A Framework for Discussing Baptism

BaptismofJesus2I am again borrowing from the comments, this time from a series of comments by me under Paul and the Faithfulness of God: Baptism and the Eucharist.

For a little background, I reference N. T. Wright’s point that baptism serves a community purpose, as baptism announces to the church that the convert has faith and made a commitment to Jesus as Lord.

I think that’s obvious, but evidently because I didn’t also say “and washes away sins” I’m a Baptist or Calvinist or something worse — although I tried to carefully nuance my writing to say that baptism does more than that.

In fact, Wright recently retired as an Anglican bishop, and the Anglicans take a very similar view of baptism as the traditional Church of Christ view (except they baptize babies). They baptize “for remission of sins.” We did not patent that one.

Still, we sometimes fall so in love with our rhetoric that if we take communion without preceding the meal with a speech against transubstantiation and consubstantiation, the poor officiant is suspected of being a closet Lutheran or Catholic. I mean, we just love going on heretic hunts. (And it gets old.)

And so I wrote …

All,

Do we really need to retread these baptism arguments? I mean, we’ve covered the topic many times before. So … many … times …

And this discussion is not remotely about what I said in the post. Which is okay, I suppose, but conceding that baptism has a community element hardly defeats either the Church of Christ or Baptist positions. It’s just true. It gets so old for folks to argue that any variation from the Church of Christ tract-rack positions means we’re guilty of the Calvinist/Baptist position — as though the totality of all Bible truths may be necessarily classified as either Church of Christ or Baptist.

There’s a world of biblical truth that doesn’t fit neatly into either category, and we really need to learn think more freely than the 10-pages of a tract.

(Rom 12:2 NET) 2 Do not be conformed to this present world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may test and approve what is the will of God – what is good and well-pleasing and perfect.

Regardless of what the old Church of Christ-Baptists debates said in the early 20th Century (which is where most of our rhetoric originated), the Bible promises salvation to ALL with FAITH in JESUS repeatedly. It really does.

(Mark 9:23) “‘If you can’?” said Jesus. “Everything is possible for him who believes.”

(John 1:12-13) Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God-children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

(John 3:14-18) Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.”

(John 3:36) “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on him.”

(John 5:24) “I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.”

(John 6:29) Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.”

(John 6:35) Then Jesus declared, “I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty.”

(John 6:40) “For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.”

(John 6:47) “I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life.”

(John 7:38-39) “Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, streams of living water will flow from within him.” By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified.

(John 11:25-26) Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?”

(John 12:46) “I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness.”

(John 20:31) But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

(Acts 10:43) “All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.”

(Acts 13:38-39) “Therefore, my brothers, I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. Through him everyone who believes is justified from everything you could not be justified from by the law of Moses.”

(Acts 16:31) They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved-you and your household.”

(Rom. 1:16-17) I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.”

(Rom. 3:22-24) This righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.

(Rom. 3:25-28) God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished-he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus. Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of observing the law? No, but on that of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law.

(Rom. 4:4-5) Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness.

(Rom. 5:1-2) Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we rejoice in the hope of the glory of God.

(Rom. 10:4) Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.

(Rom. 10:9-13) That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. As the Scripture says, “Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame.” For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile-the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

(1 Cor. 1:21) For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.

(Gal. 2:15-16) “We who are Jews by birth and not ‘Gentile sinners’ know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.”

(Gal. 3:2) I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?

(Gal. 3:22) But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.

(Gal. 5:6) For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.

(Eph. 1:13-14) And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession-to the praise of his glory.

(Eph. 2:8-10) For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith–and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God–not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

(2 Thess. 2:13) But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord, because from the beginning God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth.

(1 Tim. 1:16) But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his unlimited patience as an example for those who would believe on him and receive eternal life.

(Heb. 10:39) But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who believe and are saved.

(1 John 3:23-24) And this is his command: to believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to love one another as he commanded us. Those who obey his commands live in him, and he in them. And this is how we know that he lives in us: We know it by the Spirit he gave us.

(1 John 4:2-3) This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God: Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3 but every spirit that does not acknowledge Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world.

(1 John 5:1) Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves the father loves his child as well.

(1 John 5:3-5) This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome, for everyone born of God overcomes the world. This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith. Who is it that overcomes the world? Only he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God.

(1 John 5:13) I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.

Now, these aren’t all the verses that teach that faith is sufficient to save. They’re just some of the ones that are the most obvious. I could easily add dozens more.

The usual tired, obviously wrong Church of Christ response is, “Well, they don’t say ‘faith only.’” If I said to my child, “Bring me a dollar and I’ll give you a piece of candy,” doesn’t that plainly imply “one dollar only”? Would I have any integrity at all if I told a child that his dollar isn’t enough because I didn’t say “one dollar only”?

And so unless we’re willing to accuse the Spirit that inspired these verses of lacking integrity, we really have to accept the many, many promises to save those with faith as true. God keeps his promises. All of them.

Of course, “faith” includes “faithfulness” as part of its definition (in the Greek). We must come to God with penitence (a synonym for “faithfulness”) — and so we must obey what we know to obey. And baptism is a command.

But many, many new converts are taught baptism in error – and they are truly babes in Christ when they are taught this error. And yet they come with faith/faithfulness, and so they obey as well as their understanding permits. They can hardly be held accountable for an expertise in Greek and theology that eludes 80% or more of Christendom!

Now, a couple of years ago, we covered Romans 5 in some detail. One major theme of the chapter is that we’re only accountable to obey what we know.

(Rom 5:20-21 NET) 20 Now the law came in so that the transgression may increase, but where sin increased, grace multiplied all the more, 21 so that just as sin reigned in death, so also grace will reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Consider Adam and Eve — they were not accountable for their sins until they ate of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. We are not accountable for what we don’t know. Therefore, if a convert is taught in error regarding the meaning “baptizo” or “eis,” God will save them despite their error, if they have faith in Jesus.

After all, we don’t insist on perfect faith for salvation. Or else we’d see mountains being relocated. Nor do we expect perfect repentance (or we’d have sinless members). And so why insist on baptismal perfection?

Is baptism that much more central than faith and repentance? Faith and repentance go back to Abraham. The scriptures are filled with those two. You won’t find baptism in the prophets. And the Gospels don’t say all that much on the subject (not nothing, but compare the number of “faith” passages to the number of “baptism” passages — and you’ll wonder why our preaching doesn’t sound much like the Gospels! We really and truly sometimes preach faith in baptism rather than faith in Jesus).

Our graceless approach to Christianity helped us win debates against Baptists in the 1920s. But it’s not sound exegesis, because it requires us to ignore far too many passages that plainly center our salvation on faith in Jesus.

That’s not to say that the baptism verses don’t say what they say. They do. Of course. Obviously. The question, though, isn’t whether we should teach or practice baptism as we do. I really think we should. But we have no business teaching that those improperly baptized who come to Jesus with a genuine faith and repentance are lost. They are not. The Bible is really quite plain — if we’d just be willing to admit that we’ve been wrong to damn so many saved people.

They doesn’t make me a Baptist. I think Baptist baptismal theology is just as wrong. You see, there’s a universe of truth that fits in neither the Church of Christ nor the Baptist mold. And there’s no better way to blind yourself to the scriptures than to assume that all truth fits in one box or the other. That’s the dregs leftover from a debating culture that was more concerned with winning arguments than being true to Jesus. It’s time to think an entirely different way.

______________________

[Second comment]

Thanks for your thoughtful questions.

“I also understand you to be saying that when one in the example stated learns of the command to be baptized that they will obey.”

I know countless people who’ve chosen to be baptized by immersion on a confession of faith once they learned the First Century practice. It really happens — and happens quite a lot.

“if an individual refuses to submit to baptism because they believe that they are already saved, will grace continue to cover their disobedience forever?”

Well, they are in fact already saved. They are still in grace. But will they be damned for their disobedience? Well, are they in rebellion against God’s known will (Heb 10:26 ff)? It’s an easy, superficial argument to make — they know to be baptized correctly and they don’t do it; therefore, they are damned for rebellion.

But by that standard, not many of us will make it. I mean, who lives up to the standards of even the known will of God? Who evangelizes as he knows he should? Who prays as well as he knows to? Who loves as he knows to? Who cares for the poor as he knows to? Who is the husband or wife he or she knows to be?

Why privilege baptism as more important to God and the state of one’s heart before his judge than concern for the poor? Or the lost?

[One might argue:] Well, it’s just so easy to get it right.

True, but it’s not that hard to give away everything you own. Or to forgive all who’ve ever sinned against you. In theory. But we are complicated beings, and even the simplest things can be very hard for us.

Therefore, I decline to judge someone for failure to be baptized in this situation — because I don’t want to stand under the judgment of –

(Mat 7:1-5 NET) “Do not judge so that you will not be judged. 2 For by the standard you judge you will be judged, and the measure you use will be the measure you receive. 3 Why do you see the speck in your brother’s eye, but fail to see the beam of wood in your own? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove the speck from your eye,’ while there is a beam in your own? 5 You hypocrite! First remove the beam from your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.”

As I can’t stand that test, I will not apply that test.

At an even deeper level, I take Jesus to be quite serious when he says that all who come to him in faith will be saved. And I think those with faith will be faithful and that the faithful will obey — imperfectly with all kinds of gaps in their works and performance — and grace will cover all that. (Not that rebellion is impossible, but it’s not the expected or normal course.)

Meanwhile, I’ll teach baptism by immersion for remission of sins – because I think the Bible teaches it — and I’ll practice exactly that within my sphere of influence — and I’ll treat all who confess faith/faithfulness to Jesus as brothers in Christ.

______________________

[This was not in the comments.]

Look again at —

(Rom 5:20-21 NET) 20 Now the law came in so that the transgression may increase, but where sin increased, grace multiplied all the more, 21 so that just as sin reigned in death, so also grace will reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Not only did greater knowledge of God’s will increase accountability and therefore sin, it also increased God’s giving of grace. Indeed, grace “multiplied”! Indeed, Paul promises that in Jesus, “grace will reign.” That’s right: “Grace rules!”

Grace is not for everyone, but it is for “everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.” (Rom 1:16 NET)

In short, one of the colossal, horrid mistakes of 20th Century Church of Christ theology has been to demand baptism as a matter of obedience — and then making obedience non-negotiable to prove baptism non-negotiable (and so damn “the denominations”) — hence, making all obedience non-negotiable (which kind of damns us, doesn’t it?). It destroys grace and makes most of the New Testament into nonsense.

And by seeking to damn everyone else, we’ve put ourselves on very shaky ground indeed.

(Gal 5:3-4 NET)  3 And I testify again to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law.  4 You who are trying to be declared righteous by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace!

About Jay F Guin

My name is Jay Guin, and I’m a retired elder. I wrote The Holy Spirit and Revolutionary Grace about 18 years ago. I’ve spoken at the Pepperdine, Lipscomb, ACU, Harding, and Tulsa lectureships and at ElderLink. My wife’s name is Denise, and I have four sons, Chris, Jonathan, Tyler, and Philip. I have two grandchildren. And I practice law.
This entry was posted in Baptism, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

434 Responses to A Framework for Discussing Baptism

  1. John says:

    Very good post, Jay; well thought out. It is beyond me how Christians, even some who call themselves “progressive”, can get so hung up on correct wording; and not only that, but in how they perceive Baptism to be such an isolated, individual experience when everything else in their “theology” is about “Church, Church, Church!”

    To be honest, I believe the reverse to be true. It is our faith that is existential in nature, for we all stand before God as individuals, not as a church. But, as Wright and yourself state, Baptism is an announcement to the church; it is the person embracing the church and the church embracing the person.

    You made a great point regarding the debates of the early twentieth century. I once shared an experience on your blog a few years ago that I would like to share again. Ben Bogard was a well known Baptist preacher and debater in Arkansas during the forties and fifties. I remember when I was around twelve years old when my father and I were with some of his friends who were Baptists. They were discussing baptism and one of my father’s friends said, “Brother Bogard tore your Campbellite preachers up in those debates”. Well, my Dad gave his calm answers, and in time we left for home. In the car I turned to my dad and asked, “How can those Baptist people believe that Ben Bogard won all those debates?”. He simply smiled and said, “Well, they like to believe he won those debates; but we know that baptist baptism is not the truth, don’t we”. Ten or so years later I was thinking about that conversation, when it hit me, that there could have easily been another twelve year boy asking his father, “How can those Church of Christ folks believe they won those debates?” To which the father would reply, “Well, they like to believe they won those debates; but, we know that Campbellite baptism is not the gospel, don’t we”.

    Those debates were like WW I trench warfare. Many were “bloody” and ugly, and most everyone retreated back to their trenches and dug themselves in deeper. There was hardly any “reasoning together”. Yet, if we allow ourselves to observe others, such as the Anglicans, we can learn, if we are humble enough, that the difference in being and not being a child of God is not the water, but in saying, like Noah and the children of Israel, “yes” to God, which then makes water the beautiful and grand separation between the old and new.

  2. Grizz says:

    Jay,

    You find fault withold arguments so you must accept opposing arguments? What foolishness is this?

    This is not a matter of the least wrong argument wins. Any wrong argument is still wrong.

    Is that the end of grace? No … and neither is it. the beginning of grace. It is NOT either/or.

    Faith does not exist without action any more than love exists without action.

    So, inactivity is never faithfulness/faith.

    Reject poor arguments. Just don’t imagine another poor argument is validated by that rejection.

    Grizz

  3. Grace says:

    Jay’s comment from the other post he said, “I’ll treat all who confess faith/faithfulness to Jesus as brothers in Christ.”

    Yet at the beginning of this post Jay used these words about other people who follow Jesus, “I’m a Baptist or Calvinist or something worse”. Is this how you love your brother, really?

    Seems talking about baptism is more important to you guys than actually having and showing the many attributes Jesus says His followers should have.

  4. Ray Downen says:

    I sorrow when any seeker after truth believes that faith ALONE saves. Obviously faith in Jesus is required for salvation! All who seek truth are confident that it’s found in JESUS and only in Him. But the instant any person claims that all it takes to be saved is to believe in Jesus as Lord, they are going beyond what is written. And that’s precisely what Jay has seems to have said in this lengthy list of passages about faith. I wish he had included what James says about faith, but he doesn’t seem to want to agree with the brother of Jesus.

    Jesus is reported to have told Nicodemus plainly that entry into the Kingdom is by way of new birth of WATER and spirit. Peter explains entry by speaking of REPENTING (a spiritual change of masters) and being BAPTIZED (in water as Jesus commanded). Some seek to ignore simple truth about new birth and suggest that new birth is of spirit alone. It is not of spirit alone.If a baby stays in the womb, there is no birth. Romans 6:1-11 makes clear that the previous person of flesh is to be buried so that a new person of faith can emerge, raised into new life. This is not just a change of mind (faith). It’s based ON faith. But it is not faith alone.

    I don’t advocate debating the new birth with Baptists whether or not they claim to be members of the Lord’s church. But I insist that we are required to speak the truth about what is included in obeying the gospel. Paul says only those who DO obey the gospel will be saved. He didn’t mean ONLY baptism, but he surely includes being baptized in the obedience which saves. How dare we promise salvation to those who have NOT been baptized? Jesus doesn’t save through faith alone. How can we assure unbaptized believers that they’re now all O.K.?

    My latest writing on the subject is at http://missionoutreach.org/HS-J03.pdf. I hope you’ll read it and let me know ([email protected]) what you like or don’t like about what is there said.

  5. Grace says:

    Be sure to tell people who come to have faith in Jesus as their Lord who are on life support that if they don’t unhook the life support machines and go to be baptized the CofC says Jesus’ sacrifice will not save them.

    There are many people in the CofC who’ve been baptized that do not show the fruit that they are saved. Here’s an excellent by Royce Ogle. http://gracedigest.com/2012/10/01/repent-and-be-baptized/

  6. Alabama John says:

    Maybe we shouldn’t dare to promise salvation or hell either, to anyone. We can sure get stuck on the scriptures interpretation can’t we.
    One day we, all of mankind will stand before the Lord to be judged and it will be interesting to see how many want to argue with Him.
    Never forget Jesus out of his own mouth gave us the two top priority commandments we must be strongest in and a debate on whether we are doing those as we should would take precedence over baptism or any other act it seems to me.
    Talk about straining at a gnat while swallowing a camel!!!

  7. Grace says:

    If people were to read Royce’s post without an agenda set in their minds to so easily dismiss what God wants us to understand, that He from the beginning had one plan of salvation for all mankind. That the Creator Himself so loved us that He would give His life to save us. I’ve seen so many people that come from legalistic churches harden their hearts toward people truly seeking to know the truth. The cross gives us all access to come to Him, Jesus can save anyone anywhere. And let us show that we truly belong to Him as Jesus commands us to love one another.

  8. josh says:

    Grizz,

    I don’t understand what “You find fault withold arguments so you must accept opposing arguments?” means. Is there anyway you could clarify this.

    Grace,

    Jay is speaking about how he is perceived by others – not how he perceives others.

  9. Clark Raulerson says:

    Great article. Faith in Jesus Christ is the crux of the matter in conversion. I remember one preacher in Church of Christ saying “faith is dead until you’re baptized.”. NO! That deliberate spin and a lie. If one’s faith is dead before baptism then, if you later had true faith in Christ, then you were saved because without faith we only get wet and nothing else.

  10. Neal roe says:

    Thank you, Jay. This is a great way to close out our study of the HS & RG. Keep getting better, we’ll be praying for you and family.

  11. Grizz says:

    Grace wrote: “Grizz, I don’t understand what “You find fault with old arguments so you must accept opposing arguments?” means. Is there anyway you could clarify this?”

    Grace, What I am asking is why we seem so prone to expressing the idea that when an argument used on one side of the conversation is found wanting, we have to accept the opposing arguments as sound by default? Must the conversation be a contest decided by default? Why not explore the various arguments used on both sides for strengths and weaknesses and seek to find one together which is both scripturally sound and acceptable as a means to resolve differences which need resolving?

    Grizz

  12. josh says:

    Grizz,

    That was me who asked – not Grace. Sorry – I was reading “with old” as “withhold.” I’m a bit dense sometimes. Thanks for the explanation.

    Josh

  13. Grizz says:

    Josh,

    The fault was mine for using my cellphone to reply and not checking my spacing before hitting send. Thanks,

    Grizz

  14. Jay Guin says:

    Grizz wrote,

    You find fault with old arguments so you must accept opposing arguments? What foolishness is this?

    I agree that I cannot build a case solely by pointing out the errors in the arguments of others. But your accusation would only be fair if I’d not put forth an argument in favor of my position. I did. For example, I listed a few dozen verses that promise that faith in Jesus is sufficient. I would add —

    (Joh 3:18 NET) 18 The one who believes in him is not condemned. The one who does not believe has been condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only Son of God.

    And I would further add —

    (2Co 1:20 NET) 20 For every one of God’s promises are “Yes” in [Jesus]; therefore also through him the “Amen” is spoken, to the glory we give to God.

    God keeps his promises. (I’ve made several additional arguments in favor of my view at /books-by-jay-guin/born-of-water/)

  15. Grizz says:

    Jay,

    Of course faith is sufficient, IF you know what is meant by “faith” in those passages. It is the same with the term, “disciple.” To be His disciple is to be saved, IF you understand that there are certain requirements for being considered a disciple and not just a tag-along.

    The problem is when anyone tries to put a 21st century spin on things written in the first century and then pretend they have said the same thing. It just doesn’t wash, Jay.

    Is dying to self and sin required for salvation/new life in Christ? Jesus said it is over and over again. Is dying with Jesus and being buried with Jesus required for there to be new life given? Paul said that is when it happens. Does anyone in the 21st century know better than Paul and the Spirit who inspired him to write letters?

    When you isolate verses and then string them together with other select verses, you can seem to build a solid case that is actually about as substantial as cotton candy. That is poor Bible study substituted for seeking the truth. It isn’t enough just to claim yours are not proof-texts. It needs to be shown that the context is considered alongside other, related and relevant contexts … and not just a representative sampling.

    Jay, the problem with most approaches to the topic of baptism is that they isolate baptism from its meaning and significance the way Jesus and Paul addressed its meaning and significance, not to mention what other inspired writers wrote. Much the same thing is done with faith and repentance and other terms many seem to think only have meaning in religious contexts. Do you, for instance, have faith in the American legal system or faith in God? You cannot entrust your life to both as though you can have 2 masters any more than you can trust God and money at the same time. And it just will not do to pretend there is any real difference between a 2nd master of a legal system and a 2nd master of money. Either as a second master is an abomination. Faith in God cannot have a rival.

    Of course, this takes a broader approach to what Jesus and the apostles taught than just seeking support for a position we hold on some issue. It takes hearing Jesus out on what it means to be His disciple and who can or cannot be His disciple and why. It takes looking into how Jesus lived what He taught and not jut trying to codify His teachings into easily digestible sound bites for a suitably brief Sunday sermon. You see, Jesus lived the meaning of baptism long before He met with John at the Jordan and long before the cross and the empty tomb. But even before those things happened, He lived them daily. And if that isn’t in your understanding of immersion in His name, you do not understand His name at all.

    Jay, it isn’t about winning debates or arguments – even though it will take good arguments and debates in the form of discussions many times more than what has come before now to get to the unity Jesus prayed for and the first century saints practiced. Discussion is about winning brotherhood, not winning the score totals.

    G

  16. mark says:

    Grizz wrote “Why not explore the various arguments used on both sides for strengths and weaknesses and seek to find one together which is both scripturally sound and acceptable as a means to resolve differences which need resolving?”

    There are two reasons this is not likely to happen.

    Now I do not buy this first argument but will repeat it since it was told to me by a hard-liner. It says that if you convert someone using one argument and later on you change your mind the person my fall away and you will have caused a brother to stumble. Thus, you can’t change any thinking.

    Second, there are some people who will never admit they could have been wrong on an idea. They have an opinion, and they will teach everyone that opinion and force it on them. If you want to challenge it or even question it you will be branded a heretic.

  17. Jay Guin says:

    Grizz wrote,

    Of course faith is sufficient, IF you know what is meant by “faith” in those passages.

    Of course, we must understand the meaning of faith, but I do not understand what you are saying. Are you arguing that baptism is included in the Greek word pistis (often translated “faith”)?

    Or are you arguing that pistis requires obedience, and that failing to be properly baptized is a disobedience that necessarily damns?

    Or do you mean something else?

  18. Jay Guin says:

    Grizz wrote and Mark quoted him — ““Why not explore the various arguments used on both sides for strengths and weaknesses and seek to find one together which is both scripturally sound and acceptable as a means to resolve differences which need resolving?”

    I have done this a number of times, in considerable depth.

    /category/index/sacraments-index/baptism/ (115 posts)

    /category/index/church-of-christ-doctrinal-issues/sacramentalism-church-of-christ-doctrinal-issues/ (12 posts)

    I’m sure there are several more posts on the subject, but my indexing system is imperfect.

    I’ve also written and posted an ebook, Born of Water, that’s a free download where I do exactly that, carefully considering both sides of the argument and ultimately choosing to follow a third path — neither Baptist nor traditional Church of Christ. You see, you can’t really accuse me of picking a side in advance when I’ve chosen to follow neither side.

    I wrote the book before I began blogging. I later posted the book in a lengthy series of posts, with unmoderated comments and lots of great discussion among the readers. This led me to rewrite sections of the book — because the readers often teach me quite a lot.

    Since then, I’ve posted additional materials on the topic, even going through all the “baptism” passages in considerable detail.

    I don’t recall doing a series on the passages that teach the sufficiency of faith, as a series with that purpose. I have, of course, covered the John, Romans, and Galatians passages on the sufficiency of faith in three series that covered much or all of those books (go to the Table of Contents to find). And they make up a large number of the faith-is-sufficient passages.

    So, yes, I have tried very hard to do exactly that, and I encourage you to read either the posts or the book. I did not come to my position lightly. I worked very hard to study the issue afresh, and I’ve been glad to share the results with the readers.

  19. Grizz says:

    Mark,

    Your first argument you do well to disavow. Your second argument also falls, IF there is any flaw in the first argument, which is the foundation upon which the second argument must be constructed. Thus, as goes the first argument, so goes the second.

    Mark, since Jesus died for people, some of whom were children of Abraham before Jesus was born in the flesh, there is necessarily a problem with any teaching that there can never be any growth/change lest the person cause others whom they have instructed to fall away. Consider Peter. He taught thousands before being caused to change his own views through a vision given by God. Thus, either thousands were caused to fall away who came to Christ before Gentiles wete allowed in , or else God was wrong to give Peter that vision … UNLESS both first and second arguments are false.

    G

  20. Grizz says:

    Jay,

    If you think that you can address only a few passages and yet still “cover” those passages, then you have missed my point in a dramatic way. Either one needs no more than a phrase out of context, or else one needs the context in the fullest sense available.

    None of the inspired scriptures came in or by a vacuum. Thus, none of the inspired scriptures is intended to be understood in a vacuum.

    G

  21. Grizz says:

    Jay,

    It isn’t about terms, except to the extent a term may limit the meaning.

    You asked …
    Does ‘pistis’ REQUIRE baptism?

    I respond …
    Does faith ‘require’ or ‘include’ obedience? And is it either/or? Or is it both/and?

    G

  22. mark says:

    Grizz,
    I know that things change. I am the last person who needs convincing on that. I am a scientist and we hold one idea as true until there is evidence to the contrary. I have taught many times and said to the students that this is what I am teaching you based on the evidence up to this point. The next year I said that in light of new evidence I am teaching you something different than I taught last year. Football fans know that the call on the field can only be reversed if there is evidence that it is incorrect. I don’t know how much federal law Jay deals with, but the appellate rulings are precedent until the justices speak and then the opposite sometimes becomes precedent.

  23. Steven Sarff says:

    Jay (and others) I for one, enjoy reading discussions about baptism. It sometimes causes my head to hurt but as I try to look for Biblical teaching and to see if there is common ground for calling those who do not practice baptism like I practice it “brothers” then I find myself thinking back to the beginning. Not the beginning of time but of the Gospel.

    What about the people teaching a Sinner’s prayer salvation or a Faith only by confession Salvation where the messenger does not even bother to bring up baptism? So you have someone who has not opportunity to refuse to be obedient because they were never taught to be obedient to the command to be baptized.

    I believe that the Bible is very clear in the NT that Jesus made the command in the Gospels, the Apostles and others followed that command as exemplified in the book of Acts, and then the Epistles (most of them) refer back to the baptism and explain it’s meaning, purpose, what happened and what it did or did not do (e.g. It did not wash away fleshly dirt as per Peter).

    How can one make a Christian by not following the command and example in the Scriptures? Can I teach a person to only believe that Jesus was the Messiah and that makes them a Christian? That didn’t even work for the Jews who believed but wouldn’t confess him.

    It is undoubtedly the teachers who need to be taught better but also those who follower those who do not fully teach the word or the Lord accurately. I think of Apollos in Acts 18 and those disciples of Acts 19

    Many things save us: God saves, the Gospel saves, Faith saves, the Word saves, Grace saves, Repentance saves, baptism saves, Confession saves, obedience saves, Probably other things are tied to being saved too.

    A Gospel preacher will teach the message Peter taught and those who receive his word will be baptized as were they in Pentecost BECAUSE the preacher will teach the hearer to be baptized among the other things they need to know. (cf Acts 8 and the Eunuch) The preacher who leaves off baptism has done a grave disservice to his hearers….will such an obedient hearer be saved if no one ever comes along and tells him the word more accurately? I will leave that to God but if we know people are not teaching the Great commission correctly, do we not have a duty to correct it?

    Anyone reading this comment who would like to is invited to read what I post (or have posted) about baptism on the blog I write at http://www.LostPineschurchofChrist.com I would enjoy the conversation.

  24. Jay Guin says:

    Grizz asked,

    “Does faith ‘require’ or ‘include’ obedience? And is it either/or? Or is it both/and?”

    Grizz,

    The intensely frustrating thing about that comment is that I addressed it specifically in the main post. In fact, a very large portion of the post addresses your question directly. You see, of course the scriptures require obedience. Of course. But the nature of grace is that we don’t have to have perfect obedience to be saved.

    Hence, if you want to argue for the necessity of baptism based on baptism being an act of obedience (and I agree that is — and more), you have to be willing to consider just what the Bible means by “obedience.” And it’s most certainly not getting everything exactly right — because by that standard, we’d all be damned.

    Here’s what I wrote in the main post regarding the obedience argument (highlighting added) —

    Of course, “faith” includes “faithfulness” as part of its definition (in the Greek). We must come to God with penitence (a synonym for “faithfulness”) — and so we must obey what we know to obey. And baptism is a command.

    But many, many new converts are taught baptism in error – and they are truly babes in Christ when they are taught this error. And yet they come with faith/faithfulness, and so they obey as well as their understanding permits. They can hardly be held accountable for an expertise in Greek and theology that eludes 80% or more of Christendom!

    Now, a couple of years ago, we covered Romans 5 in some detail. One major theme of the chapter is that we’re only accountable to obey what we know.

    (Rom 5:20-21 NET) 20 Now the law came in so that the transgression may increase, but where sin increased, grace multiplied all the more, 21 so that just as sin reigned in death, so also grace will reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

    Consider Adam and Eve — they were not accountable for their sins until they ate of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. We are not accountable for what we don’t know. Therefore, if a convert is taught in error regarding the meaning “baptizo” or “eis,” God will save them despite their error, if they have faith in Jesus.

    “if an individual refuses to submit to baptism because they believe that they are already saved, will grace continue to cover their disobedience forever?”

    Well, they are in fact already saved. They are still in grace. But will they be damned for their disobedience? Well, are they in rebellion against God’s known will (Heb 10:26 ff)? It’s an easy, superficial argument to make — they know to be baptized correctly and they don’t do it; therefore, they are damned for rebellion.

    But by that standard, not many of us will make it. I mean, who lives up to the standards of even the known will of God? Who evangelizes as he knows he should? Who prays as well as he knows to? Who loves as he knows to? Who cares for the poor as he knows to? Who is the husband or wife he or she knows to be?

    Why privilege baptism as more important to God and the state of one’s heart before his judge than concern for the poor? Or the lost?

    Look again at –

    (Rom 5:20-21 NET) 20 Now the law came in so that the transgression may increase, but where sin increased, grace multiplied all the more, 21 so that just as sin reigned in death, so also grace will reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

    Not only did greater knowledge of God’s will increase accountability and therefore sin, it also increased God’s giving of grace. Indeed, grace “multiplied”! Indeed, Paul promises that in Jesus, “grace will reign.” That’s right: “Grace rules!”

    Grace is not for everyone, but it is for “everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.” (Rom 1:16 NET)

    In short, one of the colossal, horrid mistakes of 20th Century Church of Christ theology has been to demand baptism as a matter of obedience — and then making obedience non-negotiable to prove baptism non-negotiable (and so damn “the denominations”) — hence, making all obedience non-negotiable (which kind of damns us, doesn’t it?). It destroys grace and makes most of the New Testament into nonsense.

    And by seeking to damn everyone else, we’ve put ourselves on very shaky ground indeed.

    (Gal 5:3-4 NET) 3 And I testify again to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. 4 You who are trying to be declared righteous by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace!

    You do not have to agree with me. Plenty of good, smart people disagree with me. But please at least be willing to hear the arguments that I make. I’m glad to discuss the points made above further, but I’m not willing to endlessly pretend that I’ve not already tried to answer the questions you ask.

  25. Jay Guin says:

    Grizz wrote,

    “If you think that you can address only a few passages and yet still “cover” those passages, then you have missed my point in a dramatic way.”

    Of course, I’ve just demonstrated that I’ve addressed far more than “only a few passages.” You repeatedly choose to ignore what I write, which is your privilege, but I see no reason to continue to be accused of things I’m just not guilty of.

  26. Alabama John says:

    Great from the heart message Jay.

    What scares me and we never heard this preached in the COC of the past, is that we will be judged as we have judged. Thinking about that alone should make us more tolerant and understanding.

  27. Larry Cheek says:

    Jay,
    I am glad that you chose to post this message containing the scriptures that you identify as authority for your concept of belief in Jesus saving an individual without baptism. While restudying them I have determined why I had not applied the same logic to the subject as you have. I will try, I really don’t feel that I have the ability to explain this as well as many of those that comment on this blog, but I have not seen anyone portray this concept, therefore even for my own learning and answers to the questions that I have, here goes.

    I have always been taught that while studying the scriptures, it is vitally important to our understanding that we keep the message within context on the subject. It is equally important to understand who the message is directed to, why the message was necessary (was there a problem needing correction, etc:), what corrections need to be acted upon because of the message. I really thought all men should abide by those rules in analyzing the directives for their lives from scripture.

    As we study the Four Gospels we can understand that the message was directed to the Lost Sheep of Israel (The Jews). None of the Jews could conceive that later the same messages would be directed to the Gentiles. As we look back from this prospective we can see information displayed within the text that also applies to The Gentiles now.

    Many areas in scripture there are messages and instructions directed to certain people. A good example of this would be the messages to the seven churches of Asia. We also notice that there were letters written to different churches at different cities as well as letters written to certain individuals. Each contained a message to fulfill a need. Sometimes that need was to explain in greater detail an action that they had obeyed by faith.

    In the Gospels Jesus saved several individuals, but I have not found any instructions issued to any of the Apostles or Disciples containing the message that they were to deliver to others how to be saved prior to his death. After his resurrection he instructed the Apostles.

    (Mat 28:18 KJV) And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. 19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
    (Mark 16:15 KJV) And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

    He even gave the Apostles the power to forgive sins.
    (John 20:23 KJV) Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.

    Then the Day of Pentecost came and we can read of men responding to the messages of the Apostles. We also see responses to teaching all through the Book of Acts.
    (Acts 2:38 KJV) 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.
    Approximately Three Thousand responded. How many do you suppose decided not to be baptized?
    Later.
    Peter and John were together and Peter healed the lame man and after the lengthy sermon he delivered obtained this response, would anyone believe that Peter or John would not have seen to it that the same actions were completed here as was done at Pentecost?
    (Acts 4:4 KJV) Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand.

    (Acts 5:14 KJV) And believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women.)

    Peter was involved in these.
    (Acts 9:42 KJV) And it was known throughout all Joppa; and many believed in the Lord.

    (Acts 11:19 KJV) Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only. 20 And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the Lord Jesus. 21 And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord.

    Paul was teaching here from verse 16 would you suppose that he would not have baptized those that believed? Up to this time had he been informed that baptism wasn’t necessary? If he did not do it here why would he do it with the Jailer in the next event?
    (Acts 13:48 KJV) And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

    Of course almost everyone will remember the actions surrounding the Jailer. Baptism was administered.

    Would you suppose that Paul would neglect baptism in the following events?
    (Acts 17:4 KJV) And some of them believed, and consorted with Paul and Silas; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women not a few.
    (Acts 17:11 KJV) These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. 12 Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.
    Then continue baptism in the next city?
    (Acts 18:8 KJV) And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized.

    Then he met these Twelve men, it is even stated how powerfully they believed, and yet he baptized them. Anyone want to declare that this baptism was for the purpose of witnessing of their belief or faith? An outward show of what they had committed?
    (Acts 19:5 KJV) When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. 7 And all the men were about twelve.

    Considering Paul’s actions in the past, would you believe that he did not baptize these believers?
    (Acts 19:18 KJV) And many that believed came, and confessed, and showed their deeds.

    Then near the last of the Book of Acts Paul rehearses his own conversion and baptism containing the instructions from Aninias.
    (Acts 22:16 KJV) And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

    I believe that anyone would be hard pressed to identify any individual in the Book of Acts that became a believer who was not baptized. It is possible to identify there are places where the statement was not made that they were baptized but the presenters of the message to those who became believers consistently taught baptism.

    Now, for the balance of the scriptures. All the rest of the books and letters were addressed to either an individual Christian or a body of Christians usually at a city.
    Almost all these Books were written by the same men that delivered messages in Acts, and they would not have delivered a different message that conflicted with their actions in Acts.

    Not a word of the balance of the New Testament scriptures was intended to instruct a lost individual how to become saved. But, we should notice that there is communication within these messages as to what is to become of the lost and unbelievers.

  28. Skip says:

    Something else to fry our noodles… Not all verses can be taken literally because the literal interpretation doesn’t always make sense. Jesus called Herod a Fox. Jesus said “eat me”. Can Jesus be taken literally in verses like this?
    My contention is that we often make certain scriptures be literal because it suits our preconceived doctrinal ideas. At the same time we ignore the literal meaning when it makes no sense to us. The Christian world has a few varying perspectives on the exact meaning and point of conversion. They don’t take certain baptism scriptures literally. We take every baptism scripture literally but we ignore the literal meaning of other scriptures in order to suit our preconceived ideas. If we selectively choose our “literal” passages, we will come up with erroneous conclusions.

  29. Grizz says:

    Jay,

    I get your outrage. You get mine. You think mine is unjust. I think yours is posturing.

    You have given multiple responses with objections to my observations. Here are my responses, one by one to all those I have noticed today …

    Jay Guin says:
    December 14, 2013 at 10:34 pm

    Grizz wrote and Mark quoted him — ““Why not explore the various arguments used on both sides for strengths and weaknesses and seek to find one together which is both scripturally sound and acceptable as a means to resolve differences which need resolving?”

    I have done this a number of times, in considerable depth.

    /category/index/sacraments-index/baptism/ (115 posts)

    /category/index/church-of-christ-doctrinal-issues/sacramentalism-church-of-christ-doctrinal-issues/ (12 posts)

    I’m sure there are several more posts on the subject, but my indexing system is imperfect.

    I’ve also written and posted an ebook, Born of Water, that’s a free download where I do exactly that, carefully considering both sides of the argument and ultimately choosing to follow a third path — neither Baptist nor traditional Church of Christ.

    GRIZZ Here … Despite your assumptions (need we go there?), I have actually read through all of the listed posts and several more that touch the subject of baptism, as well as your e-book. So you can pretend not to hear the question or that it comes from ignorance, but that would just make you a pretender. (Why did this need to get so adversarial, Jay???)

    Besides, my questions are NOT about whether you and I agree or not. My questions are about you giving as much scrutiny to the meaning of pistis and what it does or does not necessarily include as you have about the meaning of baptism. I ask, Jay, NOT because I disagree or agree, but rather because I find your treatments helpful, though occasionally (and, I am sure, unintentionally) incomplete according to your own standards established in, say, your treatment of baptism in many posts.That is not to say that your posts must be exhaustive, but rather that you were much more thorough when researching baptism than you have been with pistis. Neither treatment has been exhaustive, but one is decidedly more thorough than the other. Why?

    It is this imbalance that causes me to comment about what you have , BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION, NOT done.

    Jay Guin says:
    December 15, 2013 at 3:18 pm

    Grizz asked,

    “Does faith ‘require’ or ‘include’ obedience? And is it either/or? Or is it both/and?”

    Grizz,

    The intensely frustrating thing about that comment is that I addressed it specifically in the main post. In fact, a very large portion of the post addresses your question directly. You see, of course the scriptures require obedience. Of course. But the nature of grace is that we don’t have to have perfect obedience to be saved.

    Jay,

    You accuse me of not reading what you have written and yet you do not even take time to notice that what you quoted from me was NOT a comment, but rather was a question. The question marks at suitable intervals should have been a rather prominent clue.

    So how is the day over there in Pot-land? Over here at the Kettles, it is getting pretty snowy. We kettles show up in high def contrast in the snow.

    Jay Guin says:
    December 15, 2013 at 3:40 pm

    Grizz wrote,

    “If you think that you can address only a few passages and yet still “cover” those passages, then you have missed my point in a dramatic way.”

    Of course, I’ve just demonstrated that I’ve addressed far more than “only a few passages.” You repeatedly choose to ignore what I write, which is your privilege, but I see no reason to continue to be accused of things I’m just not guilty of.

    Jay,

    You quoted a total of 65 verses about faith. Using the Greek and Hebrew texts for the ESV translation, there are 149 OT references and 296 NT references to faith. You referenced about 20% of those verses. Maybe that seems like a lot, but I am suggesting that you have probably addressed a significantly higher percentage of the verses on baptism in the posts on baptism versus faith and how both relate to salvation. I base that observation on the fact that the ESV translates baptism from the Greek only 20 times in the NT and translates baptize only an additional 77 times.

    So, in a subjective assessment, admittedly, of even this one current series, you have more than tripled the extent of your address of baptism in comparison to the number of verses you have addressed about faith, even using only the NT references. So have you really addressed “far more than “only a few passages””? Sure … IF by “far more” you mean 1/3 as many.

    Have a blessed day, brother. I pray you will find relief from these sensitivities that have caused you to indulge your imagination so much.

  30. Skip says:

    Ray, I have been in Churches of Christ where the members had a smug confidence that they perfectly understood salvation. They got baptized when they were 6 years old and never mind that they aren’t sharing their faith, reading their Bibles, serving people, or hardly praying. They are confident they are saved because of one external act when they were too young to understand what they were doing. Obviously, baptism alone doesn’t cut it. In addition, there are numerous saved people in the Bible who were never baptized all the way from Abraham to the thief on the cross. I have read, understood, and obeyed the baptism scriptures but I also know that there are numerous scriptures that clearly address salvation where baptism is never mentioned. It seems that some believe that it should be harder to be saved in the N.T. under grace than it was for our brethren in the O.T. who were under law.

