What Must I Do?

[Digging4Truth]

I was talking to my daughter yesterday about some new young people we have been working with and who are very excited about what they are seeing and feeling in the services they have attended.



We got on the subject of Acts 2:38. It's pretty amazing how we can begin to read a statement as one block of text and not see what's in there.

Acts 2:38 was a response to a question. What must we do (to be saved is the understood point of the question.

Peters answers states the following

1. Repent
2. Be baptized in Jesus name for the remission of your sins.

And then you will receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

You must do this...
Then you will receive this...


If someone asked what must we do to be a member of your club and I responded...

1. Fill out this information sheet.
2. Pay your dues.

Then you will receive a plaque stating your are a member of our club. There are 2 things that are their responsibility to fulfill. The other is my reaction to their fulfillment of their responsibilities.

So... I am making this thread to simply make this statement.

Peters response to the question of what one must do (to be saved) was this.

1. Repent
2. Be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins

That is his response to the question of what one must do. The rest of the verse is his telling of what God promises to do once you do what Peter had instructed.

There is more to say but I'll leave it at that for right now.

[mfblume]

That is true!

[Sarah]

I was talking to my daughter yesterday about some new young people we have been working with and who are very excited about what they are seeing and feeling in the services they have attended.



We got on the subject of Acts 2:38. It's pretty amazing how we can begin to read a statement as one block of text and not see what's in there.

Acts 2:38 was a response to a question. What must we do (to be saved is the understood point of the question.

Peters answers states the following

1. Repent
2. Be baptized in Jesus name for the remission of your sins.

And then you will receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

You must do this...
Then you will receive this...


If someone asked what must we do to be a member of your club and I responded...

1. Fill out this information sheet.
2. Pay your dues.

Then you will receive a plaque stating your are a member of our club. There are 2 things that are their responsibility to fulfill. The other is my reaction to their fulfillment of their responsibilities.

So... I am making this thread to simply make this statement.

Peters response to the question of what one must do (to be saved) was this.

1. Repent
2. Be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins

That is his response to the question of what one must do. The rest of the verse is his telling of what God promises to do once you do what Peter had instructed.

There is more to say but I'll leave it at that for right now.


It just can't get any clearer than that! For the life of me, I can't see why people just won't accept those scriptures. Why complicate things, and try and make it harder than it is? So simple....

[Digging4Truth]

Understanding that the answer from Peter on what one must do to be saved is actually narrowed down to two things...

1 Repent
2 Be baptized in Jesus name for the remission of your sins

Makes what the following verse has to say stand out a little more...


The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

[Jack Shephard]

I was talking to my daughter yesterday about some new young people we have been working with and who are very excited about what they are seeing and feeling in the services they have attended.



We got on the subject of Acts 2:38. It's pretty amazing how we can begin to read a statement as one block of text and not see what's in there.

Acts 2:38 was a response to a question. What must we do (to be saved is the understood point of the question.

Peters answers states the following

1. Repent
2. Be baptized in Jesus name for the remission of your sins.

And then you will receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

You must do this...
Then you will receive this...


If someone asked what must we do to be a member of your club and I responded...

1. Fill out this information sheet.
2. Pay your dues.

Then you will receive a plaque stating your are a member of our club. There are 2 things that are their responsibility to fulfill. The other is my reaction to their fulfillment of their responsibilities.

So... I am making this thread to simply make this statement.

Peters response to the question of what one must do (to be saved) was this.

1. Repent
2. Be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins

That is his response to the question of what one must do. The rest of the verse is his telling of what God promises to do once you do what Peter had instructed.

There is more to say but I'll leave it at that for right now.

They didn't ask what should we do to be saved. That is not correct. They asked what should they do now, after he preached the gospel and told them in verse 21 that if they call on the Lord they will be saved. They were saved then they asked now what...IMO.

[Digging4Truth]

They didn't ask what should we do to be saved. That is not correct. They asked what should they do now, after he preached the gospel and told them in verse 21 that if they call on the Lord they will be saved. They were saved then they asked now what...IMO.

I did make that designation when I first recalled their question... but...

What then were they asking "what shall we do" in relation to?

We have 2 pieces of information to glean what they were asking in relation to. We have their question and we have Peters answer.

What was the understood reasoning behind asking what shall we do in your understanding?

[Jack Shephard]

I did make that designation when I first recalled their question... but...

What then were they asking "what shall we do" in relation to?

We have 2 pieces of information to glean what they were asking in relation to. We have their question and we have Peters answer.

What was the understood reasoning behind asking what shall we do in your understanding?

I think when you, anyone, reads the full chapter it's clear that in verse 21 he tells them to call on the Lord and they will be saved. I believe they accepted Jesus and were saved then were "pricked in their hearts" after they heard him preach the Gospel. I believe when they asked, "What shall we do?" I don't think Peter then tells them a different way to be saved. I think that Peter tells them basically, "Now that you have called on the name of the Lord and are saved now go and be baptized in Jesus name for the remission of sins and then you shall receive the gift of the HS." That's how I see it.

[berkeley]

I did make that designation when I first recalled their question... but...

What then were they asking "what shall we do" in relation to?

We have 2 pieces of information to glean what they were asking in relation to. We have their question and we have Peters answer.

What was the understood reasoning behind asking what shall we do in your understanding?

Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized because of the remission of sins...

[berkeley]

JT, if the people were saved, wasn't it redundant for Peter to tell them to repent?

[Digging4Truth]

I think when you, anyone, reads the full chapter it's clear that in verse 21 he tells them to call on the Lord and they will be saved. I believe they accepted Jesus and were saved then were "pricked in their hearts" after they heard him preach the Gospel. I believe when they asked, "What shall we do?" I don't think Peter then tells them a different way to be saved. I think that Peter tells them basically, "Now that you have called on the name of the Lord and are saved now go and be baptized in Jesus name for the remission of sins and then you shall receive the gift of the HS." That's how I see it.

I'm not toying with you or being smart-alec. I'm actually volleying ideas here...


What you are saying is that people saved just moments before were told to repent?

It seems to me (and this is just me) that repentance would come before salvation since salvation would, IMO, indicate the pardoning of my sins.

[Ferd]

They didn't ask what should we do to be saved. That is not correct. They asked what should they do now, after he preached the gospel and told them in verse 21 that if they call on the Lord they will be saved. They were saved then they asked now what...IMO.

so now they are saved before they repented.

Nice.

[NorCal]

What most people can't understand is how it meshes with the statement "You must be born of the Water and of the Spirit". "You must be Born Again." "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved." "Baptism doth also now save us." etc.

Hence why the UPCI's motto was "The Whole Gospel, to the Whole World." They were not talking about their "standards", but the complete Gospel of Jesus Christ and Salvation.

Some preach "Believe" but no action.
Some preach "Action" but no Spirit.
Some preach "Spirit and Believe" but no action.
Apostolics preach Believe, Action and Spirit. The Whole Gospel.

[NorCal]

I think when you, anyone, reads the full chapter it's clear that in verse 21 he tells them to call on the Lord and they will be saved. I believe they accepted Jesus and were saved then were "pricked in their hearts" after they heard him preach the Gospel. I believe when they asked, "What shall we do?" I don't think Peter then tells them a different way to be saved. I think that Peter tells them basically, "Now that you have called on the name of the Lord and are saved now go and be baptized in Jesus name for the remission of sins and then you shall receive the gift of the HS." That's how I see it.

So anytime the Spirit convicts you and you ask "what do I do?", according to your beliefs, you are now saved? That is a farce.

So say you committed adultery, the Spirit then convicts, and you realize what you did was wrong. You then ask "what do I do?", you are saying that nothing else is required?

The "What do I do?" is quick reference to "What do I do to be saved?" or "What do I do to make recompense." or "What do I do for forgiveness".
Peter replied to them "Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins."

Please read biblical documentation with out applying your own pre-suppositions

[Jack Shephard]

JT, if the people were saved, wasn't it redundant for Peter to tell them to repent?

No. In grammar class we all, mostly, were taught that things in a sentence between commas can be omitted from sentences and the sentence still mean the same thing. The reason we include something between commas is to give a lil' further info to was discussed already or to remind the person reading or listening to what the topic is. I believe it like this, "Then Peter said to them be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus for the remission of your sins you shall receive the HG..." I think when he said "repent" he was talking about the whole thing like this, "They asked what shall we do? Peter said, Repent ( which you already have done )..." I could be wrong, but this is what I believe he was saying. Not saying they were saved before repentance, but he was recounting what the process of salvation is. Repent, call on the lord and you are saved, then be baptized for the remission of sins and then you will receive the HG....

