Necessity of Baptism for Salvation

[Vi_Type]

I’m sorry but I just have to respond to Nicene.

She wrote:

No offense but the words are pretty plain in Acts. It’s hard to get around that as hard as you are trying.

You are right they are plain, and I am not getting around them I am exegetically reading them. You on the other hand attribute something to the text that is not there. Simply siting “proof texts” does not prove anything besides the fact that a word search is possible.

Then talking about Eph 1:13b14 she writes:

You do realize that Ephesians is talking about the seal of baptism right?

Well here is the text again:

1. In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, 14) who is the guarantee[d] of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.

This text is talking about the seal with the promised Holy Spirit not the “seal of baptism”, there is no language of baptizism in the passage whatsoever.

Again good night and rest in God,
Yuriy

 

[dcdurel]

Vi Type:

Are you claiming that God does not reveal truth to individual, but only to the institution of the Church? So I can not know the truth of God without the Church? Poor poor people of the Old Testament.

Even atheists can know something about God without the bible or the Church.

But, we can only know the true Gospel that Jesus taught through His Church. Jesus revealed everything only to the leaders of His Church, the apostles, not to the ordinary people. And the apostles handed these teachings of the Gospel down through the bishops they appointed to each generation. Since this Gospel is the source of all saving truth and moral discipline, and since this Gospel the apostles taught is NOT written in any book of the bible or chapter of the bible, then it is impossible to know this Gospel except through the Church.
Jesus told the leaders of His Church, the apostles to preach the Gospel and He said, “He who believes and is baptized will be saved”. We need to believe this Gospel to be saved. And we can’t know this Gospel without the Church, who learned it from the apostles, the first leaders of the Church whom Jesus appointed…

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Elzee:

I asked a question about this exact verse last week I believe - I don’t know how to link to threads, but if you search on my name and look for a thread I started with Acts10:44 in the name you’ll find some great responses. Good luck to you!

Here it is:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=105021

to link to an old thread:

1)click on “quick links” in the red navigation bar at the top of the page
2)right click on “subscribed threads” and click “open in new window” or “open in new tab”
3)a new page will appear that lists all your old threads, find it and click on it to open the thread your looking for

4)go up to the address bar (where it says “www.forums…” or http://…" and click to highlight the whole address and right click on it and say “copy”
5)go back to the place you want the link and right click where you want it and say “paste”

it sounds complicated but its easy.

 

[Nicene]

You are right they are plain, and I am not getting around them I am exegetically reading them. You on the other hand attribute something to the text that is not there. Simply siting “proof texts” does not prove anything besides the fact that a word search is possible.

Exegesis? Here is what you said:

Acts 2:38;9:1-6 have nothing to do with the specific time of when we recieve the Holy Spirit.

Here is the text:

Acts 2:38: And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Acts 2:38 is not specific in the fact that it does not say whether it is after both repentance and baptism we recieve the Spirit or whether it is in between.

We recieve the Holy Spirit in baptism, He seals us. Why do protestants limit the Holy Spirit to outward manifestation of gifts? Are the graces of the Holy Spirit gifts or are the gifts themselves the Holy Spirit? Which is the least spiritual gift according to Paul? Why are the other gifts ignored altogether in charismatic circles?

In Acts 9:1-6, Paul exposes those so called “believers” to just be immitaters. The disciples he found were posing as Christians because they believed getting baptized by John would save them. So Paul asks then if they have the Spirit in order to expose them, and tell them the truth that is “to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus.”

While I appreciate you infer a conspiracy in this text it doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. Exposing? Posing as christians? So called believers?

**Acts 9:1: While Apol’los was at Corinth, Paul passed through the upper country and came to Ephesus. There he found some disciples. 2: And he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said, “No, we have never even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” 3: And he said, “Into what then were you baptized?” They said, “Into John’s baptism.”
4: And Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus.” 5: On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6: And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them; and they spoke with tongues and prophesied. **

Your exegesis contends by the use of the words expose, posing, and so called believers, that these disciples are intentionally subverting and undermining the message of Christ. But on examination from Paul, to whom they willingly answer his questions “Did you recieve…? No we have never heard…” They are obviously ignorant of aspects of the gospel. It is not intentional as you presuppose. Next Paul asks how they were baptized, they reply readily, and Paul explains the that there is a difference between the baptisms, which they readily accept in v5. Then he Baptizes them and then lays hands on them. Which again, they readily accept without hesitation. Ignorance does not equate to conspiracy.

