Is belief "works"?

[gr8grace]

How?

Webb,

I always strive to stay teachable and at times I am not very successful at it,but I try. I am not here to back you in a corner or disrespect you, I just want the truth.

Metanoe,w, metanoeo: change your mind, repent; translated repent. Simply put with John 6:47 I lived most of my life not BELIEVING that verse, I repented(changed my mind about that verse) and Got saved.

EVERY time a salvation verse is said in the Bible, EVERY time it is Metanoe,w, metanoeo: change your mind, repent; translated repent.

Metame,llomai, metamellomai: change your emotion, regret; translated repent. Is NEVER used in a salvation verse. And most religions and work based churches will teach this type of repentance to its people. It keeps em guilty and it keeps the money coming in.

 

[Webb]

Webb,

I always strive to stay teachable and at times I am not very successful at it,but I try. I am not here to back you in a corner or disrespect you, I just want the truth.

Metanoe,w, metanoeo: change your mind, repent; translated repent. Simply put with John 6:47 I lived most of my life not BELIEVING that verse, I repented(changed my mind about that verse) and Got saved.

EVERY time a salvation verse is said in the Bible, EVERY time it is Metanoe,w, metanoeo: change your mind, repent; translated repent.

Metame,llomai, metamellomai: change your emotion, regret; translated repent. Is NEVER used in a salvation verse. And most religions and work based churches will teach this type of repentance to its people. It keeps em guilty and it keeps the money coming in.

Is the accusation "It keeps em guilty and it keeps the money coming in" a "blanket statement"? What about repentance in Acts 8:22?
God bless

 

[gr8grace]

Is the accusation "It keeps em guilty and it keeps the money coming in" a "blanket statement"? What about repentance in Acts 8:22?
God bless

I was NOT accusing you Webb. That is experience talking from my life.

Acts 8:13 was Simons salvation verse. Acts 8:22 was His Christian walk verse.

 

[Webb]

I was NOT accusing you Webb. That is experience talking from my life.

Acts 8:13 was Simons salvation verse. Acts 8:22 was His Christian walk verse.

Hi Jarrod
Had Simon not repented (Acts 8:22) what would have been his result? I am grateful that you did not mean what you wrote about keeping them guilty and keeping the money coming in to be all inclusive as I attend a congregation which believes repentance necessary and it is not any effort to keep anyone guilty or keep the cash flowing.

 

[gr8grace]

Hi Jarrod
Had Simon not repented (Acts 8:22) what would have been his result? I am grateful that you did not mean what you wrote about keeping them guilty and keeping the money coming in to be all inclusive as I attend a congregation which believes repentance necessary and it is not any effort to keep anyone guilty or keep the cash flowing.

Heb 12:6-11

FOR THOSE WHOM THE LORD LOVES HE DISCIPLINES,
AND HE SCOURGES EVERY SON WHOM HE RECEIVES.”

7 It is for discipline that you endure; God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there whom his father does not discipline? 8 But if you are without discipline, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate children and not sons. 9 Furthermore, we had earthly fathers to discipline us, and we respected them; shall we not much rather be subject to the Father of spirits, and live? 10 For they disciplined us for a short time as seemed best to them, but He disciplines us for our good, so that we may share His holiness. 11 All discipline for the moment seems not to be joyful, but sorrowful; yet to those who have been trained by it, afterwards it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness.

 

[Webb]

Hi Jarrod
Sorry but I fail to make the connection betweeen Simon and Heb.12.

 

[gr8grace]

Hi Jarrod
Sorry but I fail to make the connection betweeen Simon and Heb.12.

Webb I have nothing for you. I am just a little country boy and have a lot to learn. I will keep studying and hope to grow so someday I can help where God wants me to help.

 

[Webb]

Hi Jarrod, Perhaps we have something in common. I'm also a country boy (not a boy any longer as I'm in my 80's) an ex-US Marine, did cowboying some, grew up in the brush of South Texas and owned a auto body shop.