[Truthseeker]

So if you didn't receive you didn't do?

[Aquila]

I was talking to my daughter yesterday about some new young people we have been working with and who are very excited about what they are seeing and feeling in the services they have attended.



We got on the subject of Acts 2:38. It's pretty amazing how we can begin to read a statement as one block of text and not see what's in there.

Acts 2:38 was a response to a question. What must we do (to be saved is the understood point of the question.

Peters answers states the following

1. Repent
2. Be baptized in Jesus name for the remission of your sins.

And then you will receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

You must do this...
Then you will receive this...


If someone asked what must we do to be a member of your club and I responded...

1. Fill out this information sheet.
2. Pay your dues.

Then you will receive a plaque stating your are a member of our club. There are 2 things that are their responsibility to fulfill. The other is my reaction to their fulfillment of their responsibilities.

So... I am making this thread to simply make this statement.

Peters response to the question of what one must do (to be saved) was this.

1. Repent
2. Be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins

That is his response to the question of what one must do. The rest of the verse is his telling of what God promises to do once you do what Peter had instructed.

There is more to say but I'll leave it at that for right now.

Don't forget... before one can repent, be baptized, and filled with the Holy Ghost... it is the subtle prick in the awakened heart that causes one to even ask the question. ;)

Acts 2:37
King James Version (KJV)
37Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?

God MUST awaken the sinner to their need for a Saviour and convict of sin BEFORE repentance, baptism, or infilling can be profitable. Salvation begins by a sovereign move of God upon the heart of the sinner. Not just anyone can choose to obey Acts 2:38 and be saved in accordance to their own will. If their being "born again" isn't being "born of God"... we just dunked a religionist and shook them into jabbering.

John 1:13
13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. (KJV)

[Jack Shephard]

So anytime the Spirit convicts you and you ask "what do I do?", according to your beliefs, you are now saved? That is a farce.

So say you committed adultery, the Spirit then convicts, and you realize what you did was wrong. You then ask "what do I do?", you are saying that nothing else is required?

The "What do I do?" is quick reference to "What do I do to be saved?" or "What do I do to make recompense." or "What do I do for forgiveness".
Peter replied to them "Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins."

Please read biblical documentation with out applying your own pre-suppositions

I didn't explain it that way and that is not what I was trying to say either. I am saying that in verse 21 Peter tells them what to do to be saved, call on the name of the Lord... then he preaches the message. After hearing the message they are convicted and he tells them to repent/call on the name of the Lord they repent, call on the name of the Lord and are saved and he says to also be baptized and then they will receive the HG.

[berkeley]

No. In grammar class we all, mostly, were taught that things in a sentence between commas can be omitted from sentences and the sentence still mean the same thing. The reason we include something between commas is to give a lil' further info to was discussed already or to remind the person reading or listening to what the topic is. I believe it like this, "Then Peter said to them be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus for the remission of your sins you shall receive the HG..." I think when he said "repent" he was talking about the whole thing like this, "They asked what shall we do? Peter said, Repent ( which you already have done )..." I could be wrong, but this is what I believe he was saying. Not saying they were saved before repentance, but he was recounting what the process of salvation is. Repent, call on the lord and you are saved, then be baptized for the remission of sins and then you will receive the HG....

Makes sense. So is it safe to assume that by for, you mean BECAUSE OF the remission of sins?

[NotforSale]

What most people can't understand is how it meshes with the statement "You must be born of the Water and of the Spirit". "You must be Born Again." "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved." "Baptism doth also now save us." etc.

Hence why the UPCI's motto was "The Whole Gospel, to the Whole World." They were not talking about their "standards", but the complete Gospel of Jesus Christ and Salvation.

Some preach "Believe" but no action.
Some preach "Action" but no Spirit.
Some preach "Spirit and Believe" but no action.
Apostolics preach Believe, Action and Spirit. The Whole Gospel.

Just to clear the air, Jesus was not talking about baptism in John 3:3-8. This parallel is a complete misnomer when arguing the point about water baptism. Water is the physical birth. Jesus said, that which is born of the flesh is flesh, and nowhere in verse 8 did Jesus say anything about water when alluding to being born of the Spirit.

[Digging4Truth]

Don't forget... before one can repent, be baptized, and filled with the Holy Ghost... it is the subtle prick in the awakened heart that causes one to even ask the question. ;)

Acts 2:37
King James Version (KJV)
37Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?

God MUST awaken the sinner to their need for a Saviour and convict of sin BEFORE repentance, baptism, or infilling can be profitable. Salvation begins by a sovereign move of God upon the heart of the sinner. Not just anyone can choose to obey Acts 2:38 and be saved in accordance to their own will. If their being "born again" isn't being "born of God"... we just dunked a religionist and shook them into jabbering.

John 1:13
13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. (KJV)

One is not saved at the prick of the heart. Wouldn't you agree?

[Aquila]

No. In grammar class we all, mostly, were taught that things in a sentence between commas can be omitted from sentences and the sentence still mean the same thing. The reason we include something between commas is to give a lil' further info to was discussed already or to remind the person reading or listening to what the topic is. I believe it like this, "Then Peter said to them be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus for the remission of your sins you shall receive the HG..." I think when he said "repent" he was talking about the whole thing like this, "They asked what shall we do? Peter said, Repent ( which you already have done )..." I could be wrong, but this is what I believe he was saying. Not saying they were saved before repentance, but he was recounting what the process of salvation is. Repent, call on the lord and you are saved, then be baptized for the remission of sins and then you will receive the HG....

The Ordo Salutis answers what I've emboldened.

[Jack Shephard]

Makes sense. So is it safe to assume that by for, you mean BECAUSE OF the remission of sins?

Right. A conjunction of 'for' is "because or seeing that"... 'be baptized for (because of) the remission of your sins...'

[Aquila]

One is not saved at the prick of the heart. Wouldn't you agree?

Salvation begins at regeneration prior to conversion. Regeneration awakens the sinner to their need of a saviour and convicts them of sin. This experience is the pricking of the heart that they were feeling. Not everyone felt it, because only those appointed to salvation by God were pricked by the Holy Ghost. It is evident that Paul felt this pricking BEFORE he came to faith in Christ.

Salvation begins by the sovereign work of the Father through the Holy Spirit in regeneration. It doesn't begin according to our little, puny, human will to be saved after hearing a scary sermon.

That which is "born again" must be "born of God"... not flesh, will, or man. Born of God.

[Jack Shephard]

The Ordo Salutis answers what I've emboldened.

Ok, but are you saying that 3 steps is the order?

[Aquila]

Ok, but are you saying that 3 steps is the order?

One can argue that the three steps are part of "conversion". But God has obviously revealed that He elected one to salvation the moment they are wakened from being dead in sin through the power of regeneration and feel conviction over sin and the need of a Saviour. It is only AFTER this sovereign move of God that one comes to realize their need for Christ and thereby chooses to have faith in Christ, repent of sin, be water baptized, and filled with the Holy Ghost.

Acts 2:37 MUST precede Acts 2:38. :)

Beware of dunking a man that isn't BEGGING to be saved.

[Jack Shephard]

One can argue that the three steps are part of "conversion". But God has obviously revealed that He elected one to salvation the moment they are wakened from being dead in sin through the power of regeneration and feel conviction over sin and the need of a Saviour. It is only AFTER this sovereign move of God that one comes to realize their need for Christ and thereby chooses to have faith in Christ, repent of sin, be water baptized, and filled with the Holy Ghost.

Acts 2:37 MUST precede Acts 2:38. :)

Beware of dunking a man that isn't BEGGING to be saved.

I agree. I was just making sure...

[Aquila]

I agree. I was just making sure...

You'd be shocked to know that this position is Reformed (Calvinist) in its hermeneutic. lol

Arminianism - A man must have faith in Christ that he might be regenerated.

Calvinism - A man must be regenerated from spiritual death by the sovereign hand of God that he might have faith in Christ.

[mfblume]

Regeneration cannot occur before faith. That would mean all sinners are already saved! lol

[Aquila]

Regeneration cannot occur before faith. That would mean all sinners are already saved! lol

No... it only means that the Father awakens the spiritually dead before He draws them to the glorious light of Christ.

John 6:44
44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. (KJV)

Who can come to faith in Christ without the Father drawing them first?

"No man." ~ Jesus

Selah.

[Digging4Truth]

Salvation begins at regeneration prior to conversion. Regeneration awakens the sinner to their need of a saviour and convicts them of sin. This experience is the pricking of the heart that they were feeling. Not everyone felt it, because only those appointed to salvation by God were pricked by the Holy Ghost. It is evident that Paul felt this pricking BEFORE he came to faith in Christ.

