For those who were or are Evangelical. Is being saved more important than Baptism?

[AbideWithMe]

True, dat.

The unholy Trinity of “Me, the Holy Spirit and My Bible” has led to this monstrosity of tens of thousands of denominations, each proclaiming that their interpretations of Scripture are the correct ones.

Eek!

No, not out of context. I am just using nomenclature for a triad of concepts used by folks to justify their personal interpretations of Scripture.

I did not mean to make any reference to The One Holy Trinity.

Trinity can mean a generic term for triad.

Again, “Trinity” does not mean the Godhead. But rather a triad.

trinity ˈtrɪnɪtɪ]
n pl -ties

1. a group of three
2. the state of being threefold
   thefreedictionary.com/trinity

Thanks for the responses, PRMerger (and the correct spelling of back-pedaling, lol), but they didn’t get at what I was asking about, so I’ll try again with a more focused questioned.

You said you “did not mean to make any reference to The One Holy Trinity”, and you just meant trinity to mean a triad or group of three.

But, I was pointing out that you capitalized trinity in your “unholy Trinity” comment. If all you meant by trinity was triad, why the capitalization? And why use “unholy”? Did you truly think that wouldn’t set up an association in readers’ minds with the holy Trinity? Really? You honestly “did not mean to make any reference to The One Holy Trinity” at some level? You didn’t notice the similarity, and all you meant was a group of three things?

You also capitalized “Me, the Holy Spirit and My Bible”. Why, again, is there the capitalization? You really thought this wouldn’t evoke an association in readers with the capitalized Father, Son and Holy Spirit? Do you just capitalize things for no reason?

The thing I thought was kind of pathetic and dishonorable if it’s true, PR merger, was that it appeared to me that you were trying to twist and “spin” your own words. As if you were saying, "Gee folks, I just meant ‘unholy Trinity’ to refer to a triad. Why would anyone see similarities between ‘unholy Trinity’ and holy Trinity, and between ‘Me, the Holy Spirit, and My Bible’ and Father, Son and Holy Spirit? Similarities? What similarities? "

 

[PRmerger]

Thanks for the responses, PRMerger (and the correct spelling of back-pedaling, lol), but they didn’t get at what I was asking about, so I’ll try again with a more focused questioned.

You said you “did not mean to make any reference to The One Holy Trinity”, and you just meant trinity to mean a triad or group of three.

But, I was pointing out that you capitalized trinity in your “unholy Trinity” comment. If all you meant by trinity was triad, why the capitalization? And why use “unholy”? Did you truly think that wouldn’t set up an association in readers’ minds with the holy Trinity? Really? You honestly “did not mean to make any reference to The One Holy Trinity” at some level? You didn’t notice the similarity, and all you meant was a group of three things?

You also capitalized “Me, the Holy Spirit and My Bible”. Why, again, is there the capitalization? You really thought this wouldn’t evoke an association in readers with the capitalized Father, Son and Holy Spirit? Do you just capitalize things for no reason?

The thing I thought was kind of pathetic and dishonorable if it’s true, PR merger, was that it appeared to me that you were trying to twist and “spin” your own words. As if you were saying, "Gee folks, I just meant ‘unholy Trinity’ to refer to a triad. Why would anyone see similarities between ‘unholy Trinity’ and holy Trinity, and between ‘Me, the Holy Spirit, and My Bible’ and Father, Son and Holy Spirit? Similarities? What similarities? "

In the interest of good dialogue I will do this:

I redact my statement regarding an “unholy Trinity” and will change it to say this:

The -]unholy Trinity/-] unholy triad of “Me, the Holy Spirit and My Bible” has led to this monstrosity of tens of thousands of denominations, each proclaiming that their interpretations of Scripture are the correct ones.

 

[cruiseladytexas]

The bible does just simply state it.

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. John 3:16

The sinners mind has to change to believe or state repent.