Then talking about Eph 1:13b14 she writes:

I am a guy not a she, again projecting that which you presuppose.

1. In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, 14) who is the guarantee[d] of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.

This text is talking about the seal with the promised Holy Spirit not the “seal of baptism”, there is no language of baptizism in the passage whatsoever.

What is a seal in Pauline theology?

**Rom 4:11: He received circumcision as a sign or seal of the righteousness which he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised and who thus have righteousness reckoned to them,

2 Cor 1:21: But it is God who establishes us with you in Christ, and has commissioned us; 22: he has put his seal upon us and given us his Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee.

Rev 7:3: saying, “Do not harm the earth or the sea or the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God upon their foreheads.” ** (and the seals continue in Rev 7:4-8, they are indelible identifiable marks)

cont.

 

[Nicene]

Ezek 9:4: And the LORD said to him, “Go through the city, through Jerusalem, and put a mark upon the foreheads of the men who sigh and groan over all the abominations that are committed in it.” 5: And to the others he said in my hearing, “Pass through the city after him, and smite; your eye shall not spare, and you shall show no pity; 6: slay old men outright, young men and maidens, little children and women, but touch no one upon whom is the mark. And begin at my sanctuary.” So they began with the elders who were before the house. (Again they are marks)

Seals are the marks from Kings from the OT (in this case God and the Holy Spirit in the NT)

**Dan 6:17: And a stone was brought and laid upon the mouth of the den, and the king sealed it with his own signet and with the signet of his lords, that nothing might be changed concerning Daniel. Does God ever tell us in prophesy how He plans to accomplish this task?:

1 Kin 21:8: So she wrote letters in Ahab’s name and sealed them with his seal, and she sent the letters to the elders and the nobles who dwelt with Naboth in his city.

Est 8:10: The writing was in the name of King Ahasu-e’rus and sealed with the king’s ring, and letters were sent by mounted couriers riding on swift horses that were used in the king’s service, bred from the royal stud.**

God tells us in prophesy how he is going to administer his plan:

**Ezek 39:23: And I will vindicate the holiness of my great name, which has been profaned among the nations, and which you have profaned among them; and the nations will know that I am the LORD, says the Lord GOD, when through you I vindicate my holiness before their eyes. 24: For I will take you from the nations, and gather you from all the countries, and bring you into your own land. 25: I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. 26: A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will take out of your flesh the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. 27: And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to observe my ordinances. **

Peter confirms this:

1 Pet 3:20: who formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water. 21: Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

And Paul:

**Rom 6:3: Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4: We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life. 5: For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his.

Col 3:11: In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of flesh in the circumcision of Christ; 12: and you were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.**

Is there evidence of what they are speaking of? What comes out of Christs side?

**Jn 19:34: But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water.
**

cont.

 

[Nicene]

The same applies to Acts 8:14-17, it does not tell us specifically when we recieve the Holy Spirit, but this text is not as easily harmanized as the others. You see since Acts 10:44-48 tells us that some recieved the Spirit upon faith without yet being baptized, and Acts 8:14-17 tells us that some believers did not have the Spirit upon faith but only after the laying of hands by the Apostles did they recieve the Spirit. The only conclusion we can make is that we can not recieve the Spirit prior to faith, but we can prior to baptizism.

Putting Acts 10:44-48 into perspective to the situation also helps a great deal. An angel of God speaks to Cornelius, a gentile, telling him to seek out Peter. Peter has a vision from God the thrust of which is “What God has cleansed, you must not call common.”. Peter, a Jew, is forbidden from eating certain foods, he is also forbidden from entering the house of a gentile v28. He is supposed to be tending to the lost sheep of Isreal. God now reveals to him that he is to take the mesage further, to the gentiles. God gives them a sign (the believers among the circumcised) to confirm Gods intentions:

**Acts 10:45: And the believers from among the circumcised who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles.
**
Why are these people amazed if this is the norm? They shouldn’t be amazed at all.

Peter immediately asks then commands that they be baptized vs 46, 48. From 1 Peter we know what Peter has been taught baptism is.

Your last statement is true, however it is not the normative means of salvation it is the non normative (but can still happen) means given as a sign from God for a particular purpose. As the apostles attest in their epistles, Revelation, and Ezekial, baptism is the normative means and seals us with an indelible mark by the Holy Spirit. Noratively we recieve the gifts of the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands. Laying on of hands also has special significance in the NT and confers not only the Holy Spirit but also for particular missions and states in life: ordination Acts and Timothy.

