Baptism Or Works Essential Or Not For Salvation?

[randyc]

Sorry randyc, I was not really aware that you are an athiest. Have you seen- http://www.reasons.org ?.

I have not. I will look into it some more.

[Tanyan]

Souds great, where do you reside/Live ?. [Just city/state no address].

[randyc]

Corvallis, Oregon. Why?

[jadams_4242]

This is my first post in a long time, but I would like to add my two cents if i may.

I kinda agree with randyc, that the scripture doesnt strictly mention baptism, (the word) I believe obviously this is where it is left up to the individuals interpretation.

I'll quote th scripture saves me from having to stuff up.

" 3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his motherâ??s womb, and be born?

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be aborn again. "

Randyc said

When Jesus says "born of water" he is talking about... birth! If you actually look at the context, it should be obvious that Jesus is contrasting physical and spiritual birth. For example, verse 6 says "that which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit."

there is part truth in what randyc was saying, he was talking about a spiritual birth, but also christ does mention something of a physical nature too in vs 5, "of water AND of the spirit,"

in my honest opinion, it doesnt take a rocket scientist to understand it.

V5 makes it very clear that there are two things its suggests, and one is that you need to be born of the water, and how can one be born of water??? only one can imagine, baptism.

The baptism of spirit is recieving the gift of the holy ghost, which is a two part process of being born again or that spiritual birth as randyc was saying, and that is what our church teaches.

Then to continue with regards about eternal salvation, God is sure of his promises, we do have eternal life until WE jepordise that, so if I were to die right now, if I lived faithfully and had faith then I do have eternal life, but if not then I have jepordised that salvation. But all judgement is left up to God. remember the bible also speaks about falling from grace.

the way evs read this is that "born of the water" means to be born phiscally into this world,

the water of the womb?.....

of course it doesnt add up or make sense but as you can see there is a way for some to

accord that it does?.......

even though 'born of the water" how is there any other way to be born into this world?

are we to have a 'dry' birth? of course not!......

so why must god "instruct" us to be born of the water?....as allready asked..were we born dry?

[Tanyan]

Just curious thats all. My adopted parents owned property in Medford Oregon in the 70's. Anyway I hope and pray that your search may be fruitfull. May Grace Rain on you. In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan.

[freakin a man]

I am not an EV, but for what it's worth, below is a Mormon scripture that teaches that whoso repenteth and cometh unto Christ, the same is His church. And that, "whosoever is of my church, and endureth of my church to the end, him will I establish upon my rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against them" (--thus will enter into God's kindgom.) It does not mention Baptism per se.

I would suspect that if someone truly repents and comes to Christ, He will lead them to His Rock (His Latter-day revelations) and thus to Baptism. Still, if it was absolutely necessary for "coming unto Christ" one would think it would be specifically mentioned.

I don't see that to be required. We should not need to be constantly told A, B, and C over and over again to know that A, B, and C are important or required. It comes down to the view can one truely come to Christ and follow Christ yet not do the things Christ's says? If one really believes, follows, comes to, ect to Christ than they accept the total package.

I think one of Satan's great tools is always casting doubt in the minds of people. He persuades them to think "Well X is not said here and if X was truely important it would have been mentioned" when in fact X is mentioned in many other places that does show its important. If Dave's dad tells him on many occasions that taking out the trash is important but fails to mention sometimes to Dave about taking out the trash as an important thing to do, Dave would be wrong to conclude that because his Dad did not mention it on this day, taking it out is not really important.

[livy111us]

www.reasons.org.....oh brother!

[Son]

Being born again IS baptism.

Baptism for most is the symbol of the true spiritual baptism. When one is born again, he cannot commit sin, as outlined in 1st John

[Tanyan]

www.reasons.org.....oh brother!

I feel a vergence in the Force !.

[Tanyan]

Baptism for most is the symbol of the true spiritual baptism. When one is born again, he cannot commit sin, as outlined in 1st John

As I stated in a previouse post there are 41 reasons to Be/Get Baptized, In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan-LDSJD.

[Son]

Corvallis, Oregon. Why?

Welcome Oregonian brother. Do you feel the area in which you live has contributed to your atheism. Your neighborhood seems to be an agnostic/athiest majority, or do you live there for that mindset?

peace,

son

[livy111us]

Clue me in on who is born-again then, and how one is born-again.