Salvation begins by the sovereign work of the Father through the Holy Spirit in regeneration. It doesn't begin according to our little, puny, human will to be saved after hearing a scary sermon.

That which is "born again" must be "born of God"... not flesh, will, or man. Born of God.


So someone who is pricked in their hearts and then refuses to respond to that prick.

Saved huh?

He was saved at the prick but then lost his salvation when he refused?

Explain to me how that works. Not all who are pricked in their heart decide that living for God is what they want more.

[Digging4Truth]

No... it only means that the Father awakens the spiritually dead before He draws them to the glorious light of Christ.

John 6:44
44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. (KJV)

Who can come to faith in Christ without the Father drawing them first?

"No man." ~ Jesus

Selah.

But not all come... some choose otherwise. Hence my previous post.

[NorCal]

Don't forget... before one can repent, be baptized, and filled with the Holy Ghost... it is the subtle prick in the awakened heart that causes one to even ask the question. ;)

Acts 2:37
King James Version (KJV)
37Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?

God MUST awaken the sinner to their need for a Saviour and convict of sin BEFORE repentance, baptism, or infilling can be profitable. Salvation begins by a sovereign move of God upon the heart of the sinner. Not just anyone can choose to obey Acts 2:38 and be saved in accordance to their own will. If their being "born again" isn't being "born of God"... we just dunked a religionist and shook them into jabbering.

John 1:13
13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. (KJV)

That is what the preaching of the Gospel does. It should prick the heart of the sinner. Peter preached the Gospel in the Death, Burial and Resurrection of Jesus Christ in Chapter 2. He even called them out saying "Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified."

They were pricked in their hearts for murdering their "Lord and Christ". Peter preached Christ, as we should also do. And when asked, "What shall I do to be saved?" our reply should be exactly what Peter said. Repent, Be Baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ, and receive the Holy Ghost.

[Aquila]

So someone who is pricked in their hearts and then refuses to respond to that prick.

Saved huh?

He was saved at the prick but then lost his salvation when he refused?

Explain to me how that works. Not all who are pricked in their heart decide that living for God is what they want more.

Excellent question!

This is the question that is behind one of the greatest debates in Christianity. Good and faithful Christians are on both sides of the debate.

One side believes that God, being sovereign and all powerful, knows how to break the will of those who refuse to respond to the pricking. This is called "irrestistible grace" or "effectual calling" and is primarily a Calvinistic teaching. They'd propose that while one might resist... grace will win, if they are elect. Then they believe that there are those who are emotionally or mentally moved by preaching, but God isn't at work in them so they resist the notion and go their marry way. Until God regenerates them, they cannot and will not obey the Gospel. Therefore prayer must be made that God, in His sovereign power, regenerate and save them. And God will only do so if God willed it from eternity.

The other side believes that if man resists the pricking of the Spirit, he will be lost. This is largely an Arminian position. Interestingly, those who believe this also believe that prayer must be made for the one who refuses, that God might break their will and save them from their rebellion (irrestitible grace). lol

So, Arminians often pray like Calvinists; asking that God do what Calvinists say He does... yet Arminians deny that they believe He will!!! ROFL!

[Aquila]

That is what the preaching of the Gospel does. It should prick the heart of the sinner. Peter preached the Gospel in the Death, Burial and Resurrection of Jesus Christ in Chapter 2. He even called them out saying "Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified."

They were pricked in their hearts for murdering their "Lord and Christ". Peter preached Christ, as we should also do. And when asked, "What shall I do to be saved?" our reply should be exactly what Peter said. Repent, Be Baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ, and receive the Holy Ghost.

Amen, men are awakened (regenerated) through the anointed preaching of the Gospel that they might obey the Gospel (be converted).

[Digging4Truth]

Excellent question!

This is the question that is behind one of the greatest debates in Christianity. Good and faithful Christians are on both sides of the debate.

One side believes that God, being sovereign and all powerful, knows how to break the will of those who refuse to respond to the pricking. This is called "irrestistible grace" or "effectual calling" and is primarily a Calvinistic teaching. They'd propose that while one might resist... grace will win, if they are elect. Then they believe that there are those who are emotionally or mentally moved by preaching, but God isn't at work in them so they resist the notion and go their marry way. Until God regenerates them, they cannot and will not obey the Gospel. Therefore prayer must be made that God, in His sovereign power, regenerate and save them. And God will only do so if God willed it from eternity.

The other side believes that if man resists the pricking of the Spirit, he will be lost. This is largely an Arminian position. Interestingly, those who believe this also believe that prayer must be made for the one who refuses, that God might break their will and save them from their rebellion (irrestitible grace). lol

So, Arminians often pray like Calvinists; asking that God do what Calvinists say He does... yet Arminians deny that they believe He will!!! ROFL!

Okay... I'll chuckle.


But now... could you actually speak to what my post had asked?

[mfblume]

No... it only means that the Father awakens the spiritually dead before He draws them to the glorious light of Christ.


We are not made spiritually alive from spiritual death before we even repent, Aquila. :) We remain dead until we appropriate what Christ did for us in conscious exertion of faith and are then regenerated. Paul associated awakening to newness of life and resurrection with so many of us as have been baptized into Christ. He also associated being dead in trespasses and sins with our need to be raised with Christ to sit together in heavenly places. There is no awakening to life from spiritual death before we even hear the gospel!

Rom 6:3-7 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.

Eph 2:1-6 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; (2) Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: (3) Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others. (4) But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, (5) Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) (6) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

Death with Christ alone allows for resurrection into newness of life. And death with Christ requires conscious decision-making to die with Him in baptism. This proves awakening to life from spiritual death occurs AFTER we believe the Gospel, not before.

John 6:44
44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. (KJV)

Who can come to faith in Christ without the Father drawing them first?

"No man." ~ Jesus

Selah.

But the Father draws all, it's just that some refuse.

[Aquila]

So someone who is pricked in their hearts and then refuses to respond to that prick.

Saved huh?

He was saved at the prick but then lost his salvation when he refused?

Explain to me how that works. Not all who are pricked in their heart decide that living for God is what they want more.

That's close to an Arminian position. However, the Arminian would argue that it was God's Prevenient Grace that convicted the sinner, and that regeneration comes only after faith. The doctrine of Prevenient Grace is really messy and leads to all sorts of theological problems. That's beyond the scope of this post.

The Calvinist position is different.

Let's take Paul for example. God chose to save Saul (Paul) and use him as a light to the Gentiles before time began. Paul was elect in Christ from eternity past in accordance to the sovereign will of God. So fast forward... Saul is born. Saul begins to persecute the church viciously. Through the Holy Spirit, the Father regenerates Saul that he might see the truth. This of confounds Saul and troubles him, leading to even more fearsome persecution of the church. Saul continues to resist the pricking of the Holy Spirit. Now... Arminian theology would argue that God could let go of Saul and let him be lost. But that creates a world of problems. Was not Saul ordained to be the Apostle to the Gentiles??? If Saul is lost... God will have to either allow the Gentiles to remain in darkness or call on plan B (God has no "plan B", the thought is silly). So Saul refuses to heed the conviction of the Holy Spirit. He's regenerated (awake), walking around resisting God's will while persecuting the church. Now... God's "Irresistible Grace" is brought to bear on Saul. God knows what will break Saul's will. On the road to Damascus Christ appears to Saul in first person and blinds him. The experience radically altars Saul's perspective and he accepts the Gospel (comes to faith) and then he obeys the Gospel (repents, baptized, etc.). Saul then becomes Paul the Apostle to the Gentiles in accordance to God's will.

Now... was Saul "saved" while resisting? We have to realize that we are temporal and we're only seeing the change in Saul that God is working. However, from an eternal perspective, in God's eyes... Saul was saved from all eternity in accordance to God's own sovereign will. Before God said, "Let there be light.", God could say, "Saul IS my servant."

[Aquila]

But the Father draws all, it's just that some refuse.

Nope. Jesus said,

John 6:39
And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

Jesus will loose NONE of those whom the Father has given Him. Else Jesus didn't accomplish God's will. Also Jesus draws distinction between those drawn and given to Him by the Father...

John 17:9
I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.

Who belong to God? Only those drawn by the Father and given to Christ.

Also note what Jesus says...

John 12:32
And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.

This verse doesn't say that God "draws all men". This verse says that God will "draw all men"... unto Christ. Since we know that all men do not come to Christ, we must conclude that all those who are drawn, are those who belong to the Father in accordance to His divine will... not the entire world.

