Are Believers Necessarily Born Again?

I think you should have checked a little further on this board if you wanted to refute the claim when I mentioned there are several people even on this board who claim Baptismal Regeneration.

For your Info.bmerr was heavily involved in the Baptismal Regeneration:

bmerr is a member of Church of Christ, I believe.

Please check:

[FONT=&#48148]http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=36988&page=3[/FONT]

[FONT=&#48148][FONT=&#48148]http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=37933&page=2[/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=&#48148]http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=38252[/FONT]

Before you bring the arguements, I hope you understand my post properly or check my previous posts on this issue first. This is a little side issue though I posted it because it is related partly.
Eunuch and 3000 were all immersed ( baptised), I have no doubt about it.

correct.

Remission of Sins was done by the shedding of the Blood ( Heb 9:22).
Baptism has NOTHING to do with Salvation. Can you agree?
Baptism is done after the Salvation ! Can you agree?

You are absolutely wrong !

Baptism has nothing to do with the Regeneration !

Was your sin washed away by the water or by the Blood of Jesus? If they were cleansed away by the water, why did Jesus have to shed the Blood and die the painful death at the Cross?

You see, I am not going to hijack this thread. Please check first the previous threads as I mentioned above, and if you find some more need and new thoughts then you can open up a new thread.

All of those verses were already fully dealt with in those threads.

Yes, the power in God, and in the Blood of Jesus

Absolutely correct. Baptism is the starting point of all the Obedience AFTER Salvation by repentance and being bornagain.

NO, Sir !

Don't misunderstand that verse. What if one believed but has not been baptised as the Robber at the Cross did?
Was the Robber not saved ?

You have very limited capacity to understand the Bible.
Read this verse.

Re 1:5
And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

Water Baptism is the Individual Acceptance, Re-affirmation, and Public Declaration of what was done at the Cross by Jesus Christ.
If the individual accepted and believed in the Lord Jesus and what He has done already at the Cross and thereby is born again by the Holy Spirit, then that individual must and can be baptised in the water.

Of course !

YES.

A trick is in your question !

What puts one into Christ is Being Born Again by believing in the Blood and Death of Jesus, before anyone is baptised.

Baptism is the Re-confirmation and Declaration of such Spiritual Baptism.

So, don't misunderstand Ro 6:3-4. Without the Spiritual Baptism, the Water Baptism means NOTHING, Sir.

Baptism doesn't save the Unbeliever who was not saved.

1 Peter 3:21 is the continuation of v 20 which explains the Noah's family.

Noah was already a righteous man before the Flood. Baptism is the Re-affirmation of the Salvation, and the Acceptance by the good conscience of the Believers.

Correct

It doesn't mean that Spiritual Baptism occurs simultaneously with Water Baptism. Read the Cornellius case which shows Spiritual Baptism first, then Peter baptized them.

If you have the correct view on the Baptism by Immersion, Baptismal Regeneration, Infant Baptism, then you wouldn't argue with my statements.

Believers Baptism by Total Immersion is the only mode and practice demonstrated in the Bible.

No, Sir. Believing starts with Being Born Again. One must believe in what was done at the Cross, in order to be born again.

Right. We must hear the Message and accept it and believe and obey it. When any doubts occur, the person must ask God to give him the faith.

If you connect Jn 3:5 with Acts 2:38, you may be in the trap of Baptismal Regeneration again.

As I already told you, the Robber at the Cross was not baptized but went to Paradise with Him.
Remember this ! The Robber was saved after Jesus spoke to Nicodemus to be born again by Water and Holy Spirit. Where was the water for the Robber ?

As I already explained, Water in John 3:5 doesn't indicate Water Baptism.

Calvin explained that one can be baptized first, then later on Holy Spirit may enter him. Holy Spirit works for the repentance first by the Words of God, then He enters the person.

You are in the trap of Catholicism. Please note that Baptismal Regeneration is held by most of the Catholics like RCC, Eastern Orthodox, COE, etc.
People often resort to the physical experience when they have no spiritual experience.

Your stance is unclear about the Baptismal Regeneration. Before you raise any further argument on this, you better check the previous threads and posts on this first, then if needed, you can open up a new thread on Baptismal Regeneration.

Here are some more threads:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=35472&page=5 ( where you participated)

[FONT=바탕]Infant Baptism[/FONT]
[FONT=바탕]http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=40444[/FONT]

[FONT=바탕]Baptism[/FONT]
[FONT=바탕]http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=41824[/FONT]

 

Sarcasm is an effective tool and rightly used is sometimes the best marker. Our Lord, during his earthly ministry, used the tool of sarcasm to point out the inconsistencies and absurdities of the Pharisees and others. Nevertheless I understand your point and your conscience.

 

In the OT the H.S is said to be IN the people of God.

Peter claims the H.S was IN the prophets of old.

It is difficult to make a Biblical argument salvation worked differently in the OT or that the H.S did not need to be IN them to cause the New Birth - pre-cross as Christ said in John 3 -- just as He is today.

in Christ,

Bob

 

bmerr said nothing about baptismal regeneration. If you think he did, then you misunderstand what he said. I am confident that bmerr and myself hold the same view on baptism and it role in our regeneration. Water can no more wash away sins than it can cure leprosy, however, that do not preclude its use in accomplishing either.

