Thanks!
I would say that Genesis is history, not science, but that science confirms that history.
Well, I am lucky in that I live near the Kentucky branch of the Holy Land (just kidding) and I was able to visit briefly the Ark Encounter and the Creation Museum a year and a half ago, which are located in Kentucky just south of Cincinnati, Ohio, as you know. And I was able to catch a noon lecture at the Creation Museum by Dr. Terry Mortensen, who is an expert on what the Enlightenment did to the Christian Church worldwide in imposing the notion of deep time upon the culture a little over two hundred years ago. However, a handful of preachers did stand against deep time until about the middle of the nineteenth century when they passed away and left no followers.
There are several scientific problems with deep time, but one of the most interesting is that the floor of the oceans was mapped in the late 1950s for the first time and the new maps provided new information for rejecting deep time and uniformitarianism. We are lucky, also, in that Dr. John Whitcomb, the co-author of The Genesis Flood (1961) with the late Dr. Henry Morris, lives here in Indianapolis. The Ark Encounter and the Creation Museum are world-class.
Hello everyone from a church of Christ guy!
Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by ChurchofChristguy, Apr 26, 2019.
Page 3 of 8
-
church mouse guy Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
tyndale1946 Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
ChurchofChristguy Member
Thanks Glen! Yes I love exploring new earth/old earth, Revelation, and end times. It is fascinating to me.
Unfortunately I have seen discussion of these cool subjects denigrate into scripture wars. People choosing sides and getting nasty. In reality (and thankfully!) the subjects do not affect have one whit to do with our assurance of salvation. -
The Biblicist Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Here is the problem for CoC as I see it with baptism. Peter says that remission of sins was through faith in the gospel preached by "all the prophets" prior to John the Baptist coming on the scene and the introduction of NT baptism - Acts 10:43. Hence, this CoC perspective on baptism ADDS to the gospel preached prior to the cross. Paul tells us that there is not "another gospel" and he claims that the gospel preached after the cross is the same gospel preached prior to the gospel for example preached to Abraham (Gal. 3:6-8). The only difference is the pre-cross gospel was developmental progressive revelation from Genesis to the cross but the very same essential gospel (Heb. 4:2).
Secondly, the old testament speaks of the sacrifices in the same remission of sins language as the NT does of baptism but that language was to be understood figurative not literal (Heb. 10:1-4) as is baptism (1 Pet. 3:21 "like figure" or corresponding figure).
The sin problem did not begin with baptism but with the garden of Eden and so the solution to sin problem cannot begin with baptism but must begin in Genesis as Peter demands it does - Acts 10:43 "all" the prophets (Abel was the first prophet). Moreover, the writer of Hebrews says that Abel did not offer up the sacrifice IN ORDER TO be righteous but as evidence that he was already righteous (Heb. 10:4).
Moreover, the baptism of John demanded "fruits of repentance" (not just repentance) prior to the administration of baptism (Mt. 3:6-8) and it is that baptism Jesus submitted to who obvioulsy did not receive remission of sins by thus submitting, although it is perfectly consistent with SYMBOLIZING what he came to die and resurrect which is what actually obtains "all righteousness". All the apostles submitted to it and it is the only existent baptism when the Great Commission was given and it was a baptism that was administered to those who already manifested "fruits of repentance."
It cannot be successfully denied by CoC that their view of baptism presents a NEW kind of gospel foreign to pre-John the Baptist and yet "remission of sins" and thus justification by faith, which is inclusive of remission of sins was obtained by Abraham through faith in the gospel (Gal. 3:6-8) PRIOR to being circumcised (Rom. 4:6-13).
So, the only possible baptism for remission of sins that is consistent with both the pre- and post cross gospel is the post-conversion gospel symbolism baptism. -
ChurchofChristguy Member
Because there is no conversion in the NT without the symbol, and because Jesus himself participated in the symbol to begjn his ministry, and ended his ministry by explicitly telling us to go, tell, and baptize.,.for my purposes, yes it is essential. If you arrive at a slightly different conclusion, I do not begrudge you nor consider you any ess of a brother in Christ. There is room for disagreement on these things without tossing the whole apple cart over.
Since I don’t personally know a Baptist or CoC believer who isn’t baptized, the whole debate for me is an exercise in futility. It matters not. If I am in error of my interpretation of baptism, it doesn’t affect my salvation.
We’ve gone into “overthink” on this issue. Both tribes place an extremely high value on baptism, with Baptists being a 9.5 and CofC being a 10. It’s important. Let’s focus then on the mountain of agreement that we share, rather than the strands of disagreement. The fields are ripe, but are there sufficient workers? -
-
The Biblicist Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Paul says if you ADD or SUBTRACT anything from gospel essentials you no longer have the gospel but either a "vain" gospel or 'another gospel."
-
ChurchofChristguy Member
Acts 2:38. 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.” -
The Biblicist Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
ChurchofChristguy Member
-
-
The Biblicist Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
ChurchofChristguy Member
God loves us and is not trying to trip us up on technicalities or honest disagreements. We are each fallible, and likely there are no two of us that have precisely the same interpretation of the Holy Scripture.
Baptism is a requirement for me personally. Not because the water saves - it does not in my opinion - but because it is a matter of simple obedience and submission. -
church mouse guy Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
ChurchofChristguy Member
-
church mouse guy Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Check this out by Bill Kynes, Council member alongside Albert Mohler, Mark Dever, etc. in The Gospel Coalition (a Calvinist fraternity made up mostly of SBC, PCA, and EFCA pastors):
EFCA Ministerial Forum (pdf)
Bill Kynes:
"When it comes to baptism, I consider myself fairly typical in the Evangelical Free Church of America. By that I mean that baptism has not played a prominent part in my pastoral ministry."
"Commonly in our churches, one’s baptismal status has no connection to church membership or to participation in the Lord’s Supper."
also, EFCA president Bill Hamel recalls:
"I had the privilege of being raised in the distinctive ethos of the EFCA by godly parents."
"In the three Free Churches I attended as a child and young man, baptism was ignored" -
The Biblicist Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Like any other commandment, baptism should be obeyed but justification is not connected with any good works. We must first be "created in Christ UNTO good works" and in context this created work is being "saved by grace through faith" which "saved" is previously defined as being quickened/born again (vv. 5, 1). Hence, new birth precedes baptism and in fact is public symbolic confession of identity with the gospel of Christ in quickening. Hence, as a symbolic external profession "arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins" -
Those who know God and have eternal life. Whose name has not been removed from the book of life.
". . . whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. . . ." -- Revelation 20:15.
Many other references can be given, 1 John 5:9-13. Those who truely know they now possess eternal life. They know they know God, John 17:3. -
ChurchofChristguy Member
Page 3 of 8