God bless

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I know that most Churches nowadays Do NOT teach Bible doctrine, they for the most part teach a lifestyle,and in actuality it becomes moral degeneracy. People are relying on their "MORAL LIFE" for sanctification and at times their justification and NOT the Grace of God.

I know this is true, but the frustration comes in when you realize you can't teach people the grace of God, meaning only God can bring them to the point of recognizing and believing that the only hope they have is the grace and mercy of God, not the effort of their good works. You can tell them all about it but until they come to the place that the tax collector in Jesus' story came to (Luke 18:13) that person is going to continue in a lifestyle of self righteousness and hypocrisy being deceived about their true relationship with God. Coming to grace is entirely a work of God.

But I disagree that the Sin unto death takes a person out of the Kingdom of God, it actually brings the apostate believer INTO the Kingdom of God and out of this world because they have become useless to God in this world. And the Sin unto death is a physical death, not a spiritual death.

The Sin unto death is not a particular sin so to speak, it is a mental attitude. And this stems from negative volition to bible doctrine, and Gods plan for that believers life. it progresses to the point that the believer has been so negative towards Gods Plan that God takes him home,because He is useless to God in this life. And Gods Grace is patient, this is a life time of negative decisions for the believer.

The problem I see with this is that in the same context of the 'sin unto death' John says repentance, the turning away from the sin they commit, is the mark of the true believer, the one born of God, not the refusal to repent.

16 If anyone sees his brother commit a sin that does not lead to death, he should pray and God will give him life. I refer to those whose sin does not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that he should pray about that. 17 All wrongdoing is sin, and there is sin that does not lead to death.

18 We know that anyone born of God does not continue to sin; the one who was born of God keeps him safe, and the evil one cannot harm him. (1 John 5:16-18 NIV1984)


See? God keeps his children safe by bringing them to repentance. That's the signature of the true child of God--repentance. That's the life God gives to his children. According to John, the faithfulness of God to his own is to bring them to repentance, not destroy them.

The 'sin unto death' is the sin of unbelief--the rejection of God's forgiveness altogether and choosing not to trust in the blood of Christ. As opposed to the sin of weakness, or ignorance, or a lack of faith in the provision of God to see us through our trials and testings in this life, which can be seen in all kinds of sins--rage, hatred, envy, jealousy, etc.

People often ask if they lose their salvation when they sin. I say, only if that sin represents an outright rejection of God's forgiveness--an "I don't care" attitude about right and wrong and the judgment to come and God's offer of forgiveness to save you from the penalty of sin. It's the "I just want to do what I want to do attitude." When a person's sin is the result of that kind of attitude toward God, that sin signifies the spiritual death they have died. There is no remedy for it, for there is no provision of forgiveness available for the sin of rejecting God's forgiveness. It only makes sense. It's the unforgivable sin. Not that God doesn't want to forgive it, but how can he?

In Exodus 4:24 we see Moses at the Door of the Sin unto death. He was being negative to Gods Plan and the Doctrine of circumcision. Gen 17:14 Saul was another example of the Sin unto death.

Moses would have been useless to God if Moses would not follow Gods plan. If Moses would not follow the plan how could He honestly expect anyone else to follow.

I don't think Moses was against God's plan at all. Hebrews speaks of his faithfulness over the house of God. Moses was weak, not unbelieving in the sense of rejecting God's plan for the Israelites.

Moses is a type of Christ. Even though Jesus did not sin, he did pay the death penalty for the sins of the nation of God on their way into the Promises of God, just as Moses was penalized because of the sin and rebellion of the people:

"37 Because of you the Lord became angry with me also and said, “You shall not enter it, either. " (Deuteronomy 1:37 NIV1984)

From here, in the very next verse, the type and shadow of Christ continues in the person of Joshua, who God then appointed to lead the people of God into the Promised Land:

"38 But your assistant, Joshua son of Nun, will enter it. Encourage him, because he will lead Israel to inherit it. " (Deuteronomy 1:38)

Christ died because of the sins of the people and was cut off from the abundance of God, and he led the people of God into the promises of God. Both are illustrated for us in Moses and Joshua.