I don’t profess to be an expert, however, it seems that you should look at the entirety of John 3 in order to determine what Jesus said about Baptism

Early in the chapter (3:5) Jesus told Nicodemus that in order to be born from above (or born again as you would say) that you have to be baptized (water and spirit)

Then in 3:15 he says “so that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.” (not will or shall but “may”).

And in 3:16 as you said "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (3:16)

But even that verse does not say “shall” or “will” not perish, but “should” not perish. So that is an invitation to everlasting life, and Jesus told us how to accept his invitation, by baptism.

Later in the chapter (3:22) Jesus set an example of what he taught by going out with his disciples and baptizing, while John was elsewhere (3:23) doing the same thing.

If baptism was not necessary, Jesus would have neither taught, nor became baptized, nor would he have baptized others.

 

[Izdaari]

Former Evangelical here. My background is Baptist and trinitarian Pentecostal.

I don’t know that you can really separate them. I’m TEC & ELCA now (yes, both), and I’ve gradually been coming around to the view that salvation isn’t a one time event, but an ongoing process, and baptism is part of that process. “I am saved. I am being saved. I will be saved.” If I understand correctly, that is also the Catholic and Orthodox view.

 

[Jon_S_1]

Former Evangelical here. My background is Baptist and trinitarian Pentecostal.

I don’t know that you can really separate them. I’m TEC & ELCA now (yes, both), and I’ve gradually been coming around to the view that salvation isn’t a one time event, but an ongoing process, and baptism is part of that process. “I am saved. I am being saved. I will be saved.” If I understand correctly, that is also the Catholic and Orthodox view.

Daily conversion and conformity to Christ!

 

[PRmerger]

Former Evangelical here. My background is Baptist and trinitarian Pentecostal.

I don’t know that you can really separate them. I’m TEC & ELCA now (yes, both), and I’ve gradually been coming around to the view that salvation isn’t a one time event, but an ongoing process, and baptism is part of that process. “I am saved. I am being saved. I will be saved.” If I understand correctly, that is also the Catholic and Orthodox view.

Actually, it’s "I was saved (Rom. 8:24, Eph. 2:5-8), but I’m also being saved (1 Cor. 1:8, 2 Cor. 2:15, Phil. 2:12), and I have the hope that I will be saved (Rom. 5:9-10, 1 Cor. 3:12-15).

 

[LegoGE1947]

Former Evangelical here. My background is Baptist and trinitarian Pentecostal.

I don’t know that you can really separate them. I’m TEC & ELCA now (yes, both), and I’ve gradually been coming around to the view that salvation isn’t a one time event, but an ongoing process, and baptism is part of that process. “I am saved. I am being saved. I will be saved.” If I understand correctly, that is also the Catholic and Orthodox view.

I also am a former Evangelical. Background is Assembly of God:wave: When I became Catholic I had trouble wrapping my head around the concept that salvation is a process rather than a one time event. It has been a gradual understanding it for me too.

 

[Porknpie]

Former Evangelical here. My background is Baptist and trinitarian Pentecostal.

I don’t know that you can really separate them. I’m TEC & ELCA now (yes, both), and **I’ve gradually been coming around to the view that salvation isn’t a one time event, but an ongoing process, and baptism is part of that process. “I am saved. I am being saved. I have the hope that I will be saved.” **If I understand correctly, that is also the Catholic and Orthodox view.

 

[Nicea325]

The man who was lowered down through the roof of the place where Jesus was preaching would not have been healed based on his own faith. It was his friends who brought him to Jesus and lowered him down in front Jesus, their faith was what got the man to Jesus and got him healed. So it is with parents with infants. The parents are exercising their faith on behalf of the infant being baptized.

Exactly! I no have doubt God knows everyone’s intentions down to the wire.

 

[Nicea325]

Isn’t that also implied by this

For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the believing wife; and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the believing husband: otherwise your children should be unclean; but now they are holy. 1 Corinthians 7:14

Aaaahhh…sort of. It basically it refers to situations where there is only one believing spouse, yet the unbeliever is exposed to God’s teachings. This also includes children with one believing parent.

