What does it mean to abide "in Christ?"

[ryanoneil]

Read it carefully for understanding.Rom 4:5 "But to the one who does not work,

but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly,

his faith, his faith, his faith, his faith

is credited as righteousness,"Not his work but his faith. Paul references Gen. 15:6 which says the same thing.

Rom 4:5 does not stand alone. Please explain exactly what this verse means, AND how it relates.

For it is not those who hear the law who are just in the sight of God; rather, those who observe the law will be justified. (Rom 2:13)

Titus 3:5 "He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit,Do you think Paul and his companions were negligent in their ministry when the Philippian jailer asked *“Sirs, what must I do to be saved?,”*Acts 16:31 They said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved,”

No they are not negligent. Baptism saves. What they don’t say is that the same washing has already saved us in every respect.

so that we might be justified by his grace and become heirs in hope of eternal life. This saying is trustworthy. I want you to insist on these points, that those who have believed in God be careful to devote themselves to good works; these are excellent and beneficial to others. Avoid foolish arguments, genealogies, rivalries, and quarrels about the law, for they are useless and futile. After a first and second warning, break off contact with a heretic, realizing that such a person is perverted and sinful and stands self-condemned. (Tit 3:7-11)

Titus 3:5 is not a stand alone verse.

 

[ryanoneil]

Can you show in Scripture where it says an infant was actually baptized? Certainly it says “household,” but “household” does not necessitate infants. Also it says the person believed along with his whole household. Hence, only those who personally believe are to be baptized. That would exclude infants.

Can you show me where Scripture explicitly says that baptism is to be restricted to adults?

“Household” does not exclude, but includes, children and infants. In the Old Law, if a man wanted to become a Jew, he had to believe in the God of Israel and be circumsised. In the New Testament, if one wants to become a Christian, one must believe in GOd and Jesus and be baptized. In the Old Testament, infants born into Jewish households could be circumsized in the knowledge that they will be raised in the faith. Same is true of Christians and baptism.

In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not administered by hand, by stripping off the carnal body, with the circumcision of Christ. You were buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead. (Col 2:11-12)

From a Jewish perspective, it would have been unthinkable to exclude infants and children from God’s Covenant kingdom. What makes Christianity different?

 

[NoelFitz]

You might like to look at catholic.com/library/Early_Teachings_of_Infant_Baptism.asp

It might help in this very interesting discussion.

 

[SHW]

But Paul doesn’t say faith alone. Paul emphasizes that works must be done in faith, not outside of faith. If they are done outside of faith, we are in a system of debt (God owes us). If they are done in faith (as James requires), we are in a system of grace. The works performed under God’s grace lead to justification and eternal life.

**eternal life to those who seek glory, honor, and immortality through perseverance in good works (Rom 2:7)

But there will be glory, honor, and peace for everyone who does good, Jew first and then Greek (Rom 2:10)

For it is not those who hear the law who are just in the sight of God; rather, those who observe the law will be justified. (Rom 2:13)**

Bear one another’s burdens, and so you will fulfill the law of Christ. (Gal 6:2)

The “law of Christ” is faith in Christ and works based on grace (God owes us nothing) and “works of the law” mean no faith in Christ, and legal works based on debt (God owes us something).

Good job!

 

[SHW]

MD …

Look at what you said above ! Look back at my questions to you. How could you possibly think I expected affirmative answers to my questions. Perhaps you are looking at the issue from your OSAS perspective … and can’t accept that Judas once held sincere faith/belief in Christ, which he later forfeited by act of his free will.

You must consider our posts in their full context. You frequently pull out a single sentence from ones post … to make invalid points … when the very next sentences provide you with the fuller context.

Now … as for Judas. You know I too once held your opinion on him. However, Peter has definitively answered this for us in Acts.

Acts 1:17-20 For he was NUMBERED AMONG US, and was ALLOTED HIS SHARE in this ministry. … Let HIS OFFICE another take.
Acts 1:25 to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas TURNED ASIDE, to go to his own place.

A ‘turncoat’ … Peter has said so clearly. Peter was a firsthand witness to events, and the chief of Apostles. I accept sacred scripture on matter … not our earlier ‘opinion’ to the contrary.

Don’t worry about the OSAS dilemma this presents for you. Do you want to be correct … or stubborn ?

