The Heretics Message to the World:Be Baptized to be Saved! (HOF thread)

[Pilgrimagain]

Nothing I have seen convinces me that Baoptism is required of salvation. We know this in reality is not true because there is at least one man in scripture who is proimised salvation who never is baptized. but while you argue about it, we'll be off caring for the widows and orphans. You can continue to be a goat.

 

[JustAChristian]

Originally posted by Pilgrimagain
Nothing I have seen convinces me that Baoptism is required of salvation. We know this in reality is not true because there is at least one man in scripture who is proimised salvation who never is baptized. but while you argue about it, we'll be off caring for the widows and orphans. You can continue to be a goat.

Pilgrimagain,

Paul preached Christ crucified to the Corinthians and many of those who heard the message of redemption believed and were baptized (Acts 18:8; 1 Cor. 2:1,2). In Acts 2:41, the day Christianity had its powerful beginning, we read that those who gladly received the glad tidings of salvation were baptized and the Lord added them to the church.

Jesus made it clear to Nicodemus in John 3:5 that a person must be born again of water and of the Spirit in order to enter the kingdom of God. We have a perfect commentary on that passage in Acts 8:12 which says, "But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women."

It is significant that the first time our Lord mentioned the church, He called it the kingdom also (Matt. 16:18-19). The culminating action that brings us into the church or kingdom is baptism (Acts 2:41; John 3:5). Also, in many of Paul's inspired writings, the church is referred to as the body of Christ (Eph. 1:22-23; Col. 1:18). Therefore, the synthesis of such teaching can be viewed in 1 Cor. 12:13, "For by one Spirit were you all baptized into one body."

Through the message of the Holy Spirit, the gospel of Christ, God's power to save, the Corinthians had become members of the church Jesus promised to build (Matt. 16:18). Later, in 2 Corinthians 5:17, they were beautifully reminded that to be in Christ meant they were new creatures. It is significant that Galatians 3:27 ties all of these passages together: "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ."

The Holy Spirit guided the apostles into all truth (John 16:13) and the message, thus revealed, convicted men of sin, righteousness and judgment to come (John 16:8). This gospel teaching told the story of Christ's death, burial and resurrection (1 Cor. 15:1-4).

In Rom. 6 we find a perfect illustration of salvation in the first century and any other age. When a man becomes dead to sin, as he is buried with Christ in baptism, and is raised to walk in a new life, he then becomes dead unto sin and alive unto God and thereby becomes a servant of righteousness. Through the message of the Spirit, as man's body is washed in pure water (Heb. 10:22), the new birth has been consummated. It is, as Paul wrote to the Ephesians, "The washing of water, by the word."

There are those who look upon all of these passages as technical matters with no spiritual significance. However, throughout the sacred Scriptures we find the blending of God's commands and man's sincere obedience. Noah was commended because he explicitly obeyed "all that God commanded him" (Gen. 6:22). The exact compliment is paid to Moses for the same reason (Exo. 40).

Disciples of Jesus were told to do "Whatever He tells you to do" (John 2:5). Our blessed Savior asks a pertinent question in Luke 6:46,

"Why call ye me Lord, Lord, and do not the things that I say?" Christ straight-forwardly stated in John 8:24, "Except you believe that I am He you shall die in your sins."

In Mark 16:16, belief and baptism are requirements prior to salvation. In Luke 13:3 we are reminded by the Redeemer that repentance is required lest we perish. And in Acts 2:38, on the very day the church became a reality, sinners were told to "Repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins." Those who attended to these matters were added to the church by our blessed Lord.

In Eph. 5, we learn that "Christ gave Himself up for the church." Acts 20:28 tells us that Christ purchased the church with His own blood. He died at Calvary that we might be spiritually tied to Him and bring forth fruit to the glory of God (Rom. 7:4). Therefore, powerfully and gloriously, we bow in deep appreciation for the vibrant nature of Eph. 3:21, "Unto God be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen."

Jesus clearly taught Nicodemus that one must be born again of water and Spirit to enter the kingdom. Acts 8:12 and 8:26-39 demonstrate this arrangement in absolute fashion. The kingdom the prophets saw and these examples of conversion illustrate the divine pattern. Praise God for such simplicity and beauty.

JustAChristian :angel:
_________________________________________

“Since you have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit in sincere love of the brethren, love one another fervently with a pure heart, having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever, because ‘All flesh is as grass, And all the glory of man as the flower of the grass. The grass withers, And its flower falls away, But the word of the LORD endures forever.’ Now this is the word which by the gospel was preached to you.” (1 Peter 1:22-25 NKJV)

 

[Francisco]

Pilgram,

Nothing I have seen convinces me that Baoptism is required of salvation.

I don't think you have seen me argue that baptism is 'required for salvation', have you? I think you are reading into the scriptures that I have quoted on this thread. I have argued only that 'those who believe and are baptized are saved'. We know this is true because the plain words of scripture tell us so at Mark 16:16, Romans 6:1-7, etc... The argument was not 'water baptism is necessary for salvation'. Those are just the words Hope and others have tried to put in my mouth.

And I have argued that Jesus did command the apostles to baptize at Matthew 28:19. I did not argue that He commanded them to 'water' baptize, but did point out that is exactly what the apostles did. I also argued that Jesus' command to baptize could only have meant water baptism, since that is the only type of baptism a man can 'perform'.

Hope's argument was that 'water doesn't save', yet I never said it did. I repeatedly have argued that Jesus saves, but I believe He can use any substance to confer grace, an unmerited gift from God, upon whomever He chooses, just as He conferred the grace of restored sight to the blind man through the waters in the pool at Siloam.

We know this in reality is not true because there is at least one man in scripture who is proimised salvation who never is baptized.

Again, I never said water baptism was necessary for salvation. However, earlier in this thread I addressed the issue of the thief on the cross, and also martyrs for the faith that died before they were baptized. You must have missed that post, so I'll summarize what I said.

I do believe being united with Jesus Christ IS necessary for the remission of sins and salvation (Romans 6:1-8), but not necessarily by 'water' baptism, although water baptism is the normative way of expressing our saving faith. I believe water baptism to be the norm because that is what the apostles did, following Jesus' command to teach and baptize. But I also believe there are 2 other types of baptism that replaces water baptism if there is no opportunity to baptize the believer in water before their death. These 2 other types of baptism are baptism of desire, and baptism of blood sometimes called martyr's baptism.

Baptism of desire would apply to the thief on the cross. I believe the thief was baptized in his own desire to be joined to Jesus Christ. Because of this desire to be united with Jesus, the thief was united to Jesus' death and also joined into Jesus' likeness and sacrifice for the remission of sin.

Baptism of blood would apply to someone who's faith in Jesus was so strong that they sacrificed their life for faith in Jesus. If suffering death for your faith in Jesus doesn't unite a person with Him, then what does? Of course it does. So, the martyr is united to Christ, through the shedding of their own blood, for the remission of sins and salvation, again as Paul said in Romans 6:1-8.

but while you argue about it, we'll be off caring for the widows and orphans.

My church is the single largest and oldest charitable organization in the world. I challenge you to find 10 that you can combine to equal what my church has done, and does do, to care for widows and orphans, or any other type of charitable work. For example, over 35% of the health care worldwide is provided free of charge by the hospitals and clinics funded and administered by the Catholic Church, even in countries like Pakistan, India, and Iraq.

Second, you make it sound as if I'm too busy arguing with you guys to do any charitable work. I do my share Pilgrim. Besides, it takes 2 to argue, so if you don't want to see me argue my views, then don't argue your views with me.

You can continue to be a goat.

I'm disappointed. I have always regarded you with respect because I have never seen you make such an un-Christian comment before. I could understand it if I had somehow provoked that comment, but to my knowledge, I have never said anything offensive to you Pilgrim. And I apologize if I ever did inadvertently offend you.

God Bless,

Fracisco

 

[Pilgrimagain]

I am sorry, I was in a very crabby mood today. I apologise for my words spoken here. I was just frustrated with all of these same old arguments and wondering what's the point. We talk and talk and talk and really, is that true religion?

I am so sorry and I think, from what you posted, that you know that it is not in character for me to speak that harshly. It all started today with the guy on another thread who is claiming that he is the Christ come back, and he IS serious. It really got my dander up.

Anyway, your post above is right on. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Peace Brother.

 

[JustAChristian]

Frustration...

Frustration...

Originally posted by Pilgrimagain
I am sorry, I was in a very crabby mood today. I apologise for my words spoken here. I was just frustrated with all of these same old arguments and wondering what's the point. We talk and talk and talk and really, is that true religion?

I am so sorry and I think, from what you posted, that you know that it is not in character for me to speak that harshly. It all started today with the guy on another thread who is claiming that he is the Christ come back, and he IS serious. It really got my dander up.

Anyway, your post above is right on. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Peace Brother.