So, I don't think Moses committed the sin of unbelief, the sin unto spiritual death. That, IMO, would be signified by a return to Egypt. Something he firmly resisted. What he didn't resist very well was the provocations of the rebels he was leading out of Egypt. But, as we see, it serves as a useful illustration of how Jesus was to be cutoff from God's blessing because of the sins of the people.

 

[gr8grace]

Hi Jarrod
Sorry but I fail to make the connection betweeen Simon and Heb.12.

Webb, I have to ask. You really do not see the Connection? Because God was right on the Scene disciplining Simon with Peter bringing It to his attention, God was right there disciplining in Acts 8:20 With Peter rebuking Him. This comes from Heb 12 rebuking is a type of Gods discipline. And if we read further We have a hint of what Simon would be going through if He did not listen to Gods rebuke.....Jealousy, bitterness and Bondage and these can lead to some tough divine discipline if we are not willing to confess our sins to God 1 John 1:9..... And also notice that Simon was not on his knees crying because he was so sorry and was so full of regret, He simply acknowledged it a prayed for nothing bad to happen to Him. Just like what we are suppose to do, acknowledge it and be done with it and carry on in grace.

 

[gr8grace]

Hi Jarrod, Perhaps we have something in common. I'm also a country boy (not a boy any longer as I'm in my 80's) an ex-US Marine, did cowboying some, grew up in the brush of South Texas and owned a auto body shop.

God bless

Thank you for your Service Sir!....we do have a bit in common. From the bottom of my heart though Webb, I wish we had more in common In Christ.

 

[Webb]

Hi Jarrod
Your thanks gratefully acknowledged. Jesus' prayer in the shadow of the cross (Jn.17) that we be one, Paul's admonition in I Cor.1:10 and his plea in Eph.4:1-6 is the only basis upon which we all may have things common in Christ. As Paul wrote in Eph.4:1 it is difficult but not impossible.

God bless

 

[dadof10]

Yes, Abraham was justified by his faith in the promises made to him about the seed, who we now know to be Jesus Christ. We simply don't know if what he knew about the seed was sufficient to justify him in Genesis 12. It just doesn't say.

This is what the Bible says:

"Abram passed through the land to the place at Shechem, to the oak of Moreh. At that time the Canaanites were in the land. 7 Then the LORD appeared to Abram, and said, "To your descendants [seed] I will give this land." So he built there an altar to the LORD, who had appeared to him. (Gen. 12)

This is what you say:

The point is that son was to inherit the promises on his behalf. He believed that and was declared righteous as a result. There are no details of Christ available at this time. The specifics of the Christ have not been revealed yet at this time. But, nevertheless, his faith is in what he does know about a son that will inherit the blessing.

The point is, Abraham had faith in what details were available at the time as to the son that would inherit the blessings on his behalf. He is establishing the truth for all people of how God grants righteousness based on one's belief in his promise of a son who would inherit the blessing on our behalf (because we can't inherit it ourselves), not granted on the basis of work completed.

You already know that it plainly says the 'seed' spoken of in all the promises to Abraham is Jesus Christ. Just because he didn't know Jesus by name (as far as we know) and that He, Jesus, is the complete fulfillment of the promise of a son to him doesn't mean he was not believing in God's promised blessing--the belief that justifies.

How is it possible to not see in the passage that Paul plainly says the seed, the seed promised to Abraham--the seed through whom all people will be blessed--is Jesus...Jesus the Christ?

Abraham had faith in what he knew, and was therefore responsible to, about God's promise to provide a seed that would be the source of God's promised blessing to all people (because he inherited). This scripture plainly tells us that seed was the Messiah, Jesus.

So, let me get this straight. The "Seed" is Christ. Abraham has faith in "what he does know about a son that will inherit the blessing" (Christ) which justifies. He has faith that the Seed will "inherit a blessing", which justifies. And he has faith in "God's promised blessing--the belief that justifies". He has this "kind" of faith in Gen. 12, yet you still "don't know" whether he is justified HERE? It seems to have satisfied all your criteria. What's really the issue? Maybe you are coming into Scripture with a bias? Maybe in your opinion, NO evidence would be enough? :yes

You presume, incorrectly, that any knowledge about Christ, and even acting on any and all knowledge of Christ, justifies.

