New Statement of Faith

[ezra]

we would all like to hear

i already have keep the S O F basic .this is not a denomination there are basic beliefs.. there are Pentecostals in here Lutheran Church of Christ baptist catholic . every one of them have a different articles of faith . so how does any one think they are going to govern that? a basic standard of rules is what is needed . good grief i joined another forum shared a post of the dumbing down of Christianity..they removed it till farther review. i asked in p.m how it took because everything in it was truth . they banned me.....how childish they was.. this forum can either be made or broke ..i had rather see it succeed with common sense that God gave us . but it appears common sense has died .

that is my 2 cents take it or leave it

 

[JLB]

this forum can either be made or broke

This Forum is blessed.

Great owner and Mods who work here to serve the body of Christ, as unto the Lord.


Best Forum on the internet!!!




JLB

 

[stovebolts]

SB,

I don't think I'd use 'baptized into Christ' in the SoF because of these difficulties:

1. In the NT, the prepositions, 'in' and 'into' (Gk ek and eis) are difficult to explain.
2. When the NT says we are 'baptized into Christ', what do the words 'into Christ' mean?
3. Throughout Paul's epistles, we have language such a 'in Christ', 'into Christ', 'in whom', 'in him' and 'in Christ Jesus' turning up many times over.
4. They express the teaching that Christians are baptized into Christ or are in union with Christ, but it is so difficult to define what that means.
5. While I acknowledge that this theological truth is a key to Christian growth, there has been so much discussion in biblical sources about its exact meaning and ...
6. When and how it happens.
7. These prepositions, "in" and "into", are important as they are used over 200 times in the NT and and 164 times by Paul alone.
8. However, I would not endorse associating 'baptized into Christ' as meaning this happens through baptism in water.
9. I'm not convinced anything about being 'baptized into Christ' needs to appear in the SoF.

Blessings,
Oz

Galatians 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

 

[ezra]

Galatians 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

question..why is baptism baptized so hard to understand

 

[stovebolts]

SB,

Regarding baptism, I consider there are 2 elements for a SoF:
(a) What Scripture says;
(b) An accommodation to some contemporary practice.

My suggestions are:

(a) We believe baptism is for believers as part of discipleship (Matt 28:18-20).
(b) No person will be excluded from CFnet who believes in infant baptism.

As for the sinful nature, I consider that Wayne Grudem's use of 'inherited sin' rather than 'original sin' has merit. Therefore, I suggest this to be included in the SoF:

All human beings were represented by Adam when he was tested in the Garden of Eden. Since he was people's representative, Adam sinned and God counted all people guilty (including Adam) before God. From the beginning of our existence as persons we have inherited sin, but it is still our sin because we commit sin (see Rom 5:12-21; adapted from Grudem 1994:494-495).​

Blessings,
Oz

Works consulted

Grudem, W 1994. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House.

Good stuff Spencer, thanks.

I did add your section of the Sin Nature, thank you for that. While I don't agree with infant baptism, I do see how some can get there through scripture. Baptism is not a line in the sand between Heaven and Hell and I'm sure we will see many believers who were baptized as infants. However, I do see baptism as normative in the scriptures for adults who have confessed.

I guess my question is this. Do you think our SOF as it currently reads on baptism is broad enough to include the varying views of baptism?

 

[stovebolts]

question..why is baptism baptized so hard to understand

Here is my short answer. St. Augustine was debating the Universalists who said everyone goes to heaven. At that time, the entire church agreed that baptism was a necessity for salvation. St. Augustine took advantage of this common doctrine to argue against Universalism (and won). However, the repercussions still plague us today. One offshoot of his debate resulted in infant baptism. You wouldn't want your child to go to hell because he-she wasn't baptized. This was a fundamental shift for how the church viewed baptism. When Rome split from the Catholic church in 1054, she ruled through fear and used baptism and communion as tools to rule the people. What we see today through the protestant line is that we are still protesting against Rome and her teachings. Thus, some believe water baptism is nothing more than a work while others spiritualise it while yet others parse it into many different pieces.
In reality, what I see is this. When we debate issues like baptism, our mindset is not to find the truth (even if we tell ourselves otherwise) but instead, our desire is to win an argument. This is what St. Augustine did and that mindset has a ripple effect because it hits at the core of our sinful nature.

Baptism is not hard to understand, but we've complicated it.