  31. Mark says:

    The verse “Judge not, that ye be not judged” only applied to the congregation and the ordinary mortals. The cofC bigwigs who preached on it did not think it applied to them when they condemned most if not all of the congregation to hell 5 minutes later or in the next sermon.

  32. Monty says:

    Skip said,

    “It seems that some believe that it should be harder to be saved in the N.T. under grace than it was for our brethren in the O.T. who were under law.”

    I realize that you and Mark are reacting out of some past slights or some gross misrepresentation of some former church member’s mistaken view of grace, but is every conservative who believes Jesus included baptism in the plan of redemption a warped, Neanderthal monster? I hope that’s not what you are implying. For every CofC member who disassociates his lifestyle(walk with God) from his obedience to the gospel(trusting and obeying) or who believes baptism is some magic spell that works without repentance, isn’t there at least (if not more so) those who would believe that because they said a sinners prayer they can continue living in unrepentant sin?

    Can’t we just reason together the scriptures without appealing, for argument sake, to the worst cases of scriptural abuse? Is that the only way we can score points for our side? When emotion rants all reasoning goes by the wayside.

  33. Monty says:

    Skip,

    I almost forgot. What is it exactly, that makes baptism “harder” to be saved than not being baptized? The only thing, I can see, that makes it “harder” would be if it’s not taught as being necessary. If it is taught as part of “saving faith,” it can’t be “harder” as you say. I would think the hard part of being saved is taking up a cross, and following Jesus. Included in that is repentance. Where I say, “good bye to the old life” (at least mentally) with a desire to change. It’s been my observation as a minister that is the “hard” part. If someone is willing to trust in Jesus and ready to repent, then baptizing them has never been “hard’.

    All Christians in Acts were baptized, baptized immediately upon believing, never a delay(unless there wasn’t any water around), and rejoicing followed, God added them to the church. All that gladly received the word were baptized. Not a soul that couldn’t respond because it was “hard.” I’m assuming there might have been one or two invalids there on Pentecost. It simply doesn’t follow that baptism makes becoming a Christian harder. It was a time of rejoicing, not complaining. My how times have changed.

    If we are to just resort to anecdotal stories. I’ll share one I heard over the weekend. One of our members whose father is Baptist and attends a local Baptist church said that his father relayed that his preacher had been giving the alter call for people to come repent and be baptized. Well that didn’t sit too well with the deacon board. So, the preacher no longer invites folks from the pulpit at the close of his lesson to be baptized.

  34. mark says:

    I am all for reason. I am just telling you what you are up against and what some of us on here have experienced.

  35. Skip says:

    Monty, I don’t see a problem. I was gladly baptized in 1974. My point is how we view sincere, commited, believers who were not taught that dunking in water was required for salvation.

  36. Alabama John says:

    Monty,

    Romans 2:14-15 answers this for me.

    Don’t know how you can make it any clearer if you just read it and do not have an agenda to try to twist it to make it fit what it does not say. The interesting part to me as a Cherokee is verse 15 where it says they show the the work of the law written on their hearts. WE all are made in Gods image and have a spirit inside us. Its in man to look up to the heavens where God is and to do certain things put in their hearts by God.

    If you didn’t have the law, it was not required you do as it says.

    That cover all of us Gentiles that were and are from many other places on earth and for many thousands of years, even up to today in all out of the way places in many different civilizations.

    Babies born in only the places where the law was and had the right teaching and followed it exactly went to heaven while the rest of the worlds babies of all time, all equally spirit filled by God, were sent to earth, born to go to hell, sure made God a respector of persons didn’t it.

    The old COC preaching and teaching that all those that didn’t obey the law even though they were born in places where the law we have written was never heard of all went to hell for not following it right is wrong and once you get away from it is also repulsive.

  37. Grace says:

    Jesus is the only Way people before and after the cross are saved, all who through faith looked forward to the sacrificial Lamb of God and all who look back to God’s sacrifice through Christ. Performing rituals and ordinances does not save anyone. It is by God’s grace through faith we are saved.

  38. Larry Cheek says:

    Alabama John,
    I don’t believe that we are intended to judge what God will do with those have lived and died long before he gave us the present instructions and we would be totally in error attempting to modify the present instructions by how we could imagine that the instructions today would affect those who are not alive today. I believe that you also agree that judging those is not our responsibility. Saying that, we live only with the present instructions guiding us into the future. The past is very important in showing us the interaction between man and God, and sometimes it really appalls us. Was it fair for all those babies to die in the flood or while God’s chosen people were commanded to destroy complete nations. Not many today would believe that God was fair with Moses after all the good work that he had performed to still hold him responsible for the one sin, but that is God and his ways are above ours. We are never allowed to rule over God, but if we attempt to modify his instructions, I believe he sees that we are rebellious and acting exactly like Satan did before he was banished from God’s presence.

  39. Alabama John says:

    Jesus was around for a long time before coming to this earth, sent by God, and being written about in the Bible. He was many things other than a human here on earth (pillar of fire, cloud, rock, as an example) that should expand our understanding of His ability. His being written about served and serves its purpose but sure doesn’t limit His being presented to others at different times in many places and in different forms.
    Many seem to think God has done nothing else but on this earth and that Jesus retired after the Bible was written.
    If all was written that was done by God including Jesus and the Holy Spirit on this earth the world could not hold all the books.
    We have much more to learn.

  40. Jay Guin says:

    Larry,

    I’m not saying that people shouldn’t be baptized for the remission of their sins by immersion as believers. I think they should be. I think baptism “works” in that sense. I’m not an advocate for Baptist baptismal theology. And the old anti-Baptist arguments simply do not address what I’m trying to say.

    Rather, my question is whether God will damn someone who comes to him with genuine faith and penitence but misinformed as to the proper doctrine of baptism. Will God’s grace cover that error — or is baptism not only effective (it is) but essential?

    Notice that the apostles in Acts were not faced with this question and so did not answer it directly. But it’s clear that if Luke intended to teach that baptism is absolutely essential, he did a particularly poor job of it (contrary to many CoC sermons, nearly all of which are based on McGarvey’s commentary on Acts).

    The Gospel According to Luke only mentions the baptism of Jesus and one quotation of Jesus in which he refers to his crucifixion as a baptism. For centuries, Luke’s Gospel circulated separately from the other 3 Gospels and the Epistles. Am I to believe that someone in the Second Century could have read Luke, come to faith in Jesus, repented, and yet not found salvation because Luke says nothing about Christian baptism? What a strange way to write a Gospel!!

    And then in Acts, baptism is certainly taught, but nothing is said about the baptism of the original 120 or Apollos. If Luke was concerned to teach the absolutely essential nature of baptism, why the omissions? No Church of Christ author would have omitted those baptismal stories, and yet either there was no baptism of these converts or else Luke considered their baptisms too unimportant to mention. Again, very odd choices for someone who considers baptism absolutely essential.

    And how very strange is it for God to give his Spirit to Cornelius before baptism if the lesson is that baptism is essential to receipt of the Spirit? And why disconnect receipt of the Spirit from baptism in the case of the Samaritans?

    I think the answer is that Luke considered receipt of the Spirit the real test of salvation, not water baptism. He quotes John —

    (Luk 3:16 ESV) 16 John answered them all, saying, “I baptize you with water, but he who is mightier than I is coming, the strap of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

    (Act 1:5 ESV) 5 for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.”

    Even when presenting John’s water baptism, Luke records Jesus contrasting John’s baptism with water with Jesus’ baptism with the Spirit. Jesus doesn’t say “he will baptize you with water and Spirit.” Jesus himself is so keen to make the contrast with John’s baptism that he omits water altogether — because the Spirit is just that much more important than the water. It is.

    Again, I think baptism is meant to be by immersion in water, for the remission of sins. I’m not a Baptist. Please don’t fire off a list of anti-Baptist arguments. I’ve heard them, covered them, and they are largely irrelevant to what I’m saying. The question is whether water baptism is so central to the gospel that God will damn someone who comes to him with genuine faith and penitence who’s been taught incorrectly about baptism.

    Or must we come to God not only with faith in Jesus but faith in baptism?

  41. Grace says:

    The church I go to we encourage baptism to people who have come in faith to our Lord and Savior Jesus. We baptize people with the Great Commission Jesus gave to us. Why would anyone say people being baptized is incorrect?

  42. Larry Cheek says:

    Jay,
    I agree that is very possible that some could be saved without having been baptized, I am not the judge on that matter, but as you have expressed the point that knowledge or lack of it could be the determining factor. If that is true (and you expressed that once an individual becomes knowledgeable) if they don’t obey the result is rebellion to obey (which damns). If we become knowledgeable of someone that claims to be a Christian because of their faith/belief and have not been baptized, and we do not attempt to teach them of their responsibility to obey this command do we also become rebellious from our responsibilities? If we support them in their known error will God see us as false teachers? If we fail here would that be a lesser sin than refusing to teach the known lost among us? I guess as we speculate about some that we see in scriptures to be acting as Christians yet find no documentation where they were baptized should we not also come to the conclusion from the Twelve who were previously baptized being baptized again by Paul that he would never have allowed a believer who had never been baptized to continue in a belief that not submitting to baptism was acceptable? Paul never addressed the Twelve about a lack of faith, wouldn’t that lead anyone to believe that Paul counted their faith sufficient? I believe that he was empowered with a spirit that would have had a perfect knowledge of their level of faith. I also believe that it would not be consistent with any of the Apostles actions to condone that anyone not submit to baptism.
    If the actions taken by the Apostles regarding baptism were important enough as you even have suggested would be condemning from rebelliousness is it a marvel why a master deceiver would attack that action to his full ability? Actually, it would be a marvel if he did not.

  43. Grace says:

    Wow Larry, you are the only person to say that Paul had the perfect knowledge of people’s faith. I believe it is God only who knows the depth of person’s faith, that’s what makes Him our ultimate Judge. Oh my! And God bless you on your endeavor to have a peg on God.

  44. Ray Downen says:

    I note that Peter and the apostles (Acts 2) did NOT include baptism in the teaching of the gospel. It was AFTER the preaching that Peter was asked and answered his questioners. What we are to preach is the gospel. The gospel does not include baptism. No sinner is ever commanded to be baptized. Jesus commands that we who preach the gospel are to baptize the new believers. The command is to US, not to them. And those who seek to disobey the Lord Jesus will regret their lack of faith. Jesus commands baptism for every NEW believer, and it’s we who love Jesus and seek to serve Him who are commanded to baptize!

  45. Ray Downen says:

    Those who serve law should speak and think clearly. I hear you excusing sinners for not being baptized when sinners are NEVER commanded to be baptized. It’s us who tell others about Jesus who are COMMANDED to baptize. So if there’s any fault to find if someone isn’t baptized, it’s with us who seek to serve Jesus and choose to not baptize every new believer. Baptism is NOT part of faith in Jesus. The gospel about Jesus calls for sinners to recognize they ARE sinners and that Jesus offers them salvation. But details about what being a disciple of the Lord requires are NOT part of preaching the gospel.

  46. Ray Downen says:

    Larry does well to point out that none of the apostles or early preachers chose to disobey what Jesus commanded concerning baptizing new believers. What a pity it is that some today suppose they are wiser than the early disciples! I noticed that when I entered a reply at 9:13 that it was in response to a particular note which my reply doesn’t designate (I thought it would go to that writer and found that it went to the blog for all to read.) And the later note at 9:20 was to JAY, and the “Leave a Reply to” doesn’t then translate to show readers to whom the reply is intended!

  47. Ray Downen says:

    Jay doesn’t seem to realize that sinners are never commanded to be baptized. Not once. So he frets about the guilt of sinners who don’t choose to be baptized. The command is to us preachers rather than to the convert. WE are told to baptize each NEW convert. So how could the Lord judge the convert for failing to obey a command that was never given to the convert? But the instant that a believer realizes that Jesus commands baptism for new converts, then the convert becomes responsible to do what he knows even if his preacher doesn’t know or accept what Jesus requires. Yes, God will surely hold guilty all who ignore the plain teaching of the Lord Jesus, and we surely should SEEK to learn all He wants us to know and do. Those who tell others about Jesus are to baptize each who comes to faith in Jesus as the risen Lord. It’s not an unimportant choice. It’s either obey or disobey. Since Jesus requires baptism, how dare we ignore what He says?

  48. Ray Downen says:

    Skip writes:

    I also know that there are numerous scriptures that clearly address salvation where baptism is never mentioned.

    He lists many, every one of course who lived PRIOR TO the command by Jesus that new believers were to be baptized. Of course people were not required to be baptized prior to the command being given by Jesus! Now that He has spoken, we’d better obey by baptizing new believers at once!

  49. Ray Downen says:

    Grace suggests that obeying what Jesus commands is at best optional. HE calls for us who tell others about Him to baptize those who believe. She thinks baptism is unimportant, if I’m understanding her comments. She thinks faith alone saves. And that’s what I hear Jay teaching! How odd to suppose that Jesus is NOT Lord after all, so we can just ignore what He commands. Is that what is being said and taught now by many in our churches?

  50. Ray Downen says:

    I get lost sometimes. I noted this exchange between Grizz and Jay:

    Grizz asked,

    “Does faith ‘require’ or ‘include’ obedience? And is it either/or? Or is it both/and?”

    Grizz,

    The intensely frustrating thing about that comment is that I addressed it specifically in the main post. In fact, a very large portion of the post addresses your question directly. You see, of course the scriptures require obedience. Of course. But the nature of grace is that we don’t have to have perfect obedience to be saved.

    Grizz asked about what faith includes. Jay wrote about what “the scriptures” require. I think the question wasn’t addressed! “Faith” is what we believe. “The Scriptures” are what is revealed as apostolic teaching for us and much truth in addition to what applies directly to us.

    I suggest that “faith” is what we BELIEVE, not what we do. I believe that the Lord commands that we who love Him are to tell others about Him and that WE are to baptize each one who comes to faith in Him as the risen LORD. This would seem to make obvious that the new convert is of course willing to do whatever his/her LORD requires. But are those who preach willing to obey? Many now indicate they don’t care to do what Jesus says we are TO do. And if we do it, we’re in no hurry to do so!

  51. Grace says:

    What to do about people locked up in prisons who have come to have faith in Jesus, get someone on the inside of the prison’s to bust the shower pipes to baptize them?

  52. Larry Cheek says:

    Ray,
    You have surprised me. I had never encountered the thought that it was the responsibility of the teacher to timely baptize the new believer rather than the responsibility of new believer to submit. It opens a new avenue of understanding. As we observe those actions being performed in scripture, the only instance that I can remember where an individual asked for baptism was the Eunuch. It seems all others were just told what to do and the one or those explaining what needed to be done completed the action. I don’t remember an instance where any believer was given the option to not be baptized. By the same observation I do not see an example that any teacher offered an expression to the new believer that he was already saved and baptism was optional. This could actually convey that preacher/teacher would be held in greater responsibility for the lack of a new believer, (having their sins washed away) borrowing an exact concept portrayed at Saul’s conversion, being baptized. This could also help us to understand why Paul wrote such a lengthy description in the book written to the Christians at Rome to Christians who had already been baptized. But did not understand the full effect of the action to which they had submitted. This would certainly remove the concept that a new believer could in any way merit his own salvation from his “works” or actions during baptism. It could also make the teacher/preacher responsible for the new believer being buried with Christ to raise to a new life. The preacher would therefore be displaying the example of the death burial and resurrection rather than the individual being immersed.
    This changes the projections of many preachers attempting to make sure that an individual understand all of the implications and concepts about baptism prior to allowing an individual to submit to their baptism.
    Many times I have wondered, what was the big concern about the knowledge an individual had about baptism or what would be expected of them if they committed their life to Christ. In the scripture message, an individual that had heard about God and Jesus and believed what they heard, and decided to become a disciple, was expected to die to their former life and be (as Jesus said) born again. Born again is a new life, a babe in Christ, in comparison to a human new born. With that in mind how much knowledge is required to be a new born? This new born in Christ was to receive a Spirit that would help with their understanding, as well as a body of older previously born individuals to gain knowledge from.
    An action that is described by Paul in Romans that takes place during baptism is not something an individual can do for themselves. A commenter once mentioned, possibly an individual could baptize himself, he could submerse himself under water, but that would not fulfill the example in scriptures. But, with a different understanding of the responsibility of the action of baptizing the idea that the one being baptized performing an act that they could take credit for is non-existent.

  53. Larry Cheek says:

    Grace,
    I would guess that would depend upon who decided that they would be damned without baptism. I know that my answer here seem different than the position I promote. But, God is the only source of the power to condemn, therefore we do not have a responsibility to condemn anyone, all we can do is teach. Based upon concepts in my prior post, if it is impossible for the teacher to perform his responsibilities of administering baptism, God could grant grace to that individual until the means were available for baptism to be completed or there have been many instances where individuals have been allowed to conduct a baptism when it did not look feasible. I would believe that God had provided an opportunity for the action to be completed.

  54. Grace says:

    There are a lot of prisons that have a lot of people in prison for life and there are a lot of people who are on life support for life. So you are saying according to your theology God will break His own rule. God breaking His own rule which is His word makes Him inconsistent, unfaithful, and a liar. God is not wishy washy, He is holy. You should consider the statements you make when you speak about God, changing God to fit your theology is not very wise to do.

  55. Grizz says:

    Ray, If the cost of discipleship is to be an afterthought, why did Jesus use it in His preaching to folks who wanted to be associated wuth Him (Matthew 10 & Luke 9 and 14)??

    One is no ‘believer’ who has not consciously chosen to give up their life to live His. (Galatians 2:20 is NOT about just surrendering. It is about dying with Jesus to live with Jesus.)

    G

  56. Alabama John says:

    Grace,

    When I asked that same question I was told by our preacher they should of thought about that before being convicted of a crime and getting in prison. They were hell bound because they couldn’t obey.

    In real life, in prison some are baptized as close to right as they can (under a shower head or hose) and believe God will do the judging of their hearts and desire to be baptized by immersion.

    Sometimes, in some places and at various times, a canvas military bath tub is available so immersion can occur, usually once a year. Bad thing is some wanting to be baptized die in the meantime.

    Some die before immersion can occur or their medical condition will not allow it.

    We who believe God to be just, believe He will do the right thing like always and keep on teaching and taking confessions, praying together asking God for an exception as that is all that is in our power.

  57. Grace says:

    God does not break His rules because He cannot tell or act a lie. God cannot lie and go back on His own word. The CofC have come up with the idea of an exception to God’s rule to try to fix the theology they have. God will not use His power against Himself and His word because He is upright and just. Either God is holy and just or He is inconsistent and a liar.

  58. Skip says:

    Ray, There are many NT scriptures beyond Acts that speak of salvation without the mention of baptism.

    Revelation 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
    1 John 5:11-13 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life. These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
    1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
    Ephesians 2:8-9 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.
    Romans 10:9-10 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
    Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God.
    Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
    Romans 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

    I also want to remind you that I was baptized into Christ in 1974 and fully understand all the baptism scriptures. The argument here is not whether baptism is Biblical or important but what happens to those who love God, repent, turn to Jesus Christ, live the Christian life, and were never taught about the meaning of baptism? Are you prepared to condemn them because they did not understand as we do?

  59. Ray Downen says:

    Jay, you suggest Acts 2:38 is not really the truth since you think otherwise. You write

    I think the answer is that Luke considered receipt of the Spirit the real test of salvation, not water baptism.

    But the fact is that the Spirit in POWER was given to the apostles by a baptism in the Spirit. That baptism was promised to none other and given to none other than the 12 apostles. The way all others receive the Spirit is by experiencing the new birth of water and spirit with the promised RESULT being remission of sins and receiving the Spirit.

  60. Monty says:

    If faith, (belief, as narrowly interpreted) is all that is necessary for salvation, then repentance is unnecessary also. Yet, when I read commentaries from faith only teachers concerning Acts 2:38, their attempt to extract “be baptized for the forgiveness of sins” from the command of Peter, “Repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus for the remission of your sins”, generally hinges on making baptism a parenthetical and that the command by Peter for them to repent is what would forgive their sins, not both repentance and baptism. Sort of like they do with He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. (Mark 16:16) Again, the first part of the command being the meat(necessary part) and the second half being the potatoes(nice to have, but unnecessary).

    I find that interesting. For me, it all seems much to do about nothing,. If people are saved when the light bulb of faith(belief) goes off in their brain that Jesus died for their sins, then why all the fuss about repentance in Acts 2:38? If faith(faith only, as they say) is that kernel of trust(belief) then everything that follows that kernel is merely potatoes, that is, what happens “after” salvation and not before. Which comes first, repentance or belief? Belief they would say. Not belief plus something, as they argue with baptism. But when pressed if a person can be saved without repentance of some sort they make statements like “Well a person who truly believes in his heart has already repented (some argue)” or, some say, “the true believer will repent(it can be assumed)”. Which is it? Which is the chicken and which is the egg, and which comes first?

    I attended a Christmas play at a local Baptist church(because we can’t have those in the mainstream CofC-LOL! ). After the play the pastor asked everyone to bow their heads and asked if there was anyone there who(didn’t know Jesus as their Savior) would believe that Jesus Christ died for their sins and accept Him, (by saying the sinners prayer in heir heart with the pastor) and if they did so, (following the prayer), would they simply raise their hand while no one was looking but only the Pastor. Apparently, according to the pastor, 6 or 7 people raised their hand because he announced it afterwards and everyone applauded. There was no mention of repentance like Peter urged those who were “pricked in their hearts”(believed Jesus was the Christ and they had crucified Him) on Pentecost. Yet when it comes time to exegete Acts 2:38, repentance becomes suddenly necessary. Strange. Unless, you just can’t have baptism having anything even remotely to do with the forgiveness of sins.

  61. Ray Downen says:

    Grace doesn’t realize that if baptism is essential, as many of us see it, then prisoners in penitentiaries need to be baptized if they come to believe in Jesus as Lord and turn to Him AS Lord. She points out the difficulty in taking them to a swimming pool or baptistery outside the prison. But many prisons have allowed baptisms with carry-in portable baptisteries furnished by American Rehabilitation Ministries in Joplin, MO. It’s not impossible to baptize someone in prison who can’t get out in order to be baptized conveniently away from the prison. Grace’s question might imply that she thinks baptism as commanded by Jesus is not really important at all.

  62. Ray Downen says:

    Skip writes

    I also want to remind you that I was baptized into Christ in 1974 and fully understand all the baptism scriptures. The argument here is not whether baptism is Biblical or important but what happens to those who love God, repent, turn to Jesus Christ, live the Christian life, and were never taught about the meaning of baptism? Are you prepared to condemn them because they did not understand as we do?

    Why are some trying to be God and make a determination of what must be done with those who haven’t read the Bible or understood what it says about baptism? Surely we waste our time debating what God will do when the commission is for us to carry the gospel throughout the world and live for Jesus each day.

    I repeat my observation that sinners are never even once commanded to be baptized (Acts 2:38 is pointing out what sinners CAN DO to receive remission of sins and the gift of the Spirit, but it is NOT a command that they MUST obey). But we Christians are commanded (assuming the “great commission” applies to us all) to baptize each new convert.

    What we SHOULD be debating is why some of us are seeking excuses for not doing what Jesus says we should DO. God will take care of those who are led wrongly and taught wrongly. And surely He will punish us for wasting time debating whether or not Jesus meant what He said!

  63. Ray Downen says:

    I surely appreciate and applaud what Larry wrote

    I had never encountered the thought that it was the responsibility of the teacher to timely baptize the new believer rather than the responsibility of new believer to submit. It opens a new avenue of understanding.

    I hope he’s not the only one who has read and understands that the command to baptize is to US not to new believers, and that we WILL be held responsible for not telling each convert what Jesus expects of them immediately and through a lifetime of serving Jesus as Lord.

  64. Skip says:

    Faith inexorably leads to action. If I truly believe Jesus is the Son of God, and I want forgiveness by turning to him, then repentance will occur as well as baptism (provided a teacher showed me scriptures on baptism). The question is not will we repent or can we be baptized, the question is: does our action resulting from our new faith save us or is it our faith in Jesus that saves us. Many in the CoC over the years relied on their baptism far more than they actually relied on Jesus. I have even seen virtually Jesus free baptisms where children of members simply went forward to be baptized but they were too young to repent and acted the same after their dunking. Numerous grown kids in the church felt they were saved because they were baptized but did not read their Bibles, did not regularly come to church, did not share their faith, and weren’t open with their lives. But the church viewed them as saved because they were dunked. Thus folks, we have a real problem with over emphasizing baptism and really missing the mark on the meaning of true faith.

  65. Mark says:

    I believe it was on Jay’s blog a while back about the age of baptism having crept down so low that aside from walking up the aisle as opposed to being carried, there was little difference in baptizing infants and 6-8 year olds. Neither really could repent.

    I believe some were even advocating raising the minimum age.

  66. Ray Downen says:

    Skip writes,

    we have a real problem with over emphasizing baptism and really missing the mark on the meaning of true faith.

    And I surely agree! If anyone is led to believe that what really matters is being baptized, they’ve been misled about the gospel of Jesus and how sinners are to save themselves. We need to learn about Jesus and His apostles and how they lived. Acts 2:38 points to conversion, but says nothing about living daily for Jesus. We don’t want to overlook becoming a Christian. But we need to teach of the need to live every day for Jesus. Skip is right!

  67. Grace says:

    All people who have faith in Jesus, who read their Bible and are living their life with the attributes Jesus says His followers will have are damned to hell by the typical CofC Ray, Larry and Monty schooled under CofC 101-damn everyone else to hell.

  68. Skip says:

    We should teach new converts to do what jesus expects, but that takes a back seat to who he is and how much he loves us.

  69. Larry Cheek says:

    Grace,
    You should notice that in the scriptures Romans through Revelation which was written only to Christians there are many passages that identify those that are not obeying the instructions which were given by Christ and his Apostles and are condemning those who have never obeyed and those that are false teachers. I don’t remember trying to make anyone believe that they are condemned, what I have attempted to do is to point you and others to the messages in the scriptures that communicate something different than I hear you stating. It seems very odd when you identify the text there not agreeing with you, therefore turn upon me because I presented it to you. You even carry this action to the ultimate and declare that we are doing the damming. I cannot say that I do not care whether or not that you feel dammed by the scripture messages that I have pointed you to, but you are the one that read the message that I pointed you to and have concluded the message there conveyed the concept to you that you were dammed. Therefore, I would assume that if you could draw that conclusion that God would hold you responsible for acting to correct the reason that you feel damned.
    Remember I posted earlier that I do not have the authority to condemn; only the scriptures and God have that power.

  70. Grizz says:

    Skip,

    How does anything take a back seat to pleasing our Lord and Master?

  71. Grizz says:

    Excuse me … What I meant was …

    Skip,

    Pleasing our Lord and Master takes a backseat to NOTHING! That is what being a disciple is all about.

    Grizz

  72. Larry Cheek says:

    Skip,
    I noticed this comment that you wrote. “Ray, There are many NT scriptures beyond Acts that speak of salvation without the mention of baptism.”
    I paid special attention to these comments, and do believe that there was not action displayed of someone being saved in any of them. These are only statements referring to a portion of an action that took place in the lives of these people earlier; all these writings were written to Christians that were already saved. The passages that you refer to saves no lost soul.

  73. Larry Cheek says:

    Skip,
    I notice that you put great emphasis on how an individual acted or reacted after being baptized or saved. But, instead of placing responsibility upon those disobeying you desire to blame the instructions in scripture that they had obeyed, for their actions. The Bible instructions did not produce the actions that you see, you really need to apply the responsibility upon the disobedient, rather than desiring to change the Bible message.

    I may have read your comments differently than you intended. You may have been emphasizing that there has been a gross lack of teaching, I am not sure.

  74. Larry, in John 5:24, Jesus does not use the word “salvation”, but does use the terms “has eternal life” “will not be condemned” and “has crossed over from death to life”. No mention of baptism here, but if a believer has eternal life, has crossed over from death to life and will not be condemned, that sounds like “saved” to me…

  75. Larry Cheek says:

    Grace,
    I am assuming by your earlier comment, “Wow Larry, you are the only person to say that Paul had the perfect knowledge of people’s faith.” that you know the extent of Paul’s gifts. I believe that God gave the Apostles all the powers that they need to perform the action he desired. If you doubt that he did that will be your choice. I know that Paul and the other Apostles were given even the ability to forgive or not forgive sins and Christ would honor their decision.

  76. Larry Cheek says:

    Charles,
    You may be able to answer your own question after I ask you this question. Did Jesus state this message in John before or after he commanded the Apostles to baptize? A second question. Can you find an action in Acts or any of the later books of the Bible where an Apostle encountered someone that had not been baptized and accepted that individual as a Brother in Christ?
    Later in this passage he stated.
    (John 6:40 KJV) And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.
    At first glance some may believe this also teaches what you are implying, but because it is God’s will only half of the equation; the other half is dependent upon the individuals will to also obey all other commands to receive the benefit.

  77. Skip says:

    Larry, Actions I take don’t save me, Jesus Christ is the savior.

  78. Larry, are you suggesting we don’t follow Jesus words because his teachings have expired?

  79. Grace says:

    Larry, I don’t feel condemned by you or your theology. It’s through Jesus’ blood He shed on the cross by the grace of God I am saved. The CofC for years have been damning people through their legalism which flies in the face of God’s sacrifice. I know the One I have faith in Who saved me from myself and changed my life.

    Romans 8:31-39 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things? Who shall bring a charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. Who is he who condemns? It is Christ who died, and furthermore is also risen, who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is written: “For Your sake we are killed all day long; We are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.” Yet in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us. For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

  80. Ray Downen says:

    Charles, you may be assuming that sin is taken away after the great commission was given and the church began in the same way it was prior to the beginning of the church age. You point to what Jesus said and assume that negates what Jesus inspired Peter and the other apostles to say about conversion. Perhaps I’m misunderstanding you. Acts 2:38 is a clear statement of how sinners have sin washed away now that the lamb has been slain and the church has begun. Do you disagree with Peter (whose words surely are echoed by all the apostles who received the same Holy Spirit baptism as did Peter)? Luke only mentions what Peter said. I figure each of the apostles gave that same message as the church began and 3,000 became the first members of the church of Jesus Christ.

  81. Ray Downen says:

    What a pity it is that Grace knows so much that isn’t so. The history book which records the deeds and words of Holy Spirit-inspired apostles apparently means nothing to Grace. But the writings of Paul and other apostles agree that we are baptized INTO Christ, and are not IN Christ prior to having been baptized because of faith in Him which led us to turn to Him as LORD.

  82. Ray Downen says:

    Skip says what he does has nothing to do with his salvation, as I read his words. But when the apostles were asked on the birthday of the church, “What shall we DO?” they were told there were two specific actions which they would have to do in order to have sin remitted and to receive God’s Spirit within. If they didn’t ACT, they wouldn’t be saved. You suggest no acts are necessary. I think you’re wrong. I’m convinced also that Jesus cares how we live each day even after we become His.

  83. Larry Cheek says:

    Charles,
    I really believe that your statement is totally out of your character. I have never experienced reading any of your communications that would shed that kind of light upon the scriptures. I will assure you that I do not believe that Jesus’ communications prior to his death are now void. But, if we were to rely only upon Christ’s messages in the Gospels, then all of the teaching of the Apostles and the record of the Peter unlocking the doors to the kingdom with the keys that Christ promised him would be useless, you see Christ never explained how all this was going to be fulfilled in the Gospels. I do believe that you mentioned that you were not a Jew. If you are not a Jew then nothing in the Gospels applies to you. Unless, you can follow the events through the teaching of the Apostles unto the grafting in of the Gentiles you won’t find a place where you can enter the kingdom. No Gentiles were allowed in the kingdom prior to the event at the preaching to Cornelius. Furthermore, I do not find where any Jews were added to the kingdom without listening to teaching from the Apostles who taught that men must be baptized. Could it be that you believe that men can be saved without being in the kingdom? Remember Jesus’ words.
    (John 3:5 KJV) Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
    Jesus said this to the Jews prior to the verse John 5:24 that you used prior in a comment. Would this mean that a Jew had to be in the kingdom prior to being able to have the benefits mentioned in John 5:24? Or can we reverse the order Jesus specified?

  84. Larry Cheek says:

    Skip,
    God or Christ has never condoned that anyone could sit on their butts and never perform any effort towards obedience in living a life in a fashion that honors The Savior, many people count these actions as joy (not identifying their actions as work) but the scriptures in both Old and New Covenants required an effort by men that most men call work.
    (Phil 2:12 KJV) Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

    Even not working for physical needs was condemned.
    (2 Th 3:10 KJV) For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. 11 For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busybodies. 12 Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread.

    How can you be a faithful “servant” without working? Explain that position to Noah, Abraham, Moses, John the Baptist or any of the Apostles.

    We may be misunderstanding your use of “Jesus only”, but since many men have portrayed the exact words that you do and lived the life that reflected their lack of any obedience, we must attempt to determine your position.

  85. Larry, in John 5:24, we find recorded where Jesus made a categorical statement to real flesh-and-blood men and women in real time and space about having eternal life. There are a limited number of rational ways to understand Jesus’ statement—

    1. It never was true.
    2. It was true back then, but it became untrue later.
    3. It was true for that audience, but not for anyone today.
    4. It was incomplete, and Jesus didn’t know it, so additional information had to be added for it to be entirely true.
    5. It was incomplete and Jesus did know it, but he withheld the rest of the information from those particular people.
    6. It was complete then, but became incomplete later.
    7. It is just as true now as it was when Jesus said it.

    You pays your money, you takes your choice.

  86. Larry Cheek says:

    Charles,
    Do you really believe that Christ would count it acceptable for anyone to quote messages from his communications prior to his death with a direct intention to cause men to disobey commands that he commanded his Apostles to teach and administer.
    They obeyed his command and administered baptism to everyone that believed. Now I know that you will believe that I just made a comment that I cannot prove, but to prove that to be true I will only have to state the following then the burden of proof will revert to you.

    If the Apostles did not obey the command to baptize, then they were disobedient to Jesus. In the many years that were involved to complete the writings that became our Bible not a single inspired writer delivered a message from inspiration that any Apostle accept Judas disobeyed Jesus teachings.
    Would you or anyone believe that our Lord or His Son Jesus would have allowed an Apostle to teach a doctrine that was contrary to their instructions, without making it an example to all that were to read their Words?

  87. Skip says:

    Larry and Ray, I never said we don’t do anything, of course Christians obey/respond. BUT, our response is not salvic.

  88. Skip says:

    Ephesians 2:8-10 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.

    If salvation is a “gift” then it can’t be earned by our obedience. If we think for one second that our obedience to scripture merits salvation then we don’t understand the gospel. K.C. Moser, formerly from Abilene Christian University, wrote two great books about this.

    It is kind of like the flee on the elephant who crossed the suspension bridge. On the other side the flea said, “Boy, we really shook that one didn’t we”. The problem is that we are infinitely smaller than the flea and God is infinitely larger than the elephant. We are unworthy servants who can’t do diddly to earn our salvation. We reach out to God in faith and he saves us out of our sewage of a life. We can’t ever look back and point to how obedient we were and thus God owes us salvation.

  89. Skip says:

    Larry said, “We may be misunderstanding your use of “Jesus only”, but since many men have portrayed the exact words that you do and lived the life that reflected their lack of any obedience, we must attempt to determine your position.”
    I have worked my butt off serving the Lord for almost 40 years. I have been in the ministry full-time twice. I have helped many people to turn to the Lord in repentance and who were baptized into Christ.
    Larry, when were you appointed the kingdom police that must determine everyone’s exact position on everything? Sounds like the Pharisees trying to police the disciples.
    However, to alay some of your fears, I believe we are saved by grace through faith and after salvation we work to please the Lord. But all the while we understand that our works don’t obligate God to save us. Salvation is by grace and is a free gift (Ephesians 2:8). We are but His humble servants.

  90. Skip says:

    Larry, You previously said, “If you are not a Jew then nothing in the Gospels applies to you.” I am confused, the whole Bible applies to us. The OT teaches us about God, sin, salvation, holiness, redemption, a relationship with God, numerous types pointing to salvation such as the flood, slaughter of lambs, the Passover, etc… The Gospels apply to me because I learn about who Jesus is, parables of the sower, etc… Jesus lays the foundation for eternal life, explains that he is the shepherd, lays down his life on the cross, … As Paul told Timothy, “From infancy you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.” II Timothy 3:15. Paul wasn’t referring to the NT which hadn’t been written yet. Paul was referring to the OT and how the Holy Scriptures make us wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.” The entire Bible is relevant to our spiritual health.

  91. Larry, I appreciate your reply, although I find it almost entirely speculative, mainly consisting of “what ifs” and rhetorical questions and supposition and assumption. Your reply is considerably less direct than my post and seems to intentionally flee discussing Jesus’ actual words in their immediate context. I did want to let you comment on my little list of possible interpretive conclusions about John 5:24. If I left out some direct, rational approach to Jesus’ words, I would be glad to add it to the list. Your posts seem to line up with Door #3, but I could be misreading you.

    For the record, for me not to accept your view of salvific baptism does not mean I somehow do not believe in the need for baptism. The idea that the earliest apostles practiced water baptism is a point not in dispute, and it is offered to lead us away from the point which IS in dispute.

    Larry, your idea that the words of Jesus as recorded in the Gospels don’t apply directly to me because I am a Gentile is a heresy of the highest order. The fact that Paul taught that which is of Jesus to the Gentiles is not what makes Jesus’ words applicable to us. Paul did not verify what Jesus said; that would make Paul the greater of the two. We are not Paul’s disciples, mere second-hand followers of a man who followed Jesus. We are the followers of Jesus. We are not the grandsons of God, related to Him only through the apostles’ post-resurrection teachings about Jesus. I am not born again of the Jule Miller version of dispensational theories which originated with the Plymouth Brethren. I am not a disciple of the Bible, but of Jesus Himself.

    Jesus said, “Follow me,” not, “Jews, you follow me; Gentiles, you follow these other guys.”

  92. Monty says:

    Salvation is a gift, and yet it has conditions that have to be met. The publishers Clearing House Sweepstakes is a gift if they pick your entry. However, you have to fill out the entry form and send it in in order to qualify. You have to do something in order to avail yourself of the gift. If you were to win the grand prize, you would never (I hope) say that it wasn’t a gift, even though there were some hoops you had to jump through.

    Another analogy is : say you are stranded at sea floating on an ice cooler and sharks are surrounding you and a guy shows up in a boat and says, “hang on I’ll save you”, I’ll throw you a lifeline and you reach out and grab it.” He then proceeds to throw out a lifeline, but there is some trust issues here, do you let go of the cooler and grab hold of the lifeline or not. The guy in the boat has in essence procured your salvation, but you have to believe(have faith) that he is going to save you by letting go and grabbing the lifeline(the rope). So, you do, and you are rescued(saved). Now who did the saving? The man in the boat of course. You would forever be beholding to the man in the boat. What role did the rope play? Could you not say, yeh that lifeline sure saved me? Of course you could. Meaning as a part of something that stands for the whole. For me that’s how the Bible refers to baptism on occasion, the word that stands for the whole salvation package. “And they were baptized.” It doesn’t mean that’s all they did, but it includes all of a man’s response. “Baptism doth now save us.” Peter isn’t saying apart from Jesus or in addition to Jesus. It just stands for the lifeline accepted.

    If some guy in the boat saved you, through whatever hoops you had to jump through, you would never say, “I did the saving work.” “Did you see how well I clung to the rope?” And you would never say,” I was saved by the guy in the boat because I “merited” being saved, which was Paul’s argument in Romans. How silly! The guy in the boat could have said, save yourself from these sharks or drowning by grabbing the rope (in a loose sense) as Peter said in Acts 2:40.”Save yourself from this untoward generation.” Meaning of course not anything meritorious, but by availing yourself of the means necessary to escape. In the context, repenting and be baptized in the name of Jesus.

    Was the guy stranded at sea saved by grace? Yes! Did he have to have faith? Yes! Did that man’s faith in the guy in the boat save him? Yes! Was it faith only? Depends on how you view faith. If you mean something not involving any actions that are called for, then no. If you mean faith that expresses itself in obedience to the orders of the one doing the saving, then yes! Did the lost soul have to reach (out and do something physical) in order to be saved? Yes! Was he saved by his own efforts apart from the guy in the boat? No! But did he have to obey the instructions to grab the lifeline so he could be can pulled in? Yes! Did he help the guy in the boat save him? If by simply clinging to the rope, then perhaps, but not in any real substantive way that would ever be argued or bragged about.

    IMO this is the type scenario that helps explain what Biblical faith is. Jesus saves us. He does the work, he throws out the lifeline, we grab onto it, he pulls us into the boat. He saves when in faith we respond to meet the conditions presented. It’s only when we start analyzing and separating each component that we have such problems understanding the big picture. Why do so many people resent the rope?(Baptism). Does the rope really detract from the guy in the boat? Really?Could he have used another means to save the guy at sea? Could he have just driven the boat over to him and lifted him out of the water? Sure , but he didn’t. That wouldn’t have been saving faith. Faith was required. The faith that responds by acceptance of the terms for pardon given. If I don’t believe the guy in the boat will save me, (if I grab the rope), then I’m not letting go of my ice cooler.

    Faith that doesn’t respond to the call to let go of the cooler and cling to the rope is really a lack of trust in the guy in the boat.(Jesus). Does believing in Jesus save us? Of course it does. When we look at it from a Biblical perspective, not from a Protestant view(reacting against Catholicism) 180 degrees. There’s absolutely nothing man can do to save himself. We were floating aimlessly at sea without hope until the guy in the boat appeared, and he made the way possible. Nothing he calls us to do in terms of availing ourselves of his rescue means we circumvented HIs grace.