Yeah,
Reminds me of the time Jesus had to chastize one of his disciples...

John 14:9 Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, `Show us the Father'?

Many people have read, heard and seen movies about Jesus most of their lives but fail miserably to "see Jesus" as he meant them to see him. Frustration sets in accompanied often by discouragement. I am not saying you might be discouraged, but I do wish you would do some more study on the importance of immersion (baptism). The weight of association with salvation, I feel, says a whole lot for its importance. Great numbers have answered to it without much knowledge (Acts 2). Individuals have made it a point to answer to it immediately (Acts 8:36-38; 16:15;16:33). Some are shown to have fail to receive it for the correct purpose and decided to be re-baptized (Acts 19:1-6). For all this I can say baptism is most important and worthy of total devotion in study and acceptance.

JustAChristian :angel:

 

[Francisco]

Pilgrim,

No hard feelings here brother!

God Bless,

Francisco

 

[HopeofGlory]

Fran,

You're confused Hope. I said water baptism is what Jesus commanded the apostles to do. You then refer us to John the Baptist saying Jesus will baptize us with the Holy Spirit. I don't deny that Jesus baptizes us with the Holy Spirit. But the issue is what baptism did He command the apostles to perform. You then say, 'It was the same baptism that the Baptist spoke of', which we know was performed with water.

Now that you have realized Jesus DID command the apostles to water baptize, we'll start making some serious progress.

Jesus did not command the apostles to do the baptizing, He commanded them to teach the words that He had spoken. "It is the spirit that quickeneth the flesh profiteth nothing". There is no act (work) that man can perform to earn the grace of God, grace is freely given. If it is of work then it is no more of grace. See previous post.

Please give me chapter and verse that shows no man has this authority (to remit sins) today. You have admitted that Christ gave that power to man, now show me when He took it back or discontinued it.

Men under the law were given the power to remit sins and the death of Christ removed the law. Explain how it is that priest are able to forgive sins.

To believe that praying for the dead can make amends for past actions and save the dead is ridiculas. The bible teaches that we who must choose the Lord and not others on our behalf.

An over zealous priest once visited an old woman on her deathbed. She had been converted from Roman Catholicism more than fifty years before, but her relatives were sure that the priest would "bring her back to the church" and have her accept the last sacraments so that she could be buried in a Roman Catholic cemetery.

The priest, too, was confident that he would be able to absolve her before she died,

"I have come to absolve you and give you extreme Unction," he told her. "What is that?" she asked him.

"I have come to forgive you your sins and to anoint you before you die."

"Let me look at your hands," she demanded.

Puzzled, the priest held out his hands which she examined closely back and front. Then she shook her head and said: "Sir, you are an impostor!"

"Impostor!" he exclaimed.

"Yes, sir, you are an impostor. The only man who can forgive my sins has the imprint of His crucifixion in the palms of His hands."

Wrong again Hope. As one example of an apostle 'baptizing in this manner', look at Acts 8:26-38. Philip baptized the eunuch in water, but only after having preached forgiveness of sin through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ to the eunuch, and the eunuch then professing his belief in Jesus Christ.

The apostles had the power to baptize in that manner. In fact, because Jesus commanded them to baptize in that manner, they had an obligation to baptize in that manner.

I have already explained this. The gospel of the circumcision required "works of righteousness" and this gospel was delivered to the eunuch. Paul by the Spirit reveal the gospel of the grace of God without "works of righteousness". Is water baptism a righteous work to you Fran? The apostles continued in the witness of the Baptist under the law after the cross.

Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; Titus 3:5
Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; Titus 3:6

Are you out of your mind Hope? If the apostles didn't obey what Jesus commanded of them, then the entire Christian religion has no hope at all. The apostles were the foundation upon which Jesus built His church. By them the writings which are now Holy Scripture came to be. All the lessons Jesus taught them had to be handed on.

You're way off base on this one Hope. It is just your misunderstanding of what you are reading that's confusing you. You seem to be basing your conclusion that the apostles were disobedient because you claim that belief in Jesus Christs sacrifice for our sins wasn't preached at Pentecost. I'm trying to tell you that it was. The Jews already had the OT, they had the prophecies of the Messiah, etc... They didn't completely understand until Peter convinced them that Jesus IS the Messiah. Unfortunately, the Jews just had Jesus crucified just 10 days prior to this, and they were hurt to finally realize what they had done to their savior:

36 Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified." 37 Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brothers, what shall we do?" 38 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 will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

My mind once controled all my actions and thoughts but not anymore, I have the mind of Christ (1 Cor. 2:16). So, thanks for the compliment. Obeidence of the apostles had nothing what soever to do with my salvation.

For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. Rom. 5:19

Christ spoke the words of eternal life and made it possible for me to receive it at the cross. The traditions of men of flesh profits me nothing. This is the root of your heretical mind set and your beloved church and its doctrine are founded on tradition and obedience.

He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day. John 12:48 (KJV)
For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. John 12:49 (KJV)

Drink ye all of it; Matt. 26:27
For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Matt. 26:28

The tragedy is when one does not understand this even as the apostles did not understand that it was done in order that they might live (eternal life).

Jesus revealed the gospel to the apostles but we must ask the question, did they receive and believe His words? Jesus came to give all that believe His words eternal life

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: John 10:27 (KJV)
And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. John 10:28 (KJV)

Jesus said...Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. John 6:54 (KJV) This was not to be taken naturally but was to be received spiritually. Jesus explains it with these words...It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life John 6:63 (KJV).
There is no profit in anything that the flesh can accomplish and anything that man can perform is a work of the flesh. The words Jesus spoke of the “new” testament (Matt. 26:28) in His blood are spirit and it is by believing in these words that we profit eternal life. Salvation is the work of God that many deny when they say you must obey in water baptism. They do not comprehend "the flesh profiteth nothing". Dead sinners can hear the words of the new testament (Matt. 26:28) but remain dead until they believe the words of the Son of God. It is the personal word of Christ that commands life and that life is eternal. It is the Holy Spirit who reveals the spoken words of Christ, and imparts spiritual life when those words are believed.
The apostles did not receive theses words of Jesus but said....This is an hard saying; who can hear it John 6:60 (KJV).

The sower soweth the word. Mark 4:14 (KJV)
And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts. Mark 4:15 (KJV)

After offering the new testament in His blood Jesus said to Peter..... Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: Luke 22:31 (KJV)
But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren. Luke 22:32 (KJV)

The new testament (Matt. 26:28) was not understood until Paul revealed this truth after Pentecost through revelations received from Jesus Christ. Paul was the first man to teach that the blood of Christ was shed for remission of sins and that is why Paul could say.......For Christ sent me not to baptize (for remission of sins), but to preach the gospel.... 1 Cor. 1:17 (KJV)

This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. 1 John 5:6 (KJV)
For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 1 John 5:7 (KJV)
And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. 1 John 5:8 (KJV)
If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son. 1 John 5:9 (KJV)
He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. 1 John 5:10 (KJV)

We must believe the record of God and not the witness of men! The witness of men is simply any work that man may perform as pertaining to the flesh. The work of God in the cross of Christ is the only witness we are to receive. If we receive any other witness than God’s we have made Him a liar.

If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true. John 5:31 (KJV)

There is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true. John 5:32 (KJV)

Ye sent unto John, and he bare witness unto the truth. John 5:33 (KJV)

But I receive not testimony from man: but these things I say, that ye might be saved. John 5:34 (KJV)

He was a burning and a shining light: and ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light. John 5:35 (KJV)

But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me. John 5:36 (KJV)

And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape. John 5:37 (KJV)

And ye have not his word abiding in you: for whom he hath sent, him ye believe not. John 5:38 (KJV)

All the witness we need for salvation (eternal life) is found at the cross of Christ! We are not to receive the witness of men because the witness of God is greater and the witness of God is the Spirit, the water, and the blood. These three Christ sacrificed for our sins so that those who believe in the greater witness of God might have eternal life.

When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost. John 19:30 (KJV)
But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water. John 19:34 (KJV)
And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe. John 19:35 (KJV)

Truly this was the Son of God!

In Christ
Craig

 

[HopeofGlory]

Fran,

I'm beginning to realize your whole problem is lack of reading comprehension. The apostles were the one's who were NOT offended by Jesus' 'eat my flesh and drink my blood' comment. After those who were offended walked away, Jesus turned to Peter and asked if they too were going to walk away from Him. Peter in turn replied they believed in Jesus and knew He had the words of life.

The need for a blood sacrifice for remission of sin is the great theme of scripture but the blood of bulls and goats was a mere shadow that could not take away sin. What we must recognize is the vast difference between the blood offering of bulls and goats (law) and the precious blood of the lamb of God (grace). The apostles remained jealous of the law (works) and offerings for sin (Acts 21:26) after the cross even up to the Jerusalem council (Acts 21:20). Paul’s epistles clearly reveal the law was an offence to the cross (Roms. 5:19-20) and it was the most important message second only to the cross which done away with the law (Col. 2:14). The line of opposition was clear, it was the law against the cross therefore the "promise" was not received at Pentecost as Peter confirms with these words ....The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance (2 Pet. 3:9).

Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. John 6:53 (KJV)
Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. John 6:54 (KJV)

This statement by our Lord to the apostles offended them and their reply was "who can hear (believe) it (John 6:60)" for they did not discern the Lord‘s body! The law taught that it was an offence to consume blood and we have to understand that Jesus knew the apostles would refuse it and yet the offer had to be made...to the Jew first! The law of works ran through their veins and was the center of their very being and it could not be denied.

It shall be a perpetual statute for your generations throughout all your dwellings, that ye eat neither fat nor blood. Lev. 3:17 (KJV)

Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: Rom. 5:20 (KJV)

The "new" testament was being delivered to them and it was to be received by the spirit (faith) and was beyond the apostles comprehension and yet it would fulfill the prophetic words of Christ...The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof (Matt. 21:43). Gentiles are that nation and the new testament would be delivered to them by Paul (Rom. 3:25). The training up of Paul would be as the apostles and was progressive but this training up would be accomplished by the Spirit of Christ based on the new testament (Matt. 26:28) and began with his conversion on Damascus road when his name was Saul. After Paul’s conversion we see a progressive change in the message and Paul will participate in the old message until he has progressively received the “mystery” revelations from Christ (Gals. 1:11-12) and at one point Paul was even caught up into heaven (2 Cor. 12:4). Ananias was the one that instructed Paul to be water baptized for remission of sins after the cross and he was.... A DEVOUT MAN ACCORDING TO THE LAW Acts 22:12 (KJV). Paul did baptize some but scripture testifies that at a later date Christ sent him to the Gentiles and instructed him "not to baptize"(1Cor 1:17). Why did Christ send Paul NOT to baptize? It is because Paul received progressive revelations of a greater witness (John 5:36) that was of God. Water baptism in the dispensation of it's inception through obedience (works) "gave remission of sins" and it can not be argued unless you choose to go against the word of God. The message was one that not only had to be obeyed (Acts 5:32) but it also demanded endurance to the end (Mark 13:13) to receive that remission. Paul now understands by progressive revelation that message is no longer effectual for remission of sins and has been superceded by the greater witness of God at the cross.

I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; 1 Cor. 1:14 (KJV)

The Gentiles freely received the Pauline message of faith in the new testament and not of works (Rom. 4:6) for they were not of the law (Rom. 6:14) and were without the offense (Acts 13:39-46).

It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. John 6:63 (KJV)

Many do not understand these words of Christ Jesus and believe there is profit in their flesh. Christ is speaking of eternal life (Matt. 26:28) and how it is received and explaining it would not be possible of the flesh. The apostles were jealous of the law (works of the flesh) and did not understand this spiritual offer of eternal life as many continue to do today. Spiritual things are not understood by those who believe eternal life can be attained by their obedience in the flesh and they are offended by the cross because they trust in their own works and not the FINISHED work of Christ.

At the last supper, Jesus shared His body and blood with the apostles: Jesus broke the bread and gace it to his disciples saying 'take, eat, all of you, for this is my body which will be given up. After they had eaten, he took the cup, again gaves thanks and praise and said take this all of you and drink, this is the cup of my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant. It will be shed for all so that sins may be forgiven.'

The apostles didn't abstain from eating and drinking Christ's body and blood.

BTW, His body and blood were truly the body and blood of Jesus Christ, but that is a discussion for another time and another thread.

The apostles drank wine and ate bread. Would you have us believe that Jesus hacked off His flesh and opened His veins and fed it to the apostles. You really have to be sick to believe such a thing.

Before the law:
Gen. 9:3-4: Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.

Under the Mosaic law:
Lev. 17:14 For it is the life of all flesh; the blood of it is for the life thereof: therefore I said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall eat the blood of no manner of flesh: for the life of all flesh is the blood thereof: whosoever eateth it shall be cut off.

To Gentiles under grace:
Acts 15:20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
Acts 21:25 As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication.

Well, we can finally agree on something. No WE, as in 'you and I' cannot forgive sins.

This statement would also include your unholy priest.

One must be able to read and comprehend the gospel before preaching it to others. You cannot comprehend even simple things that you read Hope. Please don't endanger other souls for lack of reading comprehension.

Such words from the bloody lips of a catholic.

Oh really? I don't see any instructions on how the apostles were supposed to perform this 'spirit' baptism. Where do you see 'exactly how we are Spirit baptized?

And you talk about reading comprehension? Again, the apostles were NOT commanded to do the baptizing.

Jesus explained this very clearly, 'He who believes AND IS BAPTIZED will be saved'. Your statement that 'We must "believe" His testament' is correct, but part of His testament was 'He who believes AND IS BAPTIZED will be saved.

I am begining to think you must be so sort of a moron. He who believes is baptized by the Spirit. The baptism ain't in water.

For by one Spirit are we "all baptized" into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. 1 Cor. 12:13

Hey, now that's deeeeeeeeeeep. The only thing I can think of that even comes close to being that profound would be thiso fish have hooves? Of course not, because birds fly. And I think my saying is even more logical than yours.....

Sarcasm! I could come back with more of the same but I wouldn't want to offend you. LOL

In Christ
Craig

 

[Francisco]

Hope:

The need for a blood sacrifice for remission of sin is the great theme of scripture but the blood of bulls and goats was a mere shadow that could not take away sin. What we must recognize is the vast difference between the blood offering of bulls and goats (law) and the precious blood of the lamb of God (grace).

Maybe that's the way you see it, but that just goes to show your lack of reading comprehension and reasoning. What we must really recognize is how the precious blood of the lamb of God FULFILLED the requirement for remission of sin imposed BY the law. Your claim is that Jesus REPLACED the law, but He told us himself he came not to replace but to fulfill the law:

17 "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven."(Matthew 5:18)

The difference between REPLACING the law and FULFILLING the law, is nearly as 'vast' as the difference between sacrifices of bulls and goats and Jesus' sacrifice.

The apostles remained JEALOUS of the law (works) and offerings for sin (Acts 21:26) after the cross even up to the Jerusalem council (Acts 21:20).

LOL! Improve your reading comprehension and attention to detail and you won't make these silly mistakes:

'Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all ZEALOUS of the law.' (Acts 21:20b)

LOL, LOL.

Paul’s epistles clearly reveal the law was an offence to the cross (Roms. 5:19-20)

LOL, this one is almost as funny as your last blooper:

19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:

Verse 19 simply says that as through the sin of one man, namely Adam, all men became sinners, so also through one man, Jesus Christ, would mankind be made righteous once again. That is what the redemption is all about Hope.

Verse 20 continues from what Paul said in 5:13, that sin is not imputed when there is no law, so the law was necessary for man to know what sin was, and could therefor be justly imputed. The second sentence goes on to say that as man became sinful through willful disobedience of the law, God's grace, free gifts as of mercy for instance, increased that much more.

Niether of these verses has anything to do with the law being an 'offence' to the cross. LOL. Did you arrive at that conclusion by not understanding what the scripture is saying or did someone put that idea in your head casuing you to develop an extreme and convulted eisegesis of these verses? LOL.

and it was the most important message second only to the cross which done away with the law (Col. 2:14).

Well this one is really not funny at all because Paul's words are hard to understand here. Let's take a look at the verse in context:

13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;' (Col 2:13-14)

What makes this so difficult to understand is archaic language used in the KJV, particularly the words 'handwriting of ordinances'. By looking at some more modern english translations, you can see that 'handwriting of ordinances' is not interpretted as meaning the law:

'the certificate of debt' NASB
'the record that contained the charges against us' NLT
'the record of debt that stood against us' ESV
'the charges that were against us' CEV

As you can see, it was the sins man committed under the law that was abolished by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. In other words, the enmity between mankind and God, caused by the sins of man, was 'nailed to the cross' and abolished by the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ.

The line of opposition was clear, it was the law against the cross

There is NO 'line of opposition' between the cross and the law. All you have managed to draw is a squiggle of convoluted and illogical conclusions, based on your misunderstanding of what you read, or perhaps based on the extreme eisegesis necessary to reach a conclusion someone has convinced you of.

The cross FULFILLED the requirement for unblemished sacrifice imposed by the law, so there is NO OPPOSITION, but rather a significant connection of cooperation between the cross and the law.

therefore the "promise" was not received at Pentecost as Peter confirms with these words ....The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance (2 Pet. 3:9).

Extreme eisegesis, or simple lack of reading comprehension? I can't tell for sure.

The 'promise' Peter speaks of is the second coming of the Lord. Let's take a look at the verse in context, and in a more modern english translation:

'1 This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved. In both of them I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder, 2 that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles, 3 knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. 4 They will say, "Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation." 5 For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, 6 and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. 7 But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly. 8 But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. 10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed.'