 

[ezra]

Baptism is not hard to understand, but we've complicated it.

so is the plan of salvation !

but instead, our desire is to win an argument.

that is exactly what is being generated in here the post on sin

 

[stovebolts]

ezra,
Ignatius was a direct disciple of the Apostle John. Here is how Ignatius talks about baptism in his letter to Polycarp .
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-polycarp-lightfoot.html
6:2 Please the Captain in whose army ye serve, from whom also ye will receive your pay. Let none of you be found a deserter. Let your baptism abide with you as you shield; your faith as your helmet; your love as your spear; your patience as your body armour. Let
your works be your deposits, that ye may receive your assets due to you. Be ye therefore long-suffering one with another in gentleness, as God is with you. May I have joy of you always.

To the Ephesians, Ignatius wrote:
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-ephesians-lightfoot.html
18:2 For our God, Jesus the Christ, was conceived in the womb by Mary according to a dispensation, of the seed of David but also of the Holy Ghost; and He was born and was baptized that by His passion He might cleanse water.

St. Clement of Rome, also a direct disciple of the Apostle John wrote this.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/2clement-lightfoot.html
2Clem 6:9
But if even such righteous men as these cannot by their righteous deeds deliver their children, with what confidence shall we, if we keep not our baptism pure and undefiled, enter into the kingdom of God? Or who shall be our advocate, unless we be found having holy and righteous works?

Why is it that when we speak of baptism on this site, it's always to argue salvation?

 

[JLB]

Good stuff Spencer, thanks.

I did add your section of the Sin Nature, thank you for that. While I don't agree with infant baptism, I do see how some can get there through scripture. Baptism is not a line in the sand between Heaven and Hell and I'm sure we will see many believers who were baptized as infants. However, I do see baptism as normative in the scriptures for adults who have confessed.

I guess my question is this. Do you think our SOF as it currently reads on baptism is broad enough to include the varying views of baptism?

Do you guys intend on stating what the scriptures say about the three baptisms mentioned in the Bible, or are you going to just refer to people’s commentary?



JLB

 

[ezra]

Why is it that when we speak of baptism on this site, it's always to argue salvation?

that not my point no argument.if your making a stick thread on doctrine great , what your trying to get accomplished is rules .i will repeat this again your first s o f was great .but then suddenly you someone felt the need to expand it your writing you share of the ecf is excellent . but it ha come down to argument ! rev made a excellent post .oz comes along i read speak n.t greek PTL i speak fluent hillbilly grogan lol . my point is because one thought they had better knowledge of the subject they was more qualified . my grammar skills suxs point blank. i try to keep all my ministry work on a shelf that a child can understand a young girl i baptized i explained the best i could that baptism does not save .even you agree on this it should follow salvation. i really dont know much about the church of Christ other than what i hear on t.v the true n.t church...my how silly when we all make up the body of Christ . pardon my rabbit chase . do we honestly need 2- 3 points on every thing... once again this is a christian forum . we should conduct our selves like Christians. this is not a theology class 101 . although some good theology would be great . background history info would be another thing great to have.. what i know of background history can be put on 2 pages.. i know scriptures but the back ground intro is very helpful .i do lots searches on the net my point is keep it simple

 

[JLB]

that not my point no argument.if your making a stick thread on doctrine great , what your trying to get accomplished is rules .i will repeat this again your first s o f was great .but then suddenly you someone felt the need to expand it your writing you share of the ecf is excellent . but it ha come down to argument ! rev made a excellent post .oz comes along i read speak n.t greek PTL i speak fluent hillbilly grogan lol . my point is because one thought they had better knowledge of the subject they was more qualified . my grammar skills suxs point blank. i try to keep all my ministry work on a shelf that a child can understand a young girl i baptized i explained the best i could that baptism does not save .even you agree on this it should follow salvation. i really dont know much about the church of Christ other than what i hear on t.v the true n.t church...my how silly when we all make up the body of Christ . pardon my rabbit chase . do we honestly need 2- 3 points on every thing... once again this is a christian forum . we should conduct our selves like Christians. this is not a theology class 101 . although some good theology would be great . background history info would be another thing great to have.. what i know of background history can be put on 2 pages.. i know scriptures but the back ground intro is very helpful .i do lots searches on the net my point is keep it simple

The very reason you are posting your concerns, is why we are wanting to enhance the existing SOF to include some more areas of our common faith in Christ that perhaps need to be addressed in order to bring us all closer in the unity of the faith.


Your right, it should be simple and it needs to be biblically based.


Concerning baptism coming after salvation, which one?


The way we are born again is by the Spirit, baptizing us into Christ, because we obeyed the Gospel command “repent”.


For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and have all been made to drink into one Spirit. 1 Corinthians 12:13


IOW, can a person be saved, without being baptized into Christ by the Spirit?