An additional understanding of Baptism can be found here: Baptism but I usually don’t post it but link instead because it is much longer than 5000 words, and this particular post has already been quite long.

What it boils down to is that we believe the Holy Spirit seals us at baptism and touches our soul, marking us, it is not symbolic. It seals you in Gods covenant family. Whereas under protestant theology it is just washing with water, superfluous and easily dispensible.

13: And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit. 14: The unspiritual man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

 

[Nicene]

Me:The church is the pillar and bulwark of the truth because God reveals it to the church, not the individual.

You:Are you claiming that God does not reveal truth to individual, but only to the institution of the Church? So I can not know the truth of God without the Church? Poor poor people of the Old Testament.

And what does Christ tell us about those in the OT? Didn’t God have to send prophets exactly because they continued to ignore the truth?

Even at Jesus coming he makes comment about it, which is particularly relevant to Sola Scriptura:

**Jn 5:39: You search the scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness to me;
**
And many of them still missed the boat.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

 

[Montie_Claunch]

This is from www.scripturecatholic.com I have been typing it up. It is King James Version bible.

Sacrament of Baptism

I. Born Again in Water Baptism
John 3:3-5 “Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nic-o-de’mus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb, and be born? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”
In this passage Jesus was referring to Baptism, which requires Water and the Holy Spirit.

John 3:22 “After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Ju-dae’-a; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.”
After Jesus said this, He went out and baptized. Coincidence? I think not.

John 4:1 “When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples then John,”
This further builds on Jesus’ teaching from the previous chapter on baptism.

Acts 8:36 “And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?”
Even the Eunuch sees baptism as a requirement, a washing of water.

Acts 10:47 “Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?”
Again, there is an importance of baptism with water. Why go out of the way to have these people baptized if it was just symbolic?

Acts 22:16 “And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the lord.”
Saul (Paul) is told to get up and be baptized, even though Saul was directly converted by Jesus. Why? Because, it will “wash away thy sins,”.

Titus 3:5,6 “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior;”
This “Washing of regeneration” is baptism and throughout the new testament means baptism. It washes us of sins.

Hebrews 10:22 “Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies wash with pure water.”
This is a reference to Ezekiel 36 which talks of baptism.

2nd Kings 5:14 “Then went he down, and dipped himself seven times in Jordan, according to the saying of the man of God: and his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean.”
This is a foreshadowing of the regenerative effects of baptism.

Isaiah 44:3 “For I will pour water upon him that is thirsty, and floods upon the dry ground: I will pour my spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon thine offspring:”
This shows that water and Spirit are almost always linked, further shining upon John 3:3-5.

Ezekiel 36:25-27 “Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.”
Ezekiel says that God will give us water that will cleanse us of our sins, which is baptism.

 

[Montie_Claunch]

1st Peter 3:21 “The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:”
Peter also says that washes away our sins, giving us “A good conscience”.

Romans 6:1-6 “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also would walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.”
Paul says that in Baptism, we die with Jesus and arise new creature leaving behind the old us with our previous sins.

II. Baptism is Salivific, Not Just Symbolic
Matthew 28:19-20 “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.”
Why would Jesus COMMAND us to baptize if it had now effect?

Acts 2:38 “Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”
Be baptized…for the remission of sins. That is pretty explicit that it is contributes to our salvation.

Mark 16:16 “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.”
Believeeth AND is baptized shall be saved.

John 3:3-5 “Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nic-o-de’mus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb, and be born? Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”
I can’t stress it enough. Unless your be born agian, which is in baptism where you are raised as a new creature in Christ, you cannot see the kingdom of God.

Acts 8:12-13; 36; 10:47 “But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done…And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?..Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?”
If baptism isn’t required, why is everyone being baptized right after conversion?

Acts 16:15; 31-33; 18:8; 19:2,5 “And when she was baptized, and her household, she besought us, saying, if ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide there. And she constrained us…And they said, Believe one the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night, and wasted their stripes,; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway…And Cris’-pus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized…He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.”
Here are some more people being baptized right after learning of Jesus.

Acts 9:18 “And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.”
Paul had been directly brought to the faith by Jesus. But, he still had to be baptized.

