Churches of Christ...Continued

That's a good one bmerr! :laugh:

The Bible does not say that baptism earns anything.
Baptism earns nothing. The great thing about baptism is that it simply gets you wet, and nothing more. You can ask the three thousand that were baptized on the Day of Pentecost. The all got wet, but they got wet after they were saved. It was the first step of obedience in their Christian lives--getting wet by immersion in obedience to the command of Christ (Mat.28:19,20). We do it because Christ commanded it and for no other reason. Baptism is not a sacrament, that is, it does not impart grace; it does not save; it does not make one more holy; it does not give one the Holy Spirit. No, it doesn't do any of those things. It simply makes you wet.
Now think about it seriously bmerr.
How can two atoms of hydrogen to every one atom of oxygen make you any more spiritual or save you, or wash away your sins. What kind of power do you think H2O has?? That is a superstitious belief of the Hindus who think that the holy waters of the Ganges River wash away their sins. Your thinking is the same. Even Jeremiah mocked your practice:

Jeremiah 2:22 For though thou wash thee with nitre, and take thee much soap, yet thine iniquity is marked before me, saith the Lord GOD.
DHK

 

Just a quick thought, I have 9 pizzas to prepare, lots of chopping in my immediate future!
Anyway I got to thinking about this, and you are probably right, they are asking what to do to cleanse themselves of the sin of killing their king, and the reply is verse 38, repent and be baptized for the remission ( Definition: acquittal Synonyms: absolution, amnesty, discharge, excuse, exemption, exoneration, forgiveness, indulgence, mercy, pardon, release, reprieve) of their sins, including that of having killed their king.

37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? 38 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. 39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. 40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. 41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

They took baptism to be an immediate needed step. Needed for what? According to Peter to be cleansed of the sin of killing the Son of God. That is what the context indicates with no scolars having to define it, just reading it straight as an entire chapter. I figure if it was good enough for them, then it is good enough and still applies to me as well.
Now I have a cake and pizza toppings to make.
hugs
y'all

 

So Jeremiah was wrong??

Jeremiah 2:22 For though thou wash thee with nitre, and take thee much soap, yet thine iniquity is marked before me, saith the Lord GOD.
DHK

 

No he is not wrong, he just did not have Christ die to wipe away his debt, the men on Pentecost did, and so so we.

 

Jeremiah was right, but you don't believe him. He says the exact same thing that John says. See the correlation.

Jeremiah 2:22 For though thou wash thee with nitre, and take thee much soap, yet thine iniquity is marked before me, saith the Lord GOD.

1 John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

Jeremiah--water (not even soap) will wash away your sin.
John--only the blood of Jesus Christ will wash away your sin.
COC--water is needed to wash away your sin.
Therefore the COC contradicts both Old and New Testaments.
DHK

 

Nope, the cofChrist takes LITERALLY the commands given by Peter, Paul, Phillip and so on.
You are right water does not wash away sin, but obeying Christ's command (given through Peter, Phillip, Paul and so on) does. Only by obedience can we claim the blood of Jesus. It can't be an I want the grace but give it to me my way deal.
Oh and the coChrist i was raised in did nothing by the OT, only the NT, the OT is for us history of what was, while the NT is what is and will be to the end of time.
If one believes, enough for it to be Faith, they will read and see. Once they see, with Faith they will obey.
I don't see really why there is disagreement, you either obey or you don't, you either believe or you don't. Then again though I only take the Bible literally and i tend to block out what folks say that tries to twist and confuse it. Even in the cofChrist, i take all the NT literally and do not place restriction on it regarding time or place of command. (the exception being Revelation) I figure Jesus went to the uneducated, for the most part so it is not meant to be hard to understand.

 

To get back to the original discussion about the nature and identity of the group called Churches of Christ ... Associated Baptist Press today reports that there has been something of a rapprochement between the Churches of Christ and the North American Christian Conference (i.e., those of the Campbellite tradition historically positioned between the Church of Christ and the Disciples of Christ). According to the article, while merger is not contemplated (and Church of Christ understanding of polity would not allow it anyway), there is a new appreciation for one another's gifts and a desire to back off the musical instruments issue.

 

What version of the Bible do you take literally. I mean like Eph 5 :19 one of the CoC favorite verses for defending music in the church lets examine it shall we.
(ASV) speaking one to another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody with your heart to the Lord;

(ISV) Then you will recite to one another psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs. You will sing and make music to the Lord with your hearts.