 

[AbideWithMe]

In the interest of good dialogue I will do this:

I redact my statement regarding an “unholy Trinity” and will change it to say this:

The -]unholy Trinity/-] unholy triad of “Me, the Holy Spirit and My Bible” has led to this monstrosity of tens of thousands of denominations, each proclaiming that their interpretations of Scripture are the correct ones.

Okay. As for me, I agree with an earlier poster, in that I would never use “unholy” to refer to something which involves the Holy Spirit and the Bible.

Unless I’m mistaken, you do believe as a Catholic that the Holy Spirit always dwells in us, though we can grieve Him and quench His fire in us. So then, He is with us as a real Person, desiring to give us understanding as we read or listen to the writings He inspired–the triad you’re talking about. Two parts of that triad are holy, always and without fail, and so I would not dare to call it an unholy triad.

 

[Nicea325]

Okay. As for me, I agree with an earlier poster, in that I would never use “unholy” to refer to something which involves the Holy Spirit and the Bible.

Unless I’m mistaken, you do believe as a Catholic that the Holy Spirit always dwells in us, though we can grieve Him and quench His fire in us. So then, He is with us as a real Person, desiring to give us understanding as we read or listen to the writings He inspired–the triad you’re talking about. Two parts of that triad are holy, always and without fail, and so I would not dare to call it an unholy triad.

Yes…we call it the Sacrament of Confirmation which strenths our santicyfing graces received at baptism. However, the Holy Spirit is not teaching conflicting teachings. He gives us the wisdom to understand the deeper things of God and to obey God’s will. Do I believe Protestants are guided by the Holy Spirit? Yes! But I do not believe the Holy Spirit is telling millions of folks new and conflicting teachings based o faulty misinterpretations.

 

[PRmerger]

Okay. As for me, I agree with an earlier poster, in that I would never use “unholy” to refer to something which involves the Holy Spirit and the Bible.

But I do believe that it is an unholy triad. The idea that all one needs is his Bible and the Holy Spirit, is borne from the author of lies. We see the fruit of this lie through the obscenity of tens of thousands of different denominations who use this unholy triad.

Thanks to that paradigm we now don’t know whether baptism is an ordinance, or a sacrament. Is it necessary for salvation? Or just an outward display? Is it to be done in a river? In a font? By immersion alone? In adulthood only?

And that is just the tip of the iceberg.

No, this paradigm of needing only the Holy Spirit and a Bible has unfettered a chaos and confusion that is anything but holy.

 

[Nicea325]

But I do believe that it is an unholy triad. The idea that all one needs is his Bible and the Holy Spirit, is borne from the author of lies. We see the fruit of this lie through the obscenity of tens of thousands of different denominations who use this unholy triad.

Thanks to that paradigm we now don’t know whether baptism is an ordinance, or a sacrament. Is it necessary for salvation? Or just an outward display? Is it to be done in a river? In a font? By immersion alone? In adulthood only?

And that is just the tip of the iceberg.

No, this paradigm of needing only the Holy Spirit and a Bible has unfettered a chaos and confusion that is anything but holy.

As St. Paul says: God is not the God of confusion. I would also add that those who adhere to “me and my Bible-only” and no church are walking on grounds of heresy.

 

[AbideWithMe]

Former Evangelical here. My background is Baptist and trinitarian Pentecostal.

I don’t know that you can really separate them. I’m TEC & ELCA now (yes, both), and I’ve gradually been coming around to the view that salvation isn’t a one time event, but an ongoing process, and baptism is part of that process. “I am saved. I am being saved. I will be saved.” If I understand correctly, that is also the Catholic and Orthodox view.

Daily conversion and conformity to Christ!

Actually, it’s "I was saved (Rom. 8:24, Eph. 2:5-8), but I’m also being saved (1 Cor. 1:8, 2 Cor. 2:15, Phil. 2:12), and I have the hope that I will be saved (Rom. 5:9-10, 1 Cor. 3:12-15).