[Aquila]

We are not made spiritually alive from spiritual death before we even repent, Aquila. :) We remain dead until we appropriate what Christ did for us in conscious exertion of faith and are then regenerated.

I've never seen a dead man appropriate anything. He's DEAD. Stand over a dead man and tell him to believe. What will happen??? Nothing. Life must be breathed into that dead man for him to do anything.

You also don't realize the implications of being ALIENATED from God. Man's spiritually lifeless soul is separated from God by an infinite chasm called SIN. No man can bridge that chasm with wood by building a bridge... nor can a natural and unregenerate man do it by his sinful, vile, debased, depraved, and sinful will through a profession of "faith". The devils believe in God and tremble, and they will NEVER be brought into fellowship with God. The only one who can bridge that chasm is God. This is why God must bridge that infinite chasm and breathe life into a man's dead and lifeless spirit BEFORE he can believe. Note what this verse states....

1 Cor 2:14
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. (KJV)

The natural man (unregenerate man) doesn’t receive the things of the Spirit of God. You can preach to the natural man until you’re blue in the face. To the natural man, the true things of God are foolishness. He'd rather watch football and drink beer. He's spiritually DEAD. He desires to be in control, on the throne of his life, calling the shots, and ordering his own life according to his own will. He CANNOT know the things of God because they are spiritually discerned and he is ALIENATED from God. One must have their eyes opened (Acts 26:18) to turn from darkness to light. Having faith and desire for conversion (repentance, baptism, etc.) can only happen AFTER this eye opening regeneration occurs.

It's impossible for a natural man to have faith before being regenerated. Because said natural man would have to have faith in the things of God that can only be spiritually discerned. And Scripture clearly testifies that the natural, unregenerate man, CANNOT know the things of God. Thus he CANNOT know what to believe or place his faith in. He must be regenerated, eyes opened, awakened, and the truth revealed to him. Only then, after regeneration, can he have faith in Jesus. It's not rocket science. lol

[mfblume]

I've never seen a dead man appropriate anything. He's DEAD. Stand over a dead man and tell him to believe. What will happen??? Nothing. Life must be breathed into that dead man for him to do anything.

Now, you know very well that being dead in sins is a far cry from being physically dead where we do not have a mind to think with.

I presented scriptures that disprove your theory that we are awakened from spiritual death before we even know the Gospel. I quoted Romans 6 and Eph 2 that specifically refer to regeneration and spiritual resurrection/awakening from death, and you never so much as commented on those passages. Your analogy is totally out of context.

You are in effect saying that we resurrect with Jesus into newness of life before we even know anything about the Gospel so that we can hear the Gospel! That means we did not even need the knowledge of the cross in order to believe before we were already dead, buried and resurrected with Jesus! This is totally flip-flopping the entire concept of the work of the cross.

You also don't realize the implications of being ALIENATED from God. Man's spiritually lifeless soul is separated from God by an infinite chasm called SIN.

You're preaching to the choir. I know full well about being alienated from God by sin. The fact remains that sinners in sin can hear the Gospel and reason it out and choose to believe without having to be regenerated in order to do so.

No man can bridge that chasm with wood by building a bridge... or by his sinful, vile, debased, depraved, and sinful will through a profession of "faith". The devils believe in God and tremble.

You just contradicted yourself. You said the devils believe and you claim we cannot believe unless God regenerated us to newness of life? Did God regenerate the devils so they could believe? Come on. lol

The only one who can bridge that chasm is God. This is why God must bridge that infinite chasm and breathe life into a man's dead and lifeless spirit BEFORE he can believe. Note what this verse states....

That is absolutely wrong. Wow. I never heard such error to this degree before. Double wow. Brother! Phew!

We receive the Life of God that awakens us and regenerates us before we even hear the GOSPEL???? In effect, we rise to newness of life before we can even know we needed newness of life and that means we did not need to have any faith in the work of the cross in order to resurrect with Jesus.

1 Cor 2:14
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. (KJV)[/INDENT]

The natural man (unregenerate man) doesn’t receive the things of the Spirit of God. You can preach to the natural man until you’re blue in the face. To the natural man, the true things of God are foolishness. He'd rather watch football and drink beer. He's spiritually DEAD. He desires to be in control, on the throne of his life, calling the shots, and ordering his own life according to his own will. He CANNOT know the things of God because they are spiritually discerned and he is ALIENATED from God. One must have their eyes opened (Acts 26:18) to turn from darkness to light. Having faith and desiring conversion (repentance, baptism, etc.) can only happen after this eye opening regeneration occurs.

Here is a classic taking things out of context if I ever saw it.

Paul was talking ABOUT SAVED PEOPLE when he spoke of the natural man. He tells them plainly that they were too carnal to appreciate anything spiritual BUT THEY WERE SAVED ALREADY. SAVED people can be carnal, natural or spiritual. That is what he meant. That is why he later said he could not speak unto the Corinthians as unto spiritual people, because they were yet carnal. they were worse than natural, for the natural man is soulishly oriented, while the carnal man is fleshly oriented.

Man oh man. I never saw such rife error in all my days. Especially from you, brother. That is something else! WOW.

[mfblume]

Nope. Jesus said,

John 6:39
And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

Jesus will loose NONE of those whom the Father has given Him. Else Jesus didn't accomplish God's will. Also Jesus draws distinction between those drawn and given to Him by the Father...

Jesus did not say all whom the Father has DRAWN will not be lost. He said ALL WHO WERE GIVEN. Many are called but few are chosen. The chosen were the ones finally given. But the drawing is the same thing as the calling.

John 17:9
I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine.

Who belong to God? Only those drawn by the Father and given to Christ.

No. Only those GIVEN to Him. Not drawn.

Also note what Jesus says...

John 12:32
And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.

This verse doesn't say that God "draws all men". This verse says that God will "draw all men"... unto Christ. Since we know that all men do not come to Christ, we must conclude that all those who are drawn, are those who belong to the Father in accordance to His divine will... not the entire world.

No, that is simply saying Christ died in the stead of every single person. That does not mean each one is saved, though.

Man get away from that silly Calvinism. It's crazy, bro. You are better than that. First UR, now Calvinism. What next?

[Aquila]

The Order of Salvation:

1. Election (God's choice of people to be saved)
2. Atonement (Christ's work of satisfying the law for the Elect)
3. Propitiation (Christ's satisfying God's wrath and anger against the sins of the Elect - past, present, future)
4. The Gospel call (the proclamation of the gospel)
5. Regeneration (holy conviction)
6. Conversion (faith and repentance)
7. Justification (right legal standing)
8. Adoption (membership in God's family)
9. Sanctification (right conduct in life)
10. Perseverance (remaining a Christian)
11. Death (going to be with the Lord)
12. Glorification (receiving a resurrection body in sinless perfection)

[Digging4Truth]

Jesus did not say all whom the Father has DRAWN will not be lost. He said ALL WHO WERE GIVEN. Many are called but few are chosen. The chosen were the ones finally given. But the drawing is the same thing as the calling.



No. Only those GIVEN to Him. Not drawn.



No, that is simply saying Christ died in the stead of every single person. That does not mean each one is saved, though.

Man get away from that silly Calvinism. It's crazy, bro. You are better than that. First UR, now Calvinism. What next?

Indeed. The scripture that comes to mind is many are called but few are chosen.

[mfblume]

The Order of Salvation:

1. Election (God's choice of people to be saved)
2. Atonement (Christ's work of satisfying the law for the Elect)
3. Propitiation (Christ's satisfying God's wrath and anger against the sins of the Elect - past, present, future)
4. The Gospel call (the proclamation of the gospel)
5. Regeneration (holy conviction)
6. Conversion (faith and repentance)
7. Justification (right legal standing)
8. Adoption (membership in God's family)
9. Sanctification (right conduct in life)
10. Perseverance (remaining a Christian)
11. Death (going to be with the Lord)
12. Glorification (receiving a resurrection body in sinless perfection)

REGENERATON IS NOT HOLY CONVICTION. WOW. It is resurrection with Christ.

[Aquila]

Now, you know very well that being dead in sins is a far cry from being physically dead where we do not have a mind to think with.

I presented scriptures that disprove your theory that we are awakened from spiritual death before we even know the Gospel.

This is where your disconnect might be. I never said that one is awakened from spiritual death BEFORE we even know the Gospel. I said one is awakened from spiritual death BEFORE one can put faith in the Gospel they have heard. The preached Gospel is the vehicle through which the Holy Spirit awakens the spiritually dead.