A “turncoat” indeed! Thanks for these Scripture verses. Jesus knew ahead of time (at the Last Supper) that Judas would betray Him but Judas was definitely an “insider,” one of the 12 original chosen to be apostles by Christ Himself. He “followed” Jesus for about three years before he betrayed Him.

A “turncoat” is a person who goes over to the opposite side or party; traitor. But, first the person is a “member” of the party/side before he betrays them. Dozens of Scripture verses show the truth that our justification, given to us first as a free gift of grace, can be lost through sin and also because of a lack of good works which is one of the purposes for which we were created. If we do not fulfill God’s purpose/will for us, then we do not inherit eternal life. (Ephesians 2:10, 1 Peter 1:22, 1 Peter 4:8, Matthew 7:21)

Love is greater than faith. (1 Corinthians 13:13)

John 15:12 “This is My commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you.”

We only have “hope” of salvation while we are on earth.

1 Thessalonians 5:8 “But let us who are of the day be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love, and as a helmet the hope of salvation.”

We must be “approved” by God when we die in order to inherit eternal life.

2 Timothy 2:15 “Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”

James 1:12 “Blessed is the man who endures temptation; for when he has been approved, he will receive the crown of life which the Lord has promised to those who love Him.”

Faith plus good works equals salvation. True Scriptural math equation.

Pax,
SHW

 

[SHW]

Can you show in Scripture where it says an infant was actually baptized? Certainly it says “household,” but “household” does not necessitate infants. Also it says the person believed along with his whole household. Hence, only those who personally believe are to be baptized. That would exclude infants.

Parents speak for their children in order for them to be baptized. They profess faith for their children and promise to teach them the gospel of Jesus. Parents are the “authority” for their children until they become adults. However, when children reach the age of reason which is about age seven, then they are held accountable by God for their own sins. (John 5:28-29)

Baptism actually removes Original Sin from the soul. It regenerates us spiritually and makes us friends of God. Baptism is what makes us disciples of Christ in the first place. (Matthew 28:19, Titus 3:5) To forbid baptism for babies is to take the chance that they may die “enemies of God” if they die before they can agree to be baptized themselves. (Romans 5:10) Baptism is what makes us disciples of Christ and children/sons of God.

Pax,
SHW

 

[SHW]

Any persecution of others now or in the history of the church by those who claim to be Christians is pure hypocrisy - whether Catholic or Protestant.

According to Scripture, the Israelites, the Chosen People, (in history) were commanded by God to go in and slaughter the inhabitants in the promised land and take it for themselves. (Joshua 8)

In Acts 7:57-60, 8:1-8, 9:1-30, Saul/Paul a devout Jew, is zealously defending God while he persecutes and condones the killing of the Christians.

This was their understanding of fulfilling God’s will in previous centuries. “Killing” was justified by “believers” in order to protect the “purity” of “faith” in God.

It is not prudent to “judge” all of the previous centuries by 21st Century “standards” whether he thinks them to be superior or not. It’s best to be concerned with our own standing before God instead of others’. (Matthew 7:1-5) Only God can judge the hearts justly of those who have gone before us. I think Paul would agree with this assessment.

Pax.
SHW

 

[SHW]

No! and No! Nor did he believe in Him. He was instrumental in His death.

Christ Himself called him “a devil” and “the son of perdition.” Salvation is through FAITH in Christ. He is hardly described as a man of faith. In fact, John described him as “a thief” with a money box from which he constantly pilfered (Jn. 12:6).

If Judas is your example of loving Christ and abiding in Him, then sir, you’ve got a real spiritual problem that needs to be addressed immediately.

John 12:6 documents the slippery slope that Judas slid down in order to reach the point that he could and did betray Christ for 30 pieces of silver.

1 Timothy 6:10 “For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil, for which some have strayed from the faith in their greediness, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.”

You cannot “stray” from the faith without having had faith in the first place! OSAS is not Biblical and is not a true doctrine.
**
The “son of perdition” is the Antichrist, not Judas.**

John 17:12 "While I was with them in the world, I kept them in Your name. Those whom You gave Me I have kept; and none of them is lost except the son of perdition, that the Scripture might be fulfilled.

2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 “Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.”