So how does one come in contact with the death of Christ, where His blood flowed? Rom 6 tells us and guess what, it is through BAPTISM.

When Jesus was crucified and his side was pierced, what came forth? Blood and water. That is how we come in contact with the blood.

When Peter said, "Baptism now saves us" (I Pet 3:21), then goes on to explain that its not the water but the answer to God. This verse says something saves us. What is it???? Baptism.

Baptism after salvation? Really? So Peter was all mixed up when he gave his answer in Acts 2:38. They believed, no doubt. They were cut to the heart (vs 37). They were not saved. Peter told them they needed to repent and be baptized for the remission of sins. Why did they need remission of sins if they already believed????

Here is where you are wrong, you just don't know it:wavey: . If you had read what I have written time and time again, then you would understand.The blood is the only thing that can wash away our sins. Water can't do that. That is ridiculous to think that. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Here is what you CANNOT do. You cannot show how one comes in contact with the blood of Christ that was shed at his death on the cross and exclude baptism. CAN'T BE DONE!!! You can study all you want but it can't be done.

What is the gospel? According to I Cor 15, it is the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. How do we obey the gospel. Read Rom 6:1-17 and you will see that in baptism, we do that. We obey a form of Jesus death, burial and resurrection in baptism. We are baptized INTO His death. We are buried with Him and raised to walk in a new life.

What make you think the new life begins prior to your death and burial in baptism???? Surely you have scripture to back up your claims.

Of course he was saved. He lived under the old covenant. After Jesus death he gave the instructions to his apostles to go to every nation and preach the gospel, those who believed and were baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit would be saved, those who did not believe would be condemned (Matt 28:18-20, Mark 16:15-16). This began in Acts 2 with believers asking what they needed to do with the answer returning to "Repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus for the remission of sins"

Oh really. Where are the verses to back this up?

I read that baptism is necessary for salvation (Mark 16:16)
I read that baptism is necessary for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38)
I read that at baptism, sins are washed away (Acts 22:16)
I read that baptism puts us into Christ (Rom 6:3-4, Gal 3:26-27)

I don't know if you have studied this before, but nowhere in the bible does it say that believing in the blood and death of Jesus is what puts one into Christ.

There are only two passages that tell us. Rom 6:3-4 and Gal 3:26-27. Both say we are baptized INTO Christ. You cannot find another way to get INTO Christ. There is but one baptism today (Eph 4:5) and that is water baptism. It was commissioned by Jesus in a never ending cylce (Matt 28:18-20). It is something that one man can perform.

To ignore the only passages that speak on a subject and simply declare something contrary, without any possible supporting passages is not my idea of "rightly dividing" the word of God.

Of course Noah was righteous. His was not a spiritual salvation, but a physical salvation. Ours in not a physical salvation but a spiritual salvation. Type-Antitype. The sin of the world was washed away in the flood, our sins are washed away (Acts 22:16). The world was cleansed we are cleansed.

Here is what you cannot do:
*You cannot find where the new life begins prior to baptism.
*You cannot find where any believer rejoiced prior to baptism.
*You cannot find how one gets INTO Christ without baptism
*You cannot find how one comes in contact with the death of Christ and exclude baptism
*You cannot show how one obeys the gospel and exclude baptism

To get the whole account read Acts 10 and 11. Cornelius was to be told words, whereby he must be saved (Acts 11:14). When Peter began to speak the Holy Spirit fell on Cornelius (Acts 11:15). You cannot believe something before you hear it. Now if Acts 11:14 and 15 is true, then the Holy Spirit fell on Cornelius before the heard the message and therefore before he believed.

Using you logic, if Cornelius is your test case to prove that baptism is not necessary, then you would also have to conclude that neither is belief. Therefore you are forced to conclude that the Holy Spirit falling on Cornelius was not indicitive of salvation. If is was, you have him being saved before he believed.

The Holy Spirit falling on Cornelius was a sign to the Jews that the gospel was to be preached to the gentiles also. Those words that Peter preached included instructions for water baptism and they were baptized in water.

Acts 8 also shows that preaching Jesus includes instructions for water baptism.

As I showed, Nicodemus was told what he needed to do to enter the kingdom which is the church which was not established until Acts 2. First of all, you don't know if the thief had been baptized under John's baptism or not.

Second, if you understand Heb 9:16-17 I don't think we would be having this conversation, "For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established. For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive."

After His death, burial, and resurrection He state, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." - Mark 16:16

This verse is not hard to understand. You truly have to have help to misuderstand it.

Calvin was not always right. He warped so many people's thinking.

Notice the order given by Peter in Acts 2:38, "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

No, you are in the trap of Calvin. To understand the purpose of baptism, read the passages that deal with baptism. It is clear the purpose of baptism.

Let me say one more thing to help you understand my position.

Baptism is WHEN a person receives the remission of sins.
The Blood is WHAT washes away sins.

You are confusing the "when" and the "what".

When are we forgiven, sins washed away, added to the church, added to Christ, connected with his death, buried with Christ? It all occurs at baptism.

What washes away my sins, purchased the church, is the propitiation that allows me to be added to Christ? His blood.

The bible does not contain filler. It is all there for a reason. Don't overlook the significance of John 19:34, "But one of the soldiers pierced his side with a spear, and at once there came out blood and water". After reading that, study Rom 6 and you will understand baptism.