 

[Montie_Claunch]

Acts 22:16 “And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord”
Another reference to Baptism washing away your sins.

Romans 6:4 “Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.”
In baptism we die and are brought back up into Jesus, a new person.
1st Corinthians 6:11 “And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.”
We are washed. Yet another reference to how baptism sanctifies us.

Galatians 3:27 “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.”
When we are baptized, we are baptized into Christ. We put him on.

Colossians 2:12 “Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead."
Baptism is always shown as a renewal and a cleansing, a dying and a rebirth but, never as symbolic.

Titus 3:5-7 “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior; That being justified by his face, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.”
Now what is washing and renewing? Baptism.

Hebrews 10:22 “Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.”
Again alluding to Ezekiel and being washing from evil, which happens during baptism.

1st Peter 3:21 “The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”
What now saves us? Peter tells us that is baptism, not as a “putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,)”.

Mark 16:16 “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.”
Again, one needs to believe AND by baptized to be saved.

Matthew 20:22,23 “But Jesus answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? They say unto him, We are able. And he saith unto them, Ye shall drink indeed of my cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father.”
Mark 10:38,39 “But Jesus said unto them, Ye know not what ye ask: can ye drink of the cup that I drink of? and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with? And they said unto him, We can. And Jesus said unto them, Ye shall indeed drink of the cup that I drink of; and with the baptism that I am baptized withal shall ye be baptized:”
Luke 12:50 “But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!”
Here is another form of baptism, the baptism of blood, which the myters are baptized with as seen with the thief with Christ on the cross.

Mark 10:38 “But Jesus said unto them, Ye know not what ye ask: can ye drink of the cup that I drink of? And be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?”
Another reference to baptism of the myters.

1st John 5:6 “This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.”
Jesus come by blood and by water. The myters baptism of blood.

I hope this helps. Good luck.

 

[Vi_Type]

Nicene,

For some reason I thought you were a women and I am sorry for the embarrasing mistake.

Anyways, your last post is a good example of how people misinterpret Scripture because they rely on Strongs Exhastive Concordance for there exegetical work.

And you are right what I gave was not an exegisis of the text, it was just mearly a quick summary of the what an exegisis would reveal.

I will write a lengthier respond to your post a bit later today I hope. Till then take care.

In Christ,
Yuriy

 

[Vi_Type]

Dcdurel,

Since this Gospel is the source of all saving truth and moral discipline, and since this Gospel the apostles taught is NOT written in any book of the bible or chapter of the bible, then it is impossible to know this Gospel except through the Church.

How do you know this? Is it because the RCC tells you this or Scripture? Or Both? I really think that your conclusion, that the Gospel is not found in the Bible, is quite silly.

I do not think that early church fathers would call the “Gospels” (Matt, Mark, Luke, John) gospels if they did not contain the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Furthermore Paul serves God in the “gospel of his Son” (Rom 1:9) and believes the gospel “is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes” (Rom 1:16), and since he never visit Rome up the point of writing this epistle I am sure he would share the Gospel with them. So I think we can safely bet that Paul shared the Gospel at least in one of his letters to the churches, Romans would be the best example.

I really think that post-Trent Catholic teaching would not agree with you on this point, but I’m not sure if I should do the research to prove this point. I think instead it is your responsibility as a representative of the RCC.

In Christ,
Yuriy

 

[Nicene]

Anyways, your last post is a good example of how people misinterpret Scripture because they rely on Strongs Exhastive Concordance for there exegetical work.

Actually I don’t own a Strongs concordance or any other concordance. I wouldn’t even know how to read one. I do have an exhaustive amount of bibles though (28), probably even yours. I tend to view scripture with an eye towards the kingdom knowing that most of the things which have been written signify the royal, the priestly, or the prophetic and their view of Christ in this manner. In the case of royalty they use courtly language.

For example Truly Truly, or Amen Amen
Or the significance of purple when it is employed in the texts
Mary’s prayer
John in the womb
Opening the storehouses
and so on.

Christ is the King, Priest and Prophet and the texts reflect that in the use of their language and what they point to as foreshadowing.

And what I have found that is the deeper you go into scripture the more beautiful it becomes. There is always something new that needs to be meditated on. As Jerome said,“Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ” I also think that ignorance of patricitics is ignorance of christianity. The original disciples and their successors had something to say, and it was important. They walked and talked with the apostles. They gave their lives defending it. Doctrines not in accord with the church fathers are generally made up later and do not resemble their beliefs.