I never said that, did I? As you pointed out more than once, Abraham didn't know about Christ, so this is yet another straw man.

This is no more true than when I knew something about the promises connected with and about Christ, and even had the faith to get out of bed to go to church to learn more about the gospel (a faith that certainly pleased God!), but was not justified by faith in Christ until later when I learned more about the gospel and actually put my trust in it.

Do you think Abraham "put his trust" in the promises in Gen. 12? Did he "put his trust" in "what he does know about a son"? Does leaving your father's home, and wandering the desert count as "putting his trust" in God? Does the fact that Abraham built an altar on the place where God promised Abraham his SEED would inherit the land (i.e. promise) count as "putting his trust" in God's promise? You can deny all the facts here to keep "ISAS" if you want, but it is quite transparently biased.

But, according to your belief I was most certainly justified by the faith to simply investigate the promises. Oh, how every evangelist wished that were true!

Oh, how you WISHED I would have said it! Then you wouldn't be kicking another straw-man.

Let's not lose the point of this contention and why the works justification doctrine strains to make the point that Abraham was already declared righteous before Genesis 15 (though it doesn't say that). According to works justification--meaning, 'you aren't justified until you do something righteous along with your faith'--the thinking goes that if Abraham was justified in Genesis 12, where his faith can be directly linked to something he 'did', this somehow proves that he was justified by what he did and not just by the faith alone that produced the doing.

What are you ranting about. Another straw man. You are mixing two points. That Abraham was justified in Gen. 12 (which he was) has NOTHING to do with "faith vs. works". Did I EVER make the point that Abraham was justified by WORKS in Gen. 12? No, but that he was justified because he BELIEVED GOD, just as he did in Gen. 15. Please read that again... Where do you get "where his faith can be directly linked to something he 'did'" from what I wrote ANYWHERE?

The problem being, even if Abraham was justified in Genesis 12 (remember, I've been saying all along, it simply doesn't say) how can one just automatically come to the conclusion that what he did did the justifying along with his faith????

If you want to make the argument that faith does something, that you will get no argument from anyone about. But to say a person is justified (made righteous) by that doing (along with their faith), that you will get no agreement with at all from your opponents.

:help

 

[dadof10]

Good grief, dadof10, I did that! But you take the verses I used to do that and then demand verses to make the point of those verses.

See, here's the way it works.

I say: "To Paul, the word 'works' in his 'faith vs. works' passages, means only works of the Mosaic law and circumcision"

You say "I disagree. 'Works' means 'all deeds'."

I prove my point by posting many verses that actually say "works of the law" and "circumcision" directly relating to Paul's "faith vs. works" arguments. Then I ask for any verses that directly contrast faith to anything other that the Mosaic law.

You counter with "Deeds...done in righteousness" and claim it means "all righteous works", thereby proving your point.

I counter that with four verses that tie "deeds...done in righteousness" directly to "works of the Mosaic law", thereby debunking your point. I ask again for ANY verses that contrast faith and "good deeds" or baptism or charity...

Now it's your turn to either debunk my argument or do the right thing and admit that Paul doesn't mean "all deeds" by "works" in his "faith vs. works" passages.

Simply saying "I have shown you" while channeling Charles M. Schultz doesn't cut it when there is a valid counter-argument on the table.

And do I have to point out again that "Baptism, charity, keeping the commandments, sacrifice" ARE works of the law?

Need I point out to you again where Scripture says these actions "save"?

Yes, but ONLY as long as it's understood that 'Good deeds+faith=justified' means the faith that justifies (MAKES one legally righteous before God), justifies apart from the good deeds it will most certainly produce. Works are most certainly the expected and obligatory outcome of faith . They are inseparable, but that in no way means the work of obedience, except the obedience of believing, can remove sin guilt and make a person legally righteous before God. Only the blood of Christ can do that through faith in that blood.