 

Hi Mman: I believe it has been shown you repeatedly on other threads that the passages you think teach `salvation upon completed baptism' may not do so as clearly as you think.

I believe that there is no passage of Scripture that contradicts Ephesians 2:8-10.

Most people here would disagree with Eliyahu's opposition to any water baptism at all. Most people -- let alone Christians -- know that the Bible teaches that it is very important that followers of Christ receive water baptism.

I would like to see this thread to stay on-topic.

 

Darron,

I agree that Eph 2:8-10 is in complete harmony with the rest of scripture. It does not negate nor contradict other passages.

If you read the preceding verses to get the context of Eph 2:8-10, you will notice the following:

(vs 1) And you were dead in the trespasses and sins...(vs5) even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— (vs 6)and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, (vs 7) so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.

Notice carefully, verses 5 and 6. He made us alive - by grace we have been saved- and raised us up with him. When does it state we are saved by grace. Between being made alive and being raised up with him. Remember those words. Can you think of another time Paul describes us as being dead, being made alive and raised up with him?

I can and it is in Rom 6:1-8, 16-17, "What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin. For one who has died has been set free from sin. Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him....(16-17) Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed

Clearly, prior to becoming a christian, one is a slave to sin which leads to death. However, you can become obedient which leads to righteousness.

Notice, we were slaves to sin which leads to death, but then we die to sin. We are buried with Him (Christ) into His death and raised to walk in a new life.

If you harmonize these two passages it is clear what the implication is.

We were dead in our trespasses.
We die to sin
We are buried with Christ into his death
We are made alive - By grace we have been saved (we are baptized into Christ)
We are raised with Christ to walk in newness of life

Notice verse 5, "For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his."

How are we united with him in death? He has just told us in verses 3-4, "Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death,..."

Therefore in order to be united with Him in a resurrection, we must first be united with him in death. How do we do that? Baptism.

Now back to Eph 2:5-6, notice the words again, "even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ— by grace you have been saved— and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,

First, when were we made alive with Christ? Obviously after we died with Christ. So how are we united in death with Christ? Baptism (Rom 6:3-4). When were we raised together with Him? We can only be raised together with Him if we were united with Him in death (Rom 6:5) and we can only be united with him in death by baptism (Rom 6:3-4).

Then notice one more thing. We are raised with him and seated...IN Christ.

Notice again the words from Rom 6:3 "Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?"

To be in Christ, you have to get INTO Christ. That occurs at baptism (Rom 6:3, Gal 3:27).

Of these things, I have never been more sure about anything in my life. That is why I spend time on this BB. It is certainly not for my health or because I am bored or to win an argument. I don't want anyone to take my word for anything. I do want people to study it for themselves and see the marvelous harmony in scripture. Passages, like Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, Rom 6, Gal 3:26-27, I Pet 3:21 as well as Eph 2:1-10, mean what the say and don't have to be explained away. One passage is in complete harmony with all other passages. I have looked at this from every and all angles that I can find and nothing else even comes close to harmonizing the way this does. Most of the time, those who post opposing views do little more than claim, "You're wrong" while providing no scripture to back up their claims while ignoring the logic trail that has been presented.

I believe that this is on topic. I am showing that one can believe, but until they are united with Christ in his death, they can not be united with Him in a resurrection and walk in a NEW life. Newness of life is being born again. You have a new life.

 

I am not going to waste much time for educating the stubborn people since most of the issues were already dealt with the related thread, and I would point out shortly the points related to this OP - Believe and Be Born Again. But as many people misunderstand " Baptism" as Being Born Again, and replace " Believing" with Baptism, I find the necessity to clarify it.

bmerr was very clear in support of Baptismal Regeneration.
If you cannot understand it, I would doubt about your English literacy.

Read it here:
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=37933&page=2

Also, as I mentioned, you, Darron Steele, Gerhard Ebersoehn, CarpenterApprentice, DHK were heavily involved in the debate about it. If you cannot remember it, you have a very poor memory.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=38252&page=7

You are drawing a huge, sophiscated picture of the ancient man by starting from a jaw bone as you are claiming the Baptismal Regeneration from the water flowed from Jesus. Was anyone baptised with that water from the Jesus's body?

I told you Noah was saved before the Flood since he was righteous.

So, you are claiming Baptism before the Salvation, Unbelievers' Baptism.
AC 2:38 doesn't tell you that they were pricked and repented, were they not saved before the Baptism?
Then you are claiming that Peter baptized the Unbelievers, after the Baptism, those unbelievers became the Believers by the magic power of water. Didn't they repent first? Could they repent without faith? If they repented and believed the Gospel, then were they not saved ? Then they obeyed the Baptism, then the gifts of the Holy Spirit was received, isn't it?

Don't misunderstand the sentence. They were not saved because they were wet, but saved because they repented and believed in Jesus.
Were you saved because you get wet?

Isn't that a contradiction to this verse?

Ac 10:43
To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believethin him shall receive remission of sins.

Problem is this:

Your media to link yourself with what Jesus has done by shedding the Blood and died at the Cross is Baptism.

My media to link myself with what Jesus has done for me by shedding his precious Blood is " Believing"

It seems that there is no problem with your media as long as someone puts the faith at the time of Baptism.