[livy111us]

No dis-respect Tanyan, but I am not a fan of some of their material. I agree with most everything else you post however.

I am also an Oregonian but left it a few years back. I'm heading back up there for vacation in 2 weeks. I was from a small town outside of Portland (Newberg) and then moved to Bend. Beautiful area.

[Son]

As I stated in a previouse post there are 41 reasons to Be/Get Baptized, In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan-LDSJD.

So what are the top ten? Are you sure there are only 41?

[Tanyan]

So you do agree with "some" of there material ?. I would be interested in any material that responds to them [They are in my local area-20-minutes away from where I live], thanks. Grace to you.

[Tanyan]

So what are the top ten? Are you sure there are only 41?

If you say PLEASE with Moroni sprinkles on top !. Yes there are ONLY 41, SORRY !.

[livy111us]

I agree on their beliefs of Christ and God, but not hardcore creationism.

[Tanyan]

I agree on their beliefs of Christ and God, but not hardcore creationism.

Thanks for sharing that. Grace to you. Tanyan-LDSJK.

[Son]

Clue me in on who is born-again then, and how one is born-again.

Being born of the Spirit is being baptized into the very name of Jesus Christ, or anointed with light, so that with full consciousness one realizes that "In Him we live and move and have our being." As we live with a full understanding of the meaning of His Name, and truly believe in it, we too sahll begin to be able to do the works which He did, even the greater works that He spoke of. Jesus Christ's name means "I shall be powerful when I am anointed with light," or "Spirit." It is one and the same. As we live it we begin to take upon us the name of Christ. Then one grows into being born again, or of the spirit, and can come and go as the wind.

[livy111us]

Son,

I am waiting for your response. Most say they are born-again after accepting Christ through a non-Biblical prayer. If this is what you mean to be born-again, then why do the earliest manuscripts say Christ was "begotten" or born at His baptism? Did He need to accept Himself? What about those who were once believers but lost their faith? There are NUMEROUS modern and ancient examples, is that not a sin? Saul was led by the Spirit, but later sought the life of David. David is another example of actually taking a life. That is only 2 in the OT.

Are you born-again or know anyone who is born-again?

[Son]

Son,

I am waiting for your response. Most say they are born-again after accepting Christ through a non-Biblical prayer. If this is what you mean to be born-again, then why do the earliest manuscripts say Christ was "begotten" or born at His baptism? Did He need to accept Himself? What about those who were once believers but lost their faith? There are NUMEROUS modern and ancient examples, is that not a sin? Saul was led by the Spirit, but later sought the life of David. David is another example of actually taking a life. That is only 2 in the OT.

Are you born-again or know anyone who is born-again?

I posted as you were typing, I assume, or you did not relate to my post.

Most are incorrect biblically speaking, regarding being born again, or born of the spirit- they are the same.

I know of people that are born again, but have not met them. Most everyone I have ever met that say they are, most certainly are not.

I am not born again, but hope to be one day. I have been baptized, and I do believe in the teachings of Christ.

[No Touch]

I don't know... I'm smarter?

Anyway, I was going to bring up the point that it was likely that all those who believed (to whom John was writing) had been baptized, but I figured someone else would (your ad hominem attack was just too fun to miss).You are talking about all of "traditional" Christianity, but you are basing your observation on time periods not relevant to John's writing. Reformation and restorationist churches have no bearing on the issue. Also, eastern and western Catholic doctrines are not necessarily that important either. The Bible is not consistent, and they already had a faulty system in place. In other words, I am an atheist. I don't care what Christians say. We are talking about what a particular part of the Bible says. Christians have a need to mold the Bible to make it seem consistent. Your criticism that "Everyone is doing it" and I couldn't possibly know better than the millions of great minds before me is a worthless, anti-intellectual assault (but maybe I should go get my humours checked out). If we are just going to assume that Christians are right, then there is no reason to criticize EVs for believing that baptism is not necessary. Are you smarter than all of the EVs who have come before you?

It is also possible that some were not baptized. On the other hand, whether or not they were all baptized may not matter. If you read that entire chapter (maybe skipping the part about witnesses), you will see that, in terms of having eternal life, it focuses ONLY on belief and its DIRECT power to the exclusion of ALL other explanations.

I would suggest you consider the possibility that you are not.

