No, I didn't. I said there are 3 tenses of "salvation". And I explained them. Maybe a review of what I posted would help you follow what I'm saying. As it is, it seems you aren't following any of it.
Please see post 127
Have you read Jesus' words in John 5:24? Seems not.
Yeah, I read them in context, not just that one verse. However, it;s also necessary to evaluate everything else that Jesus said on the subject.
35 "But those who are counted worthy to attain that age, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage;
36 "
nor can they die anymore, for they are equal to the angels and are sons of God,
being sons of the resurrection. (Luk 20:35-36 NKJ)
29 So Jesus answered and said, "Assuredly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife1 or children or lands, for My sake and the gospel's,
30 "who shall not receive a hundredfold now in this time-- houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions-- and
in the age to come, eternal life. (Mar 10:29-30 NKJ)
Jesus also said these statements, If we accept the idea that one present has eternal life there is a conflict with these passages. The key is to come to a position that can incorporate all of the passages with no conflicts. Both of these passage speaks of receiving life in the resurrection, not prior to it and both of them are from Jesus. We either have to harmonize or ignore some of these passages. In my understanding they harmonize.
.
In fact, no verse addresses loss of salvation, so your point here is irrelevant.
It is relevant. Your argument is the fallacy of contextomy
No, all I have to do is demonstrate that once saved, there are NO verses that tell me or you that salvation can be lost. Futher, John 10:28,29, Rom 8:38,39, and Eph 1:13, 4:30 are guarantees that all who have believed cannot be lost or separated from the love of Christ.
Which means ignoring Scripture. And, I've already shown that those you posted here don't show that.
[
No strawman. The point is that when a person believes, they are changed, born again, regenerated, given eternal life, and there are ZERO verses about any of that being withdrawn. Obvious conclusion: salvation cannot be lost.
It is a straw man, because rather than actually dealing with the subject the passage that are post are on another topic
And, you haven't provided ANY verses that tell us unambiguously that salvation can be lost.
I have posted some, they just didn't meet your criteria.
Seems you're completely misunderstanding the point of John 5:24. Jesus includes the past, present, and future all in one sentence. When a person believes, they HAVE PASSED (past tense) from spiritual death to eternal life, they HAVE (present tense) eternal life, and they WILL NOT (future tense) come into judgment.
As I've pointed out He applied this to the resurrection. Also, As I've pointed out you've not included the context with this but rather have just given the one verse. Also, what you're claiming here is contradictory to other passages that Jesus spoke.
Because his answer directly ANSWERS the question.
Yes, he answered the question, But as I said, we only have one sentence from what Paul said. Your argument is the argument from silence.
Of course not. I've read the passage. Paul also told his family how to be saved.
But wait, you can't have it both ways. There's nothing recorded of what Paul said to them. You can't argue that one sentence is the entirety to the jailer and then argue that there's stuff what was said that isn't recorded.
Totally irrelevant.
The point is that Paul didn't bother with baptism. Should tell you something. Esp since you think water baptism is necessary for salvation. Not any different than the Judaizers who claimed one had to be circumcised to be saved. Both are wrong.
It's totally relevant, it explains why Paul didn't baptize. Again, the argument is fallacious. Your position directly oppose that of Jesus who told the disciples to go and baptize.
[quoteYes, it does.[/quote]
The argument is fallacious.
He NEVER said it was necessary for salvartion. EVER.
3 are ye ignorant that we,
as many as were baptized to Christ Jesus, to his death were baptized?
4 we were buried together, then, with him through the baptism to the death, that even as Christ was raised up out of the dead through the glory of the Father, so also we in newness of life might walk.
5 For,
if we have become planted together to the likeness of his death, so also we shall be of the rising again; (Rom 6:3-5 YLT)
The verse does NOT say that baptism is necessary for salvation.
It tells how disciples are made.
Actually, he supports my view and refutes yours. What does "removal of dirt from the flesh" refer to? Water is what. iow, it isn't water baptism that saves us; it's the baptism of the Holy Spirit. John the baptizer contrasted his baptism (with water) to Jesus who will "baptize with water and fire".
again, context. He just said eight souls were saved through water, the like figure does now save us, Baptism.
You misunderstand. Baptism IS an identification. I explained all that in my previous post. Please go back and review it.
I don't need to keep repeating myself for those who don't follow the posts very carefully.
I did read it and Scripture doesn't say anything about it.
Before His ascension,
21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.
22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: (Joh 20:21-22 KJV)
At Pentecost,
KJV Acts 2:1 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. (Act 2:1-4 KJV)
Please show me any verse that says that we must have works to be saved. Unambiguous verses.
24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. (Jam 2:24 KJV) If one isn't justified they are going to be saved.
There is dispute whether that verse ever occurred in the original. But be that as it may, if baptism were required, there are a whole lot of verses that haven't mentioned it. In fact, this is the ONLY verse that includes faith and baptism. Pretty flimsy evidence. There are MANY verses that say UNAMBIGUOUSLY that we are saved by faith, with NO mention of baptism!
Again, that argument is fallacious, it's an argument from silence. Firstly, not a single passage of Scripture that you can quote says that one is saved by faith only, yet that's the claim being made, Secondly, there is not a single passage of Scripture that says baptism isn't necessary. Thirdly, the passages that are usually posted are not even addressing the subject of baptism. For instance, the argument that Romans 4 says nothing about baptism therefore it isn't necessary is the fallacy of contextomy. The reason is because Romans 4 is not addressing the subject of baptism, it's addressing the issue of salvation via faith or the works of the Mosaic law. Using this passage to argue against baptism is like taking an article that tries to determine which is better, fuel injectors or a carburetor, and trying to prove that a car doesn't need wheels. The articles is totally irrelevant because it doesn't address the subject of the wheels. Likewise Romans 4 doesn't address the subject of baptism
I see no mention of the need to be baptised to be saved here. I thought you had some verses that say what you claim.
[/QUOTE]