- A spiritually dead man hears the Gospel preached under the anointing in God’s perfect placement and timing.

- That spiritually dead man is then regenerated, awakened by the Holy Spirit through the preached Word.

- Awakened, he is convicted by sin and begins to realize his need for a Saviour.

- He then chooses to believe the Gospel, repents of sin, is baptized, and filled with the Holy Ghost (conversion).

I never said one is regenerated before hearing the Gospel. I said they are regenerated before placing faith in the Gospel that has awakened them.

Now… you believe that God has drawn, and will draw, all men to Christ (though many will reject Him). Untold numbers of individuals are perishing without having so much as having heard the Gospel this very night. How is the Father drawing them to Christ without them having heard the Gospel??? Now you have the Father drawing men by something other than the Spirit through the power of the cross.

[Aquila]

REGENERATON IS NOT HOLY CONVICTION. WOW. It is resurrection with Christ.

Conviction is the result of regeneration. The spiritually dead don't feel conviction over sin.

[Aquila]

Indeed. The scripture that comes to mind is many are called but few are chosen.

Unless we're talking about Episcopalians; of which it can be said.... Many are cold but few are frozen. ;)

[Jack Shephard]

Conviction is the result of regeneration. The spiritually dead don't feel conviction over sin.

Amen.....

:shockamoo

[NorCal]

One verse kills the Calvinism Theology.
Acts 10:34 - So Peter opened his mouth and said: “Truly I understand that God shows no partiality,"

If GOD did not provide a way for ALL to be saved, then he has shown partiality to those who are saved. Calvinism is a heresy.

[Aquila]

One verse kills the Calvinism Theology.
Acts 10:34 - So Peter opened his mouth and said: “Truly I understand that God shows no partiality,"

If GOD did not provide a way for ALL to be saved, then he has shown partiality to those who are saved. Calvinism is a heresy.

No... God has shown mercy to the undeserving who would have otherwise perished. Peter's point however, is that God shows no partiality between Jew and Gentile. You will find all peoples among God's elect.

You're under the illusion that all deserve a chance. The truth is... NONE of us deserve a chance. All we deserve is Hell.

If God has chosen you... fall on your face weeping with thankfulness and reverence. You had nothing to do with it. Your God rescued you from a devil's Hell.

[Aquila]

All we deserve is Hell.

[mfblume]

No... God has shown mercy to the undeserving who would have otherwise perished. Peter's point however, is that God shows no partiality between Jew and Gentile. You will find all peoples among God's elect.

You're under the illusion that all deserve a chance. The truth is... NONE of us deserve a chance. All we deserve is Hell.

If God has chosen you... fall on your face weeping with thankfulness and reverence. You had nothing to do with it. Your God rescued you from a devil's Hell.

Yeah, right. God chooses some to go to hell, though He is not willing any should perish. (okaaay).

[Aquila]

Some people see God as a probation officer who demands everyone come register with him for probation or they'll get the slammer forever. And if they break probation, they could be locked up forever.

Others see God as a merciful God who, knowing that the entire human race deserves Hell and would be lost, chose to save a remnant for His own glory. And that remnant, the elect, were chosen according to nothing but His mercy, love, and grace. They were rescued by God, who has compassion, knowing they are but flesh.

[mfblume]

Some people see God as a probation officer who demands everyone come register with him for probation or they'll get the slammer forever. And if they break probation, they could be locked up forever.

STRAWMAN!!!

No, we believe God is so loving that He wills none perish, discounting the concept that He will some to go to hell as calvinism proposes.

[Aquila]

Yeah, right. God chooses some to go to hell, though He is not willing any should perish. (okaaay).

God has a perfect will and a sovereign will. Of course God would desire that all men be saved. However, ALL MEN are hopelessly lost. All men have chosen sin and are in bondage to sin. All DESERVE Hell. God didn't choose some to go to Hell. We all deserve Hell on account of sin.

What God did was choose to rescue an elect remnant according to His love and grace that He might be glorified in them.

You act like man is some pitiful, cute, little creature that a big bad God chose to send to Hell. No... mankind is a monster. A beast. A vile and filthy thing deserving of eternal torments for his crimes against an eternal God and his own race.

Many say it's not fair that God sends men to Hell. No... it's perfectly fair because all men DESERVE it. What isn't fair is... the fact that God's mercy compelled Him to save an elect remnant... through punishing His only begotten Son in their place that His justice and holiness be satisfied. That's what isn't fair.

So if you want God to be fair... LOOKOUT. That's the LAST thing you should ever want.

[NorCal]

So if you want God to be fair... LOOKOUT. That's the LAST thing you should ever want.

Ha. No he is a Just GOD. If he does not give everyone a chance, then he is not JUST.

You preach and UNJUST GOD.

[Ferd]

No. In grammar class we all, mostly, were taught that things in a sentence between commas can be omitted from sentences and the sentence still mean the same thing. The reason we include something between commas is to give a lil' further info to was discussed already or to remind the person reading or listening to what the topic is. I believe it like this, "Then Peter said to them be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus for the remission of your sins you shall receive the HG..." I think when he said "repent" he was talking about the whole thing like this, "They asked what shall we do? Peter said, Repent ( which you already have done )..." I could be wrong, but this is what I believe he was saying. Not saying they were saved before repentance, but he was recounting what the process of salvation is. Repent, call on the lord and you are saved, then be baptized for the remission of sins and then you will receive the HG....


wow JT, there is a lot of adding to.

Nowhere is it suggested that the "repent" part was a recap of what had already taken place.

Further by doing so, you suggest that repenance providing salvation occurs seperately from baptism unto remission.... that is a bit of a theological problem you have there.

[berkeley]

God is willing that none should perish ...except those that perish. O.o

[Ferd]

Paul says "Dont think to highly of yourself because God has given every man the measure of faith"


the implication is that God deals to all men enough faith for salvation. Thus answering the question Auuila is posing. This does not mean that all God has so "pricked" are saved and regenerated.

[Aquila]

Ha. No he is a Just GOD. If he does not give everyone a chance, then he is not JUST.

You preach and UNJUST GOD.

Just is very different than fair.

For example, let's say I have two kids. When one turns 12 I give him a bicycle. Yet my daughter isn't as responsible. When she turns twelve I buy her a video game. She's going to kick and scream that I wasn't fair...and she's right. I was "just".

It's not fair that God save anyone. If we all got what was fair, we'd all burn forever in a devil's Hell. But God is just. God desires to reveal His love and mercy. So God chose a remnant to be saved. However, to justify saving them (make Himself just in saving them) someone had to pay the price for them. And so God gave His only begotten Son to satisfy His warranted wrath...that this elect remnant might be saved.

I admit, my God isn't "fair". He's just.

[Aquila]

God is willing that none should perish ...except those that perish. O.o

God isn't willing that any should perish... but all have chosen sin. Therefore ALL deserve Hell. And so God, being a just judge, has to punish man's sin. However, God's love prevents God from sending all of mankind to Hell. To satisfy His justice He gave His only begotten Son by way of the cross. Christ's death was a propitiation for God's elect.

The President would that there be world peace... but mankind has chosen otherwise. Therefore the President has chosen to use military might where needed to bring as much peace as possible.

Just because God would that all men be saved... it doesn't mean that all men will be saved... nor does it mean that all men will be given a chance.

[berkeley]

I didn't choose sin. I was born a transgressor.

[Aquila]

If God is fair... none of us have any hope. Because we'll get what we deserve.... Hell.

But if God isn't fair, but rather just... He may freely choose a remnant to save according to His sovereign will, through Christ who serves as our propitiation.

Spiritual Communism is a deplorable thing. We are God's. And God chooses to do with us as He chooses. And though we kick and scream and protest, banging our fists and declaring our free will... that's the cold hard reality.

[Aquila]

I didn't choose sin. I was born a transgressor.

True. There is the doctrine of Federal Headship. In Adam we all sinned and spiritually died. And so Adam's sinful condition is reckoned to us because we were in his loins. We thereby have a sinful nature. This is why we are born transgressors. The sins we commit are only manifestations of the vile, sickening, debased, depraved, monsterious, vicious, deplorable nature we have inhereted.

[Timmy]

All we deserve is Hell.

Speak for yourself! :lol

[Aquila]

Here's a little comedy relief...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfc9ARM2yCA&feature=related

[Timmy]

Here's a little comedy relief...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfc9ARM2yCA&feature=related

Yeah, it's hilarious how you guys believe that we get lots of negative "credit" for the bad things we have done, but nothing for the good things. They don't count. Filthy rags. Hilarious.