And when I talk about traditional Christianity, understand that unlike the ignorant folks who believe the Bible is inerrant, I think that to understand traditional Christianity you need to go beyond the Bible and actually deal with the practices and doctrines that go beyond it. And for 1500 years before there ever was a protestant, everyone agreed that Baptism was necessary. They learned it from people who learned it from people who learned it from the Apostles, who learned it from Christ. It is written in the scriptures, and to deny it you need to pull vague phrases that are meant to emphasize the importance of Faith, not to make irrelevant everything else. Baptism is meaningless without Faith. But Baptism is not meaningless. If it was meaningless , and Christ thought it was meaningless, and the Apostles thought it was meaningless, and the gospel writers thought it was meaningless, then why is it there in the scriptures and history of the Churches? From whom did the early Christians learn the practice, and why would they place so much emphasis on it for the last 2000 years? It's not even a question of being smarter, it a question of not ignoring peoplecloser to the root of the information.

Let me give you a scenario: Suppose you and I are two researchers in the same field of study, in which there is a famous authoritative text accepted and referenced by everyone in the field. Suppose that while you have only read this book, my father was the research assistant of the author and he and I have discussed all the topics therein at great length (or at least one key topic). Who do you think will be better able to accurately speak of the great author's understanding of said topic? You, having only read the book, or me, having read the book and having loads of information on top of that comes from the author, even if through another source?

Again, as much as you want to say it ever "excludes" other criteria for obtaining eternal life, you are incorrect. Never did the old Biblical texts contain such terminology, to say that it ONLY requires faith, or to explicitly say that Baptism & Obedience to the commandments is NOT required. While in turn it does explicitly say with regularity that Baptism is necessary, that one must be born of water, etc. To deny the meaning that is obvious here requires you to approach reading it with the specific goal of denying it.

[William the Conqueror]

AS to 1 John 5:13 Many people base there Salvation assurance on 1 Jn 5:13 are unaware that it refers only to those who have a present-tense belief in JESUS. Please notice verse 13 from Youngs Literal Translation: These things I did write unto you "who are believing" in the name of the Son of GOD, that ye may "know" that life ye have age-during, and that ye may believe in the name of the Son of God. In His Debt/Grace, Tanyan.

Romans 8: '...nothing can separate us from the love of God....neither life....nor death....nor anything in all creation...'

If I could lose my salvation or give it up, then death would separate me from His love would it not? Of course if you believe people have a 2nd chance in Hades....well that seems to contradict what Dives said to Abraham in Luke 16...of course you could argue that was before Jesus allegedly visited the lost in Hades to give them a 2nd chance, however I interpret I Peter 3 to mean the Spirit of Christ was preached through Noah for one hundred and twenty years...' the spirits NOW in prison...' of course you could argue that as Barth said some in Hades will still reject the 2nd chance, however it does say spirits NOW in prison and doesn't mention that any made it out of Hades! I Peter 4 is not the same context as '...those judged in the flesh as men might live in the spirit as God....' The Gospel was preached to those before they were dead... check out the Greek. In summary: ' It is appointed for men to die ONCE and THEN the judgement...'

Hebrews 9:27. As Jesus commanded, '...Judge rightly and not by appearance...'

[Son]

Romans 8: '...nothing can separate us from the love of God....neither life....nor death....nor anything in all creation...'

If I could lose my salvation or give it up, then death would separate me from His love would it not? Of course if you believe people have a 2nd chance in Hades....well that seems to contradict what Dives said to Abraham in Luke 16...of course you could argue that was before Jesus allegedly visited the lost in Hades to give them a 2nd chance, however I interpret I Peter 3 to mean the Spirit of Christ was preached through Noah for one hundred and twenty years...' the spirits NOW in prison...' of course you could argue that as Barth said some in Hades will still reject the 2nd chance, however it does say spirits NOW in prison and doesn't mention that any made it out of Hades! I Peter 4 is not the same context as '...those judged in the flesh as men might live in the spirit as God....' The Gospel was preached to those before they were dead... check out the Greek. In summary: ' It is appointed for men to die ONCE and THEN the judgement...'

Hebrews 9:27. As Jesus commanded, '...Judge rightly and not by appearance...'

The only thing that can separate us from the love of Christ is ourselves. We do it when ever we are out of step with his commandments. Death is the proof that we separated ourselves from his fulness, unless it was through obedience to sacrafice, as Christ did, JS, Stephen, Paul, etc....

[Tanyan]

http://www.teachmegod.com/homme1_m.htm