Does Paul save us

  • Thread starter Thread starter exiled
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It does seem normal practice that the scripture records actual conversions (which require belief) using Water Baptism. Additionally, early Church Fathers also confirmed this. The Didache even talks about “sprinkling” water over the person’s head three times…
  • Michael
baptism is a response to one’s faith in obedience to God’s word.
 
baptism is a response to one’s faith in obedience to God’s word.
oh!? What about the many Christians (and stories in the Acts) who lived before the Bible was even written, let alone complied.
  • Michael
 
baptism is a response to one’s faith in obedience to God’s word.
Is this response something along the lines of when the doctor hits you in the knee and your leg jumps involuntarily?

Or is this response something that you actively do because you know you need to do it if you can?

I think the Bible is clear that baptism is required and that it has an effect. I guess my question is why do you respond by being baptized and is it a conscience effort or an involuntary reaction?
 
baptism is a response to one’s faith in obedience to God’s word.
Baptism is an act of faith out of obedience. Hence, Baptism is necessary. Or do we have to go over John 3:36?

Now, where am I wrong in this statement, Jerry?
 
If anyone once to get this thread back on track…

Yes, Paul’s helps to save us for, “the prayers of the righteous are powerful indeed**”! :cool:
 
it doesn’t save!
Who siad it did? Although Peter makes a strong case in 1st Peter, chapter 3:
.… while God patiently waited in the days of Noah during the building of the ark, in which a few persons, eight in all, were saved through water. This prefigured baptism, which saves you now.
Now, Jerry, if I was stuck in Sola Scriptura, I might look at this verse and declare that it is baptism that saves us. Sola Scriptura can do that to the ignorant and such.

But we understand the Christ saves us. He instituted our path to Salvation beginning with baptism. Out of obedience to Him and His Promises, we are baptized. We can’t expect to make it to heaven by willingly ignoring this Promise.
 
catholics and church of christ say it does but that is not the subject here so let’s not get off track, the question is whether or not paul saves.

paul was a feisty little fellow and he’d probably slap us silly to think he is the one who saves, so let’s what he says on the matter. maybe one of you have already addressed this but i will go ahead and post what scriptura says, ok?

1 Corinthians 3:6 I planted, Apollos watered, but God caused the growth. 7 Therefore, neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but only God, who causes the growth.

no commentary necessary, God saves.
 
catholics and church of christ say it does but that is not the subject here so let’s not get off track, the question is whether or not paul saves.

paul was a feisty little fellow and he’d probably slap us silly to think he is the one who saves, so let’s what he says on the matter. maybe one of you have already addressed this but i will go ahead and post what scriptura says, ok?

1 Corinthians 3:6 I planted, Apollos watered, but God caused the growth. 7 Therefore, neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but only God, who causes the growth.

no commentary necessary, God saves.
I know this is a difficult thing to understand, but maybe…just maybe…there is another type of salvation than eternal salvation. And maybe Paul, as well as we, can provide one of them and God alone can provide the other. Lets see if there are any experiences that tell us there is more than one type of salvation (or more than one way to be saved).

An easy example is that a fireman saves people from fire. This puts the fireman as providing salvation to the rescued from fire. Does this take away from Christ’s work on the cross because we used the word salvation in an applicable way outside of eternal salvation? Only if you have no idea what salvation means. Salvation is not only to be used with eternal salvation. This is the way the Bible works.

Unfortunately, if you believe salvation is only for eternal salvation and thus saving is only that given for eternal life, you will have a very hard time reading the Bible and understanding it. Why? Because without doubt, Paul speaks of saving us as well as baptism is spoken of as saving us (as is evident from passages quoted previously on this thread). If saved can only be applied to eternal salvation, then it will be impossible to say Paul does not provide eternal salvation, just as it would be impossible to say that baptism doesn’t save us. The Bible clearly says it does.

If, however, you understand that there are different types of salvation, and thus different ways to be saved from different things, the Bible verses start to make sense. We can be saved from eternal damnation or from a desire to sin. We can be saved from our life of evil by the intersession we provide each other (the same as Paul provided). Baptism fulfills our justification and so saves us from our concupiscence.

It is just as legitimate to say that we can save each other as it is to say only God saves us. The two things you need to keep in mind is that there are different forms of salvation and that even the salvation we can provide each other from our life of sin is sharing in and using the power given to us by Christ.

God Bless.
 
I know this is a difficult thing to understand, but maybe…just maybe…there is another type of salvation than eternal salvation. And maybe Paul, as well as we, can provide one of them and God alone can provide the other. Lets see if there are any experiences that tell us there is more than one type of salvation (or more than one way to be saved).