    I truly don’t believe that if you’re drowning at sea and a guy throws you a lifeline and says, “grab on and I’ll pull you in, that you won’t be able to understand what that means.” It isn’t that complicated. People have to have been taught wrong to get it wrong, or be confused by some adverse reaction to some perceived gross error, to miss it. (An overcorrection of sorts). I don’t think that on the day of Pentecost that those in the crowd didn’t really understand who would save them or what conditions had to be met in order to avail themselves of such a great salvation. But 2000 years later here we are.

  93. Ray observed, “But the instant that a believer realizes that Jesus commands baptism for new converts, then the convert becomes responsible to do what he knows even if his preacher doesn’t know or accept what Jesus requires.”

    I agree. But what if the believer does NOT submit to water baptism that instant? What happens? What is the consequence of disobedient delay? Delay of an hour, a month, a year, ten years? Jesus more directly commanded us to love one another as he has loved us. What happens if I haven’t consistently obeyed this yet? I think most of us would admit we are still working on fully obeying this greatest of all commands even after many years.

    Are the rules requiring obedience to “be baptized” different from the the rules requiring obedience to “love your neighbor as yourself”? Are the consequences different?

    Or does God, as our Father, lead and discipline believers into a life of obedience, whether to water baptism, or to “being filled with the Spirit”, or “take no thought for tomorrow”? I know almost nobody who has that last one down. But I have never heard anyone teach that the fellow who has not yet obeyed Matthew 6:34 is perhaps not even saved.

  94. Skip says:

    Monty, “Salvation is a gift, and yet it has conditions that have to be met”. I fully agree with your post. Even though I meet the conditions for salvation by “grabbing the rope”, my grabbing is not a work that obligates God to save me. We merely initially respond to the opportunity by our submission and we continue in his grace by our continued submission.

  95. Skip says:

    Grizz, “How does anything take a back seat to pleasing our Lord and Master?” Here is how it works. We can be so obsessed with pleasing Jesus that we forget to have a relationship with Jesus. I have been in churches where the entire focus was on behavior. We were obsessed with serving the Lord but we did not know the Lord we were serving. There are some churches that teach lesson after lesson on behavior modification but hardly know who Jesus is and hardly every teach messages on the character, nature, and love of Jesus Christ. This would be like a wife fully obsessed with serving her husband but she doesn’t know him very well and they don’t talk lovingly about each other. I have friends in VA where the wife is a great homemaker but she has a very shallow relationship with her husband. In like manner, we can be obsessed with pleasing Jesus by our behavior but we don’t hardly know the Jesus we are serving. The crowing jewel is Jesus himself not service. Service flows from worship and love but not the other way around.

  96. Skip says:

    Grizz, A great example of my previous post is the story about Mary and Martha. Mary was sitting at the feet of Jesus while Martha was “slaving away” in the kitchen. Jesus made it clear that Mary chose what was best. This story in the Bible perfectly captures my consistent point.

  97. Grace says:

    Skip is right, the gospels do apply to everyone. We can read about what Jesus says about the faith people have as He was teaching throughout the gospels.

    I believe Jesus is the One who is there to save someone that is weak and tired from being stranded on an ice cooler saying to the person stranded, trust in Me and I will carry you across to other side where you will be safe. Being that person myself on the ice cooler, weak and tired knowing I was going to die, I put my trust in Him to save me and He picked me up in His arms and carried me, He saved me the moment He put His arms around me. Jesus doesn’t need a rope, His hand that took the nail reaches out to us right where we are to save us.

  98. Grizz says:

    Grace,

    Your comment reminds me of the fellow who was told a flood was coming down the valley, so he should evacuate. He replied, “My trust is in the Lord to save me.” The police came around in their cruisers announcing for everyone to evacuate, but he said again, “My trust is in the Lord to save me.” When the waters began to rise over their yards, his neighbors came by in a rowboat and said, “Get in! We need to get ourselves to safety now.” But the man stayed in his house and called out to them, “My trust is in the Lord to save me.” The rescue squad came by in a motorboat to evacuate those who had not left in time, because the waters had risen all the way to single-story roof lines. But the man waved them away and said, “My trust is in the Lord to save me.” Finally, a helicopter flew over the neighborhood looking for people to evacuate from roof-tops and saw the man sitting next to the chimney on his roof. But you know what the man said. So, of course, the man dies in the flood and meets Peter at the gates of heaven and asks, “Why didn’t the Lord save me from the flood?” Peter replied, “You rejected the warnings, your neighbors in the rowboat, the motorboat, AND the helicopter the Lord sent. You didn’t trust the Lord at all!”

    So, yes, Grace, you can reject the rope,but there will be consequences. You say you trust Jesus, but reject what He tells you? Then your claim that you trust Him is bogus and false. Trust sits down on the chair that may seem too flimsy to hold you. Trust listens and heeds the warnings, rides with the neighbors in their rowboat, climbs into the motorboat, or accepts the ride in the helicopter, BUT trust does NOT reject every means the Father offers to cast blame on God.

    What are the means God has offered? Listen when the gospel is preached, repent of living any other way besides God’s way, surrender your life to Jesus, allow your old self to die, be buried and then raised to new life with Jesus and never stop trusting Him no matter what comes your way. Jesus IS the way, but only to those who are willing to trust Him and do what He has said must be done to prove your heart does trust Him. Your love for Him cannot be rivaled by any other love, your death to sin and self must be unceasing, your accounting of the cost must be brutally honest and without fear, and your renunciation of worldly substitutes must be unqualified. (Luke 14:25-35) Jesus said there is no exception to these things if you would be His disciple. That is to say, without these things you cannot be His disciple.

    Grizz

  99. Nancy says:

    That’s a lovely word picture Grace.

  100. Larry Cheek says:

    Charles,
    You proclaim that if you apply the messages to your self that Jesus stated while he was alive before his death they will produce the exact same result as any messages after his death. Of course we are talking about salvation. But,after Christs resurrection he gave commandments to his Apostles to teach a message that contained a test upon an individual’s commitment to follow him, and he never once told them not to apply that teaching to those who believed prior to his death . Therefore I cannot verify and I am sure that you cannot find an action within the scriptures Acts – Revelations that any Apostle or teacher did not administer baptism to even those who had believed previously, notice Cornelius did he not believe and worship prior to meeting Peter, why was he not already saved just as you claim for yourself? It seems that he and you both believed and worshiped but Christ’s Apostle baptized him, and I think that you are attempting to promote that if an individual is never baptized, refuses to be baptized will not be condemned.
    I really tried to follow your line of thinking in your last post but I cannot see an individual being saved in Mat 6:34.
    (Mat 6:34 KJV) Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.
    I did notice that Christ was explaining what was to be important in their life. What was important was to do the instructions in the previous verse rather than the verse that you quoted (Mat 6:33 KJV) But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. There is an action specified that takes effort to do, he could not sit idly and let God do all. .

  101. Larry Cheek says:

    Charles,
    I searched further and after this lesson in Matt, as Jesus finishes the writer makes this statement.
    (Mat 7:28 KJV) And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine: 29 For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.

    How many of them became believers and followed Christ?

  102. Grace says:

    Cornelius was a Gentile who worshiped God, the Jews worshiped God also but there were Jews who needed to hear the gospel of Jesus. Peter was sent to go to Cornelius’ house to preach the gospel of Jesus to the Gentile people that were there.

    It really bothers you that God saved the people at Cornelius’ house giving them the promised Holy Spirit before they were baptized.

    Peter made a strong confirmation to the apostles and elders about the Gentiles in Acts 15:6-11: So the apostles and elders met together to resolve this issue. At the meeting, after a long discussion, Peter stood and addressed them as follows: “Brothers, you all know that God chose me from among you some time ago to preach to the Gentiles so that they could hear the Good News and believe. God knows people’s hearts, and he confirmed that he accepts Gentiles by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as he did to us. He made no distinction between us and them, for he cleansed their hearts through faith. So why are you now challenging God by burdening the Gentile believers with a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors were able to bear? We believe that we are all saved the same way, by the undeserved grace of the Lord Jesus.”

  103. Larry Cheek says:

    Grace,
    You read into my communications from ideas from others have stated instead of paying attention to the message that I am trying to show you. I have no problems with the order of events in the conversion of Cornelius. He was worshiping God outside of Christianity, in fact until this time Christianity was only to the Jews. Christ became the only connection between all mankind and God. This event was the (you might say door through which the Jews should recognize that all mankind would become one through Christ) and of course the message of the Gospel would then be sent to all.
    Actually the point I am trying to emphasis is in rebuttal to those that contend that salvation came to Cornelius before he was baptized, therefore men today believe that baptism is not necessary for them to be baptized. They do not want to accept that they should follow the complete message that was delivered to Cornelius. Cornelius did not refuse to participate in baptism as many do today. What would you think Peter’s reaction would have been if Cornelius would have told him that he did not believe it was necessary for him to be baptized (the exact thing that men say today) would Peter have said ok, your good just follow the rest of Christ’s commands? Actually this message should be interpreted by any believers today that have not been baptized to follow the example. I understand that you are promoting baptism as optional.

  104. Grace says:

    I was baptized and I encourage others to be baptized. If someone was to tell me that they are refusing to be baptized or refuse any command, I would probably think that they don’t have the Holy Spirit and therefore are not saved and have someone else speak with them.

  105. Larry Cheek says:

    Charles,
    You asked, “Are the rules requiring obedience to “be baptized” different from the the rules requiring obedience to “love your neighbor as yourself”? Are the consequences different?”

    Charles, can you “love your neighbor as yourself” just once in your lifetime, and get it done in less than an hour? Is that something that you do or is something that someone else does to you? Of course, you can’t compare apples to bread an expect them to be very much alike.
    Do you not believe that God would extend his Grace longer upon a command that he has given that it would require a lifetime to complete than one that could be completed within an hour?
    How quickly would you think God expect you to get something done if it only took one hour to do?

  106. So, Larry’s answer appears to be, “If it’s easy, you have to obey immediately, whatever ‘immediately’ means. If it’s hard, you can delay your obedience.” Larry, you’re just making this stuff up as you go along. And, as usual, it’s all presumption and speculation. All foam and no beer.

  107. Sometimes, I think I am hearing the early birds from Jesus’ parable of the workers hired for the vineyard. “I had to get baptized and be faithful unto death to even think I might eventually be saved, and I’ll be dipped if I’m gonna let God sneak people into heaven who didn’t work as hard for it as I have!”

  108. Ray Downen says:

    How many times must a truth be stated before it’s true? Jay seems to believe that listing multiple verses which state that faith is essential for salvation will prove that faith alone is sufficient. It doesn’t prove it unless those passage speak of faith ALONE, and not a one of them does so. But when I notice how the apostles and early evangelists won people to Jesus, I note that note one of them taught a “sinners’s prayer” as the way the convert was brought into fellowship with the Savior. No sermon ended with sinners asked to raise their hand if they wanted to be saved. I see no reason anyone wants to disbelieve the very first time the gospel was preached and spend lots of time trying to prove Peter didn’t understand how sinners are saved.

  109. Ray Downen says:

    I note that my fingers were so enthralled with “note” that they added an “e” after the NOT that belonged in line 5 of my note at 5:41 pm. I appreciate that on other blogs editing is possible!

  110. Ray Downen says:

    Skip thinks obedience to the gospel makes no difference since we can’t earn salvation. But didn’t we all notice that Peter (and no doubt the other apostles) urged hearers in Acts 2 to “SAVE yourselves” from this crooked generation? And didn’t he instruct them when asked how they were to save themselves? He surely did, and I see many now claiming to love Jesus who insist that Peter MUST have been mistaken!

  111. Ray Downen says:

    Skip seems allergic to anyone telling anyone else about the plan put forth by apostles for sinners to be saved. Larry rightly points to what the apostles taught. Good for Larry and good for all who believe that the Bible is CORRECT and complete. The apostles taught that entry into the Lord’s kingdom was as He had said, by way of new birth of WATER and spirit, that is, by believers repenting toward Jesus as Lord (giving up selfishness and self-love) and being immersed in water as Jesus had commanded was to be done. I repeat, Jesus COMMANDS baptism, and all man’s puny efforts to make baptism unimportant are worthless.

  112. Ray Downen says:

    Monty speaks clearly and kindly. Good for Monty.

  113. Ray Downen says:

    I may be misunderstanding Charles. Perhaps he doesn’t mean that a believer who didn’t understand need for baptism and later learned of the need would be saved in ignorance whether or not he immediately upon learning of the need took steps to be baptized. If the apostles understood conversion, no one was converted until they were baptized. I figure they were right. I’m also sure that it’s not my place or the place of Charles to declare anyone is saved by the blood of Jesus if they’re not baptized as He commanded. Jay is right that faith is mentioned much more often than baptism. To me that doesn’t negate the command of Jesus and the practice of His apostles. I observe that for some it does cause them to think baptism just doesn’t matter.

  114. Ray Downen says:

    Charles asks

    Are the rules requiring obedience to “be baptized” different from the the rules requiring obedience to “love your neighbor as yourself”? Are the consequences different?

    The answer is obvious. One has to do with ENTERING the Kingdom. The other has to do with living IN the Kingdom. Yes, of course they are different. Loving God and our neighbors doesn’t save us. Entering the Kingdom of Jesus Christ doesn’t mean we’ll be eternally saved, of course, but only those IN the Kingdom are on the Way to Life. Christian living is important. Becoming a Christian is essential to eternal life.

  115. Ray Downen says:

    It appears that Grace doesn’t believe there’s any reason to read and believe what apostles of Jesus wrote. At least she is eager to ignore how sinners were converted then, and believes she now knows a better way than the apostles knew. Am I understanding her? Does she really not know that the apostles immediately baptized every new believer? Does she suppose they were mistaken in how they brought people into the Kingdom?

  116. Skip says:

    Ray, I have never proposed that baptism wasn’t God’s will. Read more carefully.

  117. Jay Guin says:

    Ray,

    1. Again, I’m not Baptist and do not teach Baptist practice. I no more teach the “sinner’s prayer” or hand raising than you do. These are strawmen arguments and a waste of your efforts.

    2. Consider, for example —

    (Joh 3:18 ESV) 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.

    This verse (and many others like it) teach not only the necessity of faith but its sufficiency. The grammar is very plain.

    If I said to you, “Anyone who comments tomorrow will receive $100 from me,” and if you commented, you’d be rightfully angry if I were to reply, “I didn’t say ‘comments alone.’ You also had to swim across the Black Warrior River.” You’d rightfully consider me dishonest.

    And one of the things that really gets under my skin about the “it didn’t say ‘only’ or ‘alone'” argument is that it makes the writers of the NT seem dishonest.

  118. Larry Cheek says:

    Ray,
    Evidently, I have understood Jay’s teaching on baptism a little different than you have. I’ll admit that when he stressed belief and faith which are the foundation of everything (referring to being baptized without both of these, changes nothing or cannot create a Christian) so greatly, I almost read into his teaching that he was accepting all who believe and have faith without baptism. But, in asking him about someone who was taught that they should be baptized but refused, his answer was that they would be condemned because of rebellion. I also believe as Jay has stated that the individual that has not been taught or has not learned on their own that they should be baptized is not yet accountable to that command. This actually may place many preachers and teachers in a very dangerous position, as the Bible teaches that the blood of those may be on these teachers hands (similar to as if they murdered them). To place that in a different prospective when a teacher delivers a message that is false, how could they not reap the title of being a false teacher in our sight or God’s. On the other hand I would venture to state that there is no person alive that has not at some time taught earnestly a false message that they misinterpreted from scriptures. I sincerely pray that the Grace will cover our imperfections in this area. But, I am positive that when an individual who teaches has been approached by anyone about an error that he is teaching and he refuses to restudy the matter and apply one of the methods prescribed in scripture (namely properly dividing the Word, which really means understanding Who is speaking, to whom is he speaking, what is the message, does it apply to us today and is it a directing command to follow or is it a principle to apply) he will no doubt be condemned as the Bible condemns false teachers. I would also like to add MHO that when men attempt to build a strawman so they can knock him down with their concepts they begin to look as if their father may not be God, God’s children cannot communicate in that manner and display him in them.

  119. Grace says:

    How about letting Jay clearly say his thoughts about this matter. Jay do you believe salvation is given to people when they have faith or when they are baptized?

  120. Larry Cheek says:

    Skip,
    I am glad to hear you clear up the fact that baptism is God’s will.
    I really thought you had a misconception of baptism as you attempted to apply baptism to men in the OT who were never subject to submit to it.
    “In addition, there are numerous saved people in the Bible who were never baptized all the way from Abraham to the thief on the cross. I have read, understood, and obeyed the baptism scriptures but I also know that there are numerous scriptures that clearly address salvation where baptism is never mentioned.”
    Then I read.
    “However, to alay some of your fears, I believe we are saved by grace through faith and after salvation we work to please the Lord. But all the while we understand that our works don’t obligate God to save us. Salvation is by grace and is a free gift (Ephesians 2:8). We are but His humble servants.”
    Where you never indicated that baptism was a part of obeying and pleasing the Lord.
    You referred to a comment that I made, I hope I can help you to understand how the comment fits scripture.
    Larry, You previously said, “If you are not a Jew then nothing in the Gospels applies to you.” I am confused, the whole Bible applies to us.
    The portion of your message that I disagree with is that the whole Bible “applies to us”. I see that the OT scriptures are to us exactly what is told in this scripture.
    (Gal 3:24 KJV) Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
    Paul says that now faith has come, the law OT was a schoolmaster and is no longer binding, that does not keep it from still being a record of the interaction between men and God for our incite about God.

    The message in the Gospels was delivered to the Jews, at first no Gentiles were allowed to obey the Gospels to become a member of The Kingdom, when the Kingdom was made visible and the doors were opened by Peter all Jews came into the kingdom the same way, there was no grafting into the Kingdom from men that had been Jews upholding the Law. The Law could not save, that was a power given to Christ.
    The point that I see many men missing is that all men became members of Christ’s Kingdom the same way from the day of Pentecost, the message that was given then is still valid today. Jesus told his Apostles what to say and what to do to make disciples from men who were not. For man today to attempt to use information in the Gospels in such a way to alter the command that Jesus issued to the Apostles pertaining to entry into the Kingdom, is nothing but rebellion to his Words.

  121. Larry Cheek says:

    Grace,
    You seem to be still missing the point. Even though salvation can be had prior to baptism (an example could be Cornelius), unless an individual is baptized they can be condemned. This may hinge upon how long it takes for them to understand that Christ commanded that they be baptized, but even then the teacher may have a grave responsibility to be sure that the command is obeyed.

  122. Skip says:

    Larry, I have been consistent in my position this entire blog.

  123. Royce says:

    It is a sad truth that in our churches of Christ, teaching and preaching about the person and work of Jesus Christ takes a back seat to teaching and preaching about baptism and the superiority of the church of Christ. Jesus gave a mandate for his followers to preach the gospel and instead many of our people use all their energy preaching one response to the gospel instead of the gospel. “Gospel meetings” are announced and not once in the series of meetings is Christ and his work for sinners talked about. Then we wonder why people are leaving.

  124. Skip says:

    Amen brother Royce!

  125. Alabama John says:

    All this talk about baptism and none about the even more often pointing out correct way it has to be done. Some baptize in the name of, or authority of, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost or Spirit and leave out the for the remission of your sins part.

    Seen many rebaptized because of the baptism errors voiding their baptism.

    I thank God this silliness is being corrected more everyday and Jay is sure helping accomplish this!!!

  126. Skip says:

    Alabama John, Thanks for bringing this up. I believe I saw a woman once baptized whose head went under but some of her long hair didn’t get wet. Another time I baptized a man who’s hand didn’t fully get wet. Both obviously did not get saved. 🙂 I am glad we are nailing this stuff down. BTW, is chlorinated water ok?

  127. Alabama John says:

    Skip, the necessary inference is a river would be better and more scriptural. Good question to put to Charles and Larry to get all the possiblilities!!! LOL

  128. Ray, I appreciate your response, even if the reasoning is entirely extrabiblical. The person who comes for baptism has already entered the kingdom. Simple syllogism, really. Major premise: Jesus plainly says the one who believes HAS eternal life, that he has crossed over from death to life.. Minor premise: We only baptize believers. So- Conclusion- the person who comes for baptism already has eternal life. So, why is baptism more crucial than “love one another as I have loved you”?

    And if it immediacy IS required in baptism, HOW immediate must it be in order to be truly obedient? An hour? A day? A week? A year?

  129. Jay Guin says:

    Grace,

    As I said in the post A Framework for Discussing Baptism, my views do not fit into either the CoC or Baptist position. I wrote,

    “The question, though, isn’t whether we should teach or practice baptism as we do. I really think we should. But we have no business teaching that those improperly baptized who come to Jesus with a genuine faith and repentance are lost. They are not.”

  130. AJ is, of course, on point about necessary inference, although I would think that the requirement could be met in any body of flowing water: a lake spillway, the artificial surfing pool on a cruise ship, the tubing ride at a local water park, or, in extremis, a busted fire hydrant running into a suitably deep pothole. Other inferential concerns are the lack of any Biblical example of baptism by a Gentile, the absence of any documented baptism occurring during a worship service, and the questionable modern use of artificially heated water without authorization.

    But the problem is not insurmountable. I would suggest that local congregations could contact an area Messianic congregation for volunteer baptizors, and retrofit the baptistry with Jacuzzi pumps of sufficient size to create a consistent circulatory pattern in room temperature water. (The pumps are an expedient.) Oh, and make sure to offer a closing prayer before dunking the baptizee. If your area does not have any local Messianic Jews, one of your elders could convert. Congregations who are willing to engage in cooperative efforts might share a single converted Jewish elder, to minimize duplication of effort and eliminate excess brises.

    We are all about offering solutions here.

  131. Skip says:

    Charles, Simply hilarious.

  132. Alabama John says:

    Skip, exactly the detailed, thorough, all encompassing answer I expected from Charles!!! LMAO

  133. Larry Cheek says:

    Hello to All,
    This post has the capability to become very long, if I attempted to document all that I want to address, therefore I will paraphrase much of this and would ask that you read through the content before criticizing each and every point. I will also forgo the documentation of how I have arrived to these conclusions, except to tell you that recently Ray had presented the concept that preachers were commanded to baptize, the responsibility for being baptized was not given to the individual being baptized.
    One morning when I woke up, evidently I had a dream that had portrayed this concept.
    I will say that I have used some of principals from this dream in some of my recent posts to see if anyone picked on some of the ideas, well that has not happened. So one major disagreement about baptism is in classifying it as a work, something that you do, and then it carries over into, if you have to do a work to get it, it is no longer a free gift. Then the idea that you earn it in the work that you have performed. We know that the Bible nowhere conveys that concept when discussing baptism, but men have presented these ideas.
    I believe that everyone reading here will be familiar with the message Paul wrote in Romans and the picture that he has displayed of the details that take place during baptism. I will address some of these pictures possibly not in the exact order of events. One of the thoughts that came to me was about Abraham when God asked him to sacrifice his son. It is very easy for us to connect the parallel of God sacrificing his own Son with what he asked of Abraham. I don’t see that God asked Abraham to do this to display that concept; God never mentioned to Abraham that this was the purpose behind the action. But, God did explain after he was convinced that Abraham would complete the action of killing his own son in obedience to God’s instructions, that he had “passed the test” and God was pleased. Remember it was many, many years prior, that God had called him to follow his instructions and Abraham had obeyed. I really do not remember any event during the communications between God and Abraham that we could say displayed a concept that Abraham would not continue to obey, we all can see that while being impatient he tried to help God’s plan along, but I did not see God counting that as disobedience. Many times through out the OT God tested his followers, even tests of the nation. Let us not forget he even tested his own Son, even allowed Satan to entice Christ to disobedience. I am sure by now you should be able to supply many more events that fit the same pattern.

    So if we could view baptism as a test and during that test I would like to draw your attention to some of the details that Paul and others wrote about and paint even another picture.
    The test for a believing individual would be to allow a man to place themselves in jeopardy of their life. A similar situation would have been expressed by Abraham’s son as he willingly accepted his fathers calling to obedience. While in this position of complete submission to God’s instructions, I remember the message in Paul narrative explaining how were are separated from our sins, the exact message from Ananias. Paul also explains that we are given a new life as we are resurrected from our watery grave.
    Would it be out of order to speculate that God is actually using the individuals hands that are holding us and while we are in total submission to him he is performing the surgery necessary to separate us from the past and preparing us for the future with him, as one of his children, even implanting a spirit like him within us that was not there before?
    Of course we cannot find scriptures anywhere that express that as we start believing that action places us “into Christ” in the same context as is expressed by, “(Rom 6:3 KJV) Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?” “(1 Cor 12:13 KJV) For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.” “(Gal 3:27 KJV) For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.”

    Many men speak of a baptism in the spirit, and express what they have experienced, but how do we correlate the words of Paul as he states there is only one baptism?
    (Eph 4:5 KJV) One Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.
    The Romans that he was writing to had already been baptized, would they not understand that the baptism they submitted to was the one and only?

    Who among you will say that it is unjust for God to demand that we submit to his test of our belief/faith? If you do think it is unjust for us, then you would have to apply that same concept to his testing of all men in the OT as well. Applying that to God makes us a judge of God and his actions.

    Therefore, as we meet individuals that claim to be Christians who have expressed that they have not been baptized we need to explain the necessity of passing God’s testing and offer to help them to pass the test.

    Visualizing baptism as a test, it is very easy to understand how it would come under such a heavy attack from any angle to keep believers from participating.

  134. Larry Cheek says:

    Royce,
    Do you really believe that the majority of CoC preachers are teaching as you have stated?
    “Jesus gave a mandate for his followers to preach the gospel and instead many of our people use all their energy preaching one response to the gospel instead of the gospel. “Gospel meetings” are announced and not once in the series of meetings is Christ and his work for sinners talked about.”
    I have strained my memory in an attempt remember that baptism was so consistently taught exceeding what I would consider as teaching about the love that Christ has for us, how to love others as he does us and the sacrifices that endured for us.
    Surely, you would not be referring to the fact that we have offered an invitation at each assembly? I have attended many churches other than CoC and found very few that did not offer a similar encouragement, there is one denomination that I have attended multiple times to encourage members to communicate with me, at the end of a service normally offer a prayer then the Pastor makes the statement to the congregation “go in peace”.

    It does look odd to me that you state that,”Jesus gave a mandate for his followers to preach the gospel “. Since you stated who said it, it becomes easy to locate.
    (Mark 16:15 KJV) And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
    Jesus also continued that mandate into the next verse, which appears you do not see as important as complying with the first.
    (Mark 16:16 KJV) He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
    If I am not understanding you correctly, show me the light.

  135. Royce says:

    Larry I’m trying to track with you here but I’m having a difficult time of it. I’m imagining God looking at Larry Cheek or Royce Ogle and asking himself, “I wonder if that man will pass the test?” How could God possibly know until he sees us under the water? Do you really think this? Do you think God is ever surprised by who passes and who doesn’t? I’m trying to picture God saying to himself, “Wow, I didn’t think that guy was serious. He passed the test!” Or maybe he says, “I’m disappointed, I thought that guy was going to pass the test but he failed”.

    Trust me, God knows ahead of time.

  136. Royce says:

    Yes Larry you got it right. Many coc preachers almost never preach the gospel of Christ.

  137. Larry Cheek says:

    Royce,
    You do understand the exact comments you make here could be said about God knowing beforehand what Abraham would do, then the test would have served no purpose. Read again the communication from God to Abraham after his son’s life was spared.

    Of course it is easy to see that the test could have been conducted for Abraham’s benefit, God knowing all, but if God saw the need for Abraham to have this traumatic event for his benefit why would we discount that he could see the same type of committed event for our benefit? Anyone should realize that God would know the heart, but that could also be said of all on the day of Pentecost, The Gentiles, it is even stated about their devotion to God prior to sending Peter to them, then we could apply the same to all men that were baptized including Paul. We possibly could under that understanding remove Mark 16:16 from the scriptures as being unnecessary.

    Evidently, you have been in touch with a different sect of CoC than I have. But, what you are explaining about your area is important.

  138. Grace says:

    Baptism is not a test to prove to God we have faith in Him, God knows our heart and our faith, He knows the heart of our faith. Circumcision didn’t earn salvation nor did all the bulls and goats that were sacrificed, they were a symbol for the true forgiveness of sins that was to come through the Messiah. All the sacrifices and washings were to point them to the sacrifice of Christ just as baptism points us back to the sacrifice of Christ. The good works we do point to the One who came to save us. We have all failed the commandments of God, Moses who was given the law failed the test and wasn’t allowed to take God’s people into the promised land, would you say that Moses isn’t saved through Christ’s sacrifice? God is not an angry mean God throwing orders down to us to see how well our efforts hold up, He has long-suffered all that people have done in our failings from Adam and Eve who He covered with the animal skin right after they sinned against Him, and Abraham who tried in his own efforts to have the child God promised, to David who God called him a man after God’s own heart, who committed adultery and killed a man. Would you say that they aren’t saved through Christ’s sacrifice? God has wanted to be with us since the beginning, even when we complain and fail in our efforts. Jesus came not to condemn us in our sins but to save us so we can be with Him eternally. Jesus came to us as a baby born in a barn. We need that baby in the barn, in our efforts we can’t do it on our own. If the King of kings is willing to be born in a barn then He is also willing to meet you where you are.

  139. Royce Ogle says:

    Larry, one difference between me and you is I don’t get my theology from the coc. I study the word of God and believe what I find there without regard to how it fits what any group teaches. Several years ago I came to the conclusion that I could no longer ignore passages of scripture that didn’t conviently fit what I had been taught.

    One method of teaching is to keep hammering away at your traditional teaching, serving up the same proof texts over and over. Another is to come to the Bible with an open heart and an open mind and ask God to show you the truth. I have chosen the later. At 68 I’m still learning.

    I have learned that if God was not actively overcoming mans ability of self determination no one would ever be saved. When you talk about Paul’s conversion it is baptism that you find most important. What I see is God’s choice of Paul, not only to save him but his predetermined ministry including his suffering. Let us allow God to be God and give him glory.

  140. Alabama John says:

    Royce, I appreciate your personal comment to Larry.

    I and many others have realized we will stand alone before God and none of the teachers of the Bible we have had in the past will be with us to explain our actions or lack of to God for us. Since we will stand alone we prefer to decide alone and folllow our own understanding.

    I’m 75 and you being 68, maybe it is the old age, nearer to answering and seeing heaven thinking.

  141. Ray Downen says:

    Jay points out rightly

    I’m not Baptist and do not teach Baptist practice. I no more teach the “sinner’s prayer” or hand raising than you do. These are strawmen arguments and a waste of your efforts.

    But Jay seems to not realize that every verse about salvation by faith which he quotes never once speak of salvation by faith alone, and salvation by faith alone is what Jay is teaching.

  142. Ray Downen says:

    I surely like comments by Larry Cheek! He says

    Ray, Evidently, I have understood Jay’s teaching on baptism a little different than you have. I’ll admit that when he stressed belief and faith which are the foundation of everything (referring to being baptized without both of these, changes nothing or cannot create a Christian) so greatly, I almost read into his teaching that he was accepting all who believe and have faith without baptism. But, in asking him about someone who was taught that they should be baptized but refused, his answer was that they would be condemned because of rebellion.

    What I think is important is to note that sinners are NOT ever commanded to be baptized. Peter’s words in Acts 2:38 are informative rather than issued as a command.

    And every instance of response to the gospel except that of the Ethiopian convert shows that the baptism was done by ones who were obeying the command of Jesus that baptism was to be administered by the evangelist rather than called for by the new believer. To blame unbaptized converts rather than unbaptizing evangelists is to place blame wrongly. God knows who is at fault when sin is committed. He will surely not judge wrongly. Nor should we do so.

  143. Ray Downen says:

    Larry again speaks truly when he writes

    All men became members of Christ’s Kingdom the same way from the day of Pentecost, the message that was given then is still valid today. Jesus told his Apostles what to say and what to do to make disciples from men who were not. For man today to attempt to use information in the Gospels in such a way to alter the command that Jesus issued to the Apostles pertaining to entry into the Kingdom, is nothing but rebellion to his Words.

    We do well to recognize that it’s only AFTER a command is issued that obedience to the command is required. Many miss understanding that simple truth!

  144. Ray Downen says:

    I have to disagree that Cornelius was saved prior to being baptized into Christ. Larry writes

    salvation can be had prior to baptism (an example could be Cornelius), unless an individual is baptized they can be condemned. This may hinge upon how long it takes for them to understand that Christ commanded that they be baptized, but even then the teacher may have a grave responsibility to be sure that the command is obeyed.

    But the fact is that baptism in the Spirit is not linked to salvation. Not ever. It was given to the apostles to empower them for the work they would be doing. It was given to the household of Cornelius to prove that God wanted Jewish Christians to realize that Gentiles also could be saved. It was a sign for OTHERS, not a saving experience for the Gentiles. These Gentiles were saved just as all other converts are and were, by repenting and being baptized in water as commanded by Jesus, and submitted to because of the believers’ faith in JESUS.

  145. Ray Downen says:

    Alabama John speaks of errors in baptizing:

    All this talk about baptism and none about the even more often pointing out correct way it has to be done. Some baptize in the name of, or authority of, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost or Spirit and leave out the for the remission of your sins part.

    I observe that it is NOT necessary for the baptizer to use any particular words to validate a baptism. What is necessary is that the act be done in the name of the Master, Jesus. That’s all that’s required. That’s what Luke reports concerning valid baptisms. No formula of speech that makes the act O.K. If a believing sinner is immersed “in the name of Jesus,” the baptism is valid.

  146. Ray Downen says:

    John speaks of some need he feels is implied concering baptism in “running” water

    Skip, the necessary inference is a river would be better and more scriptural. Good question to put to Charles and Larry to get all the possiblilities!!! LOL

    The only NECESSARY teaching is that the baptism is to be in WATER. Nothing whatever is said about it being running water. A pond or baptistery filled with water is fine. A river or creek is no better.

  147. Ray Downen says:

    Charles says salvation is by faith alone. He thinks that’s what Jesus said. It isn’t what Jesus said, for Jesus didn’t state that a person who ONLY believes (faith alone) is saved. Charles wrote

    The person who comes for baptism has already entered the kingdom. Simple syllogism, really. Major premise: Jesus plainly says the one who believes HAS eternal life, that he has crossed over from death to life.. Minor premise: We only baptize believers. So- Conclusion- the person who comes for baptism already has eternal life.

    And this would be logical except for the absense of an only or alone with the “faith.”

    We have no right to believe that Peter and other apostles misunderstood Jesus and His teaching. When Peter was asked (and we believe the query was to all the apostles rather than ONLY to Peter, and that Peter’s recorded response is what all the apostles believed and taught) what believers needed to do to “get right with God” they were NOT told, “Now that you’ve believed, you’re saved.” as Charles feels is the truth. They were told very simply and clearly that to be saved they needed to turn to Jesus as LORD and be baptized as HE had commanded. That’s still the only correct and apostolic answer concerning salvation by faith alone. Faith alone is DEAD. All the words in the world won’t change that fact. Those who love Jesus will not want to imagine that His command that converts were to be baptized is unimportant after all. Yet that IS what I hear Jay and Charles teaching!

  148. Grace says:

    Ray said, But the fact is that baptism in the Spirit is not linked to salvation. Not ever.

    Paul said Ephesians 1:13-14 And now you Gentiles have also heard the truth, the Good News that God saves you. And when you believed in Christ, he identified you as his own by giving you the Holy Spirit, whom he promised long ago. The Spirit is God’s guarantee that he will give us the inheritance he promised and that he has purchased us to be his own people. He did this so we would praise and glorify him.

  149. Ray Downen says:

    Jay clearly says that baptism is not NECESSARY for salvation.

    As I said in the post A Framework for Discussing Baptism, my views do not fit into either the CoC or Baptist position. I wrote,

    “The question, though, isn’t whether we should teach or practice baptism as we do. I really think we should. But we have no business teaching that those improperly baptized who come to Jesus with a genuine faith and repentance are lost. They are not.”

    Sinners are lost IN SIN until their sin is washed away. Jay is saying that sin is washed away by faith and repentance. His new birth is of spirit but not of water. Jesus says the new birth is of “water and spirit. Peter agrees. The apostles all agree. Baptists affirm that sinners are saved and later baptized. Jay agrees with the Baptist position. He disagrees with the apostolic teaching!

  150. Ray Downen says:

    Larry wrote about being baptized “into Christ” (as mentioned in Galatians 3:27 and Romans 6:1-11)

    We cannot find scriptures anywhere that express that as we start believing that action (faith alone) places us “into Christ” in the same context as is expressed by, “(Rom 6:3 KJV) Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?” “(1 Cor 12:13 KJV) For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.” “(Gal 3:27 KJV) For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.”

    At http://missionoutreach.org/OwensMaxey.pdf is an article by me about 1 Corinthians 12:13 and its mention of “in one spirit” which obviously is a reference to the repentance which MUST precede baptism into Christ.

    The apostolic “pattern” for conversion includes PREACHING/teaching about Jesus, hearing the gospel, and obeying it by repenting and being baptized. How true it is that our message should be about JESUS rather than about baptism! But our practice must include baptism because JESUS commands it, and we love Jesus.

  151. Ray Downen says:

    Royce may be right. He says,

    “Many coc preachers almost never preach the gospel of Christ.”

    One Church of Christ preacher I get to listen to most weeks via the internet is Rick Atchley. He preaches about Jesus powerfully and kindly. I’ve apprecited hearing Al Maxey and reading his teaching. He most often preaches about Jesus and is NOT one who “almost never preaches the gospel.” But I don’t know about most. One of the Church of Christ preachers lives here in Joplin and preached truth about Jesus all the way until he retired from preaching and now is serving as an elder instead, still believing in the Lord Jesus and His love for every man. I’m sorry to know SOME Church of Christ preachers who preach little about the Lord’s LOVE and much about laws which they have added to apostolic doctrine. But we have some like that also in Christian Churches/Churches of Christ. Royce does well to praise the good and speak of how we all should preach/teach the gospel of the great Lover of all people.

  152. Ray Downen says:

    Royce comments

    When you talk about Paul’s conversion it is baptism that you find most important. What I see is God’s choice of Paul, not only to save him but his predetermined ministry including his suffering. Let us allow God to be God and give him glory.

    While the conversion of Saul/Paul is far more that just that he was baptized INTO Christ, some want to ignore baptism. And some of us refuse to go along with the ignoring. God put it IN. We want to leave it where God put it. So we recognize that Saul was told to be baptized, washing away his sin.

    The only reason we emphasize the baptizing is because so many choose to ignore what the Lord Jesus commanded, and we feel it wise to notice and OBEY what Jesus commanded.

  153. Ray, if you are going to put words in my mouth, I would greatly appreciate it if you would use my words, and not your own. There is a clear difference between the two. “Faith alone” is an oxymoron, according to James. You don’t seem to be able to hear any detail in another brother’s words once you ascertain he does not believe that baptism is salvific. If we don’t see salvation exactly as you do, we are Baptists teaching “faith only”. Sigh. I am teaching salvation by faith prior to baptism, which is consistent with Jesus’ words in John 5. I don’t have much confidence that this will be understood, so that is my last post on baptism. All yours.

  154. Monty says:

    When we come to refute them [the Gnostics], we will show in its proper place that this class of men have been instigated by Satan to a denial of that baptism which is regeneration to God. Thus, they have renounced the whole faith. For the baptism instituted by the visible Jesus was for the remission of sins.” St Irenaeus (circa 180)

    Not condemning anyone who feels otherwise, just ran across this quotation and found it interesting from a guy who was raised Baptist and converted to Lutheranism because he researched the ECF and couldn’t find one quote where any of them referred to baptism as symbol that pointed backwards,(called it a late teaching by reformers) but all tied baptism to the remission of sins. Specifically John 3:3-5

  155. Grace says:

    Irenaeus is recognized as a saint by the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church.

    The Catholic Church believes in transubstantiation which is the teaching that the bread and the wine used in the sacrament of the Eucharist is changed, they believe the bread and wine literally changes into the flesh and the blood of Jesus. There is not any ECF who denied transubstantiation before the year 500 A.D.

    “Christ has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own body, from which he gives increase unto our bodies.” St. Irenaeus, 180 A.D

    “When, therefore, the mixed cup [wine and water] and the baked bread receives the Word of God and becomes the Eucharist, the body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is eternal life, flesh which is nourished by the body and blood of the Lord, and is in fact a member of him?” St. Irenaeus, 180 A.D.

    “Come together in common, one and all without exception in charity, in one faith and in one Jesus Christ, who is of the race of David according to the flesh, the son of man, and the Son of God, so that with undivided mind you may obey the bishop and the priests, and break one Bread which is the medicine of immortality and the antidote against death, enabling us to live forever in Jesus Christ.” St. Ignatius, 110 A.D.

    “Wherever the bishop appears, there let the people be; as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful to baptize or give communion without the consent of the bishop. On the other hand, whatever has his approval is pleasing to God. Thus, whatever is done will be safe and valid.” St. Ignatius, 110 A.D.

    “Not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.” Justin Marty, 150 A.D.

    The Catholic Church believes in the holiness of Mary the mother of Jesus from tradition set by Irenaeus. Irenaeus sets out a forthright account of Mary’s role in the economy of salvation. Even though Eve had Adam for a husband, she was still a virgin. By disobeying, Eve became the cause of death for herself and for the whole human race. In the same way Mary, though she had a husband, was still a virgin, and by obeying, she became the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race.