I think what Paul said about strong doctrine, and Peter about those going about in his day are still highly relevant today.

May Gods graces flow on you. I hope your day goes well.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

 

[Vi_Type]

Nicene,

This is in response to posts 24-27.

After quoting Acts 2:38 you wrote the following:

We recieve the Holy Spirit in baptism, He seals us. Why do protestants limit the Holy Spirit to outward manifestation of gifts? Are the graces of the Holy Spirit gifts or are the gifts themselves the Holy Spirit? Which is the least spiritual gift according to Paul? Why are the other gifts ignored altogether in charismatic circles?

I must correct you again, Acts 2:38 is not specific as to when we receive the Holy Spirit. Whether it is post conversion, post-baptism, or in between. And to say that it is specific to read something that is not there.

Commenting on my interpretation of Acts 19:1-4 (I accidentally put 9:1-4 in my summary) you wrote:

Your exegesis contends by the use of the words expose, posing, and so called believers, that these disciples are intentionally subverting and undermining the message of Christ. But on examination from Paul, to whom they willingly answer his questions “Did you recieve…? No we have never heard…” They are obviously ignorant of aspects of the gospel. It is not intentional as you presuppose. Next Paul asks how they were baptized, they reply readily, and Paul explains the that there is a difference between the baptisms, which they readily accept in v5. Then he Baptizes them and then lays hands on them. Which again, they readily accept without hesitation. Ignorance does not equate to conspiracy.

Acts 19:1-7 is a great example of ignorance as you said, and not just to aspects of the Gospel but ignorance of the entire Gospel. These twelve men believed they were saved by being baptized by John the Baptist. Paul corrected there legalistic blunder by telling them what John had told them earlier and that is “to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus”. Upon hearing the Gospel these twelve men believed and were baptized into (eis) the name of Jesus Christ, and then they received the Spirit. It’s no conspiracy like you say, it’s correction of legalism.

Then you went on about some sort of seal and marks, and your Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance research proved exactly what? Anyone can copy and paste a list of “proof text”, but what exactly are you proving? This part of your post I found rather confusing because you jump all over the place from historical context to historical context just because you find the same words in the passage.

I have no idea how you went from Daniels prophecy to Jezebel forging a letter and sealing it to King Ahasuerus conversation with Queen Esther.

Then the passage from Ezekiel 39:23-27 (with is v.25-29 in my Protestant translation) was utterly off subject. It was a promise of God to restore Israel.

1 Peter 3:18-22 has absolutely nothing to do with the promise of Ezk 39:25-29, the two passages have nothing to do with each other, and have two very different contexts. Furthermore Rom 6:3, Col 3:11, and especially John 19:34 are not interrelated at all. I do not know how you make that connection besides a words search.

cont.

 

[Vi_Type]

As for Acts 10:43-48 you are mistaken again.

You wrote:

God now reveals to him that he is to take the mesage further, to the gentiles. God gives them a sign (the believers among the circumcised) to confirm Gods intentions:

I do not understand how “the believers among the circumcised” are a God given sign. Is that anywhere in the passage, because I missed it. And if it is not there then that is called eisogesis.

Why are these people amazed if this is the norm? They shouldn’t be amazed at all.

The Holy Spirit is quite amazing, and especially when he “fall on all who heard the word.” Furthermore being a Jew and seeing the Holy Spirit fall on the gentiles is extremely amazing and counter-cultured for them.

Your last statement is true, however it is not the normative means of salvation it is the non normative (but can still happen) means given as a sign from God for a particular purpose. As the apostles attest in their epistles, Revelation, and Ezekial, baptism is the normative means and seals us with an indelible mark by the Holy Spirit. Noratively we recieve the gifts of the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands. Laying on of hands also has special significance in the NT and confers not only the Holy Spirit but also for particular missions and states in life: ordination Acts and Timothy.

There is only one “normative” means of salvation, only one “way” as Jesus himself said, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6). Interestingly enough he never mentions “the church” as dcdurel insisted is the only way.

And what does Christ tell us about those in the OT? Didn’t God have to send prophets exactly because they continued to ignore the truth?
Even at Jesus coming he makes comment about it, which is particularly relevant to Sola Scriptura:
Jn 5:39: You search the scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness to me;
And many of them still missed the boat.

Christ again drives it home, because Scripture doesn’t even save, but he (Christ) does. This is exactly what John 14:6 talks about, the only way, Christ.