[Aquila]

Yeah, it's hilarious how you guys believe that we get lots of negative "credit" for the bad things we have done, but nothing for the good things. They don't count. Filthy rags. Hilarious.

Ummm... if you want to claim credit... feel free.

I can glory only in Christ and what He's done for me.

Galatians 2:21
I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

[Aquila]

Even on my best days... all I deserve is Hell.

[Jack Shephard]

Speak for yourself! :lol

LOL

[Jack Shephard]

wow JT, there is a lot of adding to.

Nowhere is it suggested that the "repent" part was a recap of what had already taken place.

Further by doing so, you suggest that repenance providing salvation occurs seperately from baptism unto remission.... that is a bit of a theological problem you have there.

I was merely stating how grammar plays a part in how I read that verse. Like I have said all along that I am a saved at repentance person. I explained it how I see/read it.

[Timmy]

Ummm... if you want to claim credit... feel free.

I can glory only in Christ and what He's done for me.

Galatians 2:21
I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

And you say God is just.

[Timmy]

Even on my best days... all I deserve is Hell.

Really? Do you actually believe that is true?

[Ferd]

I was merely stating how grammar plays a part in how I read that verse. Like I have said all along that I am a saved at repentance person. I explained it how I see/read it.

And I am just saying your explination leaves a lot more holes than it fills....

[Jack Shephard]

And I am just saying your explination leaves a lot more holes than it fills....

I think it has less holes that the OP's version.

[berkeley]

I think it has less holes that the OP's version.

:smack You're not allowed to say that!

[seekerman]

So... I am making this thread to simply make this statement.

Peters response to the question of what one must do (to be saved) was this.

1. Repent
2. Be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins

That is his response to the question of what one must do. The rest of the verse is his telling of what God promises to do once you do what Peter had instructed.

There is more to say but I'll leave it at that for right now.

Actually, that very question, word for word, is asked in Acts. It's not Acts 2:38 though and you don't have to add words to the question.

Act 16:30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?

Now, the response to the question....

Act 16:31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

[seekerman]

All we deserve is Hell.

Not true, brother.

[Michael The Disciple]

Ha. No he is a Just GOD. If he does not give everyone a chance, then he is not JUST.

You preach and UNJUST GOD.

Have to agree with Aquila on THIS point. God is not unjust if he does not draw everyone.

Paul explains that.

9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)
9:12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. Rom. 9:11-15

Verse 11 portrays grace as "unmerited favor". Jacob was chosen for no good he had done. Simply because God willed it so. He asks the question everyone today asks? Since God does this is he unrighteous? By this the implication is that God would not be just if he did not give everyone the same chance.

Read VERY carefully Pauls answer in verse 15. God does NOT promise everyone a chance to be saved. He says he will have mercy and compassion on whom he will.

His adversaries declare this unfair to mankind.

How does Paul answer them?

9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

Paul answers by asking the question is it not fair to the potter to make vessels as he chooses? It would not be fair to the CREATOR if he could not. Paul is more concerned about whats just to the POTTER than he is the clay. Whats fair to God more than whats fair to men.

The clay or thing created cannot say anything to its maker.

I dont understand whats hard to understand about how Paul answers the charge that God is unjust. He lays it out pretty clear.

So on the fact of predestination Aquila is correct.

On the point of Acts 2:38 he disagrees with Peter and the Apostles.

Regeneration is only written one time in context of salvation and refers to water baptism in Titus 3:5

3:5 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;

[Aquila]

Really? Do you actually believe that is true?

Yes.

[Aquila]

Not true, brother.

I believe that in order to be in perfect fellowship with a perfect God and live (or go) to Heaven one must be sinless... because God is sinless. Angels have the ability to sin, but they are of a spiritual nature and so can consciously choose not to without a fallen nature bidding them with constant temptation. The angels that did sin were cast out immediately. No repentance was afforded them.

To be sinless... it means far more than to be presently without sin. To be "sinless" means to have NEVER sinned in your past, to not have any sin of commission or omission (in thought or deed) in the present, and to never ever sin in the future. If one has sinned in the past... they are not "sinless". If one is in sin now, they are not sinless. If one will sin, from God's eternal perspective, they are not sinless.

Therefore I'm still a sin tainted creature, even if I'm currently not in sin... and even if I never sin again.

In order to go to Heaven and be in perfect fellowship with God, I need someone to exchange their identity with mine. I need someone to take my identity upon themselves and transfer their sinless identity to me. This is what Christ did on Calvary. Christ, who knew no sin, became sin (including my sin) that I might become the "righteousness of God". There was a perfect exchange. He took my place and died the death I deserved... so that I could take His place and dwell in eternal and perfect fellowship with God. When God sees me... He sees the sinless Christ Jesus. I am "in Christ". And being without sin, the grave had no right to hold Him forever. Therefore He paid the death penalty... and rose again victorious. I had a debt I could not pay... and He paid my debt in full... a debt that He did not owe.

So I am saved by grace through faith in the Son of God. I do not deserve healing, I do not deserve deliverance, I do not deserve to be saved. The only thing I deserve is... Hell.

[Aquila]

Have to agree with Aquila on THIS point. God is not unjust if he does not draw everyone.

Paul explains that.

9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)
9:12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. Rom. 9:11-15

Verse 11 portrays grace as "unmerited favor". Jacob was chosen for no good he had done. Simply because God willed it so. He asks the question everyone today asks? Since God does this is he unrighteous? By this the implication is that God would not be just if he did not give everyone the same chance.

Read VERY carefully Pauls answer in verse 15. God does NOT promise everyone a chance to be saved. He says he will have mercy and compassion on whom he will.

His adversaries declare this unfair to mankind.

How does Paul answer them?

9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

Paul answers by asking the question is it not fair to the potter to make vessels as he chooses? It would not be fair to the CREATOR if he could not. Paul is more concerned about whats just to the POTTER than he is the clay. Whats fair to God more than whats fair to men.

The clay or thing created cannot say anything to its maker.

I dont understand whats hard to understand about how Paul answers the charge that God is unjust. He lays it out pretty clear.

So on the fact of predestination Aquila is correct.

On the point of Acts 2:38 he disagrees with Peter and the Apostles.

Regeneration is only written one time in context of salvation and refers to water baptism in Titus 3:5

3:5 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;

Thank you for explaining where we agree.

Not to be critical, it's a historic position... but do you believe in baptismal regeneration?

[Timmy]

Yes.

You must have some really bad good days, then. On my worst day, I don't deserve hell!

[Jack Shephard]

:smack You're not allowed to say that!

Oops... :thumbsup

[Michael The Disciple]

Thank you for explaining where we agree.

Not to be critical, it's a historic position... but do you believe in baptismal regeneration?

Yes I believe baptism that is done in faith saves. Peter said baptism saves us. Faith also draws the Spirit on us.

[berkeley]

You must have some really bad good days, then. On my worst day, I don't deserve hell!

Let's take another poll to see how far your ratings have dropped.

[Timmy]

Let's take another poll to see how far your ratings have dropped.

Let's wait till I'm having a good day. :lol

[Aquila]

Yes I believe baptism that is done in faith saves. Peter said baptism saves us. Faith also draws the Spirit on us.

I can respect that opinion.

I know there are different opinions out there. Regardless... I think one better be baptized. I mean, if it isn't salvational, it's still being obedient. And if it is... well... it would be a silly thing to loose one's soul over.

[Aquila]

You must have some really bad good days, then. On my worst day, I don't deserve hell!

LOL

Have you ever sinned?

God is SO HOLY... one white lie is a criminal offense against His Holy and eternal nature. Any offense against that which is eternal... is deserving of eternal punishment. That's why God giving up His only Son to be crucified is central to the doctrines of atonement, propitiation, and justification. To say that you don't deserve Hell is like saying that Jesus didn't need to die for you, but it's the thought that counts.

[mfblume]

We cannot come close to being abhorred at the worst sin we can think of in contrast to the extent to which God abhors the least sin.

[Timmy]

We cannot come close to being abhorred at the worst sin we can think of in contrast to the extent to which God abhors the least sin.

Yeah. And I suppose that's a good thing, about God? :hmmm

[Timmy]

LOL

Have you ever sinned?

God is SO HOLY... one white lie is a criminal offense against His Holy and eternal nature. Any offense against that which is eternal... is deserving of eternal punishment. That's why God giving up His only Son to be crucified is central to the doctrines of atonement, propitiation, and justification. To say that you don't deserve Hell is like saying that Jesus didn't need to die for you, but it's the thought that counts.