    Does the CofC practice all the traditions from the ECF’s?

  156. Skip says:

    Ray, Actually there is a connection between having the spirit and belonging to Christ.
    Romans 8:9 “And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.”
    I assume that the obverse is true such that if someone has the Spirit he must belong to Christ. This begs the question, is there anyone in the Bible who had the spirit before being baptized?

  157. Skip says:

    Some scriptures proving salvation comes by “Believing”.
    John 3:16 “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”
    John 3:18 “Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.”
    John 3:36 “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life”
    John 5:24 “I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life.”
    John 7:38 “Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, streams of living water will flow from within him.” (Cornelius did this)
    I understand all the baptism scriptures starting in Acts 2 but these scriptures in John stand alone and shed light on the overall subject of salvation.

  158. Jay Guin says:

    Monty,

    The necessity of baptism was universally taught among believers until Zwingli and Calvin. John 3:5 was often a proof text. I personally happily concede that it has always been God’s intent that converts be baptized for remission of sins by immersion and that the Spirit and its blessings, including justification, be received concurrently with water baptism — so that baptism is in both water and the Spirit and yet only “one baptism”.

    The question is whether God will grant grace to those who are improperly baptized in all innocence but have a genuine faith and penitence.

    The Law taught that those who take the Passover when ceremonially unclean are to be put to death, but when Hezekiah reinstituted the Passover after it had been neglected for generations, God did not punish those who took the Passover without being cleansed in ignorance. (2 Chron 30)

    It’s ultimately about the character of God. What kind of a God is he? What are his purposes? And I think he’s the father running toward the Prodigal Son with open arms, contrary to all societal rules and expectations — a society in which honor demanded that the father make the son come to him, prostrate himself, and beg — because it is more important that his son be brought back into his family and that the Father’s love be displayed than that the rules be followed.

  159. Jay Guin says:

    Skip and Ray,

    Actually, there’s more in Rom 8 on point —

    (Rom 8:9-11 ESV) 9 You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. 10 But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness. 11 If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.

    This seems to clearly say that the possession of the indwelling Spirit means you’re saved and that not having the Spirit means you’re not saved.

  160. Jay Guin says:

    Grace,

    The conservative Churches of Christ use the ECFs to “prove” instruments sinful and to define Sunday as the day of assembly and the Lord’s Supper. However, they ignore the ECFs when inconvenient. Hence, Clement of Alexandria is often cited for his opposition to instruments, but rarely for his reason. He rejected instruments because they were used by the military! Clement was a pacifist.

    Not a single ECF uses the Regulative Principle (lack of authority) as a reason to reject the instrument. And so we agree with their conclusions but not their reasoning — hardly a convincing argument.

  161. Jay Guin says:

    Ray,

    There once was a sect in the Churches of Christ who insisted on baptism in Living Water, presumably based at least in part on John 4. They likely also knew that the Jewish rabbis insisted on living water for a mikveh when physically possible. If you believe Christian baptism is an extension of the mikveh practices of the First Century Jews, it makes some sense.

    As a result, a number of old Church of Christ buildings were built near streams, and the stream was rerouted through the baptistry.

    It’s easy to imagine that the shift from being baptized in a creek to baptism in a baptistry was seen as “change” and a repudiation of safe practices going back for centuries of baptizing in streams and creeks. Hence, churches built baptistries but brought the creek to the building!

  162. Jay Guin says:

    Ray wrote,

    To blame unbaptized converts rather than unbaptizing evangelists is to place blame wrongly. God knows who is at fault when sin is committed. He will surely not judge wrongly. Nor should we do so.

    Amen and amen! This is my position exactly! What is it that you think we disagree about?

  163. Jay Guin says:

    Skip and all,

    NT Wright points out in Paul and the Faithfulness of God that sometimes the Greek says we “believe into” Jesus or the like. So I’ve been digging into my Greek resources.

    (Rom 4:9 ESV) Is this blessing then only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? For we say that faith was counted to Abraham as righteousness. [Greek: counted Abraham faith into righteousness]

    (Rom 5:2 ESV) Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

    (Col 2:5 ESV) For though I am absent in body, yet I am with you in spirit, rejoicing to see your good order and the firmness of your faith in Christ. [Greek: the firmness into Christ your faith]

    (2Ti 3:15 ESV) and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. [Greek: into salvation through faith in Christ Jesus]

    And famously in CoC circles,

    (Rom 10:10 KJV) For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. [Greek: into salvation]

    And even more famously,

    (Act 2:38 ESV) And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in [Greek: into] the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    In each case, “into” is the Greek preposition EIS, which is the same preposition found in the several “baptized into Christ” passages.

    As a result, it certainly seems normative for confession, faith, and baptism to all be into righteousness, forgiveness of sins, salvation all at once. The writer seems not the least concerned to say which comes first or what happens if someone gets runover by a chariot on the way to the Mediterranean for a baptism.

    That leaves us to fill in the blanks, not by preferring MY verses to YOUR verses, but by asking which outcome is most true to purposes and character of God as revealed in scripture.

  164. Larry Cheek says:

    Jay,
    Considering my background, it has been a challenge to learn that salvation can come before baptism. Some of the events in scripture that have helped is Cornelius and Saul, Cornelius and others in his household were definitely filled with the same Spirit that the those in the upper room were filled with, that was testified to by Peter. Saul on the other hand did not appear to receive the spirit. As you know many of us were indoctrinated with a theory that contended that they still were not saved until they were baptized, seeing the events that were described by Paul in Romans, all the actions there are described as having taken place when those were baptized. Between the time of his communication with Christ on the road and the time Ananias came to him, Saul if he was already saved appears to be the most stressed saved individual anyone could imagine. I have never heard anyone who has believed they received Christ, it is fully obvious that Saul had believed and repented when he encountered Jesus, explain that they encountered an event like Saul’s. Yet, as Ananias approached him he called him “brother Saul”.Which leads me to believe that Ananias understood through God’s message that he was already saved. These two events both may have been special and therefore do not follow the pattern exactly like it has been displayed in other conversions. Understanding the message that you are presenting, that men can receive Christ and be saved, prior to being baptized which does not render the act of baptism as unnecessary, is visibly seen in this situation, between the time that Saul met Jesus and the time that Ananias arrived, there was no man to administer baptism, there were no Christians there. I would not dare say that if Saul had died prior to Ananias arrival and his baptism that he would have been condemned.
    Actually, as I think back and ponder upon many of the arguments that have been used by both sides discussing baptism, both those that oppose baptism and those that contend that it saves have not used good Biblical exegesis for defining a Biblical answer to proposed atrocities.

    I also have another question, are all of the books from Acts to Revelation written to only Christians?
    While asking that question I realize that there are messages in those books that explain acts that are committed by the lost and the destination of those who commit those acts.

  165. Larry Cheek says:

    Charles,
    Even though you expressed that you were not going to post any more, I hope you will continue to read. I remember that Jesus had a similar problem as he was teaching so many of the audience left because he was telling them truths that they chose not to believe that he even asked his chosen if they would leave also. Those that left lost out.

  166. Skip says:

    Larry, while I am of the persuasion ,cited above, that some can be saved prior to baptism, I have studied out the “Brother Saul” angle. You will find several times in Acts where Jews are called brothers before their conversion. Peter called the crowd brothers in Acts 2 before telling them the gospel. They were Jewish brothers, not Christian brothers.

  167. Monty says:

    Jay,

    I appreciate your response. My issue hasn’t been so much about anything you have taught( I think we’re probably pretty close on the matter) but about what some on here were teaching (that baptism is purely symbolic) and points backwards and it is like looking at a picture of your trip to Hawaii after you return home. An “Ah, wasn’t it beautiful” kind of look back..

    My issue has always been what does the Scripture teach and what is a truer picture of how penitent believers responded to the good news after the resurrection. Many have had their say about what they believe baptism is, as I just mentioned. My post have said nothing about who God will save or won’t save or anything about what God will do or not do with those who are believers but because of a Protestant reaction to Catholicism have been taught that baptism isn’t essential in bringing a penitent believer into newness of life. God is God, and he always, always, does what is right. I can’t speak for God in hypothetical situations, like what if you’re in the desert and you die before you find water. ( I believe God is merciful). But, I’d also, personally, would just as soon have everyone saved if they were truly sorry for their sins, but it’s not up to me(thank goodness).

    I have a hard time loving my neighbor. I am grace dependent. But that doesn’t negate obedience to whatever God has commanded. Especially, something so easily complied with as baptism. I was taught once by a Baptist youth pastor that baptism wasn’t necessary to be saved. Thankfully, I didn’t listen to him but listened to the scriptures. I could never in good conscience teach another soul, “Hey, you don’t need baptism.” I would stress Jesus like Peter did on Pentecost and when the question is raised what shall I do? I would say what Peter said on Pentecost. Some on here would say anything but that. If someone said to me, “here is water why can’t I be baptized” after they were obviously taught about Jesus and baptism . I wouldn’t say, “well you could do it to show your already saved or to join our denomination.” I would say what Philip did, “If you believe with all your heart you may.” If I was teaching lost souls in the middle of the night, say 2AM, and they came to faith in Jesus, I would take them the same hour of the night and baptize them like Paul and Silas did, and not wait till a more convenient time to get every body wet or when fellow church members were convened. I don’t think some on here would do the same.

    I do find it interesting that I ran across (three that I know of) on your list of progressive COfC blog roll that came out in the past week or so, saying, they believe baptism to be essential. I have to say this surprised me somewhat, in a good way.

    Jesus saves, God saves, faith saves, confession saves, repentance saves, baptism saves, the blood saves, belief saves, the word saves, obedience saves. I agree with all of those things because the Bible teaches it to be so. It’s up to good exegesis to find harmony among the salvation passages and not pit certain ones against others or to even deny some. Surely the context gives us the way that each one saves. Who am I to cut out any of those because they don’t fit my agenda?

  168. Skip says:

    Upon reading baptism scriptures a friend gave me in 1974, I was baptized around 11 P.M. at the local CoC. About 10 people witnessed it. I was so relieved and joyful. That being said, I don’t pit faith scriptures against baptism scriptures. I figure that they all fit together even though in places they appear to contradict.

  169. Larry Cheek says:

    Monty and Skip,
    Amen, Amen.
    I believe that we have allowed op-poser’s of baptism to distort the Bible view so drastically that many of us even became confused.

  170. Skip says:

    Larry, I still believe that people can be saved without baptism as we understand it. I believe once a person understands they should respond accordingly.

  171. Grace says:

    Larry, please don’t call me and other Christians “opposers of baptism” we are not. You sound like a little kid throwing a tantrum. We do not distort the Bible, we are zealous to live our lives by His greatest commandments to love Him and to love other people. Myself and other Christians who believe we are saved by the grace of God through faith in Jesus not by any works to earn salvation, we read and study the Bible, and that is the reason we are solid about what we believe, just as much so if not more so than you.

  172. Alabama John says:

    Why we hear so much difference in our thinking on baptism is because of the teaching in the past by the COC. Most COC teach the same today and a few like this site differ.

    After a sermon on baptism we left feeling so sorry for our friends and loved ones that were not baptized as preached and just knew they were to burn in hell for differing with our correct understanding. Only exception was the mentally off folks. Not having knowledge was no excuse nor was no water not available or other excetions written here. All were to burn in hell.

    Funerals were no exception and many a COC loved one who died had a sermon preached over their casket stating they were in hell suffering right now for their disobedience.

    No wonder with that background this topic gets a lot of posts. We here are differing so much from the COC teaching. I wonder where this will lead us that believe as we do. Will the COC come to our thinking or will we leave?

    Our COC preacher will not see his own mother and father at his services because they will not come see and hear him preaching this in their minds, error.

    Where will we, the COC be in 10 years? For judging so, in the hereafter?

    Only God knows.

  173. Ray Downen says:

    Skip suggests that if we who are “in Christ” possess the Spirit, then perhaps all who possessed the Spirit (at any time, any place) must be “in Christ.” But that doesn’t logically follow. Jesus says only those will be in His Kingdom who are reborn “of water and spirit.” When Peter invited seekers to enter the Kingdom he said what was needed was repentance (a spiritual change of masters) and baptism (in water as commanded by the Master).

    Many had spiritual experiences in years long before the church began. They were not “in Christ” as those are who are born again of water and spirit. Some imagine Jesus was speaking of the Holy Spirit when He told Nicodemus about the new birth of water and spirit. I think that’s a serious misunderstanding. Peter promised that those who had been born again by repenting and being baptized would THEN receive the Spirit. Obviously then, the spiritual experience involved in becoming a Christian is not the same experience which FOLLOWS the new birth of water and spirit. So Jesus didn’t speak of a new birth of water and the Holy Spirit.

    No, I’m sure that some have spiritual experienes who are NOT “in Christ.” So I don’t agree that it’s true that everyone who “feels the Spirit” is thereby made a member of the Kingdom of Christ. And it’s sure that the promise is that God will gift with His Spirit those who DO repent and are baptized. There are many spirits in this world, and many who have spiritual experiences totally apart from Jesus and HIS Spirit.

  174. Ray Downen says:

    Skip suggests that verses in John which speak of the truth that salvation comes by faith in Jesus as the Christ mean that salvation is by faith ALONE. But none of the quoted verses speak of faith ALONE. There is no question that it takes faith in Jesus as the Christ in order to be saved. NO one in apostolic writings who writes about this truth ever claims it’s by faith ALONE.

  175. Ray Downen says:

    Jay suggests Jesus will save ones who are not baptized even though He commands that all are to BE baptized. Jay explains

    It’s ultimately about the character of God. What kind of a God is he? What are his purposes? And I think he’s the father running toward the Prodigal Son with open arms, contrary to all societal rules and expectations — a society in which honor demanded that the father make the son come to him, prostrate himself, and beg — because it is more important that his son be brought back into his family and that the Father’s love be displayed than that the rules be followed.

    What Jay doesn’t explain is why Jesus would make a rule and then not expect it to be obeyed. Jesus DID command that we who tell others about Him are to BAPTIZE each new believer. Many are now claiming baptism isn’t really necessary. Jay is suggesting Jesus will rush to welcome into His kingdom ones who are NOT reborn of water and spirit. Is that really what we should be thinking? That what Jesus says is negotiable or ignorable?

  176. Ray Downen says:

    Jay comments well

    This seems to clearly say that the possession of the indwelling Spirit means you’re saved and that not having the Spirit means you’re not saved.

    And how does the Bible say a person is to receive the Spirit? See Acts 2:38!

  177. Ray Downen says:

    I was pleased to read what Jay wrote:

    Ray wrote,

    To blame unbaptized converts rather than unbaptizing evangelists is to place blame wrongly. God knows who is at fault when sin is committed. He will surely not judge wrongly. Nor should we do so.

    Amen and amen! This is my position exactly! What is it that you think we disagree about?

    I’d just as soon not disagree at all, of course! But I’m suggesting that some of our brothers dream that Jesus didn’t really MEAN that entrance into His Kingdom was through a new birth of water and spirit. They imagine that some other way will do instead of the ONE WAY of obeying the gospel. So they suggest that baptism (the new birth of water) is NOT really necessary, that faith and repentance will do. I figure anyone who is physically able to be baptized is taking an unnecessary risk by hoping to be saved despite ignoring that Jesus calls for seekers to BE baptized. I think we need to urge obedience to the LORD. To suggest He will save regardless of whether we obey the gospel is taking a big chance, in my opinion.

  178. Larry Cheek says:

    Grace,
    I had no intention to single you out or even others whom I don’t even know. How was I to know that when these discussions about baptism began pointing into another direction than what you believed that you would not do as I have, modified my beliefs to coincide with the concept that connect the largest majority of the pieces of the puzzle of understanding. I was not aware that you would not understand that I too do not believe that baptism is a work that will save anyone, in fact that is exactly the message that I am trying to make you understand. The Stories in the Bible do not relate to baptism as a “work” that would save you or anyone else. I mentioned that the “opposers of baptism” coined that concept to create that resentment for baptism. Could we guess who would have an advantage if they could entice men to disobey a command that our Lord has given? Each and every person has an obligation to study and learn God’s Word for themselves. All discussions that we can have should strive to be a learning tool for us. Many of us would still be under the influence of a lot of false teaching except we have been challenged by others to take a second look and restudy what we had been taught. I would hope that you could show us areas where we may have misunderstood scriptures, so we can reevaluate what we stand upon.
    As we look back into the beginnings of the teachings of Christ it is heavily documented that the Jews did not readily accept the teachings of the Messiah whom they refused to see fit all of the prophesies about him from the very scriptures they had studied all of their lives. We know there were a few that made the connection and followed the Savior.
    My challenge to you is put all of what you see that we have disagreed with you to the test of the scriptures, while doing that remember that the sources that have taught you what you now believe may not stand with you at judgement, the scriptures will. When you find something out of place that we have said confront us with it, just refrain from using sources other than the scriptures.

  179. Larry, I will be around. Just through re-re-treading the baptism argument on this thread.

  180. Ray Downen says:

    Larry suggests that Saul was already saved before he was baptized:

    Yet, as Ananias approached him he called him “brother Saul”.Which leads me to believe that Ananias understood through God’s message that he was already saved.

    A careful reading of the text might notice that Ananias told Saul to be baptized “and wash away your sin.” No, Saul was not saved on the road. He was not saved until his sins were washed away in baptism. As for Cornelius and his household, a sign was given to convince Peter and all Jewish Christians that Gentiles could be saved by Jesus by being obedient to the gospel. That’s why Peter then BAPTIZED Cornelius and his household as Jesus had commanded was to be done. Salvation follows baptism. It never precedes it. I’m sorry you have become confused about whether or not obeying Jesus is necessary. HE commands that we are to tell others and then BAPTIZE those who believe in Him. Salvation is promised to those who are born again of water and spirit. Peter explains how the new birth occurs. It’s by a person repenting and being baptized in water as Jesus commands is to be done.

  181. Ray Downen says:

    Skip writes well. He says

    Larry, I still believe that people can be saved without baptism as we understand it. I believe once a person understands they should respond accordingly.

    Jesus commands baptism for every new believer. Paul says we are baptized “INTO Christ” (Galatians 3:27). Jesus says a new birth of WATER and spirit is essential for entry into His Kingdom. Peter says that new birth is by repenting and being baptized (in water). Yet you imagine that people can be saved without obeying what Jesus requires? That doesn’t harmonize with much else you’ve written!

  182. Skip says:

    Ray, you are certainly entitled to your opinions.

  183. Ray Downen says:

    Grace doesn’t want to be told that by disputing with Jesus about the need for baptism she is disputing with Jesus. He requires it. She doesn’t. But she surely doesn’t like to be told of her danger in disputing with the Lord!

  184. Skip says:

    Ray, You have selective amnesia. I have commented exhaustively and have quoted numerous scriptures proving my position. You are entitled to your position.

  185. Ray Downen says:

    Larry has it right! He says

    My challenge to you is put all of what you see that we have disagreed with you to the test of the scriptures, while doing that remember that the sources that have taught you what you now believe may not stand with you at judgement, the scriptures will. When you find something out of place that we have said confront us with it, just refrain from using sources other than the scriptures.

    It’s unfortunate that some suppose what Jesus says is negotiable, that possibly He didn’t MEAN what He said. So they imagine that all it takes to be born again of water and spirit is to pray a “sinner’s prayer.” They suppose that changing their mind is all Jesus calls for sinners to do.

    And how nice it would be if we all could agree that the Bible doesn’t MEAN what it says. That we can add an “alone” or “only” when the need for faith is spoken of and then people can be saved by faith ALONE. Some think they can ignore Acts 2:38 since it doesn’t agree with what THEY want to say is necessary for the remission of sins. And they surely CAN ignore it here on earth while they’re alive. When we face the final judgment, we’ll be judged by what Jesus DID say not what we changed His words to say.

    Are we all “old meanies” when we call on everyone to honor Jesus as LORD? Some seem to think so. We have no right to promise salvation on any basis other than the promise and words of the One who can save. He never promised to save because of faith ALONE. Salvation comes through obeying the gospel. In Acts we read of the gospel being preached and if we are willing we will see how it was responded to. It was vastly different from what many today are doing and thinking they’re pleasing God!

  186. Skip says:

    Ray, don’t know your intended audience in your tirade but for me, nothing Jesus said is negotiable.

  187. Monty says:

    AJ said,

    “Funerals were no exception and many a COC loved one who died had a sermon preached over their casket stating they were in hell suffering right now for
    their disobedience.”

    I’ve never heard of such. Glad I missed that type of abuse in my past experiences in my neck of the CofC woods. Most people round my parts get preached into heaven,not out of, no matter what lifestyle they lived. 🙂

  188. Skip says:

    Ray said, “Salvation comes through obeying the gospel. In Acts we read of the gospel being preached and if we are willing we will see how it was responded to.”
    Four points:
    1) You insist on being a stickler for following the scriptures and then you throw out the concept of “obeying the gospel” yet there are no scriptures commanding us to “obey the gospel”. This is CoC terminology.
    2) The word “gospel” is used in the “gospels” but it isn’t used at all from Acts on. Thus if you want to invoke the concept then you should use the term in the sense it was used in the gospels and in that case Jesus did talk about salvation in many places without mentioning baptism at all.
    3) There are many scriptures that portray the gospel as the good news of salvation through Jesus Christ by believing in Him. One scripture in particular is John 3:36 where it says,”Whoever believes in the Son HAS eternal life”.
    4) Now I understand baptism and have baptized scores of individuals over the years. I have taught them through all the baptism scriptures to help them understand the reason. But I am also of the persuasion that the good news is about Jesus and salvation through him. The focus is on Jesus. However, over the years the CoC talked way more about baptism than about the “gospel”. This observation is coming from being a former member of many Churches of Christ over several states.

    I am reacting to our prior preoccupation with baptism and get the focus back on Jesus Christ where it should be. We are converting people to a savior not to a ceremony.

  189. Grizz says:

    Skip,

    (1) Obeying the gospel is a use of terms that can be found in 2 Thessalonians 1:8 …

    New American Standard Version
    2 Thessalonians 1:8
    “6 For after all it is only just for God to repay with affliction those who afflict you, 7 and to give relief to you who are afflicted and to us as well when the Lord Jesus will be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels in flaming fire, 8 dealing out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus. 9 These will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power, 10 when He comes to be glorified in His saints on that day, and to be marveled at among all who have believed—for our testimony to you was believed. “

    If you are going to criticize someone for inventing a phrase not found in the Bible, you should first be absolutely certain that it is not actually found in the Bible. In this case, you goofed up and made claims that are clearly false.

    (2) In just one concordance (not an exhaustive one) in my NIV Thompson Chain-Reference Bible, I found the following verses listed where the word “gospel” is used in the NT AFTER the last verse in John’s gospel, which is usually placed just prior to the book of Acts, in the position of the 4th and last of the NT gospel accounts of Jesus’ life.
    Romans 1:16, 15:16, 15:20
    1 Corinthians 1:17, 9:12, 9:14, 9:16, 15:1, 15:2
    2 Corinthians 4:4, 9:13
    Galatians 1:7
    Ephesians 6:15
    Philippians 1:27
    Colossians 1:23
    1 Thessalonians 2:4
    2 Thessalonians 1:8
    2 Timothy 1:10
    and
    Revelation 14:6

    There are probably more, but this should serve well enough as proof of your 2nd erroneous claim. At least you are proving consistent, which is good. And yet you are proving consistently wrong, which is bad. Strike 2.

    (3) Mark 16:16 also says that he who believes shall be saved. It also says he who is baptized shall be saved. Do you claim that these are mutually exclusive things, belief and immersion???
    Just a thought here – when you pit Bible scripture against Bible scripture and try to imply your Bible scriptures are stronger than someone else’s Bible scripture references, you only prove the folly of your logic. God does NOT EVER contradict Himself, as many, many Bible scriptures attest.
    Strike 3. . . Your logic strikes out, Skip. 0 for 3 puts your accuracy quotient at 0% in this recent comment.

    What about your #4? How does an anecdotal story affect one’s veracity? It can either help or hurt, depending on the usage.

    You seem to think that having been an experienced baptizer and a member of several churches of Christ in several states lends weight to your arguments. And yet in this very reply from a man who has been a member of churches of Christ in several states and a few foreign countries while on missions, a man who has also baptized people in each of those states and countries during his years in those places, ALL of them as a result of studying who Jesus was and is and will be – and NOT delving into excessive examinations of baptism passages any more than faith, discipleship, knowing Jesus, counting the cost, what it means to be His follower and what it will most assuredly cost a faithful disciple. We began by hearing what Jesus said through the accounts in the 4 gospels and proceeded on to the claims He and others made about Him. We looked into the miracles (though usually only 5 to 7 of them, depending on which gospel was being used as home base for the study) and considered how many kinds of miracles He did and what each kind had to say about Him. I would venture to say that many of those whom I had the privilege of assisting in their New Birth into God’s family knew as much or more than most preaching school and/or Bible college graduates could tell you about Jesus.

    Now we have your story, Skip, held over against my story. Which one is better? Frankly, I think neither of us would hold a candle to John-Mark’s story, despite Paul’s opinion of the man’s work ethic. The thing about John-Mark and his adventures with Paul and Barnabas and then, later, only Barnabas is that he was knocked down, but he didn’t let that be his final word. He got up again … like that song, “I get knocked down, but I get up again – they’re never gonna keep me down!” John-Mark is the very epitome of a disciple who trusted Jesus way more than he trusted himself. People who trust themselves believe in their failures. They believe their failures are the final word. They have nowhere else to look but to themselves to try to save themselves because their belief is in themselves.

    People who trust in Jesus can and often do fail as often as those who trust themselves. The difference is that failure is not final because Jesus never leaves them in the dust. Their trust is that Jesus will see them through the valley of defeat and repeated failures despite their amazing variety of ways to fail. Jesus will overcome and help them to tag along as He does. He makes them into overcomers … because they get knocked down, but they get up again and vow to never let anyone keep them down, but instead to hold onto the hand of the Lord they trust to see them through every challenge.

    So while I agree with your final point, Skip, that we must lead people to trust Jesus so much that they lay down their lives for Him to use any way He wants to … I do not agree that talking about baptism (which I did in as much or more depth than Jay has on this blog only once in the last 34 years – with a man who was coming to Christ out of the Mennonite traditions) is always a bad thing. And we also agree that baptism is most certainly NOT the only thing.

    My issue, Skip, is that none of your 4 points can stand the scrutiny they MUST encounter here. Not to worry, though, I have had some of my genius moments torn apart here, too. And it isn’t fatal. WOO HOO!!

    Have a blessed day … I pray you were able to make as much of the day as you possibly could, as I did.

    Grizz

  190. Larry Cheek says:

    Skip,
    The word “Gospel” is used 21 times Matt – Acts and is used 80 times Romans – Revelation (KJV). I hope that you just had a loss of memory as you made the statement about not used in Romans – Revelation. Seems to me that would be a very odd mistake for someone with a good working knowledge of the scriptures.
    I do not believe that Jesus ever contradicted himself as you are alluding to in this statement, “Jesus did talk about salvation in many places without mentioning baptism at all.” You are attempting to disconnect baptism from Jesus’ comments just because he did not state it plainly enough for you to see it in a few verses. Yet, he was the one, in fact he was the only one in scripture that ever commanded his followers to baptize those who believe, and there is recorded in scriptures multiple thousands of believers who were baptized according to his instructions. Several thousand were baptized within the same day that they became believers.

  191. Royce Ogle says:

    Nice going Grizz. Can you site one place in the Bible where to “obey the gospel” is connected to baptism? What is clear if you study the uses of “obey” and “disobey” and the dirivatives of those words is that to “obey” the gospel is to believe it and to ” disobey” is to not believe it.

    You “assisted” someone with the new birth? Wow! I thought that is a spiritual work done by God. (John 1:12,13)

    I had not planned to weigh in again on this thread but couldn’t resist.

  192. Skip says:

    I guess I am busted. Everyone, thanks for the help. My concordance does not have “obey the gospel anywhere. My point on baptisms is that I have seen for decades the CoC preoccupation with dipping in water OVER the actual focus on Jesus.

  193. laymond says:

    Royce, the very first act of obeying the gospel is being baptized into Christ.

  194. David Himes says:

    No, Laymond, the only act of obedience is surrendering your personal will, to the will of God. That is the whole point. Giving up one’s self, to follow the example of Jesus. Everything else follows that. Even baptism

  195. laymond says:

    David, we see things a little differently I don’t see surrendering to God as a command, I see surrendering to God as a personal decision . And if you are truly dedicated to following Jesus, which in my opinion is not a command but a personal decision, then we begin to obey the gospel by doing what God commands of us through his word delivered by his messenger Jesus Christ. It seems to be reasonable to me that Jesus’ first command would be “be baptized for remission of sins” It seems to me that the first example Jesus set for his followers was “baptism” even Jesus was baptized before he started his delivery of the word to the people. So I see it as necessary for us to begin a discipleship of Jesus, why would we not start our journey through this world as he started his?

  196. Grace says:

    Romans 10:16 “But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our report?” When any receive and believe the gospel they have obeyed. But when they refuse what the gospel says about Jesus, it is their own sin: they have not obeyed the gospel.

  197. Ray Downen says:

    Skip suggests that obeying the gospel is not defined or suggested as a command in apostolic writings. I had mentioned the need for people who seek salvation to obey the gospel.

    1) You insist on being a stickler for following the scriptures and then you throw out the concept of “obeying the gospel” yet there are no scriptures commanding us to “obey the gospel”. This is CoC terminology.

    I used Bible Gateway to search for “obey the gospel” and it returned:
    2 Thessalonians 1:8
    He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.
    2 Thessalonians 1:7-9 (in Context) 2 Thessalonians 1 (Whole Chapter) Other Translations
    1 Peter 4:17
    For it is time for judgment to begin with God’s household; and if it begins with us, what will the outcome be for those who do not obey the gospel of God?
    1 Peter 4:16-18 (in Context) 1 Peter 4 (Whole Chapter)

    I agree there is no COMMAND for sinners to obey the gospel. But I see warning about those who do NOTobey the gospel. Perhaps Skip is wrong in suggesting it’s all right to not OBEY the gospel.

  198. Ray Downen says:

    Skip suggests that “gospel” is not used in apostolic writings

    2) The word “gospel” is used in the “gospels” but it isn’t used at all from Acts on. Thus if you want to invoke the concept then you should use the term in the sense it was used in the gospels and in that case Jesus did talk about salvation in many places without mentioning baptism at all.

    I didn’t search for use of the word “gospel” in writings after the gospels themselves, but I just now sent a note which shows Paull using the word “gospel” in connection with the necessity for seekers after salvation to OBEY it. What’s this about the word not being used except in the gospels themselves?

  199. Ray Downen says:

    Skip may wnat us in Christ’s church to quit speaking about baptism, but I think he is only suggesting that we need to preach first and foremost about JESUS and His love and His invitation. Skip writes:

    I am reacting to our prior preoccupation with baptism and get the focus back on Jesus Christ where it should be. We are converting people to a savior not to a ceremony.

    And surely we all can see that the gospel is not all about baptism and IS all about Jesus. Its when seekers want to RESPOND TO the gospel that we must always echo Acts 2:38’s message telling what seekers MUST do in order to receive remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit.

  200. Skip says:

    Ray, I don’t think you saw my previous post and apology. I used my concordance to find “obey” and “gospel” together and nothing came up. I since have been corrected soundly by several bloggers. I apologized for jumping the gun and not doing a more thorough search to include “obedience” and “gospel”. I stood and still stand corrected and will promise never to go down that particular path again. Please accept my apology again.

  201. Ray Downen says:

    Grizz testifies to truth and how love leads. Good for Grizz!

  202. Ray Downen says:

    And I just now see Skip’s good note sent at 11:30 today. Good for Skip!

  203. Skip says:

    Ray, Actually I have never suggested to stop speaking about baptism. I was baptized. I teach others to be baptized. I understand Acts 2:38, Romans 6:4, I Peter 3:27 etc… I have only protested our seeming obsession with how baptism is the ultimate goal when in fact baptism is merely a start and pales in comparison to a lifetime of walking in Jesus. I have argued that many in the Christian world latch on to faith only because of the plethora of scriptures on salvation by faith where there is no mention of baptism. Whereas we historically have argued baptism with hardly a nod to faith and reliance on Jesus. Churches of Christ are proud to baptize 6 year olds who still believed in Santa Clause. It is sufficient to dunk a child under water while missing the much bigger topic of making Jesus Lord and Savior. We somehow need to understand the different perspectives in order to love and understand believers who have a different perspective while reading their Bible.

  204. Ray Downen says:

    Royce sees no connection with obeying and the gospel. Yet JESUS commanded that we who carry the gospel to others are to BAPTIZE them. There is a strong connection between gospel and obeying. It’s we who love Jesus who are commanded to baptize EACH NEW believer. Royce wrote:

    Can you site one place in the Bible where to “obey the gospel” is connected to baptism? What is clear if you study the uses of “obey” and “disobey” and the dirivatives of those words is that to “obey” the gospel is to believe it and to ” disobey” is to not believe it.

    When the apostles on the Day of Pentecost were asked, “What must (shall) we DO?” were they not asking what was necessary in order to OBEY the gospel?

    They were not told they needed to believe as the thing necessary for obeying the gospel. They were informed that the gospel called for men and women to turn to JESUS as Lord (repent) and to be baptized as HE had commanded. Only by ignoring Acts 2:38 can anyone affirm that obeying the gospel is by believing it. A changed mind is good. A changed heart is demanded, now loving Jesus and seeking to please Him. And a change in physical being is called for by the command of Jesus that new believers are to be baptized. It’s granted that the command is not to seekers to BE baptized. It’s to believers to BAPTIZE each new believer.

  205. Ray Downen says:

    Good for Laymond. He points out the stated need for new believers to be baptized. But the very FRST requirement is to TURN to Jesus as Lord. Baptism follows immediately. Acts 2:38 is ignored by many but is key to understanding conversion to Jesus as Lord. Seekers MUST repent and be baptized if they seek remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. Both are promised as a result of a new birth of water and spirit (repenting and being baptized).

  206. Ray Downen says:

    David Himes realizes the need for sinners to repent. He writes

    the only act of obedience is surrendering your personal will, to the will of God. That is the whole point. Giving up one’s self, to follow the example of Jesus. Everything else follows that. Even baptism

    But we note that the apostolic instruction is not only “repent” but is “repent AND BE BAPTIZED.” (Acts 2:38). Repentance is NOT “the only act of obedience” seekers are told is necessary in order to be added to the Lord’s church and the Lamb’s book of life. I wish David had not said “only” when pointing out the need for seekers to turn to Jesus as Lord. The new birth is NOT complete when only the heart is changed. Jesus COMMANDS baptism for new believers.

  207. Ray Downen says:

    Laymond suggests,

    I don’t see surrendering to God as a command, I see surrendering to God as a personal decision . And if you are truly dedicated to following Jesus, which in my opinion is not a command but a personal decision, then we begin to obey the gospel by doing what God commands of us through his word delivered by his messenger Jesus Christ.

    We see what we look for sometimes. Repentance is indeed COMMANDED. It’s something that seekers must DO. It’s not done to them or for them. It’s done BY them, an action, a change of desires, a surrendering to Jesus as Lord.

    So of course it IS a personal decision, just as Laymond names it. And it’s a CHANGE of masters, of goals, of desires. It’s a vital part of becoming a follower of Jesus as Lord. We surely need to speak often of the CHANGE that’s called for in order to become a followers of Jesus. We must turn away from sin and love of self. We must turn to Jesus as our LORD, our GUIDE, our MASTER. It’s not just a suggestion. It’s an act essential to new birth into Christ.

  208. Ray Downen says:

    skip well says,

    baptism is merely a start and pales in comparison to a lifetime of walking in Jesus.

    , and I agree. But a majority of present-day Christians ignore Acts 2:38 and Matthew 28:18-20. We speak up to protest people supposing they’re saved by faith alone when that is obviously a false teaching yet is held by many who think they’re speaking truth about Jesus and eternal life. We do well, and have long done well in Churches of Christ and Christian Churches/Churches of Christ to reply to seekers as the apostles did in Acts 2:38.

    Living for Jesus is why we’re born anew and brought INTO Christ after turning to Him as Lord and being baptized INTO Him and into His body on earth, His church. There’s no need to compare the life which follows with the birth itself. Until a person is BORN, they’re not alive. But what we speak about when we describe the life of a friend is not how they were born but how they lived. Skip is right that we should speak and write much more about Christian LIVING than about becoming a Christian. We speak about the birth because many who think they WERE born again of water and spirit are not in fact yet born! Somehow we need to better understand the new BIRTH than many do!

  209. Monty says:

    Preacher or teacher addressing a penitent believer after sharing the good news about Jesus with him. – “Now, you don’t really have to do what I’m about to command you to do, but I’m commanded to baptize you in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit by Jesus’ explicit command, so could you help a brother out?”

    How weird is that? The teachers are commanded to command something(baptism) that doesn’t even have to be obeyed. Imagine Peter on Pentecost, that great crowd was pricked in their hearts and they cried out, “Men and brethren what shall we do?” Peter says, “You guys, repent and be baptized for the remission of sins and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, but you don’t really have to be baptized in order to receive remission of sins and the Spirit, if you don’t want to, it’s optional for you guys, it’s just something I’m inspired to say by the Holy Spirit and I’ve been commanded to do by Jesus himself.” But hey, it’s OK, don’t worry about it. Your obedience to what I just commanded is optional and in no way effects your salvation. It’s just required of me to command it.

    I would of loved to have seen the confused looks on their faces, had Peter preached that day like some on here talk. I really don’t see in scripture where anyone who actually believed on Jesus after the New Covenant began had any option, other than, be baptized, or be considered an unbeliever. My how things have changed. Why? Because baptism has been severed from any connection to the Good News message being preached. It has lost it’s purpose as the time and place where sins are removed(washed away), and as the time (immediately following) where those baptized receive a gift, the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    No doubt baptism has been improperly stressed in the past to the minimizing of taking up a cross and(or) being penitent. But for the life of me, by the remarks of some on here, there is still much teaching that needs to be done on the matter, of it’s purpose, it’s always close proximity to the first response by penitent believers, and to the necessity of obedience to the command that those preaching are supposed to give. Again, not optional.

  210. Grace says:

    Romans 10:16 “But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our report?” The Bible says when any receive and believe the gospel of Jesus they have obeyed the gospel. But when they refuse the gospel of Jesus, it is their own sin that they have not obeyed the gospel.

    Ray praises Laymond, does Ray not know that Laymond rejects the deity of Jesus? Laymond does not believe what the gospel tells us Who Jesus is, that Jesus is God in the flesh, Laymond denies the deity of Jesus coming as the Son of Man and is God with us. But Ray thinks Laymond is all good because Laymond believes being baptized saved him from his sins.

  211. Ray Downen says:

    John says,

    we’re only accountable to obey what we know.

    Yes, perhaps we’re only accountable to obey what we know. But ignorance is bliss and those who don’t know that fire burns may be dead before they learn about the nature of fire. Likewise many may die still ignorant of the fact that we are buried with Christ in baptism and raised up THEN into new life with Him. Who will be responsible for ones who die without being baptized because no one told them that’s how new birth of water and spirit occurs?

    We surely need to emphasize repentance no less than we teach about baptism. Christians should not live like pagans. Yet some who think they are Christians because they were baptized do not live like Jesus lived or love as Jesus loved and loves. Many “Christians” don’t realize they have a DUTY to tell others about Jesus and to so live that others who see Jesus living in THEM will also want to come to Jesus and find eternal life. We indeed do need to urge Christian LIVING at least as much as we urge those outside of Christ to come to Him to gain eternal life.

    Our churches should be filled with soul-winners who are telling others about Jesus and the good life He offers.

  212. Ray Downen says:

    We have to marvel that some suppose Jesus was just wasting His breath and His words when He gave the commission to His apostles. He commands that those who believe the gospel are to be BAPTIZED. He promises salvation to those who believe and ARE baptized. Some are wiser than He for they know that sinners are saved by faith alone. Matthew was there and heard what Jesus said. He reports that Jesus commanded that new believers were to be baptized by the ones who had told them about Jesus. And some think baptism isn’t important. And they dare to promise salvation based on faith ALONE, which James points out is dead.

  213. Alabama John says:

    Monty, the even better presentation for baptism is stating when one has been baptized and added to the church all that is necessary to obtain forgiveness for a sin is to sincerely pray and ask for it.

    If one has not been baptized, that person after sinning cannot obtain forgiveness and would have to be baptized and be added to the church before forgiveness would be given. Knowing many times there is not enough time before death to be baptized will cause serious thought for the person you are teaching.

    Better to practice good planning and be in the first category just in case and to have that insurance. Good closing invitation.

  214. Alabama John says:

    Ray, it is interesting that the church of God around here quotes Acts 2:38 almost as much as we do. I see it on their letterheads, e-mails, and in personal conversations. Their emphasis is put on the believe, repent and receiving the Holy Ghost which is the gift given for believing and repenting. Odd how such a short verse can cause such confusion isn’t it.

  215. Ray Downen says:

    It’s odd that the gift of the Spirit is promised to EVERY person who repents and is baptized, and yet some might suppose it is only given to ones who learn to babble. I don’t think the verse itself causes confusion. It enlightens those who seek truth and seek to learn from the Word rather than to find in the Word what they want to have been said.