Let me point these verses out to you, yet again:

"And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him." (Acts 2:37-38)

And he said, `The God of our fathers appointed you to know his will, to see the Just One and to hear a voice from his mouth; 15 for you will be a witness for him to all men of what you have seen and heard. 16 And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.' (Acts 22:14-16)

As you can plainly see, WATER BAPTISM "removes sin guilt". Maybe you'll respond to these verses this time.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Dad, you can point them out five, ten, 100 more times if you wish. That won't change the fact that, as others have repeatedly said, you lift them out of context or misinterpret their meaning. You seem to be unable to grasp that we are Abraham's children, not by virtue of bloodline -- that is the Jewish people -- but by virtue of his faith and our faith being the same. If Abraham was permanently and irrevocably justified by his faith in God, so are we. That's all there is to it. Nothing else but faith is necessary, and your statements that baptism, keeping the commandments, charity, etc. "save" is a primary example of your misinterpretations.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Let me point these verses out to you, yet again:

"And Peter said to them, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him." (Acts 2:37-38)

And he said, `The God of our fathers appointed you to know his will, to see the Just One and to hear a voice from his mouth; 15 for you will be a witness for him to all men of what you have seen and heard. 16 And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.' (Acts 22:14-16)

As you can plainly see, WATER BAPTISM "removes sin guilt". Maybe you'll respond to these verses this time.

How does does water wash away sin? Do you really believe water in and of itself can wash away sin guilt? Even Paul says it's the washing and regeneration of the Holy Spirit that makes us clean. The Holy Spirit given to a person when they believe the gospel...not just know it's true...but trust in the gospel for their salvation.

Many, many people know the gospel is true. Few do the 'work' of trusting in that gospel. It's only those who trust in the gospel, in their heart, and who are then justified, that are given the Holy Spirit, the sign and seal of their justification through that belief/trust in the blood Christ. That can happen before, during, or after water baptism. Water is NOT a magic potion that somehow removes guilt of sin, even if done in faith. It's a symbol of what does do that, the only thing that does that--immersion into the HOLY SPIRIT.

Water never washed a single sin away. The blood of Christ, through our trust in that blood to do that is the only thing that can remove sin guilt. Following the command to show that trust publicly in a water baptism is an expected manifestation of that faith, just as all the other commanded obediences of God are manifestations of believing in the blood of Christ, believing being the actual 'work' that does the actual justifying.

 

[dadof10]

Dad, you can point them out five, ten, 100 more times if you wish. That won't change the fact that, as others have repeatedly said, you lift them out of context or misinterpret their meaning.

You're right. The waters of the flood "...symbolize baptism, which now saves you..." doesn't mean that water baptism saves. When Jesus answered the direct question "what must I do to inherit eternal life" with "keep the commandments" it doesn't mean keeping the commandments leads to eternal life. James saying that we "are not justified by faith alone, but by deeds", he doesn't mean we are not justified by faith alone, but by deeds. Paul saying "woman will be saved through childbearing..." doesn't mean that the pain of childbearing has anything to do with salvation. And Paul saying "For he will render to every man according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life" doesn't mean God will render to every man according to his works; to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life.

What was I thinking, simply reading the words in context and accepting them at face value. I should know the Bible only teaches sola-fide and interpret EVERY "dot and tittle" through that prism, like you do.

You seem to be unable to grasp that we are Abraham's children, not by virtue of bloodline -- that is the Jewish people -- but by virtue of his faith and our faith being the same.

What have I said that makes you think I'm unable to "grasp" this? Have I said differently? Paste my words please, or apologize for misinterpreting my view, thanks.

If Abraham was permanently and irrevocably justified by his faith in God, so are we. That's all there is to it.

If you have been reading my posts to Jethro, you know that Abraham was justified by his belief in God in Gen. 12. He was then justified by his belief AGAIN in Gen. 15. this points to the fact that justification is a process, not a one-time event.

Nothing else but faith is necessary, and your statements that baptism, keeping the commandments, charity, etc. "save" is a primary example of your misinterpretations.