Jesus called Judas a devil and He called the Jews who did not believe “devils.” In other words, any persons who oppose His gospel at any given moment are of the spirit of the evil one, whether they themselves believe or understand that they are or not. (John 6:70, John 8)

Jesus also called Peter “Satan” when Peter told Jesus that He would not die. (Matthew 16:21-23)

This is a Semitic manner of speaking. Exaggeration is used to make a point using the strongest words/phrasing possible. (Mark 9:47)

We must continue to abide in Christ until death in order to inherit eternal life. Until then, we only have “hope” of inheriting eternal life.

Some people believe and obey and then later disobey, which is another word for unbelief, and so are no longer justified.

2 Peter 3:17 “You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand, beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked;”

 

[BRB1]

Can you show in Scripture where it says an infant was actually baptized? Certainly it says “household,” but “household” does not necessitate infants. Also it says the person believed along with his whole household. Hence, only those who personally believe are to be baptized. That would exclude infants.

From the RSV version … Acts 2:39 For the promise is to you AND TO YOUR CHILDREN AND TO ALL who are far off, every one whom …

Luke 18:15 Now they were bringing EVEN INFANTS to him that he might touch them; and when the disciples saw it, they rebuked them. But Jesus called them to him, saying, “Let the children come to me, DO NOT HINDER THEM; for to such belongs the kingdom of God. Truly , I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.”

This is your PROOF TEXT ! It is clear from Luke’s gospel that Christ welcomed ALL. Christ was blessing, annointing, confirming … the infants & young children of families. Even his disciples first thought it improper to bring these infants and toddlers to Christ … but, Christ ‘educated’ them regarding what was proper and desirable.

Now, back to ACTS … do you think Peter or any Apostle would of withheld Baptiism from ALL those in a converts family ? No way ! Christ had already prepared them with the proper understandings on this. Entire families were being baptized into the Church … in the Pentecost and early Church days. Sadly, you Protestants have lost the true teaching of the early Catholic Church on this.

 

[ryanoneil]

**
The “son of perdition” is the Antichrist, not Judas.**

John 17:12 "While I was with them in the world, I kept them in Your name. Those whom You gave Me I have kept; and none of them is lost except the son of perdition, that the Scripture might be fulfilled.

Jesus is refering to Judas in John 17:12. His betrayal was foretold in this Psalm which Jesus also referred to in (John 13:18):

Even the friend who had my trust, who shared my table, has scorned me. (Ps 41:9)

 

[moondweller]

BRB1:

Numbered means ‘counted as’. Judas was clearly a legit disciple, and even moreso … he held the highest calling of Apostleship. None of the Apostles had a clue that Judas was gonna become an Apostate. It was only after the fact that they finally understood his fatal flaws.

So? How does that enhance your argument?

Again I ask … are you gonna continue with your ‘opinion’… or accept what Sacred Scripture tells us ?

That’s just it. I’m not expressing a personal opinion as you are. I accept the Scriptures that record him as “a devil,” “the son of perdition,” and “a thief.” It’s your opinion, against all Biblical evidence, that Judas believed unto salvation.

It is quite amazing, though, that all of you who keep stressing salvation through proof of faith by the demonstration of good works insist that Judas, described by Jesus Himself as “a devil,” “the son of perdition” and by John as a “thief” who constantly pilfered from the money box, somehow proves his salvation. So I guess you’re saying he was saved because he was “good enough” thief? He was good at what he was doing. If he just hadn’t become a “turn coat” he’d be saved today, right?

I think a reality check is needed here. How far will you stray just to tray to prove salvation by works?

 

[moondweller]

ryanoniel:

Rom 4:5 does not stand alone.

OK, we could add:Rom 1:16 “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it {the} righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “But the righteous shall live by faith.””

Rom 3:21-24 But now apart from law {the} righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,
even {the} righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction; for all sinned and (continually) fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus;

Rom 3:27-28 “Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law.”

Rom 4:16 “For this reason {it is} by faith, in order that {it may be} in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all,”

Rom 4:22 - 5:2 "Therefore IT (his FAITH) was credited to him (Abraham) as righteousness. Now not for his sake only was it written that IT was credited to him, but for our sake also, to whom it will be credited, as those who believe in Him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead, {He} who was delivered over because of our transgressions, and **was raised because of our justification/b]. Therefore, having been justified by faith/u], we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have obtained our access by faith into this GRACE in which we stand; and we exult in hope of the glory of God.

Rom 5:19 “For as through the one man’s disobedience (Adam) the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One (Jesus Christ the “Last Adam”) the many will be made righteous.”