However, based on your theory which is common to RCC as well, one can perform the Baptism even without the faith, as in the case of Infant Baptism. Therefore Baptismal Regeneration often goes with Infant Baptism.

Can you understand the Problem there? Baptismal Regeneration means( tolerates) Unbelievers Baptism.

Throughout the Bible, throughout the ages, Believing, Faith has been the media to link the people with the Savior, not the Baptism. Baptism was performed afterwards, after the Salvation.

No, Sir. I can do it without Baptism.
I can do it only with Believing ! Believing, the Faith is so important. In your case, water is so important because you believe in the magic power of water !

The New Life, the Everlasting Life begins with the Faith, with Believing in Jesus, before the Baptism.

Read it here:

Joh 6:47
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.

and the Eunuch confessed this before the Baptism:

Act 8:37
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.


Thereafter, Philip performed the Baptism.

The Truth didn't change throughout the ages. All the people who are saved throughout the ages were saved by their Faith, none by Baptism.
Mark 16:16 has to be re-written in your book of theology this way:


He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth but is not baptised shall be damned..

You are absolutely confused between the core parts of the truth and their skins, and therefore you misinterpret them.

The core part of the truth is the Faith, Believing, and Belief.
Now you are working hard to remove them and replace them with Baptism, which is heresy, sadly.

Thousands of Bible verses say that we are saved by Faith, we are grafted into the true Olive by faith. It sounds like you never read the Bible yet.
This has the same meaning as well.
Eph 3:17
That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love

We are spiritually baptised into Christ by believing Him.

The media that links us with Jesus is the faith of ours in Jesus.

 

A typical resort for the Baptismal Regeneration.

Noah was saved before the Flood. Paul was saved before the Baptism, then was baptized.

You are not believing Jesus saying this:

John 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Are you saying that this applies only to the people before Crucifixion?

Your gospel is this : Whosoever believeth in Him and is baptized into Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Read Ac 10:43-

43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
44 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.

1) Did the Holy Spirit fall on the people who didn't hear the Word?

2) Didn't Gentiles receive the gift of the Holy Spirit before the Baptism?

3) Did Peter baptise Cornellius before the Holy Spirit fall on him ?

4) Did Peter say that the remission of sins is done by Baptism?

Read ac 10:43-48.

YOu are wrong again.
Cornellius was saved by believing the Gospel, then the gifts of Holy Spirit fell on him, then Peter baptised him.

Cornellius is the exact case showing the separate timing of Spiritual Baptism and the Water Baptism.

Acts 8:37
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.

Eunuch already believed, and thereby saved, then Philip baptized him.

 

[FONT=바탕]It is your poor imagination. So, do you believe the Robber repented and was baptised in the river, then committed the murder ?[/FONT]

[FONT=바탕]You are desperate to destroy the truth that one can be saved by Faith, not by Baptism.[/FONT]

[FONT=바탕]What about the soldier who believed in Jesus in Iraqi battlefield but was not baptized and died there?[/FONT]

[FONT=바탕]So, you are ensuring that the believer like the Robber at the Cross have never existed after the Cross.[/FONT]

[FONT=바탕]Calvin claimed the Baptismal Regeneration, and therefore you are in his trap.[/FONT]

[FONT=바탕]Peter said this:[/FONT]
[FONT=바탕][FONT=바탕]1 Peter 1:5[/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=바탕]Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.[/FONT]

[FONT=바탕]Did Peter change his theology ? Why didn't he say Through Baptism unto Salvation?[/FONT]

[FONT=바탕]Acts 2:38 is the verse which is the mostly abused by the false theology, by so many people.[/FONT]

[FONT=바탕]It doesn't say that the people who repented but are not baptized are not forgiven.[/FONT]
[FONT=바탕]Listen, I am so-called Plymouth Brethren who so much emphasize the importance of Baptism. However, we do not claim that the Baptism is the pre-requisite for the Salvation or that Baptism is part of the Salvation, but claim that it is the most important sacrament after the Salvation.[/FONT]

[FONT=바탕]The Principle of the Salvation is all common throughout the ages.[/FONT]

[FONT=바탕]All the people who have had the everlasting lives were saved by nothing but the Faith in the Blood and Death of Christ, not by the Baptism.[/FONT]

 

Gospel by the people who believe in the Baptismal Regeneration:

1) Sola Fide+Baptisma.

2) One second before the baptism, the person is unsaved.
One second after the Baptism, the person is saved.
They believe in the magic power of water.

3) Whosoever believeth in Him but is not baptized should perish, have no everlasting life.

4) The Robber at the Cross went to Paradise even though he was not baptized, because he belongs to OT.
There was nobody who believed in Jesus but had no chance to be baptized after believing in Him in the NT times after the resurrection of Jesus. If there had been any who believed in Jesus but was not baptized, he or she should go to the hell.

5) Sins are washed by Water Baptism, not by the Blood of Jesus, and therefore, Jesus shed the Blood and died at the Cross in vain.

Or,

6) they believe in the Blood of Jesus, but believing is not necessary to link oneself with the Blood of Jesus, the only thing that they need is the Baptism.

7) Being born again means Water Baptism.

8) If infants are baptized in the water, then they are born again. They don't need the Faith !

9) Acts 16:31
Be Baptized in the name of Jesus, then thou shalt be saved.