Do you guys even hear what you're saying?

[berkeley]

TIMMY,

God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son ...that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, except them that perish

per Aquila's calvinism.

[Aquila]

Do you guys even hear what you're saying?

Yes. All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. And therefore ALL are in need of a savior. There is none righteous... no not one.

[Aquila]

TIMMY,

God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son ...that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, except them that perish

Those who believe are drawn, having their eyes opened to the truth of the Gospel are they not?

per Aquila's calvinism.

My ultimate point (on the other thread) is this... salvation begins with a sovereign act of God. One can call it Regeneration (Calvinism) or Prevenient Grace, also called "Preceding Grace", (Arminianism). So the fact remains... it is by God's sovereign will that a man is awakened to the truth of the Gospel, the nature of his own sin, and his need for a Saviour. God does not reveal these things to everyone.

Because I highly respect the Arminian position and my brothers who largely lean Arminian, I'll define Prevenient Grace:

Prevenient grace (also referred to as prevenial) is a Christian theological concept rooted in Augustinian theology.[1] It is embraced primarily by Arminian Christians who are influenced by the theology of Jacob Arminius or John Wesley. Wesley typically referred to it in 18th century language as prevenient grace. In modern English, the phrase preceding grace would have a similar meaning.

Prevenient grace is divine grace which precedes human decision. It exists prior to and without reference to anything humans may have done. As humans are corrupted by the effects of sin, prevenient grace allows persons to engage their God-given free will to choose the salvation offered by God in Jesus Christ or to reject that salvific offer. Whereas Augustine held that prevenient grace cannot be resisted, Wesleyan Arminians believe that it enables, but does not ensure, personal acceptance of the gift of salvation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevenient_grace

Arminius stated the following:

Concerning grace and free will, this is what I teach according to the Scriptures and orthodox consent: Free will is unable to begin or to perfect any true and spiritual good, without grace.... This grace [prœvenit] goes before, accompanies, and follows; it excites, assists, operates that we will, and co operates lest we will in vain. - Jacobus Arminius, The Works of James Arminius, D.D., Formerly Professor of Divinity in the University of Leyden (Auburn, NY: Derby and Miller, 1853), 4:472

Salvation begins with a sovereign move of God that sets at liberty the depraved human will to accept the Gospel. Salvation doesn't begin with MAN's choosing to be saved.

[Timmy]

Yes. All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. And therefore ALL are in need of a savior. There is none righteous... no not one.

Do you think this is just, the way God has set things up? That we will be punished for not doing something that is impossible for us? (We or someone else in our place, as long as that someone is perfect and sinless?)

And is it an admirable trait of God, to consider even the tiniest infraction of His law to be a capital crime? Does it make sense to you to say that God is soooooo good, that He demands every one of us be just as good as He is? Or else? :blink

[mfblume]

Do you think this is just, the way God has set things up? That we will be punished for not doing something that is impossible for us? (We or someone else in our place, as long as that someone is perfect and sinless?)

And is it an admirable trait of God, to consider even the tiniest infraction of His law to be a capital crime? Does it make sense to you to say that God is soooooo good, that He demands every one of us be just as good as He is? Or else? :blink

The key is that HE DOES THE GOOD THROUGH US, making it the easiest thing in the universe. We just have the knowledge of good and evil ingrained into us so much that we have a hard time to stop trying to exalt ourselves through self effort.

His grace is incredibly awesome as well as His wrath.

[mfblume]

Yeah. And I suppose that's a good thing, about God? :hmmm

His grace is just as overwhelming. And that is the great part!

[Timmy]

The key is that HE DOES THE GOOD THROUGH US, making it the easiest thing in the universe. We just have the knowledge of good and evil ingrained into us so much that we have a hard time to stop trying to exalt ourselves through self effort.

His grace is incredibly awesome as well as His wrath.

Would you like to answer my questions?

[mfblume]

Do you think this is just, the way God has set things up? That we will be punished for not doing something that is impossible for us? (We or someone else in our place, as long as that someone is perfect and sinless?)
It is not something that is impossible for us. I already covered that by saying His grace is divine empowerment where He does these things through us. It could not be any easier.

And is it an admirable trait of God, to consider even the tiniest infraction of His law to be a capital crime? Does it make sense to you to say that God is soooooo good, that He demands every one of us be just as good as He is? Or else? :blink

It is not being as good as He is, but Him giving us His righteousness and Him living through us. He cannot stand sin. It is his nature. He utterly abhors it beyond our imagination. Our corrupt nature cannot appreciate that. But His love is also far beyond what we can think. And that is why His grace is what it is to empower us by indwelling us to do His will.

Isaiah saw His glory and holiness, and merely scratched the surface back then and cried out how unclean he was and how unclean his lips were to speak of Him. But God send the serpahim to cleanse his lips and purge them.

[Praxeas]

They didn't ask what should we do to be saved. That is not correct. They asked what should they do now, after he preached the gospel and told them in verse 21 that if they call on the Lord they will be saved. They were saved then they asked now what...IMO.
Except the text does not say the called on the Lord...In fact Peter said to call on Yahweh..he was quoting the OT and did not yet talk about calling on Jesus

The first thing they said after Peter finished speaking was

Act 2:37 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?"

*it was only upon hearing ALL Peter said that they made this statement
*They were cut to the heart. Does that imply they had been free of a guilty conscious? No
*It was the fact that they were pained in the heart upon hearing all this that they asked what must they do
*If a person is saved, do the need to repent? If a Person is saved don't the already have the Holy Ghost? If they were already saved before asking this then Peter's response is off

If Peter was not talking about being saved then Luke is confused
Act 2:38 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.
Act 2:39 For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself."
Act 2:40 And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, "Save yourselves from this crooked generation."

Given that it's hard to see where you get they were saved during Peter's speech, before he finished

[Aquila]

Do you think this is just, the way God has set things up? That we will be punished for not doing something that is impossible for us? (We or someone else in our place, as long as that someone is perfect and sinless?)

Wrong mentality. It isn't that we are being punished for NOT DOING something. You see... that's the mindset that legalism builds. Those who go to Hell are being punished for SIN. What they have done. If you murder someone, you don't go to prison because you didn't let them live. You go to prison because you broke the law and killed them. We were in Adam's loins. When Adam sinned... we were ALL alienated from God. We all therefore were disconnected from all that is holy. Thus we are sinful by nature. The very condition of being lost is rooted in sin. By one man's sin... all fell into condemnation. And today, by one man's obedience (Christ's)... all men who believe and come out of condemnation into fellowship.

And is it an admirable trait of God, to consider even the tiniest infraction of His law to be a capital crime? Does it make sense to you to say that God is soooooo good, that He demands every one of us be just as good as He is? Or else? :blink

Yes. Think of it this way. Every court judge is a law abiding citizen (or should be). He asks nothing less of all who enter his or her courtroom. Those who enter into the court to be judged... are deemed to have broken a law. Now, what would you think of a judge who didn't punish criminals? Murderers, rapists, abusers, drug dealers, and repeat offenders in all areas... he or she just let's them walk. A judge MUST judge infranctions.

Now... let's look at assult. Let's say a man assults a guy outside of a local bar. He'll be convicted of assult if charges are pressed, a Misdoemeanor. However, let's say the same guy assults the President of the United States. Ummmm... thats a felony.

The nature of the offended determines the seriousness of the crime. God is infinitely holy. Therefore any infraction against His holiness demands infinite penalty.

[Aquila]

The key is that HE DOES THE GOOD THROUGH US, making it the easiest thing in the universe. We just have the knowledge of good and evil ingrained into us so much that we have a hard time to stop trying to exalt ourselves through self effort.

His grace is incredibly awesome as well as His wrath.

So true. I think if we just browsed the Ten Commandments we'd find that many of us are obeying them quite well without much thought. And these ten commandents can be categorized under two headings: Love God... Love Your Neighbor as yourself.

[Jermyn Davidson]

The most clear scripture on Biblical salvation in the whole New Testament!

Acts 16:27 And the keeper of the prison awaking out of his sleep, and seeing the prison doors open, he drew out his sword, and would have killed himself, supposing that the prisoners had been fled.


Acts 16:28 But Paul cried with a loud voice, saying, Do thyself no harm: for we are all here.


Acts 16:29 Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas,


Acts 16:30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?


Acts 16:31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.


Acts 16:32 And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.


Acts 16:33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed [their] stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.


WHY ADD TO THE BIBLE?

[mfblume]

The most clear scripture on Biblical salvation in the whole New Testament!