Rom 5:20-21 :The Law came in so that the transgression would increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, even so grace would reign (as king) through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."And this is in just one Epistle. There’s more in that one and so much more in the others. So, I agree, Paul’s teaching on justification by faith alone in Rom. 4:5 does not stand alone. It permeates throughout all his letters to the churches, but especially his letter to the church at Rome.

AND how it relates.

For it is not those who hear the law who are just in the sight of God; rather, those who observe the law will be justified. (Rom 2:13)

What he says is true for those who were under the jurisdiction of the covenant of Law (Jews). However, you must read on to where he delivers the fatal blow of his argument in the following chapter:Rom 3:9-10 What then? Are we (Jews) better than they (Gentiles)? Not at all;"we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin; as it is written,"THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE…;"But Paul was a minister of the gospel (“good tidings”) message, not a bearer of bad tidings. So he goes on to conclude with:Rom 3:21-24 "But now apart from law {the} righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even {the} righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ FOR all those who believe; for there is no distinction (i.e, between Jew and Gentile); for ALL sinned and (continually) fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace (how? through their works? NO!) through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus;"You see, Ryan, it’s Rom. 2:13 that doesn’t stand alone. It must be understood in light of the gospel message of justification by grace through faith in Christ alone that Paul presents in his letter to the church at Rome.

If the church at Rome is to believe any man’s words it’s to believe Paul’s, preserved in Holy Writ. And then she must test all other men’s words by his.

Titus 3:5 is not a stand alone verse.

That’s right. He goes on to say:Titus 3:6-7 "…whom He (God) poured out (i.e., the Holy Spirit) upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to {the} hope of eternal life."He then goes on to encourage the justified by His grace to engage in good deeds - not to engage in good deeds in order to be justified. The former is always the sequence in Scripture.**

 

[ryanoneil]

OK, we could add:

And this is in just one Epistle. There’s more in that one and so much more in the others. So, I agree, Paul’s teaching on justification by faith alone in Rom. 4:5 does not stand alone. It permeates throughout all his letters to the churches, but especially his letter to the church at Rome.

Those quotes are great but none of them say justification by faith alone. They say that faith is the root of justification, and that faith excludes “works of law.” But Paul does not teach that faith excludes other kinds of works (which you’ve already admitted about obedient faith Rom 6:16). They only indicate that faith comes first. This, of course, must be true, because those who do works outside of faith are in a system of debt, not of grace.

Jesus said the faith we have must be a repentant faith, not just an intellectual faith that believes in God. Repentance is not just a thought process (faith), but an act (work) by which we ask God for His mercy and forgiveness. And it falls under grace.

**And he said to them, "Thus it is written that the Messiah would suffer and rise from the dead on the third day and that repentance, for the forgiveness of sins, would be preached in his name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem. (Lk 24:46-47)

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 will receive the gift of the holy Spirit. (Acts 2:38)**

What he says is true for those who were under the jurisdiction of the covenant of Law (Jews). However, you must read on to where he delivers the fatal blow of his argument in the following chapter:Rom 3:9-10 What then? Are we (Jews) better than they (Gentiles)? Not at all;"we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin; as it is written,"THERE IS NONE RIGHTEOUS, NOT EVEN ONE…;"But Paul was a minister of the gospel (“good tidings”) message, not a bearer of bad tidings. So he goes on to conclude with:Rom 3:21-24 "But now apart from law {the} righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even {the} righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ FOR all those who believe; for there is no distinction (i.e, between Jew and Gentile); for ALL sinned and (continually) fall short of the glory of God, being justified as a gift by His grace (how? through their works? NO!) through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus;"You see, Ryan, it’s Rom. 2:13 that doesn’t stand alone. It must be understood in light of the gospel message of justification by grace through faith in Christ alone that Paul presents in his letter to the church at Rome.

I never said it stood alone. I was simply pointing out that there is more than one side of justification. Take your personal commentary out of Romans 3 because it is not there. Until you understand the difference between “works of the law” and “good works” you will continue to make the same mistake. There are works that fall under faith and grace.