10) John 3:16
Whosoever be baptized shalt not perish but have everlasting life.

The original Bible applies only to the OT people, and that's why the Robber at the Cross was not baptized.


Baptismal Regeneration is very much ridiculous, misleading, and wicked heresy and that's why the churches which claimed the Baptismal Regeneration tortured and killed millions of True Christian Believers.

 

Agreed. Ephesians 2:1-7 does not negate Ephesians 2:8-10. Ephesians 2:8-10 does not need to be explained away. Those earlier verses do not change the way to take Ephesians 2:8-10.

When Romans 6:2-11, Galatians 3:24-7, 1 Peter 3:21 all, Acts 22:16, Acts 2:38 and the forged material after Mark 16:8 are rightly understood, they do not contradict that passage. You have seen all that before.

To show you proper respect, your surmising on these passages or portions thereof is not `dumb,' but there are multiple ways to take them -- especially in light of the entire passages, the New Testament Greek language, and life in the New Testament-era world. I will always opt for the latter, especially when those ways do not contradict or require negating a passage.

 

Lets talk about Saul from the various accounts. I will clearly show that Saul was not "saved" on the road to Damascus or as a result of his believing a praying.

*He had seen Jesus on the road to Damascus. (Acts 8:17, 9:27, I Cor 9:1)
*Jesus told Saul, “Arise and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.” (Acts 8:6)
*Jesus also told him, "But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee; Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me. - Acts 26:16-18
*Saul went to Damascus (showing that He believed Jesus) - Acts 9:8
*He was in Damascus for 3 days, without sight, neither eating or drinking, and was praying (Acts 9:9, 11).

As a recap, we have a believer, who is an eye witness of the resurrected Savior who has been praying for 3 days waiting for instructions of what he must do.

You obviously would contend that he is already saved even though he has not received his instructions of what he must do. If he is, he is the most miserable saved person I have ever read about.

What was the first thing he was told to DO? And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.’ - Acts 22:16

He still needed to have his sins washed away. He had been believing and praying for 3 days and still needed his sins washed away. Are we reading the same bible???

Why would a saved person still need his sins to be washed away? He wouldn't therefore his belief in the risen Savior and prayer was not enough. HE STILL NEEDED TO HAVE HIS SINS WASHED AWAY!

If Jesus himself were to type "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned" to you on the BB, I am confident you would reject that also.

There is no need for me to respond to the rest of your post, because you would reject that too. Saul's conversion and especially the statement in Acts 22:16 has caused many people to resort to many feeble attempts to mentally explain away the clear intended meaning of the passage. You can try all you want but you are still left with the obvious that his belief in the risen Savior Jesus Christ and his 3 days worth of prayer still left him in a condition where he needed to have his sins washed away. He is showing repentance in that he did not go to Damascus to persecute but to await instructions as Jesus had told him to do.

If you think the "calling on the name of the Lord" is some mental assent that Jesus is the Christ, Saul already had been doing that for 3 days. He believed and was praying, which is your recipe for forgiveness. What did Annanias mean? Believe more? Call louder? 3 days without eating and drinking, devoted to prayer and now Annanias wants him to "call on the name of the Lord"? What more could he do?

What was the first thing Saul was told to do? And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.’ - Acts 22:16

Baptism is how one calls on the name of the Lord.

 

I truly hope that everyone is as convinced as I am. I have never been more certain about anything.

When I read the various explainations presented, they don't hold water. Logic is ripped, passages are twisted or ignored. Nothing has even come close, and I say that not bragging, but sincerely, in humility.

I want the truth, no matter what the truth is. If I have to change my beliefs, I will change. I am not here to win arguements. In all my years of study, I have come to the following conclusions:

* Passages usually mean what they say. Any explaination that requires you to change or ignore an obvious meaning is usually wrong.
* There are no contradictions. One passage does not negate or contradict another
* Easy to understand passages on a subject should be used to shed light on the more obscure
* You don't have to understand Greek to understand the bible
* Truth is knowable. God gave us a book we can understand.
* People can see the bible alike, but only when we let the bible form our beliefs and not try to fit our beliefs into the bible.
* Unless all your pieces fit, you don't have the puzzle put together right. Tear it up and start over.
* What we think or believe or like does not change truth

 

We should not repeat the same grade 11 lessons all the time, without advancing to the grade 12. This was already fully debated among bmerr, you, Darron steele, CarpenterAcpprentice, GE, Snitzelhoff, DHK, myself.
You can trace back about the arguments and issues in the threads as follows:

[FONT=바탕]Must be baptized to be saved ?[/FONT]

[FONT=바탕]http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=33902[/FONT]

[FONT=바탕]Water Baptism[/FONT]

[FONT=바탕]http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=33853[/FONT]

[FONT=바탕]Can you get saved without Bible Verses?[/FONT]

[FONT=바탕]http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=35940[/FONT]

Do you automatically like church & worship when you're born again?

[FONT=바탕]http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=36003[/FONT]



Debate for "Beliefs on Baptism."