(KJV+) Speaking2980 to yourselves1438 in psalms5568 and2532 hymns5215 and2532 spiritual4152 songs,5603 singing103 and2532 making melody5567 in1722 your5216 heart2588 to the3588 Lord;2962

(KJVA) Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;

(KJVR) Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;

(MKJV) speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord;


I guess we can discredit the International Standard Version for the Church of Christ because it says Music you get my idea dont try to hold the bible to a word by word book if you do then why dont you hold that to the book of Revaltions if it is all that way then it is dont say we take this and that but not that and this.:Fish:

 

Ok personally i study from the KJV, RSV and NIV mostly. i do have others that i read in tandem with these. The ones I refuse to accept are the gender neutral ones, where God "might be a female, we just don't know"
I have never had a problem with musical instruments, though for me they cause confusion and inhibit what i get out of the hymns. i have never seen a verse that says thou shall never use an organ, or whatever in service. So until I see that verse, I will not make a stand on music being wrong. One thing I have noticed is that once churches get a band women begin to appear on "stage" this is wrong. So yeah i tend to avoid those types of churches, no matter what the name on the door post says.
What I meant about Revelation is it is a vision, it fore told Emperor Nero and what he was going to do. Looking at history from then to now, several men have filled that vision, Nero, Genghis Khan and Hitler to name a few.

 

A different picture comes through reading this passage in foreign language translations of the ancient languages. Spanish and Portuguese have more nuanced verb tenses than ours. At Acts 2:38, the equivalent to KJV "repent" is imperative, but the equivalent to KJV "be baptized" is subjunctive, making it an obligation. The obligation was from the commanded repentance. Hence, the command is to repent for the remission of sins, and the baptism in the name of Jesus Christ was how to obey the command to repent. Whether or not the penitent Jews would have been saved without baptism being completed is another matter because Peter obviously expected all of them to live that day, but the passage in Spanish and Portuguese suggests that repentance itself was what was for Spanish "perdón" = pardon of sins, but that submission to baptism was obligated from that repentance.

For an example of this, I posted this link to a reproduction of the relevant page of an old Portuguese D'Almeida New Testament:
http://www.sbb.org.br/images/originais_nt2/0130.tif .

 

OK now I have a question and I am generalizing here a bit. The CoC around here are what I would call hardcore they say we speak were the bible speaks and are silent were the bible is silent why can no one answer my question and say this is the version we refer to when we say this, but no, I have seen refernces out of the KJV and then out of ASV just so that there POINT can be made. I would like to know what version you SPEAK out of and what version you are SILENT out of, how hard a question is that. I already know the answer but I want to see what you say. You see this is exacty why the CoC gets a reputation of being a cult which I know for a fact that they are not they are just strong in belief for what they have been taught I do realize that however there is a point were the CoC has went beyond what the bible teaches and they have added man made laws so to speak like Baptism saves were the bible clearly teachs that you are baptized because you are saved. Peace:Fish:

 

This statement has been used much by the COC.
I have a pastor friend who, in his daily devotions, reads straight from his Greek New Testament. If the COC were to take this statement of theirs literally they would also do the same. They would only read from the Greek New Testament, and from the Hebrew Old Testament, ensuring that they speak only where the Bible speaks and are silent where the Bible is silent. Otherwise, they really don't know. But, alas they are hypocritical in this area as well.
DHK

 

Bmerr,

Baptism is not a work of the Law, nor is it a work of merit. It is, however, something commanded by God to man, for a specific purpose. It is ours to obey, or reject.

Baptism is a work of the law if we localize salvation in the baptism.

So what good is faith apart from works (James 2:22)? Paul, in his letter to the Romans, speaks against the works of the Law, not obedience to God's commands.

Much good in itself! True faith will be accompanied by works. That is the point of James' statement. But an individual who is saved on his deathbed is saved by his faith despite the fact that he has not any "works" to show for it.

You refer to baptism as "God's command" and not a work of the law. Were not the OT laws commanded by God as well?

The CoC cannot claim to be a NT church when they are stuck in the OT mindset. Paul inveighs against "works of the law" because the Jews perceived these as being salvific in and of themselves. The whole point of Jesus' coming is that God has now performed all necessary "work of the law" for us. All we have to do is believe. That is the gospel in a nutshell. The CoC errs in an intent to be faithful to scriptures (like 1 Pet 3:21). But in doing so they miss the entire big picture. Jesus has done away with meritorious works.

Once again my "proof" is the example of the man who is saved and schedules a pyblic profession of faith and baptism in his church the following week but is killed in a car accident. Is he saved? If you answer "no" then you deny the very efficacy of the blood of Christ!!