**Then Peter proceeded to speak and said, "In truth, I see that God shows no partiality. Rather, in every nation whoever fears him and acts uprightly is acceptable to him. (Act 10:35)

Be doers of the word and not hearers only, deluding yourselves. For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks at his own face in a mirror. He sees himself, then goes off and promptly forgets what he looked like. But the one who peers into the perfect law of freedom and perseveres, and is not a hearer who forgets but a doer who acts, such a one shall be blessed in what he does. (James 1:22-26)**

If the church at Rome is to believe any man’s words it’s to believe Paul’s, preserved in Holy Writ. And then she must test all other men’s words by his.That’s right. He goes on to say:Titus 3:6-7 "…whom He (God) poured out (i.e., the Holy Spirit) upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to {the} hope of eternal life."He then goes on to encourage the justified by His grace to engage in good deeds - not to engage in good deeds in order to be justified. The former is always the sequence in Scripture.

Of course we don’t engage in good deeds in order to be justified, but good works justify none the less because of grace. Both faith to believe in Christ and grace to to live the gospel are underseved gifts. Apart from grace, even our most heroic efforts to please God fall short.

You are separated from Christ, you who are trying to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace. For through the Spirit, by faith, we await the hope of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus, neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love. (Gal 5:4-6)

the faith that justifies us is “faith working through love,” not faith alone. Faith and love (manifested by good works) are always connected. Faith (a process of thought) and love (an action) are never separated in the Scriptures. What is seperated are “works of the law”

 

[SHW]

Jesus is refering to Judas in John 17:12. His betrayal was foretold in this Psalm which Jesus also referred to in (John 13:18):

Even the friend who had my trust, who shared my table, has scorned me. (Ps 41:9)

We will agree to disagree. I think there is only “one” son of perdition and it is shown to be the Antichrist in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 “Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed,** the son of perdition**, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.”

Judas could have repented just as Peter did, but he chose to hang himself instead. I do not see that Ps.41:9 mentions anything about the son of perdition. There is only “one” son of perdition, it seems to me, not “two” sons of perdition.

A friend who scorns you does not claim to be God. A friend who scorns you betrays you.

However, the true son of perdition is the Antichrist because he claims to be God. Judas never did this and so he cannot be the “son of perdition.”

Pax,
SHW

 

[SHW]

Jesus is refering to Judas in John 17:12. His betrayal was foretold in this Psalm which Jesus also referred to in (John 13:18):

Even the friend who had my trust, who shared my table, has scorned me. (Ps 41:9)

Hi Ryan,

I see what you mean.

John 17:12 “While I was with them, I kept them in thy name, which thou hast given me; I have guarded them, and none of them is lost but the son of perdition, that the scripture might be fulfilled.”

So then, there are at least two “sons” of perdition and perhaps many, many more. If Judas is called the “son of perdition,” then he could not have repented at the last-second while he was dying from strangulation as some persons have speculated. So, truly Judas is in hell.

Perhaps all condemned persons are “sons of perdition.” This would make sense.

Until they die, all unrepentant sinners are called “sons of disobedience” (Ephesians 5:6), but after death since they did not repent when they had the opportunity to repent, they then become “sons/daughters of perdition” instead of “sons of God” (Galatians 3:26) and “co-heirs” of eternal life with Christ (Galatians 3:26-29).

The greatest “son of perdition,” however, will be the Antichrist since he will show himself to be God.

2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 “Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed,** the son of perdition**, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.”

Pax,
SHW

 

[SHW]

I think a reality check is needed here. How far will you stray just to tray to prove salvation by works?

We do not stray. You keep misrepresenting Catholic belief. Catholics believe that we are saved by both faith and works. First, Jesus saves us as a free gift of grace, then we continue in the faith by fulfilling the Father’s will for us so that we will be found “believing unto salvation” when we die. Jesus’ justification is just the beginning of the salvation process and unless we die immediately after Baptism, then we must perfect our faith by imitating Christ’s life in obedience to His Father’s will, which includes obeying His commandments and loving God and neighbor.

James 2:24 “You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.”

Romans 13:11 “And do this, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep; for now our salvation is nearer than when we first believed.”

Romans 5:10 “For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.”

Galatians 5:6 “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but faith working through love.”
**
Faith working through love** saves us in the end. Salvation is a process, not a one-time event.

2 Peter 3:17 “You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand, beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked;”

Peter would not be warning them that they could be led away from the faith and fall away (be damned) if it were not possible for them to do so.

Pax,
SHW

 

[moondweller]

ryanoneil:

Can you show me where Scripture explicitly says that baptism is to be restricted to adults?