Simply show me where Scripture teaches that "nothing else but faith is necessary" and that "baptism, keeping the commandments, charity, etc." don't save. You have made the positive statements, simply back them up with Scripture.

 

[dadof10]

How does does water wash away sin? Do you really believe water in and of itself can wash away sin guilt?

You're argument's not with me, it's with Peter and Ananias. They are the ones who said it, I'm simply copying their words here.

Even Paul says it's the washing and regeneration of the Holy Spirit that makes us clean. The Holy Spirit given to a person when they believe the gospel...not just know it's true...but trust in the gospel for their salvation.

Do you really believe the words here refer to the Holy Spirit? How can a person "rise and be baptized" in the Holy Spirit? Do you seriously think that Peter and Ananias had control over the Spirit, and were able to "baptize in the Spirit" at will?

Many, many people know the gospel is true. Few do the 'work' of trusting in that gospel. It's only those who trust in the gospel, in their heart, and who are then justified, that are given the Holy Spirit, the sign and seal of their justification through that belief/trust in the blood Christ. That can happen before, during, or after water baptism. Water is NOT a magic potion that somehow removes guilt of sin, even if done in faith.

That's not what Peter and Ananias taught, and Luke wrote. You can believe the men who are teaching you, or the plain words of Scripture.

It's a symbol of what does do that, the only thing that does that--immersion into the HOLY SPIRIT.

Please post the verses that teach water baptism is a "symbol of what does do that". Didn't think so...

Water never washed a single sin away. The blood of Christ, through our trust in that blood to do that is the only thing that can remove sin guilt.

How is the Blood of Christ for the forgiveness of sin applied to the believer, by faith alone, or by faith and baptism? Wouldn't this make sense in light of the verses I posted from Acts? Doesn't it make sense that baptism is HOW the merits of Christ are applied to the person? Again, faith and baptism are NEVER contrasted in Scripture, yet faith and "works" are. Because we believe that baptism saves, doesn't mean we believe faith doesn't. It's "both and" not "either or".

Following the command to show that trust publicly in a water baptism is an expected manifestation of that faith, just as all the other commanded obediences of God are manifestations of believing in the blood of Christ, believing being the actual 'work' that does the actual justifying.

Again, simply post the verses that teach baptism is a symbolic "manifestation" of faith. Again, didn't think so...

 

[Jethro Bodine]

You're argument's not with me, it's with Peter and Ananias. They are the ones who said it, I'm simply copying their words here.

We know from the whole counsel of scripture that faith is the actual agent of justification, not the water of baptism. Baptism only represents that which only the Holy Spirit can do--cleanse the Spirit of a person of sin guilt.

Do you really believe the words here refer to the Holy Spirit? How can a person "rise and be baptized" in the Holy Spirit? Do you seriously think that Peter and Ananias had control over the Spirit, and were able to "baptize in the Spirit" at will?

I said water baptism is a symbol of the Holy Spirit, and that a person can receive the Spirit before, during, or after water baptism. How does that in any way shape or form even remotely mean I said the Holy Spirit exactly mirrors water baptism?

That's not what Peter and Ananias taught, and Luke wrote. You can believe the men who are teaching you, or the plain words of Scripture.

As I say, the whole counsel of scripture reveals that the Holy Spirit is the actual agent of justification. The Holy Spirit is the righteousness we receive in Christ. The Holy Spirit is what makes us righteous. How can literal water be the agent of righteousness? How does water wash away sin? How can water make us righteous? How can it do that?

The spirit of a person is cleansed with the fire of the Holy Spirit through belief in the blood. Our Spirit joined with the Spirit of God. The flesh of a person--the defilement of what a person does--is made clean through the washing of repentance. That's how you wash the outward man. Baptism is the symbol of this washing of, both, the inner man, and the outer man by the power of the Holy Spirit. Water can't do that. How can literal water make a spirit clean? How can water make the defiled deeds of the flesh go away? But it's easy to see how the Spirit of God can do that. Water baptism is but a symbol of what only the Holy Spirit can do in the body and spirit of a person.