Peter is warning his reader to beware the argument 'where is his promise he will come?' He explains the delay in the Lord's day is for our benefit, out of God's patience and His desire to give man as much time as needed to repent and turn to God. But eventually the day will come 'like a thief', when we least expect it. Peter goes on in subsequent verses to exhort Christians to always remain ready for that day, avoiding sin, so we can stand spotless and blameless before Him on that day.

I can't really tell what you're claiming the 'promise' to be, but it's obvious you misunderstood what Peter was talking about.

I'm going to break my response here since you change subjects in the next paragraph and I don't have time to address those issues now. I'll try to respond on the remainder of your post later tonight or tomorrow.

God Bless,

Francisco

 

[gbort]

Originally posted by Francisco
Hope:
Maybe that's the way you see it, but that just goes to show your lack of reading comprehension and reasoning.

LOL! Improve your reading comprehension and attention to detail and you won't make these silly mistakes:

LOL, LOL.

LOL, this one is almost as funny as your last blooper:

All you have managed to draw is a squiggle of convoluted and illogical conclusions,

Extreme eisegesis, or simple lack of reading comprehension? I can't tell for sure.

I'm going to break my response here since you change subjects in the next paragraph and I don't have time to address those issues now. I'll try to respond on the remainder of your post later tonight or tomorrow.

God Bless,

Francisco

Goodness gracious, let me watch my bloopers in this post before I get blasted!

Francisco, I have nothing to say about this thread except a comment on the sarcasm and arrogance that bleeds into your replies. Geez Louise! You may be a smart guy but lay off on the insults about people's levels of "reading comprehension".

May we all be so fortunate as you to have such a clear and infallible understanding of God's word! :doh:

Check out 1 Corinthians 13:1 ---it'll do us all some good!:thumb:

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Are we to understand that THE LAW has not been done away with?

"For Christ is THE END OF THE LAW for righteousness to everyone who believeth"(Ro.10:4).

The end of the law!

Is that so hard to understand?

"Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us,which was contrary to us,and took it out of the way,nailing it to His cross"(Col.2:14).

Some say that this is not speaking about THE LAW,but instead about the "enmity between mankind and God" being nailed to the cross.

However,if we examine the verses which follow,we can see that the "handwriting of ordinances" must refer to THE LAW:

"Let no man,THEREFORE,judge you in food,or in drink,or in respect of a feast day,or of a new moon,or of a sabbath day,which are a shadow of things to come..."(Col.2:16).

All these things mentioned pertain to THE LAW,and these things are also referred to as "a shadow of things to come".And the author of the epistle to the Hebrews also refers to THE LAW as "a shadow of good things to come"(Heb.10:1).

So Paul is saying that the "handwriting of ordinances" (THE LAW) was nailed to the cross,so let no man judge you in respect to the things of THE LAW.

And yes,the Lord Jesus did say that He did not come to destroy the law.And while He was on earth He did not destroy the law.

But after He was crucified,He gave Paul a new revelation,the "gospel of the grace of God"(Gal.1:12;Acts20:24),which declares that no one remains under law:

"For sin shall not have dominion over you;for ye are NOT UNDER LAW,but under grace"(Ro.6:14).

In His grace,--Jerry

 

[Francisco]

gbort,

Goodness gracious, let me watch my bloopers in this post before I get blasted!

Francisco, I have nothing to say about this thread except a comment on the sarcasm and arrogance that bleeds into your replies. Geez Louise! You may be a smart guy but lay off on the insults about people's levels of "reading comprehension".

May we all be so fortunate as you to have such a clear and infallible understanding of God's word!

The sarcasm stems from a long ongoing exchange between myself and Hope, and is only intended for Hope. In fact, Hope started the sarcastic exchange about our level of 'understanding' what we read in scripture. I typically do not cast insults around, and I didn't the first couple times Hope made sarcastic remarks to me, but I will only put up with so much.

I apologize if it bothered you.

As for my 'infallible' understanding of scripture, I've never claimed that. And for you to be just now entering this thread and berating me for sarcasm in a discourse you know nothing about, you seem to sling the sarcasm around pretty freely yourself.

God Bless,

Francisco

 

[Francisco]

Jerry,

It's good to hear from you, been a long time. How are things south of the border?

Are we to understand that THE LAW has not been done away with?

"For Christ is THE END OF THE LAW for righteousness to everyone who believeth"(Ro.10:4).

The end of the law!

Is that so hard to understand?

I don't find this hard to understand at all. I understand Paul to be saying Christ is the 'end of the law' in the sense that Christ fulfills the law. When something is fulfilled, it has come to it's completion or end.

Your interpretation, that Christ has 'done away with the law', conflicts with what Jesus very clearly told us at Matthew 5:17-18:

17 "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.

The key here is 'till ALL is fulfilled.' ALL won't be fulfilled until the second coming of Christ.

"Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us,which was contrary to us,and took it out of the way,nailing it to His cross"(Col.2:14).

Some say that this is not speaking about THE LAW,but instead about the "enmity between mankind and God" being nailed to the cross.

However,if we examine the verses which follow,we can see that the "handwriting of ordinances" must refer to THE LAW:

"Let no man,THEREFORE,judge you in food,or in drink,or in respect of a feast day,or of a new moon,or of a sabbath day,which are a shadow of things to come..."(Col.2:16).

All these things mentioned pertain to THE LAW,and these things are also referred to as "a shadow of things to come".And the author of the epistle to the Hebrews also refers to THE LAW as "a shadow of good things to come"(Heb.10:1).

So Paul is saying that the "handwriting of ordinances" (THE LAW) was nailed to the cross, so let no man judge you in respect to the things of THE LAW.

I showed in my previous post to Hope that the other translations render the meaning of this sentence rather differently than the archaic english of the KJV would seem to. Rather than 'ordinances', they translate it record of debt, certificate of debt, record that contained the charges. This would indicate the sin imputed by the law, not the law itself. It was the sins of man, the charges against man, that caused the enmity between God and man. That is what Christ nailed to the cross and put an end to forever.

And yes,the Lord Jesus did say that He did not come to destroy the law.And while He was on earth He did not destroy the law.

But after He was crucified,He gave Paul a new revelation,the "gospel of the grace of God"(Gal.1:12;Acts20:24),which declares that no one remains under law:

"For sin shall not have dominion over you;for ye are NOT UNDER LAW,but under grace"(Ro.6:14).

I think part of where we may not be seeing eye-to-eye is what we mean when we say 'law'. That word means many different things in scripture. For instance, when Paul tells us there was no sin without the law, he didn't mean the law of Moses. Adam sinned way before the law of Moses, and it was certainly imputed to Adam because God punished Adam justly for his sin.

I agree with you that Romans 6, Col 2, Gal 1 and Acts 20 all speak to the 'gospel of grace'. However, we differ in our interpretation of that gospel. You claim the 'gospel of grace' preaches replacement of the law by grace. I see the grace Paul talks about as the gift God gives to those united with Christ's death through baptism, not to replace the law, but to elevate those who receive this gift above the sin that is imputed under the law. Isn't it true that if not for the grace of God, man could not turn away from sin? And also, if there were no law there could be no sin imputed,

Let's look at one of the verses you cited above, Romans 6:14, in context:

1 What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? 3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 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.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. 6 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. 7 For one who has died has been set free from sin. 8 Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. 9 We know that Christ being raised from the dead will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. 10 For the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God. 11So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus. 12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal bodies, to make you obey their passions. 13 Do not present your members to sin as instruments for unrighteousness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments for righteousness. 14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.

Paul enters the chapter with the rhetorical question, 'should we continue to sin that grace may abound'. He answers himself with 'By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it?' Paul is referring to those who have died with Christ through baptism, as he goes on to explain in the subsequent verses. And since we have died to sin with Christ we must consider ourselves 'dead to sin and alive to God in Jesus Christ'. And we must diligently persevere in not letting sin 'reign in our mortal bodies'. Paul goes further in his exhortation about avoidance of sin, and living in the grace we've received through our baptismal union with Christ. Paul concludes his statement about grace by reminding us, once baptized into the body of Christ, we are no longer under the law but under grace. Paul closes this way not to say that grace replaced the law, he says no such thing, but to emphasize the grace we receive through our union with Christ and particularly our responsibility to remain dead to the sin which is imputed by the law.

Again, Jerry, nowhere does scripture say 'grace replaced the law' or 'the cross replaced the law.' It simply is not there. You are reading that thought into Paul's words. But Paul's entire gospel of grace is to emphasize the higher importance of grace, through which our sins can be forgiven, contrasted to the law that can only accomplish the imputation of sin.

God Bless,

Francisco

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Francisco,

Everything is just fine down here in Mexico.How are things up there among those who follow the church at Rome?