  216. Grace says:

    The report spoke about is the gospel itself, what Jesus did is the gospel. We have faith in what Jesus did for us when He came as the Sacrifice to save us from our sins, as Paul says in Romans 10:17 “So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.”, and in 1 Corinthians 1:17 “For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect.”

    It is alarming to see that people in the CofC are so obsessed with baptism that Ray continues his tirade about baptism after he is told that Laymond, someone who attends a CofC, rejects the deity of Jesus being God in the flesh. It seems that Ray does think Laymond is all good since Laymond believes being baptized saved him from his sins.

  217. Grizz says:

    Royce, you wrote: “Can you site one place in the Bible where to “obey the gospel” is connected to baptism?

    What is clear if you study the uses of “obey” and “disobey” and the derivatives of those words is that to “obey” the gospel is to believe it and to ” disobey” is to not believe it.

    You “assisted” someone with the new birth? Wow! I thought that is a spiritual work done by God. (John 1:12,13) I had not planned to weigh in again on this thread but couldn’t resist.”

    I assume you read the passage in 2 Timothy. After all, you wrote that you believe obey = belief and disobey = disbelief or unbelief. I would suggest that you need to read more on the subject of what belief is and what obedience is. I would particularly suggest that you take a look at what Jesus taught in Matthew 21:28-32. Consider the two sons. What did they believe? What did they obey? Are belief and obedience interchangeable?

    Of course, that is just one passage. Another you might compare is found in Philippians 1:15-18 where it talks about two groups of preachers who were doing the same thing, but motivation was very different for each group. What part does love play in belief? What part does jealousy play in unbelief? How is it that those with love and those with jealousy BOTH could be obedient in proclaiming the gospel of Christ to the glory of God? Why wasn’t Paul ready to condemn the preaching done by the preachers motivated by envy/jealousy?

    There is much to be gained from knowing the nuances of BOTH obedience and belief and how they are distinct.

    Now, turning toward the mockery of your next statements … when Phillip baptized the Ethiopian official, did he not assist the man in being immersed into Christ? Why was it necessary for BOTH to go down into the water? Are you assuming that BOTH needed to be baptized? If so, where is the record of the Ethiopian baptizing Phillip? And if Phillip was not there to be immersed into Jesus, what does the passage in Acts 8:26-40 say about why he was there and what he did? Tell me, Royce, did Phillip assist the Ethiopian man in any way?

    Perhaps you have been present when a baby was being born, or perhaps not. I can tell you that I was there for the births of all 3 of my biological children and for the birthing of two of my grandchildren. With my kids’ births I even participated by tying off and cutting their umbilical cords as well as by coaching their mother throughout the labor process as I had been trained to do in Lamaze classes we took. With my grandkids I only watched. There our assistance was to be there with the mother, my step-daughter, to give comfort and moral support and to be advocates with the personnel serving in the delivery wards on our daughter’s behalf.

    The point, dear Royce, is that to some extent, more in some cases than in others, I have assisted in 5 physical births within my own family. I doubt anyone would deny that I have assisted in those births. So why do you take a mocking tone when I confess that I have assisted believers in their New Births because I was the baptizer? Is it because I called it “assist”-ing? Or do you say in the matter of physical births that every biological participant in the act of conception are the only ones who could possibly claim to have assisted in the births that usually follow? Do you so completely discount the work of the physicians or mid-wives often present that you claim they did not “assist” either? Do you believe a person needs no assistance to “be baptized”, but that they can do it for themselves and to themselves as if they are just taking a bath to wash their flesh? You are so ready to mock me should I guess you would mock such a person who claimed they baptized themselves as you do me?

    Perhaps you were just having fun and could not resist. Then if that is so, please consider this an explanation of your joviality to the uniniated.

    Blessings,

    Grizz

  218. Larry Cheek says:

    I hear many proclaim that Jesus is not preached enough and that baptism is over stressed. I will expose why many preachers teach on baptism so regularly. Think about it a little, in a church or assembly where almost all have already believed repented and been baptized, continual preaching on that subject connects with those in the audience in reinforcing that they have done the right thing and are safe. Those in the audience do not learn about more attributes they need to apply into their lives, therefore la la land. The preacher never has to worry about someone in the audience contesting accusing that he is teaching something that they disagree with, safety for the preacher, audience announces Amen, Amen, Amen. The exact same goes for those in the audience wanting the preacher to preach more fire and brimstone lessons, guess who is not supposed to have to worry about that problem, oh by the way there is nobody in the audience who has not committed to Christ.
    Then we are astonished about how little knowledge members of the church have about Christ, the Bible Stories and their abilities to share their knowledge in the scriptures with their neighbors.

    With that said listen to what the Bible states that an individual should learn while being taught about Jesus.
    (Acts 8:35 KJV) Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. 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? 37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. 38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.
    I have noticed that many translations leave verse 37 completely out, I guess though it really does not alter the final result.
    Philip started in the OT and there is no doubt he had described the act of baptism or the eunuch would not have reached this conclusion. So preaching Jesus also includes teaching baptism and according to the conclusion and Philip’s comments Philip must have believed that he had not stressed believing enough to feel certain that the eunuch understood that he had to have belief first.

  219. laymond says:

    Grace, I am not sure you know what the gospel is. The word gospel means “good news” the good news spoken of here is the truth, the truth spoken of here is the word of God. I don’t know where you find that Jesus was God in flesh, I do know where it is said that the WORD became flesh and where Jesus was the recipient of that word without measure, I believe this is spoken of happening immediately after his baptism. If I am wrong please show me (in scripture) just where it is that I fall short. I believe Jesus is referred to as truth.

  220. Ray Downen says:

    Laymond doesn’t read John 1:1-14 as carefully as he might or he would know that the apostle John declared that the Word BECAME flesh as the man Jesus of Nazareth. No, it doesn’t say this happened at the baptism. It happened prior to the birth. There’s no reason to misunderstand what John clearly teaches about the Word becoming the man. And in Revelation we learn that the man returned to being God’s WORD. Jesus is the Word of God, God the Son, God in the flesh.

  221. Grizz says:

    Laymond, I am not Grace, but perhaps you should revisit John’s gospel, chapter 1. Verse 14 connects verses 1-4 with Jesus … so that Jesus (the Word) who is God became flesh and dwelt among us as the only begotten (Son) of the Father (God). If you have any residual doubts about that, verses 16-18 tell us the Word is Jesus, in no uncertain terms.

    Jesus gives the Spirit without measure according to John 3:34, which says, “For he whom God has sent utters the words of God, FOR HE GIVES THE SPIRIT WITHOUT MEASURE.” Perhaps it was just a faulty memory. I do that sometimes, too … thinking a verse is worded a certain way when it is actually worded another. Also, if it matters, John 3 is an account of Jesus’ late night discussion with Nicodemus and then some questions John’s disciples asked about Jesus and John answered. This wasn’t right after Jesus’ baptism, but you can read about that in the last half of the first chapter of John.

    I hope that helps you see where you got it confused a bit.

    Grizz

  222. Jay Guin says:

    Laymond and others,

    I really don’t want to have a conversation disputing whether Jesus is God the Son — again. We’ve had that many times already. There’s no value in repeating those discussions.

    Grace,

    I, and the vast majority of Christendom, disagree with Laymond’s position on the nature of Jesus as Son of God. And as you can see, I’m not allowing that particular argument to be re-initiated. Laymond has had ample opportunity to persuade in the past, and now is not the time to restart that particular debate.

    However, that doesn’t mean that he can’t be correct on other subjects. To try to dispute his arguments by attacking his doctrinal stance on other matters is a form of ad hominem argument — attacking the man rather than his argument — and I have a long standing policy prohibiting ad hominem arguments.

  223. Royce Ogle says:

    http://gracedigest.com/2007/04/02/obey-the-gospel/ This post explains what it means to obey the gospel and to disobey it.

    Of course baptism is important. But, baptism is not “the” response to the gospel but rather “one” response to the gospel.

    Why is it that some people love Peter’s words in Acts 2 (…that is some of them) but are not so fond of his words later in Acts? Anything that does not neatly fit the traditional teaching of the coc about baptism is simply ignored, or a feeble attempt is made to explain it away. But, just so I’m clear here goes.

    Peter is sent by God to bring the good news about Jesus to the gentiles. (I assume most of us in this discussion are gentiles as well) Peter preaches Christ and this is what happened.

    43 To him all the prophets bear witness that EVERYONE WHO BELIEVES IN HIM RECEIVES FORGIVENESS OF SINS THROUGH HIS NAME.”44 While Peter was still saying these things, the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word. 45 And the believers from among the circumcised who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out even on the Gentiles. 46 For they were hearing them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter declared, 47 “Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have received the Holy Spirit JUST AS WE HAVE?” (Acts 10:43-47)

    Was Peter wrong in saying “everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins through His name? No, not at all. But, Peter is not done. Again he speaks in the next chapter. Following is Peter’s defense of baptizing gentiles. Read carefully what he says. It is shocking to some of you I’m sure.

    15 As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning. 16 And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ 17 If then God gave the same gift to them as he gave to us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God’s way?” 18 When they heard these things they fell silent. And they glorified God, saying, “Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life.”

    Peter said to the leaders of the church in Jerusalem “God gave them the same gift (Holy Spirit) as he gave us WHEN WE BELIEVED in the Lord Jesus Christ..” Trouble here, this doesn’t fit your template. Peter is saying they received the Holy Spirit when they believed! The church leaders were silent and then glorified God because God had GRANTED REPENTANCE to the gentiles. They were baptized AFTER they believed and received the Holy Spirit. Peter’s words are as clear as day. But, Peter isn’t done. Read what he says about this in chapter 15 of Acts. Peter is now speaking to the apostles and elders who made up the Jerusalem counsel. This is what Peter said.

    “Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. 8 And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us, 9 and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith.(Acts 15:7b-9)

    To make this easy and simple take it in small bites.

    1. God chose that the Gentiles would hear the gospel and believe. (God determined that not only would they hear, the would also believe…)
    2. God who knows the heart bore witness to them just as he did Peter and others…
    3. God made NO DISTINCTION between the Jews and Gentiles having cleansed their hearts by faith.

    This isn’t confusing is it? It’s really pretty simple. What is difficult for some folks is believing it. But there is more…

    10 Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? 11 But we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will.” (Acts 15:10,11)

    Peter’s words are just as clear in these three passages as in Acts 2:38 so why not just believe what Peter said to both the church and the counsel and accept that people are saved by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. Men hear the good news about Jesus, they believe and God “grants repentance”, gives them the Holy Spirit, and then they are baptized.

    Now, how you treat the Word of God is entirely up to you. But for me, especially since I am a gentile and preach to gentiles, I will expect God to act in exactly the same way today. This is normative, the events regarding Cornelius were not an aboration. Peter very plainly said three times that those gentiles’ experience was just like his own.

    No one has to agree with me. But now at least you know why I hold the position on this subject that I do. It is Peter’s experience and Peter’s defense of preaching to and baptizing gentiles. He did not baptize them so they could be saved. I can’t imagine how any person with an open mind and an open heart could read these accounts in Acts and miss the truths they clearly teach.

  224. Larry Cheek says:

    I have another question for those who want to preach more about the Gospel. Don’t you find the most information about the Gospel in Matthew through John? Those being the first four books of The NT where the complete story of Jesus birth life on earth, death and resurrection is told. These books also tell of John the Baptist and his message being the forerunner to prepare the way of Jesus. In the complete NT there are 115 forms of the word baptize, 70 of those references are in these four books, that leaves 45 references in Acts through Revelation. Of the 70 in the Gospels 15 refer to John the Baptist leaving 55 references to baptism in this section of the NT that is called The Gospels. All forms of the word “save” is only found 59 times in the same four books. All forms of the word “condemn” is found 21 times. All forms of the word “faith” is found 44 times. “Salvation” is only mentioned 6 times, but all forms of “belief” is found 140 times.
    So with that information in hand if you read from the Gospels an individual would read about 2.5 times more references to belief than about being saved, read about belief approximately 2.3 times more than baptism, read about saved almost equally the same amount as baptism, read about baptism more than about faith, read about baptism approximately 2 3/4 times more than condemnation.

    How can anyone exclaim that teaching from the Gospels will escape information concerning Jesus’ command about baptism? Just reading the Gospels will inform you about baptism, just as the story of the Eunuch. Don’t forget it was in the Gospels that Jesus gave that command.

  225. Jay Guin says:

    Ray,

    You argue that because James said that faith without works is dead, faith without baptism is dead.

    When James wrote his letter, did he intend that baptism be the only thing included in “works”? It can’t be —

    (Jam 2:15-17 ESV) 15 If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that? 17 So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

    James himself doesn’t mention baptism but he does speak of clothing and feeding a sister in Christ. If someone fails to do that, are they damned? How often must they do it? How long can they go between providing clothes and food and yet remained saved? Because under your logic, any imperfection in their works would damn.

    (Jam 2:12-13 ESV) 12 So speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty. 13 For judgment is without mercy to one who has shown no mercy. Mercy triumphs over judgment.

    I continue to wait for the Church of Christ tract that uses James 2 to argue for the absolute necessity of feeding and clothing our brothers and sisters in need. Why on earth do we take what James in fact said and treat it as a mere suggestion and then take something he didn’t mention at all, baptism, and treat it as the only obedience that faith requires?

  226. Royce Ogle says:

    Larry, Don’t you believe Paul was a pretty credible source for the gospel? 1st John, Peter’s epistles, the Hebrews, etc?

    The reason the gospel of Jesus is “good news” is that it’s good news for sinners. A set of historical facts is not by themselves good news for anyone. It is when you know what those facts mean for you is it good news.

  227. Jay Guin says:

    Grace wrote,

    Romans 10:16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our report?” The Bible says when any receive and believe the gospel of Jesus they have obeyed the gospel.

    The word “for” translates the Greek gar. Generally, gar means that what follows gives the reason for what precedes. Hence, Paul’s quotation from Isaiah explains why not all Israel has obeyed the gospel.

    Paul’s quotation is a reference to this familiar passage —

    (Isa 53:1-5 ESV) Who has believed what he has heard from us? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? 2 For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him. 3 He was despised and rejected by men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and as one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. 4 Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. 5 But he was pierced for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his wounds we are healed.

    Isaiah not only prophesies the atoning sacrifice of Jesus, he prophesies that many within Israel will reject him. And this explains why Israel, on the whole, did not obey the gospel. Because they had not “believed what he has heard from us”!

    The grammar is pretty straightforward, as is the context. In Rom 9 – 11, Paul is not discussing baptism but rather is seeking to explain why most of Israel rejected Jesus by lack of belief — and Paul repeatedly says in these chapters that Israel’s folly is their lack of faith, not their lack of baptism.

    (Rom 9:30-32a ESV) 30 What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. 32 Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works.

    (Rom 11:20 ESV) 20 That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith. So do not become proud, but fear.

    etc.

    In short, to argue from Rom 10:16 that Paul uses “obey the gospel” to refer to baptism rather than faith or even to baptism + faith is to miss the point and context of this entire section of Romans. The issue at hand is faith and Israel’s failure to have faith.

    (And none of the foregoing makes me a Baptist, means that I favor the sinner’s prayer, means that I don’t teach and practice baptism for remission of sins, or that I oppose obedience. Rather, it means that I’ve gone to the consider trouble to study these chapters in depth to understand what’s really being said.)

  228. Jay Guin says:

    Monty,

    There are those here who take a Baptist/Calvinistic view, considering baptism to occur after faith so that baptism follows faith. And yet the Baptist baptize far more than we do. Obviously, they are not saying that baptism is optional. And they would say that a truly saved person would necessarily obey instructions to be baptized, even though (in their view) their salvation does not depend on baptism.

    You see, we in the Churches of Christ often err by assuming that the only adequate motivation to obey God is fear of hell. Once that fear goes away, we assume that people will disobey at every opportunity. And yet the Baptists baptize more than we do and have more members than we do. Maybe the Baptist converts are motivated by something other than fear? Maybe its love? And that might be an interesting experiment for us to try.

    The Baptist view, of course, is not my view. I understand that water baptism by immersion is the moment when sins are forgiven and the Holy Spirit is received. I just don’t think God will damn someone who, as a new convert, was taught wrongly on the subject. In other words, I consider it a sin not to be baptized, but like all sin, potentially covered by grace for those with faith in Jesus.

    You write,

    I really don’t see in scripture where anyone who actually believed on Jesus after the New Covenant began had any option, other than, be baptized, or be considered an unbeliever

    I wouldn’t argue for a minute that baptism was considered optional — but I can’t think of a single scripture that says that a failure to be baptized makes one an unbeliever. I think you imagined that one.

  229. Jay Guin says:

    Skip wrote,

    I stood and still stand corrected and will promise never to go down that particular path again.

    Skip,

    Kudos. It should be absolutely standard that when a Christian is shown to be in error, the Christian responds as you have. You’ve set a great example.

    Some of us (obviously, not you) seem to have the idea that if we never confess our error, we won’t actually be mistaken. Rather, by refusing to admit a mistake, we prove how closed minded we are — which hardly helps us persuade others.

    Obviously, if someone is not persuaded of his error, he need not apologize, but neither should he change the subject by launching into a fresh set of “proofs” that ignore the challenges previously made to his thinking. Again, changing the subject to avoid having to answer hard questions does not excuse pretending that you weren’t shown to be in error when you were.

    And many of our commenters would be much more persuasive (and read by more readers) if they’d learn this lesson.

  230. Larry Cheek says:

    Skip,
    Jay has expressed my ideas a lot better than I can, Thanks Jay.

  231. Grace says:

    Jay, I wasn’t attacking Laymond. I think it is sad that a person long taught by the CofC does not believe in the deity of Jesus and continues to deny Him. For me, I’m not going to ask someone who doesn’t believe that Jesus is God how they think we should be doing communion, that may be just me. I have no ill feelings at all toward Laymond, I’m sad for him and I think rightly so, I’m sad for anyone who rejects Jesus. I apologize if anyone felt like they were attacked.

  232. Larry Cheek says:

    Royce,
    Your statement following is very true.
    “The reason the gospel of Jesus is “good news” is that it’s good news for sinners. A set of historical facts is not by themselves good news for anyone. It is when you know what those facts mean for you is it good news.”
    This is the exact reason I directed you and others to those messages in the text from Matthew through John, Jesus was in the process of training the Apostles and teaching others what it will be like when the doors of the Kingdom will be opened by Peter whom he gave the Keys to open the door. I see that there is very little new revelation beyond these four Gospels. The Kingdom contains all of the principles that Jesus taught, the book of Acts displays the actions during the establishment of the Kingdom, almost all of the books following are guides to better understand all of the principles taught by Jesus. The messages in them are totally directed to those who have become his disciples. If an individual misses the teaching in the four Gospels and does not follow the examples in Acts, and attempts to find entry points into the Kingdom through the instructions to Christians, he has missed the boat.
    Similar to those who Noah was preaching to, Peter opened the door and all the lost enter with the same instructions, no man can enter except through the door. You learn of the Gospel (the good news) in the four, you learn of the entry into in Acts, you learn of how to continue being pleasing to God, what is the cost if you don’t continue until the end and the rewards that you will receive if you complete the race in the balance of the NT.

  233. Grizz says:

    Royce,

    your lack of imagination in regard to what people do or do not see in Acts 10 is NOT an arguable poibt, nor is it a point for anyone to need to overcome. Your lack of imagination just is.

    Maybe you could imagine a difference between “has” and “will have.”. You know, the difference between present and future tenses.

    G

  234. laymond says:

    Jay asked the question; ” Why on earth do we take what James in fact said and treat it as a mere suggestion and then take something he didn’t mention at all, baptism, and treat it as the only obedience that faith requires?”

    We are baptized by faith alone, we are not saved by faith alone.We are baptized by faith in what Jesus said at his baptism . Because it is God’s will that we are. That is why I said baptism is our first obedient act on the road to salvation. From then on the road is narrow, and straight. with many acts of obedience to follow.

  235. Skip says:

    This is just my yammering here… As I read, I see us talking past one another. Would our time be better spent in prayer or going out and sharing our faith? We talk about obedience and faith. Blogging does not require either. Not saying this isn’t useful but it doesn’t require faith to do what we are doing.

  236. laymond says:

    Skip, why can’t we do both ? you are right blogging does not require faith in anything except the internet. When we blog we show faith that the internet will carry our words to the destination intended. When we have faith in Jesus, we have faith that Jesus’ message was true and will carry us to our intended destination. One is of greater importance than the other, but they work the same. faith is faith. some people act as if faith is only applicable to their religious life well we act by faith everyday, in many ways. Some people act as if faith is a religion in itself well it is not. my and your religion is Christianity, our faith is trust in God, and his son Jesus.

  237. Alabama John says:

    We in the church of Christ have far more faith in Pauls writings than we do in Jesus.
    Our teaching of rules or laws, whatever you want to call them mostly comes from Paul.

    Back in the mountains of North Carolina and all through Appalachia, most folks did not have access to the whole Bible and for many years all they had was a little red book of John. I have seen them sitting on a fireplace mantle many times. Used to have the one given my father by his father from the Snowbird Boundry near Robbinsville, NC.

    The folks that only had that information will be judged or have been judged by that alone is my sincere belief.

    Notice the Jews do not have many splits and arguments in their religion. Seems all the differences in Gods plan comes from the Gentiles side. 3000 plus Gentile denominations and then the Jews few differences. Seems there are less to argue about in the Old Terstament than in the new. Surely it in not the differences in the blood.

  238. Monty says:

    Jay said,

    “The Baptist view, of course, is not my view. I understand that water baptism by immersion is the moment when sins are forgiven and the Holy Spirit is received. I just don’t think God will damn someone who, as a new convert, was taught wrongly on the subject. In other words, I consider it a sin not to be baptized, but like all sin, potentially covered by grace for those with faith in Jesus.”

    Jay, again I appreciate your comments, and again I would like to say that I haven’t said or implied(I don’t believe) that God will send a person to hell who “truly” believes but hasn’t been taught properly on the subject. If I did, please show me where. I believe God is far more merciful than I have been taught or than I can even imagine. That said, don’t we (you and me) and all who teach the necessity of it, (or that God will make exceptions as he did in scripture as you pointed out before),have an obligation to refute error? I mean, after all, there are those on here who are claiming what you and I believe is truth on baptism, to be error, are they not? (See most of Royce and Grace’s comments.)

    As far as the Baptist are concerned, every Baptist preacher I’ve ever heard considers us (CofC) to teach a false gospel. It’s funny that some on here would say that baptism isn’t the gospel or even part of the gospel response, but something that sort of flows afterwards as a result of becoming a Christian, but Baptist preachers call us(CofC) teaching “another gospel” because we teach a baptismal response to the good news, and they call it a meritorious work( I know you are aware of that fact, Jay). I’m sure you also know that you can’t even be a Southern Baptist(not sure about all the different branches) without being baptized into their denomination (which is extremely ironic, wouldn’t you say).You can be a Christian, just not be a one of their kind of Christian.

    I find that in many ways I’m way more tolerant towards Baptist views than their preachers would be towards CofC views. ( See even some comments by Andy Stanley on how he was raised in the Southern Baptist Church.) I don’t write them off(even though they would me or you), or teach them into hell. (I know some CofC ministers and members who would do the same). My wish is they would teach it accurately. My quest is for truth. I believe that’s what your blog is all about, right? Truth, wherever we find it, no matter what the consequences may be.

    As far as their(Baptist) numbers being so high or more than ours as you stated, I’m not sure what that has to do with truth on baptism. That’s what being a Baptist means(you are baptized), If they didn’t teach it in order to be a Baptist, it would most certainly be optional for them. Take it or leave it. And my suspicion is that many(“true believers”) would leave it. Just like they would in most churches, even in the CofC, (if we didn’t teach it’s necessity to the believer). You’ve got to admit, baptism is kind of a weird experience. (Put on those silly looking white robes and let some guy dunk you and get all wet(especially for women) and have to dry off and change clothes, (I know there are other options, OK). But if given the teaching that baptism is just a picture of a trip I already took, and it really has nothing to do with the price of rice in China, then, I’ll pass on that picture.

    The president of the small Bible University, where I graduated from, said to me and a group of fellow preachers about 10 years ago, that he believed that(paraphrasing) “the progressives would in essence teach themselves right on out of the CofC on the necessity of baptism”. I think that’s a prophecy that is going to prove true, from the comments that I read on here. You generally make changes in baby steps and that is what I see happening. It’s essential; to it’s necessary but not necessarily damning (if taught wrong); to important (as a picture pointing backwards) and every true believer “should” do it,but not essential; to not even anything remotely having to do with the salvation experience. Maybe I’m wrong, we’ll see.

    Jay you took exception to me saying that in the days of the Apostles that those who would not be baptized would be considered as unbelievers. I’m not sure why. Many historians agree that there was no such thing as an unbaptized believer in the early days of Christianity. They certainly wouldn’t be considered as members of the church. Even newly baptized believers were looked at as to whether their conversions were genuine(see Simon the sorcerer) or read Lydia’s comments to Paul after she believed and was baptized and she said,” If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord”, enter my house. Be faithful how? By obeying the gospel – believing and being baptized. I don’t think Paul would have considered her “faithful” and a “believer” if she hadn’t obviously complied with the command to be baptized, how could she have known about it so quickly unless instructed, and if she had refused it, I don’t see Paul considering her as being faithful or a believer. JMHO.

  239. Ray Downen says:

    I missed out on earlier discussions about God the Son. How do I locate those studies in your files? I’m definitely interested in the subject and feel it matters greatly whether or not anyone believes that Jesus is God.

  240. Ray Downen says:

    Jay writes to Monty:

    You write,

    I really don’t see in scripture where anyone who actually believed on Jesus after the New Covenant began had any option, other than, be baptized, or be considered an unbeliever

    I wouldn’t argue for a minute that baptism was considered optional — but I can’t think of a single scripture that says that a failure to be baptized makes one an unbeliever. I think you imagined that one.

    How helpful it would be if we ALL recognized that it’s not the new believer who is commanded to be baptized. It’s the evangelist who is commanded to baptize the new believer who is guilty of disobedience if they disobey the teaching of Jesus. Surely Jay is right that God will not hold guilty ones who don’t know that they need to be baptized.

    But if such a believer studies the Bible he/she will soon learn of the need for baptism and THEN will be guilty if no steps are taken to become a baptized believer as soon as possible! Any Bible student who reads Acts will surely see that baptism brings believers INTO Christ. If they happen to read Galatians they’ll see that Paul says simply that believers are baptized INTO Christ. Of course when they know of the need they WILL do what will please the Master. Jay is right that we are not judged based on what we have no way of knowing. If that IS what he’s saying.

  241. Royce Ogle says:

    There was the reaction to my comment on December 26, 2013 at 9:03 pm that I expected. None!

    Jay, it’s probably time to bring this section of comments to a merciful end. Don’t you think?

  242. Johnny says:

    This is simply not true, I attended SBC’s for 50 years and Monty I never saw this. What was asked was have you been immersed after making a profession of faith. If you said yes you were accepted on that statement.

  243. Ray Downen says:

    Royce is sure that sinners are saved by faith alone. He misapplies scriptures which to HIM state that all it takes to be born again of water and spirit is to believe in Jesus. But he ignores the clear statement Jesus made to Nicodemus regarding entry into the Kingdom, and Peter’s clear explanation of the new birth as found in Acts 2:38. Ignoring them will of course not make them go away.

    Those passages are not copyrighted by “us” who understand that JESUS commands that we who tell others about Him are to BAPTIZE them if they believe. Why are they ignored by some who want to please Jesus? Why do they poke fun at us who believe Jesus and Peter? What do they hope to gain by ignoring the command of Jesus?

    What is made clear in MANY scriptures is that faith in Jesus as the risen Lord is essential for salvation. That’s not in question. What is equally clear is that faith ALONE is dead, and this just hasn’t penetrated to the thinking of some. And those of us who believe the Bible IS inspired are not willing to disbelieve the apostle Peter’s simple and plain teaching that both repentance and baptism MUST BE added to faith in order for salvation to come and in order for the person to receive God’s Spirit within!

  244. Ray Downen says:

    Jay, you write well and think well, and I’m sorry you’ve had health problems lately! I pray for good health for you. But I object to your implying that I was saying that James LIMITED “works” to baptism because I pointed out that faith without works of obedience is said by James to be dead and useless. The subject was the need for baptism, not how to live for Jesus AFTER conversion. The truth applies to the need to obey Jesus who commands that every new believer is to be baptized. Of course it has many additional applications. If our subject is conversion, then let’s apply the verse to CONVERSION. That’s what I did. I think I did the right thing.

  245. Ray Downen says:

    Jay writes, defensively,

    In short, to argue from Rom 10:16 that Paul uses “obey the gospel” to refer to baptism rather than faith or even to baptism + faith is to miss the point and context of this entire section of Romans. The issue at hand is faith and Israel’s failure to have faith.

    (And none of the foregoing makes me a Baptist, means that I favor the sinner’s prayer, means that I don’t teach and practice baptism for remission of sins, or that I oppose obedience. Rather, it means that I’ve gone to the consider trouble to study these chapters in depth to understand what’s really being said.)

    And for me or anyone to interpolate the passage and apply it to disregarding plain scriptural teaching about the need for baptism “into Christ” does not mean that we don’t understand the passage and are attempting to read INTO the passage more than is there.

    Peter makes clear what is needed for seeking believers to become Christians. No other apostolic writing will contradict what is stated in Acts 2:38. If it did, we would have to question whether or not the apostolic writings are from God. We see that it IS possible to misunderstand even with excellent motives. Yet we feel impelled to speak up for truth when we read a brother or sister claiming the Bible teaches what it does NOT teach.

  246. Royce Ogle says:

    Ray Downen, Was Peter still an apostle in Acts 10,11, and 15? I’m interested in your thoughts on those passages I quoted in my earlier post on December 26, 2013 at 9:03 pm? Those to are “apostolic writings” and are “from God”. Aren’t they?

  247. Ray Downen says:

    Royce, yes of course Peter remained an apostle until he died and we’ll meet him in glory still as an apostle of Jesus Christ. He was filled with the Spirit and seldom made mistakes. Paul had to correct one lapse, but that was unusual in the extreme. Peter did NOT in chapters 10,11 and 15 contradict what he was led by the Lord to say about conversion as recorded in chapter 2.

    Peter spoke of the need for faith in Jesus. Why would anyone suppose a person could be saved by Jesus if they did NOT believe in Him? Peter did not in any way indicate that anyone was saved prior to being baptized as JESUS had commanded. He recognized in chapter 10 and the later retelling of those events that GOD had made clear that Gentiles also could become Christians. He did NOT suppose they could become Christians by any other way than the one way he was led to speak about in chapter two.

    God gave a sign (plus other proofs) that Peter was to baptize these GENTILES into Christ. He did so. Good for Peter. We all should be obedient to Jesus!

  248. Grace says:

    Acts 15:6-11 Peter says that God ACCEPTED them by giving them the Holy Spirit through their faith. Peter said God gave the proof they were saved before being baptized.

    Acts 15:6-11: So the apostles and elders met together to resolve this issue. At the meeting, after a long discussion, Peter stood and addressed them as follows: “Brothers, you all know that God chose me from among you some time ago to preach to the Gentiles so that they could hear the Good News and believe. God knows people’s hearts, and he confirmed that he accepts Gentiles by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as he did to us. He made no distinction between us and them, for he cleansed their hearts through faith. So why are you now challenging God by burdening the Gentile believers with a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors were able to bear? We believe that we are all saved the same way, by the undeserved grace of the Lord Jesus.”

  249. Royce Ogle says:

    Really? Well, that clears the matter up then. LOL

    Tell me Ray, is it your view that it was lost people who were speaking in tongues and extolling God in Acts 10:46? And was it lost people who had received the Holy Spirit just as Peter had in Acts 10:47? And was it lost people who had received the same gift as Peter did when he believed, Acts 11:17?

    Do you just completely discount this passage of scripture that is as clear as a passage can possibly be?

    The apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider this matter. 7 And after there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. 8 And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us, 9 and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith. 10 Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? 11 But we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will.” Acts 15:6-11

    Ray, most any Bible student would be compelled to see the truth of this passage as I pointed out in some detail earlier. But, if you have your mind made up you aren’t very open. As one wise man said, “people are partial to the truth they already have”. This is the same Peter who is quoted in Acts 2:38. Tell me why you believe that passage and don’t believe this one? There must be some logical and good reason I am missing.

  250. Ray Downen says:

    I’m sorry you don’t understand what Luke reported in chapters 10, 11 and 15 of Acts. You obviously didn’t notice that Peter’s reaction was to recognize that now Gentiles could also be saved by being baptized into Christ. You read into what is said far more than is said, and ignore what you don’t want to see. The Gentiles were saved exactly as all Christians were, by repenting and being baptized. The SIGN was for Peter’s benefit and for the Jewish church so THEY would know that Gentiles also could become Christians. My mind is very able to see truth and also to see misunderstandings. The thing you are missing is that you don’t see what Peter said and did because now HE could see that Gentiles could be baptized into Christ!

  251. Grace says:

    You call what happened to the Gentiles a sign, Peter did not say it was a sign, he said the Gentiles had received the Holy Spirit just as they had. God gave them the promised Holy Spirit before they were baptized.

  252. Royce Ogle says:

    the earth is flat the earth is flat the earth is flat 2+2=3 2+2=3 2+2=3
    A man can repeat the same untruth over and over forever and it will still be untrue.

    Those great passages, especially in chapter 15, teach precisely the opposite of what you say they teach. Here it is one last time.

    God made the choice that the Gentiles should both hear the good news about Jesus and believe it. They heard it from Peter’s lips and they believed it. And God, who alone knows the human heart, confirmed they had believed it by giving them the gift of the Holy Spirit, just as He had to Peter. And Peter, seeing the Gentiles receive the Spirit, and knowing God had cleansed their hearts based on their faith declared “Who was I to stand in God’s way?” So he baptized them just as with a Jewish convert. God had orchestrated the whole thing.

    God gave Peter a vision that nothing (including Gentiles) are common or unclean. God decided that the Gentiles should hear the gospel of Christ. God decided that they would believe what they heard. And God sent Peter to do the preaching. Peter preached, the Gentiles heard the message, they believed the message, God acknowledged they had believed the gospel, He gave them the gift of the Holy Spirit. According to Peter God had cleansed their hearts by faith. After all of this happened they were baptized.

    Now brother Ray, let me make sure I understand you. You get from this narrative that God was just letting Peter know that the Gentiles could be saved by being baptized? Is that what you are saying? Yes, that is what you said. It’s difficult to believe but you said it and I believe you mean it. But, as kindly as I can say it, that doesn’t make it true.

  253. Larry Cheek says:

    Grace and Royce,
    I am seeing that you are identifying that Cornelius and family were saved prior to baptism. I would not make a statement that that is impossible, because (all things are possible with God), I will state that this example is the only one that projects your message, among many examples in which men were given instructions about baptism. These instructions include the purpose and necessity for baptism.
    Since you have identified that this act should teach salvation without baptism. I must ask you these questions.
    Once you observe that someone is saved as in this picture would you baptize them?
    If that answer is no, would you explain why?
    If that answer is yes, why would you?
    Also how soon would you do it?

  254. Jay Guin says:

    Ray wrote,

    You obviously didn’t notice that Peter’s reaction was to recognize that now Gentiles could also be saved by being baptized into Christ.

    Doesn’t hold water. Yes, Peter baptized them, but he explained what happened this way —

    (Act 15:8-9 ESV) 8 And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us, 9 and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith.

    “Having cleansed” clearly suggests that their hearts were cleansed before the receipt of the Spirit, since Peter makes no mention of baptism here, and an aorist participle must be relative to the time frame under discussion. Hence, Peter says that they had faith, God cleansed their hearts, and only then did he pour out his Spirit on them.

    And then there’s —

    (Rom 8:9-11 ESV) 9 You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. 10 But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness. 11 If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.

    Hard to see a better way to say “All with the Spirit are saved” not “All with the Spirit may be baptized.”

  255. Jay Guin says:

    Larry,

    These would be fair questions if they’d not already answered. To my knowledge, not a single commenter here teaches that converts should not be baptized. Baptism is nearly universally taught among all Christians and all denominations.

    The fact that God might give someone the Spirit pre-baptism does not destroy baptism. After all, the Baptists teach that baptism is not part of the “Plan of SAlvation” and yet they in fact baptize far more than the Churches of Christ. And they grew much, much faster than the Coc from about 1970 to 2010 or so (while we grew hardly at all).

    You’d do well to ponder why that is? Since Baptists don’t see baptism as essential to salvation, just faith, why do they baptize their converts?

    If you can’t come to understanding of this, then you can’t understand those here who think similarly.

  256. Larry Cheek says:

    Royce,
    You have a point if that was what Ray said, but it is not. Your comment; “Now brother Ray, let me make sure I understand you. You get from this narrative that God was just letting Peter know that the Gentiles could be saved by being baptized? Is that what you are saying? Yes, that is what you said. It’s difficult to believe but you said it and I believe you mean it. But, as kindly as I can say it, that doesn’t make it true.”
    This is your summation of what he was attempting to explain to you.
    I believe that Ray was intending for you to understand the continuation of validation.
    Peter, had received the vision, the other Jews that were with him had not, this giving of the gift was to convince the others with Peter and for the whole body of Jews there to be convinced so they would testify of the action to all other Jews especially to the council at Jerusalem.
    Would anyone believe that the whole council of Jews at Jerusalem would believe the lone testimony of peter?

    I can easily understand God allowing an out of the ordinary miracle for the purpose just stated.
    I really thought about asking you why you would have such a great desire to promote that two examples of receiving the spirit in a miraculous way, Day of Pentecost and Cornelius, possibly 120 people and one mans family would modify the actions displayed by the other Apostles and Philip as they explained Jesus and baptism to multiple thousands of people?

  257. Larry Cheek says:

    Jay,
    I know that your memory is far better than mine, I did not remember Royce or Grace expressing that they thought baptism is necessary. Their communication recently was leading to this conclusion.
    Sorry if I misunderstood.

  258. Johnny says:

    As a former baptist let me say anyone at any baptist church I attended in fifty years, who made a profession of faith and then refused to be baptized would have been told you have clearly not repent and expressed a genuine faith in Christ.

  259. Grizz says:

    Royce,

    When a person uses their phone to read on-the-go, it is not easy to find every response. Also, some comments can be seen as baiting instead of discussion. Just saying …

    So, if you have a point to bring up, is it worth repeating?
    If so, please re-post it. If not – quit crying about it.

  260. laymond says:

    Johnny’s comment sets this whole argument into the right prospective. Do you believe that baptism washes away sins, or do you think baptism is just an expression of faith.?
    The bible tells us it washes away our sins, the Baptist tell us it is just an expression of faith.
    We need to make up our mind as to whether we are going to follow Jesus, or follow Baptist teachings.
    Evidently there are both thoughts among the commenters here, but seems to me Jay is one who thinks that baptism is just an expression of faith, if this is so who is it that needs convincing that you really have faith God, or the people who are witnessing the event?

  261. laymond says:

    Royce, I believe you need to open that narrow window you look through and see the whole picture.
    Did some writer tell us that “God is no respecter of men” I understand that to mean there are no exceptions, one man is not favored over another when it comes to salvation. Yet you say that is not so, So Royce are there different ways for Jew or Gentile, Man or Woman to accept Jesus into their life and be cleansed of sins, if so how is that not being a respecter of men. How about a king who wished to become a Christian would he not have to take off his crown, and bend his knee in submission to Jesus. No Respecter means No Exception.

  262. Skip says:

    I have a few questions to help clarify our positions on baptism and perhaps clarify our “sticking” points:
    1. What if someone is baptized after they believed they were saved, are they now really saved even though they didn’t believe that their baptism was salvific?
    2. Is full and complete total surrender required BEFORE baptism? How many in the church do you know have been baptized but have never been “sold out for the Lord”. Would we suggest everyone of them repent and be rebaptized to make it right?
    3. What if someone wants to join the church who says they are Baptist and were baptized, would we insist they get rebaptized?
    4. What if someone is properly baptized as a teen, then falls away completely and leaves the Lord for many years…if they come back to the Lord from being fully lost, why aren’t they rebaptized? Isn’t baptism for the remission of sins? Don’t they have many sins that must be remitted?
    5. What if someone is baptized but a part of their body is not fully immersed, should they be rebaptized “properly”? What percentage of their body must be immersed to make a baptism valid?
    6. How would you compare a lukewarm Church of Christ member who doesn’t want to share their faith, but was baptized, and a fully on fire, surrendered believer who hasn’t been baptized yet? Who is closer to salvation?

  263. Grace says:

    Peter never said Cornelius and the other Gentile people there were exceptions, that was exactly Peter’s point to the apostles and elders. There was no distinction between them being Jews and the Gentiles at Cornelius’ house, Peter said we are all saved the same as they were. God gave them the Holy Spirit through their faith, God accepted them knowing their hearts before they were baptized.

  264. laymond says:

    Mat 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:

    When we figure this verse out I guess we will know the answer. is it baptism by water and fire, or baptism with water or fire.

    I noticed John did not stop baptizing people with water after he baptized Jesus.