[FONT=바탕]http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=35472[/FONT]


[FONT=바탕]NLT Acts 23:38-40[/FONT]
[FONT=바탕]http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=36592&page=5[/FONT]


How important is knowledge in getting saved?
[FONT=바탕]http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=36988&page=3[/FONT]

[FONT=바탕]Baptismal Regeneration, bmerr[/FONT]


Could you say the same? By bmerr

[FONT=바탕]http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=37933&page=2[/FONT]


[FONT=바탕]Baptismal Regeneration[/FONT]
[FONT=바탕]http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=38252[/FONT]



[FONT=바탕]What is the Baptism by Holy Spirit[/FONT]

[FONT=바탕]http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=38574[/FONT]



[FONT=바탕]http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=40881[/FONT]


[FONT=바탕]Infant Baptism[/FONT]
[FONT=바탕]http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=40444[/FONT]

[FONT=바탕]Baptism[/FONT]
[FONT=바탕]http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=41824[/FONT]


2. Shortly speaking, Acts 22:16 doesn't mean that the sins of Paul was not washed away before the Baptism, but that he needed the External declaration of the washing away of the sins.

Sins are not washed away by Water ! If they were, Jesus didn't have to die at the Cross !
Sins were washed away by the Blood of Jesus.
What links anyone with the historical facts of Blood shedding at the Cross is the Faith and Believing, not the water.

Already I told you Jesus spoke Nicodemus " without being born again by water and Holy Spirit, no one can see the Kingdom of God" If He meant that this applies only after the Crucifixion, then He would have said, " YOu should by born again by Holy Spirit because you live the world before my crucifixion and do not need the Baptism to go to heaven"
However, the Robber at the Cross though he believed in Jesus after Nicodemus, he was not baptized after he confessed the faith, and was promised to go to the Paradise.

The best illustration for the separate timing between Spiritual Baptism and Water Baptism is found in the case of Cornellius in Acts 10:43-48 as I already explained.

3. Finally, let me tell you my experience:

During 1964-1968 : I was attending churches from time to time.
1969 : I took the exam for the Catechism at the Methodist church and was baptized by sprinkling.
1969-1973 : I confessed my faith and believed that I would go to the heaven because I was believing the existence of God and attending the church. But postponed the reading of Bible again and again. Sometimes argued with unbelievers for the existence of God, predestination, for the Bible etc.
1973 : I found the whole world is corrupted, selfish, nobody lives for the justice, then found myself is the same, corrupted completely but not expressed outward, while attending Presbyterian churches.

1973:August- Finally concluded that the whole world must be destroyed and I must be a pioneer for that as I believed that God was enjoying watching the tragedy of the human beings as a spectator.
Then the conclusion was to commit the suicide telling the people of the world to follow me.
I wasn't sure that the next life after the death would be better than this as I was convinced that there will be another life after death.
I was quite sure that I could win over God in any debate with Him, but while I was preparing for the suicide, my confidence faded away and wanted to make sure to confirm whether God does nothing for this tragedy. All the time, I found the churches are just religious businesses, and they are empty and dark.
Therefore I set up to blow out myself with a dynamite and tested a dynamite under the tree of persimmon with the ignition developed by me ( I can still be an expert in ignition system for dynamite) I used the filament of the bulb.

Now the D-day for my suicide was September 5, 1973.

August 31, 1973 : I realized that I must have a final consultation before my suicide, to make sure God has nothing to say against me, then searched for the best, reliable church to visit. By that time, I had visited more than 100 churches in searching for the Truth. Among them I remembered the best church, with most sincere people, which was an independent church excommunicated from Holiness church group.

Sept 2, 1973 : I attended the church, intending to debate with the pastor after the service. At the end of the sermon, the pastor asked the people to read Galatians 2:20. When I read that verse, I was totally surprised, and exclaimed " God did the tremendous job already, I don't have to die this Wednesday !" After the service, I argued with the pastor asking " Why didn't you tell me that truth before ?" Then he said " I told you that many times before but you were not humbled enough to hear it"
Since then my life was changed greatly and entirely, I was out of joy for a long time, reading the Bible mostly 8 hours per day for many months.
But that church didn't emphasize the Baptism at that time. I was not baptized any further because I believed the Baptism by sprinkling was enough as well. Sept 2, just before 12:00 hrs, noon time was the time which changed my whole life, That was extremely clear distinction in my life. I preached the Gospel to the students, friends, relatives, and my family and they were saved.

Then around 1988, I started to attend Plymouth Brethren and they claimed I must be baptised, and I refused it, but realized that my previous church changed the Baptism from sprinkling to Immersion in the meantime.
Everyday, God convicted me of the guilty of Baptism and found the Baptism by immersion is the only correct mode.

1989 Finally I surrendered myself to be baptized in the Water, followed by my wife.

Now after reading my story, when do you think was the time of my salvation?

I can tell you this. There was a gap of 16 years between the drastic experience of 1973 and my Baptism in 1989.\

Do you think I had to go to the hell if I had died during 1973 and 1989?

In my view the people who are claiming the Baptismal Regeneration are :

1) Who have never had any experience of Salvation by Spiritual Baptism, or

2) Who have had the experience of Salvation by Spiritual Baptism unknowingly for himself or for herself, and therefore cannot remember the timing of the exact salvation.

I don't say that all the people claiming B-R are unsaved, but there can be many saved people who cannot remember the time of Being Born Again, but can memorize the time of Baptism easily.

Hope you understand the difference between the time of Being Born Again and the time of Baptism.

