Forgiveness or Remission?

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Costeon

Why has there ever been a debate in this history of the church? If indeed nothing is ambiguous, how have sincere believers disagreed on anything?

First, I never said "nothing is ambiguous", rather I pointed to what Simon Peter wrote about baptism under inspiration as being clear. Second, much of the debate in history regarding the Scriptures is just as easily chalked up to flesh and ignorance. I wouldn't go alleging that the Scriptures aren't written in a clear, direct, ready to understand, so easy a child can receive them and be saved kind of way.

The birth of the Spirit is essential to salvation (John 3.5). I'll ask you what I asked Esaias: Do you believe that the birth of the Spirit occurs automatically in baptism and is not accompanied with the sign of tongues?

I don't see the word "salvation" in John 3:5. Do you? I also don't see the phrase "the sign of tongues" there, either. Do you?

[votivesoul]

When does the body of sins get destroyed, according to Paul?

And, can a person be forgiven/have their sins remitted, without the body of their sins being destroyed?

[Esaias]

Baptism is the answer of a good conscience toward God.

Any other response to the Gospel, any other type of appeal to salvation, is decidedly NOT the answer of a good conscience toward God, but a self-delusional attempt to bypass the teaching of Christ and His apostles.

[Costeon]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Baptism is the answer of a good conscience toward God.

Any other response to the Gospel, any other type of appeal to salvation, is decidedly NOT the answer of a good conscience toward God, but a self-delusional attempt to bypass the teaching of Christ and His apostles.

Do you believe that the birth of the Spirit, or being resurrected by the Spirit, occurs automatically in baptism and is not accompanied with the sign of tongues?

[Costeon]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Baptism is the answer of a good conscience toward God.

Any other response to the Gospel, any other type of appeal to salvation, is decidedly NOT the answer of a good conscience toward God, but a self-delusional attempt to bypass the teaching of Christ and His apostles.

I just wanted to follow up with you on the question, Do you believe that the birth of the Spirit occurs automatically when someone is baptized and that it is not signified by speaking in tongues?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Costeon

I just wanted to follow up with you on the question, Do you believe that the birth of the Spirit occurs automatically when someone is baptized and that it is not signified by speaking in tongues?

Perhaps if you had the habit of following up with those who respond to your posts, then they would be more inclined to follow up with you.

Just a thought.

[Costeon]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Perhaps if you had the habit of following up with those who respond to your posts, then they would be more inclined to follow up with you.

Just a thought.

Unfortunately I don't have the hours you apparently do every day to respond in detail to multiple posts or to every point that is raised, and I may forget to respond at times as well. But your reply, however, seems to be just a clever dodge to avoid answering a yes/no question. Why don't you want to admit that you don't believe that tongues is the sign of the birth of the Spirit? You surely don't believe tongues is the sign based on what you've said about baptism.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Costeon

Unfortunately I don't have the hours you apparently do every day to respond in detail to multiple posts or to every point that is raised, and I may forget to respond at times as well. But your reply, however, seems to be just a clever dodge to avoid answering a yes/no question. Why don't you want to admit that you don't believe that tongues is the sign of the birth of the Spirit? You surely don't believe tongues is the sign based on what you've said about baptism.

Ah yes, the old "I ask the questions, but I don't have time to answer them" cavil.