Too bad that you and Rome will not just accept the plain teaching of the Holy Scriptures that "Christ is the END of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth"(Ro.10:4).

The verse does NOT say that Christ will be in the future the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

Paul makes it is plain as it could possibly be made known that THE LAW has come to an end:

"Wherefore,the law WAS our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ,that we might be justified by faith.But after faith is come,WE ARE NO LONGER UNDER A SCHOOLMASTER"(Gal.3:24,25).

That is why Paul tells us:

"For sin shall have no dominion over you;for ye are NOT UNDER THE LAW but under grace"(Ro.6:14).

And perhaps when Rome comes to the realization that no one is under law,they will also come to the realization that the teaching of "baptismal regeneration" did not come from Holy Scriptures,but instead was borrowed from the pagan religions.

In His grace,--Jerry

 

[JustAChristian]

Jerry say we are not under law...Hmm...

Jerry say we are not under law...Hmm...

Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
Francisco,

Everything is just fine down here in Mexico.How are things up there among those who follow the church at Rome?

Too bad that you and Rome will not just accept the plain teaching of the Holy Scriptures that "Christ is the END of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth"(Ro.10:4).

The verse does NOT say that Christ will be in the future the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

Paul makes it is plain as it could possibly be made known that THE LAW has come to an end:

"Wherefore,the law WAS our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ,that we might be justified by faith.But after faith is come,WE ARE NO LONGER UNDER A SCHOOLMASTER"(Gal.3:24,25).

That is why Paul tells us:

"For sin shall have no dominion over you;for ye are NOT UNDER THE LAW but under grace"(Ro.6:14).

And perhaps when Rome comes to the realization that no one is under law,they will also come to the realization that the teaching of "baptismal regeneration" did not come from Holy Scriptures,but instead was borrowed from the pagan religions.

In His grace,--Jerry

Jerry,
Can you sin? If yes, how do you get rid of sin? Can you go to heaven without getting rid of your sin? Answer these questions and I will go further.

JustAChristian :angel:

 

[HopeofGlory]

Fran,

My replies are bold.

Originally posted by Francisco
Hope:
Maybe that's the way you see it, but that just goes to show your lack of reading comprehension and reasoning. What we must really recognize is how the precious blood of the lamb of God FULFILLED the requirement for remission of sin imposed BY the law. Your claim is that Jesus REPLACED the law, but He told us himself he came not to replace but to fulfill the law:

My claim is a biblical claim founded on the finished work of Christ. Yours however is contrary to the truth. Your righteous works are contained in the law therefore you will be judged by the law. In that sense for you the law is still in effect and not one jot or tittle will pass away.

For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven."(Matthew 5:18)

Jesus in Matt 5 is explaining to those under the law that the requirements of said law are even more stringent than they were aware. The law then must not only be obeyed outwardly but inwardly as well. This fulfilling is only found in Jesus Christ.

Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity. Matt. 23:28

So the fufilling of the law left them with no hope and He ends His discourse with them with these words ...Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect. Matt. 5:48

The understanding is, righteous works of the law aren't going to cut it anymore, you must be perfect even as your Father in heaven is perfect.


The difference between REPLACING the law and FULFILLING the law, is nearly as 'vast' as the difference between sacrifices of bulls and goats and Jesus' sacrifice.

The difference between REMOVING the law and FULFILLING the law is as vast as the difference between sacrifices of bulls and goats and Jesus' sacrifice.

LOL! Improve your reading comprehension and attention to detail and you won't make these silly mistakes:

Without the mind of Christ you will never be able to understand His words.

'Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all ZEALOUS of the law.' (Acts 21:20b)

LOL, LOL.

LOL, this one is almost as funny as your last blooper:

Three LOLs! You're really on a roll now aren't you Fran.

If the apostles had not been so jealous of the law they would have receive the words of Jesus in the new testament for remission. I will explain this to you again with a following post.

19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:

Verse 19 simply says that as through the sin of one man, namely Adam, all men became sinners, so also through one man, Jesus Christ, would mankind be made righteous once again. That is what the redemption is all about Hope.

Absolutely, the only problem we have now is to get you to believe it. Hint, works of righteousness will not cut it.

Verse 20 continues from what Paul said in 5:13, that sin is not imputed when there is no law, so the law was necessary for man to know what sin was, and could therefor be justly imputed. The second sentence goes on to say that as man became sinful through willful disobedience of the law, God's grace, free gifts as of mercy for instance, increased that much more.

You still don't get if Fran. You are commanded to be perfect even as the Father in heaven is perfect. Are you Fran? Will your righteous works (law) make you so? You are required to be without sin, this is perfection. Christ made it possible for us to receive the righteousness of God for the law was taken out of the way by the cross of Christ. All those that truly believe in the power of the cross to take away sin receive the righteousness of God.

Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him. 1 John 3:6
Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. 1 John 3:7
He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. 1 John 3:8
Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. 1 John 3:9
In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother. 1 John 3:10

Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. 1 John 3:4
And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin. 1 John 3:5

As Jerry pointed out...""For Christ is THE END OF THE LAW for righteousness to everyone who believeth"(Ro.10:4).

The end of the law!

Is that so hard to understand?"

Niether of these verses has anything to do with the law being an 'offence' to the cross. LOL. Did you arrive at that conclusion by not understanding what the scripture is saying or did someone put that idea in your head casuing you to develop an extreme and convulted eisegesis of these verses? LOL.

Here's the reasoning. Before the cross righteous works contained in the law accompanied with faith were accepted by God for remission. Christ then teaches in Matt that these righteous works alone are not acceptable and that He required perfection.

Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, Heb. 6:1
Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. Heb. 6:2
And this will we do, if God permit. Heb. 6:3

We must move on to "perfection" by leaving behind the doctrine of baptism, an laying on of hands...oops, there goes your..."importance of apostolic succession" when "the apostles would lay hands on these people" and " passed on the authority that Christ gave to them".

Well this one is really not funny at all because Paul's words are hard to understand here. Let's take a look at the verse in context:

13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;' (Col 2:13-14)

What makes this so difficult to understand is archaic language used in the KJV, particularly the words 'handwriting of ordinances'. By looking at some more modern english translations, you can see that 'handwriting of ordinances' is not interpretted as meaning the law:

'the certificate of debt' NASB
'the record that contained the charges against us' NLT
'the record of debt that stood against us' ESV
'the charges that were against us' CEV

As you can see, it was the sins man committed under the law that was abolished by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. In other words, the enmity between mankind and God, caused by the sins of man, was 'nailed to the cross' and abolished by the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ.

There is NO 'line of opposition' between the cross and the law. All you have managed to draw is a squiggle of convoluted and illogical conclusions, based on your misunderstanding of what you read, or perhaps based on the extreme eisegesis necessary to reach a conclusion someone has convinced you of.

The cross FULFILLED the requirement for unblemished sacrifice imposed by the law, so there is NO OPPOSITION, but rather a significant connection of cooperation between the cross and the law.

Extreme eisegesis, or simple lack of reading comprehension? I can't tell for sure.

Your problem is that you won't accept the clear meaning of scripture. You profess that you know Christ yet your diluted theology denys the power of the cross to take away sin by removing the law. You say there is no opposition while in truth you are the oppisition. The thing that is archaic here is your doctrine as exemplified by the ritualistic traditions handed down by your church fathers.

The 'promise' Peter speaks of is the second coming of the Lord. Let's take a look at the verse in context, and in a more modern english translation:

Peter is warning his reader to beware the argument 'where is his promise he will come?' He explains the delay in the Lord's day is for our benefit, out of God's patience and His desire to give man as much time as needed to repent and turn to God. But eventually the day will come 'like a thief', when we least expect it. Peter goes on in subsequent verses to exhort Christians to always remain ready for that day, avoiding sin, so we can stand spotless and blameless before Him on that day.

I can't really tell what you're claiming the 'promise' to be, but it's obvious you misunderstood what Peter was talking about.

The promise is much more that just His coming. It includes all the promises associated with His coming kingdom.

As we review the actual account of Jesus speaking of the “things” of the kingdom which the apostles believed they would recieve at Pentecost, we see the "promise of Spirit baptism" being directly related receiving the kingdom. Spirit baptism is an operation of God (Col 2:12) and men do not have the power to accomplish it.

Water baptism in Acts 1: 5 is spoken of in contrast to..... “but” (on the contrary) ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost!

To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God: Acts 1:3 (KJV)
And, being assembled together with [them], commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, [saith he], ye have heard of me. Acts 1:4 (KJV)
For John truly baptized with water; but (on the contrary) ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. Acts 1:5 (KJV)

When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? Acts 1:6 (KJV)
And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. Acts 1:7 (KJV)

The Pentecostal experience revolved around men receiving "power" but (on the contrary) Christ speaks of a time when the power will be all God's.