JLB

 

[turnorburn]

that not my point no argument.if your making a stick thread on doctrine great , what your trying to get accomplished is rules .i will repeat this again your first s o f was great .but then suddenly you someone felt the need to expand it your writing you share of the ecf is excellent . but it ha come down to argument ! rev made a excellent post .oz comes along i read speak n.t greek PTL i speak fluent hillbilly grogan lol . my point is because one thought they had better knowledge of the subject they was more qualified . my grammar skills suxs point blank. i try to keep all my ministry work on a shelf that a child can understand a young girl i baptized i explained the best i could that baptism does not save .even you agree on this it should follow salvation. i really dont know much about the church of Christ other than what i hear on t.v the true n.t church...my how silly when we all make up the body of Christ . pardon my rabbit chase . do we honestly need 2- 3 points on every thing... once again this is a christian forum . we should conduct our selves like Christians. this is not a theology class 101 . although some good theology would be great . background history info would be another thing great to have.. what i know of background history can be put on 2 pages.. i know scriptures but the back ground intro is very helpful .i do lots searches on the net my point is keep it simple

Well said ezra i couldn't have said it better myself..

II Corinthians 11:1 Would to God ye could bear with me a little in my folly: and indeed bear with me.

2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.

3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

 

[stovebolts]

The very reason you are posting your concerns, is why we are wanting to enhance the existing SOF to include some more areas of our common faith in Christ that perhaps need to be addressed in order to bring us all closer in the unity of the faith.


Your right, it should be simple and it needs to be biblically based.


Concerning baptism coming after salvation, which one?


The way we are born again is by the Spirit, baptizing us into Christ, because we obeyed the Gospel command “repent”.


For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and have all been made to drink into one Spirit. 1 Corinthians 12:13


IOW, can a person be saved, without being baptized into Christ by the Spirit?




JLB

As far as the three baptisms, why can't they all occur at the same time? What if we thought of it like we think of the Trinity?
In other words, instead of pitting them against another and assigning a variable scale to each, what if we gave them equal footing where they actually complimented each other?

The beauty of the trinity is this. When one is lifted up, all are lifted up. When one is disgraced, all are disgraced. I believe this is the same concept with baptism.

Thoughts?

 

[stovebolts]

that not my point no argument.if your making a stick thread on doctrine great , what your trying to get accomplished is rules .i will repeat this again your first s o f was great .but then suddenly you someone felt the need to expand it your writing you share of the ecf is excellent . but it ha come down to argument ! rev made a excellent post .oz comes along i read speak n.t greek PTL i speak fluent hillbilly grogan lol . my point is because one thought they had better knowledge of the subject they was more qualified . my grammar skills suxs point blank. i try to keep all my ministry work on a shelf that a child can understand a young girl i baptized i explained the best i could that baptism does not save .even you agree on this it should follow salvation. i really dont know much about the church of Christ other than what i hear on t.v the true n.t church...my how silly when we all make up the body of Christ . pardon my rabbit chase . do we honestly need 2- 3 points on every thing... once again this is a christian forum . we should conduct our selves like Christians. this is not a theology class 101 . although some good theology would be great . background history info would be another thing great to have.. what i know of background history can be put on 2 pages.. i know scriptures but the back ground intro is very helpful .i do lots searches on the net my point is keep it simple

Hi Ezra,
Please don't take this harshly, but you say with confidently that baptism follows AFTER salvation, but what makes your understanding of scripture the sole authority of scripture? Can salvation occur during baptism or does it only occur the way you understand it? Is your way the only way, and must we all conform to your understanding, and your understanding alone? Have you now imposed yourself as Pope over us? What if Baptism plays a bigger role than any of us understands? What if in certain situations, Baptism could give us assurance of our salvation based on God's grace while entering us into the Body of Christ (The Church) and promised the giving of the Holy Spirit? Romans 6 gives us a beautiful picture of us being buried into Christ's death, and then risen in newness of life. If you ask me, when we minimize that picture and water down baptism to an unessential work, we've lost the beauty intended. Not only that, but we disregard the words of Jesus when he tells us to baptize.

The purpose of our Statement of Faith is not to set us apart from other denominations, but rather, it is to unite the fullness of the Body of Christ. This forum is extremely diverse and as Christians, our primary purpose is to spread the gospel while giving glory to God by showing our love toward one another. When one receives the gospel, they are to be baptized (by water) and then we are to teach them the ways of our Savior Jesus, the promised Messiah.