  265. Larry Cheek says:

    To All,
    This post is a very long post and I for one cannot remember all of the points that one individual makes. In some cases those who address what one individual has said can by their comments mislead the concept of the original comments, changing the original intention. A solution is to copy all the comments to a document and use the find function to locate all anyone has commented, in that method you can refresh your understanding of that individuals position and can observe if they have gained any insight by these studies. Of course it can give you a clue what other communication could influence the understanding.
    Jay this is very educational material that can never be studied in this much depth within an assembly, someone or more than one would walk out or disrupt the class and destroy the ability reach a final Biblical conclusion.

  266. Larry Cheek says:

    Grace,
    Read the account again you should notice Peter’s astonishment at the Gentiles receiving the spirit. His testimony alone can fully assure us that this had never happened in all of the preaching that he had done, that includes all those who received the word at Pentecost and the 5000 later. Documenting this receiving of the spirit as only happening twice in the complete history written by God’s servants.

  267. Grace says:

    Peter was astonished that the Gentiles were saved, he struggled that God wanted him to even go to a Gentile’s home, Jews struggled with the thought of Gentiles being saved. You say what happened at Cornelius’ house was an exception, Peter never said Cornelius and the other Gentile people there were exceptions. That was exactly Peter’s point to the apostles and elders, there was no distinction between them being Jews and the Gentiles at Cornelius’ house, Peter said we are all saved the same as they were. God gave them the Holy Spirit through their faith, God accepted them knowing their hearts before they were baptized.

    You want to keep saying that they were exceptions when Peter never said that, he said the exact opposite. Peter said what happened at Cornelius’ house is the norm.

  268. Alabama John says:

    Many people have done things different from us but the old “its what the baptist do” or what some other religious group does, has been a stumbling block all my life in the church. We can reject others views, but not simply because its believed or practiced by another denomination.

    We’ve had enough of that thinking.

  269. Larry Cheek says:

    Grace,
    I keep hearing you say that all today are saved exactly like Cornelius and family, saved by being filled with the spirit before baptism. Are you also willing to follow this example that Peter set here that immediately thereafter he baptizes the individuals?

  270. Grizz says:

    Grace,

    Just another question. No commentary.

    Why did Peter insist on baptizing Cornelius and his household? Please think it through as there may be a follow-up.

    Thanks,

    G

  271. Grace says:

    Your questioning sounds so much how the Pharisees questioned Jesus wanting to destroy Him.

    Jesus commands that we baptize believers, I would not forbid a new believer who wants me to baptize them.

  272. Monty says:

    Grace says,

    Jesus commands that we baptize believers, I would not forbid a new believer who wants me to baptize them.

    You wouldn’t forbid it, that’s nice of you, since we are commanded to baptize them. And therein lies the crux of the matter. Would you command it as Jesus taught it to the disciples and like the examples given as on Pentecost by Peter, as he did to Cornelieus and family, as Aninias did to Paul, and as Paul did to the Philipian jailor and family? If not why not? Regardless of why we do it, would you command it as taught in scripture?

  273. Grace says:

    Jesus commands that we baptize believers and is why I believe in baptizing believers. I have answered this time and time again here and will not allow you to think you can continue to interrogate me. No hard feelings the Pharisees sought to interrogate Jesus to destroy Him too, He knew when the time had come to be silent before his accusers.

  274. Grizz says:

    Grace,

    How is it possible that you have come where comments are nearly always discussed and yet do not expect to be available to defend your comments?

    Did you imagine gender provided an exemption? Or perhaps you have felt harshly treated? Frankly, I have thought you had responded well, without persuading me, but well enough, still.

    We do not see a lot of comments by our sisters here. Perhaps we have lost track of our best manners. If so, I can only hope you will remain engaged long enough for us to remember them.

    Please …

    G

  275. Ray Downen says:

    A friend pointed out to me that what Luke reported was that “as Peter began to speak” the SIGN from God appeared. Not as a RESULT of Peter speaking. As a sign that Peter could speak and act to bring these GENTILES into the church of the Lord Jesus. Until these acts of God to open the Way to Gentiles, only JEWS were admitted (Jews and partial-Jews, the Samaritans). God was forcing the door open so that the gospel would be carried to everyone regardless of race.

    Baptism in the Spirit was promised to the apostles and to no one else. It was given to the apostles to enable them to do the work for which they were trained by Jesus. Apostles performed many miracles through the power given them by the baptizing. It was given to Gentiles so all Christians would know that Gentiles were acceptable to God. Luke doesn’t mention it if the Gentiles performed any miracles at all as a result of the sign. Luke surely does point out how the church heard about it and was convinced, just as God intended and performed.

  276. Ray Downen says:

    Jay supposes that the Gentiles were saved by or prior to baptism in the Spirit. It’s made clear in several passages that baptism is for the purpose of bringing salvation to the one baptized in water. I wonder what excuse we could give Peter for allowing these Gentiles to be baptized as soon as he saw the SIGN of God’s acceptance of them. Does anyone dare to suppose they were already saved but Peter then wanted to baptize them INTO Christ? The scriptures make clear that the purpose of baptism is to bring the repentant believer INTO Christ (Galatians 3:27 et al). Some writing to Jay are convinced that the Bible is not correct as to the purpose for baptism INTO Christ. Jay is obviously wrong in his analysis of what God did and then what the apostle did in this event.

  277. Ray Downen says:

    Jay admires the success of Baptists in baptizing converts, far more than are made in our independent congregations of Christians. And it sounds as if he really does not know why Baptists baptize. It’s to make the person they think is now saved (they vote on whether or not the person IS saved and only baptize those who pass muster) a member of their Baptist congregation. Their misunderstanding is obviously widespread in OUR congregations now as well as in those who use the name Baptist. Wouldn’t it be more honest for those who believe as Baptists do to join the Baptists? Baptist doctrine is NOT Christian doctrine.

  278. Ray Downen says:

    Good for Larry! Good logic. Good thinking. He wrote

    Peter, had received the vision, the other Jews that were with him had not, this giving of the gift was to convince the others with Peter and for the whole body of Jews there to be convinced so they would testify of the action to all other Jews especially to the council at Jerusalem.
    Would anyone believe that the whole council of Jews at Jerusalem would believe the lone testimony of peter?

    I hadn’t thought to point out that very OBVIOUS truth! I repeat, Good for Larry!

  279. Ray Downen says:

    Laymond gets to the heart of what Christians need to decide about the baptism commanded by Jesus! Is it important? Does it accomplish anything? Or is it just for show? Laymone wrote

    Johnny’s comment sets this whole argument into the right prospective. Do you believe that baptism washes away sins, or do you think baptism is just an expression of faith.?
    The bible tells us it washes away our sins, the Baptist tell us it is just an expression of faith.
    We need to make up our mind as to whether we are going to follow Jesus, or follow Baptist teachings.
    Evidently there are both thoughts among the commenters here, but seems to me Jay is one who thinks that baptism is just an expression of faith, if this is so who is it that needs convincing that you really have faith God, or the people who are witnessing the event?

    Did Peter in Acts 2:38 speak of spectators for the baptisms? Did the Ethiopian in chapter 8 need witnesses? How about the jailer and his family?

    Where in apostolic writings is information about how many witnesses are necessary for the show of baptism to be effective in saving a sinner? Or where is the plainly worded teaching that the purpose of baptism is for showing someone else you believe? The plainly worded teaching is that baptism is between the person and the Savior. The person is submitting to the Savior as LORD. NO witnesses are necessary. But the immersion and being raised up into NEW LIFE is necessary.

  280. Alabama John says:

    Grace may of meant she as a woman would not forbid a person from being baptised by HER.

    How many of you in the COC have ever seen anyone baptised by a woman? Would you be OK with that, or would you deny that person wanting to be baptised by Grace and volunteer to stand in for her as a man since that is the only gender example given in scripture?

  281. Royce Ogle says:

    Two tactics widely used by debaters is first, to repeat the same talking point over and over as often as possible. We see it most often used in the political arena and sadly here too. The second is to attack the “straw man”. The strategy is to create a false position and assign it to your opponent and then attack, attack, attack. And, that too is used here.

    To even hint that I am not for baptizing new believers rises from either ignorance or dishonesty. And, I believe, based wholly on her remarks here, Grace would be in the same position as I.

    Ray mentions Baptists and Christians as one would cats and dogs. Ray, there would be no Restoration Movement if not for Baptists and Presbyterians. You probably think though that Alexander Campbell was lost until he was baptized in a church of Christ. If so, your beloved denomination of churches was founded in part at least by a lost man.

    Just for the record, and in as plain language as I can say it…It is a shameful thing for someone who claims to be a Christian to speak of other people, who are just as devoted to Jesus and the gospel as you are, as if they are not even Christians because they don’t agree with your brand of doctrine. Shame on you, you should repent.

    What arrogance to believe that you are right with God because you are right about baptism and music, etc. and John and Charles Wesley, Charles Spurgeon, John Calvin, Martin Luther, and a host of other Christ loving, godly men and women were all lost because they were not cookie cutter images of you. While we were fighting over whether it was right to pool our money together to support orphanages, Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, and Catholics were building great hospitals,doing all sorts of charitable works,and taking the good news about Jesus to the ends of the earth.

    When you have a track record of preaching Christ and what he accomplished for ungodly sinners more than you preach about baptism and music I’ll have more respect for you.

    Jesus taught that we should love everyone. I’m trying, I really am. Happy New Year!

  282. Johnny says:

    As a former baptist I must say many of you are as clueless as to what they teach as baptists are clueless about what most CoC teach.

  283. laymond says:

    Ray, I do believe if we look a little deeper into the thoughts of those who say baptism is only a showing of faith, we will find most if not all, also say they received the “holy ghost” at that very baptism. The same “holy ghost” that Jesus bestowed upon his apostles. It baffles the mind.

  284. laymond says:

    Johnny, I believe I recall you said you were “a southern Baptist” they know about as much about the original Baptist as we do.

  285. Grace says:

    No worries Grizz, I didn’t mean that I wouldn’t comment anymore. I’m just saying I’m not going to be interrogated to answer the same questions over and over when I’ve already said how we baptize. I have already said several times I believe we are to baptize believers and I believe we should baptize with the Great Commission that Jesus gave us.

    It’s seems to really bother some on here that God accepted the Gentiles at Cornelius’ house giving them the promised Holy Spirit before they were baptized. It bothers them so much they try to make it fit their theology and are reaching terribly to say receiving the Holy Spirit was something other than what Peter told the apostles and elders. Ray even goes so far to say that baptism in the Spirit was promised to the apostles and to no one else, where in the Bible did Jesus or any of the apostles say that?

    I think Alabama John asked a very good question to you all and I’ve noticed that no one has yet to answer it.

  286. Grizz says:

    What question, Grace?

    G

  287. Larry Cheek says:

    Grace,
    I understand you to indicate that the Apostles were baptized the same way as we today. You also mentioned you could not find evidence in scripture which says that the baptism of the Apostles was different.
    John the Baptist was speaking here.
    (Mat 3:11 KJV) I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:
    (Luke 3:15 KJV) And as the people were in expectation, and all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ, or not; 16 John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire:
    Did this event ever take place?
    (Acts 2:1 KJV) And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. 2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. 3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

    This is the event that Peter is referring to as he is explaining to the Jews at Jerusalem about the action while teaching the Gentiles.

    You have stated that Peter and those who were with him testified that what happened that day was the norm. You also contend that it is reoccurring yet today. In other words normal today.
    I have never encountered an individual that will verify that they saw anyone today experience an event like Acts 2:3 describes. I call that an unusual event not documented that it ever happened again.
    Have you documented it in your life?

  288. Grace says:

    John the Baptist drew large crowds to him, John the Baptist was speaking to all the people there, and God wants us to know it also.

    Peter confirmed to the apostles and elders that God gave the Gentiles the Holy Spirit just as He did to them. Peter said we are all saved the same as they were. God gave them the Holy Spirit through their faith, God accepted them knowing their hearts before they were baptized.

    Having the Holy Spirit doesn’t mean we all have the gift of speaking in tongues. Paul gives the church of Corinth a list of gifts
    1 Corinthians 12:4-11 Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone. To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.

  289. laymond says:

    Grace, do you assume Paul was only talking about baptized Christians here. If anyone has received the gift of life/breath , I am not speaking of “eternal life” they have received a spirit from God.
    ” All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.”

    And God desires every person he has given life to, to join his Church. That is why he tells us how, through his Son Jesus.

  290. Grace says:

    Do you believe the Holy Spirit gives all of these same gifts to us today as He did then, or do you believe as Larry and Ray speak that it was only the apostles who had these gifts?

  291. laymond says:

    Well, no doubt God still gives gifts, but in a different way I don’t believe he miraculously gives gifts of healing, or even speaking of different tongues, and certainly not raising of the dead. But he gives us the gift of learning, and that covers a multitude of services considered “gifts”. As for miracles my belief is that no one ever performed “miracles” except God Almighty. Yes he did it in various ways God performed miracles through the staff of Moses, God performed miracles through his Son Jesus, God performed miracles through Jesus’ followers the apostles. I am not saying God could not perform a miracle through the hands of Grace/you if he so desired, because he could. With God all things are possible.

  292. Grace says:

    It is not through being baptized that the Holy Spirit and His gifts are given to people as we see at Cornelius’ house. I believe all the gifts Paul says the Holy Spirit gives to people that God has accepted as His own still happen today.

  293. Skip says:

    Alabama John, I have seen many women baptize women over the years.

  294. laymond says:

    Grace, I assume you are a baptized Christian, what special gift did you receive from God when you first believed, and was accepted into God’s family of believers. which one of the gifts Paul named are you sure you received.? and how are you using that gift for the good of all.

  295. Ray Downen says:

    Johnny says “we” don’t correctly understand what Baptists actually teach. He may be right. We make our judgments based on what we hear Baptist preachers say in sermon/lessons and on what Baptist writers write that we read. We could easily miss what is actually taught in Baptist churches, for we’re not there. But I know what I heard BILLY GRAHAM preach many years ago in a crusade in Minneapolis, Minnesota. And I know what I’ve been repeatedly told by Baptists with whom I’ve discussed Bible questions. So I think I DO know what Baptist doctrine is.

    Lately I’ve been reading a lot of it in Church of Christ publications as well. It’s claiming that Jesus didn’t mean baptism was necessary when He COMMANDED that we who tell others about Him are to baptize those who believe us. It’s claiming that Peter didn’t understand the gospel well when he instructed believing seekers that they needed to repent AND BE BAPTIZED, for all that’s needed is to repent and PRAY. And, if it’s convenient, be baptized in water later, but the HOLY SPIRIT has baptized you when you believed. So the baptism that counts is already out of the way.

    Yes, I could be wrong. I go by what I hear and read, and perhaps the speakers and writers don’t really MEAN what they say and write. What isn’t clear to me is why they would say or write something that they didn’t mean. I understand Baptist doctrine wherever I hear it. I recognize Bible truth when I hear IT. And much that Baptists teach is scriptural and edifying. Bible truth is always good to hear and read, wherever found!

  296. Grace says:

    All believers don’t have to receive one of the gifts in 1 Corinthians 12:4-11 the moment they are saved, the Bible doesn’t say that the gifts have to be received then. I have been given different gifts at different times as the Holy Spirit apportioned to me as He willed.

  297. Ray Downen says:

    Grace writes: Ray even goes so far to say that baptism in the Spirit was promised to the apostles and to no one else, where in the Bible did Jesus or any of the apostles say that?

    I’m curious to know where baptism in the Spirit was promised except by Jesus when He was speaking to His apostles only, as recorded in John chapters 14-16 and later repeated in Acts, chapter 1. Apostles ONLY. Never anyone else. And when the baptizing was done (Acts 2) It was the APOSTLES who spoke in languages they didn’t know and who are reported then to perform miracles. NO miracles are reported performed by non-apostles until the apostles “laid hands upon” the seven who were elected by the church to handle distribution of food.

    So then when Philip went to Samaria, he performed miracles which amazed all who saw them, including one who would know the difference between magic tricks and genuine miracles.

    No one else was promised that they would receive baptism in the Holy Spirit. No record in apostolic writings of anyone else being baptized in the Holy Spirit. Some were spoken of as being “filled with” the Spirit, but they were NOT said to have been baptized in/with the Spirit. Some leap to a false conclusion based on John the Baptist’s prophecy that Jesus would baptize with the Spirit and with fire, and they assume that means Jesus would baptize every convert. But that is NOT what John was led to say.

    Those who imagine there is Spirit baptism for Christians need to read more carefully than they have Ephesians 4:4-6 where Paul makes clear there are ONEs in the Christian Way. One God. One Lord. One body. One BAPTISM. Not two or more. ONE. And Jesus commands that we who tell others about Him are to OURSELVES baptize those who believe. The ONE BAPTISM has to be the one commanded by Jesus!

  298. Ray Downen says:

    Royce concludes a note by writing: “Jesus taught that we should love everyone. I’m trying, I really am. Happy New Year!”

    In the note he suggests that we who understand that Jesus commands baptism for converts must be wrong since many sincere believers don’t agree with us. He disagrees that Jesus commands that we who tell others about Him are to baptize them? Or he just wants to ignore what Jesus said because we’re obnoxious in telling others about it?

    Jesus DID command that converts were to be baptized! His apostles did so. Not later when it was convenient. Immediately upon hearing of the convert now believing in Jesus as Lord. We see that other ways are wrong ways and that the Lord’s way is the right way. So we agree with the apostles that seeking believers who inquire what they need to do are to be told, “REPENT and BE BAPTIZED (into Christ because you now understand that HE is Lord) for the remission of your sins and you WILL (as a result) receive the gift of the Holy Spirit from God.”

    We don’t think we know more than Christ’s apostles knew as they were led and taught by His Spirit. So we don’t teach that seekers should pray. That’s NOT what evangelists taught in the apostolic age. We think the Bible is correct and doesn’t need our revisions. Our understanding about conversions comes from where the conversions in the apostolic age are reported, the book of ACTS in the New Testament.

  299. Royce Ogle says:

    Ray, To be consistent why don’t you demand that your congregation tear the pages out of your song book that have all those hymns and spiritual songs written by non-Christians? Surely you wouldn’t want to sing songs in the Sunday assembly written by infidels.

  300. Ray Downen says:

    Grace doesn’t understand the SIGN God gave to convince the Jewish Christians that Gentiles also could be saved. She assumes that the baptism commanded by JESUS is not necessary, and that somehow God will send on every group the same sign He sent to convince Jewish Christians that Gentiles also could be baptized into Christ. She writes

    John the Baptist drew large crowds to him, John the Baptist was speaking to all the people there, and God wants us to know it also.

    Peter confirmed to the apostles and elders that God gave the Gentiles the Holy Spirit just as He did to them. Peter said we are all saved the same as they were. God gave them the Holy Spirit through their faith, God accepted them knowing their hearts before they were baptized.

    Do some readers understand that the Spirit gift is promised as result of seeking believers repenting and being baptized? Let it be understood that what was SEEN and HEARD when God sent a sign the second time of His approval and desire that some people were accepted by Him did NOT empower the second group as it did the first group. The apostles were EMPOWERED by the baptism in the Spirit. That Spirit baptism was not to save them. It was to demonstrate to others God’s approval of the message those apostles were to deliver. It was at that time that apostolic POWER came upon the twelve.

    NO POWER was given to Cornelius and his household. Sufficient signs were given to convince Peter and all the Jewish church that no longer were Gentiles to be unwelcome in the Lord’s church, but instead they were to be accepted equally with all the Jews who had been and would in the future be baptized into Christ. But Cornelius didn’t begin preaching and healing as a result of the sign. Peter immediately had his fellow-believers baptize INTO CHRIST these Gentiles, and that’s the last we hear of Cornelius and his household.

    But the SIGN was spoken of frequently as the Jewish Christians needed to be convinced that now Gentiles also were welcome in the church of the Lord Jesus Christ. Cornelius and his household were baptized IN WATER and brought into Christ’s kingdom by their repenting and being immersed. This was not possible until God convinced those already IN the church by His SIGN that Gentiles were equal with Jews as members of the church of Christ.

    Cornelius was not a Christian and not saved prior to his being baptized in water as JESUS had commanded was to be done. As SOON as Peter and his Jewish companions saw the SIGN, they then baptized these Gentiles INTO CHRIST, at which time the Gentiles were saved and received the promised Spirit-gift. They were not saved by the signs of God’s approval which convinced the Jews that Gentiles could be baptized into Christ.

  301. Grace says:

    Ray said

    John the Baptist drew large crowds to him, John the Baptist was speaking to all the people there, and God wants us to know it also.
    The Scriptures say other than what Ray says.

    Mark 1:7-8 And he preached, saying, “There comes One after me who is mightier than I, whose sandal strap I am not worthy to stoop down and loose. 8 I indeed baptized you with water, but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.”

    Acts 15:6-8 So the apostles and elders met together to resolve this issue. At the meeting, after a long discussion, Peter stood and addressed them as follows: “Brothers, you all know that God chose me from among you some time ago to preach to the Gentiles so that they could hear the Good News and believe. God knows people’s hearts, and he confirmed that he accepts Gentiles by giving them the Holy Spirit, JUST AS HE DID TO US.

    Ephesians 1:13-14 And now you Gentiles have also heard the truth, the Good News that God saves you. And when you believed in Christ, he identified you as his own by giving you the Holy Spirit, whom he promised long ago. The Spirit is God’s guarantee that he will give us the inheritance he promised and that he has purchased us to be his own people. He did this so we would praise and glorify him.

  302. Grace says:

    Ray said – I’m curious to know where baptism in the Spirit was promised except by Jesus when He was speaking to His apostles only, as recorded in John chapters 14-16 and later repeated in Acts, chapter 1. Apostles ONLY. Never anyone else.

    John the Baptist drew large crowds to him, John the Baptist was speaking to all the people there, and God wants us to know it also.
    The Scriptures say other than what Ray says.

    Mark 1:7-8 And he preached, saying, “There comes One after me who is mightier than I, whose sandal strap I am not worthy to stoop down and loose. 8 I indeed baptized you with water, but He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.”

    Acts 15:6-8 So the apostles and elders met together to resolve this issue. At the meeting, after a long discussion, Peter stood and addressed them as follows: “Brothers, you all know that God chose me from among you some time ago to preach to the Gentiles so that they could hear the Good News and believe. God knows people’s hearts, and he confirmed that he accepts Gentiles by giving them the Holy Spirit, JUST AS HE DID TO US.

    Ephesians 1:13-14 And now you Gentiles have also heard the truth, the Good News that God saves you. And when you believed in Christ, he identified you as his own by giving you the Holy Spirit, whom he promised long ago. The Spirit is God’s guarantee that he will give us the inheritance he promised and that he has purchased us to be his own people. He did this so we would praise and glorify him.

  303. Ray Downen says:

    Among many other comments, Grace suggests: “John the Baptist drew large crowds to him, John the Baptist was speaking to all the people there, and God wants us to know it also.

    Peter confirmed to the apostles and elders that God gave the Gentiles the Holy Spirit just as He did to them. Peter said we are all saved the same as they were. God gave them the Holy Spirit through their faith, God accepted them knowing their hearts before they were baptized.”

    And more recently she speaks of God accepting Gentiles by giving “them” the Holy Spirit, “JUST AS HE DID TO US.” So she feels all Gentiles have apostolic powers, it seems, since the apostles received power to know all truth and to heal and even to raise the dead on occasion. But that is NOT what Peter is saying as quoted by Grace in Acts 15. What Peter is pointing out is that God is no longer a respecter of persons. That is, that Gentiles as well as Jews now could be won to Christ and could be members of the church of God and Christ JUST AS WERE JEWS.

    Paul in Ephesians 1:13,14 speaks of God giving His Spirit to Gentiles now just as He had to Jews for some years when Paul wrote the letter. Acts 2:38 specifies that God DOES gift every new Christian with His Spirit. When Peter and the other apostles said this on the Day of Pentecost in Acts 2, they didn’t realize it was for Gentiles as well as Jews. Now they know the truth, as Paul says. Apostolic powers were given by the Spirit baptism sent upon the apostles. The “gift of the Spirit” promised to all believers who repent and are baptized includes NO miraculous power, nor even any particular “spiritual gift.” It’s simply that God will dwell IN us who now are in Jesus. We are not promised ANY spiritual powers as a result of being baptized into Jesus. We ARE made members of His church as a result of turning to Jesus as our Lord.

  304. Ray Downen says:

    Royce brings up a different subject than gifts of the Spirit. He writes,

    Ray, To be consistent why don’t you demand that your congregation tear the pages out of your song book that have all those hymns and spiritual songs written by non-Christians? Surely you wouldn’t want to sing songs in the Sunday assembly written by infidels.

    I think it vital that we share with our brothers and sisters the call of Jesus for us to tell others about Him and to BAPTIZE those who believe the gospel message. I hope I’m consistent in calling for love of Jesus and all those who love Him. I’ve NOT intended to judge that all who don’t agree with my every opinion is bound for Hell. I judge that God loves us all and wants us to love one another. I thought that was the feeling of Royce with his benedictory remarks in an earlier post.

  305. Grace says:

    You call it “apostolic powers”, a term that I just don’t see anywhere in the Bible. I have to agree with Royce that anyone who has the Holy Spirit and is given the power to speak in tongues as the people at Cornelius’ house did are not dead people, but are most certainly alive.

  306. laymond says:

    Jhn 4:1 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,
    Jhn 4:2 (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)

    Make what you will out of this, but if you don’t believe the bible, you just don’t believe the bible.

  307. Ray Downen says:

    Laymond writes, and I don’t understand what he’s saying

    Jhn 4:1 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,
    Jhn 4:2 (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)

    Make what you will out of this, but if you don’t believe the bible, you just don’t believe the bible.

    I haven’t seen a note from anyone on this blog who doesn’t “believe the Bible.” I’ve seen notes from ones who don’t understand the Word, but they obviously love God and seek to share that love with us all. What am I missing to understand this comment, Laymond?

    John is simply explaining that just as John the Baptist had been sent to prepare the way for the coming Kingdom (Christ’s church) now the disciples of Jesus also were calling Jews to repent and be baptized in preparation for the coming kingdom. But John points out that Jesus Himself did not do the baptizing. Is that significant in some way I don’t understand?

  308. Grizz says:

    C’mon Royce,

    Really? If that is your best, rather admit you have no response rather than stoop to this.

    G

  309. Grace says:

    Royce seems to have a good point, why would you sing songs at church written by people he sees as heretics? Ray has stooped way low speaking about our Baptist brothers and sisters.

  310. Royce Ogle says:

    Ray said:

    I note that Peter and the apostles (Acts 2) did NOT include baptism in the teaching of the gospel. It was AFTER the preaching that Peter was asked and answered his questioners. What we are to preach is the gospel. The gospel does not include baptism. No sinner is ever commanded to be baptized. Jesus commands that we who preach the gospel are to baptize the new believers. The command is to US, not to them. And those who seek to disobey the Lord Jesus will regret their lack of faith. Jesus commands baptism for every NEW believer, and it’s we who love Jesus and seek to serve Him who are commanded to baptize!

    Guess what? I completely agree. I think Ray said here that baptism is a response to the gospel, not the gospel itself. Shouldn’t we do as Peter did? Preach the good news and then shut up and let the Holy Spirit convict an convince and then when people ask, “What should I do now?” Tell them first to repent (and explain what biblical repenting is) and to be baptized reenacting the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. Let’s preach Christ, it is Christ who saves.

  311. Royce Ogle says:

    Grizz, I don’t remember you adding anything to the discourse, except to take some cheap shots at Jay and to insult Grace because she is a woman, so in the future I’ll just disregard your jabs.

  312. Grizz says:

    Grace,

    Do you only sing songs written by folks in your faith heritage? I have yet to see such a hymnal anywhere. Of course, I have only been collecting hymnals for 40 years, but only casually. Perhaps someonehere lnows of such a hymnal?

    If not, why ask about something which doesn’t exist?

    G

  313. Royce Ogle says:

    Grace, I doubt that many people who are not Christians write Christian songs that are widely distributed, do you?

  314. Grace says:

    We don’t use hymnals, we do things at church different than how you do. I just thought it is a bit contradicting of oneself for someone to worship God with songs written by someone they see as a heretic.

  315. Grizz says:

    Grace,

    I haven’t been to a congregation that uses a hymnal in years. The churches I have attended regularly don’t use them. This has been true since the early 1990’s. Few churches around where I live even have hymnals. So Royce’s point seems irrelevant on multiple levels to me.

    And if you do not practice using a hymnal, why would you require something of another which you do not even regard enough to put into practice?

    G

  316. Grace says:

    Royce, I also agree with the Ray’s comment.
    “What we are to preach is the gospel. The gospel does not include baptism. No sinner is ever commanded to be baptized. Jesus commands that we who preach the gospel are to baptize the new believers.”

    Well said Ray.

  317. Larry Cheek says:

    Ray
    Have you noticed that the text that Grace is quoting for Ephesians 1:13,14 appears to a paraphrased version of scriptures, she has not identified from where, we are not comparing the same authority. While researching this portion of scripture there is nothing in these verses that have a direct communication with the Gentiles,the message here is speaking to the saved (all the saved from any nationality) and is not discussing a difference between believing and baptism. These verses have nothing to do with the point Grace is applying them.

    This is very much like Royce’s comments; I cannot find a place in scripture where the comments about song book pages could be documented.
    It would really help all to understanding by going to Royce’s site and read his document that Grace mentioned on Dec 13 in her post, I have and have thought about incorporating some of the doctrine here in this discussion that I cannot find in the Bible. I noticed that on his site he chooses whether to allow someone to post, I would only guess that you cannot post information that he does not agree with.

  318. Royce Ogle says:

    It isn’t in the Bible Larry. Maybe you are having trouble keeping up with context. It does require a lot of reading.

  319. Grace says:

    Grizz, We don’t think there’s anything wrong with using hymnals at all, we just sing different songs. If the church I attended thought a songwriter was a heretic we certainly wouldn’t sing their songs, I just can’t see calling people heretics and then singing their songs in worship. It does seem a bit weird for someone to do, that’s all I’m saying.

  320. Larry Cheek says:

    Grace,
    When you don’t do your job of baptizing after teaching about Jesus which cannot be done without telling them about baptism, do you then become the rebellious sinner? You being held responsible to God for the lack of completing the teaching and baptizing?

  321. Larry Cheek says:

    I just realized that I did not get the link pasted into the comment.
    http://gracedigest.com/2012/10/01/repent-and-be-baptized/

  322. Alabama John says:

    Points to ponder:

    1) Many songs we have sung for years in our COC songbooks have been changed to meet more of the thinking today so we do not sing error. “When we all get to heaven” has been changed to “when the saved get to heaven” in the newer songbooks to be more scripturally accurate.
    Many others followed and it is expected other songs meanings and word changes are coming.

    2) Those baptized by Philip didn’t immediately receive the Spirit until the apostles came and laid hands on them, then those did.
    Do we think today on this discussion all those baptized by Philip and others that went out doing as Philip did but didn’t have apostles lay hands on them all had to later be rebaptized and if they were missed, would burn in hell? That has been and still is the position taken by the COC before the progressives broke off.

    3) Romans 6:23 says the GIFT of God which would include the Holy Spirits GIFT is eternal life.
    That is the GIFT spoken of in Acts 2:38 being given from God: (Father, Son, Holy Ghost or Spirit) either one, as they, all three are one, upon being baptized for the remission of your sins. IMHO

  323. Grizz says:

    Which songwriter was called a heretic? Maybe I missed that.

    G

  324. laymond says:

    Ray, I was only backing up your statement, that Jesus did not baptize with water. by posting Jhn 4:1,2

  325. Grace says:

    Larry said – While researching this portion of scripture there is nothing in these verses that have a direct communication with the Gentiles,the message here is speaking to the saved (all the saved from any nationality) and is not discussing a difference between believing and baptism.

    Larry, if you read the whole epistle you will notice Paul referes to the people he is specifically speaking to as being Gentiles several time throughout the book of Ephesians. And Ephesians 1:13-14 is specifically about the Holy Spirit and we also know the Gentiles who were at Cornelius’ house received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized.

  326. “Apostolic powers”. Sigh. Yet another suggesting that the apostles were some sort of magical wizards instead of merely disciples who were operating in the power of the same Spirit who gives gifts to us all. The traditional view of the Twelve usually sounds more like Merlin or Gandalf than it does Peter or John.

  327. laymond says:

    Charles do you mean to tell me that the apostles were just as any everyday Christian, they had no special God given powers.
    Charles you claim special powers given from God. when did you receive those special gifts of the “holy ghost”. Did you receive “the holy ghost” upon believing in Jesus, or upon being baptized into Jesus. If you claim to have received then at either time, you must be more special or more religious than all the apostles, because they spent three years under the personal teachings of Jesus, and he did not see fit to bestow that power upon the twelve until he had been raised from the dead, and was on his way to the Father.
    Jhn 20:19 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.
    Jhn 20:20 And when he had so said, he shewed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord.
    Jhn 20:21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.
    Jhn 20:22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:

    I don’t understand why people today receive the “holy ghost” so much sooner than the apostles did.
    but I am open to any and all explanations why you think you were more deserving than the apostles.

  328. Grace says:

    We are all ordinary people called to be on an extraordinary mission. The gifts are given to the church.

    1 Corinthians 12:4-11 Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who empowers them all in everyone. To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. For to one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom, and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit, to another faith by the same Spirit, to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit, to another the working of miracles, to another prophecy, to another the ability to distinguish between spirits, to another various kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues. All these are empowered by one and the same Spirit, who apportions to each one individually as he wills.

  329. Larry Cheek says:

    Grace,
    I apologize about the manner in which I stated the message about the Gentiles he was directing a communication to them. The point I was trying to address was the fact that the Gentiles and Jews were merged into one body even prior to this writing, Christians in in Christ are no longer segregated by different nationalities.

  330. Larry Cheek says:

    Grace,
    The verses that you have quoted tell a different story than you have identified. You stated that the gifts are given to the church. Multiple places say, to one, to another and to each one individually.

  331. Grace says:

    Larry,
    No worries, It actually surprised me that you didn’t realize it.

  332. Grace says:

    Larry, the church is individual people.

  333. Larry Cheek says:

    Grace,
    I have known that probably longer than you have been on earth. But, the way you worded the message I did not think that you knew it. Thank you.

  334. Ray Downen says:

    Grace thinks I am attacking Baptists. But what I’m speaking about is Baptist TEACHING rather than the people doing the teaching. The doctrine is not the person. Anyone who believes in salvation by faith ALONE is wrong doctrinally. They probably are fine PEOPLE, but my comment wasn’t about what kind of PEOPLE they are. I have no way of judging that. I’m not their judge. Why would Grace think I was attacking Baptist PEOPLE? Surely she knows better!

  335. Ray Downen says:

    Charles says he thinks the apostles had no special powers. Obviously he hasn’t read (or hasn’t believed?) the book of Acts which tells of acts of APOSTLES of Christ and makes clear they surely did have SPECIAL powers. Those powers were recognized by all the church THEN, but apparently not by all Christians now.

  336. Ray Downen says:

    Royce right wrote:

    Shouldn’t we do as Peter did? Preach the good news and then shut up and let the Holy Spirit convict an convince and then when people ask, “What should I do now?” Tell them first to repent (and explain what biblical repenting is) and to be baptized reenacting the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. Let’s preach Christ, it is Christ who saves.

    He right wrote EXCEPT for implying that it’s wrong to speak up until the seeker asks what to do now.

    We need to speak UP for Jesus rather than to SHUT UP about Him and His love and His desire to save EVERY sinner. We need to shout out lovingly but with no chance of misunderstanding that Jesus is LORD and will be our JUDGE for eternity. Peter had their attention because of the tremendous signs given by God both aurally and orally. We need to do whatever is necessary in order to GET the attention of those who are headed for Hell. Peter with many other words urged his hearers to save themselves by obeying the gospel!

  337. Royce Ogle says:

    There you go again Ray. The straw man tactic. You only have to read my quote above to see that yours is not accurate.

    Now, maybe I owe you an apology. When you contrasted “Baptists” with “congregations of Christians” in a comment, I concluded that you did not believe Baptists are Christians. If I was wrong I do apologize.

  338. Royce Ogle says:

    I have enjoyed seeing Grace (a woman of all things..) dispatch herself rather well in this discussion. It seems to me that she knows her Bible and has more common sense than her critics.

  339. Ray Downen says:

    Grizz wasn’t asking me, but I’ll butt in. He wrote:

    Grace,

    Do you only sing songs written by folks in your faith heritage? I have yet to see such a hymnal anywhere. Of course, I have only been collecting hymnals for 40 years, but only casually. Perhaps someonehere lnows of such a hymnal?

    If not, why ask about something which doesn’t exist?

    G

    How blessed all Christians are that gospel songs and hymns have been written by folks who love Jesus. The songs are to praise God, not to praise any sectarian stance. Usually so at least. I choose to not sing some stanzas of some songs in any hymnal if those stanzas speak of salvation by faith alone. And MOST hymnals include such songs. Good songs. The less-good ones generally are soon dropped from use.

    And now, unfortunately, hymnals are not used in most large congregations. What a pity! But how easy to understand that buying enough hymnals is a very expensive and work-intensive project if the crowd is large, and it’s much cheaper to use a projector (or projectors) to put the words on screens which everyone can see.

    That’s one argument for smaller churches rather than large!

  340. Royce Ogle says:

    Would you consider 3,000 to be a large church or a small church. 3,000 minimum were added to the church after Peter’s sermon in Acts 2. And, since they were “added” to it, the church existed before Pentecost. You can’t add to nothing. So it’s pretty clear that the congregation of believers in Jerusalem after Pentecost was in the thousands. Many of those people left and went back to their home countries but the explosive growth of the church in those early days after the Lord’s ascension leaves no doubt that the church in Jerusalem was quite large. And they did not have song books! LOL

  341. Ray Downen says:

    Grace says, “the Gentiles who were at Cornelius’ house received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized.” But did they? What was given was a SIGN from God that He approved of Gentiles being baptized into Christ. The SIGN was not for the benefit of the Gentiles. It was for the JEWS who until that day were the only ones considered eligible to become Christians. The gift from God of His Spirit was given to those who HAD repented and HAD been immersed into Christ. This SIGN was not the gift promised in Acts 2:38.

    What Peter saw was not what is promised to converts to Christ. But what he saw and was able then to report to other Jewish Christians was confirmation that Gentiles also could be added to the church of the Lord. I affirm that if Peter had thought those Gentiles were already saved he would NOT have ordered those with him to baptize them INTO Christ. Baptism without fail is INTO Christ as is affirmed in Acts 2:38, Galatians 3:27 and many other scriptures (but especially clearly in those two places as being INTO Christ FOLLOWING baptism in water).

    No one was ever promised they would be saved by receiving the Spirit. Salvation is in JESUS rather than in His Spirit. Baptism is by command of Jesus. It’s being buried and raised up to walk as a NEW CHRISTIAN (Romans 6:1-11). The Spirit is NOT the Savior!

  342. Ray Downen says:

    Charles, you suggest Jesus wasted His time training and empowering apostles. You suggest they were just like all other disciples who turned to Jesus for salvation. You misunderstand or ignore the entire section of John’s gospel dedicated to the final words of Jesus on the night in which He was later taken for trial and crucified. John, chapters 14-17 are all about the apostles. Not about 120. Not about 3,000. It was the apostles we read about then in Acts 1 who specifically were promised they would receive POWER when they were baptized in Christ’s Spirit. In Acts 2 it was the APOSTLES who preached and spoke and who received the signs of God’s approval. Luke mentions then that many signs (miracles) were performed BY THE APOSTLES. It seems that you have paid little attention to what the Word reports if you don’t recognize that the apostles were set apart for special work for Jesus.

  343. Skip says:

    Ray, I know you are writing with tongue-in-cheek but it would be a tragedy to want smaller churches with fewer saved people so that we can afford a hymnal for everyone. 🙂 Would it not be better to use the money that could have been spent on hymnals to launch more missions, save more souls, or to feed the poor.

    Here is my position on hymnals… The goal is not to own a pretty blue book with shaped notes. The goal is to stir worship in the hearts of the congregants and that can just as easily be done with photocopy handouts or with a projector. God looks at the heart rather than at what book we are singing from.

  344. Grace says:

    Ray, you keep calling the Holy Spirit a sign, that is not in the Bible. Peter said, “God knows people’s hearts, and he confirmed that he accepts Gentiles by giving them the Holy Spirit, JUST AS HE DID TO US.”, Peter did not call the Holy Spirit a sign. You are making up your own story instead what Peter said.

    Anyone who has the Holy Spirit and is given the power to speak in tongues as the people at Cornelius’ house did are not dead people, but are most certainly alive.

    Ephesians 1:13-14 And now you Gentiles have also heard the truth, the Good News that God saves you. And when you believed in Christ, he identified you as his own by giving you the Holy Spirit, whom he promised long ago. The Spirit is God’s guarantee that he will give us the inheritance he promised and that he has purchased us to be his own people. He did this so we would praise and glorify him.

  345. Royce Ogle says:

    A C student in an elementary school should be able to read this passage and understand it. But, brother Ray doesn’t get it, or doesn’t want to believe it. The words speak for themselves no matter what he says.

    6 The apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider this matter. 7 And after there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. 8 And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us, 9 and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith. (Acts 15:6-9)

    I have done this before but it’s worth repeating.

    1. God selected Peter to go to the Gentiles with the gospel of Christ.
    2. God chose not only that the Gentiles would hear the gospel but also that they would “believe”.
    3. Peter preached, the Gentiles believed, and God, seeing what was in their hearts “bore witness to them by giving them the Holy Spirit. And Peter said is was “just as he died to us”.
    4. God was now treating Jews and Gentiles just the same, “he made no distinction between us and them having “cleansed their hearts by faith.