I can show you where all who were baptized were those who first believed. Notice the wording in Acts 16:34:"And he brought them into his house and set food before them, and rejoiced greatly, having believed in God with his whole household."It was his believing household that was subsequently baptized. NEVER is it recorded that infants were baptized based on surrogate faith. This crazy notion is all based on men introducing into Christianity the corrupt, extrabiblical doctrine that water baptism has power to save someone.

“Household” does not exclude, but includes, children and infants. In the Old Law, if a man wanted to become a Jew, he had to believe in the God of Israel and be circumsised. In the New Testament, if one wants to become a Christian, one must believe in GOd and Jesus and be baptized. In the Old Testament, infants born into Jewish households could be circumsized in the knowledge that they will be raised in the faith. Same is true of Christians and baptism.

Gross error. Jewish infants were subsquently circumcised because they were BORN into that covenant nation. Circumcision was a sign of the covenant God made with the descendants of Abraham through Isaac and Jacob. Circumcision took place eight days AFTER THE BIRTH of the male child. Similarly, to enter into a saved relationship with God one must be first be “born again,” by spiritual rebirth, and this through faith in Christ alone. It’s only those who are first born again through faith in Christ that are to be subsequently water baptized. In the Scriptures baptism is reserved only for those who first profess personal belief in Christ; those who are “born again” in Him. But unlike circumcision baptism is not restricted to male believers only but both male and female.

The truth is, Ryan, there’s not one single recorded incident in Scripture of an infant baptism via “surrogate” faith of the parents. The sequence is personal belief first, then baptism. But salvation itself is “by grace through faith…”, not by grace through baptism.

From a Jewish perspective, it would have been unthinkable to exclude infants and children from God’s Covenant kingdom. What makes Christianity different?

To be part of God’s covenant nation all one needed was to be physically born to Jewish parents. To be saved one must be “born again” spiritually by the Holy Spirit through personal faith in Christ Jesus. It’s “reborn” believers that are to be subsequently baptized as an outward profession of their inward faith. But baptism itself cannot cause the rebirth. One must first personally believe. To teach otherwise is eternally dangerous because it presents a false hope.

 

[moondweller]

BRB1:

From the RSV version … Acts 2:39 For the promise is to you AND TO YOUR CHILDREN AND TO ALL who are far off, every one whom …

Luke 18:15 Now they were bringing EVEN INFANTS to him that he might touch them; and when the disciples saw it, they rebuked them. But Jesus called them to him, saying, “Let the children come to me, DO NOT HINDER THEM; for to such belongs the kingdom of God. Truly , I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it.”

This is your PROOF TEXT !

You’re rationalizing. This Scriptures has nothing to do with baptizing infants. It, in fact, has nothing to do with baptisim at all.

 

[moondweller]

SHW:

According to Scripture, the Israelites, the Chosen People, (in history) were commanded by God to go in and slaughter the inhabitants in the promised land and take it for themselves. (Joshua 8)

In Acts 7:57-60, 8:1-8, 9:1-30, Saul/Paul a devout Jew, is zealously defending God while he persecutes and condones the killing of the Christians.

This was their understanding of fulfilling God’s will in previous centuries. “Killing” was justified by “believers” in order to protect the “purity” of “faith” in God.

It is not prudent to “judge” all of the previous centuries by 21st Century “standards” whether he thinks them to be superior or not. It’s best to be concerned with our own standing before God instead of others’. (Matthew 7:1-5) Only God can judge the hearts justly of those who have gone before us. I think Paul would agree with this assessment.

WOW! Unbelievable! Here you show yourself to be a master at lifting Scripture out of context to prove your personal beliefs.

(1) The Israelites were commanded to destroy the inhabitants of the land because their iniquities had gone beyond redemption. In Gen. 15:16 we read that God waited over 400 years for the “iniquity of the Ammorite” to be complete before he ordered their destruction. Their society had become irreversibly corrupt. Recent archeological finds in that area have proven this out.

(2) Paul never made an excuse for his persecuting Christ’s church, but because of his actions he called himself “the foremost” (“chief”) of sinners whom Christ came into this world to save (1Tim. 1:16). He called himself a blasphemer, a persecutor and a violent aggressor (1 Tim. 1:13), and because of this he humbly considered himself unfit to be an Apostle and the least of the Apostles - but, he says:1 Tim 1:16 "Yet for this reason I found mercy, so that in me as the foremost, Jesus Christ might demonstrate His perfect patience as an example for those who would believe in Him for eternal life."He himself is the perfect example of his own teaching on justification:Rom 4:5 "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, HIS FAITH is credited as righteousness,"Learn from Paul, SHW. Even Christ wants you to. He’s our example of justification by grace through faith alone and the gift of eternal life.

