everyone and erases the efficacy of faith, repentance, baptism, and tongues.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by Charnock

All of this parsing makes me tired.

Here's my issue.

When is a person forgiven?

Oneness Pentecostals struggle with is question.

some do some don't. Ignorance of some to teach and explain does nto negate a truth.

Some say that a person is forgiven when they repent of their sins but this cannot be true because they go on to say that the penalty for sins is not removed until baptism.

initial covenant entry or sevanthood. Repentance must have a context of what is being viewed in the eyes of the beleiver. What is before someone who has just heard and heart is turned is not the same reality as that of the saint who has been has already been delievered/saved and walking. The reality of giving up all is the same but the message of coming into covenant vs living the covenant are different. Baptism is the unification and being united with Christ and clothed with him. Baptism IS repentance. As it is the response/act or faith in turning to God and believing/trusting what his message is and what he said he would do.

However, even those who are baptized are not truly forgiven unless they speak in tongues because most OP's believe that a person must complete all three steps (repentance, baptism & tongues) to obtain salvation.

No.. baptism of the HS is the reality that GOD is moving within a heart of faith that is not resistant to his will. You don't have to have the penalty of sin removed for GOd to consider your heart just before him in which he can manifest himself. A heart that is turned to God is righteous. That however does not mean they are saved or in covenant which involves the reality of the cross. God justifying/ajudging a person heart as right does not mean salvation. It simply means According to whatever God is judging of them they re righteous in it. Ephesus was right in many things but unrighteous in a few. They overall where not justified before God.

If this is the case there is no such thing as justification by faith (notice how absent faith is from the OP message?), or baptismal remission.

wrong.

Instead, everything culminates with tongues.

no everyting culminates with what GOD accepts and does not accept. his judgement of faith is righteous not ours.

This is problematical because many people speak in tongues who are never baptized. Are they justified without baptism?

dealth with that. You use justification with tunnell vision instead of it broad understanding of God doing justice toward all things not just salvation and coming into covenant.

It's all very confusing, especially when we add a fourth component. Many Oneness preachers, like Steve Epley, believe that even those who complete all three steps will be lost without sinless perfection.

you mean living for God? Walking as he walked 1 John 1:7?

]That belief disqualifies most everyone and erases the efficacy of faith, repentance, baptism, and tongues.

no... it is about God judging you walk according to the path he has set before you to walk. Take you own short cut you have sinned and lacked faith and have created a idol of your own making.

[Charnock]

Also, the OP idea of repentance is not the same as Peter's on the Day of Pentecost.

Look at his sermon in Acts 2 and then realize he was not asking them to repent of every sin they had committed. The repentance he demanded was tied to their unbelief.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by Charnock

Also, the OP idea of repentance is not the same as Peter's on the Day of Pentecost.

Look at his sermon in Acts 2 and then realize he was not asking them to repent of every sin they had committed. The repentance he demanded was tied to their unbelief.

oh of course.... why would repentance ever involve turning away from sin? Surely unbelief and sin are not tied togethor. Surely unbelief and accepting the authority and words of the Messiah have nothing to do with come/turn and follow me. Surely the message messiah preached of forsake all to follow him was not about sin and recognize him as Lord of their life. Surely their disbelief only involved mental assent not actual recognition of Lordship. yeah yeah that's the ticket.