    Now, no one has to believe this account. But the same guy who spoke in Acts 2 spoke here in Acts 15. This syncs with Jesus, Paul, John, and others who taught salvation by grace though faith. A number of times Jay has listed many, many such passages. But, people are fond of the truth they already have and are not interested in anything that challenges their long held ideas.

    BTW, before anyone asks, why did Peter baptize these new Christians? Because that was the plan Jesus gave them. Make disciples, baptize those disciples, and teach them to be obedient to my teachings.

  346. Ray Downen says:

    Royce speaks of the church existing prior to Acts 2. All Luke mentions is that the 3,000 were added to the 120 DISCIPLES already in love with Jesus. But there was no church in existence prior to that day. It took the extraordinary displays of God’s power to begin what has now spread throughout the world. There were no meetings held of a “Christian church” prior to the converts reported on in Acts, chapter two. The church began that day even though there were disciples who loved Jesus prior to that date. From that time on, Christians have assembled particularly on Sundays in order to praise God and help one another in service to Jesus.

  347. Ray Downen says:

    Grace doesn’t agree with Peter that seeking believer need to repent and be baptized IN ORDER TO BE SAVED (Acts 2:38). She writes, “Anyone who has the Holy Spirit and is given the power to speak in tongues as the people at Cornelius’ house did are not dead people, but are most certainly alive.”

    Do Christians believe that JESUS saves? Or do we teach that the HOLY SPIRIT saves? Those who read the Bible to learn truth will understand that it’s JESUS who was crucified and whose blood washes away the sin of converts to HIM. Others will suppose the Holy Spirit is our Savior. It’s either one or the other. If the Spirit saves, then it’s not Jesus who saves. But Acts 2:38 makes clear the sequence.

    We repent of sin and turn to Jesus for salvation. As HE commands, we are baptized in water, and THEN the gift of the Spirit is given by God. That’s the way conversion happens except in very exceptional cases. And that’s what happened to the first Gentiles who were saved as well. They were ordered to be baptized because that’s how sinners are saved. It’s contrary to truth to bury living persons. Baptism is a BURIAL in water of a sinner, who because of the person’s faith in JESUS and turning to HIM as Lord, is raised up out of the baptismal water as a new Christian.

    We do not do well to ignore that Peter, having seen the sign from God with which he could explain his action, immediately ordered those with him to BAPTIZE (in water) the ones who had received God’s sign of approval. Peter knew they needed salvation, and the way to BE SAVED is, after turning to Jesus as Lord, to be baptized INTO Him (Galatians 3:27). Please don’t claim to be a Christian and ignore what the Bible teaches! It doesn’t teach that these Gentiles were saved by a baptism in the Holy Spirit which was given to persuade Jewish Christians that it was all right to baptize Gentiles into Christ.

  348. If the ekklesia is merely the collective term denoting the body of believers, and there were believers in Jesus in existence prior to Pentecost, then the church started long before Pentecost. If, OTOH, the church is really scheduled weekly meetings and disconnected local congregations and elected autonomous congregational government and believers separated by doctrinal concurrence, well, perhaps Ray is right. Jews began believing in Messiah long before Pentecost. I suspect that some of them even knew each other. And that, like the guys at Emmaeus, they ate together and talked about Jesus. But without elected elders and Sunday services, perhaps they were just Random Jews for Jesus, not Jesus’ called-out ones. Sigh.

    I would also suggest for the umpteenth time that just because a thing is not recorded in scripture is not evidence that it did not happen. There were 120 disciples gathered at Pentecost, but this does not suggest there were not a thousand more in Israel. Or ten thousand. And it’s too easy to view history through the filter of what we currently know and have our perceptions screen out the possibility of anything we did not see before.

  349. Ray Downen says:

    Royce writes, “BTW, before anyone asks, why did Peter baptize these new Christians? Because that was the plan Jesus gave them. Make disciples, baptize those disciples, and teach them to be obedient to my teachings.”

    Perhaps we need to understand what “disciple” means. A disciple is a learner, one who is a student. Are all disciples saved by some means because of their learning? Do all students graduate? Do all receive a diploma? You know better. Then why try to say that every disciple who seeks to learn of Jesus will be saved because they enrolled as a student?

    Wise seekers of truth might learn from Acts 2:37,38 where some who sought to learn about Jesus asked what steps they should take to be saved from the consequences of sin. Peter told them of something which precedes baptism. PRIOR TO being baptized, disciples must REPENT (turning away from self-love and sin and TO Jesus as Lord) and then be baptized and THEN receive from God the gift of His Spirit to work and walk with them the rest of their lives.

    Peter baptized in chapter 10 for the same reason he baptized in chapter 2 of Acts. The message hadn’t changed. Once Peter SAW THE SIGN of God’s approval (which enabled him to justify his act to his fellow apostles and to all the church) he then ordered these who sought salvation to be baptized INTO Christ. This was done. And only in this way is any person ever brought INTO Christ.
    Galatians 3:26-27 (The apostle Paul explains) ESV 26 “for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. 27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. . “

  350. Grizz says:

    Ray,

    as one with nearly 20 years of experience with choirs from kindergarten on, I can say that fans of vocal harmonies prefer to have the notes for each part to indicate when and how to sing harmonies along with the melody line. But, having had as much experience singing with both trained and untrained voices as I have, those who are trained need those notes less and those who are untrained struggle to learn harmonies for new songs with or without the notes being printed for them.

    Trained vocalists know all singing is better when those singing are looking up, so that the throat is not compressed and breathing is not restricted. So while projecting the words mean no harmony notes, it also means those singing sing better.

    Of course, this is change … which is enough for many to reject it.

    G

  351. Royce Ogle says:

    Pentecost was not about the beginning of the church (Christ’s body universal). It was about empowering the church. In the Gospel of John we can read where believers were first received the Holy Spirit. John 20:19-23 records this event. Earlier in John Jesus made clear when the Spirit would come. John 7:37, ” Now this he said about the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were to receive, for as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.” Jesus was glorified when he was raised from the dead, not later at Pentecost.

    The 120 who waited in the upper room were not there waiting to receive the Holy Spirit, they were waiting for the Holy Spirit’s power to come “upon” them. That’s what Jesus had promised.

    Now in Acts 2 notice what happened, When they were “filled with the Spirit” “ALL” of the 120, not just the disciples, or apostles, but “ALL” of the 120 (Acts 2:1-4) Now Peter will explain what is happening. Not once ever does he mention the birth of the church. This is Peter’s explanation of what was taking place.

    16 But this is what was uttered through the prophet Joel:

    17 “‘And in the last days it shall be, God declares,
    that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh,
    and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
    and your young men shall see visions,
    and your old men shall dream dreams;
    18 even on my male servants and female servants
    in those days I will pour out my Spirit, and they shall prophesy.
    19 And I will show wonders in the heavens above
    and signs on the earth below,
    blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke;
    20 the sun shall be turned to darkness
    and the moon to blood,
    before the day of the Lord comes, the great and magnificent day.
    21 And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.’

    They were filled with the Spirit for ministry and sometimes miracles. Notice, that is was not just the 11 but ALL of the 120 who spoke in tongues so that the hearers heard the “mighty works of God” in their own language. Then we read of Christians being filled with the Spirit again and again even in Ephesians where we focus on a minor matter and ignore the more weighty command to be filled with the Spirit.

    Receiving the Spirit when you believe (13 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 of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it to the praise of his glory.” (Ephesians 1:13,14) is not the same as being “filled” with the Spirit.

    It’s a good idea to read more than 5 or 6 passages of Scripture before you set your doctrine in stone.

  352. Grace says:

    Ray your savior is a baptismal pool, Jesus is not at the bottom of a baptismal pool, sorry to bust your bubble. You ignore what Peter said to the apostles and elders about the Holy Spirit, you make up a story that’s not in the Bible. And yes I do believe that God,Jesus and the Holy Spirit have good connections together.

    The people at Cornelius’ house received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized, whether you want to believe it or not.

    Peter said, “God knows people’s hearts, and he confirmed that he accepts Gentiles by giving them the Holy Spirit, JUST AS HE DID TO US.”

    Ephesians 1:13-14 And now you Gentiles have also heard the truth, the Good News that God saves you. And when you believed in Christ, he identified you as his own by giving you the Holy Spirit, WHOM HE PROMISED LONG AGO. The Spirit is God’s guarantee that he will give us the inheritance he promised and that he has purchased us to be his own people. He did this so we would praise and glorify him.

  353. laymond says:

    Col 3:16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.

    Eph 5:18 And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit;
    Eph 5:19 Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;

    Compare these two passages.( I believe they were written by the same man) To be “filled with the Spirit” is the same as to “let the word of Christ dwell in you richly”.

  354. Monty says:

    Grace,

    If you can read Acts 10 and the story of Cornelius and about the visions and angels and the Lord intervening and speaking to Peter in a vision and all the unclean animals he was supposed to eat and the Holy Spirit falling on those Gentiles(in a way he hadn’t done since Pentecost -some 10 years previous) and believe that there was anything normal about that whole scenario then I’m astounded. I simply don’t know what to say. The whole chapter and then Peter’s defense in the next chapter wreaks of abnormality.

    Gentiles were finally to be preached to and upon believing on Jesus, baptized and brought into the Church, some 10 years after Pentecost . However, it took a direct act of God to make it happen. Peter’s argument to his brethren was “who was I that I could withstand God?” In other words, I couldn’t withhold baptism ( “can any man forbid water, he asked.”) What was Peter’s concerns? He knew he was going to receive flak, if he baptized Gentiles into the Church(into Christ). The Holy Spirit falling onto Cornelius and his household was God’s way of making baptism a non-issue. Who was I to withstand God? Baptism is tied to the receiving of the Spirit-see Acts 2:38. When Cornelius had received an unusual outpouring of the Spirit how could Peter not baptize them? In fact he commanded them to be baptized. Something many are reluctant to do. I’m not sure why, since it’s perfectly Biblical to do so. It brings a person outside of Christ, into his Church. There is no other urgent command more important to those who put their trust in Jesus, than be baptized for the remission of sins-wash away sins, the washing of rebirth.

  355. Royce Ogle says:

    Ray, you lean far more heavily on “baptized” than on “repent” in
    Acts 2:38. No New Testament writer does.

    Just as John the Baptist preached to the people to “Repent” Jesus did the same thing. Do you suppose John baptized sinners who had not repented or people who had repented? John’s baptism was “unto repentance”, or we could say it was “for repentance”, but his baptism was not repentance. The Bible record is that God “granted repentance” to the Gentiles. In all the passages about Peter going to the Gentiles that is the sole reference to “repentance”. So it is easy to conclude that repentance and faith are linked together, like two sides of a coin. No person can truly repent who does not believe (have faith) and not person can truly believe who does not repent. If you will read your Bible you will find that water baptism never, ever stands alone. It is always preceded by “repent” or “believe”. Throughout recorded history, Christian baptism is “believers” baptism. The reason most of us would not accept infant baptism is that we believe the one being baptized should first repent and have faith in Jesus, and those who do are just as Paul described in Ephesians 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 of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory. (Ephesians 1:13,14)

  356. Royce Ogle says:

    Sister Grace, Each person cherry picks what fits their talking points. I’m probably guilty of that too at least to some degree. I have noticed that when you quote a clear passage of Scripture most of these guys don’t like they just ignore it and go right back to their talking points. You would think that they would at a minimum give their version of what is meant in those unfriendly passages rather than ignore them.

  357. Grace says:

    Peter baptized the people at Cornelius’ house after they believed and received the Holy Spirit. Gentiles being saved was new to them, but God did not give them the Holy Spirit any differently than the Jews, that was exactly Peter’s point to the apostles and elders.

    John 7:39 “But this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those believing in Him would receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.”

    Acts 15:6-11 “So the apostles and elders met together to resolve this issue. At the meeting, after a long discussion, Peter stood and addressed them as follows: “Brothers, you all know that God chose me from among you some time ago to preach to the Gentiles so that they could hear the Good News and believe. God knows people’s hearts, and he confirmed that he accepts Gentiles by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as he did to us. He made no distinction between us and them, for he cleansed their hearts through faith. So why are you now challenging God by burdening the Gentile believers with a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors were able to bear? We believe that we are all saved the same way, by the undeserved grace of the Lord Jesus.”

    Ephesians 1:13-14 And now you Gentiles have also heard the truth, the Good News that God saves you. And when you believed in Christ, he identified you as his own by giving you the Holy Spirit, WHOM HE PROMISED LONG AGO. The Spirit is God’s guarantee that he will give us the inheritance he promised and that he has purchased us to be his own people. He did this so we would praise and glorify him.

    According to God He didn’t make an exception giving them the Holy Spirit.

  358. Skip says:

    Laymond,
    You said, “To be “filled with the Spirit” is the same as to “let the word of Christ dwell in you richly”.”
    Does this mean you believe that no Christian has the indwelling Holy Spirit and thus isn’t filled with the Holy Spirit? I can see examples of people filled with the Spirit where reference to being knowledgeable of the Word is not given. Cornelius’ household was filled with the Spirit.

    “While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles. For they heard them speaking in tongues and praising God. Acts 10:44-46

    By the Spirit they were speaking in tongues. This is separate from Bible knowledge.

  359. Ray Downen says:

    It would seem that Grace doesn’t know that it’s JESUS who commands baptism. She thinks baptism is of little importance. But Jesus commands that we who tell others about Jesus (perhaps that doesn’t include Grace or others who don’t know about baptism “into Christ”) are to BAPTIZE those who believe. Why does she suppose anyone should be baptized if not to obey what the Lord commands? Why would anyone promise salvation without obeying JESUS as Lord?

  360. Grace says:

    I haven’t met anyone who is reluctant to baptize Christian believers, couldn’t imagine why anyone would want to go against God’s will that we baptize those who belong to Him.

  361. Ray Downen says:

    Laymond well says

    Col 3:16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord.

    Eph 5:18 And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess; but be filled with the Spirit; Eph 5:19 Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;

    Compare these two passages.( I believe they were written by the same man) To be “filled with the Spirit” is the same as to “let the word of Christ dwell in you richly”.

    Yes, Paul wrote both passages, and both refer to us expressing outwardly the love which is in our hearts, the “word of Christ” which tells us of His love and our worth. If we “let God’s love” motivate us, we are surely doing the work assigned to us by God through His Spirit. Good thinking!

  362. Ray Downen says:

    Monty’s comments are excellent! I hope everyone who is reading these comments will echo my “Amen” to what Monty wrote at 10:59 a.m. today. (only a few comments back from this one). .

  363. Ray Downen says:

    Is it surprising that I would comment about what is being said rather than to bring in a different subject? No one has questioned the need for repentance, although they believe in salvation by faith alone. But many question the need for the baptism commanded by JESUS Himself. So of course I write about the need to obey Jesus. This is not to deny the need for both repentance AND baptism, but simply to write to the seen need.

  364. Ray Downen says:

    Royce writes “Each person cherry picks what fits their talking points. I’m probably guilty of that too at least to some degree. I have noticed that when you quote a clear passage of Scripture most of these guys don’t like they just ignore it and go right back to their talking points. You would think that they would at a minimum give their version of what is meant in those unfriendly passages rather than ignore them.”

    When passages not on the subject are introduced, it hardly seems necessary to explain why they are not on the subject. No one questions the need for faith in Jesus in order for salvation. There’s no response needed to remarks about that need. But when the person claims that a passage teaches salvation through faith ALONE, it’s true we need to point out that there’s no “alone” in the passage. But we have surely tried to explain clearly why sinners are not saved by the Holy Spirit alone. Jesus is Savior. The Spirit is given to saved people. Baptism is done to people who want to BE saved. No Christian could possibly BE baptized. If they’re dunked, it’s to no purpose other than to get them wet.

    Baptism is INTO Christ, as is very clearly taught in apostolic writings, most particularly in Galatians 3:27, which I’ve quote for readers and can be found in their Bibles. I repeat. baptism brings sinners INTO Christ. No Christian should ever be dunked and told they were being baptized. Only folks ignorant of apostolic teaching would ever speak of baptizing a Christian. It can’t be done!

  365. Grace says:

    Royce said – Sister Grace, Each person cherry picks what fits their talking points. I’m probably guilty of that too at least to some degree. I have noticed that when you quote a clear passage of Scripture most of these guys don’t like they just ignore it and go right back to their talking points. You would think that they would at a minimum give their version of what is meant in those unfriendly passages rather than ignore them.

    I know Royce, Ray and Monty keep trying to say the people at Cornelius’ house who received the Holy Spirit were exceptions to please the Jews. They ignore that Peter told the apostles and elders the exact opposite, that God did not give the Gentiles the Holy Spirit any differently than the Jews. They ignore the Scriptures that oppose their made up story. As long as they ignore these passages it’s like beating a dead horse.

  366. laymond says:

    some people seem to be astounded that the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost was only promised,
    and was only given to Jesus apostles.
    Act 1:1 The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach,
    Act 1:2 Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen:
    Act 1:3 To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:
    Act 1:4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.
    Act 1:5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

    the promise only to the apostles.
    Jhn 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

    the fulfillment of that promise, only to the apostles.
    Jhn 20:22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:

  367. Ray Downen says:

    Laymond’s is a good reminder. The promise including being led into all truth was given ONLY to the apostles. We note however that the SPIRIT is promised to every believer who repents and is baptized. So it’s not only the apostles who have the Spirit. They are the ONLY ones who were baptized IN the Spirit, to receive special powers and gifts, but the Spirit Himself is promised to every Christian. Jesus referred to Him as “Comforter” in John when addressing the apostles. Laymond does well to point out the difference between apostles and us who are non-apostles! Many Bible students seem to be unaware of the difference!

  368. Monty says:

    Grace said,

    “According to God He didn’t make an exception giving them the Holy Spirit”

    Grace I think you missed the point I was making. Certainly Peter was expressing in hindsight to the Jews(Christians) that God had showed by the Gentiles (receiving the HS )that he was no respecter of persons. That is true. Great point! But what is also true is the reversal in the sequencing of events that God used to prove to Peter and Co. that the Gentiles were accepted by God and therefore approved for baptism into the church. Gentile and Jewish Christians would now be one. Baptized into the one body. (1 Corinthians 13) and (Galatians 3:26-28)

    Not the fact that they received the Spirit,(the Christians in Jerusalem were certainly knowledgeable about when you become a Christian, you receive the Spirit) but how it played out. The manner in which they received the Spirit. The sequencing was different. There was something out of the ordinary here. It was the Holy Spirit “falling on the Gentiles” as Peter “began to speak” is what he said. Something Peter said hadn’t happened since or “as in the beginning” (Acts 11:15). The beginning of what? The beginning of the day the Holy Spirit first fell upon them(on Pentecost). And it triggered a thought of what Jesus had said some 10 years earlier – that “John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.” He hadn’t thought of that verse in ages, but he did then. Why?( If that was normative, then it would have been “old hat”). However, the HS falling like that hadn’t happened in that way since then. That is the point (I believe) you are mistaken about. There was nothing “normal” about how it took place. God had waited patiently for some 10 years,if my memory serves me well (Pentecost till Cornelius) to pour out the Holy Spirit “as He did in the beginning” (on Pentecost – on Jews), to show Gentiles(who believe on the name of Jesus) were approved by Him to be brought into the body of Christ(water baptized) and for fellowship. Peter’s argument is you can’t argue with God. So, I did what I had to do, I ordered they be baptized. The believe-baptism-receive the Holy Spirit was changed to believe-Holy Spirit falling on them – then baptized. The whole story in Acts 10 is about God breaking down the Jew/Gentile barrier by extraordinary measures, in order to get some hard headed Jewish Christians to baptize Gentile believers into their club (the Church). And the Holy Spirit falling on them when Peter began to speak was the clincher!

    It marked a new chapter in the church. The issue in Acts 15 is over requiring circumcision of Gentile converts to Christianity. Peter’s argument is why? Their hearts were cleansed by faith, just like ours were. It’s faith vs. Law. It’s not faith versus baptism Peter is making (which is what you’re trying to make it). But faith vs. the Law of Moses. Can a Gentile just be a Christian without converting to the Law of Moses That’s a point I believe you are mistaken about. You are trying to rewrite the story. Galatians proves this is so. Paul writes in Galatians 3:26-28, “For you are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus(Everyone’s with Paul so far!) But watch this: “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” (did anyone jump ship?) There is neither Jew nor Greek…for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abrahams seed, and heirs according to the promise.

    Paul links faith to baptism. He would never-ever have done that if he viewed baptism (as some do) as an add-on type of work. A first work of obedience ( as I’ve heard it described). He’s just spent 2 plus chapters denying it was faith plus anything, and yet he says “You are sons of God by faith .For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.’ Think about that for a moment. Were there any sons of God by faith who weren’t baptized into Christ? No! All who were sons by faith, were all who were baptized into Christ. No such thing as a child of God by faith who wasn’t baptized. What was the assurance Paul is trying to give his readers? It’s that all (Jews and Gentiles converts alike) were all equal in God’s eyes? How so? They were by faith, all made sons by trusting in Jesus and being baptized into Jesus. Sort of sounds like Mark 16:16, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.” They all had faith and “all” put Christ on in baptism. How different than modern teaching which says, “You can be Abraham’s seed/heir without being baptized into Christ. All of God’s sons(and daughters) were in Christ, by the means of baptism. It was in the water that all were made equals/brothers-having God as Father- God being no respecter of persons, having cleansed their hearts by faith. No baptism, then no in Christ, no “in Christ” then no brothers/equals/God’s sons/Abrahams’ heirs.. That’s why baptism is essential and why it’s to be commanded, not suggested, or to be put off. Why on earth if you believed in Jesus would you put off becoming God’s son and becoming one in Christ with all other believers and becoming Abrahams heir, unless you’ve been taught. that all of the above happened pre-baptism. I guess Paul was wrong.

  369. Ray Downen says:

    I want to remind us all that Jay has written, “the Bible repeatedly promises salvation to ALL with FAITH in JESUS. It really does.” He lists many such promises. Not a one of them says that faith ALONE saves. It behooves us then to not deny that Jesus commands that new believers are to be baptized and that Jesus and His apostles link baptism with conversion every time. Apostles of Jesus simply did NOT teach or imply that salvation is by faith ALONE. The one time seekers are said to have inquired as to what they needed to do to be saved, the apostles (Peter as spokesman) informed them of their need to repent to make Jesus their Lord and to obey the baptism commanded by the Lord. We do not do well to imply that sinners are saved by faith alone! Today I’ve uploaded to my web site a discussion which is much shorter than this one has been on the subject of conversion. You’re welcome to read it if interested. It’s at http://missionoutreach.org/CB-I01.pdf. To no one’s surprise, the title is “Baptism Brings Sinners INTO Christ.” The author is a Texas, Gaylon Embrey. Perhaps you know him.

  370. Ray Downen says:

    How commendable is what Monty has written. And how sad to see the many mistakes made by Royce. The upper room contained 13 easily. But there’s nothing said in apostolic writing about 120 at any time being in any “upper room.” The crowd which gathered didn’t try to climb stairs to get to the place! The gathering was obviously in the temple courts. That’s the place in Jerusalem where a crowd could be accommodated.

    Nor does Luke write about anyone other than apostles receiving the sign of flame-like appearances over their heads or speaking in languages unknown to the speaker. The noun which tells us who received the “sign” is the noun preceding a “they.” And it’s the TWELVE apostles who are the noun preceding. And all the miracles which followed were performed “by the apostles” according to Luke’s recital of the facts. Imagination is powerful. But facts are facts. Luke reports facts. Careful readers will believe the incident as reported rather than as they imagine it might have been.

    I sympathize with the feeling of some brethren that some of us overemphasize baptism at the expense of other equally important matters. Please understand that we speak as we do only because the truth matters and we respond to untruths or misunderstandings. Truth will prevail. Monty does an excellent job of pointing out the simple truths which some obviously are denying.

  371. Grizz says:

    Monty,

    I agree that what happened with Cornelius and his household was exceptional and not normal to the way all believers of all time experience coming to entrust their lives to Christ. And I appreciate you comparing things via a timeline. That is helpful. But … I would amend your timeline just slightly.

    You have it as, “The believe-baptism-receive the Holy Spirit was changed to believe-Holy Spirit falling on them – then baptized.”

    I believe a closer look reveals that Peter had not finished sharing the gospel when the Spirit fell on them, so the timeline was actually, “the Holy Spirit fell on them – Peter shared the gospel and they believed – they were baptized into Christ.” This may seem problematic for some when dealing with Calvinism and Predestination, but it is what the record relates to us. God gave them the Spirit before they had a chance to hear and believe – because Peter had not yet shared the gospel with them. Peter would, before it was over, preach Acts 10:34-43. But before he had a chance to finish, he was interrupted … by God! Can you imagine being in the middle of a sermon or Bible study and having God interrupt you with an outpouring of the Spirit? Forget all about babies crying and people getting up to go to the bathroom. This was an interruption!

    Why? Well I believe you got the rest right, Monty. Pardon me for the (minor?) correction to your timeline.

    G

  372. Skip says:

    Ray, Many do over emphasize baptism at the expense of missing the central principles in Christianity. This leads one to believe that some harp on baptism over loving God or loving others. A balanced message is best no matter what errors we are trying to correct.

  373. Royce Ogle says:

    I can’t find the comment now but gladly take the criticism and correction. In error I said there were 120 in the upper room. That is not stated and I was wrong. Here is what the text does say.

    12 Then they returned to Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is near Jerusalem, a Sabbath day’s journey away. 13 And when they had entered, they went up to the upper room, where they were staying, Peter and John and James and Andrew, Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot and Judas the son of James. 14 All these with one accord were devoting themselves to prayer, together with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers” Acts 11:12-14

    What is not said is how many women. So I was wrong but so was my friend who corrected me. There was clearly more than he supposed. Next this statement is made.

    15 In those days Peter stood up among the brothers (the company of persons was in all about 120) and said,… Acts 1:15 And so they set about to choose a replacement for Judas. When that was finished we move to chapter 2 and it begins,

    When the day of Pentecost arrived, they were all together in one place Acts 2:1

    How many is “all”? The answer is we don’t know for certain. I think it’s safe to assume that all of those 120 were still around, still waiting for the promise to be fulfilled. And soon it was.

    And suddenly there came from heaven a sound like a mighty rushing wind, and it filled the entire house where they were sitting. 3 And divided tongues as of fire appeared to them and rested on each one of them. 4 And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance. Acts 2:2-4

    It “filled the entire house”. My critic says that was the temple court, and I think he is correct. But is “each one of them” 12 apostles or each of 120? The fact is the passage doesn’t say.

    After the visitors heard the “mighty works of God” in their own languages Peter and the other 11 were standing as Peter begins his address and he explains what was happening.

    Now the majority here on this thread insist that this Holy Spirit baptism is only for the 12. That seems plausible, that is until you hear what Peter has to say.

    First he says “these people are not drunk…” Are “these people” only the apostles, or more? Next he continues.

    But this is what was uttered through the prophet Joel:

    17 “‘And in the last days it shall be, God declares,
    that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh,
    and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
    and your young men shall see visions,
    and your old men shall dream dreams;
    18 even on my male servants[c] and female servants
    in those days I will pour out my Spirit, and they shall prophesy.
    19 And I will show wonders in the heavens above
    and signs on the earth below,
    blood, and fire, and vapor of smoke;
    20 the sun shall be turned to darkness
    and the moon to blood,
    before the day of the Lord comes, the great and magnificent day.
    21 And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.’

    Wow! He says this is what has happened. Only for the 12 apostles? Opps, I don’t think so.

    “young men, daughters, old men, male and female servants…” That is significantly more than the 12 apostles.

    So, yes I was wrong about 120 being in the upper room. But, well it says what it says doesn’t it?

  374. Ray Downen says:

    Royce writes well and is to be commended for considering other suggestions. Luke says what he says, that’s sure. And a pronoun ALWAYS has reference to the preceding noun, so far as grammar is concerned. The baptism of the Spirit was given to the 12 apostles just as Jesus had promised. Luke points out that miracles followed, all done by the apostles, empowered just as Jesus had promised.

    Where the disciples were at any time is not made clear except that it couldn’t have been in “the upper room” if the group was more than a few over a dozen. The “house” where the apostles preached to more than 3,000 (obviously each apostle preached to a group separated from other groups within the more than 3,000) and then baptized 3,000 that day had to have been large enough to have more than 3,000 standing and moving around together. The temple court is the place in Jerusalem where such gatherings normally took place although there were other possible places in the city.

    As for baptism in the Spirit, I’ve pointed out and it can’t be denied that the promise was made to ONLY the apostles. So we’ve no reason to suppose it was to a larger group. The promise included that the apostles would be enabled to remember all Jesus had taught them during His ministry and that they would be led into all truth. These gifts were part of the package of baptism in the Spirit. It’s only in John’s gospel and in Luke’s first chapter in Acts that Spirit baptism is promised. In both cases it was ONLY the apostles who received the promise.

    That EVERY Christian receives the “gift of the Spirit” is prophesied and began the same day that the apostles received BAPTISM IN THE SPIRIT. But the apostles were unique. Notice that it’s only the apostles who performed miracles in following days. That should tell any reader who received baptism in the Spirit. But the GIFT of the Spirit was promised to ALL, and surely ALL who were baptized in water received the prophesied and promised gift. But Luke doesn’t speak of a great collection of tongue-speakers all babbling at once. He speaks of the apostles preaching and being understood in many languages unknown to the apostles.

  375. Royce Ogle says:

    You didn’t mention Peter’s explanation that what was happening was Joel’s prophecy being fulfilled. Ray do you simply disregard that truth ?

  376. Ray Downen says:

    No, I don’t disregard the prophecy or its fulfillment. It’s fulfilled in the many who receive the GIFT of the Spirit, which includes every Christian. And in that generation and the next several generations, there was need for special work of the Spirit since the apostolic writings were not generally available to most believers. God continued to speak through prophets as long as there were no available words to guide us who seek to follow Jesus as Lord.

    I suspect the Spirit is more active also in areas where the Scriptures are not yet available in languages known to believers. God meets needs. He doesn’t usually provide simple pleasures to make people feel good or special. That there were prophets and prophetesses in the first century is stated, and many works of the Spirit that are not apparently needed in this generation.

    God meets needs. God does what He has said through prophets that He will do. And sometimes unexpected things to bless us that weren’t even spoken of by prophets.

  377. Grace says:

    Monty’s said, “Not the fact that they received the Spirit,(the Christians in Jerusalem were certainly knowledgeable about when you become a Christian, you receive the Spirit) but how it played out. The manner in which they received the Spirit. The sequencing was different. There was something out of the ordinary here.”

    The Gentiles were Christians when they received the Holy Spirit and Peter said what happened there is the norm, Acts 15:11 “But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they.”
    Giving them the Holy Spirit before baptism was not extraordinary or you just called God a liar. Numbers 23:19 “God is no mere human! He doesn’t tell lies or change his mind. God always keeps his promises.”

    God sent Peter to a Gentiles house to preach the gospel. The Jews were surprised to see that God saved the Gentiles giving them the Holy Spirit. Peter saw that they belonged to God, he knew it’s God’s will that we baptize His people and he baptized them.

    The church isn’t a club as you put it. The church is individual people accepted by God through Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross. Everything we all have done against God and to each other, none of us deserve to be saved. An initiation ceremony to be in a club isn’t what I needed, I needed a Savior, and I praise God He saved me right where I was.

  378. Grizz says:

    Grace,

    For all of your insistence that the event at Cornelius’ home was NOT exceptional, the fact is, it was. It is not everyday that people saw what they saw on Pentecost and at the home of Cornelius. The very fact that those with Peter were surprised to see the Spirit fall as it did that day is an indication that this wasn’t the usual, everyday way it went when they would share the gospel … not even among the apostles.

    The problem for you is that the language does NOT definitively indicate that Cornelius and his household were already saved when the Spirit fell on them. Twist it around all you like, but the grammar just isn’t there. The same is true later on when Peter spoke to the Council in Jerusalem. Peter doesn’t say when they were saved.

    I wish he did say. It would save a lot of confusion and fussing. The truth is, though, that the whole point is not as cut-and-dried (to use an old tobacco farmer’s figure of speech) as either of us might like for it to be. I can’t make it say Cornelius and household were un-saved short of the water-grave, but neither can you make it say they were saved short of the water-grave. So are we going to play ring-around-the-mulberry-bush over what the account doesn’t say? Or will we instead rejoice over what we both agree it does say? – that Cornelius and his household were saved that day and Peter got over his bigotry!

    Some say it was about 10 years after Pentecost before Cornelius got his visit from Peter and friends. I don’t know. The Bible just doesn’t tell us how long it had been. But IF it was 10 years, it was certainly about time the apostles got around to sharing with the Gentiles, which was one of the problems of the Jews inasmuch as they didn’t share with the Gentiles either! After all, Jesus said they were to make disciples of all the ethnic groups (‘panta ta ethne’)! Who today thinks we can hear Jesus say something and then just pretend we didn’t hear it for 10 years or so without raising some eyebrows and getting some tongues to wagging???

    Most churches wouldn’t tolerate that kind of delay from their preachers. They’d tolerate it much longer from many pew-packers, just so long as they are putting at least something in the collection plate. And if they tithe, we’d never allow a whisper about it for fear it might upset them and change their giving to a lesser level. (And we still try to claim we don’t believe in selling indulgences??!!??! Get real!!!)

    Peter came – and while explaining how he happened to come and then get getting around to sharing the gospel in fewer words than any gospel preacher I have ever met face-to-face – while starting to tell his story – the Lord interrupted the gathering by pouring out the Spirit the way He had done on Pentecost – and then Peter finished speaking and asked who had a problem allowing water for the whole household to be baptized?? – and then he baptized them … that very hour.

    At what point before vs 43 would any preacher here claim to have shared the gospel sufficiently for someone to put their trust in Jesus? Remember, Cornelius is said to have been a God-fearer before Peter ever got there, but that only means he lived as though he was a Jew without actually proselytizing. That is, he never became a Jewish proselyte. He simply respected their faith and observed their holy days and feasts as a sojourner in their land. He was still a Gentile.

    So for Cornelius to respond to the gospel, he would have had to have heard it and believed what he heard and set his eyes on following Jesus (repentance). According to Luke that didn’t happen until AFTER the Spirit fell upon them.

    Remember what Paul said, you cannot believe until you hear and you cannot hear unless someone is sent and preaches the gospel. That is where Paul said faith originates. No gospel preached = no faith exists. And as Peter demonstrated, it doesn’t have to be a long sermon, either.

    The end of the matter is this: Peter preached a short sermon to share the gospel, but even before that short sermon was finished, the Spirit fell on all those who were listening. Peter then finished his remarks and asked who would forbid water to baptize these Gentiles and when no one spoke against it, he ordered for them to be baptized and they were.

    Some would like to say that the Spirit couldn’t fall on anyone unless they were saved. That doesn’t explain Balaam’s donkey, though, does it? IS anyone here proposing the idea that Balaam’s ass was saved when the Spirit fell upon him? What? No takers?? Okay then. So that is laid to rest.

    G

  379. Larry Cheek says:

    Royce,
    Can you identify why the whole body that you claim received the out pouring of the HS at Pentecost were not mentioned in the picture here in Revelation, you have suggested that they performed all of the actions that the Twelve did.
    (Rev 21:14 KJV) And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

    Also, remember this message; (Acts 2:4 KJV) And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. 5 And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven. 6 Now when this was noised abroad, the multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man heard them speak in his own language. 7 And they were all amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans?
    Were all that attended the gathering numbered as the 120 Galilaeans?

  380. Grace says:

    I never said it wasn’t different to the Jews that God saved the Gentiles. I don’t believe God giving them the Holy Spirit was to appease the Jews to baptize them, I believe what they were astonished about was the fact that God saved people who were not Jews. That they were saved by God’s grace through faith is not unusual, Ephesians 2:8-9 “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.”

    To say that the sequence that God gave the Holy Spirit was different and that is what makes it extraordinary goes against the character of God. Numbers 23:19 “God is no mere human! He doesn’t tell lies or change his mind. God always keeps his promises.”

    Grizz said, The problem for you is that the language does NOT definitively indicate that Cornelius and his household were already saved when the Spirit fell on them.

    Romans 8:16 “God’s Spirit joins himself to our spirits to declare that we are God’s children.”

    Ephesians 1:13-14 And now you Gentiles have also heard the truth, the Good News that God saves you. And when you believed in Christ, he identified you as his own by giving you the Holy Spirit, whom he promised long ago. The Spirit is God’s guarantee that he will give us the inheritance he promised and that he has purchased us to be his own people. He did this so we would praise and glorify him.

  381. Larry Cheek says:

    Grace,
    I have heard you talk about others trying to beat a dead horse to death many times. Regardless how much information is place before you, you do not vary from proclaiming that Cornelius received salvation prior to baptism. I cannot read into the text that what he received was salvation, Peter explained it perfectly.
    (Acts 10:44 KJV) While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. 45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. 46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, 47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
    48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
    Peter, did not identify it as salvation! You do that. Peter even rehearsed the event with those at Jerusalem and never once announced that they were saved while he was speaking.
    (Acts 11:14 KJV) Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved. 15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.16 Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost. 17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God? 18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.
    Peter was in the presents of the Lord when the Lord explained the Great Commission to the Apostles and that message does not coincide with your message.

    Now to carry your message to it’s maximum. You have on many occasions in this blog assured us that you believe that it is important to baptize all Christians. You also call Cornelius a Christian as soon as he received the HS or HG according to which translation that you are using. I have never heard you deny that it is the responsibility of the teacher to baptize new believers. Although I do not remember you using the word repent of their sins as a prerequisite to baptism, can we assume that you believe that to be necessary before baptism?
    If you as a teacher are responsible to baptize, how do you baptize those that you believe have become Christians. Will you follow the example from Peter here and perform it immediately? Or is it your opinion that they are safe therefore there is no hurry. Unless it is your intent to delay baptism for an undetermined length of time, your whole communications here is useless.
    If you followed the example that you quote to support your concept there would only be moments between an individual receiving the Spirit or as you desire being saved, and their baptism.
    Do you understand that it is your message that is trying to separate salvation from baptism, not Peter’s or any other message in the scriptures. In fact you are creating a delay in baptizing an individual into Christ that cannot be shown anywhere in scriptures.
    Exactly, what is your point! If you use the concept that you are promoting in this time frame you are teaching a different good news than was taught by all the messengers in the Bible.

  382. Royce Ogle says:

    I have been a Christian for 55 years. For many of those years I have been telling people about Jesus and what He accomplished for ungodly sinners. I have seen God transform the lives of the down and out and the up and out. I have been a member of many churches, helped to plant two churches, knocked doors sharing the good news, preached on the street, preached in white churches and black churches, on the radio, and on the internet. In every place and in every time either I or someone else baptized those who put their trust in Christ as soon as we were able. I have been blessed to see life long Catholics, Methodists, Baptists, and church of Christ people come to Christ. Sadly, not every person who made a good confession and was baptized continued to walk with the Lord but most have to my knowledge. Yes, even in the churches of Christ some who were “scripturally” baptized turned out to be impostors and no more saved than a devil. I plan to keep telling those God puts in my path the story of Jesus and his love as long as I am able.

    I hope that those who read this who are trusting themselves instead of the Christ will turn to him. He is eternal life and there is no life apart from him. I’m am weary of this bickering and nit picking. I’m done with this thread. I’m old and grouchy and sometimes this sort of thing brings out the worst in me.

    I hope each of you have a great next year and that Christ becomes more dear to you than ever before.

    Royce

  383. Larry Cheek says:

    Grace,
    You are still quoting from Ephesians messages that were addressed to Christians who had been baptized, which cannot support your application to those that have not been baptized. Unless you can prove that Paul is addressing lost souls who have not committed to Christ, and not been baptized he would have been guilty of teaching two different doctrines.

  384. Larry Cheek says:

    Royce,
    Not a single place in the Bible tells you to trust in what you have seen and experienced. In fact, there is a message to some that trust in the same advisability that you have proclaimed.
    Jesus is speaking, he will identify some individuals.
    (Mat 7:20 KJV) Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. 21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. 24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:

    If any of us trust in these things, beware!
    Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

  385. Royce Ogle says:

    Larry, What a kind person you are! I had no idea. Thank you for loving me enough to warn me and for letting me know I’m a false teacher. Seriously Larry, do you get a kick out of being offensive?

  386. Grace says:

    Ephesians is specifically about the Holy Spirit who we know the Gentiles at Cornelius’ house received. If we want to know what the Holy Spirit means the Bible is the best commentary.

    Ephesians 1:13-14 And now you Gentiles have also heard the truth, the Good News that God saves you. And when you believed in Christ, he identified you as his own by giving you the Holy Spirit, whom he promised long ago. The Spirit is God’s guarantee that he will give us the inheritance he promised and that he has purchased us to be his own people. He did this so we would praise and glorify him.

  387. Pingback: A Framework for Discussing Baptism: Unanswered Challenges | One In Jesus

  388. Ray said, “The promise including being led into all truth was given ONLY to the apostles.”

    Ray, if I adopt the reasoning behind this statement, then his promise that “I go to prepare a place for you” was also given only to the Eleven. There is no way to rationally slice one part of Jesus’ address in John 14 apart from the rest and shuffle the intended audience around verse-by-verse when Jesus suggests no such thing.