 

[SHW]

WOW! Unbelievable! Here you show yourself to be a master at lifting Scripture out of context to prove your personal beliefs.

(1) The Israelites were commanded to destroy the inhabitants of the land because their iniquities had gone beyond redemption. In Gen. 15:16 we read that God waited over 400 years for the “iniquity of the Ammorite” to be complete before he ordered their destruction. Their society had become irreversibly corrupt. Recent archeological finds in that area have proven this out.

Be careful. Your blood pressure seems about to burst your vessels.

Moses wrote these books but did all of these Israelites learn and understand why they were killing the inhabitants of the Promised Land? I doubt it. They could not even be trusted to refrain from idol worship while Moses was away for 40 days in order to receive the Ten Commandments from God. They were commanded to kill the inhabitants in order for themselves to possess the land. They left the judging up to God. And, they were forbidden to fraternize with the pagans in any manner in order to prevent their own corruption. When they disobeyed, the following happened:

2 Kings 17:14-16 “Nevertheless they would not hear, but stiffened their necks, like the necks of their fathers, who did not believe in the LORD their God. 15 And they rejected His statutes and His covenant that He had made with their fathers, and His testimonies which He had testified against them; they followed idols, became idolaters, and went after the nations who were all around them, concerning whom the LORD had charged them that they should not do like them. 16 So they left all the commandments of the LORD their God, made for themselves a molded image and two calves, made a wooden image and worshiped all the host of heaven, and served Baal.” The king of Judah was actually worse than the Amorites! (2 Kings 21:10-12)

The fact remains, the Israelites were commanded to kill people in the name of God.

(2) Paul never made an excuse for his persecuting Christ’s church, but because of his actions he called himself “the foremost” (“chief”) of sinners whom Christ came into this world to save (1Tim. 1:16). He called himself a blasphemer, a persecutor and a violent aggressor (1 Tim. 1:13), and because of this he humbly considered himself unfit to be an Apostle and the least of the Apostles - but, he says:1 Tim 1:16 "Yet for this reason I found mercy, so that in me as the foremost, Jesus Christ might demonstrate His perfect patience as an example for those who would believe in Him for eternal life."He himself is the perfect example of his own teaching on justification:Rom 4:5 "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, HIS FAITH is credited as righteousness,"Learn from Paul, SHW. Even Christ wants you to. He’s our example of justification by grace through faith alone and the gift of eternal life.

I disagree. Paul calls himself the “foremost of sinners” because he was persecuting Christ, the Son of God, and not simply because he was persecuting those whom he assumed to be God’s enemies; because capital punishment was lawful and was practiced and even encouraged in order to defend and protect the purity of the Jewish “faith.”

We know all about how Jesus first justifies us as a free gift of grace through no works of our own. You do not have to keep repeating yourself. We also know that none of these verses state that a person cannot lose this justification. They just tell us instead how we first receive justification. There is no justification at all until we receive it through Jesus Christ as a free gift of grace.

Please review the rest of the Scriptures in order to learn that we can lose this justification, which we received first through Christ, by our own free will choices when we commit sin.

You are negligent because you keep insisting that justification cannot be lost when Scripture states otherwise.

The Epistle writers spend a lot of time warning of the loss of salvation/justification due to sinning after persons are justified. They even use a Semitic manner of speaking (exaggeration) in order to stress the seriousness of this teaching.

Hebrews 6:1-8 “Therefore, leaving the discussion of the elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, 2 of the doctrine of baptisms, of laying on of hands, of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. 3 And this we will[a] do if God permits.
4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, 5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, 6 if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame.
7 For the earth which drinks in the rain that often comes upon it, and bears herbs useful for those by whom it is cultivated, receives blessing from God; 8 but if it bears thorns and briers, it is rejected and near to being cursed, whose end is to be burned.”

Pax,
SHW

P.S. “Faith Alone” is not scriptural. (James 2:24)

We maintain our justification by “faith working through love.” We continue to be saved by both “faith and works.” (Galatians 5:6) We are judged on Judgment Day according to our works. (Romans 2:5-8)