Please post the verses that teach water baptism is a "symbol of what does do that". Didn't think so...

As I just explained, water does not cleanse the Spirit of a man. The Holy Spirit does. How is a spirit made clean by water? How are evil deeds of the flesh washed away by water? Obviously, water is symbolic of what can do that.

How is the Blood of Christ for the forgiveness of sin applied to the believer, by faith alone, or by faith and baptism?

By faith. There's no reason to think faith can't coincide with the moment of water baptism. But there's also no reason, Biblically, to think it can only happen at water baptism. It didn't for me. And I also did not receive a gift of the Spirit at my water baptism either as that happened to some in the book of Acts.

Wouldn't this make sense in light of the verses I posted from Acts? Doesn't it make sense that baptism is HOW the merits of Christ are applied to the person?

Like I say, there's no reason to think that can't happen at the moment of water baptism. It's clearly taught in the Bible that faith is how a person accesses the grace of God. Faith (in the blood) is how the grace of God is applied/ accessed, and how a person is justified:

"Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2 through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand." (Romans 5:1-2 NIV1984)

Again, faith and baptism are NEVER contrasted in Scripture, yet faith and "works" are.

Baptism is a work. Baptism, by definition, is obviously NOT faith in the blood of Christ. How is it you can't see the difference between the 'work' of believing in the blood (trusting in the blood) and all other things you can do or think???? No where in the Bible does it say that baptism, or any other work justifies a person. But it does say in many places that the grace of God through the work of faith does. The 'work' of faith stands all by itself as that which accesses the righteousness of God.

Because we believe that baptism saves, doesn't mean we believe faith doesn't. It's "both and" not "either or".

The mistake you're making is thinking that you can just substitute 'justify' in place of 'save' anywhere you want in scripture as if they mean exactly the same thing. When we get to the Day of Judgment we will not be standing before God to be made legally righteous by God. We will be there to be saved from the punishment of unrighteousness. We are made righteous now so we will be saved then, on the Day of Judgment. If you wait until the Day of Judgment to be justified you will be seriously disappointed and not saved on that Day.

We are justified (made righteous) by faith our faith in the blood. We are saved on the Day of Wrath by what we do, our works serving as the evidence that testifies on our behalf that we have the righteousness of God through faith in Christ's blood.

 

[EdenBorn]

Water baptism simply renews the person. It is an initiation into Christianity with the slate wiped cleaned. It alone does not wash away future sins- you are still accountable thereafter and must repent your transgressions.

People nowadays seem to think that God is just handing out a freebee- 'do as you please, the water you were dunked in saved you'.
The belief that baptism secures you is a falsehood. Not only is that a misrepresentation of what baptism is, but you don't even have to have to be baptized to be saved. It is a rite which helps the person in their declaration, not a rite which unlocks the gates to Heaven. It's power is a reminder to the soul, and a cleansing of past sins- very important, but not a requirement, as God will forgive any sins accounted for by those willing to be Godly.

To be honest, I find it a bit disturbing that so many people hinge on baptism to the the extremity that God puts something so simple in the way eternal fate.


Expounding on the main subject of the thread, faith is not faith without works. Because how much faith does a person have if they do not produce works? They simply have a good idea or wishful account in their minds, vain as sin itself. There is absolutely no salvation in a dead faith, and to say that faith is required is to say that all your loved ones, who are atheists and nonetheless remarkable people, are going to Hell. So in all reality, to argue that good people cannot be saved because they did the so called *evil* of not believing a collection of ancient texts is to say that everyone around you, including family and friends, will all be in Hell.
Tell me more about how paradise is so enjoyable knowing that your loved one's are in Hell. Personally, I find it quite sadistic and the reason I don't cast that judgement unto others is because I don't think they fully realize what their theology concludes with.

The fact of the matter is that Heaven is reserved for good people and Hell is reserved for bad people. God is righteous, and to send people to Hell simply because they never got dunked in water or professed a life specifically in Christ is definitively unrighteous.