There are those like yourself who do not believe water baptism has anything to do with salvation while there are those like myself who believe water baptism plays a role in ones salvation because we don't see salvation as a one time event, but rather we see salvation as God's transforming work. In other words, water baptism doesn't save, but God can save us in the baptismal waters. Regardless, we must all believe that water baptism is important because not only was Jesus baptized with water, but he commanded us to also baptize in water. Where we should be able to find common ground is that we are all concerned with the salvation of those who don't know our Savior.

So, what I am trying to do is find that common ground to show the world that there is a core group of members who are truly united and seek the truth through unity.

How then do you feel we can reconcile these views? That is what I'm after in our SOF.

 

[stovebolts]

For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and have all been made to drink into one Spirit. 1 Corinthians 12:13


IOW, can a person be saved, without being baptized into Christ by the Spirit?


JLB

Hi JLB,
We see in the first chapter of 1 Corinthians that there were divisions within the church and one of them centered on who's baptism where they baptized into.

1 Corinthians 1:13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

We can assume that those being baptized where baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

When I look at 1 Corinthians 12:13, Paul is talking about being a member of one Body, the Church which reflects back to 1:13... Who's name were we baptized into and who's church were we baptized into?

For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and have all been made to drink into one Spirit. 1 Corinthians 12:13

But he adds that we drink into one Spirit, so we understand that something else occurred when one was baptized in the baptismal pool. Something spiritual. I would suggest that normative to scripture, the three baptisms that you rightly bring up and want to address hold unity and are able to work together. A hand is no less important than an arm nor is a toe any less important than a foot. Yes, there are times a hand can work without the use of a leg and a toe can work without the use of an arm, but nothing works unless there is a head and the head has the authority to use it's Body in any way that serves His will.

To answer your question: IOW, can a person be saved, without being baptized into Christ by the Spirit?

We can say that one is not part of the Church unless they are baptized.

 

[JLB]

As far as the three baptisms, why can't they all occur at the same time? What if we thought of it like we think of the Trinity?
In other words, instead of pitting them against another and assigning a variable scale to each, what if we gave them equal footing where they actually complimented each other?

The beauty of the trinity is this. When one is lifted up, all are lifted up. When one is disgraced, all are disgraced. I believe this is the same concept with baptism.

Thoughts?

Ok.


I just want people to understand from the scriptures about Baptisms.

How each person applies each Baptism is up to them.



JLB

 

[JLB]

We can assume that those being baptized where baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

I don’t see anywhere in scripture where the Apostles baptized in any other name than Jesus.



JLB

 

[stovebolts]

I don’t see anywhere in scripture where the Apostles baptized in any other name than Jesus.

JLB

Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Can you list the three baptisms you refer to so we have something that we can start threading together to show unity within the three?

Ephesians 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

Think of it like this. One God, (Father, Son, Holy Ghost). One Baptism (x, y, z)

 

[JLB]

Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Can you list the three baptisms you refer to so we have something that we can start threading together to show unity within the three?

Ephesians 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

Think of it like this. One God, (Father, Son, Holy Ghost). One Baptism (x, y, z)

That’s my line.

Just as there is One God expressed in three , there is One baptism expressed in three.


For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and have all been made to drink into one Spirit. 1 Corinthians 12:13

This is where the Spirit baptises us into Christ, whereby we are joined to Him, and are one spirit with Him.


But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him. 1 Corinthians 6:17


After this comes being baptized in water by man.

Then Jesus baptises is with the Holy Spirit.


While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word. And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God.
Then Peter answered, “Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?”
Acts 10:44-47


Paul uses the Old Testament types to teach the three baptisms.


Moreover, brethren, I do not want you to be unaware that all our fathers were under the cloud, all passed through the sea, all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea, all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ. 1 Corinthians 10:1-4

• all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea,

JLB

 

[OzSpen]

Galatians 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

SB,

I agree that Gal 3:27 speaks of being 'baptized into Christ'.

• What does that mean?
• Well, you 'have put on Christ'. Again, what does that mean?
• When does this 'baptized into Christ' happen?
• At conversion?
• At baptism?
• When baptized in the Spirit?
• When does that happen?
• Etc.

Being 'baptized into Christ' is biblical theology. So are baptism of the Spirit, substitutionary atonement, Jesus the God-man (hypostatic union), all of God's attributes, speaking in tongues, etc - yet none of these appear in the SoF.

My view is: Why add a statement, 'baptized into Christ', about which there are evangelical differences of understanding?

Citing a verse doesn't deal with the exegesis and exposition of the meaning of the verse.

Oz