But (on the contrary) ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. Acts 1:8 (KJV)

"Not many days hence" referring to the promise in verse 5 must be considered if we seek the truth of the Lord's words. The kindom promise was not received at Pentecost and we see it mentioned again in 2 Pet 3:9 with Peter explaining that it was not received with these words:

But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 2 Pet. 3:8 (KJV)

The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. 2 Pet. 3:9 (KJV)

And, being assembled together with [them], commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, [saith he], ye have heard of me. Acts 1:4 (KJV)

Jesus told them of the "things" of the kingdom then commanded go to Jerusalem "but"(on the contrary) "wait" for the promise of the father "ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost" not many days hence.

It was not for them to know the times or the seasons!
Peter quoting the Lord in Acts 11:16 does not mean he understood it! Peter believed they would receive the kingdom and the promise but as seen in 2 Pet 3:9 we know Peter was wrong!

But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. Acts 1:8 (KJV)

The above verse explains what they received at Pentecost ... “but ye shall receive power” and that is exactly what they received and is proven in the fact there is not one verse in which they were baptized with the Holy Ghost. What they received at Pentecost was not unique and it was not baptism with the Holy Ghost.

They truly did receive the gift of the Holy Ghost (power) and it was promised that they would receive it at Pentecost. Jesus did not say the promise of being baptized with the Holy Ghost would be received at Pentecost but said “not many days hence“.

Ye shall receive power is on the other side of "but"(on the contrary) "wait","not many days hence" of He will "baptized with the Holy Ghost."

In Christ
Craig

 

[HopeofGlory]

Christ Jesus preached the kingdom message to Israel (the circumcision) and he chose the twelve to deliver it but He instructed them to not go to the Gentiles.

These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles (uncircumcision), and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: Matt. 10:5 (KJV)
But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Matt. 10:6 (KJV)
Clearly the circumcision (Jewish) message Peter preached was not to be delivered to the uncircumcision (Gentiles)or was Jesus wrong?

The gospel of the kingdom beginning with John the Baptist (Matt 3:2) was a message to be given only to Israel as God’s chosen people. This circumcision only message prepared the nation of Israel as priests and Christ commanded it was not to be delivered to Gentiles.

Water baptism was a ritual in the sense that is was a required act for religious benefit. Under the law this ordinance (required work) can clearly be seen in “old” testament rituals where the priest were made clean to receive the sacrifice. To say it was old testament simply means it was before the new testament for remission (Matt. 26:28) was given by Christ. This old testament rite was the declaration of John the Baptist (Mark 1:4) and it is the same as Peter's Pentecostal message (Acts 2:38) both were a “baptism of repentance for the remission of sins“.

In the ritual of sacrifice the priest were fully wet (not sprinkled) or "baptized" in water. This rite of cleansing removed sin and prepared them to receive the sacrifice. The priest would take of the sacrifical “blood” and "sprinkle" it on the people. The application of the blood was the most important part. Water baptism immersion is not a sign of the blood being sprinkled and they are clearly two different elements in the same ritual.

Israel's understanding of water baptism was that it "washed away their sins" even after the cross.

And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there, Acts 22:12 (KJV)
And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord. Acts 22:16 (KJV)

Notice the below scripture is unto the children of Israel and if ye “obey” my voice you will be a kingdom of priest and it is clear John the Baptist was that voice crying in the wilderness.

Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my (Mosaic) covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: Ex. 19:5 (KJV)
And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shaltspeak unto the children of Israel. Ex. 19:6 (KJV)

The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. Mark 1:3 (KJV)
John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. Mark 1:4 (KJV)

The twelve were instructed in this circumcision message and were commanded to “Go not into the way of the Gentiles“ but only to “the house of Israel”.

After the cross the apostles are now commanded to....Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. Mark 16:15 (KJV)

Why the change from.....Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: Matt. 10:5 (KJV)

For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. Heb. 9:16 (KJV)
For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. Heb. 9:17 (KJV)

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


After the cross the new testament for remission of sins was now in force and it superceded the old testament for remission in water baptism. The new testament message was to be delivered to all the world.

Before the cross Israel was still bound to ordinances for remission. The cross removed the ordinance of water baptism for remission.....Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; Col. 2:14 (KJV)

Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ , let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, Heb. 6:1 (KJV)
Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. Heb. 6:2 (KJV)
And this will we do, if God permit. Heb. 6:3 (KJV)

Before the new testament sin remission also required endurance to the end. The new testament (Matt 26:28) with a better testimony (John 5:36) granted eternal life (John 6:54) and was only effectual after the cross (Heb. 9:17).

Before the cross salvation was only found in ordinances of the law and the Gentiles were without the law (Rom. 2:14) contained in the old testimony for sin remission. Righteousness at that time had to be received under the ordinances contained in the law (Rom. 2:26) simply because the new testament had no strength until after the death of Christ.


Peter's circumcision message for remission was not the new testament (Matt 26:28) and his message (Acts 2:38) was not meant to be delivered to uncircumcised Gentiles who were without the law. The apostles were teachings the same message after the cross (Acts. 2:38) as the Baptist was before the cross (Mark 1:4). Therefore the apostles at Pentecost did not teach (Matt. 26:28).

John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. Mark 1:4 (KJV)
For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Matt. 26:28 (KJV)

Two witnesses! Matt 26:28 superceded Acts 2:38.

But I have a greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me. John 5:36 (KJV)
And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape. John 5:37 (KJV)

Christ's gave us the "NEW" testament in His blood "for" remission of sins. This is a simple fact that can not be reasoned away with false analogies. Signs are a shadow of things to come and are of no use after the real things are manifested. To say we still need water baptism is no different than to say we still need circumcision of the flesh. Water baptism "for" remission of sins (old testament) was a mere shadow of faith in His shed blood for remission of sins (new testament). Some would have us believe water baptism is a sign of the applied blood of Christ but this is clearly not the case. This confusion is found in those who sprinkle instead of immerse in water because the high priest sprinkled when he applied the blood.

Israel was God's chosen people to deliver the message of His sacrifical blood for remission to the world. We will look in vain for that message at Pentecost.
Christ died for our sins and it is through the shedding of His blood that all who have faith in God’s witness are born again by the Spirit of Christ. The Pentecostal message of water baptism is void of the power of God that Christ “died for our sins” and through “faith in His blood” our sins are remitted. This bloodless gospel for remission fulfilled this prophetic scripture.....

Whereas thou hast been forsaken and hated, so that no man went through thee, I will make thee an eternal excellency, a joy of many generations. Isa. 60:15 (KJV)

Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob. Isa. 60:16 (KJV)

God called Paul to apply the blood of our Sacrifice for remission and this message would be received freely by the Gentiles because they were without the law.

Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles. Acts 13:46 (KJV)

Paul is the first man to deliver the new testament proclaiming righteousness without the ordinances (ritual of water baptism) of the law.

But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. Rom. 3:28 (KJV)

Before this time they were justified through ordinances of the law such as the ritual of water baptism and animal sacrifices! Now through the new testament (Matt 26:28) their righteous obedience to ordinances of the law were no longer accepted and it was replaced by the righteousness of Christ by His obedience to the cross.

For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. Rom. 5:19 (KJV)
Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: Rom. 5:20 (KJV)

Water baptism was obeyed "for" remission of sins under the law and it can not be argued to the contrary unless you choose to go against clear biblical teaching. "If" indeed faith in His shed blood in the "new" testament now gives remission of sins and His death done away with the law then we can conclude the "old" testament "for" remission of sins has indeed been superceded by the "new".

The death of Christ was not taught as the means "for" remission at Pentecost but obeying in water baptism "for" remission was commanded. The main point here is those at Pentecost had to be water baptized to be saved and that was a clear message....Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that OBEY him. Acts 5:32 (KJV)

Clearly two different messages for sin remission were preached! The circumcision message was only to Israel of the law and the uncircumcision to Gentiles who were without the law.

But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; Gal. 2:7 (KJV)
(For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles Gal. 2:8 (KJV)

Jesus instructed the apostles to go to the world “after” the new testament for remission (Matt. 26:28) was given and He did not instruct them to WATER baptism.

There is only one baptism (Spirit) not two and through the practice of water baptism many are deceived and have accepted it for remission of sins and in this fact alone we must realize the error of man’s witness which is not God’s.

One Lord, one faith, one baptism, Eph. 4:5 (KJV)
One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all. Eph. 4:6 (KJV)

A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed. Matt. 16:4 (KJV)

But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same veil (Mosaic) untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which veil is done away in Christ. 2 Cor. 3:14 (KJV)

Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. Heb. 10:9 (KJV)
By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. Heb. 10:10 (KJV)

Therefore if any man be IN CHRIST, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. 2 Cor. 5:17 (KJV)

Old things (old testament) are passed away and all things are new (new testament).

We know what is truth by the gospel that came forth from the very lips of Christ our Saviour.

For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Matt. 26:28 (KJV)
But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom. Matt. 26:29 (KJV)

In Christ
Craig

 

[Francisco]

Hope:

My replies are bold.