    As a side issue, this is going to create a problem for an awful lot of funeral sermons and is going to require a boatload of letters of apology to be sent out by preachers who suggested to the bereaved that Jesus has prepared more than eleven rooms, or that he will receive more than eleven people unto himself.

  389. Ray Downen says:

    Grace writes:

    The Gentiles were Christians when they received the Holy Spirit and Peter said what happened there is the norm, Acts 15:11 “But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they.”
    Giving them the Holy Spirit before baptism was not extraordinary or you just called God a liar. Numbers 23:19 “God is no mere human! He doesn’t tell lies or change his mind. God always keeps his promises.”

    Are we agreed that Jesus told the apostles to carry with them throughout the world the gospel of the risen Lord and to baptize those who believed that gospel? Are we aware that humans cannot baptize with the Holy Spirit?

    If so, we might realize that the conversions recorded in the book of Acts are there for some good purpose. And the very first conversion was of 3,000 men following a sermon by His apostles about the risen Lord. Peter’s words are recorded. No doubt the other apostles gave the same message but Luke chose to tell us only of the preaching and action of the one (representative of all). When asked what seekers needed to do to atone for their wrongdoing, the apostolic message contradicted what many today feel is correct.

    The apostles did not tell the seekers to pray and then they’d be saved. The apostles didn’t mention faith at all. They obviously assumed that faith in Jesus was what prompted the question, “What shall we DO?” Yet they didn’t congratulate the new believers for saving themselves by believing. Instead they said, “There is something you MUST do in order to receive remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. You must REPENT and you must BE BAPTIZED as Jesus commanded. THEN you will receive remission of sins and the gift of the Spirit. Is that the message Jay now promotes? Is that what many who are reading these remarks believe and practice? If not, why not?

  390. Ray Downen says:

    Grace guesses “God sent Peter to a Gentile’s house to preach the gospel. The Jews were surprised to see that God saved the Gentiles, giving them the Holy Spirit.”

    Grace may not understand what Peter and the Jewish Christians knew and had known for some ten years, that seekers needed to repent and be baptized in order to receive the “gift of the Spirit.” This Spirit-gift for Christians wasn’t something that could be seen by others. It was simply God moving in where He had not lived before, in the heart and mind of the person. The Jewish Christians were surely surprised by what they saw, but the “gift of the Spirit” can’t be seen, so it wasn’t receiving the indwelling Spirit which so surprised these brothers. And it surely didn’t save the Gentiles!

    But it was like what had happened ten years prior when the apostles received power from on high, with accompanying signs from God that were seen and heard. There’s no mention that these Gentiles received power or any ability to perform miracles. But the signs which had appeared on Pentecost to the apostles were seen again that day (for the first time since the events recorded in Acts, chapter two), this time given to these Gentiles rather than to the apostles.

    Peter was convinced by the earlier message from God and by this outpouring of the Spirit that it was all right to baptize Gentiles into Christ so that they could be saved. The signs were given to persuade Peter and all Jewish Christians that Gentiles also could be saved. For the ten years past, only Jews and Samaritans had been invited to turn to Jesus for salvation. Now Peter was persuaded that Gentiles also COULD be brought into the Kingdom, and the signs would convince all Jewish Christians that no longer were they the exclusive people of God, but that Gentiles also could be baptized into Christ.

    So Peter immediately caused the Gentiles to be baptized into Christ, at which time they received the gift of the Spirit who then walked with them the rest of their lives. The sign was a one-time event. It had occurred once before and never has happened again. People receive God’s Spirit by turning to Jesus as Lord and being baptized in water as He commanded was to be done. That’s the ONLY way the Spirit is given, if we can believe what Luke reports. Jesus commands baptism for every new believer. It’s an immersion in water and a raising up from that water “into NEW LIFE.”

  391. Ray Downen says:

    You, Larry, comment about the ones who in chapter two of Acts spoke in languages they didn’t know, “And they were all amazed and marveled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galileans?” It’s obvious that it was not the 3,000 who were baptized that day who were speaking in understandable languages unknown to the speaker. And is it probable that all the 120 were from Galilee? Not likely. Surely that number would have included Lazarus and Mary and Martha (his sisters) and they were clearly NOT from Galilee, as were many other friends of the Lord Jesus. But the apostles were from Galilee.

    The TWELVE spoke in languages they didn’t know. You do well to point out to us all that it was NOT a larger group who had this language gift that day!

  392. Ray Downen says:

    Grace writes, “Ephesians is specifically about the Holy Spirit. . .” Larry’s point is that Ephesians is a letter written by Paul to CHRISTIANS in Ephesus. You seem to have missed the point. Christians whether Jew or Gentile received the gift of God’s Spirit when they repented and were baptized (Acts 2:38).

    Ephesians is a letter addressed not to unbelievers but to ones already in Christ. It isn’t discussing how or when the Spirit is given. That’s what you want to read INTO what the apostle wrote, but it’s not what the apostle wrote. To learn how the Spirit is given we’d better turn to Acts 2:38 where those OUTSIDE of Jesus were told how to make themselves right with God and receive the gift of His Spirit.

    Why don’t some like verses which don’t agree with what they want to believe? Why are you willing to ignore simple facts which explain how those outside of Christ can receive remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit? You seem determined to disbelieve what Peter said to seeking believers concerning how they could receive the Spirit, and you feel that God gifts His Spirit in some OTHER way than the apostle says the gift is given to every new Christian.

    The event when God persuaded the Jewish Christians that Gentiles also could be brought into the church was definitely not usual. You seem to be saying God did the unusual often or at other times than just at the household of Cornelius! It was a ONE-TIME event!

  393. Ray Downen says:

    Charles wants to believe everyone can be one of the apostles of Jesus, I understand. He writes, “Ray said, ‘The promise including being led into all truth was given ONLY to the apostles.’

    Ray, if I adopt the reasoning behind this statement, then his promise that ‘I go to prepare a place for you’ was also given only to the Eleven. There is no way to rationally slice one part of Jesus’ address in John 14 apart from the rest and shuffle the intended audience around verse-by-verse when Jesus suggests no such thing.”

    RAY: I make no attempt to “slice” what Jesus said to His apostles apart. You, Charles, can slice it if you like. The general promise that He would come again and receive us all to Himself applies to many even if uttered only to the twelve. But I note that only Jesus and His apostles were present during that conversation, and promises Jesus made to THEM applied to them and not to me or you.

    Jesus makes clear that He expects many in addition to the apostles to join Him in the New Jerusalem. It’s equally clear that the apostles were selected for a particular work which is not being done, and never was done, by others than the ones He trained and empowered. The apostles received UNIQUE gifts which set them apart from other disciples.

    In Acts, chapter 1, He appeared to the apostles alone and promised only THEM that they would be empowered by the baptism in the Spirit they would soon after experience. Baptism in the Spirit was never promised to all Christians. But that God would dwell IN us by placing His Spirit in us is sure.

  394. Grace says:

    Ray, Ephesians 1:13-14 tells us what the Holy Spirit does and means when we receive Him. The Holy Spirit is God and Christ’s Spirit living in us, not Someone I would say is a mere sign. To have the Living God in us is much bigger and more significant than Who you all have potrayed Him.

  395. Grace says:

    Ray said, “The Jewish Christians were surely surprised by what they saw, but the “gift of the Spirit” can’t be seen, so it wasn’t receiving the indwelling Spirit which so surprised these brothers.”

    That’s were I believe you are wrong. In Acts 10:45 Peter said the Gentiles had the “gift of the Holy Spirit”, the gift of the Holy Spirit is the promised indwelling Holy Spirit, and Acts 10:47 Peter said they had “received the Holy Spirit”, and in Acts 15:8 Peter told the apostles and elders that God accepted the Gentiles “giving them the Holy Spirit”. Peter said that the Gentiles were given the indwelling Holy Spirit.

    That is why we should know what it means when we receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, the indwelling Living God.

  396. Ray Downen says:

    Grace well says, “we should know what it means when we receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, the indwelling Living God.” A problem is that various gifts are referred to as “the gift” of the Holy Spirit. There’s one gift given to all believers who repent and are baptized. That’s “the gift of the Holy Spirit.” And then there are other gifts of the Spirit, which are enjoyed by particular individuals and enable them to serve God in particular ways.

    Baptism in the Spirit is often referred to as simply a baptism in the Spirit. Yet the unique sign given to Cornelius and his household which convinced Peter and others that Gentiles were also acceptable for being baptized into Christ is also referred to as a “gift of the Holy Spirit.” If it had been the gift which is given to every baptized believer, there would have been no need for Peter to have them baptized, it might seem.

    Two promises are made concerning the results of baptism of a new believer. Remission of sins and the “gift of the Holy Spirit.” Whatever that gift is it’s the same for each who receives it. Speaking of the results of baptism, Peter didn’t speak of differing results for different people, but of the exact same result for each one who followed his instruction to repent and be baptized.

    The result of the Spirit-gift sent by God to persuade Peter and the entire Jewish church of the day that Gentiles could also be baptized into Christ was that then Peter was willing to allow the Gentile believers to be baptized into Christ, at which time they received the indwelling “gift of the Holy Spirit.” There are no external signs when the Spirit is gifted to those who repent and are baptized. No sounds or sights to show that the Spirit was given. But the “gift of the Spirit” God sent upon these Gentiles was seen and heard by Peter and his Jewish companions.

    We do well to recognize that there are differing gifts of the Spirit. The Spirit-gift for the apostles was to enable them to remember all that Jesus had taught while they were together and to lead THEM (the apostles) into all truth, and to empower them to heal and transmit spirit-power to others by a laying on of THEIR (apostolic) hands. The spirit-gift promised to every believer is simply that God will take up residence (through His Spirit) in the new Christian. In the first years, there were also many special spiritual gifts given, of healing and prophecy, delivering God’s message to His people.

  397. Grace says:

    Ray, God gave the Gentiles the gift of the Holy Spirit, Peter said so numerous times.
    Acts 10:45, Peter said the Gentiles had the “gift of the Holy Spirit”.
    Acts 10:47, Peter said they had “received the Holy Spirit”.
    Acts 15:8 Peter told the apostles and elders that God accepted the Gentiles “giving them the Holy Spirit”.

    You can ignore what he said and continue your made up story all you want, you’re just writing a false tale, what Peter said is true. Peter said the Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Spirit, the indwelling Living God.

    God sent Peter to a Gentiles house to preach the gospel. The Jews were surprised to see that God saved the Gentiles giving them the Holy Spirit. Peter saw that they belonged to God, he knew it’s God’s will that we baptize His people and he baptized them.

  398. Ray Downen says:

    Grace thinks Christians should be baptized, it seems. She writes, “Peter saw that they belonged to God, he knew it’s God’s will that we baptize His people and he baptized them.” But if Grace is right, Jesus is wrong and all His apostles are wrong as to who should be baptized. I’ll point to only one of the many texts which make this clear. See Galatians 3:27 and believe it.

    No Christian is ever told in the apostolic age that they should be baptized again. Baptism is INTO Christ. Those who are IN Christ don’t need to be baptized. That’s how they got IN. That Peter knew this is obvious from Acts 2:38. He commanded that these Gentiles were to be baptized, knowing that now God had provided a sign which should convince every believer that Gentiles also could be baptized into Christ.

    The “great commission” is not that we should search out Christians and baptize them. It’s that we are to tell others about the risen Lord and the salvation He offers and baptize those who believe our message. What OUTSIDERS are called to do if they now believe in Jesus is to turn to Him as Lord and be baptized. There’s no record in the apostolic writings of any Christian ever being told to be baptized. There’s no record of any Christian ever being baptized. Those needing baptism are ones not yet IN Christ. Grace appears to be reading INTO the text what she wants to find there.

  399. Grace says:

    Ray, you keep saying the Gentiles had “A” gift, you change what Peter said to make it fit your theology, you’re writing a false tale.

    Peter said the Gentiles had “THE GIFT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT”, Peter said the Gentiles “RECEIVED THE HOLY SPIRIT”, Peter told the apostles and elders God gave the Gentiles “THE HOLY SPIRIT”.

    “THE HOLY SPIRIT” is God and Christ’s Spirit living in us, Peter said the Gentiles received the indwelling Living God. Peter saw that they belonged to God, he knew it’s God’s will that we baptize His people and he baptized them.

  400. Royce Ogle says:

    It seems to me that after, what about 300 comments?, the two sides seem to be no closer to consensus than after the first 10 or so comments. This has become a big waste of time with everyone repeating the same thing over and over and over and…

    Bro Ray has had this discussion with Al Maxey and with the same result. You see Grace, when your whole identity is wrapped up in a particular set of doctrines (baptism as a sacrament, A capella only, etc.) if anyone tinkers with those doctrines they are challenging who you are.

    People whose identity is in Jesus Christ are usually somewhat more stable in my view.

    These men whose life’s work is to defend church of Christ distinctives and to attack anyone who disagrees are doing so in most cases at the expense of the gospel. In fact once one this very blog I asked some men a simple question, “What is the gospel” and learned that at least some of them didn’t even know what the gospel of Christ is. In our more so called “conservative” churches “gospel meetings” are not usually about the gospel at all but about the church of Christ.

    A few years ago I listened to the messages of a “lectureship” that was several days long and not one man preached the gospel. Every man targeted someone they despised because he didn’t fit their agenda and spent considerable time damning that man.

    Preachers and churches that are preaching Christ and what he has done for sinners are baptizing people and preachers and churches whose message is the superiority of the church of Christ are dying for the most part.

    So, how many more times will we talk past each other and say the same thing? Have we accomplished anything worthwhile? You need to notice I said “we”. I’m guilty of taking the bait and participating far more than I should have. My wish for all of us is that we will treasure Christ more than we ever have and make it our business to tell sinners the good news of the gospel.

    On this blog I have been told to leave the churches of Christ, been called a false teacher, a Satinist, been told I do not love Jesus, and several lesser insults. My crime is I believe Jesus alone saves and that He accomplished ALL that was necessary to set a sinner right with God.

    You will see less of me at OneinJesus this year. I appreciate you Jay, you are a good man with a good heart with much to offer your readers. I wish everyone a blessed new year.

  401. laymond says:

    I believe this is comment #400 so it should be a good one- Happy new Year to all here and may the good Lord bless you with Knowledge, love, and tolerance for others.

  402. laymond says:

    Well seems while I was writing Royce posted the 400th comment and as usual it was one of division, and non tolerance. sorry thought #400 should be different.

  403. Ray Downen says:

    Grace is determined to misunderstand Acts 2:38 or to disbelieve it. The apostles, with Peter as the one quoted by Luke, when asked what seekers needed to DO about their sin were NOT told that all it takes is to believe that Jesus is Lord. They were NOT told everything necessary for their salvation was already done. They were told, and we should listen and learn, that there IS something for seekers to do if they want to be saved.

    Grace writes, ““THE HOLY SPIRIT” is God and Christ’s Spirit living in us, Peter said the Gentiles received the indwelling Living God. Peter saw that they belonged to God, he knew it’s God’s will that we baptize His people and he baptized them.” I think if she considered what she was claiming she’d quit making such a claim. The Holy Spirit is not limited to living within and helping Christians as Grace states. She obviously didn’t mean what she wrote.

    And Peter earlier had made clear what those outside Christ needed to personally DO in order to have their sins remitted and in order to RECEIVE THE HOLY SPIRIT. Grace doesn’t understand that this event in chapter 10 is totally one-of-a-kind. It was God giving His approval to the church accepting as members those hated Gentiles (hated by Jews historically and practically). And how clearly the apostles teach that it is NOT Christians who need to be baptized. It’s those not yet IN Christ who are baptized INTO Christ unless the apostle Paul didn’t understand conversion.

    And Peter’s immediate order that these GENTILES were to be baptized should show any Bible student that Peter did NOT think they were saved by the sign which was given to convince the Jewish Christians (up to that time every convert had been either a Jew or a Samaritan half-Jew). Only Jews were invited to be baptized into Christ. God is making clear that the gospel is for all. But He did not SAVE the Gentiles by the sign He gave to convince the Jewish Christians to now open the way for Gentiles to be baptized into Christ and thereby saved.

  404. Ray Downen says:

    Royce mistakenly claims, “My crime is I believe Jesus alone saves and that He accomplished ALL that was necessary to set a sinner right with God.” I hope he will understand why his sentence is wrong rather than right. Peter, along with the other apostles, preached the gospel and was asked what his hearers could DO about their sin. The answer was not that Jesus had “accomplished ALL that was necessary.” They were told there were two specific things THEY needed to do in order to have sin remitted for THEM and in order for them to receive God’s Spirit within.

    Jesus did all that was necessary for GOD to do. But seekers who do nothing other than believe in what Jesus did and who rely completely on only what Jesus did will go to Hell. Jesus commissioned His apostles to tell others about Him and to BAPTIZE those who believed. He didn’t say He had completed the job and everything needed was already done. Nor should we make such a claim. Only those who OBEY the gospel will be saved, and Acts 2:38 spells out what obedience is necessary.

  405. Ray Downen says:

    Laymond speaks well to our need to love one another. He writes

    I believe this is comment #400 so it should be a good one- Happy new Year to all here and may the good Lord bless you with Knowledge, love, and tolerance for others.

    Likely every reader will be glad to say “amen” to the benediction of Laymond. I remind that Jay’s purpose in starting this particular line of study was to discuss the place of baptism in the Way of Jesus Christ. The subject should matter greatly to everyone who loves Jesus. And our love for HIM should cause us to value greatly what He taught that we should do. I think the “great commission” spells out the goals to which our Lord wants us to aim. And His prayer recorded in John, chapter 17 makes clear His desire that we should love one another.

  406. Royce Ogle says:

    I think this statement states clearly what the problem is. Ray made this remarkable statement:

    “seekers who do nothing other than believe in what Jesus did and who rely completely on only what Jesus did will go to Hell.”

    In the view of many the death of Jesus for sinners, his offering of his own perfect life, and his resurrection is not enough. There are varying ideas about how much merit humans must earn to be added to what Jesus has done so they will finally be accepted by God.

    My belief is drastically different than a legalist. While I believe we repent, believe, confess Jesus, are baptized in water, love God, love others and a host of good other good things, I don’t believe any if those things or the total if those things are the basis for my reconciliation to God.

    God “grants repentance”. Faith “comes” as I hear the good news. My baptism was done by someone else to me. I cannot claim one thing good about myself. I had nothing to offer. After my best human effort I am still in the categories “ungodly” and “sinner”. But for God’s intervention I would be lost still and stay lost. I can truly say I can only boast in The Lord. All I, or you contributed is one ungodly, spiritually dead sinner.

  407. Jay Guin says:

    Larry wrote,

    Not a single place in the Bible tells you to trust in what you have seen and experienced.

    Really? What about —

    (Mat 16:2-3 ESV) 2 He answered them, “When it is evening, you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is red.’ 3 And in the morning, ‘It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times.

    Wasn’t Jesus saying to learn from what you’ve experienced of him?

    (Act 11:15-18 ESV) 15 As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning. 16 And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ 17 If then God gave the same gift to them as he gave to us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God’s way?” 18 When they heard these things they fell silent. And they glorified God, saying, “Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life.”

    Wasn’t Peter saying that he’d learned God’s will from what he experienced and that his fellow Jews should do the same?

    Contrary to some very bad teaching, Peter and the other apostles were much more likely to teach from the Old Testament or even their own experiences than from the apostolic authority.

    (1Jo 1:1-3 ESV) That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we looked upon and have touched with our hands, concerning the word of life– 2 the life was made manifest, and we have seen it, and testify to it and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was made manifest to us– 3 that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ.

    I’m not really a Charismatic or Pentecostal, but I don’t think that GOd is dead or a deistic God who no longer works in our lives — teaching us lessons if we’d only pay attention.

  408. Ray Downen says:

    Royce surely means well. He wants to emphasize what JESUS has done as if that would save individual sinners who do NOTHING in response. But in his strong desire to honor Jesus he is refusing to see what the Bible teaches about how conversion occurs. Jesus COMMANDS that new Christians are to be baptized and does NOT offer salvation apart from obedient ACTION/RESPONSE by the person seeking salvation. Royce says there’s nothing a sinner can do to become obedient to the gospel. Peter and Paul makes clear there ARE things sinners can AND MUST do in order to have the blood of Christ take away their sin.

    I’ve been working today on a revising of a book that might interest some readers. Here’s a tiny section from RAISED INTO NEW LIFE, available on the internet from amazon.com:

    Christian baptism brings sinners into Christ

    We are outside God’s family until we experience new birth. This second birth is completed in the rite of Chris­tian baptism. That’s why men of any age are not saved solely by what Jesus did on the cross! Note what the apostle Paul says on this subject:

    . . . for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ (Galatians 3:26,27 – ESV).

    Inspired teachers always point out and emphasize that it’s through faith in Jesus (never by faith alone) that any­one is saved. Paul places great reliance on our contin­u­ing at any cost to tell others that we do now believe in Jesus. To Christians in Rome he wrote:

    . . . if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved (Romans 10:9,10 – ESV).

    Did the apostle here mean all it takes to become saved is to believe in the resurrection, and all it takes to be justi­fied is to once tell someone we believe in Jesus? We are saved by a faith which leads us to obey! Re­mem­ber what he wrote in Galatians 3:27 (quoted just above). Paul is saying in Romans chapter ten that those who believe in Jesus are sure to continue to be obedient to Him in all ways. Believing is a way of LIFE. We save ourselves by continuing to believe in Jesus as Lord, and by obeying Him. He’s saying we need to continue to believe and at any cost to say so!

    Christian baptism is immersion in water. Jesus com­­manded that humans should perform this act. It is not performed by Jesus or by His Holy Spirit. Neither faith nor confession of faith can take the place of repentance and bap­tism (new birth of water and the spirit “into Christ”). Only we who do believe in Jesus will obey Him. We WILL tell others of our faith.

  409. Royce Ogle says:

    Ray also means well but can’t seem to get his quotes straight. Surely you didn’t say this on purpose!

    “Jesus COMMANDS that new Christians are to be baptized and does NOT offer salvation apart from obedient ACTION/RESPONSE by the person seeking salvation.”

    Of course you don’t believe that new Christians should be baptized. You have made that abundantly clear. You believe baptism is only for lost people.

    Than you say something that is just not true.

    “Royce says there’s nothing a sinner can do to become obedient to the gospel.”

    I never said that nor do I believe that. What I do believe is that I am not saved on the basis of my obedience but rather based upon the obedience of Jesus.

    Ray, as for your book… Do you have any writings on your website where you teach the gospel? I would like to read one. Not your views on baptism, I already know what you believe about that. I’d like to see how your understand the gospel. What exactly did Jesus accomplish by dying for sinners like us? And how dies whatever he accomplished apply to us? Did Jesus die for all of our sins or only part of them? And, after a man is scripturally baptized (according to the way you understand it) how many things must a person do or comply with to stay saved?

    One last question. In your view are any Presbyterians or Methodists saved?

    I believe that unlike a few people here you are a good man and have the best intentions. I am not angry at you or think ill of you. I just disagree.

  410. laymond says:

    Royce I believe we all know what Ray intended to say, I believe you know what Ray intended.
    In order to become a “new Christian” you must be baptized. Or all new Christians must have been baptized. either way it was not confusing.

  411. Larry Cheek says:

    Jay,
    It really is not hard for me to see the error that you have identified; only a few more words would have cleared the view. I said, “Not a single place in the Bible tells you to trust in what you have seen and experienced.”
    What I should have said would be, Not a single place in the Bible tells you to trust in what you have seen and experienced if that visibility is used to change directives from our Lord.
    I’ll attempt to clarify that further, we can visualize many people in the world that actually live a life that is far more like Jesus teachings, you know showing love to one another, caring for the sick, etc. etc. never in trouble with authorities even though doing what the authorities demand is in total contradiction with some of God’s laws. The scriptures explain in many places where Christians were bound by God’s laws to be disobedient to worldly laws, some spent many years in prison while upholding God’s standards, many faced martyrdom. This applies yet today but very seldom do we encounter Christians in this country who are imprisoned because they upheld God’s teachings.
    My point is that God’s laws are not always visible through eyes viewing good works, men performing healing and miracles, and especially if we want to observe Christians who are not perfect (do you know any) and use the actions viewed as a replacement for the instructions in scripture.
    Re read the post I responded to and explain if I missed the point. I saw a new authority in the making.

    Remember those whom the Lord addressed, would you suppose that men seeing them in action truly believed they were fulfilling God’s messages. This is just a little like your contention that listeners of teachers that have taught incorrectly on any Bible subject will receive grace and receive a full pardon for never putting forth an effort to learning they are in error. These men were caught in a trap probably baited there by the master deceiver. What is you conclusion upon those that are taught by men with similar teachings as these? Are they also under grace? They could fully believe in the Lord just as suggested of men today.
    (Mat 7:22 KJV) Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

    My conclusion to this is addressed in scripture.
    (2 Tim 2:15 KJV) Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

    To the extent all Christians follow this pattern.
    (Acts 17:10 KJV) And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

    I feel that fulfilling actions compared to these in Berea, is the goal of this blog. Then of course there is no point in doing this if we will not implement corrections in our lives. Which is exactly the opposite of looking back at good deeds, people we respect, concepts that are questionable if not in downright opposition to plain statements of our Lord in scripture.

  412. Jay Guin says:

    Larry,

    I’ve probably posted a dozen comments in the last 24 hours explaining that I teach obedience to God. Of course. Everyone commenting on this blog does.

    What I’m saying is that God forgives the sins of those who have faith in Jesus. And that wonderful truth does not contradict obedience.

    Many Church of Christ members struggle to understand how they can live in forgiveness and yet have to obey. There are many answers, several of them posted in the comments to this post: love for God and Jesus, gratitude, the Holy Spirit, and even the risk of falling away, not because of a single error but because sin has destroyed our love for God.

  413. Skip says:

    We all sin daily, probably even hourly. We commit sins of commission and sins of omission. We commit sins that we don’t even realize we just committed. We can’t possibly keep a running tally of every single sin and individually confess each one or we would be praying through our sin list perhaps for hours each day. True Christians have made the decision to live a pure and obedient life but they understand that they will sin and trust in the blood of Christ to cover them. If I am obsessed with keeping track of all my sin then I will be a self-absorbed, unproductive Christian. If I am obsessed with my Lord Jesus Christ and I am living in love with him. My sins will be much fewer and the blood of Christ will continually wash my sin away. I choose the latter approach based upon grace instead of the former approach based upon guilt.

    It is like the two boys standing on a gravel road in front of a house with lots of windows. They were discussing throwing rocks and breaking the windows. The first boy said, “If I break a window, my dad will kill me”. The second boy said, “If I break a window, it will kill my dad.” Which boy understood grace best?

  414. Ray Downen says:

    Royce is a gentleman and Christian. I wrote

    Christian baptism brings sinners into Christ We are outside God’s family until we experience new birth. This second birth is completed in the rite of Chris­tian baptism. That’s why men of any age are not saved solely by what Jesus did on the cross! Note what the apostle Paul says on this subject:
    . . . for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ (Galatians 3:26,27 – ESV).
    Inspired teachers always point out and emphasize that it’s through faith in Jesus (never by faith alone) that any­one is saved. Paul places great reliance on our contin­u­ing at any cost to tell others that we do now believe in Jesus. To Christians in Rome he wrote:
    . . . if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved (Romans 10:9,10 – ESV).
    Did the apostle here mean all it takes to become saved is to believe in the resurrection, and all it takes to be justi­fied is to once tell someone we believe in Jesus? We are saved by a faith which leads us to obey! Re­mem­ber what he wrote in Galatians 3:27 (quoted just above). Paul is saying in Romans chapter ten that those who believe in Jesus are sure to continue to be obedient to Him in all ways. Believing is a way of LIFE. We save ourselves by continuing to believe in Jesus as Lord, and by obeying Him. He’s saying we need to continue to believe and at any cost to say so!
    Christian baptism is immersion in water. Jesus com­­manded that humans should perform this act. It is not performed by Jesus or by His Holy Spirit. Neither faith nor confession of faith can take the place of repentance and bap­tism (new birth of water and the spirit “into Christ”). Only we who do believe in Jesus will obey Him. We WILL tell others of our faith.

    Royce replied

    Ray, as for your book… Do you have any writings on your website where you teach the gospel? I would like to read one. Not your views on baptism, I already know what you believe about that. I’d like to see how your understand the gospel. What exactly did Jesus accomplish by dying for sinners like us? And how dies whatever he accomplished apply to us? Did Jesus die for all of our sins or only part of them? And, after a man is scripturally baptized (according to the way you understand it) how many things must a person do or comply with to stay saved?

    One last question. In your view are any Presbyterians or Methodists saved?

    Many of my studies at the site are regarding the Christian life. And some point out clearly that Jesus saves, and then explain in what way sinners MUST respond in order to BE saved. I’m sure that Jesus doesn’t pick out some for salvation while others simply must go to Hell. He calls for US who know Him as Lord to tell others about HIM (the gospel is about JESUS) and in every study I seek to mention that Jesus is LORD, the RISEN LORD, who invites anyone at all to believe in and OBEY Him and be saved.

    Royce’s last question is the most difficult and the easiest to answer. Many Presbyterians and Methodists love Jesus and seek to serve Him as Lord and yet have not been immersed INTO His body for eternal life. Jesus offers life to those who ARE born again of water and spirit. Peter explains that this new birth is by the one not yet in Jesus but who now believes in Him as Lord to repent of not believing and to be immersed as Jesus commanded was to be done. If Jesus demands perfect obedience, He will not save those who have not been immersed. Nor will He save those of us who have been immersed but who live for selfish pleasures and do not love and serve Him as Lord.

    Honesty demands that those who understand Bible teachings MUST teach and practice the immersion in water which was called for by Jesus. Jesus does NOT promise to save ones who do not love and obey Him. He loves us all. He surely will NOT save any unimmersed people who could and should have learned that baptism is by immersion. He may save some who are simply ignorant but not willfully so. He surely will save those who trust Him and obey Him to the best of their understanding. Those who ignore what HE calls for are surely not headed for Heaven.

  415. Ray Downen says:

    Laymond, thanks! What I SHOULD have said is that every new BELIEVER in Jesus as Lord and Christ must repent and be baptized, for that’s what’s true. Royce did know what I should have said, and rightly points out the error in my saying wrongly what I wanted to say. And how true it is that all any of us could do would not save us except that JESUS died FOR us and offers us eternal life!

  416. Ray Downen says:

    Larry says, and should have all of us saying “Amen” to it

    I feel that fulfilling actions compared to these in Berea, is the goal of this blog. Then of course there is no point in doing this if we will not implement corrections in our lives.

    While it’s not certain that it’s the goal of EVERY one reading and writing here, it surely should be! Surely we all realize that what Jesus commands for new believers is that they are to be IMMERSED in water rather than having water sprinkled or poured over them. Do some NOT realize it?

  417. Ray Downen says:

    Skip surely has it right. He writes,

    We all sin daily, probably even hourly. We commit sins of commission and sins of omission. We commit sins that we don’t even realize we just committed. We can’t possibly keep a running tally of every single sin and individually confess each one or we would be praying through our sin list perhaps for hours each day. True Christians have made the decision to live a pure and obedient life but they understand that they will sin and trust in the blood of Christ to cover them. If I am obsessed with keeping track of all my sin then I will be a self-absorbed, unproductive Christian. If I am obsessed with my Lord Jesus Christ and I am living in love with him. My sins will be much fewer and the blood of Christ will continually wash my sin away. I choose the latter approach based upon grace instead of the former approach based upon guilt.

    And how much more pleasant it is to be with people who love Jesus and live for Him. Yet He calls for us to spend much of our time with others who do NOT yet know Jesus and to tell them about Jesus.

  418. Grace says:

    Ray, why don’t you answer the questions Royce asked you? I think the question do you believe Presbyterians and Methodists are saved is a good question. You should know their belief since you all claim to be so much more of scholars than they are. Hmmm, sounds so much like a sect of scholars who thought they knew more than the average common people, Jesus said these scholars knew the Scriptures well but didn’t know Him.

  419. Ray Downen says:

    Grace, I had replied. My comment was awaiting moderation. I often don’t see things as soon as they re posted to which I might profitably comment. I’m not at my computer every hour of the day. And I’m often doing things other than reading and replying to blogs.

  420. laymond says:

    It just seemed right to have 420 comments on this post, so here it is.

  421. Pingback: A Framework for Discussing Baptism: Unanswered Challenges |

  422. Pingback: A Framework for Discussing Baptism |

  423. Ray Downen says:

    So who’s counting? All that really SHOULD be said is that JESUS commanded that new believers are to be baptized and those who think it’s not necessary are contradicting the Lord Jesus.

  424. Ray Downen says:

    To add one additional BRIEF comment, Jay states as if it were true, ” I listed a few dozen verses that promise that faith in Jesus is sufficient.” Not one of those verses state that faith ALONE is sufficient for anything at all. No one is denying that faith is essential. We all believe every one of the verses quoted by Jay. Faith in JESUS is essential for salvation. Jesus commands that converts are to be baptized. That’s the ONE requirement included with His call for us to carry His message throughout the world. How does a believer dare disagree with Jesus that baptism is necessary? If Jay had found a verse which claimed that faith ALONE is sufficient, he would have proved his point. There is no such verse in apostolic writing! It’s not something WE should be teaching!!!

  425. Ray Downen says:

    Jay points to a statement made by Jesus prior to His command that new believers are to be baptized and wants us all to agree that therefore JESUS did NOT command that new believers are to be baptized, or that His command is made meaningless by earlier teaching. I affirm that if we do believe Jesus is LORD, we will not try to distance ourselves from doing what He clearly commands we are to do. His command was given to the apostles alone, that’s true.

    But we note in reading about the acts of those apostles and their converts that they ALL did teach, BAPTIZE, and teach. And the apostles make clear the purpose of baptism is to wash away sin. It should be clear to all that baptism is a ONE-TIME operation. In Romans 6:1-11, the apostle makes clear that it’s a NON-Christian who is buried in the water and a new CHRISTIAN that is raised up out of the water. Galatians 3:27 makes clear the apostolic belief that baptism brings believing sinners INTO Christ, ones who were not yet IN Christ.

    What a pity it is that some are so eager to prove they know more than the apostles did about what Jesus wants His followers to do! And not only did Jesus never promise salvation by faith alone, but neither did any of His apostles ever do so. It’s good that everyone writing to Jay realizes that faith in Jesus is essential for salvation. We don’t ask anyone to place saving faith in baptism. We feel compelled to point out that Jesus commands that new believers are to be baptized. And perhaps it’s good to also point out that it’s for more than just to demonstrate to OTHERS. It’s in order for the believer to become a CHRISTIAN whether or not others are seeing the baptism.

  426. Ray Downen says:

    Larry, you wrote, “salvation can be had prior to baptism (an example could be Cornelius). . .” and I wonder why you think Cornelius and his household were saved prior to being baptized in water. Apostolic teaching is clear that baptism is “for the remission of sins and to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” You may figure that the SIGN given to convince the Jewish Christians that Gentiles also could be baptized and brought into the kingdom also SAVED those first Gentile converts.

    But if they were already saved, why did Peter immediately have them baptized “into Christ”? It’s those OUTSIDE of Christ who are baptized to bring them INTO Christ. I affirm that the PURPOSE of baptism as commanded by Jesus is to SAVE the new believer. I think that’s made clear throughout apostolic writings. OBEYING the gospel involves repenting AND being baptized if the person now does indeed believe that Jesus is Lord. If Peter thought the Gentiles were already saved, he surely would NOT have had them baptized in water. It was those not yet IN Christ who were baptized INTO Him (Galatians 3:27).

  427. Jay Guin says:

    Ray comments,

    Not one of those verses state that faith ALONE is sufficient for anything at all. No one is denying that faith is essential.

    Ray,

    You are entitled to your own opinions, but not to your own facts. Granted that “alone” and “only” do not appear in the faith-only passages, there are countless other ways to say “only” or “alone” without using those words.

    (Joh 3:18 ESV) 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.

    “Whoever” is a pretty broad word. It doesn’t mean “most people who” but “all people who.”

    Imagine that I stand in front of my congregation and say, “Whoever pays me $1.00 is entitled to a free trip to DisneyWorld.” Someone brings me a dollar and I respond, “I didn’t say ‘only’ or ‘alone.’ And you should have understood that I meant $1.00 plus a $5,000 savings bond. It should have been obvious that there might be more conditions from the absence of ‘only’ and ‘alone.'”

    Well, I would be branded a deceiver — for good reason — because the nature of the grammar I chose to use did not permit me to add additional conditions.

    (Rom 10:4 ESV) 4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

    Again, I announce to the church “I will give a trip to DisneyWorld to everyone who pays me $1.00.” If what I really means is “pays me $1.00 plus a $5,000 savings bond,” am I honest? Clearly, not. Not a single person present would get that from what I said. The grammar plainly implies that $1.00 is the only requirement. That’s because “everyone” means “everyone” not “a subset of everyone who happen to also pay me a $5,000 savings bond.”

    We could continue this exercise and repeatedly reach the identical conclusion working through literally dozens of verses that promise salvation to all with faith in Jesus. To be honest exegetes, we have to admit that the text says what it says.

    It is, of course, perfectly permissible to point out all the baptism verses. They are there and they say what they say. I think our traditional interpretation — that water baptism is in mind — is generally right. I know them as well as anyone and am not pretending that they aren’t there or that they don’t say what they say.

    But neither am I going to pretend that the far greater number of verses promising salvation to all with faith in Jesus don’t say what they say. The Baptists are wrong to ignore “our” baptism verses, and we in the CoC are wrong to ignore “their” faith-only verses. They are there. They say what they say. And pretending otherwise does not solve anything.

    Therefore, both the traditional Baptist view and the traditional CoC view are wrong, because both ignore substantial parts of the evidence. I really see no point in discussing either much further, because both are plainly in error. The interesting and worthwhile venture is to seek out a better interpretation that isn’t embarrassed by either set of verses.

  428. Ray Downen says:

    Charles affirms that salvation is by faith alone. He writes, “The person who comes for baptism has already entered the kingdom.” But this contradicts what Jesus said to Nicodemus and what Paul clearly speaks about in Galatians 3:27. So I affirm that Charles is sincerely wrong. Jesus says that entry is by way of a new birth of WATER and spirit, which Peter makes clear is repenting and being baptized (in water). Paul points out that we are baptized “INTO Christ.” The believer being baptized is buried as a SINNER and raised out of the baptismal pool as a NEW Christian. My study is available at my web site, “Should Any CHRISTIAN Ever Be Baptized?” Only if he somehow became a Christian without being born again of water and spirit. The study is at http://missionoutreach.org/CD-K01.pdf.

  429. Ray Downen says:

    Those who love Jesus are not going to pretend that His commands mean nothing as do those who imagine that salvation is promised to those who ONLY believe. Jesus commands baptism. Some don’t agree with Him. That’s their right. Of course they’re wrong, but they have the right to be wrong.

    We are NOT brought INTO Christ by faith alone or else the apostle Paul misunderstands, for he in Galatians 3:26,27 makes clear that we believe and then are baptized INTO Christ. I hear some disagreeing with Paul since he thinks and clearly states that sinners are raised into NEW LIFE when they are baptized (Romans 6:1-11).

    Of course faith IN JESUS AS LORD is essential for salvation. That’s not in question. It’s a waste of time to try to convince us that faith in JESUS as Lord is required for salvation. Every quoted verse makes that clear. We don’t deny it. Not a one of the quoted verses assumes, implies, or states that faith ALONE accomplishes anything at all for anyone. So why would anyone who believes the Bible teach that salvation is by faith ALONE? Do their Bibles omit the book of Acts and Romans and Galatians?

  430. Ray Downen says:

    Perhaps it would be well if we could all just ignore the great commission with its demand that we who tell others about Jesus are to BAPTIZE them. It’s obvious that baptism isn’t important and that all it really takes to be saved is to believe something. Jesus usually doesn’t make mistakes. Obviously He was wrong to include baptism in the commission. That IS what you’re calling for, isn’t it, Jay? The faith-only theory is that baptism makes no difference in our eternal destiny, that sinners are saved without baptism. Wasn’t Jesus wrong in even mentioning it? Weren’t the apostles mistaken in baptizing every new believer? Let’s all be Baptists! Let’s ALL believe in salvation by faith alone. Or not.

  431. Royce says:

    Ray, I have never read where you put any emphasis on this part of the great commission. “… teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you..” You want to be a stickler for abiding by the great commission don’t you? Why not all of it?

    Now some of our friends who comment here believe that Jesus’ promise about the Holy Spirit”s power was only to the apostles and not to everyone. I think you Ray might be one of those who said that, maybe not. Anyway, using the same logic and method of Bible interpretation, why would the great commission not be only for the 12 disciples? They were the only ones present when Jesus gave the commission, right?

    Jay, It might be time to put a lid on this thread. I don’t think one person has been persuaded one iota after reading the many, many comments. The crazy fact is, all of us agree that we should tell others about what Jesus has done for them and baptize those who believe. ALL of us believe that! And yet on we go.

    Finally, Does the Bible say anywhere “sing” only? Maybe you can do a post on that question.

  432. Royce says:

    Wonder how Baptists got their name Ray? Do you think they got that name by not baptizing, or by baptizing? They got it by baptizing disciples. They got that title by doing what Jesus commanded.

  433. Jay Guin says:

    Royce,

    I’ve taken your advice and ended comments on this post. This would be comment 434 … a new record for OIJ, I’m pretty sure.

Comments are closed.