An easy example is that a fireman saves people from fire. This puts the fireman as providing salvation to the rescued from fire. Does this take away from Christ’s work on the cross because we used the word salvation in an applicable way outside of eternal salvation? Only if you have no idea what salvation means. Salvation is not only to be used with eternal salvation. This is the way the Bible works.

Unfortunately, if you believe salvation is only for eternal salvation and thus saving is only that given for eternal life, you will have a very hard time reading the Bible and understanding it. Why? Because without doubt, Paul speaks of saving us as well as baptism is spoken of as saving us (as is evident from passages quoted previously on this thread). If saved can only be applied to eternal salvation, then it will be impossible to say Paul does not provide eternal salvation, just as it would be impossible to say that baptism doesn’t save us. The Bible clearly says it does.

If, however, you understand that there are different types of salvation, and thus different ways to be saved from different things, the Bible verses start to make sense. We can be saved from eternal damnation or from a desire to sin. We can be saved from our life of evil by the intersession we provide each other (the same as Paul provided). Baptism fulfills our justification and so saves us from our concupiscence.

It is just as legitimate to say that we can save each other as it is to say only God saves us. The two things you need to keep in mind is that there are different forms of salvation and that even the salvation we can provide each other from our life of sin is sharing in and using the power given to us by Christ.

God Bless.
Outstanding post! Thanks!
  • Michael
 
above is a clear example as to why people need to read the Bible for their is only one Salvation and only one way, one truth and one life that leads to the father.

God bless
 
above is a clear example as to why people need to read the Bible for their is only one Salvation and only one way, one truth and one life that leads to the father.

God bless
Could you please respond with an argument? Its hard to learn from you when you do no put forward a position.
  • Michael
 
1 Corinthians 6:10-11 "nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But** you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.**

Washed means baptized. Baptism sanctifies/saves/justifies and this is done in the name of the Lord.

Matthew 28:19 “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,”

We are made disciples of Christ (Christians) through baptism.

Acts 22:16 “And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.”

Baptism washes away our sins. It sanctifies us and justifies us and saves us.

Mark 16:16 “He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.”

If you believe, then you get baptized and baptism saves you because it washes away your sins. If you do not believe, then you do not get baptized and so you are not saved, but are instead condemned.
 
catholics and church of christ say it does but that is not the subject here so let’s not get off track, the question is whether or not paul saves.

paul was a feisty little fellow and he’d probably slap us silly to think he is the one who saves, so let’s what he says on the matter. maybe one of you have already addressed this but i will go ahead and post what scriptura says, ok?

1 Corinthians 3:6 I planted, Apollos watered, but God caused the growth. 7 Therefore, neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but only God, who causes the growth.

no commentary necessary, God saves.
No commentary necessary? You must be kidding. This is why strange beliefs spring up with so many faiths. I could just as easily say “no commentary necessary” with the quote I gave from 1st Peter “baptism, which now saves you……”

Now, you boldly say that Catholics (and church of christ) teach that Baptism saves us. Where do we claim that?

And are we ever going to go over what it means to “be saved” or are we going to ignore the fact that you are probably using “saved” in a different manner than the 2000 year history of the Christian Church?
 
1 Corinthians 6:10-11 "nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And such were some of you. But** you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God.**

Washed means baptized. Baptism sanctifies/saves/justifies and this is done in the name of the Lord.

Matthew 28:19 “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,”

We are made disciples of Christ (Christians) through baptism.

Acts 22:16 “And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.”

Baptism washes away our sins. It sanctifies us and justifies us and saves us.

Mark 16:16 “He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.”

If you believe, then you get baptized and baptism saves you because it washes away your sins. If you do not believe, then you do not get baptized and so you are not saved, but are instead condemned.
wash here is not referring to baptism, washed by the word!

God bless.
 
Where do you get this from? What teachings of the Church have validated this?
I’d like to know the answer, too!

Baptism always means “water” unless it states “baptized with fire.” (Matthew 3:11) This is referring to the Sacrament of Confirmation (Pentecost “tongues of fire” were present). (Acts 2:3)
 
I’d like to know the answer, too!

Baptism always means “water” unless it states “baptized with fire.” (Matthew 3:11) This is referring to the Sacrament of Confirmation (Pentecost “tongues of fire” were present). (Acts 2:3)
I think our good friend doesn’t realize that the Catholic Church is a democracy of the dead. The Church teachings come from the entire history of the Church, not just some new idea that pops into someone’s head in the last century or two.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top