Your replies are ridiculous....

 

[Francisco]

Jerry,

Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
Everything is just fine down here in Mexico.How are things up there among those who follow the church at Rome?

LOL, I would have expected something new after all this time, not that same old 'church at Rome' thing.

Things are fine here Jerry, thanks for asking.

Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
Too bad that you and Rome will not just accept the plain teaching of the Holy Scriptures that "Christ is the END of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth"(Ro.10:4).

Verse plucking already Jerry? Don't you remember how confused you get when you look at individual verses out of context?

Again, you would have scripture contradict itself with your contrived interpretation. You simply refuse to 'just accept the plain teaching of the Holy Scriptures' when Jesus says:

17 "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.

For your interpretation of Rom 10:4 to coalesce with with these verses from Matthew 5, you have to make the ridiculous and unscriptural claim that:

Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
And yes,the Lord Jesus did say that He did not come to destroy the law.And while He was on earth He did not destroy the law.

But after He was crucified,He gave Paul a new revelation

You make it sound as if Our Lord spent all that time teaching His apostles the gospel, commanded them to teach all nations this gospel, then replaced it with a new gospel when He confronted Paul on the road to Damscus. How ridiculous!

In my interpretation the verses coalesce without any added manipulations. Jesus told us in Matthew 5:17-18 that He came NOT to destroy the Law or Prophets, but to FULFILL them. He went further to say that nothing, NOT ONE JOT OR ONE TITTLE, would pass from the LAW until ALL is FULFILLED. ALL, Jerry. ALL will NOT be fulfilled until Jesus comes again!

And Paul's words at Rom 10:4 doesn't say Jesus destroyed the law. It says He FULFILLED it. To those who have died with Christ through baptism, just like Paul tells us in Romans 6. When we are united with Christ through baptism, we are dead to sin, sin that is imputed by the law. So, it is the end of the law for those who are baptized into Jesus Christ. Take another look:

Romans 6
1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.
8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:
9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.
11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.
13 Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.
14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

You see Jerry, when we are baptized into Jesus Christ, we are dead to sin. If we are dead to sin, which is the 'fruit' of the law, then we are no longer UNDER the law but under grace, which brings us unto righteousness.

In Romans 10:1-4, Paul is talking about his fellow Jews who refuse to believe in Christ, and Paul prays for them 'unto salvation'. Paul says his fellow Jews don't have knowledge of God's justice or righteousness and try to create their own, not submitting to God's righteousness. In 10:4 Paul is saying that for those who believe and submit to Jesus Christ, they are no longer under the law, being dead to sin.

All these verses coalesce perfectly with my interpretation, and without adding any unscriptural suppositions about replacing gospels and such nonsense.

Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
The verse does NOT say that Christ will be in the future the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.

Are you now adding words to my statements as well as scripture? I never said Christ would be the future end of the law, He is the end of the law for all who believe now. What I said is that not one jot or one tittle of law shall pass away before all is fulfilled. Obviously, ALL has not yet been fulfilled, so the law has not passed away. However, if you are united to the death of Jesus Christ, you are dead to the fruit of the law, sin. In effect, Paul is saying sin no longer has a death grip on us who believe, because through our faith in Jesus Christ, God grants us the grace necessary to turn from sin.

Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
Paul makes it is plain as it could possibly be made known that THE LAW has come to an end:

"Wherefore,the law WAS our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ,that we might be justified by faith.But after faith is come,WE ARE NO LONGER UNDER A SCHOOLMASTER"(Gal.3:24,25).

Thanks, Jerry. You've made my point for me. As Paul says, those of us who have been brought 'unto Christ' by the law, are no longer under the law. It doesn't say the law was destroyed, just ended for those who believe.

What about those who still don't believe Jerry? Did Christ 'end the law' for them as well? Are they who don't believe going to receive the rewards of those who do?

Again, I see no evidence to support your claim that Christ contradicted Himself and destroyed the law.

Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
That is why Paul tells us:

"For sin shall have no dominion over you;for ye are NOT UNDER THE LAW but under grace"(Ro.6:14).

Jerry, read the 13 verses that come before 6:14. Paul says for those who are baptized into Jesus Christ are dead to sin. Because they are dead to the fruit of the law, SIN, they are no longer in the death grip the law had on them before they turned to Jesus Christ. They are now under grace.

Paul DID make it plain as it could possibly be made known that turning to Christ is the end of the law for those who believe. But again, I see no evidence to support your claim that Christ contradicted His words at Matthew 5:17-18 and destroyed the law. You are reading this thought into the text Jerry, it's not there in the 'plain words of Holy Scripture', as you said it was. But what IS in the 'plain words of Holy Scripture' is 'Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets'. Jesus' words directly contradict your claim. Without adding your unscriptural theory that Jesus replaced the gospel he taught the apostles, your theory cannot coexist with the remainder of scripture on the subject.

Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
And perhaps when Rome comes to the realization that no one is under law,they will also come to the realization that the teaching of "baptismal regeneration" did not come from Holy Scriptures,but instead was borrowed from the pagan religions.

LOL, gotta get a little anit-Catholic rhetoric in there, don't ya Jerry? Well, that just shows what kind of 'christian' you are.

But your claim that baptismal regeneration came from pagan religions has a few flaws. The biggest flaw is the date that Christian belief in baptismal regeneration can be traced back to. For your claim to be correct, that would mean this belief was 'developed' just a few decades after Jesus Christ established His church and proclaimed that not even the gates of hell would prevail against it. It would have to have been developed within the apostolic period and continued without pause through the entire history of the Church.

The Letter of Barnabas
"Regarding [baptism], we have the evidence of Scripture that Israel would refuse to accept the washing which confers the remission of sins and would set up a substitution of their own instead [Ps. 1:3–6]. Observe there how he describes both the water and the cross in the same figure. His meaning is, ‘Blessed are those who go down into the water with their hopes set on the cross.’ Here he is saying that after we have stepped down into the water, burdened with sin and defilement, we come up out of it bearing fruit, with reverence in our hearts and the hope of Jesus in our souls" (Letter of Barnabas 11:1–10 [A.D. 74]).

Hermas
"‘I have heard, sir,’ said I, ‘from some teacher, that there is no other repentance except that which took place when we went down into the water and obtained the remission of our former sins.’ He said to me, ‘You have heard rightly, for so it is’" (The Shepherd 4:3:1–2 [A.D. 80]).

Ignatius of Antioch
"Let none of you turn deserter. Let your baptism be your armor; your faith, your helmet; your love, your spear; your patient endurance, your panoply" (Letter to Polycarp 6 [A.D. 110]).

Second Clement
"For, if we do the will of Christ, we shall find rest; but if otherwise, then nothing shall deliver us from eternal punishment, if we should disobey his commandments. . . . [W]ith what confidence shall we, if we keep not our baptism pure and undefiled, enter into the kingdom of God? Or who shall be our advocate, unless we be found having holy and righteous works?’ (Second Clement 6:7–9 [A.D. 150]).

Justin Martyr
"As many as are persuaded and believe that what we [Christians] teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly, and instructed to pray and to entreat God with fasting, for the remission of their sins that are past, we pray and fast with them. Then they are brought by us where there is water and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father . . . and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit [Matt. 28:19], they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, ‘Unless you are born again, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:3]" (First Apology 61 [A.D. 151]).

Irenaeus
"‘And [Naaman] dipped himself . . . seven times in the Jordan’ [2 Kgs. 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as newborn babes, even as the Lord has declared: ‘Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’" (Fragment 34 [A.D. 190]).

Tertullian
"[N]o one can attain salvation without baptism, especially in view of the declaration of the Lord, who says, ‘Unless a man shall be born of water, he shall not have life’" (Baptism 12:1 [A.D. 203]).

Hippolytus
"The Father of immortality sent the immortal Son and Word into the world, who came to man in order to wash him with water and the Spirit; and he, begetting us again to incorruption of soul and body, breathed into us the Spirit of life, and endued us with an incorruptible panoply. If, therefore, man has become immortal, he will also be God. And if he is made God by water and the Holy Spirit after the regeneration of the laver he is found to be also joint-heir with Christ after the resurrection from the dead. Wherefore I preach to this effect: Come, all ye kindreds of the nations, to the immortality of the baptism" (Discourse on the Holy Theophany 8 [A.D. 217]).

The Recognitions of Clement
"But you will perhaps say, ‘What does the baptism of water contribute toward the worship of God?’ In the first place, because that which has pleased God is fulfilled. In the second place, because when you are regenerated and born again of water and of God, the frailty of your former birth, which you have through men, is cut off, and so . . . you shall be able to attain salvation; but otherwise it is impossible. For thus has the true prophet [Jesus] testified to us with an oath: ‘Verily, I say to you, that unless a man is born again of water . . . he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’" (The Recognitions of Clement 6:9 [A.D. 221]).