In Christ,
Yuriy

 

[Crumpy]

The Church teaches that Baptism occurs with water and the proper words of Baptism. But, it also can occur through martyrdom (baptism by fire) and by intention (Baptism by desire).

Baptism by water for protestants is not a sacrament, but it is done because it is ordered by Christ. That is what Charles Stanley said about the matter.

Catholics would usually insist on water baptism even if one is thought to be baptized by desire.

I believe the Catholic position is very scriptural and sufficient.

The Salvation Army does not insist on water baptism, as I understand, but I don’t know the reason. Perhaps they recognize baptism and salvation in the desire itself.

Scripture does not give us the assurance explicity that the apostles and Virgin Mary were baptized, by form, itself. And, then, there’s all the Old Testament people. I think God is completely in charge of the matter.

 

[Vi_Type]

Nicene,

In response to post #33.

You should really get one, Stong’s is the best, it is the useful tool for quick reference. I have run into people who only use this tool, and it takes thousands of words to respond because they site text after text of irrelevant text. Sorry for assuming that you belong that kind of group.

“Truly, truly” and other repetitions of words is common in second-Temple literature. It simply means emphasis.

Purple was very expensive dye back then so only royalty could afford it. That is why Jesus is commonly painted in purple clothing.

And I would like to be able to understand the other examples you brought up.

And I love the common expression that Christ is both Priest and the Sacrifice, both King and Servant.

And what I have found that is the deeper you go into scripture the more beautiful it becomes.

Amen, Amen.

Good night,
Yuriy

 

[Nicene]

Then you went on about some sort of seal and marks, and your Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance research proved exactly what? Anyone can copy and paste a list of “proof text”, but what exactly are you proving? This part of your post I found rather confusing because you jump all over the place from historical context to historical context just because you find the same words in the passage.

Again you are projecting a preconceived notion. I don’t own a Strongs concordance, nor any other. Nor do I copy and paste (except for scripture because it is easier.) I find those marks insulting. I feel like I wasted 6 hours of my time going through scripture, organizing and typing up to help deepen your understanding of it. As Paul says “Build each other up”

While I appreciate you accusing me of “proof texting” (though I am not sure what that means or what you are getting at) I find it interesting that the typical protestant moniker is “scripture proves scripture” unless of course I suppose when it is inconvenient.

Is this how you approach scripture projecting preconceived notions onto it?

May God bless you and lead you to an inward meditation on scripture. I offer you my blessing as well.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

 

[Nicene]

The Church teaches that Baptism occurs with water and the proper words of Baptism. But, it also can occur through martyrdom (baptism by fire) and by intention (Baptism by desire).

Exactly so, the theif on the cross comes immediatly to mind. Baptism of desire.

And those who died for the faith before they could be baptized, particularly some of the early martyrs in Nero’s reign. Baptism by fire.

God gave us the sacraments to allow his graces to flow abundantly but God is not bound by the sacraments. He can do as He wills as in the case of Acts. to paraphrase Paul “Where sin abounded, grace abounded more”

Gods mercy is boundless.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

 

[Nicene]

1 Peter 3:18-22 has absolutely nothing to do with the promise of Ezk 39:25-29, the two passages have nothing to do with each other, and have two very different contexts. Furthermore Rom 6:3, Col 3:11, and especially John 19:34 are not interrelated at all. I do not know how you make that connection besides a words search.

Again I don’t do word searches. That’s insulting. The spiritual man reads and reflects long on scripture. Those who don’t read, meditate and relfect are reading empty pages.

13: And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit. 14: The unspiritual man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.

Of course they relate. Once one grasps the meaning of “water and spirit” in John 3 it is quite clear. Water is the baptismal water, Spirit is the living waters. To say they are one and the same is redundant.

Ezekial, Peter and Paul all reflect this very thing. Peter and Paul understand that God does nothing on a whim, but has actual meaning and grace. Ezekial reflects Gods plan of water and living water, The Holy Spirit:

Jn 7:38 He who believes in me, as the scripture has said, ‘Out of his heart shall flow rivers of living water.’ 39 Now this he said about the Spirit, which those who believed in him were to recieve; for as yet the Spirit had not yet been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

Scripture is not isolated, it is a whole, interrelated. Yet not all is found in scripture because He is a living God. He still works and inspires. Canon closed, God did not.

Peace and God Bless
Nicene