I also am a former Evangelical. Background is Assembly of God:wave: When I became Catholic I had trouble wrapping my head around the concept that salvation is a process rather than a one time event. It has been a gradual understanding it for me too.

It’s a bit late in this thread to ask this, but can somebody defined “saved” and “salvation”
for me, so I know we’re using the words to mean the same thing?

As an Evangelical, I have consistently been taught that we are adopted into God’s family and the Holy Spirit is given to us as a seal. This adoption as sons is a one time event, in that God will not kick us out of His family—He has chosen us and will not change His mind. We are indelibly marked by the Holy Spirit, and now bear God’s name.

We may choose to leave and walk away from God’s family, and if we never turn around during the remainder of our lives, God will allow us to be separated from Himself eternally.

We may also choose to remain immature members of God’s family. I remember one pastor years ago talking about “Be perfect, as Your Heavenly Father is perfect”; wherein perfect (teleos? in Greek) doesn’t mean “Make no mistakes” but “Grow up, mature, grow to meet your end”. This part of salvation now is a process, somewhat akin to what the Orthodox call theosis. If we refuse to one degree or another to mature (and I think most of us do refuse to mature to lesser or greater degrees in one or more ways), we are still members of His family, in that we have not completely rejected and turned away from God.

Okay, folks, pick this apart! Be nice!

 

[Jon_S_1]

It’s a bit late in this thread to ask this, but can somebody defined “saved” and “salvation”
for me, so I know we’re using the words to mean the same thing?

As an Evangelical, I have consistently been taught that we are adopted into God’s family and the Holy Spirit is given to us as a seal. This adoption as sons is a one time event, in that God will not kick us out of His family—He has chosen us and will not change His mind. We are indelibly marked by the Holy Spirit, and now bear God’s name.

We may choose to leave and walk away from God’s family, and if we never turn around during the remainder of our lives, God will allow us to be separated from Himself eternally.

We may also choose to remain immature members of God’s family. I remember one pastor years ago talking about “Be perfect, as Your Heavenly Father is perfect”; wherein perfect (teleos? in Greek) doesn’t mean “Make no mistakes” but “Grow up, mature, grow to meet your end”. This part of salvation now is a process, somewhat akin to what the Orthodox call theosis. If we refuse to one degree or another to mature (and I think most of us do refuse to mature to lesser or greater degrees in one or more ways), we are still members of His family, in that we have not completely rejected and turned away from God.

Okay, folks, pick this apart! Be nice!

I think ours was pretty much a short hand way to describe what you described, which I believe you would call sanctification.

The difference between us probably mostly lies with

1. how you are sealed/adopted in

And

1. how you can turn away.

 

[PRmerger]

It’s a bit late in this thread to ask this, but can somebody defined “saved” and “salvation”
for me, so I know we’re using the words to mean the same thing?

Bottom line: salvation = the beatific vision. That is, being with the Eternal Godhead.

So, no one knows if he’s saved, and no one is saved, until he dies. Period.

 

[AbideWithMe]

I think ours was pretty much a short hand way to describe what you described, which I believe you would call sanctification.

The difference between us probably mostly lies with

1. how you are sealed/adopted in

And

1. how you can turn away.

Yes, those were two areas that I was thinking of, as well.

 

[Jon_S_1]

Yes, those were two areas that I was thinking of, as well.

As such, wouldn’t you want to take the more conservative view of those items, the narrower road so to speak?!

 

[AbideWithMe]

Bottom line: salvation = the beatific vision. That is, being with the Eternal Godhead.

So, no one knows if he’s saved, and no one is saved, until he dies. Period.

Since Paul uses the “adoption as sons” analogy, is it possible to give me an answer using that picture–I’m a very visual thinker. I’ve been taught to think of salvation not in either/or terms (either a once time event or a process) but both/and terms (both an initial adoption and a maturing to be fit to behold the face of God, the weight of glory).