Testimonies Concerning the Jews
"That unless a man have been baptized and born again, he cannot attain unto the kingdom of God. In the Gospel according to John: ‘Except a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God’ [John 3:5]. . . . Also in the same place: ‘Unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye shall not have life in you’ [John 6:53]. That it is of small account to be baptized and to receive the Eucharist, unless one profit by it both in deeds and works" (Testimonies Concerning the Jews 3:2:25–26 [A.D. 240]).

Cyprian of Carthage
"[When] they receive also the baptism of the Church . . . then finally can they be fully sanctified and be the sons of God . . . since it is written, ‘Except a man be born again of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God’" (Letters 71[72]:1 [A.D. 253]).

Council of Carthage VII
"And in the gospel our Lord Jesus Christ spoke with his divine voice, saying, ‘Except a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.’ . . . Unless therefore they receive saving baptism in the Catholic Church, which is one, they cannot be saved, but will be condemned with the carnal in the judgment of the Lord Christ" (Seventh Carthage [A.D. 256]).

Cyril of Jerusalem
"Since man is of a twofold nature, composed of body and soul, the purification also is twofold: the corporeal for the corporeal and the incorporeal for the incorporeal. The water cleanses the body, and the Spirit seals the soul. . . . When you go down into the water, then, regard not simply the water, but look for salvation through the power of the Spirit. For without both you cannot attain to perfection. It is not I who says this, but the Lord Jesus Christ, who has the power in this matter. And he says, ‘Unless a man be born again,’ and he adds the words ‘of water and of the Spirit,’ ‘he cannot enter the kingdom of God.’ He that is baptized with water, but is not found worthy of the Spirit, does not receive the grace in perfection. Nor, if a man be virtuous in his deeds, but does not receive the seal by means of the water, shall he enter the kingdom of heaven. A bold saying, but not mine; for it is Jesus who has declared it" (Catechetical Lectures 3:4 [A.D. 350]).

Athanasius
"[A]s we are all from earth and die in Adam, so being regenerated from above of water and Spirit, in the Christ we are all quickened" (Four Discourses Against the Arians 3:26[33] [A.D. 360]).

Basil the Great
"This then is what it means to be ‘born again of water and Spirit’: Just as our dying is effected in the water [Rom. 6:3; Col. 2:12–13], our living is wrought through the Spirit. In three immersions and an equal number of invocations the great mystery of baptism is completed in such a way that the type of death may be shown figuratively, and that by the handing on of divine knowledge the souls of the baptized may be illuminated. If, therefore, there is any grace in the water, it is not from the nature of water, but from the Spirit’s presence there" (The Holy Spirit 15:35 [A.D. 375]).

Ambrose of Milan
"Although we are baptized with water and the Spirit, the latter is much superior to the former, and is not therefore to be separated from the Father and the Son. There are, however, many who, because we are baptized with water and the Spirit, think that there is no difference in the offices of water and the Spirit, and therefore think that they do not differ in nature. Nor do they observe that we are buried in the element of water that we may rise again renewed by the Spirit. For in the water is the representation of death, in the Spirit is the pledge of life, that the body of sin may die through the water, which encloses the body as it were in a kind of tomb, that we, by the power of the Spirit, may be renewed from the death of sin, being born again in God" (The Holy Spirit 1:6[75–76] [A.D. 381]).

"The Church was redeemed at the price of Christ’s blood. Jew or Greek, it makes no difference; but if he has believed, he must circumcise himself from his sins [in baptism (Col. 2:11–12)] so that he can be saved . . . for no one ascends into the kingdom of heaven except through the sacrament of baptism.
. . . ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God’" (Abraham 2:11:79–84 [A.D. 387]).

"You have read, therefore, that the three witnesses in baptism are one: water, blood, and the Spirit (1 John 5:8): And if you withdraw any one of these, the sacrament of baptism is not valid. For what is the water without the cross of Christ? A common element with no sacramental effect. Nor on the other hand is there any mystery of regeneration without water, for ‘unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God’" (The Mysteries 4:20 [A.D. 390]).

Gregory of Nyssa
"[In] the birth by water and the Spirit, [Jesus] himself led the way in this birth, drawing down upon the water, by his own baptism, the Holy Spirit; so that in all things he became the firstborn of those who are spiritually born again, and gave the name of brethren to those who partook in a birth like to his own by water and the Spirit" (Against Eunomius 2:8 [A.D. 382]).

John Chrysostom
"[N]o one can enter into the kingdom of heaven except he be regenerated through water and the Spirit, and he who does not eat the flesh of the Lord and drink his blood is excluded from eternal life, and if all these things are accomplished only by means of those holy hands, I mean the hands of the priest, how will any one, without these, be able to escape the fire of hell, or to win those crowns which are reserved for the victorious? These [priests] truly are they who are entrusted with the pangs of spiritual travail and the birth which comes through baptism: by their means we put on Christ, and are buried with the Son of God, and become members of that blessed head [the Mystical Body of Christ]" (The Priesthood 3:5–6 [A.D. 387]).

Gregory of Nazianz
"Such is the grace and power of baptism; not an overwhelming of the world as of old, but a purification of the sins of each individual, and a complete cleansing from all the bruises and stains of sin. And since we are double-made, I mean of body and soul, and the one part is visible, the other invisible, so the cleansing also is twofold, by water and the Spirit; the one received visibly in the body, the other concurring with it invisibly and apart from the body; the one typical, the other real and cleansing the depths" (Oration on Holy Baptism 7–8 [A.D. 388]).

The Apostolic Constitutions
"Be ye likewise contented with one baptism alone, that which is into the death of the Lord [Rom. 6:3; Col. 2:12–13]. . . . [H]e that out of contempt will not be baptized shall be condemned as an unbeliever and shall be reproached as ungrateful and foolish. For the Lord says, ‘Except a man be baptized of water and of the Spirit, he shall by no means enter into the kingdom of heaven.’ And again, ‘He that believes and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believes not shall be damned’" [Mark 16:16] (Apostolic Constitutions 6:3:15 [A.D. 400]).

Augustine
"It is this one Spirit who makes it possible for an infant to be regenerated . . . when that infant is brought to baptism; and it is through this one Spirit that the infant so presented is reborn. For it is not written, ‘Unless a man be born again by the will of his parents’ or ‘by the faith of those presenting him or ministering to him,’ but, ‘Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit.’ The water, therefore, manifesting exteriorly the sacrament of grace, and the Spirit effecting interiorly the benefit of grace, both regenerate in one Christ that man who was generated in Adam" (Letters 98:2 [A.D. 412]).

"Those who, though they have not received the washing of regeneration, die for the confession of Christ—it avails them just as much for the forgiveness of their sins as if they had been washed in the sacred font of baptism. For he that said, ‘If anyone is not reborn of water and the Spirit, he will not enter the kingdom of heaven,’ made an exception for them in that other statement in which he says no less generally, ‘Whoever confesses me before men, I too will confess him before my Father, who is in heaven’" [Matt. 10:32] (The City of God 13:7 [A.D. 419]).

I know, I know, you don't care what the early fathers say. It doesn't really matter though, because just the presence of this topic so early, and so continually throughout church history, tends do deflate your 'it came from paganism' attack.

Well Jerry, it's been a pleasure. And you just come on back if you ever want to try again.

God Bless,

Francisco

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Francisco,

Yes,I agree with you that the Christian is not under law.

Next,I would like to again quote the words of your own Cardinal Newman in regard to the fact that the church at Rome has borrowed many of their rites and traditions fron pagan religions,and also to quote Dr.Davids on the same subject.In a later post,I will demonstate that the "baptismal regeneration" taught in the early church had its origin in the pagan religions.

When Roman Catholic missionaries settled in certain provinces in China,they wereamazed to find all the externals of their religion already in place.The following is a description of the Lamaism of Tibet:

"Lamaism,indeed,with its shaven priests,its bells,and rosaries,its images,and holy water,and gorgeous dresses; its service with double choirs,and processions,and creeds,and mystic rites,and incense,in which the laity are spectators only; its abbots and monks,and nuns of many grades;its worship of the double Virgin,and of the saints and angels; its fasts,confessions,and purgatory; its images,its idols,and its pictures; its huge monasteries,and its gorgeous cathedrals,its powerful hierarchy,its cardinals,its Pope,bears outwardly at least strong resemblance to Romanism..."(Dr.Rhys Davids,"Buddhism",Ch.9).

This pagan link is unashamedly admitted by Roman Catholic leaders themselves.Cardinal John Henry Newman writes:

"The use of temples...incense,lamps and candles...the tonsure...turning to the East...perhaps the ecclesiastical chant and the Kyrie Eleison,are all of pagan origin,and sanctified by their adoption in the Church"(John Henry Cardinal Newman,"An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine",Penguin Books,1974,p.369).

In HIs grace,--Jerry