Acts 16:27 And the keeper of the prison awaking out of his sleep, and seeing the prison doors open, he drew out his sword, and would have killed himself, supposing that the prisoners had been fled.


Acts 16:28 But Paul cried with a loud voice, saying, Do thyself no harm: for we are all here.


Acts 16:29 Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas,


Acts 16:30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?


Acts 16:31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.


Acts 16:32 And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.


Acts 16:33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed [their] stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.


WHY ADD TO THE BIBLE?

Amen.

[mfblume]

Except the text does not say the called on the Lord...In fact Peter said to call on Yahweh..he was quoting the OT and did not yet talk about calling on Jesus

The first thing they said after Peter finished speaking was

Act 2:37 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?"

*it was only upon hearing ALL Peter said that they made this statement
*They were cut to the heart. Does that imply they had been free of a guilty conscious? No
*It was the fact that they were pained in the heart upon hearing all this that they asked what must they do
*If a person is saved, do the need to repent? If a Person is saved don't the already have the Holy Ghost? If they were already saved before asking this then Peter's response is off
Excellent.

I do not know why people fight this. Sounds to me like they are trying to get away from full obedience to the scriptures. Why do that?



If Peter was not talking about being saved then Luke is confused
Act 2:38 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.
Act 2:39 For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself."
Act 2:40 And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, "Save yourselves from this crooked generation."

Given that it's hard to see where you get they were saved during Peter's speech, before he finished

Amen. Peter would not have to say that if they were already saved. Let's not go backwards, folks! People who once saw this are thinking for some odd reason it is works, when Peter commanded it, and are letting these things drop away. Let's go forward! These things were preached the day the church was born, for goodness' sake! :thumbsup

People are still asking what to do. If the question has not changed, why change the answer?

[Aquila]

Excellent.

I do not know why people fight this. Sounds to me like they are trying to get away from full obedience to the scriptures. Why do that?



Amen. Peter would not have to say that if they were already saved. Let's not go backwards, folks! People who once saw this are thinking for some odd reason it is works, when Peter commanded it, and are letting these things drop away. Let's go forward! These things were preached the day the church was born, for goodness' sake! :thumbsup

People are still asking what to do. If the question has not changed, why change the answer?

A man cannot be saved unless God first draws him. He can come to the altar knowing intellectually that he must be saved, and repent of sin intellectually, ... but he will never receive the Holy Ghost or be fully converted with regards to his spirit unless the Father has already opened the eyes of his spirit and drawn him to Christ through the Holy Ghost. One cannot just barge into the throne room of the King of Kings. He must be bidden to come.

Now, that being said...

One of the great debates between Calvinists and Arminians is... Can a man refuse the Father's drawing and be lost after his eyes have been truly opened to the Gospel? The Arminians say that he can resist God's drawing and be lost. The Calvinist says that he can try to resist God's drawing... but God's irresistible grace will overcome his rebellion... no matter what it takes.

For example...

Let's say Joe is a sinner alienated from God, spiritually dead. God's will from eternity is to save Joe and call him to missions work in South America that will result in thousands of souls being saved. So God's Spirit moves upon Joe and awakens his spirit to the need of a Saviour through the preached Word.

The Arminian would say that Joe can resist God's drawing and become a reprobate. This presents several problems. First, it was God's will to save Joe from all eternity. Joe's human will just trumped God's will. Second, now thousands of souls that God had willed to be saved will be lost, having never heard the Gospel as a result of Joe's ministry. God's will for them has been trumped by Joe's human will. Those souls will be lost unless God has a "plan B" and calls John to do the same. And... what if John resists?

The Calvinist would say that Joe can run... but he can't hide. He can resist all he wishes. So Joe resists (big no no). Now, God's irresistible grace will be brought to bear upon him, God knows exactly what must be done to break Joe's stubborn will and drag him to Christ. Suddenly... Joe looses his job. Joe's wife separates from him and takes the kids to Toronto. Joe comes down with appendicitis and is now bed ridden in Cleveland Ohio. Joe's car is reposessed. Laying in the hospital recovering from his appendectomy Joe is flipping through stations agonizing in his soul about his circumstances. What can he do??? Joe turns the television off and looks for something to read. On the night stand is a few Better Home and Gardens magazines and a book. Out of curiosity Joe picks up the book... a Bible. Suddenly the Holy Spirit reminds Joe of the Gospel he resisted. Humbled and broken, Joe begins to weep. With tears streaming down his face Joe begins to pray that God help him and calls his Christian friend. After Joe gets out of the hospital his Christian friend takes Joe back to church. With deep godly sorrow Joe repents of his rebellion against God and gives his life to Christ and begins to rebuild his life, allowing the Lord to lead and guide him. Four years later Joe is graduating from Bible College and gets an invitation to assist a missionary to South America. Joe accepts and boards a plan to Rio de Janeiro... right on time. After three days in Rio... Joe meets the first of thousands of souls that will be led to Christ as a result of his service to Christ.

Which is more biblical?

[Aquila]

Excellent.

I do not know why people fight this. Sounds to me like they are trying to get away from full obedience to the scriptures. Why do that?



Amen. Peter would not have to say that if they were already saved. Let's not go backwards, folks! People who once saw this are thinking for some odd reason it is works, when Peter commanded it, and are letting these things drop away. Let's go forward! These things were preached the day the church was born, for goodness' sake! :thumbsup

People are still asking what to do. If the question has not changed, why change the answer?

No one is saying that upon regeneration one is "saved". They still must be converted. As a result of conversion they are justified, adopted, and sanctified. Regeneration is just the first thing that God does to awaken the lost soul to it's spiritually dead condition and reveal to the soul it's need for a Saviour.

[Aquila]

People are still asking what to do. If the question has not changed, why change the answer?

Only those pricked in their hearts (awakened by the Holy Spirit) will even ask what to do. The rest will roll their eyes at you and go drink beer and watch football, continuing on in their state of spiritual death.

[Jack Shephard]

Except the text does not say the called on the Lord...In fact Peter said to call on Yahweh..he was quoting the OT and did not yet talk about calling on Jesus

The first thing they said after Peter finished speaking was

Act 2:37 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?"

*it was only upon hearing ALL Peter said that they made this statement
*They were cut to the heart. Does that imply they had been free of a guilty conscious? No
*It was the fact that they were pained in the heart upon hearing all this that they asked what must they do
*If a person is saved, do the need to repent? If a Person is saved don't the already have the Holy Ghost? If they were already saved before asking this then Peter's response is off

If Peter was not talking about being saved then Luke is confused
Act 2:38 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.
Act 2:39 For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself."
Act 2:40 And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, "Save yourselves from this crooked generation."

Given that it's hard to see where you get they were saved during Peter's speech, before he finished

You are right, the Bible doesn't say they called on Yahweh, but it also doesn't say that the people asked Peter, 'What do we have to do to be saved?' I am taking it based on what I see and undertand when I read it. I believe that when he preached that did repent and ask him what to do now.

[Timmy]

Wrong mentality. It isn't that we are being punished for NOT DOING something. You see... that's the mindset that legalism builds. Those who go to Hell are being punished for SIN. . . .

I was talking about not being perfect (sin-wise). If you sin, you are not perfect. And it is not possible to not sin, ever, life-long. We will be punished with everlasting torment in flames (unless you're UR) for sinning even once, and even if that sin was as tiny as taking a cookie from the cookie jar without permission. That is what I'm talking about.

[Praxeas]

You are right, the Bible doesn't say they called on Yahweh, but it also doesn't say that the people asked Peter, 'What do we have to do to be saved?' I am taking it based on what I see and undertand when I read it. I believe that when he preached that did repent and ask him what to do now.
It also does not say "Peter, now that we are saved, what else shall we do?"

The context shows the topic was being saved. They asked "What shall we do" and Peter said REPENT! Where they already saved but not repented? That's odd. They were "guilty"...they felt guilty. They were asking what to do. Simple. Saved people are free, not guilty

[Aquila]

I was talking about not being perfect (sin-wise). If you sin, you are not perfect. And it is not possible to not sin, ever, life-long. We will be punished with everlasting torment in flames (unless you're UR) for sinning even once, and even if that sin was as tiny as taking a cookie from the cookie jar without permission. That is what I'm talking about.

Frankly, every man is born alienated from God. It's part of our nature. Sins committed are like symptoms of this condition. Every man has the disease. That's why without Christ's work on the cross... the entire human race would perish.

[Timmy]

Frankly, every man is born alienated from God. It's part of our nature. Sins committed are like symptoms of this condition. Every man has the disease. That's why without Christ's work on the cross... the entire human race would perish.

Never mind.