 

Sir, I will answer truthfully because you asked me a question. I will answer in love based on my understanding of your story.

Sir, you have NEVER been baptized. You may have been submerged beneath some water but you have never been biblically baptized.

Obviously, you don't understand anything that I've been talking about. Baptism is not just submersion in water. Submersion in water can be for any reason, swimming, bathing, diving, or whatever, but that does not make it baptism.

Water can't wash away sins any more than it can cure leprosy. Let that sink in. I believe that with my whole heart. That, however, does not prevent God from using it in either case.

To understand baptism, read the passages that deal with baptism. Today, there is but one baptism (Eph 4:5). I have shown time and again that the one baptism is a baptism in water. That was commissioned by Jesus after his death and set in motion with an never ending teach, baptize, and teach do loop that cannot be broken. It is to be carried out by man and is for all men of every nation (Matt 28:18-20, Mark 16:15-16).

Those people in John 12:42 who believed but would not confess, I seriously doubt any bible student would claim that they were saved, and only someone desperate to defend their position would even attempt such a ridiculous claim.

If one of those went swimming or was submerged beneath the water at some point after Jesus resurrection, do you think their "baptism" would fulfill Jesus' statements in Mark 16:16 of "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved"? Of course not. They were not biblically baptized.

Jesus did NOT say, "He that believeth and is saved shall be baptized".

When the commission was first carried out in Acts 2, those believers asked what they needed to do. The reply was to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus for the remission of sin".

Baptism is for the remission of sins. If you feel that your sins were already forgiven prior to your baptism, then you were not baptized for the right reason.

Acts 22:16 that we've already looked at plainly gives instructions for Saul to "Arise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord".

You said:

He needed an external declaration? For what purpose? Be serious with me, removing all bias and what you want it to say, do you really come up with that conclusion when you read, "And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name."

Surely there is a translation that supports your idea? I know what you want it to say but isn't it a better idea to let scripture form our beliefs.

(KJV) And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

(NIV) And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.

(NKJV) And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

(ESV) And now why do you wait? Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name.

(NASB) Now why do you delay? Get up and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name

(ASV) And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on his name.

Not in a single translation do I get the notion that the washing of the sins was already complete and he simply needed to make that declaration. Again, we are left with a believer who has been praying for 3 days and needs to have his sins washed away.

Biblical baptism puts us into Christ, unites us with Christ in death and with Him in resurrection (Rom 6:1-8).

Oh, so it's the water that unites us with the blood, the true cleansing agent. Only the blood can forgive sins. We are only united with him in death when we recognize that we are dead. Most denominational folks want to bury people they think are alive. You don't bury the alive, you bury the dead.

Only then can you be raised to walk in a new life (Rom 6:4).

Please quit claiming that I believe in baptismal regeneration or I think somehow the waters of baptism negate the need for the blood. Without the shedding of Jesus blood, there is no remission of sins (Matt 26:28, Heb 9:22).

The only place we come in contact with the death of Christ, where His blood flowed, is in baptism (Rom 6:3). In order to be baptized biblically, we must first believe (Mark 16:16), we must be willing to repent (Acts 2:38), we must be willing to confess our belief in Jesus the Christ, the son of God (Acts 8:36-38). Then we are baptized for the remission of our sins (Acts 2:38) or to have our sins washed away (Acts 22:16), and are baptized INTO Christ (Rom 6:3-4, Gal 3:27).

It is no wonder that blood and water flowed from the pierced side of the Savior (Jn 19:34).

I am thankful that your life did not end tragically as you had once intended. Please carefully consider what I have written.

 

For 16 years until I was baptized since 1973, I have believed Jesus is my Savior, believed that Jesus paid all the price for my sins, even for the future sins, believed that I was crucified with Jesus at the Cross, live no longer but Christ lives in me, that all the sins were cleansed and forgiven by God because of what Jesus had done for me. Then I confessed such faith in the Testimony meeting at the church, thereafter I was baptized in the name of Father, of Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in the water. Now you are saying I was not baptized because I was submerged not according to your theology. But the Holy Spirit in me tells me you are wrong, above the Words of God.

Baptism is exactly the visible expression of the Spiritual Baptism which was done internally and invisibly and called " Being Born Again"

Baptism in Eph 4:5 means the Water Baptism.
But, please note the whole verse:

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

Do you see ONE FAITH ? One Faith means the Faith by Holy Spirit.

After anyone is born again by Holy Spirit, he or she can have one Baptism.
That's why Paul states ONE FAITH. Baptism without Faith means Nothing but a diving or swiming.

They were saved if they truly believed though they were not baptized due to their fear about the excommunication. One of those pointed out might have been Nicodemus.

Watch out ! In your excuse, Robber didn't need the Baptism because he belonged to OT. Didn't these guys belong to OT as well ?

Why are you judging the people by the 2 weighing different balances, which is hated by LORD?

You brought very interesting verse which I debated with bmerr over.
Do you see the fear of the people? This has the meaning of Public Declaration. If they were not baptized, they could hide themselves while still believing, then there would be no persecution. The Persecution against the True believers usually starts after the Baptism. Therefore, Baptism means the starting point of the Christian soldier in the Faith and in all Obedience.

There must be proper procedures, proper persons. If someone shout that he believes in Jesus while swiming in the water, it doesn't constitute the Baptism.

He didn't have to say so, because "Believeth" means " Saved" as we can see in the case of Robber. He didn't pass thru any complicated procedure, but got the assurance from the Lord that he would be in the Paradise.

John 3:15
That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

The whole process is the expression of the Faith and they received the Remission of Sins by the Faith. Without Faith, no one would Repent in the true sense.

Mt 26:28
For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Acts 10:43
To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.

The Remission of Sins was done by the Blood of Jesus. The media linking someone with the Blood is the Faith. Baptism is the expression of the Faith.

You are replacing the Faith with physical water.
Throughout the Bible, the Media for the Remission of Sins have been Faith which has never changed since Adam and Eve.

Paul was saved on the Road to Damascus or any time before the Baptism. Read the Bible carefully.

Ac 9
5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. 6 And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? 8 And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.

He was convicted by the Holy Spirit. A typical reaction by the sinner to the call of Holy Spirit was shown as " trembling and astonished, then called Jesus " Lord " and asked "what will thou have me to do" Paul was ready to accept His commandment, and therefore he confessed this:

Acts 26:19
Whereupon, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision:

Yes, it does, but the Faith before the Baptism does it for the first time when someone is born again.

All of your claim is the Baptismal Regeneration.
You have to check the terminology of B-R.
BR doesn't negate the Blood of Jesus, but as I said, they claim the media linking the person to the Blood is the Baptism, not the Faith and Believing.
Water confirms and visibly declares what was believed already.

Dozens of verses confirms the Faith lead us to the Death of Christ as we read Gal 2:20, Gal 3:2, 3:5.

 

Watch out there !

Do you think the Baptizee had no conviction of the Remission of Sins before the Baptism? You are saying that the Baptism brings the Remission of the sins, right?
Then it means that the person to be baptized didn't believe in the Blood of Jesus yet, before the Baptism. He earned the Remission of Sins by the Act of Baptism.
Listen, Remission of Sin is very simple and easy, because it was done already by the Blood of Jesus. The only thing for us to do is to recognize and admit it ! just to accept it ! as it was offered by Grace!
Obtain the Remission of sins first by Faith. Then you can confess your faith and go to the river or to the lake anywhere to be baptized by the proper procedures.

So, you are claiming that I have to be re-baptized again, according to your theology, but denying the One Baptism which was claimed by you, right?

 

Very well. Then one has to wonder why you reject the most natural understanding of the end of Ephesians 2:1-10, verses 8-10.

You believe that salvation is by a work in addition to faith, when the passage clearly says "through faith" and "not of works" (KJV). It specifies the order; it says that we are saved "unto good works" (KJV).

You see, I am sure of something as well. My years of study seeking correct understandings of Scripture confirm that the matter is really simple: if your misunderstandings of the passages you use against Ephesians 2:810 are actually correct, the Bible is self-contradictory on how to be saved. Therefore, those "various explainations" that you say "don't hold water" have to be more correct than how you take those passages -- that is for darn sure.

 

That is exactly what he is saying.

There are numerous exceptions, but English-using Churches of Christ commonly believe it is more important what you believe about baptism than what you believe about Christ.

In many Churches of Christ, if a person goes under because s/he knew s/he needed to in order to follow Jesus Christ, that is not enough. If s/he `goes under' having the `right' belief about baptism, that is what `seals the deal.'

This is based upon a creative twisting of the 1769 KJV at Acts 2:38. In the "be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins" the "for" was understood as `with intention of getting in exchange.' This gave the more divisive portions of the Restoration movement a rationalization to reject baptisms by others as legitimate.

This, of course, is an anomaly. The original KJV had a comma before "for" and made the command simply "be baptized in the Name of Iesus Christ" (1611). The word implies causation. The ASV translated the Greek word as "unto." Spanish translations of the Greek use a word that has no reference at all to intention -- instead of one that does. Had it not been for the English KJV 1769 edition and twisted imaginations, the notion proposed would not exist.

Among foreign translations of the Greek, the text indicates that it is actually repentance that is for the remission of sins. The baptism is shown to be an obligation from such repentance. Some languages are much better equipped than English to reflect this clearly in translation.

In Scripture, what someone believes about Christ, and not what one believes about baptism, is what is most important. Any person who is baptized because s/he believes on Jesus Christ and is doing so because s/he has decided to follow Him is properly baptized.

 

How come you are so correct on this issue?
In my own translation from TR, I translated it like that as the ancient Greek didn't use the comma in such sentences.
Of course, Repentance and Believe in Jesus, then no Baptism was unimaginable at the time of Early Church and even today for the sincere believers. However, it doesn't mean that Baptism is the pre-requisite for the Remission of Sins.

Jesus who said to Nicodemus earlier before Cross, be born again by the water and Holy Spirit, didn't rescind it when He spoke to the Robber " thou shalt be with me in the Paradise today"
Otherwise, He would have said, " Sorry, thou canst not go to Heaven because thou canst not be baptized in the water since I said " ye must be born again by water and Holy Spirit"

The excuse from BR can be this. "Oh, that applies only to the people after Cross." Then why didn't Jesus teach Nicodemus that ye must be born again only by Holy Spirit, but the people after my death should be born again by WATER and HS? In other words, it means Jesus didn't teach Nicodemus properly.